Fighter / Druid

[Harper]

Well, Ive finally got around to picking up NWN + SOU, and Im left
baffled by 3E D&D. Multi-classing or dual-classing a fighter-druid in
2E was easy, but in 3E Im left baffled. (Mainly because this is my
first exposure)

Whats a healthy, hearty fighter-druid combination for NWN? At the
moment Im looking at the 10 Fighter / 10 Druid combination - I get the
Level 5 Druid spells, plus a few extra feats from Fighter. Or possibly
a 9 Fighter / 11 Druid to get access to Level 6 spells (Greater
Stoneskin).

Mostly I prefer to rely more heavily on the fighter abilites, using
the Druid side as buffs, heals and such.

Any ideas and thoughts would be greatly appreciated.

Mike

[John Twernbold]

Multi-classing or dual-classing a fighter-druid in 2E was easy, but in
3E Im left baffled. (Mainly because this is my first exposure)

Is there any aspect in particular that has you baffled?

At the moment Im looking at the 10 Fighter / 10 Druid combination - I
get the Level 5 Druid spells, plus a few extra feats from Fighter. Or
possibly a 9 Fighter / 11 Druid to get access to Level 6 spells
(Greater Stoneskin).

Heh, sounds to me like you have a pretty good handle on how
multiclassing works, including how to rate the value of different
combinations of classes.

One thing to keep in mind: level 20 is a long ways off, so try to find a
combination that's effective throughout the character's life. That is,
figure out what kind of qualities you'd like to have at 3rd level, 9th
level, etc. etc. rather than just thinking of what the end product will
be when (or even IF) you reach level 20.

But I agree that it can be nice to have a gameplan for your character's
entire career, kinda' like planning out your courses for all eight (heh,
or ten or twelve...) semesters at college, rather than just picking
classes for the next semester only and not looking ahead.

"Whaddya mean I gotta take 11 classes this spring to graduate?!"

[QuarK]

Post by John Twernbold
Heh, sounds to me like you have a pretty good handle on how
multiclassing works, including how to rate the value of different
combinations of classes.
One thing to keep in mind: level 20 is a long ways off, so try to find
a combination that's effective throughout the character's life. That
is, figure out what kind of qualities you'd like to have at 3rd level,
9th level, etc. etc. rather than just thinking of what the end product
will be when (or even IF) you reach level 20.

You'll be about level 12-13 after the SoU campaign.
The normal campaign will end at character level 15-17.

That's the max you'll get in 1 run, characters have to be able to kill
things during the character development too. You can compensate for a
relative weak character (which a F/D doesn't have to be ;)) by taking a
powerful henchman (the monk for example).

[Harper]

In years to come, crazed archaeologists will claim that on Sun, 27 Jul

Post by John Twernbold

Multi-classing or dual-classing a fighter-druid in 2E was easy, but in
3E Im left baffled. (Mainly because this is my first exposure)

Is there any aspect in particular that has you baffled?

Skills, Feats, Packages, etc. The whole inability to roll for
abilities is pants, IMO. I always like having a high intelligence,
even on my fighters, and now I cant.

Still, I imagine there are some tomes in the game that increase
abilities somewhat.

[Matthew Miller]

Post by Harper
Skills, Feats, Packages, etc. The whole inability to roll for
abilities is pants, IMO. I always like having a high intelligence,
even on my fighters, and now I cant.

With point-buy, you can give your fighters an 18 int, if you want. By
"roll", you seem to mean "re-roll indefinitely until I get super-high
stats". And that's just silly.

Post by Harper
Still, I imagine there are some tomes in the game that increase
abilities somewhat.

Tomes, no. But magic items like crazy.

[w***@asahi-net.or.jp]

Post by Matthew Miller

Post by Harper
Skills, Feats, Packages, etc. The whole inability to roll for
abilities is pants, IMO. I always like having a high intelligence,
even on my fighters, and now I cant.

With point-buy, you can give your fighters an 18 int, if you want. By
"roll", you seem to mean "re-roll indefinitely until I get super-high
stats". And that's just silly.

Though thats a fair criticism, what you end up with using a points system in
an un-realistic level of equality.

With the points system you can't have an exceptional score without
sacrificing every other score you have, so you'r either a 1 trick wonder, or
a good all rounder.

