Best archer?

[Stworca]

I would say that the best archer for BG2 enemies is.. a wizard slayer dualed to thief (with g3 fix that adds miscast magic on ranged attacks, as it should be!)

Mage fights are a joke with such archer. Add a paladin with carsomyr / fighter-mage with staff of magi or (Weimer's) Anti-paladin and mage fights will be borring, no risk encounters.

Not just vanilla game ones, but the ones from IA / SCS / Tactics too!

I strongly recommend getting at least one WS

[Lord Tansheron]

I see your point, but then again is it really necessary? If you're already using an Anti-Paladin, mages should drop like flies even without WS's. And especially against the big, hard-hitting bosses (like, say, Pontifex) I like my Called Shots. Tbh I have never really had that much trouble slaughtering mages with an AP party, the freight-train hitters are what bothers me usually.

That being said, I do like the idea of WS->T. If I do get my ToB to finally install again, I just have to try that

[Stworca]

I first took WS just four days ago, when starting SCS II, and i asure you that Anti-Paladin wont make it fast enough. Before he gets to enemies they have protection from god spells working. A single arrow fired before all protection spells activate, change the whole battle.

Additionaly, some mages have 'cannon fodder' fighters / summons to stop any incoming anti-paladin or inquisitor

True potential of WS archers show in caster heavy encounters.. Like mentioned above Drow City defenses.. Here are the details quoted from SCSII readme.

Spolier Warning!

* Group A: disorganised raiders (about every five rounds)
o Three L9 fighters, two L9 archers, a L12/12 fighter/mage
o Two L9 fighters, two L9 archers
o Four L9 fighters, two L9 archers, a L10 cleric
o Four L9 fighters, a L11 mage
* Group B: serious war-parties (every four rounds)
Each party comprises six L9 fighters, four L9 archers, a L10 cleric, a L14 cleric, a L12/12 fighter/cleric, a L11 mage, and a L15 mage. There are four of these war-parties.
* Group C: elite battlegroups (every ten rounds, with another Group B war-party between each battlegroup)
o Four L9 fighters, three L17 mages
o Four L9 fighters, two L12/12 fighter/clerics, a L18 cleric, a L18 mage, a glabrezu, and two nabassu
o Two L11 mages, a L15 mage, a L22 mage, and four stone golems
o Six L9 fighters, two L10 clerics, two L12/12 fighter/clerics, a L14 cleric, a L20 cleric, two balors and two glabrezu.

But for big bosses that barely use magic, like Ira'Kiou'Dneg , other archers surely outclass WS. But there are very, very few fights like that in BG2. Mainly.. dragons.. demons (but WS still stops most of their buffs).. and fire giants.. (except for the fire giant priest with Balor Claw on himself)

[Lord Tansheron]

I see your point. Still, I am not entirely convinced it is that much better.

Cannon Fodder: even if there are some, you can usually safely ignore them and rush right past to punch the mage's face in. I don't recall any fight where I was seriously troubled getting to the mage in time; or, if that is not an option, kiting the adds out of range to deal with them and then turn to the mage.

Protections: I imagine with correctly scripted contingencies, you could become basically unkillable until something runs out. And that is where you can attack, either using the whole array of dispels (AP, Mage, the wand from WK) to create a defense gap or by simply outlasting the buff durations. Getting a shot in before the scripts fire is, imho at least, a bit too weak for my taste - the fun comes from dealing WITH the issue, not circumventing it.

While it is true that BG2 is a caster-heavy game, especially with the nastiest mods, don't forget that many of them are still just run-off-the-mill trash encounters that you will steamroll through. Focus should be on the bosses imo and for those, I'd rather have an Archer and not a WS.

Speaking of which, I am not sure but does the WS debuff affect the heavily scripted arsenals of the most annoying bosses in the first place?

[Stworca]

Speaking of which, I am not sure but does the WS debuff affect the heavily scripted arsenals of the most annoying bosses in the first place?

It only causes their magical, and magical-like abilities to fail. Sequencers, triggers, contingiencies and scripted effects that are applied regardless of what the creature does, are unaffected.

I.E. Beholder rays still work, Ira'Kiou'Dneg time stop contigiency still works, scripted " instant casts when wizards spawn " from SCSII still work.
But all the regular spells fail, even - which makes WS better then others - the truly instant ones, that cant be interrupted by damage, AND all the spells that are scripted to not be canceled by dmg. (and trust me, there are plenty of those in vanilla game, tactics)

I agree tho that ranged WS' damage output is rather low (10-15 dmg per shot) but for parties which already hit like running trains, miscast magic is a blessing.

However remember that on higher lvls, when it is sorcerers, bards and mages who tank enemies, there is a place for more archers. Take both and compare them yourself

While it is true that BG2 is a caster-heavy game, especially with the nastiest mods, don't forget that many of them are still just run-off-the-mill trash encounters that you will steamroll through. Focus should be on the bosses imo and for those, I'd rather have an Archer and not a WS.

Well now.. My party melts all the dragons (inc ToB) and demogorgon in less then 5 rounds (no HLA's) cause WS prevents them from using stoneskins, pfmg and other defensive spells.

