Ultimate Optimizer's Multiclassing Guide

[PeteNutButter]

Hi Folks! just a quick question.

What do you think of a Fighter 1 dip for an Oath of the Ancients Paladin?

My reasoning is that free Resilient:Con, a Fighting Style and Second Wind are worth the spells delay (imho) and leave a door open for taking more Fighter levels later on if I'll want it (and then as soon as I get in, I get Action Surge).
Plus I like the idea of a godless soldier who converted later for some important reason.

Thank you for your feedback!

It might not add quite as much as the more popular caster dips, but it's definitely solid. The one level delay in extra attack, is probably the worst of it. No MADness, so it's +1 AC for a 1 level delay. Trading paladin for fighter saves is generally a win, though you may miss having wisdom saves occasionally.

[Aidamis]

It might not add quite as much as the more popular caster dips, but it's definitely solid. The one level delay in extra attack, is probably the worst of it. No MADness, so it's +1 AC for a 1 level delay. Trading paladin for fighter saves is generally a win, though you may miss having wisdom saves occasionally.

Thank you very much

[AgenderArcee]

I want to make a good martial War Domain cleric, thinking of trying either paladin or Hexblade. Protector aasimar for race to help with the requirement of Wis and Cha. 5 levels for extra attack, maybe 6 for paladin, then back to cleric. Thought about ranger but it doesn't quite fit the flavor I'm going for, and monk has too much bonus action conflict.

Hexblade has the advantage of dumping Str if I'm good with medium armor but I'd then need to boost Dex. Paladin is good for spell slot progression, but I don't love the lack of stacking for Channel Divinity uses. Also not sure which paladin oath to go with - maybe Vengeance? Curious if you have any ideas.

[Arkhios]

I want to make a good martial War Domain cleric, thinking of trying either paladin or Hexblade. Protector aasimar for race to help with the requirement of Wis and Cha. 5 levels for extra attack, maybe 6 for paladin, then back to cleric. Thought about ranger but it doesn't quite fit the flavor I'm going for, and monk has too much bonus action conflict.

Hexblade has the advantage of dumping Str if I'm good with medium armor but I'd then need to boost Dex. Paladin is good for spell slot progression, but I don't love the lack of stacking for Channel Divinity uses. Also not sure which paladin oath to go with - maybe Vengeance? Curious if you have any ideas.

Personally, I would say Paladin is far better with Cleric than Warlock, because not only does it progress spell slots, it also benefits more with Divine Smites in the long run.
Channel Divinity uses don't stack, that's true, but as a Paladin 3+/Cleric 6+ you still gain the benefit of having two Channel Divinity uses AND all options from both classes, which is kinda big thing.

As for the Oath, I do kinda like the mix of Devotion and War Domain, especially if you dare to use both Sacred Weapon and Guided Strike Channel Divinity uses in concert: Assuming Cha 16 (pretty much enough with a multiclass paladin), you could make an attack with a whopping +13 bonus to Hit, on top of Strength and proficiency bonuses (assuming the minimum required level for this, at 9th your total bonus could be as much as 17 + Str modifier. "Don't roll a 1" -situation, as 19+ is sure to hit almost anything.

[PeteNutButter]

I want to make a good martial War Domain cleric, thinking of trying either paladin or Hexblade. Protector aasimar for race to help with the requirement of Wis and Cha. 5 levels for extra attack, maybe 6 for paladin, then back to cleric. Thought about ranger but it doesn't quite fit the flavor I'm going for, and monk has too much bonus action conflict.

Hexblade has the advantage of dumping Str if I'm good with medium armor but I'd then need to boost Dex. Paladin is good for spell slot progression, but I don't love the lack of stacking for Channel Divinity uses. Also not sure which paladin oath to go with - maybe Vengeance? Curious if you have any ideas.

Personally, I would say Paladin is far better with Cleric than Warlock, because not only does it progress spell slots, it also benefits more with Divine Smites in the long run.
Channel Divinity uses don't stack, that's true, but as a Paladin 3+/Cleric 6+ you still gain the benefit of having two Channel Divinity uses AND all options from both classes, which is kinda big thing.

As for the Oath, I do kinda like the mix of Devotion and War Domain, especially if you dare to use both Sacred Weapon and Guided Strike Channel Divinity uses in concert: Assuming Cha 16 (pretty much enough with a multiclass paladin), you could make an attack with a whopping +13 bonus to Hit, on top of Strength and proficiency bonuses (assuming the minimum required level for this, at 9th your total bonus could be as much as 17 + Str modifier. "Don't roll a 1" -situation, as 19+ is sure to hit almost anything.

