Dual-classing inconsistencies, and changes from BG1?

ljbo

First, it seems to me the two manuals contradict each other. In the "Sword Coast Survival Guide", it is stated that

No further advancement is ever allowed in the first class; all further development is in the new class.

On the contrary, "Mastering Melee and Magic" has

until they have gained at least one more level in their new class than in their old class. After this point, they can choose freely between the abilities of each class.

For e.g. a fighter/mage, that means the former manual states the mage can't gain more weapon proficiency pip whereas the latter states the opposite. The latter is what AD&D 2nd Edition says whereas the former is what the original BG1 manual said.

Then what does the game actually implement? I have never made a dual-class but a discussion about fighter/cleric on the General forum indicates that the former is what is implemented actually. Is that intentional? Or is that a change introduced by the BG2 engine?

Jalily

"advancement" and "further development" refer to gaining levels and any abilities that come with gaining levels in the first class.

ljbo

@Jalily That is exactly how I understand it. Interpreted literally, a fighter with 3 pips of e.g. long sword specialisation who dual-classes at level 3 should never be able to get a 4th pip in that weapon because his new class (be it cleric, mage, thief) can't have more than 2 pips. Is that correct?

Dee

In theory, yes. Although the way the engine handles it, any character with "Fighter" on either side of the dual can grandmaster any weapon at any time, provided he puts the required pips into it.

My brother discovered this about a week ago for himself, and it revolutionized how he viewed character creation.

That said, I don't know that I would call it "working as intended". It may just be a bug that won't ever be fixed.

ljbo

@Aosaw thanks for confirming what I thought I understood. That's a big revelation for myself too! At the very least, the documentation should make that point very clear. Not everybody roams those forums! Which are worth 100x any documentation of course!

Madhax

It might be worth noting that this sort of proficiency point shenanigans isn't possible in Icewind Dale, which uses otherwise identical rules...

Gallowglass

True, @Madhax, and that's why we build characters differently in IWD. In IWD, you have to replay in Heart of Fury mode to build a worthwhile dual-class character because there isn't enough XP in the standard mode to gain most of the advantages. And that's fine and fun, but very different from BG which has different rules and no HoF replay.

The current way it works in BG isn't the same as the IWD rule or AD&D rule, but it's very firmly established as the long-standing BG rule, and loads of us have invested huge time building our characters on that basis. They can't ever change this rule in BG, it'd no longer be BG if they did that - it'd just be "some other game which has pirated the setting and story of BG", and that's not at all what the devs here are trying (or indeed allowed) to create.

TJ_Hooker

Gallowglass said:

True, @Madhax, and that's why we build characters differently in IWD. In IWD, you have to replay in Heart of Fury mode to build a worthwhile dual-class character because there isn't enough XP in the standard mode to gain most of the advantages. And that's fine and fun, but very different from BG which has different rules and no HoF replay.

The current way it works in BG isn't the same as the IWD rule or AD&D rule, but it's very firmly established as the long-standing BG rule, and loads of us have invested huge time building our characters on that basis. They can't ever change this rule in BG, it'd no longer be BG if they did that - it'd just be "some other game which has pirated the setting and story of BG", and that's not at all what the devs here are trying (or indeed allowed) to create.

Really? I think it's pretty overdramatic to say that changing a very specific aspect of dual class proficiency rules will suddenly ruin the game. Also, this isn't how it worked in vanilla BG, it's just a result of moving to the BG2 engine. So it isn't a "firmly established ... long-standing BG rule".

Also, I'm almost positive that there's way more xp in IWD, and that you reach far higher levels than in BG1. Doubly so because IIRC increasing the difficulty in IWD actually increased the xp gains from combat. I haven't played it in ages, but I think I remember getting to level 20 or 30 playing on Insane (in the regular game, not HoF). I'm pretty sure you can easily make an effective dual class without having to play Heart of Fury.

Madhax

Yeah, dual-classing totally works without Heart of Fury in IWD. I routinely build powerful dual-classes, and I seldom enter HoF.

I view pushing grandmastery after dualling from fighter to be an exploit of an oversight in the dual-class system. Why can a fighter2->thief achieve grandmastery, but a fighter/thief multiclass can only specialize? Mechanically, it makes no sense.

If you want to play that way, fine by me. We're all our own DMs, we enforce whatever rules or restrictions we want to make the game more fun for us, and I'd be lying if I said I'd never gotten grandmastery with a dualled fighter. But it's hardly a firm rule of the saga.

