Powergaming 2e

[Klorox]

What class/race combo, using only the PHB and guidebooks (Complete Guide to Fighters, ect), is the most optimized for survival and power, in your opinion?

I personally think multiclass is so good, and I've always been a fan of Fighter/Clerics and Illusionist/Thieves.

If it weren't for armor issues, or if the DM promised me some bracers of defense or elven chain, the fighter/magic user would rule, but you never know with equipment.

I think multiclassing is just so darn good.

[CE DM]

It all depends on the optional rules used.

Multi-class often isn't that great in 2e, a (sp) mage/thief is good fun, although hardly powerful/power-gaming. cleric/fighters are utterly rubbish, unless one has a useful sp priest or kit to fix them. limited to type B weapons, no WS allowed. Unless...

The answers will typically vary based on the XP (& thus level) amounts given. Overall, the winner is probably "specialty priest". mages (sp mages generally) begin to become pretty potent indeed after mid levels (past the L5 hump).

Powergaming 2e is all over the place though. Usually rangers lack WS; however, playing a ranger of Solonor Thelandria (elf or half elf; D&DG of the Realms) means full grand mastery access with bows (also available to cleric/rangers of S.T.). Swashbuckler kits, wherever available, tend to be strong. The planewalker's handbook (planescape) warrior & mage kits are strong (weapons act as higher plus to hit monsters, reduce MR, respectively). A guide to hell has solid kits, but the Hellblade (rogue kit) is especially strong (free WP & warrior THACO with it). Forgotten Realms kits contain all manner of powerful options. Human sp mage with Halruaa or Thay (either the super specialist or double specialist versions), illusionist of Nimbral, now THOSE are power gamer wet dreams! Any number of concepts can be had, better to start with that, THEN look to make it work/power it up.


EX: one wants a rogue/archer character. Not a bad choice in vanilla, high dex & short bow, probably an elf, and the spellfilcher kit from complete book elves adds a nice secondary focus (detect magic & vs magic traps), but one can do much better. The aforementioned Hellblade, aside from a devil/hellish corruption fighting focus, could be long bow, say (hello warrior THACO!). Several kits from wizards & rogues of the realms make this a nice choice: rogue of the high dale : no armor, limited to small melee weapons, but adds dex b to damage w bows & has a surprise/sniper effect equal to backstab; Evereskan rogues get dex b to damage w bows as well, and another +2 to hit with them. They get -1 con at low altitude, -25% PP & no backstab, though, in trade. And so on.

If you have potential access to good spells lists, a fighter/mage need not rely too much on items, spells like invisible mail, phantom armor, stoneskin, improved blink, mirror image & displacement got your back. Items will come, anyway, armor is weak in HL AD&D, bracers/ring/cloak/X is better eventually.

The key is whether or not the idiotic nerfs to multi-class are applied or not, or if they are, if they can be circumvented. Still, some general ideas based on what you said:

find out what gods/pantheons are allowed/used. Your sp priest or sp priest/fighter can flow from that. I also recommend looking at the PO:S&M crusader priest base class. Pretty solid spells, warrior THACO, any weapons, & all on the standard priest XP table, unlike the later uber sp priests. In any event, it might be worthwhile to look at some different races than usual, although the typical dwarf or half elf is just fine for a C/F. Aasimar are pretty much perfect though.

Some battle sp priests from legends & lore (uses cleric xp tables) include the Norse sp priestess of the Valkyries (pretty much akin to the crusader), Aegir (actually fighters with cleric spells tacked on), Hachiman (crusader like again), Ares (cleric/fighter), Horus (CG paladin with full priest spells), & Kuan-ti (cleric/fighter)

Other (human) multi-class priests from LL include Bragi (bard/priest), Tyaa (actually a thief w some priest spells), Isis (cleric/MU+uberness), Coyote (thief ability to L10 as bonus)

As for other L&L priests, Loki is a Norse stand out, lax restrictions but powerful. The Egyptian pantheon stands out with numerous powerhouses (even more so in 2.5 versions in later books, but still crazy strong here). There are tons more though, and that's even pre 2.5e uber priests (who, should use a hard to find costly xp advancement table, it's cheap/cheating otherwise, I will note)