Frankly, there shoudn't be Paladins in NWN because of this, and probably no
Bards either. Paladins especially, but also Bards (actually truth be told in
original AD&D Bards were the best of the best like a super prestige kit) and
apparently Rangers, were originally intended in part to only be available to
people who happened to roll an extremley good set of scores, thus reflecting
the fact that they are truly exceptional individuals.

In NWN there are no 'born' heroes, only made, it's a bit of a shame.

I for one would encourage people playing the solo game to do what I did, get
out your players handbook, pick a method, roll your stats, then use Leto to
apply them to your character. Come to think of it I forgot to do that with
my IWD team....

Sean

[cavebear]

Post by w***@asahi-net.or.jp
Frankly, there shoudn't be Paladins in NWN because of this, and probably no
Bards either. Paladins especially, but also Bards (actually truth be told in
original AD&D Bards were the best of the best like a super prestige kit) and
apparently Rangers, were originally intended in part to only be available to
people who happened to roll an extremley good set of scores, thus reflecting
the fact that they are truly exceptional individuals.

But, let's be honest, if you wanted to play a paladin, bard, ranger,
etc. in previous versions, you just kept re-rolling until you got the
scores you needed. Unless, of course, you're one of those sticklers
that rolls one set of scores and then determines what kind of
character you will play. Which I'm not.

The point-buy system also keeps you from having super-characters
because somebody got lucky on their dice rolls. I get enough
differentiation from the point-buy system that I don't feel there's
any "un-realistic level of equality". While I've seen characters that
have every stat in the 12 - 14 range, such characters are "weak" from
a gaming sense, and very difficult to play (which is a differentiation
in itself). The point-buy system allows a couple of 15-16 scores, one
or two 14 scores and the rest 10 or below. With level-up increases,
you'll generally end up with one or two natural stats at 18 or higher,
which differentiates the characters very nicely.

[Visceral_Syn]

He's got a point on the whole buy-point deal. But my biggest beef with 3E
rules is the multiclassing rules. Now a single classed character, in either
NWN the game or the PnP, are nowhere to be seen cuz u can now "Compliment"
your current class with another. And no holds barred on the mulitclassing,
with only xp penalties as punishment? Not to say 2ED rules on the subject
were better, but a Paladin should be able to multiclass with anything and
stay a paladin. Ranger's with thieves and Druids same smell. Why should
sub-classes be mixed with other sub-classes is beyond me. The sub-classes
are a mix already. so with all the multiclassing goin on, which is basically
powergaming, and nothing near role playing, no one uses a single classed
character, i must be the last person to see the multiclassing killing off
D&D.

[cavebear]

Post by Visceral_Syn
He's got a point on the whole buy-point deal. But my biggest beef with 3E
rules is the multiclassing rules. Now a single classed character, in either
NWN the game or the PnP, are nowhere to be seen cuz u can now "Compliment"
your current class with another.

I have no problems with this because I didn't really like the rigid
class system of D&D anyway. The 3e multi-class rules are a small step
toward a classless RPG, which would be my preference. Why shouldn't a
fighter pick up some spellcasting ability? Or rogue skills? Why
wouldn't some paladins be more spell-oriented (multiclassed with
cleric) and others more melee combat-oriented (multiclassed with
fighter)?

Of course, having said all that. I rarely multiclass. I'm a
"powergamer" and pure-class characters are usually stronger than
multiclassed characters (unless the multiclass is exploiting a bug in
NWN...)

[eudas]

On Tue, 29 Jul 2003 03:49:21 GMT, John Twernbold

Yep, you're probably right about you being the only person to hold that
belief. And if nearly everyone disagrees, what does that suggest? :-)

Why, that everybody else is wrong, of course..
*grin*

eudas
Inside of every silver lining, there's a big, dark cloud.

[w***@asahi-net.or.jp]

At the end pf the day, point buy is an accepted method of character
generation, and I think for the online game the point buy system is just
fine.
It means no one can bitch about unfair chars cos everyone is equal, plus if
you lack a particular quality you can just hook up with someone who doesn't,
team work init.

But in solo, it's 1 man/woman against the world (sure you have your
assistants but so what), said person should be a true hero with stats to
refelect it, consider wizards, sorcers, druids, and cleric, all of whom
eventually need a 19 on 1 mental stat, which means they've either got to
spend most of their starting points, or most of their progress points on
that stat, and be little better than average at everything else.

