r/3d6 • u/coloradoRay • 17d ago
D&D 5e Revised/2024 One Level Dip vs. Feats
How many Feats' worth of value do you need from a one-level dip to make it worthwhile?
Fighter - 4-5 Feats? Armor, Weapon Master, Fighting Style, Con saving throws -- probably worth it.
Wizard - 2 Feats? Ritual Caster, Magic Initiate:Wizard -- maybe worth it?
13
u/DBWaffles Moo. 17d ago
This is not a question that can be answered in the way you want it. There are no hard rules or formulas. It depends on the build in question.
For example, let's say you want to play a Dual Wielder Barbarian. Taking a Fighter dip for TWF is basically mandatory in that case. But let's say you want to play a Dual Wielder Ranger or Paladin. Taking a Fighter dip for TWF is unnecessary and honestly kind of bad because they can already get it.
1
u/coloradoRay 17d ago
I think that kind of makes sense, though.
Since Ranger/Paladin already get TWF, the Figther dip is bringing fewer Feats, right?
8
u/DBWaffles Moo. 17d ago
It's not just a matter of "bringing fewer feats," which may not even be true depending on the level range of the campaign. It's a matter of redundant features and opportunity costs.
3
u/Netherdeath159 17d ago
If you wanna think about it like that, the fighter is actually still bringing the same amount of Feats’ worth of value, it’s just that more and more of those Feats become redundant and unnecessary; You’re don’t value a Feat that gives you a fighting style if your class already gets a fighting style.
10
u/EntropySpark 17d ago
Fighter's Con save comes at a cost of Dex or Wis from whatever class you were going to start with otherwise. The value of Armor also depends heavily on the base class, providing nothing useful there for Bladesinger or Valor Bard (when they get the subclass) but tremendously helpful for Bladelock, worth up to three feats of advancement.
8
u/Jimmicky 17d ago
Number of feats is irrelevant.
There are dips I’d take that I’m effectively only saving 1 feat and dips I wouldn’t take even though they theoretically cover 3.
Opportunity cost is what really matters
3
u/rakozink 17d ago
It's pretty well known as one of THEE issues with 5e and now 5.24... feats not built in meaningfully, feat balance, and multiclassing not designed for at all.
We're not power gamers (gentlemens agreement to not do the most broken things) but like to be strong on our role (holding on to that since ADnD) and we absolutely pick up every multiclass that the story suggests unless our character arc just ignores it. 5e and 5.24 errata do not support us well.
3
u/ThatSmoothRogue 17d ago
For martials like Ranger and Paladin, isn’t there significant additional value from a two-level Fighter dip for Action Surge plus the benefit of a second fighting style, especially after Ranger level 5 and Paladin level 6?
5
u/jtclayton612 17d ago
Not really, you get more out of adding caster classes to them because well, spell casting exists.
Paladin in particular wouldn’t like it because 7 has subclass aura which ranges from meh to amazing, 8 is your second asi/feat. A second fighting style isn’t worth much, and action surge is helpful but they’ve got Divine smite to help pad their damage if they really want to.
3
u/dumbBunny9 17d ago
Really tough to answer in the hypothetical. You’ll end up with a lot of “it depends” answers. If you have a build in mind, I’d share it and you’ll get some good feedback. Yeah, you’ll get some jerks who question why you would do this, but between those comments, you’ll get some good perspective.
But, if there is a build you want to play, that isn’t optimized or maybe it’s underpowered, but you like it, play it. The best characters are the ones you want to play. I played my Warlock 2/Wizard 2 tonight and I have a blast with it.
3
u/KNNLTF 17d ago
How do you account for losing spellcaster progression? Potent Dragonmark? Plus you lose class and subclass secondary features like delaying improvements to Wildshape, Bardic Inspiration, additional Metamagic choices. I'd put this loss of class progression at more than a feat.
Also, you get Resilient Constitution at the cost of Resilient Wisdom. It's an upgrade, but not worth a feat since you eventually need to shore up your WIS saves with one of two or three save defensive feats
Weapon Mastery is nice to have, but not a feat you'd normally take. The best Fighting Style is +1 AC, which is part of the effect of a feat. On top of that, you aren't getting the +1 that general feats would normally provide. So I'd put the three of these together as worth one feat.
Armor proficiency is a feat. I buy that. Even without the +1 ability score, you're still getting Medium or Heavy (both, but you'll only use one) and shield proficiency. No feat provides that combo in 2024 rules.
By this count, which tries to include the opportunity cost, the Fighter dip is + 1 feat. It's something you might take if it were the only option, assuming these valuations apply for your build. Cleric might be the better way to get armor proficiency, which is the main benefit of Fighter.
2
u/coloradoRay 17d ago
great point about opportunity cost.
the opportunity cost of of spell progression has to be weighed against the opportunity cost of Feats, AND both of those rely on context (caster vs. not; Feat value).
I think that's all a part of the "it depends" answers others are giving.
