DMs only: Do you allow multiclassing? Why or why not?

[Man_Over_Game]

I liked multiclassing so much, I thought there wasn't enough of it, so I added a bunch of slight modifications to classes to allow some classic tropes that don't fit with the standard rules.

Monk/Sorcerer? Got it.
Druid/Bard? Got it.
Cleric/Paladin? Got it.

I cherry-picked requirements on each build, to prevent overpowered character building. Making one of these choices is a jump in versatility, not necessarily power.

The changes are pretty simple, with things like "Sorcerers can use Wisdom, as long as they don't have Cleric or Druid levels". There's a whole list of them. Take a look at the Prestige Options link in the signature if you're interested.

[Yora]

I think there are lots of interesting combinations that you don't quite get with the classes straight. Like a druid/barbarian, a rogue/warlock, or a cleric/rogue.

I wouldn't want to play a quadruple-class character myself, but I don't see any reason to prevent the players from doing it.

[Anderlith]

For me, race choices are a much harder sticking point for me than multiclassing. I’m tired of telling one player of mine that no furries exist in my campaign world. I allow anything that the player can justify. Everything is fair game but classes like Wizard would need you to find a spellbook or teacher, Paladin needs you to genuinely find faith, Warlock require some kind of access to a Patron, etc.

If you just suddenly come to me with “Hey my Sorcerer took a level in Druid, you’d better have found a Circle to teach you Druidic secrets or something. I started D&D with 3.0/3.5 which had a million splats. I feel like 5e is pretty skimpy on content, so I dont see any reason to inhibit players.
Granted, most of my players don’t even consider multiclassing.

[Man_Over_Game]

I think there are lots of interesting combinations that you don't quite get with the classes straight. Like a druid/barbarian, a rogue/warlock, or a cleric/rogue.

I wouldn't want to play a quadruple-class character myself, but I don't see any reason to prevent the players from doing it.

To be fair, the biggest no-no's of multiclassing in 5e is basically to not mix Barbarians or Rogues with casters. Almost anything else works.

[AHF]

Wait...what? You can't have had a static AC (before shield) of more than 19 with that build, so 24 with shield. A +15 ATK hits your normal AC 85% of the time, so a mirror image dies basically every time it attacks one. With disadvantage, it hits your normal AC 72.25% of the time, so that doesn't really help. It hits your shield AC 36% of the time, so once per multiattack sequence.

CR 25 monsters also have other ways to strike. A single breath weapon from an ancient dragon (the prototypical CR 25) would nuke you, save or no save. And you wouldn't be able to save at all without a +4 DEX, since you don't have proficiency and the DC is 25.

Mirror image would only last a single round, since it doesn't get any benefit from your other spells or armor and the dragon's making 4 attacks (3 on its turn, 1 legendary) each turn. Plus, anything that gets through ends your concentration pretty much immediately. You only have 31 HP (assuming +2 CON), a single non-critical, average hit from the bite drops you immediately, two hits from a claw or tail drops you to zero.

So two rounds of normal, not even breath weapon and you're dead. 19 static AC isn't that high, and 24 (with shield, at the cost of serious resources) isn't that high either.

Plus, your offense is severely limited by burning all your slots for those defensive things so the enemies can just flat out ignore you.

I'm thinking someone did something wrong there.

Seems like we'd need more detail to really assess the numbers. OP may not have gotten things right but magic items could have boosted static AC above 19 (which I assume means Half-Plate, Shield and +2 Dex).

Example:
Half-Plate +1
Shield +2
Ring of Protection
14+ Dex
= 23 AC

That would require an 8 to hit and a 13 with shield.

With disadvantage from blur, that would drop % to hit to something more like 42% against base AC and 16% against AC with shield spell active. Add mirror image on top of that for some degree of further protection.

In either case, I think your basic sentiment of "it's a matter of time before the CR 25 monster destroys you" is correct unless the character had some means of relatively quick escape as it would be unlikely to survive more than a few rounds.

[AHF]

To be fair, the biggest no-no's of multiclassing in 5e is basically to not mix Barbarians or Rogues with casters. Almost anything else works.

Yeah, I allow any multi-classing from sources we use (no UA). As DM, I am going to affirmatively give some options for consideration and some warnings to new players if they are considering multi-classing. Would hate to see it banned.

[MilkmanDanimal]

Yep, with no limitations. Granted, it's a group of older, more relaxed players who rotate DMing, and the desire to optimize isn't that huge for anyone, but I think multiclassing does let people build out character concepts as they go, rather than forcing them into whatever idea they had when they started. I started up a Fiendlock, and then, for the heck of it, went Bard. Didn't plan on it, and, sure, I really appreciate the flexibility three levels of Lore Bard gives me with the spell slots and Cutting Words, but it took the character from "plain Warlock" to "somebody who really wanted to be a Bard but wasn't dedicated enough, so they keep taking Warlock levels". It helped flesh out a unique character concept, and it makes it a lot more fun to play.

It's a big West Marches-style campaign with a shifting roster of maybe 30 players, and I'm guessing 20-25% or so have multiclassed, some to optimize a bit, some just because it fit the character.

