What is the best (IYO) paladin class?

Remove all ads!

Most say the the Inquistitor is best because of his dispelling effects and his immunities. Undead Hunter is also good because of his immunities as well as being able to cast spells and turn undead. I never had much use for the cavalier or his abilites...... he just seems like a no lose thing since not many paladins use ranged weapons(Holy Avenger). The immunity to charm seems like a waste because I usually have some item on that gives immunity to it. The Undead Hunter's Level Drain immunity seems pointless as well since you get that amulet from Aran prior to having to fight any vampires. I just don't like the Inquistior because of his lack of many paladinish abilities that I was looking foward to from BG1. Mabye you can convince me.......

 

Good you threw up this amazing discussion *again*

Anyway, I think you're completely wrong about the cavalier which is in fact the by far best pally kit in bg-2. His melee-only restriction is not at all a disadvantage (missile weapons are for chicken-pallys) and level-drain-immunity is for cheating cowards only
The inquisitors abilities are nice and useful but not necessary, finally I liked the turn-undead and remove-fear, just like the limited cleric spellcasting, better.
The cavalier's resistances and immunities + his THACO boni on dragons and demons make him actually more powerful when fighting the really dangerous enemies - who's afraid of a vampire or a mage ?

[This message has been edited by Ragusa (edited November 15, 2001).]

 

hmm, well.. as much as i detest paladins, the cavalier is the only one i like. I'm more of a Ranger and Theif player..

 

Cavalier; no contest. I have to agree, though; this has been done a few too many times :s Ahh well...

 

An inquisitor is far too overpowered, with its immunities and spells. Cavalier is very suited for Role-Playing, and the bonuses make much sense for the "classical" knight.

 

I hate Paladins, I hate rangers and I hate goodie-two-shoes. But since you asked for the opinions of others I'll throw in my 2 cents.

Cav Kit: Whoopy-freakin do, a few resistences to fear, acid and the like and extra damage on demons and dragons. In SOA his overall use is questionable. Ask yourself how many demons and dragons are fought in SOA. Not many. Of course ToB is another story.

Inquis Kit: Overall, I feel this guy is okay long term and short term (ie Tob and SoA). He is the Pally to use against mages and there are many formidable mages in SoA and imminity to hold and charm is always a bonus.

Undead Hunt Kit: I question the long term use of this guy (in ToB undead are few are far between). But in SoA this guy can be considered okay cause there are countless undead. Immunity to level drain is a bonus.

General comment on Pallies:

- I feel the max of two profiency points in a weapon is kinda disapointing.You want a meat-axe brawler? Get a fighter Kit.

- Of course, the Holy avenger evens this out and is probably the only reason why you want a Pally.

- A Pally is more effective in combat than healing. Healing should be done by Clerics.

- Turn undead; again, save it for clerics. Who needs to use that useless ability anyways? Kill them and get the ex-pe quickly! The way I play, I bash undead into oblivion before they even pose a problem

S



[This message has been edited by Satanatron (edited November 16, 2001).]

 

Turn undead is not useless. By the way you worded it, I am not sure of what you were saying, but turning undead still gives you experience when you kill them by that means. Maybe that's why you don't think turn undead is so good, you haven't experienced it's full capabilities, or maybe you have. But let me tell you, when you go walking into a room with a cleric or paladin and within two seconds all undead have combusted on the spot, then you know turn undead is anything but useless. Not to mention if you're evil and you can get some on your side. Sure this takes a higher level to achieve this outstanding accomlpishment but that's what the big Chapter 6 fight with Bodhi and ToB and TDD are for. And a solo cleric and Paladin will definately appreciate this ability.

OK now to Paladins. I root for Inquisitor. Yes I suppose I am jumping on the True Sight/Dispel Magic bandwagon. So what. It's not really that big a deal, paladins are paladins. Some are just better at certain things than others. Take your pick, BG2 delivers when it comes to variety.

 

I love Cavaliers, especially the way I got mine, Launcelot of the Lake, tricked out:

Main Weapon: Carsomyr
Second Weapon: Daystar
Third Weapon: Dragonslayer
Armor: Red Dragon Scale
Amulet: don't remember the name, the one that gives you 10% resistance to magic

So, now I have a character with the following resistances:
Immune to Poison, Fear, and Charm
70% Resistance to Fire
20% Resistance to Acid
60% Resistance to Magic
Can Cast Dispel Magic 3 times a day, Sunray once a day, Detect Illusion once a day, in addition to all his other abilities! And the only thing I had to sacrifice was weapons mastery and missile weapons? Shoot, where do I sign up?

Bottom line: CAVALIERS!!!

 

Satanatron,
basically grandmastery is about the most overrated ability in BG-2. The boni ti gives are nice and useful but you can come along splendidly with ** since ***** just gives you a little better speed and damage. IMO only the kensai- and archer-kits really benefit from grandmastery.

