Bioware's Cleric Bias

Remove all ads!

I don't think Charisma helps with Turning Undead in AD&D 2e. I think that's a new rule that came along with 3.0 D&D.

 

>>I don't think that Ctrl-8 thing works with BG1

It does if you use BG1Tutu

Tomes in BG1:
Constitution +1: Flesh Golem Cave near the lighthouse
Charisma +1: Xvart cave at the Gnoll Fortress
Strength +1: In the catacombs under Candlekeep (level 1, in a tomb)
Dexterity +1: In a barrel near Black Lily in the Thieves' Guild
Intelligence +1: In the top floor of Ragefast's tower in Baldur's Gate
Wisdom +1 (3): Part of the 'dead child' sidequest in Baldur's Gate; in the catacombs under Candlekeep (level 1); Level 3 of Durlag's Tower (same level as Riggilo the thief)

 

@Klorox: well if not for turning undead, then for interaction with shopkeepers. Though by the end of SoA, who cares?

 

True, but that's not what you said.

 

Well, BG2 romances are all priests, right. And all female ones are elven. I must some day get down to work and finish off the bard girl...

 

don't you get -1 on dexterity while trying to get the Tears? I've never been able to avoid that one and still follow the good path.

 

This is from Dan's guide (no flaming please ):

I have found a way around it. I came in with my main char and Imoen (I
did the whole game with one but kept Imoen when she returned) so Imoen
was taken hostage. She wore the boots of speed (perhaps haste works
too). I paused immediately when she appeared below and cued her to run
to the bottom left door and open it *from the inside*. Imoen could
just reach this before being held.

The demon was satisfied, gave up the tear and buzzed off without any of
the damage described.

This does not work solo, of course.

 

If someone wants to exploit a bug like this, why not just use SK to add your 1 point of Dex back? It's not really any different.

No flaming intended to you tho.

 

Then what about this:

I found this out quite by accident. A gnome illusionist/thief had a Dispel Magic spell stored away in a Contingency, set to go off if the character became "helpless". Anyway, the i/t was spirited away by Selfish, and had the Hold spell put on him thus rendering him helpless. The Contingency spell therefore kicked in and the dispel magic freed him.

Now he could simply talk to the demon and the GOOD path was automatically chosen. He opened the final left door, which caused the main character to lose some experience, but this was the only penalty I suffered as the other doors are now inactive. No loss of DEX or HP.

A very innovative application of the contingency/dispel magic combo! ...and well within the game rules I might add. Stupid demon.

 

Wellllll... personally I would still consider it a bit of an exploitation. The entire purpose of the 5 demons is to test your PC. And you have to face the consequences of your good or evil decisions. If Bioware had wanted there to be ways to get 'around' the consequences, they would've created ways, not left it to the chance that someone finds something accidentally because the game isn't capable of reacting to strange circumstances. If it wasn't for the fact that you are playing a CRPG, which isn't capable of forseeing and defeating every possible exploitation, and which doesn't have a real living DM who can react to such exploitation by not allowing it, this wouldn't be possible. Had there been a bit better forsight by devs, or a DM playing, your illusionist/theif would've just been immediately held again.

I just look at it like this. Anytime you are exploiting the fact that you are playing a CRPG and getting away with things because of engine limitations, poor foresight by devs, or whatever, even tho it's quite obvious what you're doing isn't something the devs intended to be possible, then its exploitation and something I will try my best to avoid.

However, this is certainly one of those, "To each his own" deals. Which is why I certainly won't flame anyone who likes to exploit these things. Just making my opinion known. To me, why even work out all of these accidental/convoluted/lucky ways of breaking the intention of the game. If you want your point of Dex back, just add it back with SK. To 'me' it's no different.

 

@Xindell: I consider cheating a deamon out of stealing my dex a very legitimate thing to do. After all, you just cheated a demon, which probably deserves it! I think that mentioning Bioware's intentions is a bit of a metagaming practice. But then, as it was said, to each his own.

One thing I have been trying to determine, though, is whether a cleric (or figher/cleric, my preference) is, in fact, the most powerful player one can create. Perhaps the fact that you have high stats in all abilities means you shouldn't restrict yourself to a class that exploits only wisdom? Would a kensai/mage, for example, be more powerful, if the two went toe-to-toe? And what about Half-Elven Cleric/Ranger?

 

Question:

From a purely powergaming viewpoint, besides alignment reasons, why pick a fighter/cleric over a ranger/cleric?

