Party Suggestions for non-power gamer

Remove all ads!

Hi All,

I've picked up IWD 2 again, and I've never bothered to get through it, I don't know why, I think it's the all the character creation, unlike BG series, and getting bored with the party I create. But anyway, given I'm not new to IWD 2, and I've also played 3E AD&D for years now, I have a pretty good idea what most of my party will be. But have a couple of questions:

1) Are the ECL races, Aasimar, Tiefling, Drow, etc, worth the level penalties, given any I choose will be the characters I'm relying on the most?

2) Taking a pure: rogue, cleric, and sorcerer through, and probably a pure pally, would people go 2 fighters or 1 fighter, and then either a barbarian, monk or ranger for the 6th slot ?

I'm seriously not likely to multi class any of the 6 characters, unless I really see a benefit under IWD 2, I certainly won't see a reason for multi-ing a cleric, sorcerer or a rogue. I'm likely to be using the rogue front line for sneak attacking. I was tempted to put a druid into the 6, but from my BG series experience, shapeshifting really isn't useful at higher levels, and you're relying more on the druid's offensive spells.

As I said I'm not a power-gamer, well what I consider is power-gaming, which a lot of players do with computer games, drop certain stats to absolute minimums, example: Intelligence: 3. If I had a Half-Orc barbarian I'd drop the int to 8 or even 6, cos well they're not meant to be bright

Anyway, thanks in advance.

 

The ECL penalties are worth it IMO, especially if it's only one level. Aasimar paladins and Tiefling rogues are a lot of fun to play. With the 2 and 3-level penalties you need to be a little more careful, as they will end up leveling significantly slower, and that can be a problem in the early and late game.

I would actually not take a pure fighter through the game. There aren't that many useful feats in the game, so the fighter's main advantage isn't really one. Fighter(4)/Paladin(X) is actually a very good build if you don't mind multiclassing your pally, and can be easily justified RP-wise if you take all the fighter levels and then switch.

Barbarians are a lot of fun to play, as are monks. I never tried Rangers so I can't comment. Monks are not as overpowered as they were in BG2, but that's not necessarily a bad thing.

Really with your base 4 characters (pally, rogue, sorc, cleric) it doesn't matter what the other 2 are, as you've already got all the basics covered. Pick a character you want to play and go with it. If you like spellcasting, pick another Sorcerer and make him specialise in a completely different role. If you want to play around with shapeshifting, pick a druid. And if you want to try multiclass builds, you can do it with these two.

 

1) Yes. Because of the dynamic XP calculation your average party level will always be the same at most points in the game, only the levels compared to the other party members are affected by the ECL penalties.
If you make your non-casters ECL-races and your casters not you'll even get the high level spells faster (but this will even increase the difference between already overpowered casters and underpowered non-casters). Being able to cast as high level spells as possible as fast as possible is the key to an easy game.

2) High level spells are so powerful, multiclassing casters cripples them. Fighters don't gain much any more after 4 levels, so multiclassing doesn't hurt them on the other hand.
If you want your thief to do damage, give him high strength.
I recommend a druid for 6. Druid spells are not as essential as cleric or sorc spells, but they can help a lot if used right. The shapeshift forms you get at level 5,9 and 11 are really useful. In my game the druid did the 1:1 battles because she was the best for them. GSF transmutation and scion of storms are the most useful feats, don't waste feats for extra shapes.

 

Thanks for the advice, I'll keep the thoughts on the druid and shapeshifting in mind.

This is what I'm looking at taking in. The first four are pretty much my front line, with the ranger and rogue being able to drop back to ranged if they get too hurt, the druid will when able to shape change take care of themselves.

Aasimar Fighter: S:18 D:13 C:10 I:10 W:9 Ch:20 Intimidate:4 Power Attack, Cleave. Leading to 4 levels of fighter, and then going pally. The Dex is for max ac with full place, and by the time they're casting pally spells I can have upped wis to 11 for casting first level spells, and given they're an Aasimar I might as well take advantage of the eventual +5 from charisma to all saving throws.

Wild Elf Ranger: S:16 D:20 C:10 I:10 W:10 Cha:10. Dex for the light armour limitation and max dex for the best light armour is +5, and to take advantage of dual wield. Wis can go up to 11 for casting spells if need be.

Aasimar Druid: S:10 D:10 C:14 I:16 W:20 Cha:10. Int for all the class skills maxing. Going full druid, I see Str and Dex irrelevant cos the druid will be shapeshifted regularly and shapeshifting stats I assume over-ride what the other stats are. So Con of 14 is for when they stay spellcasting, and taking advantage of the Aasimar Wisdom bonus for spell dc saves. Combat casting for the feat.

