replacing my paladin

Kneller

I built a Cavalier on the concept that Charname grew up in Candlekeep reading stories about knights and whatnot and that's what started him out. I like the functionality of the class. It's a strong face man, stellar front liner, but has some specials to keep him interesting (spell casting, protection from evil, turn undead, etc.). That's a lot of awesome in a single class (which I prefer over dual or multi-class, especially cheese like kensages)

However, I can't keep playing him. Having to side with either the Shadow Thieves or Vampires just doesn't work for a knight-in-shining-armor type. In my interpretation of LG, a paladin would not work with either group. It just breaks immersion for me having to choose. Not to mention, there are just too many quests in the game that require you to be kinda shady, and I don't want to miss out on the XP.

So, I have to figure out a replacement. Being a strong face man just means having high charisma or using that ring, so that's not a major factor. However, I don't know too many other classes that can tank as well and has some decent specials.

What I've considered so far:

I had been considering a dualed fighter/cleric, but I'm concerned he won't be strong enough. I mean, sure, I can buff up to be uber before a battle, but a single dispel magic could end all that. Not to mention, my THAC0 would be significantly lacking.

I could multi a fighter/cleric, but would only do it if I limited myself to a four person party. I would also want that party to be Minsc, Jah, and Yoshi->Imoen. However, this would mean going quite a while without a mage until I get back Imoen. I'm not sure how viable that is.

I could just do a straight Ranger. Has some specials like the paladin, but there are no good kits for this and he is significantly weaker (no bonus to saves, no prot. evil, etc.). I mean, sure, Minsc is no slouch, but I think a halfway decent paladin could take him any day.

And that's all I have so far. Any thoughts?

Philhelm

@Kneller A bit late, but nobody has answered and I find it an interesting topic.

I think that Paladins are a controversial class when it comes to their code of conduct; give me ten different people and I will end up with ten different versions of the Paladin. Regardless, I think that the purist stance (i.e. a Paladin is always perfect in word, thought, and deed, and will never compromise when forced into an ambiguous situation) is a bit off, since there is no way a such Paladin could exist in a complex world. Being a Paladin isn't about being perfect, but being an active force of good and righteousness.

I think that what matters most is how they handle an ambiguous situation. Sometimes the only options in life are bad and worse, but the Paladin, above all others, will ensure that ultimately good is done and that the innocent are not harmed. Of course, the Paladin will have a threshold as to what he will tolerate, and will ultimately make a stand if push comes to shove. Keep in mind that Paladin's are supposed to have a high Wisdom (minimum 13), so the idea that they would tilt at every windmill in sight (like Minsc) doesn't hold water. Sometimes they will need to be discerning about when and how they deal with the lesser evils.

So, while Keldorn will complain about the Shadow Thieves, he will leave the party if you side with Bodhi, since Bodhi represents evil on a tangible level. Even while doing the "shady" quests, there are opportunities to protect the innocent from harm and to right wrongs. Also, consider that the first quest given by the Order of the Radiant Heart is to attempt to join and infiltrate a group of fallen Paladins, so the Order is apparently not above deceit if the cause is just.

Also, a Paladin need not be a knight and shining armor, although that is the primary archetype. In Neverwinter Nights, I once made a high Dexterity Paladin that wore leather armor and used a crossbow (I fancied him as a Simon Belmont style undead hunter). Paladins can use all weapons and armor, after all. Granted, the knight and shining armor style seems to be what you were aiming for.

