Boosting Balanced Multiclassing

[dmhelp]

..............................

[Tanarii]

-50% XP penalty if you have Multiclassing levels more than 1 level difference.

That's my first instinct, but yeah, continual even Splits as you level (as opposed to at a target total level) are bad enough you could probably just give a +25% XP bonus for having you two levels with 1, maybe starting around level 2/3.

[Frogreaver]

I like the concept. Not sure how to balance it.

I think you need to look at:
Martial/Martial
Martial/Caster
Caster/Caster
Warlock/Caster
Warlock/Martial
Half Caster/Half Caster
Half Caster/Caster
Half Caster/Warlock

I think specific rules will need made to handle each .

[Hellpyre]

I still think AD&D style multiclassing is the simplest and most elegant solution. Proficiency by class level instead of character level, and don't double up on ASIs at 4/8/12/16/19. Quick, easy, and relatively efficient.

[Hand_of_Vecna]

I like what you have, but it needs more. It might need a boost at lower levels if you are asking players to play 1/1, 2/1, 2/2, 2/3, 3/3. As you would be delaying the first subclass ability, in addition to extra attack which you addressed.

[bid]

Early ASI at level 2/2.

In fact, any feature known to both classes uses character level.
- extra attack at level 2/3 (or 3/3 when either is from valor/bladesinger)
- monk/rogue evasion at 3/4 and Wis proficiency at 7/8
- bard/rogue... rogue 6 extra expertise at 4/4 {averaging rogue 6 and bard 10}
- specific spells on both caster list


And don't bother locking both levels. As long as it's within 1 level they get the bonus. If not, they lose it.

[Frogreaver]

Seems like most of the proposals are overturning this a bit.

You have to do something about 3rd level spells. A full caster combo can't wait till level 10 for those. You have to do something with level 11 features.

You have to figure out how full casters and half casters interact.

[Gignere]

This feels like a solution searching for a question. Like why even split of classes are so important?

Are there a whole stable of character concepts that can’t be achieved with current single class or MC rules?

Is there something inherent to even splits, that somehow makes things better in anyway shape or form to the game?

[Hellpyre]

This feels like a solution searching for a question. Like why even split of classes are so important?

Are there a whole stable of character concepts that can’t be achieved with current single class or MC rules?

Is there something inherent to even splits, that somehow makes things better in anyway shape or form to the game?

I believe to goal is to encourage multiclassing without also benefitting dipping a class for a small number of levels. An even split means both classes are (in theory) equal parts of the character identity, instead of afterthoughts for mechanical gain

[Gignere]

I believe to goal is to encourage multiclassing without also benefitting dipping a class for a small number of levels. An even split means both classes are (in theory) equal parts of the character identity, instead of afterthoughts for mechanical gain

This is really multiclassing for the sake of multiclassing, instead of mechanical advantage or character concept based multiclassing. I don’t see a need for this, also not everyone MC for mechanical advantages at all. Like why isn’t a 3 level dip in wizard for an AT can’t constitute an equal split in the character’s mind.

The even split is only a meta view. As in characters in game don’t track their growth in terms of class levels.

[Moreb Benhk]

I believe to goal is to encourage multiclassing without also benefitting dipping a class for a small number of levels. An even split means both classes are (in theory) equal parts of the character identity, instead of afterthoughts for mechanical gain

I guess its a simpler fix than adding in more later features so classes aren't so front-loaded.

[JNAProductions]

I guess its a simpler fix than adding in more later features so classes aren't so front-loaded.

The reason, as best I can tell, that classes are front-loaded is so that way you feel like your PC is doing what they should be early on.

No one I know wants to play a 5th level PC who has six levels to go before they can do what they're supposed to.

[Hellpyre]

This is really multiclassing for the sake of multiclassing, instead of mechanical advantage or character concept based multiclassing. I don’t see a need for this, also not everyone MC for mechanical advantages at all. Like why isn’t a 3 level dip in wizard for an AT can’t constitute an equal split in the character’s mind.

The even split is only a meta view. As in characters in game don’t track their growth in terms of class levels.

I'm not the OP, I don't feel that this is a needed system. I'm just opining what they appeared to want based on what they laid out in terms of change. I personally offer my players both AD&D-style multiple-class-advancement and bog standard PHB multiclassing, because they offer different levels of specialization and overall depth into classes

I guess its a simpler fix than adding in more later features so classes aren't so front-loaded.

