GameBanshee Forums

I thought I've already installed it but it looks like it was just an intention... I'll check this out

[QUOTE=The Great Hairy]Have you experienced the joys of warhammers? The *spluggie* noise they make as they crush someone(thing)'s skull? What about staves? Or great big lumps of spiky metal (flails)?[/QUOTE]

I know what you mean, but still.. I kind of try to put a little bit of myself into the PC I'm creating, and I'd never use a spiky metal flail (Probably wouldn't even be able to lift it in real, but that's another matter ) Sword is the weapon I'm gonna use, that's sure.

VonDondu: I haven't got enough of mages, no way I kind of force myself to try something different, I'm so familiar with its skills and abilities that I'm afraid it wouldn't be so exciting to play the game over again with a mage for the *counts* fourth time I'm curious to see other classes' strength and weaknesses, but I still think that the mage is the best (which may change if I try something else )

But you're right, a mage has many tools to defend himself, Mirror Image, Stoneskin, Fireshiled, Mislead, etc... so eventually it may not be neccessary for her to wear armor at all. Good point. And the Fighter's HLAs are also very attractive

What about the weapon proficiencies? I gave up on the Cleric/Fighter b/c she's allowed to use Cleric weapons only. I hope it's not the case with Fighter/Mage... It would be quite ridiculous to fight with darts... And what about the items, that are not useable by mages? They're not useable by Figther/Mages either, I presume...


[QUOTE=VonDondu]I assume you're using BG Tutu, correct? Then you should think about what your character will look like when you reach Shadows of Amn and Throne of Bhaal.[/QUOTE]

Yeah, that's exactly why it takes so much time for me to create my main char I'd like to ki.. *ahem* meet Drizzt and find Imoen with the same PC, I don't want to change my mind when starting BG II. So I take time for preparation

Thanks for all your suggestions and comments, really. It helps a lot.

[QUOTE=Brynn]What about the weapon proficiencies? ... And what about the items, that are not useable by mages? They're not useable by Figther/Mages either, I presume...[/QUOTE]
One of the advantages of multi-class characters is that they can use items that are useable by either class. For example, a Fighter/Mage can use any item that a Fighter or a Mage can use. The main exception to this rule is a multi-class Cleric; for example, Fighter/Clerics and Cleric/Rangers can only use weapons that are useable by Clerics. But no such restriction applies to Fighter/Mages. Of course, a Fighter/Mage cannot cast spells while wearing armor, but you can wear armor (with spells disabled) if you so choose. So in that sense, a Fighter/Mage can use any item that a Fighter can use. I hope that makes sense.

Pardon me while I momentarily digress. I've said this many times before, but I like Fighters because they get the job done. They can use almost any kind of weapon, they get many attacks per round, and they can hit HARD. If you have a Mage in your party and a Fighter in your party, the most efficient way to kill monsters is to have your Mage dispel your enemies' protection spells (if they have any) and then let your Fighter go to work. Mages run out of spells, but Fighters never run out of attacks. When I want to fight an army of fire giants, I take a Fighter with me.

All other things being equal (without buffing spells), Fighter/Mages are almost as good as single-class Fighters in melee. The only difference (besides spells) is that Fighter/Mages can only put two proficiency points in any weapon type. Single-class Fighters or dual-class Fighters can have up to five proficiency points in any weapon type. Unless you're using the Grand Mastery Patch, three proficiency points is optimal (that is, you can hit pretty hard and still put two proficiency points in something else). What's the difference between two proficiency points and three proficiency points? Enough to make a difference in the long run, but not significant in any one battle. So Fighter/Mages are pretty good in melee.

Fighter/Mages can use any kind of weapon that a Fighter can use, which includes just about everything that doesn't have a special restriction (like the Holy Avenger, which can only be used by Paladins). Blades and Swashbucklers are also free to use almost any kind of weapon. But Fighters (and Fighter/Mages) are more skilled with weapons than any other class. If you can play without a "tank" in your party, I salute you, but I find they come in handy.

[QUOTE=VonDondu]One of the advantages of multi-class characters is that they can use items that are useable by either class. For example, a Fighter/Mage can use any item that a Fighter or a Mage can use. The main exception to this rule is a multi-class Cleric; for example, Fighter/Clerics and Cleric/Rangers can only use weapons that are useable by Clerics. But no such restriction applies to Fighter/Mages. [/QUOTE]

Phew... That's a great relief Now it sounds much better to me than a Bard... Can use any kind of weapon, good in melee, can cast powerful spells, has access to great HLAs... I think I'll go for a F/M, eventually

It just occurred to me that maybe I should mention that I've never played a Fighter/Mage, in spite of the benefits (unless you count the Fighter/Mage/Thief I tried to solo with in BG1 but abandoned before I finished Chapter Two). I don't have anything against Fighter/Mages; I simply preferred to play other characters because of the way I structured my party. So as you can see, just because a Fighter/Mage is a great character, that doesn't mean you have to play one. Most of my BG1 characters have been Fighters in a well-rounded party of six. I played an Archer the first time I played Shadows of Amn, and I've tried several other classes in other games, including a Swashbuckler, a Fighter/Thief, a Berserker dualled to a Cleric, a Cleric/Ranger (more than once), and a Sorcerer. I also played with a party of Bards before Throne of Bhaal came out (I never played Throne of Bhaal with them).

