You would only be something other than a Half-Orc to either be a class they can't be, or because you really want the shorty save bonuses.
Those are two very significant reasons NOT to be a half-orc, though - especially since there are so few char classes they can choose from (only FOUR out of the eleven non-multi casses).
I think the half-orc's advantages in str & con balance out the fact that it has such limited class options.
Also, while half-orcs are ideal for melee fighters, what if you'd prefer your fighter to be more of a ranged fighter? In that case, you may prefer to play as an elf, with their advantages in dext, using bows, and infravision.
If I just wanna play... a fighter I'm gonna go Half-Orc probably. But there are a lot of things other than fighters to play. Or I may want to specificly try something different like a Halfling Fighter with Grand Mastery in Slings or something weird.
Half-Orcs are awesome at what they do, but that's a bit of a narrow list.
half orcs cant be dualed. so, no, not overpowered at all.
For a full trilogy run multiclasses will almost always be better than the equivalent dual-class. Fighter/Thieves are the main example available to Half-Orcs. In that case having access to both HLA pools outweighs any kit bonuses. There are some interesting dual-class builds, but they are more eccentric than they are practical. For a simple run through of BG1 I can see dual classing coming out ahead in many circumstances, but not by enough to see it as a huge advantage for humans.
half orcs cant be dualed. so, no, not overpowered at all.
For a full trilogy run multiclasses will almost always be better than the equivalent dual-class. Fighter/Thieves are the main example available to Half-Orcs. In that case having access to both HLA pools outweighs any kit bonuses. There are some interesting dual-class builds, but they are more eccentric than they are practical. For a simple run through of BG1 I can see dual classing coming out ahead in many circumstances, but not by enough to see it as a huge advantage for humans.
I still think that kai + assassination + correct offhand/mainhand + improved haste is probably the n1 source of damage in the game.
@vekkth That combination is certainly very powerful, but assassination does not work against many of the most powerful enemies in the game. Critical Hit might deal less damage, but it works against most strong enemies. It's biggest advantage is that is ensures a hit with all attacks except critical misses. The damage is good enough even without the doubling. Late game enemies rarely have enough hp to survive for long.
I still think that kai + assassination + correct offhand/mainhand + improved haste is probably the n1 source of damage in the game.
Assuming a Kensai 13/Thief 24 that hits every time, you're looking at, with 20 Strength, +17 damage, and if you're using a scimitar or something, assume an extra +9, to be very generous, damage for Kai. +5 for a +5 weapon.
So.... +31 damage, backstabbed to 155 damage on a single hit, 1550 on 10 hits, assuming that their offhand does identical damage to their main hand.
Assuming a Fighter/Mage/Thief with Mislead active, Improved Haste and Critical Strike activated, forgetting any of the other damage boosting buffs they may have, you're looking at, with the same 20 Strength and +5 weapon, and rolling a 1 for all damage rolls:
2[13+2+5+1]x5 damage. Or, 42 damage, as you're misled, they're all backstabs, for 210 damage per hit, 1890 damage assuming they only get 9 attacks due to lacking Grand Mastery. The attacks all hit, guaranteed, and all crit, guaranteed.
If you throw in Tenser's, or the fact that instead of using Critical Strike and Improved Haste, the F/M/T can simply GWW with Carsomyr or Staff of the Ram, you'll probably find some higher numbers in there somewhere.
Whilst good, Kai is simply not as valuable as Fighter HLAs.
@Pantalion correct me if i am wrong - you need to remove exp cap to reach levels you mention with a tripple class? I THINK lvl 12 kensai ken get thiefs HLA without the need to remove it, right?
If he has lackluster AC it'd only be because you didn't roll for 18 Dex and a mild ding due to being stuck with Splintmail.
Half-Orcs are definitely overpowered in BG1, their disadvantage affects nothing they can be, and they combine the best advantage possible, +Str with the Dwarf bonus of +Con. It was ok for BG2 since they couldn't be imported from BG1, and thus couldn't benefit from all the stat tomes a BG1 veteran character could get.
You would only be something other than a Half-Orc to either be a class they can't be, or because you really want the shorty save bonuses.
The Tomes actually make them worse because with them every race besides Elves can get 19 strengh and the difference between 19 and 20 is quite neglectable.
The cap allows for full x5 Backstabbing at level 17, and Mislead is a level 6 spell, so that's level 12 at the earliest. All they need are the two HLAs to allow them to grab Critical Strike, and one of those is Smite, which actually gives all critical hits for as well (but is only really valuable against Large or bigger enemies because of the knockback), meaning they can do this two rounds a day or so if for some unholy reason an enemy survives a first round 1,800 damage.
