Unfinished Party

Remove all ads!

Whoopsiedaisy - I got the conjurer mixed up with the BG2 conjurer, which has Divination as barred school.
Now that it's clear to me that you have no real arcane spellblaster, I must add a little criticism about that. Your Morninglord won't have enough spells to cover ambushes, he is best used as extra support in large ambushes, but is by no means a substitute for arcane fireballing, I'm afraid. That doesn't mean that you can't make do with this party, just use your enchantments and summons wisely, and be prepared for scrappy fights.

 

This is why I laid out all those detailed questions about the Druid and the archer mage! I was not expecting the Morninglord alone to make up for the lack of a pure arcane spellblaster, but rather the combination of the Morninglord, the Druid with ADS, and the archer mage. I would be missing any remaining exclusive sorc/wiz Evocation spells (well, high level ones anyway, if I take the archer mage). Or maybe the archer mage is redundant and I would do better to have five faster leveling (with the tweaked XP tables and 10% bonus) characters.

 

The game is easily playable without fireballs, I think I never used them in my runthrough, for me they fit better to turn based games than to rts games with moving units. Buff spells like mass haste are far more important to me.
There are very useful non-evocation spells for each level (maybe except level 1), I'd try a game without them, it's surely more interesting than standard nuking.

 

The druid won't do much spellblasting until it reaches [spell level 5], there are some neat 'additional' spells on that level, like Sunfire, Shroud of Flame, and the original Static Charge and Insect Swarm are not to be forgotten - Insect Swarm is the best disabler of clerics.
The Morninglord gets Holy Smite at level 4, Flamestrike at lvl5, and Firestorm at lvl6, but these are all once per day, unless you sacrifice Raise Deads for Flamestrikes at cleric-spell-lvl4. It's unwise to completely rely on enchantments to disable enemies, so my tip would be to buy Web and Stinking Cloud scrolls for your mage, you won't find them anytime soon.

As for the 10% bonus to XP for kills; people make a big fuss over it, but you won't get much further in the game because of it. You'll start to earn less XP for kills as soon as you're ahead a level earlier than normal, so the advantage is less than 10% overall, and will probably be just enough for your party to gain an extra level by the end of the game. But even 1 level is something.

The general rule for mix-ins would be: Leave your character pure, unless the benefits of the mix-in are worth it, and greatly benefit your character.

 

I have no problem using any offensive Conjuration/Necromancy spells with the Enchanter. I'm just calling him that because it better evokes what I want from him .

I'm a bit confused about the Druid here. Before the additional spells, he is a mediocre bombardier. After the additional spells, he should be at least a good bombardier! I mean (before level 9) we've got..
Level 1: Burning Hands, Ice Dagger, Sunscorch
Level 2: Alicorn Lance, Produce Fire, Rainstorm
Level 3: Call Lighting, Icelance, Mold Touch
Level 4: Thorn Spray, Flame Srike, Vitriolic Sphere
Level 5: Ball Lighting, Cone of Cold, Ice Storm, Shroud of Flame

Obviously this isn't close to the AoE attacks that a Sorcerer would get. I just thought that with the Conjuration/Necromancy spells of the Enchanter, the Morninglord's .. few spells.. LOL.. and the inclusion of the archer mage to supplement the party with Evocation spells, it would be sufficient, albeit not equivalent to having a Sorc.

 

This was something I just noticed today, the STR bonus doesn't seem to show up on the record screen. I tried giving a sling to a buffed paladin and he was certainly getting it nonethless. That, or else he was rolling a critical every time.

I wouldn't be in favour of giving 4 fighter levels to a character just for ranged damage. At lower levels a character with max Dex, rapid shot and weapon focus will be a great attacker regardless of class. By the time you'd begin to notice the BAB difference in a mage his spells should be of far more use and he should have enough not to be doing an awful lot of shooting. Enemies with DR will also soak up a lot of D6+2 hits. I know it's intended that this character will shoot more than is normal but it's still a significant reduction in casting power just for +2 to damage. There'd be much more justification for a melee build taking 4 levels as they'd have more need for the bonus HP.

I haven't played a pure druid in IWD2 but my IWD1 druid was a decent bombardier. The list you gave is mostly comprised of decent but not great spells. It's noticeable that a lot of them don't improve siginificantly as you level (flame arrow/fireball are good examples of spells that are great for a long time). I can't see your druid being bad at blasting. As you said yourself, he's just much worse than a sorcerer would have been.

 

I corrected my remark in my earlier post, what I meant was caster level 9, activating level 5 spells.
As for the earlier spell levels having good spellblasting options: no. Other spells are better on those levels.

They're mediocre, and have small area effect at best. Outdoors always pick Entangles, indoors I personally go only for heals and the occasional Sunscorch for Drow/Gray Dwarves.

