Let's get to scratching our heads over another party.

Remove all ads!

I've been away from IWD II for a month now and am thinking of returning. Before I start however I'd like to clear up a few things about the charecters. These guys will run through the entire game in Normal and HoF modes.

For now the melee fighter type.
And how a Dwarf stacks up against an HalfOrc, or a Human. I am going to use a Sheild Dwarf for this comparision as I am not much impressed by the other two communities.

SHIELD DWARVES:
Dwarves are short stocky humanoids with ruddy cheeks, dark eyes, and dark hair. Though there are exceptions, they tend to be a dour and taciturn people. Dwarves have a natural resistance to magic and poison and possess darkvision, which allows them to see warm objects in the dark.

Advantages:
+2 to Constitution, (+1HP/level +1 to Fort saves)
+2 to Search, (is this of any use?)
+2 to Fortitude saves against poison, (OK, nut who uses poison in this game?)
+2 to saves against spells, (Now this must rock!)
+1 to hit vs. orcs, goblins, and bugbears, (Very useful till the end of chapter 1)
+4 to AC vs. giants, (err... well... whatever)
Darkvision.

Disadvantages:
-2 to Charisma. (With that ridiculous beard!?! Like it counts)

Favored Class:
Fighter

HALF-ORCS:
Half-orcs are born from the union of human and orc parents. They are as tall as humans, but a little heavier due to their muscular builds. Their greenish pigmentation, sloping forehead, jutting jaw, prominent teeth and coarse body hair make their lineage plain for all to see. Half-orcs are known for their great strength.

Advantages:
+2 Strength (so... effectively +1 to hit & damage vs. everyone)
Darkvision.

Disadvantages:
-2 to Intelligence (that sloping forehead restricts brain growth)
-2 to Charisma. (err... right)

Favored Class:
Barbarian

HUMANS:
Humans are the predominant race in Faerun, and they rule most of the significant empires and kingdoms in the Forgotten Realms. Humans may choose any class.

Advantages:
One bonus Feat at first level, (Always useful)
two extra Skill Points at first level, (whatever)
+1 Skill Point ever level after first level. (with 3Int here I come!)

Favored Class:
Whichever class has the highest level

The idea is to create someone who can sit in the frontlines and do the most damage. So what does it take to create someone like this?
Are fighter levels necessary? If yes how many?
Is weapon specialization worth getting? And maximised attacks?
Can getting Rouge feats such as Evenom Weapon and Arterial Strike make a difference?
Should I get some spells in here too? Or elemental feats?

Is anyone still interested?

 

If all you're interested in is melee power without using any buff spells at all, go with Fighter(4)/Barbarian(x) using Halberds. If you feel really lucky, pick Greataxes and hope for the Massive Greataxe of Flame +5 and/or Tymora's Loop ring to drop.

However, if you consider the various spells, the only thing a warrior is better at than a cleric is getting those extra attacks per round a bit faster. You'll still hit the attack rate cap with level 22 cleric and Haste, so it's not like you need to have warrior BAB's to get there. (If using ranged weapon with Rapid shot, the cap is reached already at level 15.)

 

A full leveled fighter carries with him an impressive number of feats. Don't just pour them all into weapon specalisation, grab the extra saves, the extra combat feats (power attack, cleaves, ambidexterity, two handed weapons) and the toughness feats for even more tankability.

I prefer dwarves as fighters for roleplaying, combat abilities (dodge vs giants does come in handy) and there is alot of poision against the yaun-ti.

 

also, there are quite a number of spiders in the game

 

Fighter/Barbarian is the way I am going too. However since the last time there are a few options which I'd like to understand before I try them.

1> Weapon Specialization: Earlier I would take this as soon as possible in 1 if not 2 weapons. However I am not so sure now if this is really necessary. As such not putting any feat points into weapons makes me more versatile, if a little less effective with my weapons. Or does it?

2> Fighter: Since I am not going to take WS (and WF is useless anyways) why go for Fighter[4]? Instead just take 2 fighter levels and gain 2 extra feats.

