Skip to content

2 levels of Assassin/Fighter vs. Berserker Kit

2

Comments

  • the_sexteinthe_sextein Member Posts: 711
    edited July 2015
    I've argued in favor of the Ken/thief for pure damage many times but I also agree that playing as a single class thief in SOA is not fun and extremely not fun with SCS on insane.

    That being said, I think the fighter/thief multiclass is the better option. Not only will you get your thaco as low as an assassin/fighter can go because you will pass level 22 in both fighter and theif classes but you will get X5 backstabs, more theif points to distribute, more traps to use, UAI which will allow for a better armor class and you can even cast a find familiar scroll in TOB with UAI and gain +40 hitpoints for free. Using UAI you are going to have Carsomyr witch will give 50% magic resistance and auto dispel on hit as well as a +1 to hit and damage. Top that off with both fighter and theif HLA's and more of them. The only con is that the fighter/thief multi class will level up 1 level behind the assassin/fighter dual the whole game.

    The assassin fighter will be more powerful at certain points in the game because he will gain fighter levels quicker which will give a thaco bonus and grandmastery will grant an extra half attack a round and +2 to hit and +3 to damage and you will get your assassin bonus to hit and damage as well. In the end the fighter/thief multi will be slightly weaker in damage per round but only a little and he will be much stronger over all with more options, better protection and more damaging special abilities/combos. Unlike the dual class ken/theif you would not have to play any of the game as a watered down single class.

    I have played as an assassin/fighter before but I waited until I got X7 backstab before I dual classed. That was a real pain and probably not worth it in the end. It was a true powerhouse though.

    As you already pointed out, the assassin/fighter dualed at level two is simply a normal fighter with one use of poison and a weak almost pointless backstab and a single trap with boring fighter HLAs and a +1 to hit and damage. It is more interesting than a vanilla fighter and certainly no slouch combining fighter character progression with poison and extra +1 to hit and damage but I agree that the fighter kits are not all that satisfying and dualing an assassin at that low of a level is not really a game changer. That is why I feel the fighter/thief multi is more fun and more powerful than dual class with a kit. Not the whole game, but he is very strong the whole game and considerably better at the end. The ken/thief is even better at the end game but you have to dual at 13 in order to achieve that and its just not fun.

    In the vanilla game on core rules a pure class kensai kit will be able to withstand most fights easily especially once he obtains the ring of mirroring and the boots of gargoyle. At the end game he will be the most efficient killing machine possible with the most damage, number of attacks, and highest thaco. Using a throwing dagger with the current implementation of strength bonus and he will do more damage at long range than a grand mastered carsomyr two handed sword (which makes no sense).

    It's only when enemies start to do double damage and gain extra hitpoint through mods that the other classes start to stand out more. I would argue that mixing the fighter with the thief is more fun and tactiacal with more options to use overall but the pure kensai is truly the damage king and his armor class is not a very big con using core rules in a standard game. If you really crank the difficulty through mods and you want the most options for use then a FMT would be a good choice as well though character progression is slow and fighting ability is noticeably compromised at times in SOA but its extra magical protection can go a long way if enemies have way more hitpoints and abilities then they are supposed to and they are hitting for double damage.
    Post edited by the_sextein on
    RAM021Lateralus
  • WowoWowo Member Posts: 2,064
    My thinking tends to wonder why you'd want a pure fighter in the first place.

    Compare and contrast an assassin 2-> fighter with a multi fighter/thief and then compare and contrast a fighter/thief with a fighter/Mage/thief. Also make sure you consider in each case that it's a bhaalspawn with items and defenses not available to normal characters (tomes from bg1 etc).

    Overall the FMT is going to be the best tank and have the best damage and cover the parties needs for a thief, carsomyr wielder (if desired) and backup spellcaster.
    RAM021JuliusBorisov
  • the_sexteinthe_sextein Member Posts: 711
    edited July 2015
    This isn't the first time an experienced player on these forums like yourself has mentioned this. I am surprised at how many people feel the same way you do but maybe your are right and that is the reason. I respect your opinion but mine is similar to the op in that I prefer warriors for melee to focus on what they do best without waste. The FMT has 5 less thaco at the end game and levels at slower speeds the entire game and ends up with two less HLAs and less hitpoints with a weaker armor class. You are giving up 33% of the game's XP for nothing but added magical protections that are not needed in the vanilla game and add nothing but tedium to each area you enter. Since other casters in your group will have more spells per a level than your FMT and access to higher level spells at any given point in the game it's pretty pointless in my mind.

    Unless you are playing on insane SCS I don't really see a benefit to those extra protective spells. In the vanilla game enemies are simply not a threat to a character in a 6 person party that has -18 armor class and 250+ hitpoints. You will kill your enemies faster and with less tedium with a character that hits more and does more damage with faster character progression. A kensai will do this far better than a FMT but with a protective penalty. A fighter theif multi will strike more of a balance between protection and damage while gaining both HLA's and backstabs like the FMT. Your mages will cast spells the best and focus on disabling protections and disabling enemies while your melee characters do what they do best.

    Just my preference I suppose as I have run into many on this forum and others that disagree with me. I feel like fighting with a fighter is great and casting with a mage is great. casting with a FMT is wasting your fighting ability and fighting with a FMT is wasting your casting ability. You can't do both at the same time but a FMT is weaker at casting and fighting the entire game as a result of trying to do two things at once. Casting protective spells and then fighting is great but it just adds time to the encounter and is completely unneeded. SCS on insane is the exception for me. I will admit the FMT is better in ths situation and the added protections are not just pointless and tedious when playing full out balls to the wall. Then again, the point of adding all of the optional SCS components is geared toward challenging power players and most certainly throws the game out of it's intended balance.