You also mention illusionist/thieves, by which I presume you mean gnomes. Consider Tieflings along with gnomes, elves & halflings. On gnomes, the Vanisher, Image maker & Mouseburglar kits (complete book of gnomes & halflings) are all good stuff, albeit the appear written for single class characters. Still, consider the new sp mage options of Alchemist (PO:S&P/PO:S&M) & Artificer (PO:S&M) to your multi classed gnome (fighter, cleric, sp priest, or thief). Very different from illusionist (a fun, but weak specialty in 2e, sadly). The artificer has a slow/rough start, in particular, but becomes a real powerhouse at mid+ levels; it appears made for power-gaming (abuse).

EDIT: no powergaming in AD&D discussion is complete without at least touching on the (terrible) dual class rules. Human ex-fighter L7, X is pretty hard to beat, but a whole host of options are possible (albeit requiring very good stat rolls to pull off, and timing & some serious work).

I re-iterate that knowing far more details on the rules & campaign used is all important. Just the stat generation method alone changes everything (along with your specific luck in using them).

[MeeposFire]

Multiclassing is effective though HP tends to be slightly lower. Most classes multiclassed with fighter work pretty well. THe fighter part makes you more durable and better with weapons (even if limited by the other class) while the other class is essentailly your actual class. Multiclassed characters tend to be 1 level behind single classed characters until you start getting into levels 10+ so for most campaigns I find it to be a good option.

If you have access to things like Faiths and Avatars from FR then some specialty priests rock (Tempus, Mystra, and Mask are great ways to play a most of a multiclass character but single classed).

Going more vanilla going straight fighter is very viable. Weapon specialization is actually very effective if limiting for you. Archery (especially as an elf) can be nasty though targeting in melee can be a pain. You can put a lot into using things like baldesinging but it is prof heavy and involve a lot of planning. Punching has a lot of potential what with the cestus, tumbling, weapon specialization, punching specialization, two weapon fighting, and more. Bonus points if you can get the gladiator class instead of fighter. Biggest problem with a punching specialist is the difficulty in getting magic weapons for them unless the DM caters to you.

IN any event for me if playing a warrior class of any sort I tend to prioritize int more than str. Str does not improve your character unless you get the highest of rolls (in my opinion only if you get 18/XX strength) so I find con, dex and int are much better. INt in particuar is a nice benefit that many miss since warriors can trade bonus languages for bonus prof in weapons and NWP. You can use this to pick up the fighting skills you want early enough to actually see them. Further spells and items boosting str are the most common of the stat boosting items as well.

[Raimun]

Elven Fighter/Mage. As far as I remember, you only lag one level of effectiveness behind pure classes. Key here is versatility and utility, no matter your level. When you start, you aren't just a "one magic missile per day"-dude, you can also use weapons to survive. At later levels, you aren't just an one dimensional guy with a piece of sharpened metal, you can also cast spells. Not to mention, at this point you can also combine the advantages you possess to fight in new and interesting ways, such as fighting enemy casters with steel and enemy warriors with magic. Also, you are an elf and elves are cool in this edition.

Yeah, this is what I picked. While I think this is powerful, the main reason was that this is an interesting and fun playstyle. If you are used to more modern game systems, most other classes can feel a bit one dimensional, including a pure mage. So, if you roll the stats for Figher/Mage, it's totally worth a try.

[CharonsHelper]

The big thing is to never go straight Thief. It's just bad. (though from what I recall - some of the kits made it less so)

In addition to multi-classing, dual-classing can be very potent, though rather rough if you actually play through all of the re-leveling.

Going Fighter for HP and weapon specialization and dual-classing into Thief can be pretty good since the bonus damage gets multiplied on a backstab, and since you level faster in Thief you won't be stuck without your Fighter abilities for as long.

[thorr-kan]

In 2ED, much more than 3ED, powergaming is based on the player, not the character.

