Balancing multi and dual classes

[Grammarsalad]

I have a suggestion for an optional--i stress optional--component in kit revisions to even out the power level of multi and dual classed characters with single classed characters.

 

In the clab of each class/kit that can multi/dual include spls that penalize features that are only available to other classes.

 

For example, a cleric/mage mc at 1st levels has clear advantages over a (eg true) single class mage or cleric. It has an advantage over a sc (true--I'll always assume true here) mage in every way, and a sc cleric only has 2 extra HP assuming max at first. But, if a mage has in his clab -1 cleric (1st level) spell per day, and the cleric has -1 mage (1st level) spell per day, then the advantage is not so clear.

 

Now, as a side note, I believe vanilla progression would leave the m/c mage (at least) with no spells. But I assume that kr will address the mages top light progression--they have the opposite problem than paladins--and give 1st level mages more spells (or other perks to make them survivable at early levels). The point is that watever kr gives them (and clerics for this example) only serve to make mc/DC characters that much more powerful at early levels.

 

I assume that this would work for dual class characters as well. A 3rd level mage eg becomes a thief and finds that he has one less 1st level spell when he regains his mage levels. (Diversity has its price).

 

Some suggested penalties:

 

Thief: penalty to some skills that the character will have at first level (implementation is much easier in bgee where you can actually reduce # of points to distribute)

 

Fighter: he suffers enough IMO

 

Mage: reduced spells.

 

Cleric: reduced spells

 

Ranger: reduced stealth

 

This is a general idea, but precise implementation I leave to the experts.

[Jarno Mikkola]

I have a suggestion for an optional--i stress optional--component in kit revisions to even out the power level of multi and dual classed characters with single classed characters.

Ouh, so the double XP needed to gain the levels is not enough ? WHAT ? (this is in recards of multiclass)

And dualing removes the kit -ability from the second class, where the kit bonuses really should begin to shine, as in the 14th level and beyond. The kits can disallow dualing, so long as it's productive. And what comes to balancing the duals, well the kits usually have penalties too, so they should kinda balance the dualings too.

And the magic users have not been gone deep in that much that we could judge any of this, yet.

[Grammarsalad]

 

I have a suggestion for an optional--i stress optional--component in kit revisions to even out the power level of multi and dual classed characters with single classed characters.

 

Ouh, so the double XP needed to gain the levels is not enough ? WHAT ? (this is in recards of multiclass)

And dualing removes the kit -ability from the second class, where the kit bonuses really should begin to shine, as in the 14th level and beyond. The kits can disallow dualing, so long as it's productive. And what comes to balancing the duals, well the kits usually have penalties too, so they should kinda balance the dualings too.

And the magic users have not been gone deep in that much that we could judge any of this, yet.

Nope. It's not enough. We have two 'sorts' of balancing mechanisms. Comparing classes longitudinally, perhaps they even out. But ’synchronically' they are uneven. My primary concern regarding multi class is the early levels, especially first. Whatever happens with the classes, first level mc characters are always better than single class versions of the same type except possibly fighters where mc fighters have less(essential for the class) HP, and armor concerns compared to sc fighters. But even here fighters make their paired classes better in every way (eg a f/m has more hp; weapon use after he casts his spell, etc.)

 

I'm not sure I understand your point about dual class, but this wouldn't horribly cripple eg a kensage, even if it took one spell per level.

 

But I'm not really going to argue the merits. Only someone that already thought m/d class need to be humbled would install this option

[Demivrgvs]

@Grammarsalad, clever idea for an eventual implementation, but are you sure it works for dual classes?

 

Regarding balance itself...

 

Multi-classes
For the most part they are fine imo, as Jarno says they need twice as much xp to level up.