This is all available to an F/M/T the moment they get 3,300,000 Total Exp (3,000,000 if you're facing a large enemy so you can use Smite). They can do it twice in a row when they get to 3,375,000 Total Exp.
With the 8,000,000 cap in place, the only real limitation to an F/M/T is that they cannot cast level 9 spells without Simulacrum Scroll abuse.
You are correct in that things get a little crazy without the cap. Were the cap raised only to 9,000,000 then an F/M/T would be able to cast level 9s and squeeze in two Mage HLAs for Summon Planetar and Improved Alacrity. The latter would then allow the casting of Assassination, GWW and Critical Strike all at once, giving ten attacks that all automatically hit and all deal backstab damage without the need to go invisible at all.
Edit: It occurs to me I didn't mention, for frame of reference, that a Fighter 12 needs 1,000,000 Exp, and Fighter 13 (definitely worth the wait for an extra 1/2 attack, you can reach 14 without changing your maximum Thief level of 39) needs 1,250,000 Exp, and this amount doesn't add when Dual Classing for calculating when you receive HLAs, so the K/T needs a minimum of 4,000,000 Total Exp to gain Assassinate.
@Pantalion: I love FMTs with all my heart, just finished ToB on insane with one (as in about 20 mins ago), but Mislead-Backstab is very much overpowered and exceedingly exploity... and with the awesomeness they can get, totally unnecessary.
I mean, time traps? (aka your level 9 spells, beats Time Stop any time) that alone means that you can murder pretty much everything before it could hit back.
the whole class is awesomesauce, beats any other lesser dual/multi power-, fun- and variety-wise.
...and unlike other backstabbers. they can actually survive the heat punching holes into an enemy next to his friends brings at you, even on the highest difficulty (mirror image, stoneskin, PFMW) - not really a strong suit of other thief combos.
the only weakness of FMTs in BGEE is the dreaded xp limit - they stop just short of getting the extra 1/2 attack from fighter levels, or 4th level spells, though they can still eat little kensais for breakfast.
disclamer: this comment may seem somewhat... fragmented. sorry about that, I've been playing ToB for the past... erm... 14 or so hours?
half orcs cant be dualed. so, no, not overpowered at all.
For a full trilogy run multiclasses will almost always be better than the equivalent dual-class. Fighter/Thieves are the main example available to Half-Orcs. In that case having access to both HLA pools outweighs any kit bonuses. There are some interesting dual-class builds, but they are more eccentric than they are practical. For a simple run through of BG1 I can see dual classing coming out ahead in many circumstances, but not by enough to see it as a huge advantage for humans.
Well it depends.
I find early dualclassed Clerics (i.e. Fighters/Rangers dualed at the very start of BG2 or imported dualclassed Clerics from BG1) to be far superior than multiclassed Clerics in BG2, especially if you run with a full party, because they're always 1-3 levels behind. With the abundance to undead in BG2, those levels really matter for turning undead rolls. Viconia and Anomen, for example, would be able to mindcontrol/instagib undead of appropriate level, where as, Aerie would merely turn them. The difference can make certain level-based abilities, like turn undead, go from OK to very powerful during a playthrough. I mean, who doesn't love instagibbing vampires by the 6th chapter in BG2? XD
Also, for some classes, the kit bonuses, the early access to spell levels, number of spells per level, and spell power is very beneficial DURING the playthrough, and I find that more enjoyable than having a stronger endgame, IMO. Aerie, for example, gets ridiculously powerful by the end of SoA and when ToB comes around, but I find her pretty meh through most of the playthrough in SoA compared to say Edwin or Viconia.
With that said, multiclasses are almost always better by the time HLAs come into play. Also, multiclassed druids and thieves hit their effective levels pretty early, so they aren't affected as much as say mages and clerics. On the other hand, dualclasses typically would access HLAs quicker (even if it's just of the 2nd class instead of both) than a multiclassed one. And if you ignore their HLAs (I realize they are extremely powerful), Fighters and Rangers also don't offer much at later levels, so dualclassing away from one doesn't really hurt that much. There's a reason why everyone thinks dualclassing is OP or at least makes up for the lack of perks Humans get =P
EDIT: I probably should say that my views are a bit biased, because i primarily play BG2: SoA with a full group and ignore the ToB part of the trilogy, so that really inhibits my access to HLAs.
half orcs cant be dualed. so, no, not overpowered at all.
