Char Ops in 1st Edition?

[tussock]

1st edition Druid? Heat Metal, baby. Round three and the Fighter is disabled by his burns for 1-4 days. No save (DMG nerf, magic armour gets an item save), other than getting out of the armour (not in three rounds) or getting hit with an Ice Storm or similar (!).

[PoliteNewb]

1st edition Druid? Heat Metal, baby. Round three and the Fighter is disabled by his burns for 1-4 days. No save (DMG nerf, magic armour gets an item save), other than getting out of the armour (not in three rounds) or getting hit with an Ice Storm or similar (!).

At 2nd level, no less. And Call Lightning at 3rd.

Druid love isn't just for 3E.

[Bill Bisco: Isometric Imp]

I'm surprised at some of the bad and or incomplete advice offered in this forum.

Take a look at my list I made in Frank's style for 1st edition. Spells that Kill People.

In short, spells in 1st edition are very powerful. There are several which outright incapacitate an enemy with no save or are a simple save or die depending on the type of enemy.

You definitely want to be a caster. Everyone should want to be a caster. The only time in which you would choose to start out as a Fighter type (Fighter, Ranger, Paladin) is if you rolled an 18 and rolled really well on Percentile dice. (I'd say at least 18/81 for +2/+4). If you didn't roll good on percentile strength or didn't get an 18, you should be a spellcaster (Cleric, Druid, or Wizard or even Illustionist).

If you have good scores or starting xp. You should dual class, even dual-classing at level 1.

Hire Henchmen, fighting animals, or whatever means you need, go into the dungeon, cast your save just suck or save or die spell for the day. Then go to sleep and start the game all over again.

If your game is a short term one, you should definitely multiclass. I see some people advocating a thief class. I disagree. I think thieves suck for many reasons.

1st edition was different than 2nd edition in that elves and half-elves could still cast in armor if mutliclassed. SO the following options are advised.

Elven Fighter / Magic-User
Half-Elven Cleric / Magic-User
Half-Elven Fighter / Magic-User / Cleric.

I highly recommend the Fighter / Magic-User / Cleric. You'll be able to cast in full armor, use fighter weapons, get better HP than a Magic-user and comparable HP to a Cleric. You'll get the save just suck / save or die spells from both the Magic-user and the Cleric and be able to have a 10 minute work-day instead of just a 5 minute one. Also, later on you can get find traps from Cleric and Knock from Magic-user and fairly effectively cover for the Trap Avoidance duties as well.

Most 1st edition games won't go very far, and if they do the DMs will often ignore the racial level limits anyway.

Hope that makes sense. Please ask for clarification.

-- Bill

[hogarth]

I agree with pretty much everything you say (and I don't think any of it conflicts with the comments I've made in this thread), but this is a bit misleading:

I highly recommend the Fighter / Magic-User / Cleric. You'll be able to cast in full armor, use fighter weapons, get better HP than a Magic-user and comparable HP to a Cleric.

You'll have the hit points of a cleric...that's two levels lower than a regular single-classed cleric.

[Bill Bisco: Isometric Imp]

Keep in mind a couple of things.

1. In a one shot game, it won't matter. No one is going to level or level meaningfully to matter. In this case it's strictly better to be multiclassed

2. Single classed folks will level quicker. However, multiclass folks will quickly catch up despite split xp.

As a caveat, if you're going for a short-medium term game, I woul suggest a Magic-User / Cleric instead of Fighter / Magic-User / Cleric since the fighter's contribution is mainly just for the ability to use bows and swords and be able to get Percentile Strength.

If your game is going for the long term and you expect to gain several levels, then you'd optimally want to start out as a Fighter who switches to Cleric and/or Magic-User later on. It's usually more practical i.e. easier to start out as a Cleric Switching to Magic-User.

[hogarth]

1. In a one shot game, it won't matter. No one is going to level or level meaningfully to matter. In this case it's strictly better to be multiclassed.

I don't think anyone's arguing that being single classed is better than being dual classed or multiclassed. That's just crazy talk.

It's just that your comment about triple-classing vs. double-classing for better hit points is misleading; a f/m-u/c is rarely better off in terms of hit points than a m-u/c unless he has a Con of 17 or higher.