Regarding alternative classes, your best bet is probably a Fighter/Cleric of some sort. Even a dual class Fighter 7/Cleric 39 would end up with grandmastery and an extra 1/2 APR (for a total of 5/2 APR), a lot more Cleric spells, and a higher turn undead level. Of course you would be restricted to blunt weapons and couldn't use Carsomyr. Overall, I think the closest approximation to the Paladin would be a Cleric (or Priest of Lathander) dual classed to Fighter. You would have more spells at a lower casting level, a lower turn undead level, but would be able to get Fighter HLAs and grandmastery, as well as the Fighter stronghold.

erronius

I don't want to give you roleplaying advice because I don't RP, and it's for each person to decide anyway. If you want something in the fighter/cleric type area, my three recommendations are:

Cleric/Ranger multiclass - one of the strongest multiclass options in the unmodded game, if not the strongest (barring things like F/M/T at the *very* end of the game I have to say it is the top multiclass). You will be a very strong melee character - I have this character use Crom Faeyr (SP?) in the offhand with Runehammer or Flail of the Ages mainhand, depending on whether I need Negative Plane protection or Free Action + Damage. You get your HLAs super early, before the rest of the party. It's like, unfairly early for some reason (though this may have been changed in EE). And you'll be a solid divine caster with access to all cleric + druid spells (including Iron Skins). Alternatively I've heard good things about Ranger->Cleric dualclass but don't ask me when. I recommend Dragon as your racial enemy, it's a nice boost when you need it most.

Berserker(9ish)->Cleric - not my personal favorite but it definitely works, you can go the same weapon setup or just focus on Warhammer/Flail (more incentive to focus on 1 weapon type because of Grand Mastery potential). If you want a few extra pips, wait till later to dual over.

Shapeshifter (with BG2 tweakpack Shapeshifter Rebalancing http://www.gibberlings3.net/bg2tweaks/content.php) Basically what you're getting here is a super tanky Druid. His melee capabilities will be impressive at the beginning of the game, and for a while after you hit lvl 13 and get Greater Werewolf form. But even into late TOB when you're missing the GWWs of real fighters, you are still super-tank. Recommended with Tactics, it is a little IMBA in the default game.

With regard to the idea of starting as a Cleric and dualing to a fighter, this is a terrible idea from a powergaming perspective. You never want to dualclass out of a caster class. If it suits your RP needs though, don't let me stop you.

Philhelm

erronius said:

With regard to the idea of starting as a Cleric and dualing to a fighter, this is a terrible idea from a powergaming perspective. You never want to dualclass out of a caster class. If it suits your RP needs though, don't let me stop you.

This is a commonly held belief that I think is somewhat untrue, unless we are going to assert that taking any mundane pure class is a terrible idea. For hardcore power gamers, that may well hold true, but people have been able to solo the game with all of the character classes, even the Wizard Slayer.

I judge dual class characters from the perspective of the second chosen class. Compared to a level 34 Fighter, even a dual classed Mage 2/Fighter 33 is superior. This character would obviously want to wear armor, so couldn't cast in battle, but would be able to have a familiar, perhaps identify some items between quests, and could use scrolls, wands, and items normally reserved for Mages. The Cleric 2/Fighter 33 could cast spells such as Sanctuary, Protection from Evil, etc., all for the expense of one Fighter level. Fighter HLAs would also be available to both characters.

erronius

If you think a Mage 2->Fighter 33 is better than a Fighter 34 you are either very confused, or using mods that you haven't explained. Dual classing eliminates the possibility of selecting a kit, which is a huge loss in power. A 34th Level Kensai would have... +11 damage/to hit? Or if you don't like that the Kensai can't wear armor, a Berserker who gets the amazingly useful Berserk ability that blocks basically every negative status including imprisonment... Giving up on a Kit for first level mage spells is not a good idea at all.

Casters really don't become all that effective at much of anything until they get at *least* third level spells, so character level 5-6. At this point, Arcane gets Fireball, Haste, and a couple summons, and Divine gets Dispel Magic, Holy Rain or whatever that spell is called, Glyph of Warding.

Also the other problem with dualing from Mage to Fighter is the way the game rolls your hit points. At levels 1-9 for Fighters (and I think it's 1-10 for mages, but the point is the same) you get up to a full hit die of HP (4 for mage, 10 for figher). After that you just get about 2hp per level plus your Con bonus. So if you take mage levels early you will be missing out on higher Max Hp. Even if you don't use the "Always Max HP rolls", it's still a lower range. On a 1d4 roll you'll average 2.5, on a 1d10 roll you'll average 5.5.

illathid

@erronius
I don't believe cleric/rangers get the full Druid spell list in 2.0 anymore.