3> Barbarian: Once I hit Barbarian[20] and get Tireless rages, there is no need to take additional barbarian levels. Why not take some other class? Perhaps Cleric.

4> Rouge: There will be the standard Deep Gnome decoy in my party. Will the rouge feats Arterial Strike, Hamstring and Evenom weapon make any difference? Can this guy take Rouge[1] specifically for these feats?

5> Spellcasting: Any spellcaster levels I let this guy have, he will still be constrained to 3rd, maybe 4th, level spells. Any class that can make a difference?

 

Depends what you like, really. If you prefer to avoid micromanagement, fighter(4)/barbarian with specialisation in two-handed weapons and Great Cleave is for you.

If you prefer to be ready for everything that combat may bring you, perhaps a pure class fighter, human or dwarves for feat elligibility (lots of feats are human only, or human and dwarven - that's why I suggest human)?

Aasimar is a good choice. It doesn't give that extra feat, but fighter doesn't really care. At least not with the bigger picture in mind. You can have Cleave from start regardlessly, and you'll have Weapon Focus by level 4 when you'll be getting Specialisation. The benefit of Aasimar is 4 stat points for free. Increasing STR by 2 will offset the ECL +1 lower BAB, also helping your weight carrying capacity and damage. Two points remain for the taking. Constitution seems a solid choice.

 

To gain 2 extra feats, you need Fighter 3. Fighter 1 gets you one extra and then it's every two levels after that (ie. Level 3, 5, 7, etc.).

Not a bad idea. Most people play some sort of multi-class character anyways. Other than the various mages, IMO, it doesn't make much sense to go with a single class.

Arterial Strike Prerequisites: At least one level or rogue and base attack bonus of +4 or greater.
Hamstring Prerequisite: At least three levels of rogue.
Envenom Weapon Prerequisite: 1 level of rogue, Alchemy 8 or greater.
So to get all three feats, you need at least 3 levels of Rogue. I don't care about these feats for my characters so if I multi-class in Rogue levels, I usually only take 2 levels.

If it were me, I would look at the Cleric spells so that he could buff/heal himself.

 

Actualy, Vassago fighters get their bonus feats at lvl 1 , lvl2, 4, 6 and so on.

 

The only class I can think of that you wouldn't multiclass is a monk. Every other class hits some kind of 'levels are rather pointless from now on' barrier or they have a 'you might as well add one level of XXX class' for example sorcerer/paladin.

 

Agreed on Monk and would add Paladin to the list. In contrast with the core book version, IWD2's paladins receive spells up to level 6, Heal included IIRC. Paladin spell progression is not fast and the casting level is halved, which makes it more beneficial to stay Paladin full time than to take levels in other classes. For rangers, this works more or less the same with one exception: 3E's Ranger is begging for Rogue levels for evasion and skill points, especially considering the similarities in core class skills.

 

Paladin's don't get heal sadly. Their level 6 spells are: Circle of Blades, Divine Shell and Spiritual Wrath. The best 'cure' spell they aquire is Cure Moderate Wounds.

Considering you only get about one level 6 spell with a level 30 Paladin I wouldn't bother pure classing him. I'd grab the 4 fighter levels and put weapon specalisation on longswords for Cera Sumat.

 

Do you really think that having a full time Paladin is worth it?

A paladin has 3 facets:
1> Great saves and absolute immunity to fear and disease. But Monks can have better saves eventually.
2> Limited spellcasting ability. The spells are basically combat oriented and contain only minor healing capability. They are no comparision to Druids or Clerics.
3> Frontline melee capability. However a Fighter or Barbarian will prove to be better at plain killing.

Honestly the only thing that a Paladin has over everyone else are the immunities and the ability to weild Cera Sumat. And both are available for a 3rd level Paladin. So there is no motive for going on with taking Paladin levels.

Then again I just dont get the Paladin credo and Barbarians just feel more real.

