Skip to content

What, in your opinion, would be the worst party composition in a fully pregenerated party?

Simple, if you pregenerated a full party( without class or kit duplication) what do you think would be the worst party composition?

Comments

  • semiticgoddesssemiticgoddess Member Posts: 14,903
    edited November 2018
    With no duplicate classes?

    Human Thief
    Human Beastmaster
    Human Cleric
    Half-elven Cleric/Thief
    Human Bard
    Human Sun Soul Monk

    That excludes a lot of mage spells, most racial bonuses, and Carsomyr; restricts physical damage resistance stacking in ToB; adds redundant cleric and thief levels; and gives you the weakest kit for each class available.
  • RVNSRVNS Member Posts: 285
    @semiticgod

    I like it! Very well thought out.

    Mine was similar,
    Human Bard
    human thief
    human beastmaster
    human cleric
    human monk
    human wizardslayer

    I think yours is definitely harder though.

    I am interested to see other posts in regards to this.
  • Permidion_StarkPermidion_Stark Member Posts: 4,861
    Here's my list. I restricted myself to only one of each race as well as each class.

    Gnome Barbarian
    Half-Orc Thief
    Elf Beastmaster
    Dwarf Cleric
    Human Monk
    Halfling Fighter
  • RVNSRVNS Member Posts: 285
    @Permidion_stark

    Also a hard list, especially to attempt a race restriction as well.
  • BlackravenBlackraven Member Posts: 3,486
    Disregarding nonsensical dual-classing shenanigans, I'd probably come up with something like:

    - Human or Half-Orc Assassin: only 15 thieving skill points per level, nerfed poison weapon ability
    - Transmuter: lacking abjuration spells means no spell protections and almost no debuffing
    - Human Beastmaster: more weapon and armor restrictions than other warriors for negligible gains
    - Human Wizard Slayer: slow XP progression and thus slow MR progression in a full party, especially a non-shorty who can't rely on saves until late SoA,
    - Human Cleric: no perks like the kits
    - Sun Soul Monk or unkitted Monk: both vulnerable for a long time (Dark Moon Monk a bit stronger defensively)
  • RVNSRVNS Member Posts: 285
    @blackraven

    Also very strong choices(or weak choices in this situation)!
    had not put much thought to the assassin, or the transmuter. Both would be difficult.
  • ThacoBellThacoBell Member Posts: 12,235
    edited November 2018
    Nothing but fighters with minimum stats and all with identical proficiencies. In morningstar and two handed weapon style..
  • RVNSRVNS Member Posts: 285
    @thacobell

    I was trying to go without class duplication and kit duplication if I could. Although that right there certainly would be rough to run!
  • Balrog99Balrog99 Member Posts: 7,371
    Human thief
    Gnome cleric (17 wisdom)
    Human bard
    Human monk
    Human druid
    Halfling Kensai

    If you can keep the halfling alive somehow, you might be able to make this not suck too badly...
  • semiticgoddesssemiticgoddess Member Posts: 14,903
    I'd go with humans across the board. The other races all have advantages that outweigh the disadvantages:

    Half-elf: identical to human, but with 30% resistance to charm and sleep spells.
    Elves: low CON, but high DEX and 90% resistance to charm and sleep spells, as well as a +1 bonus to THAC0 when using bows and longswords
    Dwarf: low DEX, but high CON and large bonuses to saves vs. death, wands, and spells that increase with CON
    Halfling: low STR, but high DEX and large bonuses to saves vs. death, wands, and spells that increase with CON, as well as a +1 bonus to THAC0 when using slings
    Gnome: low WIS, but high INT and large bonuses to saves vs. wands and spells that increase with CON
    Half-orc: low INT and CHA, but high STR and CON

    The short races all have massive bonuses to saving throws, which are very important in BG.
  • Balrog99Balrog99 Member Posts: 7,371

    I'd go with humans across the board. The other races all have advantages that outweigh the disadvantages:

    Half-elf: identical to human, but with 30% resistance to charm and sleep spells.
    Elves: low CON, but high DEX and 90% resistance to charm and sleep spells, as well as a +1 bonus to THAC0 when using bows and longswords
    Dwarf: low DEX, but high CON and large bonuses to saves vs. death, wands, and spells that increase with CON
    Halfling: low STR, but high DEX and large bonuses to saves vs. death, wands, and spells that increase with CON, as well as a +1 bonus to THAC0 when using slings
    Gnome: low WIS, but high INT and large bonuses to saves vs. wands and spells that increase with CON
    Half-orc: low INT and CHA, but high STR and CON

    The short races all have massive bonuses to saving throws, which are very important in BG.

