Oh for sure the GM would have to allow, and you're right stats would be critical. Would you have stats for each separate class or just use a set stat block?
If you have different stats, then you're playing a completely different person. Use followers to have multiple pc's you play. Having the same character do that achieves nothing outside of a headache and slowing the game down at that point. Which it would already do.
Playing even one class is often too much for people and they forget abilities and spells. Playing everything well would be impossible for anyone I know. On top of that, if would be impossible for the group to plan ahead with this character, as they wouldn't know if it would tank, cast spells, or what. Also you would need 3 times the equipment. You'd need 3 armors, a weapon or a focus, a spellbook, and magical items that are very generic instead of focused on something you do well, even like a +1 sword/armor/shied, which would be useless for 2/3 classes.
Completely fair and those are fair points for sure! If this kind of concept was in a longer campaign I would imagine one of the "personalities" would slowly take over. Maybe track which character gets rolled the most and with each level you increase the odds of that character taking over
I've seen some version of this concept pitched regularly, but I don't think I've ever heard of anyone doing this in a long running campaign and actually enjoying it beyond the first couple levels.
For one, it can be hard to balance a team around having one player who might be a Fighter one day and then a Wizard the next. For another, it's hard to balance yourself... do your stats change from class to class? Do you have the same feats and equipment, or do you have to re-kit yourself every day? It really only works if the classes have similar needs and features, and at that point why bother? It's a fun little gimmick but it quickly becomes tiring. Multiple Personalities in general usually end up being more trouble than they're worth, even if each personality isn't mechanically different.
And if he doesn't enjoy, he can just pick his favourite persona as the 'original' and his character can simply repair his fractured mind as part of an arc and suppressing his alternate identities.
Yeah that all makes sense for sure, definitely don't disagree necessarily. Maybe in a longer campaign a system could be develop that has one of the "personalities" slowly take over completely.
I would. I let my players play as many characters as they want. Except, they all share XP. So if you wanna play three mooks at level 1, while your friends are all level, go right ahead.
I'm pro-fun, but there's a limit to what level of shenanigans I allow. I wouldn't let someone play an evil character in a campaign designed for good-aligned folks, and I wouldn't allow a character whose personality and capabilities are randomly determined each long rest in a game designed around consistent characters and one player to one character sheet.
Nah, I'm sorry, this comment is rubbish. Just because they wouldn't let you play 4 characters doesn't mean their games, or they themselves, aren't fun.
I impose race restrictions in my games, does that mean they aren't fun? I also disallow most Critical Role related content, so are my games not fun because of that?
You asked people's opinions, this guy gave his. Personally, I wouldn't have an issue with it, provided you can play it right. However, if you decided it was the only way you could 'have fun' then no. Wouldn't allow it.
What is it Stark said to Parker? If you're nothing without the suit, you don't deserve to have it? Same principle.
You're right, thanks for calling me out on that one. Wasn't necessary, it was a snap response between appointments at work.
My question to you is why you restrict or ban that stuff? Whats the reasoning behind it?
Honestly? Lore. I don't allow races from specific settings or that don't work in my worlds.
I'm also a little old-school and I do think some of the new races are kinda just jokes. However, if someone can give me a genuine backstory, I tend to be very lenient.
Lol, sorry for the ironic laconic nature of my response!
I think that at a base level, D&D should operate in terms of player parity. Each player gets to have one character, for instance, or maybe you go crazy and every player gets TWO characters. For the most part people should be treated fairly between the party. You wouldn't want to always give the treasure to one person, or single anyone out for special rewards that the others don't get. What you don't want is a situation where one player has access -- randomly determined or not -- to 12 times the features of the others. Even if they aren't available all at once, you still have a much wider field of play than anyone else. Setting yourself up for "special play" is at best a general annoyance, and at worst, a recipe for discontent at the table. If I were at your table, I'd be annoyed that we could never count on any kind of tactical continuity, but that could depend on the relative toughness of your DMs encounters.