Barkskin, Barkskin, Barkskin

Call Lightning can be decent outdoors, but Spike Growth suits my playstyle better. Most battles are over before lightning strikes twice, let alone 3 times. So it's a single person spell, not area effect.

Stoneskin, Stoneskin, Stoneskin Long live the [Ease-of-Use] mod!

That's what I was talking about! Don't overlook Insect Plague.

@Deise
Thanks for clearing that up. There is no place in the manual that mentions if slings get additional STR bonus to damage, so it was confusing me for a while.

 

For level 5 druid spells I recommend: static charge, static charge, static charge, static charge, static charge, static charge, ...
Extremely powerful when used properly, not only at the the battle squares.

 

So what I'm gathering here is that the Druid's use is situational, utility, and not a true spellblaster.

OK.. so I'm not sure what you're suggesting exactly. 4 fighter levels doesn't make sense.. in which case it should just be a pure Wizard... in which case it might as well just be a Sorcerer because the whole reason the character was a Wizard in the first place was because after 4 levels of Fighter a Sorc would be 5 spell levels behind. Am I missing something? Were you suggesting maybe a Fighter 2/Wizard X? At some point it becomes pointless for it to not be a Sorc, because the best reason for going Wizard is for versatility, yet this character would only be able to scribe the Evocation spells that the Enchanter is barred from. If anyone has a specific build suggestion here, that would really be great.

My issue is that this character has to be gimped somewhat, so as to not take the spotlight off of the Druid or the Enchanter, or to become a crutch. Why go invisible/charm/hold/dominate or otherwise manipulate the battlefield when you can just nuke everything? Ideally I can take along a character that will provide spellblasting support during those portions of the game where my other characters cannot provide it, or where I am generally experiencing a lot of difficulty, but at the same time isn't a powerhouse. Failing that, I will have to decide between taking a pure spellbaster or deliberately taking on the challenge of having a somewhat gimped party.

 

Sorry, I guess I picked up on the fact that you said there was no strong RP reason for taking the archer/mage and assumed you wanted a powerhouse. The character isn't optimal but if you want him to take a back seat to the other two than he isn't a bad choice. A pure class wizard would probably outshine the other two with blasting, a sorcerer could leave them in the shade.

 

I'm wondering what would be better in this specific case, a Fighter 4/Transmuter X, or Fighter 2-3/Sorcerer X (or some other Sorc hybrid). The Sorc would lose some BAB and Weapon Spec, as well as feats and skill points. But he would gain access to spell levels at the same rate as the Wizard, and he would have more casts per rest of a given spell, as well as gaining access to self-buffs that the Wizard may not because he is only able to scribe Evocation scrolls, or duplicate scrolls that the Enchanter doesn't need.

 

If you must have a fighter/mage type, then go for a fighter2/sorcererX.
You really want to make sure he doesn't outshine your druid and conjurer? Then take loads of mix-ins. The most functional ones are 1 ranger for dual-wielding, 1-(3) paladin lvls for save bonuses, a monk lvl for Evasion is great with paladin, and

Spoiler

a transmuter lvl w/10 Alchemy (effective) will give you a {+1STR*} +5HP bonus when you reach Imphraili's lab

This will give the character up to 6 levels mixed-in, take them early and your auxiliary caster will be exactly that - no way it'll outshine your wiz or druid. It will have a decent attack bonus, and could be quite the archer
It's a powergamer's nightmare (I exaggerate), but will fit your roleplaying requirements nicely, and you won't be lacking any essential area-blasting spells either.

Damn! I just got to Imphraili's lab, and I wasn't getting the +1STR from the 'transfuse-int-your-own-blood' option, just the +5HitPoints. So I checked the code in NearInfinity, and it turns out I was misinformed. There is no +1STR bonus at all. Besides the embarassment, I've also been misinforming people in my guide, and numerous posts! It looks like I'm going to have to correct it all

 

I'm a little confused, as usual lol. The original problem with a Fighter 4/Wizard X is that he would be four spell levels behind. I thought this was the ideal amount of reduction in power so as to still be effective but not outshine the others. But a ____ 6/Sorcerer X? As a Sorcerer is naturally one spell level behind a Wizard, this would effectively put him back seven spell levels. I think the Monk and Ranger levels would be very helpful though. Even if I keep him a Wizard, the Evasion would help make up for his lack of armor or defensive spells, and the dual-wielding would probably be more valuable than Weapon Spec in the long run. (So perhaps a Fighter 2/Ranger 1/Monk 1/Transmuter X)

But as far as Sorc vs. Wiz, I'm not sure if having a couple extra casts of a spell is worth losing all of the extra feats (or even a given feat taken several levels earlier, like GSF: Evocation/Spirit of Flame, enough skill points to get Spellcraft high enough to take SoF in the first place, or the ability to take Dodge) which would in effect make those spells more potent, so it's a question of quality vs. quantity.

