Is a Rogue necessary?

Remove all ads!

Hi,

are there any locks which can only be opened by Rogues? Isn't it possible to bash locks open instead of picking them, as long as I am willing to neglect the 150 exp. for lockpicking?

Thanks

 

I'm quite sure you don't need a rogue, but if add a rogue level to a character he can gain enough extra XP to gain several levels.
If you really want to play without a rogue level in your party I recommend just doing so, even if I'm wrong you can't get stuck because of it since you'll always be able to get a rogue NPC.

 

Just found a chest in the main halls, that can only be lockpicked. So I hope a single Rogue level with a good dex bonus will be enough to pick locks.

 

I have a rogue/ranger (levels evenly divided) and have had no problems with battles or thieving.

 

I never understood what a Ranger is good for? All those archery feats seem to be worthles since the damage is too low and the enemies may close in in one round. Maybe for some minor Druid spells since there is no druid in the game. But the only Druid exclusive spell seems to be Entangle.

 

I find that a ranger is good for the archery feats. I play a human ranger/rogue. I only take ranger levels at level 1 and 3 and plan to level in rogue the rest of the way. All of my other party members are melee characters, so I wanted a ranged one.

 

There is a level cap in the game for any specific class -- but you can have two classes at that level cap by the end of the game. It makes sense to choose multiclasses which compliment each other. Rogue and ranger do just that, they are an excellent combination. Any number of fighter combinations are good but I like the following combinations:

Rogue/Ranger
Sorcerer/Paladin
Fighter/Barbarian
Cleric/Monk

It goves a good flavor to the game.

Now if only I could get rid of the stickmen in my game and see the characters....

 

I've played once through with a kick*** party: sorcerer/thief and cleric/paladin and no NPCs. I think by the end they were only a few levels away from being maxed out.

I've got a hankering to replay this using the NPC sorcerer (I forget his name) + 2 other characters. I'd like to try a monk (because of all the cool monk only items) and also a barbarian for a change.

So I'm thinking with the NPC sorcerer I'll have a monk/cleric and a barbarian/rogue.

Maybe pick up a few more NPCs along the way like the ranger/fighter.

What do you think? Is this viable?

 

You always need a rouge, otherwise you just look pale (sorry, couldn't help myself!)

 

But the Sorceror/Paladin combination is not able to cast arcane spells without suffering spell failures while wearing the armour a Paladin normally would wear (that is until you find the armourpieces after a while in the game that have lower casting penalty).

 

I have a paladin/monk, High dex high wisdom, Barbarian/fighter, cleric, npc sorcerer, and rogue / ranger.. using the character editor 1.9 work very fine for me.. hack slash and kill most oponnents in 1 blow, due to lot of double/triple damage weapons... recently add emmerick (fighter) to my party..

 

I found a sorcerer/monk has potential. The monk suffers, but taking two levels of monk early is a HUGE bonus to the sorcerer's survivability and the deflect arrow feat greatly helps prevent disruptions from ranged attacks, not to mention general HP loss.
Paladin/Cleric can be interesting more priest spells but you have all your eggs in one basket for healing. Better to have the paladin be paired with somebody else.

The ranger/rogue combo works because both can use stealth, although that is seriously nerfed by the need to keep the party together. It also allows the rogue a few spells. I tend to favor the Ranger class more than the rogue for level ups, but sneak attack is very nice. Still, it isn't that much better or worse than combining fighter, paladin, or barbarian with rogue. All work.