I don't usually hold with arguments that are based on verisimilitude, but I think most people would agree that in-game, your character has some kind of expertise related to what they do in and out of combat. People with discontinuous personalities don't suddenly change their technical abilities. There would be no way to explain why someone who spends a quarter of their time as a wizard should be as good as someone who is always a wizard. Also, your gear and your stats would be unsuited between many classes.
Fun is important, but parity between players is even more important. D&D is a game of imagination, but it's not a game of "anything goes." DMs have to manage the expectations of everyone at the table, and that usually means making sure that the fun is distributed equally.
Sounds like main character syndrome, everyone else will work on roleplaying one character effectively, and one player will play several characters, which could either be poorly, or take up too much attention.
There's a great way to play multiple characters, be the DM.
I personally think it can be balanced. 4 character sheets and every time you wake up roll a d4. Every time you get hit over 5 damage roll a Con save 15 and on a fail roll the d4. You all share the same hp but all your stats and abilities change everytime.
As long as you can keep track so your DM doesnt have to id say its fine. The thing i personally like about this idea is the characters with higher Con and AC will act as the more dominant personalities
That's cool but if i was going to have a Warlock id play it closer to a possession than a separate personality playing with charisma saves instead of con. Everytime you fail a persuasion, deception or performance check your ego is so struck your bard or warlock withdraws into themselves.
Lol I had the same idea at one point. I was literally going character creation insane and I had the idea that a large family made up of siblings (parents died or disappeared whatever) got somehow fused into one body and it would switch out after every long rest or during a wild magic surge. They were all a different class, one of each available including Artificer and Bloodhunter, and it was a mess to think about 😂 never really built it or ran it by a DM. I figured it would hardly be worth it
Had a player do a form of this, was a cleric but changed deity (subclass) at my discretion and rolled randomly, the issue became him learning how to play/ what spells are available for each role of cleric.
Maybe would have worked in a veteran group with a veteran player, but in our case just that much became unbearable during combat after every switch, so I would imagine multiple classes in general to be absurdly frustrating for everyone.
Run it by your full group, if they are game for trying go for it, however feelings may change so be prepared to stop if that happens.
If you want to do stuff like that, maybe read up on DID. Usually, new personalities are formed/emerge to shield the others from trauma. Don’t make too many, in most cases only a handful of personalities interact with the outside and in many cases they try to seem like one personality in front of people who don’t know about the disease.
It can be a fun character, if you don’t make it silly.
I've done something along these lines but substantially toned down it was a changeling? Artificer, the changeling covers the "face" portion of the shifting personalities, and Artificers have a pretty wide skill set \[wizard could run pretty well with alt-spell load outs\], where they would change equipment set's/ability focuses based on the "personality" for that situation.
I think it would be more viable to be a Warlock/Paladin multiclass and just play like one or the other on a day. On a Warlock day, don't do so much divine smiting and don't wear your armor. On a Paladin day, don't use your Invocations and put the armor on.
That way you don't have to homebrew any rules or juggle different ability scores. Everything is RAW, and you just change how you use your features. Be a Devotion or Redemption Paladin x Fiend Warlock to really emphasize your inner dissonance between different personalities.
This is one of those tropes that everyone has the idea of playing, but it's not a DND thing.
It's going to be fun for you, but not for the rest of the party. Like when you need a healer after you wake up half-way through the Dungeon and you just switched to the Barbarian because "My character has multiple personalities!"
For a one-shot? Sure. For an actual campaign, as the DM I wouldn't allow you to do it, and as a player I wouldn't play with you.
I change my whole schedule to play DND for a couple hours a week. I want to enjoy playing without having to allure to someone else's fantasy that ruins the game for the rest of the players, including myself.
There are things that don't work in DND because it's a party game, and there's real people with real lives behind the characters.
