GameBanshee Forums

Pellinore wrote:Why is everyone so down on poor Minsc??? I had him with me from Nashkel to the Abyss and the Justice Fist and he kicked major butt for me. I used him as a tank, enraged him and let him go to town on vampires and beholders. He ended up with Axe of Unyielding and Storm Star and was just a pure terror (not as much as my Paladin ). I never figured out why my Paladin started leaving him behind in XP as both use the same XP table and I was only one level above him in the dungeon (ended up 4 levels ahead)...

Several quests in which each party member receives a set amount of experience points gives a greater number to the PC alone. If I remember correctly, it's mainly from the Hell and Abyssal realm challenges, and also in some of the Dream/slayer related stuff in SoA.

Ian Kognitow-

If you look at my original post on this thread, I said this:

"Minsc is the most natural to be replaced, though he does have value as an archer, since there seems to be a lack of ranged fighters (could be generally covered with Jaheira on sling)."

So given the notion that Sarevok and the PC (Ken/Mage) are more than enough to handle melee situations, Minsc's abilities as an archer I found more suitable for a balanced party (may for that reason be better off with Mazzy, but that's a different story).

I don't use archers all that much, but Keldorn is still very handy with firetooth if need be, but I like using at least 3 front-liners anyway, but to each their own. Keldorn can do either duty though.

And I'd even venture to say that in ToB, when Keldorn's other abilities can be easily duplicated, Minsc's enrage ability can be more useful, and incidentally also make him hold-free (and while he doesn't get the Inq. bonus, Minsc too can dispel magic as a level 3 spell). Give Minsc arrows of dispelling as well if you like. It's actually a better option to dispel bad magic against your own party members since it won't take down all buffs in the area - just on the single target.

Well if a single target is all that's affected, I rarely bother unless it's charm or something, otherwise actually shooting your teammate seems rather extreme. Minscs little ranger spells are pretty puny compared with keldorns abilities. Enrage is nice, but I don't think it can compete overall with keldorns abilities.

I did neglect the Inquisitor resistance to hold, thinking it was only charm, because the armor would seem redundant. But as for the free action ring, it can indeed be equipped in mid-battle, like any other item except armors.

Of course, but it can only be used as prevention, never as cure, and there isn't enough prevention to go around for everyone, so you need some curing, hence, Keldorn.

I don't really understand your argument though that even with the ring always on, it's only luck that that character misses the saving throw. Isn't your whole argument that Keldorn's free action allows him to bail out the party whilst everyone else is down? How is it different for his much more powerful Kensai-Mage to be permanently free actioned instead via the ring?

Yeah, you're right, I just got the impression that you were using free action as a way to avoid having to use dispel at all.

And again, as to your first point, assuming some spell has totally incapacitated, say, half the party (even when most saving throws across the board are at least <5 in ToB), what situation is such that only 'an old paladin can fix it'? Certainly, if someone needs to get beaten up it can be handled in short order by the PC or Sarevok; and if a dispel is absolutely necessary, every single member of the party in question except Sarevok is capable of dispel magic.

I find ordinary dispel magic to be, ordinary and I find it rarely fixes everything like 2x level does, in fact very often even in ToB I'd find if I needed to dispel 3 people without 2x level dispel, only 1 might actually be dispelled. Fine id you don't mind reloading a lot though. Usually, if your party is getting pounded on by spells, yeah, Sarevok and the PC won't be enough really.

More specifically about saving throws, it was you, in your original argument, who had brought up Keldorn's 'excellent saving throws to count on.' I was just pointing out that in ToB, everyone is going to have such throws.

Not everyone, mages and thieves won't, but that only really leaves Imoen as a problem. True, Keldorns saving throws are only 2 better than other pure fighter types, but it's still excellent.

As for dispel magic in general, I really don't want it anywhere near my party. I don't even remember using it once by any character in the ToB chapters during my last game. Remove magic is more than nice, it's inherently a better offensive option.

I still get my mages to memorise lots of remove magic. Why not have both?

I've always found the best recourse when party members are incapacitated is to quickly get rid of whatever danger is still out there.

Not always possible if your party is being pounded by spells and half or more of your team is out because of a previous spell. Half a team is rarely enough for anything difficult.

Which, actually seems to be what you're saying anyway about not wanting the mages/clerics busy dispelling. So, if something is badass enough to incapacitate everyone worthwhile, it's probably going to be doing something quite unfortunate to Keldorn if he's pulling out his dispel (which will also then make them even more vulnerable to further damage).

A dispel which takes 0.6 seconds shouldn't be a problem, as opposed to the 1.8 sec mage dispel and remove magic and the 3.6 second priest dispel. I think .6 seconds is probably worth taking the time to help the team get back in.

