actually two's advice works in a party too.
granted it all does come down to playstyle, but lets take a deeper look at your ftr.
Fighter:
Str 18 Dex 18 Con 18 Int 6 Wis 10 Cha 6
now when this ftr is using the bow - the str & con stats are now useless, chances are it is not a target of the enemy ai.
when the ftr fights in melee, the dex becomes undervalued - chances are the char could get as good / better protection from a heavy armour that does not allow full benefit of the higher dex.
by contrast
ftr 2
str-18 dex 12 con 18 int 6 wis 16 cha 6
this ftr is more of a melee guy, and has better will saves (remember that will saves are easily the most important save, as one fail will take you out of combat entirely)
imo this build is more efficient, and gets the more out of it's stat points.
but it will be about equililant to the bard as far as archery prowess, and far superior in melee.
--
also bear in mind you don't need more then one tank type, and for every tank over one, that's less clerics / mages / druids / bards in the group.
Kayless’ Guide to Multi-Classing
Originally posted by koz-ivan
Fighter:
Str 18 Dex 18 Con 18 Int 6 Wis 10 Cha 6
now when this ftr is using the bow - the str & con stats are now useless, chances are it is not a target of the enemy ai.
when the ftr fights in melee, the dex becomes undervalued - chances are the char could get as good / better protection from a heavy armour that does not allow full benefit of the higher dex.
by contrast
ftr 2
str-18 dex 12 con 18 int 6 wis 16 cha 6
this ftr is more of a melee guy, and has better will saves (remember that will saves are easily the most important save, as one fail will take you out of combat entirely)
imo this build is more efficient, and gets the more out of it's stat points.
but it will be about equililant to the bard as far as archery prowess, and far superior in melee.
alternatively, you could take ftr 2 and make him thusly:
Str 12 Dex 18 Con 18 Int 6 Wis 16 Cha 6
a better archer, with high Will saves. not as strong in melee, but he is supposed to be an archer after all.
I am not saying that looking at overall abilities the ftr is better than the Bard, I am just looking at stat pt allocation, BAB, attacks/round, hit points, and feats, and it appears that from that very strict point of view that the most effective archer to add to a party would be a fighter.
personally, I think it would be a waste, since you can "get" an archer who is only slightly less skilled than the fighter by using a Bard or a rogue, who would be a much better contributor to the party via their other skills/abilities/spells. (whereas the fighter would likely only be able to aid the party in melee, which the other char could also do, albeit much less effectively)
but for the narrow view of which character makes the best archer, I think it is the fighter, due to more freedom in stat point allocation, faster progress in BAB and attacks/round, more bow feats at start (I think), more feats available as the character levels up, and higher hit points.
what about the ranger? could he figure into any of this discussion?
does his dmg to favored enemies apply to missle fire?
that's what i've been trying to say!Originally posted by Krysalyn
personally, I think it would be a waste, since you can "get" an archer who is only slightly less skilled than the fighter by using a Bard or a rogue, who would be a much better contributor to the party via their other skills/abilities/spells. (whereas the fighter would likely only be able to aid the party in melee, which the other char could also do, albeit much less effectively)
but for the narrow view of which character makes the best archer, I think it is the fighter, due to more freedom in stat point allocation, faster progress in BAB and attacks/round, more bow feats at start (I think), more feats available as the character levels up, and higher hit points.
what about the ranger? could he figure into any of this discussion?
does his dmg to favored enemies apply to missle fire?
the ranger has the same problem as the bard - lack of feats, no ws. favoured enemy damage should work w/ a bow but i'm not sure.
imo the ranger is a good archer, has other skills that may be usefull, spells, ect ect.
but still won't quite be as good as the "archer build" ftr in terms of who would win an archery contest.
"all around you is tinder for the gods"
Originally posted by koz-ivan
that's what i've been trying to say!
that's what I thought... I think we were arguing apples and oranges...
