Ranger/clerics, though, are a lot of fun to play. Enormous potential as a tank and front line fighter, strategic limitations on equipment from both classes to help you RP (and know what to sell!), and a hugely diverse spellcasting ability.
One small thing I noticed about Ranger/Cleric and Ranger>Cleric was that Clerics don't level up as fast as Druids towards the mid-game.
So if you want swift access to Ironskins or Insect Plague, you may be better off taking a Fighter>Druid (or ideally Berserker>Druid). Druids also get more 7th level spells than Clerics do, even if their 15th level XP is, shall we say, non-linear.
By the end of ToB it doesn't matter, of course -- you'll have 7th level spells either way.
As I recall DRuids level faster until level 14 or 15 then they slow way down and the cleric catches up and passes them for most of the rest of the progression.
I see everyone addressing this through a melee standpoint, but I'm going to argue that the use of wands tips the balance in favor of the fighter/mage. The fighter/cleric is a great kit...probably more so for a melee/tank character... the fighter/mage loses armor, but the use of wands is too great to dismiss... and the higher level crowd control spells remove the need for tanks in many ways...
Sarevok can be defeated by the use of 1 arcane spell... greater malaison with almost any other lower level spell you can cast... like blind or hold person, or a wand of paralysis... or you could go for the ever cheesy cloudkill, which will kill anything in BG1 with enough casts...
Cleric spells are great, but arcane spells tend to beat them. And I'd personally go ranged and not worry about melee... the use of a composite longbow in BG1 is not to be taken lightly.
But if it's wands and mage spells that win the day and melee doesn't matter why go fighter/mage at all - why not just go with your favorite specialist mage or a sorcerer?
Ranger/clerics, though, are a lot of fun to play. Enormous potential as a tank and front line fighter, strategic limitations on equipment from both classes to help you RP (and know what to sell!), and a hugely diverse spellcasting ability.
One small thing I noticed about Ranger/Cleric and Ranger>Cleric was that Clerics don't level up as fast as Druids towards the mid-game.
So if you want swift access to Ironskins or Insect Plague, you may be better off taking a Fighter>Druid (or ideally Berserker>Druid). Druids also get more 7th level spells than Clerics do, even if their 15th level XP is, shall we say, non-linear.
Berserker lvl 7 => druid lvl 9 is a very strong choice in BGEE, having 3.5 APR (with dual wielding), access to the best weapons in the game (Scimitars) with 5 * in the proficiency, access to the best armor (Ankheg plate mail), gaining full benefits from the tomes of wisdom, able to cast lvl 5 spells (with the awesome Magic Resistance, which allow to reduce magic resistance of Drizzt, Aec Letec, Sarevok...)...
It is so much more powerful than any druid kit or even priest kit...
Only dowside is the requirements : 17 strenght, 17 wisdome and 17 charisma. With a lucky roll this can be a powerhouse.
Ranger/clerics, though, are a lot of fun to play. Enormous potential as a tank and front line fighter, strategic limitations on equipment from both classes to help you RP (and know what to sell!), and a hugely diverse spellcasting ability.
One small thing I noticed about Ranger/Cleric and Ranger>Cleric was that Clerics don't level up as fast as Druids towards the mid-game.
So if you want swift access to Ironskins or Insect Plague, you may be better off taking a Fighter>Druid (or ideally Berserker>Druid). Druids also get more 7th level spells than Clerics do, even if their 15th level XP is, shall we say, non-linear.
Berserker lvl 7 => druid lvl 9 is a very strong choice in BGEE, having 3.5 APR (with dual wielding), access to the best weapons in the game (Scimitars) with 5 * in the proficiency, access to the best armor (Ankheg plate mail), gaining full benefits from the tomes of wisdom, able to cast lvl 5 spells (with the awesome Magic Resistance, which allow to reduce magic resistance of Drizzt, Aec Letec, Sarevok...)...
It is so much more powerful than any druid kit or even priest kit...
Only dowside is the requirements : 17 strenght, 17 wisdome and 17 charisma. With a lucky roll this can be a powerhouse.
Yep yep, totally right.
Also the Cha tome can be had really early, and there are 3 Wis tomes if you know where to look, but planning your build around that seems to require a sizable dose of meta-gaming.
Ranger>Cleric is much easier to roll, since Ranger already has a hefty Wisdom requirement.
I agree, but a dual ranger 7 => cleric 8 is not available in BGEE due to the XP cap, meaning you have to finish BG1 with a level 7 cleric, and wait the begining of BG2 to recover your ranger abilities.
Other easy way is a multiclass ranger/cleric, but in BG2 it will be a less powerful spellcaster than the two previous options.
Other easy way is a multiclass ranger/cleric, but in BG2 it will be a less powerful spellcaster than the two previous options.
But will get ranger HLAs and higher level ranger perks - a pretty good trade since their spellcasting is still awesome. There is pretty much nothing gimped about a multi-R/C.
Cleric caps at lvl 7 spells, so a multi is better in tob... Their hla aren't spectacular enough to need heaps, I'd rather have more warrior abilities. Well, dual r/c if you run a stalker or beast master.
Cleric caps at lvl 7 spells, so a multi is better in tob... Their hla aren't spectacular enough to need heaps, I'd rather have more warrior abilities. Well, dual r/c if you run a stalker or beast master.
F/M is way, way stronger in BG2, because arcane magic is way stronger. F/M becomes nearly invincible, F/C just gets a bit better at hitting things. As an epic level fighter... you are going to hit things already.
F/C/M is actually pretty good if you play BG:EE capped- you lose 2 spells and gain a good 10 or so cleric spells, which is a nice deal. Gnomes still beat it as F/Ill though.
F/M is way, way stronger in BG2, because arcane magic is way stronger. F/M becomes nearly invincible, F/C just gets a bit better at hitting things. As an epic level fighter... you are going to hit things already.
F/C/M is actually pretty good if you play BG:EE capped- you lose 2 spells and gain a good 10 or so cleric spells, which is a nice deal. Gnomes still beat it as F/Ill though.
I wouldn't put F/M way way above a ranger/cleric - I'd say they were pretty equal in overall power - the R/C needs a lot less buffing too thus requires less meta-gaming to be successful in many situations.
They both need fairly similar buffing- if you aren't buffing, you are just a plain ranger, which isn't especially better than a fighter with a minor armour restriction.
PFMW and Mirror Image are both nearly instant cast, so even if you object to meta gaming buffing the F/M does better at the job.
It is pretty well known that the game can be completed by almost any class, so to me it's not a question of which character is going to have the best Thaco's or APRs or can wear which armor etc. It's the 'style of life' that Charname desires and that you the player want to experience.
Since both choices involve Fighter, this must be a Charname who feels pretty aggressive and warrior like tendencies. But then, as an individual his intellect and desire may be fascinated by the many facets of magic and its possibilities, or does he feel he is more of a creature who is devoted to the divine order of things. As a player, which one will excite you the most to play this time around?
Maybe what I'm talking about here would be considered something too elementary for this thread, but I must confess that this is the only way I tend to think about these things. Which 'style of life' feels more exciting to you so you will be willing to explore it throughout the BG series?
I am surprised nobody mentionned the spell Sanctuary. That gives a F/M a significant advantage. Obviously so for those players who want to keep it realistic by not reloading much. But it is also great against mages who have buffed/protected themselves as Sanctuary last a while: cast it and wait for your mage opponent defenses to go down.
They both need fairly similar buffing- if you aren't buffing, you are just a plain ranger, which isn't especially better than a fighter with a minor armour restriction.
PFMW and Mirror Image are both nearly instant cast, so even if you object to meta gaming buffing the F/M does better at the job.
Rangers aren't restricted from any armor except to use stealth and with sanctuary that's no restriction at all - so while the mage is busy putting up defenses the R/C can be casting mage killers like insect plague and/or summoning allies to distract the mage and/or his minions since many of his protections (armor, shield, etc) cannot be dispelled. Then a little DUHM and he wades in with flail swinging while the mage is busy swatting insects and dodging the summoned allies. The result is divine...
In other words - if the concept of F/M is to give the mage some melee or other warrior type options while maintaining his arcane casting options - the R/C has the warrior side covered even better and still has all the cleric and druid spells at his fully armored disposal so the idea that the F/M is way way more powerful is simply incorrect.
@Wanderon I sort of agree with you, but Cleric or Druid spells simply aren't as good as BG2 arcane spells. I agree that the difference isn't as marked as some would say, but IMO things like contingencies and Time Stop make all the difference.
@Wanderon I sort of agree with you, but Cleric or Druid spells simply aren't as good as BG2 arcane spells. I agree that the difference isn't as marked as some would say, but IMO things like contingencies and Time Stop make all the difference.
Well my point is in relation to the F/M & R/C specifically - if powerful mage spells are the only criteria for the F/M being more powerful why not just play a mage - my own opinion is as powerful as mage spells may be they are not an instant win when comparing one class option to another - you have to consider the whole package.
