I'm thinking of dual classing my lv10 beserker to a cleric. I've sided with Bodhi and am of evil alignment (as is most of my party). Can anyone sight any advantages/disadvantages of dual classing my beserker to a cleric. Should i wait until i'm a higher level? Thanks for any response.

I've mentioned it before -- dual classing is not something I would do -- the game gets harder with every adventure you fulfill, and tackling something designed for a 10th level character with a character who is effectively 1st level strikes me as foolhardy at best. But, it is a valid oprion and people have experienced success, so I'll just give some hard game data.
I hope you don't have any weapons skills in the slashing or piercing category, as you will lose them when you dual. Remember, your cleric can only wield blunt weapons.
On the plus side, you still can achieve Grand Mastery, even though you no longer progress as a fighter. This is a good thing! Given that clerics have lower HP than fighters, I'd stick with the sword and shield style and focus on slings and hammers -- it is a pity that only one throwing hammer exists in the game, and the stupid thing can only be used by dwarves (which you are obviously not, since you are dual classing). But, if you decide to assemble Crom Faeyr, you will have a berserker cleric with 25 strength! And that's worth the time! You could also get the sling of seeking, which allows you a strength bonus to your ranged attack. Crom Faeyr won't help here, obviously, but if you have a high initial strength and / or a belt or other strength enhancing item, you can dish out some nice damage with that sling.

Thanks.

I've got 4 proficiency points on flail (which i think is a blunt weapon) and two points on dual weilding.

I plan on using the flail of ages and crom fayer.

I'm hoping this will make a for good fighter/cleric.

It sure will.

And you won't have that much less hp than a regular fighter, because they stop getting their big hp bonusses at level 10. I would have adviced to dual at level 9 (or 13 with ToB), but you're obviously past that point.

To tackle the problem of being a level 1 character for a time: You could now do some missions, but don't report them done (and then do it when you have dualclassed and get the reward + xp), when you do this and the reward you get isn't quest exp, you could throw your partymembers out so you'll get all the exp (don't if you're in a romance though). You could also buy lots of scrolls, dismiss everyone except for a mage and have him/her scribe the spells.
These are ways to make you level up really fast and regain your fighter abilities.

Lord Keldin Depaara wrote
... tackling something designed for a 10th level character with a character who is effectively 1st level strikes me as foolhardy at best.It's not as bad as you make it out to be.
First it's not "effectively a 1st level character", since the character retains lots of good things from the previous levels, particularly important is the HP's. Secondly the character should almost instantly gain several levels and be at around level 5 in the new class in short order. Thirdly - unless soloing, which isn't the case here - the rest of the party will balance things out to the extent that you might not even notice that you've just dual classed your character


On the plus side, you still can achieve Grand Mastery... This is a good thing!IMO getting to Grand Mastery is a waste and should only be taken when you have reached Specialized or Master in all the weapons you want.


Given that clerics have lower HP than fighters, I'd stick with the sword and shield style and focus on slings and hammersUsing a sword and a shield is good, but beware that you do not take the "Weapon and Shield" proficiency! Ever!

Uh, why not, Earl? I always take the weapon and shield style -- if I'm a melee fighter, it protects me from ranged attacks while I get close enough to kick some butt.

IMO the bonus from Weapon and Shield proficiency is too weak and the proficiency pooint(s) can normally be better spent elsewhere.

I think Tobold will do fine dual-wielding. As Menion Leah says, the HP disadvantage is not that great, and with the right armour, the extra AC you get from a shield (and the minor AC bonus vs missiles if points are placed in weapon/shield style) is not that big of a deal. Dualling at level 13 is still an option (for the extra ½ attack), but it may not be worth the wait you have until you regain your berserker abilities.

I tend to agree with Earl, sort of. The bonus isn't weak at all, just not as useful to a melee fighter. IMO, Sword & Shield style is only meant for Spellcasters - i.e. Clerics and Druids, all dual and multi combos, and any Mage combo (but obviously not single). What do I care if my Barbarian with 145 hitpoints gets hit with a sissy 1d6 arrow? Nuttin'. But I do care when my Cleric/Mage gets his spells inturrupted by a sissy 1d6 arrow. Melee fighters need access to more weapons, spellcasters need cover to get their spells off. Pretty cut and dried, at least the way I play.

Wow. Great arguement Death Rabbit.

One thing to recall when dual-classing: Do not duplicate proficiencies, as they will be lost. Thus, when you switch to cleric, it's hello mace, sling and then hammer proficiencies. If you have any more after that (I don't remember right now), pick staff or club or something like that. Don't put a star in anything you presently have (even dual wielding).

it depends on if you're playing solo or with a full party. If the latter, then I'd go for the dual-class at 9 or 12 level. If the former, I'd do a bunch of quests that you get extra xp for, but don't go back and talk to the person that gives you your reward. That way you can dual-class, then talk to all the people you've done quests for and get all the xp when you want to.

Seems the consensus is to dual at lv 9 or 13.

Is there any reason why one shouldn't dual at 10, 11 or 12?

So as to re-gain my fighter status quickly i'm thinking of dualing soon on lv 11.

