SoD really does complicate these questions. Used to be ~160,000 XP was a great place to dual, and Chateau Irenicus/Circus Tent were a great way to get back a lot of the difference. Now there's a whole campaign to play at that level, and the jump to BG2 doesn't happen til ~500,000 XP. It makes the inter-game dual-class much less attractive, to me at least.
The more I think along those lines, the more I like multiclassing over the wacky dual-classing mechanic. Especially now that I can mod the game to allow humans to multiclass, and allow multiclass kits. If Beamdog would ever add a script action to the game in response to my two-year-old feature request, I would be able to create a hybrid system that gives players the best of both worlds... but Beamdog has not shown any interest in giving us that tool.
I'd rather they just threw the whole thing out and went with 3rd Edition.
Well, ripping out the guts of the game and completely reprogramming the multiclass rules doesn't seem very likely at this point. Whereas by comparison, making a Script Action or opcode to flip a single bit in a .cre file would be child's play. And would give us the main benefit of the 3E system: no downtime (like multiclass), and the ability to ultimately advance to high levels in a single class (like dual-class).
Not to mention that 3rd ed. multiclassing rules are utter garbage.
I tend to have a preference for multiclass, but I did have fun with a Berserker dualed to Cleric as well. R'am converted to Priesthood at level 5, after he got his second Enrage.
*edit: But my most beloved warrior/priest combi was Faihra, a Cleric/Ranger multiclass (in the pre-EE BG Tutu, where a C/R had access to Druid spells from level 1), who progressed through BG2 as well until I finished Shadows of Amn.
Not to mention that 3rd ed. multiclassing rules are utter garbage.
Well, 3E multiclassing rules are great for two reasons: 1) they let you decide how much your character wants to devote to each class; and 2) they don't involve downtime in any class at any time.
I could give players both of those benefits within the 2E system... if Beamdog were to add a new opcode or script action. (Theoretically.)
Multiclassing is when a person devotes their time to multiple classes simultaneously. 3rd ed "multiclassing" is just a dual class that can't make up its mind, switching back and forth between professions like an indecisive college student.
No it isn't. It drastically changes the way xp is divided. A 3rd ed multiclass (Using 2 classes as an example) will end up with both of their classes at half the level of a pureclass. The way BG does it, you are only 1-2 levels behind by cap. Its training both your jobs at once (an actual multiclass) vs. glorified dual classing (ignoring one class to train another).
No it isn't. It drastically changes the way xp is divided. A 3rd ed multiclass (Using 2 classes as an example) will end up with both of their classes at half the level of a pureclass. The way BG does it, you are only 1-2 levels behind by cap. Its training both your jobs at once (an actual multiclass) vs. glorified dual classing (ignoring one class to train another).
That could only be true if 3rd edition somehow overhauled the XP level progression, and I don't think it did.
The reason I always end up not playing 3e is because the lack of boundaries in the class system completely breaks my restartitis. I just can't make up my mind what to play since I can play anything and everything at the same time, so I end up creating theoritical beastly chars theat become gimped because I multi too much, heh..
For me, the best system would be the 3e system but once you have picked your first class, most other classes are greyed out and made unavailable and you only get a couple to choose from based on your race. So if I choose dwarf fighter everything 'cept cleric, thief and a few more is off limits. To me, this hybrid between 2 and 3e would be optimal.
I dunno why though, but choosing a class to get skills/feats makes me feel a bit.. shattered. I've realized I have a hard time to RP someone with too diverse classes and then you add prestige classes to that as well. The classes are almost becoming redundant and they are just merely a "feat package" you buy. Like when I add shadowdancer level 1 in NVN just to get the HiPS. It's a great feat to have of course, but it doesn't make much sense RP wise.
So even though I think the system I mention above would be really good, I still always come back to 2e and static classes, heh.. Better the devil you know, ay?
No it isn't. It drastically changes the way xp is divided. A 3rd ed multiclass (Using 2 classes as an example) will end up with both of their classes at half the level of a pureclass. The way BG does it, you are only 1-2 levels behind by cap. Its training both your jobs at once (an actual multiclass) vs. glorified dual classing (ignoring one class to train another).
