Interesting Party

Remove all ads!

I started a party like this:

Human Battleguard of Tempus
Human Stormlord of Talos
Human Sorceress
Tiefling Rogue
Moon Elf Transmuter
Tiefling Wizard

I figured the party would be decimated the first time they met a golem, but they thrived. The mace is a very effective weapon against golems, and Spiritual Weapon tears them apart. Before major battles I cast Emotion: Hope, Strength of One, Defensive Harmony, Stoneskin on all characters, Improved Invisibility on all characters. The party tears apart all golems easily, and Sherincal (possibly a thorn in some player's sides) fell in an instant.

In-battle, the clerics will focus on taking down enemies at melee. The stoneskin provides defense against most attacks, and if ranged attacks are expected, casting protection from missles works really well. The sorceress usually spends equal time casting chromatic orb (against spell-casters), magic missile (against anyone), and fireball (against grouped units). The rogue can flank and sneak attack at will considering the improved invisibility, and the wizards each concentrate on either firing weapons from range, attacking with magical or mundane weapons of choice, or casting chromatic orb, magic missile, flame arrow, or other such spells. The constant bombardment of spellcasters with up to 15 magic missles a round not to mention 3 chromatic orbs per round causes most spellcasters to fall insantly. Those remaining are either sneak attacked, or struck by the clerics. Most enemy spells fail instantly and the enemy falls very quickly.

There is no real downside to the party. Low strength for the clerics isn't a problem because they are given strength of one and have stoneskin with a 10/+5 enchantment. The only problems arise with golems rushing the party unexpectedly. Especially within the ice fortress. Other than that, the party is well rounded, and able to confront any task.

Although there are no fighter classes, the clerics have one very nice feature: high wisdom. The high wisdom gives them a nice buff against enchantment spells. Most enchantment spells fail outright and very rarely do they affect both clerics at once, allowing them to easily return the other to active duty. Also, the clerics are of good and evil alignments respectively (not really likely in tabletop, but apparently acceptable in Icewind Dale II) this allows for Turn Undead to either destroy all undead in range or turn them to my side insantly. Very effective in either case.

Anyway, that's my party. I think I'll try playing through the game with 1 character each from the party and see if I can get anywhere. I believe the clerics and wizards would do well, but I doubt the rogue could get past iron golems or the six white dragons you fight early after the Fell Wood.

 

I agree, it is an interisting party.
have you completed the game with it?

 

As of yet, I haven't beaten the game with the party. I plan to, though. I'm not yet at the "guardian" just outside the Yaun-ti Temple, so we'll see if I can defeat him.

 

that shall be an interisting battle.

 

My favorite character i've Seen is still that Drowish Priest of Lathander..
'
*chuckles at the Implications..*

 

but.... thats not right
LoL

 

It's a good party except for one thing!
You have two wizards and as they reach mid levels you'll be seriously lacking in new spells. There are very few scrolls in the game.

Two sorcerers and one wizard would be much better than one sorcerer and two wizards.

 

Earl Grey

I started thinking about it initially, and that's essentially why I chose two specialty wizards rather than two generic wizards. My wizards are a Transmuter (opposing schools necromancy and abjuration) and Necromancer (opposing schools illusion and enchantment) That means that at least 2 schools of magic will be given to both wizards at a minimum, and both can cast all evocation spells. I've noticed that evocation and conjuration spells (two schools that both wizards can cast) are numerous in the game and generally include more than one scroll of each type. Also, the specialty classes allows for 1 extra spell/level. Essentially, any wizard can cast as many spells as a sorcerer per level, but they have more of a range of abilities with those spells. Regardless, the spells I continuously cast by a sorcerer tend towards spells that are readily available (not to mention often included in shops) these include Stoneskin (not castable by my transmuter because of the abjuration opposition), Fireball and flame arrow (castable and easily found for both casters) and magic missile and chromatic orb. Other spells, such as Improved Invisibility are really only needed for my front-line cleric fighters, and that means only 2 per battle. I've essentially realized what is awaiting the characters and have made selections based upon that. Also, there are certain spells that NEED to be cast by a wizard but are rather useless for a sorcerer to spend their limited points on (Black Blade of Disruption, Aegis, Phantom Blade, etc) mainly because those spells tend to last through 1 medium-length fight, so continuously casting them is not necessary. The game almost REQUIRES that you sleep after every battle.

Regardless, my sorc tends towards casting only evocation spells. Very rarely conjuration and illusion spells. Really the only multi-casting non damage inducing spells I cast with the sorc are Stoneskin, Mirror Image, and various invisibility spells. Also, it's worthless for a sorcerer to cast Circle of Invisibility (something my Transmuter OFTEN casts before battles) because that wastes a spell slot that could be spent on a much more effective spell.

Anyway, there is no "best party" I just chose this one because it would be the most adaptable to all circumstances, and wizard scrolls are set up to allow for 2 spell casters. As of yet, both Wizards have quite a few spells from each level of magic they can cast.