    Halfling Kensai is worse than human though. Can't use slings so bonus is worthless, 17 strength max means it takes that much longer to kill anything, and 19 dexterity doesn't lower AC over 18. Not worth the extra save bonus IMHO.
  • QuickbladeQuickblade Member Posts: 957
    ThacoBell said:

    Nothing but fighters with minimum stats and all with identical proficiencies. In morningstar and two handed weapon style..

    I'll see your 6 min-stat fighters and raise you 6 min-stat mages who don't cast.
  • semiticgoddesssemiticgoddess Member Posts: 14,903
    Potions of Genius would fix that, actually. INT is only needed to scribe scrolls. At any rate, this thread is about the worst party without redundancies.
  • Grond0Grond0 Member Posts: 7,457
    As far as the classes go, my reaction after reading through the various lists is they all look pretty easy :p. Everyone has included a cleric in their lists and their spells are extremely powerful - at least in BG1. Everyone also has a thief of some sort and if you want to take the trouble they can kill virtually anything important in the game using traps. As for bards and mages, if you're allowing the use of wands ...

    I've played every possible class (unmodded) multiple times and don't think there's any configuration that would make the game that much more difficult. If you nerf stats & proficiencies and introduce equipment restrictions it's a different story, but that doesn't seem to be the point of this thread.

    If you restrict yourself to no more than one of each basic class type, the following list would seem the weakest full party to me, but I think it would still be pretty easy to make progress in an unmodded game unless you introduce additional restrictions:
    Human wizard slayer
    Human beastmaster
    Human paladin
    Human monk
    Human druid
    Human assassin
  • ThacoBellThacoBell Member Posts: 12,235
    @Balrog99 I've taken a 16 str halfling fighter all through ToB. Its not a big deal. 14 strength on the other hand...
  • Balrog99Balrog99 Member Posts: 7,371
    ThacoBell said:

    @Balrog99 I've taken a 16 str halfling fighter all through ToB. Its not a big deal. 14 strength on the other hand...

    I don't doubt it, but it certainly isn't optimal. Besides, I said Kensai. Try taking a 16 str halfling Kensai through with no other really good melee options. That was the party I recommended...
  • Balrog99Balrog99 Member Posts: 7,371
    Grond0 said:

    As far as the classes go, my reaction after reading through the various lists is they all look pretty easy :p. Everyone has included a cleric in their lists and their spells are extremely powerful - at least in BG1. Everyone also has a thief of some sort and if you want to take the trouble they can kill virtually anything important in the game using traps. As for bards and mages, if you're allowing the use of wands ...

    I've played every possible class (unmodded) multiple times and don't think there's any configuration that would make the game that much more difficult. If you nerf stats & proficiencies and introduce equipment restrictions it's a different story, but that doesn't seem to be the point of this thread.

    If you restrict yourself to no more than one of each basic class type, the following list would seem the weakest full party to me, but I think it would still be pretty easy to make progress in an unmodded game unless you introduce additional restrictions:
    Human wizard slayer
    Human beastmaster
    Human paladin
    Human monk
    Human druid
    Human assassin

    Too many good melee classes for my liking. You can win with any combo but one with only one sub-par fighter would be tedious...

  • ThacoBellThacoBell Member Posts: 12,235
    Balrog99 said:

    ThacoBell said:

    @Balrog99 I've taken a 16 str halfling fighter all through ToB. Its not a big deal. 14 strength on the other hand...

    I don't doubt it, but it certainly isn't optimal. Besides, I said Kensai. Try taking a 16 str halfling Kensai through with no other really good melee options. That was the party I recommended...
    There are a ton of good melee options. Daggers are amazing in BG1 (well, the DoV anyway). There are some good cheap magical axes if you go that route as well. Longswords are still really good. There is also the stupifier mace, or Ashideena. Being a halfling doesn't mean you can't melee well.
  • Grond0Grond0 Member Posts: 7,457
    Balrog99 said:

    Grond0 said:

    As far as the classes go, my reaction after reading through the various lists is they all look pretty easy :p. Everyone has included a cleric in their lists and their spells are extremely powerful - at least in BG1. Everyone also has a thief of some sort and if you want to take the trouble they can kill virtually anything important in the game using traps. As for bards and mages, if you're allowing the use of wands ...

    I've played every possible class (unmodded) multiple times and don't think there's any configuration that would make the game that much more difficult. If you nerf stats & proficiencies and introduce equipment restrictions it's a different story, but that doesn't seem to be the point of this thread.

