Skip to content

How do YOU Fighter/Mage?

124

Comments

  • elminsterelminster Member, Developer Posts: 16,315
    Lemernis said:

    @spaceinvader it's been about 4 years since I played BG2. 90,000 XP can be picked up that quickly? Seriously, how long do you think it would take?

    Depends on your party size. With things like the circus tent question (19500xp split amongst the party), 18500 for getting Aerie back to her true form, 27,000 from killing Kalah/ending the illusion and another 3000 for finding the son/talking to both of them you can cover a lot of that just by doing that one quest in the promenade. Obviously this is going to be tougher to do solo but even in a group with say Jaheira and Minsc just doing the circus quest covers about 1/4 of this amount.

  • booinyoureyesbooinyoureyes Member Posts: 6,164
    The other choice is a Wizard Slayer/Wizard, but that character would be so conflicted I don't know if I could handle the angst.
  • jackjackjackjack Member Posts: 3,251
    Pantalion said:

    With thieves attached.

    Yeah, I ran out of poll options, so I decided to omit triple-classes from this discussion.
  • SpaceInvaderSpaceInvader Member Posts: 2,125
    Lemernis said:

    @spaceinvader it's been about 4 years since I played BG2. 90,000 XP can be picked up that quickly? Seriously, how long do you think it would take?

    As @elminster‌ already said, it depends on your party size.
    But in general VERY quickly.
    If you need further quests details just ask ;)
  • mumumomomumumomo Member Posts: 635
    With a group :

    dual from the start.You will have to be carried out by Minsc/Jaheira and imoen but it is easy enough. You should get around 25kxp (100k/4 total) in chateau irenicus + 30k quest xp upon exiting
    Scroll scribing (from what you found in chateau irenicus + in the circus) should provide around 5-6k Completing the circus with minsc and jaheira would yield 23k (69/3).

    At this point, you already have around 85kxp. If you are willing to remove your ncp before some quest rewards (djinn in chateau irenicus for 15kxp, djinn riddle 19k, free aerie 18k), you will get 90kxp before completing the circus

    Solo :
    dual just before existing chateau irenicus-> 30kxp quest reward
    Purchase a few scrolls on top of the ones you found in chateau irenicus and scribe -> 25kxp
    Djinn riddle ->19kxp
    Aerie -> 18kxp
    That's it, you got your 90kxp in 5 minutes without fighting once.
  • OnestepOnestep Member Posts: 225
    This is kind of a tough one.

    Kensai/Zerker Dual Class are so incredibly powerful (Particularly Zerker), but I just have a hard time imagining a frothing Berserker driving himself into a battle-rage... And then hanging back to cast Stoneskin.

    A plain Fighter > Mage Dual Class is probably my favorite. Fighter's are very strong in BG, and Mage's are very strong in BG2, so you always feel like a useful, powerful character.
  • NimranNimran Member Posts: 4,875
    Hey, everyone! Let's dance!
  • ScourgeScourge Member Posts: 97
    edited December 2014
    Berserker mage. All this adoration for kensai\mage does not have any link with reality.

    I will crush you, crush you to goo! EHHHEE
  • dunbardunbar Member Posts: 1,603
    A vanilla F/M, M/C is for me, comparatively uncomplicated to play (no messing around with different spell schools or fighter kits) and much, much easier to role play.
  • jameskenobijameskenobi Member Posts: 4
    I picked Kensai/Mage as that's the only one I've finished the whole saga with and I had a great time with him. I dualed him at level 9 and had my mage levels back in a couple of hours (didn't cheese too much other than kicking Minsc, Jaheira, and Yoshimo out right after Irenicus's dungeon and learning all the spells I gathered there and then picking them back up) so getting my fighter levels back didn't really bother me in the long-term.

    At some point I'd like to try the "ideal" Kensai/Mage by dualing at 13, but I'm definitely in no rush to slog through that (definitely going to solo/cheese a bit for that if I do).