About the casting time--remove magic, dispel magic, and true sight can easily be loaded into contingencies (and chain contingencies), making the casting time absolutely 0 (and contingencies of course can be cast while paused in the middle of battles without regard to alacrity). So again, the PC (who probably has saving throws around 0 anyway), Imoen (or basically any mage or bard) wearing the free action ring is pretty much even more efficient in the role you say is only for 'an old Paladin'.

All this talk about contingencies is exactly my point. You almost actually need contingencies etc. to make dispelling by a mage worthwhile or effective, and you're taking up way too many spell slots that could be much better utilised with the addition of Keldorn freeing them up.

For that matter, in ToB you're much more likely to get stunned rather than held as far as incapacitation goes. Dump Keldorn, get yourself a bard, and start singing.

I don't think Zalath is interested in a Bard, but indeed, you could even have both.

Schu wrote: Not always possible if your party is being pounded by spells and half or more of your team is out because of a previous spell. Half a team is rarely enough for anything difficult.

All this talk about contingencies is exactly my point. You almost actually need contingencies etc. to make dispelling by a mage worthwhile or effective, and you're taking up way too many spell slots that could be much better utilised with the addition of Keldorn freeing them up.

Well, that's why it's a matter of being a contingency - only use if it's absolutely needed. It's not like a number of chain and regular contingencies shouldn't be memorized in the first place. Also, if you dump all protections on your characters via dispel magic, if they were poor enough to get taken out in the first place, aren't the mages going to have to waste more spells to rebuff in order not to get taken down even easier right after.

If there happens to be a particular issue with throws, there are plenty of ways to equip appropriately. Even Imoen can easily have negative saving throws across the board in ToB. Just between a good archmagi robe, staff of magi, and +2 ring, there's a +5 bonus already on top of the already low saving throws for any character with at least 3 million XP. And since you mentioned thieves, with the possibilities UAI gives them in equipment and potions, throws are the least of their worries.

Also, since in your scenario the party is getting beaten down by spells, it would be quite easy for a PC Kensai-mage and (or even without) Sarevok to take down whatever mage is causing you problems. It's actually that kind of scenario exactly where the chained remove magic works out (usually just a wand of spell-striking breach can be enough), allowing the offending spellcaster to get quickly beat up. Then, of course, there's the possibility for the mages to time stop.

That said, ToB tends to be much more combat-intensive anyway--lots of hard hitting demons, giants, assassins, drow, etc. They tend to throw out a lot of damage, but I'm still kind of unsure what is regularly causing you large-scale incapacitation that's not of the being dead sort. --slight spoiler--perhaps Demogorgan or the WK seal party, but certainly those are the kinds of battles in which everyone should knowingly be optimally buffed in advance. Particularly the mages who may not have negative throws will last for just about that .6 seconds without buffs if they were in a position to be disabled in the first place. Out of curiosity, exactly what ToB situations do you have in mind where more than 1 or 2 party members would actually be completely disabled but not dead?

Ian Kognitow wrote:Well, that's why it's a matter of being a contingency - only use if it's absolutely needed. It's not like a number of chain and regular contingencies shouldn't be memorized in the first place.

In my opinion, the spell slots could be used much better than just a contingency for dispel magic.

Also, if you dump all protections on your characters via dispel magic, if they were poor enough to get taken out in the first place, aren't the mages going to have to waste more spells to rebuff in order not to get taken down even easier right after.

Possible, but better than having your party torn apart while they can do nothing about it. There are obviously situations where you wouldn't use dispel, just like there are situations where you wouldn't use remove magic.

If there happens to be a particular issue with throws, there are plenty of ways to equip appropriately. Even Imoen can easily have negative saving throws across the board in ToB. Just between a good archmagi robe, staff of magi, and +2 ring, there's a +5 bonus already on top of the already low saving throws for any character with at least 3 million XP. And since you mentioned thieves, with the possibilities UAI gives them in equipment and potions, throws are the least of their worries.

Imoen can't get UAI. Negative saving throws are actually not always enough, and the situations in which they are not enough are always the difficult ones where your party faces the greatest challenges.

Also, since in your scenario the party is getting beaten down by spells, it would be quite easy for a PC Kensai-mage and (or even without) Sarevok to take down whatever mage is causing you problems. It's actually that kind of scenario exactly where the chained remove magic works out (usually just a wand of spell-striking breach can be enough), allowing the offending spellcaster to get quickly beat up. Then, of course, there's the possibility for the mages to time stop.

Yes, if it's just mages. If the mages have minions, you will probably be in a lot of trouble. Mages are very very often not alone.