For a full trilogy run multiclasses will almost always be better than the equivalent dual-class. Fighter/Thieves are the main example available to Half-Orcs. In that case having access to both HLA pools outweighs any kit bonuses. There are some interesting dual-class builds, but they are more eccentric than they are practical. For a simple run through of BG1 I can see dual classing coming out ahead in many circumstances, but not by enough to see it as a huge advantage for humans.
Well it depends.
I find early dualclassed Clerics (i.e. Fighters/Rangers dualed at the very start of BG2 or imported dualclassed Clerics from BG1) to be far superior than multiclassed Clerics in BG2, especially if you run with a full party, because they're always 1-3 levels behind. With the abundance to undead in BG2, those levels really matter for turning undead rolls. Viconia and Anomen, for example, would be able to mindcontrol/instagib undead of appropriate level, where as, Aerie would merely turn them. The difference can make certain level-based abilities, like turn undead, go from OK to very powerful during a playthrough. I mean, who doesn't love instagibbing vampires by the 6th chapter in BG2? XD
Also, for some classes, the kit bonuses, the early access to spell levels, number of spells per level, and spell power is very beneficial DURING the playthrough, and I find that more enjoyable than having a stronger endgame, IMO. Aerie, for example, gets ridiculously powerful by the end of SoA and when ToB comes around, but I find her pretty meh through most of the playthrough in SoA compared to say Edwin or Viconia.
Personally, I prefer a multiclass fighter over dual-classing away from one in almost every case. The HLA pool is just that good. That being said, I can see dualing away from Cleric as being good (for SoA and ToB, at least). They have very good low level buffs, but their HLA pool is probably the worst of any class in the game.
I would take Aerie over Viconia, but not Edwin. It's not really a fair comparison since Viconia and Edwin have huge NPC bonuses while Aerie doesn't. Viconia has a high innate MR, Edwin has his amulet of extra spells, but all Aerie has is the Elf bonuses rather than Half-Elf bonuses. Her Turn Undead will be worse, but remember that unlike Viconia's Unholy Blight Aerie's Holy Smite will actually harm evil enemies. There aren't that many lawful good enemies in the game. It's a very nice AoE damage dealer that doesn't harm the kind of party which is likely to have Aerie in it (one of non-evil alignment). Mind Controlling the undead isn't that useful in my opinion. The trick with early and mid-level C/M is to combine low and mid level Cleric and Mage spells for powerful combinations. They will never compete with a single classed character in that character's domain. Aerie might not compete with Anomen as a Cleric either, but remember that she can set Skull Traps, grant Improved Haste, and Breach enemies. Thanks to abilities like Stoneskin, Mirror Image, and, eventually, Protection from Magical Weapons (along with Cleric buffs, of course) she can probably be a much tougher melee character than Anomen for short bursts of time. Earlier than that she is still good as a buffer, and AoE damage dealer. The key to a C/M is its diversity, not its ability to replace a Mage or a Cleric.
With that said, multiclasses are almost always better by the time HLAs come into play. Also, multiclassed druids and thieves hit their effective levels pretty early, so they aren't affected as much as say mages and clerics. On the other hand, dualclasses typically would access HLAs quicker (even if it's just of the 2nd class instead of both) than a multiclassed one.
It's been some time since I played ToB, but isn't it the other way around? A dual-class can only access HLAs if their current class has sufficient XP, but a multiclass only needs the total XP to be high enough. For instance, a F/M begins to receive HLAs earlier than a Kensai->Mage, but the K->M can get the Mage spell HLAs earlier because they get level 9 spells earlier than the F/M.
And if you ignore their HLAs (I realize they are extremely powerful), Fighters and Rangers also don't offer much at later levels, so dualclassing away from one doesn't really hurt that much. There's a reason why everyone thinks dualclassing is OP or at least makes up for the lack of perks Humans get =P
I think most people consider them to be overpowered because of the Kensai->Mage, which, while powerful, is hugely overrated. I'm fairly sure it was designed to sneak some fighter levels in under the SoA level cap while still hitting level 17 as a mage. In that case it actually was far more powerful than the multiclass, but it caught on as one of the top classes and is now unfairly preferred over the Fighter/Illusionist. With the ToB cap and in BG1 a Fighter/Illusionist will be far stronger (although, being more powerful than a Kensai->Mage is not that important, since they will plough their way through the game quite nicely without Figher HLAs).
It's true that there aren't many disadvantages to dual-classing a Fighter early, it's a perfectly valid strategy. I prefer a multi class, but those combinations are certainly among some of the better classes in the game. If you intend to play a game where you only level high enough to get a few HLAs at the end of the game, then you should obviously give them far less weight.
