dual class question

[BaRoN NiGhT]

i need some opinions:witch one is better, a fighter dualled to a mage or a mage dualled to a fighter?thx

[Armen]

Originally posted by BaRoN NiGhT: i need some opinions:witch one is better, a fighter dualled to a mage or a mage dualled to a fighter?thx

what sort of character do you want to play?

assuming level nine dual and miximum rolls your fighter->mage will have 72 more hit points than your mage and will go on to get all of the mage spells - if you still want a serious figher type fighter at the higher levels then tenser's transformation, improved haste and dual wielding would be a way forward - you'll also be able to choose a kit for you fighter

mage->fighter would be a bit limiting on spells i think and as you would want to wear proper armour anyway i imagine you'd be limited to pre-battle buffing

i've toyed with the idea of mage(2)->fighter (in BG1 obviously) to get basically a fighter who can use wands and scrolls but haven't yet

some thoughts anyway . . .

[Zuvio]

But overall; a fighter->mage is way better than a mage->fighter.

[Faceman]

a mage/fighter gets to be a fighter who can use wands - period.
If you equip him with a nice suit of elven armor he can also cast some spells but nothing serious.
A fighter/mage however - even if dualed right at the beginning - becomes a proper mage with devastating spell power just like a true mage BUT can have Grandmastery in Staffs, has a better Thac0, can wear Elven Chain, can use swords, ...
With a high level fighter/mage you can just timestop -almost- ANY enemy and then use the attack rounds not to cast but to whack him dead. If you like mages and you ever worried about their low melee abilities the Fighter->Mage is your choice.
If you are looking for an elegant fighter with some magic abilities you could use the Mage->Fighter but I would go for a Blade instead.