Howdy, Stranger!

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

Categories

Neverwinter Nights: Enhanced Edition has been released! Visit nwn.beamdog.com to make an order. NWN:EE FAQ is available.
Soundtracks for BG:EE, SoD, BG2:EE, IWD:EE, PST:EE are now available in the Beamdog store.
Attention, new and old users! Please read the new rules of conduct for the forums, and we hope you enjoy your stay!

Between an Archer and a Kensai witch is more interesting to play as?

I am wondering which one you guys find the most fun and also which is most powerful in your opinion.

Comments

  • thespacethespace Member Posts: 1,033
    I much prefer the archer. I don't know about most powerful, however an archer is pretty much guaranteed to have the highest kill % of anyone.

    TrollopsAndPlugTails
  • DanacmDanacm Member Posts: 480
    It really depends on you. I personally like archer, because of called shot, stealth and dmg of course. But i always play in party not solo.

    TrollopsAndPlugTails
  • chimaerachimaera Member Posts: 688
    For the main character I prefer the archer, simply because they are much easier to keep alive. Ease of use, I guess. ;)

    TrollopsAndPlugTails
  • ThacoBellThacoBell Member Posts: 7,652
    Unpopular opinion time! I prefer Kensai, they are more dynamic and require actual play, whereas an Archer you click and forget. Both classes are really good, I just prefer melee combat as a personal preference in the BG games. Whatever you choose, Archer is easier early one and never really becomes difficult, where the Kensai can be very difficult at low levels, but becomes very powerful going into BG2.

    Whatever you choose, the Kensai is not a tank or a frontline fighter. Send your main tank in first, then have the Kensai flank and destroy. Eventually, with powerful magical equipment and levels, you won't have to worry as much, as the Kensai will be killing everything too fast to take much damage.

    AurorusGreenWarlockGotural
  • AurorusAurorus Member Posts: 194
    ThacoBell said:


    Whatever you choose, the Kensai is not a tank or a frontline fighter. Send your main tank in first, then have the Kensai flank and destroy. Eventually, with powerful magical equipment and levels, you won't have to worry as much, as the Kensai will be killing everything too fast to take much damage.

    You make me want to play a Kensai. Maybe... someday... . It seems dual-classing them is a waste of their potential... agree?

    GreenWarlock
  • OlvynChuruOlvynChuru Member Posts: 1,693
    Archers are way better in Baldur's Gate 1 but kensai can be better late in Baldur's Gate 2. I think kensai are more fun to use overall.

    ThacoBell
  • ThacoBellThacoBell Member Posts: 7,652
    Aurorus said:

    ThacoBell said:


    Whatever you choose, the Kensai is not a tank or a frontline fighter. Send your main tank in first, then have the Kensai flank and destroy. Eventually, with powerful magical equipment and levels, you won't have to worry as much, as the Kensai will be killing everything too fast to take much damage.

    You make me want to play a Kensai. Maybe... someday... . It seems dual-classing them is a waste of their potential... agree?

    I'm the wrong person to ask for that. I don't like dualclassing and have never touched it.

  • AurorusAurorus Member Posts: 194
    edited October 9
    ThacoBell said:



    I'm the wrong person to ask for that. I don't like dualclassing and have never touched it.

    Not a fan myself. The only dual-class that I have ever played or would play again is a Fighter/Druid and only because of the funky druid level progression. Otherwise, I would have just played a fighter/druid multi-class.

    ThacoBell
  • SimulacreSimulacre Member Posts: 102
    edited October 9
    The archer is the easy way, especially in Baldur's Gate 1. A kensai is entertaining but way trickier.

    It could be compared to the fighter/mage vs blade debate. The F/M is a powerhouse with few downsides if any, learn a few things you'll be rolling like crazy. Meanwhile, the blade has some interesting things going for him BUT he's also a lot trickier to play, requires a lot more knowledge and experience to be played at its full potential.

    So yeah, you can't go wrong with the archer but that's precisely what could be the problem. The kensai has some neat distinctive features and is solid if played correctly.

    Any class can be fun, really, it only depends on your mood. Some people like it easy, some people are hungry powergamers, some people are passionate roleplayers, some people are masochists..

    Post edited by Simulacre on
    GreenWarlockThacoBell
  • GreenWarlockGreenWarlock Member Posts: 1,343
    I prefer the Kensai as it presents a puzzle to solve - a character whose abilities revolve around melee, yet is banned from wearing armor. I will ignore the use of throwing weapons as an accident of the engine, rather than a feature of the class.

    Archers will be way more powerful in the first game, where bow weapons rule to begin with. I find archers a much less compelling gameplay in BG2, where the maps, even outdoors, are a lot more constrained and combat feels much more close-quarters. This plays to the strengths of the Kensai, which was designed for BG2 originally (the first game never had kits, they are an EE feature). That said, the same point about design can be said about the archer ;)

    Last one to bear in mind is the swashbuckler, who gets only weapon mastery, not grand master, and lacks fighter APR, but also gets an AC bonus with levels while functioning as the party thief as well.

    ThacoBell
  • The_CheesemanThe_Cheeseman Member Posts: 175
    Archer is pretty consistently good throughout most of the series, though suffers against MOBs immune or resistant to missile damage (which isn’t that common, but can be a significant problem in specific fights). They are also undoubtedly the kings of damage in BG1. Period.

    Kensai is an investment in the future, kind of like Monk. They are pretty terrible early game, so the rest of the party pretty much has to carry them through BG1. But at high levels, once the Archer’s power starts to fade, Kensai keep ramping up to absurd levels. At the end, AC becomes superfluous, because nothing lives long enough to attack the kensai. It’s very satisfying, but you really have to earn it.

    Kensai have a much wider variety of weapon choices, so you don’t need to worry as much about damage immunities. They will also end up the most powerful ranged attackers, assuming you choose to Grandmaster daggers, since Archer bonuses slow down at epic levels, while Kensai’s do not.

    So the question is really what part of the game you’re most interested in. Archers dominate early and end up mediocre at end game (mostly due to itemization), whereas Kensai are just plain terrible for a long time, but eventually end up blenders of death in the end.

    Lammas
  • DanacmDanacm Member Posts: 480
    I like archer more, because i rather be stronger in the 70% of the game and mediocre after, than weak in the most of the game to be strong in the last 20%.

    Lammasraelcari
  • NeoptolemusNeoptolemus Member Posts: 25
    The other day I ran into a group of gnolls outside high hedge and kivan (modded to archer) cut all six of them down in two rounds. Now we were high level and just doing some shopping so any party would have slept their way through that fight but it was still pretty expect domination by the archer.

Sign In or Register to comment.