Kitting INTO a dual-class would not be any more overpowered than hundreds of options ALREADY IN THE GAME. I don't see how adding more options and therefore more replay value is a bad thing under any circumstance.
Just try to look on this situation like it was in real life. You can't be the best actor, programmer and sportsman at the same time. You spend your life to be the best in something, but you became weaker in something else. Or you can know anything a little here and here and become fighter/cleric but not kensai/necromancer
If they added in the ability to kit into a dual-class, how would that make your protagonist any better than any other protagonist? I simply meant to point out that your Bhaalspawn already has a billion options to be "OP" as the game will currently ship.
I don't care if I can't be the best at a billion different things in real life. This is a video game, and one in which you literally ascend to god-hood. I don't play fantasy RPGs to be limited like I am in meatlife.
And even without adding this option, I can already be a kensai/mage. I'm not a proponent for making it so you can kit both classes (that is an engine limitation, to the best of my understanding.) I just think it sucks you can be a swashbuckler who dual-classes to cleric, but you can't be a thief who dual-classes to Cleric of Talos. Neither of those is really "overpowered," but one is ALREADY AN OPTION while the other is not.
If they added in the ability to kit into a dual-class, how would that make your protagonist any better than any other protagonist?
A you serious? There is no need for dual or multi classes at all. At highest levels you are already superhuman. I think they should spend their time to give us more new good content
Neither of those is really "overpowered," but one is ALREADY AN OPTION while the other is not.
I think your example with clerics was correct. All clerics must to have specifications, but BG1 haven't kits, so, while they can't add new cleric kits for all deities to BGEE, second class should be simple cleric. All other kits i compare with real life where you can't became superior anywhere you want. I think 3.5 redaction was close to your opinion, but 3.5 has limited statpoints
All other kits i compare with real life where you can't became superior anywhere you want.
That argument really goes to switching from kit to kit, and I buy it.
Why couldn't they allow people 1 kit either on the front or the back end, though? (Unless it is an engine limitation).
That makes much more sense in terms of the real life argument you are making. There have been lots more people who started dabbling in one area of life and then got focused on something and became and expert (like started as a generalist thief wielding a sword through level 9 and then focused on specialty training in that sword as a Kensai) than people who started off as the best in the world at something and then moved to a less focused arena through which they achieved their greatest successes (Kensai at level 7 moves to generalist thief who hits level 30 by the end of TOB). So from a realism point of view:
generalist to specialist
makes more sense than
specialist to generalist
I have no issue with the idea of making kits available on the back end particularly when you recognize that the dual classed character must become more developed in the second character class (i.e., the one we are talking about having the focused or specialty kit) to regain the first classes advantages. Shouldn't the kit be for the class in which the PC has invested more time and experienced and achieved more development?
Are you serious? There is no need for dual or multi classes at all. At highest levels you are already superhuman. I think they should spend their time to give us more new good content
But that option is ALREADY in the game. I dual-class any time I play a human NPC simply because there is no meta-gamey reason to pick human otherwise. (Well, okay, to play Monk or Paladin but if you could be any other race, Humans would be worthless in comparison.) I don't care if I don't need to do it. I want to do it because limitless power is more appealing than intentionally hindering my video game character.
Expanding on a feature LOTS OF PEOPLE use is a good thing. I couldn't care less if YOU PERSONALLY don't ever utilize it because you feel it's overpowered. I like being super powerful. It is not my fault you do not choose to take part in options already a part of character creation.
I don't think the amount of resources it'd take to make it so we could dual-class into a kit would really be all that significant. Make it so if you aren't kitted already, you can choose one upon choosing your new class. BOOM. Done.
I don't think the amount of resources it'd take to make it so we could dual-class into a kit would really be all that significant. Make it so if you aren't kitted already, you can choose one upon choosing your new class. BOOM. Done.
I just tested it and you can already do this with Shadowkeeper so it shouldn't be very difficult.
There really needs to be a poll for this & I'd like to know if it was thought about/done by the EE fellows. I fully support it and the complants I'm hearing seem to be largely from people who don't like dualclassing at all as it stands. Simple solution - don't use them, pretend they don't exist. It's a small feature and one that you won't notice unless you actively pursue it.
It will also offer many more deverse options to charater creation, it certainly won't make previous classes/multiclasses/dualclasses redundant. Shouldn't that be what EE is all about? More choice?
