Do people like Vanilla Classes?

[Deleted User]

The user and all related content has been deleted.

Erg

All of the above!

Madhax

I prefer a kit to a vanilla class typically. But my favorite playthrough was a vanilla mage, too.

ElectricMonk

I do enjoy "vanilla" classes but have also played (and enjoyed) dual, multi, and kitted classes; never have tried the triple class.

I don't "powergame" or min-max or anything, I usually play as per some combination of enjoyable level of challenge, RP, and general fun. Druids have always been my favorite class to play for some reason, although I know many people have trouble seeing how the BG protagonist could have been a druid, growing up in candlekeep... Due to this if I want to play a druid, and want it to make sense RP-wise, I sometimes start as a fighter and then dual to druid sometime later in the game.

ReadingRambo

I like all the choices I have in character creation, including all the kits. It gives you the freedom to envision charname any way u like.

Freche

I almost always play multi classes, but depending on what classes I choose I sometimes use SK to assign a kit.

ChildofBhaal599

I play vanilla fighter. I don't like downsides and I like to be leader so I go to the front line.

element

my main char is a half-elf pure mage.

it varies by what class i use. With some im happy to use the basic kits. Some though i would never use the standard kits; thief,druid and ranger are examples of this. Also cleric although thats mostly cus i dont like the choice of gods available in the kits

Darkcloud

Kits all the way!

atcDave

I enjoy playing a little bit of everything. I like the contrast of both stronger and weaker characters. I like playing really optimized characters (I have a Cavalier going in one game with three 18s in the physical scores), and really "average" characters (I have a single class halfling fighter going whose only bonus is a 16 constitution), and really unusual (I also have a half-elf fighter/cleric/Mage going).
I'm not sure I would agree with the assertion kits are supposed to be rare, many of the PNP kits are very underpowered collections of traits and skills like farmer or peasant. It's really not hard to imagine a party where most of the characters might even be exactly the same kit. Of course that actually sounds pretty boring to play, but from a pure role playing perspective it makes some sense (a group of peasant kids; say mostly fighters and thieves, with a single specialty cleric of a "common man" sort of priesthood, all having the appropriate kit for their background). Although some kits are more eccentric (Cavalier, Myrmadon, Assassin) and should be less common. But even so, player characters ARE meant to be special cases, so I don't know that uncommon is ever really an issue.

O_Bruce

I have no particular rules about usage of kits or classes (other than considering dual classing absolutely senseless). Sometimes I use vanilla classes, sometimes kits, depends on the mood and my character concept.

RnRClown

I liked the journey from a default class in BG1 to a specific kit (optional) in BG2. It is a little strange being able to choose a kit while still within the walls of Candlekeep.

If someone was to opt for a default Fighter in BG:EE, for example, would they be able to choose a kit when importing their character to BG2:EE? Or is the choice of class and kit now a continuous one from one game to the next?

Rhyme

With the introduction of kits, vanilla classes seem very... Vanilla.

The worst is "Fighter." It sounds so ordinary. Even when BG1 first came out, I would play Rangers and Paladins, because they were special compared to Fighters.

The other day, I found myself wanting to play a warrior that could wear plate mail, but also use a bow, and potentially reach grand-mastery in some weapons. The only class that fit that description was a vanilla fighter...

I couldn't do it. I tried. I just couldn't do it.

If somebody created a Fighter kit that was identical to a vanilla fighter, but had a different name, I would play it in a heartbeat.

IkMarc

After years of strictly playing standard classes (mostly because I was a young brat who didn't have a clue) I discovered effective dual and multi classing and now I am on a roll.......

LadyRhian

I play a Vanilla Fighter as well, probably because there were no kits when I first played the game. And I am enjoying myself immensely, too! I am about to enter Cloakwood Map 2, so we'll see how I handle the Fat Spiderlady and her sword spiders...

Hmmm... not well. And I have Dynaheir as my blasty mage, too. Looking for some nasty scrolls...

Pantalion

I enjoy vanilla classes so much, I need two or three at the same time.

Eudaemonium

I like vanilla classes, and use them sometimes. Honestly, as awesome as having kits in BG1 is, I feel it makes far more sense to get kits in BG2, once your character has been on the road a while and specialised further. That said, I rarely play unspecialised mages. (I rarely play mages at all, though).

[Deleted User]

The user and all related content has been deleted.

Eudaemonium

Thank you @Bhaaldog. At least now I will be able to kill you last.