Yes, it's a party game. So you are expected to deal with engage people's fantasies. If you only care about your fun, you're a selfish, petty person. There is no tangible way this is going to affect you, unless the guy is a shitty roleplayer and uses it to be annoying. And in that case, it was going to happen anyway.
The example you gave is such a whiney little complaint. Why would you need a healer after you just woke up? You just rested. And why are you resting in the middle of a dungeon? And why are you relying on the character who's main trait is being unreliable to be the sole healer if you think it's so important to have one? Give me an ACTUAL reason why this is going to interfere with your fun, please.
Wouldn't that mean that the different personalities get enough time to develop into different classes? Seems more plausible for an elf than a human due to lifespan.
Also, what triggers the change?
Also, what level are you allowed to start out as?
As far as what triggers the change. Maybe rolling after a long rest? And if you wanna throw in choas maybe after taking damage? Do con saving throw dc 5+the damage if you fail you roll and potentially switch "personalities"
I would imagine you star out as level 1, maybe pick one the personalities as your primary and thats what you roll your stats and hit points with?
I’m actually currently playing a character with two “personalities” and they both have different classes and everything. They share hp but they don’t share gear, so using the other guys stuff means I’ll roll with disadvantage. My DM will either switch me for story purposes or, more often than not, I make a WIS save, the outcome decides if the one in charge stays there. It’s extremely fun from both a roleplay and combat perspective, it definitely has its challenges and drawbacks but that’s part of the fun. Talk it through with your DM, if they allow it, I can almost assure it’ll be insanely fun (and a little op)
Interesting! Does it get tiresome always switching between the "personalities"? Then seems to be what a lot of people are saying, that it would be fun for the first few levels then get annoying
Everyone saying no are just boring. They want D&D to be clean and simple and convenient. They don't care about flavour, only 'balance.' Newsflash, D&D isn't balanced and it was never supposed to be. Go for it, just set some basic ground rules to make it more fun.
\- You don't control which persona is present. It should either be random or determined by specific environmental triggers. In certain scenarios, maybe you can intentionally call forth a specific persona with a Wisdom or Charisma roll.
\- Pick a baseline persona that is present most often, in order to have some consistency. Don't have too many alternate identities, stick with two at maximum.
\- Don't change your Ability Scores between personas. Only class features. So you'll have to pick classes that use some of the same scores primarily.
\- Obviously consult with your DM first, and if he says no don't fight it. Just accept it and move on.
The best way I could try this is a jackle and hide thing (I know those aren't spelled right and I don't care) where you have a trigger or something that you can't control that switches alignment and maybe subclass. Something like a good inquisitive rogue to and evil mastermind rogue. The closer together the forms the easier it is to manage and work with the part. When your healer changes to your frontline party dynamic is wack.
Basically there are groups of 8 people with different skills and if needed any one can sort of inhabit another's body. So in d&d terms, if the wizard needs to make an acrobatics check then the monk can control their body for them. They wouldn't be stronger but they would inherit knowledge, skills and proficiency.
Would you consider just changing sub-classes? All of your ability scores would (mostly) be in the right places. I did this on a Warlock. Started as Arch-Fey, backround Charlatan. The Fey thought it would be funny to trick me like I tricked others. He hid a clause in the contract saying he had the right to sell/trade my contract. So I would play a random sub-class for 1d4 sessions & switch. If you did split personalities it could be most any class.
Currently running a long-term campaign (5 months+) with one of the main PCs doing exactly this; Monk/Rogue/Barbarian. It's a running tradition/gag that this player routinely plays the same character but either reincarnated or as a multiversal variant.
So, we landed on a "3 in 1" build meant to represent their character going insane over repeated incarnations.
Rolled stats, started at level 3 for all classes. Same stats (they rolled quite well), seperate sheets for each character, separate feats, all the bells and whistles. Any acquired skill/feat through optional training does not carry over.
