Skip to content

Paladin or Fighter?

I have only just got back into Baldur's Gate and I want to start again as a front-line fighter character. But I still don't know which is better to use; Fighter or Paladin. If some veterans could help me in choosing which class to be and the best kit to use, it would really be appreciated.
«1

Comments

  • elminsterelminster Member, Developer Posts: 16,317
    Paladin. Its a safe bet. Depending on your kit you may eventually get a few spells to choose from (only in BG2EE though), but for now you can focus on the fighter sides of things. It also lets you try out things like turn undead, minor party healing, etc depending on what kit you go with.

    For a kit I'd go with Cavalier. Mostly for its immunities.
  • SionIVSionIV Member Posts: 2,689
    If you're going to pick a fighter, then go with a Berserker. His rage will remove most of the frustrating parts of the difficult fights.

    For a paladin you can pick anything really, but the Cavalier is amazingly good. The inqusitor is also great but he has quite a few drawbacks aswell.

    Now a fighter or paladin? Unless you're going to dual class your fighter later in the game then you should probably pick a Cavalier (Paladin kit) instead. The fighter is quite boring as the only thing a pure fighter can do is beat stuff with his weapon. The cavalier will be able to get priest spells, summon devas and lots of other neat things. Let me show you to make it easier

    Fighter (Berserker)

    1.) Great fighting abilities
    2.) Rage

    Paladin (Cavalier)

    1.) Great fighting abilities
    2.) Divine spells
    3.) Turn Undead
    4.) Two amazing weapons that only paladins can wield
    5.) Summon down devas (Angels) to help you fight on higher level
    6.) Easier to get high stats
  • KamigoroshiKamigoroshi Member Posts: 5,870
    edited July 2013
    The Dwarven Defender kit is the best defensive front-liner for BG:EE, giving their plentiful physical resistances. If you enjoy a more aggressive playstyle, then the Berserker kit fits your bill perfectly.

    Paladins only get their spells in BG2 due to their level cap, so I don't bother with them at all in BG:EE (blackguards being an honourable exception here). Not to mention my natural dislike of goody-goodies. :P
  • atcDaveatcDave Member Posts: 2,387
    Either is very playable. I prefer paladins, but that is purely a matter of preference.
  • the_spyderthe_spyder Member Posts: 5,018
    Fighters level up faster but has been indicted, paladins and their sub-classes are probably more fun.
  • zur312zur312 Member Posts: 1,366
    edited July 2013
    barb>berserker>cavalier>undeadhunter>inquisitor>
    but still fighter/cleric dwarf would be really good for this role with max con much better hp and ST
    plus duhm even more power and other buffs and spells from cleric
  • CaptRoryCaptRory Member Posts: 1,660
    Paladins are often more robust in terms of survivability because of the different resists and immunities they have. Fighters with their ability to Grandmaster weapons are very offensively oriented. They also have different strongholds in the second game, so if you've done one before you might wanna do the other just to see it.
  • SionIVSionIV Member Posts: 2,689
    edited July 2013
    zur312 said:

    barb>berserker>cavalier>undeadhunter>inquisitor>
    but still fighter/cleric dwarf would be really good for this role with max con much better hp and ST
    plus duhm even more power and other buffs and spells from cleric

    How do you put Barbarian as the best one there?

    1.) He's worse than the berserker on almost every point. His rage is worse than the berserkers, he can't wear plate, he can't get grand mastery, His extra 2 health per level isn't going to make a difference and the immune to backstab is only important when you play SCS. The only redeeming feature he has is the 20% damage reduction you get late on, and that isn't worth all the negative points.

    2.) I can agree with Berserker -> Cavalier for the rage and if you dual class.

    3.) Inquisitor -> Undead hunter. The undead hunter doesn't bring anything new to the table that you can't get with items. The Inquisitor will destroy every single caster combat you'll fight, and his dispel magic is more powerful than the mage will ever have.

    4.) Cleric/Ranger is much better in BG than a fighter/cleric.

    I'm really curious about why you rate the Barbarian so highly.
  • elminsterelminster Member, Developer Posts: 16,317
    edited July 2013
    SionIV said:



    4.) Cleric/Ranger is much better in BG than a fighter/cleric.

