GameBanshee Forums

I've done several different types of "Anti-Paladins" before.. but I think this is my favorite:

Anti-Paladin | NWN2 Character Builder

It does however require the installation of all 3 campaigns.

I forget.. what happens in NWN2 to Paladin levels if your alignment changes to evil? Wasn't there something to that?

Tricky wrote:I forget.. what happens in NWN2 to Paladin levels if your alignment changes to evil? Wasn't there something to that?

Probably nothing, or something very differend than should according to 'ze rules' on which NWN was made.

Let's not forget that the dwarf get's fully leveled once he switches to monk What? Yes, i've said the dwarf, because aside from Neeshka i didn't care about any NWN2 npc's, and don't even remember most names (beaten the game twice )
In unpatched, vanilla NWN his monk levels were added on TOP of his Fighter levels, resulting in few hundret health and some extra stats.

Ahoy!

Lol! But that means you have to level him as a monk while he's still a fighter. Meaning points to Wisdom and such, which isn't his strong point at all.

Wacky Bioware.

Tricky wrote:I forget.. what happens in NWN2 to Paladin levels if your alignment changes to evil? Wasn't there something to that?

You just can't progress in that class anymore (..until it's back to Lawful Good). Actually it's not if you change to Evil, but rather if you change to anything but Lawful Good (..which is considerably more restrictive).


Paladin as a *class* was pretty powerful in 2nd edition rules. (..you actually lost all Paladin abilities if you changed alignment from Lawful Good.)

In 3rd it's a watered-down class that isn't worth more than 3 levels, in 3.5 (and nwn2) it expands that usefulness to 4 and 5 levels (for leveraging Turn Undead and selecting Divine Might and Divine Shield).

Once upon a time Turn Undead was actually powerful.. now it's a joke - basically a doorway to selecting Divine Might/Divine Shield.

The same is true for Smite Evil.. in 2nd edition is was powerful (when compared to other attack methods).. now you pretty much need to roll a critical (with a good critical modifier) when you Smite to see good damage, and you'll need numerous Epic Smite feats to see really spectacular damage. (..and it's sadly ironic that it's preferable to go with a Divine Champion for you epic levels instead of a 30 level Paladin.)

I've no idea what's become of the class in 4th edition.


Blackguard is basically a class structured as an Anti-Paladin. It's overall a more powerful class than Paladin and is far less restrictive (by virtue of it's "prestige" class structure and requiring only an Evil aligment for progression.. as opposed to a dual-alignment requirement for the Paladin).

Oh, I should also make note of an earlier and very similar build I have here:

Entropic Warrior | NWN2 Character Builder


While the build is a Blackguard, I don't tend to think of it as an Anti-Paladin. IMO an Anti-Paladin isn't going to be Bard-based, but rather some type of High BAB melee class.

The fact is though that the attack numbers are the same when this build has Inspire Courage on.

The real differences are:

1. The Bard-based build has significant magic at its disposal at epic levels (..and considerably better than just about any Paladin I might add).

2. The Bard-based build has a net +6 damage (30 level) most of the time both from an additional +8 Strength and +2 from Inspire Courage.

3. The Fighter-based build can add a LOT more damage via Improved Power attack.

4. The Fighter-based build has better attack numbers for most of it's progression, particularly at lower levels.

5. The Fighter-based build is MUCH better when fighting multiple opponents. (..the Bard-based build has Cleave, the Fighter-based build has all 3 Cleaves.)

7. The Bard-based build has EDM as soon as you can get it. (..The Fighter-based build must wait an additional 5 character levels in comparison.)

8. The Fighter-based build has Divine Shield "front-loaded" at level 12. (..the Bard-based build doesn't have it until level 23.) (..the Bard-based build counters with more Tumble bonus and RDD bonuses.)

9. The Bard-based build has higher saves.

10. The Fighter-based build has better protection added to those saves (..Steadfast Determination and Epic Resilience.)

11. The Bard-based build has additional types of special attacks (..Knockdown and Disarm).

12. The Bard-based build has additional protection from Fire and Paralysis (..though Paralysis is unlikely with a high save).



IMO the *key* differences are that:


The Fighter-based build is better for the first 20 levels. Further, it's considerably better against multiple opponents - for this reason alone it's vastly superior for the campaigns (where there are so many "mobs").

The Bard-based build is probably better against single tough opponents once nearing the end of it's build. (..in large measure due to an extended Mirror Image and Displacement spells ..and the Disarm/Knockdown ability.)


Despite the superior saves of the Bard-based build, AND its additional protection from Fire and Paralysis at high levels, I'd still say that the Fighter-based build is better overall against most magical attacks.

