Best paladin kit?

Remove all ads!

Inquisitors do their job best IMO

[ September 02, 2002, 22:15: Message edited by: Gothmog4230 ]

 

Undead Hunters, all the way!

I never got the hang of Inquisitors. I had Keldorn in my party through most of the game, and completely forgot about his Dispel Magic ability until about halfway through ToB. Sure, it made the rest easier, but I've just never seen paladins as spell-turners.

As for Cavaliers...well, the dragons weren't *that* hard, IMO. And the demons are smitten easy enough with the truckload of cleric spells designed to send 'em packing. Besides, I like my ranged weapons.

So, Undead Hunters take it. It sucks to lose the Lay on Hands ability, but being immune to that thrice-damned level drain is nice. Besides, there's something inherently cool about a lone paladin charging into Bohdi's hall and slaughtering vampires by the dozen

[ September 07, 2002, 22:17: Message edited by: TheNovak ]

 

Okay a chance too show my ultimate pallie knowledge and rant about the inqisitor.(Tal I might mention some Tob material but please dont remove it. This goes for all mods and admins cause this is my official rant and I'm gonna be showing this to people who think that Inquisitors ar soo great)Please dont remove anything.
Note: This is not a insult ofr attack too MSG2 okay its just a note about Inquisitors.

@MSG2(Whatever): Have you Soloed with a pallie in you LIFE???

The priest spells are one of the best things about paladin. A cavaliers holy smite deals up to 40 damage on ANY evil creature and what if someone needs immeadiat healing??? a Pallie can suplie it with his USLESS cleric spells. Also the inquisitor is the worst class to take

Heres why: Everyone thinks that Inquisitor are ultimate because they can use rangd weapons and because they can cast dispel magic and cannot be affectedlevel drain. Well has it ever occured to you that if they are feared none of these abilities are of any use? Inthe battle with firekraag he will run like a coward. Also(ToB referance) In Tob(Please dont cut this out) when you fight the shadow master near th temple you go to were Yaga shuras mother is his shadow cast fear all the time meaning that, you guessed it, he will run like a coward and not help you at all and since he will be a main this sucks since most of the shadows will target him. . Oh and another thing this ranged weapon thing has gone too far. When you take a pallie you get a fighter and a support healer not a Ranger. His ranged abilities do nothing that good
Pallies deal up to 40 damage in close ranged attack and up to 9 attack in long ranged attackes. Also this hold thing pisses me off. He can still be entangeled and febblming, confusion etc. effect him still. Finally he gets no bonusses to attacking creature while a cavalier get to demons and dragons. Do you know that Padeen could kill a tanari at a level7 withut getting hurt? And his Super dispell abilities will take of stuff like haste and immunity to fear or even other vital protection spells and therefor sucks! An inquisitor is a fighter who cannot get GM therefor he isnt a pallie at all! If you want a good and strong paladin who is a good fighter and a backup healer then you take either a cavalier or a undead hunter.
oh and cavaliers gets 20% resistabces to fire and acid and are immune to acid or poison which IMHO helps alot!

If you want a paladin you take a cavalier or a undead hunter. Trust me I'm THE paladin expert around here. (No offence to other pallie lovers and experts)

Check your manual too and you'll see that cavaliers get less dissadvantages and more advantages. But an undead hunter is still also
very good!

@TheNOval: Hmmm undead hunters are good but obviously you havent playd tob or even Soloed before to call dragons easy. Buy ToB and fight draconis. Also Vamps get all too easy at level 10 so I wouldnt realy take them for just that. They are good and powerfull but having a cavalier will help you against:
Draconis
Firkraag
Abazigal
Demogorgon
Dragons
Demons

Oh and also (IWD2 reference please dont remove this admins and mods)In IWD demons have been impoved! Try fighting a balor in IWD2 and it'll be like fighting demogorgon and draconis together. Also dispell magic has been cut down making it even more pathetic.

All in all the best and most usseful Palaadin too take is a cavalier. I'm not saying that UH are bad but they get outdated when you get a level8-10 party!

