I'm one of those players who loves the single class character. The pinnacle of class evolution, as it were. And I've seen quite a few "help with my multiclass optimization" threads since the PHB dropped.
I guess my query here is: do you think Wizards dropped the ball on single class power to the point where multiclassing is necessary to have an effective 20th level character, or are people mostly interested in the flavor of multiclassing because it offers a variety of playstyles that a single class cannot, even with the new subclass options?
Multiclassing is absolutely not needed. There is a pretty big overstatement as to how much a 1 level dip (usuallt Fighter or Cleric) actually impacts a character. A pure 1-20 character is every bit as viable as a multiclass one.
I'd go so far as to suggest that the discussion on these boards substantially overstates the effectiveness of level dips, by hand-waving the costs. Multiclassing usually results in delayed stat bumps, delayed spell level access, and forfeiture of some pretty powerful keystone powers.
There's three level dips that I would personally consider:
* Fighter-6 (already enjoying attack stat 20) into Rogue-2 or Rogue-4 for Cunning Action and maybe the Assassin level 3 feature. Then back to Fighter for the level 8 stat bump or feat.
* A human Wizard starting as a knowledge Cleric-1 for the medium armor, shield, and two Intelligence skills with de facto expertise.
* A mid-level Dex-Wis Cleric/Druid/Ranger/Rogue dipping Monk-1 when they get their hands on the Bracers of Defense, assuming those aren't rewritten in the DMG.
Nothing else really appeals to me in comparison to working straight through a class progression.
I think multiclassing is more about character customization than it is optimization, but optimization became a common product from multiclassing in the past as players looked for those combinations of abilities following system mastery. It doesn't surprise me that players would look for that optimization if it's available.
It's important to keep in mind that multiclassing is an optional rule, and there are specific rules attached to help limit optimization in those rules.
It's also important to look at the abilities themselves, and a splash often costs the player an ABI at 19th level and also postpones acquiring ABI's and class abilities because ABI's/feats were moved directly into class features instead of by total character level. This means a spash gives up the capstone feature if it's for 1 level, an ABI and the capstone if it's for 2 levels, and additional high level abilities as the number of multiclass levels goes up. It takes 4 levels to avoid the lost ABI and that typically costs several high level abilities.
MC optimization will still happen but I don't think pure classing is signifantly impacted during play because of it based on the table structures, and if I did have a concern I could just not include that optional rule at my table. Personally, I think the players looking at MC builds are simply enjoying tinkering with ideas for limited or neutral gain. 
Thanks for the replies thus far. :D
I remember in 3.5e where you could go to 6 in fighter, and then take any other class and still be incredibly useful. It doesn't seem like that's such an easy possibility anymore -- but maybe I'm wrong?
Whir wrote:
Rancid_Rogue wrote:
wills2009 wrote:
Hm. For whatever reason, I wasn't aware that multiclassing gave you spell slots by character level.
Whir wrote:
baronspam wrote:
Rancid_Rogue wrote:
baronspam wrote:
Jordan175 wrote:
ppaladin123 wrote:
Personally, I like multiclass because I like to be a unique snowflake. If something is simple or easy, it just isn't as fun.
Whir wrote:
Whir wrote:
Tony_Vargas wrote:
Hard to say in 5E, but in general it looks like multi-classing has much less of a long-term benifit to a character. Most abilities are not front loaded on classes, certain abilities could be gained via feats, and in general the loss of a level or two is going to be felt at higher levels. For the wizard...
Dipping into levels in any other class to start with, appear to only be useful in low-level survival. Sure, you can take a level of fighter or cleric and get some armor, shield, weapons, and possibly some spells to keep you alive at 1st, 2nd, and maybe 3rd levels. When your spells run out, you can switch to a bow or sword, and armor saves casting defensive spells. However, this becomes rather ify at 5th, 6th, etc. where you start missing getting a high-level spells for a level, getting your feat(s)/ability increases later, you aren't typically running out of spells, and your defensive spells are as good or better than the armour. You aren't tough enough in melee, so you have to stay back and not get hit anyway.
I think many folks will just bear with the fact that at 1st and 2nd levels, the wizard is risky and rely on other party members, smart play, etc. to stay alive. At 5th+ they likely reap the rewards from having fireball and fly.
BW0222 wrote:
Whilst I don't hate Multiclassing, in practice I've had more fun just sticking to a single class.
Whilst multiclassing can be the path to making 3+4 = 42 it often also creates a rather ineffective character.
Alot of making multiclassing effective seemed to require planning ahead and doing things in the right order (tm). Arguably this is still the case.
Now, I might be making that fatal mistake of applying something resembling realism to D&D but given that 1st level often is meant to represent "your life until your first adventure!" the literal implications of picking up a level in a class can be downright wierd unless you've already written it into account.
As Order of the Stick wonderfully demonstrates:
http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0126.html
kalani quoth:thats one of the things i like most about 5e... the game rewards versatility and specialization with equivalent power, yet different options. something the game has traditionally struggled to accomplish.
blake_marlowe wrote:
I will point out that a (dragon) Sorcerer/Warlock (say 15/5 split), is IMO better than a (dragon) Sorcerer 20. That is, it loses the level 9 spell slot but gains 5 slightly larger hit dice (meh), Eldritch Blast and Invocations (yay), and two level 3 spell slots that recharge every short rest. Oh and you get Hex to boost your damage too.
I kinda feel like some of the multi classing mania is coming from the limited number of subclasses at launch. If you can't get what you want in one class then mix and match to make it happen.
Really I miss the 4e hybrid classing system. It was easy to make a borderline unusable character with but damned if it didn't simplify making whatever weird mashup you wanted.
Thanks for all of the input, folks!
I enjoyed multi-classing in 3.5 (and playing weird races, like a half-green-dragon/half-yuan-ti wizard), but it just seems like they are almost trying to discourage it in 5e with getting stat bumps based on the class level rather than character level, amongst other things.
When I look at the variety of subclasses they already present and the pros and cons of multiclassing as-is, I just can't help but feel it's better to just work with your DM to get the character you want with a pure class instead of multiclassing. Really, there's nothing stopping you from playing an eldritch knight that actually has eldritch blast other than five minutes of work with your DM!
Thanks again!