Armoured Arcana vs. ranger level

Remove all ads!

I was mulling over feats that I had dismissed earlier, and I noticed that Mage Armour (and I believe the Shield spell) works in conjunction with a shield, meaning you get both armour bonuses.

Spoiler

If you're not (yet) proficient with shields, don't worry: you can buy a shield from some guy at the trade depot in Targos for 400gp (can barter down to 300), and this shield has 5% spell failure and an armour check of -0. This means that your penalty to attack bonus, Hide, Move Silently and Pick Pockets is minus zero. Ouch!
Correction: Knucklehead actually has 15% spell failure, but another shield has 5% failure and -0 armour penalty: Sad Giant's Cap. You can find this quite early too.

So I was wondering what is best to improve your mage: A ranger level for dual-wielding and nearly all weapon/armour proficiencies, or taking a single feat in Armoured Arcana, to utilize the numerous bucklers you can find in the game?

Armoured Arcana costs you a feat, which mages do need to enhance their spellcasting, but it allows you to get an AC bonus, which helps mages even when not in melee.
A ranger level allows mages to use all kinds of weapons, as well as dual-wield them, so this can have numerous bonus effects. But when not in melee, mages don't technically need dual-wielding ability, OR proficiency, to simply equip two weapons. The mage's attacks aren't too bad in Heart of Fury, not far behind my warriors (I maxed CON not STR) But this does set you back a level in your casting class...

I decided to make it into another poll What would you do? Take a feat, take a mix-in level, do both, or neither?
Personally, I'd go for both, relying on Armoured Arcana for most of normal mode, but taking the extra attack (of equal attack bonus to the first attack -2) later on, to dual wield those varied HoF weapons

 

I've never taken AA in any of my run throughs and I've never missed it. The ranger levels are only good for getting the extra damage on your chosen enemy IMO and it takes so long to be able to pick new enemies that it seems almost pointless.

If I feel like multiclassing later on then I'll occasionally add a ranger but generally I find it's best to mix in a couple of fighter levels. You get the skills and a hit point boost

 

If I went for Armored Arcana, I'd take a Fighter level so I could get several ranks faster and in order to get some armour proficiency.

I'm not a big fan of Rangers (still, I included a Sorcerer/Ranger in my last party for fun but the Ranger level didn't bring much to the build).

Don't make to much of dual wielding, if it's not a warrior it will only allow a character to suck one more time per round.

Regarding Armored Arcana I've tried it before and it is a bit of a waste of feats. One rank is ok if you want to use a shield and get rid of the 5% failure but considering more is a bit iffy. I've tried a heavy armoured spellcaster and an arcane failure of 10-15% would often result in spells being wasted (more often than what could be expected from the numbers). It turned out that character was more useful when using scrolls or pre-fight buffing (taking off the armour).

If you consider effectiveness then the first option is the only one I choose in your poll, if not then it doesn't matter because nobody said you couldn't play a spellsword instead of a nuker. I may like weird multiclasses but they don't make uber spellcasters.

 

Well, if you value feats like Dodge and Expertise for your mages, then Armoured Arcana should rank in there too. One feat in this will allow you to wear certain bucklers safely, that you couldn't use before without risking spell failure. So, it can be seen as an AC bonus, something useful for casters especially in normal mode.

 

I'd take bracers +5 (and a Ring of Mage Armor, Phaen's Robes and Cat's Grace to begin with) and eventually a bow or a crossbow (like the hellthrower -the one with 3 attacks) to save spells against regular foes rather than invest in Armored Arcana for the sake of a shield (if we limit these to the ones with 5% of casting failure it doesn't seem to be a stellar choice either, Dodge is still better -it works with bows and crossbows).

There's always the possibility of using Leto's Scar instead in the off hand (dual wielding for fun only, it's not like the poor spellcaster is going to hit anything anyway but the AC bonus doesn't come with any spellcasting failure).

Even worse, feeling a bit malicious, I'd switch between shield and no shield just to cast my spell.