--slight spoiler--perhaps Demogorgan or the WK seal party, but certainly those are the kinds of battles in which everyone should knowingly be optimally buffed in advance. Particularly the mages who may not have negative throws will last for just about that .6 seconds without buffs if they were in a position to be disabled in the first place.

In those situations, dispel is more of a safety net, usually used when the major buffs have worn off and the enemies are starting to get out of my incapacitation spells and are casting again.

Out of curiosity, exactly what ToB situations do you have in mind where more than 1 or 2 party members would actually be completely disabled but not dead?

Quite often more than 2, and with only one out as I said I wouldn't bother usually. Any situation with dragons, mages, demons, priests, as I remember, just about any battle where it wasn't a straight out melee battle. There are plenty of spells that have these effects. True, in ToB the emphasis is more on damaging spells than effect spells, but there's still plenty of everything to go around.

Look, sure, you can cover the need for keldorns dispel fairly well if you use contingencies, use items, shoot your own team, use alternative spells etc. but I prefer to have keldorns ability, save some spell slots for better things, save item slots for potentially better things and just go ahead and keep Keldorn. He's a great warrior, can do the ranged stuff quite well too, and his dispel NEVER FAILS, unlike almost every other method of dispelling there is. If you prefer these work-arounds, fine, but you can't say that his ability wouldn't be useful. Using Keldorn to do this actually strengthens your other characters by allowing them to ignore (to some degree) dispelling duty and concentrate on better things (yes, including remove magic), and potentially allowing them to use better items than ones purely for immunities.

Schu wrote: Quite often more than 2, and with only one out as I said I wouldn't bother usually. Any situation with dragons, mages, demons, priests, as I remember, just about any battle where it wasn't a straight out melee battle. There are plenty of spells that have these effects. True, in ToB the emphasis is more on damaging spells than effect spells, but there's still plenty of everything to go around.

I guess in my experience I just don't see where such broad based disabling is coming about with such enemies. For instance, dragons are typically throwing out damage via breath and wing buffets; they aren't exactly casting hold spells. Essentially, the same is true with ToB mages, which are scripted more for time stops and area effects like horrid wiltings, or at least higher level save-or-else spells like finger of death rather than the old holds and dominations. And the reason is because ToB level saving throws generally make it pointless. Sure, there's the 5% chance of a perfect roll for a spell to work (assuming it also bypasses the magic resistance that most characters probably have in some measure).

It seems to come down to this for me: there are 4 main effects that totally disable a character without killing them: hold, charm,confusion, and stun. The first three will probably have to be rolled for, with little chance due to saving throws; and the plenitude of items offering protection against charm and confusion should allow solid protection that the characters will want to wear anyway. Stun is somewhat more tricky and often combat inflicted, and I believe (I may be wrong about this) can't be dispelled like the other effects (like level drain isn't dispelled)--or at least in some cases (like weapon stun or the Comet stun). Moreover, in nearly all cases, these effects wouldn't be from an area-effect that would hurt the party en masse.

Now, there are two effects that are more prevalent in ToB that are very disruptive but not disabling - fear and blind. Fear is something that dragons and demons especially can use to cripple a party--if that party is dumb enough not to already take the easy measure of having any mage or cleric use a low-level resist fear in advance (or be resistant via items). Actually, I guess fear is disabling as well, but one can't rely on potentially dispelling it anyway because different characters will be running in and out of range. Blind is very bad and is probably the most legitimate use of a dispel magic, especially if the party is broadly affected. However, blind does not totally disable character. Rather than have a paladin toss a dispel in, potentially knocking down the buffs of the non-affected, it's probably easier for the individual character(s) to go off somewhere more isolated and dispel on themselves (again, the party mainly can question can all dispel with the exception of Sarevok). And even then, that option is mainly for mages, who should have been far enough from the fray not to get hit unless individually targeted. Fighters, while suffering penalties, should still be able fight well enough that taking away other protections by dispelling the blind would probably end up a net loss.

And as a general point - I don't think that the use of contingencies/basic item protection/etc., should be considered 'work-arounds' to dispel magic. I consider them better alternatives to a spell I typically have found to be unneeded and usually less beneficial to the alternatives I have brought up. My original point in the thread in preferring Minsc to Keldorn for that particular party (Keldorn could certainly be more useful in a party not taking Sarevok and less flush with Cleric abilities) was not just that Minsc offered other useful abilities (better ranged attacks, enrage ability, better overall balance) but also that in ToB Keldorn's special attributes (dispel, true sight, hold/charm immunity) are basically unnecessary and superfluous. I can say that Keldorn's dispel ability--in the context of ToB--is not useful. Or, at least, it is no more useful than any other ability that I rarely have the faintest desire to use.

