I'm not in favor of it to be honest.
If they allow it, it should be heavily restricted since their classes are part of the companion's personality. I can imagine multiclassing as an option for companions though, e.g. Minsc (once we get him) as a ranger/barbarian since he is meant to be a Rashemi berserker if I'm not mistaken.
Yeah, he's pretty much a barbarian berserker, except he was introduced as a character before the class was an actual thing available in D&D (or at very least in Bioware's D&D, can't be bothered to check at what point 2nd Edition introduced the barbarian in pen & paper).
Still, I'm guessing that at this point he's pretty well established as a ranger in everyone's imaginary and they won't change that.
AD&D 1st edition introduced the barbarian as a class in "Unearthed Arcana", AD&D 2nd edition then cut/removed the class and added it as a "kit" in the "Complete Fighter's Handbook".
Yeah, he's too well established as a ranger, hence the possible multiclass option. That way he'd still start out as ranger.
Honestly, I still don't get this argument. Aside from one line of dialogue being that Boo is his animal companion and that he's good with animals, the Ranger does not adequately represent Minsc at all.
Mechnically Ranger do not fit with Minsc.
He's a melee character, who uses big heavy weapons. Rangers can't even take the great weapon fighting style (Sersiously, this still pisses me off, not every Ranger has to be Drizzt).
From the mechanics of the character and his history only Barbarian truly represents Minsc. He's 100% a berserker. Hell, this is demonstrated both in "Heroes of Baldur's Gate" and "Minsc and Boo's Journal of Villainy".
I think if we need to keep the whole ranger thing going, just having the Berserker lodge have a rank of Ranger, resolves all canonical issues with his class. Now if only Jim Zub would stop trying to push him into the class without using any of the ranger class features that would be great.