Paddy!(Yes I am THE expert on Paladins.No offence thought)

[ September 10, 2002, 11:07: Message edited by: Padeen Dragonblade ]

 

The cavalier rules not because he's more usefull but because he is a real paladin like they ment to be close combat is the best who needs a bow
Dragon and daemons slayen that's the important stuff undead's are easy enough to kill

 

somehow, i tend not to totally agree with padeen.
most of what he say are true (although i find some of them difficult to understand... literally, sorry padeen... no harm intended) but i see no reason to put down the inquisitor just because it doesn't suit one's playing style.

my personal pick would have been a cavalier, that is with respect to the elemental resistance and immunities. but somehow the vampire's level drain was more than i could tolerate so i shifted to undead hunter. the shift was not because i dislike the cavalier but rather the cavalier was not up to my playing style. the inquisitor actually have the same story, i never create an inquisitor for the reason that keldorn exists. but i don't use keldorn much because i have a paladin too. but using another class, i find keldorn to be very usefull. so you see, to me the cavalier was the best but i ended up not playing it.

if you hate level drains and being charmed, take the undead hunter.
if you hate fear, poisons, and dragons and demons, take the cavalier.
if you hate magic users, take the inquisitor.

so harkle, although by this time you would already be playing with your choice of paladin kit, the best paladin kit is actually the one that you find most suitable to your playing style. not for their stats or abilities. if we are going to judge these kits by their pros and cons, we can never come to an agreement.

 

I dont tend to take the Cavalier because his the best or I'm can play with him better I take him beacause he is the only paladin.

This is some info I gathered on paladins and knights:

Paladin: A paladin is a man of chivalry and good. Paladins tend to alway be good and obey the law. Paladins will never accapt a money reward for to them a good dead is the greatest of any. Paladins learn the way of the sword but not like fighters. They train in medical care and first aid and can sense an evil presents in a maner on seconds. Paladin are ussually cavaliers , demon slayers, undead slayers and even Inquisitor, who, in the eye of many are not seen as paldins. Cavaliers are the most idea type of Paladin. A Cavalier is a man og good who tends to strike down evil creatures such as dragon, demon and almost anyone who does not obey the law. Cavaliers train in madical care and first aid and they have a amazing sense for detecting fear.A Cavalier will never run or even be feared even if death is staring him in the eyes. Cavliers ussualy ride on horses but some are mstly seen of their horses or without any for they may die in a hard battle. A cavalier is hardy and ussually does not suffer from poison or other types of it like acid. Altho Cvaliers can be masters of the sword and kings of justice and good they never use bows, slings or crossbows. Cavaliers dont use ranged weapons for on a horse a cavalier must have his hand holding the horse and therefor they tend to avoid ranged weapons.

I wont write more cause I dont have the book that deals with Inquisitors. Anyway ther is a lot more wich also contains the priest spells but I am too lazy to write it. I wont write about the knights either since her we are dealing with the Cav's and Inq's. Anyway tell me what you couldnt understand and I'll re-write/ explain it!

Still though A cavalier is the best choice. I dont like Inquisitor bacause they are usseles and dont look like real paladins! A paladin as mentioned above learns madicine and first aid and he also learn priest magic! Anyway I personally think that a cav is best. h and the charm is only effective againt: dire charm and charm. I think domintion doesnt work but i'm not sure about it.
Oh nior lemme correct something you said.

If you hate magic the the wizard slayers is the man for you!
Paddy!
(Yes I am THE Paladin master!)

[ September 10, 2002, 16:15: Message edited by: Padeen Dragonblade ]

 

Padeen
I like your stile your saying excatally tht same as me but in a lot more words but it comes down to this the real paladin doesn't know fear wants to look his enemy straight in the eyes and doesn't take anny distance so what have you than a cavalier

 

Actually, an Inquisitor with Carsomyr can be tougher against magic users than the Wizard Slayer. Although both are formidable in their own right, true seeing helps quite a bit. I agree that their dispel magic is not that great of an ability, and admittedly I don't like them much.

If I play a paladin, I'll take a cavalier, but that's due to my own playing style, not due to a powergaming ethos. IMO, all three kits are overpowered. As nior said, take that one that suits you the best and that you would most like to roleplay.

 

I hear Inquisitors suck and I hear they are the best. Being a paladin hater myself, I dislike them all equally. I think the reason no one can come to an agreement is that they're fairly balanced therefore making it more of a choice of playing style and personal preference.

 

Actually Sol the inquisitor has less advantages than the dissadvantages!
It is the opposite with the cavaliers. I am not saying that they suck I am doing this beacause everyone thinks that they are all ultimate and unstopable when their just a weak fighter who gets LOH but cannot get GM!

Paddy!
(Yes, I am THE paladin master)

 

Well, I'm not much of a paladin player but I thought I'd not a few things just because they occured to me while reading this thread.

