Convince me to bring a Ranger and/or a Druid next time

Remove all ads!

After playing BG & BGII for a long time I decided to give IWD a go again. I have a alway been a chronic restarter so IWD are no exeption. If I don't like my party I always start a new game. But that's not really the issue now. I would like to get some advice about two classes that I NEVER bring since I'm sure that I'm missing something. The Ranger and the Druid never makes it to my adventures since I don't really see the point. Of course I'm looking for reasons to bring a single- or dual class since I can see the reasons behind bringing either one of these as a multiclass. So prove me wrong - why should I bring anyone of these two?

When i played BGII I couldn't for the life of me understand the Blade (Bard) and why he should be so good. And then one day I did and now I absolutely love Blades. So I'm hoping for the same result here. Maybe there is some argument that I can't see that will change my perspective. The only argument that I won't consider is "that they will be become very powerful in the end". By that time I will probably have started over again so...

Druid: I've never liked Druids and that a combination of two things. First of - I probably don't understand them and their strengths. In BG II they have some really awesome spells but they were too few. Insect Plague, Iron Skins and Creeping Doom was not enough for me to justify playing a Druid. Secondly - Cernd pretty much killed the class for me. He was so annoying. While that is not a good reason to disregard the Druid as a class it still is something that i strugle with. Then of course it is the weapon selection which is somewhat limited. If i compare the Druid and the Cleric I will only see that the cleric is better in every aspect.

Ranger: For me this is a poor substitute for a fighter. While I admit that the C/R multiclass is very good, I don't see what a single class Ranger can do compared to a Fighter. Use him as a scout? A thief can do that so why should the Ranger? Racial enemy doesn't seem like a good enough reason as you increase in levels. I'll admit that the Ranger is probably a harder choice for me than the druid at this point.

I should finally point out one more thing - I have only finished IWD once and therefore has no memory of what weapons are good and were to find them. That part is exactly very interesting but it also means that I'm not able to create a Ranger or a Druid with a special build in mind. It's not a qustion of powergaming - it's more that I want to find out what's good about these classes so that I can bring them in my party on my next attempt.

 

In IWD especially if you are playing the addons aswell single class characters are not really the best way to go (with the exception of Fighter and Bard). But I take them all the time for RP purposes, which is as good a reason as any in my opinion to take either a Ranger or a Druid single class.

The Ranger gets extra attacks for using single handed weapon without a shield (IIRC) and a few spells late on and can wear heavy armour so he isn't all that bad. Much more powerful with R/C multi tho. Also if you play like me and add characters throughout the game for RP purposes (ala BG) a Ranger with Orc enemy is a nice solo start to the game.

The main reason I find the Cleric better than Druid is the armour. If you are like me and roll only once at char creation (and have house rules about how low you can put particular stats) its really hard to get a good druid roll because of the annoying pre-requisites like high charisma even though it actually does not affect the Druid in anyway, so you often end up sacrificing strength because you need Dex due to the crappy druid armour To get around this take a Human Fighter and Dual Class to a Druid, you can get extra pips in your weapon slots and heavy armour then, even if you dual early.

Edit:

Also I think but I'm not sure that the Ranger/Cleric is bugged and gives you extra spells from the Druid table which makes it more powerful than it should be. I'm not 100% sure on this because to be honest I don't really know what constitutes the Ranger spell list.

 

I'm all for roleplaying my characters rather than powergaming them. I do however want to see that every included member of my parties bring something useful to the group. I started a new party yesterday and had lots of trouble figuring out what the sixth member should be. I play on normal and with a team of six characters (need to be more familiar with the game before playing on harder diffuculties). This is what I went with:

Fighter (gnome) with ** in axes and maces.
Fighter (gnome) with ** in large swords and missile weapons.
Fighter (half-elf) with ** in great swords and bows.
Thief/Illusionist with * in bows.
Fighter (human) with ** in hammers and slings. Dualed to a cleric at lvl 3 and put the extra * in hammers.
Bard (half-elf) with * in bows and halberd.

