Kayless’ Guide to Multi-Classing

baileyatbrats · Post by **baileyatbrats** » Fri May 31, 2002 1:58 pm

Good choice.
That's why I'm looking forward to the teifling bard, and the ghostwise barbarian. (I guess it's prefered, but a halfling in the front ranks is going to be tough.) The 1/2 Orc ranger will be there to help.

If the game is ever released, we can compare notes and see who has the most fun.

Kayless · Post by **Kayless** » Sat Jun 01, 2002 2:25 pm

Originally posted by baileyatbrats
If the game is ever released, we can compare notes and see who has the most fun.

Indeed. Actual experience with IWDII may show certain combinations are more effective than others. We'll just have to wait and see.

DaringCommander11 · Post by **DaringCommander11** » Mon Jun 03, 2002 11:43 am

About that Sorcerer/Monk idea. Only the sorcerer levels with count for the strength of his spells. A 1 sorcerer/8 Monk still only shoots 1 magic missle.
Also the mage/cleric is now a weak idea. Aerie in BG2 was strong but 2E multi-classing had both classes leveling up as if they were independent characters (as for as xp for next level goes) in 3E you need the same xp for a 1 Cleric/ 8 Mage as a 5 Cleric/ 4 Mage. Pure class or with just one other level of something else added tends to be the most powerful.

baileyatbrats · Post by **baileyatbrats** » Mon Jun 03, 2002 1:19 pm

I suppose it's an idiomatic thing, really.
With the advent of the new rules, they've eliminated the need for nursing the extra class.
You can take a level of Cleric and have CLW and Turn undead for life, even as a fighter. That might come in handy. (Isn't magic stone a 1st level spell too? -or is that one gone?)
Also: Your mages can all start out as fighters to get the extra 1st level hit points and other class benefits.

The point is that if you want the 1st (and 2nd) edition Fighter/Cleric/Mage You can still have fun playing it (Only dwarves or Elves could do that right? - It's been so long.)
It might not be the most powerful or useful character, but at least it will get to do something in every battle. Mostly it will be dying that it does, but at least it'll be doing somehting.

A 5th Level mage/4th level Cleric can turn a nice batch of undead, then fireball the remaing ones. Now isn't that worth the effort? Huh? Fireballing the undead you couldn't turn? (And no, Flame Strike doesn't count)

Moot. Moot moot. No game. No game.

Xyx · Post by **Xyx** » Tue Jun 04, 2002 10:43 am

Originally posted by DaringCommander11
About that Sorcerer/Monk idea. Only the sorcerer levels with count for the strength of his spells. A 1 sorcerer/8 Monk still only shoots 1 magic missle.

Are you sure? The Player's Handbook does not mention a need for caster levels or Sorcerer levels, it just mentions... well, "levels".

Where/how did you come by this information?

baileyatbrats · Post by **baileyatbrats** » Wed Jun 05, 2002 3:57 pm

That theory would make sense. (I haven't read the 3rd edition PH or DMG enough to know yet.)
Otherwise, level dependant skills would all multiply as one went up in power.

Could a 6th level fighter/1st level Cleric turn undead at 7th level?
Can a 5th level wizard/10th level rogue cast fireballs with 10d6 of damage? (Maximum in POR rules listed in Gamebanshee)
Would the same character be able to "Charm person" for 15 hours?

I don't know. The player in me says. "Yes!" The DM in me says, "No!" The player in me playing with the guy who has to have every darned special quirk of every rule explored ad nauseum until he gets his way and doens't loose a single hit point even though he's got hundereds of them says, "Can't we just play the darned game?"

Mr.Waesel · Post by **Mr.Waesel** » Thu Jun 06, 2002 1:33 am

I think it's class levels, too.

baileyatbrats · Post by **baileyatbrats** » Thu Jun 06, 2002 9:22 am

I just read the player's hand book, and there's nothing to indicate that you would get more missles etc as a 1 lvl mage/5 lvl monk. Your levels go up by class. Only the things that are xp based wuld apply to your character. New feat at a certain level (Has to come from the class you just attained though. - I think) and another stat point every 4 levels would apply to a multiclass character.

As far as Favored class the PH says that you ignore the favored class for xp penalty calculations. That means that you can have a very high or a very low favored class and not get a penalty. Your gnome could take 1 level of illutionist and 10 of monk, or he/she could take 1 of monk and 10 of illutionist. (or 1 illusionist and 5 monk/ 5 bard.) All this with no xp penalty.

