Between an Archer and a Kensai witch is more interesting to play as?
2088432
Member Posts: 229
I am wondering which one you guys find the most fun and also which is most powerful in your opinion.
0
Comments
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.
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..
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.
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.