Dualling at 9 is the earliest you should do for purposes of best THAC0, extra weapon proficiency at level 9, and best HP total. 10 and 11 don't make sense because the only benefit is slight HP and THAC0. 12 almost makes sense because of the extra weapon proficiency, but, if you're waiting for 12, might as well wait for 13, where you get an extra 1/2 attack per round.

I find it really depends on which class you're dualling to. If, say, you're dualling from a Kensai to a Thief, I'd go with lvl 13 or higher because a thief levels up so fast. In your case it's hard to say since a cleric does'nt really have a significant pattern in it's XP to level ratio. It takes longer to level in the lower levels, then you start leveling quickly somewhere around 15 or so (I'm too lazy to dig out my manual). A Berzerk to a Cleric, I would say go for level 12, because you get an extra Rage at 12, I think (it's every four levels, right?) and you get the spec point. You may wish to wait til lvl 13 though, since as a cleric you won't get any extra attacks per round. It's up to you since it's your game and it doesn't really matter what choice you make. Just rack it up to XP (pun intended).

Will the cleric have as much attacks / round than the berserker?

Some advise to do quests and wait till you're dual classed before claiming XP? I think it's cheesy!

You will get the attacks per round as the cleric but only once you have surpassed the amount of XP in the Cleric class as you reached in the fighter.
I hope that made sense???

I'm doing a similar character right now(berserker/cleric), and I'm going to dual at level 9. The abilities are nicer at 12 or 13, but it will take forever to get your fighter abilities back.

the most powerful dual classes i have played were
fighter dualed to thief and fighter dualed to cleric in that order

i dualed at level 9 for both and cleaned up everyone

Level 10 is a better level for dualling than level > 10 because of the amount of time you spend waiting to recover your original abilities. You'll already need 675,000 XP before you get your fighter levels back and it's seriously tedious. Up to now, you've been kicking (un)righteous butt, but when you're effectively a single-class cleric you'll find that you can't hit anything worth a damn. And somehow you lose your ability to swing a flail. That sucks. I dualled a fighter character to a cleric at level 9, and it was tedious enough waiting to gather the 450,000 XP required to recover the fighter abilities. Level 9, IMO, is the best level to dual a fighter: you've got all your HP and a goodly number of weapon proficiencies.

Level 9, or level 13 if you really want that extra weapon proficiency and 1/2 attack (this isn't worth it, IMHO).

BTW, a great way to "catch up" a little faster is to do some of the really easy mini quests (like matching up that paladin with the small girl) solo.

I'd say 2, 7 or 13. While 2 is the equivalent of 3E one fighter level for armour and weapon profs, 7 gives you some nice HP and 1/2 attack per round more. 9 is the border of decent HP progression, but with clerics you only get 4 HP more, which is not worth the points. Same to 8 for rogues, I think. Maybe the 12 for wizards, but come on - just how much HP do you really need when you're stoneskinned and protected from elements which better come soon that some wimpy 12 HP increase at the cost of 180K XP (the difference between fighter level 7 and 9). 13 might be fun with loads of hit points, fine assortment of proficiencies and the biggest number of attacks, but grand mastery also gets you attack per round increase, so you will exceed your multi-classed counterpart. You'll get less thac0, sadly. Thus, 13 isn't all that bad, if you need the thac0.

Sword and shield prof isn't a waste if you don't get it too fast. If you only plan to use one weapon type throughout the game, you can get grand mastery in it, some sling profs during your larval period ;) and ultimately, when you're done with grand mastery, sword and shield. Two-handed style makes no sense since that would only be staves and you don't get a good staff early, but think about single-weapon, too. Dual-wielding gives +1 attack per round at slightly reduced thac0, two-handed is nearly useless, but single-weapon specialisation means -2 AC (like a shield +1) and threat range 19-20 instead of 20, effectively doubling your chance of scoring a critical. I used to consider this style useless, but when I had nothing better to do, I tried it on a cavalier character and it worked like charm. Plus, I could always use a shield +4 if really needed, for +2 net gain over single-weapon style use.

I tend to agree with Earl, sort of. The bonus isn't weak at all, just not as useful to a melee fighter. IMO, Sword & Shield style is only meant for Spellcasters - i.e. Clerics and Druids, all dual and multi combos, and any Mage combo (but obviously not single). What do I care if my Barbarian with 145 hitpoints gets hit with a sissy 1d6 arrow? Nuttin'. But I do care when my Cleric/Mage gets his spells inturrupted by a sissy 1d6 arrow. Melee fighters need access to more weapons, spellcasters need cover to get their spells off. Pretty cut and dried, at least the way I play. Wow, you just made the best argument I've ever seen for Aerie to start spending points in "Sword and Shield."


On a related note, this question is for those who have waited until level 12 to dual: Do you think it takes too long to "catch up"? Will I be past Chapter 2 by the time I finally catch up if I wait this long, or will it take even longer?

On the subject of backstabs, Whats the highest Backstab damage you've reached. I thik i may have gotten over 300 with my fighter theif a couple o times but that may have been with ToB.

OOOOOOOPS MY BAD WRONG TOPIC, SORRY TAL!!

[So why didn't you edit your post to remove the ToB reference?] -Tal

[ November 20, 2003, 12:09: Message edited by: Taluntain ]