Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Categories

Dark Dreams of Furiae - a new module for NWN:EE! Buy now
Attention, new and old users! Please read the new rules of conduct for the forums, and we hope you enjoy your stay!

Is there a way to add 2 kits to a multi or duel class character?

SmilingSwordSmilingSword Member Posts: 827
edited July 2015 in General Modding
As the title says, is this possible?

It's easy to add one kit with EE keeper, but 2 seems to be a no go.
Really wanna try silly things like a kensai/assassin or swashbuckler/wildmage or a zerker/cleric of Talos or something like that.

Post edited by SmilingSword on

Comments

  • The user and all related content has been deleted.

    SmilingSword
  • wolpakwolpak Member Posts: 390
    I think a mod may be able to do this. If you give the ability at level 1 to play the hidden monster trick and add a kit to your current character.

  • AquadrizztAquadrizzt Member Posts: 1,018
    @wolpak, it is not an issue of adding a kit from character creation or through Keeper.

    The issue arises from the fact that .cre files in the Enhanced Editions (and also any original Baldur's Gate game) only have a single dword (4 bytes) at offset 0x244 reserved for kits. This means that the game files can only handle a single kit on any creature.

    elminsterSmilingSwordRAM021
  • The user and all related content has been deleted.

    SmilingSword
  • ErstarrungErstarrung Member Posts: 48

    Eh, for me it seems uninteresting anyway. If you want extra powers just cheat yourself whatever spell you want. Or toggle God Mode, or whatever. What's the difference?

    I don't think it necessarily has something to do with wanting to cheat oneself superpowers. It could be about roleplaying as well. For instance, it's well in accordance with the Forgotten Realms rulebooks (even the 2e ones) that you're not just a Cleric, but a Cleric of a specific God, so it would make perfectly sense to wish to play, for instance, a Fighter / Cleric of Helm multi.

    Or take a human: Let's presume he's an accomplished Assassin who decides it's easier to earn money not with murdering specific targets while on his own, but with being hired as part of a large group to battle other large groups, so he becomes a mercenary (= any Fighter), the game says it's all fine and dandy to do so (Assassin -> Fighter is allowed). But presume the opposite: A mercenary who decides he'll earn more money when eliminating specific targets on his own instead of being part of a large group, the game tells you that this is a no-go (Fighter -> Assassin isn't allowed). To me, that restriction doesn't make sense from a roleplaying point of view.

    Or, directly from the events of BG2: After playing through BG1 you get captured by a magician who kills some of your friends and tortures you and some of your friends - wouldn't it make sense that your PC, let's say a Bounty Hunter, starts loathing wizards? Wouldn't then a class change Bounty Hunter -> Wizard Slayer make sense as well?

    RAM021
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 0
    edited July 2015
    The user and all related content has been deleted.

  • ErstarrungErstarrung Member Posts: 48
    edited July 2015

    Anyway the role-playing reasons make some sense: your ability to take a kit happens when you decide to specialize solely in one area; if you split your time between two fields you can still gain XP and become skilled, but you have lost the opportunity to become a specialized master; those special extra benefits are reserved for those who devote themselves singularly and solely to that profession.

    (...)

    Kits are meant to represent a career or profession. So for you example of a bounty hunter>wizard slayer above, don't think of it as two separate professions that you want to combine; instead think of it as a single career path, and design a kit for that career path.

    Well, that is not always true. While a specialist wizard certainly has to train for his abilities and it might be ok to exclude humans from dual-classing into wizard kits (although it takes training to become a non-specialist wizard as well, so the on-the-fly wizardisation of CHARNAME when he duals over is unrealistic as well), the same isn't true for clerics. Clerics receive their spells (and their 'special kit spells') not because they train for years, but because their deity grants these spells to the Cleric. In my opinion (which was enforced in 3e latest), there shouldn't be any kitless Cleric at all (as every Cleric has to worship a specific deity which grants all the spells in return).