2. Single classed folks will level quicker. However, multiclass folks will quickly catch up despite split xp.

I'm not sure what you mean by "catch up". If you mean that a level 7 and a level 9 PC are closer in terms of power than a level 2 and a level 4 PC, that's true. But they're always about 2 levels behind their single-classed counterparts (ignoring weird exceptions like bards and druids and thieves) until name level at which point they start falling further and further behind (e.g. a cleric with 1.8 million XP is level 16, but a f/m-u/c with 1.8 million XP is level 10/11/10).

Or are you talking about some system of scaling XP based on the level of individual PCs?

[Username17]

It's just that your comment about triple-classing vs. double-classing for better hit points is misleading; a f/m-u/c is rarely better off in terms of hit points than a m-u/c unless he has a Con of 17 or higher.

Triple Classing increases your hit points substantially because you get a minimum of 1 hit point per die. If you could triple class Thief/Thief/Thief, your hit points per level would be 4.5 instead of only 3.5 for a single classed Thief. Multiclassing Thief/Thief would be in between, averaging 4 hit points per die.

Magic User / Clerics get half a d8 plus half a d4, which is a d4 + d2. That averages 4, and isn't much worse than a Cleric single class.

-Username17

[hogarth]

Magic User / Clerics get half a d8 plus half a d4, which is a d4 + d2. That averages 4, and isn't much worse than a Cleric single class.

Does it really specify that you round up when you divide your hit points by 2 (or 3)? I thought the rules were a bit vague on the issue.

My interpretation was that a multiclassed m-u/c gets (1d8+1d4)/2 = 3.5 hp per level on average, vs. (1d10+1d8+1d4)/3 = 4.17 hp per level for a f/m-u/c. So at level 1/1/1, the triple-classed PC will be ahead of the level 1/1 PC, but then he's behind in terms of hit points until level 6/6/6 (25 hp) vs. 7/7 (24.5 hp), assuming there are no Con bonuses.

[Bill Bisco: Isometric Imp]

2. Single classed folks will level quicker. However, multiclass folks will quickly catch up despite split xp.

I'm not sure what you mean by "catch up". If you mean that a level 7 and a level 9 PC are closer in terms of power than a level 2 and a level 4 PC, that's true. But they're always about 2 levels behind their single-classed counterparts (ignoring weird exceptions like bards and druids and thieves) until name level at which point they start falling further and further behind (e.g. a cleric with 1.8 million XP is level 16, but a f/m-u/c with 1.8 million XP is level 10/11/10).

Or are you talking about some system of scaling XP based on the level of individual PCs?

This is one area of decision making that one has to adjucate based on the situation and how long the campaign is reasonably expected to last. For example consider the following:

It takes a Single Class Cleric 1500 XP to get to 2nd level which grants them one more 1st level spell which means one more save just suck / save or die spell per day. It would take a Magic-User / Cleric 3000 XP to get to 2nd level Cleric.

If your campaign will end at 1500 XP, it's still better to be a Magic-User / Cleric because the extra save or die from Cleric Level 2 is already accounted for by the Magic-User Level 1 save or die.

If your campaign will end at 3000 XP, the Single Class Cleric would get another a net 2 extra first level spells and 1 extra 2nd level spells (more with good wisdom). Whrereas the Magic-User / Cleric would get just 1 extra 1st. At this breakpoint it'd be better to be single-classed assuming the time spent at 3K XP was significant.

If your campaign ends at 6000 XP, you have a Cleric 4 or a Cleric 3/ MU 2. At this breakpoint the Multiclass option is beter regarding save or dies and both have access to 2nd level spells.

If your campaign ends at 10,000 XP, you'll have a Cleric 4 vs a Cleric 3 / MU 3 . Again, at this breakpoint, the Multiclass option is better cause you have 2nd level spells from Cleric and Wizard. You also have access to Invisibility and Silence 15' radius or Find Traps and Knock which means that you're well on your way to replace a thief's functions when needed.

If the campaign ends at 13,000 Xp, then the comparison is a Cleric 5 vs a Cleric 3/ MU 3 which is about even.

My experience tells me that this range from 3000 to 10,000 xp is where a lot of games end. Multiclass starts out strictly better, is slightly worse during the short period that the single class has 2nd level cleric spells and then quickly shifts back to the multiclass option being better for some time. Long term the Multiclass Magic-User / Cleric character will be 1 level behind their single class counterpart but this is more than made up for by having lots of spells.

