Is there a problem with using a mod for this? Nothing has changed. It's just organized differently. Barbarians were always fighter kits. I fail to see why the simple act of changing how the class is selected during character creation now means that it must be required to edit:be allowed to dual-class. Rangers can dual, but not all of the ranger kits can.
If you want to dual your barbarian, use this mod. It is one of the most stable and tested mods for BG.
Really it simply is a matter of description, if Barbarian is meant not to dual and selected as a fighter kit, the only thing is to add a "cannot dual class" line in the kit features.
By the way, I am not too sure what you mean about ranger kits not being able to dual. I cannot remember how it used to be in vanilla but definitely all ranger kit can dual now
If barbarian is going to be treated as a kit, he should be able to dual. But thats just my opinion about the matter. I doubt it would create balance problems. Then again I won't lose my sleep over it if currents are mechanics are kept.
Is there a problem with using a mod for this? Nothing has changed. It's just organized differently. Barbarians were always fighter kits. I fail to see why the simple act of changing how the class is selected during character creation now means that it must be required to edit:be allowed to dual-class. Rangers can dual, but not all of the ranger kits can.
If you want to dual your barbarian, use this mod. It is one of the most stable and tested mods for BG.
Really it simply is a matter of description, if Barbarian is meant not to dual and selected as a fighter kit, the only thing is to add a "cannot dual class" line in the kit features.
By the way, I am not too sure what you mean about ranger kits not being able to dual. I cannot remember how it used to be in vanilla but definitely all ranger kit can dual now
Right you are, I guess stalkers and archers can now dual. They were unable to dual before, not sure when beamdog changed that.
If Beamdog did change it for other classes, then that changes things. If they decide to "Keep as it was in Vanilla", then by all means, prevent Barbarians from dualclassing. But if they have already changed it for other kits, then really, why not do it for the Barbarian as well, and make life a little easier for those that want to dual Barbarian. It's not like it affects the gameplay for those that would not want to dual their Barbarian.
Except Humans having the ability to Dual-class and Demihumans having the ability to Multiclass has always been that way, is a core element of 2nd edition itself, and is not something that Beamdog has messed with at all.
((I'll just ignore your Alacrity comment. You can't seriously believe that even makes sense, as a lot of people tend to queue up their next move directly after completing the last one.))
Changing which kit can or cannot dualclass is something they have already been messing with in the past. It therefor stands to reason that if they move the Barbarian over to a Fighter Kit (I know it technically always was a kit under the hood, but it didn't appear to be so in the UI), they should either have the Barbarian be able to dualclass just like the Fighter can, or make an active and conscious decision for the Barbarian to not be able to dualclass for whatever reason they come up with.
If Beamdog did change it for other classes, then that changes things. If they decide to "Keep as it was in Vanilla", then by all means, prevent Barbarians from dualclassing. But if they have already changed it for other kits, then really, why not do it for the Barbarian as well, and make life a little easier for those that want to dual Barbarian. It's not like it affects the gameplay for those that would not want to dual their Barbarian.
Technically, they did "Keep as it was in Vanilla". In SOA, stalkers were able to dual class. This was disabled in TOB. Beamdog simply kept it a little more vanilla than some would have expected.
Except Humans having the ability to Dual-class and Demihumans having the ability to Multiclass has always been that way, is a core element of 2nd edition itself, and is not something that Beamdog has messed with at all.
...And barbs being unable to dual is one of the core elements of that class, and not something Beamdog should mess with. (Unless they want to - it's their game after all. )
They have already messed with it, by changing a class into a kit.
In terms of game mechanics, the change Beamdog made was trivial, simply moving something from one menu to another, however, in terms of Baldur's Gate game rules (not 2nd edition rules, which are different anyway) they have already made the fundamental change by converting a base class into a fighter kit.
The Barbarian CLASS is forbidden from duel classing under Baldur's Gate rules, but the Barbarian CLASS no longer exists in BGEE 2.0.
The Barbarian FIGHTER KIT should be governed by the BG rules that apply to fighter kits: Can duel class into Mages, Clerics, Druids or Thieves, unless something else forbids it (such as attribute scores, alignment, or race).
NB, historical point with regard to ranger kits: When BG2 was first released, Stalkers could dual class into clerics. However, when ToB was released BG2 was patched to forbid Stalkers duel classing into clerics. No explanation was given. When BGEE was released, Stalkers regained their ability to dual class into clerics.
Well, fighter kits only get 1d10 hp per level. You forgot to mention that. So we'll just drop their hit points too, I guess. Oh and ditto for the dwarven defender. They must be "governed by the BG rules that apply to fighter kits."
There is no such rule. It is already an established rule that kits can have different HD to the base class (Dragon Disciples).
Strictly speaking, in terms of gameplay mechanics the change we made was non-existent, not just trivial.