    And in my example above, the Bounty Hunter -> Wizard Slayer would certainly not follow a single career path, but would first follow the career path of Bounty Hunter, and then, due to the life-changing events at the start of BG2, would abandon that career path (although still using what he learned during his time as a Bounty Hunter) and would start a completely new career path he now follows exclusively - the path of a Wizard Slayer.

    By the way, I just checked my old 2e rulebooks from back in the day (Complete Fighters and Complete Thieves), and both rulebooks (who introduced the respective kits) specifically allowed not only dual-classing away from a kit, but as well dual-classing into a kit (so my above Fighter -> Assassin dual class is actually a legal dual-class option in 2e, specifically allowed by the rules).

    Anyway, I just wanted to note that it may not always be a power gaming attitude that might lead you to mod the BG games, but roleplaying reasons might do the same (and, btw, I certainly wouldn't count a Bounty Hunter -> Wizard Slayer as cheating oneself godly power, but more or less gimping your character for roleplaying purposes).

    RAM021
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 0
    edited July 2015
    The user and all related content has been deleted.

    Post edited by [Deleted User] on
  • RAM021RAM021 Member Posts: 403

    Read Outliers by Malcolm Gladwell, it basically provides a scientific basis for the ADnD 2e restrictions on kits for 2nd classes or multiclasses.

    That would be swell if:
    1 - Outliers actually supported your claim
    2 - more importantly 2E had such restrictions

    Outliers shows that it takes practice to achieve mastery, which the 2E rules suggest should indeed take place; however, 2E rules also explicitly allow both multiclass kits and kits for a dual-class's second class.

  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 0
    edited July 2015
    The user and all related content has been deleted.

    Post edited by [Deleted User] on
  • RAM021RAM021 Member Posts: 403

    Just as important (for me, as I "DM" my own experience with these games), kits were originally designed to be role-playing aids, not combat aids. They were meant to help players flesh out their characters' history, career, and identity. Bioware created a pure combat-oriented "RPG" and turned the idea of kits into specialized roles with completely mechanical, rather than thematic, characteristics. In that context (which, let's remember, is not faithful to the PnP rules) it's worth paying attention to power balance and rules design. The vanilla kits were specifically designed for single-class characters; therefore, for kitted multiclasses, I think it's better to design kits specifically for them.

    That BG1&2 contain numerous non-combat encounters fundamentally disproves your statement and casts significant question as to the validity of the rest of your 'analysis'. Furthermore, while kits are intended to assist with character development, there is no evidence that kits were merely "designed to be role-playing aids" - indeed, a quick literature review shows that many kits are in fact combat oriented. Nevertheless, the IE kits do have thematic characteristics even if they are mostly mechanical differences.

    We appreciate that despite the game engine you are your own best DM; however, not all of us agree with your definition of fun. As such, 'tweaking a rule further from PnP to make the game more fun' is not necessarily a good tweak.

    While we cannot say whether the kits were designed solely for single class characters or not, it seems inconceivable that given the level of BG1 modding, there would be no consideration of the possibility of multi/dual-class kit use. After all, BG1 supported dualling to what would become Mage kits. That said, we have not seen any official word one way or the other.

    Certainly we agree that given the official PnP existence of multi/dual-class kits their inclusion would have been preferable; however, your own post expresses a frustration with the game engine (as indeed so to do your many excellent mods) that need not be a factor in this case.
    [And in this case it is not even an engine issue so much as a GUI problem since the engine actually somewhat supports it]

    PnP supports kitting multi & dual-class characters and kEEper lets you assign them after the fact. That said, not all kits are better than the kitless class and the relative power balance between individual kits fluctuates wildly throughout the series as do the classes themselves - just like in PnP!

  • The user and all related content has been deleted.

  • The user and all related content has been deleted.

