any suggestions for a single-person multiplayer party to use thru bg1&2 + expansions?

ksn · Post by **ksn** » Sun Nov 21, 2004 11:13 am

hi all,

(fyi - i've never posted to a forum before, so bear with me. i did look around before posting, and didn't find what i needed. anyway, here goes

)

i'm looking to play bg with a multiplayer party and am considering a paladin/ranger/fighter/thief/mage/cleric deal. (vanilla, i know, but i haven't played an rpg in a long ass time. i'll try the all-bard combo next time). here's the wrinkle - because i'm sentimental, i'd like to use that same party for the expansion and then export it to bg2. but i'd like for the games to be challenging all the way through. so...

* will bg2 get too easy if i play it with a party that finished bg (even if i adjust diff levels)?
* if yes, does it make sense to dual class them? at what point does that make sense? (maybe to some of the new classes in bg2?)
* or should i just multiclass 'em from the beginning and settle in for the long-haul?
* was also planning on going with 6 characters. should i go with 5 and leave a slot left for npcs for quests?

hope that was an ok post, and thanks for any advice!
ksn

ps. also posted this to planetbaldur, i figured i could use all the help i can get

LotharBot · Post by **LotharBot** » Mon Nov 22, 2004 4:47 pm

Check out the BG2:ToB forum for my description of a party my wife and I took all the way through both games with both expansions. Mine was maybe a bit overpowered for what you're looking for, but it's a good place to start.

I love to start BG1 with a party of mostly fighters (with a single thief and a single cleric-mage), and dual-class the fighters at various levels depending on what I want them to eventually be and how long I'm willing to go without their skills from each of the 2 classes. Fighter levels 7, 9, and 13 are all good times to dual-class if you're just playing BG2 -- but since you're playing BG1 as well, you have to watch the experience cap if you try to dual at level 7. If you go fighter-druid or fighter-thief you can do it at level 7 and still get the fighter abilities back before the end of BG1, but if you go fighter-cleric or fighter-mage, you can't (which is why my fighter-cleric dualed at level 6.)

I would definitely avoid taking a straight mage or a straight cleric. At the very least, start the game as a fighter (for the extra strength and hitpoints) and then dual at level 2. Your thief can always dual-class into a mage during BG2 to give you some extra spell power, as well.

I've also heard you can do some nice things with the ranger if you dual/multi him as a cleric.

So, with respect to your party:
- Paladin. Good as is. Pick a BG2 kit for him based on your preferences.
- Ranger. Good. Consider Ranger/Cleric for additional casting possibilities.
- Fighter. Good as is.
- Thief. Consider a fighter/thief multi or a fighter/thief dual at level 2, or a thief/mage dual at about level 10 (in BG2).
- Cleric. I highly recommend fighter/cleric (dual at level 2) for bonus HP and strength. If you have enough healing from your PC and paladin early-game, dual at a somewhat higher level for the extra HP.
- Mage. I highly recommend a fighter base (dual at level 2 or higher), again, for the bonus HP and strength.

Coot · Post by **Coot** » Tue Nov 23, 2004 1:30 pm

I'm not in agreement with Lotharbot about dualclassing your mage. Why does the mage need a fighterbase? He doesn't need strength or hp. A mage was never meant for melee. He casts spells from behind the frontliners.
If your party had less melee power dualing the mage would make sense, but you already have a paladin, ranger and a fighter... not even counting the dualed cleric (which makes more sense: a dualed fighter/cleric can be quite a powerhouse, especially at higher levels, with all those spells buffing him up.).
Dualing the mage only costs xp IMHO, xp that could go to a straight mage resulting in more magical power. Just my thoughts.
BTW, if you dual in BG1, your guy won't be able to pick a kit in BG2.

Welcome to GameBanshee.

me0w · Post by **me0w** » Tue Nov 23, 2004 5:40 pm

"Dualing the mage only costs xp IMHO, xp that could go to a straight mage resulting in more magical power. Just my thoughts."