    If you restrict yourself to no more than one of each basic class type, the following list would seem the weakest full party to me, but I think it would still be pretty easy to make progress in an unmodded game unless you introduce additional restrictions:
    Human wizard slayer
    Human beastmaster
    Human paladin
    Human monk
    Human druid
    Human assassin

    Too many good melee classes for my liking. You can win with any combo but one with only one sub-par fighter would be tedious...

    Not really. If you don't have fighter types then you're left with classes with other strengths. I've done a no-reload with a party of pure-classed mages for instance. If you have multiple thieves you can start killing things with just traps without even having to set them up in advance. Multiple druids will start not just disabling, but actually killing everything just with insect spells ...
  • semiticgoddesssemiticgoddess Member Posts: 14,903
    I disagree about the strength of clerics. They are very, very good in BG1 and have brilliant uses in sections of SoA where disablers are life-threatening, but they don't have quite the same power in SoD, and by ToB, they have much less potential than almost any other class besides perhaps druids.

    I would not include a druid in this setup. They're not nearly as strong in BG1 as clerics, but they are spectacular in SoD, game-breaking in SoA, and are on par with clerics with ToB. Plus, you cannot create a druid/thief without mods, so you can't add the same kind of redundancies that you can with a cleric, cleric/thief, and thief in one party.

    Nor would I include a paladin. They are solid damage dealers and roughly on par with fighters even without Carsomyr on hand. Fighters in general are very effective; Beastmasters are the only ones who cannot fulfill normal fighter roles due to their weapon limitations.
  • Grond0Grond0 Member Posts: 7,457
    I was putting a party together with a limit of one member per main class (and no multi or dual classes). In that context any of the other options seems to me to provide much more to the party than a paladin. I agree that they're a match (in fact I would say more than a match) for a human fighter. I would have a clear preference for a dwarf fighter to a paladin though, but then I very rarely buff characters. If you do take the time to buff then saving throws become far less of an issue.

    I agree that druids are pretty strong and that was the 6th character I settled on. There's a potential argument for a cleric instead. However, clerics are so much better during early levels (when the party as a whole is most vulnerable) that I thought they shaded it overall.
  • RVNSRVNS Member Posts: 285
    I think all parties here would be very hard to run. I am planning a no reload scs challenge soon and wanted to take some of the less powerful classes through in a party dynamic. This is certainly helping form the perfect (imperfect) team for this.
  • RVNSRVNS Member Posts: 285
    @semeticgod @Grond0 do you think if I can get the bard to hlas would I use him with the modified bard song or would you think he stand in as my only arcane caster? Just curious on how you think this would play out.

  • Grond0Grond0 Member Posts: 7,457
    @RVNS I would have thought he would perform both functions. In a full party the bard song is extremely powerful - it can make the bard himself an exceptionally good tank, while giving protection to other party members against many disabling effects. In most cases I think that song would make more impact on combats than spell-casting. However, the bard can of course also buff up the party in advance of combats and spells like chaos can be thrown in prior to engaging in combat to cause, well, chaos among enemies.
  • RVNSRVNS Member Posts: 285
    @grond0 I see what you are saying. I will just have to learn when to use which.
  • BlackravenBlackraven Member Posts: 3,486
    Re: Cleric vs Druid, I agree with what @semiticgod says about druids, and I'd like to add that they're great even in BG1. They need only 35k XP to reach level 7 and get level 4 spells, including Call Woodland Beings whose Hold Person, Confusion, Mental Domination, Hold Monster, Mass Cure spells are amazing. And druids also get level 5 spells (Insect Plague, Ironskins) still in BG1.

    @RVNS: if you don't mind micro-management, you can 'song twist' with a bard. The engine only checks once every six seconds whether the Bard song is active. When you get the "singing bard song" message in your action log, you have six seconds to cast a spell and/or make an attack. If you click the bard song icon again within those six seconds, you'll reactivate the song just in time for the next check ensuring the song buff is active all the time.
  • RVNSRVNS Member Posts: 285
    @blackraven I did not know song twisting was a thing. So going with that, how does casting speed work in comparison to seconds? is it one second per point of casting time? ex. casting time is 7, does that mean it takes 7 seconds to cast?
  • Grond0Grond0 Member Posts: 7,457
    edited November 2018
    @RVNS in 2nd edition AD&D a round lasts 6 seconds. The round is split into 10 segments, which correspond to the casting times for spells - so a casting time of 1 would be 0.6 seconds, a casting time of 5 3 seconds etc.

    If you're playing at the standard 30 fps, the real timing of the action on your computer will approximate those times, i.e. a round will last around 6 seconds (ignoring pauses and the slowdown you tend to get in large battles).
Sign In or Register to comment.