To reach 20th level a character should have to go through so much variety
and intensity of struggle that merely being good at 1 thing would not cut it
(again in a party situtaion it's a team effort so...).

Post by cavebear
But, let's be honest, if you wanted to play a paladin, bard, ranger,
etc. in previous versions, you just kept re-rolling until you got the
scores you needed. Unless, of course, you're one of those sticklers
that rolls one set of scores and then determines what kind of
character you will play. Which I'm not.

Yes but thats the fault of the players not the system, and at the end of the
day, it's a game, you paid for it, if you won't satisfied with your
character/the game unless you have stats of 18,17,16,15,14, and 13 (just for
example), and you don't mind sitting there clicking re-roll for 30mins and
shouting "OH $h!t" everytime you accidentlally re-roll a really good set of
stats cos you were in zombie mode, then thats your perogative.

Post by cavebear
The point-buy system also keeps you from having super-characters
because somebody got lucky on their dice rolls. I get enough
differentiation from the point-buy system that I don't feel there's
any "un-realistic level of equality". While I've seen characters that
have every stat in the 12 - 14 range, such characters are "weak" from
a gaming sense, and very difficult to play (which is a differentiation
in itself). The point-buy system allows a couple of 15-16 scores, one
or two 14 scores and the rest 10 or below. With level-up increases,
you'll generally end up with one or two natural stats at 18 or higher,
which differentiates the characters very nicely.

You have a point and maybe I'm being a touch greedy, though actually I think
if you can engineer a character through leveling up and equipment who has 14
on every stat thats really quite good becasue it means pretty much everytime
you (or rather the software) throws a dice you are getting a +2, and not
weak as such, though maybe spread a bit thin.

Anyways, easy solution to my complaints = dice + LETO.

Sean

[w***@asahi-net.or.jp]

Well, when you consider your average commoner has most all stats in
the 6 to 10 range, PCs are way above average.

What makes you think that? Any version of D&D I've ever played has been
either 9-11 or 8-12 for regular folk stats.

Eh. You start with your prime requisite at 16 and still have 20 points
to spread around at creation. Then you spend your first three level-up
points on your prime requisite, and you're good to go. Besides, if
you're "role-playing" your character, you're most likely going to have
one (or two) weak stats--sort of like superheroes always have a
weakness.

As I said, perhaps I'm a touch greedy...

Post by w***@asahi-net.or.jp
To reach 20th level a character should have to go through so much variety
and intensity of struggle that merely being good at 1 thing would not cut it

I played a half-orc monk through the OC, finishing at level 17 (soloed
the whole game). Started and ended with natural INT and CHA of 6. OK,
he couldn't Persuade his way out of anything, and he was highly
unskilled, but he could still kick ***.

Yeah, but it's a CRPG, in a real rpg, the challenges would usually be much
more complex, fact is most players (me included) struggle to play a role
that has 6 on any mental stat, this is not an average commoner, it's someone
with mental or emotional difficulties as reflected by the -2 penalty.

So you're sickly wizard is getting about 2HP per level and can't carry
anything larger than a toothpick. He doesn't need to be close to
obliterate his enemies.

Gonna be toast as soon as he misjudges a situation. Thats what saved games
are for I guess.

And what of the fact your awkward paladin has

trouble putting his shoes on the right feet? The undead he destroys
aren't all that agile themselves. Etc.

Exactly my point, a Paladin with a weakness, is gonna be limited to be pest
control against low level undead, once the banshees, vampires and ghosts
come out, the fact that he's a point exchange compromise, and not the
traditional exceptional champion, is gonna become painfully obvious. Level
20 seems even further away...

If it weren't for
re-rolling, 80% of 1e and 2e PCs would have been fighters.

I think that's how it was supposed to be in those editions (right?), the
majority of adventurers were likely to be fighters and/or perhaps
rouges/thieves, since they represented the classes most similar to regular
people who'd just gone that extra mile, whereas the magic using classes were
special cases.

anyways
Sean

[Kipper]

Hi all. This is my first post here so please excuse any bad manners...

Allow me to rant a little ;)

Post by w***@asahi-net.or.jp
What makes you think that? Any version of D&D I've ever played has been
either 9-11 or 8-12 for regular folk stats.

