Rebalancing Multiclass

MilesBeyond

I find that in all the IE games, Multiclass ends up inevitably paling in comparison to Dualclass. In fact, generally speaking, when you want to powergame through an IE game, you create a party of six human fighters, have them put in as many levels as necessary, then DC them over for what you actually want.

BG1 is the game where this is the least obvious, but its still there. A human with a couple levels as a fighter then DCed over to a Cleric is generally going to end up stronger than a Fighter/Cleric, as it will have quicker spell advancement without sacrificing all that much fighting ability.

MC do have the advantage of being stronger in early chapters, and not having that annoying downtime where one class is deactivated, but those are both only temporary advantages.

So here are two suggestions I have to rebalance Multiclass characters a bit:

#1. Allow MCs to pick a kit. Maybe not two kits, but at least a kit. It's annoying how humans have the lovely option of a Kensai->Mage while all other races are limited to just Fighter/Mages. If MCs could choose a kit for one of their two classes, that would go a long way. It also forces you to make decisions: Who's the better backstabber, the Fighter/Assassin or the Kensai/Thief?

#2. Allow Fighter MCs to achieve GM. Anyone else think it incredibly stupid that a level 7 fighter dualled to a Mage will be significantly more proficient with their weapon than a level 30 F/M? It's just an unnecessary disadvantage for MCs.

Dragonfolk2000

Multi-class is balanced in its own way and shouldn't need adjustment. However, I do agree with your second notation. So long as we are actively leveling in the class we should receive the full benefits of doing so.

Cloutier

I believe dual-class is meant to be the human racial benefit. Gnomes, elves, dwarves, etc, get other bonuses.

Edvin

I have better idea.

#3. Dont allow humans with kits using Multiclass.

Kit = Specialization

Specialization mean focusing on your profession.
If you switch to different profession, you will lose Kit bonus.
You can´t be (for example) warrior specialist, if you are mage now.
You can keep only standart warrior abilites.

Kithrixx

@Edvin Kits aren't specialization, kits are specifics. The "specialization" aspect is the base class - for instance, the fighter who specializes in hitting things and the mage who specializes in casting magic. Kitted characters are characters that are doing things in a specific way, like focusing on a specific fighting style or a specific brand of magic or worshiping a specific deity. Just because a Kensai decides to learn magic doesn't mean he's suddenly proficient with full plate again, he's going to continue performing close combat like he always has; hard and fast and without armor.

Edvin

If you are switch to multiclas, then you are stop with your current profession. And professions with special aiming require fucusing on special aspect profession. Kensai is good example. If you change him to thief and use his power " all items to use ", then Kensai can wear armors, This is stupid, because Kensais fighting style require no armors. So he can´t keep his bonus because his new profession.

It is like in world war II.
If you are multiclas " German/Jude " you can´t have bonuses from both of them
When you switch to Jude, then you lose all German bonuses.

Shin

I believe Cloutier is right, that dual classing is meant to balance various skill/stat/resistance advantages that other races get, making them particularly suitable to play certain classes. Dual classing could be looked at as representing the versatility and quick learning capacity of humans.

Kithrixx

Edvin said:

If you are switch to multiclas, then you are stop with your current profession.

It's dual class. And yes, you do stop, but you don't forget.

Edvin said:

And professions with special aiming require fucusing on special aspect profession. Kensai is good example. If you change him to thief and use his power " all items to use ", then Kensai can wear armors, This is stupid, because Kensais fighting style require no armors. So he can´t keep his bonus because his new profession.

While this is possible, it's also something that requires a great deal of effort to achieve, and therefore finds balance in that respect.

Edvin said:

It is like in world war II.
If you are multiclas " German/Jude " you can´t have bonuses from both of them
When you switch to Jude, then you lose all German bonuses.

No. It's not like that at all, and that is an incredibly bad comparison. What it's like is if I decided to be a mason, and went to a trade school for masonry. After completing school and becoming an apprentice mason, I decide that I instead wish to be an electrician, and then go to a trade school for electricians, where I complete my degree and become a master electrician. Just because I became a master electrician does not mean that I have lost whatever masonry skills I already know.

