I just...don't like the aesthetic of a cleric dual-wielding, personally. Unless, of course, it's like a melee weapon and some kind of badass wand or holy symbol.
they will stick to racial an alignment restrictions as per 2E rules (a shame, really). i love the idea of EVIL paladin kit and making evil plathrough less ridiculously hard. or illogical.
too bad i'm a pussy and play goody-two-shoes all the time. my extent of evil is snarky responses, but this time i will try harder. :P
You're losing out quite a bit if I may say so myself. Not only that, but then you can dual wield energy blades with Defender of Easthaven for 10 attacks per round!
@schneidend I'm going to have to disagree with you there. I really feel that plain fighters really need that extra half an attack to keep up =/
And for people worried about dual wielding 2 grand mastery weapons. Think of it this way. In order for it to happen you need 8 proficiency points. You start with 4 so the earliest this can be done to maximum effectiveness is level 12. If they want to do that WITH 2 different weapons (like say dwarves with axes and warhammers) it can't happen until level 27.
I think level 12 is when you're starting to hit level 2 spells on paladin and ranger. Now you can make the case that some of them don't get spells (Inquisitor), but they MORE than make up for not being a fighter and not getting their paladin spells too.
If the Blackguard's poison scales like the assassin poison does, that will also begin to close the gap. But plain fighters really needed the proper grand mastery back. In my opinion (as a Ranger and Paladin player).
Fighters probably needed that to distance themselves from the better Paladin kits. But not the poor Rangers. The only good kit is the Archer. I really don't believe that that level 2 Ranger Spell is that awesome to outshine a plain Fighter.
@Tanthalas You're right poor rangers always get =(
But I'll be asking for too much if I ask for stalkers to get the ability to get Grand Mastery in any weapon a thief could use :P Same if I asked that rangers get draw upon holy might as well.
I mean personally I like the stalker, especially elven stalkers with longswords. But they get their backstab so slow =( The only good news is that they get haste and minor spell deflection but those are definitely minor.
Also @Tanthalas. Can you check to make sure that Elves are only getting +1 thaco for longswords only? I've read other places on the internetz that Elves were getting it for any Sword or Bow instead of Longswords and Longbows (Bows doesn't matter as much but it would really open things up if it applied to scimitars, katanas, short swords etc).
I just...don't like the aesthetic of a cleric dual-wielding, personally. Unless, of course, it's like a melee weapon and some kind of badass wand or holy symbol.
Damn, so sorry to hear that you don't like that. But I guess it doesn't matter that we don't like the aesthetic of a cleric using swords.
Fighters probably needed that to distance themselves from the better Paladin kits. But not the poor Rangers. The only good kit is the Archer. I really don't believe that that level 2 Ranger Spell is that awesome to outshine a plain Fighter.
Archer is indeed incredible, but saying it's the "only good" Ranger kit when the other two are actually pretty bad-ass is kind of ignorant. For BG1, okay, Beastmasters are pretty bad.
Stalkers are amazing from the outset, though. They are fighter/thieves who level up way faster. If we're talking saga-wide, Stalkers are effing incredible. x4 backstabs with pure fighter Thac0 and some of the best arcane buff spells wrapped up in the disguise as Divine spells, PLUS even more divine buffs? Amazing.
Beastmasters are pretty baller in BG2 as well. Load them up with summon animal spells and your other casters can specialize in other areas, and they are pretty capable archers in their own right. If you want to meta-game, get one to 12 and then dual-class to cleric to have Summon Animal for literally every single solitary spell slot. Beastmaster/Clerics are bar-none the best summoners in the game.
@Schneidend: A single-class cleric can't do it simply because you NEED two proficiency points in dual-wield to make it worthwhile. That said, dual-wielding with fighter/clerics or ranger/clerics is hilarious and extremely effective. Ranger/Clerics are already the best tanks in the game so it's not like they need a shield.
Stalkers actually cap at x3 Backstab. They also only get x2 Backstab only at level 9. But they're not bad, I just don't think they're that good either. EDIT: Unless they get another backstab upgrade in ToB.
Beastmasters though? Their only advantage is extra HP from a Familiar and the ability to summon canon fodder. For that you lose the ability to wear any armor heavier than leather and a wide slew of great weapons. Hardly a fair trade-off. (EDIT: I think they actually can use heavy armor).
Damn, so sorry to hear that you don't like that. But I guess it doesn't matter that we don't like the aesthetic of a cleric using swords.
Well, unfortunately, the whole of the FR pantheon disagrees with you. Eillistraee lets her clerics use bastard swords, Tempus axes, Mask short swords, etc.