It seems that some people are distinctly unhappy if their character has a
weak stat. What is a weak stat? If a regular person in the game world has a
stat of 9-12, as you point out, and we consider them weak, then basically
what you are saying is that you consider any stat that doesn't give a
positive modifier to be weak! This seems ridiculous. How many wizards do you
imagine running around with STR 14 carrying more weight than Jon the
Blacksmith who is a commoner? This wizard has spent his/her whole life
studying to be able to cast spells, the blacksmith has spent his whole life
beating iron with a big hammer, yet the wizard can bench press more than
him...

Does no-one remember Raistlin Majere from the Dragonlance books? Could
hardly take two steps without his brothers aid, coughed himself silly half
the time, and yet became the most powerful wizard around and challenged a
god. And what about Flint, terrible with an axe but none-too-bright... These
are true heroes and they all had their problems (i.e. some weak stats).

Post by w***@asahi-net.or.jp
Yeah, but it's a CRPG, in a real rpg, the challenges would usually be much
more complex, fact is most players (me included) struggle to play a role
that has 6 on any mental stat, this is not an average commoner, it's someone
with mental or emotional difficulties as reflected by the -2 penalty

Ok, it's a CRPG and what I've said above isn't particularly relevant but NWN
isn't such a great game because of the single player story, it's great
because of the multiplayer possibilities. In a party of several PC's (and no
henchmen), why do you need a wizard with a high STR, or a fighter who can
think for himself? Each party member plays their role. The fighters protect
the wizards, the clerics provide some healing, and the thief backstabs the
wizard whilst the others are busy and runs off with his stuff ;)

But seriously, this is what I think the game was made for. The party pools
their abilities and resources to overcome the challenges, and if they can't
defeat the band of kobolds (or whatever) then they rethink and try a
different strategy. Or (shock-horror!) look for another way to solve the
problem without killing everything in sight. That's the distinction between
Roleplaying and Powergaming.

As for the suggestion earlier in this thread that weak stats impair the
ability to roleplay a character, I'll choose to shut-up and not risk making
any enemies so soon ;)


Anyway, thanks. And all IMHO
Marios

[w***@asahi-net.or.jp]

Post by Kipper
Hi all. This is my first post here so please excuse any bad manners...

Do you mean your 1st post in this group or your 1st post ever on any group?
Either way your manners are well above average : )

Post by Kipper
Allow me to rant a little ;)

Post by w***@asahi-net.or.jp
What makes you think that? Any version of D&D I've ever played has been
either 9-11 or 8-12 for regular folk stats.

It seems that some people are distinctly unhappy if their character has a
weak stat.

I think it seemed that way to wizards of the coast too, which is why they
made 3e much more generous with both the stats you get and the effects of
the stats. IMO it's a huge improvement that bonuses start at 12, in 2e and
b4 it was all too tempting to do 2 for 1 point exchange (etc) since anything
from 11 to 15 was ultimately not that handy, whiltling away all those points
into a char with 5 10's and 1 18 was what I expected of most players

Post by Kipper
What is a weak stat?

In NWN/CRPGs a weak stat is anything that makes your life difficult, the
game less fun or frustrating.
In table top roleplaying, a weak stat is anything that you as a player lack
the skill or energy to portray beyond a rudimentary fashion, anyone can go
"duh me smash", but to really get inside and be consistent of a character
whose mind functions on a different level to yours can be very challenging
(the same of course applies to the upper reaches of mental scores).

Post by Kipper
If a regular person in the game world has a
stat of 9-12, as you point out, and we consider them weak,

I don't consider regular people to be weak, I presume that adventures would
simply not be weak otherwise they might not even make it to the handy jump
on point of the game/story.

Post by Kipper
Does no-one remember Raistlin Majere from the Dragonlance books? Could
hardly take two steps without his brothers aid,

Exactly, if he'd been trying to do the NWN campaign (and perhaps even more
so if he'd been playing on/in KrynnHaven which can be very tough going)
without the rest of the Dragonlance team looking out for him, and without
his staff of the magi, he'd probably be defeated by the training dummy.

Post by Kipper
In a party of several PC's (and no henchmen), why do you need a wizard

with a high STR, or a fighter who can

Post by Kipper
think for himself? Each party member plays their role.

