Is Multiclassing "ruining" the game?

[Aett_Thorn]

I'm going to say that multiclassing doesn't ruin the game. However, the Developers, by not assuming that people will multiclass, are doing some damage to game balance by not accounting for it when designing subclasses. Just because it's an optional rule doesn't mean that the Developers shouldn't keep it in mind when designing their game.

[2D8HP]

...If players and/or the DM are interfering with each others' fun via minmaxing, or insulting each other over not optimizing...

.
The only time that I experienced being hassled for multi-classing was because I wasn't"optimizing" (other player thought that my selection was "sub-optimal", and I have also been hassled for not playing a Wizard when I rolled a high stat.

I've seen criticism for "optimizing cheese" in this Forum, but in-game I've only been criticised for not trying for superpower, by those who just can't stand my not wanting to play the most powerful character possible.

[ad_hoc]

I'm going to say that multiclassing doesn't ruin the game. However, the Developers, by not assuming that people will multiclass, are doing some damage to game balance by not accounting for it when designing subclasses. Just because it's an optional rule doesn't mean that the Developers shouldn't keep it in mind when designing their game.

This is exactly what they should do, and I imagine, why it is an optional rule.

Hamstringing design/the game just because there is an optional rule that might be used is ridiculous.

Using optional rules means that the table is responsible for problems that may arise. Most of which are super easy to fix using common sense.

For example, we use feats but we don't use all of the feats because we find some to be problematic. It's really as simple as that.

[Arkhios]

I'm going to say that multiclassing doesn't ruin the game. However, the Developers, by not assuming that people will multiclass, are doing some damage to game balance by not accounting for it when designing subclasses. Just because it's an optional rule doesn't mean that the Developers shouldn't keep it in mind when designing their game.

Playtest process is more tedious than that. First you got to make sure that a new class is balanced comparing a single class against another.

The developers are smarter than you might think they are. When they ask for feedback and exclaim upfront that this version of the class is neither intended nor tuned for multiclassing, it's you who is doing disservice to them and to yourself if you complain about how multiclassing this playtest version breaks the game. It's not what they asked for, was it?

[Vaz]

On one hand we have people people sayng Multiclassing is ruining the game on. Another, Wizard Simulacrum shenanigans. And on another - 5+10 feats.

It's hilarious.

[Willie the Duck]

On one hand we have people people sayng Multiclassing is ruining the game on. Another, Wizard Simulacrum shenanigans. And on another - 5+10 feats.

It's hilarious.

Actually, I quite clearly didn't say Wizard Simulacrum shenanigans were ruining the game. I used them as an example of optimization-cheese that was not related to multiclassing. None of any of this ruins the game unless you let it.

[Dudewithknives]

Playtest process is more tedious than that. First you got to make sure that a new class is balanced comparing a single class against another.

The developers are smarter than you might think they are. When they ask for feedback and exclaim upfront that this version of the class is neither intended nor tuned for multiclassing, it's you who is doing disservice to them and to yourself if you complain about how multiclassing this playtest version breaks the game. It's not what they asked for, was it?

That is true but also the base process is completely wrong.

If you create a class not based on multi classing, do not playtest it based on multi classing, and then once all that is in you balance it with multi classing in house you essentially had the playtest done for an incomplete class build which is mostly ineffective.

The game uses multi classing, the fact it is optional should not even come up when play testing, because 90% of home games and ALL AL games allow it.

They are play testing mechanics in an environment that is not even the environment their organized and official play uses.

That would be like designing a race car in a lab and testing it on machines and then releasing it to the public when you only let 3 or 4 people ever actually drive the car on the street.

It is an idiotic way to playtest things.

[Grod_The_Giant]

Playtest process is more tedious than that. First you got to make sure that a new class is balanced comparing a single class against another.

The developers are smarter than you might think they are. When they ask for feedback and exclaim upfront that this version of the class is neither intended nor tuned for multiclassing, it's you who is doing disservice to them and to yourself if you complain about how multiclassing this playtest version breaks the game. It's not what they asked for, was it?

