Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Categories

Neverwinter Nights: Enhanced Edition has been announced! Visit nwn.beamdog.com to pre-order, apply for the Head Start and check for details. NWN:EE FAQ is available.
Soundtracks for BG:EE, SoD, BG2:EE, IWD:EE, PST:EE are now available in the Beamdog store.
Attention, new and old users! Please read the new rules of conduct for the forums, and we hope you enjoy your stay!

The General Questions Thread

2456738

Comments

  • ElrandirElrandir Member Posts: 1,566
    Bit of a strange question, I know, but do glasses (as in for one's eyes) exist in the forgotten realms? I'm working on a heavily role-played play-through and I was about to describe Phlydia as having glasses...

    jackjackRavenslightJuliusBorisov
  • jackjackjackjack Member Posts: 3,247
    edited May 2014
    @Elrandir‌
    image
    (Jansen Spectroscopes)
    :P
    As to regular ol' eyeglasses, I'm not sure, but I can definitely justify them existing in a world so rife with magic.

    ElrandirFinaLfrontJuliusBorisovRavenslight
  • ElrandirElrandir Member Posts: 1,566
    Haha Well I was aware of the spectroscopes, but I suppose it's likely that regular eyeglasses do as well. I did a little research myself, and it seems like they probably do exist within the Forgotten Realms.

    jackjackJuliusBorisovCrevsDaakRavenslight
  • FinaLfrontFinaLfront Member Posts: 259
    Well, you have eye glasses of identification. One would think that there is a non magic version out there.

    jackjackJuliusBorisov
  • CrevsDaakCrevsDaak Member Posts: 7,058
    jackjack said:

    Though I would argue that the Mace of Stunning is still more powerful, and indeed one of the most OP weapons in the first game.

    It IS the most OP. I ran a Cleric solo, and even sold Krotan's Skullcrusher+2 :/

    WolkEadwyn_G8keeperjackjackJuliusBorisov
  • WolkWolk Member Posts: 279

    What a great Asian Gnome Pimp/Illusionist portrait

    Thats why he took Aerie in!

    FinaLfrontelminsterjackjackJuliusBorisov
  • abacusabacus Member Posts: 1,295
    I'm currently doing my first solo run with an elven FMT (first time with this class combo too), and I'm just about to pass 3m XP and therefore to get HLAs.
    My questions:
    1) With the wide variety of already usable items, is there any point me taking UAI? (I'm dual-wielding, so not interested in Carsomyr)
    2) Should I be able to access any Mage HLAs? (I know the spell ones are out of my casting ability, but what about the extra spell slots?)

  • Eadwyn_G8keeperEadwyn_G8keeper Member Posts: 520
    Is there a site where BG fans can submit their own versions of various dialogue exchanges?? Or propose dialogues that could occur if a non-recruitable NPC is Charmed...

  • abacusabacus Member Posts: 1,295
    abacus said:

    I'm currently doing my first solo run with an elven FMT (first time with this class combo too), and I'm just about to pass 3m XP and therefore to get HLAs.
    My questions:
    1) With the wide variety of already usable items, is there any point me taking UAI? (I'm dual-wielding, so not interested in Carsomyr)
    2) Should I be able to access any Mage HLAs? (I know the spell ones are out of my casting ability, but what about the extra spell slots?)

    In the same scenario, what would be the best use of Contingency?
    Dispel Magic on self when immobilised?

  • StormvesselStormvessel Member Posts: 609
    This is a good idea. I've asked too many questions already since I've been here and I don't want to clutter up the GQ thread any more than it already is.

    ElrandirJuliusBorisov
  • elminsterelminster Member, Developer Posts: 15,565
    edited May 2014
    abacus said:

    I'm currently doing my first solo run with an elven FMT (first time with this class combo too), and I'm just about to pass 3m XP and therefore to get HLAs.
    My questions:
    1) With the wide variety of already usable items, is there any point me taking UAI? (I'm dual-wielding, so not interested in Carsomyr)
    2) Should I be able to access any Mage HLAs? (I know the spell ones are out of my casting ability, but what about the extra spell slots?)

    With UAI you can use the scarlet ninja-to. Its a +3 weapon (that grants an APR boost) that is normally only usable by monks.

    I don't think you can get any of the mage HLA's (including the spell slots). At least not without a mod.

    abacusCrevsDaakJuliusBorisov
  • abacusabacus Member Posts: 1,295
    @elminster‌
    Many thanks, I was aware of the Scarlet Ninja-to, but I'm specked for short & long swords (call it an elf thing :) ), so I'm pretty happy with Kundane.
    I guess many the bardic gloves (for extra spell slots), or Montolio's Cloak could also be handy, but they seem fairly minor boosts compared to another GWW or Spike Trap.