Arkhios has fine suggestions. You'd probably want to go all the way to paladin 6 though, which might not make you feel like much of a war cleric, depending on how long you expect the game to go.

An alternative would be to dip hexblade for just 1-3 levels, using booming blade over extra attack. The low level warlock slots not stacking can actually be a good thing, because those are 2 shield spells per short rest. Speaking of shield spell, it's so amazing, that it can justify the one level dip all on its own for any full caster that wants to melee. You could always go for 5 levels if you wanted extra attack at some point, but booming blade is actually better in many situations above level 11 for a multiclass character.

With the Aasimar, you can point buy 15, 8, 14, 8, 13, 16 for a higher charisma character that can still wear plate without slowing down. With a low wisdom, you can focus on buffs and utility spells. If you want to use more cleric spells, you can use strength to attack, since you need it higher to wear the plate and go 15, 8, 14, 8, 15, 14, bumping wisdom and str with first ASI.

[WadeWay33]

Will you add Artificer to this guide once it is released in the new book? (Sorry if this has already been covered)

[PeteNutButter]

Will you add Artificer to this guide once it is released in the new book? (Sorry if this has already been covered)

Yep, just give me a little time to digest it, and to update it.

[WadeWay33]

Yep, just give me a little time to digest it, and to update it.

Alright, thank you! I love this guide and use it often, so I am glad you keep updating it! Keep up the good work!

[AgenderArcee]

Thanks! Appreciate both of your advice. I rethought the build a bit and decided to start Paladin 2 and go War Cleric from there, so as not to delay the cleric features too terribly long. I figure the spell slots for higher-level smites will help to make up for the lack of an extra attack. Maybe if I get high enough level I'll come back to paladin for another 3-4 levels, but I'd prefer to get Radiant Strike first. Also decided to go Zariel Tiefling for the +1 Str and because tieflings look cool (always the most important thing to consider).

[PeteNutButter]

UPDATE:

As many have requested, I've begun to update the guide to include the Artificer. The chart is updated with some of my preliminary opinions, but I am very open to input. At this point the colors are largely based on MADness or SADness which, although important, doesn't tell the whole picture.

I'll develop these further, as I work on the individual entries.

Feedback is appreciated.

[MaxWilson]

UPDATE:

As many have requested, I've begun to update the guide to include the Artificer. The chart is updated with some of my preliminary opinions, but I am very open to input. At this point the colors are largely based on MADness or SADness which, although important, doesn't tell the whole picture.

I'll develop these further, as I work on the individual entries.

Feedback is appreciated.

Rating Wizard/Artificer gold but Wizard/Cleric as merely sky blue seems overblown. Artificer 1 gives you medium armor and shields, but Artificer is less front-loaded than Cleric is: most of the good Artificer stuff only comes online at level 2+, and if you're going to dip two levels you are going to be tempted to go for Wizard/Fighter instead. The best thing about Wizard/Artificer, as Merduo pointed out in another thread, is INT-based Sanctuary, but overall I think it just deserves to be sky-blue in an overall tie with Fighter and Cleric.

[PeteNutButter]

Rating Wizard/Artificer gold but Wizard/Cleric as merely sky blue seems overblown. Artificer 1 gives you medium armor and shields, but Artificer is less front-loaded than Cleric is: most of the good Artificer stuff only comes online at level 2+, and if you're going to dip two levels you are going to be tempted to go for Wizard/Fighter instead. The best thing about Wizard/Artificer, as Merduo pointed out in another thread, is INT-based Sanctuary, but overall I think it just deserves to be sky-blue in an overall tie with Fighter and Cleric.

Fair point. I think I may have over-valued the gish SADness. I'm wary of SADness due to the strength of hexblade dips. At least Artificer requires 3 levels for that. My first inclination is to try an Abjurer x/Artificer 3, using BB. Compared to the fighter dip, it's as much about gishing vs just survivability. You lose that heavy armor (and action surge potential) but gain Int to attacks, and still only lose 1 level of slots. (Yay round up!)