That could only be true if 3rd edition somehow overhauled the XP level progression, and I don't think it did.
Blatant thread necromancy here, but I just want to add something that I missed when this was a current thread.
3E did drastically overhaul the XP level progression. The following numbers, for brevity, are in thousands.
2E basically doubles the exp for each level for some number of levels, usually the first 10 levels, then goes linear for each class. So something like 2,4,8,16,32,64,125,250,500,750,1000,1250... is common looking for levels 2 to 13, and is the fighter table. Save for minor truncation from 128->125 and 512->500, it IS doubling. The Priest also doubles from 2 to 10, the rogue and wizard (and off-archetypes like Druid/Paladin/Ranger) aren't quite so neat, but they do double for a time at low levels, then go linear unto infinity.
3E adopts a non-linear formula of (n-1)*1000 exp to add to reach next level. Whatever your current level, add that many thousand XP to get to the next level, from 1 to infinity. So basically 1,3,6,10,15,21,28,36,45,55,66,78... is the exp levels necessary to hit character levels 2 to 13.
78k for ANY class at 13th is radically different from 750k for the lowest 2E class at 13th, the Druid.
Of course, you also don't get exp for non-challenging fights, which IIRC is something like -6 levels. I could kill a million gibberlings by eventually one-shotting them and reach level 40 in 2E. Eventually the exp tap trickles and stops in 3E, making you have to fight harder and harder things. Though there's also exp bonuses for going over your head.
Comments
Perhaps we have very different definitions of "completely unplayable".
*edit: But my most beloved warrior/priest combi was Faihra, a Cleric/Ranger multiclass (in the pre-EE BG Tutu, where a C/R had access to Druid spells from level 1), who progressed through BG2 as well until I finished Shadows of Amn.
For me, the best system would be the 3e system but once you have picked your first class, most other classes are greyed out and made unavailable and you only get a couple to choose from based on your race. So if I choose dwarf fighter everything 'cept cleric, thief and a few more is off limits. To me, this hybrid between 2 and 3e would be optimal.
I dunno why though, but choosing a class to get skills/feats makes me feel a bit.. shattered. I've realized I have a hard time to RP someone with too diverse classes and then you add prestige classes to that as well. The classes are almost becoming redundant and they are just merely a "feat package" you buy. Like when I add shadowdancer level 1 in NVN just to get the HiPS. It's a great feat to have of course, but it doesn't make much sense RP wise.
So even though I think the system I mention above would be really good, I still always come back to 2e and static classes, heh.. Better the devil you know, ay?
Blatant thread necromancy here, but I just want to add something that I missed when this was a current thread.
3E did drastically overhaul the XP level progression. The following numbers, for brevity, are in thousands.
2E basically doubles the exp for each level for some number of levels, usually the first 10 levels, then goes linear for each class. So something like 2,4,8,16,32,64,125,250,500,750,1000,1250... is common looking for levels 2 to 13, and is the fighter table. Save for minor truncation from 128->125 and 512->500, it IS doubling. The Priest also doubles from 2 to 10, the rogue and wizard (and off-archetypes like Druid/Paladin/Ranger) aren't quite so neat, but they do double for a time at low levels, then go linear unto infinity.
3E adopts a non-linear formula of (n-1)*1000 exp to add to reach next level. Whatever your current level, add that many thousand XP to get to the next level, from 1 to infinity. So basically 1,3,6,10,15,21,28,36,45,55,66,78... is the exp levels necessary to hit character levels 2 to 13.
78k for ANY class at 13th is radically different from 750k for the lowest 2E class at 13th, the Druid.
Of course, you also don't get exp for non-challenging fights, which IIRC is something like -6 levels. I could kill a million gibberlings by eventually one-shotting them and reach level 40 in 2E. Eventually the exp tap trickles and stops in 3E, making you have to fight harder and harder things. Though there's also exp bonuses for going over your head.