Urgh. "Balance". I hate that word as it usually means wrecking anything that is remotely fun or good, because it is remotely fun or good, for the sake of some whiney peeveepeetard. In this case however, I believe the issue should be fixed not for balance but for correctness.
Is it actually possible though? Does the infinity engine actually have druid/cleric spellbooks separately or does the game just check something like "Is character druid/ranger? Then unlock spells flagged druid."? Because if it's the latter, it's probably trickier to fix.
However much I would rather not change anything, the mixed class does not "deserve" (for lack of a better word) higher level druid spells. They absolutely should get the ranger's spells, maybe even a special ability.. But there should be some sort of generation of power from the two types of magic being mixed together.
My opinion: I would propose they get their own spell set, however much that would be improper and tradition breaking (here comes the wrath). There should be some higher end druid spells that a ranger/cleric should receive; on the flip side, there should be some higher end cleric spells the mixed class should NOT receive.
Suggestion-- Point 1: I'll only look at BG2 spells for a number of reasons, main reasons being since this is the ToB engine I assume it will be those spells (please correct me if I'm wrong), and most importantly I should be working!! Point 2: I think my list might be a tad defensive, so changes can easily be made for balance and RP reasons. Point 3: I thought of this list believing the mixed class would be more "one with nature and a spiritual understanding of the other realms and deities.. that can shoot things," hence the mostly defensive/healing spells. I almost see it as a ranged attacking doctor-like with spiritual and physical prowess. Point 4: I think some of the necromanic spells like Dolorous Decay could be used to balance this, but that's where my bias in Point 4 comes in.
L1-3: You get what you get right now, maybe minus a few. L4: Animal Sum I, Cloak of Fear, Cure Ser Wounds, Def Harmony, Farsight, Free Action, Neu Poison, Poison, Mental Domination L5: Animal Sum II, Cure Crit Wounds Chaotic Commands, Magic Resist, Pixie Dust, True Seeing, Flame Stirke, Iron Skins, Raise Dead L6: Bolt of Glory, Fire Seeds, Sol's Searing Orb, Conjure Animals, Physical Mirror, Wondrous Recall L7 (if at all) : Earthquake, Transformations, Resurrection, Nature's Beauty, Storm of Vengeance, Sunray
*Casts Sanctuary* I'm just going to sit over here and comment during this fight to the death... I only played a Cleric/Ranger in IWD, not in BG, but I don't really see a reason for the 4th level + druid spells to be provided to any other class. Unless you are kitted, it feels like that is the only powerful unique feature (I don't think bear or wolf shapeshift are THAT powerful). Also, I don't think the Cleric/Ranger really needs those spells, they seem to do fine without them from my experience.
Personally I don't see the issue of the cleric/ranger having those extra spells. So, it's against the rules in PnP, but are those spells really that unbalancing? I think it makes the class unique and actually usable. Why not just balance out multi classed fighter? Give them their proper grand mastery and that pretty much rebalances everything, doesn't it? Now the part fighters make better offensive fighters while the ranger/cleric stays a powerful defensive fighter. I do think that a fighter cleric that is multi classed is not on par necessarily, but I think just restoring proper grand mastery would rebalance everything.
The point isn't that Baldur's Gate is not an FPS or an MMO. The point is that there is no REASON a cleric/ranger SHOULD have druid spells. It doesn't even make any sense. Heck if you could go cleric/druid then of course! By all means give all spells to both! But it isn't a cleric/druid. It's a cleric/ranger. Why, from any logical stand point of basic common sense, should a cleric dipping into a ranger class (or vise versa) get FULL access to druid spells?
@chickenhed. A cleric can't dip into ranger class or vica versa.
I''m unsure what you're saying here. Are we not talking about cleric ranger multiclass or ranger - cleric duals? Or are you pointing out that clerics cannot dual into rangers? I am aware of clerics not dualing to rangers. Which is why a ranger dualed to a cleric only "dips" into the ranger class as cleric gets most of the levels. Wording. Semantics. I'm sure my point got across regardless.
EDIT: yes you can dual from cleric to ranger. My mistake.
I'm thinking Johlanthus was being a stickler on your wording. I would also note to you that it is possible for a Cleric to dual to a Ranger (without shadowkeeper or any such help).
I'm thinking Johlanthus was been a stickler on your wording. I would also note to you that it is possible for a Cleric to dual to a Ranger (without shadowkeeper or any such help).
Then I am even more confused than before about what he meant. Either way, thank you for letting me know that. I'm not sure why I thought you couldn't. My mistake.
@chickenhead probably because it is sort of like dualing from a mage to a cleric, or from a cleric to a fighter. It is not the most common choice to make. Plus you can only do it as a good cleric.