    If you mean the series thats one thing, if you mean BGEE I have to ask what do you really get out of being a Cleric/Ranger compared to a Fighter/Cleric? Druid spells like Charm person/mammal, Call lightning, summon insects, and summon woodland creatures. Only the latter one is really going to be that useful. But you get this at the expense of slower level progression for your warrior levels. Also Fighter/Clerics can be Dwarves and Dwarves saving throws are quite nice. That or they can be Half-orcs which provides itself a nice strength/constitution boost.
  • TressetTresset Member, Moderator Posts: 8,268
    I like the inquisitor the most out of the paladin kits. Illusion protections? I don't think so! Magic? I dispel magic better than an archmage!

    I honestly do not see why people dislike the inquisitor so much. Priests can turn and heal far better than any paladin anyway. The loss of spells is kind of a big hit, but most people just bring a priest along for that anyway. Not to mention the class bonuses are really good. The inquisitor is the one and only class that can cast the ultra dispel. That is very unique and incredibly useful.

    I also do not understand why the cavalier gets such admiration. He is basically just immune to some stuff. Sure there is the bonus vs demons and dragons, which are nasty, but how common are those guys in the series anyway? Not to mention they lose missile weapons.

    I personally would rather have the actively used special abilities of the inquisitor than a few passive immunities. Makes me feel like I'm actually doing something. Besides, there are spells that give immunities. Why would I want to pick a kit that just gives me a few immunities that I can get with spells and items anyway?
  • zur312zur312 Member Posts: 1,366
    SionIV said:

    zur312 said:

    barb>berserker>cavalier>undeadhunter>inquisitor>
    but still fighter/cleric dwarf would be really good for this role with max con much better hp and ST
    plus duhm even more power and other buffs and spells from cleric

    How do you put Barbarian as the best one there?

    1.) He's worse than the berserker on almost every point. His rage is worse than the berserkers, he can't wear plate, he can't get grand mastery, His extra 2 health per level isn't going to make a difference and the immune to backstab is only important when you play SCS. The only redeeming feature he has is the 20% damage reduction you get late on, and that isn't worth all the negative points.

    2.) I can agree with Berserker -> Cavalier for the rage and if you dual class.

    3.) Inquisitor -> Undead hunter. The undead hunter doesn't bring anything new to the table that you can't get with items. The Inquisitor will destroy every single caster combat you'll fight, and his dispel magic is more powerful than the mage will ever have.

    4.) Cleric/Ranger is much better in BG than a fighter/cleric.

    I'm really curious about why you rate the Barbarian so highly.
    1.) who can get 23 str at level 1? barb
    + his rage is almost as good as of berserker

    2.)i think paladins shine in bg2 where they can cast some buffs from spells so that is why i rate them lower here

    3.) is arguable massive dispell vs few immunities

    4.) arguable like 3 dwarf will have better con and ST while ranger/cleric will not
    ranger/cleric won't have 5th level spells like 6/10 fighter/druid and that is why druids are cool in bg1


  • SionIVSionIV Member Posts: 2,689
    edited July 2013
    Let's look at it then

    The C/R gets :

    1.) More divine spells to pick between (Druid pool) with things like Woodland being one of the strongest (If not the strongest) divine spell in the game.

    2.) Favored enemy which helps alot

    3.) Easier to get good stats when you create your character.

    The F/C gets :

    1.) Better saving throws if you're playing a dwarf.

    2.) A little bit faster level progression (This is so little it really isn't going to change anything)

    3.) Better constitution and strength if you play a orc. You'll get high enough constitution and strenght wit DuHM that this is only really that important early game.

    As you can see the only main reasons are if you're playing half orc or dwarf. And I really don't think those weight up for what the C/R gets.

    I know we're talking BGEE here but when/if you get to BG2 with this character, the C/R will destroy the F/C.

    BG 1 -> C/R
    BG 2 -> C/R by alot.

