An odd trio for a front line
Rawrbarian
Member Posts: 40
Barbarian: 1/2 Orc w/a 2-hander (thinking Axe or Halberd) or two 1-handers (thinking Axe and Morning Star)
Kensai: Elf with 2 Longswords
Monk: Human (Kit Class depending on Alignment)
Too squishy?
Kensai: Elf with 2 Longswords
Monk: Human (Kit Class depending on Alignment)
Too squishy?
Post edited by Rawrbarian on
0
Comments
just make sure that either your kensai or monk is lawful good so you can buy that blur belt from orrick when he gets it, that +3 AC bonus is going to come in super handy
and if you dual wield with the barbarian, if you get lucky, dual wielding defender morning stars +4 would be great
your kensai can get x2 longsword of actions +4 in HoW which is pretty good
Good thinking. I was wondering what alignments would be suitable for each one. I was thinking Chaotic Neutral for the Barbarian, Lawful Neutral for the Kensai, and I didn't know which alignment would be good for the Monk, especially if I wanted to go with a kit.
Danacm: Yeah, too many fringe classes (or kits) in one group is a bad idea. Two would be optimal. One on the frontline as a utility warrior and one behind the scenes as support. Though, I might be able to get away with a second in the supportive cast.
Barbarian: Half-Orc: Chaotic Neutral: Axes (one with bonus AC) and Morning Stars (one that heals/buffs).
Sun Soul Monk: Human: Lawful Good: Get that blur belt and maybe use Long Swords (get the fire one).
Fighter/Druid: Half-Elf: True Neutral: Hunt for Scimitars and special armor, help with summons.
Or would the Fighter/Druid be in the same situation as the Kensai? Perhaps go with a Dwarven Defender instead?
its hard to have lots of good or even useful stats at once ( STR for melee obviously, DEX for some AC, CON for HP which will direly be needed, and WIS for some extra spells AND the fact your CHA will HAVE to a min of 15 ) so stat wise it kind of hurts, although for me i rolled an 89 and went with 18 DEX/CON/WIS and 15 STR ( which is enough to use a large shield and use heavy armor) so because of that, the to hit and to damage wasn't all that good, but eventually in chapter 6 you can get a belt of 19 STR so that helps
next, is weapon choice, in IWD there really isn't all that great weapon choices for melee fighter/druids, it wont be until chapter 5 before you get a scimitar +3, and before then you only have a small chance of even getting a +1 version, and club wise you also have a small chance of finding a good one of those period as well ( i guess you could buy said weapon from the blacksmith but i prefer to find my weapons ) so you are basically going to have to rely on daggers, now with that said, presio's dagger +2 i found to be pretty decent, but then again, you need to be able to hit, to make it work
so there's that to think about
and in my opinion i think dwarven defenders are a bit over rated and a bit OP, with their ridiculous amount of damage resistance there is almost no point in having any other melee characters, especially when you can get your resistances over 100% ( seriously, what were the devs even thinking when they made this class? )
anyway, if you truly want to use one, then buy all means do so, but if not then going dwarf berserker, or just plain old fighter, OR if you truly need another spell caster you could always go with dwarf fighter/cleric, there are tons of flails and morning stars everywhere, there is even the odd hammer ( although their damage isn't all that good ) and maces, well not too many cool ones, although HoW has a decent mace, but don't rely on IWD giving you a good one that's for sure
or if you wish to keep the elf element, you could try a ranger/cleric half-elf, still restricted to the cleric weapons, but again, better cleric weapon selection as apposed to melee druid weapon selection
but then it comes down to personal preference, if you truly really want to use a fighter/druid then by all means do so, in the team i have now the reason why i have a fighter/druid is just to add some flavor to the party, not necessarily for its "amazing" fighting ability
When I was thinking about the Fighter/Druid, my main concern was armor. I know you can get the Umber Hulk armor made in the Dwarven area, but that is more than half way through IWD. If I start with a group in HoW, I will get Black Dragon Armor, but HoW is really only a chapter long. I know there is Trials of the Luremaster, man was that a pain in the butt, but that is basically only one chapter as well. So basically, not really enough time to really play and/or enjoy the build.
Then I remembered that the Druid has armor spells like the Mage. I think one of them, for the purpose of the game, will last a few hours. Also, the Druid has weapon spells. But I haven't played a Druid in games like these, so I don't know how useful they are. Honestly, I was never into the Druid in 2nd or 3rd edition table top. I guess I could call upon my experience from D2: LoD or WoW, but that doesn't really count, well imo.
So the Druid class, even the Fighter/Druid, is more of a curiosity. Like you said, flavor. It's something different, like the Kensai or the Monk. Though I wish they would have stuck to the 2nd edition Monk. It was just a kit class to the Cleric.
Yeah this game is heavy on the Morning Stars for sure, which makes sense because of all the skeletal undead. Yes, there are a ton of Warhammers too for the RP aspect, Dwarf or even the Gnome, but the damage is about the same as a Dagger. Besides RP, why use a Warhammer at all? As a place holder till the better Morning Star comes along?
I was looking into the Dwarven Defender, just because it's a Dwarf and the kit class is only for a Dwarf, so it is really specialized. Plus the class can use all kinds of weapons. Fighter/Cleric and Cleric/Ranger are limited to blunt weapons. Yeah, again, the game has plenty to choose from, but I like being able to use any weapon for any occasion, if at all possible.