Unfortunately they're still limited to the AD&D ruleset regarding those. No elven paladins or dwarven rangers for us =( I honestly think that is my favorite part of IWD2 in comparison to the BG series.
True, though I'm not looking for a elven paladin or dwarf ranger but you're probably right it's likely to be a limitation. I was always fond of Drow Paladins in IWD2, Deep Gnome Monks were also interesting.
haha yeah, that & mirror image, blur & invisibility. They had huge issues with staff bonus attacks though, don't think any patches fixed it (all the more reason for an EE). Lets not forget that they had natural magic resistance that stacked with their monk magic resistance!
@AHF , @sandmanCCL Guys, you force me to repeat myself. Of course multiclass is an option, and anyone can use it, but BG1 is to weak for this option. But you want them to add another 10 or something overpowered choices. I understand people who want to be much, MUCH more powerfull, but, maybe, let the programmers spend their time for something more usefull for all players, not just little part of them? They don't have rights to change the game and they can't rebalance it. Balance is important part of any game (just look at Blizzard, they spend years to balance game even if they failed this), with BG2 engine we gain more unbalanced BG1. Tonight i'll try dual-wield solo fighter in BG1 to make sure it's to much for the best rpg game.
@sandmanCCL I never undertand people who protect something they don't need. You don't play dual, so, maybe, let people who play speak for themselves?
@AHF , @sandmanCCL Guys, you force me to repeat myself. Of course multiclass is an option, and anyone can use it, but BG1 is to weak for this option. But you want them to add another 10 or something overpowered choices. I understand people who want to be much, MUCH more powerfull, but, maybe, let the programmers spend their time for something more usefull for all players, not just little part of them? They don't have rights to change the game and they can't rebalance it. Balance is important part of any game (just look at Blizzard, they spend years to balance game even if they failed this), with BG2 engine we gain more unbalanced BG1. Tonight i'll try dual-wield solo fighter in BG1 to make sure it's to much for the best rpg game.
Does this in any way relate to your argument objecting to a generalist to kit progression based on realism?
"All other kits i compare with real life where you can't became superior anywhere you want."
I am failing to connect the 10:08 comment (directed to me) to my last post explaining why I think generalist to kit is actually more realistic than kit to generalist. Apologies in advance for my confusion if there is some kind of connection.
If you are objecting to dual-classing on a larger basis of balance and feel that it is abusive to allow dual classing in any form (which seems to be tenor of your 10:08 comment), then that is an entirely different line of discussion from what best reflects reality.
After much thought I have to say I am against allowing the Specialists (kits) to Dual or Multi-class the whole thing that makes them special is that they are focused like a laser beam on their specialty.
After much thought I have to say I am against allowing the Specialists (kits) to Dual or Multi-class the whole thing that makes them special is that they are focused like a laser beam on their specialty.
I get that argument. Starting from the ground up, I agree.
However, it conflicts with one of my basic premises for BGEE which is that they aren't going to take away any of the basic game mechanics such as barring dual classing for kits. Given that premise (that they won't take dual classing away from people starting with kits), it makes more sense to me to allow only one kit on either side of the dual-classing rather than making it so that only people who kit on the front end with the class for which they end up with less focus, less experience and fewer levels can have dual class combos with kits.
@AHF Oh yeah I don't think they are changing that aspect of the game but if they are Im not too worried about it because of my basic philosophy on the whole "Kit" thing.
@AHF Oh yeah I don't think they are changing that aspect of the game but if they are Im not too worried about it because of my basic philosophy on the whole "Kit" thing.
That goes for all of us. My vote would be:
(1) Kits can't dual or multi-class;
(2) If kits can dual class, let them select a kit on either end;
(3) If kits can dual class and you want them only to pick a kit on one end, pick it on the second end so that the end with your kit is the end with more experience, more time and more focus.
@AHF , @sandmanCCL Guys, you force me to repeat myself. Of course multiclass is an option, and anyone can use it, but BG1 is to weak for this option. But you want them to add another 10 or something overpowered choices. I understand people who want to be much, MUCH more powerfull, but, maybe, let the programmers spend their time for something more usefull for all players, not just little part of them? They don't have rights to change the game and they can't rebalance it. Balance is important part of any game (just look at Blizzard, they spend years to balance game even if they failed this), with BG2 engine we gain more unbalanced BG1. Tonight i'll try dual-wield solo fighter in BG1 to make sure it's to much for the best rpg game.