Makes no difference. In terms of RULES the change is major.
And fixing things to make the rules consistant is pretty trivial.
Again, the change to the rules is non-existent. Barbarian was always a Fighter kit; the change is just moving it from one menu to another. (Similarly, putting "Lore" in the "Proficiencies" tab on the Character Sheet doesn't make Lore a proficiency.)
To me, the issue here is one of class description. The Barbarian is now listed as a Fighter kit, which means that its description should be updated to make it read like one--with a list of Advantages and Disadvantages. The Disadvantages section, then, would include "May not dual-class".
NB, historical point with regard to ranger kits: When BG2 was first released, Stalkers could dual class into clerics. However, when ToB was released BG2 was patched to forbid Stalkers duel classing into clerics. No explanation was given. When BGEE was released, Stalkers regained their ability to dual class into clerics.
In other words, there *is* precedent from the original game for kits to have restricted dual-classing options.
In the current game (IWDEE v1.4), wild mages are listed as a mage kit, but cannot dual-class. So, there is precedent in the EE game for kits that cannot dual-class, while the base class can.
It's a simple thing to mod (and had been done so by BG2 Tweaks for years). If Beamdog wants to change it, fine. But suggesting that the barbarian as a kit is somehow violating some holy rule of "All kits shall have the the same dual-class options as the base class, so sayeth Alaundo" is just false. The original game has an example of a kit with dual-class restrictions, as does the current (non-beta) EE game.
Strictly speaking, in terms of gameplay mechanics the change we made was non-existent, not just trivial.
Makes no difference. In terms of RULES the change is major.
And fixing things to make the rules consistant is pretty trivial.
Again, the change to the rules is non-existent. Barbarian was always a Fighter kit; the change is just moving it from one menu to another. (Similarly, putting "Lore" in the "Proficiencies" tab on the Character Sheet doesn't make Lore a proficiency.)
To me, the issue here is one of class description. The Barbarian is now listed as a Fighter kit, which means that its description should be updated to make it read like one--with a list of Advantages and Disadvantages. The Disadvantages section, then, would include "May not dual-class".
Not so. Whilst Barbarian was a fighter kit under the hood, this is a matter of game mechanics, not game rules. There is a difference.
Bioware's intent was that Barbarian appear base class, not a fighter kit. That's why they took steps to hide it's true nature, including preventing it from dual classing.
Just as an FYI to anyone out there interested in dual-classing a barbarian or a wild mage: it's pretty easy.
1) Download Near Infinity (known as "NI"). It is free and cross-platform
2) Put NI into your game directory. If you aren't sure where your game directory is, use your computer's file search function to find chitin.key. Wherever that is, that is your game directory.
3) Run NI. Click "2DA" in the left window and scroll down to "DUALCLAS.2DA."
4) In the right window, find the line for barbarian and/or wild mage. Change the zeros to ones as appropriate for that class (mimic other fighter kits for barb, mimic other mage kits for wild mage). Below, click "save."
5) Quit NI and play the game!
Not quite that easy. Looking at DUALCLAS.2DA for IWDEE v1.4, there are no lines for BARBARIAN or WILDMAGE in the base game.
If you don't have those lines in your DUALCLAS.2DA, copy the MAGE and FIGHTER lines and paste them at the end of the file. Then change MAGE to WILDMAGE and FIGHTER to BARBARIAN in the lines you pasted.
Just as an FYI to anyone out there interested in dual-classing a barbarian or a wild mage: it's pretty easy.
1) Download Near Infinity (known as "NI"). It is free and cross-platform
2) Put NI into your game directory. If you aren't sure where your game directory is, use your computer's file search function to find chitin.key. Wherever that is, that is your game directory.
3) Run NI. Click "2DA" in the left window and scroll down to "DUALCLAS.2DA."
4) In the right window, find the line for barbarian and/or wild mage. Change the zeros to ones as appropriate for that class (mimic other fighter kits for barb, mimic other mage kits for wild mage). Below, click "save."
5) Quit NI and play the game!
I know how to mod the game, and have played multi-classed barbarians in BG already.
I am arguing out of a desire for rules consistency, and clarity for new players, not because I am incapable of modding the game.
I accept that for consistency, Wild Mages should also be able to dual class. However, never having tried to mod it myself, I am unsure how difficult it would be. However, since I have done it myself, I know the barbarian change would be trivial.
Strictly speaking, in terms of gameplay mechanics the change we made was non-existent, not just trivial.
Makes no difference. In terms of RULES the change is major.
And fixing things to make the rules consistant is pretty trivial.
Again, the change to the rules is non-existent. Barbarian was always a Fighter kit; the change is just moving it from one menu to another. (Similarly, putting "Lore" in the "Proficiencies" tab on the Character Sheet doesn't make Lore a proficiency.)