Somehow a Ranger/Cleric NPC is related to a cleric with nature circle in an 3.5 D&D so we can at least justify it. What i think is that a Ranger/Cleric shoud get some penalities in other circle spells, necromancy circle for example (finger of the death and animate death should be removed from an Ranger/Cleric option).
Fighters who multiclass do not get past 2 points in proficiency slots. You don't get anything as a fighter if you decide to multiclass, the ranger will always have it better.
Anomen is an exception, just to ppl know he can go to 5 proficiency slots.
I don't think this discussion should be about people trying to convince others that their opinions are wrong. People are just voting on what they want and providing their reasons.
- Some people like how Cleric/Rangers currently function and go "To hell with the rules!" - Other people would like Cleric/Rangers to be fixed so that they respect the rules.
Both reasons are perfectly fine for me.
In the end, is just an Lawful x Chaotic question, so it seems i'm in the chaotic side atm... XD!
Kelemvor needs more Cleric/Rangers since he is apposed to undead. Having a Priest that can track undead back to their lair and finish them off in combat or with turn undead would be a massive boon to his cause.
Overall balance is irrelevant. The C/R will never be as powerful as combinations like the Kensai->Mage or even the Sorceror. The problem, as I see it, is that the C/R takes up a niche already occupied by a couple of other class combinations, and so we want to keep it unique without having it make those other classes redundant.
So here's what I propose:
Give the Cleric/Ranger access to all Druid spells, but have them appear at a slower rate than the Cleric spells. Maybe gain a new level of spells for every 3 Ranger levels, rather than every 2 Cleric levels.
That way, a C/R ultimately gets the bonus of being able to cast high-level Druid spells, giving it an edge over the F/C, but it gains the Druid spells slowly, keeping it from replacing the F/D
EDIT: Wait, crap. I totally meant to vote for the second option.
EDIT2: I just remembered I modded my game to allow GM for Fighter multiclasses, so my evaluation on how R/C would stack up compared to F/C and F/D may be a bit off the mark. Obviously with MC GM, R/Cs are the least potent fighters of the three, but they make up for it by getting all divine magic.
Honestly? That might be an even better fix. Just allow multiclassed Fighters to put five pips in a weapon spec.
Honestly? That might be an even better fix. Just allow multiclassed Fighters to put five pips in a weapon spec.
Would that not devalue pure fighters? If M/C characters can get 5 pips in weapons then there is no mechanical reason to ever make a pure fighter.
Although this is also true now, if they don't un-nerf grand mastery there is no real reason to get more than two proficiency (1 TACH0, 2 damage and -3 speed factor is not all that great for three extra proficiency slots). I never play a pure fighter because of this, only when starting a D/C, but even then I seldom spend more than two points in favor of specialization in more weapon types.
Honestly? That might be an even better fix. Just allow multiclassed Fighters to put five pips in a weapon spec.
Would that not devalue pure fighters? If M/C characters can get 5 pips in weapons then there is no mechanical reason to ever make a pure fighter.
Pure fighters can take a kit (Kensai and Berserker are ace), will advance much faster, meaning that they get the pips earlier (and often, at all - in BG1, for example, a F/x probably would only be able to reach four pips, maybe even three, and they certainly won't be able to get GM in two weapon types in ToB the way pure fighters can), and will still have substantially more hitpoints due to pureclass fighters getting better hit dice than M/C. Their THAC0 and saving throws will be worse due to levelling slower, etc.
Also notable is the fact that unless you're making an F/T, you're also looking at a fourth stat you need to take care of (STR, DEX, CON and either INT or WIS depending on your second class), which means the odds of you having good stats are pretty low.
I get that it kind of devalues pureclass Fighters a bit, but MC'd fighters in turn are devalued by DC fighters, who can level up until they reach GM, then switch over to the other class, and be substantially better at both classes than an equivalent MC
EDIT: It may be worth mentioning that I've actually tried it. In Icewind Dale (much more combat heavy) I applied the tweak pack to give MC'd fighters up to five pips in any weapon slot, and while being more versatile, our party's Fighter/Thief was still no match at all for our Dwarvern pure-class Fighter in a straight-up brawl. Like it wasn't even a contest. So in my experience, it doesn't undermine the value of pureclasses, and with kits in the picture I imagine that would be even more true.
Honestly? That might be an even better fix. Just allow multiclassed Fighters to put five pips in a weapon spec.
Would that not devalue pure fighters? If M/C characters can get 5 pips in weapons then there is no mechanical reason to ever make a pure fighter.