[MaxWilson]

I generally don't. Unless the player can give me a reason why and a way how. Like during a six month downtime. Not just a long rest and a level up.

Why do you allow it? Strictly for optimization? Or what?

And please hold off, you beautiful die hard remainder AL DMs. We know your situation.

Sure. I'm pretty permissive, and I like to err in favor of allowing anything the player might expect (from the rulebooks) to be able to do. A player says, "Do you allow Dragonborn?" and I say, "Sure, and because PHB Dragonborn are weak I'll even let you use your breath weapon as a bonus action, and recharge it after a minute of not using it."

5E multiclassing is really just custom class construction rules anyway, not "true" AD&D-style multiclassing. There's nothing that says a Fighter who intends to multiclass to Wizard eventually isn't already schooled in magic and practicing spell formulas in his off time--he's just not good enough yet to be a full-fledged wizard. A Paladin who will eventually take a couple levels of Celestialock might already have made a Pact before play begins. So on and so forth.

[PhoenixPhyre]

Seems like we'd need more detail to really assess the numbers. OP may not have gotten things right but magic items could have boosted static AC above 19 (which I assume means Half-Plate, Shield and +2 Dex).

Example:
Half-Plate +1
Shield +2
Ring of Protection
14+ Dex
= 23 AC

That would require an 8 to hit and a 13 with shield.

With disadvantage from blur, that would drop % to hit to something more like 42% against base AC and 16% against AC with shield spell active. Add mirror image on top of that for some degree of further protection.

In either case, I think your basic sentiment of "it's a matter of time before the CR 25 monster destroys you" is correct unless the character had some means of relatively quick escape as it would be unlikely to survive more than a few rounds.

At level 4? That seems unlikely.

[MaxWilson]

Wait...what? You can't have had a static AC (before shield) of more than 19 with that build, so 24 with shield. A +15 ATK hits your normal AC 85% of the time, so a mirror image dies basically every time it attacks one. With disadvantage, it hits your normal AC 72.25% of the time, so that doesn't really help. It hits your shield AC 36% of the time, so once per multiattack sequence.

...snip...

I'm thinking someone did something wrong there.

I'm thinking the poster meant "could not hit me" = "DM's dice were cold that day", not "I was probabilistically invulnerable to the CR 25 monster."

[Wuzza]

If a player wants to do something, I'll go out of my way to accommodate it as an enabler of fun.

Fortunately we're not a power playing bunch, heck, the Sorc didn't even take Haste at 5. :P

[strangebloke]

Yes, of course. It doesn't hurt the newbs at all and the powergamers going for versatility over raw power isn't a bad thing in my book.

The only actual problem dips, IMO are hexblade 1 and cleric 1. Even those "Just" grant some armor proficiencies and cantrips.

Though I do run with Int-based warlocks so the hexblade dip is a lot less OP than it once was.

[OldTrees1]

Yes, I allow multiclassing.

Multiclassing allows D&D to mechanically support more classes than it can print.

So when the 12 base classes don't cover the character concepts, then my players can / do multiclass.

[Spiritchaser]

I absolutely allow it.

More fun concepts
More fun mechanics
And if optimizing is your thing? Why not? It doesn’t ruin anything for anyone else.

Now: with new players I typically don’t introduce the idea, but when a new player just happened to say they wanted to be a more magicky paladin, I certainly didn’t stop them.

The only real concern I have is that MC characters can exacerbate extreme power imbalance within the group. That’s possible to deal with, but it does create more work for me.

And hey, you can get extreme power imbalance just as quickly in the other direction with one non-optimized sorcerer.

[Yora]

For me, race choices are a much harder sticking point for me than multiclassing. I’m tired of telling one player of mine that no furries exist in my campaign world. I allow anything that the player can justify. Everything is fair game but classes like Wizard would need you to find a spellbook or teacher, Paladin needs you to genuinely find faith, Warlock require some kind of access to a Patron, etc.

I've long ago adopted the approach to use whitelists for character options. You can pick any of these seven races, and any of these seven classes. Do what you want with them, but no other races and no other classes exist in this campaign setting.

[moonfly7]

As a dm, I love it. The players always know it's an option, and since in character there isn't such a thiby as classes, it's easy to say " I've been working on being sneakier" or " I picked up some tutoring in magic from that library we stayed in for a month" or stuff like that. Ironically, in games we've played where it's restricted, we end up wanting it bad because we actually need it in game, but in games where no one cares, it's not an issue. Now, I personally like straight classing because I love the special high level goodies, but I have a couple characters that go above and beyond multiclassing norms, and then a few simpler, classic mixes. I am of the opinion that restricting these kinda things, things that players should get to choose, ruins the game a little for people. Like, many times I've known people so didn't want to do the prohibited thing anyways, but it's an rpg, everyone should have the choice if it says they can. So even if my world doesn't have something, lets say drow, and my players want to play one, I'm the kinda guy who'll say "well, drow don't exist anymore actually, it's a plot point. But you could totally be the last drow" and suddenly, the game is more fun for everyone. I guess I'm really influenced by this saying I found once:
Remember, it might be your world, but it's THEIR story.
I think that should be kept in mind a lot more often as dms

[Nhorianscum]

Yes. It adds another layer to character creation and progression, more that that multiclassing allows for characters to develop mechanically in a way that works with and accentuates their thematic development both internally and in relation to the world.