Besides, it's not as if I said I don't want clerics to be ABLE to dual-wield. I just don't do it, myself. It doesn't appeal to me. Dual-wielding in general only appeals to me in rare circumstances and weapon combinations, as I loved the Witch King of Angmar dual-wielding a flail and long sword in Return of the King for instance.
The 2E cleric restriction against bladed weapons is based on Christian statutes during the time of the Crusades, as I recall, which forbade priests from drawing blood. That has no bearing on a fantasy realm, and getting around it by using bludgeoning weapons is hypocritical and silly.
Stalkers actually cap at x3 Backstab. They also only get x2 Backstab only at level 9. But they're not bad, I just don't think they're that good either. EDIT: Unless they get another backstab upgrade in ToB.
Beastmasters though? Their only advantage is extra HP from a Familiar and the ability to summon canon fodder. For that you lose the ability to wear any armor heavier than leather and a wide slew of great weapons. Hardly a fair trade-off. (EDIT: I think they actually can use heavy armor).
They can still use any ranged weaponry you want if you leave them as a raw beastmaster. You lose out on a wide array of melee stuff, but they are also the only real viable option for a Staff of Striking or something. The point is not to tank, but to summon cannon fodder to tank while you bow-and-arrow or sling to death.
As such, I'm okay with being limited to non-metal armors. Honestly I usually used the big leather/hide armors for my rangers in BG2 because stealth is handy and I've got clerics and fighters to wear the really thick stuff. Armor class really isn't that important outside of one or two dudes in your party.
And trust me. Stalkers are incredible. Saying they "only" get x3 backstab during regular BG2 play is a big freakin' deal. When you compare it to a fighter/thief, the next closest thing, they are pretty much equal on everything through BG1 and Stalkers are better for BG2. It isn't til Throne of Bhaal where fighter/thieves take over as a "better choice" because thief epic level abilities are amazing, and it isn't like your Stalker is going to suddenly stop being useful. Fighter/Thieves will have a slight edge on raw melee slappy damage (and actually it's pretty minor because it's mostly from x5 backstab which you'll only get one of per fight), Stalkers will be slightly more durable due to divine spells + their mage spells.
This is a really long-winded way of saying I heart Stalkers.
Fighters probably needed that to distance themselves from the better Paladin kits. But not the poor Rangers. The only good kit is the Archer. I really don't believe that that level 2 Ranger Spell is that awesome to outshine a plain Fighter.
Kind of always wanted the archer to have possibilities for 5 points in Slings, but they are limited to two.
With Grand Mastery in slings, they could have been awesome duals with Clerics.
Damn, so sorry to hear that you don't like that. But I guess it doesn't matter that we don't like the aesthetic of a cleric using swords.
Well, unfortunately, the whole of the FR pantheon disagrees with you. Eillistraee lets her clerics use bastard swords, Tempus axes, Mask short swords, etc.
Besides, it's not as if I said I don't want clerics to be ABLE to dual-wield. I just don't do it, myself. It doesn't appeal to me. Dual-wielding in general only appeals to me in rare circumstances and weapon combinations, as I loved the Witch King of Angmar dual-wielding a flail and long sword in Return of the King for instance.
The 2E cleric restriction against bladed weapons is based on Christian statutes during the time of the Crusades, as I recall, which forbade priests from drawing blood. That has no bearing on a fantasy realm, and getting around it by using bludgeoning weapons is hypocritical and silly.
How cool would it be if they added in kits for every Alignment type rather than simply good, neutral and evil?
We've already got NG (Lathander), LN (Helm) and CE (Talos).
What I'd like to see: LG: Torm or Tyr would fit best for this being along the Sword Coast. Most the other LG dieties are racial dieties or minor dieties. I don't really know what either's bonuses would be. CG: Tymora. Right? You'd have to. She's got such a prominent role in BG2. If not her, then Selune would be a good choice. Prominent diety, worshipped all over Faerun, pretty specific and unique abilities you could give them as uniques. True Neutral: Oghma. Easy choice, especially considering how much sense it'd make for your CHARNAME to do this growing up in Candlekeep. Can cast Identify once per level or as a level 1 divine spell? Dunno what you could come up with for their secondary ability. CN: Tempus. Bonus +1 to hit/thac0, ability to equip axes. Would also be granted to Branwen. LE: Bane, because Bane is awesome. Cloak of Fear as a usable ability, and maybe something fun like Disintegrate once per 10 levels. NE: You mentioned Mask and I can get behind that. Not gonna say give them the ability to use swords, but maybe invisibility once per day and multiple uses of Blind/Silence as a class skill?
