F/C vs. F/D

Jagged

I'm going to be one of the priest classes for my full trilogy run. My issue is I can't decide between a F/C or a F/D. I'm also wondering if I should dual from berserker at 7 or just straight multi class.

So, what are done of the pros and cons of Clerics and Druids?

I know druid xp is a little wonky but I'm not too concerned with that. Also, a C/R is out.

artificial_sunlight

Druids have spells that are more fun.

Wanderon

Clerics spell selection is a bit better in the original but by BG2 druids mostly catch up IMO - but for fighter or beserker to druid dual I'd probably stay in fighter class until level 9 in BG2 then dual and you only need 125K for druid 10 to get your skills back (vs 450K for cleric 10)

The biggest advantage of dual vs multi of course is the opportunity to get more than 2 pips in a weapon prof - if you can live with only 2 then multi is a solid choice too IMO and you don't have the hassle of waiting to get your old skills back - everything progresses right from the start.

IMO Clerics have a bit better weapon choices especially for BG2 where they can wield some of the best in the game but both are viable choices.

Lord_Tansheron

Dual-class is usually better when paired with a caster. Fighters stop scaling fairly quickly, while casters continue to accrue benefits until very high levels. For a trilogy run, Berserker 7 is a good base to start from, though if you plan on dualing only in BG2 and not BG1 I'd consider B9, too.

Clerics have more buff spells than druids. Draw upon Holy Might and Righteous Magic in particular pair well with your fighter base, as they increase combat capabilities quite significantly. Druids do have Iron Skins, though, which is a supreme defensive skill. Their other spells are more offensive in nature (pun!), with disablers and some damage. They also tend to have the stronger summons later on.

It's a tough call between the two, and very much dependent on personal preference and play style. I prefer Clerics for their combat-capabilities, but others favor druids for their disabling spells instead. Not something that can be decided objectively for most people I'm afraid. Maybe you can read through the spell selections and think what sounds coolest to you? What would you want to use?

elminster

Druids can't use warhammers, maces, morningstars, and flails (which each have quite powerful items in BG2 especially) but unlike clerics they can use daggers, darts, and scimitars. The latter of which (the scimitar) lets you use Belm in your off hand (provides an extra attack per round). Concerning multiclassing, the downside of a fighter/druid here is that you will have access to only a very limited number of level 6 and level 7 spells until your reach 6,000,000 xp. Unlike the Cleric you will also have to rely on potions and items to boost your strength rather than spells (once you lose your DOHM ability anyways).

mjs

i'd go f/c, they can dish out decent damage with buffs like DuHM and RM and they can soak it up with AoF, Defender of Easthaven and Hardiness

Aristillius

Berseker/druid sounds more fun roleplay wise... Hmm.
Otherwise Im generally a fan of multiclass rather than dualclass because of the hassle of deciding what level is the most effective to dual away from and the down-time when leveling your new class.

Corvino

The major weakness of druids in the trilogy is the level 14->15 XP mountain. This make a multiclass a lot less attractive than a dual. The only major downside of the dual Berserker -> Druid is the fairly brutal 15 Str, 17 Wis and 17 Cha required to legally dual.

Dualling at Berserker 7 lets you get to Druid 9 before the BG1 XP cap, and hit grandmastery at level 8. Continuing to level 9 means you'll be playing a Berserker all the way through BG1. I played one through BG:EE recently and it was fun. Arguably it's better to dual at 9, but then you just play as a berserker through BG1 (powerful but dull).

Clerics do well as duals, and are much more viable multiclassers than F/Ds. You can also choose a shorty race for great saves if you multi, as well as fulfilling your frontline caster role from day 1.

Frosty

Druids can't raise dead.

sledgefang

Why not just go Ranger/cleric? That way you get both druid and cleric spells and still get to two PIP in warhammer, maces, and flails.

doggy

Would go f/c. Better spells and DUHM. Got to love that one.

Also as written by others above your weapons of choice.

elminster

Frosty said:

Druids can't raise dead.

They can't cast the spells "Raise Dead" or "Resurrection". They can however use scrolls of "Raise Dead" as well as the Rod of Resurrection. Vhailor's Helm helps in this regard. They can also eventually get "Mass Raise Dead".

[Deleted User]

I prefer F/D because the F/C weapon restrictions cut you off from all the "speed" weapons, and Iron Skins is an amazing spell for a front-liner to have. Also, the Club of Detonation is a great weapon (especially in combination with the Aura of Flaming Death spell).

smeagolheart

R/C > Beserker/Cleric >/= Berserker/Druid

Awong124

Nevermind, misread something.

Wanderon

Awong124 said:

sledgefang said:

Why not just go Ranger/cleric? That way you get both druid and cleric spells and still get to two PIP in warhammer, maces, and flails.

He wants to dual-class, so a Ranger wouldn't get any spells before dualing, and he'd be behind a fighter in terms of combat (unless he plans to dual-wield).

Still eventually he's going to have a warrior/caster and adding the offensive druid spells to the clerics buffs makes for such a good caster that many folks want to nerf it and while losing druid bladed weapons he still gets some of the best weapons in BG2 plus 2 free pips in dual wielding so he can use two of them at once.

I'd say R->C or even R/C multi comes out at least as good as if not better than any other F-priest combo unless you are stuck on mastery or higher for weapon profs.

Awong124

Not only for weapon mastery, but Rangers require more XP to advance than Fighters. So if he's not going to get any spells from being a Ranger, and he doesn't plan to dual-wield, there's no point in choosing Ranger over Fighter.