    I feel that the fighter theif multi is the best balance of power, protection, and character progression in the vanilla game at least when you are using a full party. Solo is FMT all the way because utility wins in a solo run.

    Oh and I know this sounds corny but on personal level I feel like a warrior is all about fighting and a mage is all about casting. A FMT always came off as a generic character to me but I know this is just my own narrow minded thinking.

    A little more on topic, I would say that I would prefer the assassin fighter over a berserker but it would be simply my preference of using traps and poison. The assassin fighter dual at level 2 is practically a fighter anyway but I prefer the assassin character style.

    Technically each character has benefits and flaws based on the individual situation. This extends all the way to the FMT argument as well. Some fights you might benefit more from doing more DPS and in others you may benefit more from better protection. The game is balanced pretty well and I don't think a definite answer is really out there. I think the F/T, F/M, FMT are probably at the top of the list in terms of overall power but a lot of it comes down to personal preference when playing. The benefits of a pure class fighter or pure class mage can be more beneficial in some situations depending on your party and playing style. It's not clear cut.
    Post edited by the_sextein on
    WowoRAM021
  • WowoWowo Member Posts: 2,064

    This isn't the first time an experienced player on these forums like yourself has mentioned this. I am surprised at how many people feel the same way you do but maybe your are right and that is the reason. I respect your opinion but mine is similar to the op in that I prefer warriors for melee to focus on what they do best without waste. The FMT has 5 less thaco at the end game and levels at slower speeds the entire game and ends up with two less HLAs and less hitpoints with a weaker armor class. You are giving up 33% of the game's XP for nothing but added magical protections that are not needed in the vanilla game and add nothing but tedium to each area you enter. Since other casters in your group will have more spells per a level than your FMT and access to higher level spells at any given point in the game it's pretty pointless in my mind.

    Unless you are playing on insane SCS I don't really see a benefit to those extra protective spells. In the vanilla game enemies are simply not a threat to a character in a 6 person party that has -18 armor class and 250+ hitpoints. You will kill your enemies faster and with less tedium with a character that hits more and does more damage with faster character progression. A kensai will do this far better than a FMT but with a protective penalty. A fighter theif multi will strike more of a balance between protection and damage while gaining both HLA's and backstabs like the FMT. Your mages will cast spells the best and focus on disabling protections and disabling enemies while your melee characters do what they do best.

    Just my preference I suppose as I have run into many on this forum and others that disagree with me. I feel like fighting with a fighter is great and casting with a mage is great. casting with a FMT is wasting your fighting ability and fighting with a FMT is wasting your casting ability. You can't do both at the same time but a FMT is weaker at casting and fighting the entire game as a result of trying to do two things at once. Casting protective spells and then fighting is great but it just adds time to the encounter and is completely unneeded. SCS on insane is the exception for me. I will admit the FMT is better in ths situation and the added protections are not just pointless and tedious when playing full out balls to the wall. Then again, the point of adding all of the optional SCS components is geared toward challenging power players and most certainly throws the game out of it's intended balance.

    I feel that the fighter theif multi is the best balance of power, protection, and character progression in the vanilla game at least when you are using a full party. Solo is FMT all the way because utility wins in a solo run.

    Oh and I know this sounds corny but on personal level I feel like a warrior is all about fighting and a mage is all about casting. A FMT always came off as a generic character to me but I know this is just my own narrow minded thinking.

    A little more on topic, I would say that I would prefer the assassin fighter over a berserker but it would be simply my preference of using traps and poison. The assassin fighter dual at level 2 is practically a fighter anyway but I prefer the assassin character style.

    Technically each character has benefits and flaws based on the individual situation. This extends all the way to the FMT argument as well. Some fights you might benefit more from doing more DPS and in others you may benefit more from better protection. The game is balanced pretty well and I don't think a definite answer is really out there. I think the F/T, F/M, FMT are probably at the top of the list in terms of overall power but a lot of it comes down to personal preference when playing. The benefits of a pure class fighter or pure class mage can be more beneficial in some situations depending on your party and playing style. It's not clear cut.

    Very insightful point of view and a completely reasonable approach to the game.

    To respond to your points. The benefits of a FT over a FMT are pretty minimal. Yes, racial benefits but elf racial benefits are quite good even if dwarf or halforc is situationally better (though shorty saves is ellipsed by wizard defenses and halforc strength is close to irrelevant on a bhaalspawn with stat boosts and DUHM). The biggest difference as you point out is THAC0 but I've seen no indication that a bhaalspawn FMT will struggle to hit anything if appropriately built and geared (elf +1 to hit with swords and bows helps too especially in bg1). Also better to have a familiar at level 1 rather than waiting for UAI. Finally, who wants to give up on the awesome backstabbing carnage of mislead?

    A multi vs dual comparison is harder and is about weighing the benefit of having the role of thief covered vs the loss of GM and kit bonuses. Overall I think that thief HLAs are awesome and well worth including a thief in the party to use and a PC multi thief is the easiest way to do that. Additionally, it's nice to do thieving duties like scouting with main character as I made them to play them (not have them sit in the back) and they tend to be the most sturdy and able to take care of themselves anyway. Besides damage output a dual is going to have much more HP but mainchar already has max con and maxed HP so I really think that what the multi gets is enough (don't forget the free HP from a familiar too).