OP did say they wanted a simple fix - major overhauls to inter-class balance is probably more time than they want to spend on this.

[OldTrees1]

I guess its a simpler fix than adding in more later features so classes aren't so front-loaded.

Initially I was going to disagree. After all the pain points the OP felt were with 1:1 ratios being UP. However this would work well.
Single class? More later features is a buff
Dip? More later features is a buff
Ratio Multiclass? More later features in both classes is a buff

All in all if the later features are early enough to impact a ratio multiclass, then it would impact everyone. However a flat buff to everyone will dilute existing differences. So it does achieve the desired effect.

[5eNeedsDarksun]

I like the thought, and I think somehow it should be more viable to have actual multi-classes as opposed to dips. In my current situation, however, your specific suggestions don't really help me. I have a Sorcerer Fighter who I was originally thinking of trying a more even split with. The main stumbling block is that Booming Blade and Green Flame Blade are just too good, and multi-attack just isn't worth it. By 5th level MA vs GFB is situational depending on if you can get a second target, and by 11th GFB is just better. It'd be neat to have an easy house rule to make it worth taking more than 3 or 4 levels of a martial with a caster, so I'm interested in where this thread goes.

[Gignere]

I like the thought, and I think somehow it should be more viable to have actual multi-classes as opposed to dips. In my current situation, however, your specific suggestions don't really help me. I have a Sorcerer Fighter who I was originally thinking of trying a more even split with. The main stumbling block is that Booming Blade and Green Flame Blade are just too good, and multi-attack just isn't worth it. By 5th level MA vs GFB is situational depending on if you can get a second target, and by 11th GFB is just better. It'd be neat to have an easy house rule to make it worth taking more than 3 or 4 levels of a martial with a caster, so I'm interested in where this thread goes.

If you took EK to 7 you can make a bonus action attack after casting a cantrip. Which would be a straight up buff to BB/GFB unless you get that Dimir bracelet.

[cutlery]

I don’t think 10/10 splits are enough for every class to be worth it; even if the 5th level power spike problem was set aside.

A F10 Warlock10 would have two attacks, action surge, 2 5th level spells per SR, 5 invocations, but either a F11/w9 or a F9/w11 or 8/12 splits would make much more sense.

On the other hand, giving a class the 11th or 12th level benefits from either class is too much.

[Moreb Benhk]

The reason, as best I can tell, that classes are front-loaded is so that way you feel like your PC is doing what they should be early on.

No one I know wants to play a 5th level PC who has six levels to go before they can do what they're supposed to.

A lot comes down to how you view "can do what they are supposed to" and I think that's where 5e fell down. No one complains Wizards can't cast wish, teleport or force-cage at 5th level (or even at 11th). There are 2 challenges:
1. How can we provide the 'core class' stuff in 3-5 levels?
2. How can we expand upon that to provide a meaningful level of progression over the next 3 batches of 5 levels.

And the answer, aside from spellcasting (and iterative attacks for a Fighter) is that they did 1 very well and 2 pretty badly - hence the issue with Dips.

In terms of the suggestion it seems relatively reasonable, though I did like the streamlining of:

Early ASI at level 2/2.

In fact, any feature known to both classes uses character level.
- extra attack at level 2/3 (or 3/3 when either is from valor/bladesinger)
- monk/rogue evasion at 3/4 and Wis proficiency at 7/8
- bard/rogue... rogue 6 extra expertise at 4/4 {averaging rogue 6 and bard 10}
- specific spells on both caster list

Gaining most shared things at the average level the 2 classes would get it seems pretty reasonable - though that might (if in combo with OP's suggestions) be too good

[Snails]

There are 2 challenges:
1. How can we provide the 'core class' stuff in 3-5 levels?
2. How can we expand upon that to provide a meaningful level of progression over the next 3 batches of 5 levels.

And the answer, aside from spellcasting (and iterative attacks for a Fighter) is that they did 1 very well and 2 pretty badly - hence the issue with Dips.

