Ironworks Gaming Forum - View Single Post - fighting strategy, best offensive class, and katanas

01-11-2001, 01:37 PM

I have a few questions, and would like to hear some of your views:

1) What do you think is the best offensive/combatant player in the game? What I can think of is kensai, and monk. But because I am not that much into the dice, AC, THACO etc, I'm not sure. A monk gets speed and at lvl 20, 20 damage with his fists, which is more than two swords with a kensai... but on the on the other hand a kensai has more attacks per round? I'm not sure, like I said, I'm not that good in comparin gthe statistics since I am not an AD&D board player myself (not much xp with the math that is done). What do you think is the best offensive player (mage is good, but only with lvl 4+ spells, and when he has cast them (like 10 orso) he can't do anything and has to sleep, so I think mage is not that good)

2) I was thinking about the best strategy to kill an opponent. Here is why I need an answer to (1). Well, if you just have a fighting opponent, I guess you can entagle him/her and shoot arrows, or just attack him with ranger/paladin/fighter/monk and he will be dead soon. Problem is, when a mage gets involved. What I was thinking about that (example: fighting a lich): you cast silence 15" radius on the party (or only the fighters) and you just kill the mage with a plain old sword: with 15 radius he can't cast at all, so you can whack away (and a mage is not tough when he has no magic ))
Can anyone think of a flaw in this strategy? If there are none, I guess what you need is a thief for the traps etc, a cleric to cast the 15" radius, and ALL fighters to kill everything in the game without real trouble. Anyone care to comment?

3) A katana is supposed to be the best sword there is right? Is it just me, or is it better to spend proficiency on long sword (and not katana) since there are better long swords than katanas? I mean, 2d4+4 and stunning and what not capabilities is much more fun than a 1d10(+2) katana. Again, since I'm not all into the comparing statistics, maybe it's better to use katanas since they are faster...? I don't know if that negates the fact that they do less damage...

01-11-2001, 01:37 PM	#1
Jaric Guest Posts: n/a	I have a few questions, and would like to hear some of your views: 1) What do you think is the best offensive/combatant player in the game? What I can think of is kensai, and monk. But because I am not that much into the dice, AC, THACO etc, I'm not sure. A monk gets speed and at lvl 20, 20 damage with his fists, which is more than two swords with a kensai... but on the on the other hand a kensai has more attacks per round? I'm not sure, like I said, I'm not that good in comparin gthe statistics since I am not an AD&D board player myself (not much xp with the math that is done). What do you think is the best offensive player (mage is good, but only with lvl 4+ spells, and when he has cast them (like 10 orso) he can't do anything and has to sleep, so I think mage is not that good) 2) I was thinking about the best strategy to kill an opponent. Here is why I need an answer to (1). Well, if you just have a fighting opponent, I guess you can entagle him/her and shoot arrows, or just attack him with ranger/paladin/fighter/monk and he will be dead soon. Problem is, when a mage gets involved. What I was thinking about that (example: fighting a lich): you cast silence 15" radius on the party (or only the fighters) and you just kill the mage with a plain old sword: with 15 radius he can't cast at all, so you can whack away (and a mage is not tough when he has no magic )) Can anyone think of a flaw in this strategy? If there are none, I guess what you need is a thief for the traps etc, a cleric to cast the 15" radius, and ALL fighters to kill everything in the game without real trouble. Anyone care to comment? 3) A katana is supposed to be the best sword there is right? Is it just me, or is it better to spend proficiency on long sword (and not katana) since there are better long swords than katanas? I mean, 2d4+4 and stunning and what not capabilities is much more fun than a 1d10(+2) katana. Again, since I'm not all into the comparing statistics, maybe it's better to use katanas since they are faster...? I don't know if that negates the fact that they do less damage...