[talozin]

Does it really specify that you round up when you divide your hit points by 2 (or 3)? I thought the rules were a bit vague on the issue.

If memory serves, you round down but cannot round down to 0. So Frank is literally correct that you must always gain at least 1 hit point, but the spread on a d4 / 2 would be 1, 1, 1, 2 rather than a literal d2's 1, 2.

But I wouldn't bet my life on that. I'll look it up when I get home if no one else has by then.

[talozin]

1. In a one shot game, it won't matter. No one is going to level or level meaningfully to matter. In this case it's strictly better to be multiclassed

Also, in a one shot game, the major non-level-limit disadvantage of elves (it's easier to die and harder to get brought back to life) is much less relevant.

But they're always about 2 levels behind their single-classed counterparts (ignoring weird exceptions like bards and druids and thieves) until name level at which point they start falling further and further behind (e.g. a cleric with 1.8 million XP is level 16, but a f/m-u/c with 1.8 million XP is level 10/11/10).

"Catch up" is the wrong word but "not fall behind" is a pretty good one. Having two classes each 2 levels behind is usually enough to make you a pretty effective character. Also, a lot of multiclass combos involve Thief, which tends to not be as far behind vis-a-vis Clerics and Magic-Users.

It is true that this no longer holds past name level, but:

a) AD&D effectively ends at name level anyway, and
b) you probably have a better chance of winning the lottery than of playing in a retro AD&D campaign long enough to accumulate 1.8 million XP.

Unless the campaign is starting at the multimillion XP level already for a Bloodstone Pass one-shot or something, I wouldn't worry too much about the fact that you'll fall behind by that level.

[hogarth]

Does it really specify that you round up when you divide your hit points by 2 (or 3)? I thought the rules were a bit vague on the issue.

If memory serves, you round down but cannot round down to 0. So Frank is literally correct that you must always gain at least 1 hit point, but the spread on a d4 / 2 would be 1, 1, 1, 2 rather than a literal d2's 1, 2.

In that case, a double-classed PC would be even better off compared to a triple-classed PC in terms of hit points (since the triple-classed character would be rounding down 2/3 of the time instead of 1/2 the time for the double-classed PC).

This is one area of decision making that one has to adjucate based on the situation and how long the campaign is reasonably expected to last. For example consider the following:

Like I said, adding dual classing or (doubly) multiclassing is clearly better than having a single class (although "catching up" has nothing to do with it). Your advice to triple class for improved hit points is pretty much out to lunch, though. The ability to use a bow is okay, but not really that much better than the ability to use darts.

[PoliteNewb]

Here:

Multiclassed characters determine their hit points as follows:

--Roll the hit die (or dice) appropriate to each class the character is
professing.
--Total the sum of all dice so rolled, and adjust for constitution (q.v.).
--Divide the total by the character's classes (two or three), dropping
fractions under 1/2, rounding fractions of 1/2 or greater upwards to the
nextwhale number.
--The number derived (quotient) is the number of hit points the
multi-classed character gains with the rise in that experience level.

There are also a few examples in the multiclass section:

(under Fighter/magic-user)
Hit points are good on the average (5.5 + 2.5 = 8 / 2 = 4 hit points per double-classed level).

(under Fighter/magic-user/thief)
Hit points are good (5.5 + 2.5 + 3.5 = 11.5 / 3 = 4) on the average.

Those averages hold true when you're rolling all 3 dice at once (i.e. at 1st level), but less so when you're rolling the dice at different times (when raising levels), because of the aforementioned rounding issue.

A couple other observations:

1.) It actually doesn't say that you have a minimum of 1 HP per die, at least here. The PH says that Con penalty can't reduce you below 0, but nothing says you can't round 1/3 of a HP down to 0 (that I can see, anyway).

2.) The remark about "adjusting for Con" is a bit unclear, IMO...you are supposed to add that bonus to each hit die (so that when you divide, you're dividing triple the bonus by 3, ending up with your normal bonus per level). But the way its written could make it seem like you only add your Con bonus once (to the total), and are thus getting less than normal.

[hogarth]

--Divide the total by the character's classes (two or three), dropping fractions under 1/2, rounding fractions of 1/2 or greater upwards to the next whole number.

Great news for a double-classed character (you always round up, assuming you're not rolling for multiple classes at once), bad news for a triple-classed character.