Overall the artificer seems like a strong utility dip that can slightly or significantly vary in power depending on the prevalence of magic items in your game. It's one of those weird classes that doesn't directly synergize with a ton of things, but can really shore up weaknesses and be slapped onto anything. A big appeal is the regular bonus action usage potential for classes that don't have that don't have a busy bonus action.

[Zigludo]

First new class in five years! How exciting! This document gets so much larger now!

By the way Pete, it seems like quite a bit of the old art you had in this doc has fallen off / 404'd. Any plans to go back and replace it?

[PeteNutButter]

First new class in five years! How exciting! This document gets so much larger now!

By the way Pete, it seems like quite a bit of the old art you had in this doc has fallen off / 404'd. Any plans to go back and replace it?

Ah, I hadn't noticed. Seems I'll have to do more than one bit of maintenance.

[Tamms]

Rating Wizard/Artificer gold but Wizard/Cleric as merely sky blue seems overblown. Artificer 1 gives you medium armor and shields, but Artificer is less front-loaded than Cleric is: most of the good Artificer stuff only comes online at level 2+, and if you're going to dip two levels you are going to be tempted to go for Wizard/Fighter instead. The best thing about Wizard/Artificer, as Merduo pointed out in another thread, is INT-based Sanctuary, but overall I think it just deserves to be sky-blue in an overall tie with Fighter and Cleric.

I registered just to say that I heavily disagree with this reasoning of why Wizard/Artificer should be sky-blue. I do believe the rating of gold was warranted as it comes with the oh-so-necessary CON save proficiency attached and, more importantly, complements a Wizard's already impressive versatility with only one or two levels invested.

A one level dip does not hold back spell slot levels at all, due to Artificer being the only half caster that rounds UP when considering spellcaster level. This is especially important early in campaigns when Wizards are most vulnerable, but does not hold back spellcasting as much as a start in Fighter would.

The utter lack of MADness is yet another in the long list of reasons that it is a fantastic dip. A one level dip gives access to: Guidance, Spare the Dying. Cure Wounds, Faerie Fire, AND Sanctuary. The fact most of these spells originally would justify dipping Cleric, yet use INT for the modifier instead makes it obviously superior. If anything, the largest loss of Cleric dipping is for Bless, which is quickly replaced with other Concentration spells in the Wizard list.

A second level dip giving an obvious +1 to hit with all spell attacks while also giving multiple other choices for infusions that can benefit not only the Wizard but the party cannot be underestimated. I remember reading a post somewhere, that I wholly agree with, that there is no reason any full Wizard should not start with Artificer to 2nd level.

This may have been a bit of rambling but after much testing of my own with various builds and play in campaigns, I cannot agree with Wizard/Artificer remaining at a sky-blue rating. It has the capacity to enhance any majority Wizard build.

[BurgTurdler]

Hi all, I'm particularly interested in Artificer(Battlesmith)/Fighter. I'm actually looking at the UA Rune Knight for the fighter levels but thats not within the parameters of this guide. Any tips on that combo would be especially appreciated

[PeteNutButter]

I registered just to say that I heavily disagree with this reasoning of why Wizard/Artificer should be sky-blue. I do believe the rating of gold was warranted as it comes with the oh-so-necessary CON save proficiency attached and, more importantly, complements a Wizard's already impressive versatility with only one or two levels invested.

A one level dip does not hold back spell slot levels at all, due to Artificer being the only half caster that rounds UP when considering spellcaster level. This is especially important early in campaigns when Wizards are most vulnerable, but does not hold back spellcasting as much as a start in Fighter would.

The utter lack of MADness is yet another in the long list of reasons that it is a fantastic dip. A one level dip gives access to: Guidance, Spare the Dying. Cure Wounds, Faerie Fire, AND Sanctuary. The fact most of these spells originally would justify dipping Cleric, yet use INT for the modifier instead makes it obviously superior. If anything, the largest loss of Cleric dipping is for Bless, which is quickly replaced with other Concentration spells in the Wizard list.

A second level dip giving an obvious +1 to hit with all spell attacks while also giving multiple other choices for infusions that can benefit not only the Wizard but the party cannot be underestimated. I remember reading a post somewhere, that I wholly agree with, that there is no reason any full Wizard should not start with Artificer to 2nd level.

This may have been a bit of rambling but after much testing of my own with various builds and play in campaigns, I cannot agree with Wizard/Artificer remaining at a sky-blue rating. It has the capacity to enhance any majority Wizard build.