    [Edited] :

    Paladin level 2 = 2250 experience
    Fighter level 2 = 2000 experience

    Paladin level 7 = 75000
    Fighter level 7 = 64000

    It isn't that hard to get experience in this game, and both will be able to reach the same level in TotSC.
  • elminsterelminster Member, Developer Posts: 16,317
    @Soltra As you can see there is a wide range of opinion here. I still maintain that for someone just getting back into the game a cavalier provides a strong melee character with a wide range of abilities and immunities. Give him some scale mail (later plate and full plate mail), a helmet, a two handed sword (and proficiencies in two-handed swords and two-handed weapon style) and he's good to go :)
  • zur312zur312 Member Posts: 1,366
    edited July 2013
    i see this is as
    woodland beings vs all the adv for f/c
    the nymphs are cool

    in bg2 there is no question

    the easy one would be take them both
    they are rather strong
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 0
    edited July 2013
    The user and all related content has been deleted.
  • SionIVSionIV Member Posts: 2,689
    edited July 2013
    zur312 said:

    i see this is as
    woodland beings vs all the adv for f/c
    the nymphs are cool

    in bg2 there is no question

    How did you get that out of my post?

    1.) Better stats
    2.) Favored enemy
    3.) All druid spells (Woodland beings)

    Against

    1.) Better saving throws if you play dwarf, +1 str and +1 con if you play half orc.

    So how are that "All the advantages"
    elminster said:

    @Soltra As you can see there is a wide range of opinion here. I still maintain that for someone just getting back into the game a cavalier provides a strong melee character with a wide range of abilities and immunities. Give him some scale mail (later plate and full plate mail), a helmet, a two handed sword (and proficiencies in two-handed swords and two-handed weapon style) and he's good to go :)

    I agree with Cavalier probably being the best class for him to play. I enjoy playing Cavalier alot myself aswell, such a great kit.

    [Edited] : This has nothing to do with C/R vs F/C and everything to do with two races. So no the F/C doesn't have any advantage over a C/R except being able to pick Half orc or Dwarf.
  • zur312zur312 Member Posts: 1,366
    how is ranger/cleric better stats when dwarf and orc will get higher con? and orc higher str

    how is favored enemy even there? it is not like there is 1 type of monster in the game
    there is a lot different and if you kill just 1 type a little easier it doesn't really matter

    woodland beings are good
  • zur312zur312 Member Posts: 1,366
    thespace said:

    ...and a cleric ranger gets stealth (and ** free duel wielding), which seemingly always gets looked over in the c/r vs f/c discussions... once one gets used to having "free invisibility" all the time, it definitely seems something is missing going without. Even without backstabbing, having a warrior just appear, swinging duel maces right next to a mage will end them before they can rock your party with spells.

    But, to get back to the original question, yeah I'd go with a cavalier or inquisitor over a fighter, just b/c they're more fun.

    well
    do you know sanctuary is level 1 invisibility spell? every cleric can use it
    at least dual-wielding is nice feature of them
  • SionIVSionIV Member Posts: 2,689
    zur312 said:

    how is ranger/cleric better stats when dwarf and orc will get higher con? and orc higher str

    how is favored enemy even there? it is not like there is 1 type of monster in the game
    there is a lot different and if you kill just 1 type a little easier it doesn't really matter

    woodland beings are good

    1.) +4 hit and damage vs one enemy type. This is huge against annoying things like spiders/greater doppelgangers/ogres and such. You fight alot of very hard ogre battles in the game (The cursed woman, all ogre mages, the ogre in the tavern in BG1, sarevoks consort has 2 ogres with her at the iron throne, the house with 6 ogre mages).

    It's not as big as having it against dragons in BG2 but it's still an amazing ability to have in BG1 aswell.

    2.) The ranger/cleric got the easiest to get good starting stats in the game. They got so many high minimums in stats that you can't roll bad with them. You'll have to roll quite a bit to get good stats on a half-orc or dwarf while it's easy to roll this up on a ranger/cleric :

    18 str
    18 dex
    18 con
    18 wisdom
    10 intellect
    10 charisma.

    I normally get something like this on my C/R

    18 str
    18 dexc
    18 con
    18 wisdom
    13-15 intellect
    10 charisma

    Yes you can roll for several hours to get good stats, but it helps alot to play C/R here.

    3.) Woodland beings are GREAT. It's like having an extra level 8-9 cleric in your party.
  • zur312zur312 Member Posts: 1,366
    edited July 2013
    1.) didn't have ranger and killed easily ogres spiders and other mobs it is just a little addon
    2.) but those stats are worthless it is not icewind dale 2 when higher int get you something
    3.) woodland beings are great so they are still the only plus side on ranger/cleric

    r/c is also like paladins
    he shines in bg2 level range
  • SionIVSionIV Member Posts: 2,689
    edited July 2013
    1.) I killed everything in the game with a naked bard, so everything is so easy that you don't need anything else. Why make a barbarian when you can go through the game with a level 1 rogue?