Originally posted by koz-ivan
the ranger has the same problem as the bard - lack of feats, no ws. favoured enemy damage should work w/ a bow but i'm not sure.
imo the ranger is a good archer, has other skills that may be usefull, spells, ect ect.
but still won't quite be as good as the "archer build" ftr in terms of who would win an archery contest.
but since Str does not affect dmg on most bow damage, perhaps the favored enemy dmg bonus would be very helpful in the long run if you choose correctly?
makes me wonder if a ranger would not be better than a Bard for a party wanting a focused ranged attacker but also side benefits of spells... it is probably wether you prefer the buffing spells of the Bard or the summons of the ranger...
as an aside, how effective would a rngr/cleric or druid/cleric build be? once you get the 6th lvl rngr spells, you could advance strictly as cleric... this would give you nature summons as well as undead summons... and both use Wis for casting...
Originally posted by Krysalyn
as an aside, how effective would a rngr/cleric or druid/cleric build be? once you get the 6th lvl rngr spells, you could advance strictly as cleric... this would give you nature summons as well as undead summons... and both use Wis for casting...
i don't think the summons alone are worth it, a single ranger level adds some benefit for a lightly armoured cleric, but since clerics already get ani dead & giant vermin, + some monster summons, they don't really need to cast more.
and too many non caster levels hamper them a bit, unless you are looking to go the distance and hit lv 30 w/ hof.
the druid cleric is more promising, but imo it goes back to the "don't multi casters" rule.
"all around you is tinder for the gods"
Still have to disagree, in a party the bard rocks
"if you are looking at a party where you have the characters to cast these same spells on your fighter, then the fighter comes out on top. i.e. in a party that has a fighter and a Bard, which one would be the better archer?
it is the fighter, since he starts with a bow feat the Bard doesnt have, and has more "wiggle room" to min/max his stats to become the best archer, whereas the Bard must have pts in Cha. "
This was written by Krysalyn, but I think it has a slightly skewed take on what makes for a good party.
As I said before, if you have a tricked out fighter-based archer with a party member that is willing, at the start of every big battle, to cast upon him cat's grace, emotion:hope, haste, improved haste (later), etc. than yes, that buffed fighter archer will be "better" than a bard-based archer. But, of course, you have also sucked away resources from the party. Meaning, you sucked away some 2nd, 3rd, 4th, and higher level spells from the wizard/sorcerer, plus (and this is critical) you wasted the sorcerer/wizard's time at the start of each combat. Is the sorcerer better off summoning a monster, or casting haste on the archer? Is the wizard better off fireballing, or casting emotion:hope? If the fighter-based archer gets all the buffs he needs, he's keeping 2 people busy; himself and the buffer.
This makes for bad party play. Why should an archer required/use another character's resources and combat time/actions? Isn't it far more efficient to have to bard self-buff with haste WHILE the sorcerer casts ice storm or whatever? Or have the bard mirror-image to take care of the low hit point problem, WHILE the wizard dominates a monster? Of course. The beauty of the bard, particularly at mid-high levels, is that he can self-buff, and thus waste ZERO fellow party member spells. Which can then be used to do other things, thus making an even stronger group.
By the time the fighter's BAB hits 6, and grants another iterative attack, the bard can cast haste and get another attack as well -- at an even higher bonus. By the time the bard can cast improved haste, he gets 2-3 more attacks a round than the fighter archer. Plus, as noted... the bard can do a million other things, such as summon really really nasty shadow monsters, go invisible, sing a fear-defeating song, etc. etc. etc. A 15th level fighter-archer just looks pretty silly next to a 15 level bard. The bard is self-contained; does not drain other party resources; is incredibly versitile; and does more damage with a bow than the 15th level fighter archer could manage (without 4-5 buffs spells from a party pal). I don't see the issue. Bard wins hands down.