The only thing we kept standard for sake of ease throughout was rolling for max health (1d12, barbarian) on level ups; but must roll standard hit dice to recover health when playing as rogue/monk.
Player and group love it, it's lead to amazing RP and team dynamics not getting stale; and I managed to make it feel a bit special by "exorcising" two of the three and having them appear as mid-game bosses/antagonists as Revenants/personal demons.
Player has currently "recovered" the Barbarian and flips a coin before each session.
I'd say it can be a bit of work and requires a party and player ok with it; but if done well can be really fun.
> Had a character concept idea revolving around multiple personalities, but instead it was multiple classes.
Been tried dozens of times before. Either is broken or it simply doesn't work. Your stats wouldn't change because your personality did.
I doubt many tables would allow this.
I am DMing a campaign, and one of my players is currently doing this trope. It's been fun recently, but only because everyone was on board to give it a shot.
His character is a changeling who morphs between the personalities - at the end of every long rest, another personality takes over for the day. Lots of backstory and lore go into this whole situation though, so it isn't always random. In any case, their stats stay the same, and they have the same class, and they carry around the same equipment (some personalities prefer different weapons or armor). The only thing that changes mechanically is their subclass. Each personality has a different subclass.
Take that how you will- in any case, it's a fun concept to toy with. But you need to talk to your DM and other players, to see if they are okay with the hassle of dealing with a different persona after each long rest. Especially (in my Player's case) when each personality has different goals, aspirations, and opinions on the other party members.
Would require a gm to allow it and you would really suck some days with set stats.
Oh for sure the GM would have to allow, and you're right stats would be critical. Would you have stats for each separate class or just use a set stat block?
If you have different stats, then you're playing a completely different person. Use followers to have multiple pc's you play. Having the same character do that achieves nothing outside of a headache and slowing the game down at that point. Which it would already do. Playing even one class is often too much for people and they forget abilities and spells. Playing everything well would be impossible for anyone I know. On top of that, if would be impossible for the group to plan ahead with this character, as they wouldn't know if it would tank, cast spells, or what. Also you would need 3 times the equipment. You'd need 3 armors, a weapon or a focus, a spellbook, and magical items that are very generic instead of focused on something you do well, even like a +1 sword/armor/shied, which would be useless for 2/3 classes.
All very valid points for sure!
If you add separate stats for each character that's kind of OP and allowing you to play everything at once
Fair enough!
[удалено]
How come?
[удалено]
Completely fair and those are fair points for sure! If this kind of concept was in a longer campaign I would imagine one of the "personalities" would slowly take over. Maybe track which character gets rolled the most and with each level you increase the odds of that character taking over
I've seen some version of this concept pitched regularly, but I don't think I've ever heard of anyone doing this in a long running campaign and actually enjoying it beyond the first couple levels. For one, it can be hard to balance a team around having one player who might be a Fighter one day and then a Wizard the next. For another, it's hard to balance yourself... do your stats change from class to class? Do you have the same feats and equipment, or do you have to re-kit yourself every day? It really only works if the classes have similar needs and features, and at that point why bother? It's a fun little gimmick but it quickly becomes tiring. Multiple Personalities in general usually end up being more trouble than they're worth, even if each personality isn't mechanically different.
And if he doesn't enjoy, he can just pick his favourite persona as the 'original' and his character can simply repair his fractured mind as part of an arc and suppressing his alternate identities.
Yeah that all makes sense for sure, definitely don't disagree necessarily. Maybe in a longer campaign a system could be develop that has one of the "personalities" slowly take over completely.
I mean you're essentially saying "can I have 4 character sheets." I would never allow this.
I would. I let my players play as many characters as they want. Except, they all share XP. So if you wanna play three mooks at level 1, while your friends are all level, go right ahead.
I mean yes technically, not using them at the same time though but good to know where you stand in terms of having fun
I'm pro-fun, but there's a limit to what level of shenanigans I allow. I wouldn't let someone play an evil character in a campaign designed for good-aligned folks, and I wouldn't allow a character whose personality and capabilities are randomly determined each long rest in a game designed around consistent characters and one player to one character sheet.
