Swashbuckler vs Stalker

Remove all ads!

Its just before I rip my head off. I just can´t decide weather I should play the BG Saga with a Swashbuckler or a Stalker. I thought that this post could be used to compare these two classes.
Everytime I think I have decided one a class I read a post somewhere thats makes me change my mind. Or I can´t decide if I should use a human or a elf.

Tell me witch one is the funniest! Tell me witch one is the strongest! Tell me witch one is the best fighter. Witch one is best at dual wielding. Tell me everthing that is to know about these two classes and then compare them.

 

I say go Stalker.

I assume you mean funnest (not funniest), and that depends on whether you want to be a thief or a fighter, and your playing style. Who is stronger and the best fighter? Stalker. As a warrior, they can get exceptional strength and progress in thac0/damage as any other warrior. Which is the best for dual wielding? Stalker. Not only do they start with 2 free points in 2-weapon style, but they have access to every weapon in the game. The swashbuckler doesn't. Also, Stalkers cast druid spells after level 7, and have a few cool mage spells thrown in. Swashbucklers cast no spells.

The swashbuckler can pick locks, pickpocket, set traps, detect illusion and have a higher lore. However, they can't backstab. The stalker is better here becuase they have decent stealth as well as the ability to backstab. Decide what's more important: thieving skills or damaging enemies. Personally, I think the Stalker makes more sense.

As for your race, I'd go with an elf. 19 dex is very helpful, and a 17 in CON won't hurt your HP all that much, especially since warriors roll a d10 for HP (rogues only a d6). Also, if you're planning on taking this character through both BG1 and 2, you can get tomes to boost CON anyway. Plus, elves get a natural bonus with Long Swords and Bows.

Of course, you could always do an elven multi-class fighter/theif, and successfully combine all of the above advantages (except for the spell casting). It would also allow you to achieve a higher backstab modifier than a Stalker (x5 instead of x3). You would advance in levels only slightly slower than a Stalker would. If you plan on taking this character on through the expansion, this would be the way to go for sure (I can't elaborate more within this forum.)

[ July 03, 2003, 16:11: Message edited by: Death Rabbit ]

 

I agree with Death Rabbit's points. The real question here is do you want a thief or a fighter? While a swashbuckler doesn't get the same melee bonuses as a stalker would, keep in mind that there are very few good thieves in BGII, and if your PC is a thief, you don't need any of them. Also, your swashbuckler will eventually have a very low AC. They get a bonus of -1 to their AC every 4 or 5 levels, so by late in the game, you're walking around with -12 armor class without any buffs.

I really can't see why you are so confused as to which to play - they are really quite different classes. The only things a swashbuckler and ranger have in common are: cannot wear more than leather armor, can get two proficiency points in weapons, and three proficiency points in two weapon fighting style.

The stalker is a damage machine that can backstab. A swashbuckler is a thief with better fighting abilities than all other thief classes, but not as good as a fighter, ranger, or paladin, but because he's a thief, you get all the thief abilities except backstab. Since you're playing through the entire BG saga, you should really decide before you start on which NPC's you are going to have in your party, and decide on your PC based on what your party's needs will be.

Oh, one more small point. You said that you are playing through the entire BG saga. If that means that you are going to start with BGI, remember that you CANNOT play any kits in BGI. You will have to be a vanilla thief or vanilla ranger in BGI, but then when you import that character into BGII they will let you select a kit.

 

Thats the plan yes. the reason why I don´t use fighter/thief is that I find kits more interesting and rp. More fun to be a pure class.

 

try with both together

 

No thanks. More than one PC ruins much of the fun I think. Half the fun is the NPC.

 

Ozzi...listen...I want you to read this book...it's called "Mary Can't Make Up Her Mind"

just push the button and get slaying

 

You got a point there. I´ll bets ya a will get so tired of thinking of witch character I shall have, that I get tired of trhe whole game before I even play it.

 

Stalker + Shadow Dragon Armor + Celestial Fury and Daystar(later Blackrazor if you're going ToB after) = Great deal of killings.

 

@ OzziS

That is far more true than you know.

@ Velve

Nice to see ya, bro!

 

If you are going to roleplay - choose the stalker. It makes much more sence if you is trained by a good character and therefore becomes a ranger.

Also, I think the stalker is an excellent kit for roleplaying as well. Think like this:

Ranger = R

R becomes more and more powerfull and learns new things. After having one great adventure he learns new techniques(backstabbing) and abilities(three mage spells) but to use these he must restrict his item so that he wont be too immovable. Could work.


@Death Bunny - Check my topic, the leaving was shorter than believed.

 

it also depends if u want to take the chance of losing your head as you run over traps. OR you could just take the safer way and choose the thief.....but roleplaying wise, i think a stalker might be better.....but if youre soloing, then id say take the swashbuckler

 

Is this good to?
stalker+shadow dragon armor+celestial fury+belm+2?

 

I would prefere the Swashbuckler as I have absolutally no confidence in any of the NPC thiefs whatsoever, Stalkers are not IMHO very good, I think that the avenger would be really cool as it can cast chain lighting (great party friendly area damage spell), Chromatic orb, various other mage spells, druid spells and

 

I did a Swash/Mage once... but I played him wrong. I tried using him as a fighter dual-wielding with backup spells. Don't use a Swashbuckler because he can't backstab. The whole point of a theif is backstab. If you're playing TOB, play an assassin he can get high backstab multiplier which really helps for the higher monsters.

I'd go with a stalker. The Shadow Dragon Armor is awesome for him.

P.S. (Did anyone else notice that OzziS seemed to be drunk with his last reply?

 

I would choose Stalker. IF you don't want Valygar in your party. If you want him in your party, don't take a Stalker. Easy as that.

 

I played the game with a vanilla thief and I only backstabbed twice (or maybe it was three times), anyway it really depends on your style of play, Through the game I made my thief dual wield the short sword of bachstabbing and Celestrial Fury and I enjoyed doing this more than when I backstabbed.

Some people prefere backstabbing, but IIRC most creature worth backstabbing are immune to it (liches, Beholders, Dragons, Demiliches, Barbarians etc.)

 

Assassins with their 7x backstab is GREAT....but since a swashbuckler loses out, youd have to take the stalker.....but then again, you wouldnt want to jump over every single trap, you would miss bonus experience points
i say FLIP A COIN before you rip your head off.....random actions solve all

 

How fun depends on your style of playing. I myself don't backstab a lot so I like Swashbucklers quite a bit. Now, a Stalker is stronger in combat then a Swashbuckler, and I quoteh Irenicus, "It seems logical enough". A Stalker is a warrior class. A Swashy is a rogue class.
As for dual-wielding, both can get 3 stars in two-weapon fighting, but Stalkers starts with 2 stars in that so a Stalker's probably a better dual-wielder.
The extra spells Stalkers get is not all that handy especially since all of them are crammed in the Level 3 Spells which makes you end up choosing Call Lighting anyway.

 

I can't really tell you what to choose because it is your own choice. I would personally go with the stalker because of the good fighting/stealth/backstab combo. The stalker is alot better than the swashbuckler at low level but if there is one thing my best friend has told me it is that swashbucklers are damn good in high level!! ( he has a lvl 20 swashbuckler eho can fight better than keldorn @ lvl 21!!)

Anyway my point is that it is just coosing between a warrior or a theif!