Philhelm

@erronius A Mage 2/Fighter 33 is better than a Fighter 34. I never said anything about Kensais or Berserkers. Obviously, if you want the benefits of the Kensai or Berserker kits, then you would have to start as a Kensai or Berserker. I'm not here to argue that, nor am I here to argue about the most powerful class combinations. Some people do play vanilla Fighters, believe it or not, so from that perspective, taking a few caster levels before dual classing to Fighter isn't as woeful as you make it out to be.

There are different ways to play the game, and not everyone wants to play as a Kensai/Mage, Berserker/Cleric, etc. How about, say, a Priest of Lathander 11/Thief 39 (or whatever the cap would be)? You could backstab with quarterstaffs (Staff of the Ram) and improve the backstab damage with spells such as Righteous Magic and DUHM (lesser bonus than a high level Cleric, but a bonus nonetheless). You could also abuse Sanctuary in order to steal without consequence, and would have two Boons of Lathander, as well as a lot of added utility. It's a viable build that is stronger than a pure Thief, even if it's not a Berserker/Cleric, and is far from your suggestion that it is always a terrible idea to dual out of a caster class.

Please note that I don't disagree with you regarding the power of certain builds. I disagree with you that it is always a terrible idea to dual out of a caster class. If pure, vanilla classes are viable (which they are), then builds that are essentially a pure vanilla class with some extras are also viable. Further, I find unorthodox builds to be entertaining as they present new ways to play the game and can provide unexpected results.

Diomedes33

I personally havent made a dual Fighter/Cleric but I do take Anomen in most of my parties hes a Fighter7/Cleric and also one of my most powerful characters. He can tank, heal, debuff and summon.

On the RP side, its been a while since my RP days but are there not Paladins of Helm? Helm is true neutral so your character siding with the shadow thieves could be viewed as keeping the balance by opposing Bodhi, who is obviously winning the war.

erronius

A Mage2/Fighter 33 would be missing out on (with 18 con) 16 hit points. They wouldn't be able to cast spells during combat, unless you are going to forgo armor for some reason. And in exchange, they get... 2 1st level spells. Great trade? If this is your main character, I suppose you can make up for the HP with familiar.

Look I'm not saying that you can't beat the game, or enjoy the game, or whatever with things like a Priest of Lathander 11/Thief 39. It's just not very good. It's extremely sub-optimal to dual-class out of a caster class, in terms of power. In this case, you'd end up with not all that much divine power (you'd end up with a single 6th level spell and only 2 5th level spells) in exchange for missing out on a thief kit. Vanilla classes *aren't* very good for power reasons, true fact. If you're playing an unkitted non-multi non-dual classed character (like a pure Thief) sorry, but again, from a "power" perspective you're doing it wrong. If you don't care for backstabbing, you go with Swashbuckler and get huge AC/to hit bonuses by the end of the game, as well as WW attack. If you love to Backstab, the Assassin's multiplier goes to I think 7.

Again, everyone is free to play the game how they choose, RP, not RP, powergaming, or not. But in terms of "what's strongest" the answer is not "any old combination". Some things work and some things don't.

EDIT: I don't claim to be the final sole arbiter of all the strongest builds. However, I have spent quite a lot of time comparing various builds and strategies. When I was referring to what "works" just above, I meant what works best. The test is "does this build work better for what it does than all available alternatives". And the answer for a Priest of Lathander->Thief (in my opinion at least) is a resounding no.

illathid

Diomedes33 said:

I personally havent made a dual Fighter/Cleric but I do take Anomen in most of my parties hes a Fighter7/Cleric and also one of my most powerful characters. He can tank, heal, debuff and summon.

On the RP side, its been a while since my RP days but are there not Paladins of Helm? Helm is true neutral so your character siding with the shadow thieves could be viewed as keeping the balance by opposing Bodhi, who is obviously winning the war.