Also note that when it comes to the R/C it's not cleric OR druid spells - it's cleric AND druid spells with the possibility of coming out of BG1 with 21 wisdom for massive extra spells per level.
For fighting trash, really, either is fine. For boss fights, buffing is sort of the point of spellsword classes, and the F/M gets much more buffed.
And, its not like theres nothing a F/M can wear? Early game, you can put armour on when its not a major fight because you are probably saving spells (obviously, first 5 levels R/C is better), but late game Bracers/ Robes of the ArchMagi/ect mean you have a base armour class of 3-5 which isn't bad at all. And can use a shield if they want, but this is powergaming talk so its dual wielding all the way.
F/M with stoneskin and bracers/robe is about 2-3AC and a few hit points behind the R/C going into combat with, well, stoneskin apparently. Thats not a big difference.
The point is that either the F/M can use self-buffing spells to be a much better tank than the R/C, or they can use attack spells to attack much better. Because, arcane spells are better. Add in continegncies and spell triggers, and really, they can get ready much faster than R/C.
Using PFMW or Mirror image isn't an obligation for the F/M to be able to tank; its an option that just means they tank better than the R/C, should they choose it.
Don't get me wrong, Ranger/Cleric is still a great class, but F/M is just better, because Arcane Magic is where the power is at.
Guess we'll just have to agree to disagree - you might want to try a run through both BG1 & 2 with a MC ranger/cleric - I'm guessing it might change your tune.
Comments
It is so much more powerful than any druid kit or even priest kit...
Only dowside is the requirements : 17 strenght, 17 wisdome and 17 charisma. With a lucky roll this can be a powerhouse.
Also the Cha tome can be had really early, and there are 3 Wis tomes if you know where to look, but planning your build around that seems to require a sizable dose of meta-gaming.
Ranger>Cleric is much easier to roll, since Ranger already has a hefty Wisdom requirement.
Other easy way is a multiclass ranger/cleric, but in BG2 it will be a less powerful spellcaster than the two previous options.
F/C/M is actually pretty good if you play BG:EE capped- you lose 2 spells and gain a good 10 or so cleric spells, which is a nice deal. Gnomes still beat it as F/Ill though.
PFMW and Mirror Image are both nearly instant cast, so even if you object to meta gaming buffing the F/M does better at the job.
Since both choices involve Fighter, this must be a Charname who feels pretty aggressive and warrior like tendencies. But then, as an individual his intellect and desire may be fascinated by the many facets of magic and its possibilities, or does he feel he is more of a creature who is devoted to the divine order of things. As a player, which one will excite you the most to play this time around?
Maybe what I'm talking about here would be considered something too elementary for this thread, but I must confess that this is the only way I tend to think about these things. Which 'style of life' feels more exciting to you so you will be willing to explore it throughout the BG series?
In other words - if the concept of F/M is to give the mage some melee or other warrior type options while maintaining his arcane casting options - the R/C has the warrior side covered even better and still has all the cleric and druid spells at his fully armored disposal so the idea that the F/M is way way more powerful is simply incorrect.
Also note that when it comes to the R/C it's not cleric OR druid spells - it's cleric AND druid spells with the possibility of coming out of BG1 with 21 wisdom for massive extra spells per level.
And, its not like theres nothing a F/M can wear? Early game, you can put armour on when its not a major fight because you are probably saving spells (obviously, first 5 levels R/C is better), but late game Bracers/ Robes of the ArchMagi/ect mean you have a base armour class of 3-5 which isn't bad at all. And can use a shield if they want, but this is powergaming talk so its dual wielding all the way.
F/M with stoneskin and bracers/robe is about 2-3AC and a few hit points behind the R/C going into combat with, well, stoneskin apparently. Thats not a big difference.
The point is that either the F/M can use self-buffing spells to be a much better tank than the R/C, or they can use attack spells to attack much better. Because, arcane spells are better. Add in continegncies and spell triggers, and really, they can get ready much faster than R/C.
Using PFMW or Mirror image isn't an obligation for the F/M to be able to tank; its an option that just means they tank better than the R/C, should they choose it.
Don't get me wrong, Ranger/Cleric is still a great class, but F/M is just better, because Arcane Magic is where the power is at.
Guess we'll just have to agree to disagree - you might want to try a run through both BG1 & 2 with a MC ranger/cleric - I'm guessing it might change your tune.
Its just that F/M is just better though: arcane magic is where the game breaking power happens.
i can has dispell?
cleric for newbies mage for powergamers
Thief Illiuionist