Gallowglass

TJ_Hooker said:

Really? I think it's pretty overdramatic to say that changing a very specific aspect of dual class proficiency rules will suddenly ruin the game.

For those of us who often build characters using dual-classing, it'd be a huge change. All the planning for when to dual and what proficiencies to take would change, and many useful builds would lose their point.

TJ_Hooker said:

Also, this isn't how it worked in vanilla BG, it's just a result of moving to the BG2 engine. So it isn't a "firmly established ... long-standing BG rule".

You can't take a dual-classed character very far in BG1, and sometimes don't even dual at all until you're into BG2, so I can't remember if I ever experienced the issue in original BG1. I always take my characters through BG2 as well, and for those of us who have stuck with the BG series all this time, I'm sure taking a character right through is pretty standard practice. BG2 has been out since 2000, so that's been the rule since then. I think that's pretty long-standing and firmly-established.

TJ_Hooker said:

Also, I'm almost positive that there's way more xp in IWD, and that you reach far higher levels than in BG1.

Yeah, somewhat more. Single-classed on core rules you'd finish at about level 17. For a dual-classed character to shine, that's often not enough.

TJ_Hooker said:

Doubly so because IIRC increasing the difficulty in IWD actually increased the xp gains from combat. I haven't played it in ages, but I think I remember getting to level 20 or 30 playing on Insane (in the regular game, not HoF). I'm pretty sure you can easily make an effective dual class without having to play Heart of Fury.

20 maybe, but it's not that dramatic an increase with difficulty in the ordinary game. To get to 30, surely you'd have had to go into HoF? Or repeated replay in the ordinary game.

Madhax

I have a party full of level 17-ish multiclasses, a level 23 paladin, and a level 8 thief -> 22 mage in IWD currently. About halfway through Trials of the Luremaster, insane mode. Only five party members, though.

Anyway, would many "useful" builds lose their point, or would many "exploitative" builds lose their point? Why can taking 2-3 levels of Fighter before permanently switching to a different class get a character to Grandmastery, but multiclassing a Fighter is capped at specialization? These sorts of builds are getting more abilities than the sum of their parts, for no clearly explicable reason. Especially when you consider that a dual-classed Fighter can actually attain Grandmaster FASTER than a single-classed fighter with the right build.

TJ_Hooker

Gallowglass said:

TJ_Hooker said:

Really? I think it's pretty overdramatic to say that changing a very specific aspect of dual class proficiency rules will suddenly ruin the game.

For those of us who often build characters using dual-classing, it'd be a huge change. All the planning for when to dual and what proficiencies to take would change, and many useful builds would lose their point.

TJ_Hooker said:

Also, this isn't how it worked in vanilla BG, it's just a result of moving to the BG2 engine. So it isn't a "firmly established ... long-standing BG rule".

You can't take a dual-classed character very far in BG1, and sometimes don't even dual at all until you're into BG2, so I can't remember if I ever experienced the issue in original BG1. I always take my characters through BG2 as well, and for those of us who have stuck with the BG series all this time, I'm sure taking a character right through is pretty standard practice. BG2 has been out since 2000, so that's been the rule since then. I think that's pretty long-standing and firmly-established.

This sounds less like preserving some kind of sacred rule in BG, and more about you not wanting something changed that might somewhat inhibit your ability to powergame. And that's fine, I don't really care too strongly either way. I might even be in favour of keeping it the way it is, simply because it's easy for people who don't like it to simply choose not to take advantage of it. Just don't act like keeping it in its current form is some noble effort to maintain the integrity of the game. I mean, they changed the benefits from weapon specialization (making them significantly better) from what they were in BG2, but I haven't heard you complaining about that.

hansolo

How it currently works isn't 100% PnP but in my opinion it is fairly well balanced if you consider the wider scope of both games BG1 + 2.
Sure enough, Dualclasses and Multis are more powerful than Singles, that's for sure.
But among these two Multis have the huge advantage of
1) getting HLAs of both classes later on rather than only from one class
2) they usually have the better THAC0 later on (e.g compare a F9->Mage with a high Lv F/M)
3) no waiting time to regain abilities and thus no 'weakness' phase

I consider it fair for Fighter-Duals to be able to Grand Master as a sort of compensation besides them getting high level abilities (like spell level access) faster. Eventually, the multis (exception are tripleclasses) will as well gain all the powerfull stuff, just a bit slower. What remains is the small advantage of Grand Mastery.