 

There are only two real issues imo:

1) at 1st level the multi is obviously advantaged

2) when single classes reach their cap at epic levels multi-classed characters fill the gap too much, getting all the cool top tier stuff from both classes

 

But:

1) this isn't a huge deal because it doesn't last much (single class characters reach level 2 quite fast, don't they?), and most of the gap is kept under control by other game mechanics (e.g. a F/T cannot use stealth and medium or heavy armor, a F/M cannot cast spells in armor - or is penalized by doing so within IR, etc.)

2) KR will make sure single class characters will get "unique/better HLAs" (e.g. a multi F/T will get Whirlwind Attack, but only a single class character will get the Greater version), and while the current revised xp tables aren't optimized the long term plan is to make high levels a bit harder to reach and this also help keeping multi classes "under control" because for them it will be twice as much harder.

Dual-classes
This system is broken beyond salvation imo. The "disable first class until the second one has more levels" thing makes no sense on BG (and still little sense on PnP imo) and dual classes are noticeably superior to any single or multi class, if not completely broken (e.g. Kensai-Thief using UAI). I know it was supposed to be the selling point of picking a Human character but the end result is that a human single class is ridiculously inferior to all other races (e.g. dwarves can have up to +5 to almost all saves, +5!!!), while a human dual class is superior to all other races.

 

Honestly, I don't know if we can make this system balanced even with your suggestion, and it may actually risk to nerf multi classes more than necessary (because afaik there would be no way to nerf a dual without affecting the multi). :/ Anyway, thanks for the idea, I will think a bit more about it.

[Grammarsalad]

Good points Demi.

 

I suppose I was thinking about minor nerfs at 1st level for, but that would hardly touch dual class. And implementing higher penalties at higher levels would mostly hurt mc. (sigh)

 

I've been tempted to eliminate dual class completely (from my build). It is such a wonky mechanic

[Jarno Mikkola]

I'm not sure I understand your point about dual class, but this wouldn't horribly cripple eg a kensage, even if it took one spell per level.

Well, the point was that the kit bonuses should rise the kit above the negative conjugations above the level 13, so the Wizard Slayer should be better in his job than any regular fighter, despite the few negative things he has to carry with him. Yes, the kit bonuses should be concentrated at these levels, not on levels 1-5. The penalties will be from the start of course, unless extreme circumstance.

Yes, the kits are a trades...

This is tied to dual classing in the fact that if you want to have a normal character, you are likely going to dual before the half of the game is done, and in BGT that's around the level 13-14, or 1-2 Mil total XP. If you dual from a kit, you should be just getting the more of the negative and less of the positive. At least for the cost of the XP.

 

I've been tempted to eliminate dual class completely (from my build).

There's always the option to take the "Player shall never take a Dualed character" house rule, that no one else has to apply on their game, if they don't want to.

 

And with this: "The kits can disallow dualing, so long as it's productive." I actually mean that if the kit is meant to actually auto dual to another class, they can very much remove the dualing option, but there's really no other reason to do so.

[kreso]

There's always the option to take the "Player shall never take a Dualed character" house rule, that no one else has to apply on their game, if they don't want to.

This.

[Demivrgvs]

@Jarno, I still don't see any benefit in changing the way +1/2 apr is given to warriors at levels 7 and 13. You simply do not want warriors to get them with non-proficient weapons?

 

What you say about making kits get more stuff at mid-high levels is true, but the same is valid for true classes, not just kits. I actually tried to go for that (mostly spreading vanill-like stuff within levels 1-9, instead of just 1, and adding new stuff for levels 10-19), but at the same time I cannot move a lot of stuff away from low levels imo because then you would get kinda plain, boring classes for the whole BG1. The way I see it, most class defining abilities should be there at levels 1-5, but you should get really cool stuff at mid-high levels to make those defining features become outstanding.

[Kalindor]

If you are not able to modify the APR bonuses that the fighter gain with levels, maybe make the Kensai get theirs a couple levels early?

[Jarno Mikkola]

@Jarno, I still don't see any benefit in changing the way +1/2 apr is given to warriors at levels 7 and 13. You simply do not want warriors to get them with non-proficient weapons?