First, just check the description of the kit in the game to see the advantages/disadvantages. I say this because the self-proclaimed "paladin expert" makes numerous mistakes about who has which ability. Contrary to his first post Inquisitors are not immune to level drain, contrary to his last post Inquisitors can not use Lay on Hands (if you're arguing an Inquisitor is a poor choice why attribute them with these abilities? if they had them they'd be truly fearsome to behold.)

I agree that it boils down to playing styles. They are well balanced, each kit likely to appeal to different people, just like others mentioned above. I simply want to speak up and say that the Inquisitor may not be the class for you but it can still be a brilliant class. The ability to almost instantaneously dispell at twice your level is a thunderous weapon against a mage. Mages will shriek in frustration after they spend time bending arcane powers to hide from your sight only to have an inquisitor see through their deceptions with ease. Padeen is particularly worried about fear while facing dragons (I'd like to add that in my experience the most dangerous opponents to send your party scattering like frightened children are the lichs your party might face at a relatively young age) and I agree that immunity to fear is very nice but it's not something that a cleric or mage can't protect the entire party against ahead of time, or dispell from the party, or.... you get the point. The resistances of the cavalier are also capable of being duplicated with a cleric and equipment if need be, particularly the resistance to fire which in my experience is far more important than acid. Immunity to poison is very nice, but a cleric can.... So, what about the +3 to hit and damage to demons and dragons? The plus to damage is nice but not worth choosing the class from a power perspective in my opinion but the +3 to hit is awesome and can't be duplicated. With the Inquisitor the dispell magic is extremely powerful and can't be duplicated because no other class can cast it at twice your level and when you try to cast it with your mage or cleric it can be painfully slow. It is also a double edged sword in that it can cut through helpful conditions as well, it must be used judiciously. Also, the Inquisitor's true sight can't be duplicated either because it casts so quickly -- nothing worse than having your party sit around waiting on your mage or cleric to cast true sight so that you can do something (if you have robe of vecna on a mage this can be alleviated.) So, by my count the Cavalier has one advantage that can't be easily duplicated and the Inquisitor has two. That's not to say one is better than the other, I don't think one is. It is a matter of taste and how you like to proceed like others mentioned, I just wanted to point out that the Inquisitor does have two things that no other class in the game can do as well and the Cavalier has only the one skill which no other Paladin class can duplicate (obviously a Paladin's thac0 won't compare to some other classes even with a +3 bonus.) With the paladin I'll cast my vote on the side of it's a matter of preference.

From an RP standpoint, I'm rather fond of the idea of there being a sect of the Holy Order of Shield Knights that is looked upon a bit differently by their brethren. They are perhaps a bit harsher, and certainly more grim, not showing the brash bravado of their cavalier cousins. Years of hunting rogue mages of immeasurable power and encountering the perverted creations of these mad men have stripped this select sect of the flamboyant air which surround their brothers. They are not the gallant knight upon a white steed riding off to face dragons from the stories of old, stories which make women swoon. These are the men who receive no accolades for their service, yet with grim determination continue their constant vigilance, knowing that while their brothers and their wars will always draw the publics eye because of the obvious valour of their deeds in their war against evil dragons, the evil of mages who have succumbed to the dark is often far more devious and far more dangerous. Let the crowds cheer for their heroic brothers, they do not begrudge them their well earned admirations, the true reward for an Inquisitor is the feel of the flesh of an evil sorceror or lich being torn asunder under his blade and the knowledge that the innocent will sleep well safely tonight, though they knew not their danger.

Got a bit carried away there eh? Anyways, its probably just the name Inquisitor which causes me to look at them as being a bit more grim than the cavalier. I picture the battles with evil mages to commonly be out of sight and not draw the public attention and I think I like the idea of or role playing a character a bit more grim than the way cavaliers are commonly described. You might prefer the shining armor and white steed though -- again, a matter of preference.

[ September 12, 2002, 06:39: Message edited by: Laches ]

 

This is a bit off-topic, but i feel that this would actually somehow help someone. So please bear with me. And lets just contain this with the paladin class.

Padeen,

There are two things that I don't understand.
First, the way you write.
And second, the way you write.

Allow me to expound.
First, the way you write.
This problem is not that important, you probably know it. There are some problems with spellings and grammar. Some of your sentences are leading nowhere or are simply followed by other sentences that made your point hard to understand. Although I'm sure a lot of people out there understood you, so I don't really care about that (it might just be me). You're learning, just as I am. Keep on writting and you'll probably be one of the best poster here.

