I have no idea why people like Barbarian when the Dwarven Defender is better in every way that matters.
Because I like to play a barbarian?
Sorry but I dont like people like you coming up with powergamer comments like "this is sooooo much better"
I just simply want to play a barbarian in a barbarian setting. And dwarven defender does not appeal to me. Same way some people prefer apples to oranges. You gonna tell them an orange is so much better because it has more vitamin C?
But if you want an answer your way: you are shit out of luck when your dwarf gets charmed/held/whatever'd and your whole party gets screwed over because he was holding a chokepoint doorway. And I dont really care for HoF anyway.
I simply think the dwarven defender is a cheaply thought of class... "Here have a fighter with a huge damage resistance and be off with it" I'm very sorry that I think playing a barbarian paired up with a stalker is more fun in my world.
That's... awfully rude of you to attack me when I never attacked you. You are new here, so I'll let it slide, but it's not nice to personal attack someone.
Then again, the thread is called "Best Party Setup" so when one comes to ask for party advice, that's what I'll do: give advice.
This is why I don't venture into threads discussing the "best" or "worst" party/NPC/character/class/race/whatever. A party/character/class/race/whatever is only as good--or as bad--as the player pulling the strings. Consider SoA/ToB: after 13 years the game has been beaten by every conceivable class or race, usually in a solo run or with only minimal NPCs. This disproves any claim of "worst" while claims of "best" is like asking "which is the best chocolate chip cookie in the bag of cookies?".
I have no idea why people like Barbarian when the Dwarven Defender is better in every way that matters. HP? Same 1d12? Resistances? The Dwarf will get those too, AND can get more at the drop of a hat at lvl 1. Movespeed? Not such a big deal here. If you send your DD ahead of everyone else, he'll take the brunt anyway. Backstab Immunity? Minimal value in 2 small mini areas... and having high slash resistance trumps them anyway.
Barbarian Rage is not terrible, but I'd rather not risk the damage, especially on HoF.
The status immunities.
Also, the extra speed. It's handy when your tank runs faster than the rest of the party and gets ahead naturally.
Also, you don't have to be restricted to playing as a dwarf.
Icewind Dale heavily rewards parties that multi/dual class. You only need one thief. The first choice is how many player characters you will have. 3, 4, and 6 members are the most common. My favorite 6-player party was:
Since you start this game of as lvl 1 I'm wondering if it's really worth it to dual at 8 and 9. Even if you reach lvl 9/10 with the new class, won't the game be pretty much over by then? Or does IWD have pretty high XP cap and you reach a 8/9 and 9/10 char in somewhat reasonable time?
Since you start this game of as lvl 1 I'm wondering if it's really worth it to dual at 8 and 9. Even if you reach lvl 9/10 with the new class, won't the game be pretty much over by then? Or does IWD have pretty high XP cap and you reach a 8/9 and 9/10 char in somewhat reasonable time?
It's a good point. The party that I suggested is built for HoF, which you shouldn't start until you've completed the main game and the two expansions. IIRC, most of my parties ended up recovering their original classes around the end of the main game or the start of the two expansions. If you're not planning to play HoF, then you're right - it's probably better to switch over at around Ranger 2-4 or 6 (probably earlier since that IS your cleric) and Fighter 3. If you intend to play the entire game, the expansions, and HoF, then you'll end up playing something like 60-70% of the game (and all of the "hard" parts of the game) with access to the full abilities of the original classes, as well. IIRC, I generally made the switch somewhere around the Yxonemei fight, for reference, so with my party you're kind of grinding/carrying those two from the Severed Hands through Dorn's Deep. That's a long time, admittedly, but it does make the game easier in HoF.
It's up to you, of course, but with dual-classes in general the longer you stick with the base class then the better the character becomes at the end, and the quicker you switch them over then the less time you spend grinding. The Ranger, for example, can theoretically be dualed over at (something like) 12 or 13, but even I think that that's excessive and provides relatively few benefits.
I won't claim that this is the best party for every player, but it matched my play-style pretty well and it made the game quite a bit easier on me than the other parties I've played through the game with.
I have no idea why people like Barbarian when the Dwarven Defender is better in every way that matters. HP? Same 1d12? Resistances? The Dwarf will get those too, AND can get more at the drop of a hat at lvl 1. Movespeed? Not such a big deal here. If you send your DD ahead of everyone else, he'll take the brunt anyway. Backstab Immunity? Minimal value in 2 small mini areas... and having high slash resistance trumps them anyway.
Barbarian Rage is not terrible, but I'd rather not risk the damage, especially on HoF.
The status immunities.
Also, the extra speed. It's handy when your tank runs faster than the rest of the party and gets ahead naturally.
Also, you don't have to be restricted to playing as a dwarf.