    RAM021Grammarsalad
  • AstroBryGuyAstroBryGuy Member Posts: 3,415

    By the way, I just checked my old 2e rulebooks from back in the day (Complete Fighters and Complete Thieves), and both rulebooks (who introduced the respective kits) specifically allowed not only dual-classing away from a kit, but as well dual-classing into a kit (so my above Fighter -> Assassin dual class is actually a legal dual-class option in 2e, specifically allowed by the rules).

    Fighter -> Assassin dual-class is legal by PnP rules, but not Bounty Hunter->Wizard Slayer. The rules are pretty explicit that you can only have one kit.

    If a character starts off as a warrior, he may take any of the Warrior Kits above. If, later, he decides to change classes according to the normal Dual-Class Benefits and Restrictions rules, he doesn't lose any of the benefits or hindrances of the Kit he chose; he is still that sort of fighter. If that second character class also has a range of Kits available to it, he may not choose a new, additional Kit.

    If a character starts off as some other character class, does not take on a Kit appropriate to that class, and then later switches to one of the warrior classes, he can choose a Warrior Kit at that time . . . though the DM may insist that certain campaign events be accomplished in order to allow him to do this.
    The original kit rules from the Complete Fighter's Handbook explicitly disallowed multi-class characters from having kits.
    These Warrior Kits are designed to add depth to a warrior-class character. But if the character is already multi-class (for example, an elf fighter-mage), he doesn't need any more depth. Therefore, only single-class warriors can take one of the Warrior Kits described above.
    Later books like the Complete Book of Elves allowed multi-class PCs to have kits (setting up yet another instance where two AD&D books have completely conflicting rules), but they are still firm on the one kit per character rule.
    Once a player has chosen a particular kit for a PC, he or she cannot exchange it for a new one. Neither can a character have two kits. It is only possible to have one kit at a time.

    If characters want to abandon a kit for any reason, they cannot select a new one, for the kit describes their development and growth. These PCs can abandon the kit's hindrances, but they also loses any benefits as well.
    Bizarrely, the 1994 printing of the Complete Fighter's Handbook has the rule barring kits for multi-class PCs, despite the Complete Book of Elves coming out in 1992 allowing them. TSR was publishing rulebooks with conflicting rules at the same time! :confounded:

  • ErstarrungErstarrung Member Posts: 48
    edited July 2015

    But I honestly think that the guy who apprentices with the assassin's guild from age 12 and learn's nothing else, should be different and better at it, than the guy who spends a quarter or half of his career being a fighter first. (Not to mention the role-playing issues - how would you just decide to be an assassin or bounty hunter or jester etc.? Who trains you? It should really be a quest reward, not just a decision you make.)

    But if this is your (main) concern, you should be against any dual class. I mean the guy who apprentices with the thieves' guild from age 12 and learns nothing else actually isn't different and better at thieving than the guy who spends a quarter of his career being a fighter first. And not to mention the roleplaying issues - how would you decide to just be a thief or a wizard etc.? Who trains you?

    So, to make a long story short, the way dual-classing is implemented raises the exact same roleplaying issues regardless if you dual into a pure class or a kit. Not only an Enchanter needs time and training to learn how to cast spells, how to read and write magic, etc. - a pure class Wizard needs this training, too.

    What is more, some kits do not represent specialist trainig - a Wild Mage, for example, isn't a Wizard with some specialist training, but a Wizard who is born with a natural special aptitude, so his special talent would simply start to show while he receives ordinary, pure-class training. And (again) the cleric kits - the kitted clerics don't train for their special abilities, their deity grants them these abilities, they simply know how to do it in an instant (the very instant a divine being decides that this Human should simply know how to do it).

    So you should either speak up against any dual-classing (for roleplaying reasons), or let people dual into a kit if they want to (if you disregard the roleplaying issues you have with ANY dual-classing, even into pure classes).

    As the game engine is limited to one kit per character, it would be perfectly viable to take a pure class first, and a kit second (and not only the other way round).

    RAM021
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 0
    edited July 2015
    The user and all related content has been deleted.