 

With the monk mix-in, you are totally missing the point. I advised a monk level only in conjunction with a paladin mix-in, and then only for sorcerers:
You want to get a sky-high reflex-saving-throw bonus, so that it will save against almost every reflex-save-spell cast at it. If your sorcerer has a paladin mix-in, it will get a bonus to reflexes not only from the DEX modifier, but also from the CHA modifier! This way a sorcerer with 18DEX and 18CHA will get a 4+4=8 bonus to dexterity from the start, and this will only increase as the sorcerer increases its primary casting stat. This way it's almost as good as Spell Resistance, and probably better when facing enemy casters with low-DC reflex spells.
You propose to give a monk mix-in to a transmuter, which has only mediocre reflexes, resulting in a far less useful Evasion effect. Remember that Evasion only has effects if the character makes a save, otherwise you get full damage.

If you are aiming for being exactly 4 levels behind, take a sorcerer with 3 mix-in levels (pal/rgr/mnk is awesome) or stick to your original plan.

 

You really don't need the evocation spells, no need to add a crippled sorcerer or mage to cast crippled evocation spells.
Take a bard instead, his songs will help the tanks a lot and reduce the gap in power between casters and non-casters a little.

 

This Sorcerer would have to be a Wild Elf, right? Also, he would need to start with a Sorc lvl, not Paladin? If Sorc, it would still be advisable to take the Paladin level before the other mix-ins?

I believe the Fighter 4/ Paladin X needs to start as a Paladin, is that right? I don't remember why, but in my old notes I had written out the leveling order that way, whereas the Fighter 4/Barbarian X starts as a Fighter.

 

Wild Elves get the sorcerer as favoured class, so are free to add numerous mix-ins. But the human and half-elf get 'ANY' as their favoured class (this still means they must abide by the multiclassing rules for their one class, they still get an XP penalty if they have more than 2 classes which are more than 1 level apart). The human gets a lot more skills and an extra feat, so they are arguably the best race for a powergamed sorcerer.

And as for the paladin and barbarian; when I started playing, I also had a tendency to take my mix-ins early, but this is a mistake. You should delay the fighter mix-ins for both, until you decide they are wanted or necessary. Keep the warriors pure too, this way your paladin gets spells sooner, and the barbarian gets more innate abilities. The barbarian might want to wear heavy armour, so a single fighter level early might not be a bad idea, but otherwise: You can't go wrong if you just delay mix-ins. My own party is a good example of what I mean:

Drow Dreadmaster of Bane 12
Drow Morninglord of Lathander 12
Deep Gnome Illusionist 10 / Rogue 2
Human Sorcerer 11 / Paladin 1 / Ranger 1
Human Druid 12 / Monk 1
Human Bard 13
Half of this party is still single class, and the mix-ins I took were what I found greatly beneficial. Here's what my party should look like at very high level in HoF:

Dreadmaster of Bane X / Fighter 4
Morninglord of Lathander X / Paladin 1 / Fighter 2 / Wizard 1
Illusionist X / Rogue 2 / Ranger 1 / Fighter 2
Sorcerer X / Paladin 1 / Ranger 1 / Monk 1 / Fighter 2 / Wizard 1
Druid X / Monk 1 / Ranger 1 / Fighter 2 / Wizard 1
Bard X / Rogue 2 / Fighter 2 / Wizard 1
A lot of those fighter and wizard levels are for extra feats, and my main class should be very high level before taking these mix-ins becomes worthwhile.

 

For the fighter/barbarian it doesn't matter on the long run in which class you start (unless you want wilderness lore), I think at level 1 additional speed, HP and rage are more useful than the bonus feat and heavy armor proficiency.

If you don't start the paladin/fighter with a fighter level you have a broader choice to spend the many skillpoints you get at the start without having to take cross-class skills.

 

I think that the original concept for the archer mage had him as an elf because of the 20 DEX. I've also come around to the idea (from an RP standpoint) of an elven archer/mage lol. But I suppose with the Fighter/Wizard you are already getting so many feats and skill points that you don't miss what you lose from not being Human.... hmmm

I found out it was the UPP where I got my plan to start the Barb as a Fighter.

 

The two UPP's are interesting to read, and full of useful advice. But that doesn't mean that they can't contain the wrong advice on occasion. I mean, I write an IWD2 guide myself, and I've made some stinkers of mistakes in the past. The UPP's haven't been updated since I-don't-know-how-long, and they tell you nothing about playing with mods either. You're on the right forum for active advice, so we can help you with your exact wishes for your roleplaying party.

It's hard to find intelligence-bonus-items, especially in the start, and now you have 2 characters that need high INT. It's a pity that you don't like sorcerers, and kmonster's idea of a bard could be good for your party too.

Spoiler

If you install Light of Selune's main mod component, a good ranger (mixed in with a pal1/sorcX, for example) will get a nice bonus from a bowyer in the Wandering Village: Does a bow with added (2-handed) strength to damage sound nice?