    It doesn't work like that. Favored enemy is a great bonus to have in this game, and it makes some encounters trivial. 4 Thac0 and damage is HUGE. So ofcourse this is a bonus.

    2.) None of those stats are worthless

    Strenght -> Damage
    Dexterity -> AC
    Constitution -> Health
    Wisdom -> More spells
    Intellect -> Awesome when fighting illithids and mind flayers.

    So you're saying that only having to spend 2-5 minutes to get amazing stats isn't a bonus, because they are worthless?

    3.) Woodlands is the best divine spell in BGEE/BG1 and probably up there with the best arcane spells aswell.

    You have this odd idea that things like Favored enemy isn't a plus?

    4.) I'm going to play a half-elf F/C and i don't get any bonuses against the C/R. Dwarf and half-orc are useless here as i'm not going to play them. So F/C have absolutely no advantage.

    Half-Elf C/R

    Favored enemy
    Druid divine spells
    Easier to get good stats

    Half-elf F/C

    Nothing
    Nothing
    Nothing

    So there is absolutely no advantage to playing F/C.
  • zur312zur312 Member Posts: 1,366
    SionIV said:

    1.) I killed everything in the game with a naked bard, so everything is so easy that you don't need anything else. Why make a barbarian when you can go through the game with a level 1 rogue?

    It doesn't work like that. Favored enemy is a great bonus to have in this game, and it makes some encounters trivial. 4 Thac0 and damage is HUGE. So ofcourse this is a bonus.

    2.) None of those stats are worthless

    Strenght -> Damage
    Dexterity -> AC
    Constitution -> Health
    Wisdom -> More spells
    Intellect -> Awesome when fighting illithids and mind flayers.

    So you're saying that only having to spend 2-5 minutes to get amazing stats isn't a bonus, because they are worthless?

    3.) Woodlands is the best divine spell in BGEE/BG1 and probably up there with the best arcane spells aswell.

    You have this odd idea that things like Favored enemy isn't a plus?

    4.) I'm going to play a half-elf F/C and i don't get any bonuses against the C/R. Dwarf and half-orc are useless here as i'm not going to play them. So F/C have absolutely no advantage.

    Half-Elf C/R

    Favored enemy
    Druid divine spells
    Easier to get good stats

    Half-elf F/C

    Nothing
    Nothing
    Nothing

    So there is absolutely no advantage to playing F/C.

    lol
  • elminsterelminster Member, Developer Posts: 16,317
    One benefit of a Fighter/Cleric is alignment. You can't fall as a fighter and you can start out good, neutral, or evil.


    Faster level progression for a fighter/cleric is a big factor. To get to level 7 (gives you another 1/2 APR) as a fighter you need 22000 XP less than a Cleric/Ranger, and the biggest things a cleric/ranger has that make up for this is a favoured enemy, the dual wielding bonus, better weapon variety, and call woodland beings (the latter of which it doesn't get until later into the game). In the beginning the better weapon variety can be nice if you go the warhammer/mace route, but it all depends on what your party members are and what they are using (plus whatever offhand weapon you are using only attacks once per round regardless). The dual wielding is its saving grace in the beginning but as the game progresses it becomes less relevant. A dwarf dual wielding one weapon type (say maces) can actually get to 3*'s in dual wielding about 1000xp before a Cleric/Ranger just because Cleric/Ranger's can't add (past the 2*'s) to dual wielding in the character creation screen (and as I've pointed out as the game moves forward their level progression takes progressively longer than a fighters). As for favoured enemy you only get 1 favoured enemy in BGEE so yes you can kill 1 enemy really well. Carrior crawlers and Ogres are really the only threats on there and carrior crawlers especially are so rare they are hardly worth mentioning.

    Woodlands also has a casting time of 7. Its a great spell, but they require themselves a fair bit of micromanagement to actually do the right thing (with the AI on for instance typically the first thing they cast is hold monster even though it generally is useless). They also of course have very little health and they are mushy summons next to the skeletal warriors that you could be summoning instead (from either your character or another cleric in your party). Both classes also don't get level 4 cleric spells anyways until 110,000 XP into the game. Thats about roughly half of the available experience in the game.