That being said, based on your limitations, I've had good runs with a half-elf F/MU/C. I've had the most fun with a half-orc C/T using the Shadow kit from Complete Book of Humanoids.

[Telok]

Oh hey, see if the DM will let you use the point based class building guidelines from the DMG. Those were really easy to break, just pick a couple good/decent abilities and get the multiplier down to 1/4.

[LibraryOgre]

Or make a specialty priest with Skills and Powers. You can be pretty much anything you want to be with that.

[Jay R]

Once you get past 58,000 xp, a 5th level Fighter that dual-classes to Mage is excellent. For the trifling cost of 18K xp, you have a mage whose first five hit dice are d10s (not cut in half by multi-classing), and who can use the magic powers on weapons. [A sword with powers is valuable even if you stay out of melee.]

But mainly, a mage with 5d10 hp.

[LibraryOgre]

Once you get past 58,000 xp, a 5th level Fighter that dual-classes to Mage is excellent. For the trifling cost of 18K xp, you have a mage whose first five hit dice are d10s (not cut in half by multi-classing), and who can use the magic powers on weapons. [A sword with powers is valuable even if you stay out of melee.]

But mainly, a mage with 5d10 hp.

Human Dual-class, when you have the stats, is pretty sweet in a lot of cases.

[MeeposFire]

Human Dual-class, when you have the stats, is pretty sweet in a lot of cases.

True though it can be also annoying in play depending on how many levels you went with before switching.

For instance if you go 2-3 levels of fighter and switch to thief then it probably won't annoy you too much but if you went 13 levels of fighter (to max out the standard fighter benefits) then you will go a REALLY long time without being able to effectively use most of your fighter abilities. It also sucks more if the 1st class is important to your identity since you cannot use those abilities.

Personally I find multiclassing to be more fun for most of the game and still very good.

[Lord Torath]

True though it can be also annoying in play depending on how many levels you went with before switching.

For instance if you go 2-3 levels of fighter and switch to thief then it probably won't annoy you too much but if you went 13 levels of fighter (to max out the standard fighter benefits) then you will go a REALLY long time without being able to effectively use most of your fighter abilities. It also sucks more if the 1st class is important to your identity since you cannot use those abilities.

Personally I find multiclassing to be more fun for most of the game and still very good.If you stop at level 6 (36,000 xp), you can have High mastery in a single weapon (assuming you save your level 3 proficiency slot until you hit level 5, allowing Mastery). Pick a longbow, and you can stay out of melee, and still hit hard after you run out of spells.

Jay R, did you mean 18,000 xp instead of 58,000 xp?

[CE DM]

almost all of us are ignoring what restrictions/choices the OP gave us (including me:smalltongue:)

from what he gave (PH +complete X)
I'd go with a top 10 of, in no special order:
1 elf fighter/mage bladesinger
2 human ranger or paladin samurai
3 half elf or elf thief swashbuckler
4 dwarf cleric/fighter champion
5 dwarf fighter rapid response rider (griffon or similar)
6 human fighter, dual class X (swashbuckler for most, but not cleric)
7 human thief, dual class sp mage (transmuter, illusionist, etc)
8 human cleric, dual class sp mage (necromancer, abjurer, diviner, etc)
9 gnome cleric/illusionist
10 X fighter beast rider (with a potent mount, X is any medium size race)

[MeeposFire]

If you stop at level 6 (36,000 xp), you can have High mastery in a single weapon (assuming you save your level 3 proficiency slot until you hit level 5, allowing Mastery). Pick a longbow, and you can stay out of melee, and still hit hard after you run out of spells.

Jay R, did you mean 18,000 xp instead of 58,000 xp?

Depending on what rules you are using I would not bother go ing to high mastery. If you are using things like knockdown and the enhanced criticals then yea it is probably worth it but if you are not then I would probably either only go specialized or go all the way to grand mastery (the extra attack is nice). There are some nice fighting styles (two weapon fighting or some versions of sword and shield are very good though of course shield bashing usefulness depends on how the DM decides to rule some things) and that is not going into some of the more out there materials.