Yep, and I've said most of the way along that I think point buy is well
suited for online, except of course for Paladins...

Post by Kipper
Or (shock-horror!) look for another way to solve the
problem without killing everything in sight. That's the distinction between
Roleplaying and Powergaming.

I'm begining to think that CRPGs are by their nature geared towards
powergaming, fact is, 99% of the time the only way to handle those kobolds
(or equivalent) in a CRPG is too kill them.

Post by Kipper
As for the suggestion earlier in this thread that weak stats impair the
ability to roleplay a character, I'll choose to shut-up and not risk making
any enemies so soon ;)

You seem like a fairly vocal person whose likely to become a regular
contributer here, so I'll point out in advance: I am not your enemy. When I
1st arrived here I got into some scrapes, people mistook the fact that I
like to argue (and I mean aruge as much as discuss) as meaning I was looking
for trouble or trolling. I'm not, so if I get heavy at any point it's just
that I enjoy the fray.

Sean

[John Twernbold]

Post by w***@asahi-net.or.jp
I'm begining to think that CRPGs are by their nature geared towards
powergaming, fact is, 99% of the time the only way to handle those
kobolds (or equivalent) in a CRPG is too kill them.

If you play solo, then yes. Have you tried multiplayer? More specifically,
multiplayer with a human DM?

[w***@asahi-net.or.jp]

Post by John Twernbold

Post by w***@asahi-net.or.jp
I'm begining to think that CRPGs are by their nature geared towards
powergaming, fact is, 99% of the time the only way to handle those
kobolds (or equivalent) in a CRPG is too kill them.

If you play solo, then yes. Have you tried multiplayer?

Yes. It was just kiling with a bit of chit chat with other other players
thrown in.

Post by John Twernbold
More specifically, multiplayer with a human DM?

No, not yet.

Sean

[Harper]

In years to come, crazed archaeologists will claim that on 28 Jul 2003 13:18:40 GMT,

Post by Matthew Miller

Post by Harper
Skills, Feats, Packages, etc. The whole inability to roll for
abilities is pants, IMO. I always like having a high intelligence,
even on my fighters, and now I cant.

With point-buy, you can give your fighters an 18 int, if you want. By
"roll", you seem to mean "re-roll indefinitely until I get super-high
stats". And that's just silly.

Not necessarily. I just dont like the point-buy system. If I was granted a certain number
of points, and then every increase was simply one point - ala BG, then Id be fine - limit
my points to whatever, I dont care - but with a 1:1 ratio, I can at least decide to take a
stat to 18 without absolutely destroying my other stats.

Mike

[John Twernbold]

Post by Harper
with a 1:1 ratio, I can at least decide to take a
stat to 18 without absolutely destroying my other stats.

You can do the same with NWN's point buy, but that 18 doesn't arrive
until later in your character's development. Remember, higher stats
"cost" more at character creation, but the subsequent 1-point increases
at 4th, 8th, 12th, 16th, and 20th levelings are a 1:1 ratio, no matter
how high or low the existing stat is. Even if you start with a 16 at the
beginning, you could be up to an 18 at 8th level, and 21 at 20th level.
'Course, it's pointless to compare the stats of 3E to 1E/2E since
they're very different systems--it's an apples & oranges situation.

Furthermore, NWN's point buy is fairly middle-of-the-road with respect
to total points available. If you play PnP, something like the RPGA's
Living Greyhawk environment has a lower amount of total spendable points
in the beginning. But in some groups where the characters want more
heroic heroes, they increase the points to where you could easily have
an 18 and still have decent values for your other stats.

Point buy isn't for everyone, but its advantages include greater equity
amongst players, and more flexibility for players to create the
character they envision. Many (perhaps most?) players want this
flexibility, which is also why 3E mutliclassing is popular (see the
other tangent in this same message thread).