IMHO the heart of the problem is that classes that are not primary spellcasters simply get much less interesting goodies in the someteenth levels. That does not directly address the question of the even split multi, but it would be madness to significantly boost the even split multi until the context is set correctly for a single class character. You would be creating a situation where, for example, the single class Fighter would be a trap path.

[5eNeedsDarksun]

If you took EK to 7 you can make a bonus action attack after casting a cantrip. Which would be a straight up buff to BB/GFB unless you get that Dimir bracelet.

I could... pretty tough to justify taking 3-4 levels mainly to get a bonus attack on top of GFB when I can currently get a Spell off on top of GFB with Quicken. Obviously 1 has limited uses and 1 is at will, but those extra Sorc levels make the uses less limited and the spells better. I'd have to have a DM using a whole lot of encounters per day to make it a consideration.

[bid]

In my original iteration I also gave an ASI early at character level 4. In my original iteration I did give extra attack at character level 5. But then I was thinking a level 1, 2, & 3, and a level 1 & 2 feature plus extra attack was better than a level 1, 2, & 3 features plus extra attack and an ASI.

So no ASI before level 7?
That's the best way to kill dual classing.

Many here recommend getting a class to level 5 before MC. Having your defining feat at that point is what makes it a powerhouse.. It doesn't matter if it takes a few months to finish your MC boost, you have something that works.

[Gignere]

I could... pretty tough to justify taking 3-4 levels mainly to get a bonus attack on top of GFB when I can currently get a Spell off on top of GFB with Quicken. Obviously 1 has limited uses and 1 is at will, but those extra Sorc levels make the uses less limited and the spells better. I'd have to have a DM using a whole lot of encounters per day to make it a consideration.

It’s also potentially 2 ASIs which is huge also extra spells known, and that shores up a weakness of the sorcerer.

Obviously if your DM likes the one big fight a day, fighter levels would be much less attractive.

[5eNeedsDarksun]

It’s also potentially 2 ASIs which is huge also extra spells known, and that shores up a weakness of the sorcerer.

Obviously if your DM likes the one big fight a day, fighter levels would be much less attractive.

For Sorc spells known isn't impacted by Chr. Also you'd get one of those ASIs back with the Sorc levels.

To follow your suggestion we'd be talking about a 7/7 split here by the time it came online, so the alternative would be Sorc 11/ Ftr3. I think that character would have enough resources for a heck of a lot more than 1 big fight.

I think some of this discussion highlights something another poster mentioned, that Martials tend to get shortchanged at higher levels compared to Casters, so attempting to make MCs more balanced is tough. The extra high level spells, metamagic, and sorcery points are just better in most cases.

[OldTrees1]

Okay due to feedback:

There is no permalock into split leveling.
Extra attack is gained at character level 5.
Dual full caster progression (now including Warlocks) is increased slightly (+1 @ 5, +2 @ 11, and now +3 @ 17) granting up to 8th level spells known.
Spell slots per day use the most favorable progression based on character level.
But for game balance these changes do not apply to Paladin multiclassing (they do fine with standard multiclassing, pretty much regardless of the split).

Examples of spell slots:
6 Warlock/5 Rogue would have the pact slots of a level 11 Warlock (3 slots of 5th level per short rest), but could only know level 3 Warlock spells (and level 1 Wizard spells if Arcane Trickster)
9 Ranger/8 Barbarian would have the spell slots of a level 17 Ranger, but would only know level 3 Ranger spells
5 Ranger/6 Warlock would have the pact slots (you ignore the Ranger spell slots) of a level 11 Warlock (3 slots of 5th level per short rest), but could only know level 2 Ranger spells and level 3 Warlock spells
9 Sorcerer/8 Warlock would have the spell slots (you ignore the Warlock pact slots) of a level 17 Sorcerer, but could only know level 8 Sorcerer spells and level 7 Warlock spells (instead of Mystic Arcanum these spells would come from spells known and use spell slots)

And I think the delay of ASI in multiclassing matters less since I use a standard array of (17, 15, 14, 13, 10, 8) before racial modifiers.