To me, the issue here is one of class description. The Barbarian is now listed as a Fighter kit, which means that its description should be updated to make it read like one--with a list of Advantages and Disadvantages. The Disadvantages section, then, would include "May not dual-class".
Not so. Whilst Barbarian was a fighter kit under the hood, this is a matter of game mechanics, not game rules. There is a difference.
Bioware's intent was that Barbarian appear base class, not a fighter kit. That's why they took steps to hide it's true nature, including preventing it from dual classing.
Bioware established the precedent that kits (not just kits masquerading as classes) can be restricted from dual-classing, as you pointed out with the Stalker in ToB.
And the Wild Mage is a kit that cannot dual-class. I don't have an active ToB install to double-check, but I found a screenshot showing it as a kit in the original game.
So, a kit that cannot dual-class while the main class can appears to have precedent back to Throne of Bhaal.
Personally, I don't see any reason to keep the barbarian from dual-classing, but I very much agree with Dee that Beamdog hasn't actually changed anything about the class. If you want to argue that the barbarian should be able to dual, I agree with you. If you want to argue that the barbarian should be able to dual because it's now listed in a different menu, I'm sorry, but that just does not make any sense to me.
Just as an FYI to anyone out there interested in dual-classing a barbarian or a wild mage: it's pretty easy.
1) Download Near Infinity (known as "NI"). It is free and cross-platform
2) Put NI into your game directory. If you aren't sure where your game directory is, use your computer's file search function to find chitin.key. Wherever that is, that is your game directory.
3) Run NI. Click "2DA" in the left window and scroll down to "DUALCLAS.2DA."
4) In the right window, find the line for barbarian and/or wild mage. Change the zeros to ones as appropriate for that class (mimic other fighter kits for barb, mimic other mage kits for wild mage). Below, click "save."
5) Quit NI and play the game!
Would this work for Shaman also? So I could take 3 levels in Barbarian and then dual into a Shaman with 3 pips in Battle Ax
There would need to be a primary stat; maybe Wisdom and Con?
Again, the change to the rules is non-existent. Barbarian was always a Fighter kit; the change is just moving it from one menu to another. (Similarly, putting "Lore" in the "Proficiencies" tab on the Character Sheet doesn't make Lore a proficiency.)
Lore is listed under "Proficiencies" in the original character sheet too. That's not even a change.
I'm just blown away how a simple menu change has sparked such an intense conversation. Beamdog could not have anticipated this reaction.
Just use a mod. Seriously. Stop complaining and use a mod. Nothing is different from before except how you select your character during character generation.
Well, fighter kits only get 1d10 hp per level. You forgot to mention that. So we'll just drop their hit points too, I guess. Oh and ditto for the dwarven defender.
Yeah, because providing an option that people could either use or ignore is totally the same thing as forcing a change that affects everyone using said kit, whether they want to or not...
It's quite obvious that the main reason that Barbarians were made unavailable for Dualclass, was the odd implications it would cause. First, it would allow a Dualclass combination that doesn't exist as a Multiclass combination. Second, you would be able to Dualclass from Barbarian to another class, but not from another class to Barbarian. It would work totally unlike any other class, so they disabled Dualclassing to keep things simple and understandable for the player.
Now that Barbarians are a Kit, that reason is gone! Multiclass can't choose kits, and Dualclass can't dual into a kit. Ergo, "keeping things simple and understandable for the player" shifted from "Let's not make them dualclass, because that would be confusing." to "Let's just make them dualclass, because kits that can't dualclass are the exception, not the norm!".
Thus, it's a totally reasonable request. I guess Beamdog has their reasons to still prevent them from Dualclassing, though...
Comments
Really it simply is a matter of description, if Barbarian is meant not to dual and selected as a fighter kit, the only thing is to add a "cannot dual class" line in the kit features.
By the way, I am not too sure what you mean about ranger kits not being able to dual. I cannot remember how it used to be in vanilla but definitely all ranger kit can dual now
Right you are, I guess stalkers and archers can now dual. They were unable to dual before, not sure when beamdog changed that.
((I'll just ignore your Alacrity comment. You can't seriously believe that even makes sense, as a lot of people tend to queue up their next move directly after completing the last one.))
Changing which kit can or cannot dualclass is something they have already been messing with in the past. It therefor stands to reason that if they move the Barbarian over to a Fighter Kit (I know it technically always was a kit under the hood, but it didn't appear to be so in the UI), they should either have the Barbarian be able to dualclass just like the Fighter can, or make an active and conscious decision for the Barbarian to not be able to dualclass for whatever reason they come up with.
Fighters can Multiclass, and Barbarians are a Fighter kit. Monks cannot Dualclass, nor can Sorcerers.
They have already messed with it, by changing a class into a kit.
