Single, dual, or multi?
messy
Member Posts: 40
1. Single-classed characters level up very fast toward the end of the game, eventually becoming higher level than Elminster, which just feels wrong.
2. Dual-classed character have the same issues, and the idea of losing abilities for any length of time bugs me.
3. Multi-classing, however, hits the sweet spot. Leveling is slow and end in the 20’s, which feels like a good end point.
So, I prefer multi-classing. What about you?
2. Dual-classed character have the same issues, and the idea of losing abilities for any length of time bugs me.
3. Multi-classing, however, hits the sweet spot. Leveling is slow and end in the 20’s, which feels like a good end point.
So, I prefer multi-classing. What about you?
- Single, dual, or multi?22 votes
- Single-class40.91%
- Dual-class31.82%
- Multi-class27.27%
3
Comments
However, one could argue that single-classed characters reach their highest potential sooner. It's a good point. That said, you'll start out stronger with the tools of two classes combined than just one, at least most of the time. A level 1 Fighter/Mage will be able to use better weapons between spells and wield a shield to lower its AC effectively. Armor is also a possibility when you're out of spells. The faster progression of the mage will NOT catch up with that advantage in the first levels of BG1. Second example: should you be a Mage/Thief, you'll get valuable utility and better THACO. Again, faster progression is not going to compensate.
Dual-classing is a tricky one. It depends on what you dual-class into, from what and when. What is certain though is that you have, for instance, zero reason to not dual from a fighter kit in the first chapters of BG2 if you intend to play a mage. You'll catch up with the XP poured into your first class so quickly that it will barely delay your other class progression. There are a few dual choices like that that are no-brainers, so much so that dual-classing becomes the right way to single-class. How ironical.
In the end, single-classes are only justified from a powergaming perspective if you want to a play a unique kit that is both unavailable for dual-classing and multi-classing. If you want to roleplay, everything's fine.
If you play human characters, then an early dual is a clear benefit, but that rules out the option of using a shorty to take advantage of the lower saving throws.
A balanced party needs a little bit of thieving skills, arcane and righteous magic. If you've got those covered, it's fine to single-class. If you don't, however, you might want to consider dual-classing or multi-classing to fill in the missing role.
Personally, I wouldn't bother with shorties. Sure, I'm missing out on better saving throws if I play a human or half-human but that's nothing I can't fix with potions, spells, rings and so on. It's also redundant if you seek a higher magic resistance and if you play around with spell immunities, which I like to.
Is it even worth it if you're not in the front line? I wouldn't be too sure... Meanwhile, if you dual or multi-class into a thief, you can get an extra fighter in place of a thief that has the same shorties, like Kagain. It's just my opinion though.
Going Necro to cleric sounds interesting, but it'd be a slog as a single-class cleric if I dualed at level 16 or 18 (I can't imagine being a Necromancer who doesn't have Horrid Wilting and two levels more gets you an HLA and Wail of the Banshee!). On the other hand, if I dualed earlier I could be an undead exploding cleric with Skulltrap. I hate restartitis... ?
4. Other (please explain) ?
It depends. If I intend to play with a full party and start from Candlekeep, I prefer single class. If I plan to be completionist and take along every NPC at least for their quest, or if I play with a small party, I'd prefer multiclassing.
I prefer to play minimal or no-reload, and if I go with roleplaying restrictions and a full party, I won't have such a fast level progression. A F/M/T may shine late in the game, but not in the Bandit Camp with a party of 6. I like it when a character is useful in any stage of the game, because survival counts from Candlekeep to ToB. As I said, with a smaller party or a more completionist XP heavy playthrough, I don't mind multiclassing, but I use it to enhance the abilities of one of the classes more than actually using both classes equally. For example I have a fighter/thief in the Android beta, and I use him more like a thief with better Thac0 and weapon proficiency than as a fighter who can detect traps or something.
I'm not a fan of dual-classing, but that's probably because I only play human when I play Paladin, who can't dual anyway.
I design around whole parties rather than just the protagonist; even if most of the characters are NPCs with their standard classes, they're all considered even before the run starts, when I plan things out. And as I pick characters to fit the concept, all of these options come into play.
For example, my last full run was built around a fire theme; make the party immune and blow things up.
Naturally, the protagonist was a Dragon Disciple. Massive firepower, and the only class that gets full permanent fire immunity innately.
For BGEE, I paired him with an Avenger. That character spent much of her time on the front lines in fire salamander form.
My second BGEE front-liner was Jaheira (fighter/druid multi), using equipment (scimitar, ring, helmet) to achieve fire immunity.
Khalid (fighter) came with her, focusing on archery.
Imoen tagged along, as trapfinder and second mage (thief-mage dual). I avoided dungeons and cleared wilderness areas during her downtime.
