Howdy, Stranger!

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

Categories

New Premium Module: Tyrants of the Moonsea! Read More
Attention, new and old users! Please read the new rules of conduct for the forums, and we hope you enjoy your stay!

Favored Enemy - What's Your Choice?

24

Comments

  • lroumenlroumen Member Posts: 1,918
    I like to pick ettercaps and umberhulks if I don't random it.

    typo_tillythespaceJuliusBorisov
  • thespacethespace Member Posts: 1,039
    BG1 - Ettercaps, because of all the close up poisoning/trapping ambushes going back and forth to Cloakwood, often hittin' ya when your tapped

    BG2 - Demons, because they're demons!

    JuliusBorisovjesterdesu
  • DragonspearDragonspear Member Posts: 1,825
    BG1: Ogres, Spiders or Hobgoblins. Usually I pick spiders, cause its fun pretending that my ranger would go around candlekeep when she was younger squashing them

    BG2: Normally I pick dragons (of course, usually I run a cavalier), but I could easily see myself picking Demons as well. I've also done beholders, illithids and liches at some point as well.

    JuliusBorisovjesterdesu
  • DragonKingDragonKing Member Posts: 1,656
    !


    BG2: Normally I pick dragons (of course, usually I run a cavalier),

    @Dragonspear
    You don't deserve that name!

  • typo_tillytypo_tilly Member Posts: 5,702
    pft! XD adorable curfuffle ahead >:3

    semiticgodprocco
  • DragonspearDragonspear Member Posts: 1,825
    @DragonKing

    Well, how about you get Tiamat and the evil chromatic dragons in line, and then Bahamut and I won't have to keep making them favored enemies, or endorsing paladins in their name to kill them.

    And the Dragonspear name is based off Dragoons. I merely imitate draconic fighting styles

    semiticgod
  • JuliusBorisovJuliusBorisov Member, Administrator, Moderator, Developer Posts: 19,714
    We need new choices for favored enemies in SoD ;) "Driders", "neothelids" and "cyclops", for example.

    semiticgodDragonspear
  • DragonKingDragonKing Member Posts: 1,656
    @Dragonspear
    I'll get tiamat in line when you all get Cyric, Talos, and Lolth all in line!

  • GallowglassGallowglass Member Posts: 3,356
    edited November 2015

    I kind of mentioned it in the OP, but I picked Golems for BG2 not just because of their inherent toughness, but because they nerf other options a Ranger has. If you're facing a demon, a stalker can backstab, and any ranger can kite them, so the usual tactics work fine. A golem forces you to take it head-on, and there's no point in kiting a clay golem when it's immune to your ranged attacks. If you're going head-to-head with those, then I think you need the bonus more.

    If you're soloing with a Ranger, then yes, I agree that this is a solid reason for picking Golems, because you'll have to use your Ranger in melee against them.

    With a party, it's less convincing, because you've usually got some melee specialist with you, who can step up to the Golem instead of your Ranger having to do so. I'd generally rather have my Ranger specialising in an enemy which he can attack at range.

  • DragonspearDragonspear Member Posts: 1,825
    @DragonKing

    Don't look at me, I'm a paladin of Mystra

  • DragonKingDragonKing Member Posts: 1,656
    @Dragonspear
    Who is a greater deity long side Lolth, Talos, and cyric. Unlike Bahamut and Tiamat, you'd expect greater deties wanting to keep other greater deities in check.

  • TressetTresset Member, Moderator Posts: 7,740
    Heh, not a whole lot of talk about racial enemies going on really... I guess a little of that is fine, just don't get too far off topic.

    semiticgod
  • semiticgodsemiticgod Member, Moderator Posts: 14,070
    Rangers are total racists.

    DragonKingAbi_DalzimNimranFenghoang
  • KamigoroshiKamigoroshi Member Posts: 5,310

    Rangers are total racists.

    More like speciesists.
    To make things worse: weak rangers like Minsc or Valygar can't even do a single round-house kick. :smirk:

    lolien
  • DragonKingDragonKing Member Posts: 1,656

    Rangers are total racists.

    More like speciesists.
    To make things worse: weak rangers like Minsc or Valygar can't even do a single round-house kick. :smirk:
    Na, racist was the correct term, the better stay away from my dragons or else!