I will say though that general idea is a sound one a bow with high levels of specialization can be a fearsome thing at least until you are shooting into melee (assuming you are using that rule of course). Throwing weapons can also be nasty though far more reliant at higher levels in hoping you get a weapon that comes back to you hand right after being thrown.

I will say though that level 6 can be a long time in some games especially ones that do not use gold for XP rules and the bonUs XP for classes rules. IF you have one of those DMs that only awards XP for monster kills (and I Have met too many of those in AD&D sadly) or one that gives levels when they feel like it you could be waiting a very long time to play what you really want to play (if you want to play a fighter mage then you could be playing a fighter for a while and then a mage for while and in some campaigns you may never get to really play a fighter/mage).

Dual classing is good but it is really easy to forget that in many games it can kind of suck to play for a while until you finally get to play what you want (at that point it is pretty awesome though).

[LibraryOgre]

True though it can be also annoying in play depending on how many levels you went with before switching.

For instance if you go 2-3 levels of fighter and switch to thief then it probably won't annoy you too much but if you went 13 levels of fighter (to max out the standard fighter benefits) then you will go a REALLY long time without being able to effectively use most of your fighter abilities. It also sucks more if the 1st class is important to your identity since you cannot use those abilities.

Personally I find multiclassing to be more fun for most of the game and still very good.

I've long wanted to run a game with a single PC who is a 13th level fighter who dual-classed to a 1st level thief... and is trying to solo the Caves of Chaos. 1st level thief attacks, but with the fighter's old long sword (+5... he was 13th level, after all), his sneaking around armor (leather +1), a couple rings, etc. All those fighter HP, just wading into the fight.

However, "long time" is also a bit subjective. If you're actually doing a level-appropriate adventure, your main problem is going to be the one-level-at-a-time restriction, plus time. Did the party get a big treasure? Looks like you got a level, and lost like 3000xp on top of that. Did you get a magical item? Level, plus another chunk of lost XP. Fight that dragon? You leveled, so get more XP. If you're including training, that's going to be the real slower of advancement.

[Mutazoia]

I always had fun with the Gnome Cleric/Thief combo, for such gems as being able to cast "Silence 10' Radius" on yourself for a 'Move Silent" check that can't possibly fail, even if you are wearing the nice plate armor that clerics get to wear.....

[Jay R]

If you stop at level 6 (36,000 xp), you can have High mastery in a single weapon (assuming you save your level 3 proficiency slot until you hit level 5, allowing Mastery). Pick a longbow, and you can stay out of melee, and still hit hard after you run out of spells.

Yes, but that takes a lot longer before you can use the Fighter abilities.


Jay R, did you mean 18,000 xp instead of 58,000 xp?

Nope. It comes into its own at Fighter 5/Mage 6 - 58,000 xps. At that point the restrictions are gone, and you are the same level mage you would be as a single class.

[CharonsHelper]

Yes, but that takes a lot longer before you can use the Fighter abilities.

A lot of that depends upon what your 2nd class will be.

For Mage (as you are both talking about) getting to level 7 is pretty rough, and you're probably doing Fighter first more for the HP boost than anything else (and I believe it'll be a long time before Mage saves are better). The weapon skill you nab is nice, but it's pretty secondary.

For Thief that High weapon mastery is pretty huge as it can make up for their medicore accuracy and the extra damage multiplies with a backstab. Perhaps more importantly, thieves level much faster than mages do.

[CE DM]

it does, but the topic is POWERGAMING, & dual class is powergaming 101 in AD&D.

L7 warrior class, not 6, generally. L9 is getting a bit too late, but is another good spot. Basically, one starts "shopping" for a wand, staff, etc with mage attack powers at L6+ (by shopping I mean take them as a treasure pick, etc). THEN, one does the jump to sp mage/mage, and can hold their own with sheer HP, and the using the magic item liberally, and remembering, that in 2e, falling back on the old class only negates XP for the encounter & reduces it to half XP (who cares at lower levels?) for the adventure.

