Hello everyone,
Sorry if the title is misleading, I don't want extra attack between two classes to stack, I just dont think that they should be punished with a dead level. Spell casters for example have the multiclass table so they arent entirely penalized for multiclassing, so I thought it was a bit of the short end of the stick for martial classes.
I think that when you get your second extra attack (lets say you went 5 barbarian and 5 fighter) you gain a fighting style of the combined list of the two classes. For example that Barb5/fighter5 would have access to any fighting style on the barb's list and the fighter's.
As a better example, a ranger5/paladin5 would have access to all the figting styles for their choice of fighting style at level 10 (when they hit the second extra attack).
I think this way it shows that your martial skill is still increasing (much like how a spell caster can gain slots but not spell levels)
in the case of a mix of barbarian or monks that get extra attack but no fighting style, I think adding the Mariner fighting style (waterborne adventures) to barbs and monks will be a fine fix.
for warlocks, wouldnt add any new fighting styles, but it would take from the fighting style list of its other multiclassed class.
In addtion, just to squeeze it in. What do you think of letting the martial adept feat give you a fighting style in addtion to its listed benefits?
tell me what you think 
Don't think it's a good idea, but do as you wish
I just let them skip the dead level.
Thus a barb 5/ fighter 5 would get the fighter 6 feature (i.e. an extra ABI)
I don't think it is a bad idea. And it does seem like they should get at least something for the level. And I can't think of how it would imbalance anything. It might take a way a little from the Champion Fighter as the only class that gets two fighting styles, but I guess you can get two (or more) from multiclassing anyway.
So yeah, I think it would make a good house rule.
Edit: Oh, for classes with no fighting style, I would just give them the Defense style. It's good for anybody.
Ill probably test it out with a dummy character for a few sessions and see how it plays out.
The level skip thing is interesting. Have you tried it out before? how does it feel in play?
mr.troutz wrote:
Rather than a level skip, I'd give out an ability score improvement. BUT, I also am not fully convinced that stacking would be a terrible thing. Hear me out.
What does a 5/5/5/5 barbarian/fighter/paladin/ranger get?
Rage 3/long, +2 damage
Unarmored Defense (Con to AC)
Reckless Attack
Danger Sense
Primal Path 1
Ability Score Improvement
Extra Attack 1
Fast Movement
Fighting Style 1
Second Wind (1d10+5) 1/short
Action Surge 1/short
Martial Archetype 1 (lets go with eldritch knight), 2 cantrips
Ability Score Improvement 2
Extra Attack 2
Divine Sense
Lay on Hands 25/long
Fighting Style 2
Divine Smite
Divine Health, Sacred Oath 1
Ability Score Improvement 3
Extra Attack 3
Favored Enemy
Natural Explorer
Fighting Style 3
Ranger Archetype 1
Primeval Awareness
Ability Score Improvement 4
Extra Attack 4
Spellcasting as a 6th level character (2.5 from paladin, 2.5 from ranger, 1.66 from fighter), but can only prepare 1st level wizard, 2nd level paladin, and 2nd level ranger spells. (slots 4/3/3)
If you don't let any Extra Attacks stack, this character will probably be behind. If you let them stack, they're ahead of the fighter's number of attacks. But, in a 3 round combat, a fighter at level 20 will drop something like 16 attacks; 4 each round, and 4 from action surge (since they get 2 per short rest, they can afford to use one a fight unless the fight seems stupid easy or very hard). At 5 attacks per round, and 1 action surge per short rest (pretending they use it every other encounter), you're looking at 17.5 attacks per encounter; a slight gain.
They also have 1 less ability score improvement over a standard character; that won't get in the way of them maximizing their attack stat, but it does mean they can't abuse Unarmored Defense.
So, is this character overpowered if you let their extra attacks stack? Maybe. Is it underpowered if you don't let them stack? Yes. Is it underpowered if you don't let them stack but you swap out ability score improvements? Instead of getting 4, they'll get 7, which is the amount that the fighter gets; they also have 1 attack and no divine strike/improved holy smite to improve it; I still think they'd be weak without stacking.
Caster levels stack. Maybe combat levels should stack too; I don't know.
I see the issue with multi-attack stacking being more paladin 15/ranger 5.
3 attacks, at +1d8 each, and 1/2 spell slots for smiting.
I'm not convinced it would be bad, either... but I also don't think it's necessary. The nice people at WoTC put lots and lots of thought into what worked with other stuff and what didn't, so I'm not going to second guess them. If they say "don't stack these", then don't stack them. Slip the features down one level or don't multiclass that way, focus on one and just dip into the other
It is certainly interesting to think about. I think outside of the damage potential side of things, I think that it having a bunch of a attacks is a fighter thing, so it might take away from that aspect. I also think it would discourage finishing a class as it would be stronger dipping around.
im not dismissing the idea of stacking attacks entirely, but I feel that it might be a little gimmicky.
I think that an ability score up isn't an awful idea, especially when it's an opportunity for melee to gain access to feats.