Question about dual-classing and weapon proficiency
fzzzt
Member Posts: 1
I noticed something that seems wrong to me... When I dual-class a Thief into a Cleric, I can only use Cleric weapons. However, when I dual-class a Kensai into a Mage, I can still use swords and whatnot, even though they say "not usable by Mage". This seems inconsistent to me, is this intentional? Does the Fighter proficiency somehow override the Mage, but the Thief doesn't override the Cleric?
0
Comments
It makes more sense if you look at it from a lore perspective, maybe. Thieves and mages can't use certain weapons due to a lack of training, while clerics and druids actively choose not to use them due to their faith.
So a fighter dualed to mage at the beginning of the game can use a sword, because in that moment he can put proficiences in it. When he become a mage he can not use it, but just for the fact that in that moment he can not put proficiences in it, when his first class is active again he can use it again as he can put proficiences in it again.
Clerics and Druids even when the first class is active again continue to be prevented by their god or ethic.
And you should have known it as both Jaheira and Anomen are fighters, but are prevented from using weapons forbidden to their other class while Nalia and Imoen can use the weapons of both classes.
So is intentional and consistent.
Scimitars are allowed because they resemble the sickle, the one holy instrument the druids use to harvest mistletoe:the key ingredient in all of their spells. Daggers require little precious ore, and clubs/quarterstaves are just the arms and legs of the nature, still thriving with the energy and life that allows the druid to defend himself. Spear is the oldest weapon that requires little resources for the best effect. Slings and darts are also effective in the same rein.
Totally agreed.
In the late thirteenth or early fourteenth century sword and bucker manual known as I:33 or the Walpurgis codex, we do see a priest taking up the sword, and being quite competent with it. We also see a female (given the name Walpurgis) wielding the sword.
Scimitars probably was just used because they didn't want to put in sickles for some reason. Though now-a-days, sickles do seem to be tied to druidism, for some reason. Not entirely sure why.
restriction different from the others we find in the game. A druid can not wear platemail, but if has some fighter levels can, a mage can not use bow, but a mage rogue can.
I think that the restrictions on the weapons of the divine casters are the only one prevailing on what a second class allow.
Ranger/Cleric - Restricted to Cleric weapons.
Fighter/Cleric - Restricted to Cleric weapons.
Fighter/Druid - Restricted to Druid weapons.
Fighter/Mage - Can't cast spells in armor.
Fighter/Thief - Can't use thief skills in heavy armor.
Mage/Thief - Can't cast spells in armor.
Mage/Cleric - Restricted to Cleric weapons, can't cast spells in armor.
Cleric/Thief - Restricted to Cleric weapons, can't use thief skills in heavy armor.
Fighter/Mage/Cleric - Restricted to Cleric weapons, can't cast spells in armor.
Fighter/Mage/Thief - Can't cast spells in armor, can't use thief skills in heavy armor.
@subtledoctor: The cleric kits are already odd in that they only have advantages, not disadvantages. Having them also allow additional weapons without any disadvantages wouldn't make much sense balance wise.
Every Thief can't use thief skills in heavy armor (if he has UAI), every Mage can't cast spells in armor, the restriction is there, but is a equipment related restriction (they can not do something because they are equipping something, not just because they are mages or thieves), just removing the armor the restriction is also removed.
Mages and Thieves are enabled to do something by the other class (Being also Thief or Fighter override the limitation that prevents the Mage in using bows), and the fact that this don't remove some of their normal restriction is a different thing from the restriction on the weapons that the divine casters have, which can be never be overrided.
Fighter thieves cannot be thieves while using something the other class gives them, being heavy armour.
Clerics do not have the same restriction, they can already do everything they can while wearing heavy armour, so they are being restricted in weapon choice when multiclassing with fighters.
"Fighter/mages cannot be mages while using something the other class gives them, being armour."
No, they are mages and not casting in armor is the normal behavior of an arcane caster, being also fighter enables them to do something, using other weapons and wear armor.
Is a limitation similar to the one that thieves have (not in your examples), Thief can not backstab with not Thief weapon (that can equip having UAI or being also Fighters) but they have just to equip a Thief weeapon and they can backstab. is an equipment related restriction.
And every divine caster can cast while armored. Single class, dual or multi, Aerie armored can cast divine spells and is prevented from using the arcane ones by the equipment that she uses, but she can remove it at will and cast again both magic.
No matter what a F/C or F/D equip or unequip, is always prevented from using the weapons forbidden to his divine class. There is nothing that they can do to avoid their weapon limitations. Arcane casting and backstabbing limitations can be avoided just unequipping something or using the proper weapon.
Remember that the OP's original point is " When I dual-class a Thief into a Cleric, I can only use Cleric weapons. However, when I dual-class a Kensai into a Mage, I can still use swords and whatnot, even though they say "not usable by Mage".
Every other class can be enabled in using weapons normally not allowed, just having some levels of a class that can use them. They are enabled, but with the normal in game restrictions, a F/T can use a 2H sword, he just can not use it to backstab.
The divine casters are the only ones that are not enabled in using weapons prevented to the single class, even if they take levels in a class able to use them.
That said, the limits of clerical weapon use should logically be different for each faith
Edit: corrected as I wrote arcane instead of the intended divine.
A thief is only proficient with weapons that can backstab, and only proficient with armor that they can use thieving skills in. While they can equip other armor, they lose some class abilities, so they still have to choose between "not wearing heavy armor like fighters can" or "not using thieves skills like thieves can".
Yes, fighter/thieves can go forth and back between the two (but not in combat), and fighter/clerics cannot. Is that such a big thing? Does everything need to be identical.
Don't forget, the impact of wearing different armor is generally bigger than the impact of wielding different weapons. All weapons are pretty similar to one another. One may do slightly more average damage than another, but their THAC0 remains the same. Armor on the other hand, there's quite a difference between a Studded Leather and an Ankheg Armor, both available early into the game. Don't forget that Ashideena is one of the first "more than just +1" magical weapons you run into.
As for Cleric kits, I don't like them how they're currently implemented. They feel kinda lazy. You get some bonus spells and an alignment restriction, that's it. Whoop di doo.
It would be nicer if they implemented something like slightly different weapon and armor proficiencies, and having some spells added and removed from their spell list. That said, I can't really recall how cleric kits were implemented back in the day.
It's also a bit problematic because there are so many gods, but they implemented so few of them as kits. They didn't even include the kits for the only two singleclass Clerics in the saga: Branwen and Viconia (Yeslick/Quayle/Tiax/Aerie/Anomen can't have cleric kits due to multi/dualclassing).