Tiefling Rogue: S:14 D:20 C:10 I:14 W:10 Cha:10. Dex to take advantage of the tiefling bonus and the armor restrictions of the rogue, Str for extra damage, but will weapon finesse or alternatively go to bow, the int for the skills I want the rogue to have. Dodge for the feat, he'll be up front with the Fighter and Ranger, most likely dealing extra dam with sneak attacks and flanking.

Aasimar Cleric: Morninglord of Lathander(Imp Turning Feat free): S:10 D:12 C:10 I:12 W:20 Cha:16. Dex for full plate again, Int for getting spellcraft and concentration maxed.

Aasimar Sorcerer: S:10 D:18 C:10 I:12 W:10 Cha:20. Dex for ranged spell touch attacks and making sure I don't hit party members, and Aasimar again to take advantage of spell dc saves like the cleric and druid. Int again to make sure I have spellcraft and concentration maxed, the former mostly for any possible counterspelling.

Of course this means only the ranger stays ahead, of all the other classes, but I'm sure this won't be a problem.

I assume this party and stats would work. I figure con of 10 on most won't give me a lot of hp to play with, but with pure cleric and druid, and then extreme emergency when they get high enough of the pally and range, I shouldn't have too many deaths.

Thoughts ?

 

Your party looks good. It's fun to have most caster types in the party and the druid is a good backup caster for both the cleric and sorc. Just remember that you can't cast spells while shapeshifted.

A few thoughts on your party:

I would lower the cha of the cleric as much as possible and put those points into strenght. Turn undead isn't really useful in this game as undead are often quite easy and a few weapons you get along the way make you wish every enemy was undead...

I would also give the sorcerer a few more points in int instead of dex. Then he would be able to take the talking skills along with spellcraft and concentration. I can't remember many useful spells that require ranged touch attacks (if any?). Also lower strenght to 8 (he's a sorcerer, they're supposed to be physically weaker!). Since sorcs get so few HP/lvl they are the ones that needs con the most so those 2 points could go there.
My usual aasimar sorcerer has these stats: 8 8 18 18 8 20. That way she get 8HP/lvl, all talking skills + SC + concentration and still maxed cha. Her defence comes from mirror images when she get surprised.

 

1) About your paladin/fighter
I'd only raise strength at level up. It's great having someone who can damage monsters with damage reduction.
I'd keep wis low and take only 3 paladin levels which already yield nearly all benefits. Paladin spells below level 4 don't make a difference and this character won't reach 15 paladin levels or 14 wis.
If you want to cast the "holy power" spell and use smite evil at full strength take a pure paladin.

2) I'd take goblin as the ranger's favored enemy.

3) About your druid:
You don't need 16 int. You only need maxed out concentration for uninterrupted casting and 10 spellcraft for being able to take the elemental feats. Wilderness lore is a nice roleplaying skill but it doesn't require many skillpoints. 20 wis already grants 5 and you can just retry if you fail. 10 int already yields sufficient 2 skillpoints/level, 12 another one for wasting. Rather take 14 dex for AC and ranged combat (rapid shot and dodge are great feats).
Combat casting is useless if concentration is high enough. I'd take a useful feat instead.
Druids are casters, not fighters. If their shapeshifts were always as good as well equipped warriors, there'd be no need for fighter classes. (although the boar and bear forms are often underestimated)


4) About your rogue and sneak attacks in combat: Monsters always turn towards the nearest enemy, so guess who gets their back: the tank at greatsword range or the rogue with weapon finesse at dagger range ?
For sneak attacks in combat you need long range weapons, two-handers are most effective. They also deal out far more damage. Backstabs from the shadows are far more damaging with 2-handers too, only the animation can be annoying. If you have a slow weapon and only 1 attack per round you'll see a cosmetic attack animation before the attack.

5) About you cleric: Full plate is heavy. If you want to wear it full take at least 14 str. I'd lower int or cha instead.

6) About your sorc: I agree with Mudde about higher int (I'd lower dex and wis). Because of the high cha he's the perfect diplomat, at level 4 he can have 26 cha with eagle's splendor which means 8 in all diplomatic skills without even spending a single point. 1 point per level is enough, I'd alternate between bluff and diplomacy. lt's also nice if you have someone with alchemy or knowledge arcana to identify stuff without having to cast the identify spell. I'd start with mercantile background.
I wouldn't raise con, sorcerer is already the most powerful class. If you eliminate the only weakness by giving him more HP then the rogue you'll get quite an unbalanced party.


