PDA

View Full Version : 5e Multiclassing



SpawnOfMorbo
2014-06-19, 09:20 AM
I would like to see multiclassing work in 5e, I really really would. However a lot of things I saw in playtest packets and such really scares me that we will go back to the days of 3.X. I also don't want to see feat multiclassing (though gaining new abilities through feats would be fine) sincethen you need to balance the MC feats with other feats, which will suck.

Hybrids I would love to see in the game eventually, but that is making an entirely new class. I love the 4e hybrid btw.

How about setting up multiclassing to work off archetypes or whatever the hell they are calling each class choice gained at certain levels.

So a Fighter with 13 Cha could take the multiclass archetype "Chaos Magic" and gain a trigger to roll on the chaos magic table when that trigger happens.

Obviously you would need to balance these (my above example may be a bit crazy but it is more of the idea of it) with other archetype selections, but I think that is happening anyways (one would assume all archetypes will be balanced with each other...haha...sigh...).

A wizard could pick up Fighter Style (Defense) for a +1 AC when wearing armor. This wizard may focus on blasts and want to wear armor and get into the thick of things like a Warmage from 3.5.

This may not be perfect but it could lead to interesting combos. You can still enjoy feats or stat boosters while gaining a new class feature.

Are there any other ideas for Multiclassing in 5e?

obryn
2014-06-19, 09:26 AM
I'm not a fan of multiclassing at all, and especially not the 3.x way of doing it. Next following in its footsteps is one of my biggest problems with the game. I don't think buffet-style multiclassing can possibly work well with how D&D treats classes. If you want buffet-style multiclassing, something like d20 Modern or Star Wars Saga's approach (sorta) makes a lot more sense.

I prefer more rigid classes, which gives a designer the freedom to both front-load classes with interesting abilities, and cut down on the synergies that occur when you can, for instance, cast two spells in a round with Action Surge.

SpawnOfMorbo
2014-06-19, 09:32 AM
I'm not a fan of multiclassing at all, and especially not the 3.x way of doing it. Next following in its footsteps is one of my biggest problems with the game. I don't think buffet-style multiclassing can possibly work well with how D&D treats classes. If you want buffet-style multiclassing, something like d20 Modern or Star Wars Saga's approach (sorta) makes a lot more sense.

I prefer more rigid classes, which gives a designer the freedom to both front-load classes with interesting abilities, and cut down on the synergies that occur when you can, for instance, cast two spells in a round with Action Surge.

Yeah the 3.X style of MC really really bugs me. It is one of the things that makes me think they still don't know why 3.x was/is bad.

Action surge would be something I wouldn't put in a MC feat, archetype, or hybrid. Make it class specific. Actually, no, just get rid of it. I'm not a fan of breaking the action economy.

obryn
2014-06-19, 10:01 AM
Yeah the 3.X style of MC really really bugs me. It is one of the things that makes me think they still don't know why 3.x was/is bad.

Action surge would be something I wouldn't put in a MC feat, archetype, or hybrid. Make it class specific. Actually, no, just get rid of it. I'm not a fan of breaking the action economy.
You see, I like Action Surge a lot. But again, multiclassing seems like it'll hose the whole thing up.

I'm honestly more worried about some of the Cleric and Wizard features than I am about Action Surge.

Jigawatts
2014-06-19, 10:02 AM
I'm not a fan of 3E style either, personally I have always loved me some AD&D multiclassing. My first (and longest played, and all time favorite) D&D character ever was a 2E Fighter/Mage/Thief. I would have been really happy if they had gone back to that style or something similar.

