Multiclass vs. Dualclass and Grandmastery
Arizael
Member Posts: 263
There has been no discussion about multiclass vs dualclass in 2014. We must fix this obvious oversight!
On more serious note I would realy like to know peoples recent opinion about this. I've always found extremely overpowered that dualclasses could have easily achieve grandmastery, while multiclass could not. What do you think?
On more serious note I would realy like to know peoples recent opinion about this. I've always found extremely overpowered that dualclasses could have easily achieve grandmastery, while multiclass could not. What do you think?
- Multiclass vs. Dualclass and Grandmastery52 votes
- Multiclass should be allowed to achieve grandmastery.67.31%
- Dualclass should be restricted to speacializtion (two pips) only.9.62%
- Dualclass should be able to achieve grandmastery but only if Fighter is the second option.23.08%
1
Comments
I genuinely think that the current balance is pretty good. Yes a Dual-class character can get grandmastery, but he can never get Fighter HLAs (assuming first class is Fighter), which is a pretty big loss.
I recall a recent thread where the merits of Fighter/Mage vs Kensai=>Mage was debated, and the consensus was that the two builds are pretty even, with Kensai obviously weaker than F/M in BG 1, but then becoming stronger in SoA after he completes the Dual-class process, thanks to greater weapon proficiencies and faster access to high level magic.
However in ToB, after 6M xp, the F/M catches up and surpasses K=>M once the Fighter HLAs are combined with Mage HLAs. And you gotta bear in mind that we're not talking about Fighter=>Mage here. Kensai=>Mage is generally considered a powergaming optimal build thanks to game mechanic synergies.
My point then is that multi-class is already very competitive with Dual-class over the course of a full saga playthrough.
Another point to consider. If a Dual-classed character achieves Grandmastery, he/she will likely have almost no other proficient weapons.
I quite like having characters who can use a range of weapons to deal with different situations, which is both more realistic and provides some tactical flexibility. Yes it is not powergaming optimal, but why does everything have to be?
The classes and their combinations are already not balanced anyway, and they don't all have to be exactly equal in powergaming terms.
Second, I have always thought that proficiencies were terribly broken in 2nd edition. If you are going to "modify" them, I'd allow multiclass players to get 4 pips. Give them at least 1 short of the extra half attack. Rangers and Paladins should get this too...but I digress.
I don't think it was @Arizael's intention to make a biased poll. Just an oversight.
Unfortunately I don't think it is possible to edit polls, presumably to prevent users from creating a poll and then changing the options to mislead the voters.
OP would you like me to delete this thread and u can start the poll again with all the options available?
I believe that the inactive "catching up" phase is much balanced out by the ability to pick a kit and more importantly specialize.
Also I believe people are too much fixed on kensai/mage or berserker/mage combinations.
My favorite dual class combination is plain fighter/mage focusing on longbows + 2 pips in single weapons. This is huge gain over classic mage role, as you can shoot between spells. Plus if need arises to meele theres Black blade of disaster and similar spells.
Problem is that Human dual Fighter/Mage, will have more dmg and more THAC0 for BG1 1st half SoA than multi-class elven F/M, which is imho wrong.
Also, no necroing old threads. Let's keep the talk in this forum to a minimum please.
Back to relevant discussion, I've always felt dirty when I dual class a level 7 fighter with grandmastery in katana's into a thief and go backstab the crap out of anyone that moves with celestial fury. But man it's fun to watch bosses explode without getting a chance to talk. I'd vote that dual classing should be nerfed a bit but maybe the solution is to make grandmastery harder to achieve. it is grandmastery after all
So a decision to use 5 of those for GM has more of a downside - it's not as if they can have their cake and eat it as well.
Multi-class advantages: access to BOTH classes HLAs (and as multi-class characters tend to level up more, they get not only more options but more picks of HLA).
There's no overpower in these 2 options, they're pretty balanced (and multi in my opinions is a bit more overpowered).
Pre-7 you can get GM super quick, before the end of BG1, but you lose out on 1/2 and attack about at the end of BG2 to the end if ToB, and your Thaco is only better for a very brief window compared to a dual-class.
If you wait until 7, the Thaco window where you beat dual-classes lasts a bit longer, but still pretty small. You do jump to 2.5 attacks much faster though. This is counter balanced by Duals hitting much lower thacos be the end of BG2 and on.
At 13, you obviously have the HUGE gap of being underleveled, and once you get them back, your base Thaco is pretty set in, except clerics or Druids who will eventually hit their class cap of 6 versus the 8 for thieves and mages.
Naturally, there are other factors to consider likes tensers transformation, which makes dualed mages much better than first glance, but the two options basically even out under current rules.
If you were to add GM to multiclasses, they would out class the dual classes with the exception of maybe fighter/mages.
It is really non-nonsensical that multi-class fighters can't get 5 pips and dual class (human) can. In fact, it is borderline racist!
1) Has limited acces to kits
2) Can achieve grandmastery
3) Player can choose how the xp is distributed between classes.
Advantages of multi class:
1) Wider pool of HLA
2) Can play more specialized race than human
3) No Inactive period
**************************************************************************
I believe that dual class is slightly more powerful, due to more effective customization. Since I prefer nerfing stuff that i consider overpowered instead of buffing the rest, i would také grandmaster away from dualclass.
The no inactive period is nice, but the way the games are split and how experience is managed, you could easily see very little game time of inactive period.
I think it is much more fun to add more to classes and then make the content harder than to take away options. So, grandmastery should be for both. If you want to balance it better, make a dual classing only for pure classes and not kits.
The bonuses and penalties from Berserkers and Kensai are significant. Then again, so are racial characteristics. Shorty saves and elven near immunity to charm and sleep are not insignificant. The difference is racials are more front loaded and kit bonuses/penalitues become much better/less severe the higher you go.
Will adding a few Thaco, damage, and 1/2 an attack balance that? Not really. If anything, the limit on max pips makes for better character planning since the array of weapons you can effectively use gets much better.
- 80% is still not 100%, thus limited ;-)
- If a new class is added, that obviously surpasses other classes (=op, i.e. blackguard ;-) ), that class should be nerfed. If you solve this problem according to "much more fun to add more to classes and then make the content harder", you need to insane ammout of work. And if you manage to slightly buff one class than the other, than you need to repeat the process by buffing all classes and adding to content again.
Nerfing is much more effective for op situation. The same comes for underpowered classes - buff them. We try to reach the ideal middle.