  • StormvesselStormvessel Member Posts: 609
    edited May 2014
    Here's a question:

    Why would anyone play a Paladin (not counting Blackguard) when they can play a Cleric? Here are the reasons why this makes no sense to me (maybe someone more experienced knows something I don't):

    1. Exceptional strength is meaningless. A cleric that starts w/ 18 str can raise it to 19 w/ the manual of Gainful Exercise effectively rendering exceptional strength MOOT.

    2. The fewer pips (as a non-warrior) is mitigated by the fact that Paladins cannot master any weapon, and you are only ever going to focus on one or two weapons, anyway.

    3. The saving throw bonus is pointless. The Cleric has more spells and better spells, and can easily make up for that and still have way more spells leftover.

    4. Can only use blunt weapons. Boohoo. Flail of the Ages is what's you're going to want, anyway, and lack of a pip is easily mitigated by the high level buffs that Pallys only WISHED they had.

    The extra hitpoints (thanks to the higher constitution) and weapon specialization are the only real benefit I can see, but better bonuses can be obtained by a high-Wisdom Cleric with more than enough Spells left to cast.

    Clerics can:

    1. Cast WAY more spells.

    3. Cast higher level spells.

    2. Turn undead way better.

    4. Wear plate and helm!

    Clerics have so many freaking spells that anything it lacks over a Paladin is easily made up for and then some by tons and tons of buffs, and the Cleric still would have plenty of spells leftover to eat the Paladin for breakfast.

    I see no reason to play a Paladin when a person play a Cleric. Maybe I am missing something.

    Edit:

    Also, you have to be human to be a Paladin, which stinks. You can be an elven Cleric.

    Lastly, You can roll a human and dual-class into a Cleric at 13 and you will have 8 pips by the time you dual and you will still be able to get to where you have 5 lvl 7 spells.

    Elvin Cleric, Fighter/Cleric multi or (especially) Human Fighter/Cleric dual seems to me eats the Paladin for breakfast.

    To me the Paladin seems built for a noob.

    I am not as experienced as some of you and I hope maybe someone can shed some light on this because I really love the Paladin concept but I see no real reason to play one.

    Post edited by Stormvessel on
  • abacusabacus Member Posts: 1,295

    Here's a question:

    Why would anyone play a Paladin (not counting Blackguard) when they can play a Cleric? Here are the reasons why this makes no sense to me (maybe someone more experienced knows something I don't):

    1. Exceptional strength is meaningless. A cleric that starts w/ 18 str can raise it to 19 w/ the manual of Gainful Exercise effectively rendering exceptional strength MOOT.

    2. The fewer pips (as a non-warrior) is mitigated by the fact that Paladins cannot master any weapon, and you are only ever going to focus on one or two weapons, anyway.

    3. The saving throw bonus is pointless. The Cleric has more spells and better spells, and can easily make up for that and still have way more spells leftover.

    4. Can only use blunt weapons. Boohoo. Flail of the Ages is what's you're going to want, anyway, and lack of a pip is easily mitigated by the high level buffs that Pallys only WISHED they had.

    The extra hitpoints (thanks to the higher constitution) and weapon specialization are the only real benefit I can see, but better bonuses can be obtained by a high-Wisdom Cleric with more than enough Spells left to cast.

    Clerics can:

    1. Cast WAY more spells.

    3. Cast higher level spells.

    2. Turn undead way better.

    4. Wear plate and helm!

    Clerics have so many freaking spells that anything it lacks over a Paladin is easily made up for and then some by tons and tons of buffs, and the Cleric still would have plenty of spells leftover to eat the Paladin for breakfast.

    I see no reason to play a Paladin when a person play a Cleric. Maybe I am missing something.

    Edit:

    Also, you have to be human to be a Paladin, which stinks. You can be an elven Cleric.

    Lastly, You can roll a human and dual-class into a Cleric at 13 and you will have 8 pips by the time you dual and you will still be able to get to where you have 5 lvl 7 spells.

    Elvin Cleric, Fighter/Cleric multi or (especially) Human Fighter/Cleric dual seems to me eats the Paladin for breakfast.

    To me the Paladin seems built for a noob.

    I am not as experienced as some of you and I hope maybe someone can shed some light on this because I really love the Paladin concept but I see no real reason to play one.