 

If you know in advance that you will play with a specific weapon, then it is always better to use grand mastery.
But everyone probably knows my opinion on the non-AD&D rules for weapon profs now by now

 

i play as a paladin cavalier in both BG's in icewind dale and in D&D, there is no contest. basically a hard-nut, they stand out front taking minimal damage slaying the enemies while your friends with missile weapons stand behind you (out of danger!) and fire from a long distance.

 

I'm aware of how experience works with "turn undead" Big B.

My comments were based purely on the fact that I am a violent and impatient bastard when it comes to playing BG. Undead especially. Perhaps I have underrated the ability because it is obvious to see how it can complement your style of play. But personally, I found turn undead a useless ability because no undead creature lives long enough to pose a threat regardless of difficulty. The ability takes too long to become "effective" for my liking. And even if it did destroy most or all undead within two seconds, big deal. My fighters wouldn't take too much longer.


As for grand mastery, well thanx whoever it was who told me about its effectiveness. But I'll stick to my guns about grand mastery being more useful to me than turn undead because I'm a more offensive melee player when it comes to undead.

Turn undead... bah! That's pretty much a euphemism for "cowardly ability to avoid and occassionally destroy piss-weak laughable reanimated monsters".

S



[This message has been edited by Satanatron (edited November 17, 2001).]

 

Satanatron; but doesnt it annoy you when youre trying to rest and gangs of about 6 shadow fiends keep harassing you from your slumber? It certainly does me, and thus there is nothing more satisfying than turning undead and seeing them all keel over instantaneously rather than wasting 5 minutes hacking away at them.

Also, it has been said that you dont meet many demons/dragons etc in SOA. Not true; there are 5 dragons which you can kill (all of which are major battles on par with any of the other "boss" characters you meet) and tonnes of demons. The abyss becomes an excellent source of xp is you've got the balls to hack your way through it after getting the demon heart you need, for example.

[This message has been edited by Will (edited November 17, 2001).]

 

Actually it doesnt Will. I welcome the monsters with a sword (or a hammer for undead) and I usually dont rest in dungeons. I usually do a marathon run and do all that's required in the one fell swoop. Like I said, I'm impatient.

As for dragons and demons, I stand by my prior comments. Why would a pally kill a silver dragon, and animal of compassion virtue and honour - isnt that against all he stands for? And as for the dragon in hell, again, why would a pally want to kill that and become fallen? (at least I think it would make you fallen...)

As for demons, I still believe there isnt enough demon battles to justify a long term interest in a Cav in SoA.

Anyways, I think we are probably going off on a tangent with some of these topics.

S

[This message has been edited by Satanatron (edited November 17, 2001).]

 

If you want to see Turn Undead at it's best, put Anomen in your party. He can fell whole gangs of the undead by himself. What he can't get with that, his Holy Smite spell finishes off.

 

Don't put Anomen in your party, he's a fool. A paladin can do good enough with turn undead. Besides only chickens use it anyway. Its not very fun compared to walking up and useing a sword to kill them.

[That's an interesting thing to say for one with your nickname - BTA]

[This message has been edited by Blackthorne TA (edited November 17, 2001).]

[Its also more fun to kill them with a bow than have them all die at once. With a bow they at least have a chance ]

[This message has been edited by Archer14 (edited November 23, 2001).]

 

Hi Satanatron,

Not sure whether you just don't rate turn undead or you just don't see the point of having it on a paladin if you already have a cleric.

Anyway, turn undead is very useful, especially if you are really that "impatient b**d" you speak of. Would you rather gibb a room full of undead in 6 seconds, or take 5 minutes to kill them all?

I walked into a room in TOB the other day that had like 30 shadows, shadow fiends, death fiends etc etc in it. Aerie started to turn undead and 6 seconds later gibbs were flying everywhere. I then walked out and carried on, whole thing took about 30 seconds real time. Now that is just right for the impatient player isn't it?
It would have taken keldorn, minsc, and my fighter 5 minutes real time to hack their way through them, plus all of the time to recover those lost strength points etc and get the party back into shape to carry on.

Or is it that you are really just the "violent b**d" you mentioned? and hence would prefer to here the slice of a longsword or the slap of the hammer? No problem there.

In which case, don't use turn undead and take longer to kill the enemy. Your choice...

Just because an ability in the game doesn't fit your playing style, doesn't mean the ability is useless.

Cheers,

WittyNewt

 

What do you think is better, a paladin with a two handed sword or one with a bastard sword and a large sheild. Baring in mind that there are two proficiencies on both and he has a high dexterity giving him the extra AC modification?

 

The two handed sword. Even if you wanted a shield, I'd take a long sword instead of a bastard sword. The reason is because a bastard sword is a lot slower and only has +1 minimus damage, and aslo because there are almost no good bastard swords in the game(I don't know about in ToB though). The reason you want a two handed is for the holy avenger, a +5 two handed sword(that only Paladins can wield) that grants 50% magic resistance and dispels on hitting the enemy. I wish the they had balanced out the powerful magic items more so you could choose whatever you like. I also pictured a Paladin carrying a shield though.

 

I always like undead hunters. becasue of their immunity to lvl drain. it is one of my pet peeves. i find it annoying. but, i have to say that in raw power the caviler is more better.