Anyone else feel that the vanilla classes are better suited for IWD than the kits?
SharGuidesMyHand
Member Posts: 2,582
I can't quite put my finger on it, but it seems to me that the style and content of IWD are, generally speaking, better suited for the vanilla classes than the kits. Perhaps it's because the IWD versions of these classes have additional attributes that they didn't have in the BGs? - for example, the vanilla paladin's immunity to fear makes the cavalier class slightly redundant IMO, and the vanilla bard receives a much larger variety of songs than any of its kits, in stark contrast to their BG counterparts. Or perhaps it's because the relentless combat style of IWD requires a more varied response, and the vanilla classes are typically more versatile than the kits?
Of course, the cleric class still remains an exception, since there still isn't any practical (non-RP) reason to not play as one of the kits.
What are others' thoughts on vanilla classes vs. kits in IWD?
0
Comments
Nearly every battle in the game played out the same for me. Buff -> Summons -> CC -> Damage. With Summons and CC getting phased out as I get further into the game. If anything the relentless combat requires a simple response.
So Skalds have an advantage over Bards because their song focuses on the Damage part.
The Bounty Hunter is an outright better Thief. 5 Thief Points per level? In exchange for better traps? You only need 100 Detect Traps and save reload can get you through without spending a bunch of points in Pickpocket.
Assassins are a little tougher to sell as a superior Thief, but again the low reliance on high point Thief skills makes Poison Weapon so much more attractive in any mode except HoF. And HoF makes Assassins level up so fast that their drawback is irrelevant.
Stalkers lose the ability to wear heavy armor, but so what? That's what Iron Skin is for. And if you're picking a Stalker you're already not going to give them heavy armor to begin with.
The Undead Hunter loses Lay on Hands and Cure Disease, unless your party doesn't have an actual Divine Spellcaster, this loss is pretty irrelevant compared to dealing +3 damage to the most common enemy type in the game.
The Avenger only loses +1 Damage and +1 To Hit (because all its other drawbacks are either pointless, they only get bonuses for 16 CON anyway, and Barkskin Ironskin is far better than any armor a Druid can wear) in exchange they get one of the best CC spells in the game, Web.
Variety doesn't immediately equate to better, the variety has to actually amount to a better option and not just a different way to solve a problem that doesn't need a different way to solve it.
"My main concern with the re-releases was balance, which I do believe suffers in BG and IWD. The BG2 kits were really tuned for that game. The content in BG and IWD was not, so a lot of the encounters (that I’ve seen, anyway) become much easier to blast through. Still, they’re a lot of fun."
http://jesawyer.tumblr.com/post/108585274081/i-hope-this-doesnt-sound-like-an-attempt-to-get-a
"As one of the main designers on Icewind Dale, seeing the BG2 kits in there destroy all the balance kind of made me a little sad. The BG2 kits are really powerful and Icewind Dale was kind of balanced around one thing."
http://www.pcworld.com/article/2886976/pillars-of-eternity-josh-sawyer-talks-mods-pc-first-focus-big-head-mode-and-more.html?page=2
My opinion: the choice is never excessive. If you feel the kits are not for this game, don't use them. Other people will find it alright to try totemic druids, dragon disciples and blackguards in IWD. There're always options of whether you take them (the kits) or not.
Fighters:
I do think too many consider vanilla fighters to be inferior to 'zerkers, and in some cases they are of course, but since I prefer consistency and low-rest/continued dmg output I like my chars to be able to both attack with ranged and melee. Yes yes, I know about throwing axes etc, but there are alot of good xbows and longbows I like to put to use, so using a vanilla fighter for a dual-class can IMHO be better than zerker since specialization in a ranged weapon can add alot of damage per round on average.
Thieves:
Three kits add more value than the vanilla part IMHO, and that is swashie for non-backstabbers, assassin for anti-mage/clerics and overall damage and BH for trappers. The vanilla thief get more points than needed anyways, so trading some for better damage output or defense? Sign me up. I don't use SC thieves much though, they are mostly for dualing or F/T's, M/T's C/T's etc.
Bards:
I prefer blade and skald to all other bards normally, but in IWD skald is better. I like the bard for it's versatility, but in the end the skald just brings more overall consistency and higher damage output throughout the game. Need a full party to be at it's best though.
Ranger:
I've never understood vanilla rangers really. Gimped fighters with no real pro's. If it weren't for Drizzt, noone would have ever played a vanilla ranger
Stalkers and Achers, especially archers, are better in every way. I don't really use BS much in IWD, but for ppl using sneak attack instead I guess Stalkers do add som value.
Paladin:
I prefer to have a char with poison weapon, so if I don't have an assassin I like to add a blackguard. All paladins are great, both vanilla and kits, but since as said above I like to have ranged, I tend to not use Cavalier alot so for me UH and Blackguard are both better than vanilla.
Just my 2 cents.
That's cute.
Talking about balance in a game with a difficulty mode, meant for a party that went through the game, that can be reasonably beaten by a fresh party.
The balance of the game was already wrecked in the original. The extra stuff just make it more obvious.
And I just continually despise the fact that due to their poor adaption, every class (except mages), has 1 kit that is objectively better then the vanilla class (sometimes all of them are), which means you can't really justify not using it, except for purely roleplaying reasons.
Why do you think everyone is always trying get kits added to the NPCs...they're better then those that don't have a kit, instead of the vanilla classes being just as good as the kits (in all cases the kits lose a lot of the benefits of the source class in order to gain new abilties...or at least that's how it's supposed to work) albeit with a different style of play.
it's not a different style of play when you're choosing having a bonus the other class doesn't and not having that bonus but being for all intents and purposes the same.