[Username17]

--Divide the total by the character's classes (two or three), dropping fractions under 1/2, rounding fractions of 1/2 or greater upwards to the next whole number.

Great news for a double-classed character (you always round up, assuming you're not rolling for multiple classes at once), bad news for a triple-classed character.

I have seen so few triple classed characters that that particular rounding thing was forgotten by me entirely. Still, it's not so bad.

A d6 has results 0, 1, 1, 1, 2, 2. That is an overall average of 1.17. That's exactly 1/3 of what you'd expect on a single die. For the d8, it's similar. Your average is 1.5, which is exactly 1/3 of 4.5. For the d4 and d10, you get screwed, but not by much (0.75 and 1.8 respectively).

But yes: bottom line is that you get a small but noticeable hit point increase going with two classes instead of one. But you don't get that increase going with three classes instead of one.

-Username17

[Bill Bisco: Isometric Imp]

Well let's take a look at the HP diffrences with three scenarios. 1 Scenario no bonus hp, partial bonus hp and full bonus hp.

This also depends on how the DM does HP, if he decides round up or round down. If the DM chooses round up we get the following tables:

Fighter HP

Fighter Die Roll	HPs Granted
1	1
2	1
3	1
4	2
5	2
6	2
7	3
8	3
9	3
10	4

Average HP = HP Granted * Chance of Occurence.

Average Fighter HP = 1*0.1+1*0.1+1*0.1+2*0.1+....+4*0.1 = 2.2 HP

Cleric HP

Cleric Die Roll	HPs Granted
1	1
2	1
3	1
4	2
5	2
6	2
7	3
8	3

Average HP = HP Granted * Chance of Occurence.

Average Cleric HP = 1*0.125+1*0.125+1*0.125+2*0.125+....+3*0.125 = 1.875 HP

Magic-User HP

Magic-UserDie Roll	HPs Granted
1	1
2	1
3	1
4	2

Average HP = HP Granted * Chance of Occurence.

Average Magic-User HP = 1*0.125+1*0.125+1*0.125+2*0.125 = 0.625 HP , but since minimum HP is 1. HP = 1

Total Average HP = 2.2+1.875+1 = 5.075

So basically the above is only true if the DM rounds up on HP. This will only happen if the DM isn't following the rules. Thanks PoliteNewb

[PoliteNewb]

Let's compare 2-classed to 3-classed, shall we? Specifically, we'll go with the C/F/MU vs. C/MU, since those are 2 being touted.

At 3000 XP, you can have a C2/MU1 (1500x2) or a C1/F1/MU1 (1000x1). Mostly a push.

At 6000 XP, you can have a C3/MU2 (3000x2) or a C2/F2/MU1 (2000x3). I think the 2-classed pretty clearly wins that one.

At 10,000 XP, you can have a C3/MU3 (5000x2) or a C3/F2/MU2 (3333x3). Once again, I think the 2-classed comes out ahead.

The 3-classed doesn't really pull ahead until 15,000 XP (at which point it has 2nd level spells in both C and MU)...and loses the edge at 26,000, when the 2-classed hits C5/MU4 (while the 3-classed is at C4/F4/MU3). And even at 15,000-26,000...the 3-classed loses on HP.

For shits and giggles, HP comparison: assumes no Con bonus, and that classes always level separately.

EDITED (removed HP comparisons):

I apologize for my analysis...it was actually some horrendous math fail on my part (I did not divide the average HP for the C/MU in half). Combined with how averaging should probably be done differently, I'm going to recalculate when I have a minute, but the difference will probably be not nearly as stark.

[Bill Bisco: Isometric Imp]

If you're a Fighter/ Magic-User / Cleric with 18 Con, you can come out one point ahead in HP.

For example: Max fighter is 14 (+4 Con), Max Cleric is 10 (+2 Con) and max magic-user is 6 (+2) con, dividing by 3 leaves you with 5 HP from Fighter, 3 HP from Cleric and 2 HP from Magic-User. That is 10 HP.

The max for a Cleric / Magic-User would be 10/2 + 6/2 = 8 HP.

So potentially the triple is higher.

[K]

--Divide the total by the character's classes (two or three), dropping fractions under 1/2, rounding fractions of 1/2 or greater upwards to the next whole number.

Great news for a double-classed character (you always round up, assuming you're not rolling for multiple classes at once), bad news for a triple-classed character.