  • AstroBryGuyAstroBryGuy Member Posts: 3,415

    What is more, some kits do not represent specialist trainig - a Wild Mage, for example, isn't a Wizard with some specialist training, but a Wizard who is born with a natural special aptitude, so his special talent would simply start to show while he receives ordinary, pure-class training. And (again) the cleric kits - the kitted clerics don't train for their special abilities, their deity grants them these abilities, they simply know how to do it in an instant (the very instant a divine being decides that this Human should simply know how to do it).

    Wild Mages in PnP are NOT born with a "special aptitude". The are mages who have chosen to study a new theory of magic. From the Tome of Magic:
    With the discovery of wild magic has come the appearance of wizards devoted to its study. Like their traditional specialist brethren, wild mages have thrown themselves into the intense study of a single aspect of magic. This has given them unique benefits and restrictions on their powers. Wild magic is so different from traditional magic that only those devoted to its study may cast wild magic; no wizard other than a wild mage may attempt to use the spells of wild magic.
    The Wild Mage class description for BGEE makes no reference to a special aptitude either:
    WILD MAGE: Wild magic is a new type of magic that is characterized by powerful and dangerous surges of unpredictable magic. Generally considered to be an unfortunate byproduct of the Time of Troubles, wild magic has recently begun to attract the attention of many a curious or scholarly wizard.

    Wild Mages are wizards who specialize in the study of wild magic. They have access to spells to protect themselves from wild magic and bend it to their wills. Wild magic is extremely unpredictable and should be used with caution.
    Beamdog decided to use the "inborn aptitude/genetic mutation" trope for Neera. She can't help being a Wild Mage because she's born to it, like Harry Potter can't not be a wizard or Rogue can't stop sucking people's life energy away when she touches them. It's an way to make the character an "Outsider", but it's not the way Wild Mages are supposed to be in PnP.

    As for cleric-kits, those are special orders. And one does have to undergo special training/rites to gain admittance to an order. Not all clerics of Shar get inducted into the Nightcloaks. There are also the Dark Justiciars, Beguilers, and Darkcloaks. There are also some priests who aren't in an order.

    Now, all priests of Shar should only get access to spells by particular spheres (this is not implemented), but the kit abilities should be reserved for the special orders.

    [Deleted User]RAM021
  • ErstarrungErstarrung Member Posts: 48

    I "should" think something? You want to control what opinions I'm allowed to have? Sorry buddy, I'm not your straw man - I can have any opinions I damn well please. My rationalizations are perfectly reasonable and well-thought-out.

    (...)

    (EDIT - and, for the record, I *am* against dual-classing, I think it's dumb in concept and mechanically broken. I think the game would be better if the choice was either single-class or multiclass (and allow humans to multiclass). But lots of players love the powergamey aspects of dual-classing, and if you ever made a mod that just eliminates it you would get laughed out of town.)

    Well your rationalisations are not only perfectly reasonable and well thought-out, you're overabundant with humility, as well...

    Apart from that, I'm not sure how one can reasonably jump from "you should speak up" to "I want to control what opinions you're allowed to have"? - To make it clear, "you should speak up" was short for "if the aforementioned roleplaying concerns are your main reasons to speak up against dualling into kits, it would make more sense to speak up against dualling as a whole, as the aforementioned roleplaying reasons apply for individuals dualling into pure classes as well". But seeing that I'm not perfect, I'm sure that what I said was easily mistakeable for your perfectly reasonable deductions as me trying to deprive you of these damn well pleasing opinions you have...

    While with your edit, you actually stated that you indeed speak up against all dual-classing, why should I make a mod that disallows dual-classing? - If I (or anybody else) doesn't want to dual-class, I simply don't. No mod needed.

    RAM021
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 0
    edited August 2015
    The user and all related content has been deleted.

    Post edited by [Deleted User] on
  • VallmyrVallmyr Member, Mobile Tester Posts: 2,445
    If there's one thing that this post taught me it was that 2e rulebooks seem to be a mess when it comes to consistency XD. I know the Complete Book of Necromancers, which is the only book I own, talks about being able to dual into a specialist mage (specifically the Necromancer) and in fact a kit as well.