@sandmanCCL I never undertand people who protect something they don't need. You don't play dual, so, maybe, let people who play speak for themselves?
I think there is a language barrier misunderstanding here. What is your native tongue? I doubt I speak it but I live in Southern Utah so there's a good chance I can find some former Mormon Missionary who speaks it.
A lot of what you're saying seems contrary to what I've said.
I don't understand "BG1 is too weak for this option." Say what? Even in vanilla BG1, I'm talking before Tales of the Sword Coast, dual-classing is considered by a lot of players to be "overpowered." That was pre-kits, and the level cap was only 89k.
I've gone through BGtutu with a swashbuckler dual-classed to mage before. He was a little more durable than a typical mage would have been but you're forced to abandon your kit at like 6 or 7, so most kits barely gain any bonuses to anything. A lot of the "truly overpowered" dual-class builds for end-game Throne of Bhaal are actually bad ideas for BG1. Kensai/mage, for example, doesn't gain enough kensai levels to justify not being able to use robes and bracers over a simple fighter/mage.
I also don't understand where you get the idea they don't have the rights to change the game and rebalance it. They can't alter content already in the game, meaning they aren't allowed to tweak NPC stats or alter conversations of those said characters, but they have the creative writes to change the rest of the game as they see fit to my understanding. They just aren't going to alter much, instead favoring bug fixes because "if it ain't broke, don't fix it."
Lastly dual-wielding is not that great for BG1. You have to spend at least 2 pips in it to make it worthwhile for a new character, and even then your off-hand swings at -4 penalty. Yeah okay you get an extra attack per round, but it won't hit very often and you're going to suffer a huge AC penalty over a dude using a shield. Even end-game BG1, AC >>>>>>>> attacks per round. There aren't a lot of weapons in BG1 that grant bonuses simply for having them equipped, either. That's the biggest strength of DW in BG2; a bunch of weapons are arguably better than shields from a defensive stand point.
Final thing: I don't understand people who attack something that doesn't hurt them, by the same token. Besides, I don't know where you got the idea I don't dual-wield. If they made it so the kit was on the back end of your dual-class, I'd make a fighter/swashbuckler as my first guy guaranteed.
I am failing to connect the 10:08 comment (directed to me) to my last post explaining why I think generalist to kit is actually more realistic than kit to generalist.
@AHF I think the kit is the path of the live of some person. Here is example: you are young and you like firetrucks. You became firefighter and evolve in fighter class with firefighter kit, but then, when you reach age 37 you realise you want to be an actor. Of course you can became an actor, and you even could be famous actor, but you can't became George Clooney kit actor : )
If you are objecting to dual-classing on a larger basis of balance and feel that it is abusive to allow dual classing in any form (which seems to be tenor of your 10:08 comment), then that is an entirely different line of discussion from what best reflects reality.
My main aim is the balance, but disbalanced dual-class already exist, and there are people who want more disbalanced dual-classes, so, i try to make this people look on this "new" classes with real-life comparison. They don't care about balance and real-life, i understand it ) So, appears the third line of discussion - Time of the team, let them spend it on something more usefull
@AHF Oh yeah I don't think they are changing that aspect of the game but if they are Im not too worried about it because of my basic philosophy on the whole "Kit" thing.
That's what i talkin' about! The kit is the only way. Thank you!
I think there is a language barrier misunderstanding here. What is your native tongue? I doubt I speak it but I live in Southern Utah so there's a good chance I can find some former Mormon Missionary who speaks it.
I don't understand "BG1 is too weak for this option." Say what? Even in vanilla BG1, I'm talking before Tales of the Sword Coast, dual-classing is considered by a lot of players to be "overpowered." That was pre-kits, and the level cap was only 89k.
That's it. They are already overpowered. BG don't need another pack of this monsters
I just mentioned dual-wielding as one of the BG2 options which we can use in BGEE (the kits is another). I tryed this option yesterday solo fighter BGT, and, after few hours, i reach Davaeorn. The only problem were adventurers at basilisk area. Almost all monsters have 30 or lesser hp, so, you chop them with two or three hits. Mages have only one spell versus melee attackers - mirror image (second level spell, wich name i don't remember). Plus one attack is very strong against them. I don't know how they change this option, but BGT gives me 4 stars (2 for DW and 2 for LS). It gives me, i think, -2 for second hand.