 

I guess that I never worried all that much about AC for my mages. I generally looked at it this way ... if my mage was really having to worry about AC, then the rest of my party wasn't doing its job in protecting my mage. (Of course, if you're playing a smaller party or solo, it could easily be a bigger concern.)

@Caradhras: I actually always enjoyed playing rangers, regardless of the fact that they're a comparatively weak class. Given that you can beat normal mode with many, many different combos, I never felt the massive urge to overly powergame my parties to the point that it was simply too easy. Besides which, I actually enjoy playing stealthy characters. Heck, I've also played fighters who mix in a level of rogue every so often (plus starting as a rogue), so that they can be stealthy while wearing chain mail.

When I'm in an area where stealth can be useful, I love sending a team or 2 or 3 stealthy characters ahead of the rest of the party to try to take out an enemy spellcaster unaware, and then have the remainder of the party come a-running when the fun begins.

Sure, pure rangers aren't powergaming monsters extraordinaire, but they are completely usable and can be fun to play if you make use of their talents.



re: Armored arcana: I never used it myself, strictly because I always was much more concerned with keeping my mages out of melee, and used buffs, like stoneskin to give them some protection vs ranged attacks. I saved my mage's feats for more "mage" oriented feats like spell focuses.


re: bow or crossbows: Oddly enough, I never would give my crossbow using mages the Hellbolter. The way I looked at it was that mages' BAB's weren't all that good, so I'd given them the Xbow with the best attack bonus, rather than the one with a lower AB but more shots. I'd give the Hellbolter to a character with a higher normal BAB to get the most value out of it.

 

Powergaming is only an option, not a necessity. Some less effective builds can be more fun in the long run because it forces the player to use different tacks instead of going for massive area of effect spells and the like.

@Crucis: good point about the Hellbolter (I couldn't remember the name correctly) I'd rather have more attacks for a non fighter (for regular fighters I'd use a crossbow with more damage instead). "Silent but Deadly" just like the bow in LoS.

I gave it some more thought and I would perhaps consider Armored Arcana with a Fighter Mage who will definitely have many many feats (wearing studded leather without spellcasting penalty is not fantastic but to be honest you don't get five bracers +5) but otherwise I don't think I would (which doesn't mean I won't give it a try just to see for myself what are the pros and cons of using it).

 

"Only an option": yes, true. And I wasn't really dissing powergamers. I'm not a true role-player, I suppose, since I've always semi-optimized my IWD2 characters' stats. I just don't go as far as more serious powergamers when it comes to lowering less important stats or with certain class choices.

I do think that less than optimal builds and class choices can be very fun. I think that pure rangers and pure rogues can be very fun to play, and have had plenty of fun with them myself.

Some might say that pure rogues require a lot of "micromanagement" to play properly... Well, since I have never EVER used IE's party AI functionality for any IE game, that's a complete and total non-issue for me. I don't see these IE games as single character games, but as games where it's the players job to play the entire party. And I don't want to turn over control of the other party members to the computer. I want to have total control of overy party member. I like to treat my parties like well-trained combat units, rather than a rag-tag bunch of people who go running of willy-nilly. I actually love micromanaging my parties and wouldn't have it any other way!!!

Caradhras, in truth, it's probably one of those statistical things where you may actually be better off firing multiple shots at a lower AB than a single shot at a higher AB. I guess that I just like the imagry of letting my xbow using mage get in the best single shot possible.

re: Silent but Deadly: I remember the name, but don't even remember the bow. It's been that long since I looed at LoS.

I agree. For a Ftr/Mage, Armored Arcana may be a very good choice. Let me say that for a Ftr/Mage, AA is a much more viable option.

 

Silent but Lethal is found just lying in a container in the Targos area, and it gives +3 AB, +4 dmg, +4 Hide & +4 Move Silently. It's a shortbow with a blue handle, and no STR requirement. Ideal for any rogue/mage.

