Class Selection

[Crenshinibon]

Now, I do not know much about any of the modules so I'll stay out of that are but, the monk can easily kill the Berserker by spamming Cloudkill with the wand. The monk can actually use a good amount of wands. I'm also playing this through in a no potions duel.

It's a game of strategy. That is what a thief does. You can't expect a rogue to fight face to face with a fighter, that'd be very unwise. Each class has their advantages and disadvantages and Stealth is to be viewed as a strategic advantage and must be used whenever needed.

[rbeverjr]

but, the monk can easily kill the Berserker by spamming Cloudkill with the wand.

The monk fires one puff of cloudkill and dies underneath Celestial Fury. Or if he practices some sort of disappearing act, the fighter goes invisible with a potion, and it's a stalemate. (Of course, the fighter won't sit in the cloud kill like the brainless monsters in the game. Also, if there are wands, then there are potions.) I really don't want to get into PvP. If that's what you want, I can try to hook you up with Death-Caster for the resolution of that one. The POINT of my personal match was basically to showcase the importance of weapons. Celestial Fury stuns - some bosses are immune, but when it works, it really rocks. The Flail of Ages slows, and few monsters are immune to its effect. When this happens, the slowed monster is usually killed. When monsters have physical resistance of almost 100%, then vorpal weapons, stat drain weapons, or level drain weapons have a huge advantage. Weapons doing elemental damage through stoneskins are nice. Weapons that dispel on hit are nice. Just how good is the monk's fist? In my match, damage was similar to the weapon - but without any special affect. The monk's fist special affects (stun; quivering palm) seem a little unreliable, particularly in ToB, because of the saves.

[galraen]

With a once a week ability, I would expect it to work on monsters with more HD than me. After all, those are the ones that matter! What amazes me is the number of times people have reported that QP works on ToB dragons.

If BG was played by correct 2nd edition rules re QP, then a monk would have to be 23rd level. Given a monks THACO and number of attacks at that level, QP should be an almost automatic kill. Of course one has to take into account that no sane DM would put a Dragon in a confined space as happens in BG, in a P&P game. It seems BI think all Dragons were as stupid as Smaug!

[Jedi_Sauraus]

Sorry Crenshinibon, but NO!! the Blade is clearly inferior to the F/M

Lets do a little breakdown of the Blades advantages

Blade gets UAI. What exactly are you going to use this ability for ?? Staff of Cheese, Vhalors, and Scrolls, perhaps Vecna. The F/M can do all of the Above without UAI and earlier on too.

Next, Spells: a F/M with 4,000,000 (each class) will have two level 9 casts and clearly outpreforms the Blade in this area. Furthermore he has access to Mage HLA's, which essentially synergize and exponentially multiply the cheese factor. I'm not going to reiterate all the advantages that come from this, they have been beaten to death by Lark and myself in the ToB Fighter vs Mage thread.

Lastly, tanking ability: Blade has Offensive and Defensive spin, The First is clearly and without question outpreformed by the combination of GWW, Hardiness and any other nice HLA's you can think of. The second cripples you because you cannot move. Regardless the AC -24 it offers if no serious problem. The fighter stops advancing THACO before he gets to 4,000,000 and, as such, can still have a THACO in the high negative teens and still hit you at least 2/3 of the time, if not more.

The only thing the Blade does better is traps, which of itself is not enough to close the power gap that exists between these classes. Ironicly enough you say that the F/M/T woud be better than a F/M but I have to disagree here as well, the F/M/T doesn't have the critical level 9 spells that give the F/M his potency.

[rbeverjr]

Ironicly enough you say that the F/M/T woud be better than a F/M but I have to disagree here as well, the F/M/T doesn't have the critical level 9 spells that give the F/M his potency.

Remove the XP cap. And don't they have a mod to add the desirable HLAs for FMT with XP cap removed? It's been a while since I messed with that. Any way, the FMT can be fun - until its ease becomes boring.

In the stock game, I agree with Jedi that the FM can be tougher than the FMT. Still, the FMT can be more desirable than the FM in some teams because he brings the thieving skills.

