The Great Debate

[thecleaner517]

Pure classing or Multiclassing? Which is better?

Now I understand that this can be a purely subjective and all around personal preference topic. However, to me personally, I prefer pure classing.

Multiclassing seems to just muddy up the waters and reduces the full potential of said class that you originally chose.

To me, a pure class, you just get the full potential of it and it goes well with the role playing aspect.

What is your choice? Either or? Both? Why? Especially with it being DnD 5e since this is what BG3 is using.

[Jon]

Pure classing is always the strongest. Multiclassing just offer variety, also 12 is kinda low for proper multiclassing.

[Minnzy]

12 levels of wizard. No exceptions!

[thecleaner517]

Originally posted by Jon:

Pure classing is always the strongest. Multiclassing just offer variety, also 12 is kinda low for proper multiclassing.

Agreed for the level being to low for it but what is your preference, regardless of level cap?

Originally posted by Minnzy:

12 levels of wizard. No exceptions!

I agree with this. I'm going to be doing a Wizard Necromancer for my first playthrough. Still trying to decide on race for it.

[Jon]

Originally posted by thecleaner517:

Originally posted by Jon:

Pure classing is always the strongest. Multiclassing just offer variety, also 12 is kinda low for proper multiclassing.

Agreed for the level being to low for it but what is your preference, regardless of level cap?

I think overall i prefer pure but multiclassing does provide a certain fun aspect to playing.

[Rusted Metal]

With the way larian sounds like their homebrewing multiclassing spellcaster/anything might get pretty strong. espeically with things like the Warped Headband of Intellect still being where it is in full release

[elbentzo]

Originally posted by thecleaner517:

Pure classing or Multiclassing? Which is better?

Now I understand that this can be a purely subjective and all around personal preference topic. However, to me personally, I prefer pure classing.

Multiclassing seems to just muddy up the waters and reduces the full potential of said class that you originally chose.

To me, a pure class, you just get the full potential of it and it goes well with the role playing aspect.

What is your choice? Either or? Both? Why? Especially with it being DnD 5e since this is what BG3 is using.

It really depends on a few factors, mainly on what level you're planning to end up. Generally speaklng in p&p I'd say it's quite hard to make a multiclass character that is better than a monoclass. There are exceptions for some powerful combinations, but they're quite few and far between, and even they usually aren't *that* powerful.

However, it seems like in BG3 multiclass character might be significantly stronger than monoclass because they're not sticking to the usual multiclass rules of dnd5e. The fact you can respec alone gives a HUGE bonus to multiclass, since you can completely rebuild your character at each level with the optimal distribution of class levels. You can switch your base class (starting in class A and multiclassing to B is different from starting in B and multiclassing into A, and with respeccing you can change it at whim). They also implied some stuff that is tied to class level (like spell casting or feats) might be redefined to follow character level.

Can't know for sure until release, but it seems like BG3 more or less removes all the problems and disadvantages of multiclassing.

[thecleaner517]

Originally posted by elbentzo:

Originally posted by thecleaner517:

Pure classing or Multiclassing? Which is better?

Now I understand that this can be a purely subjective and all around personal preference topic. However, to me personally, I prefer pure classing.

Multiclassing seems to just muddy up the waters and reduces the full potential of said class that you originally chose.

To me, a pure class, you just get the full potential of it and it goes well with the role playing aspect.

What is your choice? Either or? Both? Why? Especially with it being DnD 5e since this is what BG3 is using.

It really depends on a few factors, mainly on what level you're planning to end up. Generally speaklng in p&p I'd say it's quite hard to make a multiclass character that is better than a monoclass. There are exceptions for some powerful combinations, but they're quite few and far between, and even they usually aren't *that* powerful.

However, it seems like in BG3 multiclass character might be significantly stronger than monoclass because they're not sticking to the usual multiclass rules of dnd5e. The fact you can respec alone gives a HUGE bonus to multiclass, since you can completely rebuild your character at each level with the optimal distribution of class levels. You can switch your base class (starting in class A and multiclassing to B is different from starting in B and multiclassing into A, and with respeccing you can change it at whim). They also implied some stuff that is tied to class level (like spell casting or feats) might be redefined to follow character level.

