2 Fighters or 2 Mages in Party

zeemnypa

Hey folks,

I need some help from you, please. I started a new game playing a halfling fighter/thief and thus dualed Imoen into a mage early on (level 2).

Now I have to decide between a party with two mages (Imoen and Dynaheir besides myself, Khalid, Jaheira and Minsc) or two fighters (Kagain and Khalid besides myself , Imoen, Jaheira and Kivan).

What would you recommend me? Thanks a lot.


PS: I don't mind Kagain is evil, actually I find it pretty cool to have a LE member in the group.

Iglosnof

Kagain will leave if your reputation ever hits 19 (which it will if you play a good character). Otherwise I'd say 2 fighters might be better than 2 mages if you're new to the game.

zeemnypa

I'm new to Baldur's Gate but I have played a lot of other isometric RPGs.
If my reputation is becoming too high and I don't want to do evil stuff can I change Kagain for Yeslick early on?

Iglosnof

Yeah, you can change. Yeslick is a better NPC in my opinion anyway.

sarevok57

zeemnypa said:

I'm new to Baldur's Gate but I have played a lot of other isometric RPGs.
If my reputation is becoming too high and I don't want to do evil stuff can I change Kagain for Yeslick early on?

yeslick is near the tail end of chapter 4, so you cant really do it early unless you start rushing hard through the game

and once yeslick is on your team, he will want you to finish your quest that you are on once you grab him or else he will leave ( which isn't bad since you are already in the area you need to be anyway)

but after that, then you can go back to exploring the world if you wish

ThacoBell

For BG1 one mage is all you need.

gunman

And one tank is all you need as well.

IMO, more fighters => easy early game, more wizards => easy late game

alceryes

gunman said:

And one tank is all you need as well.

IMO, more fighters => easy early game, more wizards => easy late game

I think, with the XP ceiling in BG1, two fighters are more advantageous as a whole. However, the two parties @zeemnypa mentions already have khalid, jaheira, and minsc or khalid, jaheira and kivan so they're already fighter heavy. Better to go with an extra mage at that point.

Yeslick is a great companion. Better than kagain in some aspects.

JumboWheat01

Yeslick gets Draw Upon Holy Might. When you throw that on a Fighter, it's just not fair.

I would say two Wizards over two Fighters most of the time. While they can specialize in their own way, Fighter is pretty much "smack with weapon, repeat as necessary." Wizard specialization can really change the class. You could have Xan with his Enchanter focus, laying down some sweet Crowd Control, and then let Dyna let loose with her Evocation focus. Or have Imoen's flexibility handle a wide range of supportive spells while Neera handles the offensive power.

gmazca

I would personally go with two mages. As @gunman said, two mages is great for the late game. Right now I have Edwin and Baeloth in my evil party and they are crushing it. That being said, this is not an option for a "good" party, but Imoen with Dynaheir/Neera would work wonders as well. The Crowd Control mages posses is too good. I just wish Neera or Edwin came with proficiency in darts or something...have to go so long before they can use something other that Quarterstaves reliably between spells.

ThacoBell

With the exp cap, having an extra archer or flank attacker is more advantageous than an extra spellcater. One mage provides more than enough spells for several encounters in BG1

Peldin

I think one mage can handle it, definitely. But if you don't know what's up ahead, two mages will mean a lot less resting to memorize different spells.

One mage has a pretty limited supply of spells. If you decide to memorize a bunch of single target spells in order to handle boss-type enemies but then get attacked by a group, you have no aoe CC to deal with them. So you either go back and rest to memorize different spells, or you have two casters. One to deal with groups, and one to deal with bosses.

In BG1 I can think of multiple cases where there is a boss encounter that includes friends with him anywhere between Mulahey and Sarevok. But there are also multiple cases where there is just a single, tough target, like at the end of Durlag's Tower, or the assassins that plague you in the first few chapters.

My point is, two mages give you much more versatility in dealing with all the different "difficult" encounters. On the flip side, two fighters will allow you to mow through the "easier" encounters faster.

Alternatively, a second "healer" or multiclass "healer" can accomplish the same thing you might bring a second mage for. For example, in my current SoD playthrough, I have both Jaheira and Glint in my party. Both are multiclass healers, however, neither actually has very many spells memorized that actually heal. Most of their memorized spells are crowd control or buff spells. This leaves my mage open to focus more on spells that deal damage. Now I still have some CC and buff spells, but I have a much larger arsenal of damage spells that I wouldn't normally have.

Skatan

I concur on the pro-fighter arguments. Having multiple of ANYTHING is always good, but we're talking BG1 here and fighters will roll through it with a lot less effort than any mage can. Having one mage is great, having two is redundant, having no mage is definitely feasible.

The best NPC for your party is Coran. The best member in ANY party is always Coran, haha
Sure, he's a F/T like your CHARNAME, but nevermind that as he's an excellent archer and I'd take an archer over another mage in BG1 any day of the week.
Same with people arguing for Yeslick. Is he great? Sure he is. Is he better and can consistently dish out the DMG than Coran? No. Jaheira can tank for you, Minsc can shoot arrows then switch to melee and support Jaheira. You as a F/T halfling can specialize in slings doing good damage and use melee when/if needed. I know, I know, Coran was not on your list so if you are dead-set on choosing between Kagain (the least talkative of ALL npc's. He's a stonewall, that one, both in terms of tankyness and talkyness.) and Dyna, I'd go with Kagain.

Nimran

A party with two mages will end up with two members who either do nothing or throw rocks ineffectually for almost the entire game, at least until higher levels when you actually have a half decent supply of spells. That said, going in with fighters galore is kinda dull. I'd probably go with two fighter-ish characters, a cleric, a thief or two, or maybe a bard instead of second thief, and one mage to be used almost exclusively during tough encounters. That's just me, though. You can play however you like.

Archaos

thedamages said:

For BG1 one mage is all you need.

Exactly. In BG1, you want more melees/ranged people than casters.
In BG2 it is reversed and you want at least two mages.

jinxed75

zeemnypa said:

Hey folks,

What would you recommend me? Thanks a lot.

Go with the personalities you like the most. Any combination is capable of getting you through the game

Arius

Iglosnof said:

Kagain will leave if your reputation ever hits 19 (which it will if you play a good character). Otherwise I'd say 2 fighters might be better than 2 mages if you're new to the game.

not if you stick a helm of opposite alignment on him which changes him from Lawful evil to chaotic good.

rolling deep with the plates is the way I go. Ajantis Kagain Yeslick with Kivan and a Mage Dual classed Imoen plus my F/T Dwarf Char name

Mush_Mush

I have two mages in my party, myself (conjurer) and Xan and it works pretty well. Generally you have one for damage and one for crowd control/utility spells. There are no rules you can have whatever works for you. Generally though aslong as you have your bases covered (tank / mage / healer / thief) in whatever form you have a pretty well balanced party.

It's also worth noting that ranged attacks are devestating in BG1. So any left over slots are always well filled by powerful archers this can be Kivan, Coran or Khalid any fighter type with decent dex.