New OOTS products from CafePress
New OOTS t-shirts, ornaments, mugs, bags, and more
Results 1 to 15 of 15
  1. - Top - End - #1
    Dwarf in the Playground
    Join Date
    Mar 2019

    Default Another Attempt at Multiclassing Balance Adjustments

    Thanks for the feedback!
    Last edited by dmhelp; 2020-12-08 at 11:12 PM.

  2. - Top - End - #2
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    nickl_2000's Avatar

    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Another Attempt at Multiclassing Balance Adjustments

    Question: What do you do with subclasses that give a second attack? 2nd attack invocation, Bladesinger, Battlemaster/Armorer, Valor Bard, etc?

    Say I'm a Hexblade 3, Valor Bard 3 do I get a second attack or not? Or even more confusing Sorcerer 4/Bard 2 (you haven't picked a subclass for Bard yet, but you have made it to level 6 where Valor Bard would get a second attack).

    *EDIT: This second part is solved through either an edit or re-reading above. However, there is still the issue of Fighter 3/Bard 2 (some bards get it some don't, do you get it or not?).
    Last edited by nickl_2000; 2020-12-01 at 11:33 AM.
    Pronouns he/him/his
    Spoiler: 5e Subclass Contest Wins
    Show

    ● IV-Pinball Wizard
    ● VI-Luchador Bard
    ● XIII-Rogue, Tavern Wench
    ● XV-Monk, Way of the Shrine Guardian
    ● XVI-Cleric, Madness Domain
    ● XVIII-Fighter, Chef
    ● XXI-Artificer, Battling Bowman
    ● XXV-Ley Line Sorcerer

  3. - Top - End - #3
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    BlackDragon

    Join Date
    Apr 2020

    Default Re: Another Attempt at Multiclassing Balance Adjustments

    Quote Originally Posted by dmhelp View Post
    I'm used to running a no multiclassing game and wanted to limit the potential power difference between a multiclassed and single classed character at Tier 3-4 (I'm a game balance fanatic). I adjust martial vs caster game balance thru magic items. I was originally trying to buff the single classed character but the rules felt pretty awkward. I'd also like to make multiclassing easier, where people just have the option of picking two classes, alternating their levels and being viable. This would be more similar to Gestalt/AD&D multiclassing, which I prefer (but found it takes too many rules to implement and I would like as few rules as possible).

    This is another attempt to improve multiclassing at Tier 1-2 and nerf it slightly at Tier 3-4 with minimal adjustments to the base rules. It was originally more lengthy but the feedback at enworld that I got was that it was overly complicated and too much of an improvement for multiclassed characters.

    • Multiclassed characters are limited to two classes and may not advance past level 10 in each class (i.e. eventually gets to 10/10 at level 20)
    • Multiclassed characters gain standard ASIs at character level 4, 8, 12, 16, & 19 instead of by class level (this creates some dead levels but gives someone balancing their levels quicker ASI advancement), ASIs at Fighter 6 and Rogue 10 are unaffected
    • Classes that gain Extra Attack gain it based on character level instead of class level if both classes are no more than 1 level apart (benefit lost if you level out of the balanced split); Bladesingers also gain their cantrip as an attack ability with this



    I think that martial/martial and martial/caster are especially easy to create with these modifications. Certain combinations like Cleric/Druid would probably not be ideal.

    Thanks for any feedback!
    I feel like you're still overthinking it. This system hurts some of the most obvious combos like fighter/rogue (because rogues don't get extra attack). Changing around the ASIs just makes characters relatively overpowered for a level or two and then they face a dead level that's no fun.

    Honestly I'd go even simpler: you're allowed to do alternating levels between two classes from level 1 no questions asked, and you're allowed to switch classes later in the game only with strong plot justification and DM approval.

    What exactly are you trying to prevent here in tiers 3-4? I'm struggling to think of a multiclass combo that would be more powerful than just a straight-class caster at high levels. Maybe some of the one-level-dip stuff like hexblade/paladin, but those combos should be pretty easy to call BS on as DM.

  4. - Top - End - #4
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    GnomeWizardGuy

    Join Date
    Apr 2019
    Location
    Lower Menthis

    Default Re: Another Attempt at Multiclassing Balance Adjustments

    This is way too clunky compared to the normal rules, and I'm not sure any of this is needed. You don't need to be so afraid of multiclassing. There are always trade-offs when you multiclass, and those characters aren't significantly more powerful than straight classes. Usually they can do something really well such as smites or quickened eldritch blasts, but there are costs associated with multiclassing that in play are usually more pronounced than they seem on here, especially being behind in spell level for casters. I'd just allow multiclassing and enjoy the ride.

