How to wield a longsword for a fighter\mage\priest class character?

Remove all ads!

I don't seem to know it even use cheats

If these two lines are in the box for the character

 

the cleric can't wield sharp weapons, I don't think you can cheat it in.

 

Only way would be to give UAI for the character...you can do it by starting the character asa thief, then levelling her up to lvl 24, then SK'ing her to F/M/C lvl 1/1/1 or something and playing regularly...but then you'd have to fiddle a little with the character stats if you don't want her to have too many hp...but I've found this to be far more trouble than worth and it makes the game a little boring since the character tends to get too overpowerful then..

 

Or install a mod called "Ashes of Embers", which allows you to open up weapon proficiencies, among other things.

 

I believe there is a 2da(?) file which could be modified to allow this -- but I don't know which one. It would be a file in your override folder which can be read and modified as a text file.

 

About the only legit way of having a cleric holding a sword (or other sharp object) is to use dual classing.

By dual classing a cleric to something else you can make sure the character is holding a sharp weapon just prior to that last level up when the cleric class becomes active. When this happens the game may not remove the sword from the character's hand-leaving it until you do or the game does for some possible plot related event.

It probably works the same way for a fighter that dual-classes to a cleric.

That said these are both guesses and even if they work you would be stuck with that sword for awhile.... provided you didn't cheat.

 

Indeed

 

There are three longswords which come to mind that are extremely lethal in the hands of a F/M/C: namely the Flame Blade, Phantom Blade and the Black Blade of Disaster. Especially the last one, with removed XP cap, is devastating in conjuction with Righteous Magic.

Dualclassing as suggested will work, but the un-legitimate longsword will be automatically unequipped at the first level-up after your character regains his clerical levels back.

 

I think that BG2 Tweaks at G3 will allow clerics to use swords if that is what you so desire.
There are a lot of other optional rule changes as well, some I like, some I don't, but you have the choice as to which parts to install.

There is actually a reason for the restriction.
Back in 1066 when England was invaded by the Duke of Normandy, his brother was a bishop who also fought. In those days, clergy were not allowed to carry swords. (There is some scriptural justification for this) so he carried a mace instead. (Not much difference in my opinion) It is all shown on the Bayeux tapestry and is quite interesting.

 

I've been reminded in the past that this is a Throne of Bhaal only ability and doesn't belong in Shadows of Amn discussions.

I've found that messing around to make clerics use sharp weapons usually results in BG2 crashing to desktop upon loading the game. It seems the game is VERY strict on clerics about using swords.

 

Do you know whether the game still crashes if you use BG2 Tweaks to enable the use of swords? I'm just curious. When I installed BG2 Tweaks, I deliberately didn't use that componant as it felt wrong.

 

This one works fine, but I like the version offered by Nythrun's Level one NPC's mod available at G3. It, too, can open up all weapons to all classes, and it does so without the preconditions employed by ashes of embers. For those that don't want to alter any of the in-game NPC's, this mod is still worth a look because you needn't alter that component. For purists and rules-lawyers like me, another nice feature is the ability to open up weapon selections for fighter/druids while closing off metal armor. Druidic weapon limitations weren't ethos based. Their armor restrictions, however, were.*

* Well....not entirely. Wearing metal armor wasn't technically a violation of the Druid's ethos. The 2E rules used some BS fluff to argue that a druid with a scimitar in his hand can cast spells and shapechange but a druid wearing, say, ring mail or studded leather couldn't -- because the metal from his armor (but not the metal from his scimitar [which probably has more metal in it than studded leather armor, anyway], the gold in his purse, the pots and pans in his backpack, his cooking knife, etc -- that stuff was fine) would stop him from being able to cast spells, shapechange, and do all that other druidy stuff like dancing naked in the woods with the fairies and dryads and vegepygmies. Ridiculousness aside (metal is, last I checked, a natural substance -- I wonder if a druid wearing polyester can cast spells...), druids are only banned from wearing metal armor and shields, not from wielding metal weapons.

 

If to use ShadowKeeper.No problem , dear... get "use all item" for the character,and of course "tweak" it like the picture.

 

Actually, there is no Biblical origin for this restriction whatsoever. Roman Catholic theologians didn't even make a pretense of claiming this was a Biblical restriction. It was a commonly acccepted rationalization that worked its way into Roman Catholic teaching, but it was never based on the Bible. People thought that priests spilling blood was unseemly, even though you can make someone bleed almost as well with a blunt weapon as with a slashing or piercing one. Not only does the Bible never forbid such weaponry to the clergy (or anyone else), but Jewish priests used "slashing" weapons all the time when sacrificing animals. You'll never find anything in the Bible that forbids clergy from using certain kinds of weaponry -- because it simply doesn't exist.

Long story short -- just because it is taught or practiced by the Roman Catholic Church, or any other nominally Christian religion or person, does NOT mean it is in fact based on anything in the Bible.

---------- Added 0 hours, 5 minutes and 50 seconds later... ----------

ROFLMAO

Yes, like clerics being limited to blunt weapons, its all being done in the name of "game balance," which in both of these cases sounds like a BS rationalization for an unnecessary and irrational rule (AD&D relgions are based on fantasy mythology, not real-world religions, anyway).