Some concepts just don't work single classed.

[Laserlight]

It's not my character, it's the player's. I get to control the whole rest of the world, I'm not enough of a control freak to need to control their character too.

If it's a newish player, I would ask what they want to get from MCing and might recommend that they stick to single class to simplify things. But my regular crew can do whatever they want; I may not even know what their build is.

[Arcangel4774]

I allow multiclassing almost always. The only exception being the situation were we have 1 optimizingly skilled player and multiple less optimizing players. In that case you occasionally end up with a player who dominates but never gets challenged and ends up not having as much fun. Even then its a provisional thing. People who optimize around an idea dont as often dominate as people who optimize just to do damage. Sometimes that optimization is just keeping them par with everyone else

[Rukelnikov]

I allow it, and don't use attribute requirements for it. But it has to make sense, a superstitious barbarian wouldn't be allowed to take a lvl of wizard out of the blue, but if he roleplayed learning magic to overcome his fears, or just spends a lot of time trying to do stuff with some spellbook he found it would likely be ok.

[KorvinStarmast]

Multiclassing allows D&D (5e) to mechanically support more classes than it can print.

Bingo. Wins thread.

PS: OP, we did this recently. This same thread.

[Lyracian]

To be fair, the biggest no-no's of multiclassing in 5e is basically to not mix Barbarians or Rogues with casters. Almost anything else works.

I can see why you would not want to mix Barbarian but would have thought a Rogue with something like bard or Arcane Trickster with some Wizard levels would work well?

And comparing builds at ECL 20 is rather silly. Heck, only a few games even get beyond T2, let alone T3. We focus so much on these forums on high-level stuff that most people never even see outside of one-shot silly games.

I think that is a good point. At Tier 1 and Tier 4 there can be some clear weakness to multiclass builds. However in the middle you can often get good benefits for the trade off.

A single level of Cleric at low levels does seem very strong. You get armour, Guidance, Bless and healing spells (which can make use of those higher level slots you do not yet have spells for). I have a Cleric of the Music God which makes for a great Bard/Cleric multiclass.

[Keravath]

I'm thinking the poster meant "could not hit me" = "DM's dice were cold that day", not "I was probabilistically invulnerable to the CR 25 monster."

IF the DM was rolling behind a screen, I think it was more likely "DM takes pity on poor little level 4 that will be little more than a splat if he doesn't pretend that every dice roll is bad"

[KorvinStarmast]

PS: OP, we did this recently. This same thread.

We've done it twice in the past month.

http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showt...=multiclassing

http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showt...=multiclassing

FWIW

[Laserlight]

I allow multiclassing almost always. The only exception being the situation were we have 1 optimizingly skilled player and multiple less optimizing players. In that case you occasionally end up with a player who dominates but never gets challenged and ends up not having as much fun. Even then its a provisional thing. People who optimize around an idea dont as often dominate as people who optimize just to do damage. Sometimes that optimization is just keeping them par with everyone else

As a player I am usually That Guy, so I normally build support characters and almost never build strikers. Nobody complains about "His character is overwhelmingly effective...at making me look awesome."

[Zhorn]

I allow it one one condition: It makes narrative sense for how you are playing your character in the story.
Tell me what you intend to level into and I'll do my best as a DM to make the story given your character the opportunity.
The character doesn't even need to make sense. Play as the loonie if you want. Barbarian Wizard? Sure. As long as you're having fun, and it isn't preventing the fun of others at the table, then I'm all for it.

[MeimuHakurei]

IF the DM was rolling behind a screen, I think it was more likely "DM takes pity on poor little level 4 that will be little more than a splat if he doesn't pretend that every dice roll is bad"

I don't think a soft/easygoing DM would have a Level 4 character fight a CR 25 monster to begin with...

[PhoenixPhyre]

I don't think a soft/easygoing DM would have a Level 4 character fight a CR 25 monster to begin with...

Or it was a paper tiget--theoretically a challenge but not stated right at all to be able to hang with the big boys.

[Kurt Kurageous]

We've done it twice in the past month.

http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showt...=multiclassing

http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showt...=multiclassing

FWIW

I was not aware. I knew it was out there, but not that it was so burnt over.

I wan't trying to create clickbait or hammer the issue. I was getting tired of 5e skipping optimization threads, all of which involve...Comments about optimization nearly derailed this thread anyway.

It tends to come around, like alignment, quite often.

And you picked the winner already. I concur.

[Demonslayer666]

I generally don't. Unless the player can give me a reason why and a way how. Like during a six month downtime. Not just a long rest and a level up.

Why do you allow it? Strictly for optimization? Or what?

And please hold off, you beautiful die hard remainder AL DMs. We know your situation.

I allow it with restrictions. I don't like the power dips (like 2 levels of Warlock). They seem pretty cheesy. I encourage interesting characters over optimized.

I allow it because I want the players to have lots of choices.