And second, the way you write.
Now this is a serious problem. If this goes unchecked it might cost you your reputation as a paladin master or expert. And someone had brought that up already. Here are some of your flaws:

1. Wrong information - you have stated the right facts for the wrong kit. We are only talking about paladin kits of BG2, so there are only:

• Cavalier
• Undead Hunter
• Inquisitor

Just 3 of them but you already got more than half of your descriptions into the wrong kit. You talk a lot about the paladin in general but I got a feeling that the info you gave are what you think they should be and not what it should have been. It would have been better if you just cut and paste the information into your post. Advise... know your area of expertise.
You give too much highlight to the cavalier, put down the inquisitor too much, and vaguely said anything about the undead hunter. A paladin master does not put down his own. A paladin master recognizes the strenght and weaknesses of his fellow paladin. And would be able to give recommendations that would suit a given circumstance.
Example of what a paladin master would do:
1. First, he would gain answers to questions like: Is Harkle going solo or with a party? Who would Harkle choose to have in his party? If he gets Keldorn, then his best choice would either be cav or UH. Does he have more than one cleric (especially Anomen) if he does, then the cav would provide a more balance party.

2. Second, answer questions like: Does Harkle enjoys simply playing for fun or is he after the challenge of the game? If it is just for fun, you should be able to recommend the kit that would do that, otherwise, the kit that would provide the best challenge.

Advise... analyze things based on strenghts and weaknesses of the kits with respect to preferences of the playing party not on your preferences. If you should present your preferences, do accompany them with ideas or experiences that brought about these preferences.

A paladin master always present things accordingly, stating all the pros and cons. And should be able to recognize instances that the kit should take advantage of or be aware of. Thus making use of his strenghts and protecting his weaknesses.

You mentioned about soloing as a paladin. How many times have you soloed a paladin? If you claimed you are a master, I would assumed that you have by AD&D standards soloed each kit and the plain paladin class at least 3 times each.
(3 times?!)
* - proficient
** - specialised
*** - mastery
**** - high mastery
***** - grand mastery

And fought, at least the last game, as if all these kits are the best. This means that no matter how good or bad the paladin kit is, you are able to bring out the best of it. Thus becoming a master over it.

Therefore, for someone to claim that he/she is a master of paladin he/she should:

• Know the facts by heart.
• Knows how to use the information.
• Is not bias in his/her judgement or recommendation.
• Had played the paladin class and it's kits extensively.

I did mention that most of what you said is correct. They are technically correct, but I still have to analyze which kit are you talking about and made the adjustments myself.
I'm sure that you have noticed that no one here have posted the way that I have just presented, it is because none of us have claimed to be a master of whatever. If you want to keep the title of "Paladin Master", do what a paladin master should do.
So Padeen, those are the two things that I could not understand. Don't take it personally, and no need for further explainations.

I love being an archer.

[ September 12, 2002, 11:47: Message edited by: nior ]

 

You speak wise word but....

I do not want to really put down the others but I hate it when others put down the cavalier. Some dont know he exists and others think that he is pathetic so I wanted this time to show you what it can be like when a master puts down another paladin. I dont often mantion the UH bacause we were having a conversation about inquisitors and cavalires versus ach other. I' have finished the game at least 9 times with a pallie and I have played many other classes. I know I make some mistakes and that is because I have just recently bacame the ultimate mastre(It's hard to remember all of this stuff.). Anyway Im gonna study a bit more and if you wanna hear about UH and nquisitors than tell me and you will hear so much on them you'll get sick of it. I dont want to pu The Inq and UH but this time the post was officially for the cav. V.S the Inquisitor!
Anyway tell me if you need any info on pallies and you'll get it(The ftuff comes from various books)
Padeen and Acauriel!

 

I just got a bit curious and I'm going to be thinking and writing as I do so. Disclaimer -- I'm not a paladin expert and some of this is from experience since I have played the three classes but it is primarily from the written descriptions.

THE UNDEAD HUNTER:
(1) Immune to Hold -- the Cavalier can cast priest spells which includes the fourth level spell free action at level 15 and since the Inquisitor is also immune to hold at level 15 all paladins can achieve this advantage without equipment.

(2) Immune to level Drain -- very helpful but again a Cavalier can cast priest spells which include the fourth level spell negative plane protection at level 15. The Inquisitor will have to rely on the amulet of power which is easy to come by. So, again they are all capable of achieving this advantage but the Inquisitor must rely on equipment, although it is easily attained.