  5. - Top - End - #5
    Dwarf in the Playground
     
    NecromancerGuy

    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Another Attempt at Multiclassing Balance Adjustments

    Quote Originally Posted by ZRN View Post
    What exactly are you trying to prevent here in tiers 3-4? I'm struggling to think of a multiclass combo that would be more powerful than just a straight-class caster at high levels. Maybe some of the one-level-dip stuff like hexblade/paladin, but those combos should be pretty easy to call BS on as DM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Bobthewizard View Post
    This is way too clunky compared to the normal rules, and I'm not sure any of this is needed. You don't need to be so afraid of multiclassing. There are always trade-offs when you multiclass, and those characters aren't significantly more powerful than straight classes. Usually they can do something really well such as smites or quickened eldritch blasts, but there are costs associated with multiclassing that in play are usually more pronounced than they seem on here, especially being behind in spell level for casters. I'd just allow multiclassing and enjoy the ride.
    I agree with these guys, I don't think you should be that worried about allowing multiclassing. Just make sure the players tell you ahead of time what their long term plan is for their build if they're multiclassing and you can just shut it down on an individual basis if their answer is something like "I want to be a Helf Sorcadin that can crit fish with elven accuracy, attack twice, quicken booming blade for a third hit, and smite with all of my high level spell slots" then just talk to them about nerfing that specific build or having them go down a different path.

    I do find the rules you proposed interesting though, I think it might be great for a short campaign or a one shot to expand the rules even more and try and have everyone at the table playing with some cool multiclass builds that you couldn't make in the normal ruleset.
    Last edited by Necromas; 2020-12-01 at 02:42 PM.

  6. - Top - End - #6
    Ogre in the Playground
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Vacation in Nyalotha

    Default Re: Another Attempt at Multiclassing Balance Adjustments

    Try hard enough to shove everything into the same box and you’ll have a hard time telling them all apart. A devotion to balance for its own sake can remove too many defining differences to the point that choices are mechanically meaningless. 5e already has itself set in a very narrow band of outputs.

    Is your primary concern that multiclass gets ahead of the shake n bake single class approach, or that lots of multiclass concepts fall flat on their face?
    If all rules are suggestions what happens when I pass the save?

  7. - Top - End - #7
    Ogre in the Playground
    Join Date
    Dec 2017

    Default Re: Another Attempt at Multiclassing Balance Adjustments

    I'm not sure I understand the objective.

    Single classes aren't balanced against each other at any particular level, why do you have an issue with multiclasses? A multiclassed character often picks up some additional abilities and versatility at the expense of losing higher level features or progressing spell levels and spell slots.

    Examples:
    - A moon druid is a powerhouse at level 3-4, they are ok at level 5-6, they are again impressive at level 10-12 when elemental forms become available and again at level 20 when they can renew their beast shapes indefinitely and even cast spells.
    - A paladin has a big boost at 6 with their aura and are an all round decent martial character with casting support. Their ability to smite is also impressive. A single classed paladin is arguably as powerful or more than many of the multiclass options. The level 18 30' aura feature is very impressive.
    - At level 17+ casters pick up 9th level spells and can be very impressive when compared to other classes.
    - which is more powerful - level 17 wizard with 9th level spells or a level 15 caster with 8th level spells and 2 levels of something else? Fighter for action surge, hexblade for agonizing blast, armor and other features? ... and those are just dips where a character sacrifices a level or two in their primary class for some of the features and training in another class.

    Mechanically, I find very few multiclass combinations that are "Overpowered" or "way more powerful" than a single classed character. More versatile and different YES, more powerful (unless you equate versatility and power), generally not.

    On the other hand, a player probably needs to do some work on the character backstory and progression (if the DM and the game look for that sort of thing) to justify why a character has a couple of levels in one class but most in something else.

    ----

    Anyway, I think your suggested approach to multiclassing really hampers the ability of the player to create a certain type of character that they want to play.

    A fighter 10/rogue 10 for example misses out on 3 attacks/round as a fighter at level 11 or reliable talent as a rogue at level 11. Those are class defining features and arguably a 9/11 or 11/9 is a better (and more interesting) fighter/rogue than a 10/10. An 11/9 leans more heavily into the fighter aspect while the 9/11 is more rogue-like.