    On the question of whether Mage spells are worth it on a FMT ... How could they not be? Consider that until you hit 10
    APR you can throw in a low casting spell like magic missile and still make all of your attacks every round. Consider that if the FMT is your third caster then you can strip spellshield, spell turning and stoneskin all in one round. Consider that as long as you have 18/50+ base strength then for most of bg1 you can self buff to 18/00. Consider that buffing doesn't have to take a long time considering that in most situations a stoneskin and mirror image is enough. Consider that in the fights that you start by lobbing a couple of fireballs into a room that an extra fireball will never hurt. Consider that when you do have to buff the whole party that an extra caster can help and effectively increase the duration of buffs by letting you cast all required buffs in a shorter amount of time. Consider that thieving duties are much easier when you can cast invisibility on yourself in a pinch. A FMT isn't a Mage so much as a FT with some free Mage spells.
    RAM021JuliusBorisov
  • the_sexteinthe_sextein Member Posts: 711
    edited July 2015
    I can't say I disagree. The last time through the game I was a FMT and the support casting was nice. Did I need it? Probably not but it is a nice bonus. It really comes down to who you have in your party and what you want to focus on.

    My thing is that I don't see a point in buffing 90% of the time in the vanilla game and by the time you could use it you will have access to the ring of mirroring. A F/T can also use wands for things like fireball and magic missile. I would rather have a +5 to hit and +2 to damage with a lower armor class that does not require casting, cannot be dispelled and more hitpoints. Especially when you are going up against Rakasha and the like. That being said. You are absolutely right that the extra abilities are not something to be ignored I simply value them less than others I suppose.

    As I mentioned before, I do appreciate the spell protections very much with the improved components of SCS. At a point in TOB you have to face off against 5 dragons at once and they have like 500HP a piece. On insane they are doing double damage so it is practically impossible to survive unless you really have a bunch of spells.

    I used stoneskin, mirror image, spell immunity, spell trap, improved invisability, improved haste, and blur with carsomyr and a full party to back me up and I still found it very tough. In that case the FMT is very badass.

    I would proabably rather have improved alctricity and timestop with a grandmastery like a kensai mage or just stick to kicking in teeth with a kensai theif but dual classing is annoying and for the most part, not worth it. If a FMT did not have an XP limit so he could go beyond level 17 fighter and he was allowed to grandmaster then I would agree that good things come to those who wait and the extra time it takes to build that character would be worth it. As it stands I don't agree but I understand the argument and why many disagree with me.
    RAM021
  • WowoWowo Member Posts: 2,064

    I can't say I disagree. The last time through the game I was a FMT and the support casting was nice. Did I need it? Probably not but it is a nice bonus. It really comes down to who you have in your party and what you want to focus on.

    My thing is that I don't see a point in buffing 90% of the time in the vanilla game and by the time you could use it you will have access to the ring of mirroring. A F/T can also use wands for things like fireball and magic missile. I would rather have a +5 to hit and +2 to damage with a lower armor class that does not require casting, cannot be dispelled and more hitpoints. Especially when you are going up against Rakasha and the like. That being said. You are absolutely right that the extra abilities are not something to be ignored I simply value them less than others I suppose.

    As I mentioned before, I do appreciate the spell protections very much with the improved components of SCS. At a point in TOB you have to face off against 5 dragons at once and they have like 500HP a piece. On insane they are doing double damage so it is practically impossible to survive unless you really have a bunch of spells.

    I used stoneskin, mirror image, spell immunity, spell trap, improved invisability, improved haste, and blur with carsomyr and a full party to back me up and I still found it very tough. In that case the FMT is very badass.

    Where does +2 damage come from?
    How would you have a lower AC than a FMT who can have Spirit Armour and Blur?
    Spell Immunity: Abjuration takes care of dispels.
    A F/T can't use Fireball Wands until UAI at which point they're mostly useless. Fireball wands are actually a great argument for a FMT as they can use them to complement they're limited spell list along with other wizard only wands letting them more fully participate as a wizard when desired.
    Until UAI I don't think a FT is going to be all that far ahead in HP due to Find Familiar (and as I said who cares given how many more HP charname has anyway and the defences available).

    RAM021
  • the_sexteinthe_sextein Member Posts: 711
    edited July 2015
    You can be a half orc which grants +2 strength and damage bonus and you can where full plate mail without loosing your spells because you don't have any. I have imoen around so locks and traps are covered. Backstabs, detect illusion, and set traps still work with full plate. Shurupacs plate is -2 armor base and gives a plus 1 to dexterity.

    If you don't want to use a wand then you can use a necklace to launch unlimited fireballs. The FT can use find familiar as well he just needs to wait until late game. Blur won't even last through a fight so oh well.

    These are just my feelings. This is clearly why we don't agree. But is is no big deal I thinks it is cool that we can debate these things due to the vast options and play styles with great balance that this game offers.

    My FMT had a -16 armor class and could use blur to achieve -19. My FT has -18 and doesn't bother with spells. That is why I find them unnecessary. I would rather put that 33% of XP toward improving my fighting and hitpoints faster.

    A FT can cast mirror image with the ring of mirroring, and stonskin with the boots of gargoyle. The ring of gax can cast improved haste. Nothing is stopping Imoen or Nalia from casting improved invisability or improved haste on your FT either. The only spell the FMT has that I would miss is spell immunity and it's totally not needed in a vanilla run of the game. In fact, none of these buffs are needed on a warriar with full plate armor. I have beaten the game with a vanilla fighter on insane difficulty and had no real problems in the past. Maybe this new difficulty mode that beamdog is talking about will change things up a little.
    Post edited by the_sextein on
  • WowoWowo Member Posts: 2,064

    You can be a half orc which grants +2 strength and damage bonus and you can where full plate mail without loosing your spells because you don't have any. I have imoen around so locks and traps are covered. Backstabs, detect illusion, and set traps still work with full plate. Shurupacs plate is -2 armor base and gives a plus 1 to dexterity.

    If you don't want to use a wand then you can use a necklace to launch unlimited fireballs. The FT can use find familiar as well he just needs to wait until late game. Blur won't even last through a fight so oh well.

    These are just my feelings. This is clearly why we don't agree. But is is no big deal I thinks it is cool that we can debate these things due to the vast options and play styles with great balance that this game offers.