  • MeyahiMeyahi Member Posts: 143

    Rangers are total racists.

    More like speciesists.
    To make things worse: weak rangers like Minsc or Valygar can't even do a single round-house kick. :smirk:
    Na, racist was the correct term, the better stay away from my dragons or else!
    @Kamigoroshi I've had the same thought but @DragonKing is correct since everyone can copulate with anyone else and have a fertile offspring. Effectively, it is a single species and multiple races.

    If someone knows what can have a fertile offspring with what and what can't (providing it is coherent), we may be able to class D&D characters into species and races. For now, "race" sounds like the apropriate term.

  • GallowglassGallowglass Member Posts: 3,356
    The proper definition of "species" is a topic of continuing argument in biology, it's a surprisingly slippery concept to pin down precisely.

    Being able to breed together is a crude and long-obsolete suggestion. Being able to breed together and have fertile offspring is a slightly more useful definition, but it turns out that some hybrids between clearly-distinct species are nevertheless fertile hybrids, so that definition doesn't work either. (And it also turns out that some pairings between different populations of what clearly appears to be the same species can nevertheless be inherently infertile, which also invalidates this definition.) But then there are all the species which reproduce by asexual means (parthenogenesis, etc.), where "breeding together" doesn't apply at all.

    Probably the only way we'll ever arrive at a general and consistent definition of "species" will be based on molecular analysis of DNA, but the molecular biologists haven't yet arrived at agreed criteria for what does (or doesn't) constitute a separate species. There'll undoubtedly be a Nobel Prize handed out when someone develops a satisfactory answer to this question, but it hasn't yet been achieved.

    On the simplistic basis of "you know it when you see it", I reckon the various sentient "races" of Faerun are all different species, not just races within the same species, but there's no definitive answer because there's no adequate definition.

    It's therefore rather a pointless argument. The proper answer is "we don't know".

    And all this is getting hugely off-topic!

    GrumDragonKing
  • DragonKingDragonKing Member Posts: 1,656
    You all need to stop sweating to small details sweet cheeks, I'll buy you all something pretty when we get him OK?

  • YelocessejYelocessej Member Posts: 182
    Ogres then Vampires because there is a lot of them and they can beat you to goo.

  • GemHoundGemHound Member Posts: 799
    I picked golems earlier for the simple reason that thieves are for the most part helpless against them, and I primarily play thieves.

    typo_tillyDragonspear
  • GemHound said:

    I picked golems earlier for the simple reason that thieves are for the most part helpless against them, and I primarily play thieves.

    But... Thieves aren't Rangers. Can't even multiclass with them.

  • GemHoundGemHound Member Posts: 799
    edited November 2015
    @Tad_Has_A_Cold_Olive Its a personal thing as I play thieves the most which means golems have a special place for me.

  • recklessheartrecklessheart Member Posts: 691
    Oooh. Illithids are tedious. I imagine Human is a consistently legitimate choice across both games, however. Is it a choice? Or have I dipped into 3.5E there?

    In fact, might I in a moment of humble ignorance ask: what benefits does a Ranger get when they fight their favoured enemy in BG?

  • DragonspearDragonspear Member Posts: 1,825
    @recklessheart

    Favored enemy should be +4 to hit and damage against the favored enemy.

    And I know Humans, Elves, Dwarves, etc were legit choices even in AD&D. But you also could only pick your own race if you were evil. So maybe it was 3e.

    semiticgodrecklessheartGrumEmpyrial
  • Abi_DalzimAbi_Dalzim Member Posts: 1,410
    Humans and others are choices in the tabletop games, but not in Baldur's Gate.

  • AlmateriaAlmateria Member Posts: 257
    Liches

    Liches get stitches

    EmpyrialYelocessejSmilingSwordcloudkillbeatsall
  • SharGuidesMyHandSharGuidesMyHand Member Posts: 2,471
    edited November 2015
    For BG1, I go spiders - they're deadly, difficult, and somewhat common enemies that you meet at all stages of the game.

    Ogres would be my second choice for BG1, but since Kivan is a staple of my good-aligned parties, picking them would usually be redundant for me.

    I don't play BG2 much, but for IWD I usually pick giants.

Sign In or Register to comment.