    If you are trying to prevent dips then just impose a rule that a multiclassed character can't have more than X levels between each class, where X could be 1,2,3,4,5 or whatever you like. (A value of 1 appears to correspond to your current concept but is very restrictive and not as compatible with 5e due to the significant increases in capability at levels 5, 11, and 17).

    This sort of approach with X>1 lets the player build the character with the features they want but prevents taking only 1 or 2 levels in a class to pick up the front loaded characteristics.

    If you imposed a limit of 5 for example ... a martial character could take 5 levels in one class to get extra attack before multiclassing or a caster could obtain 3rd level spells ... but if you play to level 20 the character would end up with a level split of 12/8 or less and be heavily invested in both classes.

    P.S. If you haven't run a game with multiclassing at all, I would be tempted just to run one and see how it goes since theory crafting "balance" in 5e doesn't seem to be a very effective pass time.

    In my experience, a lot of the features that people claim are overpowered without actually playing with them just aren't much of an issue in actual games I have played ... examples: Sorlock multiclasses (as long as you leave out game abusing concepts like coffeelock), feats in general, PAM, Xbow expert, Sharpshooter, Great Weapon Master (the -5 to hit really goes a long way towards balancing these two until at least early tier 3 unless the DM likes to give out magic items like candy), the Lucky feat (this has to be one of the most over-rated feats I have ever seen in use or had on a character). Paladin/warlock or sorcerer multiclasses - they come online late and they really don't give you that many more spell slots for smites though the sorcerer spell options and metamagic can enhance versatility and options.

    e.g. a level 11 paladin has the spell slots of a 6th level caster while a level 6 paladin/5 sorcerer has the slots of a level 8 caster. The difference is 2 4th level spell slots for smiting and a wider selection of sorcerer spells and meta magic in exchange for paladin improved divine smite, aura improvements and other class features. Honestly, I don't see a clear winner balance wise, but the sorcadin IS more flexible and versatile due to the enhanced spell selection. The two extra 4th spell slots/day represent a grand total of 45 extra damage on average over an entire adventuring day - that isn't much.
    Last edited by Keravath; 2020-12-01 at 03:55 PM.

  8. - Top - End - #8
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Zhorn's Avatar

    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Location
    Space Australia
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Another Attempt at Multiclassing Balance Adjustments

    Agreeing with the above posters, these adjustments seem unwarranted in trying to fix a problem that doesn't exist in the way you imagine.

    Like others have mentioned, multiclassing already comes with a steep cost on progression as it is, or the specialisation at the expense of versatility.

    A more effective method of 'balancing' is just to keep encounters varied so that different builds are given different opportunities to shine, or present adventuring days that are more than just a single rest to single fight ratio so that the cheesy nova solution isn't always on the table.

  9. - Top - End - #9
    Firbolg in the Playground
     
    stoutstien's Avatar

    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    Maine
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Another Attempt at Multiclassing Balance Adjustments

    Your effort is better spent on planning a better campaign. You will see better results without your players feeling like your trying to install governors.
    what is the point of living if you can't deadlift?

    All credit to the amazing avatar goes to thoroughlyS

  10. - Top - End - #10
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    SolithKnightGuy

    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Location
    GMT-5
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Another Attempt at Multiclassing Balance Adjustments

    I suggest keeping it simple with "Multiclassed characters are limited to two classes and must alternate which class they take a level in as they level up. You decide whether or not your character will multiclass when they gain their second level. Extra attack stacks."

    (I also dislike the idea of changing multiclassing in this way.)

  11. - Top - End - #11
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Zhorn's Avatar

    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Location
    Space Australia
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Another Attempt at Multiclassing Balance Adjustments

    It does sound more along the lines of backseat driving your players' characters rather than anything to do with actual balance. The only 'problem' I see you fixing is people wanting to build their characters out in a way you don't like

  12. - Top - End - #12
    Ogre in the Playground
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Vacation in Nyalotha

    Default Re: Another Attempt at Multiclassing Balance Adjustments

    Have you considered giving classes the full 1-20 progression they deserve, expanding on the stubs WotC provided? In other words giving the classes solid reasons to be taken in full?
    If all rules are suggestions what happens when I pass the save?

  13. - Top - End - #13
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    BlackDragon

    Join Date
    Apr 2020

    Default Re: Another Attempt at Multiclassing Balance Adjustments

    Quote Originally Posted by dmhelp View Post
    I want similarly themed characters to be comparable. So my problems are when fighter 11/barb 9 >> barb 20 or Ranger 5/rogue 15 >> rogue 20. Etc. At level 20 that also includes some caster splashes.

    The limitation is a lot cleaner/simpler than rewriting all of the capstones/high level progression.

