@Madhax Yeah everyone seems to love Fighter/Thief, but I've never been the biggest fan of Multi/Class (I prefer Dual, but to each their own). I am thinking now of trying it, most likely as a gnome. The one time I did play a fighter/thief was my favorite character (a halfing) from Icewind Dale (using the same portrait as my profile picture), who was definitely the most useful member of my party. Even without 18 strength, he was crazy useful. Maybe I'll give it a try... any suggestions as to what race?
Not sure which would be the best race. I did an Elf and it worked out great. The constitution loss isn't a big deal, since it only half-matters anyway.
@Riolathetl But at what level would you dual class? Such a dilemma over what level Monk abilities to give up in order to spells...unless you are talking Multi, in which case which race do you let become a monk?
Agreed, a monk is really only useful in a single-class sense anyway. Their high-level bonuses are too great to pass up. This sort of thing makes more sense in 3rd edition, where taking a single level of Monk is enough to get you your Wisdom modifier added to your AC if you avoid wearing armor, which can be nice for certain builds.
I've played both. I prefer the Stalker out of the two just because of my personal play style, but I prefer a Fighter/Thief over the Stalker, you don't get Ranger spells but it's better in almost every other way. The Archer is fun, and it's not overshadowed by a Fighter/Thief if all you want is the most effective archer possible.
Could the Archer be a good option to dual for a Mage/Sorcerer? I would like to be a Sorcerer but start BG1 as an Archer up to say Lev .4-5 then dual to Sorcerer. This way I get good HP to start and some usefulness at low level which will also come back once the Sorcerer reach Lev 4-5. Also the archer, like the sorcerer, tries to stay away from melee to be most effective. The armor restriction also suit it well. Any comment ?
Ranger/Mage is not an available multi/dual class. Rangers can only mulit/dual to a Cleric.
The no dual-classing is a bug, Stalkers and archers are supposed to be able to dual-class.
Yes, the no dual-class Stalker/Archer was a bug introduced with ToB at the same time that Stalkers were nerf’d to be unable to backstab with any of their weapons; having heard that Stalkers & Archers could now dual class again I was hoping that Stalkers would be able to backstab properly again
Can you backstab with a bow? I'm thinking of a stalker/cleric multi (via shadowkeeper) or dual, - but I'm a bit disconcerted. As I recall, you can't backstab with a bow in BG2, unlike 3E, and ranger/clerics can only use cleric weapons, while you can only backstab with weapons a thief can uses. So you get these free two dots in two weapon fighting, but have to use clubs/warhammers/flails, which are completely useless weapons as far as backstabbing is concerned. So it would seem that a stalker/cleric wouldn't be a useful combo.
You can backstab with ALL thief weapons,right? So with daggers, long/short swords, katanas, scimitars(waki and ninja too), and with staves?
Yus. With clubs and quarterstaves, I like to refer to it as "backbreak." Quarterstaves are actually the best in the whole series due to easy access to high enchantment staves. Ambush Tranzig in Feldepost's Inn in Beregost early in the game for a free +1. Then, later, you can just walk up to Ulgoth's Beard and BUY a +3 staff.
Depends on whether they fix the ammunition stacking with Gesen/Firetooth in BG2EE. By the base numbers, Firetooth can't compete with the best melee weapons, but ammunition you fire with it stacks its damage with the self-created ammo, leading to cheesy 1d8+1d8+5+2 bolts, which can out damage the best melee weapons when combined with the archer's passive damage bonuses (plus you have Grandmastery).
@Madhax Yeah everyone seems to love Fighter/Thief, but I've never been the biggest fan of Multi/Class (I prefer Dual, but to each their own). I am thinking now of trying it, most likely as a gnome. The one time I did play a fighter/thief was my favorite character (a halfing) from Icewind Dale (using the same portrait as my profile picture), who was definitely the most useful member of my party. Even without 18 strength, he was crazy useful. Maybe I'll give it a try... any suggestions as to what race?
Not sure which would be the best race. I did an Elf and it worked out great. The constitution loss isn't a big deal, since it only half-matters anyway.
@Riolathetl But at what level would you dual class? Such a dilemma over what level Monk abilities to give up in order to spells...unless you are talking Multi, in which case which race do you let become a monk?
Agreed, a monk is really only useful in a single-class sense anyway. Their high-level bonuses are too great to pass up. This sort of thing makes more sense in 3rd edition, where taking a single level of Monk is enough to get you your Wisdom modifier added to your AC if you avoid wearing armor, which can be nice for certain builds.
3.0 ruleset was SO broken, 3.5 was a little less so but still had a lot of potential for being super broken as well.
3.5 was pretty outrageously broken, in so many ways. Fighters were terrible, Wizards could do anything better than anybody else, and clerics could not only fight better than fighters, they could cast better than wizards. Assuming the right builds, of course. And then there is Pun-Pun...
Comments
EDIT: Noticed it was already answered.
Any thoughts?
18/00str
19 dex
I rarely make Archers or Ranged PC's because I usually employ Kivan or Coran