------------------------
As for the recommendations made since my last post:

Its Barbarian as the main class for my melee charecter. That is why Aasimar is not an option. I want to avoid XP penalties as far as possible.
It has to be Human, HalfElf, HalfOrc, Ghostwise Halfling. Dwarves are an option, but then I would have to keep any other classes for the end.

Currently Fighter, Rouge and Cleric seem to be valid mixin options.

 

I would make him/her a Human Barbarian w/ 4 levels of Fighter for Weapon Specialization. I don't see where mixing in Rogue would do much good unless he/she is going to have high dex instead of high str. IMO, maxing str and dex on a character is a waste due to the armors that don't allow much if any dex bonus to armor class. Cleric also would not be a bad option, but if you do that, you're probably only going to want to mix in 2 or 3 levels of Barbarian and then leave the rest as Cleric. If you mix in more Barbarian levels, then you'll start to see a decline in the number of spells that you will be able to cast in the end. Remember also, that a party of 6 in normal mode will only finish around 16-17 levels if none of them have ECL penalties.

 

..that is, if you abstain from level-squatting, muling and/or adding characters along the way. Using those methods can get you up to level 20+ in no time.

 

A barbarian will be better than fighter in plain killing. Well, perhaps not in damage delivery, if the barbarian doesn't have 4 fighter levels for Specialisation, but d12 dice makes some difference compared to d10. Also, damage reduction prevents the taking of damage to some extent, making the barbarian able to offset the fighter's Specialisation. Fighters will have much more feats, but barbarians have a consistent system of progression in benefits of their class.

With proper spells, paladins can get +4 to damage, which is double what Specialisation gives. They can also raise their STR through spells, increasing also attack bonus. A fighter can't do that. He will be Specialised in several weapons, have several saves bumped, have the Power Attack and Cleave chain etc etc, but that's it. Paladins don't need the saving throw feats so much, nor do they use more than one weapon from the point when they get a holy sword. Also, paladins can have the Fiendslayer feat, giving roughly the same as Specialisation against daemons, dragons and the lot.

Of course, you can take paladin of Helm(x)/Fighter(4) and get both, but you will be greatly delayed in obtaining the spells.

 

Just to clear things here, this will be a 4 member party. It will go through Normal and HoF modes. The current party constitution looks like:

LG Aasimar Paladin of Mystra[3]/ Sorcerer[27]
CN HalfOrc Fighter[2] /Rouge[1] /Barbarian[20] /Demarch of Mask[7]
NE Drow Druid[13]/ Dreadmaster of Bane[17]
CG Deep Gnome Rouge[2] /Fighter[2] Bard[1] /Wizard[25]

Right now I'm only talking about the second guy/gal here.

Fighter levels are for the extra feats and heavy armour usage.
Rouge to get sneak attack damage and evenom weapon. Since the decoy will already have attracted everybody's attention there could be some use here.
That particular cleric for the free Blind Fight feat and domain spells and any one elemental feat.

@Jukka
Even with level squatting you only get to L20 at the very end of the game in Normal. This obviously means that muling is pretty useless or incompatible with level-sqatting.

 

With that kind of split, you're only going to be able to cast 1 level 9 spell. You will, however, have quite a few low level so I guess it's a matter of preference.

 

OK, quick question...

What is more useful or beneficial in the long run in the case of my Aasimar Paladin[n]/Sorcerer[x]:

Knowing an extra L3, L5 and L7 spell?
Having complete immunity to fear and disease?

I gotta levelup soon

 

Fear doesn't come into play often. And I've never seen anyone diseased in IWD2, IIRC. Power-wise, the spells would be more useful. And if you have taken sorcerer levels after paladin levels, you can't take any more paladin levels, anyway. Myself, I'm currently playing a level 3 Aasimar paladin whose all further levels will be sorcerer.

My basic impression about spellswords and spell ranks is that you need level 7 spells and you would greatly benefit from level 9 spells, but you can live without level 8 spells, so don't bother getting past level 7 spells if you can't reach level 9 spells. I'm speaking of arcane spells here.

 

Ditto, once you took a level of Sorcerer, you can't go back to Paladin.