It's not that I'm not cool with it. It'd definitely make for a bad-ass option to dual-class into thief. I just think there's pretty bad-ass stuff you could do elsewise as a bonus for Mask clerics.
As for it being "the least powerful," we'll have to agree to disagree there. One of the best weapons in BG1 is the Short Sword of Stabbing, and I think the Short Sword of Mask is probably the best weapon in all of BG2.
Clerics can spend only one points in all available weapons and styles. It goes the same for all non-warrior classes with the exception of the Swashbuckler and to a certain degree the Blade.
Mages can't spend points in styles altogether since they don't have them.
@sandmanCCL: Sounds like a kickass combo. Blunt weapons can be real strong in BG2....even staves.
@Schneidend: Gotta disagree. Stats, race, class, kit, weapon profs, spells...these all make a build. Elven ranger archer is an archer build distinct from any other, just like dwarf fighter-cleric is a tanking build distinct from other tanks. Dual class also creates unique builds. Sure, you don't have as many choices, but the choices are damn important!
Eh, I'm more of a Feats/Perks/Talents/Skill Tree kinda guy. Don't get me wrong, I love Infinite Engine games to death, but their mechanical elements are not the deepest by any means. Especially since I hate dual-classing for how disgustingly overpowered it is. 3E/Pathfinder is the only edition that got multi-classing right, as far as I'm concerned, so in BG and IWD I'm almost always single-classed except for the occasional Fighter/Thief or Fighter/Cleric multi-class. I certainly never dual-class.
Dual class normally kills the fun for me too. I can see your point: builds are more solidly defined in 3E and beyond. I'm actually trying out pathfinder for the first time this month...and looking at 5e as well. Nerd weekend! Fighter-thief is easily my favourite multiclass.
Pathfinder and 4E are my favorites for how robust even a single class character can be. In Pathfinder, a Barbarian gets to customize their Rage with Rage Powers, something they gain naturally without having to spend precious feats! It's a great system.
Single class clerics can be extremely deadly melee combatants. However, high-level fighter HLAs make things competitive again because they get so many more attacks. Also, they have more raw HPs and resistances so they can stomach hits better (assuming the AC is the same).
Comments
too bad i'm a pussy and play goody-two-shoes all the time. my extent of evil is snarky responses, but this time i will try harder. :P
Not only that, but then you can dual wield energy blades with Defender of Easthaven for 10 attacks per round!
And for people worried about dual wielding 2 grand mastery weapons. Think of it this way. In order for it to happen you need 8 proficiency points. You start with 4 so the earliest this can be done to maximum effectiveness is level 12. If they want to do that WITH 2 different weapons (like say dwarves with axes and warhammers) it can't happen until level 27.
I think level 12 is when you're starting to hit level 2 spells on paladin and ranger. Now you can make the case that some of them don't get spells (Inquisitor), but they MORE than make up for not being a fighter and not getting their paladin spells too.
If the Blackguard's poison scales like the assassin poison does, that will also begin to close the gap. But plain fighters really needed the proper grand mastery back. In my opinion (as a Ranger and Paladin player).
Fighters probably needed that to distance themselves from the better Paladin kits. But not the poor Rangers. The only good kit is the Archer. I really don't believe that that level 2 Ranger Spell is that awesome to outshine a plain Fighter.
But I'll be asking for too much if I ask for stalkers to get the ability to get Grand Mastery in any weapon a thief could use :P Same if I asked that rangers get draw upon holy might as well.
I mean personally I like the stalker, especially elven stalkers with longswords. But they get their backstab so slow =( The only good news is that they get haste and minor spell deflection but those are definitely minor.
Also @Tanthalas. Can you check to make sure that Elves are only getting +1 thaco for longswords only? I've read other places on the internetz that Elves were getting it for any Sword or Bow instead of Longswords and Longbows (Bows doesn't matter as much but it would really open things up if it applied to scimitars, katanas, short swords etc).
Stalkers are amazing from the outset, though. They are fighter/thieves who level up way faster. If we're talking saga-wide, Stalkers are effing incredible. x4 backstabs with pure fighter Thac0 and some of the best arcane buff spells wrapped up in the disguise as Divine spells, PLUS even more divine buffs? Amazing.
Beastmasters are pretty baller in BG2 as well. Load them up with summon animal spells and your other casters can specialize in other areas, and they are pretty capable archers in their own right. If you want to meta-game, get one to 12 and then dual-class to cleric to have Summon Animal for literally every single solitary spell slot. Beastmaster/Clerics are bar-none the best summoners in the game.