EDIT: I probably should say that my views are a bit biased, because i primarily play BG2: SoA with a full group and ignore the ToB part of the trilogy, so that really inhibits my access to HLAs.
That might be true, I'm probably biased towards small groups and solo play. I should say that I still think that dual-classes can be very powerful, better than many other classes in the game. I just think that multiclasses usually have some advantages over them. I should also say that I'm comparing the classes directly without considering party. A certain dual-class could be better for a certain party than the equivalent multiclass. I also think that we have wandered far off the original topic.
Comments
There you go smeagolheart!
I think the half-orc's advantages in str & con balance out the fact that it has such limited class options.
Also, while half-orcs are ideal for melee fighters, what if you'd prefer your fighter to be more of a ranged fighter? In that case, you may prefer to play as an elf, with their advantages in dext, using bows, and infravision.
Half-Orcs are awesome at what they do, but that's a bit of a narrow list.
That combination is certainly very powerful, but assassination does not work against many of the most powerful enemies in the game. Critical Hit might deal less damage, but it works against most strong enemies. It's biggest advantage is that is ensures a hit with all attacks except critical misses. The damage is good enough even without the doubling. Late game enemies rarely have enough hp to survive for long.
So.... +31 damage, backstabbed to 155 damage on a single hit, 1550 on 10 hits, assuming that their offhand does identical damage to their main hand.
Assuming a Fighter/Mage/Thief with Mislead active, Improved Haste and Critical Strike activated, forgetting any of the other damage boosting buffs they may have, you're looking at, with the same 20 Strength and +5 weapon, and rolling a 1 for all damage rolls:
2[13+2+5+1]x5 damage. Or, 42 damage, as you're misled, they're all backstabs, for 210 damage per hit, 1890 damage assuming they only get 9 attacks due to lacking Grand Mastery. The attacks all hit, guaranteed, and all crit, guaranteed.
If you throw in Tenser's, or the fact that instead of using Critical Strike and Improved Haste, the F/M/T can simply GWW with Carsomyr or Staff of the Ram, you'll probably find some higher numbers in there somewhere.
Whilst good, Kai is simply not as valuable as Fighter HLAs.
Your statement is incorrect.
The cap allows for full x5 Backstabbing at level 17, and Mislead is a level 6 spell, so that's level 12 at the earliest. All they need are the two HLAs to allow them to grab Critical Strike, and one of those is Smite, which actually gives all critical hits for as well (but is only really valuable against Large or bigger enemies because of the knockback), meaning they can do this two rounds a day or so if for some unholy reason an enemy survives a first round 1,800 damage.
This is all available to an F/M/T the moment they get 3,300,000 Total Exp (3,000,000 if you're facing a large enemy so you can use Smite). They can do it twice in a row when they get to 3,375,000 Total Exp.
With the 8,000,000 cap in place, the only real limitation to an F/M/T is that they cannot cast level 9 spells without Simulacrum Scroll abuse.
You are correct in that things get a little crazy without the cap. Were the cap raised only to 9,000,000 then an F/M/T would be able to cast level 9s and squeeze in two Mage HLAs for Summon Planetar and Improved Alacrity. The latter would then allow the casting of Assassination, GWW and Critical Strike all at once, giving ten attacks that all automatically hit and all deal backstab damage without the need to go invisible at all.
Edit: It occurs to me I didn't mention, for frame of reference, that a Fighter 12 needs 1,000,000 Exp, and Fighter 13 (definitely worth the wait for an extra 1/2 attack, you can reach 14 without changing your maximum Thief level of 39) needs 1,250,000 Exp, and this amount doesn't add when Dual Classing for calculating when you receive HLAs, so the K/T needs a minimum of 4,000,000 Total Exp to gain Assassinate.
I mean, time traps? (aka your level 9 spells, beats Time Stop any time) that alone means that you can murder pretty much everything before it could hit back.
the whole class is awesomesauce, beats any other lesser dual/multi power-, fun- and variety-wise.
...and unlike other backstabbers. they can actually survive the heat punching holes into an enemy next to his friends brings at you, even on the highest difficulty (mirror image, stoneskin, PFMW) - not really a strong suit of other thief combos.
the only weakness of FMTs in BGEE is the dreaded xp limit - they stop just short of getting the extra 1/2 attack from fighter levels, or 4th level spells, though they can still eat little kensais for breakfast.
disclamer: this comment may seem somewhat... fragmented. sorry about that, I've been playing ToB for the past... erm... 14 or so hours?