Ian Kognitow wrote:I guess in my experience I just don't see where such broad based disabling is coming about with such enemies. For instance, dragons are typically throwing out damage via breath and wing buffets; they aren't exactly casting hold spells. Essentially, the same is true with ToB mages, which are scripted more for time stops and area effects like horrid wiltings, or at least higher level save-or-else spells like finger of death rather than the old holds and dominations. And the reason is because ToB level saving throws generally make it pointless. Sure, there's the 5% chance of a perfect roll for a spell to work (assuming it also bypasses the magic resistance that most characters probably have in some measure).

I agree ToB tends not to use so much of disabling spells as was in SoA, however, they are still extremely annoying to me when they do happen, which was often enough. I always remember even in ToB using up most of Keldorns dispels every time (though admittedly I don't rest much in my games).

It seems to come down to this for me: there are 4 main effects that totally disable a character without killing them: hold, charm,confusion, and stun. The first three will probably have to be rolled for, with little chance due to saving throws; and the plenitude of items offering protection against charm and confusion should allow solid protection that the characters will want to wear anyway. Stun is somewhat more tricky and often combat inflicted, and I believe (I may be wrong about this) can't be dispelled like the other effects (like level drain isn't dispelled)--or at least in some cases (like weapon stun or the Comet stun). Moreover, in nearly all cases, these effects wouldn't be from an area-effect that would hurt the party en masse.

I'm pretty sure dispel can dispel pretty much any temporary effect, and level drain is permanent until restoration. Exception is maze, which explicitly says so in the spell description. Power words and symbols are area of effect spells, and I remember quite a few slingings of greater malison (which I think dispel dispels). All this happened to me annoyingly often, and got fixed very often by Keldorn.

Now, there are two effects that are more prevalent in ToB that are very disruptive but not disabling - fear and blind. Fear is something that dragons and demons especially can use to cripple a party--if that party is dumb enough not to already take the easy measure of having any mage or cleric use a low-level resist fear in advance (or be resistant via items). Actually, I guess fear is disabling as well, but one can't rely on potentially dispelling it anyway because different characters will be running in and out of range. Blind is very bad and is probably the most legitimate use of a dispel magic, especially if the party is broadly affected. However, blind does not totally disable character. Rather than have a paladin toss a dispel in, potentially knocking down the buffs of the non-affected, it's probably easier for the individual character(s) to go off somewhere more isolated and dispel on themselves (again, the party mainly can question can all dispel with the exception of Sarevok). And even then, that option is mainly for mages, who should have been far enough from the fray not to get hit unless individually targeted. Fighters, while suffering penalties, should still be able fight well enough that taking away other protections by dispelling the blind would probably end up a net loss.

Due to inquisitor dispels very short casting time, you can get everyone affected in time easily (it has surprisingly good range and seems to bounce off people, that is, transmit from one to the other). I don't think I ever bothered with dispelling blind, for the reasons you give above mainly.

And as a general point - I don't think that the use of contingencies/basic item protection/etc., should be considered 'work-arounds' to dispel magic. I consider them better alternatives to a spell I typically have found to be unneeded and usually less beneficial to the alternatives I have brought up. My original point in the thread in preferring Minsc to Keldorn for that particular party (Keldorn could certainly be more useful in a party not taking Sarevok and less flush with Cleric abilities) was not just that Minsc offered other useful abilities (better ranged attacks, enrage ability, better overall balance) but also that in ToB Keldorn's special attributes (dispel, true sight, hold/charm immunity) are basically unnecessary and superfluous. I can say that Keldorn's dispel ability--in the context of ToB--is not useful. Or, at least, it is no more useful than any other ability that I rarely have the faintest desire to use.

The fact is, you can't protect everyone against everything with items if you have a 6 player party, so items can't guarantee success, in fact, very far from it. Contingencies are very nice, but very inferior comared to Keldorns ability in regards to dispel. Use them for remove magic and everything else, sure, but dispel is Keldorns domain.

Sure, you could use Minsc instead and use all the different methods for dispelling, he's very slightly better in combat of both kinds and enrage is nice, but I don't agree about balance with you and Keldorns ability with dispelling, true sight and protection from evil far outweighs Minscs few spells, and in my opinion, the fact that using Keldorn frees all your characters to memorise better spells instead of going for contingencies and weak dispelling is an extrememly valuable point in Keldorns favour.

So it looks like it's agree to disagree... Minsc is great I agree, but overall I find Keldorn better even in ToB and even with other casters available.