    My FMT had a -16 armor class and could use blur to achieve -19. My FT has -18 and doesn't bother with spells. That is why I find them unnecessary. I would rather put that 33% of XP toward improving my fighting and hitpoints faster.

    Half Orc has +1 strength which varies between +1 damage and +1 attack and damage but you give up all of the racial benefits of being a shorty race which, without spells, you really need I think.

    In any regular party a FMT vs a FT means that you can have an extra character launching fireballs (as the necklace can be given to a fighter), a better mage (as you don't need Imoen and can take Neera or Edwin instead), better average AC (as Shurapacs plate can be given to a warrior), better HP for mainchar early game when it matters thanks to FF, better archer for early game (thanks to elf race), better melee combatant late game (mislead) and so forth.

    I completely agree that it's great how we can discuss different play styles. However, what I've noticed is that many players discount the triple classes because they "develop to slowly" or "have bad thac0" or "low HP" and I just want to demonstrate that it simply isn't the case due to the mechanics of second edition. Whichever way you crunch it there really is very little reason to play a FT when you can play a FMT or a FC when you can play a FMC except personal preference.
    RAM021
  • the_sexteinthe_sextein Member Posts: 711
    edited July 2015
    The half orc gets an additional +1 from the deck of many things. The FMT gets a plus one to dex from the deck of many things. The Half orc gets a +1 to dex from his full plate armor so he ends up with +1 constitution and +2 strength over the half elf in the end. I have played as a human fighter for so long I guess I don't really care about the half-elf bonuses.

    Actually, in BG1 there are enough necklaces to give everyone in a 6 person party a fire ball ability as long as you have two mages using wands which I always do.

    Your thinking makes sense to me from a PNP stytle of 2E rules but they don't apply with this games limitations in my opinion.

    Yes personal preference is a big one. Perhaps the biggest. I say down with the weakling half elf and let the brute half orc do the skull cracking.

    I will give you mislead but again personally I consider it an oversight by the devs. A horrible bit of cheese that I don't bother with. In fact I didn't even know about it until someone told of it the last time I had this argument lol.

    The game is balanced. No class is absolutely better in all ways. It all comes down to preference and party. For example, The fighter thief is a better fighter but the fighter mage theif is still plenty good with a sword. The fighter mage theif has magical protection but a fighter theif has plenty good protection without it. In the end I prefer to do more damage to destroy my enemies faster unless I am playing a modded game where protection matters more. Preference is all it comes down to for me. In PNP where you can reach level infinite I will give it to the FMT but not here. Dare I say that this game is better balanced than the PNP version of the rules.
    Post edited by the_sextein on
    RAM021
  • LateralusLateralus Member Posts: 903
    Actually, my favorite character is my lawful neutral Invoker(2) turned fighter with a 97 total ability roll. You get all the HPs back and more with a familiar, and who doesn't love that dimensional hole your ferret can hide valuables in? You advance quick, get to grand master weapons, and from the beginning to the end you can use wands, staves, and most importantly: scrolls. Buy a bunch of stoneskin and mirror image scrolls and cast them while wearing full plate.

    I never went past level 7 with a kensai but that is some cringe worthy damage later in the game.
    RAM021
  • LateralusLateralus Member Posts: 903
    Half-orc fighter/thief is one of my favorite characters, to me it's the most interesting build and the most fun to play.
  • the_sexteinthe_sextein Member Posts: 711
    edited July 2015
    What level did you dual on the invoker? I have never tried that kit character mix before.

    EDIT: Nevermind I see the 2 in parenthises now. I will check it out. I am always looking for new combinations to play for fun. It is hard playing other classes when you have finished the game as a power class like the FM, FT, and FMT. Anything to mix it up is cool though.

    Though I feel the FT is a better fighter I do think the FMT is one of the most interesting builds as it mixes all 3 class abilities allowing for a bunch of fun options. Though the FMT is slower to progress I don't think it is all that bad. It sounds worse then it actually is. The FM dual is also great because you get the grand-mastery and the spell protections plus you can use level 9 spells so you can really beat things up with a timestop and you can throw around hefty damaging level 9 spells in an improved alctricity/timestop combo like a pure class mage. There is waste as with all fighter mage types but it is kept to a minimum and some of the level 9 spell options allow for improved fighting opportunities due to great synergy.

    Of course the dual class combo's like the Kensai/mage and Kensai/thief even at level13 puts a hurt on your thaco even with kensai thaco bonus and is a pain to deal with the single class parts of the game unless you are board or really like single class characters and don't mind giving your party members more of a chance to shine.

    Each character class/kit/combo has great bonuses and serious cons. That is why I have a hard time even figuring out what I prefer. That is the sign of a well balanced game. I tend to prefer different types of characters based on the difficulty and the members I am using in my party. I do sway toward the half orc fighter thief multi because he does more damage than a FMT and less damage than a pure class fighter. He has more protection than a pure class fighter but less protection than a FMT and he has a middle of the road number of abilities as well. Also his character progression is slower than that of a fighter but faster than a FMT. To me, he is the ultimate middle man or to put it in other words, the most balanced when playing the vanilla game with core rules. His theif abilities complement his fighting abilities and never cause any waste.

    Being that a mage can never beat edwin and all mages end the game with the same spells that do the same damage, I tend to focus on melee oriented characters for my main character. Your main character can be a much more damaging melee basher than even the most OP NPC's like Dorn and Serevok.

    The FM and FMT have much waste but are very interesting jack of all trade type characters that make up for their waste with great moments of synergy between classes. Depending on who you are traveling with they too can be the best option for your team. I think the FMT's utility makes it the best solo character and shines nicely in 4 person parties where the slower progression is equalized.
    Post edited by the_sextein on
    RAM021
  • LateralusLateralus Member Posts: 903

    What level did you dual on the invoker? I have never tried that kit character mix before.