You make a strong defense. You may be right on many parts, but it's a bit far to say EVERY wizard should start with artificer. Delayed spells are an issue, especially in games that don't reach higher levels. I remain on the fence on this one.

Since gold is "You can't go wrong." I'd say sky blue probably fits just a tad bit better. Since there would be ways to make a sub-optimal character, for instance, by taking too many levels of artificer. By comparison on the other gold ones, namely the cha caster and paladin combos. You can take almost any level spread and still expect to be one of the most potent characters in the party.

Either way, though it is close.

Hi all, I'm particularly interested in Artificer(Battlesmith)/Fighter. I'm actually looking at the UA Rune Knight for the fighter levels but thats not within the parameters of this guide. Any tips on that combo would be especially appreciated

I'm not up on UA content, but it seems like 3-4 levels is a solid artificer dip. You can attack with Int and get the bonus action goodies. If you take it to the 4th level, you're not missing out on an ASI. I'd rush extra attack first (meaning fighter 5) since you don't want to put that off. Use shield spell for defense, hit things, profit.

[Tamms]

You make a strong defense. You may be right on many parts, but it's a bit far to say EVERY wizard should start with artificer. Delayed spells are an issue, especially in games that don't reach higher levels. I remain on the fence on this one.

Since gold is "You can't go wrong." I'd say sky blue probably fits just a tad bit better. Since there would be ways to make a sub-optimal character, for instance, by taking too many levels of artificer. By comparison on the other gold ones, namely the cha caster and paladin combos. You can take almost any level spread and still expect to be one of the most potent characters in the party.

Either way, though it is close.

I suppose I should clarify what I meant when I said EVERY Wizard should start with Artificer because it did leave a bit of ambiguity. What I meant by that statement is not that every Wizard that plans on multiclassing something different should start with Artificer, but more so that every character that plans on staying Wizard afterwards has no reason to start with a class other than Artificer unless pursuing a different multiclass build. Higher level dips are debatable, I concur, but in a campaign that will not reach higher levels, Artificer still sets the framework for a Wizard X/Artificer 1-2 character being almost undeniably better than a pure Wizard build.

1st level access to spells Wizards don't normally get, medium armor, shield and CON as a saving throw. 2nd level magical infusions that create various magic items, causing the Wizard to be more powerful than the other PCs until magic items become more common. Having a lower chance to be hit while also allowing a Wizard to skip taking Resilient (CON) is definitely something that I believe to be worthy of "cannot go wrong", especially considering the Bard/Warlock multiclass description.

A bard who dips warlock gains the full blasting capability of warlock in just two levels. Eldritch blast with agonizing and possibly repelling blast, immediately fixes the bard's innate lack of powerful at will blasting. Both are cha based, making this SAD. The warlock slots are great for some short rest recovery, at the cost of higher level bard spells and slots. With the addition of hexblade, this becomes even better, potentially gaining substantial AC from shield and medium armor, access to the shield spell, and cha to attack and damage with 1handed weapons, all in just 1 level. Archer bards would require 3 levels, but the SADness is more than worth it.

With this being said, a dip of 1 level into Artificer adds the survivability aspect and the CON proficiency while, like Bard/Warlock, remaining completely SAD. Another level dip adds infusions that only add to the versatility of the Wizard without compromising power.

I truly am not trying to sound argumentative but, as this guide is used very often by new players and veterans alike (myself included, who absolutely loves optimizing in DnD), I do not want such a powerful combination to be understated when it fixes many of the issues Wizards start with and with such a small investment in levels.

[MaxWilson]

I suppose I should clarify what I meant when I said EVERY Wizard should start with Artificer because it did leave a bit of ambiguity. What I meant by that statement is not that every Wizard that plans on multiclassing something different should start with Artificer, but more so that every character that plans on staying Wizard afterwards has no reason to start with a class other than Artificer unless pursuing a different multiclass build.

Maybe I'm dense but I can't figure out what you're trying to say. It looks like you probably aren't saying "never go pure-class wizard", but you seem to be saying "never multiclass anything but Artificer unless you're thought hard about the tradeoffs first". Is that right?