DG

 

Kabuki man: Are you crazy?!?!?! Drow priest of Lathander?!?!?! All Drows are evil and hate sun and light generally(with the exception of Drizzt of course).

Earl Grey: Have you ever played with two wizards? They're very helpful in battle. As for the scrolls, I never had any problem. If I couldn't find something, I bought it from a store.

[ May 07, 2003, 15:57: Message edited by: Alexander the Great ]

 

Two things I hate: Scribing Scrolls and absurdly non-playable character classes.

Scribing scrolls (at least in Icewind Dale II, assuming you have a wizard) is almost a necessity if you want to have an enjoyable (and playable) gaming experience. That's a problem. A good DM will adjust the gaming experience if you aren't able to scribe a scroll which is necessary for certain areas. Take a fireball spell for instance. Perhaps the DM realizes that you would need a fireball spell to kill the 45 kobold archers that are coming around the next corner. But, if your wizard didn't know fireball because you failed to scribe the spell, he would likely make the number of kobolds less daunting. However, in IWDII, you need the various spells to continue through the game. That poses a problem. You have three options as I see it: either take the chance that the scribe attempt will fail (which can happen almost at random regardless of caster level, spellcraft, spell level, etc.), reload a savegame before you attempted to scribe (what's even the point of pretending it's realistic?) or lower the difficulty to allow for automatically learning spells. Well, all three of those aren't acceptable in a game that requires a wizard to have a large number of spells learned. Regardless, that's just one gripe.

The only other gripe I have is about two character classes (in D&D as a whole). I don't like Paladins. The reason I don't is that their zealous nature lends them towards acting against "evil" or whatever they might deem as evil in a way that seems more like a chaotic evil monster bashing through everything in his path, rather than a knight in shining armor. Besides, if the game really wanted to be true about Paladins as Knights, they would make most if not all of them very loyal to their king, but rapers of those in the countryside and keeping an iron boot on the people in their lands. Dark Age and Medieval Knights were horrible men put in power over an area. Most were more apt to lounge around in a large keep overlooking their lands than ride around slaying dragons and the like. Fallen Paladins are more like Knights than Paladins. The second character class I don't like is The Druid. Don't get me wrong, Druids are very powerful, especially at high levels. What I don't like is that they are essentially a non-adventuring class. There is no reason for a Druid to be traipsing around Baldur's Gate or any other "civilized" city. Even if a group of loggers were resting up in Baldur's Gate before returning to rape the forest I doubt a druid would be inclined to enter the city. Druids would really only exist in a very specific adventuring situation, dare I say almost supernatural to the point that their deity or nature herself ordered them to do something. Other than that I like the D&D classes. Still, I am at a loss as to why a Ranger would have two-weapon fighting ... I mean, the most well-known ranger (some might argue that it is Drizz't) is actually Aragorn from The Lord of the Rings (considering J.R.R. Tolkien laid the groundwork for D&D, it's acceptable) and his skills involved herbal remedies, fighting with a single, powerful (albeit broken) longsword, and bow, oh, and wandering through a forest of undead and leading them on an attack against the military might of Mordor herself ... That's a ranger. Drizz't is a special case and that's mainly because he's gone back and forth in the mythology as perhaps being a ranger, and perhaps being a fighter. Regardless Drizz't is a very special case considering he is a Drow but still wanders around on land during the day. Gotta love it.

When I see a group of Duerger Fighters storm the Purple Dragons of Cormyr, then I'll respect the races of the underdark wandering across the lands. Oh ... and believe me, I want that to happen ... The Purple Dragons are a blight upon the land.

Lord Garrett

Chaotic Neutral Low-Wisdom Gnomish Illusionists of Gond forever!

 

To Lord Garrett:

1. Druid could be an adventurer. Just to find another amazing parts of nature. But he could travel with others. To maintain his security and also to protect them. Think about Ents (I would say they are druids). They do not like to travel. They have their forest. But imagine a Entwife in foreign countries. I think an Ent would run through all towns, rocky countries only to find this Ent wife. And if he realizes that somebody is damaging his forest ... he will march into war ... into the waste land full of machines ... his diminishing in this war would be no problem for him ...

2. Think of a ranger by name Legolas. He has a bow. And on his back there are two small swords or long knives. If he is forced to melee he uses them - he dualwields.