[eudas]

Post by Harper
Well, Ive finally got around to picking up NWN + SOU, and Im left
baffled by 3E D&D. Multi-classing or dual-classing a fighter-druid in
2E was easy, but in 3E Im left baffled. (Mainly because this is my
first exposure)
Whats a healthy, hearty fighter-druid combination for NWN? At the
moment Im looking at the 10 Fighter / 10 Druid combination - I get the
Level 5 Druid spells, plus a few extra feats from Fighter. Or possibly
a 9 Fighter / 11 Druid to get access to Level 6 spells (Greater
Stoneskin).
Mostly I prefer to rely more heavily on the fighter abilites, using
the Druid side as buffs, heals and such.
Any ideas and thoughts would be greatly appreciated.
Mike

IMO focusing on the Fighter aspect is as important; druids are only 2hp behind
per hit dice (1d8 vs 1d10), and scimitars are pretty good weapons. They far, far
more than make up for any fighting differences once they get spells like
Barkskin, Stoneskin, Resist Elements, etc. Plus, they get Animal Companions,
animal friendship, and of course everybody gets a henchman. They can run around
with a small barkskin/stoneskin/resist elements/etc army. Don't forget about
their upper level attack spells either... call lightning, firestorm, etc.

Druids are a powerful class.
You might want to just go up to Fighter4 for weapon specialization, but above
that... *shrug*.
And in fact, NWN probably lets you get away with going Druid3/Fighter1 and get
weap spec (as opposed to the PNP game which requires you actually get to
Fighter4 to get weap spec). So you could wind up with something ridiculous, like
Druid18/Fighter1/Monk1 and use your weapspec for normal fighting and monk Flurry
for fighting while transformed. Fun.

eudas
Inside of every silver lining, there's a big, dark cloud.

[Harper]

In years to come, crazed archaeologists will claim that on Sun, 27 Jul 2003 20:23:12 GMT,

IMO focusing on the Fighter aspect is not as important; druids are only 2hp behind
per hit dice (1d8 vs 1d10), and scimitars are pretty good weapons. They far, far
more than make up for any fighting differences once they get spells like
Barkskin, Stoneskin, Resist Elements, etc. Plus, they get Animal Companions,
animal friendship, and of course everybody gets a henchman. They can run around
with a small barkskin/stoneskin/resist elements/etc army. Don't forget about
their upper level attack spells either... call lightning, firestorm, etc.
Druids are a powerful class.
You might want to just go up to Fighter4 for weapon specialization, but above
that... *shrug*.
And in fact, NWN probably lets you get away with going Druid3/Fighter1 and get
weap spec (as opposed to the PNP game which requires you actually get to
Fighter4 to get weap spec). So you could wind up with something ridiculous, like
Druid18/Fighter1/Monk1 and use your weapspec for normal fighting and monk Flurry
for fighting while transformed. Fun.

From the looks of it, and from reading several other threads, I might be well served by
swapping the fighter class out for a taste of monk. That would seem to be a fun class full
of shape-changing monkey-business and such.

Ostensibly, Im trying to recreate my PC from the BG series, who was built along the same
lines as Jaheira. But Im thinking 3E prevents such a clean translation.

[Windigo]

Post by Harper
Well, Ive finally got around to picking up NWN + SOU, and Im left
baffled by 3E D&D. Multi-classing or dual-classing a fighter-druid in
2E was easy, but in 3E Im left baffled. (Mainly because this is my
first exposure)
Whats a healthy, hearty fighter-druid combination for NWN? At the
moment Im looking at the 10 Fighter / 10 Druid combination - I get the
Level 5 Druid spells, plus a few extra feats from Fighter. Or possibly
a 9 Fighter / 11 Druid to get access to Level 6 spells (Greater
Stoneskin).
Mostly I prefer to rely more heavily on the fighter abilites, using
the Druid side as buffs, heals and such.
Any ideas and thoughts would be greatly appreciated.
Mike

Mike, while I tend to agree with you on wanting somewhat higher attribute
scores, for multiplayer gaming the point buy system as implemented in NWN is
easy, fair, reduces the opportunity for cheating and makes the DM's job much
simpler.

For single player mode I suggest you download a copy of Leto. It will allow
you to modify your character to fit a more heroic mold. You can do the same
thing from the console but Leto makes it easier.

You can find Leto at http://www.weathersong.net/weathersong/leto/

You'll have to modify the nwplayer.ini file to include

Single Player Enforce Legal Characters=0
Single Player ItemLevelRestrictions=0


Remember that once you modify the characters they will be unplayable in any
multiplayer game that enforces Legal Characters.

When you learn to use the toolset you'll be able to create items that
approximate magic items and weapons in 1st and 2ed edition AD&D.

Windigo


windigo(AT)paganplanetD0Tcom