Dual classing ranger cleric
![[Deleted User]](https://forums.beamdog.com/applications/dashboard/design/images/defaulticon.png)
[Deleted User]
Posts: 0
The user and all related content has been deleted.
0
[Deleted User]
Posts: 0
Comments
Flavor? It's an interesting dual. Not powergamey, but interesting. For instance, starting with an archer (focused on slings) and dualing to cleric is a solid build that only gives up heavy armour (not necessary for a slinger anyway) to gain combat bonuses and stealth.
Multi class always seems slow to me. I am not sure why.
@Pokota The multiclass did that, didn't know about the dual. You can still get that behaviour though. Beamdog added a switch in the LUA file that toggles it. All you need to do is change one variable.
That's certainly another option, but the sling bonuses for an archer dualed at level 13 is pretty impressive. You don't need HLA's for that combo to be effective. Clerics get some solid summons and buff spells that are pretty darned good. I don't think it would be boring just because you can't whirlwind. The Sling of Everard can hit anything in the game without pfmw too so that's a plus that shouldn't be ignored.
Speaking for myself, it's actually nice to roleplay a stalker/cleric (a religious spy type) , and dual os better because your cleric levels advance much faster late game.
An archer 13/cleric using slings was suggested. Combining archer and proficiency bonuses, that's 2.5 APR, +5 attack, and +6 damage. Nice. Now, a fighter 13 (no kit)/cleric with grandmastery in slings - that's 3 APR, +3 attack, and +5 damage. Quite possibly even better, especially since you can stack sling, bullet and stat bonuses all together for high attack and damage bonuses even before that. Also, the fighter/cleric can (and should) wear heavy armor, can specialize or more in a melee weapon, and has an extra cleric level because fighter 13 is 250K less XP than ranger 13.
Beastmaster duals are only there to flood a Cleric's spellslots with Animal Summoning 3 and trying to win the game with infinite swarms of lions. It's not GOOD, but it's hilarious
Stealth and the ranger stronghold are the other reasons to go Ranger instead of Fighter. It's not much, but it's not nothing either.
also having for a big part of the game higher cleric levels he has earlier strongest cleric combat buffs, that mean always maxed dmg roll, con, dex and str increase (better ac, more hp and more dmg better thac0), mean a further hp boost, up to 2 hp/level, capped at lev 20 if i am not wrong, mean 25 str at will earlier and even late game with less spells, a high cleric reaches it with holy power and righteous magic only sparing the round needed for duhm.
the dual has also more base hp as spend all the first levels as pure ranger.
on the fighter hla i agree, most of the cleric ones are underwhelming and late game he don't even get more of them as he has already them all.
but this does not mean that the dual lacks of power at all, has the spike from when the dual is complete to the moment the multi start to really get enough fighter hla to turn the tide, a single ww or it and a couple of gww are not enough, hardiness can be more relevant until the RC can really have a large number of hla.
on a side note the phase of the game where the dual has the spike is also the most challenging and at the very beginning, before starting the dual, the single class ranger does not lack of power.
EDIT: depending on the dual level the dual reaches also earlier enough levels to actually turn undeads, up to having the mighty kangaxx explode.
way earlier to have mummies, ghouls and vampires explode or even only try to run away ceasing to be a danger, as he maybe hit them with his powerful sling, is something very noticeable.
the whole temple ruins but the boss, some areas in the firkraag's dungeon, the bodhi's lair and the random encounters with vampires in the town are very easy with a high enough level cleric, sanctuary and kaboom, the multi can do it only if in a very small party or soloing as usually lacks of the needed cleric level.