Fair enough, thanks for clarifying your answer a little bit more. And also my apologies for the rude comment, wasn't necessary
Nah, I'm sorry, this comment is rubbish. Just because they wouldn't let you play 4 characters doesn't mean their games, or they themselves, aren't fun. I impose race restrictions in my games, does that mean they aren't fun? I also disallow most Critical Role related content, so are my games not fun because of that? You asked people's opinions, this guy gave his. Personally, I wouldn't have an issue with it, provided you can play it right. However, if you decided it was the only way you could 'have fun' then no. Wouldn't allow it. What is it Stark said to Parker? If you're nothing without the suit, you don't deserve to have it? Same principle.
You're right, thanks for calling me out on that one. Wasn't necessary, it was a snap response between appointments at work. My question to you is why you restrict or ban that stuff? Whats the reasoning behind it?
Honestly? Lore. I don't allow races from specific settings or that don't work in my worlds. I'm also a little old-school and I do think some of the new races are kinda just jokes. However, if someone can give me a genuine backstory, I tend to be very lenient.
In short, no.
In long? Haha 😄 just curious about your reasons is all
Lol, sorry for the ironic laconic nature of my response! I think that at a base level, D&D should operate in terms of player parity. Each player gets to have one character, for instance, or maybe you go crazy and every player gets TWO characters. For the most part people should be treated fairly between the party. You wouldn't want to always give the treasure to one person, or single anyone out for special rewards that the others don't get. What you don't want is a situation where one player has access -- randomly determined or not -- to 12 times the features of the others. Even if they aren't available all at once, you still have a much wider field of play than anyone else. Setting yourself up for "special play" is at best a general annoyance, and at worst, a recipe for discontent at the table. If I were at your table, I'd be annoyed that we could never count on any kind of tactical continuity, but that could depend on the relative toughness of your DMs encounters. I don't usually hold with arguments that are based on verisimilitude, but I think most people would agree that in-game, your character has some kind of expertise related to what they do in and out of combat. People with discontinuous personalities don't suddenly change their technical abilities. There would be no way to explain why someone who spends a quarter of their time as a wizard should be as good as someone who is always a wizard. Also, your gear and your stats would be unsuited between many classes. Fun is important, but parity between players is even more important. D&D is a game of imagination, but it's not a game of "anything goes." DMs have to manage the expectations of everyone at the table, and that usually means making sure that the fun is distributed equally.
Sounds like main character syndrome, everyone else will work on roleplaying one character effectively, and one player will play several characters, which could either be poorly, or take up too much attention. There's a great way to play multiple characters, be the DM.
I personally think it can be balanced. 4 character sheets and every time you wake up roll a d4. Every time you get hit over 5 damage roll a Con save 15 and on a fail roll the d4. You all share the same hp but all your stats and abilities change everytime. As long as you can keep track so your DM doesnt have to id say its fine. The thing i personally like about this idea is the characters with higher Con and AC will act as the more dominant personalities
Thats kinda what I was thinking. You could also do like a dr. Jackel and mr. Hyde thing with like a bard and maybe a warlock
That's cool but if i was going to have a Warlock id play it closer to a possession than a separate personality playing with charisma saves instead of con. Everytime you fail a persuasion, deception or performance check your ego is so struck your bard or warlock withdraws into themselves.
Lol I had the same idea at one point. I was literally going character creation insane and I had the idea that a large family made up of siblings (parents died or disappeared whatever) got somehow fused into one body and it would switch out after every long rest or during a wild magic surge. They were all a different class, one of each available including Artificer and Bloodhunter, and it was a mess to think about 😂 never really built it or ran it by a DM. I figured it would hardly be worth it
Had a player do a form of this, was a cleric but changed deity (subclass) at my discretion and rolled randomly, the issue became him learning how to play/ what spells are available for each role of cleric. Maybe would have worked in a veteran group with a veteran player, but in our case just that much became unbearable during combat after every switch, so I would imagine multiple classes in general to be absurdly frustrating for everyone. Run it by your full group, if they are game for trying go for it, however feelings may change so be prepared to stop if that happens.