Wow, that is more ambitious of a dual caster boost than I expected. Same goes for multiclassing spell slot buffs.
1) For dual full casters, I think 5E could handle limiting it to 7th level spells. So +4 levels (+2 spell levels) instead of +6. Think of it as a 10/10 split having the spells known of 10+10/3.
2) Spell slots already have great multiclass rules. Increasing it further could overtune it.
2b) Pact Magic multiclassing with normal spellcasting maybe might have merited an increase, but I think you overtuned it here. You merged the two castings types, giving Pact Magic dominance, and increased it to full speed. A Warlock 5 / Rogue 5 probably should not have 5th level slots. I think the best option is to keep the two types of slots separate and maybe increase their rate by 50% of the other's casting.
Warlock 6 / Rogue 6 currently has 3rd level Warlock Pact slots (cl=6) and 1st level Rogue spell slots (cl=6/3=2). With a 50% multiclassing boost you get 4th level Warlock Pact slots and 3rd level Rogue spells slots (cl=6+2/2=7) and (cl=2+6/2=5). I think this is more reasonable than them having 6th level Pact slots on what amounts to a half level half caster (still better than 12th level Paladin).
3) If properly tuned, you could allow Paladin. The problems with Paladin you mentioned are when Paladin dips or is dipped. A Paladin 10 / Bard 10 will have similar issues as a Ranger 10 / Cleric 10 or an Artificer 10 / Wizard 10. Although I suggest only 8th level slots and 4th level Paladin/Ranger/Artificer, and 6th level Bard/Cleric/Wizard spells known in this example.

[Gignere]

For Sorc spells known isn't impacted by Chr. Also you'd get one of those ASIs back with the Sorc levels.

To follow your suggestion we'd be talking about a 7/7 split here by the time it came online, so the alternative would be Sorc 11/ Ftr3. I think that character would have enough resources for a heck of a lot more than 1 big fight.

I think some of this discussion highlights something another poster mentioned, that Martials tend to get shortchanged at higher levels compared to Casters, so attempting to make MCs more balanced is tough. The extra high level spells, metamagic, and sorcery points are just better in most cases.

Just pick spells that don’t need CHR but it would free up sorcerer spells known, like shield, absorb elements, blur, etc.. you don’t pick shatter/burning hands with your EK spells. It’s like you only focus on the negatives, so to me that means you’ve decided already and don’t want to consider other POVs. That’s ok this isn’t a thread of the relative strengths of a 11/3 sorc / fighter relative to a 7/7 split.

[bid]

And I think the delay of ASI in multiclassing matters less since I use a standard array of (17, 15, 14, 13, 10, 8) before racial modifiers.

And IIRC you've changed feats, so getting a +5 ASI at level 0 is better than getting a feat at level 2/2.

[5eNeedsDarksun]

I like the concept. Not sure how to balance it.

I think you need to look at:
Martial/Martial
Martial/Caster
Caster/Caster
Warlock/Caster
Warlock/Martial
Half Caster/Half Caster
Half Caster/Caster
Half Caster/Warlock

I think specific rules will need made to handle each .

I think a blanket rule that could apply to many of the Martial combos is to give an option of an ASI instead of the extra attack. Is this enough? Are there MCs that are already considered stronger that the base class that would be further enhanced by this?.. I don't think Sorcerer Paladins would opt for this but maybe somebody would figure out a way to make this OP.

[OldTrees1]

[*]Classes that gain Extra Attack or Extra Attack (2) gain it based on character level instead of class level (usually at character level 5 for Extra Attack or character level 11 for Fighter's third attack)[*]Duplicate features (Channel Divinity, Evasion, Extra Attack, or Unarmored Defense) instead grant an ASI, but not before character level 4 (e.g. a Barbarian/Monk would gain additional ASIs at character level 4 for Unarmored Defense and character level 10 for Extra Attack)

For example a Barbarian / Fighter would gain
Extra Attack at 5th (Barbarian 3 / Fighter 2)
Nothing at 9th at 5th (Barbarian 5 / Fighter 4)
A bonus ASI at 10th (Barbarian 5 / Fighter 5)
Extra Attack(2) at 11th (Barbarian 6 / Fighter 5)
And nothing at 22nd (Barbarian 11 / Fighter 11)

This will make 5th and 11th bigger spikes since the character can gain a 3rd/6th level feature at the same time. But will balance out over time. Just something for the DM to be aware of.

[*]When leveling up one class, may also make changes to the other class (e.g. a Fighter/Warlock that gains a Fighter level may also swap out a Warlock spell and Invocation)[/LIST]

Good addition.