For the record, the true value of WCotS was its resistance bonus for your fighters. Very tough warriors made HoF much more doable. The healing in vanilla was mainly great because it meant you could freely heal completely between every little skirmish. This is one reason WCotS wasnt as good in IWD2, it only healed during combat, aka useless.
Well, if you plan to enable cheese, why not play in story mode?
I didn't enable cheese, that's just the way the game works. It's not like it makes it overpowered or anything, it just allows for a wider spell selection.
So I'm actually rethinking my party line up. Rather than the sole Ranger/Cleric, I might drop the Paladin and have a pure class Cleric and a Fighter/Druid. I just feel that my current lineup is a bit weak with Divine spells overall. That will give me 3 Arcane casters, 2 Divine and 1 character that's nothing but a tank.
No, it isn't "how the game works".
By default, ranger/clerics do not get druid spells until they qualify for them as a ranger in IWD.
There is a flag you have to enable in the game files if you want full access to the druid spell list.
Thus a multiclass ftr/cleric is better than a multiclass ranger/cleric for the simple reason that dwarves are better than half elves.
By default, ranger/clerics do not get druid spells until they qualify for them as a ranger in IWD.
Then after that they get full access just like they did in the BG games. So what's your point? Where is the cheese if they were designed that way?
No they don't. They get access to 1st level druid spells only when they hit ranger level 6, 2nd level at ranger level 10 (or there abouts), etc. You need ranger level 22 for Iron Skins.
The cheese is you can edit the ini file you give you BG access to druid spells.
No they don't. They get access to 1st level druid spells only when they hit ranger level 6, 2nd level at ranger level 10 (or there abouts), etc. You need ranger level 22 for Iron Skins.
The cheese is you can edit the ini file you give you BG access to druid spells.
I see, assumed they were just delayed until level 6. I did change the ini file at first, but I've since changed it back. And I'm now going for a Half-Elf Fighter/Druid and dual classing a Human Fighter to a Cleric at level 3. I figured I'd be too weak with Divine spells relying on just the one character. It should be interesting to have a Cleric who can Grandmaster on the Flail.
Well, if you plan to enable cheese, why not play in story mode?
I didn't enable cheese, that's just the way the game works. It's not like it makes it overpowered or anything, it just allows for a wider spell selection.
So I'm actually rethinking my party line up. Rather than the sole Ranger/Cleric, I might drop the Paladin and have a pure class Cleric and a Fighter/Druid. I just feel that my current lineup is a bit weak with Divine spells overall. That will give me 3 Arcane casters, 2 Divine and 1 character that's nothing but a tank.
No, it isn't "how the game works".
By default, ranger/clerics do not get druid spells until they qualify for them as a ranger in IWD.
Yes, that is how the game works - as your next sentence admits.
Thus a multiclass ftr/cleric is better than a multiclass ranger/cleric for the simple reason that dwarves are better than half elves.
While Dwarves are possibly better than HElves, that is a pretty weak argument for why a F/C would be superior to a R/C. The Fighter's biggest advantage over the Ranger is annulled when multiclassed, whereas all of the Ranger's abilities complement a Cleric nicely.
Well, if you plan to enable cheese, why not play in story mode?
I didn't enable cheese, that's just the way the game works. It's not like it makes it overpowered or anything, it just allows for a wider spell selection.
So I'm actually rethinking my party line up. Rather than the sole Ranger/Cleric, I might drop the Paladin and have a pure class Cleric and a Fighter/Druid. I just feel that my current lineup is a bit weak with Divine spells overall. That will give me 3 Arcane casters, 2 Divine and 1 character that's nothing but a tank.
No, it isn't "how the game works".
By default, ranger/clerics do not get druid spells until they qualify for them as a ranger in IWD.
Yes, that is how the game works - as your next sentence admits.
Thus a multiclass ftr/cleric is better than a multiclass ranger/cleric for the simple reason that dwarves are better than half elves.
While Dwarves are possibly better than HElves, that is a pretty weak argument for why a F/C would be superior to a R/C. The Fighter's biggest advantage over the Ranger is annulled when multiclassed, whereas all of the Ranger's abilities complement a Cleric nicely.
I have no doubt duel classed is stronger than both, but I don't see how "a Ranger's abilities complement a cleric nicely". Shorty saves, slightly faster levelling and an awesome beard easily beat free duel wield, pointy ears and the ability to cast Entangle and Sunscorch.