Lord_Tansheron

Not sure why people are debating R/C now, it was pretty clearly ruled out from the beginning...

Personally, I think B->C might be better than R/C or R->C anyway, particularly at higher difficulties. Druid spells aren't terribly impressive compared to the power of cleric buffs on a real fighter.

Jagged

Yup, the R/C might be awesome but I find it to be a bit too much cheese.

Thanks for all of the responses. I have decided cleric is the way to go. I really like insect swarm, iron skins, and natures beauty but clerics just seem more versatile.

I'm still undecided on multi or dual. I'm leaning towards the multi for hardiness and some GWW with the FoA.

Awong124

In my experience you'd probably end up with more hp going dual.

chickenhed

For raw power, a dwarf multi F/C is one of the most fun and powerful race/class combinations in the game. They're juggernauts. I just hate that they can't romance the ladies. Seriously. Makes no sense. My dwarf is a sexy bastard.

[Deleted User]

I do like the multi for GWW with the FoA, and being able to play a Dwarf gives you shorty saves, which is a nice boost to survivability. Dual-class gets you better spellcasting faster, but I find myself rather ambivalent about the level 6 and 7 Cleric spells, so I'm usually not in such a big hurry to get there. Dual-classing also gives you a useful turn undead ability, though, and lets you hit grandmastery, which is a big deal for the extra APR. Not to mention all the fun immunities and bonuses from Berserker.

Lord_Tansheron

The reason dual is generally better when it's fighter->caster is that fighters don't scale very well past level 13; casters on the other hand continue to grow well into their 20s/30s.

You do lose HLAs, which is a bit of an annoyance, but you also gain things. Grandmastery is a big one, and so is Berserker Rage. If you have a mage in your party to give you Improved Haste, you aren't much behind GWW in terms of APR. You also get caster levels faster, which helps improve your spells and Turn Undead ability (watch those Liches blow up!).

Multi-class is close, though, particularly in small parties. If you aren't min/maxing, then just go with what you find most comfortable to play with, the differences probably won't even be big enough to notice.

kab

Well the other thing is any time you're looking at a full trilogy run a multi-class option is going to be consistent throughout. Spending the entirety of BG1 waiting to dual isn't all that fun. Of course I also tend to solo or duo BG1, so sitting someone at the back out of the way isn't an option.

F/C is strong. A Berserker dual is fun, if you don't mind the waiting. I find F/D to be more interesting but I enjoy summoning elementals so I'm going to be biased.

Battlehamster

This depends, are you playing BG or IWD?
BG = Meh
IWD + HoW = ZOMG OP!!!!

chickenhed

If you simply want "end game" power, nothing touches a dual Berserker - Cleric (out of the listed options here). So if that is what you're looking for, there really isn't a debate. Zerker rage, better casting levels, better turn undead (which is a bloody blast, btw), and grand mastery in a weapon. So if you want BG2/end game power, there really isn't much else to say. Dual simply wins. HLA's do not outweigh those advantages in my opinion.

HOWEVER. I hate waiting. Hate it. If I were starting a fresh BG2 campaign, I would definitely go Dual. But I love BG1, and waiting almost an entire game (and a wonderful game) to get fun cleric spells drives me bonkers.

So that's that. If you can wait and want power, go dual. If you're impatient like myself, go multi, be a dwarf, smash everything and love that your divine lord gives you the tools to do so right off the bat.

For Mordadin's Hammer!

zur312

plagus from druid are ulimate "i win spells" rest of the druidic spells are pretty much a waste
nymphs and driads are really good too

druid better HLA

cleric is more balanced and better at fighting

multi is much better in bg1 compared to bg2
dual is better in bg2 compared to bg1
duals are overall probably stronger but i think it is very small margin and very much exp dependance

Quartz

Fighter/Cleric multi-class is a ton of fun.
For Fighter/Druid you are probably best off doing a dual-class.

Jagged

Is it possible to get Berserker (7)->Cleric in BGEE. I thought I could but now the xp seems to be off. I guess I would be better off just dualing in BG2 and taking the berserker all the way.

Also, what do you guys think of the Priest of Lathander as an alternative? I know it will be a bit weaker but I was thinking I just might prefer it RP wise.

Thanks again!

Lord_Tansheron

@Jagged: afaik Cleric is just about the only class that doesn't work with a 7 dual in BG:EE. I don't think staying Berserker until lvl9 in BG2 is a big deal, fighters are pretty decent on their own in BG1.

All the Priest kits are great. I recently made a Cleric of Lathander 12 -> Fighter dual, and it worked out okay. You get lvl6 spells and the maximum scaling on DuHM/AoF, which is a really nice complement to the fighter once you regain levels. Boon of Lathander makes up for missing APR and with lvl12 it lasts 12 rounds, which is quite enough for most fights (it's quick on the recast too, if needed). Does take a while for the dualing/regaining, though (but not as long as some other combos). The nice thing is that you get fighter HLAs later on, so in ToB you can go around whacking everything with GWW+Staff of Ram. Quite fun!

Corvino

@Lord_Tansheron I noticed the entire "You can't do a Fighter 7 -> Cleric dual under the BG1 XP Cap" a few days ago and was borderline upset. It works for just about any other class, and Clerics are usually pretty forgiving. I also only worked it out once my 18 Wis Fighter was level 4.

I guess he's going straight fighter throughout BG:EE then.