I think the slightly higher amount of XP needed is more than balanced out by dual weilding, favored enemy, and the ability to be stealthy.

 

@drowling: You're still exploiting an obvious bug by doing this. Think for half a second. If a demon snatched away your traveling buddy and held them, and that character was suddenly free without your 'test' being completed, do you think the demon would just stand there with his finger up his a$$? My point is just that this is a rather obvious exploitation, and since the game is incapable of reacting the way a DM would, it's not something I would be willing to do. I will agree with you on one thing tho... to each his own.

As for your question. Well, I'm not so sure a Fig/Cleric necessarily IS the 'most' powerful class. I think the conversation just kinda gravitated to that since your original question was about Bioware's Cleric bias, and we've been talking about the ability to get so damn much of a bonus to Wisdom over the course of the saga. Fighter-Clerics are badassed, but I don't really know if they're the 'best. A lot of people do believe a Kensai-Mage is the best. I think it depends on playing style to an extent, and what equipment you had available.

@klorox: I still think a Fighter is a better choice to use if you're dualing to a Cleric. XP is one reason. In an unmodded version of BGII, Fighters are the only class that can get full Grand Mastery in a weapon. I believe Rangers are limited to Master (***). The free two points you get in Dual Weilding is nice, but in the long run, rendered rather insignificant. Favored Enemy and stealth are decent enough abilities, but frankly not all that important, IMHO. Favored enemy just doesn't come into play often enough to matter, unless you select a weak enemy that you'll have no problem slaughtering on the regular anyways. And with all the Potions/Rings of Invisibility in the game, stealth isn't all that important either.

Just my viewpoints here, but for this build, I do think that a fighter (maybe even a Berzerker if you don't care much about ranged combat) is a better choice than a Ranger.

 

My bad, Xindell. I thought we were talking multi-class.

 

I guess you're right in that it really does become a question of whether the increased wisdom score results in wisdom-dependent classes dominating. For example, charisma can be raised to a higher level than wisdom would ever be, but not for a sorceror. But in any case, we would also have to distinguish between classes that are good for soloing (and I don't think the cleric is that good), and classes good for teamwork (where a cleric or fighter/cleric shines).

But ultimately I am, in fact, interested in what class is 'ultimate', given all the ability increases. Is it really kensai/mage?

 

@Xindell: Don't forget a ranger/cleric opposed to a fighter/cleric gets ALL druid spells in his/her cleric spellbook! Do I have to mention 'nature's beauty' - which is in my eyes the best spell in the game, allowing NO saving throw and rendering the enemy blind - is druid spell of level 7; and there is always iron skin and insect plague. Also consider that grand mastery in an unmoddes BG2 doesn't give THAT great a bonus over proficiency (btw rangers can only put ** in their weapons, only in two-weapon-fighting they can put *** in).

D'accord on your view that these demon tactics are exploits, though.

 

@Maertyn: I've never really played a Ranger/Cleric, so I didn't know they get all those spells. Interesting. Still, that seems a little odd. If neither class is capable of casting certain spells (like those level 7 Druid spells), then it doesn't seem right that multiclassing the two of them suddenly makes it possible. Hmmm... probably because the Ranger uses the same spell list as a Druid, but is only able to cast spells up to level 3. But since the Cleric spells go higher, that must unlock them. Heh, I'm about to beat a dead horse here, but sounds like another exploit to me! You're right about the Grand Mastery tho. It's not a major difference, tho not insignificant either.

@drowling: If the question is "what is the ultimate class?" Well, that's a WHOLE different conversation. In BG2, Charisma isn't the important stat for Sorcs, like it is in 3E D&D. Frankly, the score of your main stat isn't really all the big of a deal when it comes to deciing which class is ultimate (tho it helps). If stats are all that matter, then you have to seriously consider an evil Half-Orc fighter type. With tomes, hell trials, MoLtM, a Half-Orc can end up with STR 23, DEX 20 & CON 23. Those are superb stats for a fighter type, but that doesn't come close to making it the ultimate class.

This discussion ultimately comes down to opinion. But, to me, a Kensai Mage seems pretty damn powerful. Great melee fighting abilities from the Kensai and then magic as well. There are those that swear by the sorceror. And a Kensai Theif isn't too shabby either. Personally, I don't think there 'is' an ultimate class. I think there are several that could be devastating, depending on what your play style is.

 

The Druid AND Cleric spells was the reason for my earlier post, even though I really don't think I said it too well there.

[ August 13, 2005, 05:19: Message edited by: Klorox ]