    I believe there was this cool Arabian Undead Hunter guy named Talib the Magnificent who was like a Fighter/Necromancer (Deathslayer).

    ronaldo[Deleted User]RAM021
  • RAM021RAM021 Member Posts: 403

    By the way, I just checked my old 2e rulebooks from back in the day (Complete Fighters and Complete Thieves), and both rulebooks (who introduced the respective kits) specifically allowed not only dual-classing away from a kit, but as well dual-classing into a kit (so my above Fighter -> Assassin dual class is actually a legal dual-class option in 2e, specifically allowed by the rules).

    Fighter -> Assassin dual-class is legal by PnP rules, but not Bounty Hunter->Wizard Slayer. The rules are pretty explicit that you can only have one kit.
    If a character starts off as a warrior, he may take any of the Warrior Kits above. If, later, he decides to change classes according to the normal Dual-Class Benefits and Restrictions rules, he doesn't lose any of the benefits or hindrances of the Kit he chose; he is still that sort of fighter. If that second character class also has a range of Kits available to it, he may not choose a new, additional Kit.

    If a character starts off as some other character class, does not take on a Kit appropriate to that class, and then later switches to one of the warrior classes, he can choose a Warrior Kit at that time . . . though the DM may insist that certain campaign events be accomplished in order to allow him to do his.
    Bizarrely, the 1994 printing of the Complete Fighter's Handbook has the rule barring kits for multi-class PCs, despite the Complete Book of Elves coming out in 1992 allowing them. TSR was publishing rulebooks with conflicting rules at the same time!
    Fighter Handbook 9th printing was Oct 1994; first printing seems to indicate Dec 1989. It does not seem to incorporate any errata or other corrections. It appears to be merely a verbatim re-printing.

    The Complete Thief's Handbook (1989? & Jan 1990? & Nov 1993) places no such restriction on second class kits:
    If a human character starts off as a thief, he may take any of the Thief Kits above. If, later, he decides to change classes according to the normal Dual-Class Benefits and Restrictions rules, he doesn't lose any of the benefits or hindrances of the kit he chose; he is still that sort of thief.

    If a character starts off as some other character class and then, later, switches to one of the thief classes, he can chose a Thief Kit at that time, though the DM may insist that certain campaign events take place in order to allow him to do this.

    Priest Handbook (Jun 1990?) explicitly allows multi-class to take a kit, but extends this restriction to Dual-class as well: single kit total. Of course, it also makes a distinction between Priesthoods/Faiths and Kits...
    Any multi-class priest can take one of the Priest Kits above. However, he can only take one kit, total. If he has several character classes, he can't take a separate kit for each class.

    The same is true of dual-class characters. If a character begins play as a priest and takes one of the kits above, and then later changes to another class, he does not have to abandon the kit. However, he still may only have one kit. Also, if he chooses to abandon the kit when he changes class, he may not then take on a kit from the new class. The character may only have had one kit, ever, as long as he is played.

    Wizard Handbook (Aug 1990? & Oct 1994) makes no mention of Multi or Dual-class exclusions or exceptions; however, it does make clear that Specialist Wizards are NOT kits and indeed can take kits themselves as well as multiclass.
    [in fact the Complete book of Necromancers (Apr 1995?) lists Necromancer specific kits - no kit restrictions whatsoever]

    Bard's Handbook (Apr 1992? & 4th, Nov 1994) does not address multi or dual class kits, but unlike other classes does permit a Bard to swap his initial kit in a limited fashion.
    [yes, Bard's can multi & dual]

    Ranger Handbook (Dec 1993? & 3rd, Jul 1994 & 4th, Oct 1996): A Ranger chooses a character kit at the outset of his ranger's career; only one kit can be chosen for a particular ranger. Dual-class Rangers may be of any character kit allowed in the campaign. No discussion of multi-class kits, although the Ranger/Druid multi is explicitly permitted.