I agree that you need to playtest the thing on its own first. On the other hand, it's not hard to consider multiclass potential. I used to do it all the time when I was writing lots of 3e classes. You look at the first few levels (and level 1 in particular) and consider if any of the abilities really stand out. Particularly,

• Things that scale with total character level, rather than class level-- for example, Expertise, or Eldritch Blast.
• Things that significantly alter base game rules-- for example, Hex Warrior's Cha-based fighting
• Things that are significantly broader than comparable abilities on other classes-- for example, the Mystic's Psionic Focus abilities.

Then you run down the list of existing classes and look at how your new class interacts with their main features. You don't have to go through every subclass and every possible interaction, just think "how will this work with Rage/Inspiration/Wild Shape/bonus action attacks/Smite/Expertise/Sneak Attack/Metamagic/Pact Magic/Rituals/9th level spellcasting/Extra Attack?"

You can catch most problems with a checklist, particularly given how few moving parts 5e has compared to previous editions. Multiclassing issues jump out plain as day. "Hmm, Smite becomes more powerful than expected when combined with higher level spells." "Huh, Eldritch/Agonizing Blast gives you a lifelong benefit with just two levels."

[Vaz]

Actually, I quite clearly didn't say Wizard Simulacrum shenanigans were ruining the game. I used them as an example of optimization-cheese that was not related to multiclassing. None of any of this ruins the game unless you let it.

Wasn't using anyone in particular as an example. I find i've had games ruined by more people than by optimization ability.

[QuickLyRaiNbow]

You look at the first few levels (and level 1 in particular) and consider if any of the abilities really stand out. ... You can catch most problems with a checklist, particularly given how few moving parts 5e has compared to previous editions. Multiclassing issues jump out plain as day.

You can also run this checklist in reverse, looking for important holes or weaknesses in particular classes. Bards have a ton of utility, but that's compensated for by weak at-will damage options. Is there an easily accessible, powerful source of at-will damage? If so, maybe that interaction needs to be tweaked somehow, as an example.

[Arkhios]

On the other hand, it's not hard to consider multiclass potential.

You're right, it's not hard. But, however difficult it is, it still adds additional layer to the balancing process and needlessly complicates things. They have more people in-house than just JC and MM to take care of the fine tuning. They might do the initial work in designing, but they have employees under payroll to deal with the more arduous processes (obviously under their supervision). That's not to say that they shouldn't open up multiclassing for playtest as well, but imho, they don't have to do that at the same time while they still want to playtest the core.

[Toofey]

15/15 Fighter/Mage can be worked out with various Gish builds, especially now with the new Xanathar guide.

You can even be a full caster (with access to 9th level spells) and be at least as competant in melee as a non-magic user.

You just need to refluff you class development a bit. A wizard or sorcerer level could not only represent your dedication to Arcane study, but spliting your attention between that and martial training. Same with an Eldritch Knight for example.

His method of novaing was upping his number of attacks ridiculously (he was a two weapon weilder which in 2nd ed with a good enough dex is fantastic, and just isn't as powerful at all in 5e, which I like as a mechanical decision to be clear) that's much harder. if he knew he would need to do melee damage for a few rounds he'd use a haste variant he's researched and go crazy, in 5e you end up getting 1 more attack.

There was a religious element to his campaign, he was a champion of Selune, so I've been thinking about converting him to a light paladin/Wizard which works fine if I keep his rolled stats (which are ridiculous) but I miss the 2 weapon hasted nova of previous eds.

I've looked at a number of splits, and I want to maintain the character's 7th level spells. I was a big fan of simulacrum back in the day, and for those who remember it persistence back when it was a cult of dragon spell.

Thanks for the input though keep it coming.

[mephnick]

You can also run this checklist in reverse, looking for important holes or weaknesses in particular classes. Bards have a ton of utility, but that's compensated for by weak at-will damage options. Is there an easily accessible, powerful source of at-will damage? If so, maybe that interaction needs to be tweaked somehow, as an example.

