Hmm... when it comes down to ammunition consumption Gesen Bow or Firetooth in ToB might be really powerful for archer especially when they can be improved. I have also made BG 2/ ToB play through with fighter/ mage grand master in crossbows using Light Crossbow of Speed until I had access to Firetooth and had no problems with ammunition or enemies I encountered. There are only few monsters in game that have so much resistances/ immunities that would really limit these weapons use. If ammunition consumption is so dreadful for archer then carefully select the time and encounteres when you really start using your most powerful trick.
Stalkers can only backstab with weapons a single class thief could use. And no it doesn't (staves are the best backstab weapons in the game anyway). Stalkers get fighter strength bonus which is multiplied, thieves get a max of +1 hit, +2, with a thief's thac0 and hp...stalkers can potentially get +3 hit, +6 damage at creation, with a fighter's thac0, specialization, free dual-wielding, and hp and can fighting just as good as any other ranger vs enemies that can't be backstabbed, while thieves are in Deep crap in the same conditions (especially since ALL thieves and bards should be able to dual-wield slightly better then *** two weapon just by having 17+ dex).
If you're lazy, an Archer, if not, Stalker. That's really all it comes down to. Stalkers require more micro-management to use effectively, while archers are just fire and forget till the target dies. Damage-wise they're ultimately the same, though in different ways of going about it.
And if you're awesome, BEASTMASTER!? They're surprisingly fun to play, not much in the way of weapon variety, but still quite fun.
Roger – thank you for clarifying that. Just find it interesting that they reversed Stalker dual-classing but did not revert the any weapon backstab. Much obliged!
Just as it was said several times already - Archers rock in BG1, Stalkers in BG2. Archers are pure dmg and can get a bit boring, Stalkers need more micro-management, but can become quite powerful.
Depends on your playstyle. A Stalker has a bit similar flavor than a Fighter/Thief, but with a bit of spellcasting on side.
If you master dualwielding and pick pips for warhammer and scimitars or flails you can be a melee beast also in BG2 as archer. you dont NEED to fire bows every fight.
if its your first play-though take an Archer. Really I made a 3rd character (druid + chaotic evil fighter) and the archer is super boring to play but just mows down enemies and mages easily. so much so Ive decided to make a new character and keep my archer ranger for later use.
As for Stalker, I have absolutely no interest in and sounds like a poor man fighter/thief.
Archer is definitely the better choice - the thac0 progression is insane! By the end of the saga your thac0 would be something along the lines of -15 Archery is just awesome in BG1 and contrary to popular belief doesn't lose that much in BG2 and ToB AND with the trick arrows (arrows of dispelling and arrows of detonation FTW) it's anything BUT boring
Sure, there will be SOME (not a lot) enemies you wouldn't be able to hit in ToB But the Stalker's thing (backstabbing) is pretty much useless from the get go of BG 2 where 90% of the enemies are undead
Hardly 90% of all enemies in BG2 are undead. :P Of the optional dungeons, only the cleric stronghold quest and the ranger stronghold quest has a significant amount of undead.
I'm also interested in this topic, since I have the same problem for my good party, can't decide between them. In pen and paper games (not ad&d, different system but whatever) I almost always played wth elf archers. But Stalker sounds fun too. Could someone clarify me what are the creature types that can't be backstabbed? Or maybe what are those specific bosses who can't be?
Golems, undead, demons, beholders, dragons and pretty much all ToB bosses can't be backstabbed Kuo-toa and most mages can see you creeping up so that pretty much means you can't backstab them either
So that leaves what? Minor monsters and the odd Regular Joe Useless I tell you
Actually, with non-detection, true sight won't reveal stealth. So only enemies with the innate ability to see through stealth can't be backstabbed.
For ToB bosses, if you mean Demogorgon, Abazagal (form 2), Balthazar, Ravager and Final bad, as most, then yes, you're quite correct. (Illisera, Gromnir, Yaga, Nialee, Sendai (all forms), Brenden, Draconis, Abazagal (form 1), Egghead, fake Kirk, some of the seal guardians can all be backstabbed).
Kuo-toa actually CAN be backstabbed, but it requires a lot more work and just isn't worth setting up given how easily they die...a prince is really the only worthy target. (of note, Balthazar can ALSO be backstabbed using the same technique (but it's MUCH harder because of his speed and how much he moves around), or managing to time stop him (which is possible, but requires careful timing to pull off since he normally counters it by using his time stop immunity move, whatever he calls it), or if you're a F/T (or a 13 dualed F/T) just lay into him with a 10 attack Assassination...works just fine as well).
Kuo-toa and most mages can see you creeping up so that pretty much means you can't backstab them either
Most mages can't see you, and a thief definitely makes short work of these encounters, unless you install various "improved AI" mods that are imbalanced, and honestly, pretty retarded. They argue that certain game features are imba and introduce cheese to fight that cheese, but two wrongs don't make a right.
Actually, with non-detection, true sight won't reveal stealth. So only enemies with the innate ability to see through stealth can't be backstabbed.