Fwiffo86
2014-06-19, 10:03 AM
makes me wish for the days of:

Only demi-humans could multi-class. And even then, their levels were limited.
Only humans could change class. And you didn't reclaim your class abilities until your new class level matched or exceeded your previous class.
And special classes (Ranger/Paladin/Barbarian) all had attribute requirements commesurate with the special abilities they got. (Paladins requiring Cha 17 anyone? LOL)

Trundlebug
2014-06-19, 10:11 AM
makes me wish for the days of:

Only demi-humans could multi-class. And even then, their levels were limited.
Only humans could change class. And you didn't reclaim your class abilities until your new class level matched or exceeded your previous class.
And special classes (Ranger/Paladin/Barbarian) all had attribute requirements commesurate with the special abilities they got. (Paladins requiring Cha 17 anyone? LOL)

Each to their own but as someone that grew through 1-3 (and dabbled in 4) 2E's dual-classing was kludgy and a royal pain in the neck for me as DM. As for the stat requirement, meh ambivalent to that. In my experience point buy has become more and more default so it's less a special thing and more "welp gotta put 17 there".

That said I miss some of the charm of 2E. Not trying to keep up with buying the books as a young person though.

Millennium
2014-06-19, 11:06 AM
It's tough to get a sense of how to improve multiclassing in 5e when we can't be sure we have the whole picture of how multiclassing will work. We can't even really be sure we have the whole picture of how single-classing will work.

That said, as a very general statement, it seems to me that there are four situations which multiclassing really tries to model. No edition has done all four of them very well, though different editions (and subsystems and variants) have done better at some than others.

Specialization: I am X, and I'm especially focused on Y. 3e-style multiclassing handles this well via PrCs. 4e's Paragon paths could be considered a kind of specialization, but do paragon paths count as a kind of multiclassing? 2e doesn't use multiclassing for this (though it has its own ways).
Broadening: I am X, but I've picked up some tricks from Y. This is where 4e multiclassing really shines. The 3.x line (including Pathfinder) could do this, but they never really got the balance of early class abilities right: early versions front-loaded too heavily, and later versions swung in the opposite direction. 2e doesn't really handle this.
Hybridization: I am both X and Y. 2e's demihuman multi-classing works decently here: you have both classes, and you advance them simultaneously, though with penalties and level caps. You could also build on UA3's gestalt rules, though you'd need to figure out a way to rebalance the XP table (and probably bar further multiclassing). Stock 3e tried this via hybrid PrCs and, later, hybrid core classes, but the results were a mixed bag at best. 4e doesn't do this so much.
Career change: I used to be X, but now I am Y. 2e's human dual-classing handled this decently, though the XP and ability penalties you faced until you "caught up" in class Y were a bit clumsy and more than a bit heavy-handed. You can express it in 3e, though it relies on a disciplined player rather than actual rules to keep from going back. 4e just plain doesn't handle it.

What will 5e do? That remains to be seen. It's doubtful that it will touch all four bases well: few systems ever do. It might be that we just plain need multiple systems, even though 2e's setup was clunky

SpawnOfMorbo
2014-06-19, 11:29 AM
It's tough to get a sense of how to improve multiclassing in 5e when we can't be sure we have the whole picture of how multiclassing will work. We can't even really be sure we have the whole picture of how single-classing will work.

That said, as a very general statement, it seems to me that there are four situations which multiclassing really tries to model. No edition has done all four of them very well, though different editions (and subsystems and variants) have done better at some than others.

Specialization: I am X, and I'm especially focused on Y. 3e-style multiclassing handles this well via PrCs. 4e's Paragon paths could be considered a kind of specialization, but do paragon paths count as a kind of multiclassing? 2e doesn't use multiclassing for this (though it has its own ways).
Broadening: I am X, but I've picked up some tricks from Y. This is where 4e multiclassing really shines. The 3.x line (including Pathfinder) could do this, but they never really got the balance of early class abilities right: early versions front-loaded too heavily, and later versions swung in the opposite direction. 2e doesn't really handle this.
Hybridization: I am both X and Y. 2e's demihuman multi-classing works decently here: you have both classes, and you advance them simultaneously, though with penalties and level caps. You could also build on UA3's gestalt rules, though you'd need to figure out a way to rebalance the XP table (and probably bar further multiclassing). Stock 3e tried this via hybrid PrCs and, later, hybrid core classes, but the results were a mixed bag at best. 4e doesn't do this so much.
Career change: I used to be X, but now I am Y. 2e's human dual-classing handled this decently, though the XP and ability penalties you faced until you "caught up" in class Y were a bit clumsy and more than a bit heavy-handed. You can express it in 3e, though it relies on a disciplined player rather than actual rules to keep from going back. 4e just plain doesn't handle it.