My main aim is the balance, but disbalanced dual-class already exist, and there are people who want more disbalanced dual-classes, so, i try to make this people look on this "new" classes with real-life comparison.
In that context, I don't see how anyone could object to having one dual class on the back end. To use your example, someone who spends 3 years as a firefighter and then dedicates himself as an artist for 20 years should have their "kit" on the 20 year side not on the first end. Unlike real life, in BG you can only have 2 classes and you must have higher levels in the second class to be a meaningful dual-class. Therefore, having the option to kit on the back end rather than the front makes much more sense from the perspective of your real-life comparison.
@Candramelekh: I wasn't making a joke. I think my friend John served his mission in Russia.
I didn't think you were attacking ME, btw. I simply meant your stance here.
2 pips in dual-wielding means no penalty to your main hand and -4 thac0 to your offhand. A third pip lowers the off-hand thac0 to -2.
It seems to me this comes down to an inherent disagreement with video game philosophy. You want balance in a game where there really is no need for it. The challenge for a gamer in the BG franchise is and always will be self-induced. I can't think of a single situation in the entire game, in the entire series, which cannot be overcome easily through use of tactics.
I just don't understand the desire to limit what other players want to do out of your own sense of morality. You've already admitted you don't use many player options because you feel they are too powerful and make the game easy. If this feature was added, you still wouldn't use it. And many players would. It's a single player RPG at heart.
Do you somehow feel cheated out of the gameplay experience if someone else had an easier time because they used tactics or builds you felt were too powerful?
At the very least, I think multi-class characters should be able to have one kit. If dual-class can do it, multi-class should be able to do it as well. It wouldn't be terribly unbalancing because a Kensai/Mage still wouldn't be nearly as good as a Kensai->Mage, and it would still leave Gnomes with an advantage (anyone could be a Kensai/Mage, but only Gnomes could be a Kensai/Illusionist).
People say multi-class is OP, but in all honesty, in a lot of cases I even find pure class preferable to multi-class. The only exception is early on in BG1, but to be honest, the massive XP hit multi-class characters have to take doesn't really justify it.
Everything a multiclass can do, a dual-class can do better. The only exception to that is Cleric/Mage, and in my opinion, that's not a very good class, as it relies on level progression to be powerful, and slow level progression = not much power.
Same deal with F/M/T or F/M/C - two extraordinarily powerful classes on paper, but in practice? They level waaaay too slowly to be anything but rubbish beyond the first couple of levels. You'll probably be able to start casting Fireballs at around the time you get to Athkatla.
So give multiclasses some love, and let them take a kit like dualclasses can.
Dual wield isn't overpowered, just powerful & very common. I gotta disagree that 'it wasn't that great in BG1' because the extra attack makes a big difference. But, especially when you compare it to missile combat, it's not that ridiculous. I do wish two-handed weapon style and sword-and-shield style were more competitive with this style.
Am I the only one who wishes that Sword and Shield style just added like...1 flat AC point? That would be pretty cool.
@Silence I don't know about that, using a shield is bonus enough by itself in my mind. Two-weapon fighting is fantastic but ultimately come TOB epic ablilities a sword & shield fighter can have as many attacks as a dual wielder by activating whirlwind (it's the same with two handed weapons like the ravager). Alot of shields aside from hefty AC bonuses give you additional bonuses as well.
I always have my fighter/mage & fighter/thief multis dual wielding but I'd never have my cleric/ranger do it, the flail of ages and a shield everytime. Makes you an insane tank.
Also if sword and shield did give you another AC point it'd make single weapon style look less appealing.
@Isair: I avoid ToB when it comes to balance discussions about BG1 + BG2. Epic abilities (whirlwind, use any item, spike trap) all border on game-breaking and that's part of the fun.
Sword and Shield does grant extra AC already (+ to missile attacks), so the suggestion isn't unreasonable in my mind to make it a flat AC bonus. This would give BG the 'tank' weapon style which the game is currently lacking. But I can just see someone saying "this is not WoW" to that (for the record, never played WoW).
As for Single weapon style, it'll still be awesome for thieves, who are usually the only ones who take it. The reason is that thieves cannot use shields anyway.
Comments
@Isair Yes, now i get it ) It's hard to understand true meaning when english is not your main language
If they added in the ability to kit into a dual-class, how would that make your protagonist any better than any other protagonist? I simply meant to point out that your Bhaalspawn already has a billion options to be "OP" as the game will currently ship.