@Schneidend: A single-class cleric can't do it simply because you NEED two proficiency points in dual-wield to make it worthwhile. That said, dual-wielding with fighter/clerics or ranger/clerics is hilarious and extremely effective. Ranger/Clerics are already the best tanks in the game so it's not like they need a shield.
Stalkers actually cap at x3 Backstab. They also only get x2 Backstab only at level 9. But they're not bad, I just don't think they're that good either. EDIT: Unless they get another backstab upgrade in ToB.
Beastmasters though? Their only advantage is extra HP from a Familiar and the ability to summon canon fodder. For that you lose the ability to wear any armor heavier than leather and a wide slew of great weapons. Hardly a fair trade-off. (EDIT: I think they actually can use heavy armor).
http://www.playithardcore.com/pihwiki/index.php?title=Baldur's_Gate:_Classes_and_Kits#Ranger_Kits
That's where I got my info but it could easily be wrong. I do agree that beastmasters need some help.
Besides, it's not as if I said I don't want clerics to be ABLE to dual-wield. I just don't do it, myself. It doesn't appeal to me. Dual-wielding in general only appeals to me in rare circumstances and weapon combinations, as I loved the Witch King of Angmar dual-wielding a flail and long sword in Return of the King for instance.
The 2E cleric restriction against bladed weapons is based on Christian statutes during the time of the Crusades, as I recall, which forbade priests from drawing blood. That has no bearing on a fantasy realm, and getting around it by using bludgeoning weapons is hypocritical and silly.
As such, I'm okay with being limited to non-metal armors. Honestly I usually used the big leather/hide armors for my rangers in BG2 because stealth is handy and I've got clerics and fighters to wear the really thick stuff. Armor class really isn't that important outside of one or two dudes in your party.
And trust me. Stalkers are incredible. Saying they "only" get x3 backstab during regular BG2 play is a big freakin' deal. When you compare it to a fighter/thief, the next closest thing, they are pretty much equal on everything through BG1 and Stalkers are better for BG2. It isn't til Throne of Bhaal where fighter/thieves take over as a "better choice" because thief epic level abilities are amazing, and it isn't like your Stalker is going to suddenly stop being useful. Fighter/Thieves will have a slight edge on raw melee slappy damage (and actually it's pretty minor because it's mostly from x5 backstab which you'll only get one of per fight), Stalkers will be slightly more durable due to divine spells + their mage spells.
This is a really long-winded way of saying I heart Stalkers.
With Grand Mastery in slings, they could have been awesome duals with Clerics.
We've already got NG (Lathander), LN (Helm) and CE (Talos).
What I'd like to see:
LG: Torm or Tyr would fit best for this being along the Sword Coast. Most the other LG dieties are racial dieties or minor dieties. I don't really know what either's bonuses would be.
CG: Tymora. Right? You'd have to. She's got such a prominent role in BG2. If not her, then Selune would be a good choice. Prominent diety, worshipped all over Faerun, pretty specific and unique abilities you could give them as uniques.
True Neutral: Oghma. Easy choice, especially considering how much sense it'd make for your CHARNAME to do this growing up in Candlekeep. Can cast Identify once per level or as a level 1 divine spell? Dunno what you could come up with for their secondary ability.
CN: Tempus. Bonus +1 to hit/thac0, ability to equip axes. Would also be granted to Branwen.
LE: Bane, because Bane is awesome. Cloak of Fear as a usable ability, and maybe something fun like Disintegrate once per 10 levels.
NE: You mentioned Mask and I can get behind that. Not gonna say give them the ability to use swords, but maybe invisibility once per day and multiple uses of Blind/Silence as a class skill?
As for it being "the least powerful," we'll have to agree to disagree there. One of the best weapons in BG1 is the Short Sword of Stabbing, and I think the Short Sword of Mask is probably the best weapon in all of BG2.
@Dragonspear: http://forgottenrealms.wikia.com/wiki/Shadowdancers
This is probably what you're thinking about. Mask worshipers often take Shadowdancer as a prestige class.
Video game flaw #1: Builds entirely basd around game-breaking items and nothing else.
Mages can't spend points in styles altogether since they don't have them.
@Schneidend: Gotta disagree. Stats, race, class, kit, weapon profs, spells...these all make a build. Elven ranger archer is an archer build distinct from any other, just like dwarf fighter-cleric is a tanking build distinct from other tanks. Dual class also creates unique builds. Sure, you don't have as many choices, but the choices are damn important!