Pure Fighters can use any weapon compared to a Fighter/Druid or Fighter/Cleric. Fighter/Thief and Fighter/Mage means that they can't use Heavy Armor while thieving/casting (though you could swap armor before combat, but meh).
I never understood why multi-classed fighters are barred from Grand Mastery. No other class used in a multi-class has that kind of penalty.
seems like that's your answer then, isn't it? Besides, if you do take away the extra druid spells from the C/R then what's even the point of playing that class? Might as well play a fighter cleric or fighter druid. I personally think there needs to be a better reason than the fact that a small technicality isn't followed
Fighter/Thief and Fighter/Mage means that they can't use Heavy Armor while thieving/casting (though you could swap armor before combat, but meh).
I never understood why multi-classed fighters are barred from Grand Mastery. No other class used in a multi-class has that kind of penalty.
That's what elven chain is for. Though admittedly you don't get it until late in bg2.
I think I used dalekeeper to do that once because I thought it was silly to put ranks in weapons I wasn't going to use to I just swapped them out. Single handedly cleared out a room full of trolls with a shortbow and some fire arrows
seems like that's your answer then, isn't it? Besides, if you do take away the extra druid spells from the C/R then what's even the point of playing that class? Might as well play a fighter cleric or fighter druid. I personally think there needs to be a better reason than the fact that a small technicality isn't followed
Take undead as your favored enemy, or demons, then hunt the abominations with holy power backing you up.
Doesn't bother me. I always play warrior classes, or at the very least a Blade or Swashbuckler. Doesn't seem all that imbalanced, either. Multi-class cuts your XP gain relatively evenly between Cleric (arguably the second best class in the game) and Ranger (essentially a weaker version of the Fighter), and any Druid spells you memorize come at the cost of some very good Cleric spells.
No more overpowered than Fighter/Mage or Thief/Mage, imo.
I'm actually a bit confused at this point, because I'm not sure what the actual issue is anymore. Is the problem that rules aren't being followed, or is it a balance issue?
I'm actually a bit confused at this point, because I'm not sure what the actual issue is anymore. Is the problem that rules aren't being followed, or is it a balance issue?
Different issues for different people I gather. I think there are good points behind behind the change based both in the rules and in the balancing IMO.
I would support the 5 points for a multiclassed fighter solution, but then there is a question of a pure druid (no kit). Like the non-kit Paladin and non-kit Cleric there really is no positive benefit in being one, since there are a number of examples of armour you can get early on where most kits can wear (I've read that the shapeshifter cannot wear armour, I'm not sure if that includes ankheg mail). Plus their ownly advantage over totemic druids is that they can shapechange, which isn't particularly useful in either game (you don't get it until level 7 in BG, which is a fair period of time into the game).
I'm actually a bit confused at this point, because I'm not sure what the actual issue is anymore. Is the problem that rules aren't being followed, or is it a balance issue?
Seems to be a mechanical problem really; game doesn't differentiate between druid and cleric spellbooks so it just does a check to see if the character is a cleric or druid/ranger; if the character is either of the latter classes then it unlocks druid spells in the priest spellbook and that's the end of it. So it's an oversight or limitation in the engine. It can be justified lorewise by saying the cleric is a cleric of the nature-spell giving god I suppose, but that isn't the actual mechanical reason for level 4+ spells being unlocked.
And then people are arguing about balance and rules which really have nothing to do with it; it would have to be intentional to allow the argument's existence :P
I'm not sure what would be a good remedy for the cleric/ranger. According to the rules rangers only get access to divine spells from the animal and plant spheres. But since this is only a small fraction of the available druid spells that would be very limiting.
Comments
Is it actually possible though? Does the infinity engine actually have druid/cleric spellbooks separately or does the game just check something like "Is character druid/ranger? Then unlock spells flagged druid."? Because if it's the latter, it's probably trickier to fix.
My opinion: I would propose they get their own spell set, however much that would be improper and tradition breaking (here comes the wrath). There should be some higher end druid spells that a ranger/cleric should receive; on the flip side, there should be some higher end cleric spells the mixed class should NOT receive.
Suggestion--
Point 1: I'll only look at BG2 spells for a number of reasons, main reasons being since this is the ToB engine I assume it will be those spells (please correct me if I'm wrong), and most importantly I should be working!!
Point 2: I think my list might be a tad defensive, so changes can easily be made for balance and RP reasons.
Point 3: I thought of this list believing the mixed class would be more "one with nature and a spiritual understanding of the other realms and deities.. that can shoot things," hence the mostly defensive/healing spells. I almost see it as a ranged attacking doctor-like with spiritual and physical prowess.