    I plan on doing another powergamey run with a F/M multi after I finish my single class Swashbuckler run, so I can see what all the buzz is about.
  • OnestepOnestep Member Posts: 225
    dunbar said:

    A vanilla F/M, M/C is for me, comparatively uncomplicated to play (no messing around with different spell schools or fighter kits) and much, much easier to role play.

    Really? How do you find it easier to roleplay?
  • kamuizinkamuizin Member Posts: 3,704
    Kensai/Mage multi-class:

    Pro - Can reach 5 proficience points (Grandmastery) in any weapon. Multi-class is restricted to 2 prof points (specialized).
    Can choose a kit for the first class.


    Con - Don't have access to the fighter HLA skills. Multi-class has access to both class skills.


    The truth of what i wanted:

    A Dual-Class Kensai(13)/Dragon Disciple Sorcerer.
    But then, we can't have all that we want, no? :)!
  • ElrandirElrandir Member Posts: 1,664
    Onestep said:

    dunbar said:

    A vanilla F/M, M/C is for me, comparatively uncomplicated to play (no messing around with different spell schools or fighter kits) and much, much easier to role play.

    Really? How do you find it easier to roleplay?
    While I don't play F/M, it makes much more sense to role-play. I mean, let alone the fact that trying to role-play a dual class (which I still say is one of the worst game mechanics in any game based on logic alone) is silly, roleplaying a berserker who becomes a mage? Yeah right. Fat chance. And a Kensai? The sanctity of their weapon and their skills with said weapon are an integral part of the class. Muddying the waters with magical skill, and also abandoning the pursuit of physical mastery completely contradicts what the class is about. Compare all these to a F/M multi. A mage who has taken the time to expand his physical skills and abilities, at the cost of a slight bit of time away from his magical studies. Makes WAY more sense.
  • Tad_Has_A_Cold_OliveTad_Has_A_Cold_Olive Member Posts: 183
    edited December 2014
    jackjack said:

    I'm currently playing a gnomish fighter/illusionist. He wields two-handed weapons literally as big as he is (there are some benefits to being a demigod, as it turns out).

    There is something undeniably awesome about it, right?
    I think the phrase "weapons literally as big as he is" speaks for itself.
  • FinneousPJFinneousPJ Member Posts: 6,455
    @Tad_Has_A_Cold_Olive‌ Wow. So Final Fantasy. :P
  • DullSkullTheSecondDullSkullTheSecond Member Posts: 243
    Now after reading a bit of the comments I think I lean more against Berserker/mage as the more powerful choice. But I think fighter/mage multi is much more enjoyable. Or to get the best of both worlds a berserker/mage multi.
  • OnestepOnestep Member Posts: 225
    Elrandir said:

    Onestep said:

    dunbar said:

    A vanilla F/M, M/C is for me, comparatively uncomplicated to play (no messing around with different spell schools or fighter kits) and much, much easier to role play.

    Really? How do you find it easier to roleplay?
    While I don't play F/M, it makes much more sense to role-play. I mean, let alone the fact that trying to role-play a dual class (which I still say is one of the worst game mechanics in any game based on logic alone) is silly, roleplaying a berserker who becomes a mage? Yeah right. Fat chance. And a Kensai? The sanctity of their weapon and their skills with said weapon are an integral part of the class. Muddying the waters with magical skill, and also abandoning the pursuit of physical mastery completely contradicts what the class is about. Compare all these to a F/M multi. A mage who has taken the time to expand his physical skills and abilities, at the cost of a slight bit of time away from his magical studies. Makes WAY more sense.
    Well, the kits themselves make it somewhat hard to roleplay, but it's not hard at all to roleplay a vanilla Fighter > Mage Dual Class. That's simply fighter who's begun to study magic, either self-taught or expanding on lessons learnt in his youth.