Certainly, though, with a strong kit, a multi class character is quite viable. Even without such, they can well be more fun to play up in the early game, but again, the question was about powergaming

Rolling 4d6, drop lowest, though, and it reveals the CHANCE to do a DC is low, while a standard multi class is as easy as pie to roll up.

[LibraryOgre]

The break points on a fighter (the point where you should get out for optimum dual-classing) are

2nd (easy to recover from that XP bump)
7th (bonus half attack)
9th (followers)
13th (bonus half attack)

That's assuming you don't include things like mastery.

Break points for clerics are largely 2nd level plus after you get any spell level. Druids especially "break" after 7th level (when you get shapechanging) and 11th level (after which you have to fight for levels... but now have access to 6th level spells), though they also follow general cleric rules.

Break points for thieves are with the Backstab Multipliers, OR when you achieve the skills you want, OR 10th level, when you can use scrolls... but thieves are usually not your first class, unless you're going Wizard ('cause a 15 Dex and a 17 Int makes a nice wizard, regardless, and qualifies you for Transmuter, one of the more powerful specialties).

Mage is probably not your first class, because of how HP work.

[Jay R]

One reason I wouldn't go too far with the first class of a dual-class character is duration. I've rarely seen a game go past about 100K-200K xps.

A dual-class character isn't really powergaming until you can use the advantages of both classes. The higher you go in the first class, the less time you spend able to use both.

[LibraryOgre]

One reason I wouldn't go too far with the first class of a dual-class character is duration. I've rarely seen a game go past about 100K-200K xps.

A dual-class character isn't really powergaming until you can use the advantages of both classes. The higher you go in the first class, the less time you spend able to use both.

True. I find the REAL strength of dual-classing is when you're starting at higher levels... if you've been given 300,000xp, then investing a few in an earlier class is worthwhile.

[CharonsHelper]

Another advantage of dual & multi-classing with Fighter which doesn't seem to have been mentioned is that if you DO SOMEHOW roll an 18, you get to take advantage of the higher Fighter STR for 18/xx.

I believe that if you went Fighter and into another class with dual-classing, even though you wouldn't be able to use Fighter abilities until you level higher in your new class, you would still be able to take advantage of the higher STR.

[MeeposFire]

Another advantage of dual & multi-classing with Fighter which doesn't seem to have been mentioned is that if you DO SOMEHOW roll an 18, you get to take advantage of the higher Fighter STR for 18/xx.

I believe that if you went Fighter and into another class with dual-classing, even though you wouldn't be able to use Fighter abilities until you level higher in your new class, you would still be able to take advantage of the higher STR.

That is only time I advocate putting your high score into str. Unless you get an 18/XX str is not a score to put your high ability score.

[LibraryOgre]

Another advantage of dual & multi-classing with Fighter which doesn't seem to have been mentioned is that if you DO SOMEHOW roll an 18, you get to take advantage of the higher Fighter STR for 18/xx.


If you're ditching fighter early, you might also do this with Constitution, to get the Fighter HP bonuses.

[CharonsHelper]

If you're ditching fighter early, you might also do this with Constitution, to get the Fighter HP bonuses.

Wouldn't that only affect the fighter levels you take?

[Mutazoia]

Dual classing in 2e is nothing like dual classing in 3e....

The problem with Dual classing in 2e, is that you have to completely stop using any and all class abilities of your first class, or forfeit any and all XP for that days adventuring, plus (if I'm recalling my old 2e knowledge correctly) you NEVER get around this. And... only humans can dual class, so you miss out on any racial boni and abilities that you may otherwise get for rolling a demi-human and multi-classing.

Sure, the drawback to multi-classing is splitting your XP between the two classes, giving you a slightly slower level progression, but it rather makes up for it when your Fighter/Mage can stop using his Wand of Force to shoot magic missiles, and use it as a +5 Bastard Sword (with all incumbant fighter stats), when the mobs get in melee rage, without having to sacrifice any XP for the day. (whew...that was a long sentence.)

[Jay R]

Dual classing in 2e is nothing like dual classing in 3e....