    EDIT: Nevermind I see the 2 in parenthises now. I will check it out. I am always looking for new combinations to play for fun. It is hard playing other classes when you have finished the game as a power class like the FM, FT, and FMT. Anything to mix it up is cool though.

    Though I feel the FT is a better fighter I do think the FMT is one of the most interesting builds as it mixes all 3 class abilities allowing for a bunch of fun options. Though the FMT is slower to progress I don't think it is all that bad. It sounds worse then it actually is. The FM dual is also great because you get the grand-mastery and the spell protections plus you can use level 9 spells so you can really beat things up with a timestop and you can throw around hefty damaging level 9 spells in an improved alctricity/timestop combo like a pure class mage. There is waste as with all fighter mage types but it is kept to a minimum and some of the level 9 spell options allow for improved fighting opportunities due to great synergy.

    Of course the dual class combo's like the Kensai/mage and Kensai/thief even at level13 puts a hurt on your thaco even with kensai thaco bonus and is a pain to deal with the single class parts of the game unless you are board or really like single class characters and don't mind giving your party members more of a chance to shine.

    Each character class/kit/combo has great bonuses and serious cons. That is why I have a hard time even figuring out what I prefer. That is the sign of a well balanced game. I tend to prefer different types of characters based on the difficulty and the members I am using in my party. I do sway toward the half orc fighter thief multi because he does more damage than a FMT and less damage than a pure class fighter. He has more protection than a pure class fighter but less protection than a FMT and he has a middle of the road number of abilities as well. Also his character progression is slower than that of a fighter but faster than a FMT. To me, he is the ultimate middle man or to put it in other words, the most balanced when playing the vanilla game with core rules. His theif abilities complement his fighting abilities and never cause any waste.

    Being that a mage can never beat edwin and all mages end the game with the same spells that do the same damage, I tend to focus on melee oriented characters for my main character. Your main character can be a much more damaging melee basher than even the most OP NPC's like Dorn and Serevok.

    The FM and FMT have much waste but are very interesting jack of all trade type characters that make up for their waste with great moments of synergy between classes. Depending on who you are traveling with they too can be the best option for your team. I think the FMT's utility makes it the best solo character and shines nicely in 4 person parties where the slower progression is equalized.

    There is zero longterm "waste" to the Invoker(2) "fighter kit". Sure, early in BG1 your STR will need a poyion boost and you will have dumped HP, but those are just temporary disadvantages.

    Invoker2 Fighter "Kit"

    Arvantages:
    Wands
    Scrolls
    Staves
    Scrolls (usable in armor)
    Mage speciffic items
    Familiar
    Better ability stat rolls (min 16 con/ 9 int as opposed to van fighter str 9)
    3 first level spells (ID, Friends, etc..)
    Bonus weapon proficiency (dagger, staff, etc)

    And an amazingly likeable stroyline. Repressed mage (INT 15 is all you need) decides on a career change after the trauma of the Gorion murder leaves you feeling hopelessly outgunned.

    Disadvantages
    Takes awhile to find your legs in armor (18str for a bit)
    18 hp dump makes the game challenging for a bit, but oh yeah maybe just use the wand of paralyzation? Familiar gets you 6 back right away. 12 more in bg2 and 24 more after that.

    At the end of BG1 I had 16 int, 13 wis, and 19s in everything else. 3 pips in 2wf, 3 in katana, and 1 for my offhand dagger of venom.
  • RAM021RAM021 Member Posts: 403
    Lateralus said:

    Half-orc fighter/thief is one of my favorite characters, to me it's the most interesting build and the most fun to play.

    We feel that the HOrc's +1 STR is a little wasted on classes that roll Exceptional, whereas it is great on non-Warriors such as a Cleric/Thief...
  • LateralusLateralus Member Posts: 903
    RAM021 said:

    Lateralus said:

    Half-orc fighter/thief is one of my favorite characters, to me it's the most interesting build and the most fun to play.

    We feel
    Who exactly are "we"? lol Is there a committee or a board of ability stats? ;)
  • RAM021RAM021 Member Posts: 403
    Lateralus said:

    RAM021 said:

    Lateralus said:

    Half-orc fighter/thief is one of my favorite characters, to me it's the most interesting build and the most fun to play.

    We feel
    Who exactly are "we"? lol Is there a committee or a board of ability stats? ;)
    Us & yes
  • LateralusLateralus Member Posts: 903
    So you have made the assumption that I agree with your previous statement. I do not. I enjoy playing HOFTs for a variety of reasons beyond the initial STR score. Which is still very much a significant boon IMHO.
  • the_sexteinthe_sextein Member Posts: 711
    edited August 2015
    Strength bonus is pretty important to a fighter that is why the half orc who specializes in fighting gets a bonus to strength and constitution. Things like strength, thaco, hitpoints, and full plate armor matter much more to fighter characters. Ending the game with 24 strength and allowing your magic users to utilize things like the robe of vecna with level 9 spells instead of hogging the best fighter , thief, and magic items all on one ball hog character works better than you might think. I don't mind sacrificing some thaco and damage for more damaging special abilities that don't interfere with the act of fighting. I just don't think I want to sacrifice even more fighting ability for some unneeded magical protection that causes fights to take longer with pre-buff and then causes the fight to take even longer with less to hit and damage. In the end you will make use of that extra protection simply because you are less efficient at fighting and even slower with character progression.

    Pretty sure the fighter/thief and the half orc have a purpose within the design of the game.
    +50HP
    -2AC
    +5 thaco
    +2 damage
    +2 HLA abilities
    + 1 per class character progression

    If you don't know how to fully utilize a party to full effectiveness with a F/T that does not make it inferior. The problem is on you. These stat scores are not my opinion. Just the facts regarding who is the better fighter. If you want a better fighter then maybe consider a fighter and if you want a better magic user then consider a mage. Just sayin.