General advice:
- Everyone should have a ranged weapon.
- 2-handed weapons rule

 

Minor point: why give the pally 13 DEX? Max bonus is already there at 12, and that extra point could go elsewhere instead. Remember that there is no difference at all in 3E between an even number and the higher odd number, so you might as well keep all your stats even, especially if you don't plan on adding to them on first level up.

 

13 dex allows very useful feats. Dodge improves AC and rapid shot is as good as ambidexterity and 2-weapon fighting combined while wearing a shield.
High strength + throwing axe + rapid shot = lot's of damage.

 

kmonster is spot on exactly why my Pally and some of my front line has 13 dex. For dodge, etc. It can save you every time.

Thanks for all your advice though, but I think, some of you ended up missing my point. I'm not a power-gamer, I'm an rp-er. So I'm not going to drop certain stats, or forgo certain skills just because they're not useful to the game. As for combat casting, umm, no offense, but I would assume some of you don't actually play 3rd or 3.5 ad&d and understand how useful combat casting can be. Yes maybe, I'm not realising since I do get bored with parties as to how irrelevant certain skills are. But my fighter, soon to be pally, has easily got the conversation skills covered, along with help from the sor and cle. The fighter has more diplomacy etc, than my other party members.

But anyway, thanks for the advice, I'm not ungrateful, but I think things got sidetracked and you missed the point of part of my post :-/

 

Powergaming advice would have been totally different, believe me.
No powergamer would give his sorc more than 12 int for example, knowledge or alchemy are nice to have, so are the additional options you get with talking skills, but they are irrelevant for combat and therefore useless for powergaming.

I forgot that knowing the facts can reduce the fun, casting spells in combat is important, combat casting sounds cool, it makes my caster a combat caster so take it, knowing what this feat really does will only spoil the fun.
I apologize for showing the suboptimality of your rogue build by telling how sneak attacks work in IWD2. You probably wouldn't have realized it in the heat of battle if I hadn't spoiled it for you. I hope you'll still have fun with him.
Sorry for telling you that 10 strength isn't enough to wear full plate without trouble. I hope I didn't spoil the fun you'd had with your cleric until you bought one.

I should have told you that your party is fine. Detail improvements aren't necessary, compared to the pregenerated IWD2 parties your party still looks like a powergaming party.

One advice:
If you want to roleplay take the easiest difficulty level, else the difficulty of combat will shift the game from adventure to rts with many reloads. You'll still have more combat trouble than with BG2 at normal difficulty.

Have fun !

 

Jechor, if you don't care which choices are useful, and which aren't, why are you asking for advice?

 

Welcome to ignore. Now you're just being a jerk, mate.

I asked for advice from a non-power gamer point of view, and in the end I did not get it. Welcome to ignore as well, because you're being a jerk like kmonster.

You both including others, are the reason I gave up posting in sorcerers place years ago, because a lot of people are narrow minded arrogant power gaming jerks.

People should pay attention to what the subject heading is and what the question people are asking, and therefore keep the answers relevant.

 

Peoples view on what is or is not "powergaming" is also very different. To me seeing someone taking stats for specific bonuses, and races for specific bonuses is "powerplay". So my first thought when I read the suggested party above was "Power gamer".

When doing "role play" I generally roll up my characters with actual dices, and write them down with stories and personalities before even touching a dice.

Also I will have to agree with kmonster that most of hes advise was explanations on basic things and how they work in the game, and is no more "powerplay" than having read the PHB 3E book.

For example, the sneak attack really works different in this game than in Pen & Paper D&D becose of engine/game limitations. He pointed this out, and told you how to work "around" it so you could have an enjoyable experience with sneak attacking.

I know I sure didn't have much fun with my rogue first game, continually getting killed over and over and over. I put him to bow duty simply becose there was nothing else for him to do, save dying.

 

@ kmonster, JT, whomever,

I want to make sure I'm getting you - I'd thought that sneak attacking only worked with light weapons. Is this wrong? Could I sneak-attack with a greatsword? And in fact, is that preferable for the reach?

TIA

Peanut gallery: I tend to agree with raptor on what powergaming is. I think any time you plan your character based on bending the game engine and/or stat limitations to get a desired result (such as having a 13 dex just to open the door to certain feats), you are, in a sense, powergaming. If you give your character a 13 dex because you imagine him/her as a soldier whose early station required occasional light running but the necessity for heavy armor and standing guard prevented attaining a truly blinding movement speed (in other words: the 13 dex isn't arbitrary), then you're roleplaying.

There's nothing inherently wrong with powergaming, IMO. It's only lame when it's squeezed to beyond a reasonable limit to achieve an extreme result.

