Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Categories

Neverwinter Nights: Enhanced Edition has been announced! Visit nwn.beamdog.com to pre-order, apply for the Head Start and check for details. NWN:EE FAQ is available.
Soundtracks for BG:EE, SoD, BG2:EE, IWD:EE, PST:EE are now available in the Beamdog store.
Attention, new and old users! Please read the new rules of conduct for the forums, and we hope you enjoy your stay!

Fighter/Druid vs. Druid?

I normally play druids as my main character. I hear Fighter/Druids as very good in IWD, how much worse are just Druids? Also to be good, do Fighter/Druids just use weapons, or do they shapeshift?

Kenji

Comments

  • ElendarElendar Member Posts: 822
    I personally prefer Fighter/Druids. That way they make good upfront fighters. Plain druids cannot wear metal armor and don't have a fighter's THACO. I typically don't bother with shapeshifting much with them. If you're wanting more of a caster druid than a front line druid, then I would go with the single class.

    Permidion_StarkThacoBellsemiticgod
  • WesboiWesboi Member Posts: 403
    If your plan on using the druid for further games go fighter/druid due to how the level cap works. If just one play through go avenger druid.

  • Permidion_StarkPermidion_Stark Member Posts: 3,192
    I prefer a Fighter/Druid for IWD because the game is so combat-heavy I find the extra hit points and better AC useful. There are times when enemies seem to come at you from every direction so it can be hard to keep characters with low hit points and a high armour class alive.

    You can still shapeshift as a Fighter/Druid but it's not something I tend to do. I generally used them as a second rank fighter who can also cast (pretty much the same way I use a Cleric).

    inethdok0zhivago
  • RedrakeRedrake Member Posts: 423
    Fighter/Druid is one of the most useful classes in IWD1. Single class Druid might gets you access to some nice spells faster, but overall, in combat is rather useless.

    However, is best to approach it as a multi-class. Dual-class is in fact better as a character, but the requirements for Dual-classing are insane. You need to have at least 17 in Str, Wis and Cha. Let alone the fact that not having either at least 15 in either Dex or Con is going to make your fighter would be druid a wimp. One should not attempt it unless you are prepare to actively search for lots of re-rolls.

    RAM021
  • chimaerachimaera Member Posts: 482
    edited October 2017
    I wouldn't call a single-classed druid useless in combat in IWD; they get access to shapes earlier, and two shapes (boring beetle and water elemental) make very good decoys due to their physical resistances. Even better if you stack static charges or call lightning on them beforehand. >:) Though I agree a f/d is better.

    semiticgodKenji
  • RedrakeRedrake Member Posts: 423
    Call lightning is unfortunately mostly useless in IWD1. Basically 90% of the game takes place in-doors and the places where there are out-doors are quite easy to get by. The only possible exception might be Burial Island and maybe Gloomfrost.

    PokotaKenjiProont
  • ThrasymachusThrasymachus Member Posts: 586
    Redrake said:

    Fighter/Druid is one of the most useful classes in IWD1. Single class Druid might gets you access to some nice spells faster, but overall, in combat is rather useless.

    However, is best to approach it as a multi-class. Dual-class is in fact better as a character, but the requirements for Dual-classing are insane. You need to have at least 17 in Str, Wis and Cha. Let alone the fact that not having either at least 15 in either Dex or Con is going to make your fighter would be druid a wimp. One should not attempt it unless you are prepare to actively search for lots of re-rolls.

    You "only" need a 15 Str to dual class out of a fighter. :)

    RAM021
  • WarChiefZekeWarChiefZeke Member Posts: 782
    I typically run a Dual Classed Fighter/Druid as my main Character, but in IWD the optimal use of a druid is single classed in my opinion. You get lots of damaging spells as a Druid and it's nice to get access to them, as well as the summons, as quick as possible. Clerics, on the other hand, are seemingly always best with fighter levels because the attacks per round enhance greatly their abilities.

  • RedrakeRedrake Member Posts: 423

    I typically run a Dual Classed Fighter/Druid as my main Character, but in IWD the optimal use of a druid is single classed in my opinion. You get lots of damaging spells as a Druid and it's nice to get access to them, as well as the summons, as quick as possible. Clerics, on the other hand, are seemingly always best with fighter levels because the attacks per round enhance greatly their abilities.