I like to micromanage my party too; I have autopause:Spell Cast switched on, and every right or wrong move your party makes, counts. Especially with this game. I'm playing normal mode in Insane difficulty (enemies do double damage) and getting used to reloading even with minor encounters. I just entered the Wandering Village map, and thought that Thvara Baelm would be a pushover. Reload. Got out the summons, and set some Web/Entangle/Grease/Spike Growth/more Grease to create a sticky mess for the enemy. Cast 2 fireballs before letting my undead summons advance. I must say that the Hold effect on Chromatic Orbs are still lifesaving - they stop Thvara or the barbarian shaman in their tracks, though only temporarily: Unless they are both held, the other casts Remove Paralysis. I never realized how special Chromatic Orb is: It takes a reflex save to avoid paralysis, while most other spells make a will save. Very useful against the many clerics in the Ice Temple.

Oh, and the description doesn't say it, but Hagnen's Folly crossbow also has multiple attacks. You loot it off the head aurilite ranger in the Andora village (chapter 2) and it's better than the Hell Bolter, I think: +3AB, +3dmg. And Rapid shot does apply. If AB is most important you could buy Shukonu (LoS mod item) in the Wandering village: +4AB, +2dmg, but it's a bit of a waste if you already have Hagnen's Folly. I always end up selling the Hell Bolter. And the one Dragu drops after raiding the duergar encampment is better than the one he gives you (one is the Doom Bolter, the other the Hell Bolter). EDIT: Wrong, the Hell Bolter is +4AB +4dmg, and gives 2 extra attacks!

As for the fighter/mage concept: Since Mirror Image is perhaps the best protection from damage (cheesy almost), I often use my mages in melee combat, especially in difficult fights. With 16STR and a paladin level quite early, my sorceress is a juggernaut with the Moonblade of Selune, Gauntlets of Weapon Skill, and the Sad Giant's Cap buckler. It's just annoying that sometimes she fails a spell because of the buckler. That's why taking one feat in Armoured Arcana is high on my list of priorities.
One of the tactics i often use for strong groups, is to set up a killzone, to tie the advancing enemies down, and blast them with spells. But if they're behind a doorway or small passage, it difficult to achieve. Another favourite tactic of mine is to Stoneskin-Mirror Image-Blur-Blink my sorceress, and send her in to cast all her Sunfires in rapid succession. In this case, it's just hoping that she saves against dispelling.

 

I stopped using it and didn't give it to my Sorceress in my current party. I was quite surprised to see that I didn't really miss it so far.

I have a Bard/Barbarian and I considered Arcane Armour for a while but eventually discarded it. That guy is there for support and is more of a tank I don't care that much for a few low level Bard spells.

In the end I guess it all comes down to a specific situation requesting a different way to confront the opposition.

 

Kudos for the sorceress w/no MI, how do you keep her out of harm's way? In my experience, keeping her in the back sounds easy in theory, but the AI seems to target her anyway.
In the past (before I got the hang of using IWD2 spells, and was fresh out of the melee-oriented BG2) I always picked/memorized Mirror Images, but didn't use them often enough. Now that I know when to cast them before battle, and when not to cast and wait if the AI targets her, I'm having a much easier time!
I'm thinking about which characters can use the Armoured Arcana best, and I've come to the following conclusions:
* My Rogue2/Illusionist might take it, but I'm not sure how early I'll take a ranger level with her: Using warrior items (I'm thinking STR-bonus belt) might be desirable early, but maybe I'l try a different approach this time. I'll probably take an Armoured Arcana feat. Even though she uses a bow mostly, she will switch to a melee weapon when targeted, if only to avoid the +4AB to enemies in melee, and these are the crucial moments that her spells mustn't fail.
* The Paladin1/Sorceress gets a level ranger at around level 12 (LoS quest for a good ranger in the Wandering Village, right, crucis? It's not essential, but I do want the bow w/STR bonus to damage). This makes it better for her to just wait it out, and dual-wield. If I hadn't taken the ranger level early, then I would've gone for Armoured Arcana.
* The Monk1/Druid would lose WIS AC if using shields, so no Armoured Arcana.
* And my Bard is probably the character that could use it best, since my diva will be singing, an AC bonus does more than any weapon could.

