Better as a single class

pixie359

It seems that the are few classes that don't significantly benefit from being a multi or, even better, a dual. What build, if any, would you say is worth keeping solo?

FrozenCells

In BG1 or a series as a whole? In BG1, Avenger is a pretty sweet kit. Over the series as a whole I would probably only consider the Sorcerer as a no-brainer worthwhile pure build. There are reasons why you might want to stay pure (e.g. specialist mage, inquisitor, bounty hunter, blade) but I would mostly say that fighter(or beserker/kensai)7->duals and multiclasses offer more than pure or pure kitted classes. That's just how it goes. This is obviously just speaking from a power perspective, if you really like a Stalker or a Cleric of Talos then you won't find them lacking either just...there are better options.

Ammar

First off, let me say that I really disagree with dual class being better than multi. Otherwise it is more a question of what you want. A pure mage definetively is useful in a different way than a f/m.

The only classes I dislike pure are thieves. Fighter mages or clerics are arguably always superior to plain fighters but require more micromanaging which is why I like to have a plain fighter or two.

Shin

Dual isn't necessarily better than multi, but provides different utility. Being able to get the baseline abilities from a class for the exceedingly cheap low-levelrange exp cost and then shut it off is a tremendous advantage, and when available it's virtually always superior to playing a single class.
There's really no build that can dual class that is better off not doing so except for RP purposes.

Ammar

Define early? If it is really early in terms of playtime i.e. in Bg1 the advantages get small early while you lose the option to take a kit or specialization for your second and main class. For mages and thieves this is a severe loss and in some ways also for druids and evil priests.

FinneousPJ

Yeah, only specific kits are better as single. Even then it's only due to game mechanical limitations: if Fighter -> Inquisitor duals were possible they'd be superior to a single class Inquisitor. Generally multi/dual is better.

Ammar

FinneousPJ said:

Yeah, only specific kits are better as single. Even then it's only due to game mechanical limitations: if Fighter -> Inquisitor duals were possible they'd be superior to a single class Inquisitor. Generally multi/dual is better.

Sure. But the restrictions are there and one has to work within them. And that is really a required balancing factor.

elminster

Kensai

JuliusBorisov

An inquisitor is a very solid choice.

Also I'd choose a blade.

Other good variants that are good as a single class include a dwarwen defender, a wild mage, a sorcerer and an assassin.

FinneousPJ

@bengoshi How I wish Blades could dual. Fighter/Bards are my favourite in NWN.

Bulldog

Blade is pretty fun

atcDave

I often enjoy single class characters. But then I'm not really a power gamer, I like making the most of whatever odd or gimped character I end up playing.

nano

@atcDave Even though I am a bit of a power gamer I enjoy that sort of thing too. Taking a character concept and making your character the best it can be within your constraints is much more satisfying than making the strongest possible character overall. Funnily enough, unrestricted powergaming often ends up being more restrictive than setting some restrictions in the first place.

Schneidend

All the classes are just more fun and balanced as a single-class or multi-class. Dual-classing is probably the worst idea in the history of D&D, and people really only do it to abuse the proficiency bug or combine classes that nullify the disdvantages of certain kits, like Kensai/Mage.

Xanar

Dual classing was meant to be the huge advantage of being a human. Kensai/mage is only as overpowered as multi-classes with no level cap.

meagloth

I much prefer single class kitted parties. I figure that's why you have more than one person on your team, so you can have multiple people that are very good, instead of just so-so. I never dual or multi my CHARNAME, and try to avoid people like-*WHEN THE HECK DID IMOEN BECOME A FREAKING MAGE?!!!* what? Who said that?

Corvino

There are quite a few classes that cannot dual or multi (Bard and kits, Paladin and kits, Sorcerer and kits, Monk and kits) that are still very worthwhile even from a powergaming perspective.

From a roleplaying perspective, you lose nothing by taking the same class through the whole saga. I've played paladins, an unkitted fighter (I was young) and a swashbuckler to the end of ToB as well as multiclasses without finding it difficult or unrewarding.

I've only just started using multiclasses other than Fighter/Thief and they are definitely powerful. But it depends what you want your main character to be, and if they need to be a one-man-army to do it.

[Deleted User]

Leaving aside classes that cannot dual or multi (because I'm pretty sure I would dual/multi-class a Paladin, Monk, or Sorcerer in a heartbeat if I had the option), doesn't leave much, but I'd say a single-class Wild Mage is worth it for novelty alone.

the_spyder

I gotta agree with the concensus (or so I imagine). I like and prefer single class characters. I see no reason to slow my own progression towards ultimate power by adding any fighter levels into my mage class. That's why I have flunk... ahem... Companions like Minsc and Korgan.

At the end of the day, that is why you have a party. Different classes have different strengths and weaknesses. Companions help level out those weaknesses. At least that is how I play.