    Of course dwarves enter into this and they are certainly not useless here. For the sake of argument I'll stick with arguing in favour of a Dwarf Fighter/Cleric because it is a relevant setup. +5 saves vs spells, death, and wands (not as relevant) is extremely useful and isn't something a cleric/ranger can ever get. Access to this is a point in favour of the Fighter/Cleric (in the same way that speaking of dwarves only getting 16 dexterity - should of course be 17 - is a negative for dwarves). In comparison half-elves get 30% resistance to sleep and charm spells. Its a great racial bonus but its not at the same tier.

    Its easier to get good stats with a cleric/ranger but you really don't need much to be a good fighter to begin with. While checking things I just rolled a fighter/cleric and the first roll I got was 86 (relatively speaking it was a lucky roll). You only need a roll of 82 to have (in the case of a Dwarf 18/whatever, 16, 19, 10, 18, 1. At a certain point you are just rolling for a charisma score or better intelligence. The charisma isn't all that useful if it isn't at least closer to 16 anyways.
  • SionIVSionIV Member Posts: 2,689
    edited July 2013
    I
    elminster said:

    One benefit of a Fighter/Cleric is alignment. You can't fall as a fighter and you can start out good, neutral, or evil.


    Faster level progression for a fighter/cleric is a big factor. To get to level 7 (gives you another 1/2 APR) as a fighter you need 22000 XP less than a Cleric/Ranger, and the biggest things a cleric/ranger has that make up for this is a favoured enemy, the dual wielding bonus, better weapon variety, and call woodland beings (the latter of which it doesn't get until later into the game). In the beginning the better weapon variety can be nice if you go the warhammer/mace route, but it all depends on what your party members are and what they are using (plus whatever offhand weapon you are using only attacks once per round regardless). The dual wielding is its saving grace in the beginning but as the game progresses it becomes less relevant. A dwarf dual wielding one weapon type (say maces) can actually get to 3*'s in dual wielding about 1000xp before a Cleric/Ranger just because Cleric/Ranger's can't add (past the 2*'s) to dual wielding in the character creation screen (and as I've pointed out as the game moves forward their level progression takes progressively longer than a fighters). As for favoured enemy you only get 1 favoured enemy in BGEE so yes you can kill 1 enemy really well. Carrior crawlers and Ogres are really the only threats on there and carrior crawlers especially are so rare they are hardly worth mentioning.

    Woodlands also has a casting time of 7. Its a great spell, but they require themselves a fair bit of micromanagement to actually do the right thing (with the AI on for instance typically the first thing they cast is hold monster even though it generally is useless). They also of course have very little health and they are mushy summons next to the skeletal warriors that you could be summoning instead (from either your character or another cleric in your party). Both classes also don't get level 4 cleric spells anyways until 110,000 XP into the game. Thats about roughly half of the available experience in the game.

    Of course dwarves enter into this and they are certainly not useless here. For the sake of argument I'll stick with arguing in favour of a Dwarf Fighter/Cleric because it is a relevant setup. +5 saves vs spells, death, and wands (not as relevant) is extremely useful and isn't something a cleric/ranger can ever get. Access to this is a point in favour of the Fighter/Cleric (in the same way that speaking of dwarves only getting 16 dexterity - should of course be 17 - is a negative for dwarves). In comparison half-elves get 30% resistance to sleep and charm spells. Its a great racial bonus but its not at the same tier.

    Its easier to get good stats with a cleric/ranger but you really don't need much to be a good fighter to begin with. While checking things I just rolled a fighter/cleric and the first roll I got was 86 (relatively speaking it was a lucky roll). You only need a roll of 82 to have (in the case of a Dwarf 18/whatever, 16, 19, 10, 18, 1. At a certain point you are just rolling for a charisma score or better intelligence. The charisma isn't all that useful if it isn't at least closer to 16 anyways.

    I agree with some of the stuff you mentioned, especially the alignment as hell trials can fuck you up here. But some pointers.

    1.) The saving throws are a bonus in BGEE as once you get Chaotic / Death ward you can remove this factor.

    2.) Greater doppelganger in my SCS installation are cruel. Perfect target for favored enemy.