"if you are looking at a party where you have the characters to cast these same spells on your fighter, then the fighter comes out on top. i.e. in a party that has a fighter and a Bard, which one would be the better archer?
it is the fighter, since he starts with a bow feat the Bard doesnt have, and has more "wiggle room" to min/max his stats to become the best archer, whereas the Bard must have pts in Cha. "
This was written by Krysalyn, but I think it has a slightly skewed take on what makes for a good party.
As I said before, if you have a tricked out fighter-based archer with a party member that is willing, at the start of every big battle, to cast upon him cat's grace, emotion:hope, haste, improved haste (later), etc. than yes, that buffed fighter archer will be "better" than a bard-based archer. But, of course, you have also sucked away resources from the party. Meaning, you sucked away some 2nd, 3rd, 4th, and higher level spells from the wizard/sorcerer, plus (and this is critical) you wasted the sorcerer/wizard's time at the start of each combat. Is the sorcerer better off summoning a monster, or casting haste on the archer? Is the wizard better off fireballing, or casting emotion:hope? If the fighter-based archer gets all the buffs he needs, he's keeping 2 people busy; himself and the buffer.
This makes for bad party play. Why should an archer required/use another character's resources and combat time/actions? Isn't it far more efficient to have to bard self-buff with haste WHILE the sorcerer casts ice storm or whatever? Or have the bard mirror-image to take care of the low hit point problem, WHILE the wizard dominates a monster? Of course. The beauty of the bard, particularly at mid-high levels, is that he can self-buff, and thus waste ZERO fellow party member spells. Which can then be used to do other things, thus making an even stronger group.
By the time the fighter's BAB hits 6, and grants another iterative attack, the bard can cast haste and get another attack as well -- at an even higher bonus. By the time the bard can cast improved haste, he gets 2-3 more attacks a round than the fighter archer. Plus, as noted... the bard can do a million other things, such as summon really really nasty shadow monsters, go invisible, sing a fear-defeating song, etc. etc. etc. A 15th level fighter-archer just looks pretty silly next to a 15 level bard. The bard is self-contained; does not drain other party resources; is incredibly versitile; and does more damage with a bow than the 15th level fighter archer could manage (without 4-5 buffs spells from a party pal). I don't see the issue. Bard wins hands down.
Re: Still have to disagree, in a party the bard rocks
I don't agree with you on these points:
1) some of the buff you cast well ahead of the battle as they last for long time (cat's grace, stoneskin, even hope), and you probably would have cast them anyway on one of your fighters (bull strenght instead);
2)other spells with shorter duration are cast anyway because all the party gets the benefits; if you play with a party of many char it is normal that spellcasters buff fighters, and while they buff the party, fighters are hitting the enemy (thay don't play cards waiting for the spellcaster to finish); clerics and mage/sorc. (not bards) gets summons that last more than 8 (!!!!) hours, animate dead, so you summon them in advance too; so at the end when a BIG battle starts your summon and fighters attack, one of your spelcasters finish to buff the party and the other spellcasters attack too, so you will have only one char that is not fighting, and the same happen to your party, your bard is not fighting while he is buffing!!!!
3)Not taking into account the buffing spells that can be cast on everybody, the bard is a much inferior archer than a fighter, but is even inferior than a rogue (!!!): both the fighter and the rogue will have max Dex (possibly 20 at the start) while that will be very difficoult for a bard unless sacrifying other important stats; a bard needs a feat for bow profic. while fighters/rogue get it for free (thus a xbow seems a better choice for a bard);
4) than you add for the fighter WS, better BAB and more HP.
So at the end, in an archery competition the fighter is the best archer, second come the ranger, third the rogue and last the bard. .
But the game is not an archery comp., so you need an useful char., and for me a fighter-archer is not the best char in a game as IWD2 .
My best choice for a ranged attacker is a rogue with some fighter lev. mixed in, in that way you have a rogue with all his abilities, plus a good ranged attacker.
Regarding the bards my opinion is that they are a strong choice in a very small party (1-3 char) where flexibility pays, but in a large one specialization is a much more powerful option.
