Cleric vs fighter/cleric multiclass for a campaign that’ll end around level 5 or 6

[Klorox]

Comparing a multiclass fighter/cleric and a single classed cleric, the THAC0 is pretty close, you can’t specialize in weapons with a multiclass character, the HP are pretty close, and the Saving Throws are mostly favorable for a cleric anyway in a game not destined for higher level play.

So, am I missing something or am I better off going single classed cleric?

[JadedDM]

I personally would go with full cleric myself, especially since the game will be low level enough that level limits won't come into play, so slowing down your XP rate won't be necessary.

That said, if your DM allows kits, there's a great one for dwarves (I'm assuming this is a dwarf character, since they're the only race that can do fighter/cleric by core) for fighter/clerics called Champion, which allows you to specialize in one weapon which is automatically magical.

[Thane of Fife]

One difference you're missing is that you can't dual-wield as a single-classed cleric. That may not matter to you, though.

[erikun]

You can't specialize as a multiclass character in AD&D2e? I don't think I've ever played that way.

Straight Cleric seems like it would be the best option to me, in this case. The additional spells you would get at the higher Cleric levels would more than make up for the slightly worse HP, THAC0, and certain saves for not multiclassing. Sure, Cleric spells are not as broken as in later editions, but those extra castings of Cure Wounds, Bless, and Spiritual Hammer are still very useful for the party.

Fighter/Cleric does give you better THAC0 even when you account for the Fighter class being a level behind the single-class Cleric. (THAC0 16 for Fighter 5, vs. THAC0 18 for Cleric 6) You'd also start getting multiple attacks if the game does roll around to Level 7, somehow, for what it matters.

[D+1]

You're unlikely to be fighting nearly as well as single-class fighters in any case unless the method for generating ability scores is generous enough for you to max out wisdom and still have an 18 to give you super-strength. Or, lacking an 18 for strength as well I assume you're more likely to apply best score to wisdom for the bonus spells than to strength for keeping combat ability competitive with straight fighters. In terms of spell ability, a cleric/fighter is likely to be 5/5 while a single-class fighter or cleric will be 6th. The higher thaco will be nice, but again, it's unlikely you're going to have anything like ability to keep up with fighters. Specialization is likely a question for the DM to answer as house-rules about this are common. BTB even as a cleric/fighter you ARE going to be limited to cleric weapons, although, again BTB, you could specialize with them.

All in all, given the limited level you expect for the campaign I personally think you'll do better as a single-classed cleric. Multiclassing fighter would provide somewhat better thaco, weapon specialization (but not with fighter weapons), no better AC, only slightly better hit points, and also introduces multiple attribute dependency because you're ostensibly trying to optimize two classes at once. Level limits won't be a concern if the campaign isn't going to last that long. Unless you have roleplaying reasons to go cleric/fighter, I think straight cleric is a better mechanical choice.

[JadedDM]

You can't specialize as a multiclass character in AD&D2e? I don't think I've ever played that way.

According to the PHB (CH. 5, pg 52):

"The specialization requires a single-minded dedication and training. Thus multi-class characters cannot use weapon specialization; it is available only to single-class fighters."

[ImmanuelRant]

According to the PHB (CH. 5, pg 52):

"The specialization requires a single-minded dedication and training. Thus multi-class characters cannot use weapon specialization; it is available only to single-class fighters."

It was an effort to help boost fighters versus the other choices available, as there was not a big incentive to play one without extras.

[Zekestone]

A couple of things to consider.

What are your stats like? I know stats aren't quite as crucial in 2e than later editions but a fighter/cleric has a wider need than a plain cleric.

Are you using any kits/speciality priests? Otherwise, even not taking weapon specialisation into account, clerics are limited to generally inferior weapons overall. Not to mention swords are heavily favoured when it comes to rolling up magic weapons in the tables. And it is especially apparent when it comes to ranged weapons when a pure fighter can use longbows while a cleric is stuck with slings or throwing hammers.

[Klorox]

A couple of things to consider.

What are your stats like? I know stats aren't quite as crucial in 2e than later editions but a fighter/cleric has a wider need than a plain cleric.

Are you using any kits/speciality priests? Otherwise, even not taking weapon specialisation into account, clerics are limited to generally inferior weapons overall. Not to mention swords are heavily favoured when it comes to rolling up magic weapons in the tables. And it is especially apparent when it comes to ranged weapons when a pure fighter can use longbows while a cleric is stuck with slings or throwing hammers.

