If a character can multi-class as a rogue (theif)/warlock (fey pact), why can't they multi-class as a rogue (theif)/rogue (assassin)? There should be rules for doing that. In 1st edition, I remember a player that wanted to be a theif/assassin.
There are some classes that it would be weird and/or interesting to do this with. Warlocks-- they would have 2 pacts. Are they double agents or philanderers? But theif/assasins make sense, as do hunter/beastmasters.
I think this will be covered in the DMG. There was some mention about being able to build your own subclass.
I think the big problem is structural, it's easier for them to allow you to mix classes than try to offer a 2nd option on in class decisions.
One approach involves restructuring each class to allow for a primary and secondary sub-class, but that'd be a lot of work.
Alternatively we could re-introduce 4e-style themes which would give us another character creation pillar to work with. So you could be a rogue-thief with the assassin theme, or a rogue-assassin with the thief theme.
I'd allow it although it would work under all the rules of multi-classing. You would therefore have to consider it as two separate classes. To get the benefits of a second sub-class you would have to level as Rogue (thief) 3/Rogue (assassin) 3 and each level you took would not stack as far as rogue benefits go. So you couldn't go Rogue (thief) 10/Rogue (assassin) 10 and get 10d6 sneak attack. It'd be only 5d6 but from two classes.
Which is the exact kind of logistical nightmare that should be avoided.
Thank_Dog wrote:
grendel111111 wrote:
Ok so in your mind the truncated benefits of a second sub-class are enough to compensate for all the other class features, and the truncated primary subclass, and the loss of sneak attack damage because honestly the first 3 assassin and thief abilities don't look that great to me.
What you describe sounds like a 20th level rogue who gets no features, sneak atack, ability boosts/feats, beyond 10th level with the exception of the first three abilities of another subclass.
So explain either what you actually meant, or how what I just described is a good idea.
He meant exactly what you described, and frankly, it isn't a good idea 
It'd be exactly the same as a 20th level rogue/fighter, they'd get no features, sneak attack, ability boosts, feats beyond 10th level either. They'd be a 10th level theif and a 10th level fighter. Multiclassing has drawbacks in 5e, make no mistake.
demon_idol wrote:
Customizing rules can be cool. But homebrew is a dirty word. Maybe we should ask hasbro for permission before we alter rules, they could charge us a consultation fee, it might be more profitable than selling splat books. :-)
Bumamgar wrote:
I guess what I would do would be to list the level/feature for each of the subclasses, and then anytime a character gained a subclass feature, they could substitute for the first subclass feature of the alterante subclass in the chain that they didn't have. So, an assassin rogue at 9th level could gain the feature of the 3rd level thief archtype instead of the 9th level assassin archtype feature, and then at 13th level they could gain either the 9th level thief archtype feature, or the 9th level assassin archtype feature.
Thank_Dog wrote:
For me the shadow assasin shouldn´t be a rogue subclass but a hybrid core class, mixing stealth and the shadowmancer´s mysteries from "Tome of magic 3.5". The misteries would a no really arcane power source but different (like the elemental magic), a less powerful magic but better to avoid adivination spells. My shadow assasins would be a nighmare for spellcasters who use "adivination school" to detect lurkers or another potential enemies.
A Rogue(thief)/Rogue(assassin) multiclass doesn't work for the reasons given above (though they didn't actually give them as negative reasons): you aren't really gaining any new features other than from the subclass. A Rogue/Fighter (or any other class) gains the features from the new subclass AND, more importantly, from the new class. Classes in 5E carry a lot more weight, mechanically, compared to subclasses.
Compare a Rogue 6 to a Rogue 3/Fighter 3 and to a Rogue 3/Rogue 3.
The multiclassed Rogue is giving up 1d6 of sneak attack damage, an ability score improvement (or feat), uncanny dodge, and expertise. But, by adding 3 levels of fighter, they are gaining extra HP, fighting style, second wind, action surge, and a martial archetype. By adding 3 levels of Rogue (with a different subclass), you are gaining a single rogue archetype feature. Not at all a good trade-off.
So the best way to go is to customize a new build. Ask the player: what do you want to accomplish by being a Thief/Assassin? Then take a look at all the features from the two subclasses, and mix and match to make something that suits the players needs.
Or maybe mix and match subclass features, but Rogue 10 (assassin)/Rogue 10 (thief) doesn't quite jive with me.
No two subclasses are worth the headache, really. There's nothing all that attractive about the idea, either. I can't think of a single *good* reason for anyone to want to multiclass into the same class they're already in.
demon_idol wrote:
I can understand the thematic nature of trying out difference mixes of the same base class..but the in game mechanical advantages don't seem to add up in any way. It comes down to what the player is actually hoping to gain...if its power-gamery stuff then it needs close regulation...If its thematic fluff to help them envision their character the way they want, I am probably all for it.
A paladin isn´t a warrior, a sorcerer isn´t a wizard, and a shadow assasin isn´t a rogue. The assasins have got special tricks like spells or ki maneuvers. A rogue is 100% stealth and a assasin is a hybrid stealth + shadow magic.
This is a business, it isn´t only gameplay, but also marketing, and a sourcebook with shadow assasin class will be sold better.
Sooner or later we will see a stealth-magic hybrid class, maybe the remake of spellthief, beguiler or factotum, but assasin would be a more comertial choise to sell more books.
Amusingly, none of the above Assassins use shadow magic 
Unless you count that weird mind-meld technology...?
Timborama wrote:
Apologies if this has already been said.
Back in 1st Edition, the reason why a character could be a Thief/Assassin was that Assassin was a separate class from Thief. Mechanically, it was no different that a Fighter/Magic-User.
Um
Greenman wrote:
kave99 wrote:
That is the weakness of the sub-class approach vs. the discrete ability tracks approach used by saga edition and in the 3e and pathfinder rogues.
You can't switch focuses mid-go.
I guess I was wrong. It's been a LONG time since I've even seen the 1st Edition rules. I was speaking from an old memory.
As to the comment by demon-idol about a rogue starting as thief, and being more and more involved in assassination and the ranger befriending a wolf, I think this is the sort of character development that a good DM should allow. Just change your character from thief to assassin. This is a simple solution. though as mentioned, the rules currently don't back this up. As Luciender pointed out, this could be covered in the DMG.
demon_idol wrote:
Luciender wrote:
I wasn't reallly thinking about about being a thief/assassin, or a hunter/beastmaster. I was thinking if you started as a thief and found the game/story more appealing by going assassin, for example, then I hope your DM would let you retcon your character to reflect that you are more assassin than the thief you started as. Perhaps there will be rules for "retraining" in the DMG?
demon_idol wrote:
I wouldn't make them take the first thief ability. I'd allow a subclass ability if your level or lower. If it causes problems, address it at that time. I don't see a reason to make someone start with the first subclass ability though.
Mostly because a lot of sub-class powers play off the first aility, or are useless without it.
I really think the DM guidelines for building unique subclasses are the way to go with this. Trying to fit it into some sort of multiclassing pattern is a recipe for confusion that isn't actually any better than starting from scratch, but gives some people the illusion that it is--thus wasting their time and effort. There are a lot better uses for such obvious creativity than trying to make a counterproductive multiclassing pattern.
Just trying to be helpful.
What if you could take a subclass feature from your class for a feat? So with 4 feats you could get all 4 assassin subclass features.
I agree with Lawolf this is something that is dealt with better with feats.
demon_idol wrote: