D&D 4E Hybrid Classes - applying a 4e concept to 5e

[cbwjm]

This is another reason why I would have liked subclass abilities to be gained at the same levels for every class, to aid in turning a class into a subclass that can be taken by anyone. That way, the fighter could take a barbarian subclass and gain barbarian abilities like rage, fast movement, and unarmoured defence (along with whatever higher level barbarian abilities may have been available). They wouldn't necessarily gain every barbarian ability, but would gain just enough to add some barbarian flavour to the primary class.

 

[Rellott]

This is another reason why I would have liked subclass abilities to be gained at the same levels for every class, to aid in turning a class into a subclass that can be taken by anyone. That way, the fighter could take a barbarian subclass and gain barbarian abilities like rage, fast movement, and unarmoured defence (along with whatever higher level barbarian abilities may have been available). They wouldn't necessarily gain every barbarian ability, but would gain just enough to add some barbarian flavour to the primary class.

One could argue the subclasses already attempt to do something like this.
Shadow monk = rogue monk
Four elements monk = sorcerer monk
Arcane trickster rogue = wizard rogue
Eldritch Knight fighter = wizard fighter
And more. Granted, not every class gets an option to blend with every other class, but it allows you to have that flavor/story without compromising the class progression or the need to multiclass.

 

[cbwjm]

One could argue the subclasses already attempt to do something like this.
Shadow monk = rogue monk
Four elements monk = sorcerer monk
Arcane trickster rogue = wizard rogue
Eldritch Knight fighter = wizard fighter
And more. Granted, not every class gets an option to blend with every other class, but it allows you to have that flavor/story without compromising the class progression or the need to multiclass.

They do to a limited degree in that a specific subclass needs to be taken but that arcane trickster or eldritch knight is limited to a few spells known instead of a spellbook. Their subclass abilities are also very different to what a wizard gets. If subclass levels were similar then a ranger could pick up some wizardry or a fighter could pick up some ranger abilities. A mystic theurge could be a cleric with a wizards spellbook or a wizard with access to clerical spells.

I think when I last looked at hybrid classes I looked at the four basic classes and then tacked them onto another class with an increased XP cost/level.

 

[Tony Vargas]

Hybrid rules in 4e were fraught. They tended towards decidedly under-powered results unless you optimized, and then could occasionally break high with some bizzarro exploit or another (like the rebreather). And, as has been pointed out, they only worked as well as they did because 4e classes were comparatively (meticulously by broader D&D standards) balanced, shared common advancement & structure (AEDU), and got features mainly at first level. 5e's classes would seem arbitrary and imbalanced by comparison, hardly suitable for 3e-style MCing, let alone hybrid(ization?).
Something like d20 Gestalts (wildly OP as it might be) would probably work more smoothly with 5e.

 

[LordEntrails]

Sounds to me that there is no problem developing the character concepts per RAW. It's simply you don't like the mechanics or don't think they yield a powerful enough character.

IMO, I don't care much for character power. I would rather play a fun concept.

It's too easy to break the mechanics when you start fussing with complexity and getting min/maxers involved unless everyone in the party decides to go that route together (which is fine, I'm in a group right now playing 3.5 Dragon Lance, and the three players together have made a set of minotaurs that simple break the game as written.)

If the rules you propose are good for your table, go for it. Have fun.

 

[HerrZach77]

Hybrid rules in 4e were fraught. They tended towards decidedly under-powered results unless you optimized, and then could occasionally break high with some bizzarro exploit or another (like the rebreather). And, as has been pointed out, they only worked as well as they did because 4e classes were comparatively (meticulously by broader D&D standards) balanced, shared common advancement & structure (AEDU), and got features mainly at first level. 5e's classes would seem arbitrary and imbalanced by comparison, hardly suitable for 3e-style MCing, let alone hybrid(ization?).
Something like d20 Gestalts (wildly OP as it might be) would probably work more smoothly with 5e.

I actually ran and played in a Gestalt game and I personally didn't find it too bad. Obviously, there is a shift you have to make as a DM in what exactly you can prepare for your players (and with two optimizers and two RPers its interesting), but the game itself with Gestalt is immense fun, especially if you are doing milestone leveling (particularly if it's not consistent milestone leveling). It allows for a character build to come online far sooner and therefore generate far more varied and, potentially, more interesting characters even among the same base class combos. A Battle Master/Zealot Barb for example will play SIGNIFICANTLY differently than a Champion/Berserker.

That said, the set of rules for Gestalt that I found I believe came from the D&D wiki, and I took the gist of it and then modified it a bit.

 

[James Gasik]

I had several hybrid characters in 4e, and they were all pretty decent. My favorite of these was a Bard/Wizard- no synergy at all between the classes, he had to split Int/Cha, and yet, he became one of my highest level characters and never had a problem pulling his weight. You're going to burn a feat to get a useful class ability most likely, but most classes hybrid rather well (the Fighter, sadly, has issues due to how his marking ability functions).

Normally you do want some synergy, however, which is why most of my other hybrids were better thought out, like my Seeker/Cleric or Warlord/Wizard.

Now as to hybrid classes in 5e, I don't think the system is built to do that easily. You have classes that get subclass abilities at different levels, or sometimes multiple abilities at the same level. And sometimes abilities gained at the same level are not the same in power- no Battlemaster is going to miss Know Your Enemy, since it's both hard to use, and doesn't give especially great information.