Im about to go through whole game once more, so i'll take an archer with me this time AND a WS, to compare them on field. Even now however i know what results i will get.. Archer deals more damage, while wizard slayer allows the party to unleash hell earlier in 'tough' encounters

Edit :

Protections: I imagine with correctly scripted contingencies, you could become basically unkillable until something runs out. And that is where you can attack, either using the whole array of dispels (AP, Mage, the wand from WK) to create a defense gap or by simply outlasting the buff durations. Getting a shot in before the scripts fire is, imho at least, a bit too weak for my taste - the fun comes from dealing WITH the issue, not circumventing it.

I meant the buffs that mages cast manualy, as mentioned before Contin's and triggers are unaffected.
And last but not least.. Since whole point of having WS is his disrupting attack, which does not get better when levels go up, you can dual him as soon as you can! (be wary of THAC0 tho)

[Lord Tansheron]

I tested the WS as an Archer now (without ToB though, still can't get it to install);

I have to say, it is indeed impressing. Rendering Mages utterly useless within seconds, as well as crippling bosses is quite a substantial advantage.

That being said, I toyed around with them a bit and came across the WS->Mage combo instead of ->Thief. Now that of course means that you will not get to bypass the inherent WS penalties with UAI, but then again do you even need to, really? Rings and Amulets are not that relevant for an archer-type character, which leaves Boots (annoying to miss speedy footgear, but not crucial), Belt (would be nice, but not enough to go around for the whole party anyway) and Hands (that one does hurt). On the upside, you get some significant bonuses: better defenses (Stoneskin and the whole shebang), better combat stats (Tenser's - true, you can use scrolls with UAI but duh...) and most importantly: better offense! It seems somewhat paradox but I found that after you pump the spell casting penalty up high, there won't be much left to do, since your damage isn't exactly stellar. That's where as a Mage, you can switch to the usual arsenal of high-end arcane nukes including the nifty multi-target spells that offset your non-mage fight liabilities.

I'm trying it out to the full extent right now and I got to say for me personally it outshines WS->Thief in basically every aspect so far. But then again, it's without ToB... so maybe UAI does impact it more than I would like to admit.

[Bescheid]

So how did it go?

As the title asks! Wizardslayer/thief or mage or archer best?!

Kinda curious on you insights. And about the weapons u use

[Crenshinibon]

I still stand by what I said earlier. The best archer is the archer kit. Aside from your impressive damage and THAC0 gain, you have good weapons available early on. I personally like using Crimson Dart +3 at the start. It's very fast, acquirable straight out of the dungeon, has good to hit and damage bonuses and has fast weapon speed.

I don't think that a Wizard Slayer/Thief has any place in this competition. I'd say that the only other competitors would be the Assassin/Fighter or the Swashbuckler/Fighter dual classes. The reason as to why I chose these two characters in addition to the archer is because they both gain a bonus to hit and damage throughout their primary classes and can use any item, which makes them flexible. The Assassin in particular is a born mage killer as he can stack his poison applications to all his weapons, which causes the pain animation to play so much that the enemy may as well be helpless.

[Bescheid]

hm

Dont u think u diss the concept the others described a bit to easily, i mean clearly one of the most important (if not the most) role of the arsher is disruption against casters. Wich leads us to the Wizardslayer (and with the fix it working in range). I think it has pretty strong argument for it in its role as a disruptor, dont u think?

[Crenshinibon]

It can disrupt casters, yes, but so can the Assassin with his poison, which, unlike the Wizard Slayer's ability, is useful again non caster characters as well.

In my opinion, a full assassin and a full archer are the best at stopping mages (and other characters) due to the poison (Assassin) and the sheer amount of attacks per round, along with damaging abilities (archer). Don't forget that they're effective from the start, unlike the other choices.

With the Assassin (or any backstabber in general) I find mages a nuisance as most can be killed within a single backstab, whereas the Wizard Slayer/Thief has to attack the enemy six times (and hit) in order to have them fail at casting their spell most of the time, and at that point, they should be dead anyway.

The only time that a Wizard Slayer could have an advantage of the Archer and Assassin is when initiating a fight with a full amount of attacks per round. Even then, nothing is guaranteed since there is an almost instant cast trigger on a lot of mages and boss characters, at which point there's still a chance that they might succeed in casting all of their protections.

[DragonBice]

I want to take these NPCs because I have never had them in my party before - except for Imoen. But she is the only decent Thief in the game.

I can't beleive you think Imoen is the only decent thief in the game! I can see that she's 'useful' as a mage with some basic thieving skills but really, if you want a good THIEF there are others. Yoshimo is really the one I like the best but if you can't stand his treachery (being forced to end up with imoen anyway ) go with Jan Jansen. Besides, if you only need a good mage with the necessary thieving skills, you can actually use Nalia. She's a better mage and you'll come across enough free thieving pots and rings etc to enhance her skills when needed.

I almost instant-killed Melissan with Jan Jansens traps. Hit her like, twice, with a fighter and she was history. (In between the fights I used Jan and my Wild Mage to cast Wish spells so that everyone regained their skills = new traps for Jan = new instant-kill on Melissan :devil

Imoen can't place traps which are a huge asset.

[Crenshinibon]

Keep in mind that a lot of players don't use traps because they are too cheap and overpowered.