I don't care if I can't be the best at a billion different things in real life. This is a video game, and one in which you literally ascend to god-hood. I don't play fantasy RPGs to be limited like I am in meatlife.
And even without adding this option, I can already be a kensai/mage. I'm not a proponent for making it so you can kit both classes (that is an engine limitation, to the best of my understanding.) I just think it sucks you can be a swashbuckler who dual-classes to cleric, but you can't be a thief who dual-classes to Cleric of Talos. Neither of those is really "overpowered," but one is ALREADY AN OPTION while the other is not.
Why couldn't they allow people 1 kit either on the front or the back end, though? (Unless it is an engine limitation).
That makes much more sense in terms of the real life argument you are making. There have been lots more people who started dabbling in one area of life and then got focused on something and became and expert (like started as a generalist thief wielding a sword through level 9 and then focused on specialty training in that sword as a Kensai) than people who started off as the best in the world at something and then moved to a less focused arena through which they achieved their greatest successes (Kensai at level 7 moves to generalist thief who hits level 30 by the end of TOB). So from a realism point of view:
generalist to specialist
makes more sense than
specialist to generalist
I have no issue with the idea of making kits available on the back end particularly when you recognize that the dual classed character must become more developed in the second character class (i.e., the one we are talking about having the focused or specialty kit) to regain the first classes advantages. Shouldn't the kit be for the class in which the PC has invested more time and experienced and achieved more development?
Expanding on a feature LOTS OF PEOPLE use is a good thing. I couldn't care less if YOU PERSONALLY don't ever utilize it because you feel it's overpowered. I like being super powerful. It is not my fault you do not choose to take part in options already a part of character creation.
I don't think the amount of resources it'd take to make it so we could dual-class into a kit would really be all that significant. Make it so if you aren't kitted already, you can choose one upon choosing your new class. BOOM. Done.
I fully support it and the complants I'm hearing seem to be largely from people who don't like dualclassing at all as it stands. Simple solution - don't use them, pretend they don't exist. It's a small feature and one that you won't notice unless you actively pursue it.
It will also offer many more deverse options to charater creation, it certainly won't make previous classes/multiclasses/dualclasses redundant. Shouldn't that be what EE is all about? More choice?
Unfortunately they're still limited to the AD&D ruleset regarding those. No elven paladins or dwarven rangers for us =( I honestly think that is my favorite part of IWD2 in comparison to the BG series.
Anyway, maybe my first character will be a hacked guy. Always wanted to be a Dwarf Cavalier through BG1 named some Dwarven pun take on Don Quixote.
Guys, you force me to repeat myself. Of course multiclass is an option, and anyone can use it, but BG1 is to weak for this option. But you want them to add another 10 or something overpowered choices. I understand people who want to be much, MUCH more powerfull, but, maybe, let the programmers spend their time for something more usefull for all players, not just little part of them? They don't have rights to change the game and they can't rebalance it. Balance is important part of any game (just look at Blizzard, they spend years to balance game even if they failed this), with BG2 engine we gain more unbalanced BG1. Tonight i'll try dual-wield solo fighter in BG1 to make sure it's to much for the best rpg game.
@sandmanCCL
I never undertand people who protect something they don't need. You don't play dual, so, maybe, let people who play speak for themselves?
"All other kits i compare with real life where you can't became superior anywhere you want."
I am failing to connect the 10:08 comment (directed to me) to my last post explaining why I think generalist to kit is actually more realistic than kit to generalist. Apologies in advance for my confusion if there is some kind of connection.
If you are objecting to dual-classing on a larger basis of balance and feel that it is abusive to allow dual classing in any form (which seems to be tenor of your 10:08 comment), then that is an entirely different line of discussion from what best reflects reality.
However, it conflicts with one of my basic premises for BGEE which is that they aren't going to take away any of the basic game mechanics such as barring dual classing for kits. Given that premise (that they won't take dual classing away from people starting with kits), it makes more sense to me to allow only one kit on either side of the dual-classing rather than making it so that only people who kit on the front end with the class for which they end up with less focus, less experience and fewer levels can have dual class combos with kits.
Oh yeah I don't think they are changing that aspect of the game but if they are Im not too worried about it because of my basic philosophy on the whole "Kit" thing.