    Paladin Handbook (May 1994?): A Paladin may only have one kit; Dual-class have access to any allowed kit. Obviously there is no multi-class section, but "demipaladins" should be Fighter/Clerics... Mazzy?!?!?

    Barbarian (Feb 1995?) may only have one kit; dual-class Barbs have access to any compatible kit allowed in the campaign. Barbs may multiclass with Cleric.
    [although not explicitly stated, presumably Shamans (Barbarian Clerics) could then also multi with Fighter]

    Druid (Aug 1994?) confirms validity of Ranger/Druid, Druid/Mage & F/M/D and numerous Dual-class possibilities, but nothing on kit limits.


    Dwarves (Nov 1991? & Nov 1993): No mention of dual-classes obviously...
    A character may only use a kit that belongs to his class. It is not possible, for example, for a thief to use a warrior kit. Multi-class characters are an exception. A player with a multi-class character is not restricted to these options. He may choose any one kit from those relevant to his character. A warrior/priest could choose a warrior, a priest, or a warrior/priest kit. A character may have only one kit.

    Elves (1992? & Jan 1993?): A character cannot have two kits; it is only possible to have one kit at time. Multiclass kit selection same as Dwarves.

    Gnomes & Halflings (Mar 1993? & 3rd, Feb 1994): Once a character has been assigned a kit, that selection remains for the life of the character as a character who is assigned one kit can never exchange that kit for another. Multiclass kits as per Dwarves.

    Humanoids (May 1993? & 5th, Jul 1995 & 6th, Mar 1999) allows only one humanoid kit per character but places no further restrictions on multi & dual-classes.


    Finally Forgotten Realms specific:

    Wizards and Rogues & Warriors and Priest of the Realms (1995?/Feb 1996?) state that if there is a contradiction between a Handbook and the Realms, that the latter takes precedence. Neither book places any general limits on kits, although specific kits themselves can have restrictions.

    Faiths & Avatars (Mar 1996?) generally prohibts (human) specialty priests from selecting a kit with few exceptions; however, Demihuman Deities (Dec 1998?) generally permits (demihuman) specialty priests to select a kit. Unfortunately, Powers & Pantheons (Sept 1997?) makes no mention of kits whatsoever although it does have some interesting Human MULTIclassing...

    Demihumans of the Realms (1998? & Jan 1999?) deliberately makes mention of a modification to previous guidelines regarding kit usage: a multiclass character many only have one kit, which can be applied to only one of the character's classes.


    Therefore, as there are thus numerous examples of both internal inconsistences/disagreements with kit selection AND that in theory newer rules replace older rules we do not believe that it can conclusively be stated outright "that you can only have one kit". If nothing else certain combinations do not explicitly disallow multiple kits. In fact, given that certain races/classes have the ability to select kits that are not appropriate to their class, that would even allow them to bypass the restriction on dualing into a Fighter kit!

    Certainly possible that the conclusion could be that a character is to only have a single ACTIVE Kit; however, as it currently stands various combinations permit multiple simultaneous kits.

    VallmyrErstarrung
  • VallmyrVallmyr Member, Mobile Tester Posts: 2,445
    Was coming into say that Talib was written as a
    Dual Class Human: 5th level Desert Warrior/16th-level
    Necromancer (Deathslayer)

    Though, the post above me seems to solve the matter completely now XD

    RAM021
  • The user and all related content has been deleted.

  • RAM021RAM021 Member Posts: 403
    We are not sure that the IEee will NEVER support multiple kits; after all IWD2 would require a significant re-working, although that seems to be on the backburner as of late. Nevertheless currently a single active kit is all that is possible.

    The multi-kit mod 'builds' an entirely new kit by combining all the functions of the selected kits into a single kit. This built kit then is assigned to the character's single kit slot. It works well enough although installing is finicky to say the least on the EEs. Since it is off to a good start, updating and finishing this would probably achieve the desired multiple kit goal...