Originally posted by two
"As I said before, if you have a tricked out fighter-based archer with a party member that is willing, at the start of every big battle, to cast upon him cat's grace, emotion:hope, haste, improved haste (later), etc. than yes, that buffed fighter archer will be "better" than a bard-based archer. But, of course, you have also sucked away resources from the party. Meaning, you sucked away some 2nd, 3rd, 4th, and higher level spells from the wizard/sorcerer, plus (and this is critical) you wasted the sorcerer/wizard's time at the start of each combat. Is the sorcerer better off summoning a monster, or casting haste on the archer? Is the wizard better off fireballing, or casting emotion:hope? If the fighter-based archer gets all the buffs he needs, he's keeping 2 people busy; himself and the buffer.
This makes for bad party play. Why should an archer required/use another character's resources and combat time/actions? Isn't it far more efficient to have to bard self-buff with haste WHILE the sorcerer casts ice storm or whatever? Or have the bard mirror-image to take care of the low hit point problem, WHILE the wizard dominates a monster? Of course. The beauty of the bard, particularly at mid-high levels, is that he can self-buff, and thus waste ZERO fellow party member spells. Which can then be used to do other things, thus making an even stronger group.
By the time the fighter's BAB hits 6, and grants another iterative attack, the bard can cast haste and get another attack as well -- at an even higher bonus. By the time the bard can cast improved haste, he gets 2-3 more attacks a round than the fighter archer. Plus, as noted... the bard can do a million other things, such as summon really really nasty shadow monsters, go invisible, sing a fear-defeating song, etc. etc. etc. A 15th level fighter-archer just looks pretty silly next to a 15 level bard. The bard is self-contained; does not drain other party resources; is incredibly versitile; and does more damage with a bow than the 15th level fighter archer could manage (without 4-5 buffs spells from a party pal). I don't see the issue. Bard wins hands down.
I don't agree with you on these points:
1) some of the buff you cast well ahead of the battle as they last for long time (cat's grace, stoneskin, even hope), and you probably would have cast them anyway on one of your fighters (bull strenght instead);
2)other spells with shorter duration are cast anyway because all the party gets the benefits; if you play with a party of many char it is normal that spellcasters buff fighters, and while they buff the party, fighters are hitting the enemy (thay don't play cards waiting for the spellcaster to finish); clerics and mage/sorc. (not bards) gets summons that last more than 8 (!!!!) hours, animate dead, so you summon them in advance too; so at the end when a BIG battle starts your summon and fighters attack, one of your spelcasters finish to buff the party and the other spellcasters attack too, so you will have only one char that is not fighting, and the same happen to your party, your bard is not fighting while he is buffing!!!!
3)Not taking into account the buffing spells that can be cast on everybody, the bard is a much inferior archer than a fighter, but is even inferior than a rogue (!!!): both the fighter and the rogue will have max Dex (possibly 20 at the start) while that will be very difficoult for a bard unless sacrifying other important stats; a bard needs a feat for bow profic. while fighters/rogue get it for free (thus a xbow seems a better choice for a bard);
4) than you add for the fighter WS, better BAB and more HP.
So at the end, in an archery competition the fighter is the best archer, second come the ranger, third the rogue and last the bard. .
But the game is not an archery comp., so you need an useful char., and for me a fighter-archer is not the best char in a game as IWD2 .
My best choice for a ranged attacker is a rogue with some fighter lev. mixed in, in that way you have a rogue with all his abilities, plus a good ranged attacker.
Regarding the bards my opinion is that they are a strong choice in a very small party (1-3 char) where flexibility pays, but in a large one specialization is a much more powerful option.
-
Galuf the Dwarf
- Posts: 3160
- Joined: Wed May 07, 2003 11:00 am
- Location: Connecticut, a place of open land, hills, forests,
- Contact:
Well, I thought I'd tell of my modest success with a multi-classed character.