Kivan (ranger) joined the party as another archer, later to be replaced in that role by Coran (fighter/thief multi)
In BG2EE, I killed off that Avenger. The protagonist and Jaheira returned - only now Jaheira went for shapeshifting (fire elemental form HLA) for her immunity.
The avenger was replaced by Cernd (shapeshifter), who also used fire elemental form.
Imoen was replaced by Nalia (thief-mage dual), using the fire resistance from her signet ring in conjunction with the ring of fire control to achieve immunity.
The last two slots went to Anomen (fighter-cleric dual) and mod NPC Isra (cavalier). Both used multiple equipment pieces to achieve their fire immunity - helped along by Anomen's personal shield and Isra's innate resistance.
Single class, dual class, and multi class characters are all represented in both games. That wasn't the goal; it was simply a side effect of choosing the best party to fit the theme.
When playing a mage, dual into it from a strong fighter kit. Berserker->Cleric is also very strong. Those are straight upgrades over mages and clerics and, if not dualed too late, also almost straight upgrades over multiclasses, unless you are determined to get fighter HLA. Thaco gets partly compensated through Grandmastery and you get damage bonus on top. The caster part is a straight upgrade over multi. More spellslots and better scaling. This assumes party Play with split XP of course.
Since thieves get way more Skillpoints than needed those are great when played as multis. They benefit from every class without really sacrificing anything in return.
Single classes shine when playing strong or just interesting kits.
I just enjoy the specialization of a single class character versus the utility or power of multis and duals. Over the years I also began to role play more than power game, and single class in my mind fits this playstyle better. A playthrough has to be challenging to keep my interest and prevent a restart, but also I have to get into the role or persona of the character I create. With multis I always struggle to find that focused specialty versus a focused single class. With duals it is even worse!
But I fully understand the attraction of multis and duals and back in the day played my fair share of fighter/thieves, mage/thieves, and fighter/mages. Just not much these days.
I think probably the only thing that could tempt me - maybe someday soon - is a good old shorty fighter/thief. Especially if dwarven or halfling, as this multi and race combo reminds me of the old halfling class in basic D&D. I last played this kind of character after watching all 6 Jackson LoTR and Hobbit movies back to back with my teenage son. It was a fun week-end!
To be fair, we tend to exaggerate the difference between single, dual and multi-classes. Whatever I said above is true, but that doesn't mean it's a big deal. I will even go as far as to say it's not really RP vs powergaming.
First, there are a few single-classes that are jack-of-all-trades, so much so that they can be compared to multi-classes. I'll take two examples: the Blade, which is basically a lesser Fighter/Mage with unique advantages. Second example: the Swashbuckler, which is a thief with fighter looks. It's sort of a lesser Fighter/Thief but, once again, it has unique abilities that make up for it and it retains maximum utility beyond backstabbing. One could argue that both the F/M and the F/T are superior choices, but it'd be preposterous to claim there's a huge gap in power between them. I think it's actually possible to demonstrate Blades are on par with F/M if their strengths are maxed out. In the end, the real waste is when picking a single-class Fighter when you could have picked a F/M or F/M. You don't gain anything by being a mere Fighter while you gain something unique when you play a kit... especially a good kit!
Second, the whole powergaming thing is about feeling all-mighty. It's about potential, not actual power. Indeed, there are so many ways to cheese the game that you don't need to be the mightiest class to walk unchallenged. Knowing the game's mechanics is far, far, FAR stronger than picking whatever class for powergaming reasons. Let's admit it, we just like looking at numbers (especially DPS calculations for nerds) because it makes us feel empowered. But, really, it's smokescreen for vanity.
Therefore, you're absolutely right to play whatever feels best for you as you'll be godlike if you know what you're doing.
For me personally, my class decision is what @jmerry said. It's based on thinking about which NPC's I want to take at each stage of the saga. I'm often starting characters with the idea of including companions I haven't used lately.
Then there's silly ideas like Shapeshifter 13 -> Fighter or Avenger 7 -> Fighter to try to abuse the shapeshifts into actual usefulness, Kensai -> Druid to actually allow Barkskin to do something (maybe)...
edit: on second thought: Can a mage->fighter cast from scrolls while wearing armor?
Scrolls ... even in my no-spellcasting party, with a bard along to enable the option (and a fighter/thief protagonist eventually gaining UAI), I didn't use them much. I used a few "silver bullet" strikes like a Cloudkill scroll on Davaeorn, but mostly they just sat in the scroll case until I either cashed them in for XP or sold them.
Wands, on the other hand, saw plenty of action - even into ToB. Cloudkill to disrupt spellcasters. Lightning for Devil Shades and their massive weakness. Spell Striking to clear away abjuration immunity so that Keldorn's dispel could get through.