    I love Paladins... But mostly for flavour.
    Mechanically the kits have useful resistances and abilities... in particular the Inquistor's insta-cast True Sight and epic Dispel level are really powerful in a game rammed with powerful magic users.
    But it's mostly taste... Any class/kit can be powerful if used right.

    ElrandirCrevsDaakmeaglothJuliusBorisov
  • ElrandirElrandir Member Posts: 1,566
    @Stormvessel‌ Well to mention one useful trait; THAC0. The paladin WILL outdo the cleric in melee combat. So the question is, do you want a character that is excellent in melee and can do some casting, or do you want a character who is far superior at casting. Now if you say Fighter/Cleric, then I can start to see how the paladin crumbles. But against a single class unkitted cleric? They're each useful. Especially when you bring the pally's kits into the picture.

    JuliusBorisov
  • StormvesselStormvessel Member Posts: 609
    edited May 2014
    Thanks for answering guys. I can see how Paladins are about flavour. I will mention that True Sight and Dispel are both Divine spells so the Cleric can cast them, too. And for the Inquisitor to get Dispel he has to give up Divine Spells (no DUHM) which makes them a horrible kit IMO. A good thief can negate the need for True Sight. In a full party the Inquisitor's abilities are redundant.
    Elrandir said:

    @Stormvessel‌ Well to mention one useful trait; THAC0. The paladin WILL outdo the cleric in melee combat. So the question is, do you want a character that is excellent in melee and can do some casting, or do you want a character who is far superior at casting. Now if you say Fighter/Cleric, then I can start to see how the paladin crumbles. But against a single class unkitted cleric? They're each useful. Especially when you bring the pally's kits into the picture.

    Even with a superior thac0, that is more than made up for by casting Champions Strength which grants exceptional Str (18/00) and raises Thac0 by 1 for every 3 levels. Draw upon Holy Might (which can be admittedly cast by either but Clerics can cast it WAY more) raises your Strength by a large amount which brings it's own bonuses to thac0 (though it can't be used w/ Champions Strength for obvious reasons).

    I guess it comes down to flavour. I really, really want to play a Paladin but I am stuck in the powergaming rut where I have to know the logic of a class before I can play it.

    Edit: Priests of Lathander can use Boon of Lathander...it just keeps getting worse for the Paladin as far as I can tell.

    JuliusBorisov
  • elminsterelminster Member, Developer Posts: 15,565
    edited May 2014
    Compared to a cleric...

    Paladin can use speed weapons (kundane and belm) or even useful two handed swords like Carsomyr.

    Pure cleric can't get more than basic proficiency in a weapon. They also won't get improved APR at levels 7 and 13 (which a paladin gets).

    Paladins get warrior HLA's, which are generally a lot better than the clerics. Paladins for instance can get 9-10 APR with Critical Strike active, meaning that every one of their attacks hits in that round. They also still get summon deva (or fallen deva in the case of blackguards).

    I don't think there is any doubt that clerics are the better casters, but generally paladin are better up close (and with ranged weapons since they get more options when it comes to ranged weapons).

    ElrandirmeaglothJuliusBorisovThacoBell
  • CrevsDaakCrevsDaak Member Posts: 7,058
    Elrandir said:

    @Stormvessel‌ Well to mention one useful trait; THAC0. The paladin WILL outdo the cleric in melee combat.

    What makes the difference is APR, not THAC0. Clerics can get their THAC0 even lower than Fighters in BG1 (where it matters the most) but they can very hardly increase their APR (unless they are Priests of Lathander).

    jackjackJuliusBorisov
  • StormvesselStormvessel Member Posts: 609
    edited May 2014
    elminster said:

    Compared to a cleric...

    Paladin can use speed weapons (kundane and belm) or even useful two handed swords like Carsomyr.

    Seeking Sword. 3 attacks per round at +4 to hit. Granted it can't be used often so I see your point.
    elminster said:

    ...Pure cleric can't get more than basic proficiency in a weapon. They also won't get improved APR at levels 7 and 13 (which a paladin gets).

    Paladins get warrior HLA's, which are generally a lot better than the clerics. Paladins for instance can get 9-10 APR with Critical Strike active, meaning that every one of their attacks hits in that round. They also still get summon deva (or fallen deva in the case of blackguards).

    I don't think there is any doubt that clerics are the better casters, but generally paladin are better up close (and with ranged weapons since they get more options when it comes to ranged weapons).

    I can see your point. And I swear this is my last question. I am not trying to be argumentive I just really want to play a Pally and have to get these things worked out before I can bring myself to do it.