I don’t have my sheet in front of me, but I rolled fairly well.

I know I have one stat at 18, so if I go multiclass fighter, I have percentile STR. If I go single class, it’ll be put into WIS.

[Thrudd]

18 Wis will make you a significantly better cleric at these levels, with the bonus spells. It depends a bit what your next highest is - 14 Wis will still get you two bonus 1st level spells, 14 Str will get you nothing.

Chances are your exceptional Strength is going to end up +1 or 2 to hit and +3 damage. Is that more worthwhile than five extra spells per day (by the end of the campaign)? Maybe, depending on the rest of the party- if you're going to be the only fighter, the extra damage and THAC0 will probably be worth the multiclass. You could get lucky and roll higher on the strength.

The weapons available to you as a cleric may vary from the standard if your particular deity allows it, kits, etc. So it's possible to end up with a cleric who can wield swords or axes or anything. If that's the case (or not a concern), and your party already has at least one other fighter, I'd just go with full cleric.

Also, single class with 18 in your prime requisite will get you 10% XP bonus (assuming the DM is running XP/leveling by the book). Multiclass, you'd need at least 16 in the other prime stat, as well, to get the bonus.

[Lo'Tek]

One thing not mentioned so far is weapon proficiencies: a cleric gets 2 +1/4 with weapons and 4 +1/3 other skills. A fighter gets 4 +1/3 and 3 +1/3 This means multi-classing enables a trade of 1 other proficiency for 2 weapon proficiencies at the start and a 3rd if the endgame is level 6. The question is: what to spend those on, if specialization is not an option? A default cleric is limited to blunt weapons, Baldurs Gate rules include slings for ranged combat in that. Priests have other selections depending on their cult. Multi-classing as fighter removes these restrictions (talk with the DM some religions have strong opinions).

If the "Complete Fighters Handbook" is on the table the weapon+shield fighting style specialization is available to mono-class clerics. It allows the shield parry and shield bash action with the offhand, granting a second melee action each round, similar to the two weapon style, and with the same -2/-4 to hit on main-hand/off-hand until a second proficiency point is spent to make it 0/-2 For a mono-class cleric the four points for melee weapon, ranged weapon, and style require level 8, too late if the game ends before that. Even if one picks the style before the ranged weapon, the to hit malus on multi-attacks until level 4 is bad, and lack of a ranged weapon proficiency may also be a problem. So one benefit of multi-classing is the option to get more weapon proficiencies earlier. Note that the shield parry and shield bash actions also benefit from exceptional strength. The weapon proficiency points from level 3 and 6 are then available for a looted magic weapons that don't match the initial selection. A fighter multi-class skilled with a diverse set of weapons can use almost anything they find with little to no issue if the rule about familiar weapons is used. If nothing good is found, take spear to counter chargers and poke stuff at a distance.
The "Player Options - Combat and Tactics" book introduced a "Shield Proficiency" distinct from the Shield and Weapon Style which grants even more armor class when using a shield.

Multi-classing also means access to fighter non-weapon proficiencies, and while i find the basic set in the player handbook rather lackluster (crafting and outdoor survival) the Intimidation skill from the "Complete Book of Humanoids" is a strength based social skill. While not as powerful as a charm spell, it does not require spell slots and allows non-lethal conflict resolution, breaking enemy moral, walking past guards, and can be used in tandem with a charismatic party member for good cop, bad cop interrogation. Also there is a synergy between clerical cultism and intimidation, if you are aligned that way. Note that subtle uses not reliant on the threat of the characters physical strength are checked against charisma.
Ambidextrous is a skill in the fighter list, It negates the -2 on the offhand.
Blind Fighting is a fighter skill which reduced the debuff from blindness, darkness, low light, dense fog, invisibility and so on from -4 to -2. There are more of those in the campaign sets, like underwater fighting and zero gravity combat... for every situation that has a to hit debuff there is a fighter proficiency that, at least partially, negates it.
A variation of this is archery while riding: it has a to-hit debuff of -2 at half move and -4 at full move. The "Players Options - Skills and Powers" books introduced a "horse archery style" that costs one weapon proficiency and negates 2 points of the malus. Fighters can use their intelligence language points for combat styles, so it's all just point shifting, learn the language with a non-weapon proficiency, use the int bonus for horse archery.
Yet another variation is the Close Quarters Combat non-weapon proficiency in the Book of Humanoids, as that one requires a skill check, most others don't, but it also gives a flat +2 even in absence of a to-hit malus to negate.
In raw blind fighting, close quarter combat and underwater combat all cost 2 while zero-grav costs 1 but only gives 1 point to hit. Underwater and zerograv also partially negate the initiative malus. Availability to classes differs by skill.