(3) +3 to hit and damage against undead -- none of the other kits can achieve this. This is nice but I've never had much trouble hitting undead anyways and the damage is negligible.

(4) Can't use Lay on Hands: neither can the Inquisitor though. Undervalued skill that casts quickly and is great in combat.

THE CAVALIER:
(1) Immune to Fear and may cast remove fear: the Undead Hunter may cast priest spells and at level 9 can cast the first level priest spell remove fear. The Inquisitor will have to rely on a cleric to cast this spell before battle (this is only an issue if you choose to solo, otherwise it isn't a big deal whatsoever)or items like the DragonSlayer which make you immune to fear.

(2) Immune to Poison: Undead Hunter's can cast the spell slow poison at level 11 which isn't quite as good as immunity but is close. The Inqusitor will need to rely on a cleric or the easily attainable Periapt of Proof Against Poison. Again, it turns out to not be a huge advantage.

(3) 20% resistance to fire and acid: the Undead Hunter is capable of casting the third level priest spell protection from fire which absorbs 80% of magical fire damage at level 13. Also, resist fire is a level 2 spell that absorbs 50% of all magical fire damage at level 11. Also, the ring of fire resistance gives 40% resistance , helm of defense +20% fire resistance, red dragon scale +50% fire resistance, or the dragon scale shield sets your fire resistance to 25% (this could hurt so careful.) All in all, you can get a lot of fire resistance for an Inquisitor just by playing the game, not a huge advantage for anyone here.

(4) +3 to hit and damage to demons and draconic creatures: none of the other kits can achieve this. The +3 to damage isn't that great a boon in my opinion but the +3 to hit is very, very nice. Unfortunately, there aren't many dragons or demons in the game relative to other types of creatures.

(5) Can't use missle weapons: won't use them much anyways, I believe you can take advantage of a game flaw and use throwing axes if you want but not certain.

THE INQUISITOR:
(1) Can't use preist spells, turn undead, cure disease, or use Lay on Hands: the turn undead and cure disease aren't too big a loss since to turn undead you can't do anything else and disease isn't particularly worrisome. Laying of Hands is very nice and a loss but not a huge one particularly if you have clerics, they'll just be slower in casting. However, occasionally the quick speed of LOH is the difference. The loss of priest spells is a big blow and I think that the priest spells are undervalued. Armor of Faith, Bless, Protection from Evil, Aid, Chant, Draw Upon Holy Might, Resist Fire, Holy Smite, Protection from Fire, Death Ward, Defensive Harmony, Free Action, Holy Power, and Negative Plane protection are all great spells. Maybe the best is the level one spell Doom but I'm not certain that Paladins can cast it though I suspect they can.

(2) Can cast dispel magic at twice his level once per day: no other class in the game can do this. It is not only incredibly powerful but also incredibly quick. A truly powerful weapon but a double edged sword that can remove your parties enchantments as well and therefore should be used with a bit of forethought and strategy rather than just throwing it about heedlessly.

(3)True Sight: Another great ability, the description doesn't say that it casts quicker but my experience indicates that it does. None of the other paladin kits can do this though a mage or cleric in their party can.

(4) Immune to hold and charm spells: the immunity to hold is talked about above. The Cavalier and Undead hunter can achieve this immunity via items such as the Helm of Charm Protection.

CONCLUSION:

(A) The Undead Hunter has one advantage over the other kits that can't be easily duplicated, the plus to hit and damage against undead but they aren't that hard to hit in my experience anyways.

(B) The Cavalier has one advantage over the other kits that can't be easily duplicated, the plus to hit and damage versus demons and dragons but there aren't that many of these creatures in the game.

(c) The Inquisitor has two advantages over the other kits that can't be easily duplicated and they probably would come into use more than the advantages of the other kit but they also give up the most, noticeably the lack of priest spells.

So, there are the choices in my opinion, the Cavalier or Undead Hunter with their less powerful advantage or the Inquisitor with his more powerful advantages but more restrictive disadvantage. The designers did a great job balancing these kits in my opinion, the only way they could've balanced it a bit more is to have thought of a way to make the choice of a pure paladin more attractive making the choice that much harder.

[ September 12, 2002, 21:31: Message edited by: Laches ]

 

Laches, you present a very good argument, but there are some additions I feel I need to make.

The Amulet of Power cannot be used by any Paladins, leaving the Inquisitor forced to use either the Mace of Disruption or face the Level Drain. The Cavalier can cast Negative Plane Protection, that is true. However, at level 15, vampires are not much of a challenge anyway and the spell lasts for such a pathetically short duration, that it is not worth the effort.

