CLERIC VS MAGLINGS

[Sythe]

Originally posted by Dundee Slaytern: Nah... Death Spell is more humourous when used to rescue a certain Drow lass.

I thought Death Spell works on low level monsters such as wolves, goblins, kobolds, gnolls and all the like.

[Gangrell]

Originally posted by Sythe: quote: Originally posted by Dundee Slaytern: Nah... Death Spell is more humourous when used to rescue a certain Drow lass.

I thought Death Spell works on low level monsters such as wolves, goblins, kobolds, gnolls and all the like. [/QUOTE]It works on all summoned monsters, and yes, low HD opponents as well (humanoid or not).

[Dron_Cah]

First, I'm just curious, how many times has this been discussed?? Also, why is it continually discussed? The truth is, BG2 has always been about pure power, and in that, mages are naturally a better choice, even in old D&D. True, BG2 is heavily oriented towards mages as the "ultimate" power, but we are speaking in the context of the game. Now, if we took this discussion over to the general discussion board, things may go for awhile... heheheheh. [img]graemlins/firedevil.gif[/img]

[Nerull]

You mean PnP? It's still no contest. At early levels (before 5th level), the cleric is dominant because the mage simply can't do much by that point (run out of spells very quickly, and then the cleric can melee the wizard). After about 5th level, the mage evens up and quickly passes up the cleric as they advance after that. At higher levels, mages dominate the D&D world.

[wally p]

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.

[Userunfriendly]

now cleric mage vs sorceror...that one is a little tougher..dundee's opinion not withstanding, a 12/12 cleric mage vs 24 sorceror...that's hard to call...

24/24 cleric mage vs 24 sorceror...cleric mage would win...

[img]smile.gif[/img]

[Dundee Slaytern]

Originally posted by Userunfriendly: now cleric mage vs sorceror...that one is a little tougher..dundee's opinion not withstanding, a 12/12 cleric mage vs 24 sorceror...that's hard to call... 24/24 cleric mage vs 24 sorceror...cleric mage would win... [img]smile.gif[/img]

Well duh... considering you are crushing a lad that has 5,250,000XP with a beast that has 8,850,000XP.

Not a fair fight, and unrealistic too, because numbers are rarely even in multiclassed characters.

A lvl 24 Sorcerer duelling with a Cleric/Mage of equivalent XP faces an opponent that is 19/17. The numbers become more lopsided as the XP goes higher.

[Dundee Slaytern]

Although if you love multiclasses a lot... the IWD series follows a cap system based on levels, not XP. So a level 30/30 Cleric/Mage is not unheard of, although good luck finding the XP needed to reach there.

[Odruith]

Mages with objects like Vhailor's helm, Robe of Vecna... firetooth dagger +3 or the +4 mage's or bone daggers... are great.

Ring of wizardry rings of protection too.

They can be heavily armoured with spell protections and immunity to weapons enchanted or other.

A mage alone, heavily protected... is a force to be reckoned with.

A mage with protection from magic or undead can solo Kangaxx the Demi-lich quite easily.

And a high level mage in ToB is even more powerful... starting Bg 2 with a lvl 8 mage.. or one with 160,000 EXP imported from BG 1 with spells already scribed can make quite a powerful opponent in the long run.

[Dundee Slaytern]

Originally posted by Odruith: Mages with objects like Vhailor's helm ~~ Only if they dual/multiclass. Not relevant in this discussion, because that opens a whole new can of worms. The Circlet of Netheril though... or the Pale Green Ioun Stones are another matter. A mage with protection from magic or undead can solo Kangaxx the Demi-lich quite easily. Not PfMagic... unless you are machoistic or something.

[ 01-29-2004, 04:09 AM: Message edited by: Dundee Slaytern ]