I'd say that if I roll up stats like 12, 13, 15, 10, 6, 9, there's some attraction to going Str 9 Dex 14 (13) Con 12 Int 16 (15) Wis 10 Cha 6 Artificer 1/Wizard X, but there's still very valid reasons potentially to go Str 9 Dex 10 Con 13 (12) Int 16 (15) Wis 13 Cha 6 Forge Cleric/Wizard X instead: better AC, gaining access to no-concentration magic weapons (for the party Fighter, not yourself) or armor for the party tank (could be yourself), better Wisdom saves, access to Bless/Command/Healing Word/Shield of Faith/Protection From Evil on top of Sanctuary (only 2 of those prepared at a time of course), access to Heavy Armor Master if you want it.

And I just wouldn't go Artificer 2/Wizard X at all because it costs too many levels for what you get. If I were willing to spend two levels I'd go for Fighter 2/Wizard X instead, but not take the second Fighter level until quite late (Tier 3-4) when I have enough spells combinations to make the extra action worthwhile. Artificer 2 has nothing as valuable as Action Surge.

[WadeWay33]

This is probably just an issue on my part, but is the Artificer section up? I see people commenting about it, but when I open it I can’t see anything.

[MaxWilson]

This is probably just an issue on my part, but is the Artificer section up? I see people commenting about it, but when I open it I can’t see anything.

The Artificer section isn't up but the Chart is updated with colors for Artificer combos, and we're commenting on those colors.

[Tamms]

Maybe I'm dense but I can't figure out what you're trying to say. It looks like you probably aren't saying "never go pure-class wizard", but you seem to be saying "never multiclass anything but Artificer unless you're thought hard about the tradeoffs first". Is that right?

I apologize for the vague terms but you were correct with the first guess. With Artificer granting so much to Wizards with even a single level dip, it is objectively better to start as an Artificer than as a Wizard if the build is meant to be pure Wizard.

I'd say that if I roll up stats like 12, 13, 15, 10, 6, 9, there's some attraction to going Str 9 Dex 14 (13) Con 12 Int 16 (15) Wis 10 Cha 6 Artificer 1/Wizard X, but there's still very valid reasons potentially to go Str 9 Dex 10 Con 13 (12) Int 16 (15) Wis 13 Cha 6 Forge Cleric/Wizard X instead: better AC, gaining access to no-concentration magic weapons (for the party Fighter, not yourself) or armor for the party tank (could be yourself), better Wisdom saves, access to Bless/Command/Healing Word/Shield of Faith/Protection From Evil on top of Sanctuary (only 2 of those prepared at a time of course), access to Heavy Armor Master if you want it.

There is a lot to respond to in this specific part of the post so I will split it into sections.

I'd say that if I roll up stats like 12, 13, 15, 10, 6, 9, there's some attraction to going Str 9 Dex 14 (13) Con 12 Int 16 (15) Wis 10 Cha 6 Artificer 1/Wizard X, but there's still very valid reasons potentially to go Str 9 Dex 10 Con 13 (12) Int 16 (15) Wis 13 Cha 6 Forge Cleric/Wizard X instead

PetenutButter's Ultimate Optimizer's Multiclassing Guide

In order to make broad judgements on class combinations some assumptions must be made. For this guide I am considering only published, in book, AL legal content. I am also assuming standard 27 point buy. Many of the negative ratings have MADness as a big factor, so take that with a grain of salt when rolling stats. It is best to reference the individual breakdown for your desired multiclass for more details. This is of course subjective, and I will update it, as needed.

Stated at the beginning of the multiclassing guide itself, the ratings are based on standard 27 point buy, therefore rolling for stats should not be considered in rating multiclass combos as it adds a massive amount of variability that would make it impossible to truly make a guide that is standardized.

better AC, gaining access to no-concentration magic weapons (for the party Fighter, not yourself) or armor for the party tank (could be yourself), better Wisdom saves, access to Bless/Command/Healing Word/Shield of Faith/Protection From Evil on top of Sanctuary (only 2 of those prepared at a time of course), access to Heavy Armor Master if you want it.

Better AC? Surprisingly, that is incorrect. This is obvious when comparing Scale Mail having an AC of 14 + Dex modifier (max 2), with Chain Mail having an AC of 16 with a 13 STR requirement. They both end up with an AC of 16 and this pattern stays the same until finally reaching Full Plate with 18 AC, whereas Half Plate can only reach 17 AC.