    True, except that when they run out of spells they are weak as kitten in melee. Without fighter levels they are unable to use armor higher than studded leather and they cannot use shields (except bucklers and those are horrible).

    inethStummvonBordwehr
  • RAM021RAM021 Member Posts: 366
    Ranger/Cleric > Fighter/Druid > Druid

  • Armanz92Armanz92 Member Posts: 52
    Actually, Fighter/Druid beats Ranger/Cleric because of Iron Skins. That's the sole reason why Fighter/Cleric is the only class that can fight the Dwarven Defender for it's position as the single best tank in the game.

  • ThacoBellThacoBell Member Posts: 4,393
    edited December 2017
    Ranger/Cleric gets every druid spell in addition to the cleric spellbook. Mechanically, ranger/cleric is superior in every way. The "nerf" doesn't count, beamdog intentionally left that easily reversible.

    *edit* @Armanz92

    Post edited by ThacoBell on
    RAM021
  • Armanz92Armanz92 Member Posts: 52
    edited December 2017
    Ranger/Cleric gets the first four levels of Druid spells only, which means no Iron Skins. It's still an insanely good class because of the way it can buff itself up but imho the sheer power of a Fighter/Druid with Iron Skins beats that (obviously only after the character reaches that point).

    On second thought, I just realized that Ranger/Cleric gets Enthropy Shield, which, while coming on a level after Iron Skins for Druid classes kind of remedies everything I've talked about right now. I will play myself out, shamefully.

    Edit: Aaaand even that was wrong. My lack of playing the add-ons shows my missing knowledge of higher levels. My bad on this, wasn't aware of the fact they get access to the higher level spells.

    Skatan
  • RAM021RAM021 Member Posts: 366
    Armanz92 said:

    Actually, Fighter/Druid beats Ranger/Cleric because of Iron Skins. That's the sole reason why Fighter/Cleric is the only class that can fight the Dwarven Defender for it's position as the single best tank in the game.

    Armanz92 said:

    Ranger/Cleric gets the first four levels of Druid spells only, which means no Iron Skins. It's still an insanely good class because of the way it can buff itself up but imho the sheer power of a Fighter/Druid with Iron Skins beats that (obviously only after the character reaches that point).

    IWD R/C does in fact get Iron Skins.

  • ArctodusArctodus Member Posts: 880
    ThacoBell said:

    Ranger/Cleric gets every druid spell in addition to the cleric spellbook. Mechanically, ranger/cleric is superior in every way. The "nerf" doesn't count, beamdog intentionally left that easily reversible.

    *edit* @Armanz92

    It might not "count", but the nerf makes a whole lot of sense : rangers can't cast beyond level 3 druid spells. Why would they when they're multiclassed to clerics ?

    StummvonBordwehrsemiticgod
  • RaduzielRaduziel Member Posts: 1,839
    @Arctodus

    The whole "can't cast beyond level 3 druid spells" is because Rangers get minor access to the Plant and Animal spheres.

    But every deity that accepts Ranger/Cleric in their priesthood gives major access to those same spheres.

    Every Cleric needs a Deity, so it is easy to assume that a Ranger/Cleric would be under the blessing of one deity related to his/her duties - by doing so it gains major access to the early mentioned spheres.

    That's the logic behind the R/C Spellbook in BG.

    ThacoBellRAM021semiticgodProont
  • ArctodusArctodus Member Posts: 880
    edited January 16
    The only problem with what you're saying is that, even in a sphere system, which is not how divine spells are implemented in the BG games, the ranger/cleric wouldn't have access to every cleric and druid spells that are possible to cast : he would, as any other type of clerics, be restricted to certain spheres, thus could not cast all spells. However, I agree that access to high level spells in their respective spheres makes sense for a r/c. Still, the way they were originally implemented, r/c were actually cheating by having access to every goddamn divine spells, which is the conceptual problem, in my opinion. Before the fix, they were basically fast levelling (compared to other triple class) fighter/cleric/druid wrapped into one, without any sort of a drawback.

    tbone1RaduzielStummvonBordwehr
  • RAM021RAM021 Member Posts: 366
    Arctodus said:

    Still, the way they were originally implemented, r/c were actually cheating by having access to every goddamn divine spells, which is the conceptual problem, in my opinion. Before the fix, they were basically fast levelling (compared to other triple class) fighter/cleric/druid wrapped into one, without any sort of a drawback.

    Cheating does not mean what you seem to think it means and R/C do have drawbacks.

    Regardless, it is irrelevant since in ICEWIND DALE Rangers (& Paladins) get high level spell access already.

Sign In or Register to comment.