My most successful party up until Chpt. 6 (I quit after going through the game so fast, stats could be a little sketchy) was:
Altredus - Lawful Good Aasimar Paladin of Helm Level 13
16 Str (boosted to 18 with a certain belt from Chpt. 4)
10 Dex
16 Con (started at 15)
10 Int
13 Wis (boosted to 14 with an item, I believe)
18 Cha (started at 17)
Galuf (I like that name) - Neutral Good Shield Dwarf Fighter Level 14
18 Str
12 Dex
20 Con
12 Int
8 Wis (started at 6, boosted w/ levels)
8 Cha
Buregar (I forget his name, this is a guess) - Chaotic Good Half-Orc Barbarian/Ranger (levels 13 and 14, last I remember)
20 Str
12 Dex
16 Con
8 Int
12 Wis
8 Cha
Elenia - Neutral Good Human Silverstar of Selune Lvl. 14
12 Str
10 Dex
12 Con
10 Int
20 Wis (originally at 18, though boosted higher otherwise)
16 Cha
Fenris - Chaotic Good Strongheart Halfling Rogue Level 14
10 Str (originally 8)
22 Dex (originally 20)
12 Con
16 Int
8 Wis
12 Cha
(Forgot his name) - Neutral Good Drow Elf Wizard Level 14
10 Str
20 Dex
10 Con (originally 8)
20 Int
8 Wis
12 Cha
The Half-Orc was my savior in the Chamber of Immolation in Chpt. 4. The dual-wielding bonuses, rages, etc. left him turning Bronze Monks into bronzing for his boots, leaving him near death, but alive and successful.
The Favored Enemy attribute of the Ranger levels also made it easier, him turning trolls and goblins into grave material with ease!
My most successful party up until Chpt. 6 (I quit after going through the game so fast, stats could be a little sketchy) was:
Altredus - Lawful Good Aasimar Paladin of Helm Level 13
16 Str (boosted to 18 with a certain belt from Chpt. 4)
10 Dex
16 Con (started at 15)
10 Int
13 Wis (boosted to 14 with an item, I believe)
18 Cha (started at 17)
Galuf (I like that name) - Neutral Good Shield Dwarf Fighter Level 14
18 Str
12 Dex
20 Con
12 Int
8 Wis (started at 6, boosted w/ levels)
8 Cha
Buregar (I forget his name, this is a guess) - Chaotic Good Half-Orc Barbarian/Ranger (levels 13 and 14, last I remember)
20 Str
12 Dex
16 Con
8 Int
12 Wis
8 Cha
Elenia - Neutral Good Human Silverstar of Selune Lvl. 14
12 Str
10 Dex
12 Con
10 Int
20 Wis (originally at 18, though boosted higher otherwise)
16 Cha
Fenris - Chaotic Good Strongheart Halfling Rogue Level 14
10 Str (originally 8)
22 Dex (originally 20)
12 Con
16 Int
8 Wis
12 Cha
(Forgot his name) - Neutral Good Drow Elf Wizard Level 14
10 Str
20 Dex
10 Con (originally 8)
20 Int
8 Wis
12 Cha
The Half-Orc was my savior in the Chamber of Immolation in Chpt. 4. The dual-wielding bonuses, rages, etc. left him turning Bronze Monks into bronzing for his boots, leaving him near death, but alive and successful.
The Favored Enemy attribute of the Ranger levels also made it easier, him turning trolls and goblins into grave material with ease!
Dungeon Crawl Inc.: It's the most fun you can have without 3 midgets and a whip! Character stats made by your's truly!
I tried the Sorcerer 1/Monk x concept, but I'm having second thoughts about it. The idea was to build a monk that can cast Shield/Mage Armor/Reflected Image, but it requires much in the way of Charisma, leaving little for Wisdom.
I figured that'd be worth it, but what's making me have second thoughts is the ease with which I found items to cast these spells with.
That, and lots of clicking is required to keep the protections active at all times...
I figured that'd be worth it, but what's making me have second thoughts is the ease with which I found items to cast these spells with.