 

Well my Sorceress has one Ranger level (yes, I know I keep posting how taking a Ranger level is a bad idea... It's like do what I say not what I do... ) she has a good DEX which gets even better with Cat's Grace, add Barkskin and Stoneskin (Shield when things get heavy) plus nice shiny items (especially bracers +5 but also minor ones like the ring of mage armour and Phaen's robe) she is often in the middle of the fray dual wielding (not much damage though) and casting fire spells like there is no tomorrow. Vampiric Touch is effective too. After my Druid/Monk she has the second best AC in my party while my tank has a rather mediocre AC but loads of hitpoints. My tank (Barbarian/Bard) doesn't care though, he wields a two hander and deals enough damage to keep enemies at bay and he has the benefit of wearing the Periapt of Wound Closure and his good friend the Cleric is always at hand to cast heal to keep him healthy.

So far the only character who would benefit from Armored Arcana is the Barbarian/Bard but he is more of a Barbarian so it's not really first on my list.

Intense buffing can change the outcome of many battles, Barkskin + Stoneskin work wonders together (especially with Cat's Grace for high DEX characters). I don't even take into account Cleric buffs which tend to have a shorter duration though.

Lately I haven't been using ranged weapons much. When you start getting good spells, the usefulness of ranged weapons tends to decrease.

 

Wow. You remember LoS better than I do.

Yep, that's a good way to do spellcasting... use spells with saves that are harder to make ... reflex and will saves. It's a big reason why I always like Will save based spells, most particularly in HOF mode, where Fort saves are so very high.

I think that I once tried a fighter/mage in IWD2, but I just couldn't get excited about it. It was too much work to constantly cast the buffing spells every time the party had a battle to fight. But I have to admit that it was probably more of a matter of playing style for me.

The "Killzone" was one of my favorite tactics as well. Like you mentioned above, use Grease, Web, Entangle, etc. to make it difficult for the enemy mob to move. Then cast a number of multi-turn damaging spells, like spike growth, spike stones, cloudkill, and so on and so on. It doesn't hurt to use a single really tough summons like an undead monster or a fire elemental to further keep the attention of the enemy mob. And it's really cool when that summoned monster is immune to the multi-turn damaging spells you're using. (Who really wants to kill your own summoned monster in the middle of a nice, nasty killzone?)


Killzones get really nasty in HOF, when you have so many more spells and spell choices to work with. And if you have any sort of Freedom of Movement Item, you can set up the web/grease/etc. part of the kill zone first and send in a fleet footed decoy to get the baddies to follow him back to the kill zone. Then your spellcasters can just start pounding away! The Goblin Warrens can be perfect for killzones ... wide enough for the spells without being too narrow to limit the number of enemies that can get into the kill zone.

 

I tend to rest only when I've exhausted at least 3/4 of my spells, preferably more. Before a diffucult encounter, I cast Barkskin+Stoneskin on all my party, so they run out quickly. The War Chant of Sith is really helping me out in long battles, it seems overpowered, but I'm not complaining.

makes sense, I'm playing it on my laptop as we speak, so I can just check the item descriptions

nah, all saves go up in HoF mode, enemies don't start making their fortitudes more than other saves. In my experience, reflex save bonuses are the ones that stay limited, which is good, since the evocation spells are relatively weaker than in normal mode. But there are monsters in HoF just like in normal mode, which have sky-high fortitude. They're easy to recognize mostly; they always look big and strong

I've never tried to lure with a FoM-equipped character, maybe I'll try that. My party started chapter 3, and is around caster level 8-12. I'm still working with the low-to-medium spells really, and I hope that will cut it against Limha. Something tells me that Insect Plague won't affect her... Many reloads ahead

 

It works quite well if the FoM equipped character is also under stealth (or invis). Just position the FoM character, then cast the movement impeding spells. The instant those spells are in place, the FoM draws the attention of the enemy mob and draws them thru the Grease/Web, etc. Of course, your casters are starting to dump all their nice damaging multi-turn spells onto the kill zone while the enemy mob is stuck, and the flood of damage begins.