The problem with Dual classing in 2e, is that you have to completely stop using any and all class abilities of your first class, or forfeit any and all XP for that days adventuring, plus (if I'm recalling my old 2e knowledge correctly) you NEVER get around this.

That's only true until your second class is higher than your first. After that, you can use them both freely. That's why I said a Fighter 5 who dual-classes to Mage comes into his own at 58,000 xps. At that point, he's a Wizard 6 and can use all his skills.


And... only humans can dual class, so you miss out on any racial boni and abilities that you may otherwise get for rolling a demi-human and multi-classing.

Yup. But multi-classes are non-human, and under the published rules, their progression in one or more classes eventually stops. [Many people house-rule this away, but we are currently discussing 2e, not the house rules.]

In the games I've seen, the real cost of being a non-human is that your first Wish will be used to get rid of the level limit.


Sure, the drawback to multi-classing is splitting your XP between the two classes, giving you a slightly slower level progression, but it rather makes up for it when your Fighter/Mage can stop using his Wand of Force to shoot magic missiles, and use it as a +5 Bastard Sword (with all incumbant fighter stats), when the mobs get in melee rage, without having to sacrifice any XP for the day. (whew...that was a long sentence.)

It's "a slightly lower level progression" only until xp requirements stop being exponential. Then you progress only half as fast.

[CE DM]

You seem to be thinking 1e, 2e is less harsh, as I said above. I'll quote it since it seems to have been missed: "But if he uses any of his previous class's abilities during an encounter, he earns no experience for that encounter and only half experience for the adventure". Combined with the one level max rule, it is often no issue at all to only get 1/2 XP & miss XP on some encounters. That changes as levels rise, but then again, as the new class's level gets high, it's much more capable of handling things "on it's own".

In a L7-8 group, a DC ex fighter L7 turned mage L1, say, could resort to being a fighter for much of an adventure & still easily attain the 2500 xp required to hit L2 mage. Right up to pulling armor out of the bag og holding, even. Metagaming it is und=fortunately required, but the poor DC rules are exceedingly metagamish in the first place, so "meh". While not an obvious power game tactic to play a thief, the ex fighter (or cleric) turned thief can often get away with using their old class quite extensively, relying on "loose" treasures & thief ability use (x1/2) to earn levels early on.

Jay R: indeed, I hear many groups stop at 100-200k. Well, 300k more like. Ours NEVER did. We were much more likely to START at 100k than stop like that.

Mark: indeed, at high levels, those DC XP amounts fade into nothingness. That is why I'd not allow newly made (but with XP) characters to be more than L1 (or quite low) in their new class, or else the reverse (a very low amount of XP in the now defunct class on a high level character).

[LibraryOgre]

Mark: indeed, at high levels, those DC XP amounts fade into nothingness. That is why I'd not allow newly made (but with XP) characters to be more than L1 (or quite low) in their new class, or else the reverse (a very low amount of XP in the now defunct class on a high level character).

It's a powergaming decision, of course.... balancing old levels and new, and figuring out how hard you want to push it.

[CE DM]

I consider it a good DMing decision, but sure, sometimes the DM wants the players to powergame as much as they can, I guess

[Klorox]

Wouldn't that only affect the fighter levels you take?
Yup.

Thanks for all the great replies guys!!

[Jay R]

Wouldn't that only affect the fighter levels you take?

Sure. But even for just a few levels, turning d4+2 into d10+4 is a significant improvement.

[Dimers]

What class/race combo, using only the PHB and guidebooks (Complete Guide to Fighters, ect), is the most optimized for survival and power, in your opinion?

Depends on stats, XP at game start, and whether your DM accepts dual-dual-classing (the PHB doesn't say whether that's possible).

If starting at 1st level, I'd say dwarven fighter|priest. Tough, good saves, healing or buff spells, able to cast in armor, can specialize a little in a weapon. 'Survival' is more important than 'power' at 1st level, and this build's power is decent as it gains levels.

If the stats are good enough for it, a human fighter-->bard is pretty tasty at low to mid levels, because they get magic and useful skills quickly while getting back their fighter abilities. If your DM lets you find or research cat's grace to go along with strength, well, you're a fighter and a rogue, so you roll high for both, and they last a long time.

