Do people like Vanilla Classes?
![[Deleted User]](https://forums.beamdog.com/applications/dashboard/design/images/banned.png)
[Deleted User]
Posts: 3,675
The user and all related content has been deleted.
- Do people like Vanilla Classes?144 votes
- I enjoy using vanilla classes40.97%
- I only use a vanilla class to make a dual class9.72%
- I prefer a Kit35.42%
- Multi-class is the way to go!11.81%
- Triple Class Rules!2.08%
0
Comments
I don't "powergame" or min-max or anything, I usually play as per some combination of enjoyable level of challenge, RP, and general fun. Druids have always been my favorite class to play for some reason, although I know many people have trouble seeing how the BG protagonist could have been a druid, growing up in candlekeep... Due to this if I want to play a druid, and want it to make sense RP-wise, I sometimes start as a fighter and then dual to druid sometime later in the game.
it varies by what class i use. With some im happy to use the basic kits. Some though i would never use the standard kits; thief,druid and ranger are examples of this. Also cleric although thats mostly cus i dont like the choice of gods available in the kits
I'm not sure I would agree with the assertion kits are supposed to be rare, many of the PNP kits are very underpowered collections of traits and skills like farmer or peasant. It's really not hard to imagine a party where most of the characters might even be exactly the same kit. Of course that actually sounds pretty boring to play, but from a pure role playing perspective it makes some sense (a group of peasant kids; say mostly fighters and thieves, with a single specialty cleric of a "common man" sort of priesthood, all having the appropriate kit for their background). Although some kits are more eccentric (Cavalier, Myrmadon, Assassin) and should be less common. But even so, player characters ARE meant to be special cases, so I don't know that uncommon is ever really an issue.
If someone was to opt for a default Fighter in BG:EE, for example, would they be able to choose a kit when importing their character to BG2:EE? Or is the choice of class and kit now a continuous one from one game to the next?
The worst is "Fighter." It sounds so ordinary. Even when BG1 first came out, I would play Rangers and Paladins, because they were special compared to Fighters.
The other day, I found myself wanting to play a warrior that could wear plate mail, but also use a bow, and potentially reach grand-mastery in some weapons. The only class that fit that description was a vanilla fighter...
I couldn't do it. I tried. I just couldn't do it.
If somebody created a Fighter kit that was identical to a vanilla fighter, but had a different name, I would play it in a heartbeat.
Hmmm... not well. And I have Dynaheir as my blasty mage, too. Looking for some nasty scrolls...
Edit: just to clarify, I thought this years before Warcraft was in existence lol!
because CHARNAME grew up in secluded Candlekeep
and recieved a balanced education from Gorion
I am going to put in my playthrough wishlist
BG1 was the 2nd game I played on my first computer
my 1st CHARNAME was a Paladin with stats of (No Lie )
STR 18/00
DEX 18
CON 18
INT 03
WIS 18
CHA 18
I know thats not muh of a RP MC
When BG2 came out
I went kit crazy
except for my vanilla fighter
never dueled classed and only played one multi-class
an gnome illlusionist/ thief ( I wanted my own version of Jan)
Now I try to put a little more thought in to my Main characters
and thinking about what would be my CHARNAME reason to duel class
also what was Imoen reason to duell class??? ( or just simply studying magic )
Was it Dnyheir ( Minsc's witch ) that taught Imoen her first spelll
since CHARNAME and Imoen had adventured together throught Baldur's Gate
would Imoen being taken away near the begining of BG2 be a traumatiic experience for the main character
and if the MC is human would the experience of losing Imoen make them want to duel class also
to try to compensate for the loss
Just somethin to think about
Especially clerics make little sense to me without a kit/chosing a deity. It's probably very very rare in the real world that someone decides to become a priest without being a believer first. (I don't like playing monks, but the same would apply to them.) I can see the limited kit/deity options as a reason for playing a non-kitted cleric, so Charname can worship a deity not offered as kit though.
@the_spyder It's because people put far too much stock in class names, and so playing a "Thief" when they would describe themselves as a "Scout" or "Spy" bothers them. See also: the reason for the proliferation of dozens of kits (classes and prestige classes in 3rd edition) covering minor variations on an archetype instead of just filing the serial numbers off a perfectly serviceable general class and calling your "Fighter" a "Knight" or "Viking" instead.
it also leaves me feeling like 'Rogue' (not rouge) is just generally to "PC".
Hmmm.. Now I really want to start another run with Charname being a female Elven Thief named "Rouge".
You raise some valid points. It is not out of the question for our protaganist to have a specialisation (a kit) with all things taken into consideration. The observation on age and the ease of access to a library filled with infinite knowledge is a very astute one indeed. Now I want to choose a kit!