What will 5e do? That remains to be seen. It's doubtful that it will touch all four bases well: few systems ever do. It might be that we just plain need multiple systems, even though 2e's setup was clunky

Except for the hybridization point about 4e, this is a good list. 4e did hybrids the best, and I would say that it is the true multiclass gem of the edition. Which it is pretty much a more balanced version of 3.5 UA gestalt rules of course.

I'm not sure if 5e will actually have multiclassing in the PHB, I figured they would throw multiple styles of multiclassing in the DMG. I also think they might just say "screw it" and throw in 3e MC rules and call it a day. Kinda up in the air.

So a better question I could have asked earlier...

How would you, dear playground, have multiclassing be used in 5e.

Jigawatts
2014-06-19, 11:47 AM
Hybridization: I am both X and Y.
This is definitely my preferred style. And I would argue that AD&D did this rather well. You WERE both, but you would always be at least 1 level behind your single classed compatriots. The only really wonky part about this system was calculating hit points, but even that wasn't too bad.

Also this style has never been properly emulated since, the Eldritch Knight, Duskblade, Magus, etc, none of them could ever quite capture the feel (and glory) of the AD&D Fighter/Mage.

While I would prefer that this way be the "core" style of multiclassing in the PHB (although it doesnt look like it will be), I will be happy if they just have rules supporting it in the DMG.

SpawnOfMorbo
2014-06-19, 11:53 AM
I've been calling them archetypes bit I should have said Sub-classes.... Oopse...

StabbityRabbit
2014-06-19, 02:48 PM
Broadening: I am X, but I've picked up some tricks from Y.

This would have to be my favorite method of multiclassing. Maybe it's because 4e's multiclassing was the first that I knew, but I'd like to see a modified version of 4e multiclassing.

Ideally just take away the restriction to one multiclass (like a bard), and powered up a bit to be on par with other 5e feats.

RedWarlock
2014-06-19, 05:59 PM
My preference is the ability to have multiclassing broaden your approach. Was-X-is-now-Y, without needing to forget everything from X. 3e multiclassing was good for that idea, if not the implementation. I hate having to start a character as a half-X-half-Y, because I feel like that should be a decision decided on during the course of the character's play-lifespan.

Eten
2014-06-20, 09:50 PM
One of my players took to the multiclassing with excitement and ran a bunch of possibilities by me to see if it would fly. I told him up front it would, but I listened to him. Afterwards, despite how impressive what some of these multiclass characters could do, I asked him if it was truly that much better than an equivalent max level fighter, or wizard. He would come back and say that no, the multiclass combinations really weren't any better. And that's why I'm not concerned with even his wildest multiclassing combinations.

SpawnOfMorbo
2014-06-20, 11:53 PM
One of my players took to the multiclassing with excitement and ran a bunch of possibilities by me to see if it would fly. I told him up front it would, but I listened to him. Afterwards, despite how impressive what some of these multiclass characters could do, I asked him if it was truly that much better than an equivalent max level fighter, or wizard. He would come back and say that no, the multiclass combinations really weren't any better. And that's why I'm not concerned with even his wildest multiclassing combinations.

Action Surge makes Fighter x completely worth it.

Lokiare
2014-06-21, 05:18 AM
Action Surge makes Fighter x completely worth it.

Yep, imagine a Fighter Monk using flurry of blows with Action Surge...

SpawnOfMorbo
2014-06-21, 07:35 AM
Yep, imagine a Fighter Monk using flurry of blows with Action Surge...

No imagine a wizard with action surge. Depending on how the final version is made that could be the most popular multiclass.

Fighter 2/Wizard 18 double cast spells. They need to stop with this action economy breaking bull crap, did they not learn anything from 3e?

Lokiare
2014-06-21, 12:11 PM
No imagine a wizard with action surge. Depending on how the final version is made that could be the most popular multiclass.

Fighter 2/Wizard 18 double cast spells. They need to stop with this action economy breaking bull crap, did they not learn anything from 3e?