He is just suggesting dualing at levl 2, 1.5k - 2k experience is so insignificant, it really can't ruin your leveling. Its worth doing, it makes your mage so much more powerfull! - Although you would have to dual to a "Mage" I think, which sucks, because mages are very annoying. I quite like having a Necromancer and an Illusionist. Also Having the mage with 20-30 more hp, depending when you dual (levl4?) it will really help later on.

"paladin/ranger/fighter/thief/mage/cleric"

Do you want to make these characters yourself?

If your playing through, and your used to BG, I might suggest using TuTu, it could be usefull.

With Tutu I'd suggest for BG1 having You as a paladin, Kivan(ranger), Kaigan(fighter),Imoen(thief/dualed to mage at levl 6-9), Edwin(Necromancer) and Branwen(cleric). - also you could substitute someone for Coran, one of the nicest and most powerfull characters in BG1.

All those characters are available early on, perhaps if you want to change you class you can go for Ajantis as your paladin, but he is quite a late character.

As for BG2, stick with You (paladin-turn either Undead Hunter, or Inquisiter), Imoen/Yoshi(thieves+imoen as mage, take the other along, they will keep swapping about), Anomen (cleric/fighter), Valygar (Ranger), Edwin(Necromancer) and Jaheria (Druid/Fighter, to be substituted for a later ToB warrior - no other warrior types fit, and man can she and anomen hold the front!).

These 2 parties keep to your "paladin/ranger/fighter/thief/mage/cleric" idea. They will be extremely powerfull, especially in BG2. I'd advise being a female character so that you can Romance Anomen, because Jaheria will be swapped at ToB.

Oh crap, you want a Multiplayer party, well go with either BG1 or 2 type, Instead of Edwin have a sorcerer. Also Valygar is a stalker and Jaheria is multi'd while Anomen is dualed at around levl 7-9. Make your thief a dualed/Multi'd either Fighter or mage, its worth it.

Anyway, I hope this helps. Good luck.
Oh and;
"Welcome to GameBanshee.

"

LotharBot · Post by **LotharBot** » Tue Nov 23, 2004 8:07 pm

Coot wrote:Why does the mage need a fighterbase? He doesn't need strength or hp. A mage was never meant for melee.

Well, he doesn't *NEED* those things -- but they're nice to have. Having a mage that can also hit hard and take a little bit of punishment is a nice benefit. I'm currently playing through BG2 with a "5 fighters and a paladin" party: 2 kensai-mages, 1 wiz slayer-thief, 1 berserker-cleric, and one fighter-cleric multi. This is perhaps the most powerful party I've ever had, because everybody can take a decent amount of punishment, and everybody can at least hold their own in melee.

I can't think of any disadvantages, except the two you listed below:

Dualing the mage only costs xp... that could go to a straight mage resulting in more magical power.

Dualling at level 2 costs 2000 XP. This means it'll take a bit longer to reach the next level than the rest of your characters, at least at low levels. At higher levels, it's a trivial difference. And none of the mage levels are within 2000 XP of either game's experience cap, so you'll never actually miss out on a top level because of this (you'd have to go to fighter level 5 or 6 before the experience cap becomes an issue in BG1, and fighter level 9 in BG2.) This will not make your mage any less powerful in terms of levelling too slowly, except at the very very start of the game.

if you dual in BG1, your guy won't be able to pick a kit in BG2

He can always pick up a kit on his first class when you import him. He just can't get one on his second class. That is a worthwhile consideration, if you have a particular kit you want to use for the second class.