    Don't forget, you were brought up in Candlekeep and had a mage for an adoptive father. It'd be stranger if CHARNAME didn't have some understanding of magic, regardless of class.
  • ElrandirElrandir Member Posts: 1,664
    But a multi still makes more sense. Not that I really care, I just want an armored caster... *sighs* Chainmail's not good enough.
  • @Tad_Has_A_Cold_Olive‌ Wow. So Final Fantasy. :P

    You say that like it's a bad thing.
  • OnestepOnestep Member Posts: 225
    Elrandir said:

    But a multi still makes more sense. Not that I really care, I just want an armored caster... *sighs* Chainmail's not good enough.

    I disagree on the first point about multi classing making more sense, but whatever.

    Unfortunately, there's no real way around not having armour, even in 3rd Edition, let alone 2nd. Unless you're willing to waste tons of feats, that is.
  • ElrandirElrandir Member Posts: 1,664
    @Onestep‌, please, prove me wrong. I'm actually interested in your reasoning.

    And I'd totally waste all those feats. My dream is a traditional "battle mage" wearing platemail, wielding a sword in one hand, and shooting magic from the other. But that's not really D&D's style. Which makes me sad.
  • kamuizinkamuizin Member Posts: 3,704
    Elrandir said:

    @Onestep‌, please, prove me wrong. I'm actually interested in your reasoning.

    And I'd totally waste all those feats. My dream is a traditional "battle mage" wearing platemail, wielding a sword in one hand, and shooting magic from the other. But that's not really D&D's style. Which makes me sad.

    I believe whatever mentioned means he doesn't care about proof you wrong or right.

    You can get a modded full plate to mod this. If i'm not wrong the adamantium full plate armor from the Drows allow spellcasting, that IF you manage to bring one with you in one piece (in the past existed a way, today in BG:EE i don't know.

    About 3Ed, specially 3.5Ed, feats are a lot important to be wasted for this, probally some prestige class open levels have this feat for free there (arcane warrior comes to mind).
  • lroumenlroumen Member Posts: 2,508
    I must confess that i don't understand the hype of fighter/mage. If i want a fighter i make one. If i want a mage i make one. A bit of both is a bard....but if I were to fighter/mage out would be with a specialist mage (transmuter) dual classed to fighter. Because transmuters are interesting.
  • ElrandirElrandir Member Posts: 1,664
    kamuizin said:

    Elrandir said:

    Onestep‌, please, prove me wrong. I'm actually interested in your reasoning.

    And I'd totally waste all those feats. My dream is a traditional "battle mage" wearing platemail, wielding a sword in one hand, and shooting magic from the other. But that's not really D&D's style. Which makes me sad.

    I believe whatever mentioned means he doesn't care about proof you wrong or right.

    You can get a modded full plate to mod this. If i'm not wrong the adamantium full plate armor from the Drows allow spellcasting, that IF you manage to bring one with you in one piece (in the past existed a way, today in BG:EE i don't know.

    About 3Ed, specially 3.5Ed, feats are a lot important to be wasted for this, probally some prestige class open levels have this feat for free there (arcane warrior comes to mind).
    I don't care what he meant, I'm requesting him to provide his opinion and try prove me wrong, as opposed to merely stating "I disagree." The entire point of my question was merely to draw him out into saying more.

    As for the armored warrior I think it's interesting that there's the adamantium plate, but if I remember correctly, in the EE they've made it so that you can't get around the rules. Regardless, it isn't even that spectacular, is it? Oh well. I digress.

    When it comes to D&D, I don't even like playing mages much anyway, so I don't really care. I just wish there was an easier route for when I DO want to play a tank mage. Like in Dragon Age, where the Arcane Warrior specialization uses their magic stat in place of their intelligence, allowing them to wear armour. Anyway. I'm getting way off topic.
  • OnestepOnestep Member Posts: 225
    Elrandir said:

    kamuizin said:

    Elrandir said:

    Onestep‌, please, prove me wrong. I'm actually interested in your reasoning.

    And I'd totally waste all those feats. My dream is a traditional "battle mage" wearing platemail, wielding a sword in one hand, and shooting magic from the other. But that's not really D&D's style. Which makes me sad.

    I believe whatever mentioned means he doesn't care about proof you wrong or right.