Access to no-concentration magic weapons for party members? Funny enough, Artificer does that better than Cleric. In defense of Cleric, it does only require a 1 level dip for a magic item, but Artificer is able to do the same with much more variety with a 2 level dip. Making any weapon +1, making any armor +1, giving a spell focus +1 to hit, the potentially useful returning +1 to throwing weapon, and giving a ranged weapon +1, causing it to use no ammunition, and allowing it to ignore the loading property(!). This is in addition to being able to create various magical items like a Bag of Holding at level 2.

The final part is very true but those spells all being based off of WIS weakens their usefulness as the spellcasting ability modifier will be much lower than that of INT. That the Wizard will soon have much more useful concentration spells further reinforces that.

And I just wouldn't go Artificer 2/Wizard X at all because it costs too many levels for what you get. If I were willing to spend two levels I'd go for Fighter 2/Wizard X instead, but not take the second Fighter level until quite late (Tier 3-4) when I have enough spells combinations to make the extra action worthwhile. Artificer 2 has nothing as valuable as Action Surge.

I already covered infusions earlier so I will spare mentioning specifics. I agree that Action Surge is amazing but it fills a different niche than Infusions, which are meant to be consistent and permanent buffs that can be used for a variety of things and can include more than combat.

I am very welcome to differening opinions on whether it deserves Gold or not but I personally have yet to see any other class combinations with Wizard that 1) Lack any MADness 2) give medium armor (or higher) proficiency 2) give CON proficiency and 3) do not delay spell slot progression. Fighter comes very close to this, fulfilling 3 of the 4 criteria (DEX is taken no matter what so I do not consider that MADness). For these 4 reasons, I believe that Artificer is undeniably the most optimal Wizard multiclass.

[stoutstien]

Maybe not the most optimized but a artificer 18/ forge cleric 2 would be the master of semi permanent buffs while having strong AC, utility, and would make for a powerful battle Smith.

[MaxWilson]

Better AC? Surprisingly, that is incorrect. This is obvious when comparing Scale Mail having an AC of 14 + Dex modifier (max 2), with Chain Mail having an AC of 16 with a 13 STR requirement. They both end up with an AC of 16 and this pattern stays the same until finally reaching Full Plate with 18 AC, whereas Half Plate can only reach 17 AC.

Yes, that's exactly what I said. Better AC. (And you have the option for another +1 from Forge Cleric's armor bonus, if you're not busy using that to make the party Fighter's weapon magic.)

Access to no-concentration magic weapons for party members? Funny enough, Artificer does that better than Cleric. In defense of Cleric, it does only require a 1 level dip for a magic item, but Artificer is able to do the same with much more variety with a 2 level dip. Making any weapon +1, making any armor +1, giving a spell focus +1 to hit, the potentially useful returning +1 to throwing weapon, and giving a ranged weapon +1, causing it to use no ammunition, and allowing it to ignore the loading property(!). This is in addition to being able to create various magical items like a Bag of Holding at level 2.

But you're changing the subject to a different build: Artificer 2, not Artificer 1. I addressed Artificer 2 in a separate paragraph and said I wouldn't take it, the opportunity cost is too high.

The final part is very true but those spells all being based off of WIS weakens their usefulness as the spellcasting ability modifier will be much lower than that of INT. That the Wizard will soon have much more useful concentration spells further reinforces that.

Not that much lower. Sanctuary DC 13 and Sanctuary DC 17 are relatively similar in overall impact; and the gap won't be that wide unless you eventually max out your INT. Early on with the proposed build and stats it's just a difference of DC 2, which doesn't matter 90% of the time.

I am very welcome to differening opinions on whether it deserves Gold or not but I personally have yet to see any other class combinations with Wizard that 1) Lack any MADness 2) give medium armor (or higher) proficiency 2) give CON proficiency and 3) do not delay spell slot progression. Fighter comes very close to this, fulfilling 3 of the 4 criteria (DEX is taken no matter what so I do not consider that MADness). For these 4 reasons, I believe that Artificer is undeniably the most optimal Wizard multiclass.

In order to not delay spell slot progression, you have to give up infusions and stick to Artificer 1. You can't have both.

And I think you're overrating Con saves, since it costs you Wisdom saves (remember you can lose concentration on a failed Wisdom save too, against e.g. Tasha's or Hold Person), and since good AC is a way to avoid taking damage and avoid making concentration checks at all. If Artificer's gave you Con saves AND Wisdom saves that would justify gold, but of course it does not. It's just a swap.

