Which class should be represented better in the trilogy?

Xavioria

There are loads of NPCs, but there's gotta be a class or such that would be awesome if it was implimented, and I was wondering if anyone had any ideas on a class that just ISN'T there that should be (or would be awesome if it was). If it's a kit of a class that's listed, please just be specific in a post

Shin

Monk. It wasn't even represented in the poll.

Rasaad, his questline and the monk kits alleviate this issue somewhat, but before that you had to go until Amkethran before finding any actual monk-themed content. And the monk still lacks a proper stronghold and is stuck with the fighter HLA table. They definitely need attention.

Xavioria

@Shin completely forgot to list sorcerer too : / but you're right I think the monk is not represented well at all. wasn't QUITE what I was really asking but I think you're point is very valid! Do you think it would be beyond the limitations of beamdog to add in a monk stronghold into bg2?

elminster

Certainly in BG1 it would be nice to see a good paladin who is a bit more seasoned than Ajantis. In BG2 you get Keldorn, as well as paladin-esque characters like Anomen and Mazzy. Still, it would be interesting to see like a good paladin of Mystra for instance.

CoM_Solaufein

Fighter. In the BG books the main character was a fighter.

Flashburn

There isn't a single Fighter/Mage, Cleric/Ranger or triple-class in the series. The only one left unrepresented at all is Barbarian.

Kamigoroshi

Fighter/Illusionist. Seriously, not a single gnome NPC has this obvious combination!

Xavioria

@Flashburn I was thinking of a Cleric/Ranger myself, and as for a triple class... I think there were a few practical reasons as to why that didn't happen...

element

id very much like to see an exotic fighter variant like kensai, dwarf defender, beserker or barbarian (who isn't listed)

StoneSwords

Barbarian maybe? You never really hear about them in BG, besides being called a northern barbarian at one point by some Amnish mercenaries if I remember correctly. Would be nice if they got a seperate stronghold from the fighter in BG2 also

KidCarnival

Shin said:

Monk. It wasn't even represented in the poll.

Same for Barbarian. If it is to be seen as a class and not an outsourced fighter kit, it should be represented like any other class.

Fardragon

I would have to say barbarian.

Eudaemonium

Fardragon said:

I would have to say barbarian.

What's one of those when its at home? Like some kind of sheep?

Varwulf

Druid hands down, needs more love

sylvanus

Couldn't agree more!

velehal

Bard. In BG2 there isn´t any. I don´t count Haer´Dalis as bard, he is more fighter/mage than bard.

Arktosa

Cleric/Mage: For prayers & magic casting also the ability to be a great support in battles + magic resistance due to high wisdom. Wizards battles can be such a pain sometimes

StoneSwords

Varwulf said:

Druid hands down, needs more love

Shapeshifter druid needs love after BG1, the rest do ok on their own imo

jackjack

We need a proper fool.

amftron

CoM_Solaufein said:

Fighter. In the BG books the main character was a fighter.

Those "books" are a slight on the name of Baldur's Gate and have no canonical basis whatsoever.

StoneSwords

Agreed, have you actually read them? they're complete garbage

Xavioria

I refused to read them after reading all the reviews on them. Such a screwed up character

Quartz

Druids. DEFINITELY Druids. Faldorn is one of the worst NPCs thanks to her pretty much godawful stats (her only redeeming value being her 16 Wisdom), and besides that she's terribly uninteresting. Hell her appearance in BGII is more interesting than if you bring her in your party in BG1. Cernd is cool, but has godawful stats and a troublesome kit. After that you only have Jaheira who is indeed a very cool and fitting Fighter/Druid. But that's it, it's just her really. Taking Faldorn or Cernd in your party is more of a challenge than something enjoyable.

I'm definitely with people on the whole Barbarian part, and I think a Fighter/Mage/Thief could be very amusing frankly. Imagine the potential personality of a character that wacky. I realize we have several Mage/Thieves but besides Jan Jansen, neither Imoen nor Nalia really "own it," as it were. Nalia seems more like a Mage or Sorceror period, and Imoen also seems entirely disconnected from any of her thieving past.

meagloth

I would point out, that the one class that can really claim to be under-represented is sorcerer. Bealoth really only sort of counts, what with being an OP Easter egg and all.