In BG2, the Ranger/Clerics had a bigger advantage because of the availability of Druid spells. In IWD1, I think the balance is in favour of a Fighter/Cleric, unless you change that setting in the ini file.
I have no doubt duel classed is stronger than both, but I don't see how "a Ranger's abilities complement a cleric nicely". Shorty saves, slightly faster levelling and an awesome beard easily beat free duel wield, pointy ears and the ability to cast Entangle and Sunscorch.
Race /= Class, but even then, HElves get much better gear in IWD than Dwarves...
Multiclass is significantly stronger in IWD.
The Fighter never pulls far enough ahead to make up the difference in proficiency pips, and the Ranger catches up eventually anyway. The Cleric benefits from the Ranger's Favourite EN, Tracking and Spells; the Cleric does not benefit from the Fighter's inability to access Mastery.
Never been a fan of song bards really. I hate not being able to select all characters at once and attack lest the bard stops singing, and having to sing again after everybody attacks. Far too time consuming to me.
Never been a fan of song bards really. I hate not being able to select all characters at once and attack lest the bard stops singing, and having to sing again after everybody attacks. Far too time consuming to me.
You're forgetting the Static Charge spell. True, you get it quite late at level 15, but the damage potential is huge. And, actually, unless you already have one, Gnome is better than Dwarf as a Figther/Cleric since (s)he can wear the Trusted Defender.
You're forgetting the Static Charge spell. True, you get it quite late at level 15, but the damage potential is huge. And, actually, unless you already have one, Gnome is better than Dwarf as a Figther/Cleric since (s)he can wear the Trusted Defender.
Even with less HP and a lower WIS, I totally agree.
Any reason not to run a Skald and Vanilla? They'd probably cover arcane fine (I never head access to high enough level scrolls it seemed, or if I did, I had really crummy spells), can they perform a duet? You could still bring a F/C and F/D, maybe a half-orc Kensai for massive damage, some manner of thief too maybe. WCotS is sweet, but lacks the offensive buff of the Skald song! Obviously make very, very liberal use of summons.
That would kind of be overkill IMO. Then you'd have two characters that aren't really engaging in combat but just standing back and singing, instead of just the one. That would probably greatly reduce the effectiveness of your party.
That would kind of be overkill IMO. Then you'd have two characters that aren't really engaging in combat but just standing back and singing, instead of just the one. That would probably greatly reduce the effectiveness of your party.
It might be overkill, but I can also see it being extremely effective, especially if you like using summons (to maximize the effectiveness of the Skald songs).
F/D F/T F/C Dwarf Defender or Paladin or Sorcerer or Archer or whatever. Skald Bard
Since bard songs stack, you can have 5 bards/skalds and one indestructable powerhouse. Could be a good option for players who prefer to control a single character. However, there is a rule that any such character is known as Sir Robin.
That would kind of be overkill IMO. Then you'd have two characters that aren't really engaging in combat but just standing back and singing, instead of just the one. That would probably greatly reduce the effectiveness of your party.
You can help your party by making everyone hit harder and be more durable. Your summons get buffed too!
Comments
By default, ranger/clerics do not get druid spells until they qualify for them as a ranger in IWD.
There is a flag you have to enable in the game files if you want full access to the druid spell list.
Thus a multiclass ftr/cleric is better than a multiclass ranger/cleric for the simple reason that dwarves are better than half elves.
The cheese is you can edit the ini file you give you BG access to druid spells.
Multiclass is significantly stronger in IWD.
The Fighter never pulls far enough ahead to make up the difference in proficiency pips, and the Ranger catches up eventually anyway. The Cleric benefits from the Ranger's Favourite EN, Tracking and Spells; the Cleric does not benefit from the Fighter's inability to access Mastery.
I hate not being able to select all characters at once and attack lest the bard stops singing, and having to sing again after everybody attacks. Far too time consuming to me.
And, actually, unless you already have one, Gnome is better than Dwarf as a Figther/Cleric since (s)he can wear the Trusted Defender.
Trusted Defender is a great item.
F/D
F/T
F/C
Dwarf Defender or Paladin or Sorcerer or Archer or whatever.
Skald
Bard
Damn!
And at what point in the game would you eat the minstrels?
(And there was much rejoicing)