    3.) Getting free proficiensy in dual wielding is never a bad thing.

    4.) The starting proficiensy of the R/C and F/C

    Ranger :

    2* Dual wielding
    2* War hammer
    2* Mace

    Fighter :

    2* Dual wielding
    2* War hammer

    5.) Just the fact that the dryad can heal your whole party up is great. The hold, charms and such can make a very hard battle trivial.

    6.) You can easily roll 90 with a C/R.

    7.) The fact that the F/C can get dual wielding 1000 experience before the R/C really isn't that much of an advantage. When you look at the 2 free prof points the R/C gets and you shouldn't be dual wielding at low level. Get a large shield +1 and wait until later on with dual wielding.

    The only thing i would give to the F/C is being a dwarf or half orc. Both of the bonuses they get are useless once you get into BG2. And if you're only going to play BG1 then you could aswell just play a pure class berserker and walk through the game.

    I would also want to mention that if you take dual class into consideration instead of dwarf/half-orc you could make a Berserker / cleric for the rage.
  • elminsterelminster Member, Developer Posts: 16,317
    edited July 2013
    SionIV said:

    I

    elminster said:

    One benefit of a Fighter/Cleric is alignment. You can't fall as a fighter and you can start out good, neutral, or evil.


    Faster level progression for a fighter/cleric is a big factor. To get to level 7 (gives you another 1/2 APR) as a fighter you need 22000 XP less than a Cleric/Ranger, and the biggest things a cleric/ranger has that make up for this is a favoured enemy, the dual wielding bonus, better weapon variety, and call woodland beings (the latter of which it doesn't get until later into the game). In the beginning the better weapon variety can be nice if you go the warhammer/mace route, but it all depends on what your party members are and what they are using (plus whatever offhand weapon you are using only attacks once per round regardless). The dual wielding is its saving grace in the beginning but as the game progresses it becomes less relevant. A dwarf dual wielding one weapon type (say maces) can actually get to 3*'s in dual wielding about 1000xp before a Cleric/Ranger just because Cleric/Ranger's can't add (past the 2*'s) to dual wielding in the character creation screen (and as I've pointed out as the game moves forward their level progression takes progressively longer than a fighters). As for favoured enemy you only get 1 favoured enemy in BGEE so yes you can kill 1 enemy really well. Carrior crawlers and Ogres are really the only threats on there and carrior crawlers especially are so rare they are hardly worth mentioning.

    Woodlands also has a casting time of 7. Its a great spell, but they require themselves a fair bit of micromanagement to actually do the right thing (with the AI on for instance typically the first thing they cast is hold monster even though it generally is useless). They also of course have very little health and they are mushy summons next to the skeletal warriors that you could be summoning instead (from either your character or another cleric in your party). Both classes also don't get level 4 cleric spells anyways until 110,000 XP into the game. Thats about roughly half of the available experience in the game.

    Of course dwarves enter into this and they are certainly not useless here. For the sake of argument I'll stick with arguing in favour of a Dwarf Fighter/Cleric because it is a relevant setup. +5 saves vs spells, death, and wands (not as relevant) is extremely useful and isn't something a cleric/ranger can ever get. Access to this is a point in favour of the Fighter/Cleric (in the same way that speaking of dwarves only getting 16 dexterity - should of course be 17 - is a negative for dwarves). In comparison half-elves get 30% resistance to sleep and charm spells. Its a great racial bonus but its not at the same tier.

    Its easier to get good stats with a cleric/ranger but you really don't need much to be a good fighter to begin with. While checking things I just rolled a fighter/cleric and the first roll I got was 86 (relatively speaking it was a lucky roll). You only need a roll of 82 to have (in the case of a Dwarf 18/whatever, 16, 19, 10, 18, 1. At a certain point you are just rolling for a charisma score or better intelligence. The charisma isn't all that useful if it isn't at least closer to 16 anyways.

    I agree with some of the stuff you mentioned, especially the alignment as hell trials can fuck you up here. But some pointers.

    1.) The saving throws are a bonus in BGEE as once you get Chaotic / Death ward you can remove this factor.

    2.) Greater doppelganger in my SCS installation are cruel. Perfect target for favored enemy.

    3.) Getting free proficiensy in dual wielding is never a bad thing.