Thankfully our God, Eldritch Blast, is there to shore up any damage/range deficiencies an already powerful class like Bard or Paladin could have.

Blessed be WotC's ignorance.

[Galactkaktus]

Thankfully our God, Eldritch Blast, is there to shore up any damage/range deficiencies an already powerful class like Bard or Paladin could have.

Blessed be WotC's ignorance.

Yeah but it's not like it's for free there is an opportunity cost to getting eldritch blast + agonizing blast. For bards you delay your spellprogression and for paladins you don't usally want to spend your time using eldritch blast if you can avoid it since you have so much better things to do. Not saying it isn't worth it just that it isn't free.

[Dudewithknives]

Yeah but it's not like it's for free there is an opportunity cost to getting eldritch blast + agonizing blast. For bards you delay your spellprogression and for paladins you don't usally want to spend your time using eldritch blast if you can avoid it since you have so much better things to do. Not saying it isn't worth it just that it isn't free.

Paladins have almost no ranged ability at all, for just a minor 2 level dip into warlock they get the best ranged cantrip in the game, that will always scale with them, essentially 2 extra smites per short rest, another floating invocation of their choice, and whatever patron ability they want, which lets face it is going to be Hexblade so they can use CHA to hit and damage.

all that for just 2 levels behind on getting to their level 6 ability which is the only one anyone cares about past level 2.

Bards have crap damage pretty much all around until they can cherry pick other classes lists, EB for them fixes their only real downside.

It just depends on when they take the 2 levels of warlock.

[Beelzebubba]

If you create a class not based on multi classing, do not playtest it based on multi classing, and then once all that is in you balance it with multi classing in house you essentially had the playtest done for an incomplete class build which is mostly ineffective.

Nah.

When you design a new thing, you first reduce the number of variables you are dealing with so you understand how the different parts work together. If you have too many things going on, when you make changes, it's not clear what could have caused the effect. You have to see how the one system works in isolation before you add more optional bits.

That's a basic tenant of design.

Tweaking a well-understood, well-balanced, tested class for multiclassing is much easier and more effective than trying to juggle every single possible option at once.

[Dudewithknives]

Nah.

When you design a new thing, you first reduce the number of variables you are dealing with so you understand how the different parts work together. If you have too many things going on, when you make changes, it's not clear what could have caused the effect. You have to see how the one system works in isolation before you add more optional bits.

That's a basic tenant of design.

Tweaking a well-understood, well-balanced, tested class for multiclassing is much easier and more effective than trying to juggle every single possible option at once.

Yes, but they completely skip the part where they playtest it AFTER it is fixed for multi classing.

No scientist or anyone else who is testing to see the validity of something is going to do it without testing it in the native environment.

It is like they do the lab rat tests and just skip human trials.

And no, doing the last testing in house does not count, 30,000 people play testing something is much more effective than 12.

[Socratov]

You're right, it's not hard. But, however difficult it is, it still adds additional layer to the balancing process and needlessly complicates things. They have more people in-house than just JC and MM to take care of the fine tuning. They might do the initial work in designing, but they have employees under payroll to deal with the more arduous processes (obviously under their supervision). That's not to say that they shouldn't open up multiclassing for playtest as well, but imho, they don't have to do that at the same time while they still want to playtest the core.

And that is entirely true, however, releasing a class that has been tested internally (as a whole) but not in conjunction with other classes (i.e. through multiclassing or the synergy between characters as a whole) is a class only half tested. A class that is half-tested, is not fit for release.

Now, on the subject of game breaking stuff, yes some multiclassing options can yield an impressive synergy on a specific aspect. However, often that power comes at the cost of versatility. And even then they could be very much upstaged by a well built wizard a some clever use of spells.

And even that is besides the point: the point is that you want to keep the game fun and within reason. That is not a game problem, that is a player problem.

Besides, the concept of classes and levels are artificial constructs anyway...