Can't know for sure until release, but it seems like BG3 more or less removes all the problems and disadvantages of multiclassing.

I can see where respeccing your character as much as you want, will allow you to fine tune both pure and multiclass options. It can help both for sure. Even though it will allow one to experiment with multiclassing and finding that synergistic combination, I do believe in my opinion in the end, you just won't be able to surpass a pure classes power.

True, that multiclassing gives you variety and different skills/abilities at your disposal but they would be weaker than what they could be. Especially since the level cap is only level 12.

Just my 2 cents, really.

[Atari 2600]

After reading a lot of posts, and watching videos, it seems that Warlock mixed with Sorcerer is stronger overall than pure? And a pure Gloomstalker is not stronger than mixing in 3 Assassin? There are some classes that benefit more from mixing than others. Sometimes an extra ASI is not as strong as other mixed benefits.

[Gigantoad]

Originally posted by Jon:

Pure classing is always the strongest. Multiclassing just offer variety, also 12 is kinda low for proper multiclassing.

Hmm, are you sure about that? It seems to me that something like a gloomstalker who also has Sneak expertise and Sneak Attack from Rogue would be insane?

[Tin Can Kat]

Won't be multiclassing on my first playthrough(s). I like just sticking to the thing I picked and never been one much for number crunching to squeeze that extra percentile out of my whacks. Min-max episodes can come later. Also adds an extra element of newness to future playthroughs.

[Super_]

the only way to get level 12 in a class is to play it and only it

[Kyutaru]

Subclasses have made multiclassing not necessarily required. You don't need to invest levels into Wizard to have a fighter who can cast spells anymore.

[Dean]

Not even a debate. Just be who you are.

[dulany67]

Can't really answer until we know how larian handles spell level progression.

[medicinezombie]

I've played and DM'd 5e since release, and I would agree that it is much harder to make a multiclass build as strong as a single class, and very very difficult to make one that is stronger.

There's only 1 multiclasss build that I think is consistently stronger than single classed (tempest cleric 2/sorc x, shoot maximized metamagic Lightning Bolts while wearing Heavy armor)

There are a lot of things in 5e that don't play well together - AC bonuses don't stack between classes, you lose progression to a 2nd melee attack, you lose ASIs/Feats, you lose spellcasting power (spells known and possibly spell slots).

Many good class abilities are deeper in the character tree as well.

Some classes use Bonus Actions, and you only have 1 to spend per round (barbarian monk can Rage OR Flurry of Blows, but not both in 1 round)

Multiclass builds can be VERY powerful at certain levels, since most classes have some levels where you get more stuff, so you can line up 2 power increases in 2 levels and grow in power quickly. But then you might have 4 levels without much happening, not even an ASI/Feat, if they are levels in different classes.

Originally posted by lokiju:

After reading a lot of posts, and watching videos, it seems that Warlock mixed with Sorcerer is stronger overall than pure? And a pure Gloomstalker is not stronger than mixing in 3 Assassin? There are some classes that benefit more from mixing than others. Sometimes an extra ASI is not as strong as other mixed benefits.

Mixing Warlock with Sorc means no 6th level spells of either class, which is a loss. EB is really nice but I don't think Sorc adds anything to it. Gloomstalker with Assassin levels is harder to compare, but neither one jumps out clearly as better than the other to me.

Originally posted by Gigantoad:

Originally posted by Jon:

Pure classing is always the strongest. Multiclassing just offer variety, also 12 is kinda low for proper multiclassing.

Hmm, are you sure about that? It seems to me that something like a gloomstalker who also has Sneak expertise and Sneak Attack from Rogue would be insane?

Hard to say, but Sneak Attack only progresses via Rogue levels, so the more of that you have, the less ranger stuff. Land's Stride can be handy, and Hide in Plain Sight would be fun if they implement it, +10 to Stealth checks until you move or take an Action.