For ToB bosses, if you mean Demogorgon, Abazagal (form 2), Balthazar, Ravager and Final bad, as most, then yes, you're quite correct. (Illisera, Gromnir, Yaga, Nialee, Sendai (all forms), Brenden, Draconis, Abazagal (form 1), Egghead, fake Kirk, some of the seal guardians can all be backstabbed).
Kuo-toa actually CAN be backstabbed, but it requires a lot more work and just isn't worth setting up given how easily they die...a prince is really the only worthy target. (of note, Balthazar can ALSO be backstabbed using the same technique (but it's MUCH harder because of his speed and how much he moves around), or managing to time stop him (which is possible, but requires careful timing to pull off since he normally counters it by using his time stop immunity move, whatever he calls it), or if you're a F/T (or a 13 dualed F/T) just lay into him with a 10 attack Assassination...works just fine as well).
Illisera isn't really a boss - come on, she's barely tougher than Carbos and Shank Draconis' second form is immune to backstab Brenden, Egghead and fake Kirk I don't even know/remember so chances are they were also fairly forgettable encounters devoid of any challenge
Yeah...but Abazagal and Draconis's 2nd forms are vulnerable to instant death, where as the first forms are not. So...wiping out most of their first form hp gets them into 2nd form quicker so you can 1-3 shot them with a silver sword, ravager or AotU.
But I digress. A stalker can just straight up murder the non-BS ones in melee, since they're just a ranger with fewer armor choices (though not bad by any means) and a few extra spells that make them decent for killing beholders.
so basically what you are saying is that neither the stalker nor the archer is really good,since tougher encounters in SoA and ToB are usually immune to missiles/backstab?
When it comes down to backstab I see it like this; it works on; liches, mindflayers, vampires, beholders etc - so it's a very useful option to have, even more so on a character with a good BAB/THACO.
Both are awesome. I think the Stalker has a built-in personality though. Focused, calculated, vengeful...dedicated to eradicating evil through spycraft.
I find archers extremely boring to play. In a party of six you might not notice, but I prefer my main character to be at the center of the action, and playing an archer shifts the spotlight to the NPCs.
Regardless of relative power, I'd choose a stalker any day.
I have played both, and I definitely enjoy the stalker more. In BG:EE, I am basically doing a solo run with a stalker in terms of how I deal with encounters (Speed boots, sneak attack, rinse repeat). Even though I am getting less experience because I do have 6 people in the party (and I use them for healing, and for big boss fights), I don't really need to bonus experience as a level 4-6 Stalker kills everything! Also, I generally prefer to have a Swashbuckler as my rogue, so the Stalker makes up in the backstab/scouting department.
Archers are cool killing machines, but as it has been said before they lack the better ammunition in BG2 for hitting really tough enemies, they are very point/click/kill (which to be fair, so are many of the fighter classes, these ones just point and click from farther away), and they aren't good at melee weapons in a pinch (while my stalker enjoys specialization and scimitars AND crossbows just in case).
Basically, Stalkers are cool, Archers are cool, but I prefer Stalkers. Now to try out a Beastmaster in my next game....RANGERS FOREVER!
I have played both, and I definitely enjoy the stalker more. In BG:EE, I am basically doing a solo run with a stalker in terms of how I deal with encounters (Speed boots, sneak attack, rinse repeat). Even though I am getting less experience because I do have 6 people in the party (and I use them for healing, and for big boss fights), I don't really need to bonus experience as a level 4-6 Stalker kills everything!
That's remarkably similar to how I just went through the game with my F/T multi. It's a fun strategy =D
The Archer's thac0 doesn't matter. Any one that gets fighter progression by lvl 22, will have so much thac0 from levels, items, specialization, str/dex, you can only miss on a 1 vs any enemy...Kensai and Archer's literally have TOO much thac0...it goes to waste because they long ago went beyond the point where missing could only happen on a 1. The damage bonus is nice though.
Still...a Stalker Backstabbing with the Staff of the ram+6 or just straight up beating the enemy to death with it during a GWW will out damage an archer, no matter the bow, with equal stats (and has a double chance to crit from 2-handed weapon style, which specifically excludes ranged weapons). And have about...-14 thac0...sure, the Archer will be about -22-ish..but the highest enemy ac in the game is only -16 (that numb-nutz Drizzt, but since it's a blunt weapon, it's technically only -14, so you have to roll a 1 to miss...the next closest is -10)
Thanks guys, and @toanwrath also confirmed what I have been thinking about for some time now: that you don't have to be an archer to be good with ranged weapons After all, Kivan is a simple ranger as well, still he is one of the two best ranged NPCs in BG, and a stalker gets the same to hit and damage as he does...
@Senash Yeah I used crossbows with my guy until level 2 or 3 because ranged combat is very very helpful early on in BG1/BG:EE. Even though I wouldn't mind being able to use a bigger variety of weapons, and even though I rarely use crossbows now, the fact that I can (and did) was well worth the two proficiency points.
@Madhax Yeah everyone seems to love Fighter/Thief, but I've never been the biggest fan of Multi/Class (I prefer Dual, but to each their own). I am thinking now of trying it, most likely as a gnome. The one time I did play a fighter/thief was my favorite character (a halfing) from Icewind Dale (using the same portrait as my profile picture), who was definitely the most useful member of my party. Even without 18 strength, he was crazy useful. Maybe I'll give it a try... any suggestions as to what race?
