oh good, the debate on dual vs multi F/D started again; I have been absent in the previous debates. Personally I follow the NobleNick school of thought dual is better than multi. But the issue of course is more complex than that. It really depends on various factors.
Quote:
Originally posted by Dundee Slaytern:
Do you play your F/D as a brawler, or as a spellcaster? If the former, then the F/D is not exactly the best choice. If the latter, then Grandmastery is a moot point.
I do not know about the playstyles of others, but for me, my Druid(s) spent most, if not all, of the battle casting spells. Therefore, I very much prefer the Multi for earlier access to spells.
|
But in that case, why not choose a
pure class druid, so as to progress twice as fast as F/D. He won't have weapon specialization, he'll have less HP, he won't be able to wear armor, but so what? we only use him for spells, right?
Whether we like it or not, we will use the druid to attack. That grandmastery might not seem important, but in HoF it means grandmastery in
missile weapons. In a game where you keep firing ranged weapons, that would mean a lot, much more than slight difference in HP.
I am currently running a comparism between dual and multi F/D in my
HoF party. So far on second level of Kressalack's tomb my multi is D(9)/F(7) while my dual is F(8). Stats are simialr for both. Killwise dual is slightly better. I can't remeber exact numbers because I have it on a different computer but I believe it is something like dual 22% of kills while multi 18% of kills. But of course that doesn't really mean much, the multi's usefullness comes not as much from her kills but rather from her spells (disabling spells, summons).
Anyway, like I said, comparing dual vs multi depends on lots of factors. For example whether it is HoF or not.
First let's assume not HoF:
_If soloing:
Definately multi. If you try dual you will have LOTS of trouble trying to play with single class fighter without spells, and MUCH MORE trouble trying to kill more difficult monsters with single class low level druid (unless, you keep some of those ultra high quest XP awards.)
_If small party (2-3):
Multi might be better for same reasons as above, though it is less important if you have another full-time spellcaster.
_If full party:
this is were fun in comparism starts. I personally prefer dual. The only reason why multi might be better is if you are playing low-spellcaster party, specifically if you dont have any clerics and have to rely on druid spells for healing. Otherwise dual is the way to go.
First of all he will have more spells (unlike HoF, you won't max out with druid here), second he will have the important grandmastery.
Then there is another point. Remember I mentioned single-class druid? Well it is not a bad idea if you consider the fact that he will gain XP twice as fast as multi. With a small modification: instead of single class take a dual class and
dual immediately at level 2. That way he will have most of the advantages of F/D: weapon specialization (only in 2, but who'd need more than two? missile plus 1 mellee), ability to wear armor, percentile strength; while at the same time gaining XP twice as fast as multi and thus having more spells. All he loses is some 4000XP to the fighter class.
So that's another advantage of dual over multi: it is more customizable; you can choose how much fighter you want to have. You can dual at level 2, 5, 9, 13... as you like.
_If full party with
two druids:
This is slightly different. I think 2 multis is a bad idea: why have 2 slowly advancing druids with less spells? 1 multi and 1 dual seems to be good. Though personally I would say two duals is good as well. While 2 high level duals might not sound good, having one high dual (e.g F(13)/D) and one low dual (e.g F(2)/D), is an excellent idea, I'd say better than 1 dual and 1 multi.
_If all human party.
IMO dual is better than multi. You see, having human multi is against the rules. So it's generally accepted here that trying to make human multis is not a good idea. You can try clicking on the 'multiclass' but most probably it won't get you anywhere because the button is grayed out. So if you decide to include a multi F/D in your all human party, chances are you won't progress beyond the character creation screen.
Now let's assume you have HoF.
Here the multis are much more useful for two important reasons. First: You will max out anyway, so dual won't have more spells, and it would seem D(30)/F(30) is better than D(30)/F(15) or D(30)/F(2) or D(30)/F(0). Second: You will need those druid spells in early stages of the game much more than you needed them without HoF.
That said, I am still not sure multi is more useful. The dual will have other important advantages like the grandmastery in slings, and access to more high level spells before maxing out.
_____
That's it for now from my part. More on this as I progress through my game.
[ 08-09-2006, 08:41 PM: Message edited by: ZFR ]