Skuld · Post by **Skuld** » Tue Nov 23, 2004 10:44 pm

IMHO don't do a solo multiplyer party. There's no character interactions and therefore will be boring, but if you must my party would go something like this:
Human Conjurer(change to a sorceror in BG2)
Dwarven Cleric/Fighter(tank weilding big hammer)
Elf Fighter/Thief(bow and lots of arrows)
That's all you need(well you don't even need that much), and if anyone else tells you otherwise they just don't know. Don't be afraid to roll forever to get good stats because the sole purpose of playing this way is to get the perfect party so why not go all the way. And this configuration will allow you to take on NPCs in BG2 for their specific quests and then dump them without harming the integrity of your party.

lompo · Post by **lompo** » Wed Nov 24, 2004 2:45 am

I agree with Skuld, don't multi, it will be more fun to have NPC (remember that you will control them anyway); certain NPC are in both the game, so you can have the same party throughout the whole saga:
Imoen: thief in BG1 -> dualed to mage in BG2
Viconia: cleric (great cleric!!!) all the saga
Jaheira: fighter/druid multi, very powerful
Edwin: conjurer (the best mage you can ever dream, almost a sorcerer!)
Minsc: ranger (great fighter)

If you make yourself a paladin you'll have the party you have in mind.

LotharBot · Post by **LotharBot** » Fri Nov 26, 2004 9:43 pm

it will be more fun to have NPC

That is, of course, a subjective judgement.

I much prefer a game where my characters don't say anything interesting (see: Starcraft, Nethack, Descent, etc.) so I don't mind not having NPC's. I also play with my wife, so I have plenty of dialogue. In this case, it's a question of whether you'd have more fun with the dialogue or with the majorly kick-butt party. It sounds like the original author prefers the second, at least for this one time through.

Now, it is possible to play using the same NPC's all the way through BG2, if you can find a group of NPC's you want to keep through both games. Unfortunately, some don't show up until fairly late in one game or the other -- for example, Imoen isn't available for quite a while in BG2. That can be very frustrating.

me0w · Post by **me0w** » Sat Nov 27, 2004 12:38 pm

"I much prefer a game where my characters don't say anything interesting"

Are you serious?

You prefer games where they say things that arn't interesting?

Having good dialogue doesn't hurt, your team can be matched but most other parties.

LotharBot · Post by **LotharBot** » Sat Nov 27, 2004 6:19 pm

me0w wrote:"I much prefer a game where my characters don't say anything interesting"

Are you serious?

You prefer games where they say things that arn't interesting?

That's not the way I'd state it. It's more like, I'd prefer characters who just shut up and do what I tell them to do (like in Nethack), or who give me very predictable audio cues that let me know what's happening to them (like in Starcraft). That is, I'm interesed in dialogue that relates to the tactical or strategic aspects of the actual game. I'm not particularly interested in characters who interrupt my gaming session with their annoying chatter.

I don't play the game for the dialogue, or the story. I play for the game mechanics, and I play to master them. Random dialogue (like you get from NPC's) just gets in the way.

Having good dialogue doesn't hurt, your team can be matched but most other parties.

"Good" is a matter of opinion. I wouldn't call the dialogue a lot of the NPC's give "good" so much as "annoying" -- and that can be a detriment.

Also: you can always outdo an NPC party with a multi party, unless there's an NPC that has an ability or attribute that can't be rolled up with a normal character (Korgan's 20 con, for example.) As long as you can roll up a character that matches or beats all of the attributes the NPC has, you can build a superior party.

Now, if you're criticizing the specific party I put together, keep in mind that it was assembled based on certain criteria the original poster specified. Can you beat it using an NPC party that still meets the same criteria? I doubt it.

Bluestorm · Post by **Bluestorm** » Sat Nov 27, 2004 7:29 pm

I would say to anybody who is playing BG1 or BG2 for the first time to use NPC, then play with your own party. I think you get more out of the game in this way.
Have play through both games in this way,The last few times with my own party but i think next time i will try the NPC again.

ksn · Post by **ksn** » Mon Dec 06, 2004 2:54 pm

thanks

hey all,

thx for your ideas, much appreciated. i hadn't realized BG was as huge a game as it is, and since i haven't finished it yet using NPCs (that thing called reality keeps on getting in the way), i figure i'll go that route again. once i've done that, i'll start mucking about with a multi solo party.

thx again, that was great

K