Do you find 2e rules in BG2 restrictive, and how do you get around them?

Remove all ads!

As per topic. Why are there so many restrictions? Here are some of the restrictions I find silly, and use SK/mods to get around

Race restriction on classes and dual/multi classing - don't think i need to elaborate on that

Multi class fighters limited to 2 * in proficiencies - way I see it, each * is like a year in training, so how the fighter plans to place the * is totally up to him.

No kits in multi-classing - a kit brings it's own disadvantages to a multi-class as well, so why is it not allowed? (barring using UAI on a kensai/thief)

What do you guys think?

 

Restrictions exist principally for two reasons:

1. Game balance
2. Engine limitations

Race restrictions are obviously a "balance" issue - Humans have no concrete advantages (stat bonuses etc.) over the other races, so to compensate are the only race that may take any class, and dual class. Of course, in PnP they are also the only race free from maximum level restrictions, which neither BG game implements.

Multiclass fighters not getting Grandmastery is obviously a balance issue - Fighters are supposed to be the ultimate warriors, skill-wise, so those that "dilute" their abilities in other ways have to be restricted to maintain their inferiority in that area. Otherwise, why bother being a pure fighter, when a Multiclassed schlub gets the same weapon bonuses as you do, plus a hunk of other abilities? The same logic applies to Rangers and Paladins. Mind you, GM isn't really worth it in BG2 w/o using an upgrade patch.

The same argument could also apply to kits in multiclasses, particularly in view of how HLA implementation in BG2 favours them so strongly. I do suspect that there was also an engine issue here, too, though. the programmers would have to had overhauled the character creation section quite a bit to implement kit selection, so chose not to do so when it could also harm game balance. Linking to what I said earlier about class/race restrictions, the fact only dual class characters can use a kit also gives a boost to the relatively underpowered humans.

That said, some restrictions are bananas. Why can't elves be Bards, for Heaven's sake?! And why is this most magical of races so heavily restricted in what Mage specialisms it can choose? What's wrong with a Halfling Cleric/Thief? A Human multiclass... anything is no more powerful than any other race, so why not let them multiclass? There are plenty of others, of course. But as you point out, Mongerman, that's what ShadowKeeper was invented for.

 

I see your point about the race issue. But humans dont have a stat penalty as well (not that its a big deal)

Regarding weapon proficiencies, I still think any mixture of classes with fighter should be able to GM (like 4 levels of fighter in 3e will be able to specialize in weapons). Its just a matter of specializing in one weapon or spreading out your training over a few weapons. Agree that restrictions should still remain on paladins, rangers etc

And like I said, a kit carries its disadvantages over as well, so it kinda balances it out for me

 

True, a kit carries some disadvantages - but often these disadvantages are nullified when combined with another class's abilities. For example, a Kensai multiclass would be able to work round its armour restrictions too easily (K/M - a host of armour spells; K/C or K/D - Barkskin; K/T - UAI). True, a dual class can do this too, but they are restricted in how many levels in a kit they can gain. In effect, multiclassing does remove the penalties of the kit. Of course, other kits have different restrictions, and may not be as easy to work round. In my experience of messing around with SK, though, multiclass kits are very overpowered. Not to mention that a Kensai/Mage multiclass would have the extra spell slots of a specialist mage without the spell school restrictions, due to the way the engine is coded.

 

I don't see any problems with the restrictions. At all.

I find it far more realistic and easier to get into character in 2nd Ed than 3rd Ed. The ability to shift to a new class on the fly (or have several classes) is a bit absurd. Especially given the abilities gained upon obtaining 1st level in some classes -- classes like monk, barbarian, ranger, and paladin are obtained after extensive training and conditioning. A wizard must learn to read magic and 'get in touch' with his or her arcane side. Clerics must devote themselves to the cause. None of this is done 'on the fly.' At least with dual class the character had to completely abandon their former training for a time.

If a character isn't willing to focus exclusively on their fighting ability they should never become better than 'specialized.' Mastery assumes complete and total devotion to their art -- no multiclass (or dual class for that matter) can be that devoted.

Kits require the same exclusive devotion. 'Nuff said.

Race restrictions on classes -- I can see your point. I could never understand why a halfling couldn't be a paladin. The whole multiclass/dual class thing was a bit odd, but that was how Gygax decided to balance out the races -- remember, most non-humans live much longer than humans and age is a factor in pnp (or at least should be). Gygax also had level restrictions on races as well (something I really never understood).

 

I see a few problems with the restrictions.

If you have a fighter becoming a mage (dual-class), is it realistic to say the fighter side of the character could never again be improved/learn how to ue a new weapon?

I can see the point about having to learn new skills/aspects of one's self taking up a lot of someone's focus, but that may not require becoming totally stagnant in the prior class. Besides the ability score requirements serve as a decent limiting factor for if it would be reasonable to think someone could successfully gain or learn the new skills.

I agree some of the racial restrictions make no sense. For example, is a physically small halfling really more likely to become a fighter than a mage?

And if halflings can become fighters then why not rangers or paladins too?

 

Yes, it is reasonable. We're not talking about keeping up with your [insert recreational game here] while pursuing your chosen career. We are talking about the equivalent of being a professional football player while - and I mean at the same time - being a leading research professor in quantum physics. You must retire from one to pursue the other. You simply do not have the ability or time to pursue both and be good at them.