[Galactkaktus]

Paladins have almost no ranged ability at all, for just a minor 2 level dip into warlock they get the best ranged cantrip in the game, that will always scale with them, essentially 2 extra smites per short rest, another floating invocation of their choice, and whatever patron ability they want, which lets face it is going to be Hexblade so they can use CHA to hit and damage.

all that for just 2 levels behind on getting to their level 6 ability which is the only one anyone cares about past level 2.

Yes they get a good ranged alternative. But most of the time they want to hit stuff in order to be able to smite so i think this advantage appears to be bigger than it is.
And the 2 1st level smites per short rest. Comes at the cost of atleast one smite of the higghest spell slot avalible to the paladin since paladins are half casters two levels behind means one level behind in spell slot progression. You also get your second asi later since you took two levels of another class.

So no i don't agree with the cost you associate with the two level dip. It can absolutly still be worth it especially with the hexblade patron but it's not as clear cut as you made it out to be.

Bards have crap damage pretty much all around until they can cherry pick other classes lists, EB for them fixes their only real downside.

It just depends on when they take the 2 levels of warlock.

It fixes their downside but it weakens their uppside becuase they are behind in spell progression.

[ad_hoc]

The game uses multi classing, the fact it is optional should not even come up when play testing, because 90% of home games and ALL AL games allow it.

I'd like to see your data on that.

[krugaan]

Yes they get a good ranged alternative. But most of the time they want to hit stuff in order to be able to smite so i think this advantage appears to be bigger than it is.
And the 2 1st level smites per short rest. Comes at the cost of atleast one smite of the higghest spell slot avalible to the paladin since paladins are half casters two levels behind means one level behind in spell slot progression. You also get your second asi later since you took two levels of another class.

So no i don't agree with the cost you associate with the two level dip. It can absolutly still be worth it especially with the hexblade patron but it's not as clear cut as you made it out to be.

It fixes their downside but it weakens their uppside becuase they are behind in spell progression.

In almost no cases does multiclassing spellcaster make you actually stronger. It may give you more options, but rarely will it help your primary role because of the way spells work.

Now, martials is a different story, because extra attack(s).

That being said, I'm not sure if gaining a good at-will ranged attack is worth 2 levels of main class progression, unless you're an 17th level sorcerer. It might be.

[Dudewithknives]

I'd like to see your data on that.

Well, the fact that it is in the rules of AL that multi classing is allowed.

And the fact I used to own the only gaming store in 90 miles and saw people run 100s of games there and I can only remember 4 that said no multi classing.
Those 4 were also made because people were tired of people power gaming multi class builds.

Unless my area is far outside the norm to be an outlier, that would imply that ALL AL games allow multi classing, and by far most non-AL games do.

[UrielAwakened]

In almost no cases does multiclassing spellcaster make you actually stronger. It may give you more options, but rarely will it help your primary role because of the way spells work.

Now, martials is a different story, because extra attack(s).

That being said, I'm not sure if gaining a good at-will ranged attack is worth 2 levels of main class progression, unless you're an 17th level sorcerer. It might be.

Hi my name is the Sorcerer and I would love to get my 20th level capstone by level 7, especially since it lets me double-up on the best damaging cantrip in the game on a round-by-round basis.

[Galactkaktus]

In almost no cases does multiclassing spellcaster make you actually stronger. It may give you more options, but rarely will it help your primary role because of the way spells work.

Now, martials is a different story, because extra attack(s).

That being said, I'm not sure if gaining a good at-will ranged attack is worth 2 levels of main class progression, unless you're an 17th level sorcerer. It might be.

Then i think we are on the same page since i'm of the opinion that multiclassing into warlook for eldritch blast is highly overrated.

[sithlordnergal]

Yeah, people really over-estimate the power of Eldritch Blast and two levels of Warlock. I far prefer to take a level of Sorcerer if I am looking for ranged cantrips. Firebolt gives a nice d10, chill touch is a perfect d8 back up, and you aren't putting off spell slot progression.