[Deleted User]

The user and all related content has been deleted.

the_spyder

Like the OP, my 'Usual' Charname is a human generic mage. I occasionally dabble with specialist mages and once or twice I have tried other classes/class combinations, but for the most part, yeah. Sign me up for generics all the way.

ReadingRambo

Rhyme said:

With the introduction of kits, vanilla classes seem very... Vanilla.

The worst is "Fighter." It sounds so ordinary. Even when BG1 first came out, I would play Rangers and Paladins, because they were special compared to Fighters.

The other day, I found myself wanting to play a warrior that could wear plate mail, but also use a bow, and potentially reach grand-mastery in some weapons. The only class that fit that description was a vanilla fighter...

I couldn't do it. I tried. I just couldn't do it.

If somebody created a Fighter kit that was identical to a vanilla fighter, but had a different name, I would play it in a heartbeat.

I've always hated the name "fighter" in DnD. Warrior would be such a better name. Also I disliked "thief" and was very pleased to see it change to "rogue" in 3rd Ed.

Edit: just to clarify, I thought this years before Warcraft was in existence lol!

OzzyBotkins

I like your RP perspective of playing an non specialized mage
because CHARNAME grew up in secluded Candlekeep
and recieved a balanced education from Gorion
I am going to put in my playthrough wishlist
BG1 was the 2nd game I played on my first computer
my 1st CHARNAME was a Paladin with stats of (No Lie )
STR 18/00
DEX 18
CON 18
INT 03
WIS 18
CHA 18
I know thats not muh of a RP MC
When BG2 came out
I went kit crazy
except for my vanilla fighter
never dueled classed and only played one multi-class
an gnome illlusionist/ thief ( I wanted my own version of Jan)
Now I try to put a little more thought in to my Main characters
and thinking about what would be my CHARNAME reason to duel class
also what was Imoen reason to duell class??? ( or just simply studying magic )
Was it Dnyheir ( Minsc's witch ) that taught Imoen her first spelll
since CHARNAME and Imoen had adventured together throught Baldur's Gate
would Imoen being taken away near the begining of BG2 be a traumatiic experience for the main character
and if the MC is human would the experience of losing Imoen make them want to duel class also
to try to compensate for the loss
Just somethin to think about

the_spyder

ReadingRambo said:

Also I disliked "thief" and was very pleased to see it change to "rogue" in 3rd Ed.

I am just the opposite. I hated the conversion from thief to rogue. Rogue is just a little bit to "Politically Correct" for my taste. You hide in shadows, you pick locks, you pick pockets. you are a Thief. Why the need to 'class' it up? Were they feeling that thieves were in need of a self image boost?

KidCarnival

I usually use kits. Charname is 20 years old when the game begins, so he/she probably had an idea of what he/she wanted to do with his/her life. Already being specialized without having the experience in the world outside of Candlekeep is still reflected by starting at level 1, so there is no roleplay conflict for me. Charname could have picked a special field by reading about it and gaining theoretical knowledge which he/she depends on after Gorion's death.
Especially clerics make little sense to me without a kit/chosing a deity. It's probably very very rare in the real world that someone decides to become a priest without being a believer first. (I don't like playing monks, but the same would apply to them.) I can see the limited kit/deity options as a reason for playing a non-kitted cleric, so Charname can worship a deity not offered as kit though.

Lemernis

I like and use them all.

[Deleted User]

I mainly play multi-classes, though I'll play some of the kits I find more interesting here and there.

@the_spyder It's because people put far too much stock in class names, and so playing a "Thief" when they would describe themselves as a "Scout" or "Spy" bothers them. See also: the reason for the proliferation of dozens of kits (classes and prestige classes in 3rd edition) covering minor variations on an archetype instead of just filing the serial numbers off a perfectly serviceable general class and calling your "Fighter" a "Knight" or "Viking" instead.

Erinne

I've played all kinds of classes, but my favourite is single-class unkitted thief :P.

the_spyder

@Kaigen. I take that fully as one of the main reasons. And I for one don't stand on ceremony over a name. Which is why I do as you so eloquently said "Filing the serial numbers off a perfectly serviceable general class". I love that.

it also leaves me feeling like 'Rogue' (not rouge) is just generally to "PC".

Hmmm.. Now I really want to start another run with Charname being a female Elven Thief named "Rouge".

RnRClown

@KidCarnival
You raise some valid points. It is not out of the question for our protaganist to have a specialisation (a kit) with all things taken into consideration. The observation on age and the ease of access to a library filled with infinite knowledge is a very astute one indeed. Now I want to choose a kit!

KidCarnival

@RnRClown: Be a jester, join our club. It's a very fun kit and still true to it's base class.