[Lancelot122]

Whoa Crenshinibon, I have to give my opinion on this one ! You can't seriously say that a Blade is superior to a F/M ! More fun, better role-playin' experience, yea sure, why not, but more powerfull???

First and foremost, the F/M has acces to lvls 7, 8 and 9 spells, wich alone make him quite stronger in my opinion. I dare you compare skull trap to ADHW, Time stop and the like !

Second, you say that a blade cast spells at higher lvls, while this may be true in the lowers lvls, it doesn't make much of a difference doing like 5 more dmg with Fireball.. And most of the spells are capped at lvl 20 anyway if I'm not mistaken.

Third, a bard can only be proficient (*) in each weapon, while the F/M can put (**) in each, witch means faster attack, more of em, and more dmg (+2).

Fourth, a F/M has more HPs, not alot more, but still... He also has a way better THACO.

And like Jedi said, while offensive spin is ok (still GWW is way stronger), Defensive spin quite suck. I mean, in ToB, ennemies will hit you anyway and you ain't even able to move while using it...

In a dual, the Blade would not last a minute... F/M Timestop, Improved acalarity, Spellstrike, Breach, ADWH x 3 or something like that... Blade dead and hasn't even swing once:laugh:

Cheer,

Lancelot

[Lonelypilgrim]

Third, a bard can only be proficient (*) in each weapon, while the F/M can put (**) in each, witch means faster attack, more of em, and more dmg (+2).

Fourth, a F/M has more HPs, not alot more, but still... He also has a way better THACO.

Lancelot

I'm rather certain the blade can put 2 slots in long swords and short swords. However he can only be proficent in long bow. But as he can achieve maximum (3 slots) in two-weapon fighting then its a no-prob.

I believe 2 slots in L. Swords/ S. Swords and 3 in two weapon fighting can get the thac0 to a quite reasonable level.

[Onkel Bob]

I'm rather certain the blade can put 2 slots in long swords and short swords. However he can only be proficent in long bow. But as he can achieve maximum (3 slots) in two-weapon fighting then its a no-prob.

I believe 2 slots in L. Swords/ S. Swords and 3 in two weapon fighting can get the thac0 to a quite reasonable level.

They can't unless they're Haer'Dalis.

[Jedi_Sauraus]

Ok with an exp cap remover, your opening another can of worms and there is no doubt that
the F/M/T is alot better than F/M

Thieving abilities don't matter from a strictly powerplaying perscpective, doors can be knocked, and traps can be walked over with minimal consequence.

Another point is that the Bard is actually better at casting low level buffs since they will last up to a turn longer than if the F/M cast them (the F/M buffs still last long enough for any fight though). Offensivly the only spell that is uncapped and therefore benefits from the Blade's levels is skull trap. That spell even at those high levels is still out done by ADHW and Dragon Breath and probably others I'm missing.

For a complete list of cheese go view the Fighter vs Mage thread in ToB forum. all the deadly combinations involving level 9 spells have been exhausted by various people who know what their talking about.


Edit @ Lancealot: while I'm sure the F/M is alot stronger, Don't bet on dual either way Staff of cheese + non detection = stalemate. It would depend how smart the mage is. Since the blade would only be able to win by luring the Mage into traps, one would have to be really carefull and use infinite spell strategy and use for example spiderspawn to scout the area out extremely carefully. Carelessness would be disastrous for the F/M but then the same can be said of the Blade.

Since their is a possibility of a stalemate between these classes it only makes sense to compare them in actuall game preformance, Highlighting the harder fights and who has it easier, as well as development. As I mentioned it simply was not fun to wait untill 3 000 000 exp to have the blade gain more power than a level 10 tank out of Irenicus dungeon.

[rbeverjr]

Thieving abilities don't matter from a strictly powerplaying perscpective

Are you discussing bards here or thieves? Thieves can do a lot of nasty things with traps they set (heck even a level 11 thief's trap can mess with Shangrilar), backstabs, and thief-specific HLAs like assassination. Of course, the infamous pile of Spiked Traps has been brought up often enough....