I actually have not found this to be that great, but that might be because I tend to take enemies down very quickly anyway. Early in the game, it is great, however as your hitpoints get stronger, the ability doesn't get much better. 2xLevel is nothing worth crying about, but I agree, it's nice in an emergency. It is easy to do without.

Aye, you can. However, doing this pretty much forces you into using a two-handed weapon, but that's not really a big deal.

Personally, I think that disease is one of the more annoying abilities in the game. Any cleric at this level can cure it on their own however. This is a pretty nasty loss if you are soloing, however.

They can. That only gives the enemy a -2 penalty though, and since you weren't that impressed with +3 bonuses, I'm surprised you would be with this. I'd say remove fear is the best first level spell.

I honestly don't know why anyone is impressed with the dispel magic ability of the Inquisitor. It will not dispel most of the protections that enemy mages are likely to use. The best use of it that I can see is to remove unpleasant effects (Charm, Confusion, etc.) from party members. This is a double-edged sword, however, as it also removes beneficial effects.

The immunity to hold of both the Inquisitor and the UH is also nothing to write home about. Most of the enemies later on in the game use stun, not hold. Neither kit is immune to this. The spell Free Action, or the Ring of Free Action is the only way to become immune to that effect. BTW, IIRC, the Helm of Charm Protection won't stop any sort of hold effect.

[ September 12, 2002, 22:50: Message edited by: Rastor ]

 

Rastor, one note about the dispel magic ability. It has been a while but I'm certain that my Inquisitor's dispell magic cut through all of the mages nasty combat protections, things like stoneskin were out the window. I wish I could recall whether it takes out things like protection from magic weapons -- kind of important to remember, heh. Normally dispel magic won't take these out when my mages cast it but I recall distinctly that stoneskins disappeared when the Inquisitor casts it so it may well do the same with other combat protections -- someone with more gumption than me would test it : )

My Inquisitor was only my second character well over a year ago, I had no clue then when to use all of the magics such as breach or pierce shield. What I seem to recall though is I didn't have to lear until I started playing mages because my Inquisitor could destroy all of the combat protections AND spell protections of the enemy mages with his double dispel magic thereby allowing not only physical damage from the party but allowing the mages to cast damaging spells.

Now, it is entirely possible that I'm losing my mind and remembering things wrong, but this is how I seem to recall it. Anything that destroys not only combat protections but spell protections is a potent weapon.

EDIT -- oh forgot to add that the great thing about doom in my opinion is that it is cumulative and casts so quickly. You can fire off a couple along with one or two from a cleric in no time and all of a sudden that's a penalty of 8 to the monster. ALso, just to clarify, I don't think the +3 to hit and damage versus undead is a tremendous advantage since hitting them is typically not a problem I've found and 3 extra damage doesn't seem that much to me since they don't usually last long enough for it to accumulate, but it is nice. I don't think the +3 damage to dragons and demons is tremendous but it is nicer than the undead damage since the fights last longer and the extra damage tends to accumulate more, the +3 to hit versus dragons and demons is very very nice I think since they can be more difficult to hit for some characters.

[ September 12, 2002, 23:45: Message edited by: Laches ]

 

Well for what it's worth here's my 2 cents...

I haven't played with my protagonist as a Paladin yet - however, from having Keldorn in my parties (at least for a short time) the Inquisitor Dispells and True Sight are very useful against mages and Liches.

But if I played AS a Paladin (which I may well do next time I start from the beginning) I would probably be the Cavalier; assuming you aren't soloing, you can have clerics and/or mages Dispel Magic and cast True Seeing if you need to; as for level drain, use the Amulet of Power or Mace of Disruption+2 - before you get these you can usually handle most vampires/level draining creatures without much drain and again, simply use a Cleric if you do. Finally - I don't know if this is true or not yet, but if Cavaliers can't use ranged weapons EXCEPT throwing axes, there is a very good throwing axe which damages undead for extra called Azuredge that you can buy (or steal, but being an honest Paladin you'd buy ) very early on in the game from Bernard in the Copper Coronet.

 

Thanks for help. I've played cavalier now three weeks and I'm soon in chapter 4.

 

I think Cavaliers are also immune to Charm? Or is it added in ToB?

 

Harkle can your Cavalier use throwing axes? Especially the ones that can return to your hand?

If so I think I'll definitely be a Cavalier next time!