Point 4: I think some of the necromanic spells like Dolorous Decay could be used to balance this, but that's where my bias in Point 4 comes in.
L1-3: You get what you get right now, maybe minus a few.
L4: Animal Sum I, Cloak of Fear, Cure Ser Wounds, Def Harmony, Farsight, Free Action, Neu Poison, Poison, Mental Domination
L5: Animal Sum II, Cure Crit Wounds Chaotic Commands, Magic Resist, Pixie Dust, True Seeing, Flame Stirke, Iron Skins, Raise Dead
L6: Bolt of Glory, Fire Seeds, Sol's Searing Orb, Conjure Animals, Physical Mirror, Wondrous Recall
L7 (if at all) : Earthquake, Transformations, Resurrection, Nature's Beauty, Storm of Vengeance, Sunray
Thoughts?
I only played a Cleric/Ranger in IWD, not in BG, but I don't really see a reason for the 4th level + druid spells to be provided to any other class. Unless you are kitted, it feels like that is the only powerful unique feature (I don't think bear or wolf shapeshift are THAT powerful). Also, I don't think the Cleric/Ranger really needs those spells, they seem to do fine without them from my experience.
Edit: For clarity
EDIT: yes you can dual from cleric to ranger. My mistake.
I'm thinking Johlanthus was being a stickler on your wording. I would also note to you that it is possible for a Cleric to dual to a Ranger (without shadowkeeper or any such help).
Maybe I roleplay too much.
So here's what I propose:
Give the Cleric/Ranger access to all Druid spells, but have them appear at a slower rate than the Cleric spells. Maybe gain a new level of spells for every 3 Ranger levels, rather than every 2 Cleric levels.
That way, a C/R ultimately gets the bonus of being able to cast high-level Druid spells, giving it an edge over the F/C, but it gains the Druid spells slowly, keeping it from replacing the F/D
EDIT: Wait, crap. I totally meant to vote for the second option.
EDIT2: I just remembered I modded my game to allow GM for Fighter multiclasses, so my evaluation on how R/C would stack up compared to F/C and F/D may be a bit off the mark. Obviously with MC GM, R/Cs are the least potent fighters of the three, but they make up for it by getting all divine magic.
Honestly? That might be an even better fix. Just allow multiclassed Fighters to put five pips in a weapon spec.
Pure fighters can take a kit (Kensai and Berserker are ace), will advance much faster, meaning that they get the pips earlier (and often, at all - in BG1, for example, a F/x probably would only be able to reach four pips, maybe even three, and they certainly won't be able to get GM in two weapon types in ToB the way pure fighters can), and will still have substantially more hitpoints due to pureclass fighters getting better hit dice than M/C. Their THAC0 and saving throws will be worse due to levelling slower, etc.
Also notable is the fact that unless you're making an F/T, you're also looking at a fourth stat you need to take care of (STR, DEX, CON and either INT or WIS depending on your second class), which means the odds of you having good stats are pretty low.
I get that it kind of devalues pureclass Fighters a bit, but MC'd fighters in turn are devalued by DC fighters, who can level up until they reach GM, then switch over to the other class, and be substantially better at both classes than an equivalent MC
EDIT: It may be worth mentioning that I've actually tried it. In Icewind Dale (much more combat heavy) I applied the tweak pack to give MC'd fighters up to five pips in any weapon slot, and while being more versatile, our party's Fighter/Thief was still no match at all for our Dwarvern pure-class Fighter in a straight-up brawl. Like it wasn't even a contest. So in my experience, it doesn't undermine the value of pureclasses, and with kits in the picture I imagine that would be even more true.
I never understood why multi-classed fighters are barred from Grand Mastery. No other class used in a multi-class has that kind of penalty.
I think I used dalekeeper to do that once because I thought it was silly to put ranks in weapons I wasn't going to use to I just swapped them out. Single handedly cleared out a room full of trolls with a shortbow and some fire arrows Take undead as your favored enemy, or demons, then hunt the abominations with holy power backing you up.
No more overpowered than Fighter/Mage or Thief/Mage, imo.
I would support the 5 points for a multiclassed fighter solution, but then there is a question of a pure druid (no kit). Like the non-kit Paladin and non-kit Cleric there really is no positive benefit in being one, since there are a number of examples of armour you can get early on where most kits can wear (I've read that the shapeshifter cannot wear armour, I'm not sure if that includes ankheg mail). Plus their ownly advantage over totemic druids is that they can shapechange, which isn't particularly useful in either game (you don't get it until level 7 in BG, which is a fair period of time into the game).
And then people are arguing about balance and rules which really have nothing to do with it; it would have to be intentional to allow the argument's existence :P