For roleplaying reasons the two gnome fighters are brothers - fiercly determined to prove that a gnome can be as impressive as fighters as any dwarf, human or elf. The T/I is member of the same clan but joins more for exploring and lerning purposes. The half-elven fighter feels that because of her heritage she dosen't belong with either humans or elves - therefore strives to become a seasoned adventurer. The cleric is slightly inspired by Branwen from BG - a seasoned and tough warrior and cleric at the same time. And of course the bard wants to be a part of any great adventure to find new songs and tales. However this took me a long time to put together...

I wanted two fighters, a bard and and a fighter that later would dual to a cleric so no problems there. I also needed to make room for a thief and a mage. So I thought about F/T (gnome or halfling) and a fighter (human) that would dual to a mage. But the mageidea soon went out the window since I didn't really feel like making an archer with spells. So then I thought about a F/M (multi) or F/I (gnome again) and decided that I really didn't like the idea. The F/T was still a viable option but since I didn't know what to do about the mage, I decided to make it T/I to solve that problem.

Two hours later... Now I had five characters that I liked (F, F, T/I, bard and the fighter who would become cleric) and wondered what I should do with the sixth spot. I thought of the R/C multi but I already had a cleric. Thought about the F/D but (see reasons in my original post) that idea was soon forgotten. I really wanted to find a reason to include a ranger or a druid but in the end I went with the fighter who would become an excellent archer. The only reason that really favored the ranger (over an other fighter) was to make an scout (since the T/I wouldn't risk his neck) but it wasn't enough. So here I'm - stuck in my narrow way of thinking. So far I really like this party but it would be nice to find reasons to include these two classes (druid and ranger) in my next party.

 

I've always liked multiclassed fighter/druids in IWD. Dual classed is ok too, but the stat requirements are hideous (given that you also want to actually enter melee). Druids level up very fast, giving access to higher level spells sooner than cleric - like some actually helpful healing spells. Some useful offensive spells too; Entagle is great in early game and Static Charge can be very helpful. In your party I'd see fighter/druid as a second line fighter/primary healer, at least until the cleric levels start to kick in.

 

Maybe I should start a second game with some form of druid and/or ranger in the party - just so I could compare. I'm not really that familiar with druidic spells so I could really use som tips. Are there any other weapons than scimitars that are any good (quaterstaff perhaps) for a druid. I would probably make him/her a dual class (fighter 3/druid x).

As for the ranger... What's more useful - a dualclass ranger/cleric (for some hitpoints and weaponskill) or a single class ranger (elven)? I'm not really sure what a dc ranger/cleric would contribute that a dc fighter/cleric can't. And I am totally lost when it comes to racial enemy - some form of undead or giants seems most likely.

 

IWD NPCs mod includes 5 NPCs. Their classes are adjustable at download time. Try it. it is a good example of a Druid and Ranger and how powerful they can be. The Druid can be a Fighter or a Fighter Druid. The Ranger can also be chosen as a R/C. You make your character and add the other 5 via Import. There is even voices for them. They are not uber characters, but decent, which makes you really use their abilites tothe max. you will learn the in and outs of each class rather quickly.....

 

Tharlock,

I too suffered from CRS (chronic restarters syndrome). For years. Here is my solution.

Take the following party and I promise you you'll thoroughly enjoy your IWD experience. This assumes that you have Heart of Winter installed. (Trials of the Luremaster is good, too).

Human Paladin
Half-elf Ranger/Cleric
Dwarf Fighter
Human Fighter 2/Druid X (dual class at level 2)
Gnomish Illusionist/Thief
Half-elf Bard

OR

Human Paladin
Dwarf Fighter/Cleric
Human Fighter 2/Druid X
Halfling or Elf Fighter/Thief
Half-elf Bard
Human Conjurer

You'll notice a common thread with both of these parties - they're designed to give you a little bit of everything, for the best possible IWD experience. No classes doubled up. It allows you to experience every race, class, and weapon type.

