Thread: Baldur's Gate

I really like this game. It's just that certain classes are mostly useless especially if you go into the sequel. Then, there's next to no downside to dual classing and really even multiclassing. There aren't too many great feats to justify going pure class.

Why have a pure thief or a pure mage/sorceror when you can have a fighter/mage, fighter/thief, or a thief/mage? Your thief skills only need to be so high especially with knock and backstab/crits don't affect tough opponents in the second game.

Playing a monk or a sorceror in 3rd edition or higher is fun and much more viable. Doing the "3rd edition adapted to 2nd edition class" thing feels so limited. For monks, besides the lack luster specializations, you have to wait until level 25 to have your fists count as +4 weapons, which forces you to use an actual +4 weapon for certain enemies.

Sorcerors lack HP that you can get from multi/dual-classing a mage and only get a few spells more. You can do the dragon disciple thing...for eventual HP regen, a once-a-day breath attack that deals lackluster damage later, and fire resistance. You just can cast fewer spells per day. HP regen? Why does your caster who should be staying in the back need that especially considering that the points spent to get you to 20 constitution get you no extra HP/level or saves? Fire resistance? Not like there aren't spells/potions/items for that.

Rangers feels useless. If you go melee, it seems good, until you realize that a fighter will perform better. For ranged, I'm pretty sure there isn't any ammo beyond +3 in the second game, which means you can't damage certain enemies.

Barbarians don't seem that great. Sure, you get more HP, but you can't use the tankiest armor so your armor class is going to be worse than a fighter/paladin/cleric.

Why role a paladin/cleric when you have great NPC ones provided in game for you (hello Ajantis/Dorn)?

I just feel frustrated that I have so little freedom in playing the series how I would like to play it while having a useful main character.

Originally Posted by DJ Mr. White

I really like this game. It's just that certain classes are mostly useless especially if you go into the sequel. Then, there's next to no downside to dual classing and really even multiclassing. There aren't too many great feats to justify going pure class.

Why have a pure thief or a pure mage/sorceror when you can have a fighter/mage, fighter/thief, or a thief/mage? Your thief skills only need to be so high especially with knock and backstab/crits don't affect tough opponents in the second game.

Playing a monk or a sorceror in 3rd edition or higher is fun and much more viable. Doing the "3rd edition adapted to 2nd edition class" thing feels so limited. For monks, besides the lack luster specializations, you have to wait until level 25 to have your fists count as +4 weapons, which forces you to use an actual +4 weapon for certain enemies.

Sorcerors lack HP that you can get from multi/dual-classing a mage and only get a few spells more. You can do the dragon disciple thing...for eventual HP regen, a once-a-day breath attack that deals lackluster damage later, and fire resistance. You just can cast fewer spells per day. HP regen? Why does your caster who should be staying in the back need that especially considering that the points spent to get you to 20 constitution get you no extra HP/level or saves? Fire resistance? Not like there aren't spells/potions/items for that.

Rangers feels useless. If you go melee, it seems good, until you realize that a fighter will perform better. For ranged, I'm pretty sure there isn't any ammo beyond +3 in the second game, which means you can't damage certain enemies.

Barbarians don't seem that great. Sure, you get more HP, but you can't use the tankiest armor so your armor class is going to be worse than a fighter/paladin/cleric.

Why role a paladin/cleric when you have great NPC ones provided in game for you (hello Ajantis/Dorn)?

I just feel frustrated that I have so little freedom in playing the series how I would like to play it while having a useful main character.

Monks become nigh on invincible around level 20 though...I've solo'd Fiirkraag with a level 20 monk...they can do a solid amount of damage and NOTHING hits them.

Sorcerers are easily the most OP class in the game. It's not even remotely close...if you use the right spells once you have 3rd Level spells in BG1 you are pretty much untouchable for the rest of the series with a little bit of forethought. Once you get 6th level spells in BG2 you have enough buffs to get through any non-lich/dragon fight without really having to worry about taking damage. Add in Staff of the Magi and your level 7 and 9 spells(8 is meh other than Horrid Wilting which is beast) and it gets pretty stupid pretty fast.

Rangers can be really OP actually...especially if you go ranger/cleric(gives you access to all divine spells). The best bet for them is to either:

A) Take the Archer kit...the extra APR and Called Shot mean you will wreck everything you can hit...as for Ammo...the ammo doesn't determine hit..the weapon does. If you are playing an Archer you should probably go with short bows, slings or crossbows - there simply aren't any +4 longbows in the game.

B) Dual wield and go all out offense...don't really worry about tanking(although you still can do that effectively with some protections). Stalkers are good for this...they can open up with a backstab and then go to town. Just depends on your weapons. The bonus you get starting with 2 prof points in Dual wield helps out a lot early on.

C) Go ranger/cleric. Most effective tank in the game..you get all the major defense buffs that clerics get, along with the offensive side the druids get. Add in Iron Skins on top of all your normal cleric buffs and a ranger/cleric is pretty much invincible around 14/14...and definitely not a slouch before that.

Barbarians steel cannons...they can do stupid amounts of damage...I prefer a berserker though because their berserk makes them immune to almost everything...Barbs do get some bonus resistances and immunities (backstab,poison etc)

Inquisitors and Cavaliers can be incredibly useful. The bonus resistances Cavaliers get make them very good tanks. Inquisitors get the really OP dispel magic, and get to wield Carsomyr in BG2(which makes up for a whole lot of things).

I've beat the game with a protagonist of every class and most kits...they can all be viable...some just take a little extra thinking...mods help with rebalancing it some as well.

But...even with all that I'll take 3.5/pathfinder rules any day of the week over 2E.

edit: Also, how specifically do you want to play it? Or do you just mean that you feel restricted, not necessarily missing out on the playstyle you want?

Restricted, mainly. I enjoy multiple playstyles.

I can understand that. I think it might just bother me less because I grew up playing 2E d&d. There are many good mods that help reduce those restrictions...if you play the originals then I'd go TuTu or Trilogy + Big Picture Project. EE then I'd probably start going through the normal sitesL G3, SHS, PPG, etc...a lot of the old mods still work.

Hmmmmmmmm...
Baldurs Gate Reloaded at Neverwinter 2 Nexus - mods and community