StoneSwords

Xavioria said:

I refused to read them after reading all the reviews on them. Such a screwed up character

I slogged my way through them just to say I've read them, but it was tough, and I don't recommend them at all to anybody lol

Battlehamster

Whoa, it seems I'm the only ranger dude. Don't get me wrong I am a HUGE Minsc fan (I mean look at my account name for cryin' out loud) but he really should be a barbarian or a berserker - he really isn't much of a ranger aside from the fact that he carries a hamster around which can be attributed more to sanity than his profession. Valygar had a good character - but him being a ranger felt like a forced decision. He more closely resonated with a Wizard Slayer and being a class that used magic felt contradictory given his story. In BG1 - Kivian feels a little to revenge motivated to make a really adequate Ranger. And Drizzt being Drizzt has special "I'm exempt from any group because, well, I'm Drizzt" status.

Rangers were supposed to be Aragorn-like characters and although I liked the BG trilogy there really weren't any rangers (who I am aware of other than Drizzt) who fufilled the role of being a leader. They were all way too brooding or silly to be really considered a Ranger imo. Its not that they didn't have any representation, they just had bad representation.

moody_mage

@Arktosa said:

Cleric/Mage: For prayers & magic casting also the ability to be a great support in battles + magic resistance due to high wisdom. Wizards battles can be such a pain sometimes

Saving throw bonuses due to high Wisdom are not implemented in BGEE (nor were they in the original BG). Something I think that needs to be changed.

recklessheart

Given that the only two conventional melee fighters that have the actual Fighter class are Chaotic Evil, I would not be opposed to another choice of Fighter.

Druids must be True Neutral and considering that there are 2 in BG1, as well as 2 in BG2, I'd say they are respectably well represented - the general mood on the forum seems to be that people want a plethora of classes that cover all alignment zones so they can run alignment parties. Also, given that Druids are as much a twist on a staple class (the Cleric) as the Ranger or Paladin are to the Fighter, and the Sorcerer to the Mage, I'm not too thirsty for another. Or at least that's how I view them: I guess that is probably too controversial a statement to make to state in such a factual way. I like the present BG2 Druids a lot, really.

Another Thief wouldn't be a bad thing. A Cleric to suit a Good-alignment party's needs that is not as polarising as Aerie or Anomen would be nice, but I'm not calling out for blood without one. I don't think I've ever completed a playthrough of BG2 without Jaheira, Viconia or Cernd, so I doubt I'll be too begrudging without a shiny new Cleric.

Xavioria

I strongly dislike pure class clerics, they have to be able to do something other than buff, heal, and throw bullets at people. Granted I KNOW they have SOME offensive spells, but most people keep their offensive spells for their mages anyway.

Of course, I Digress.

A Fighter/Illusionist is an awesome idea. I think My mother made one of those once as her main. She was having SO much fun with that... but was annoyed at the armor drawback lol.

AND I think I'm digressing again.

AND now I don't remember what my comment was going to be : /

AndrewFoley

amftron said:

Those "books" are a slight on the name of Baldur's Gate and have no canonical basis whatsoever.

Without getting into the merits of the books, after The Sundering introductory adventure Murder at Baldur's Gate the novels technically *are* the canon, at least as far as the trademark's owners are concerned.

badbromance

Xavioria said:

I strongly dislike pure class clerics, they have to be able to do something other than buff, heal, and throw bullets at people. Granted I KNOW they have SOME offensive spells, but most people keep their offensive spells for their mages anyway.

Of course, I Digress.

A Fighter/Illusionist is an awesome idea. I think My mother made one of those once as her main. She was having SO much fun with that... but was annoyed at the armor drawback lol.

AND I think I'm digressing again.

AND now I don't remember what my comment was going to be : /

You were going to say Bards!

Songs, not swords!!