    Synergy is great and the FMT is probably the most powerful character overall in the game which matters when you are solo. In a group where things are specialized, specialization wins the day. Better fighters and mages will work better. Unless you unbalance the game design with mods.

    I think people just want to label a certain class as the best so they can be that class and feel satisfied that they are the best thing since sliced bread. The 2E rules are not perfect but they are far better than most players can wrap their minds around. The FMT would be better in a game that never ends but that is the problem. Most people even in PNP will stop long before the FMT pulls ahead of any other classes by any significant amount which was probably taken into consideration when it was created. Baldur's Gate is no exception. There is a limit to XP, spells, and levels. 2E isn't perfect and some classes are certainly more powerful than others but they all have their niche. Even the wizard slayer. I am not saying the FMT is weak or that it doesn't provide ample reasons to play as. I am simply saying that it is not the best at everything all the time and most certainly not the best fighter type character. FMT is an average fighter with above average protection. If you take the time to utilize his theif abilities he can make up for some of his fighting problems but he will never match the F/T who utilizes his Thief abilities. The Half orc will get a +to damage and attack right out the gate and will level up faster and then reach levels that the FMT cannot even reach at the end game. It balances out. Some would rather have the extra magic and some would rather have the faster character progression and fighting ability. In the end I think preference and party should be the most deciding factors other than difficulty and mods. If someone asks for the best fighter I don't mind if someone mentions the FMT but when they mention that all other characters other than their favorite are pointless and have no statistical data to back any of it up it gets old.

    I think ultimately many people just don't value fighters or fighting ability so they play down the bonuses and focus on magic oriented characters who can fight because they want to be a mage even when they think about the benefits of melee damage and fighting. You can't have the best of it all at one time, it's simply not possible when you consider character progression, XP limits, magic spell limitations, and thaco, HP, AC, and fighter specialization bonus. Nothing has it all.
    Post edited by the_sextein on
    RAM021
  • RAM021RAM021 Member Posts: 403
    Lateralus said:

    So you have made the assumption that I agree with your previous statement. I do not. I enjoy playing HOFTs for a variety of reasons beyond the initial STR score. Which is still very much a significant boon IMHO.

    Only assumptions here are the ones you are making. If +1 damage is 'significant' you have a very different definition than we do...
  • the_sexteinthe_sextein Member Posts: 711
    edited August 2015
    RAM021, I am not arguing with you because I disagree with you but significant is subjective to everyone. You agree with wowo and I am cool with that but I think a +1 to damage improvement is significant in that it is better than not having one. I acknowledge that it will not be a huge difference that will mean life and death but neither is throwing the balance into another area of character creation. Is a -1 to armor class significant? Is having 1 less memorable spell per a level significant? Is having access to one less level of casting or access to a backstab significant? How about the barb's extra D12 hit point rolls?

    It depends, if you don't backstab often then who cares? If a party has 3 magic users that all have level 9 spells does it hurt that a FMT doesn't have them? On the other hand do you even need a main character to have any spells at all with such a setup? It's all preference. If I have a+1 to damage and I have improved haste cast on me and then my enemy steps on a timestop trap and I enable the assassination HLA you would have 10 attacks with +1 each and all of them would be X5 damage so that would turn a +1 bonus into 50 points of additional damage in 1 round. It depends on how you play and how much you focus on each area of the game. Some value raw damage, some value RTS strategy and others value magic tactics or a mix of all three. How significant something is cannot be defined for everyone equally. When you are first leaving candle keep I think a +1 to damage is pretty cool and it's benefits continue to snowball all the way to TOB. Over the course of the game I probably do a massive amount of damage because of that +1. Add another +1 and another...they add up eventually. Every attack you make has a +1 for the rest of the game. If you attack 7 times a round that will turn into a ton of extra damage that ultimately does matter it's just not as direct as casting a stoneskin on yourself or enabling a turn undead ability.

    What one person values may not be valuble to another. As a result each person will define what is signifigant to what they feel is important to what they prefer to use. Sometimes they are limited by their lack of knowledge of the engine. Sometimes they are limited by simple preferances and other times they are limited per each encounter since each encounter is different and different tactics will make each encounter harder or easier depending on many things. If we were talking about a 1 on 1 fight between characters it would be a matter of comparing facts but it's not that simple considering how complex this game is and the crazy amount of character types, battles, difficulty settings, mods, NPC combinations ect.

    I can prove that a F/T hits more often and does more damage per a hit but that doesn't mean a F/T is a better character. I choose the F/T beause I value hitting more often and doing more damage per hit. I have magic buffs and debuffs covered in my strategy based on the other NPC's I am using and how I equip them. To me, every +1 to hit and damage is important because that is what I prefer to focus on and I have found ways to bend it to my advantage to great success. This is why the warrior exists within the game. I am not arguing with you because I think you are wrong for not caring about a +1 bonus but I disagree that it is insignificant in the broader view of things.

    I mean no disrespect to you or wowo but I have always felt this way even before I had played through the game with a FMT. I know the stats and I have my preferences and after playing the game with different characters including the FMT I have learned some things but ultimately my opinions are unchanged. They have changed a little here and there but nothing huge. My preferences change based on the difficulty of the game, how many people are in my party and who I take with me. They change based on what mods I have installed and how I distribute items. I just can't see any one character making all of the others obsolete under any circumstance outside of moding the game balance far and beyond what was intended. If a character is less powerful 90% of the game but they are the most powerful class for the other 10% and that 10% happens to be the hardest 10% of the game where do you draw the line in terms of importance of that character and just how powerful are they? Will your opinions match the opinions of everyone else? probably not.
    Post edited by the_sextein on
    Francois
  • FrancoisFrancois Member Posts: 452

    Synergy is great and the FMT is probably the most powerful character overall in the game which matters when you are solo.

