Cleric\ranger is a powergaming class. There are many powergamers in here. So if you cut this build or class they will not be happy --> don't buy the game.
And if you don't like this build - just go with another class.
In response to reading this question, I went into New Game. I didn't even have to complete the Create a Character process to see that "Entangle" was a possible spell for memorisation.
In fact, it took me longer to write these two mini-paragraphs than it did to find out that Ranger/Clerics do still have the full array of divine spells.
I don't believe Ranger/Clerics should have full access to Druid spells, but I also think Fighter/Clerics and even straight up Mages are more powerful. Paladins might even be more powerful with their Paladin only weapons and kits in BG2. I believe Mages will destroy anything at high levels at that is how it should be. It appears redoing Ranger/Clerics the right way will be to much work. I don't think it's any more powerful than a number of other combinations available in the game. The Fighter/Druid is still quite powerful though I never felt I needed Druid spells anyway. One Druid or Cleric is enough in most cases. Dual or multi classed with fighter is preferred.
Don't suggest nerfs. It just brings on even more nerfs. You don't like Ranger/Cleric. If it got nerfed, some assclown would come in the next week with a new class to be gutted.
Don't know about you, but I would rather be having fun(even if a bit overpowered) keeping things the way they are, than to be playing a bunch of crappy classes. People should understand that for THIS game, having items/classes that break the game are completely acceptable and usually fun. Aren't we supposed to be children of a god?
I think this forum should have a system where all cases of the word "nerf" are replaced with "boost"
I think the Cleric/Ranger combination was something put in by a developer for personal reasons. I put one together today just to play around. For one, it's Half-Elf only, why would the team waste time on a class combination for one race, unless it was a personal thing? 2, There are plenty of other weird combo's like multi-class Bards and such that doesn't make it, why just Cleric/Ranger for the weird combos. 3. I definitely don't like that this class progress the Ranger half as if it were a Druid, spell wise. The Ranger half should not get spells until level 8 and then be only those which the Cleric half does not normally get. The only priest spells they should get is on the Cleric level up.
I think the Cleric/Ranger combination was something put in by a developer for personal reasons. I put one together today just to play around. For one, it's Half-Elf only, why would the team waste time on a class combination for one race, unless it was a personal thing? 2, There are plenty of other weird combo's like multi-class Bards and such that doesn't make it, why just Cleric/Ranger for the weird combos.
What?
I mean, you don't have to like cleric/rangers, but that was not sound reasoning right there.
Actually, Cleric/Ranger was a valid multiclass even back in games like the original Eye of the Beholder, Curse of the Azure Bonds and other Gold Box games. It's practically grandfathered in.
I am playing one again right now, as it was my first class to complete the BG saga...I would be fine if the spells / spell slots were changed around to mimic PNP...but I have to be honest, on insane in BG1 the first 3 chapters I usually spend all my spell slots on Cure Light Wounds.
Ranger/Cleric is a fun combo, and in my experience, not particularly more powerful than any other melee/caster hybrid build. Ranger/Cleric is not effectively a triple class, because they get no additional spell slots, they only get the option to memorize a selection of Druid spells in place of their Cleric spells. Personally, I find no problem here--it's a fun class that doesn't break anything, so why change it? It's not so much a bug as an unintentional feature!
Please don't change them. If you find them over powered just play a fighter/Druid or fighter cleric instead. Let the folks that enjoy the full divine spell access have their fun like they have for well over a decade. They still have to select spells after all. Filling a spell slot with a Druid spell is still sacrificing a slot that could have been a priest spell.
Why do people even care that much seems irrational to me. Ranger/clerics spell chart isnt breaking some cosmic law. It's an oversight that turned out fun. Much of science progresses through serendipitous discoveries. Let us keep our penicillin!
@Tanthalas Ranger/Druid was officially errata'd for Neutral Good to be an acceptable alignment (and requires a good nature diety with both ranger/druid followers, i.e. Mieliki in FR). It's only available as a multiclass (half-elf) however, since it requires being raised in both traditions from birth basically.
Because they aren't supposed to have them. Simply put. And it turns out it's easier to fix then I thought. You just delete the Ranger's spellbook line (it has the same spellbook listing as a druid), then edit the ranger and it's sub-kits level bonuses to manually grant all the appropriate spells at the appropriate levels.
You could probably take it a step further and skip adding the other spells (but that would allow low lvl dual-classes to still access 1-3 druid spells without being high enough level to cast them...the first solution fixes that problem entirely) and just make a whole new spelllist for them, but I'm not sure how to do that.
And it's especially broken since a dual-class only needs 2 levels of ranger to get full druid spell casting.
I might be ok with it, if they impose the proper restrictions for a nature oriented mythos priest, since the cleric would lose access to several spell sphere's in exchange for the druid spells.