Regardless of how you dual and solo games aside, I think the biggest fun is not needing to wait for the majority of the games until you dual (at 13) and then waiting for another third to regain the original class bonuses.
usually in a dual the first class picked is the fighting one and then you dual into the casting one, and dual into cleric, given the cleric combat buffs, allow to dual at 7 and to have optimal thac0 (until dispelled... ) even in the very late game, where dual into mage or druid start to suffer severe thac0 problems even if from fighter (GM) and with more levels in the fighting class.
but yes, to do the opposite, giving up a lot of spell casting, as a ranger don't shine in it even at high levels, to have more mlee power and fighter's hla is viable and has its own power, in a different way.
having to do it i probably would start with the cleric of lathander kit and would dual at 11, to have better clerical buffs and 2 boons of lathander/day, that can be stacked, giving +2 apr for 11 round and some immunity.
a CoL->R will have after lev 13 ranger 2 base apr + 1DW + 0.5 specialization = 3,5
that with a boon active become 4.5 for 22 rounds, with 2 boons stacked are 5 apr for 11 rounds, using the MH weapon only, so using a shield for better protection or a 2H weapon like the staff of the ram that is one of the weapons with the better alpha damage.
starting from that kit and dualing earlier gives only a boon and less cleric buffs. at 9 you get only a single, shorter lasting, righteous magic, before you don't get it at all.
also the rounds the boon is active are tied to the cleric level.
anyway my point was only that the R->C version of the dual does not suffer thac0 wise, not that the other way is not powerful or interesting to play, i agree with you on that.
I can attest that a Priest of Lathander (11) -> Fighter is perfectly viable.
And with GWW, this dual class armed with a sling can in theory become the best ranged character damage-wise.
I made calculations long ago, can't remember exactly which buffs/modifiers were taken into account, but the PoL/Fighter dual barely outdamaged (390 damage per round) an Archer wielding the Gesen's bow (380 DPR) and a Kensai wielding the K'logarath throwing axe (370 DPR).
Even before 3M XP and HLAs, the +1 APR from the Boon stacks with haste for 5 APR at lvl13 and 5 pips in slings, keeping this character on par with the Kensai (using the Firetooth Dagger outside GWW) and the Archer (who would do even more damage using the Firetooth crossbow along with GWW).
Obviously, those numbers are theoretical and have a large margin of error, being calculated with a specific build in mind & gear shared between the characters, not to mention completely irrelevant given that enemies would be dead long before the full damage comes into play.
But I like numbers and wanted to share it
EDIT: back on topic, I guess a PoL dualed to ranger would be viable too, although I don't see what the ranger class brings to the table, and you lose out on grandmastery instead. And since you dual from the caster class, even the access to higher druid spells doesn't mean much as a lvl11 priest with not that much spellcasting anyway.
I mean if you want to call "following P&P rules more closely" a nerf, then sure. A Ranger 1>Cleric 4 isn't supposed to be able to cast 2nd circle Druid spells under any circumstances.
All right then, let's argue it from the Infinity Engine side of things.
A Ranger 1/Cleric 4 still shouldn't have been able to cast Druid spells since an equivalent Ranger 4 can't cast Druid spells. This was an error in the original versions that was fixed in the Enhanced Editions.
This. Was. A. Bug. It was a bug with a beneficial side effect, since I don't actually know of anybody that played a trueclass ranger all the way to the end, but a bug all the same. It even ascended to being a proper option rather than just a programming error in EE 2.0.
a RC can cast the same number of spells of a single class cleric of his level, he gains only some not useful low level druid spells, then is better to go FC so at least GM is allowed.
the RC is a worst caster then the MC of the same level as gains almost nothing from his druid magic and is a worst fighter then FC as being cleric can not use speed weapons and at the same time can not reach GM.
the original game RC was not a caster as good as the MC, but was a viable and not overpowered alternative to the FC, trading GM for some useful druid spells, basically the insect summoning ones.
if it was a bug that had to be fixed or not to each one his opinions, some can argue that it had to be changed because the PnP is different (but is also different in a lot of other things, the magic and combat system is based on the PnP, but very different in some aspects) or because a ranger never reaches those spells. but others can say that using that logic a RC should not be able to cast let's say more then 3 times/day entangle, and only if he is actually at least lev 13 ranger or should not be able to cast call lighting before having at least lev 12 in ranger and that to do it 3 times/day should have at least lev 16, things that are not true, as he can fill all the level 1 and 3 with them and cast them all day long. a ranger is not supposed to cast 8 entangle/day, this is not what i see in the table you posted @Pokota, so also the EE RC has to be nerfed or the table you show is not useful to know what the ranger part of a rc can cast.
