This is technically answered, as cleric/rangers can't fall, but when I ran a Paladin, he fell at about 6 rep, iirc. I would think a ranger would be similar, though not sure. Oh, and I think the rep drop for killing "a certain Drow" is 10 points.

Why can't C/R's fall like any other Ranger, Dron_Cah?

Call it an oversight. The fallen ranger would still be able to cast spells however because of the cleric part.

Technically, he should lose stealth and charm animal abilities... but why would being fallen make you forget to hide in shadows?

Krunchfrogg: the hammer also gives a +2 thac0 bonus, while the staff gives nothing.
And just how is it a disadvantage by having electrical damage done? Just because some creatures can resist it means that it makes the hammer suck? Well then, technically, every creature resists the elemental damage done by the staff since it <u>doesn't have any.</u> That electrical damage can also go through some spell protections if the weapon itself won't harm the creature.

Where did you get that idea? The staff and hammer both have the same THAC0 bonus.
I already described in my above posts why electrical damage isn't as good as regular damage. No where did I state that electrical damage sucks.

Please tell me what spell protections that electrical damage will get through, where using a staff mace +2 will not.

The only protection spell that will block physical, but not elemental, damage is Stoneskin, which of course doesn't exist in BG1. But for some reason, elemental damage is better at causing spell disruption: I have seen enemy Mages take multiple hits while casting and still get their spell off, but elemental damage seems guaranteed to make their spell fizzle.

This might be due to the fact that weapons like Ashideena simply deal two types of damage simultaneously. Let's say that each time a person takes damage while casting, there is an 80% chance that their spell will get disrupted.
Staff Mace: Caster takes 2D4+2 Blunt damage, has a 20% chance of completing spell
Ashideena: Caster takes 1D4+3 Blunt damage, has a 20% chance of completing spell, then takes 1 Electrical damage, now has a 4% chance of completing spell.

I never noticed a difference with spell disruption, but I'll take your word for it, SixOrSpades.

My C/R is still using Ashideena, but I will switch over when I finally get my hands on that Staff Mace, I think.

Hey guys, at what point do you figure a Cleric/Ranger can be called a 'powerhouse'. I guess the Druid spells in BG2 need to kick in before the offencive options become worthwhile. I played through BG1 and found C/R to be nothing special, solid in defence but lacking in attack. I'd much rather have a Cleric/Mage. I hear that C/R is also good in IWD, though I was led to believe that DC is prefered to MC. What do you think?

MC is the way to go if you can get to high levels. If I were not planning on transferring my character to BGII, I probably would have played a Fighter/Cleric instead (Fighter's advance in levels faster than Rangers). But the advantage of Cleric/Rangers is that they gain access to all Druid and Cleric spells. This is only really beneficial in the higher level games, like BGII. I've never played IWD, so I can't give an educated opinion there.

i have heard there is a staff of striking. if this is true, thats a weapon that is worth giving up a shield for