For higher levels, an aged human priest7-->wizard8+ has decent survivability and All The Spells. (More survivability than theory would suggest, because your party will probably protect you as a treasure-trove of goodness.) I like to go to priest 7 for the fourth-level spells, since you can get one bonus with realistic amounts of Wisdom.

[CE DM]

Sure. But even for just a few levels, turning d4+2 into d10+4 is a significant improvement.

eventually you loose con points to death/raise dead. It's terrific for non fighters to have over 16, too, just for that reason.

[CharonsHelper]

Sure. But even for just a few levels, turning d4+2 into d10+4 is a significant improvement.

Right - but that's mostly the Fighter levels in general, not the high Con. With a Con of 14 you'd still be getting d10+2.

The extra 2 points are nice, but it just seemed odd to me that he mentioned it specifically for only dipping a couple levels in Fighter. It'd be far more beneficial if you were taking 5+ in Fighter. If you're only dipping 2, I probably wouldn't bother putting that high a stat into Con and put it in something else.

Of course - this is all assuming that you get a 15 STR, a 17 in your 2nd class's prime stat, and still have a high enough stat to even take advantage of the Fighter's high Con benefits.

[LibraryOgre]

Wouldn't that only affect the fighter levels you take?

Not by my reading.

So, you're a level 4 Fighter, who turns into a mage. You're very lucky, and have an 18 Constitution.

For levels 1-4 of Fighter, you're getting 1d10+4 HP.

For levels 1-4 of Mage, you don't have access to fighter abilities, but you're also not getting HD. At level 5 Mage, you get access to your Fighter abilities again, including your improved HP bonus on HD. This is born out when looking at the multi-classing rules... you get half of the benefit when going up in one class, and half when going up in the other... your benefit isn't capped at +2, even for a 19 Constitution Dwarven fighter/cleric.

So, if you have a great Constitution, you can get great HP as a mage, though a huge bonus.

[Jay R]

Not by my reading.

So, you're a level 4 Fighter, who turns into a mage. You're very lucky, and have an 18 Constitution.

For levels 1-4 of Fighter, you're getting 1d10+4 HP.

For levels 1-4 of Mage, you don't have access to fighter abilities, but you're also not getting HD. At level 5 Mage, you get access to your Fighter abilities again, including your improved HP bonus on HD. This is born out when looking at the multi-classing rules... you get half of the benefit when going up in one class, and half when going up in the other... your benefit isn't capped at +2, even for a 19 Constitution Dwarven fighter/cleric.

So, if you have a great Constitution, you can get great HP as a mage, though a huge bonus.

That's an interesting argument. It didn't convince me you're right, but it did convince me for the first time that the question is open, and I looked at the PHB.

The multi-class does indeed get it for both classes. And the description of the bonus under Constitution doesn't say it only applies to warrior levels. It says that the warrior characters get the bonus. The dual-class Fighter/Wizard is a warrior, so he gets it - even when getting hit points from a mage level.

Thank you. I would never have looked it up without your explanation.

[LibraryOgre]

That's an interesting argument. It didn't convince me you're right, but it did convince me for the first time that the question is open, and I looked at the PHB.

The multi-class does indeed get it for both classes. And the description of the bonus under Constitution doesn't say it only applies to warrior levels. It says that the warrior characters get the bonus. The dual-class Fighter/Wizard is a warrior, so he gets it - even when getting hit points from a mage level.

Thank you. I would never have looked it up without your explanation.

I know you're agreeing with me, but I just found a bit of further bolstering:


He does not gain or lose any points on his ability scores (for example, an 18 Strength wizard who changes to fighter does not gain the percentile Strength bonus, but likewise a fighter changing to a wizard would not lose it).

Since % strength is specific to Warriors, and they keep that, they would also keep warrior-only Constitution bonuses.

[CharonsHelper]

Well - that being the case - I 100% agree that it'd be a great reason to dip a couple levels of Fighter.

