Real Ultimate Power from Dual-Classing in a cRPG

General questions, debates, and rants about RPGs

Moderator: Moderators

Lago PARANOIA
Invincible Overlord
Posts: 10555
Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 3:00 am

Post by Lago PARANOIA »

NOTE: Despite the original title of the thread, this is actually aimed more towards 2E D&D tabletop.

If I was designing a character for a 2E D&D game that:

[*] Was some sort of melee bruiser / mage multi or dual-class.

[*] Had a generous but not Monty Haul DM, as in I could generally find bits of generic equipment and a couple of choice pieces of gear

[*] Was viable from a maximum of level 3 to the rest of the game.

[*] Was versatile as possible but slanted towards melee.

[*] Didn't use any infinite loops, rely heavily on DM arbitration for a favorable result (except for the treasure thing), or use stuff that invited a large amount of Gygaxian screwage.

[*] Didn't use more than 2-4 sourcebooks.

What would my character look like?

Frank said that you could make a priest that outfought a fighter or any of the fighter types in 2E D&D, but I don't see it. The spheres things and the lack of a default pantheon -- along with a general lack of killer-app buff spells -- makes the class seem kind of pants. I suppose you could use a cleric, but then where are the killer app abilities and proficiencies?
Last edited by Lago PARANOIA on Thu Jun 27, 2013 7:50 am, edited 1 time in total.
Josh Kablack wrote:Your freedom to make rulings up on the fly is in direct conflict with my freedom to interact with an internally consistent narrative. Your freedom to run/play a game without needing to understand a complex rule system is in direct conflict with my freedom to play a character whose abilities and flaws function as I intended within that ruleset. Your freedom to add and change rules in the middle of the game is in direct conflict with my ability to understand that rules system before I decided whether or not to join your game.

In short, your entire post is dismissive of not merely my intelligence, but my agency. And I don't mean agency as a player within one of your games, I mean my agency as a person. You do not want me to be informed when I make the fundamental decisions of deciding whether to join your game or buying your rules system.
Lago PARANOIA
Invincible Overlord
Posts: 10555
Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 3:00 am

Post by Lago PARANOIA »

And while we're on the subject of 2E D&D:

Were you allowed to be a regular-ass cleric or did you have to pick an elemental priest? And if you were forced to pick an elemental priest, why would anyone ever do that?
Josh Kablack wrote:Your freedom to make rulings up on the fly is in direct conflict with my freedom to interact with an internally consistent narrative. Your freedom to run/play a game without needing to understand a complex rule system is in direct conflict with my freedom to play a character whose abilities and flaws function as I intended within that ruleset. Your freedom to add and change rules in the middle of the game is in direct conflict with my ability to understand that rules system before I decided whether or not to join your game.

In short, your entire post is dismissive of not merely my intelligence, but my agency. And I don't mean agency as a player within one of your games, I mean my agency as a person. You do not want me to be informed when I make the fundamental decisions of deciding whether to join your game or buying your rules system.
User avatar
Ancient History
Serious Badass
Posts: 12708
Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2010 12:57 pm

Post by Ancient History »

Double-specialist wizards like the Pyrogathean Wizard (Fire/Earth) or the Frost Wizard (Air/Water) were a bit obscure but offer a fair bit of juice, though I don't know if they're quite the bruisers you're looking for. Clerics, as I recall, were mostly about the buff spells they had available - and if you're including Tome of Magic I seem to recall some decent low-level buffs among the elemental spells.
Lago PARANOIA
Invincible Overlord
Posts: 10555
Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 3:00 am

Post by Lago PARANOIA »

Ancient History wrote:Clerics, as I recall, were mostly about the buff spells they had available - and if you're including Tome of Magic I seem to recall some decent low-level buffs among the elemental spells.
Do go on.

Heck, what were the good bail-out levels for clerics if I was going to go this route? Also, what were the good spell enhancement/pseudo-metamagic options? I see crap like a proto-empower spell, but, how did that bojangles work?

Also, did all of the cleric kits really and truly suck eggs or was it just the ones in the Complete Priest's Handbook?
Josh Kablack wrote:Your freedom to make rulings up on the fly is in direct conflict with my freedom to interact with an internally consistent narrative. Your freedom to run/play a game without needing to understand a complex rule system is in direct conflict with my freedom to play a character whose abilities and flaws function as I intended within that ruleset. Your freedom to add and change rules in the middle of the game is in direct conflict with my ability to understand that rules system before I decided whether or not to join your game.

In short, your entire post is dismissive of not merely my intelligence, but my agency. And I don't mean agency as a player within one of your games, I mean my agency as a person. You do not want me to be informed when I make the fundamental decisions of deciding whether to join your game or buying your rules system.
User avatar
Bill Bisco: Isometric Imp
Knight
Posts: 447
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 1:12 am

Post by Bill Bisco: Isometric Imp »

Generally Speaking, Good bail-out levels in 2E are

Level 2. Minimum Dual Classing level. With level 2, you get better hp and healing spells. For a Wizard this is a godsend.

Level 3 is very good because you get find traps. With this spell, you literally laugh at the idea of putting points into find/remove traps. You also get slow poison and hold person at this level, and you already got command as a level 1 spell. 3rd level clerics are freaking versatile and powerful in the game at large.