    I agree with what you say, and FT is my favorite class. And I think FT is still better than FMT in solo. You reach high levels very quickly and UAI makes the mage class obsolete in my opinion.

    Even in a party it can be good to have a character that can be self-reliant, because there are a number of situations where it's good strategy to send just one or two characters and keep the others out of harms way.

    In the end I think the only significant thing is whatever makes you character fun to play.
    the_sexteinLateralus
  • RAM021RAM021 Member Posts: 403

    RAM021, I am not arguing with you because I disagree with you but significant is subjective to everyone. You agree with wowo and I am cool with that but I think a +1 to damage improvement is significant in that it is better than not having one. I acknowledge that it will not be a huge difference that will mean life and death but neither is throwing the balance into another area of character creation.

    Have you been following this thread? We have liked and agreed with you more than wowo. Now we do think wowo's assessment is more correct although you seem to be under the mistaken belief that we dislike the F/T.

    In any event, the definition of significant is not whether it is better than not having one; you yourself even admit it will not make a huge difference which is where something WOULD be significant.

    That said, if you do not disagree then why are you arguing?

    Strength bonus is pretty important to a fighter that is why the half orc who specializes in fighting gets a bonus to strength and constitution.

    STR Bonus is important to a FTR absolutely; nevertheless, the HOrc's racial boni do not derive from fighting, rather their racial advantages (and in this edition their limited class options) incline them towards fighting.

    The correct comparison is not HOrc F/T vs (H)Elf F/M/T, but HOrc F/T vs xxx F/T and HOrc F/T vs HOrc x/x. Probably also worth considering HOrc Swash as well.


    Ultimately we have no horse in this race, and initially were commenting solely on Lat's one off statement.
  • the_sexteinthe_sextein Member Posts: 711
    edited August 2015
    Ok I got to admit that I am confused. by "we" I thought you meant you and wowo. If you are referring to yourself as we then WTF dude.

    To clarify, each person will feel that certain things are significant or not based on their own subjective views so it's hard to say what is and is not significant for anyone other than yourself. I do acknowledge that a +1 to damage is not life and death but as I demonstrated it could be considered significant if it means a ton more damage over the course of the trilogy.

    I am arguing because the thread was about improving over a vanilla fighter by mixing the theif class with the fighter class or simply sticking with a fighter kit. Then the FMT got brought up and it became an issue of weather or not a character who sacrifices fighting ability for magic support is the better fighter or not. Since you agreed with wowo and liked what I wrote I assumed you were showing respect for my view but ultimately agreeing with wowo which is why I addressed you in the above quoted part of my post. What makes a fighter better? More hitpoints, better armor class, higher thaco, higher APR, special abilities that cause the most melee damage and of course + to damage which you began arguing was insignificant.

    My point to you was simply that there is no need to argue with lateralus over what you and he consider significant because you each obviously have your own opinion on the matter and neither of you are correct or wrong. You both have opinions that are valid. That is all I was getting at.
  • the_sexteinthe_sextein Member Posts: 711
    edited August 2015
    Francois said:

    Synergy is great and the FMT is probably the most powerful character overall in the game which matters when you are solo.

    I agree with what you say, and FT is my favorite class. And I think FT is still better than FMT in solo. You reach high levels very quickly and UAI makes the mage class obsolete in my opinion.

    Even in a party it can be good to have a character that can be self-reliant, because there are a number of situations where it's good strategy to send just one or two characters and keep the others out of harms way.

    In the end I think the only significant thing is whatever makes you character fun to play.
    I agree mostly. Sometimes when you are solo and a large group of people are coming at you I find it easier to survive by using spells to disable large numbers of enemies so I can focus on a few at a time. For me, having magic protection and the ability to disable enemies is more important than raw damage in a solo environment or under extream conditions brought about by mods. That said UAI and magic items that allow you to cast spells do allow you to cover pretty much everything and still achieve better fighting and faster character progression which is why I prefer the FT as well. You bring up a good point about character progression as well. I think many people choose to down play just how much of a difference it can make if you are leveling up faster and gaining more attacks and higher to hit and damage. It can change the battle very much even more so in a solo run so that is a good point.

    It's nice to see someone who prefers the FT around here. Thanks for sharing your opinion.
  • RAM021RAM021 Member Posts: 403

    Ok I got to admit that I am confused. by "we" I thought you meant you and wowo. If you are referring to yourself as we then WTF dude.

    To clarify, each person will feel that certain things are significant or not based on their own subjective views so it's hard to say what is and is not significant for anyone other than yourself. I do acknowledge that a +1 to damage is not life and death but as I demonstrated it could be considered significant if it means a ton more damage over the course of the trilogy.

    I am arguing because the thread was about improving over a vanilla fighter by mixing the theif class with the fighter class or simply sticking with a fighter kit. Then the FMT got brought up and it became an issue of weather or not a character who sacrifices fighting ability for magic support is the better fighter or not. Since you agreed with wowo and liked what I wrote I assumed you were showing respect for my view but ultimately agreeing with wowo which is why I addressed you in the above quoted part of my post. What makes a fighter better? More hitpoints, better armor class, higher thaco, higher APR, special abilities that cause the most melee damage and of course + to damage which you began arguing was insignificant.

    My point to you was simply that there is no need to argue with lateralus over what you and he consider significant because you each obviously have your own opinion on the matter and neither of you are correct or wrong. You both have opinions that are valid. That is all I was getting at.

    Significant has a pretty specific meaning and yet a post ago you were not arguing :(

    In any event, the thread is actually about Ass2/Ftr vs Berserker. Given that the discussion strayed into multiclass builds, the F/M/T deserves as much consideration as a F/T. Nevertheless we do like early duals!