 

Sneak attack works with all melee weapons including greatswords.
I'd prefer 2-handed weapons because of
- longer range
- higher base damage
- extra damage for strength

 

Hmmm....

I had a human paladin, half-orc battleguard of Tempus, tiefling monk, human rogue/ranger, human wizard, and wild elf sorcerer (I think only the Half-Orc had a 18 in any stat in the begining -- that was strength). What a fun party.

The paladin and half-orc usually engaged one enemy each, while the monk and rogue/ranger worked in tandum -- I didn't even know about the game limitations with sneak attack. I guess it was just my dumb luck that my dual wielding, weapon finessing ranger/rogue was effective.

 

Well, everyone else seems to hate turn undead, but I find having one high level morninglord with high charisma makes undead encounters really cool. you turn undead, and they either explode or run in fear. Really nice.

Most of your classes could do with less intelligence and more strength or constitution, especially your cleric. If you arent keen to min max, use 8 intelligence or something - somewhat slow, but not a complete idiot.

 

Death Rabbit, if choosing your stats so that you'll qualify for the feats you want is powergaming, then so is just about everything else in this game, including casting spells at the enemy or wielding weapons you're proficient in. In my opinion, a basic emphasis on your character's strengths isn't powergaming, but simple normal gameplay. This includes actions like assigning a 18 to INT as a Wizard (you can have 18 14 12 12 10 10 without even reducing stats), choosing Weapon Specialization: Great Sword as a Fighter, or MAXing out Concentration with your Cleric.

You've moved into powergaming when you:
- start MINimizing abilities that are unimportant, especially when you're using metagame knowledge. Example: dumping your cleric's CHA and INT down to 3 because turn undead is pointless, skills are useless or can be taken with another character, and you don't care that his stats would make him a disfigured retard in P&P.
- use advanced knowledge of game rules and quirks to make counterintutive choices. Examples: Best AC is with naked buffed characters, ECL non-casters cause your non-ECL casters to gain levels faster.
- make ridiculous multiclassing dips or use "inappropriate" items. Example: Your Sorc takes a paladin level. He doesn't give a damn about being a Paladin or any of the Paladin abilities, except for the +8 (or more) to all saves. Bonus points if he then takes a Monk level for the Evasion and additional +2 to all saves. This is really the game designer's fault, but you're still a powergamer for taking advantage of it.
- MINimize or eliminate your character's key weaknesses, especially if those weak points are normally supposed to be compensated for by other classes. Example: Sorc encounters magic-immune Iron Golems, buffs himself with Mirror Image, Stoneskin, Haste, Mordy's Sword, and AC boosters, kills the Golems easily while the poor Fighter runs around in circles.

 

JT,

I guess I see what you're saying, and we'll likely agree to disagree. But IMO there's a big difference between giving your character the otherwise unremarkable (and illogically arbitrary, given 3rd edition's even-numbered bonus system) 13 in dexterity for no other reason than to qualify for a feat, and in giving him a 14 or higher because you want a faster, more dexterous character who'll also happen to qualify for said certain feats because he's so nimble. It's the same thing as dumping a human cleric's INT to 3 because the game engine will still grant that character 2 skill points per level (giving you just enough juice to max Concentration and Spellcraft, the only essential skills for a mechanical player with a cleric). Though the Cleric example is admittedly more extreme, in both cases you're doing exactly the same thing: exploiting the game engine and the game's rules by manipulating a character's stats to the bare minimum required to achieve a certain result, which you wouldn't reasonably bother with otherwise.

This goes to your "basic emphasis on a character's strengths" argument, where you're kind of making my point. Obviously a character with only 13 in Dex is a character for whom Dex isn't important, in which case you'd have just left it at 12, or even 10, and used those valuable points elsewhere. Or if it was important to the class in a prime-stat sense - rogues, monks, finesse fighters, archers, etc. - you'd have maxed it to 18 or so, like the mage example you gave with Intelligence. Right?

Again - I'm not against powergaming, I just acknowledge that there are certainly different levels of it. I'm comfortable with a minimum level of it (because my free time is scarce and I don't enjoy a slog), but would never play something like Jukka's UPP - that's just absurd for someone with no interest in ever playing HoW (like moi). All due respect to Jukka of course.

Anyway, this is all just silly semantics and detracts from an otherwise enjoyable game, and everybody's reasons for doing whatever in this game are just as valid if they're having fun. Whatever strategy works and you enjoy, go forth and have fun. I'm in the middle of a run-through at the moment for the first time in several years, and having a ball.