Classes are professions. You do not forget what you have learned how to do in a job just because you have gained a new, different job. You do not forget how to flip burgers at McDonald's because you were promoted to upper management and got a desk job. One does not forget how to be an infantryman when they are promoted to Officer.

Silence

2. I have no problems letting an MC fighter achieve grandmastery. To me, weapon mastery seems core to what being a fighter is and I think it should apply to all fighters, MC or not. Currently, MC fighters are no better with weapons than rangers or paladins (who also top out at two slots per weapon). That said, this is not a major issue for me as the bonuses would be so minor - I mean grandmastery only grants +1 hit/+1 dmg, it no longer grants an additional attack. So there's no real push for me to see this feature, though I definitely see your argument.

1. I miss having a kit when playing an MC character, but I think the balancing issues are a real challenge. That said, I do not think allowing an MC character a kit is a great idea - whether or not it's logical.

I think a major reason kits are a bad idea for MC characters is that at low levels such characters would be overpowered. Up until around your party reaches level ~9, your MC characters will only be 1 level behind their single-class companions. But while their level is comparable to a single-class character, the MC character has twice the ability set, making them far more versatile. Add kits on top of that, and MC characters would be strongly favoured over single-class characters, at least at low levels.

A further problem with the multi-class characters is how these kits powers would interact. A Kensai assassin backstab? A shapeshifter druid with berserker rage? The beauty of this is that, if you want the kits anyway, most editors have a functionality which will let you add them. So it's doable, whether or not its in BG:EE.

I also think it's interesting how this thread is becoming more about the definition of Dual Class (which is still an important topic) than it is about the definition of MC. I think Dual class is intended to be the better option. It's more work for more reward. Further, as many people have said, it balances out the game for humans, who receive no real edge otherwise.

Tanthalas

@Silence
Don't forget that Humans also have the edge of being able to select any class too.

Silence

True that. I personally think dual class is a bigger advantage than expanded class selection though, unless you're going to be a paladin.

Also, in PnP, as if that wasn't enough, non-humans also have racial level limits as well (even for half-elves). God, those would wreck BG if implemented. The first time I played the game I was surprised that they weren't there. It would be impossible to have BG2 if they were, I think.

Kithrixx

Silence said:

A further problem with the multi-class characters is how these kits powers would interact. A Kensai assassin backstab?

I actually already covered this situation in my thread about double kits, but allow me to reiterate. A Kensai/Assassin sounds like a great idea at first, but it's really not viable until MUCH later. Assassins are not good at being thieves, as they only get 15% to spend on thief abilities, and you are almost required to dump all of that into stealth so you don't suck at the very thing that you're building the character to do (backstab). They also wouldn't be able to attack from range due to the Kensai restrictions, so they would be forced to melee with the Kensai lack of armor and penalty to durability because of being multiclassed to a Thief kit. They wouldn't be so great in toe-to-toe because of the MC restriction on Fighters preventing them from gaining full proficiency in weapons. Assassins don't gain backstab multipliers any faster either, so their only real advantage in that respect is, again, in the later levels. You'd only see advantages to the Kensai/Assassin over a Kensai/Thief once they reached the 6x multiplier for Backstab, and in the meantime, they'd end up being kind of bad at everything else. For maximum level challenges? They'd be absolutely great. However, the journey between Point A and Point B would be a long and arduous one.

Silence said:

A shapeshifter druid with berserker rage?

Turns out, not really that great. Taken from "Play it Hardcore": http://playithardcore.com/pihwiki/index.php?title=Baldur's_Gate:_Classes_and_Kits

Play It Hardcore said:

Comments: Shapeshifters got the shaft even harder than typical druids. Firstly, the werewolf forms you can change into are not equivalent of other werewolves in the game. Regular werewolves are supposed to have +20% magic resistance (not magic resistance locked at 20%), immunity to normal weapons (as opposed to gaining no benefits at all) and werewolf pays are supposed to 1d12 damage as opposed to 1d6. Greater werewolves should recieve a Thac0 of 6 (you recieve no benefit), saves of 1/1/1/2/1 (again, you recieve nothing), base elemental resistance set to 50% (instead of base elemental resistance locked at 50%), base magic resistance of +40% (instead of locked at 40%), immunity to normal weapons (you get nothing), the paw should do 2d8 slashing damage as a +3 weapon (instead of 1d6 piercing damage as a +2 weapon), and regeneration of 3 HP per second. Half the reasons you'd want to be a werewolf are removed. While the downside of not having other forms to shapeshift into is not significant, completely being without armor is a huge detractor. You can still equip with bracers, however. As a general rule, avoid shapeshifter unless you download a mod to fix the nerfs to your werewolf form.