Since you generally want some Wisdom anyway, Forge Cleric comes pretty close to lacking MADness, it doesn't delay spell slot progression, it gives better armor than Artificer, it gives Wis save proficiency, and it gives party access to a no-concentration magic weapon or enchanted armor. For this reason I believe Artificer is comparable to cleric.

[Keravath]

The main reason folks argue against dips is the delay in spell selection progression rather than spell slot progression. Neither cleric nor artificer delay the spell slots. They both offer better armor/shields and additional useful spells. The artificer offers con saves. I personally like the trade offs of either depending on the campaign.

However, both options delay spell progession. Fireball, haste, counterspell aren't available until character level 6, polymorph, greater invisibility character level 8 and level 5 spells are delayed until character level 10. In some campaigns this isn't a big deal. In others, however, a level 5 wizard without their 3rd level spells could spend months of play time working towards level 6 with only 3rd level spell slots and no 3rd level spells. For this type of campaign, the one level delay in spell selection options is a significant consideration and could well be an important factor in choosing not to multiclass at all. In this type of campaign, choosing a one level dip in either cleric or artificer might be sub-optimal and all the wonderful armor, save proficiencies and spells won't change that.

As a result, I would argue that a one level dip in Artificer is NOT always the best choice for a character intending to be primarily a wizard.

[MaxWilson]

The main reason folks argue against dips is the delay in spell selection progression rather than spell slot progression. Neither cleric nor artificer delay the spell slots. They both offer better armor/shields and additional useful spells. The artificer offers con saves. I personally like the trade offs of either depending on the campaign.

However, both options delay spell progession. Fireball, haste, counterspell aren't available until character level 6, polymorph, greater invisibility character level 8 and level 5 spells are delayed until character level 10. In some campaigns this isn't a big deal. In others, however, a level 5 wizard without their 3rd level spells could spend months of play time working towards level 6 with only 3rd level spell slots and no 3rd level spells. For this type of campaign, the one level delay in spell selection options is a significant consideration and could well be an important factor in choosing not to multiclass at all. In this type of campaign, choosing a one level dip in either cleric or artificer might be sub-optimal and all the wonderful armor, save proficiencies and spells won't change that.

As a result, I would argue that a one level dip in Artificer is NOT always the best choice for a character intending to be primarily a wizard.

+1 to this. In order for the delay in progression not to be painful, you need something just as fun in its own way as the higher-level spells you're not getting yet. Two ways to do this are the sorlock option (leverage the fact that cantrips scale with character level, and spend level 5 rejoicing in your newly-empowered Agonizing Repelling Eldritch Blast instead of rejoicing in Fireball) and the Enchantank option (leverage your high AC to do fun things that a normal Enchanter couldn't do, like running around the battlefield hypnotizing big bad enemies with Hypnotic Gaze, possibly while Invisible for extra defense).

But if I knew a campaign was going to be frozen for long periods at level 5 exactly, I would still probably prefer to play an Iron Wizard 5 than a multiclassed Armored Class 1/Wizard 4.

HOWEVER, to be fair, by that logic sorlock should not be gold either, since warlock 2 also delays spell progression significantly.

[PeteNutButter]

+1 to this. In order for the delay in progression not to be painful, you need something just as fun in its own way as the higher-level spells you're not getting yet. Two ways to do this are the sorlock option (leverage the fact that cantrips scale with character level, and spend level 5 rejoicing in your newly-empowered Agonizing Repelling Eldritch Blast instead of rejoicing in Fireball) and the Enchantank option (leverage your high AC to do fun things that a normal Enchanter couldn't do, like running around the battlefield hypnotizing big bad enemies with Hypnotic Gaze, possibly while Invisible for extra defense).

But if I knew a campaign was going to be frozen for long periods at level 5 exactly, I would still probably prefer to play an Iron Wizard 5 than a multiclassed Armored Class 1/Wizard 4.

HOWEVER, to be fair, by that logic sorlock should not be gold either, since warlock 2 also delays spell progression significantly.

The reason sorlock is gold is as soon as you take that second level of warlock you are completely golden on offense for the rest of the character's life, provided you take the near mandatory invocation (agonizing blast). With just those two levels, you're getting fighter damage progression (though without the option of GWM/SS boosting). You literally can't screw your character up from there regardless of how many levels of either class you take. You will always be providing competitive damage with the potential to quicken it to do it twice. That fits the gold definition in that you practically can't go wrong, or phrased another way: You'd have to actively try to screw it up to not do well. Similarly, once you have just 2 [or 6] levels of Paladin, you can toss on any cha caster(s) or more paladin levels and always be viable.