I find early dualclassed Clerics (i.e. Fighters/Rangers dualed at the very start of BG2 or imported dualclassed Clerics from BG1) to be far superior than multiclassed Clerics in BG2, especially if you run with a full party, because they're always 1-3 levels behind. With the abundance to undead in BG2, those levels really matter for turning undead rolls. Viconia and Anomen, for example, would be able to mindcontrol/instagib undead of appropriate level, where as, Aerie would merely turn them. The difference can make certain level-based abilities, like turn undead, go from OK to very powerful during a playthrough. I mean, who doesn't love instagibbing vampires by the 6th chapter in BG2? XD
Also, for some classes, the kit bonuses, the early access to spell levels, number of spells per level, and spell power is very beneficial DURING the playthrough, and I find that more enjoyable than having a stronger endgame, IMO. Aerie, for example, gets ridiculously powerful by the end of SoA and when ToB comes around, but I find her pretty meh through most of the playthrough in SoA compared to say Edwin or Viconia.
With that said, multiclasses are almost always better by the time HLAs come into play. Also, multiclassed druids and thieves hit their effective levels pretty early, so they aren't affected as much as say mages and clerics. On the other hand, dualclasses typically would access HLAs quicker (even if it's just of the 2nd class instead of both) than a multiclassed one. And if you ignore their HLAs (I realize they are extremely powerful), Fighters and Rangers also don't offer much at later levels, so dualclassing away from one doesn't really hurt that much. There's a reason why everyone thinks dualclassing is OP or at least makes up for the lack of perks Humans get =P
EDIT: I probably should say that my views are a bit biased, because i primarily play BG2: SoA with a full group and ignore the ToB part of the trilogy, so that really inhibits my access to HLAs.
I would take Aerie over Viconia, but not Edwin. It's not really a fair comparison since Viconia and Edwin have huge NPC bonuses while Aerie doesn't. Viconia has a high innate MR, Edwin has his amulet of extra spells, but all Aerie has is the Elf bonuses rather than Half-Elf bonuses. Her Turn Undead will be worse, but remember that unlike Viconia's Unholy Blight Aerie's Holy Smite will actually harm evil enemies. There aren't that many lawful good enemies in the game. It's a very nice AoE damage dealer that doesn't harm the kind of party which is likely to have Aerie in it (one of non-evil alignment). Mind Controlling the undead isn't that useful in my opinion. The trick with early and mid-level C/M is to combine low and mid level Cleric and Mage spells for powerful combinations. They will never compete with a single classed character in that character's domain. Aerie might not compete with Anomen as a Cleric either, but remember that she can set Skull Traps, grant Improved Haste, and Breach enemies. Thanks to abilities like Stoneskin, Mirror Image, and, eventually, Protection from Magical Weapons (along with Cleric buffs, of course) she can probably be a much tougher melee character than Anomen for short bursts of time. Earlier than that she is still good as a buffer, and AoE damage dealer. The key to a C/M is its diversity, not its ability to replace a Mage or a Cleric. It's been some time since I played ToB, but isn't it the other way around? A dual-class can only access HLAs if their current class has sufficient XP, but a multiclass only needs the total XP to be high enough. For instance, a F/M begins to receive HLAs earlier than a Kensai->Mage, but the K->M can get the Mage spell HLAs earlier because they get level 9 spells earlier than the F/M. I think most people consider them to be overpowered because of the Kensai->Mage, which, while powerful, is hugely overrated. I'm fairly sure it was designed to sneak some fighter levels in under the SoA level cap while still hitting level 17 as a mage. In that case it actually was far more powerful than the multiclass, but it caught on as one of the top classes and is now unfairly preferred over the Fighter/Illusionist. With the ToB cap and in BG1 a Fighter/Illusionist will be far stronger (although, being more powerful than a Kensai->Mage is not that important, since they will plough their way through the game quite nicely without Figher HLAs).
It's true that there aren't many disadvantages to dual-classing a Fighter early, it's a perfectly valid strategy. I prefer a multi class, but those combinations are certainly among some of the better classes in the game. If you intend to play a game where you only level high enough to get a few HLAs at the end of the game, then you should obviously give them far less weight. That might be true, I'm probably biased towards small groups and solo play. I should say that I still think that dual-classes can be very powerful, better than many other classes in the game. I just think that multiclasses usually have some advantages over them. I should also say that I'm comparing the classes directly without considering party. A certain dual-class could be better for a certain party than the equivalent multiclass. I also think that we have wandered far off the original topic.