Bards with Wands: an uber solo recipe

Remove all ads!

You know, you can start with a less than 18 CHA and still pickpocket that +1 dagger in Candlekeep.

I suggest starting proficiencies to be Small Sword (or whatever Dagger is) and Bow. By the time you're going to steal Drizzt's scimitar, you'll be 4th level (at least) and can get the Large Sword proficiency.

EDIT: Does an enchanted bow have a bonus to damage as well? If not, you might be better off with a Composite Longbow than a Shortbow +1 (since you should have an 18 starting STR). BTW, the higher the STR, the better your chances of busting open random chests, which is nice.

 

Klorox, I'll try pickpocketing the dagger on my next re-run; I'm not sure if my pickpocketing will be good enough, though. It would be a nice way of solving the cash-flow problem I am having directly at the start; I don't have enough money in Candlekeep to buy a weapon and chainmail there, forcing me to do the run to the Friendly Arm Inn using Studded Leather.

Your remark about the proficiencies raises a question: I haven't been clear on this yet, but I am actually using BGtutu. I use it only for the interface, and don't want to use the newer game-features (ie: I use a standard Bard, and no stuff like dual-wielding).

However, the BG2 engine has a specific Scimitar-proficiency. Does that mean that I need to use the Scimitar-Proficiency (as appropriate for BG2), or the Long Sword-proficiency (as I believe is the case in a pure BG1) ?

As for the bows: Bards are not allowed to use a Composite Bow, so that Composite Bow+1 for sale in Beregost is off limits for me, I'm afraid.

Busting open chests can be nice indeed, although I have no real need for it; it only results in money (directly or indirectly), and I have plenty of that. Unless ofcourse, you know of a specific chest with something really good in it..

 

Since you're using Tutu, you will need the correct proficiency (Long Sword for Long Swords, Scimitar for Scimitars, ect.). If you didn't have Tutu, "Large Sword" covers Long Swords and Scimitars.

BTW, since you're playing Tutu, wouldn't this build be more powerful with either a Skald or a Blade?

 

Right, that means Long Sword and Short Bow to start (I'm wielding a Sword+1 before FrostBrand), and Scimitar at level 4 then.

I'm not using a BG2 kit for this, as I want this run to be the same as in the pure BG1 (obviously, this proficiency-business puts a small dent in that, but such is life).

On a side-note: I just found a weird quirck. It is possible (but tough) to charm an Ankheg. If you then command it to move, it will go underground, and try to pop up at the selected spot, but won't succeed. It will keep trying though, so you end up with two eye-balls dangling from the ground. You can't even select or attack it anymore. Strange stuff..

My current tactic for beating the Ankhegs to get the Wand/Fire is the omnipotent Stun. It is working ok (Stun works about 70% of the time on them), but does anybody know a nice solo-solution for the Ankheg-cave ? Did anybody find a Scroll/Protection from Gigantic Insects somewhere ?

 

Only thing i can think of is Sanctuary

If you could haste yourself you could probablly just have RUN through the entire thing without the ankhegs having time to attack you (pause as you are looting).

Alternativelly hoard up on blindness spells and scrolls ! (they so totally rock!)

 

Ah, yes, Sanctuary: no Soloing Cleric should go without that one..

Blindless would only reduce their stats, right ? They'll probably have a save on that as well anyway, so stunning them immediately is probably better.

For now, I'll keep the tactic at Stun, with a Mirror Image to save on the occasional blow. That seems to work quite nicely.

On my quest for finding a good second-hand ring (I have the Ring/Fire res in one slot, but after finding magical armor the Ring/Prot+1 has to go), I had a look at the Ring of Energy from the Red Wizards.

This ring gives an Agannazar's Scorcher-like beam, comparable to the Wand/Fire. It is not as damaging per turn (2D6/No save vs. 6D6+6/Save for half), but it lasts longer (4 or 5 turns vs only 2 turns), so "sweeping the battlefield" with it is more effective.