Nope, they sure did not. I wonder why people question that WotC knows what its doing when they continue to do this kind of thing.

pwykersotz
2014-06-21, 12:54 PM
Other than Barbarian and Monk, the classes don't appear to have capstone abilities worth mentioning, so this sort of thing seems encouraged. Wizard spells don't progress at all after 17, so Barbarian 1 / Fighter 2 / Wizard 17 might be fun. Just for Iron Hide plus the extra action. Solid defense without armor penalties, burst damage, seems fun.

SpawnOfMorbo
2014-06-21, 01:05 PM
Nope, they sure did not. I wonder why people question that WotC knows what its doing when they continue to do this kind of thing.

Because they can still get people like you (and all of us) talking about their product. There is no such thing as bad publicity.



Other than Barbarian and Monk, the classes don't appear to have capstone abilities worth mentioning, so this sort of thing seems encouraged. Wizard spells don't progress at all after 17, so Barbarian 1 / Fighter 2 / Wizard 17 might be fun. Just for Iron Hide plus the extra action. Solid defense without armor penalties, burst damage, seems fun.

I like that there is no capstone, or at least making the classes capstone be at level 17 (casters). This gives more wiggle room.

I would like to see capstones worked out by ECL. Give a bunch of class feature options and when you hit level 20 you may select one as long as you have a certain number of levels in that class.

So if you are a Wiz 2/Fighter 18 then you can select from the low level wizard capstones or from the high level Fighter capstones. If you are a Fighter 2/Wizard 18 then you can select from the low level Fighter capstones or the High Level Wizard Capstones...

This way, however they do multiclassing, won't completely discourage multiclassing and you can still get a capstone.

Nizaris
2014-06-21, 09:11 PM
This is one of those things that has me fairly leery of the system in 5e. I don't like the stat requirements at all. What if I want to play a rogue who picks up some street fighting skills as a fighter later on, it makes the Str based fighter the one that seems more "correct". At least the apprentice tier does spread out class features some but there is very little reason for any optimizer not to start as a fighter, multiclass into what they actually plan to be (and is stated for), and then pick up Fighter 2 for action surge. I would prefer multiclassing to be relegated to feats like Arcane Archer or a separate 3-5 level table specifically for each class for multiclassing that grants the proficiencies only at level one to stave off the front loading as much.

SpawnOfMorbo
2014-06-21, 10:10 PM
This is one of those things that has me fairly leery of the system in 5e. I don't like the stat requirements at all. What if I want to play a rogue who picks up some street fighting skills as a fighter later on, it makes the Str based fighter the one that seems more "correct". At least the apprentice tier does spread out class features some but there is very little reason for any optimizer not to start as a fighter, multiclass into what they actually plan to be (and is stated for), and then pick up Fighter 2 for action surge. I would prefer multiclassing to be relegated to feats like Arcane Archer or a separate 3-5 level table specifically for each class for multiclassing that grants the proficiencies only at level one to stave off the front loading as much.

I pretty much ignore any ability score requirement so this won't be an issue for me.

You learn to do something and that increases your base score... Not the other way around you know.

da_chicken
2014-06-22, 10:12 AM
So if Fighter 2 is so fantastic for Wizard because of armor proficiency and action surge, when do you take it? It's not like it's without cost. You are 1 spell level behind if you do it before level 17. Is Quicken Spell 1/encounter worth that? Additionally, you have to be spending feats on Strength to qualify. Or are you planning to take Fighter first and then multi to Wizard.

JBPuffin
2014-06-22, 01:22 PM
I think the plan was to MC into Wizard after you get Action Surge, then carry on as your BA Fighter/Wizard self.

Yeah, 3.5's MC would have been great if the classes themselves weren't on wildly different levels. Now, if everything's equal, and there are some abilities a class or two have that the others don't, then sure! Also, you would have to be careful of combos...unless everyone can do something that broken, which is actually the kind of game I'd encourage (if everyone's capable of destroying the world, who's to say that they can do it better?).