However, I still think that you'd have an issue in 2e of having a 15+ STR, a 17+ INT, and an 18 CON. If you pull that off it's amazing, but those are some tough stats to roll outside of Baldur's Gate (where you roll 317 times to get amazing stats).

I know that 2e has STR boost items - are there CON boost items? I could see having a more average CON and just aim to get an item to boost it eventually.

[LibraryOgre]

Well - that being the case - I 100% agree that it'd be a great reason to dip a couple levels of Fighter.

However, I still think that you'd have an issue in 2e of having a 15+ STR, a 17+ INT, and an 18 CON. If you pull that off it's amazing, but those are some tough stats to roll outside of Baldur's Gate (where you roll 317 times to get amazing stats).

I know that 2e has STR boost items - are there CON boost items? I could see having a more average CON and just aim to get an item to boost it eventually.

Oh, I agree, it's a pretty difficult set of stats to get.

For Con boost items, I can think of:

1) Ioun Stones.
2) Manual of Bodily Health
3) Girdle of Dwarvenkind

Those are from the DMG; there may be more, of course.

[Jay R]

However, I still think that you'd have an issue in 2e of having a 15+ STR, a 17+ INT, and an 18 CON. If you pull that off it's amazing, but those are some tough stats to roll outside of Baldur's Gate (where you roll 317 times to get amazing stats).

The weirdest part to me is being a wizard who didn't make INT his highest stat.

[CE DM]

quite common in pre d20 D&D games

INT often isn't all that for a MU or mage

[Klorox]

quite common in pre d20 D&D games

INT often isn't all that for a MU or mage

What?!?

INT determines your chance to learn spells, how many you can scribe in your spellbook, and what level of spell you can cast.

[Khedrac]

What?!?

INT determines your chance to learn spells, how many you can scribe in your spellbook, and what level of spell you can cast.
Chance to learn spells can be houseruled away as too annoying to remember*.
The others come into play depending on what level you expect the campaign to reach - and many campaigns never get past 10th level - which not only affects the max level you need to be able to cast, but how many spells you will encounter and attempt to scribe.

* It's not the chance, it's remembering which spells you met two (real world) years ago and failed on then so you should not re-roll now...

[Klorox]

Chance to learn spells can be houseruled away as too annoying to remember*.
The others come into play depending on what level you expect the campaign to reach - and many campaigns never get past 10th level - which not only affects the max level you need to be able to cast, but how many spells you will encounter and attempt to scribe.

* It's not the chance, it's remembering which spells you met two (real world) years ago and failed on then so you should not re-roll now...

Well, if you're going to house rule away the function of a statistic, then I'll agree with you.

[LibraryOgre]

What?!?

INT determines your chance to learn spells, how many you can scribe in your spellbook, and what level of spell you can cast.

Which, TBH, might not be all that important.

The difference between a 17 and an 18 is one language/NWP, a 10% chance to learn spells, and access to 9th level spells. As an optional rule, it can also be the difference of 4 spells per spell level (we used it back in the day, but the more I think about it, the less I like that particular rule).

But that's not that much. If your play usually caps out at 8th or 9th level (as seems common, IME), then access to 9th level spells doesn't mean that much. A 10% chance to learn spells is significant, but not crippling, especially when you're 75% likely to get them, anyway. And 14 v. 18 spells per spell level isn't that huge, really, in the long run.

But compare that to the advantages of an 18 Constitution. It means an additional 2 HP per level (over a 16 Con)... so 20 more HP over the course of your career (since wizards get 10 HD). It also moves resurrection survival from "Near Certainty" to "Certainty", and gives a bump to system shock (though I admit those are minor points, especially after poo-pooing a 10% change in Chance to Learn spells). And you've also got a bit more space for making magic items and permanency, if you live that long... while, you might also do the same math and say "When my constitution drops with middle age, my intelligence will go up."

I don't think it's necessarily the optimal arrangement, but I can also see looking at those scores and saying "I will be a pretty buff wizard if it comes to that." And if you're playing through those lower levels, that toughness might appeal to you.