Shapeshifters are kinda... meh. Granted, multi-ing into a Fighter would make your damage much more acceptable, but... still.

Silence said:

The beauty of this is that, if you want the kits anyway, most editors have a functionality which will let you add them. So it's doable, whether or not its in BG:EE.

I'm not much a fan of modding my game. I would much rather play it as intended, and there's not much of a logical or balancing reason not to allow Kits for both MC'd classes or both stages of Dual Classed characters.

Silence

Character editors aren't technically mods. Editors like Shadowkeeper are relatively non-invasive and work on the original edition of the game painlessly and easily. All I was getting across was that you could play that character today, if you wanted. And if you feel the rules should allow it, what's stopping you from trying it now?

I don't consider Shapeshifter druids that great...In general druids are more suited to PnP (their advancement table is ridiculous too). My point there was that when you start to combine abilities, there are a lot of other considerations. Not just about balance, but about bugs and coding.

Kithrixx

@Silence I'm aware, and I've actually done pretty extensive testing using Shadowkeeper. Dual Kit characters are rarely any more powerful than their standard counterparts. All class kits sacrifice something to get their features and bonuses, and more often than not, these cons end up making the balance happen. Rarely were any of the Dual Kit multiclasses more powerful than a Single Kit multiclass or a No Kit multiclass. They were often more specialized, yes, but taking on additional cons (on top of those already present in the base class) was always what balanced things out.

Edvin

I really dont want Kensai/Assasins or something like thant.
Multiclass is allready overpower and must be disadvantaged, no make more favourable.

Kithrixx

... Multiclass is already disadvantaged, though.

MilesBeyond

Yeah, I was gonna say, in what sense is multiclass overpowered?

If you take out the XP cap, maybe. But as it is? It generally tends to go Dualclass > Pure Class > Multiclass. The only exception is thieves and maybe druids, where the multiclass can be better than the pure class. Isn't always, though.

Dualclass might be seen as the human's racial ability, but if so then it's an absurdly powerful one. Isn't the ability to be Paladins and Monks enough of a racial bonus?

Shin

Tanthalas said:

@Silence
Don't forget that Humans also have the edge of being able to select any class too.

Though, that's only really an advantage when you either pick a race first with no idea what class you want to be, or when there's no other eligible race that could be seen as technically better suited for the class; both of which seem like rather indistinct advantages.

Of course, it shouldn't all be about balancing everything down to the last millimeter either.

MilesBeyond

Shin said:

Tanthalas said:

@Silence
Don't forget that Humans also have the edge of being able to select any class too.

Though, that's only really an advantage when you either pick a race first with no idea what class you want to be, or when there's no other eligible race that could be seen as technically better suited for the class; both of which seem like rather indistinct advantages.

Of course, it shouldn't all be about balancing everything down to the last millimeter either.

Heh, like I just said, it means humans get to be Paladins and Monks, two insanely powerful classes that no one else has access to

Shin

@MilesBeyond Perhaps.. just not convinced about it being in the same league of perks, as it's not based on merit but rather exclusion of everyone else, much like how you have to be a non-human if you want to multiclass. Also, when you select one of those classes it nullifies the other human advantage.

Kithrixx

MilesBeyond said:

It generally tends to go Dualclass > Pure Class > Multiclass. The only exception is thieves and maybe druids, where the multiclass can be better than the pure class. Isn't always, though.

I wouldn't go that far. Dual Class is the most powerful for those that know what they're doing, whereas the other two are kinda hard to screw up. Multi and Single are basically on par with each other, depending on what you want.