While the wizardificer is immensely strong, he can go wrong. So, I'm going to have to stick to sky blue, but I'll be sure to encourage the strength of the combination in the individual entry. I'd say no one is denying the long term strength of the dip, just pointing out that there is a trade-off in delaying access to those juicy higher level spells.

[Pufferwockey]

Playing a fighter GWF 2/blade fiend warlock 17, with GWM. Having trouble picking my 9th level mystic arcanum .

Leaning true polymorph for sheer fun. Foresight seems a little bland but could lead to some spectacular swash buckling silliness, but if I decided to go pure deadliness how's this combo for pure DM infuriation?

Hex, eldritch smite, attack, action surge, attack, attack+hurl through hell, turn, prepare action to cast power word kill on target's reappearance/immediately after the party's prepared actions.

[Tamms]

The reason sorlock is gold is as soon as you take that second level of warlock you are completely golden on offense for the rest of the character's life, provided you take the near mandatory invocation (agonizing blast). With just those two levels, you're getting fighter damage progression (though without the option of GWM/SS boosting). You literally can't screw your character up from there regardless of how many levels of either class you take. You will always be providing competitive damage with the potential to quicken it to do it twice. That fits the gold definition in that you practically can't go wrong, or phrased another way: You'd have to actively try to screw it up to not do well. Similarly, once you have just 2 [or 6] levels of Paladin, you can toss on any cha caster(s) or more paladin levels and always be viable.

While the wizardificer is immensely strong, he can go wrong. So, I'm going to have to stick to sky blue, but I'll be sure to encourage the strength of the combination in the individual entry. I'd say no one is denying the long term strength of the dip, just pointing out that there is a trade-off in delaying access to those juicy higher level spells.

At this point you seem to have decided so I will not try to change your mind as to make Wizard/Artificer gold.

However, what you are saying here does call the entire validity of the gold rating into question. I agree with you on Sorlock and other Eldritch Blasters being impossible to screw up due to simplicity, but that is not the case for other combinations you have rated gold. Using the trade-off as an example of what you mentioned, a Paladin dip of 6 does heavily delay access to higher leveled spells and could make the character worse than it was before the dip.

I would rather not come off as rude but it seems you are using differing expectations for multiclassing in your responses than in your guide. I don't know if this is based on your changing opinions but, after looking through the gold combinations in the chart, there are some that would be better relegated to sky blue due to them having the ability to go wrong.

[PeteNutButter]

At this point you seem to have decided so I will not try to change your mind as to make Wizard/Artificer gold.

However, what you are saying here does call the entire validity of the gold rating into question. I agree with you on Sorlock and other Eldritch Blasters being impossible to screw up due to simplicity, but that is not the case for other combinations you have rated gold. Using the trade-off as an example of what you mentioned, a Paladin dip of 6 does heavily delay access to higher leveled spells and could make the character worse than it was before the dip.

I would rather not come off as rude but it seems you are using differing expectations for multiclassing in your responses than in your guide. I don't know if this is based on your changing opinions but, after looking through the gold combinations in the chart, there are some that would be better relegated to sky blue due to them having the ability to go wrong.

I understand how it can seem that way. I've tried not to alter what the colors mean, but perhaps some clarification is in order. "You really can't go wrong here. These two just compliment each other so well."

There are a number of things to consider when rating these combinations, and ultimately it comes down to a certain amount of opinion. Of the classes I've rated gold most of them have very simple requirements and no "land mines" that can screw you up. Sure, can screw up a sorlock by making it with 13 charisma, but no practical optimizer is going to do that other than for the luls. On the flip side an inexperienced optimizer might take too many levels in his dip class and slow his casting progression to the point of gimping his character. You might argue the same is the case for the sorlock, but no matter what the sorlock does it can always blast.

In that vein the gold class combos seem to have the least barriers into getting it right (take agonizing blast, take at least 2 levels of paladin, etc) and least ways to screw it up (once you've done these things you can do whatever with any subclass and remain fully functional).

There isn't really an exact science to it. I'm sure personal biases come into place, despite my best efforts. The good thing is people rarely argue more than one color up or down (no one says a gold should be red etc), so I think it's in a fairly good place. I appreciate the input, and your original points will certainly make it into my entry.