By the way. The rules say that for Human or 1/2 Elf count the highest class as the favored class. That would indicate that any 2 class human or half elf could progress in levels of each class at will. (1st fighter. 2nd -6th mage 7-10 fighter then back to mage for a few levels.) Opinion?

Nippy · Post by **Nippy** » Thu Jun 06, 2002 11:21 am

Agreed completley Bailey, a human can be any class and get no penalties, unless if you have three classes, then I think you might be penalised.

Kayless · Post by **Kayless** » Thu Jun 06, 2002 3:48 pm

Originally posted by Nippy
Agreed completley Bailey, a human can be any class and get no penalties, unless if you have three classes, then I think you might be penalised.

You don't get the experience penalty if your classes aren't more than one level apart (i.e. distributing experience equally between classes like AD&D multi-classing). A human or half-elf Rog3/Ftr4/Bbn7 won't have any exp penalty (since the Rogue and Fighter levels are so close and the the Favorite Multi-Class ability takes the highest class out of the equation when determining exp penalties). Of course a half-orc could get away with this too, since the half-orc's favorite Multi-class is the barbarian. Humans and half-elves are just more versatile.

Mianna · Post by **Mianna** » Thu Jun 13, 2002 11:19 am

So if I have a tiefling rogue and advance him...lets´s say 1 level and then I take 1 level ranger and then again 1 level rogue and then 1 level ranger...I won´t suffer any experience loss? Is wielding dual daggers a bad idea? How about a bow? In BG2 you have to remove your off-hand weapon to use a bow...

baileyatbrats · Post by **baileyatbrats** » Thu Jun 13, 2002 11:25 am

Two daggers sounds good to me.
Bows work. They may have improved the game mechanics for IWDII, so maybe you can switch between weapons automatically. (Actually I think they have a 'weapon configuration' button. So you can switch between sword and sheild to two daggers to bow.)

You're right about the level progression

Again the goal is fun.
So, don't worry about level progression and xp pentaly.
Your characters will do fine in the game. Make what you want. If you have one character with slow growth whom you like, then the others will do fine until your character progresses.

Mianna · Post by **Mianna** » Thu Jun 13, 2002 10:28 pm

Thanks! Now I´ll just wate for the game to be published.

Kayless · Post by **Kayless** » Tue Jun 18, 2002 6:07 am

Originally posted by baileyatbrats
Again the goal is fun.
So, don't worry about level progression and xp pentaly.

Blasphemy!

The whole purpose of this thread is to help produce characters that don’t have exp. penalties and kick some power gaming ass!

Originally posted by Mianna
So if I have a tiefling rogue and advance him...lets´s say 1 level and then I take 1 level ranger and then again 1 level rogue and then 1 level ranger...I won´t suffer any experience loss?

Yuck!

I can't see a reason why anyone would want to take more than one level of ranger. They're woefully underpowered. My advice is to just take a single level then move on to something better, depending on your race's favorite multi-class (humans and half-elves being the most versatile).

Originally posted by Mianna
Is wielding dual daggers a bad idea? How about a bow? In BG2 you have to remove your off-hand weapon to use a bow...

I'd recommend short swords over daggers. But then again, this is coming from a pragmatist perspective. Role-playing is all well and good, but sometimes it can get in the way of practicality (especially in a dungeon crawl like IWD2). For example, you could play as a wizard with an Int of 6 for role-playing purposes, I just wouldn't recommend it for reasons of practicality.

Mianna · Post by **Mianna** » Tue Jun 18, 2002 7:45 am

From a role playing view: Ranger fits best for me. I tried powerplaying as a fighter/mage in BG2 and never liked it...I find the summon natures ally spell very very interesting. How about Minsc in Baldurs? He surely ain´t underpowered! I have noticed that paladins and rangers are quite the same in combat but they have different abilities.

It´s all about peoples taste so everyone can play what they want...and HOW they want.

baileyatbrats · Post by **baileyatbrats** » Tue Jun 18, 2002 10:10 am

Right.
Back in the olden days. (1994?) when I was playing the orginal Pool Of Radience Series I did have to change a couple of characters to make them more powerful. (Reroll for better stats and single class them.)
Since then, I have not had that kind of trouble. Someone mentioned earlier in here that strength and dexterity shouldn't be an issue because there will always be magic items to use.

"Power play" is good, but you only need one good fighter and one good spell caster to get out of the difficult jambs.

Face it. 6 Single class humans would be boring.

Kayless · Post by **Kayless** » Tue Jun 18, 2002 7:32 pm

Originally posted by baileyatbrats
Face it. 6 Single class humans would be boring.

