Party suitable?

Velociraptor

It's been a long time since I played IWD (and it turns out so long that I barely remember anything), but having played a lot of BG I think I've at least some idea of what I'm going for.

I've tried not to go too spoilery but I've been told it's good to have a bard, and a halfling or gnome and a paladin.

I've gone for

Human paladin undead hunter
Dwarven defender
Halfling cleric (yes the -1 wisdom is not optimal)
Elf Fighter/thief - I'm not keen on dual and multi classing, but a pure thief is a waste I think.
Gnome illusionist
Half-elf bard

I did try hard difficulty but I've realised with 50% extra damage it's going to be a bit too dependent on luck for having to reload saves etc.

I don't expect I'll want to replay more than once to do the harder modes etc. I know multi and dual classing is optimal from a player power perspective, but I do prefer not to.

So does this party seem reasonable, and will it allow me to see most of the game etc?

ineth

Velociraptor wrote: »

So does this party seem reasonable

Yes, it's a well-rounded party.

The only thing it's missing out on, combat-wise, are druid spells. Druid spells include some neat area-of-effect ground spells for softening up enemy mobs when using choke-point tactics. But you can live without them; Your party has enough other ways do deal with enemy mobs.

and will it allow me to see most of the game etc?

Yes.

There isn't much content locked behind race/class restrictions; mostly just a few extra lines of dialog and a few minor extra XP rewards.

Note that in dialog, it matters which party member is considered the "speaker":
1) When you select a single party member and then initiate conversation, that's the speaker.
2) When you group-select your party and initiate conversation, the slot 1 character is the speaker.
3) When an NPC initiates conversation with your party, usually the party member closest to them becomes the speaker.

To get the most out of dialog,
a) use your Bard as the speaker when doing quests/conversations related to songs or singing, and
b) use your Paladin or Cleric as the speaker when talking to sentient undead.

Also, try talking to one of the unnamed "Townspersons" of each town with each party member as the speaker, in turn.

Velociraptor

I couldn't think of a way to get druid magic into the game. The fighter thief could be a ranger but that would mean no detect traps.

The dwarven defender is really the only place I could think of, they could change to a dual wielding melee ranger which would allow some druid spells but I don't think area of effect spells would really come well from a druid.

Thanks for your help!

ineth

Velociraptor wrote: »

I couldn't think of a way to get druid magic into the game.

Yes, it's hard to fit all combat abilities into one party without aggressive multi-classing.

But that's OK, you don't need them all.

IMO, the only things I'd consider "mandatory" in an IWD party composition, are:

1) At least 1 front-line warrior who can wear heavy armor, and hold his own against the hordes.
2) A Thief with "Open Locks" and "Find Traps". (Ideally dual- or multiclass so they're not useless in combat).

I mean you could even go without those two, but it would be tedious and devolve into cheese-tactics. In addition to those two, it's fine to just round out the party based on what classes seem fun.

Velociraptor

Yeah. I don't want to put myself into cheesing, or savescumming.

I could drop the dwarven defender and just go with a paladin on their own, and replace the dwarven defender with a druid.

Is that a worthwhile swap?

ineth

Velociraptor wrote: »

Is that a worthwhile swap?

I'm not sure. Both options are fine.

It's nice to have multiple front-line warriors, so you don't have to waste spells on every trash mob.
There's also plenty of warrior weapons and magical armor to go around, and it's a shame to have to sell most of them.
Not to mention that the party-wide combat bonuses from your Bard's bard songs provide more utility the more party members you have fighting with weapons.

A druid shines with stationary AoE spells when you can get multiple enemies to clog up in one spot (the aforementioned "choke-point tactics"):

...and also as a creature summoner (but your Illusionist will also get some summoning spells), and secondary healer (but your Cleric, and later Bard, do that better).

I guess it depends on play-style:

1) The more often you're willing to rest to regain spells, the more utility you'll get out of an extra spellcaster compared to a fighter. Personally, I find it tedious (and a bit cheesy) to rest after every battle, and find it satisfying to complete a whole dungeon (or large dungeon level) in one day.

2) Do you like relying on summoned creatures? I would consider it a cheese-tactic to always send summons ahead in front of my party, but I do think it's helpful to complement my party with some summons in larger battles.

Velociraptor

Thanks for the detailed response! I'll stick with what I have.