    For dual class chars, we can already change the kit to match the second class. In most cases this works well enough as you rarely lose the previous gained abilities, although disadvantages and penalties can be mistakenly annulled.

    Multi-class characters can exploit this to manually change the active kit to match the class leveling up; however, classes that level at the exact same XP point do cause issues.

    Both cases require considerable use of kEEper and often the assignment of effects to fully duplicate multiple kits...


    In any event, as before we see no need to delay new kit abilities or remove previous kit effects given that the rules often explicitly allow it. Certainly there is some power creep (as there was with the introduction of kits, etc to begin with), but as the game is single player and not inherently balanced to begin with that should simply not be a concern.

  • semiticgoddesssemiticgoddess Member Posts: 14,833
    To address an earlier question in this thread: yes, you can actually have two kits. It won't display as such, item restrictions may not stack, and proficiency maximums may conflict, but you can give a character the bonuses and penalties for two or more kits by putting all such bonuses and penalties into a single CLAB file. That's how I ran characters with 5 kits in an old randomized run: I just added more stuff to a given CLAB.2da. So, you could give a character +1 to AC every 5 levels, like a Swashbuckler, plus immunity to fear like a Cavalier, plus access to Called Shot, to a cleric.

    This is a big post, so I'll put it in spoilers to disguise the fact that I'm talking too much.

    I tweak characters to make them more interesting. A Kensai/Assassin isn't interesting to me, because it's just a Kensai/Thief with bigger damage. But a Stalker Monk would be interesting because it's a backstabbing monk.

    Still, I think "I want a 200-damage backstab" is an okay reason for making a Kensai/Assassin. A Fighter/Thief would want the same thing.

    The Michael Jordan analogy doesn't quite fit: MJ spent 20 years playing basketball, and wasn't a star baseball player, but that doesn't mean the basketball kit is incompatible with the baseball kit. It means he's a level 20 basketball player dualing to a level 1 baseball. His stats are okay; he just doesn't have enough XP. Give him another 21 years (lifespan isn't too relevant by comparison since your character in BG hits level 40 in 2 years) and he'll be a level 20/21 baseball/basketball player and he'll be a pro at both sports. Basketball doesn't render him incapable of playing professional baseball; he just didn't have enough XP to be a level 20 baseball player. A multi-class level 15/15 baseball player/basketball player could play both sports extremely well--he or she just wouldn't be able to play as well at either of them compared to a level 20 character. The abilities are still there.

    Think about it. A class is a form of specialization. A mage doesn't learn to swing a sword because he or she wants to read books. A kit is another form of specialization. The specialist mage doesn't read certain books to make room for others.

    Multi-classes are a form of generalization. A Fighter/Thief learns less about fighting to learn more about stealth. A Kensai/Bounty Hunter does the same, and also learns less about armor to learn more about weapons, and learns less about locks to learn more about traps.

    It's all different levels of specialization. I study Chinese instead of French, political science instead of biology, history instead of religion, and diplomacy instead of finance. You could call me a Chinese Speaker/Historian/Diplomat, a triple-kitted character, or an Analyst on Chinese Politics, a single-kitted character.

    Kits impose penalties as well as grant bonuses. More kits doesn't mean a better character. Use Any Item can negate some penalties, but that speaks to the power of UAI, not any kit.

    RAM021kid_combo
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 0
    edited August 2015
    The user and all related content has been deleted.

  • semiticgoddesssemiticgoddess Member Posts: 14,833
    Yeah, my multi-kit munchkins had to be tweaked manually, one by one. Most of the work happened in randomizing their stats and resistances, however.

    The original Bioware kits don't always give big bonuses for small penalties. Sometimes it's the other way around. But usually people combine stuff to make their characters more powerful, and so the better kits get chosen. That's why we ask for RP justifications for power-gamey builds, instead of power-gaming justifications for RP builds.

    RAM021
Sign In or Register to comment.