3. Aragorn. Ranger ? Yes. (He can heal - he is not cleric ... by my opinion). But he IS NOT pure Ranger. PALADIN I think. When he is dressed in his cloak he is a ranger. In a bright armor he is a king - the best basic class would be Paladin. Maybe some levels of bard - he likes to sing, he has diplomacy skills (Paladin is also good in diplomacy of course). And maybe a level or two as a fighter. And one level of rouge - use magic device (palantír). I would say Ranger 8 / Paladin 11 / Bard 5 / Rouge 1 is his base ... I know he would have a huge EXP penalty ... but he is a partially Elf/Maia - he lives very long, thus it is no problem for him

His "family tree" excerpt (ignore dots - their are just for positioning):


..............Olwë.......Elwë.=.Melian.the.Maia
................|.................|
................v.................v
Finarfin.=.Eärwen.........Lúthien.=.Beren
...........|...............................|
---------...............................|
...........v...............................v
.......Galadriel.=.Celeborn.........Dior.=.Nimloth
...................|............................|
...................|............................v
...................|............Eärendil.=.Elwing
...................|.......................|
...................|..............-----------
...................v..............v............v
................Celebrian.=.Elrond......Elros
.............................|..................(Kings.of.Númenor)
.............................|..................(Lords.of.Andúnië)
.............................|..................(King.of.Arnor)
.............................|..................(Chieftains.of.the Dúnedain)
.............................|...........................|
.............................|...........................|
.....................------------------...........|
.....................v........v............v...........v
...................Elladan..Elrohir.....Arwen.=.Aragorn

[ May 07, 2003, 23:41: Message edited by: Quicho ]

 

Thanks for not sticking up for the Paladin Class, Quicho. I'm fairly certain no one really likes them. For the druids, I would say that in some circumstances, they would definitely go out and fight. (I would say that anything involving the War of the Ring and the fellowship would be considered absolutely essential. Also, the forest itself cried out to the Ents from being destroyed by the Orcs in Isengard, leading to the attack on the fortress. In addition, it took an Entmoot which could have taken months or years but only took a few days because of the hobbits spurring them on. In truth, they were still reluctant to go to war even after they learned of the death of their kin and other trees.)

I have read and re-read the various Tolkien books and have come to the conclusion that the Rangers are just that: Rangers. They entered the land, and although descended from kings long ago, they are not kings or necessarily even Lawful Good. Most Paladins would not take to the shadows and climbing over walls to gain quiet (albeit illegal) entrance into a town. They are the true ranger. Legolas is a wood elf, I don't know what his class might be, but he is not a ranger in the classical sense that Tolkien refers. The rangers are the sons of Numenor, the Dunedain. It is not even clear that most rangers of that ilk are actually even good. Regardless, I do understand that the ideas have been changed for Dungeons and Dragons, but Legolas is not a good example of what the Ranger class, according to Tolkien, would be. Within Dungeons and Dragons, I would say that Legolas might be a ranger, but if we based everything on Legolas himself (dual-wielding for example) then all rangers would be able to run on top of six feet of freshly fallen loose-pack snow without falling through, and be able to see 100 miles in poor weather.

You must realize that Aragorn as you are thinking of him (essentially within The Return of the King) is doing just that, returning. It is my opinion that he did far more than just pass through an area when he entered the land of the dead. All were changed there, and in a way he became more than what he was. The strength of his former noble ties came back to him, and he led the army which had betrayed his ancestors into battle against Mordor. Gimli went through that land as well and did not come out unchanged.

I do like the correlation of Ents as druids, however.

Lord Garrett

 

Hi Lord Garret.

Some good points.

But.

0. I try to aproximate Tolkien into D&D.

1. Think about Aragorn beeing lawfool good ranger. Then "multiclassing" to Paladin. I know in ROTK he is Ranger, then King (!using healing skills - is think about ranger having healing skills), then again Ranger and in the end definitely King.

2. One Ranger being lawfool good does not imply all Ranger need to be lawfool good.

3. I see a difference between ranger and Ranger.

4. Wood elf Legolas could be a ranger. I don't say he's a Ranger. Hee can run on snow beacuse being an elf, he ca see very far - has keen elf senses. Also think about full D&D rules with skills like climb, jump, swim, ... it depends on how many points are in whichever skill.

5. Ranger and ranger <=> Wizard and wizard. Mithrandil (Gandalf) is definitely Wizard. It is said so. But is he only wizard? He uses staf and a long sword - it's OK. But he has high WISDOM. All Wizards are wise. This would rule him to be cleric, druid or paladin. Not everything in Tolkien is equivalent to something on D&D.

6. Ents being druids. What else?


D&D has special classes - they are called prestige classes. Maybe there better could be made for Aragorn then paladin. There could be some special races also: Maia, Valar - aproximation (very poor one) Aasimar and Tiefling.


It's all about how we understand things, how we see them and about fantasies. I cannot say that my vision is the true one. No one knows. Think about Gollum/Sméagol's role. Everyone sees him as chaotic evil. But he WAS true neutral. And in the end he casts the ring into fire - he don't want to. But his deeds leads to it. You can say that his deed was to get the ring all through the story. But if Smégol could win the everlasting battle, maybe he would not bite of Frodos finger. He would maybe turn to someone good.

(I cannot express all my thoughts - first I cannot write a novel here and second English is not my mother tongue and I'm not skilled in it - I was never in an English speaking country. I'm in the end.)