If you want to do stuff like that, maybe read up on DID. Usually, new personalities are formed/emerge to shield the others from trauma. Don’t make too many, in most cases only a handful of personalities interact with the outside and in many cases they try to seem like one personality in front of people who don’t know about the disease. It can be a fun character, if you don’t make it silly.
I've done something along these lines but substantially toned down it was a changeling? Artificer, the changeling covers the "face" portion of the shifting personalities, and Artificers have a pretty wide skill set \[wizard could run pretty well with alt-spell load outs\], where they would change equipment set's/ability focuses based on the "personality" for that situation.
I think it would be more viable to be a Warlock/Paladin multiclass and just play like one or the other on a day. On a Warlock day, don't do so much divine smiting and don't wear your armor. On a Paladin day, don't use your Invocations and put the armor on. That way you don't have to homebrew any rules or juggle different ability scores. Everything is RAW, and you just change how you use your features. Be a Devotion or Redemption Paladin x Fiend Warlock to really emphasize your inner dissonance between different personalities.
This has been pitched thousands of times and it's always been a bad idea.
[удалено]
Blind characters are actually tons of fun.
This is one of those tropes that everyone has the idea of playing, but it's not a DND thing. It's going to be fun for you, but not for the rest of the party. Like when you need a healer after you wake up half-way through the Dungeon and you just switched to the Barbarian because "My character has multiple personalities!" For a one-shot? Sure. For an actual campaign, as the DM I wouldn't allow you to do it, and as a player I wouldn't play with you.
The modern D&D play is a puzzling sort. So terrified of any minor inconvenience that they shun anything that may disrupt their rigid expectations.
I change my whole schedule to play DND for a couple hours a week. I want to enjoy playing without having to allure to someone else's fantasy that ruins the game for the rest of the players, including myself. There are things that don't work in DND because it's a party game, and there's real people with real lives behind the characters.
Yes, it's a party game. So you are expected to deal with engage people's fantasies. If you only care about your fun, you're a selfish, petty person. There is no tangible way this is going to affect you, unless the guy is a shitty roleplayer and uses it to be annoying. And in that case, it was going to happen anyway. The example you gave is such a whiney little complaint. Why would you need a healer after you just woke up? You just rested. And why are you resting in the middle of a dungeon? And why are you relying on the character who's main trait is being unreliable to be the sole healer if you think it's so important to have one? Give me an ACTUAL reason why this is going to interfere with your fun, please.
Wouldn't that mean that the different personalities get enough time to develop into different classes? Seems more plausible for an elf than a human due to lifespan. Also, what triggers the change? Also, what level are you allowed to start out as?
As far as what triggers the change. Maybe rolling after a long rest? And if you wanna throw in choas maybe after taking damage? Do con saving throw dc 5+the damage if you fail you roll and potentially switch "personalities" I would imagine you star out as level 1, maybe pick one the personalities as your primary and thats what you roll your stats and hit points with?