being also ranger a cleric gains the ability to understand and use the druid magic, that is a different branch of the same magic he knows as cleric, as they use the same slots and share a lot of spells, if there are reasons to don't allow druid spells of level higher then 3 there are also reasons, just as good, to allow them.
while for the HLA, specifically the elemental prince, there are reasons to don't allow the RC have druid HLA, as he has the specific ranger ones.
anyway in the original game no one compel a player to memorize the insect spells if he feel it wrong (so there was no need at all to nerf), but is also true that in EE all the druid spells can be enabled so at least this nerf is completely optional, who does not like it is not affected by it.
No. It. Was. Not.
You clearly do not know what a ‘bug’ actually is. “An error, flaw or fault in a computer program or system that causes it to produce an incorrect or unexpected result, or to behave in unintended ways.”
Nothing functioning as deliberately coded is a bug. Was Rng 'extra attack' for single weapon a bug? No, because that was the design decision at the time. Just like Rng/Clr casting as verified by the lead developer.
When they made BG2, they could now dual-wield and get the proper TWF attacks, so they removed Rng extra attack. But the development team confirmed they made a conscious decision to leave Rng/Clr casting as it was.
It. Has. Been. Nerf’d.
A trueclass ranger cannot cast druid spells before 8th level. Why can a Ranger 1/Cleric 1 do so?
And a feature that is removed is a nerf. QED.
It was a bug. It was always a bug. Liking it does make it less of a bug. Some bugs are good, which I think this one was. Either way, you're ranting about doesn't matter, because it is easily enabled.
a bug is always originated by some error in the way a program is coded. if something in the program/game is possible because the developers intended to have that possible is a feature of the game, if it happens because they overlooked some part of the coding so something is possible beyond they willing it to be possible it is a bug. simple as that.
an exploit can or can not use a bug to work and is a different thing, ie infinite spell strategies are exploits that use the spells as they are intended to work in a creative way to cast certain ones with a positive impact on the spells memorized, you have at the end more spells memorized then before.
while let's say the inventory swap or the wand of lighting trick are or was exploits that use a bug to work.
unless someone can give an evidence that the RC casting all the druid spells was not an intended feature by the original developers we lack of any reason to be sure that it was a bug. and even if the original game had few patches the thing was well known by the game community before those patches so either it was from the origin an intended feature or it has ascended to the legittimate feature rank by not being patched (nerfed) in the patches.
the EE developers had a different opinion on that feature and decided to nerf it, that is not fixing a bug but deciding that the game, for reasons related to else from being it a bug, like how the thing works in PnP or balance issues or whatever, would be better with that feature changed.
but the fact that they decided to let that feature open for those that like it is a clue that also they did not believed that it was a bug, we can have the feature active without an other coder, let's say a modder, enabling it, it is still an optional part of the game as it is.
while when they fix a bug usually they don't give us the chance to enable it again.
and still in the game a RC does not cast his druid spells as a single class ranger of the same level would have cast them, I created a multi RC in ToB to check, he can memorize 8 druid only spells at the first 3 levels while a single class ranger, at the same ranger level, but also at xp cap, can never cast more then 3 of them. also the ring that the cleric gets reached a certain level allows to cast more cleric spells, but it works also for the druid only ones.
is the game still bugged for those 2 reasons? i would say no, it is an intended behavior as in not EE and by player's choice also in EE is an intended feature to cast druid spells that a single class ranger never reaches even if he can use the druid magic.
unless someone brings to the topic the evidence that an original developer rated that feature as a bug that had never been corrected, in spite of the fact that was well known, for some reason.
it is perfectly possible that in some old or new interview an original developer tells so, but only that can qualify the feature as not intended, so a bug, a code overlooking.