The reason is the seemingly disproportionate number of times I've seen a "1" rolled in a save. Having immunity to an "auto-fail" roll turns out to be a big thing. On the other hand you could drop the Bard-based build's: Improved Critical Scythe, Knockdown, and Disarm - and replace them with: Toughness, Epic Toughness, and Epic Resilience (respectively).

Ehi ScottG, Thanks for this build.

Sergio1992 wrote:Ehi ScottG, Thanks for this build.

Your Welcome!


I've just finished testing this character in the OC.. weak at early levels due to the 2 level penalty and the attack numbers and particularly the number of attacks per round. It was expected though.

*Very* strong once you reach character level 12 and have a good Strength modifier belt.

Feints were rarely used.. and in one occasion failed when needed most.

The Red Dragon was pretty much unbeatable at character level 15 and ONLY using melee tactics. The Red Dragon has an insane Spots skill.. so Feints won't work. It has VERY high AC (particularly because it also casts Shield), so most attacks miss. It has very high attack numbers and number of attacks per round - so even with your very high AC (lower 50's) it still hits with more damage than you can.. AND it has more hit points to out-last a battle.

The remedy of course is magic use.. and at level 15 with your "Use Magic Device" skill and your augmented Charisma, there aren't that many spells you can't use. So stock-up on scrolls for this battle if you are intent on soloing. Don't forget the scroll's and potions of Healing.. Healing Kit's just won't cover the kind of damage this monster can dish-out.


Btw, I've got the game on it's most difficult setting - so keep that in mind with this report.

Ehi a question: Do you consider this build a power build, like kaze no kama? Have you never made a build as powerful as the kaze? Or is it just a build for fun? I saw that you put a lot of thoughts behind this build, that's why I'm asking

Sergio1992 wrote:Ehi a question: Do you consider this build a power build, like kaze no kama? Have you never made a build as powerful as the kaze? Or is it just a build for fun? I saw that you put a lot of thoughts behind this build, that's why I'm asking

I guess you could say that most of my builds are "power builds".. at least the ones with names that have skills "fleshed-out". If I'm just running a "test" build then chances are that it has significant flaws (..either in attack/damage or defenses).

However, very few of my builds are specifically designed to "beat everything" in a PvP context. For instance, while the Anti-Paladin has superb damage and defenses to magic, it's attack numbers aren't excellent (even when feinting), nor can it achieve an exceptional AC. On the other hand every Kama build I've seen has similar flaws..

So yes, in its own way this build is as good as any Kaze build - but a well designed Kaze could kill the Anti-Paladin one-on-one. On the other hand any Kaze would have a very difficult time against a well designed Wizard build.. where the Anti-Paladin would likely prevail.

Here is a build designed to "beat any build".. it specifically needs a LOT of bonus to Hide, Move Silently, Listen, and Spot. Stealth serves both to enhance attacks (by lowering AC on an opponent) and provide "cover" from magical attacks. When properly equipped AND used, it can beat just about anything in "battle of the builds". There are of course more powerful "buff" characters that I've done, but I'm not to fond of the time required to buff a character.

Hitman | NWN2 Character Builder

Blackguard is cool sounding in pen n paper. There is a feat called sunder arms and armor where you can attack their gear and chop it to pieces.

Claudius wrote:Blackguard is cool sounding in pen n paper. There is a feat called sunder arms and armor where you can attack their gear and chop it to pieces.

It would have been much better if they implemented this - or at least something that allowed a character to lower AC other than causing them to be "flat-footed" (or Taunt). More "complete" if it expressly altered normal *armor* AC.

Say feats for the fighter-type (selectable Armor, or Dexterity, or Natural Armor) with various levels of reduction with additional feats. Shouldn't criticals alter this as well?


I'd also like something that altered only magical AC, perhaps with spells or magical weapons.

Speaking of that, the "dispells" really should have some sort of limited effect on magical armor - limited in duration, but also limited in effect vs. AC bonus based on the power of the dispel. Like MD works on everything for the same duration as it lowers spell resistance, Greater works +5AC for the same duration as greater spell breach lowers spell resistance, Dispell works on +3 AC for the same duration as lesser spell breach lowers spell resistance, and Lesser on +1AC for 2 rounds.

As cool as dungeons and dragons is for pen and paper I think they are handcuffing themselves by adopting pen and paper gameplay into video games.

Claudius wrote:As cool as dungeons and dragons is for pen and paper I think they are handcuffing themselves by adopting pen and paper gameplay into video games.

Yeah, but they managed to get in some changes.. Spell Breach was new, and the parry system was new (though worthless). Even "real-time" fighting is new, but personally I think they screwed that up as well (..and should have made it more like Temple of Elemental Evil or even Fallout.)

But hell, even once they had the opportunity they couldn't get it right. Dragon Age is pretty much that opportunity, and it's no where close to the complexity of D&D. (..the spell stacking for "combo's" was pretty cool though.)