    Considering that by level cap a Cleric can cast a whopping 60 divine spells compared to a Paladin's 20, it seems to me that anything the Cleric lacks is mitigated and then some. I think of all the bonuses a Paladin has, many of which you just named, and then I think of the 40 extra spells the Cleric has as well as the ability to wear Plate (like the Cleric) and wield FotA, and I think those 40 extra spells (22 are level 5 and up) would provide enough buffing to more than make up for anything the Cleric lacks, with enough leftover to make the Cleric a sure winner.

    And then I think about a human dualed to Cleric. He can dual at 13 and if I'm not mistaken still hit level 32 as a Cleric. So if I'm planning on playing through the whole saga as a Pally (which I want to do) I can't help but feel handicapped in the long run. And only playing BGEE I feel it's pointless considering I only get 1 measly lvl 1 spell and only one measly 1/2 attack when all is said and done.

    Meh, I am beating a dead horse now. Thanks for all the input guys. If anyone can come up with a reason to play a Paladin from a powergaming perspective, I am all ears.

  • ElrandirElrandir Member Posts: 1,566
    @Stormvessel‌ If you really can't justify playing a paladin, then play as a fighter/cleric multi. It makes more sense from a role-playing standpoint as well. Charname wouldn't have been able to become an "official" paladin, but he could've trained the required skills.

    StormvesseljackjackJuliusBorisov
  • elminsterelminster Member, Developer Posts: 15,565
    edited May 2014



    Seeking Sword. 3 attacks per round at +4 to hit. Granted it can't be used often so I see your point.

    Also it becomes really, really annoying in BG2EE because it can't be used often (I know because I did a playthrough with a Priest of Helm once). Plus it only does 2d4 damage, and while righteous magic does mitigate that loss (because it ensures you always do maximum damage) you still are limited in terms of your APR. Also when using it you don't get a lot of the really good hit effects/elemental damage that you can get with other weapons.



    I can see your point. And I swear this is my last question. I am not trying to be argumentive I just really want to play a Pally and have to get these things worked out before I can bring myself to do it.

    Considering that by level cap a Cleric can cast a whopping 60 divine spells compared to a Paladin's 20, it seems to me that anything the Cleric lacks is mitigated and then some. I think of all the bonuses a Paladin has, many of which you just named, and then I think of the 40 extra spells the Cleric has as well as the ability to wear Plate (like the Cleric) and wield FotA, and I think those 40 extra spells (22 are level 5 and up) would provide enough buffing to more than make up for anything the Cleric lacks, with enough leftover to make the Cleric a sure winner.

    And then I think about a human dualed to Cleric. He can dual at 13 and if I'm not mistaken still hit level 32 as a Cleric. So if I'm planning on playing through the whole saga as a Pally (which I want to do) I can't help but feel handicapped in the long run. And only playing BGEE I feel it's pointless considering I only get 1 measly lvl 1 spell and only one measly 1/2 attack when all is said and done.

    Meh, I am beating a dead horse now. Thanks for all the input guys. If anyone can come up with a reason to play a Paladin from a powergaming perspective, I am all ears.

    Honestly a lot of the divine spells are pretty mediocre. The higher level ones are good and there are a few good lower level ones. Also I think its important to remember that divine casters are limited to one spell/round (unless they are a cleric/mage) so while its true you have 60 spells you won't cast them all (at least not in any one fight). Also given that a lot of the higher level cleric spells have longer casting times (especially the level 7 ones) you are basically giving up potential attacks in favour of casting them. Whether or not that is going to be worth it is situational.

    The thing with paladins is that they are a warrior character (so they got all those HLA's) that can have 25/25/25 for strength/dexterity/constitution by the time they are level 26 (thanks to DUHM) without potions or anything like that. Obviously a cleric can get this (as well as cast Armor of Faith), but the fact that they can get these spells while getting the warrior benefits is what is important. Anyways, think of them more as a warrior and less as a cleric.

    As for dualing at level 13. I mean sure you can do it but you are basically handicapped for 1.35 million xp. In a 6 person party you are basically looking at being closer to the end of SoA when you get your fighter skills back. Personally I'd probably dual class earlier.

    jackjackJuliusBorisovStormvessel
  • StormvesselStormvessel Member Posts: 609
    edited May 2014
  • FinaLfrontFinaLfront Member Posts: 259
    You can just edit his race from "Half-Orc" to "Monster"

    StormvesseljackjackCrevsDaakJuliusBorisov
  • StormvesselStormvessel Member Posts: 609

    You can just edit his race from "Half-Orc" to "Monster"

    Touche!

    FinaLfrontJuliusBorisov
Sign In or Register to comment.