Now, personally? I loved FFT's way of handling classes. Get something like that together, with actually balanced mechanics and classes that have basic I-can-do-everything potential, and I'd spend ten dollars a month on that, hands down. For 5e, though, just let me shift my class features around. (I don't want a bad BAB anymore? I'll trade half my casting for it, sure. I want Sneak Attack? No Action Surge for me! Not that drastic, probably, but that idea.)

SpawnOfMorbo
2014-06-22, 01:32 PM
So if Fighter 2 is so fantastic for Wizard because of armor proficiency and action surge, when do you take it? It's not like it's without cost. You are 1 spell level behind if you do it before level 17. Is Quicken Spell 1/encounter worth that? Additionally, you have to be spending feats on Strength to qualify. Or are you planning to take Fighter first and then multi to Wizard.


I think the plan was to MC into Wizard after you get Action Surge, then carry on as your BA Fighter/Wizard self.

Yeah, 3.5's MC would have been great if the classes themselves weren't on wildly different levels. Now, if everything's equal, and there are some abilities a class or two have that the others don't, then sure! Also, you would have to be careful of combos...unless everyone can do something that broken, which is actually the kind of game I'd encourage (if everyone's capable of destroying the world, who's to say that they can do it better?).

Now, personally? I loved FFT's way of handling classes. Get something like that together, with actually balanced mechanics and classes that have basic I-can-do-everything potential, and I'd spend ten dollars a month on that, hands down. For 5e, though, just let me shift my class features around. (I don't want a bad BAB anymore? I'll trade half my casting for it, sure. I want Sneak Attack? No Action Surge for me! Not that drastic, probably, but that idea.)

Well I have no plans to use 5e MC unless it isn't a pile of 3.5 garbage. Jury is out on this one.

I'm working on a FFT type game right now, a bit of changes but overall working on the so called multiclassing like they do.

unwise
2014-06-22, 10:57 PM
I am quiet concerned about multi-classing too. I think it is easily addressed though by simple DM fiat, or setting a X level minimum of investment for each multi-class. So if you are a 3wiz/1rogue, the DM might say that there cannot be more than 3 levels difference between the two, until you hit level 4 in the lower one.

Using the latest playtest packet, I am playing a 3bard/1rogue. 10 skills with expertise in 8 of them makes a great skill monkey. Especially given he can't roll less than 10 on lore checks. The Rogue seems a little front loaded, with sneak attack, 4 skills + theives tools and expertise at level 1. Maybe I am just too into skills.

MCing can feel like a good investment at one level, and feel like a setback later one. The Fighter who hits level 5 and does not get an extra attack because they MC'd to a less fightery class will be kicking themselves. A level later they will feel fine about it. The same goes to a less extent with feats; MCing at level 4 is hard pill to swallow.

captpike
2014-06-22, 11:19 PM
while MCing causing overpoweredness is a big problem, its only half the issue.

the other half is making it no suck to multiclass intuitively. as in "I am a fighter who has dabbled in magic, fighter 8/wizard 2 sounds good" or worse "I am a gish, wizard 5/fighter 5 sounds good"

that is..hard to make work to say the least.

unwise
2014-06-22, 11:36 PM
while MCing causing overpoweredness is a big problem, its only half the issue.

the other half is making it no suck to multiclass intuitively. as in "I am a fighter who has dabbled in magic, fighter 8/wizard 2 sounds good" or worse "I am a gish, wizard 5/fighter 5 sounds good"

that is..hard to make work to say the least.

That's a good point, a lot of the combinations of yesteryear might not play out well in practice. The Fighter/Theif/MU, Fighter/Theif, Theif/Mage and Fighter/Cleric combos were always popular during old games. How many of those are going to be viable? I have not looked into it myself.

In the case of the Fighter/Mage, I wonder if the Eldritch Knight, which we were told would be a fighter specialisation, will have the old ability of "levels in this class count as full/half caster levels". It is a decent fix, but it does away with the elegance of the system and opens a floodgate to "you have to be this specialisation if you want to MC to X"

captpike
2014-06-22, 11:54 PM
That's a good point, a lot of the combinations of yesteryear might not play out well in practice. The Fighter/Theif/MU, Fighter/Theif, Theif/Mage and Fighter/Cleric combos were always popular during old games. How many of those are going to be viable? I have not looked into it myself.