[Jedi_Sauraus]

Assasination is only semi-usefull since you can select it once. I was refering to thief skills mostly.

Stealth skills are easly replaced for any thief by UAI (SoM + Cloak of nondetection). Doors and traps are not an issue for a powerplayer. Oh and did I forget to mention that the Bard doesn't have a backstab multiplier ?? I would enjoy a Bard if he had a backstab multiplier and could open locks

The HLA are very nice from powerplaying perspective but they don't apply to the Bard which is really the Issue here. Of the really usefull HLA's he does not get assasination, and his most powerfull use of UAI will be to use scrolls, Vecna - (which btw does not increase scroll casting speed I tested this) and Staff of Magi.

The F/M can do all that without requireing UAI, which means he can do it earlier on, well before 3 000 000 exp point. The only thing he has which the F/M doesn't is traps, which while nice can't compare, by themselves, to all the cheese of Chain Contingency and other level 9 spells, mage HLA's and utterly devastating combos the mage can pull off.

[rbeverjr]

@Jedi,
Oh, you are still comparing bards vs FM? OK, carry on. I think that the FM is so clearly superior power-wise that the comparison doesn't make sense.

Of course, the game is not simply about power. For the experienced player, a challenge is more fun. And if someone enjoys playing bards, that's cool too.

[Jedi_Sauraus]

well I was still comparing them because somebody quoted me and said that the F/M/T would be better equiped vs a Bard than a F/M which is true only with the exp remover and hence level 9 levels.

I definitly agree with your last statement, everybody can own with a Kensai > mage , F/M or a Sorc but a beast master or Blade are alot more interesting

[Onkel Bob]

well I was still comparing them because somebody quoted me and said that the F/M/T would be better equiped vs a Bard than a F/M which is true only with the exp remover and hence level 9 levels.

I definitly agree with your last statement, everybody can own with a Kensai > mage , F/M or a Sorc but a beast master or Blade are alot more interesting

Ahh now come on! You're not seriously suggesting that the power of a Blade and a Beastmaster is comparable in any way are you?

[Jedi_Sauraus]

No, I'm not, that was a bad analogy. while IMO both classes are inferior to the F/M or anything else than can cast level 9 spells, the Beast master is weaker than the any Bard subclass by orders of magnitude. They really should have tuned him up a bit IMO

Edit: but playing those underdog classes is challenging and potentially rewarding. I prefer powerfull classes that make roleplaying sense and as little micromangement as humanly possible. I remember being disappointed by the Kensai>Thief since nothing could touch him almost right out of the chateau.

[Sheila Lee]

Am I allowed to bring Refinements monks into the monk vs. berserker/barbarian debate? Or would that just make it all too one sided?

[Celacena]

not sure

there have been lots of generalisations in this thread - some of which depend of definitions of 'cheese'. I don't think that we posters agree on what amounbts to cheese - there are some 'iron man' gamers who would consider saving the game as 'cheese'.
certain 'exploits' that run contrary to role-play could be considered as making the game situation far easier than the developers imagined, but some combinations are just the benefits of an 18 INT. if through years of arcane study, a mage notices that dragons rarely chase round looking for the source of poison clouds and are so determined to guard their horde that they will not leave, even if attacked - is that the rewards of study or nipping to the dairy for some cheddar? opinion is divided.
setting traps and luring creatures to them (multiple skull-traps, glyphs and thief-set) - is that tactics or gorgonzola?
is it not 'cheese' to anticipate a known adversary and have counter-measures in place?
sometimes, no matter how much Neal's Yard has supplied, some opponents are devastatingly powerful - even with a party of level 34 and down - including 2 level 20+ mages - some situations look impossible, until a particular strategy or ruse de guerre is adopted.