The theory behind dual classing is the character is maintaining his level of training in the previous profession -- that's not easy to do. How many Olympic athletes maintain their level of training when they shift to a new profession? How many improve on their abilities with that shift to a new profession?

Multiclassed characters seem to disregard that, but demihumans (at least elf, half elf and dwarf) are much older at the start of adventuring and had extensive training in how to learn all the professions simultaneously. They also progress much slower. Humans simply do not live long enough to allow such training or slow progression.

 

You raise a few good points. Does one have the time in a day to both be an accountant and a basketball player.... probably not.

On the other hand a mage will not forget everything he learned (decline in ability) just because he has made the decision to pick up a sword or axe.

And if you are maintaining your training as a dual-classing individual then why do you only regain your prior abilities when you reach a level above where you were before?

Also the same multi-class restrictions and options apply to all dwarves, elves, and halflings regardless of age (at least beyond a certain point). The protagonist in particular can be multi-classed while only growing up within the time span of a human life (Gorion's).

If a human (via magic perhaps) lives as long as a dwarf the human is still not allowed to multi-class.

There is still the basic problem that skill and/or knowledge related abilities and potential are being defined by race. Which isn't realistic.

 

If a mage is the equivalent to the quantum physics professor I previously mentioned, he will decrease in his abilities if he does not keep up with material. Knowledge can be forgotten over time.

You 'regain' because you cannot use the prior arts and still gain experience in the new art. You do not learn how to unlock a door by simply breaking it down. You do not learn to fight in a new technique by relying on the previous technique when in a tight situation. The total exclusion was a programming feature -- in pnp the DM has the ability to deny experience to a character who uses his previous skills (or even award the experience to the former class), but that's too complicated for a game design.

Gorion is an old man.... how long you were with him could/should be dependant on your race. Your PC is a young adult in whatever race was chosen. Demihuman races are by design much different than humans -- in early games they were their own class and gained unique abilities which crossed class boundries with level. Shifting to allow multiclass kept some of that flavor while allowing specialization for the race (i.e., one class). Demihumans were restricted in the levels they could obtain -- and it was really stupid to limit elves to 11th level mage and dwarves to 9th level fighter (both were unlimited in thief though)....

Using magic to extend life occurs after reaching adulthood. Extending childhood and the learning capabilities of a child is at question here.

The whole game isn't realistic.

Montresor: You are giving a one-in-a-million (perhaps billion) example. It is possible, but not on the scale of even dnd statistics.

 

The designer may have been trying to have balance, and I have to admit the game isn't that realistic anyway in a few other ways.

But that doesn't mean it cannot be questioned/rethought in some of the ways it isn't realistic.

The old penalties relate to experience gained. Which may be a good way to view things. If you are trying to develop 2 skills at once it takes longer-just as it takes longer to level up a multi-class individual. If you focus on developing a certain skill it takes less time overall-like with a single class npc.

A multi-class person could be thought of as someone with 2 part-time jobs rather than 1 full-time. Ability with each could improve, it just isn't as likely to be as fast as it will with a full-time job.

This same method of skill/knowledge development could be applied regardless of race.

 

That's where our opinions greatly differ. Adventurers are the elite of their world -- like a professor at a top twenty university or a professional athlete. Multiclass is not like two "part-time jobs" it's like two completely different and very involved careers. You're both a heart surgeon and a cardinal in the catholic church ... or a professional athlete and a quantum physics professor ... perhaps a star performer on the high wire for Ringling Brothers and a world class fencer.

It's not equivalent to "I can flip burgers with the best of them then go out and deliver pizza's without getting lost." These are orders of magnitude apart. If one of your part time jobs is taxing, the second is usually a no-brainer type of job -- in one job you increase your skill at a reasonable level, in the other you just do what is necessary to get by.

 

Actually I've met professors who work part-time. Part-time jobs are frequently low skill/knowledge level, but not always.

And it isn't like a professional athlete could not learn non-sports related skills. They spend so much time training that it may be prohibitive during the same time they are in training camp, but it isn't impossible or unreasonable to think that with the proper allocation of time other skills could be developed.

And if time relates to experience then the difference between multi-class and single class is simply the amount of time focusing on each individual class.

There may be an argument for increased flexibility here because someone could arguably focus on developing one of their classes more, still developing each but with slightly more time and effort on one than the other. I haven't dealt much with 3rd edition but I think it may have tried to address this.

 

Remember now, that polymaths were actually quite common hundreds of years ago. People might be accomplished mathematicians, novelists, theologians, and inventors, all in one. Within a human lifespan. Aristotle. Da Vinci. Jefferson. Newton. And being a level one adventurer is hardly being a world-famous cardiologist - it's more like being a year one medical student. Now, a level twenty mage? That's top of the field. And that's why multiclasses never get to be level twenty mages (okay, well... maybe at 8 million XP. But that's officially "semi-divine" territory).

I'm of the less restrictive bent, mind you. I think halflings should be paladins. And elves should be bards. And dwarves should be mages. And humans should be able to multiclass. Why not? Plenty of crusadings knights could have been considered fighter/clerics. And tons of dashing rakes and charming rogues could have been fighter/thieves. I think there's plenty of historical precedent.

If the lengthy lifespan explains why demihumans are allowed to multiclass, you'll have to provide some sort of explanation for half-orcs, whom are said to "rarely reach 75."