Pure Melee Sorc Build

Remove all ads!

I was wondering: what about a purely melee based Sorcerer build? Basically, the sorcerer would focus on buffing spells and use these to buff themselves and the party. Sorcerers are pretty incredible buffers, they can stoneskin the entire party and make it much more powerful in combat.

BTW, I'm playing the game with Icewind Gate 2 and Light of Selune.

I'm thinking Drow Sorc(20)/Paladin(1)/Ranger(1)/Warrior(4), starting with maxed out CHA, DEX, STR and CON. Any suggestions for the remaining four levels? The character will put points gained from level up into strength for extra melee damage, and will focus on melee feats such as power attack as opposed to spell feats.

Also, what is the best weapon to specialize in? Axes are awesome, as there are ridiculously good ones in the game, plus criticals do x3 damage. They're also flexible - can be dual wielded, used with shields, two handed and even thrown! But then again, the HOF greatsword holy avenger with 2d8+10 damage and magic resistance also sounds like an excellent choice. Longswords, polearms etc also seem like viable options.

Any ideas, comments and suggestions?

 

The 4 fighter levels are unnecessary; they cause an XP penalty because of the other mix-ins. It's been discussed on this forum before; the +2dmg isn't worth getting 4 fighter levels early for. But if you didn't have the other mix-ins, then 4 fighter levels might be advantageous after level 20...
As for buff spells, you could concentrate on things that otherwise have lower priority if the sorceror were a party caster. Things like Fireshield, Tenser's Transformation, Seven Eyes and Aegis. Perhaps Iron Body and Antimagic Shell might actually be useful for you: normally the 10rounds/level of casting failure make those spells bad.
if you focus on buffing your sorceror, then it will play more like a battlecleric. Most essential are good starting stats; constitution and strength. Actually, if you focus strongly on buffs, then it isn't strictly necessary to have high charisma, just maximizing it at the start will suffice. Then you can improve strength to get more out of a 2 handed weapon. A real warlock.

 

Coin is right regarding Fighter levels, they're not worth it with the other levels you take.

Sorcerer is cool but in that case Wizard may be better to avoid XP penalty (of course Sorcerer and Paladin work well together so it's your call to decide whether or not the XP penalty is acceptable).

If you indeed go for a two handed weapon then don't take the Ranger level (useless in that case). If you really want to take an extra level, a Monk level may be nice for extra saves and Evasion (very useful when dealing with area of effect spells).

 

I've thought about wizard, as a wizard with a couple of levels of rogue could also perform a lot of the thieving functions, and would get very useful extra feats, but in the end I decided against it, as I've tried wizards before, but in actual combat, they do not come close to sorcerers.

Sorcerers benefit a LOT in melee combat by being able to cast any spell they want whenever they want. As soon as your mirror images or stoneskins are about to come down, you can fire another one up almost ASAP. Not only that, but you can buff your entire party with stoneskins on the fly if the situation calls for it. The gameplay advantages of sorcerers is tremendous

 

For this kind of purpose, the sorcerer really is a better choice. While a wizard would probably fill each level with only one or two spells anyway, the sorcerer will still get more spells to cast. Add to that the bonuses from high CHA and a level of pally, and the wizard just doesn't compete for this purpose. I'd forget about a shield, as that'll incur a casting penalty, so the question is if you want a two-hander or two weapons. Like Caradhras said, a two-hander makes the ranger level useless, so decide which you're going for before you take the ranger level.

Honestly, I'd probably drop the ranger level, take a two-handed weapon, and invest more levels in fighter (for feats and BAB). If you think you don't need any more feats, you may want to invest some in Armored Arcana so that you can use some armor without a casting penalty. It's been a while since I've played, but I seem to remember there are a few armors that have low casting penalties (5-10%) and some nice bonuses. You can probably match or beat the AC with armor spells, but some resistances, immunities, etc. may be nice.

 

I actually used a Human Paladin(1)/Sorcerer(x) as my MAIN tank in one of my playthroughs. Other than their lowish HP and poor BAB advancement, mages make rather fine tanks, much thanks to their Mirror Image and much better AC potential.

Using Shield, Mirror Image, Ghost Armor, Stoneskin and Tenser's Transformation as the main spells ensures that your low HP count is more than well compensated against a traditional tank. And before you bring in the subject of less attacks per round, remember that such a "tank" gets access to Fireball and Sunfire right about the same time as the traditional tank gets extra attacks.

 

Is this sorc supposed to support melee or *engage* in melee? At first I thought you were suggesting a solo sorc build.

The Holy Avenger is okay, damage-wise. The SR bonus is great if you're into that sort of thing (I found that SR became much less important to me once I quit using spells like DBFB in HoF). The melee weapons I like best are Golden Heart of Edmund Blackadder (et al.) for the hassle-free defensive bonuses, and Coward's Flight for the nigh-irresistable fear/slow effects. I think if I had to solo a melee character I'd probably switch constantly between Coward's Flight and Big Death--but you said melee-only so that rules out Big Death.

-Max

 

I've used a Rogue/Sorcerer combination before who focused on self-buffs and make quite an effective front-line fighter.

 

It depends on what you intend to do. You forgot to mention a Sorcerer's biggest advantage in IWD2, i.e. the possibility to cast a spell without having to learn it from a scroll. It saves a lot of cash and means you don't have to worry about getting ahead as a spellcaster (especially if you solo or use smaller parties). Moreover like I've said above Sorcerer works well with Paladin because they both benefit from a good CHA score.

What's annoying about the Sorcerer option is the XP penalty. With an ECL race it's a bit of a drawback (unless you're into level squatting and stuff).

A Wild Elf would make for an easier time instead of a Drow especially if you intend to take a few extra levels in other classes.

But then you may argue that the SR alone is worth losing 20% of your XP. It all depends on your playstyle really.

 

Neither. He's supposed to main tank.