Which is why my present party consists of:

Durnkrag, LG male gold dwarf Pal3/FtrXX
Str 14, Dex 10 Con 14 Int 12 Wis 10 Cha 16
Personality (In-brief): A steadfast, earnest, and high-minded soul who would gladly lay down his life to save an innocent.

Machiavelli "Mac" Saint Aiur, CN male human RogXX/Rng1
Str 13, Dex 18 Con 12 Int 13 Wis 10 Cha 10
Personality (In-brief): A terse neurotic loner whose self-deprecating wit and wry sense of humor belie deep-rooted angst.

Grizella, NG female half-orc Bbn1/DrdXX
Str 10, Dex 14 Con 14 Int 10 Wis 18 Cha 8
Personality (In-brief): Warm, open, and affable despite having a fiery temper. Quick to anger, but also quick to defend her friends.

Nebuchadnezzar "Nabucco" Jalre, NE male drow elf WizXX
Str 8, Dex 16 Con 12 Int 20 Wis 14 Cha 10
Personality (In-brief): A petulant, vain and apathetic schemer who wouldn’t think twice of stabbing a friend in the back.

Asenath Rayne, LN Aasimar female ClrXX
Str 13 Dex 10 Con 12 Int 13 Wis 20 Cha 12
Personality (In-brief): Intellectual, persuasive, and serenely spiritual, if somewhat aloof. Though well intentioned, she has a habit of deciding what's best for people (without consulting them).

Sarahanna "Sadie" Van Eyre, CG half-elf female Sor1/MnkXX
Str 13, Dex 16 Con 12 Int 8 Wis 16 Cha 11
Personality (In-brief): A garrulous and cheerfully vacuous idiot savant of martial arts. All-in-all the quintessential bimbo, albeit one capable of inflicting considerable pain upon her foes.

As you can see, no two characters are of the same race or have redundant classes. There is also a nice mix of single and multi-classing as well as an even gender mix. And all of them work from both a role-playing and a power gaming perspective.

Raistlin · Post by **Raistlin** » Fri Jun 21, 2002 2:57 am

Originally posted by Nippy
I'm gonna guess that some people are going to basically burn this game onto the hard disk permanatley!

Very true .. I installed BG series nearyl 2 years ago , even they cover more 6gb hardisk space , i keep'em as a showing of my respect to BlackIsle .

Onyx · Post by **Onyx** » Fri Jun 21, 2002 6:30 am

@Kayless

Nice team there, from a roleplaying view.
Very interesting.

I would like to know how is "Nabucco" going to fit there, you know, being the (neutral)evil one in the team.

Still, i think a very good team.

Kayless · Post by **Kayless** » Fri Jun 21, 2002 1:14 pm

Originally posted by Onyx
@Kayless

Nice team there, from a roleplaying view.
Very interesting.

I would like to know how is "Nabucco" going to fit there, you know, being the (neutral)evil one in the team.

Still, i think a very good team.

Thanks. I always try to have an interesting mix of characters.

A little history on Nabucco first. You’ll notice his last name is Jalre, which is a drow house from Lords of Darkness that (in modern Faerun at least) lives on the surface of Cormathor and worships Vhaeraun instead of Lloth. They have smaller and more detailed plots than simple world domination, and plan to take over old elven settlements, study mythals and remnants of elven high magic, and find a way to tune these powerful wards to keep out both surface enemies and other drow (the Lloth worshipers).

Since Icewind Dale takes place about 80 years in the past, House Jalre still lives in the Underdark and is a persecuted minority. As a member of House Jalre, Nabucco has more to fear from other drow than most surfacers. Also, Nabucco’s neutral evil, which means he’ll work with just about anyone if it’s beneficial for him to do so. Though he finds it distasteful, he hangs around a group of (mostly) do-gooders for his own protection; from both surface dwellers that wouldn't think twice about killing a lone drow, as well as Lloth worshipers of his own kind (the vast majority of drow). It also gives him a nice camouflage for when he’s secretly checking out places of old elven magic. A lone drow (or a party of drow) would be profoundly suspicious, but a band of heroic adventurers are given a good deal of leeway (since adventurers are always crawling around such places). For their part, the others in the group tolerate Nabucco because he's intimately familiar with the Underdark and (most importantly) he's the only wizard they have. However, he does tend to rub the good aligned party members the wrong way...

Note: At the moment I'm working on a custom soundest that uses Jeremy Irons (mostly from his part of Scar in the Lion King) as the the petulant and insinuating voice of Nabucco.