Level 5 is especially good since now you get Cure Blindness and Cure disease and Remove Curse, which takes a chunk out of the nastiness the DM can throw at players. Animate Dead is good assuming your party and DM don't veto it. Undead are great for hitting traps. Speak with the Dead and Locate object give good situational abilities. And, there's a ton of good use for Continual Light which gives a permanent light source. Also, Dispel Magic works pretty well in 2nd edition.
Black Marches
"Real Sharpness Comes Without Effort"
sabs
Duke
Posts: 2347
Joined: Wed Dec 29, 2010 8:01 pm
Location: Delaware

Post by sabs »

My favorite 2nd edition character of all time was my 9th Wizard/9th Cleric (in a game where all the single characters were 10th). THat character was just outrageous amounts of fun. And I do mean outrageous.
User avatar
CatharzGodfoot
King
Posts: 5668
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
Location: North Carolina

Post by CatharzGodfoot »

A Half-Orc Cleric/Thief with a strength of 19 is very useful if you can get around the level limits.
The law in its majestic equality forbids the rich as well as the poor from stealing bread, begging and sleeping under bridges.
-Anatole France

Mount Flamethrower on rear
Drive in reverse
Win Game.

-Josh Kablack

User avatar
Bill Bisco: Isometric Imp
Knight
Posts: 447
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 1:12 am

Post by Bill Bisco: Isometric Imp »

Just as an added note. For Clerics, 4th level spells are kinda weak, the best of them being neutralize poison, which in many cases can be taken care of by slow poison. I'd say generally that 5th level is a good stopping point. Beyond that It'd be 10th level because you get raise dead and plane shift as 5th level spells.
Black Marches
"Real Sharpness Comes Without Effort"
User avatar
hogarth
Prince
Posts: 4582
Joined: Wed May 27, 2009 1:00 pm
Location: Toronto

Post by hogarth »

Bill Bisco: Isometric Imp wrote:Just as an added note. For Clerics, 4th level spells are kinda weak, the best of them being neutralize poison, which in many cases can be taken care of by slow poison.
In practice, if you don't have any other sources of healing in your party you'll probably be stuck with Cure Serious Wounds. But there are some seriously awesome cleric spells in the 2E Tome of Magic. For instance, Dimensional Folding is like Teleport except it's a 4th level cleric spell, and Solipsism is a weird do-anything utility spell.
User avatar
tussock
Prince
Posts: 2937
Joined: Sat Nov 07, 2009 4:28 am
Location: Online
Contact:

Post by tussock »

Be a Fighter, specialise in Longsword, and take Two-Weapon Style specilisation twice, so you can attack a lot of times with your dual longswords for no penalty. Have exceptional strength so everything dies from level 1.

When you hit level 7 and get your extra half attack (and have a lot of hit points), Dual-class into Mage, so you can be an 8th level Mage before you would have been an 8th level Fighter. It's awesome, but you need 16 Int, which sucks, so cheat like a crazy person on your stats (like writing down 18-00/18/18/16/3/3, and saying you rolled it at home).

Cleric? No. Make someone else play the Cleric, whoever arrives last, it's traditional.
PC, SJW, anti-fascist, not being a dick, or working on it, he/him.
Lago PARANOIA
Invincible Overlord
Posts: 10555
Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 3:00 am

Post by Lago PARANOIA »

So what's with this rare and extremely rare spell bullcrap I see in the 2E D&D magic item catalogs? Is that one of those 'technically optional but you should expect the DM to use it anyway because grognards are a bunch of stealth-nerfing pigfuckers' rules or is it actual stealth errata to prevent people from getting the sweet spell cheese that they crave?
Josh Kablack wrote:Your freedom to make rulings up on the fly is in direct conflict with my freedom to interact with an internally consistent narrative. Your freedom to run/play a game without needing to understand a complex rule system is in direct conflict with my freedom to play a character whose abilities and flaws function as I intended within that ruleset. Your freedom to add and change rules in the middle of the game is in direct conflict with my ability to understand that rules system before I decided whether or not to join your game.

In short, your entire post is dismissive of not merely my intelligence, but my agency. And I don't mean agency as a player within one of your games, I mean my agency as a person. You do not want me to be informed when I make the fundamental decisions of deciding whether to join your game or buying your rules system.
User avatar
Ancient History
Serious Badass
Posts: 12708
Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2010 12:57 pm

Post by Ancient History »

"Named" spells like Bigby's ____ Fist and whatnot were supposed to be harder to get than "common" spells like fireball. I think Ed Greenwood came up with the concept, but I'm not sure. On the other hand, they also tended to be cooler/more powerful. Like that weird fireball/lightning bolt crossover spell in The Magister.
User avatar
tussock
Prince
Posts: 2937
Joined: Sat Nov 07, 2009 4:28 am
Location: Online
Contact:

Post by tussock »

Wasn't it just a world-building thing for NPCs? Rare meant only the necromancer cabal guys would have that particular necromancy spell, and Very Rare meant only Fred the Lich from Skull Mountain had that spell.

The fact that the FR stuff has always been borderline-broken good is unrelated. There's also a lot of incredibly bad rare spells from what I recall. It's basically asking the DM to have his NPCs primarily use core spells.
PC, SJW, anti-fascist, not being a dick, or working on it, he/him.
Post Reply