I have seen so few triple classed characters that that particular rounding thing was forgotten by me entirely. Still, it's not so bad.

A d6 has results 0, 1, 1, 1, 2, 2. That is an overall average of 1.17. That's exactly 1/3 of what you'd expect on a single die. For the d8, it's similar. Your average is 1.5, which is exactly 1/3 of 4.5. For the d4 and d10, you get screwed, but not by much (0.75 and 1.8 respectively).

But yes: bottom line is that you get a small but noticeable hit point increase going with two classes instead of one. But you don't get that increase going with three classes instead of one.

-Username17

I'm pretty sure that you get a minimum of 1 HP each time you get a level.

[shadzar]

If you're a Fighter/ Magic-User / Cleric with 18 Con, you can come out one point ahead in HP.

For example: Max fighter is 14 (+4 Con), Max Cleric is 10 (+2 Con) and max magic-user is 6 (+2) con, dividing by 3 leaves you with 5 HP from Fighter, 3 HP from Cleric and 2 HP from Magic-User. That is 10 HP.

The max for a Cleric / Magic-User would be 10/2 + 6/2 = 8 HP.

So potentially the triple is higher.

be VERY careful with you math, make sure you group the operands correctly.

FMuC: (10+4+4+2+8+2) / 3 = (30) / 3 = 10
CMu: (8+2+4+2) / 2 = (16) / 2 = 8

if at some point you get to a level where no longer gain HP or stop getting CON, you have to divide in the right place.

example with a +1 CON you could end up with a level granting:

CMu: (8+1) / 2 = (9) / 2 = 4.5 = 5hp

3. Divide the total by the character's classes (two or three), dropping fractions under ½, rounding fractions of ½ or greater upwards to the next whole number.

Not6 that when multi-classed characters are no longer able to progress in any given class, they no longer gain the hit dice for that class.

still painful to look at this book with its terrible organization and tiny type. always hoped for an updated revised printing that made it easier to read.

[talozin]

If you're a Fighter/ Magic-User / Cleric with 18 Con, you can come out one point ahead in HP.

It's pretty vanishingly unlikely that that will ever actually happen, though. Among other things, if you are a Magic-User who rolled an 18, you almost certainly put that bad boy in Intelligence rather than Constitution. You need at least a 13 in Wisdom to avoid clerical spell failure chances, you need a Strength of 9, and you need Dexterity and Charisma of at least 6 each. So if you roll up stats of 18 18 13+ 9+ 6+ 6+ and max all your hit point rolls, you could manage it, but your odds of doing that are ... not good.

I'm pretty sure that you get a minimum of 1 HP each time you get a level.

I've always thought so, too, but after checking, I can't find any actual rule stating such in the PHB or the DMG. Maybe I missed it, or maybe that's one of the countless sanity house rules where people just sort of assumed it worked that way.

[shadzar]

I'm pretty sure that you get a minimum of 1 HP each time you get a level.

something like that...

Hit Point Adjustment indicates the subtraction from or addition to each hit die for a character. (Hit dice are explained fully under the appropriate heading.) Note that subtraction can never reduce any hit die below 1, i.e. if a die is rolled and a 1 comes up, or if a 2 is rolled and the penalty due to constitution is -2, the die is read as 1 (hit point) regardless of subtractions.

[K]

I'm pretty sure that you get a minimum of 1 HP each time you get a level.

I've always thought so, too, but after checking, I can't find any actual rule stating such in the PHB or the DMG. Maybe I missed it, or maybe that's one of the countless sanity house rules where people just sort of assumed it worked that way.

It was a stated rule in 2nd edition, but I don't have a handy 1st edition to do any checking.

[PoliteNewb]

(all right, had a sec to crunch a few numbers)

Okay, so (assuming minimum of 1 per hit die, no Con bonus, and dropping fractions below 1/2 and rounding 1/2 or higher up, per the rules).

Average HP for a 2-classed Cleric/Magic-user work out like this:

Cleric possibles are 1/1/2/2/3/3/4/4, average of 2.5
Magic-user possibles are 1/1/2/2, average of 1.5

Average HP for a 3-classed Cleric/Fighter/Magic-user work out like this:

Cleric possibles are 1/1/1/1/2/2/2/3, average of 1.625
Fighter possibles are 1/1/1/1/2/2/2/3/3/3, average of 1.9
Magic-user always gets you 1 HP, so the average is 1 (possible results are 0.333, 0.666, 1.0, and 1.333...all round to 1)

So, at these points...