That, and lots of clicking is required to keep the protections active at all times...
[url="http://www.sorcerers.net/Games/BG2/SpellsReference/Main.htm"]Baldur's Gate 2 Spells Reference[/url]: Strategy, tips, tricks, bugs, cheese and corrections to the manual.
Originally posted by Xyx
I tried the Sorcerer 1/Monk x concept, but I'm having second thoughts about it. The idea was to build a monk that can cast Shield/Mage Armor/Reflected Image, but it requires much in the way of Charisma, leaving little for Wisdom.
I figured that'd be worth it, but what's making me have second thoughts is the ease with which I found items to cast these spells with.
That, and lots of clicking is required to keep the protections active at all times...
you are probably better off going with a deep gnome monk... they have the innante ability to cast invisibility, mirror image, and blur once a day... plus they can start with 20 Wis, so AC will be better initially... and Cha and Int can be reduced (minimized if you power game) to have more pts in Dex/Str/Con
I believe there is also a ring that you get about half way thru the game that allows you to cast the shield spell twice a day...
ok, I just want to ask a quick question to make sure I understand this multi-classing.
e.g. if you are a dwarf, it is better to take another class first for no xp penalty, then go fighter (for no exp penalty), and throughout if you just follow that, there will not be any exp pentalty, right? same going for any other favoreds, but Im just using this e.g. for my question as an example.
e.g. if you are a dwarf, it is better to take another class first for no xp penalty, then go fighter (for no exp penalty), and throughout if you just follow that, there will not be any exp pentalty, right? same going for any other favoreds, but Im just using this e.g. for my question as an example.
Assuming I understand you and how MClassing works, you're half right. You can take any class you want first; so long as none of them have a difference greater than one, your fine ignoring favored class for calculation. Which means if your favored class is a fighter, when checking for EXP penalties ignore your fighter class.
There are 10 types of people in the world:
Those that understand binary and those that don't
Those that understand binary and those that don't
-
Bloodstalker
- Posts: 15512
- Joined: Wed Apr 18, 2001 10:00 pm
- Location: Hell if I know
- Contact:
You can have as many levels as you want between favored class and the other classes, but each of the other classes you choose can't be more than one level apart
Ex;
Favored class might be fighter at level 8, then you have theif level 2 and ranger level 1....your ok.
If you had more than one level between the theif and ranger classes you'd get the penalty.
Ex;
Favored class might be fighter at level 8, then you have theif level 2 and ranger level 1....your ok.
If you had more than one level between the theif and ranger classes you'd get the penalty.
Lord of Lurkers
Guess what? I got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell!
Guess what? I got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell!
I just started playing IWDII for the first time and I wanted to know if my party is good nuff to finish the game with. Here it is :
Dalia, Sorceress lvl 4 (effective character lvl 6) Drow.
Str 6
Dex 20
Con 12
Int 12
Wis 10
Cha 21
Domina, Cleric/Tempus lvl 5 Human.
Str 17
Dex 12
Con 14
Int 12
Wis 19
Cha 3
Elva, Barbarian lvl 5 Half-Orc
Str 21
Dex 17
Con 17
Int 10
Wis 8
Cha 2
I chose to have only 3 in my party as I want to level up fast and get all my characters to highest possible levels.
Is my party too weak to finish the game with or?
Should I multi any of them to make them more effective?
As it is now, they're doin good, but will they later?
With hopes of advises.
Thx
Dalia, Sorceress lvl 4 (effective character lvl 6) Drow.
Str 6
Dex 20
Con 12
Int 12
Wis 10
Cha 21
Domina, Cleric/Tempus lvl 5 Human.
Str 17
Dex 12
Con 14
Int 12
Wis 19
Cha 3
Elva, Barbarian lvl 5 Half-Orc
Str 21
Dex 17
Con 17
Int 10
Wis 8
Cha 2
I chose to have only 3 in my party as I want to level up fast and get all my characters to highest possible levels.