Fighter/druids bad weapon selection is really hurts, you can use qstaves, scimitars and almost thats all for frontline. The shapeshift to elemental can be strong, but not optimal, because you cant cast spell while transformed. The stoneskin is makes druids good front liner at all, but ranger/cleric do better, because use better weapons. Two morning stars is so deadly.
If you really want druid, use it as a mage-like backup, in iwdee gaves very strong spells.
To replace kensai, why not use the ranged equivalent: archer? Has almost the same dmg and thaco ratio, high apr, but safe distance.
Nowdays i only use classes without kits like in the original iwd, i feel the game balances to that.
Dwarf fighter strong without kit, but not invincible like dwarven defender, paladin can be useful and strong etc.
I like 3 frontliners if plays insane mode without the added xp.
Dwarf fighter (+5 saves for high con)
human paladin (+gear and roleplaying, but a gnome fighter should be a very better alternate, it gain a fancy gnome-halfling only helmet)
half-elven ranger/cleric (if can edit the baldur.lua to gain all druidic and clerical spells so ironskins here we are - if you can not, use a dwarven fighter/cleric - +5 saves, very strong frontliner)
gnome illusionist/thief (it should be thief 6 dual mage or cleric)
human bard (for rp and i likes bards but not optimal only after the last song - you can use a cleric/mage, fighter/mage or whatever you want in this slot)
dwarf cleric(or human fighter dualled cleric, pure cleric for turn undead) or half elven druid if you feel you dont need cleric.
i also agree with Danacm on that i don't like using class kits ( except for specialist mages ) since they weren't in the original game and it helps balance the game out better, class kits are super strong and IWD EE is just not strong enough to handle them ( not even on insane difficulty to be honest, unless perhaps you are playing HoF mode at level 1 maybe? )
although i do understand the flavor of a dwarven defender, my suggestion, which is a silly one is to never use their dwarven stance ability, although it kind of defeats the purpose of being one, the other advantages they get are still incredibly good, with huge HP, DR, being able to wear heavy armor, and being able to master axes and hammers is just amazing in of itself
Some of the kits have way too many drawbacks for them to work in IWD: EE. Matter of fact, they would be a challenge in a 2nd Ed. table top game, especially since you can't min/max attribute points. When I played, you rolled a 4d6 (drop the lowest, reroll ones) six times, then choose which roll goes to which stat. Many times my highest roll was a 14 and I had more than one 7, 8, or a 9. Yeah, imagine that in IWD: EE. Even with core classes that wouldn't work.
For a serious play through, I would only be interested in a few of the kits. Another example would be the Totemic kit for the Druid. For a fool around play through, I would test each one to see if it was broken good or broken bad. For example the Dragon Disciple kit for the Sorcerer.
However, I never liked the Sorcerer from 3rd Ed. I would rather play a specialized Mage, usually either an Invoker or a Conjurer. I might, one day, try the Wild Mage kit for the Mage, but by then I think I would have a nice dose of IWD: EE fatigue. Either I will play IWD 2 or I give Baldur's Gate a shot.
Danacm: I read about Dwarven Battleragers back in the day, but never played one. Matter of fact, I don't think I even played a character in 2nd. Ed that could 'rage' or go 'berserk'. For the Fighter/Druid, I would put points in the Scimitar and Club category just for the spells and hope that I can find a decent +2 weapon. I am not sold on Dual Classing. It's not really the same as in a table top game. By the time you get what you need from both classes, the game is over. I would rather multi-class.
sarevok57: Yeah, needing a 15 in Charisma hurts a lot. Especially if you are not going to use the Druid or Figher/Druid as the party leader. To make a decent Fighter/Druid you would need 88+ points. Even then, you need to decide which stat you want to sacrifice.
With 88 points I would Str: 15, Dex: 16, Con: 16, Int: 10, Wis 16, Char: 15. I hate seeing stats lower than 10. But if I were to settle for an 8 in Int, I would put those 2 points in Dex to make it 18. Why 16 in Wis? By the end of the game I will not have access to the highest level spells, so it doesn't really matter to me. If I dropped the Int to 3, then I would bump Wis (Con if F/D) and Str to 18. Char 15 is still good enough, even if the character was the party leader.
so i believe my stats were; STR 15, DEX 18, CON 18, INT 4, WIS 18, CHA 15
i boosted up the WIS a bit only because fighter/druids still get their early spells pretty quick and that 18 WIS gives bonus spells up to level 4 which is nice ( plus i knew i would be giving the belt of 19 STR to this guy, so all the better )
but as you said in the late game it hardly matters what the druid's WIS is, unless of coarse they are a single class druid
Danacm: True. 16-18 was rare indeed. 11-15 was the average. But I was unlucky and rolled lots of stats under 11. That's why I don't mind doing the min/max stat thing. Still hate seeing stats lower than 10 though, even if there isn't a difference between a 3 and a 10 in a computer game. That's right. I forgot about the class limits for each race in 2nd. Ed. That was another good thing about being a Human, no class limit. Obviously makes sense since they can Dual Class. Class limits make sense for the other races, since most players would multi-class with them and it takes long to level up a multi-class character.