(1) Kits can't dual or multi-class;
(2) If kits can dual class, let them select a kit on either end;
(3) If kits can dual class and you want them only to pick a kit on one end, pick it on the second end so that the end with your kit is the end with more experience, more time and more focus.
A lot of what you're saying seems contrary to what I've said.
I don't understand "BG1 is too weak for this option." Say what? Even in vanilla BG1, I'm talking before Tales of the Sword Coast, dual-classing is considered by a lot of players to be "overpowered." That was pre-kits, and the level cap was only 89k.
I've gone through BGtutu with a swashbuckler dual-classed to mage before. He was a little more durable than a typical mage would have been but you're forced to abandon your kit at like 6 or 7, so most kits barely gain any bonuses to anything. A lot of the "truly overpowered" dual-class builds for end-game Throne of Bhaal are actually bad ideas for BG1. Kensai/mage, for example, doesn't gain enough kensai levels to justify not being able to use robes and bracers over a simple fighter/mage.
I also don't understand where you get the idea they don't have the rights to change the game and rebalance it. They can't alter content already in the game, meaning they aren't allowed to tweak NPC stats or alter conversations of those said characters, but they have the creative writes to change the rest of the game as they see fit to my understanding. They just aren't going to alter much, instead favoring bug fixes because "if it ain't broke, don't fix it."
Lastly dual-wielding is not that great for BG1. You have to spend at least 2 pips in it to make it worthwhile for a new character, and even then your off-hand swings at -4 penalty. Yeah okay you get an extra attack per round, but it won't hit very often and you're going to suffer a huge AC penalty over a dude using a shield. Even end-game BG1, AC >>>>>>>> attacks per round. There aren't a lot of weapons in BG1 that grant bonuses simply for having them equipped, either. That's the biggest strength of DW in BG2; a bunch of weapons are arguably better than shields from a defensive stand point.
Final thing: I don't understand people who attack something that doesn't hurt them, by the same token. Besides, I don't know where you got the idea I don't dual-wield. If they made it so the kit was on the back end of your dual-class, I'd make a fighter/swashbuckler as my first guy guaranteed.
I didn't think you were attacking ME, btw. I simply meant your stance here.
2 pips in dual-wielding means no penalty to your main hand and -4 thac0 to your offhand. A third pip lowers the off-hand thac0 to -2.
It seems to me this comes down to an inherent disagreement with video game philosophy. You want balance in a game where there really is no need for it. The challenge for a gamer in the BG franchise is and always will be self-induced. I can't think of a single situation in the entire game, in the entire series, which cannot be overcome easily through use of tactics.
I just don't understand the desire to limit what other players want to do out of your own sense of morality. You've already admitted you don't use many player options because you feel they are too powerful and make the game easy. If this feature was added, you still wouldn't use it. And many players would. It's a single player RPG at heart.
Do you somehow feel cheated out of the gameplay experience if someone else had an easier time because they used tactics or builds you felt were too powerful?
People say multi-class is OP, but in all honesty, in a lot of cases I even find pure class preferable to multi-class. The only exception is early on in BG1, but to be honest, the massive XP hit multi-class characters have to take doesn't really justify it.
Everything a multiclass can do, a dual-class can do better. The only exception to that is Cleric/Mage, and in my opinion, that's not a very good class, as it relies on level progression to be powerful, and slow level progression = not much power.
Same deal with F/M/T or F/M/C - two extraordinarily powerful classes on paper, but in practice? They level waaaay too slowly to be anything but rubbish beyond the first couple of levels. You'll probably be able to start casting Fireballs at around the time you get to Athkatla.
So give multiclasses some love, and let them take a kit like dualclasses can.
They'd have to rework the game's code to change that up.
Am I the only one who wishes that Sword and Shield style just added like...1 flat AC point? That would be pretty cool.
I always have my fighter/mage & fighter/thief multis dual wielding but I'd never have my cleric/ranger do it, the flail of ages and a shield everytime. Makes you an insane tank.
Also if sword and shield did give you another AC point it'd make single weapon style look less appealing.
Sword and Shield does grant extra AC already (+ to missile attacks), so the suggestion isn't unreasonable in my mind to make it a flat AC bonus. This would give BG the 'tank' weapon style which the game is currently lacking. But I can just see someone saying "this is not WoW" to that (for the record, never played WoW).
As for Single weapon style, it'll still be awesome for thieves, who are usually the only ones who take it. The reason is that thieves cannot use shields anyway.