    You can get a modded full plate to mod this. If i'm not wrong the adamantium full plate armor from the Drows allow spellcasting, that IF you manage to bring one with you in one piece (in the past existed a way, today in BG:EE i don't know.

    About 3Ed, specially 3.5Ed, feats are a lot important to be wasted for this, probally some prestige class open levels have this feat for free there (arcane warrior comes to mind).
    I don't care what he meant, I'm requesting him to provide his opinion and try prove me wrong, as opposed to merely stating "I disagree." The entire point of my question was merely to draw him out into saying more.

    As for the armored warrior I think it's interesting that there's the adamantium plate, but if I remember correctly, in the EE they've made it so that you can't get around the rules. Regardless, it isn't even that spectacular, is it? Oh well. I digress.

    When it comes to D&D, I don't even like playing mages much anyway, so I don't really care. I just wish there was an easier route for when I DO want to play a tank mage. Like in Dragon Age, where the Arcane Warrior specialization uses their magic stat in place of their intelligence, allowing them to wear armour. Anyway. I'm getting way off topic.
    I don't understand what's hard to get. Someone began on one path of adventure, and then started studying another. It's quite simple. It's no more absurd than a multi-classes inability to learn anything outside their chosen classes at any point, ever. My point was not that Dual Classing makes more sense than Multi-classing, but that Multi-classing makes no more sense than Dual Classing.

    Dual/Multi classing in 2nd edition did not make much sense from a 'real life' point of view. 3rd edition was a little better at this, but suffered in other ways for it.

  • DullSkullTheSecondDullSkullTheSecond Member Posts: 243
    Elrandir said:

    kamuizin said:

    Elrandir said:

    Onestep‌, please, prove me wrong. I'm actually interested in your reasoning.

    And I'd totally waste all those feats. My dream is a traditional "battle mage" wearing platemail, wielding a sword in one hand, and shooting magic from the other. But that's not really D&D's style. Which makes me sad.

    I believe whatever mentioned means he doesn't care about proof you wrong or right.

    You can get a modded full plate to mod this. If i'm not wrong the adamantium full plate armor from the Drows allow spellcasting, that IF you manage to bring one with you in one piece (in the past existed a way, today in BG:EE i don't know.

    About 3Ed, specially 3.5Ed, feats are a lot important to be wasted for this, probally some prestige class open levels have this feat for free there (arcane warrior comes to mind).
    I don't care what he meant, I'm requesting him to provide his opinion and try prove me wrong, as opposed to merely stating "I disagree." The entire point of my question was merely to draw him out into saying more.

    As for the armored warrior I think it's interesting that there's the adamantium plate, but if I remember correctly, in the EE they've made it so that you can't get around the rules. Regardless, it isn't even that spectacular, is it? Oh well. I digress.

    When it comes to D&D, I don't even like playing mages much anyway, so I don't really care. I just wish there was an easier route for when I DO want to play a tank mage. Like in Dragon Age, where the Arcane Warrior specialization uses their magic stat in place of their intelligence, allowing them to wear armour. Anyway. I'm getting way off topic.
    This is a forum and made for discussion but if he just wants to disagree and provide no reason for it. Why not?

    I can step in instead. I think dual class makes just as much sense as a multi class. Why? A multi class trains two or more skills at the same time and ends up weaker in all but gains versatility. A dual class is pretty much the same but the individual chose to first train one skill to a point and then continue training another. The difference is really just how they trained. Everything at once or one thing at a time. At least that is how I see it.

    And if losing all skills when dual classing is weird then yeah it's a bit weird. But the justification for it could be how it is hard to advance in a new skill if you rely on your old skills(learning to ride a bike while only driving your car). So the game forces it on you so you can't keep using your old skills and still gain xp for the new class. That is until both are on par and you no longer have to hold back to advance your new class(drive both a car and ride a bike but focusing on learning new tricks with the bike and only like drive to work with the car).

    Writing this on a phone so excuse me if it looks like a brick
Sign In or Register to comment.