Is my party too weak to finish the game with or?
Should I multi any of them to make them more effective?
As it is now, they're doin good, but will they later?
With hopes of advises.
Thx
rogue/ranger
just a comment about the multi classing from a fogue to a ranger, im playin multiplayer with a couple friends and i currently have around a level 8 rogue, i was thinking about multi classing to a ranger to get ambi dexterity and two weapon fighting, then use two shortswords. is this a good idea even though im at lvl 7 or 8 rogue? and once i multi class from rogue to ranger i can still continue to lvl up as a rogue right?
thx for any help
just a comment about the multi classing from a fogue to a ranger, im playin multiplayer with a couple friends and i currently have around a level 8 rogue, i was thinking about multi classing to a ranger to get ambi dexterity and two weapon fighting, then use two shortswords. is this a good idea even though im at lvl 7 or 8 rogue? and once i multi class from rogue to ranger i can still continue to lvl up as a rogue right?
thx for any help
go for the eyes boo...GO FOR THE EYES!!!
-
Stilgar
- Posts: 4079
- Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2001 11:00 am
- Location: The Netherlands - Sietch Tabr
- Contact:
Re: a good combo
You take the rogue levels for the sneak attack?
And what levels? 5/5 or 8/2 (in that case a drow wouldnt be the best choice)
Originally posted by Aenarion
hello
for me a good combo is monk/rogue drow or tiefling... it's really kick ass... when it comes to level 10 it's really terrible against mage or big caracter...try it
Good luck
You take the rogue levels for the sneak attack?
And what levels? 5/5 or 8/2 (in that case a drow wouldnt be the best choice)
I do not have the touch, nor do I have the power.
-
silverdragon72
- Posts: 850
- Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2004 4:53 am
- Contact:
.
reading this thread - I've to disagree that there are only a few good mc combinations:
A) Pal1/SorcXX: - a real good one - wouldn't change anything
B) ranger1/rogueXX: - good one but better combinations possible
1st - I would add one barb level - gives you:
increased speed (using the ranger - you can only use light armor) + rage + more HP + better BAB + better Fort. saves
2nd - I would add 2 Fighter levels:
HP + BAB + Fort. Saves + 2 bonus feats
3rd - You could think about adding 1 Bard level:
Better Will & Refl. Saves + lvl 1 Bard song - but no BAB-bounus for this level
So you have a Ranger1/Bard1/Barb1/Fighter2/RogueXX:
you only loose 2d6 sneak attack damage and get your special rogue feats at level 15
but you get:
more HP, better BAB, Speed, 2 bonus feats, better saves, 1st level bard song !!!
C) one completely forgotten MC: PAL1/ClericXX: much better savings than a pure cleric !
D) and my favourite one: Fighter2-4/Barb1-4/rogue2-3/cleric (selune) 11-13
a real killer !!!
...and there are a few more good ones...
.
reading this thread - I've to disagree that there are only a few good mc combinations:
A) Pal1/SorcXX: - a real good one - wouldn't change anything
B) ranger1/rogueXX: - good one but better combinations possible
1st - I would add one barb level - gives you:
increased speed (using the ranger - you can only use light armor) + rage + more HP + better BAB + better Fort. saves
2nd - I would add 2 Fighter levels:
HP + BAB + Fort. Saves + 2 bonus feats
3rd - You could think about adding 1 Bard level:
Better Will & Refl. Saves + lvl 1 Bard song - but no BAB-bounus for this level
So you have a Ranger1/Bard1/Barb1/Fighter2/RogueXX:
you only loose 2d6 sneak attack damage and get your special rogue feats at level 15
but you get:
more HP, better BAB, Speed, 2 bonus feats, better saves, 1st level bard song !!!
C) one completely forgotten MC: PAL1/ClericXX: much better savings than a pure cleric !
D) and my favourite one: Fighter2-4/Barb1-4/rogue2-3/cleric (selune) 11-13
a real killer !!!
...and there are a few more good ones...
.