ZanathKariashi

@Xanar

Dual-classing was more of a fringe benefit as very few people in DnD would be able to do it even once, without extensive use of wishes or the like.

Unlimited advancement, and the ability to play any class are humans main benefit.

Dual-classing was simply something characters who got very lucky and rolled very good stats could add a little extra variety to their character.

Lord_Tansheron

Speaking objectively, I can think of no class that is better off not dualing (assuming they can dual in the first place, of course). The price for dualing is so ridiculously low, particularly in BG2, and you gain a lot from it. Given that you tend to dual early, you are usually at XP brackets that are close to what you need for a single level later on, meaning that even when you cap, you are usually behind a single class by only trivial amounts. The only real downside is the time spent regaining your levels, but it doesn't take a whole lot of meta-knowledge to make that time almost insignificantly small (unless you dual at high levels).

Of course, that's looking at things objectively, without personal preference. If you like doing things differently, that's your choice, and perfectly valid.

karnor00

I think that dualing from fighter classes provides the biggest benefits - you get fighter hp, strength and constitution bonuses. So adding some early fighter levels to a mage, cleric or thief provides very useful benefits.

However if you want to ultimately be a fighter, I don't see much advantage in dualing. All options lose the benefit of fighter hp, strength and constitution bonuses. Mage > fighter gets some extra spells but can't cast them while using armor. Thief > fighter gets some thief skills but similar armor restrictions. Cleric > fighter is a possibility - no armor restrictions but do the cleric spells outweigh the lack of hp and exceptional strength?

Of course there's little point being a single class basic fighter in the first place. Better to add a kit (no wizard slayer tho!) or be a paladin/ranger.

CutlassJack

Single Class Swashbuckler will always be my favorite thing through both games.

Lord_Tansheron

@karnor00: There are several combinations of dualing into fighter that are worthwhile: Swashbuckler->Fighter, for example, is one of the better thief combos; Cleric of Lathander/Talos/Helm->Fighter is mostly better than a vanilla fighter; even Mage->Fighter (dualed very early) has its advantages.

FinneousPJ

Thief -> Fighter duals are pretty awesome actually, but do take some time to regain abilities.

SionIV

1.) Avenger
2.) Bounty hunter
3.) Specialist mage

cbarchuk

I find the assassin to be a great single class. I've played through the game twice with one and both playthroughs were among my favorite.

Lord_Tansheron

SionIV said:

1.) Avenger
2.) Bounty hunter
3.) Specialist mage

Pretty sure those are all worse than dual class alternatives. Some examples:

1.) Berserker->Druid
2.) Kensai->Thief
3.) Kensai->Mage

You picked kits that have innate scaling to higher levels than you'd usually dual at, but that doesn't make those kits any good. If you want to play those kits because of a personal preference that's fine, but if you go by personal preference then there's no need for a discussion - just do what you like.

nano

@Lord_Tansheron Those aren't even similar alternatives. Berserker>Druid and Avenger? Kensai>Thief and Bounty Hunter? Presumably you picked the class because you want to take advantage of its unique features and if you wanted to dual you'd dual away from it while keeping those features. If you're only going by overall power it'd just be Kensai/Mages for everyone.

wampa

Bounty Hunter's Special Maze Traps at level 21 are among the most powerful kit-specific abilities in the entire game, (effectively a more potent version of what's naturally a level 8 spell) and can utterly trivialize normally quite difficult fights. That said, Kensai/Thief IS an incredible dual class - but don't underestimate those Bounty Hunters!

Lord_Tansheron

nano said:

If you're only going by overall power it'd just be Kensai/Mages for everyone.

Yeah, pretty much. Hyperbole of course, but with a grain of truth; if you look at things objectively there is no reason to play anything but the best class/kit setups. I'm not saying that is a reality by any means - personal preference is a HUGE factor, but you can't have a discussion about it. Personal preference is personal, no amount of logic can change that. Besides, for this discussion you can just assume that the class is set by preference (i.e. no K-Ms for everyone), but the specific kit or dual/multi combo isn't.

Either way, the OP's question still applies here. There is no significant benefit to being an Avenger, or Bounty Hunter, or Specialist Mage over the alternatives I listed. Sure those kits have special perks and special abilities, but the dual/multi alternatives have things going for them as well - more things, as a matter of fact.

Sure a Maze Trap is great, but it's not just something you gain as a bonus without any trade-offs: you lose the fighter HP and damage output (particularly if you're a Kensai) and those tend to matter a lot more than being able to maze enemies here and there. Same goes for the other listed examples.

I'm not saying those kits are bad, or anything like that. I'm just saying that staying single class in those kits is not (objectively) better than being a dual-/multiclass, which is what the OP was asking about.