Actually, you can use simulacrums to clone your scrolls and solve the problem of high-level scrolls being scarce. Just put whatever scroll you want to cast in one of your quick slots, cast simulacrum, use the scroll from your clone and voilà! The original scroll will not be destroyed and you can repeat the process if you wait long enough. If you can't cast simulacrum from your spell pool, you can use Vhailor's Helm once per day. This makes casting from scrolls a viable option.
Edit: I thought you meant casting from your spell pool, in which case no. For scrolls, I think you can eventually.
I am using SCS which prevents this kind of cheese.
This seems to make it a tad risky in BG1.
I actually don't mind this one, it's far from being the worst cheese and it brings a whole new gameplay for classes that can't cast high-level scrolls naturally. Since arcane users tend to be overpowered in this game, it closes the gap a little.
Apologies for my second answer, I read too fast and thought you meant learning from scrolls and then use them as a learned spell. I know I can cast in armor from scrolls if I'm a F/M or even a Bard, but when it comes to dualclassing I'd guess you won't be able to when you're a sole fighter or mage since you can't wear armor when you're a mage and can't cast from scrolls if you're a fighter. After you've reached the necessary xp to get your mage class to dual effectively into fighter, you should be able to cast from scrolls while in armor just like a F/M, but not your spell pool unless you have a specific armor. Someone will probably confirm or disprove.
Anything is allowed in single player games of course, but it can turn combat from a challenge to a cakewalk quickly when compared to usual progression of available spells. Not everyone enjoys that.
In no-reload the hoarding and occasional use of scrolls can really turn the tide of a battle, but to spam them like that would kill the fun for me.
One big plus in favor of single class that I forgot to mention in my first post is that I quite like to try out the many different kits available, to try out the differences and how it affects gameplay. Of course those could be dualed then, but I fear I would fall into the optimization trap then which seems to be the cause of so many cases of restartitis. Or it could lead to different builds that are then still played in the same way, and I love to try out new things and characters that require me to adjust the way I play them instead of falling back into old patterns.
I respect your opinion. Here's why I personally don't mind:
1) You're bothered by the fact that with simulacrum a rare scroll can be used multiple times. You mention that this breaks balance. What I don't understand is that learning from a rare scroll and casting the rare spell whenever you want from your spell pool leads to the same result as casting from quick items through simulacrums. In both cases you'll be able to cast the rare spell more than once, circumventing the scarceness. If it was impossible to learn from those scrolls, I would agree with you. But you can!
2) Vhailor's Helm doesn't allow you to cast simulacrum in every battle, it's once per day. You may claim that one can sleep an entire day between each battle but how is that any different from resting between every fight and recasting from your spell pool?
3) What turns combat into a cakewalk isn't cloning if you ask me, it's high-level arcane magic no matter the source. There are quite a few spell combos that are so powerful that it's basically a "press to win"' situation. I understand mages start out pretty underwhelming and need to come out very strong to compensate, but ultimately high-level arcane magic was blown out of proportion. Also, there are a few potions or protection scrolls that are OP, cloned or not. Blaming cloning for using broken spells/items is kinda misleading in my humble opinion, there wouldn't be anything broken if the scroll/spell/potion wasn't broken in the first place.
For most spells, the minimum effective caster level is the minimum level you can cast them at; you won't get any less than 12th level effects for level 6 spells, 14th level effects for level 7 spells, 16th level effects for level 8 spells, and 18th level effects for level 9 spells. Casting them with an actual caster level of 10 is only worse in regard to dispel checks.
On that "in your school" note - specialization does lock you out of scroll-casting anything in your opposition school. It's a significant drawback, and might not be worthwhile. Especially since you're not really getting anything from the primary kit bonus of extra spell slots.
You get the save bonus/penalty for your specialization school. That also applies to scrolls and wands so you are getting 'something', especially if you choose invoker.
(I hope I'm not derailing the thread too much by answering that. Also not trying to convince anyone that my opinion is right, it's a personal opinion after all. Just explaining)
By casting a scroll from a similacrum's quickslot, you can use it more often than when you memorize the spell, because you can cast spells that are still above your casting level without having to fret when to use that precious high-level spell, or use more than your spell slots allow at your current level. Memorizing the spell doesn't help you if you can't cast it yet or have only one level 8 or 9 slot and various valuable spells for that slot. Additionally, not being interrupted while casting is a huge advantage compared to casting from your memorized spells.
And imagine using the one and only Protection from Magic scroll in SoA, sold by Ribald, like that. Instead of a once-in-a-lifetime rescue item you could use it every time.
You don't need to agree with me, but maybe that makes it a bit clearer where my impression comes from.