Well, the though is that the proficiency is the base that the characters get their apr bonuses, and the high proficient fighters can get them sooner rather than later (when the other fighter types get them if they are properly proficient, like Barbarian, Berserkers, Paladins etc. ).

Also the Thieves and Clerics (and mages)use the same table, so with added proficiency, they could substitute a Paladin in all aspects except the Thac0 and bonus items/abilities(and HP).

Of course the Thieves and Clerics would get less proficiency points through out the game, but they should still be able to use the same weapons as a regular fighter, if they are as proficient for the task.

And if they are more, well, the fighter could even loose.

This makes the Weapon Master kitted char even better.

[subtledoctor]

Multi-classes

2) when single classes reach their cap at epic levels multi-classed characters fill the gap too much, getting all the cool top tier stuff from both classes

 

I never understood why multiclass characters got HLAs at level ~14 in TOB. I think in just about every high-level sourcebook such powers came at level 20, period, end of story. If you actually play with such a rule it works strikingly well in BG2. I suppose it was more of Bioware trying to duct-tape 3E junk into a 2E game... with predictable results.

 

But I think this is an obvious way to balance multis: just take away HLAs until they reach level 20/20. Their mechanical disadvantages at ~15/15 are, imho, more than balanced by their sheer flexibility.

 

For lower levels, I've been trying to give single-class mages (for a start) benefits/abilities that multis won't get... but do far I've been unsuccessful. You can do it by making abilities granted by items, but that's kind of kludgy and immersion-breaking. Might be worth it, might not.

[subtledoctor]

Sorry to double-post but I was thinking. One place the kludgy 'abilities for single-class only' might be for trueclass thieves and their dirty trick ability.

 

Have a .spl in the base thief CLAB that creates an item that is unusable by multi/dual characters. Use the item and you get the ability. Write a paragraph of appropriate fluff in the item description. Voila, a reason for layers to play unkitted thieves!

[Jarno Mikkola]

I never understood why multiclass characters got HLAs at level ~14 in TOB.

The reason is that you get your HLAs after the ~2 500 000xp amount, that reason is the fact that the ToB game starts around there somewhere. You can modify the lunumab.2da file and set them as you like&see what happens. It's part of the ToB high level rules set, not the 3ed.

Yes, the numbers could use a tweak ...-ing.

[subtledoctor]

Well yeah, I understand that's *how* they implemented HLAs... I just never understood *why* they implemented it that way. It is (imho!) stupid. Above 20th level you are godly, and have abilities most mortals don't. Multiclass characters take longer to reach those godly levels... so try should also take longer to get those abilities.

 

I said 3R because with the 3E multi/dual hybrid system (which to be fair is MUCH better than 2E's) a 14/14 multiclass really does have 28 levels. In 3E the TOB HLA system would make sense. Given all the other pseudo-3E stuff they slapped into the game, I have to assume it was the inspiration for this rule. But because it is not actually a 2E game, it doesn't work well. Which is why I always have to play with that mod that delays all HLAs to level 20.

[Grammarsalad]

Well yeah, I understand that's *how* they implemented HLAs... I just never understood *why* they implemented it that way. It is (imho!) stupid. Above 20th level you are godly, and have abilities most mortals don't. Multiclass characters take longer to reach those godly levels... so try should also take longer to get those abilities.

I said 3R because with the 3E multi/dual hybrid system (which to be fair is MUCH better than 2E's) a 14/14 multiclass really does have 28 levels. In 3E the TOB HLA system would make sense. Given all the other pseudo-3E stuff they slapped into the game, I have to assume it was the inspiration for this rule. But because it is not actually a 2E game, it doesn't work well. Which is why I always have to play with that mod that delays all HLAs to level 20.

To be fair, I think high level abilities was a 2e thing. It might have been optional though