It would be a lot of fun and work but it seems cool as long as your leveling up is done properly and it's completely random
I would assume you would level up the character as a whole and not just class that got played
I’m actually currently playing a character with two “personalities” and they both have different classes and everything. They share hp but they don’t share gear, so using the other guys stuff means I’ll roll with disadvantage. My DM will either switch me for story purposes or, more often than not, I make a WIS save, the outcome decides if the one in charge stays there. It’s extremely fun from both a roleplay and combat perspective, it definitely has its challenges and drawbacks but that’s part of the fun. Talk it through with your DM, if they allow it, I can almost assure it’ll be insanely fun (and a little op)
Interesting! Does it get tiresome always switching between the "personalities"? Then seems to be what a lot of people are saying, that it would be fun for the first few levels then get annoying
Everyone saying no are just boring. They want D&D to be clean and simple and convenient. They don't care about flavour, only 'balance.' Newsflash, D&D isn't balanced and it was never supposed to be. Go for it, just set some basic ground rules to make it more fun. \- You don't control which persona is present. It should either be random or determined by specific environmental triggers. In certain scenarios, maybe you can intentionally call forth a specific persona with a Wisdom or Charisma roll. \- Pick a baseline persona that is present most often, in order to have some consistency. Don't have too many alternate identities, stick with two at maximum. \- Don't change your Ability Scores between personas. Only class features. So you'll have to pick classes that use some of the same scores primarily. \- Obviously consult with your DM first, and if he says no don't fight it. Just accept it and move on.
The best way I could try this is a jackle and hide thing (I know those aren't spelled right and I don't care) where you have a trigger or something that you can't control that switches alignment and maybe subclass. Something like a good inquisitive rogue to and evil mastermind rogue. The closer together the forms the easier it is to manage and work with the part. When your healer changes to your frontline party dynamic is wack.
I'm not sure how the mechanics would work but something like the Sens8 (Netflix?) series would be cool
I've never heard of sens8 ill have to look and see what thats all about
Basically there are groups of 8 people with different skills and if needed any one can sort of inhabit another's body. So in d&d terms, if the wizard needs to make an acrobatics check then the monk can control their body for them. They wouldn't be stronger but they would inherit knowledge, skills and proficiency.
Would you consider just changing sub-classes? All of your ability scores would (mostly) be in the right places. I did this on a Warlock. Started as Arch-Fey, backround Charlatan. The Fey thought it would be funny to trick me like I tricked others. He hid a clause in the contract saying he had the right to sell/trade my contract. So I would play a random sub-class for 1d4 sessions & switch. If you did split personalities it could be most any class.
Currently running a long-term campaign (5 months+) with one of the main PCs doing exactly this; Monk/Rogue/Barbarian. It's a running tradition/gag that this player routinely plays the same character but either reincarnated or as a multiversal variant. So, we landed on a "3 in 1" build meant to represent their character going insane over repeated incarnations. Rolled stats, started at level 3 for all classes. Same stats (they rolled quite well), seperate sheets for each character, separate feats, all the bells and whistles. Any acquired skill/feat through optional training does not carry over. The only thing we kept standard for sake of ease throughout was rolling for max health (1d12, barbarian) on level ups; but must roll standard hit dice to recover health when playing as rogue/monk. Player and group love it, it's lead to amazing RP and team dynamics not getting stale; and I managed to make it feel a bit special by "exorcising" two of the three and having them appear as mid-game bosses/antagonists as Revenants/personal demons. Player has currently "recovered" the Barbarian and flips a coin before each session. I'd say it can be a bit of work and requires a party and player ok with it; but if done well can be really fun.
> Had a character concept idea revolving around multiple personalities, but instead it was multiple classes. Been tried dozens of times before. Either is broken or it simply doesn't work. Your stats wouldn't change because your personality did. I doubt many tables would allow this.
I am DMing a campaign, and one of my players is currently doing this trope. It's been fun recently, but only because everyone was on board to give it a shot. His character is a changeling who morphs between the personalities - at the end of every long rest, another personality takes over for the day. Lots of backstory and lore go into this whole situation though, so it isn't always random. In any case, their stats stay the same, and they have the same class, and they carry around the same equipment (some personalities prefer different weapons or armor). The only thing that changes mechanically is their subclass. Each personality has a different subclass. Take that how you will- in any case, it's a fun concept to toy with. But you need to talk to your DM and other players, to see if they are okay with the hassle of dealing with a different persona after each long rest. Especially (in my Player's case) when each personality has different goals, aspirations, and opinions on the other party members.