Thief 6/Cleric X
csuzw
Member Posts: 48
I've been thinking about the following dual class option: Thief (or more likely Swashbuckler) 6/Cleric X. It gives you 100 in Open Locks and Find Trap while still giving you all the Cleric skills you could ever need (should reach the same level as a pure Cleric by the end). It basically covers all the "necessary" utility for the party meaning that you can be much more free in what NPCs you decide to hang around with. Does this seem like a good idea? Am I missing anything that makes this a terrible (or an even better) choice?
0
Comments
Not having Backstab means it doesn't matter what weapon skills you focus on. And it means that not putting points into hide and sneak doesn't mean anything since you won't be sneaking in for a backstab. AND it's the next best thing to dual classing from Fighter to Cleric. It's like having your cake, eating it too, AND having it with Ice Cream.
You'll just need to bring in a thief to cover until you hit Cleric 7.
Since you say you want a character that gives you the most flexibility in party choice, not that you particularly love the thief/cleric, I have another suggestion:
Play a mage - or xx/mage dual-class. The mage NPC options are VERY limiting, with two of the mages having required partners, tying up an extra slot in your group. Of the two pure mages that are left, one can't cast evocation spells, and the other is evil and will leave if your rep gets too high. Three of the four full mages will fight with at least one other NPC, further restricting your party choices. Quayle can be a lot of fun, but you get him so late that his HP will always lag behind, and his low wisdom means no bonus spells at all. He'll also never get the most powerful mage spells. Neera at this point is still a wild card (pun intended).
I always feel that my parties are defined by the mage NPC I decide to use. Playing as a mage allows me to build the party I want.
Just my two cents. I still think the NPC selection is most limited when it comes to mages.
Regarding the mage/cleric decision, I do prefer playing a mage but it always seems like I have a bigger problem with clerics than them and I'll almost certainly be taking Neera because she's new and most likely to fit alignment-wise. Also the lack of kit/specialisation seems much less of a drawback for clerics than mages although that's a very minor point. Part of my problem with clerics is my irrationally deep fear of level drain which means I'm not comfortable with letting a druid cover that role or am I mistaken and they do get the level drain removal/protection spells? Even if you include druids I think there are still somewhat surprisingly more mage options and although overall they clerics are probably easier to handle they still have their fair share of problem cases.
I know I could go to 7 and still make up the cleric class but I don't see it really adding anything other than a longer wait to get thief skills back. 25 extra points isn't going to make much difference to a skill when you've spent all the rest of your points maxing pick lock and find trap and I'm not sure you get anything else by waiting a level.
I'll probably agonise over this until the game is released and then play something completely different like fighter/druid!
I've always felt BG1 was light on solid mages, and BG2 of course is light on solid thieves. Thief->Mage or multi is a great solution.
every other class had members running around with godlike stats, only the poor clerics were left out. :C
also, I forgot to add that even though clerics don't get nearly enough loving, there are 3 wisdom increasing books, in contrast to only 1 for every other stat.