0 XP:

C1/MU1 = 4
C1/F1/MU1 = 4.525

3000 XP:

C2/MU1 = 6.5
C1/F1/MU1 = 4.525

6000 XP:

C3/MU2 = 10.5
C2/F2/MU1 = 8.05

10,000 XP:

C3/MU3 = 12
C3/F2/MU2 = 10.675

Looks like the 2-classed starts out slightly behind, but is thereafter a couple of HP ahead. But it's not a major difference.
For real comparison, a single-classed Cleric would have:

0 XP = 4.5
3000 XP = 13.5
6000 XP = 18
10,000 XP = 18

Single class ends up with around twice the HP of a multi-class with the same XP total, most of the time.

It's pretty vanishingly unlikely that that will ever actually happen, though. Among other things, if you are a Magic-User who rolled an 18, you almost certainly put that bad boy in Intelligence rather than Constitution. You need at least a 13 in Wisdom to avoid clerical spell failure chances, you need a Strength of 9, and you need Dexterity and Charisma of at least 6 each. So if you roll up stats of 18 18 13+ 9+ 6+ 6+ and max all your hit point rolls, you could manage it, but your odds of doing that are ... not good.

Well, if you're a multiclassed fighter (as this hypothetical guy is), you'd probably want that 18 in Str, since it gives you percentile Str, which is pretty awesome if you plan to ever hit things in the face (which you'll probably end up doing at some point).
Remember, in 1E mages didn't get bonus spells for a high Int, and it didn't affect saves. All it affected was the maximum level of spells you could cast, how many of each level you could know, and how easy it was to learn them. You could be a reasonably effective mage with as little as 15 Int.

I'm pretty sure that you get a minimum of 1 HP each time you get a level.

something like that...

Hit Point Adjustment indicates the subtraction from or addition to each hit die for a character. (Hit dice are explained fully under the appropriate heading.) Note that subtraction can never reduce any hit die below 1, i.e. if a die is rolled and a 1 comes up, or if a 2 is rolled and the penalty due to constitution is -2, the die is read as 1 (hit point) regardless of subtractions.

That sentence only applies to reductions for low Con. It says absolutely nowhere (that I can find) that each HD must grant at least 1 HP.
Now, it's a perfectly reasonable assumption, and everyone I know played it that way...but there is no book support for it.

[talozin]

Well, if you're a multiclassed fighter (as this hypothetical guy is), you'd probably want that 18 in Str, since it gives you percentile Str, which is pretty awesome if you plan to ever hit things in the face (which you'll probably end up doing at some point).
Remember, in 1E mages didn't get bonus spells for a high Int, and it didn't affect saves. All it affected was the maximum level of spells you could cast, how many of each level you could know, and how easy it was to learn them. You could be a reasonably effective mage with as little as 15 Int.

Well, I'm not going to break your neck trying to stop you, but I don't agree. Percentile Strength is nice, but I think Intelligence is much more important:

1) Even with an 18 Con, your hit points still aren't that great. Actual melee combat should be low on your priority list. I might even be tempted to prioritize Dex over Str for this character, as it will increase your survivability both directly (AC bonus) and indirectly (encourages you to use missile weapons).

2) While they don't affect your saves, stats do affect your level limits (except for Cleric, oddly enough -- one more reason to punt Wisdom if it's already 13). Given the choice between topping out at Ftr 6/MU 8/Clr 5 or Ftr 8/MU 6/Clr 5, I would lean toward the former. Though 7th is an important breakpoint for both Fighter (3/2 attacks) and Magic-User (4th level spells).

3) I think you're underselling how important the spell learning roll is in AD&D -- if you miss, you don't get to retry next level. You don't get to retry ever unless you somehow raise your Intelligence, which is just shy of impossible.

4) There are a fuckton of ways to boost your Strength, an even larger number of ways to boost to-hit and damage directly, but very few ways to boost your Intelligence. It's not guaranteed that you will ever run into a pair of Gauntlets of Ogre Power or a Girdle of Giant Strength but it's way more likely than discovering a Tome of Clear Thought.

For a melee character Strength makes sense. I just don't see a Fighter/Magic-User/Cleric as primarily a melee character.