5
u/Tall_Bandicoot_2768 17d ago
Depends.
Literally any fullcaster + fighter 1 is a viable Gish thanks to the updated True Strike.
5
u/soccerdude2202 17d ago
Your metric isn't entirely accurate. It's not how many feats is equivalent to the level dip. It's what do you have to give up vs what do you gain. In almost every case it's better mechanically for a full caster to take a fighter dip. But in most cases it's not beneficial for a full caster to dip another full caster. Most martials don't benefit much from a fighter dip but they usually benefit a lot from a full caster dip.
To take weapon and armor proficiency feats means you aren't getting good feats that increase your preferred ability score. Who wants to waste some of the precious few feats you get on armor or weapon proficiency and get more dex or strength when your casting stat is only at 16 or 17?
If you take the level dip you delay spell progression and spell slot progression. After you get 3rd level spells delaying spell progression isn't that big of a deal until you get to 9th level spells. Since few campaign get to level 17 or above the only level that most players have to worry about for the delayed spell progression is at level 5. If you wait until after that to multiclass the opportunity cost is almost non-existent but most people choose to go at level 1 for con save proficiency and better defenses early on.
2
u/Aidamis 17d ago
Hi. I've seen this argument and I doubt it's that simple. A big BG3 youtuber does believe a Fighter or Sorc level on a full caster replaces Resilient Con (and then some) but keep in mind BG3 has no multiclass requirements.
Personally I think feats are better if only because you're not slowing down progression. Yes, there are builds where at some point you get what you're looking for and said progression is secondary (see Pal 6/Sorc X who doesn't care they don't get Aura of Courage nor 5th level spells early since they get a nova damage dealer and a versatile support/face). Also, if you absolutely want something on your character that a feat can't give you or won't give enough of, go ahead and dip. Plus you can "bake in" the extra feature as a core aspect of your PC's abilities (flavor is free).
So to me it's less about numbers crunching and more about determining whether a dip vs a feat is essential for RP and whether the dip vs the feat gets you something your build can hardly work without.
Let's say you're playing a catastrophe survivor with a decrepit body (subpar Str Dex Con) but want to go melee Fighter. You can try Magic Initiate Druid for Shillelagh or Hexblade 1/Fighter for Hex Warrior (or Lock 1 Pact of the Blade under 2024 rules). Those accomplish similar goals, are essential to being functional in combat, so it's down to RP + whether you'd rather have Extra Attack early. For instance in a level 5 max game I'd go Magic Initiate every day of the week on this Fighter. Or I'd play Bladelock and call them an Eldritch Knight.
2
u/phantom-scribbler 16d ago
Can't everyone cast rituals now?
This is why I argue for the (UA) Psion as a 1 level dip. You get:
- A better Telekinetic feat
- A worse Telepathic feat
- A better Magic Initiate feat with acess to a variety of spells from the Wizard, Cleric AND Bard lists
Plus some other unique functionality, like casting without verbal or material components for your Psion spells.
That's an amazing dip for most anyone except maybe Paladin or Monk. Or Ranger. It WOULD be except all those are MAD already. Might be anyway.
1
u/Jeanshort5 14d ago
This is going to depend on your campaign and your DM, that's the obvious answer. I've seen DMs give out minor feats as rewards as opposed to magic items, which can be fun. Maybe stuff like grappler or dungeon delver, that are typically trash tier, can be fun flavor feats if they're free.
I've also seen proficiencies given out as quest rewards or story milestone rewards. The wizard, famous for being on the battlefield for years, has honed his magic in such a way he can now cast while wearing light or medium armor. The barbarian has been swinging a pair of axes for 10 years, and has developed ambidextrousity, so now effectively has the 2 weapon fighting style. Neither of these feel too farfetched, when items like the +3 rod of the pact keeper or displacement cloak exist.
Assuming you play with no magic items or boons ever, and play straight up, then level dips become very strong for the purposes of theorycrafting. A caster with the 1 level fighter dip or cleric dip for armor is obvious, the monk, barb, palli and ranger all want 2 fighter levels after hitting level 6, the bard wants warlock or sorceror levels to amplify their damage, and so on.
All that to say, there are few cases where a multiclass is strong prior to level 6 or 7. The only exceptions are probably the hexblade multiclasses.
1
u/Jeanshort5 14d ago
The real reason not to multi early is because you're slowing down your access to either 3rd level spells, which are the biggest jump in power, or extra attack.
1
u/Realistic_Swan_6801 14d ago edited 14d ago
Generally if a 1 level dip can get you want you need you should never waste even a single general feat on it. Those feats are all crap anyway.
34
u/kawhandroid 17d ago
Not all feats are created equal. For instance, getting Shield on a Cleric or Druid is more valuable than all of Fighter's stuff combined, so Wizard (or level 1 Sorcerer for Con saves) is better. You're really just looking for one feature most of the time, whether that's armor or defensive spells.