What's with this ranger dualed to cleric at level 2? Unlike BG it wouldn't qualify you for druid spells, so Berserker2->cleric is way better (and more IWDish).
What's with this ranger dualed to cleric at level 2? Unlike BG it wouldn't qualify you for druid spells, so Berserker2->cleric is way better (and more IWDish).
Good point - I had completely forgotten that, and you're completely right to recommend a Berserker 2 -> Cleric dual, instead. Berserker is actually my favorite fighter kit, but not one that appears int he current IWD and so I had forgotten about the possibility. The immunities are actually even better than the Barbarian's, especially because in BG2 it protects them from Kangaxx.
I wouldn't say never dual a ranger, but if I was following that path I would go stalker and dual at level 7, for maxed out stealth, 1st level druid spells, x2 backstab and +1/2 an attack. Level 9 would get x3 backstab and level 2 driud spells, but I think that is a bit late for a non-HoF IWD playthrough.
Edit: or play a multiclassed ranger/cleric instead.
I'm holding off to see how the Avenger is implemented. It will probably get significant changes to reflect IWD druids. They get web anyway, so it's level 2 bonus spell would need to be changed. But the shape-shifting may also get adjusted. As it stands, Avengers get basic and bonus forms at the same time as vanilla druids: level 7. But in IWD vanilla druids get forms at 5, 7, 9, 11, 13 and 15. Would Avengers get the vanilla forms as per IWD, plus all bonus forms lumped at level 7? Would the bonus forms be spread out: spider at 5, wyvern at 7, salamander at 9? Would they replace some or all of the vanilla forms?
What's with this ranger dualed to cleric at level 2? Unlike BG it wouldn't qualify you for druid spells, so Berserker2->cleric is way better (and more IWDish).
Are you sure a ranger dualled to cleric doesn't give you both cleric and Druid spells?
I'm pretty sure I remember making a ranger and dual classing into cleric at level 2, but it was a long time ago.
It worked well, but I think I missed having short folk so much I restarted. LOL. I think my Mage had higher level spell slots, but nothing in her spellbooks before long also, which pissed me off.
It's nice having the ability to place multiple pips in weapons (like scimitar for the Druid, longbow for the Mage), for classes that are just a couple of thousand XP behind a true single classed character.
Comments
And it will probably be a bastard sword, because they are obviously eviler.
Sorry but I dont like people like you coming up with powergamer comments like "this is sooooo much better"
I just simply want to play a barbarian in a barbarian setting. And dwarven defender does not appeal to me. Same way some people prefer apples to oranges. You gonna tell them an orange is so much better because it has more vitamin C?
But if you want an answer your way: you are shit out of luck when your dwarf gets charmed/held/whatever'd and your whole party gets screwed over because he was holding a chokepoint doorway. And I dont really care for HoF anyway.
I simply think the dwarven defender is a cheaply thought of class... "Here have a fighter with a huge damage resistance and be off with it" I'm very sorry that I think playing a barbarian paired up with a stalker is more fun in my world.
Then again, the thread is called "Best Party Setup" so when one comes to ask for party advice, that's what I'll do: give advice.
I'm just tired of people bashing all sorts of classes simply because they dont do the most damage/have the most this/that.
And that is all there is to it.
But lets be fair, it isnt disclosed wether we are talking about HoF or not
It's up to you, of course, but with dual-classes in general the longer you stick with the base class then the better the character becomes at the end, and the quicker you switch them over then the less time you spend grinding. The Ranger, for example, can theoretically be dualed over at (something like) 12 or 13, but even I think that that's excessive and provides relatively few benefits.
I won't claim that this is the best party for every player, but it matched my play-style pretty well and it made the game quite a bit easier on me than the other parties I've played through the game with.
Evil party:
Assassin
Blackguard
Wild Mage
Cleric of Talos
Totemic Druid
Fighter/Mage
Good party:
Cleric/Thief
Undead Hunter
Illusionist
Scald
Avenger
Barbarian
Edit: or play a multiclassed ranger/cleric instead.
I'm pretty sure I remember making a ranger and dual classing into cleric at level 2, but it was a long time ago.
I recall doing a party like this once:
Fighter 3 > Druid
Fighter 3 > Mage
FMT
Bard
Paladin
Ranger 2 > Cleric
It worked well, but I think
I missed having short folk so much I restarted. LOL. I think my Mage had higher level spell slots, but nothing in her spellbooks before long also, which pissed me off.
It's nice having the ability to place multiple pips in weapons (like scimitar for the Druid, longbow for the Mage), for classes that are just a couple of thousand XP behind a true single classed character.
(you know what I'm talking about)
Look at the "what's known" thread.
But it can for IWD? I just don't get it.