In the case of the Fighter/Mage, I wonder if the Eldritch Knight, which we were told would be a fighter specialisation, will have the old ability of "levels in this class count as full/half caster levels". It is a decent fix, but it does away with the elegance of the system and opens a floodgate to "you have to be this specialisation if you want to MC to X"

it also has to be made in such a way that when you do make a useless character, its obvious that you did it (like being a all str, no int wizard).

one of the big problems with 3e style MCing is that its really really easy to make a worthless character by making intuitive choices.

SpawnOfMorbo
2014-06-23, 07:12 AM
I guess the most likely to be balanced, well as balanced as WotC could make is to make each multiclass possibility its own class with its own subclasses.

Crazy I know, the dreams of a mad man...

But, if you want to MC Fighter/Mage then you will pick up the class "Fighter-Mage" and gain that class's abilities and such.

Max spell level will probably be 7th or so, but up till them they are a full caster when gaining new spell levels but get less spell slots to use.

Action Surge comes in later than a standard fighter.

"D&D Multiclass PC Compendium"

You could have a chapter devoted to each base class that has each combo with one other class. At the end show DMs how to allow triple multiclassing (but make that variant rare of whatever).

Make there be a difference between Cleric/Barbarian (Shaman) and Barbarian/Cleric (Rage Prophet) and you will have yourself an awesome book that will sell pretty well.

Also...

I wouldn't mind seeing rules for Clerics to multiclass with Cleric. As in, I'm a Cleric of War and I want to multiclass as a Cleric of Destruction. Or I'm a Cleric of Yondella and I MC Cleric of Corellon. Let's get polytheistic up in here.

This way when I make my aithiest cleric he can draw power from a few different gods and change up his abilities :smallbiggrin: (random note, being an aethiest Cleric is super fun).

Surrealistik
2014-06-23, 03:19 PM
If they're anything like the closed doors alpha playtest, most of the capstones are powerful to the point that even 1 level dips will have substantial opportunity costs, which is great. Yes, you can have your action surge (which IMO should not be usable for casting), but at the cost of losing an ability score improvement, a couple of higher level spell slots, and a couple of 3rd level spells that refresh when you take a short rest.

Lokiare
2014-06-23, 03:37 PM
Some other stuff they said during articles is that casters won't lose power if they multiclass. Some of their casting ability will be based on total level. The way they explained it, sounded backwards to me though.

Personally I would do with where your spellcasting DC is going to be based on your class level, because unless you really dump all your scores, you'll have a lesser casting score. Then you simply gain exactly what you would on the level you pick up for your caster class. So say you are fighter 5 then pick up a level of wizard. Well at level 6 a Wizard gets 1 level 3 spell slot and gains 1 spell of their choice of a level they can cast. Then you aren't behind on anything and you are trading an ability score improvement delay for 1 level and some hp for the ability to use a spell that will be useful at your level.

I don't think this is how they planned for it to work though.

SpawnOfMorbo
2014-06-23, 04:28 PM
Some other stuff they said during articles is that casters won't lose power if they multiclass. Some of their casting ability will be based on total level. The way they explained it, sounded backwards to me though.

Personally I would do with where your spellcasting DC is going to be based on your class level, because unless you really dump all your scores, you'll have a lesser casting score. Then you simply gain exactly what you would on the level you pick up for your caster class. So say you are fighter 5 then pick up a level of wizard. Well at level 6 a Wizard gets 1 level 3 spell slot and gains 1 spell of their choice of a level they can cast. Then you aren't behind on anything and you are trading an ability score improvement delay for 1 level and some hp for the ability to use a spell that will be useful at your level.

I don't think this is how they planned for it to work though.

I'm not sure if they know what they are planning... :smallsigh:

Unless this 3.5 style MC is a clever trick?

