Desdicado, I agree with you.. I have to admit tho that I haven't yet played BG2 (or BG1 also, as a matter of fact) as a pure spellcaster. All this spell memorization and resting and casting etc aint my style . In every game what I can remember so far, I have always been a warrior or a paladin.
But, that is not to day that I wont try a mage. It will certainly be a challenge, especially to me who aint really into mages. But the game is worth trying it. Why I was maybe 'ticked' a bit is the question - why always all try to suggest to take kensai and then dual to a mage, or take a multiclass fighter/mage/thief.. I played the game twice thru while having both time "pure" class and had no problem whatsoever. Had cavalier, then berserker, at the moment I have assassin (which is quite fun), which allows me actually to have wider range of party members - I can pick the locks and disarm traps myself, so I don't need half the NPC's I used before. I can also fight fairly well, with the equipment I have now (and level/skills). I simply love the 'Hide in Shadows' and then backstab thingie, lovely to see most of the rabble fall (You did quintiple damage!), and the ones who do not fall get quite a smack in the back..
All in all, all those "dual from this at that level into this until that level and get this much something" sound like some boring statistics. Just take a char and play the game thru. Don't seek the 'best' choice.
Once I have it finished with the assassin, I think I'll go with cleric.. Or skald.
|