    4.) The starting proficiensy of the R/C and F/C

    Ranger :

    2* Dual wielding
    2* War hammer
    2* Mace

    Fighter :

    2* Dual wielding
    2* War hammer

    5.) Just the fact that the dryad can heal your whole party up is great. The hold, charms and such can make a very hard battle trivial.

    6.) You can easily roll 90 with a C/R.

    The only thing i would give to the F/C is being a dwarf or half orc. Both of the bonuses they get are useless once you get into BG2. And if you're only going to play BG1 then you could aswell just play a pure class berserker and walk through the game.

    I would also want to mention that if you take dual class into consideration instead of dwarf/half-orc you could make a Berserker / cleric for the rage.
    You can't select Dopplegangers as a choice in BGEE. Maybe with the mod, I can't say, but not in vanilla.

    Better off going for the Mace (Stupefier) as your main weapon for the dwarf fighter/cleric. Its only a +1 weapon but with your APR and its no-save effect its the weapon you want to be hitting enemies with as much as possible. 25% is a good percentage and once you get an enemy once with the effect they are pretty well crippled anyways (it impacts them anywhere between 1-4 rounds). Plus you can buy a Mace +1 in Beregost at the smithy. Its not as good as the warhammer of electricity of course for an offhand weapon but its only a different of 2 damage a round (1 later if you dare to go to the depths of Durlag's for the +2 mace). Once you get DUHM either as a spell or ability you are going to be doing a lot of damage just with strength bonuses so that 2 damage is going to be relatively less significant.

    +5 saves vs spells is certainly not useless in BG2. Yes fighters have good saving throws by themselves, but it just provides an added layer of protection against any mage spells you encounter. Especially the ones like confusion or feeblemind that can really screw over an encounter.
  • MathsorcererMathsorcerer Member Posts: 3,042
    Is the question really that complex? The answer is simple: whichever one you feel like roleplaying. Min/maxing stats to obtain the "optimum" character takes much of the fun out of a game. One of the most fun characters I ever played was a lawful good fighter who *thought* he was a paladin when he really wasn't.
  • AnaximanderAnaximander Member Posts: 191
    Wizard slayer 13, grandmastery greatsword, Carsomyr, dual to thief, ... much later on, Use Any Item ... VICTORY!!
  • the_spyderthe_spyder Member Posts: 5,018

    Wizard slayer 13, grandmastery greatsword, Carsomyr, dual to thief, ... much later on, Use Any Item ... VICTORY!!

    Play the game (regardless of race/class/party composition). Have fun. VICTORY!!!

  • ZanathKariashiZanathKariashi Member Posts: 2,869
    I really hope they fix R/C some day, then this wouldn't even be a discussion......a R/C in BG1 wouldn't have any druid spells at all (just free DW and some stealth, and a chance to lose it all if you make a bad decision (and being limited to good only) but requiring giving up heavier armor to take advantage of), and in BG2 wouldn't get anything druidic above 3rd level...which druid spells don't really become good-ish until 4th (and the cleric already gets the few good lower level spells druid would).

    In BG1, the barbarian is flat out superior to the berserker in every way possible. Easily the best fighter type character in the game in fact. Their speed bonus is RIDICULOUSLY powerful (you can't get boosts of speed until over 2/3 of the way through the game), and their rage is a double strength DUHM (for BG1 anyway, since DUHM caps at +2) with built-in immunities. the armor "penalty" is a non-issue, because they spend less time moving towards the target and thus don't take as many ranged attacks, and once in melee range, depending on weapon speed and reach (quarterstaves are god), they can effortless kill any target in melee without taking a hit due to superior mobility (and ranged only enemies take a a big thac0 hit for close range, while you get a thac0 bonus to hit them).

    In BG2...they're still flat out superior, aside from a small band right in the middle. (But we've already had this discussion in another devoted thread, so I'll leave it at that).
  • zur312zur312 Member Posts: 1,366
    favored enemy is 1%(?) of the game - very minor
    dwarf/orc better STATS are forever - big
    dwarf better ST are forever - big
    woodland beings - big
    dual wielding from ranger - very very very minor 1st level f/c can dual-wield + have the same level of weapon prof.
    only str dex con wis is good for clerics it is not iwd2 or there are no ilithids (ilithids are bg2 and we agree it is different story there)
Sign In or Register to comment.