D&D 5E Why do you like single or multi classing

[Warpiglet-7]

I have had successful single and multiclass characters. That is to say they survived and contributed and also did not bore me.

As time goes by, I find myself drawn more to single classed characters. It could be a Tasha’s effect or something else but I find I can make most concepts/approaches work with a single class and feats.

I like getting to feats or ASIs faster and feel less cluttered going single classed.

Just curious about others and their preferences for single or multiclassing. Why do you like one approach over the other?

 

[DND_Reborn]

Just curious about others and their preferences for single or multiclassing. Why do you like one approach over the other?

I prefer multiclassing because I find a single class rarely fulfills my vision of the character.

Often, I will only take a few levels of a class and then move on. While this lacks the depth of single class characters, I find the wider variety of options I get from multiclassing appeals more to me.

Concerning Tasha's: I don't like all the feats that step on the toes of the features key to classes (e.g. metamagic, eldritch invocations, fighting styles, etc.). Soon, I expect feats that allow sneak attacking, raging, smiting, ki strikes, and every thing else that makes classes unique.

Finally, we have always done feats by character levels, not class levels, so multiclassing does not slow down gaining feats at our table.

 

[Benjamin Olson]

I almost always multiclass because I like having characters who can A) participate meaningfully in almost everything the group does, B) make full use in combat of action, bonus action, and ideally reaction as often as possible, and C) feel somewhat unique. While I think this is all probably possible with some sort of single classed build of every class, it is much easier to achieve with a dip in something else.

Multiclassing also does a lot more to satisfy my theorycrafting urges.

I'd probably be more single-class oriented if feats were a larger part of the game, but if you actually want strong stats they are too few and far between in 5e to satisfy me. I've only played one character who had more than one of them and that required him both being a Fighter, and hence getting an extra ASI, and being bitten by a Werebear, and hence getting his Strength upgraded to 19 for free.

 

[Charlaquin]

I have mixed feelings about multiclassing. I do like having the ability to combine features from different classes, and a one-level dip into a class is one of the most efficient ways to pick up a proficiency you really want, plus a bunch of extra benefits. But I also feel like multiclassed characters often don’t have a cohesive story tied to the mechanics, and I don’t care for that. I enjoy multiclassing when the player and the DM work together to come up with a narrative for the character’s particular blend of abilities, or in campaigns where you have to train with someone of another class to start gaining levels in it. But I don’t like it when you can just pick up a level of whatever on a whim with no narrative justification.

 

[payn]

I'm a 3E/PF1 guy, so naturally I love multi-classing. It's a little more manageable in 5E though. I dont get too bogged down in the details of why a multiclass character came about narratively. I view leveling pretty much under the hood. So, putting together a unique blend of abilities allows me to build my own class. I like systems that tie in the background to make it feel a little more organic, but often find these features to be wanting. I think bounded accuracy helps make more sense of the setting in general, so 5E likely does multiclassing better in this approach of D&D than previous editions.

I'm not opposed to single classing either. Whatever seems to fit my imagination for the campaign is what I go with. I do vastly prefer systems that allow a full range of multiclass choice. So, systems like 4E and PF2, are kind of a bummer for me in the multiclassing department. YMMV

 

[jmartkdr2]

I do both fairly regularly. I like gish concepts, which are hard to pull off without multiclassing (except for paladins and hexblades, but those come with a lot of rp baggage I don't always want).

When I play non-gish concepts, I rarely multiclass.

 

[Warpiglet-7]

I'm a 3E/PF1 guy, so naturally I love multi-classing. It's a little more manageable in 5E though. I dont get too bogged down in the details of why a multiclass character came about narratively. I view leveling pretty much under the hood. So, putting together a unique blend of abilities allows me to build my own class. I like systems that tie in the background to make it feel a little more organic, but often find these features to be wanting. I think bounded accuracy helps make more sense of the setting in general, so 5E likely does multiclassing better in this approach of D&D than previous editions.

I'm not opposed to single classing either. Whatever seems to fit my imagination for the campaign is what I go with. I do vastly prefer systems that allow a full range of multiclass choice. So, systems like 4E and PF2, are kind of a bummer for me in the multiclassing department. YMMV

I think it is limiting when we are not allowed to make a unified whole. For example, I don’t think of a sorcerer warlock has to be two professions. I see them as practitioners of magic drawing on many sources like they do in fiction.

I like to think of multiclass characters as a unified whole in a narrative sense—-unlike others the dual classing (not multiclassing) of 1e.

I had a cleric warlock that had been a mercenary captain. Long story short I took cleric with heavy armor at one—-channeling the ideals of the seven heavens. I assumed he was already in touch with the fallen angel who was trying to redeem himself when at level 2 celestial patron warlock levels started.

I just assumed he knew the heavy armor and weapons from his mercenary days and the cleric abilities were just his burgeoning celestial pact abilities.

It was actually a cool and effective character. Sadly we moved on at 8th level due to incompatible party goals…

 

[Krachek]

In fact we got single class, dipping, and multi split class which is almost inexistent except for sorcerer-paladin-warlock mix.
Tasha feats give enough variety and flavor, and look to me more natural than dipping so I prefer feats over dipping.
As for sorcadin and sorlock I can live without them.
So no MC for me.

 

[LordEntrails]

I have a distaste for multi-classing. In and of itself, no problem, but I find the most common reason for doing it is DPR, and that I really don't like.

 

[not-so-newguy]

I prefer to go single class for now. I think a lot of it has to do with the fact that I DM most of the games that I play and I don't have much chance to explore the players' side of things.