Fully charged, it gives 50 shots, and is dirt-cheap; 67gp a pop makes it less than half the price of a Wand/Fire-Scorcher. Getting it is also easy; just fire-bomb the wizards untill they are all dead.

So that brings back the Necklace of Missiles again. I see no other good Rings/Necklaces anyway (the Ring of Infravision seems useless as well), and Necklace of Missiles+Ring of Energy can fully replace the Wand/Fire, giving room for a different Wand. But which one ?

Right now, I see the following possibilities (in order of preference):

* Wand of Frost : A boosted Magic Missile. It has a nice visual effect, but doesn't really seem to be that good.

* Wand of Sleep : Might be interresting, but only seems effective against low-level enemies.

* Wand of Fear : I hate Fear. Running after fleeing enemies is not my cup of tea.

Does anybody know of a better wand (or other item) to use instead ?

 

Actually blindness gives enemies a penalty to hit, and since its save vs spells most "beats" fails its saves very often. The big advantage is that enemy looses the ability to "target" anything more than 5 feet away from them

in other word a level 1 mage can blind a ogre, and stand 2 cm away from it on screen and sling it to death (good duration to).

Wand of Frost is powerfull enough, blasted many things i piece with it. Unfortunatelly it has a bad habbit of freezing the victim AND its loot, so when it blows up the loot is gonne.

Ring of Animal Friendship j/k, Algernons cloack should have all those handled anyways.

What armor are you going for ? i tend to aim for nomral armors, and rather go for rings of protection since they give bonus both to armor and savingthrows.

 

The best "other ring" would be the Ring of Free Action, but I think you might need the expansion for that one.

 

How was "Free Action" + "Haste" or boots of speed in this game again ? i keep forgetting.

 

I don't think they'll work together, but since you're playing a solo game, I'd much rather walk slowly and never be "held."

 

Oh good glaeven, no! You need fast walking for quick retreats, and I don't think I'd be sane if I'd gone for Free Action over the Boots of Speed and Haste in all my solo games. That's one of the biggest bonuses to playing solo: you don't have to wait for your slow party to catch up to the guy with the Boots. You can blaze through the game with a vengeance.

 

Ring of Free action and boots of speed will work together, but you have to take them both off and put them back on every time you load a game or the speed partof the boots gets cancelled out. Some kind of bug I'm geussing.

 

Brallrock: if that's true, the only bug is that the game allows it. It shouldn't work.

Fel: To each his own, I guess. I'm not in a rush.

 

Gator, I am going for the Chain+2, as it gives AC+2 instead of the early Ring/Prot+1 and frees up that slot, but that savings-throw bonus is indeed interresting. I seem to have ignored that factor of the rings.

I tend to agree with Klorox on the Haste-issue. I rarely ever run away from fights with this Bard; why do that if you can fire-bomb or summon-swamp the lot of them ? Having said that, in my normal solo's I also like the Boots of Speed; they really speed up the pace of a solo-game, and they are very handy for letting your sword reach those wizards in the back.

The Ring of Free Action is very nice indeed. It comes a bit late for this Bard though. To be honest, I can't be bothered to get this far; this Bard gets Uber so fast, only the very early stages are fun.

I'll be starting a new run, implementing the ideas I got from this thread. I see a lot of improvement to make..

 

Keep us updated Har!

 

if you use spiders bane then you can have free action that does not hinder the boots at all.

 

this power bard idea is silly imo, spammin wands just cuz you can... where's the fun in that? (I'd go as far as to call it cheese)..
limited number of spells makes fights challenging and therefore fun... hurling fireballs at everyone just doesnt seem all that hard..

 

w.d.: I belive that is part of the idea behind it. to make a powerfull character out of something that is usually not considered powerfull.

The Bard was never considered a very strong character in the first place, but for playing Solo he does fairly well.

 

@ w.d.

The point is not whether the character would be *fun* to play (indeed the author himself claims that it ain't), but rather the fact that you *can* (as Raptor pointed out). There's loads of other juts as hideously overpowered and boring character builds out there, and their ultimate goal is, just as well as this bard's, not to have fun RP-wise, but to test how powerful one can be.