In terms of game mechanics, the change Beamdog made was trivial, simply moving something from one menu to another, however, in terms of Baldur's Gate game rules (not 2nd edition rules, which are different anyway) they have already made the fundamental change by converting a base class into a fighter kit.
The Barbarian CLASS is forbidden from duel classing under Baldur's Gate rules, but the Barbarian CLASS no longer exists in BGEE 2.0.
The Barbarian FIGHTER KIT should be governed by the BG rules that apply to fighter kits: Can duel class into Mages, Clerics, Druids or Thieves, unless something else forbids it (such as attribute scores, alignment, or race).
NB, historical point with regard to ranger kits: When BG2 was first released, Stalkers could dual class into clerics. However, when ToB was released BG2 was patched to forbid Stalkers duel classing into clerics. No explanation was given. When BGEE was released, Stalkers regained their ability to dual class into clerics.
Makes no difference. In terms of RULES the change is major.
And fixing things to make the rules consistant is pretty trivial.
There is no such rule. It is already an established rule that kits can have different HD to the base class (Dragon Disciples).
Again, the change to the rules is non-existent. Barbarian was always a Fighter kit; the change is just moving it from one menu to another. (Similarly, putting "Lore" in the "Proficiencies" tab on the Character Sheet doesn't make Lore a proficiency.)
To me, the issue here is one of class description. The Barbarian is now listed as a Fighter kit, which means that its description should be updated to make it read like one--with a list of Advantages and Disadvantages. The Disadvantages section, then, would include "May not dual-class".
In other words, there *is* precedent from the original game for kits to have restricted dual-classing options.
In the current game (IWDEE v1.4), wild mages are listed as a mage kit, but cannot dual-class. So, there is precedent in the EE game for kits that cannot dual-class, while the base class can.
It's a simple thing to mod (and had been done so by BG2 Tweaks for years). If Beamdog wants to change it, fine. But suggesting that the barbarian as a kit is somehow violating some holy rule of "All kits shall have the the same dual-class options as the base class, so sayeth Alaundo" is just false. The original game has an example of a kit with dual-class restrictions, as does the current (non-beta) EE game.
Not so. Whilst Barbarian was a fighter kit under the hood, this is a matter of game mechanics, not game rules. There is a difference.
Bioware's intent was that Barbarian appear base class, not a fighter kit. That's why they took steps to hide it's true nature, including preventing it from dual classing.
Not quite that easy.
If you don't have those lines in your DUALCLAS.2DA, copy the MAGE and FIGHTER lines and paste them at the end of the file. Then change MAGE to WILDMAGE and FIGHTER to BARBARIAN in the lines you pasted.
I know how to mod the game, and have played multi-classed barbarians in BG already.
I am arguing out of a desire for rules consistency, and clarity for new players, not because I am incapable of modding the game.
I accept that for consistency, Wild Mages should also be able to dual class. However, never having tried to mod it myself, I am unsure how difficult it would be. However, since I have done it myself, I know the barbarian change would be trivial.
Bioware established the precedent that kits (not just kits masquerading as classes) can be restricted from dual-classing, as you pointed out with the Stalker in ToB.
And the Wild Mage is a kit that cannot dual-class. I don't have an active ToB install to double-check, but I found a screenshot showing it as a kit in the original game.
So, a kit that cannot dual-class while the main class can appears to have precedent back to Throne of Bhaal.
Would this work for Shaman also? So I could take 3 levels in Barbarian and then dual into a Shaman with 3 pips in Battle Ax
There would need to be a primary stat; maybe Wisdom and Con?
Lore is listed under "Proficiencies" in the original character sheet too. That's not even a change.
Just use a mod. Seriously. Stop complaining and use a mod. Nothing is different from before except how you select your character during character generation.
Yeah, because providing an option that people could either use or ignore is totally the same thing as forcing a change that affects everyone using said kit, whether they want to or not...
It's quite obvious that the main reason that Barbarians were made unavailable for Dualclass, was the odd implications it would cause. First, it would allow a Dualclass combination that doesn't exist as a Multiclass combination. Second, you would be able to Dualclass from Barbarian to another class, but not from another class to Barbarian. It would work totally unlike any other class, so they disabled Dualclassing to keep things simple and understandable for the player.
Now that Barbarians are a Kit, that reason is gone! Multiclass can't choose kits, and Dualclass can't dual into a kit. Ergo, "keeping things simple and understandable for the player" shifted from "Let's not make them dualclass, because that would be confusing." to "Let's just make them dualclass, because kits that can't dualclass are the exception, not the norm!".
Thus, it's a totally reasonable request. I guess Beamdog has their reasons to still prevent them from Dualclassing, though...
There's no such a thing as a simple change if BG is taken into cosideration. Players will notice even one sprite change immediately