In IWD: HoW, Bards and Druids are beefed up substantially. Whereas I used to never use either class in IWD or BG2, in IWD w/ HoW I can't play without them. Rangers are still good, but I prefer to take a Ranger/Cleric. They're powerful, have both sets of priest spells and very useful for healing and buffing. Full-class Rangers are good ranged damage dealers who level quickly, but I'd prefer an elven Fighter/Thief, personally. By mid-game you'll find that your druid and bard are two of the most useful members of your team, both as excellent secondary casters and pretty decent melee fighters in a pinch. And once your bard learns the song War Chant of the Sith, you'll be in love.

Play either one of these parties and I guarantee you'll have a good, satisfying playthrough.

 

@Death Rabbit: I have completed the game once but didn't complete HoW (gave up when killed repeatedly at Buried Island). Thank you for your suggestions by the way. I think I had paladin, dwarven fighter, M/T, cleric, bard and some multiclassed or dualclassed fighter (can't remember). At that time I didn't considered things "boring" since it was my first experience with IWD.

I'll admit that I'm more concerned with "what's good" than I am when playing BGII. The reason for this is mainly that I know BGII very well and can now try things just to get a different experience. With IWD I don't have the same luxury - apart from two items (pale justice and helm of the trusted defender) I can't remember which items are good and/or where they are. But that is a good thing!

Part of the problem is that I have to create a party - in BG & BGII you create one and pick up Keldorn, Kivan, Kagain and so on. That means I now have to like all six members of my team or I'll just restart. But right now I have a new group which is very good so far see previous posts). So I probably run two separate parties (since my curiosity won't let the druid/ranger issue go away). That means I can play small parts at a time with separate parties and see if I like the second one (with the ranger and druid) enough to finish it later. Otherwise I can just move forward with the first one.

 

IMO the Druid is unique because he's healer/support with lots of offensive spells. He also has quite a few weapon spells (Star Cudgel, Moonblade) which is why a Fighter/Druid multiclass with scimitar and club proficiencies can be such a nasty melee fighter.

I had a few runs where the Ranger proved his mettle. I remember one was when I didn't have a good shielder along and so I had to rely on the Ranger to scout and wear down monsters with his ranged attacks while my party stood at the ready with their buffs and web/entangle spells. He was deadly with the bow and just as dangerous in melee. I don't believe a thief could have replaced the guy - a (dual) fighter/thief, perhaps, but rangers are good from the start (they get favored enemies and an extra attack when using a one-hand weapon) and they age well (access to druid spells, including Moonblade iirc). Tracking is nice if you don't know which monsters spawn where, though if you've finished the game before then just looking at the general layout of the area should jog a few memories.

BTW if you plan on maxing characters out then there's no real reason to play a pure fighter-type of any kind.

Before HoW druids were not very interesting (only had a few low level offensive spells), and so were rangers (only had stealth and favored enemy). Bards at least were like mages who could use a bow, sing, pick pocket and cast spells more effectively (higher caster level) at low levels.

 

A Druid can turn into a bear.

A BEAR.

 

Just remember your first time playing BG1. Remember the Bears? Bear = Brave, Brave Sir Robin, Sir Robin Ran Away!!!!!

Druids are awesome!

 

Druids add powerful options to the party. Sunscorch is perfect for finishing trolls. They can prevent monster hordes from getting close with entangle and finish them with spike growth or spike stones. They get powerful summoning spells. They can shapeshift to get extra attacks per round and even 90 percent damage resistance in water elemental form, with the right equipment it can even be raised above 100 percent so you get healed from enemy hits.
They get call lightning and static charge which is so powerful that it had to be reduced in IWD2. You can wipe out Burial Isle with a druid alone.

Rangers get access to druid spells and an extra attack per round if they don't wear a shield. They can have 2.5 attacks per round with a greatsword from the beginning, while fighters have to wait until level 9 and won't be able to grandmaster more than one weapon type.

 

Ok, guess that your arguments was enough for me to try something different - thanks for all your advice. After starting this game on a number of occasions (and really sucked) I wondered how it was possible for me to complete this game once before? Anyway - started a new party and I'm afraid I have to admit that I went for really good rolls, stats and combinations that I believe will work really well. So much for roleplaying over powergaming... I just feel that at this point I'm terrible at IWD and need some success in order to try something different later.

So, as I said, I started again with a new group of dungeoncrawlers. This time it is:

Bard (half-elf) - always in the party and will always be.
F/T (halfling) - had a hard time deciding if it should be gnome instead but...
Ranger (human) - will dual to a cleric at level 7 since I'm not that impressed with rangers as a single class.
F3/Cleric x (human) - I needed a cleric right away but figured that he could use a couple of fighter levels first. Got *** in hammers since i prefer a more meleeoriented character in this role.
Fighter (human) - will dual to a mage at level 6 or 7 - not sure about which it will be. Didn't really feel that I needed a mage right away since the bard works well.
Fighter (human) - will dual to a druid at level 6,7 or 9. I'm thinking that it will be 9 since I don't have any "pure" fighters and I'm not really sold on the whole druid-idea.

So far the ranger is a lot better than I thought he would be. I actually use his scouting ability... I had forgotten about the second level in Vale of Shadows - there were A LOT more undead than I remembered. Imbued Wights were a real pain (combined with the skeleton mage). Here the rangers stealthskill was a great thing since both he and the F/T could sneak up to a wight each, therefore preventing them from casting magic missile. Phew! I realize that noone is gonna be impressed with this acomplishment but still... It really hard when you a) don't remember were the enemies are and b) don't have a clue what items are good.

The one thing that I do realize is that when facing undead it is a good thing to have the ranger in front. Barrage of missiles soften up attacking skeletons and the ranger having a mace/morningstar with most attacks, works real well.

 

If I could make a few suggestions...

EVERYONE should have a missile weapon skill. Your point about Rangers softening up advancing undead is correct - but why have just the ranger doing it? If everyone is lobbing off missiles and switches to melee only when the enemy gets in range, you can take out most of an advancing hoard before they even reach you. Especially if you utilize the pause button to refocus the party's aim whenever an enemy dies.

Dual-classing your ranger won't give you access to druid spells beyond level 1. I think you'd be much happier with a half-elven Ranger/Cleric. And this one ranger/cleric is all the cleric you need. Between this character and your Druid, priest duties will be more than covered.

On that note - I would ditch the Fighter 3/Cleric X for a Paladin. The best weapons in the game are bladed - and right now the only characters who can use them are your bard, fighter/thief and druid (scimitars only), none of whom are suited for two-handed weapons. A paladin can handle this nicely.

I would seriously consider dualing your Druid at level 2 or 3 - just enough to get them specialization in a druid weapon (slings, scimitars or staffs) and the ability to wear heavy armor. The druid's real strength are their spells and abilities. That they're also pretty decent in combat is a nice (but secondary) perk. You want your druid getting high-level druid spells as soon as possible. Waiting until level 9 is a huge waste of potential, as the combat bonus you'll gain won't measure up to the druid's natural prowess in other areas.

 

I was probably somewhat unclear I see. What I meant was that ALL partymembers fire arrows and/or bullets but I had the ranger in front. When a skeleton reached the party I have the ranger use his blunt weapon while the others continue to fire away at other opponents.

Regarding the R/C multi or dual I have to say that I thought about it for along time. But I decided to give the dual a go since I've tried the mc before and this way I can better evaluate if I like the ranger or not.

No paladins for me thank you - I'm so bored with them right now. I used to have one in IWD and about 33% of my plays in BG & BGII. you could say that I'm on a "paladinfree vacation" for a while. Most of my characters are at level 4 so I have to stick with the strategy I got.

And finally about the dc F/D. I considered dualing at level 3 (as with the fighter who became cleric) but decided against it. Right now I'm "rediscovering" IWD so I'm in need of more fighters (just my opinion) and mainly want to try the druid. I also thought about F/D as a multiclass but have read tons of info on how dualclass is the way to go. I used to be a multiclass type kind of guy so I'm trying something that I not usually do.

Right now I think I have to focus mainly on enjoying the game that I've got and see what the pros and cons are. Otherwise I will NEVER finish IWD + HoW. And as long as it works for me and is fun I'm not concerned with if this is the best way to do things.

 

I never found room for either druids or rangers in my groups. An elf fighter with 5 stars in bows seemed alot more effective than the ranger. As for druids...well...I liked them in the BG games, but I had alot more use for clerics in IWD. Its alot more hack and slash, so healing is a must.

 

Get scimitars/clubs as proficiencies for your F/D, focusing on scimitars since there are lots of good scimitars in the game (including a cheap one you can buy off an NPC in Kuldahar) and the Star Metal Cudgel uses club proficiency.

The Star Metal Cudgel is a +2 club that hits as a +4 weapon and does an additional 2d6 damage against unnatural creatures like undead, elementals, constructs like golems, and outerplanar creatures (eg demons, salamanders). You'll be surprised just how many unnatural creatures there are in the game, I'd say around half of them including all of the more the dangerous ones. The club does 1-6 + 2-12 + 2 = 5-20 base damage - impressive for a one-handed weapon. In comparison the Cairn Blade (a +4 Greatsword) only does 5-14 base damage.

Once your F/D gets Moonblade he'll also be an effective mage killer, since the Moonblade does magic damage (ie ignores Stoneskin) and scrambles magic (causes any spell the victim attempts to cast in the next round to fail). It's also the most damaging weapon vs undead in the game (6-28 base damage, ignores strength bonus).

Fighters are superior in a direct confrontation, but depending on how you design your party this may or may not be a good thing. They are terrible forward scouts. Bard songs help with healing so you don't have to turn your Cleric into a complete healbot, and this actually works well with having the ranger scout out areas first. As the ranger scouts and starts picking off weaker monsters, the bard song heals.

 

Thanks for all suggestions so far - I'm now convinced that I'm a hopless restarter. Sigh. I had to start over AGAIN since I realised that I had made two mistakes (what a suprise) and felt that they were too anoying. So I spent a lot of time figuring out what I should do now. I could not find a way to create a party with BOTH the ranger and the druid so in the end I decided to go with just the druid. It seemed like a better idea. Anyway, now it is (hopefully) a group that I will be able to keep.

Selina Moonglow - Bard (HE)
Mysticus Maximus - Thief/Illusionist (Gnome)
Theorin Hammerfist - Fighter (Dwarf) with axe and mace. I just use thwowing axes as missile weapons and it seemed like a better idea to spend ** in maces, since I have never found a magical axe before Vale of Shadows.
Lucas Ironoak - Human Fighter who will dual to a druid at level 3. After carefully consider the wisdom of Death Rabbits words I concede that this is a better idea than dualclassing at a higher lever.
Cassandra Harkness - Human Fighter who dual to a cleric at level 3. Couldn't get rid of this idea and prefered a fighter to a ranger as a starting class.
Victor Delroy - Human Fighter with greatswords (and bows). This was the only way I could get someone to spend points in greatswords and I couldn's stand the idea of a dwarf or gnome with such a huge weapon.

The druid better be good since it was annoying to roll some decent stats. I had to decide between good dex and con and in the end decided to go with dex. Better to use a sling and spells most of the time.

 

I'd take 7 fighter levels before dualing to druid. The extra half attack per round fighters get at level 7 will double when you when you shapeshift.

 

Just to possibly avoid another restart: what kind of stats did you get aka. Does the character meet the heavy stat requirements for dual classing to a druid?