    I think caster martial balance can be addressed by magic item selection & custom magic items, just how it was handled in ad&d/1e. So I’m not concerned w wiz 20 vs fighter 11/x 9, only vs the similarly themed character (wiz 20 vs wiz 19/cle 1).
    I mean, if you're willing to hand out custom magic items to ensure the barb20 is as good as the wiz20, why can't you hand out custom items to ensure the barb20 is as good as the barb9/fighter11? (Just a weapon with expanded crit range would go a long way here.)

    This is especially evident if at level 9 you were an eldritch knight 4/bladesinger 5 (who normally still would not have extra attack) or you could be a 3/3 split who still didn’t have the option for a feat until level 7. I want to play a ranger/rogue but I have to think up some reason why I’m going to suddenly go pure rogue from level 6 on.
    I'm not saying this to be tendentious, but I really don't get your point here. In the current system, a fighter3/barbarian3 doesn't get a second attack, but he DOES get two subclasses, so he can use that hit to deal +2d6+5 damage every round (from zealot and battlemaster). Maybe not optimal, but certainly not disastrously weak. In your system, he gets all that PLUS a feat PLUS a second attack each round, making him WAY better than a single-class fighter or barbarian. But then, in your system he has to take at LEAST two levels of NOTHING, because he already got the level 4 and 5 features for both classes he's taking. How is that progression any less clunky?

    Meanwhile, unless I'm missing something about your rules, the ranger/rogue is STILL going to have to take 5 levels of ranger, because rogue doesn't get Extra Attack and thus his rogue levels won't count towards that. And of course, it's not like the ranger doesn't get any class features after level 5! Heck, the level 6 class feature isn't bad at all with Tasha's.

  14. - Top - End - #14
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Zhorn's Avatar

    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Location
    Space Australia
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Another Attempt at Multiclassing Balance Adjustments

    Quote Originally Posted by dmhelp View Post
    ... I already have a lot of house rules ...
    Quote Originally Posted by dmhelp View Post
    ... I like the simplest change that gets things done ...
    I'm not too sure these statements really go together.
    From reading the posts you've done in the past about putting your house rules up for review, I think you may have fallen into a rules bloat trap. I've seen it quite a few times, even fell into it myself before and scrapped a whole lot of house rules when I realised I was doing it.

    Playing about and adapting your own set of house rules and homebrew is a good learning experience, but another part of the process is learning when to cut back and keep things simple and easy for outsiders to understand.
    Trying to have a set of class specific rules AND a set of multiclass restriction rules at the same time, both with the stated goal of fixing a perceived imbalance, it just sounds like unnecessary over complication. Either one set of adjustments works or it doesn't. If it works, there's no need for an additional set of adjustments, and if it doesn't then don't include it with testing the next set of house rules. Keep the bloat down.

  15. - Top - End - #15
    Ogre in the Playground
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Vacation in Nyalotha

    Default Re: Another Attempt at Multiclassing Balance Adjustments

    Quote Originally Posted by dmhelp View Post
    I already have a lot of house rules (eg frenzy buff, weapon spec for champion, etc) so I like the simplest change that gets things done.....
    Extra ASI handouts on a GM perception and fiat basis is anything but a rule. Monks are over/underpowered, fighters are... this claims to address stuff but cannot be relied upon for any objective comparisons. As a player reading that bit of guidance I’d note the following.

    1. The benefit is delayed, pending delivery based on poor performance.
    2. The benefit is not a known quantity in advance.
    3. Each successive ASI is less valuable than the previous one, and in T3-4 generally pale in comparison to class features.

    I see no reason to jump for a single class option when a multiclass provides the tools to better shape my desired character. I know what I’m getting and when with the MC, the single class probably dwindles to just +stats, and they’re not even all guaranteed here!

    The multiclass rule is rather naked in pushing a very particular way of building a character. It’s a solution in search of a problem. Why does there need to be this minor benefit (ASI) to fitting inside the dotted lines? It’s not generally sufficient to encourage that exact split.

    The extra attack change portion of the MC rule is far from minor. With how pretty much all martial classes are frontloaded this is an interesting if narrow fix to WotCs kludge, but it may lead to a great many MC characters springing up in place of the single classed options. However past a point I don’t see a reason to keep the split, once a class is self sustaining on the extra attack you can just break the arbitrary ratio to pursue the features you want. You don’t take a class to X because that’s the way it should be done, you take it until it stops giving you stuff you care about and then you chase down other stuff.
    If all rules are suggestions what happens when I pass the save?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •