Some strange differences

Remove all ads!

Proteus, again, entirely too analytical. You sound like you only want perfectly efficient characters.

I've often liked playing with a rogue and a ranger in my parties, even though they're hardly efficient characters in 3e. I just like the flavor of the classes and can deal with less than efficient nature of the characters for the sake of the fun of it.

 

Why not just arm your Rogue with Luck items? (Ned's Lucky Knucky in HoF and Tymora's Loop = +5) - you should always cause maximum sneak attack damage then.
Unfortunately, this only works for HoF (NLK) - and that sneak attack will merely annoy most enemies.

Anyway, if you want purely "efficient" characters, then why ever pick Rangers, Wizards, Bards and Druids (when compared to Barbarians/Paladins, Sorcerers and Clerics)? Why ever pick an elf, as opposed to a drow? (we could make comparisons until the end of time)
Does efficiency = powergaming?

All such characters, as previously said, are about having fun, playing the game differently to the predictable way you would normally play.

 

I would consider myself a powergamer, but still I sometimes use high-lvl rogues. My way to powergame is that I first choose a race and a place in the team for the character and then makes him/her as powerful as possible for that specific role. Sometimes a rogue can be very useful as a part of the group.
I had a half-orc rogue/barbarian (mostly rogue) that could sneak up behind the enemies and do loads of damage thanks to the sneak attack. Even if the enemies started beating him he did quite good damage, but lost the nice sneak-bonus.

Backstabbing did not always kill a 2E anamy and if it didn't the thief was doomed. Now a rogue can stand on his own, which is something I appreciate.

 

"Does efficiency = powergaming?"

I think they're pretty much the same thing but to different degrees.

Here's an example from IWD2...

A "role-player" (note: no actual role playing is involved; that's just what he calls himself) puts some points into Wildnerness Lore with three different characters, two of whom also have the Forester Feat.

An efficient player *might* have *one* high-WIS character put 5 or 7 points in Wilderness Lore, but he definitely would not waste a feat on Forester.

A powergamer knows (either from playing the game before or from reading FAQs/walkthroughs) that Wilderness Lore is just worthless fluff except in the Fell Wood. He also knows that the party cleric can use Wilderness Lore untrained just fine because of his maxed out WIS and the unlimited retries the skill allows. So he does not put any points at all in it.

A munchkin uses DaleKeeper to give all his characters all spells and feats and 30 ranks in every skill. He never actually uses Wilderness Lore, though. When he gets to the Fell Wood, he gets frustrated and uses the cheat console to move to the next section.

 

Thing is, those funny elves get longsword and longbow proficiency for free. Then if your sorceress has some 16 DEX and a longbow, no wonder she's quite deadly. As well, a rogue with 18 DEX and Finesse will hit more often than your 14 STR paladin, for instance. Just in the beginning.

If you go on and play NWN, then you will come across the Zen Archery feat allowing characters to apply WIS bonus instead of DEX bonus to ranged attacks. Now imagine your level 20 cleric has some 8 DEX but 22 WIS. You gain a neat +6 and the total is 21 AB with the bow, which is about as much as a 12 DEX fighter's of the same level, which is good. Then comes Longbow +5, Arrows +5, guess the rest.

In IWD2 itself, you will notice clerics can be practically the equals of fighters if they buff well. In fact, they can probably beat fighters to sheer melee with enough buffs. If we consider some 5 castings of full Heal available to such characters, fighters just stand no chance so long as the reverend is not interrupted when spellcasting.

Druids are probably less powerful in combat, but they can still be pretty versatile, and they make good artillery spellcasters. Speaking of, my Morninglord of Lathander (from a party of six, so no solo killing machine) was a viable frontliner without a single combat feat, while also being a powerful fire/evocation spellcasters, joining up with two sorceresses for some frying. Alternatively, you can always make your cleric a Tempus, Helm or Ilmater worshipping one and turn him into a combat machine with tons of healing. Or you can give Bull's Strength to all or almost all members of the party. I suppose clerics are more versatile than druids, as well, in fact. So I'm in favour of clerics over druids so far as power goes.

Rangers are quite by far more powerful, as well. For example, if you make an intelligent rogue, you can switch over to ranger after level 2. You will still have the skills covered well enough for the game. Same goes for rogue/wizard.