DemonSlayer6
2015-05-04, 08:38 PM
Hey, Spawn, multiclassing in 5e (official) is an odd thing. To note, however,

Ability score improvements and feats are tied to Class Level.
Spells are cast using spell slots of different power levels. You know and prepare spells based on each Class Level, but have access to spell slots based on your combined Caster Level.
In 5e, there are no "skill points". There is instead a flat "Proficiency Bonus" that is tied to your overall Character Level.
When you multiclass, special class features (extra attacks, Ki/spell points, pacts/oaths, etc) are kept but do not progress except by leveling in the specific class that grant said feature.
Additionally, multiclassing only grants some basic proficiencies. A bard/fighter would be proficient with 3 instruments, any 3 skills, all simple/martial weapons, all light/medium armor, and shields. A fighter/bard would be proficient in 1 instrument, 2 specific skills, any 1 skill, all simple/martial weapons, all light/medium/heavy armor, and shields. You also keep your first class' saving throw proficiencies.
Lastly, so long as one is proficient in their armor they can perform spells in that armor. Reciprocally, if you do not have a proficiency in the armor you wear then you cannot cast spells while wearing it.



This may be a little odd, so let me go through some of your examples. First, there's a "Chaos Mage" Fighter.

You could go Warlock (Charisma-based spell-caster class), taking the "Pact of the Blade". Warlocks are proficient with simple weapons and light armor, and Weapon-Pact Warlocks are automatically proficient with their pact-weapon. A Dexterity-based Warlock with a finesse weapon could be almost as efficient in combat as a Rogue.
You could go Fighter, taking the "Eldritch Knight" battle path (Intelligence-based spell-caster option). Fighters are proficient in all weapons, armor, and shields. Eldritch knights gain spellcasting at one-third of a full-spellcasting progression. This is a straightforward option for those who might want to cast spells and swing a sword simultaneously.
You could multi-class as a Fighter/Sorcerer. Sorcerers (Charisma-based spell-caster class) have two archtypes from which they get their magic: a Dragonic Bloodline, and Wild Magic. Wild Magic, a response from the innate chaotic magical energies of the world to your bending them, is probably what you want.


Wild magic, however, doesn't actually necessarily have a trigger other than that you cast a spell. The DM is able to call for it to trigger at any time. Though what you could do in this instance is work out a system that enables it to trigger without the DM's explicit demanding.

For a Wizard/Fighter, there are a couple options.

As mentioned, you can take a "front-lines" blade-pact Warlock. Then you don't need to multiclass.
As mentioned, you can also take an "Eldritch Knight" "defense" Fighter. Again, no need to multiclass. Hell, the Intelligence-based spellcasting of the Eldritch Knight is explicitly drawn from the Wizard spell list.
You can take a Cleric. Clerics already have light/medium armor proficiency, shield proficiency, and simple weapon proficiency. Some Divine Domains, meanwhile, grant martial weapon and even heavy armor proficiencies. Tempest Cleric also grants always-prepared "domain spells" such as Thunderwave (which does damage to and pushes away up to 9 targets in a 15-ft-by-15-ft cube in front of you. Front-lines blaster like no other.
You can multiclass a spell-caster with a level in Fighter and take the "Defensive" style. This could actually prove insane with a Tempest Cleric (Clerics are full casters, FYI!) since a shield grants +2 to AC and the heaviest armor offers a base AC of 16. 16 +2 because of the shield +1 because of Defense totals to an AC of 19. That's a 10% chance to be hit at all! Perfect for a front-line fighter.
You could also take as your base a Defensive Fighter and then multiclass into a spellcasting class. Probably, you would elect for a Fighter/Sorcerer simply because Eldritch Knight covers Fighter/Wizard and blade-pact Warlocks don't necessarily need to multiclass to be front-line fighters.
You could take a Draconic Bloodline Sorcerer and multiclass as either a Monk or a Barbarian. Monks add their Dexterity and Wisdom bonuses to their "unarmored defense" and Draconic Sorcerers already have a base unarmored defense of 13. Barbarians, meanwhile, add their Dexterity and Constitution bonuses to their "unarmored defense". And while the Barbarian and Monk defenses don't stack with each other, the Draconic defense ability can stack with either.


These are, of course, theoretical. But they show quite a few interesting single-class and multi-class options for doing what you want to do.

