Ironworks Gaming Forum - View Single Post

wally p · 01-28-2004, 11:14 PM

well, there are probably a couple reasons why it's discussed so much.

one, there isn't a pinned/stickied thread about this, so i imagine a lot of people just want to have these discussions but don't feel like using the search function like a fine-toothed comb.

second, while it may seem that everything there is to know about BG2 is already known, that seems like a biiig statement and you never know when new things will be discovered that might actually tip the balance of things.

I also disagree about the mage being the more powerful in pen and paper.

usually, healing is quite important in pen and paper as potions are rarer and natural healing is quite inadequate.

In 3e at least, the cleric can spontaneously convert any other memorized spell into a cure of the appropriate level, which can be a godsend, not to mention, he or she never has to memorize them, allowing for more flexibility.

Also, there are usually physical components to arcane spells which makes the casting of them much harder, bring their power more in line.

In BG2, the gap is really not *that* large. Certainly, equipment can help bridge the gap--if there was some cleric-friendly weapon that conferred an extra hit like belm, he could conceivably dual wield it with FoA, using Righteous Magic and Holy Power to give him a disgustingly low thac0. This pierces stoneskin and slows at 3 attacks a round.

Obviously, the mage isn't defenseless against this, but neither is the cleric.

I do agree that the mage is on-balance more powerful in BG2, but certainly not as much as some make them out to be.

01-28-2004, 11:14 PM	#25
wally p The Magister Join Date: January 18, 2004 Location: new haven, CT Age: 42 Posts: 108	well, there are probably a couple reasons why it's discussed so much. one, there isn't a pinned/stickied thread about this, so i imagine a lot of people just want to have these discussions but don't feel like using the search function like a fine-toothed comb. second, while it may seem that everything there is to know about BG2 is already known, that seems like a biiig statement and you never know when new things will be discovered that might actually tip the balance of things. I also disagree about the mage being the more powerful in pen and paper. usually, healing is quite important in pen and paper as potions are rarer and natural healing is quite inadequate. In 3e at least, the cleric can spontaneously convert any other memorized spell into a cure of the appropriate level, which can be a godsend, not to mention, he or she never has to memorize them, allowing for more flexibility. Also, there are usually physical components to arcane spells which makes the casting of them much harder, bring their power more in line. In BG2, the gap is really not that large. Certainly, equipment can help bridge the gap--if there was some cleric-friendly weapon that conferred an extra hit like belm, he could conceivably dual wield it with FoA, using Righteous Magic and Holy Power to give him a disgustingly low thac0. This pierces stoneskin and slows at 3 attacks a round. Obviously, the mage isn't defenseless against this, but neither is the cleric. I do agree that the mage is on-balance more powerful in BG2, but certainly not as much as some make them out to be.