    You might want to re-read since the only assumptions are being made by you and Lat - who incidentally was that one to inject that the increased STR was very much a significant boon. It simply is not. To further obfuscate the issue by attempting to refute a quantitative difference with a bunch of qualitative suppositions is not helping.

    Finally, this is so not how backstab damage works:

    If I have a+1 to damage and I have improved haste cast on me and then my enemy steps on a timestop trap and I enable the assassination HLA you would have 10 attacks with +1 each and all of them would be X5 damage so that would turn a +1 bonus into 50 points of additional damage in 1 round.

    Not understanding backstab really calls into question the rest of your F/T analysis.

    [(Base damage + Proficiency bonus + item bonus, bard song, etc) x backstabbing multiplier + strength bonus] x critical hit + additional weapon damage

    Thus in your example it would be +10 damage (barring crits). One hopes that 10 damage would not be a significant portion of an Improved Haste Time Stopped Assassinate...
  • the_sexteinthe_sextein Member Posts: 711
    edited August 2015
    Yes and the assassin/fighter is mixing a theif class with a fighter class and comparing it with the bezerker which is sticking with a fighter kit. lateralus brought up the F/T himself and it's his thread. No one said the FMT could not be brought up. I only mentioned that it is an inferior fighter because...it is.

    I was arguing with you not because you think a +1 is insignificant but because the term significant is subjective so the argument was pointless. By all means continue trolling lateralus if you think it is going to get you somewhere other than pissing him off.

    Oh and the calculation mistake regarding backstab. How about this... A +1 damage for every hit in the entire trilogy is a whole bunch of damage. If you fail to see it as significant I am cool with that but some of us see the benefit of a fighter class doing more damage when he fights.

    I think referring to yourself as "we" and then getting all upset with lateralus and I because WE called you out on it calls into question your analysis of the subject but might I digress. One of the failings of the FT is that without innate magical ability I need to be prepared with arrows of acid and fire and unfortunately I am all out at the moment. Good day.
    Post edited by the_sextein on
    FinneousPJ
  • LateralusLateralus Member Posts: 903
    RAM021 said:

    Lateralus said:

    So you have made the assumption that I agree with your previous statement. I do not. I enjoy playing HOFTs for a variety of reasons beyond the initial STR score. Which is still very much a significant boon IMHO.

    Only assumptions here are the ones you are making. If +1 damage is 'significant' you have a very different definition than we do...
    Yes, we do.
    RAM021
  • RAM021RAM021 Member Posts: 403

    Yes and the assassin/fighter is mixing a theif class with a fighter class and comparing it with the bezerker which is sticking with a fighter kit. lateralus brought up the F/T himself and it's his thread. No one said the FMT could not be brought up. I only mentioned that it is an inferior fighter because...it is.

    That MAY be, especially if you restrict the difficulty to Core. Wowo and you both present valid points of view; however, even you concede that the F/M/T pulls ahead under more difficult conditions. Consider IWD's HoF or BG's Nightmare and forthcoming LoB modes. Those are official difficulty settings not requiring 'jacked up insane SCS mods'....

    You argue both that specialization (presumably single class in this meaning) wins and that multiclass is better. Internal consistency certainly helps one's points. Not to mention that the "ultimate middle man" hardly instills thoughts of greatness. In any event, we fell that Wowo has mroe than adequately rebutted your points and presented the case.

    I was arguing with you not because you think a +1 is insignificant but because the term significant is subjective so the argument was pointless. By all means continue trolling lateralus if you think it is going to get you somewhere other than pissing him off.

    Statistically, not significant and insignificant are not synonymous. We like to think that if we were wanting to troll Lat, we would do a better job than arguing with you... We are unsure how to take this backhanded compliment?

    Oh and the calculation mistake regarding backstab. How about this... A +1 damage for every hit in the entire trilogy is a whole bunch of damage. If you fail to see it as significant I am cool with that but some of us see the benefit of a fighter class doing more damage when he fights.

    Is +1 damage every hit across the game a lot of damage? Of course it is. It also pales in comparison to the rest of the damage from every hit, let alone the combined damage of the party. Frankly, your backstab example and singular focus on damage should point out the obvious benefits of a F/M/T's Mislead spell.

    Further, the question we raised was never whether a Ftr would benefit from doing more damage, but rather a combination of whether a HOrc makes the best F/T or is perhaps better suited to a different build.

    I think referring to yourself as "we" and then getting all upset with lateralus and I because WE called you out on it calls into question your analysis of the subject but might I digress. One of the failings of the FT is that without innate magical ability I need to be prepared with arrows of acid and fire and unfortunately I am all out at the moment. Good day.

    It is clear the only one getting upset here is you. Ad hominem is the last refuge of the desperate; had you not stuck your out of joint nose in, Lat and us could have had an interesting debate. Fortunately as part Mage we are lacking in neither the necessary defensive capabilities nor offensive options. Good luck!
  • DeeDee Member Posts: 10,447
    @RAM021 this is the second time in less than a week that I've seen you provoke people with this kind of rhetoric. The "royal we" isn't something you've used historically, so I can assume this is a new thing you're trying, but the result is that your posts are conveying a very disrespectful attitude toward the people you're upsetting. Ad hominem may be the last refuge of the desperate, but arrogance followed by canned phrases like "Ad hominem is the last refuge of the desperate" (again, this is a phrase you've used elsewhere in exactly this context) is the first sign of trolling, and that's something that's very clearly not allowed in the site rules.
    JuliusBorisov
  • WowoWowo Member Posts: 2,064
    @Dee assuming that anyone is upset is a bit strong. Let's say that "we" are mildly amused.
Sign In or Register to comment.