Of course, the additional combo of summoned undead and cloudkill, or fire elementals and firey cloud makes for an even nastier kill zone. A summoned monster who is immune to the attacks you're using and keeps the attention of the enemy mob in the kill zone.

BTW, this tactic also works well in IWD1 as well. This tactic can work in BG2, but the number of areas that are just wide enough to be useful without being too narrow to limit the number of baddies you can encompass seemed more limited in BG2 from my recollection. But in the IWD games, the number and layout of dungeons seemed more amenable to kill zone tactics.

 

If you just use a high-DEX character (a ranger, crucis?), preferably wearing Witherbranch Boots or FoM item, you can lure them all the same. My bard doesn't have any FoM item, but he just lures them (while singing Siren's Yearning) and moves back as the web/entangle/grease combo is formed, even topping it off with another grease of his own. If you don't have a FoM item yet (chapter 3 and I still don't), then it doesn't matter. The good thing about Siren's Yearning, is that it stalls any high-reflex & low-will opponents that might have traversed a killzone. And the bard becomes visible the moment that the song is active.

I try to keep summoning and killzone tactics separate whenever possible. Fire elementals don't give XP for kills, so there's a chance you miss out on rewards. If I entered a map, and then summoned and buffed up, then it's very disappointing when you discover that a killzone would be most effective. I keep my summons away from killzones, so if anything makes it through the entangled/webbed/greased area, my zombies can have a go at it.

Maybe the game designers thought that there wouldn't be any problems with pathfinding in the game, because of the large areas. Boy were they wrong. It's my biggest problem with IWD2 gameplay.

 

I would take neither from my mages. I find that my mages tend to stay out of melee 99% of the time. I equip them with ranged weapons and give them high Dex so their AC is decent and they can hit well enough with weapons. If I do on occasion get into melee, I find I can maneuver my other party members to help out or I can simply use Mirror Image or other spells to survive.

There have only been two instances where I have taken a level of ranger. One is when I wanted both weapons and skill points in stealth skills rather than a feat and also wanted access to more weapons. I gave my rogue a level of ranger to get access to a few more ranged weapons.

The other is if I have a melee character that wears light armour or less and wanted the 2WF and AD feat. My current deep gnome ranger/monk is such a character. He is my tank/decoy so he is in melee. Since he wears no armour, he can take advantage of the free 2WF/AD feats. Also, IWD2 does not seem to count your fists as weapons that get the Weapon Finesse bonus. On top of that, you cannot use Weapon Focus on fists where as you can with light blades. Since he has high Dex low Str, I gave him Weapon Finesse and he uses light blades. I start him off as a ranger so he can take Weapon Finesse at level 1. Later I take Weapon Focus light blades. He wields two light blades and gets multiple attacks allowing him to deal pretty good damage, particularly early on.

 

I agree that keeping mages pure is very important, at least in normal mode. In HOF mode, one can make some reasonable arguments about multiclassing in other classes after 20 levels of the prime casting class.

Yes, one ranger level IS a good mix-in for an otherwise pure rogue. You get all the weapons, and most of the skills.

For whatever it's worth, the old Ease of Use mod tweaks fists so that they could as light blades and thus become finesse-able.

 

Fists still have some ways to go when compared to some of the really good light blades I can find. The one from the battlesquares is going to be better than the monk's fists can ever be. On top of that, I can wield a second light blade in my other hand.

 

I don't disagree, Stuntman. I was merely pointing out that the EoU mod does turn fists into finesse-able "weapons". Nothing more. (Honestly, I've never particularly liked the monk class. Finding new items for my characters to use has always been one of the fun things about D&D CRPGs. Characters that need few or no such items seem to be rather boring to me. But as with many other things, tastes vary.)