Personally my rule of thumb is +2 situational bonus to hit per proficiency point. One proficiency per situation, requires extensive training. Available to all warrior types and fighter-multi-classes. Other classes, including druids whose access to the warrior skill table is due to the animal and nature survival skills, must pay 2 points, making it less interesting for them. Checks depend on the situation, typical are dexterity or wisdom. No check required if it negates a situational malus.

You can't specialize as a multiclass character in AD&D2e? I don't think I've ever played that way.

Baldurs Gate 2 rules use a simplification of the "Players Options - Combat and Tactics" book which introduced a five point progression: "Proficiency - Specialization - Mastery - High Mastery - Grand Mastery" for mono-class fighters and then added "Expertise" as a weaker form of two point specialization that is available for fighter multi classes. BG2 scratched that and gave multi classed fighters the two point specialization (but not mastery). The book suggests level and quest locking high and grand mastery and making them rare, not the standard progression of fighters.

Also note the difference between style specialisation and weapon specialisation. Following the Complete Fighters Handbook only mono-class fighters can put points in more than one style specialization, everyone else can only specialize in one style. The "Players Options" books are more lenient and allow multiple style specializations for all warrior types, not only mono-class fighters.

I'm assuming this is a dwarf character, since they're the only race that can do fighter/cleric by core

Half-Elves can be fighter/clerics according to the 2nd Ed. Players Handbook, which is as core as it gets.
Half-Orc fighter/clerics were in the 1st Ed. Players Handbook but moved to the Complete Book of Humanoids.
Athasian Elves have a fighter/cleric kit dual-wielding long swords, but Dark Sun classes are for Dark Sun campaigns.
The availability of race/class combinations is determined by the world creator, not by some puritan selection of holy scriptures ;-)

The rules are only guidelines.
You’ve probably already noticed things you like or things you would have done differently.
Take the time to have fun with the AD&D rules. Add, create, expand, and extrapolate.

Some rules are bad for clerics that tank at the front line:
1) "The medium shield ... prevents the character from using his shield hand for other purposes." (same goes for heavy)
2) "The caster must ... have both arms free"
This may mean dropping the shield mid combat to cast a spell with a somatic component, with all the drawbacks of not having its AC bonus, initiative malus for picking it back up, getting outmaneuvered by an enemy stepping on it, and so on.
Even worse this note from Combat and Tactics
3) "Most shields are strapped to the character's arm and take a full round to remove"

We never played like that. We allowed clerics, as well as some specialist priests like those of Yondalla, to use their shields passive bonus while casting, but not the bash/parry active skills. Other priesthoods don't use shields, like the fighter/priests of Clangeddin Silverbeard, Lord of the Twin Axes. I've thought about "one handed casting" or "pray and parry" skills but decided against it. Casters don't need more actions.

Anyway the "core books" spent no time expanding on multi-classes, leaving that to kits in splat books like the "Complete Book of Dwarves" or the "Dark Sun Elves of Athas". So my last point is: talk with the DM about what you want to play, how to fit it into the campaign and how to make it work mechanically. Remember the foreword to the second edition DMG: "Don’t be afraid of experimentation, but do be careful." If it must be in a book, binding a hardcover costs (1D4+1)*10 coins.

[JadedDM]

Half-Elves can be fighter/clerics according to the 2nd Ed. Players Handbook, which is as core as it gets.
Half-Orc fighter/clerics were in the 1st Ed. Players Handbook but moved to the Complete Book of Humanoids.
Athasian Elves have a fighter/cleric kit dual-wielding long swords, but Dark Sun classes are for Dark Sun campaigns.
The availability of race/class combinations is determined by the world creator, not by some puritan selection of holy scriptures ;-)

Oh, you're right, I somehow glanced right over Half-Elves. (As for the rest, well, I did say 'by core' and the Complete Book of Humanoids and Dark Sun campaign material are not core, so technically speaking, I was right on those.)

[Jay R]

I recommend being cautious about trusting the statement that the campaign will end around level 5 or so.

I was in a "one-shot" at level 3, and designed the character on that assumption. Telerion was a great level 3 character, but the game kept on until about 13th level, and it wasn't a great build for that.

Even i the character is intended for levels 1-5, build a character who can grow beyond that well if necessary.