spoiler
the druid spell Nature's Beauty can save a party - if the mega-opponent fails to save against NB, they are blinded - not much of an inconvenience? when they are a spell-caster and cannot target the party it sure is. chain contingency of casting 3x lower resistance on nearest enemy when spotted, then time-stop - chuck in a few breaches, warding whips, etc and finally a natrues beauty and even Bhaalspawn stand there eyeless and unable to cast.
chain-c and a combination that ends up with project image on sighting enemy can be useful.
when are such things cheese or just good play?

the OP weighs up different classes excluding cheese, yet recommends an exploit of a helm that should count as armour, yet doesn't.
there have been other oddities - some armour allows casting, which is handy for Aerie or a dualled F/M.
I have magic-enabled armour from various places, but there are exploits that allow non-wearers/users to take advantage. I had a powerful harp, supposed to be a bard-only item, yet Keldorn could use it - cheese or good play?

It might be interesting for some people to play a character that starts out as a mage, which allows the use of magic items, then dual to thief or fighter - less HP etc and unable to cast, but with the use of scrolls, items, SotM etc.
I did that - so that the fighter could use the SotM - worked rather well.

[rbeverjr]

@Sheila: I think I recall at least 2 mods that give monks more HLAs, making them a lot like a certain monk in ToB. In this case, the monks are even stronger in ToB and may indeed be preferable to fighter-types with uber weapons, depending on your team and play style.

@Celacena: Indeed cheese is defined differently by different people. I tend to be more lenient with what I allow fighters. High level spells casters generally have a huge advantage over fighters (if their buffs are up). For example in my game, I do allow the kensai to wear that certain helm that the game makers meant anyone to use. Any tactics that a person-judge would not allow the player to succeed with under second edition rules, I consider cheese. That most definitely includes Cloud Kill on dragons from out of sight. I'm sure your kidding when you say a highly intelligent dragon would just sit on his pile of gold - and die in a cloud of orange acidic poison. I think traps could often be used, but personally avoid them in general because when done well, traps eliminate challenge (a lot like backstabbers). It's not that these tactics are necessarily cheesy, just that they make the game no fun for me. However, the way that spiked traps always do a ton of damage to every monster regardless of their defenses - that is a bit much. In general, I personally avoid using spells and tactics that were tossed out in more recent versions of DnD, but may use them when I can't win otherwise. (This is a *gross* generalization. I do use some defunct spells, but certainly try to avoid the most powerful ones like Project Image.)

As stated in my original discourse of the different classes, my favorite classes are not necessarily the most powerful, but I did try to mention the powerful classes too.

[Celacena]

I was pretty surprised at how good PI is - a duplicate caster with the only disadvantage that they can't fight - putting that in a trigger on sighting enemy is a bit more powerful than a DM would expect. the PnP DMs I played with (or me for that matter) would have a low value enemy pop up to trigger the spells - something like an invisible stalker or a magic golem...

I have just defeated the Ravager (and steely mates) and even without imposing any restrictions on my PC, I took a few re-loads to survive that encounter. When the little ghosty symbol floats around - that signifies a vorpal hit, but on such creatures, the vorpal weapons do not seem to work.
I wore the creature down with attack after attack - throwing umpteen breaches, spellstrikes, pieces magics, lower resistances etc at it whilst others used bolts of glory, area effects and anything we could throw at it. the PC only survived by running to the opposite edge of the arena and having a screen of bodies shielding him whilst casting. tough, despite everything going into the pot.
I tried all kinds of spell-triggers, but nothing did any good.

no matter how big the lump of gorgonzola, there is still a bigger rat.

[rbeverjr]

I have just defeated the Ravager (and steely mates)

Congratulations. The ravager generally gives folks problems, particularly the first time through. However, the ravager can be defeated without resorting to what I consider cheesy techniques. In particular, project image is not required. Check the forums for more tactics (off this thread's topic).

I really appreciate everyone posting! I try to consider every aspect of each class and have played many of the different classes and class-mixes. I hope this discourse will be of particular value to beginners, or as a reminder to old hats coming back to the game. Still, I realize that there is a chance I could miss something when analyzing it alone. So, everyone's input is valuable to me.