Ranger -> Cleric Questions
mrb101
Member Posts: 68
I have decided to make a ranger dualled to cleric as my next play through and have a few questions I'm hoping someone can answer.
1. what is the best level to dual at (i will be playing a mostly 6 person party), do i need a certain level to get all druid spells?
2. if i take the evil option for +2 strength in hell i become a fallen ranger does this mean i lose out on druid spells or my weapon profs or thaco?
3. what is the best racial enemy to choose?
1. what is the best level to dual at (i will be playing a mostly 6 person party), do i need a certain level to get all druid spells?
2. if i take the evil option for +2 strength in hell i become a fallen ranger does this mean i lose out on druid spells or my weapon profs or thaco?
3. what is the best racial enemy to choose?
0
Comments
2: Yup, fallen ranger. Lose spells, I believe, and any kit bonuses, but not weapon proficiencies, I don't think.
3: Fairies.
3. Since you'll be able to handle undead pretty well as a Cleric, you might choose a non-undead racial enemy. I like demonic/fell.
Are you going to use a Ranger kit?
Find the line
'Game Options', 'Cleric Ranger Spells', '1',
and change the 1 to a 0 (and save the file).
I suppose you could make an argument for a bit better Cleric spell progression and higher Turn Undead, but it comes at the cost of reduced combat prowess, and the advantage diminishes the further you go in the game.
Conceptually, it makes perfect sense. An Archer is just a ranger who focuses on ranged weapons, and avoids clunky armor to make sure their armor doesn't get in the way of their archery. Using slings would be a perfectly valid choice; not every ranged attacker has to use bows or crossbows.
Slings do suffer from pretty poor APR compared to the other ranged weapons, but at epic levels at least, an Archer/Cleric could start using Energy Blades as its ranged weapon, and they benefit from Archer bonuses.
EDIT: ToB in vanilla also prevented Stalkers from dual-classing, I assume because of the same cleric weapon restrictions. But you can still backstab with clubs and staffs.
Now, the only advantage over a Fighter->Cleric is that the R->C can do stealth, but the disadvantages (e.g. limiting to two proficiency points per weapon) greatly outweigh that. Perhaps there's slightly more point in a Stalker->Cleric, since that one can backstab while in stealth ... but even then, I can't see how it's worth the disadvantages compared to a F->C. Well, that's no longer possible for any character in the standard game. As already noted, you'd have to edit the .ini file to restore the original behaviour ... each to his own, but to me that's cheating. If you do all of the quests, including all of the NPC personal quests, then actually your protagonist eventually ought just about to make it to 8M XP, even with a full party at all times. However, not until almost the very end ... for example, in my last completed run, I got there with the very last points at the end of Chapter 9 (i.e. fighting the Ravager), just as I was about to go into the big Final Battle.
If I had been a part-Cleric (I wasn't), then getting my Holy Symbol just as I'm preparing for the Final Battle would have been very nice timing!
I haven't exhaustively tested slings but I remember them being pretty good already with the STR modifier. Maybe GM would make them too good? But would it, really? Hm...
Shouldn't be too hard to test, maybe I'll do a Slinger run sometime in the future (adding GM via EEKeeper). Yeah, I'll put it on the list!
If you're dualling out of Ranger, then you're probably not building a character designed for front-row melee (especially now that you can't make up for weaker melee abilities by casting Iron Skins from the Druid spells). It'll be a character mostly for standing well back and either casting spells or using his sling, fighting in melee only when occasionally necessary ... and a Fighter->Cleric could do that significantly better by being more proficient with his sling.
If you want to retain serious melee competence into the later stages, then you ought to be a multi-class Ranger/Cleric, not a dual-class Ranger->Cleric. For the multi-class, yes, dual-wielding is a sensible route to take ... but the dual-class ought to carry a shield, or at least ought to go two-handed and try to use the extra reach to fight in melee from behind a proper melee warrior who can absorb most of the enemy's hits. Sacrificing AC in order to dual-wield is a sensible plan only for characters who will be sufficiently good at melee that the enemy will fall before he can hurt you too badly, and a character dualled out of Ranger (unless we're talking about a ridiculously late dual) won't have the THAC0 to be very good at this. Even if you insist upon building a dual-wielding Warrior->Cleric, a Fighter->Cleric will again be significantly better at it than a Ranger->Cleric, because he can master his weapons.
So even with two free points in dual-wielding, I don't see a case for ever again building a Ranger->Cleric, because a Fighter->Cleric will always be better (except for stealth, which isn't important enough to make the difference). Even the case for a multi-class Ranger/Cleric (which used to be a very good class because of the extra Druid spells) is now much weaker, since a multi-class Fighter/Cleric levels faster.