-----

What I am currently doing for a multiclass experiment in my group's run of "Elemental Evil" is actually a mechanics mash-up: Half-Orc Protective Tempest Champion

Half-Orcs have a race feature called "Savage Attacks" where they get to add an additional die to critical hits. This means every critical hit I make with my warhammer does 3d8+3.
Champion-archetype Fighters gain "Extended Criticals", where instead of getting a critical on a 20 they get a critical hit on both a 19 and a 20.
Half-Orcs also get a racial ability called "Relentless Endurance" where once a day if they are dropped to 0 hit-points they can instead go to 1 hit-point and remain standing.
Tempest Clerics, meanwhile, have an ability called "Wrath of the Storm" where if an enemy within 5 feet inflicts damage you can use a reaction a set amount of times a day to inflict 2d8 damage.


This has two key desires: Get a lot of critical hits to keep doing monster damage, and maintain a "Last Stand" defense where my enemy takes himself down. Add this one feat that allows me to roll damage dice twice for every attack I make and lets me take the highest roll, and I could smash more effectively than the Hulk!

coredump
2015-05-05, 12:21 AM
Um.... this thread is from 10 months ago....

Rowan Wolf
2015-05-05, 12:56 AM
Yes, you can have your action surge (which IMO should not be usable for casting)

They kind of built in protection there with the interaction between bonus action spells and only allowing cantrips in the same turn.


Um.... this thread is from 10 months ago....

So it is at that hadn't noticed at first seemed interesting at nothing else, but then I haven't been awake a full hour yet.

MeeposFire
2015-05-05, 06:06 AM
They kind of built in protection there with the interaction between bonus action spells and only allowing cantrips in the same turn.



So it is at that hadn't noticed at first seemed interesting at nothing else, but then I haven't been awake a full hour yet.

Action surge does not make a spell a bonus action so a fighter/caster can cast any spell and use action surge to cast any other action spell in the game of any level. The bonus action rule never comes up because no spell used was a bonus action spell.

However action surge is still affected by the bonus action rule if you use your bonus action to cast a spell in which case it is also limited to cantrips just like your other action based spells would be (unless you play with the useless reading of the bonus action rule only applies after you cast the bonus action spell in which case the rule is generally effectively useless).

This is just one example of how the bonus action casting rule is just not very well written as it also prevents you from casting reaction spells on your turn which was also probably not intended (among other weirdness).

Clistenes
2015-05-05, 06:12 AM
Hey, Spawn, multiclassing in 5e (official) is an odd thing. To note, however,
[LIST=1]
Ability score improvements and feats are tied to Class Level.

I actually don't like this. Every class get ability score improvements at 4th, 8th, 12th, 16th and 19th level, so, why aren't those tied to character level, like proficiency bonuses are?

MeeposFire
2015-05-05, 06:31 AM
I actually don't like this. Every class get ability score improvements at 4th, 8th, 12th, 16th and 19th level, so, why aren't those tied to character level, like proficiency bonuses are?

To give you further bonuses for sticking with a certain class. They wanted to make sure that they kept the importance of your class defining you character as it is in most editions of D&D (3e being the most prominent exception, not saying it is a bad thing but it is the exception out of the group).

By tying the boosts to your class it forces you to really consider what you giving up by multiclassing and what you gain. This especially hits hard those who dip lots of classes since if you take many levels in a classes you are going to get back some ability boosts.

Also notice that the ability boosts are not quite as needed in 5e than they were in 3e and 4e. In 3e and 4e the boosts were required for prerequisites and the basic math of the game. In 5e the system is designed that you can work with your starting stats though of course it is a good idea to find ways to boost them as that can be a big help.

It also looks like it is working as your statement makes me think that the loss of ability boosts does make a big enough effect on you to tempt you to not multi class. To those that think classes as character defining game mechanics that is an indication that the system is working (an dit looks like the current designers fit that mold).


To be fair I do like giving players free feats as they level up (only a few) so that they get some nice ways to make their characters unique and to allow them to use their ASIs with some more freedom but I do like the idea of tying ASIs to class level.

Haruki-kun
2015-05-05, 09:43 AM
The Winged Mod: Thread Necromancy.