Helm is lawful neutral.

Diomedes33

illathid said:

Diomedes33 said:

I personally havent made a dual Fighter/Cleric but I do take Anomen in most of my parties hes a Fighter7/Cleric and also one of my most powerful characters. He can tank, heal, debuff and summon.

On the RP side, its been a while since my RP days but are there not Paladins of Helm? Helm is true neutral so your character siding with the shadow thieves could be viewed as keeping the balance by opposing Bodhi, who is obviously winning the war.

Helm is lawful neutral.

Even better for this example.

Jaheiras_Witness

The point of mage 2/fighter is not 2 level 1 spells, it is the ability to use all mage items, particularly scrolls. The character would play as a fighter in every respect, he would wear armour (doesn't stop you using scrolls), except he can use scrolls to do things the pure fighter cannot even dream of. In every respect, a mage 2/fighter would destroy even a Fighter 40 and it isn't even a contest.

What you forgo in such a build is just two things: kit and race. You don't even miss out on HPs since your familar gets you +24 HPs in ToB.

Philhelm

Jaheiras_Witness said:

The point of mage 2/fighter is not 2 level 1 spells, it is the ability to use all mage items, particularly scrolls. The character would play as a fighter in every respect, he would wear armour (doesn't stop you using scrolls), except he can use scrolls to do things the pure fighter cannot even dream of. In every respect, a mage 2/fighter would destroy even a Fighter 40 and it isn't even a contest.

What you forgo in such a build is just two things: kit and race. You don't even miss out on HPs since your familar gets you +24 HPs in ToB.

@Jaheiras_Witness Precisely. I even tried to explain that above. The actual spell slots are irrelevant. After casting Find Familiar to make up for lost HP, I'd probably just fill my slots with Identify and use it between battles. For one measly Fighter level, you would end up with a medium version of Use Any Item, but still be able to take Fighter HLAs.

@erronius You're pretty much preaching to the choir when it comes to the power of certain dual class builds, which isn't something that I am contesting. Again, I am only responding to your assertion that it is never acceptable to dual from a casting class.** It's still an improvement from a pure class version of the second class.

**Priest of Lathander/Mage

moody_mage

Mage 2/Fighter X could do the following;

• Identify items
  
• Cast from Scrolls (Timestop/Shapechange etc..)
  
• Use Wands (Spellstrike/Cursing/Cloudkill/Fire etc...
  
• Pickpocket/Remove traps via familiar (and corresponding alignment)
  
• Use Fighter levels to get Grandmastery in Staff and then use Staff of the Magi to be the most annoying opponent ever
  
• And more I'm sure
  

It's almost like a new kit in itself.

erronius

Interesting points.

A correction before I delve into anything else - I didn't say it was "never acceptable". I said from a powergaming min/max perspective, it is never optimal.

I did not consider the ability to use scrolls; I generally do not use much in the way of Wands/Scrolls/Potions (other than healing) unless absolutely needed (just my playstyle, and in general, you really don't need them. The default game is already pretty easy). However, they *are* of limited use, by definition.

But again, if we're going to debate what's optimal, how does your Mage 2 /Fighter X compare?

Vs. F/M/T : A F/M/T will eventually reach 18/17/22, get Use Any Item (and all of the crazy good stuff that comes with), and be able to cast up to 8th level mage spells. Because THAC0 stops improving at I believe 22, his THAC0 won't be much lower than a single-classed fighter. HP wise I haven't done the math, but assume he will end up a bit lower than the Mage 2 /Fighter X. He'll also have plenty of thieving skills and lots of HLAs (not sure if it's more than the Mage2/Fighter X but it's a lot). Yes, it will take him a LOT longer to be as good of a fighter, but he will have actual magic skills (not just reading from scrolls) and thieving skills to make up for it. You are not that heavily invested in your mageness, so if you want to wear armor until you get the Aslyferund, you can. With Stoneskin/Protection from Magic Weapons (that you can actually use in every fight if you need, since they aren't on scrolls) his defenses will be substantially better. If you don't like how slow he levels up...