There are really only two spells people object R/C's having access to: Iron Skins and Conjure Fire Elemental (otherwise known as "the reasons druids exist"). Thus, while DR will redo the sphere system to fix R/C's, if you pick a deity with the elemental sphere for your Cleric, you end up with the same spells anyway... and, of course, everyone picks elemental sphere deities.
Assuming you don't use any of the druid spells, sure, since a ranger can't hit 8 when MC'd which is when they SHOULD get access to 1st level druid spells.
A 161k experience Ranger/Cleric with equipment and stats obtainable in game can easily solo Serevok with zero cheese.
To be fair, the same can be said for a Fighter, a Fighter/Cleric, a Fighter/Mage/Thief, a Mage/Thief, a Fighter/Druid, a Fighter/Mage, a Ranger, a Cleric, a pure class Mage and quite probably any variety o Thief.
A 161k experience Ranger/Cleric with equipment and stats obtainable in game can easily solo Serevok with zero cheese.
To be fair, the same can be said for a Fighter, a Fighter/Cleric, a Fighter/Mage/Thief, a Mage/Thief, a Fighter/Druid, a Fighter/Mage, a Ranger, a Cleric, a pure class Mage and quite probably any variety o Thief.
I can attest that ANY class can solo Sarevok without cheese or exploits...easier for some then others, but very much do-able. Hell a R/C is basically a F/C with free dual-wielding...you don't even NEED the druid spells at any time, any level, for any reason since the cleric spells alone are already brokenly powerful...and who needs iron skins when you're effectively immune to physical damage period.
And I don't even consider it overpowered (as the above, the druid spells are simply inferior in every way to what a cleric can do)...it's merely something they should not have, and only do so due to an oversight that the developers were too lazy to correct (IWD was done by a different team at BI, who did decide to correct it in their game, but on the other hand went overboard on bards for whatever reason...I mean yeah, they got the shaft big time in BG, so some compensation might be in order...but...uh..they took a lot of liberties with those buffs), since it's no big deal...the cleric spells are simply better, who'd waste slots on those worthless druid spells anyway?
Comments
And if you don't like this build - just go with another class.
In fact, it took me longer to write these two mini-paragraphs than it did to find out that Ranger/Clerics do still have the full array of divine spells.
Don't know about you, but I would rather be having fun(even if a bit overpowered) keeping things the way they are, than to be playing a bunch of crappy classes. People should understand that for THIS game, having items/classes that break the game are completely acceptable and usually fun. Aren't we supposed to be children of a god?
I think this forum should have a system where all cases of the word "nerf" are replaced with "boost"
I mean, you don't have to like cleric/rangers, but that was not sound reasoning right there.
Actually, Cleric/Ranger was a valid multiclass even back in games like the original Eye of the Beholder, Curse of the Azure Bonds and other Gold Box games. It's practically grandfathered in.
They could have separate pages in the spell books for Ranger/Druid and Paladin/Cleric spells.
Or combine the spells per level properly in the 2DA file.
Otherwise, for the XP cost of a double-class, you get the abilities of a Ranger/Cleric/Druid triple class.
And what happens if a human dual-classes from Cleric to Ranger? Or vice versa?
~
Win!
Actually Trent Oster said, that they can't change the vanilla content. C\R - is a part of the vanilla content and not a bug.
op! op! op!
I like! I like! I like!
Because they aren't supposed to have them. Simply put. And it turns out it's easier to fix then I thought. You just delete the Ranger's spellbook line (it has the same spellbook listing as a druid), then edit the ranger and it's sub-kits level bonuses to manually grant all the appropriate spells at the appropriate levels.
You could probably take it a step further and skip adding the other spells (but that would allow low lvl dual-classes to still access 1-3 druid spells without being high enough level to cast them...the first solution fixes that problem entirely) and just make a whole new spelllist for them, but I'm not sure how to do that.
And it's especially broken since a dual-class only needs 2 levels of ranger to get full druid spell casting.
I might be ok with it, if they impose the proper restrictions for a nature oriented mythos priest, since the cleric would lose access to several spell sphere's in exchange for the druid spells.
Potions are just plain awesome when layered.
And I don't even consider it overpowered (as the above, the druid spells are simply inferior in every way to what a cleric can do)...it's merely something they should not have, and only do so due to an oversight that the developers were too lazy to correct (IWD was done by a different team at BI, who did decide to correct it in their game, but on the other hand went overboard on bards for whatever reason...I mean yeah, they got the shaft big time in BG, so some compensation might be in order...but...uh..they took a lot of liberties with those buffs), since it's no big deal...the cleric spells are simply better, who'd waste slots on those worthless druid spells anyway?