[krugaan]

Hi my name is the Sorcerer and I would love to get my 20th level capstone by level 7, especially since it lets me double-up on the best damaging cantrip in the game on a round-by-round basis.

Wait, what's the sorc 20th level capstone again, and how do I functionally get it at level 7? Is this a coffeelock thing?

Then i think we are on the same page since i'm of the opinion that multiclassing into warlook for eldritch blast is highly overrated.

Yeah, I tend to think so to, particularly at low levels. I'm playing a sword bard with a 1 level dip in hexblade for the SADness. Currently 4/1, but the extra level in lock is so tempting, even though I know more bard is probably better. Already, not being able to hypnotic pattern is super annoying, although for cha based melee, a dip in hexblade is a little too good to pass up.

[Galactkaktus]

Hi my name is the Sorcerer and I would love to get my 20th level capstone by level 7, especially since it lets me double-up on the best damaging cantrip in the game on a round-by-round basis.

How are you getting the level 20 capstone by level 7? If you talk about converting warlook spell slots to sorcery points then you need three levels of warlook before you get the same effect of 4 sorcery points per short rest which whould leave you with
4 level 1 spell slots and 3 level 2 spell slots+ 4 sorcery points for being a sorcerer and 4 more from the warlook spell slots for a grand total of
4 Level 1 spell slots
3 level 2 spell slots and 8 sorcery points (ignoring your max cap of 4 SP)

The level 7 sorecerer has
4 level 1 spell slots 3 level 2 spell slots 3 level 3 spell slots and 1 level 4 spell slots + 7 sorcery points
If we convert the higher level spell slots to SP to make a more direct comparision 3 level 3 spell slot and 1 level 4 spell slot gives 13 sorcery points
So the level 7 sorcerer has
4 level 1 spell slots
3 level 2 spell slots
20 sorcery points

20-8=12
12/4=3
So the multiclassed sorcerer needs 3 short rests to catch up to the single classed sorcerer.

[krugaan]

Yeah, people really over-estimate the power of Eldritch Blast and two levels of Warlock. I far prefer to take a level of Sorcerer if I am looking for ranged cantrips. Firebolt gives a nice d10, chill touch is a perfect d8 back up, and you aren't putting off spell slot progression.

Lets be realistic here, two levels of lock basically doubles your at will damage, which is nothing to sneeze at.

But how often does at-will damage seal the deal, when well picked and placed spells can end encounters? Honest question.

[UrielAwakened]

How are you getting the level 20 capstone by level 7? If you talk about converting warlook spell slots to sorcery points then you need three levels of warlook before you get the same effect of 4 sorcery points per short rest which whould leave you with
4 level 1 spell slots and 3 level 2 spell slots+ 4 sorcery points for being a sorcerer and 4 more from the warlook spell slots for a grand total of
4 Level 1 spell slots
3 level 2 spell slots and 8 sorcery points (ignoring your max cap of 4 SP)

The level 7 sorecerer has
4 level 1 spell slots 3 level 2 spell slots 3 level 3 spell slots and 1 level 4 spell slots + 7 sorcery points
If we convert the higher level spell slots to SP to make a more direct comparision 3 level 3 spell slot and 1 level 4 spell slot gives 13 sorcery points
So the level 7 sorcerer has
4 level 1 spell slots
3 level 2 spell slots
20 sorcery points

20-8=12
12/4=3
So the multiclassed sorcerer needs 3 short rests to catch up to the single classed sorcerer.

The single-classed Sorcerer can't Eldritch blast twice for basically nothing.

Say all you want about spell slots, the best status effect is still dead. And Quickened Eldritch Blast gets you a whole bunch of dead.

[krugaan]

The single-classed Sorcerer can't Eldritch blast twice for basically nothing.

Say all you want about spell slots, the best status effect is still dead. And Quickened Eldritch Blast gets you a whole bunch of dead.

What's with the level 20 sorc part?