Interjection: Yes, all of these multiclass characters will (to my mind unfairly) lose out on Grandmastery - but the advantages are just not that big in BG2 anymore.

Vs. F/T or F/M: Either of these will level faster and be able to make use of Staff of the Archmage. Fighter/Mage Reaches Fighter 24 and Mage 20, allowing 9th level spells. The F/T reaches Fighter 24 and Thief 28. The F/T will be able to use scrolls if that's what you're looking for - but again, he gets UAI so he can also use Carsomyr, or Paladin Bracers, Staff of the Archmage, Wondrous Gloves, whatever. I generally prefer the Fighter (Either Kensai or Berserker) dual classed to a mage than a multiclass F/M, but the multiclass does get access to fighter HLAs including GWW, so you take the good with the bad.

Fact of the matter is, the (unmodded) game really does not reward you for playing single-classed characters. In terms of power, you only do that if that's your only option (Monk, Paladin, Sorcerer). Most classes stop gaining much in the mid 20s (THAC0 stops improving, you don't get more spells per day - your spells are generally "powerful enough" i.e. anything based on level has capped out, or durations are super long).

moody_mage

@erronius Agreed that a fully levelled FMT or even F/M is a top tier character in terms of relative power. My comparison was more to illustrate that a Mage 2/Fighter 33 would actually be better than a Fighter 34 build simply due to the extra versatility it would bring to the table. Admittedly though the early levels would be tougher - 18 STR vs 18/xx STR makes a big difference.

erronius

I can concede the point that a Human Mage 2/Fighter 33 would be somewhat stronger than a Human Fighter 34 with no Kit. Kinda misses the point though - it's also stronger than an Archer who only uses melee weapons, or to take a less extreme example, an Assassin who rarely uses backstab. Is it the best option or one of the stronger options for the role it fills? Not even close, at least in my opinion. And I've provided some good reasons for that opinion.

EDIT: @Philhelm Priest of Lathandar/Mage dual class idea - not sure why you would do this. A multiclass cleric/mage will accrue similar casting potential without losing their cleric powers for a huge part of the game. None of the caster kits make this option attractive enough. Again, inherent problem with dual classing out of a caster class; you don't gain big enough benefits unless you sink a huge number of levels in, (like 18) and at that point it takes you forever to get those powers back.

Philhelm

@erronius I haven't actually played the Cleric/Mage dual build, but I recall reading another thread about its performance. Regardless, the downside of the multiclass Cleric/Mage is that you will sacrifice something like eleven Mage levels, as opposed to, say, two mage levels for a Priest of Lathander 11* > Mage 29.

The level 11 PoL will allow for two Boons of Lathander, conferring +2 APR, -2 Thac0, +2 damage, and +2 saves for one minute and six seconds. Of course, the Cleric casting levels will be lower than the multiclass version, but who cares? For such a build, I'd prefer a higher Mage casting level than a higher Cleric casting level.

Also, the Mage 2/Fighter 33 wouldn't be just somewhat stronger than a Fighter 34, since the former would be able to pull off all sorts of shenanigans thanks to the Mage levels. I would even rate it higher than a Berserker or Kensai pure class. With a decent inventory of wands and scrolls, the build is simply capable of so much more.

Finally, and again, I'm not arguing against the power of top tier builds. The game is twenty years old, and we all know what they are. The core of my position is that I think you are too dismissive of perfectly viable builds just because they aren't top tier. As a rule of thumb, I agree that it is better to dual into the casting class, but I wouldn't always consider it a terrible idea.

Tying back to the OP, I would imagine that even a Priest of Lathander 11/Fighter X just might be better than a Paladin anyway. Dual wielding Crom Faeyr and the Flail of Ages with Grandmastery, the Gauntlets of Extraordinary Weapon Specialization, and +2 temporary APR doesn't come off as weak to me. It would also be able to take Fighter HLAs, unlike the Berserker/Cleric.