@Riolathetl But at what level would you dual class? Such a dilemma over what level Monk abilities to give up in order to spells...unless you are talking Multi, in which case which race do you let become a monk?
Comments
There are only few monsters in game that have so much resistances/ immunities that would really limit these weapons use.
If ammunition consumption is so dreadful for archer then carefully select the time and encounteres when you really start using your most powerful trick.
If you're lazy, an Archer, if not, Stalker. That's really all it comes down to. Stalkers require more micro-management to use effectively, while archers are just fire and forget till the target dies. Damage-wise they're ultimately the same, though in different ways of going about it.
And if you're awesome, BEASTMASTER!? They're surprisingly fun to play, not much in the way of weapon variety, but still quite fun.
Depends on your playstyle. A Stalker has a bit similar flavor than a Fighter/Thief, but with a bit of spellcasting on side.
As for Stalker, I have absolutely no interest in and sounds like a poor man fighter/thief.
Archery is just awesome in BG1 and contrary to popular belief doesn't lose that much in BG2 and ToB
AND with the trick arrows (arrows of dispelling and arrows of detonation FTW) it's anything BUT boring
Sure, there will be SOME (not a lot) enemies you wouldn't be able to hit in ToB
But the Stalker's thing (backstabbing) is pretty much useless from the get go of BG 2 where 90% of the enemies are undead
Golems, undead, demons, beholders, dragons and pretty much all ToB bosses can't be backstabbed
Kuo-toa and most mages can see you creeping up so that pretty much means you can't backstab them either
So that leaves what? Minor monsters and the odd Regular Joe
Useless I tell you
For ToB bosses, if you mean Demogorgon, Abazagal (form 2), Balthazar, Ravager and Final bad, as most, then yes, you're quite correct. (Illisera, Gromnir, Yaga, Nialee, Sendai (all forms), Brenden, Draconis, Abazagal (form 1), Egghead, fake Kirk, some of the seal guardians can all be backstabbed).
Kuo-toa actually CAN be backstabbed, but it requires a lot more work and just isn't worth setting up given how easily they die...a prince is really the only worthy target. (of note, Balthazar can ALSO be backstabbed using the same technique (but it's MUCH harder because of his speed and how much he moves around), or managing to time stop him (which is possible, but requires careful timing to pull off since he normally counters it by using his time stop immunity move, whatever he calls it), or if you're a F/T (or a 13 dualed F/T) just lay into him with a 10 attack Assassination...works just fine as well).
Draconis' second form is immune to backstab
Brenden, Egghead and fake Kirk I don't even know/remember so chances are they were also fairly forgettable encounters devoid of any challenge
But I digress. A stalker can just straight up murder the non-BS ones in melee, since they're just a ranger with fewer armor choices (though not bad by any means) and a few extra spells that make them decent for killing beholders.
Unless they're also immune to fire damage
edit:
I forgot about the slimes
They're also immune to backstab
And are bows really completely useless against +5 weapon only enemies or would fire / ice arrows still work for the 1d6 breath damage?
Regardless of relative power, I'd choose a stalker any day.
Archers are cool killing machines, but as it has been said before they lack the better ammunition in BG2 for hitting really tough enemies, they are very point/click/kill (which to be fair, so are many of the fighter classes, these ones just point and click from farther away), and they aren't good at melee weapons in a pinch (while my stalker enjoys specialization and scimitars AND crossbows just in case).
Basically, Stalkers are cool, Archers are cool, but I prefer Stalkers. Now to try out a Beastmaster in my next game....RANGERS FOREVER!
Still...a Stalker Backstabbing with the Staff of the ram+6 or just straight up beating the enemy to death with it during a GWW will out damage an archer, no matter the bow, with equal stats (and has a double chance to crit from 2-handed weapon style, which specifically excludes ranged weapons). And have about...-14 thac0...sure, the Archer will be about -22-ish..but the highest enemy ac in the game is only -16 (that numb-nutz Drizzt, but since it's a blunt weapon, it's technically only -14, so you have to roll a 1 to miss...the next closest is -10)
Yeah I used crossbows with my guy until level 2 or 3 because ranged combat is very very helpful early on in BG1/BG:EE. Even though I wouldn't mind being able to use a bigger variety of weapons, and even though I rarely use crossbows now, the fact that I can (and did) was well worth the two proficiency points.
@Madhax
Yeah everyone seems to love Fighter/Thief, but I've never been the biggest fan of Multi/Class (I prefer Dual, but to each their own). I am thinking now of trying it, most likely as a gnome. The one time I did play a fighter/thief was my favorite character (a halfing) from Icewind Dale (using the same portrait as my profile picture), who was definitely the most useful member of my party. Even without 18 strength, he was crazy useful. Maybe I'll give it a try... any suggestions as to what race?
But at what level would you dual class? Such a dilemma over what level Monk abilities to give up in order to spells...unless you are talking Multi, in which case which race do you let become a monk?