[QUOTE=VonDondu] I don't have anything against Fighter/Mages; I simply preferred to play other characters because of the way I structured my party. So as you can see, just because a Fighter/Mage is a great character, that doesn't mean you have to play one. [/QUOTE]

No, no, I like it anyway. Actually, Bard, Cleric and Fighter/Cleric came to my mind, but b/c of the weapons I crossed out the clerics, so Bard remained, but F/M is really better, so I'll pick that one, eventually.

F/M is boring, I did BG1 with it (solo) its just lame. A Blade is so much more exciting, even though it may be slightly less powerfull.


"What about the weapon proficiencies? I gave up on the Cleric/Fighter b/c she's allowed to use Cleric weapons only. I hope it's not the case with Fighter/Mage... It would be quite ridiculous to fight with darts... And what about the items, that are not useable by mages? They're not useable by Figther/Mages either, I presume..."

(I dunno if this has already been tackled)

- F/M or Mage anything, can use any wepeon that it and its alternate class can. It can use swords, bows, hammers, shields etc.

- The reason Clerics cannot use bladed wepeons, no matter what class conjunction is that Clerics in their oath refuse to use bladed wepeons, so are only capable of using blunt wepeons. Perhaps this isn't exactly correct, but its pretty much why. There may be more to it though.

Finally I picked F/M/T, decided that i might need thieving skills, too. See what comes out of this I'm happy with this char so far.

"Finally I picked F/M/T, decided that i might need thieving skills, too. See what comes out of this I'm happy with this char so far."

Locks - "Bash" it open and the 2nd level spell Knock.

Theivery - The blade covers this.

Traps - Mirror Image, and you can walk right over them.

Once again this is the BG1 forum, so no blades here.
And the best part of the thief when soloing is the backstab.
Great for taking out the mage in a enemy party, or just to hurt the larger enemy's that wont go down easaly.

[QUOTE=Brynn]Finally I picked F/M/T, decided that i might need thieving skills, too. See what comes out of this I'm happy with this char so far.[/QUOTE]
I think this is the best choice the first time you solo. But if you really want to play a "cleric" that uses a sword, you might consider the paladin. They have some cleric spells and can turn undead, but are otherwise fighters. I don't particularly like paladins, especially in BG1 where turning undead is not very practical, but they might give you that "ladylike" quality that you seemed to be looking for earlier.

But, as I said, the first time soloing, you are probably better off with your FMT. This will allow you to wear armor in the begining (when you don't have a lot of spells and when thieving abilities are not that helpful) but will allow you to be more "nuanced" at later stages when you can make up for the lack of armor with magic items.

[QUOTE=me0w]Traps - Mirror Image, and you can walk right over them.[/QUOTE]But for that to work, you need to know that the traps are there in advance. Even if one has played the game before (as Brynn did), one probably doesn't know the location of ALL traps and even if one did, it's not very role-playerish.

[QUOTE=JackOfClubs]I think this is the best choice the first time you solo. But if you really want to play a "cleric" that uses a sword, you might consider the paladin. They have some cleric spells and can turn undead, but are otherwise fighters. I don't particularly like paladins, especially in BG1 where turning undead is not very practical, but they might give you that "ladylike" quality that you seemed to be looking for earlier.[/QUOTE]

The problem with paladins (for me) is the alignment restriction. My char has to be chaotic (just like the real me ), so that excludes this class

Anyway, I'm quite happy with my F/M/T right now, she's doing pretty well. I took Imoen with me (how could I leave my sister alone in the middle of the forest? ), so I'm not really soloing, but I try to use her as rarely as I can. Most of the time I just have her standing in a safe distance from the battle - like a real guardian would do

[QUOTE=Brynn]The problem with paladins (for me) is the alignment restriction. My char has to be chaotic (just like the real me ), so that excludes this class [/QUOTE]Well, the whole alignment system is silly as far as I'm concerned. I mean, the whole concept of dividing all of humanity in nine different kind of people is strange and inadequate. So SK-ing my char a different alignment is not beneath me .