the usefulness of a bard

[ister]

Don't take the bard instead of the thief - you need one thief to take out traps.

Or use the clerical detect traps spell.

[pritchke]

Originally posted by ister: Don't take the bard instead of the thief - you need one thief to take out traps. Or use the clerical detect traps spell.

Then have your bard take out the trap with a mirror image.

[ 02-08-2005, 11:08 AM: Message edited by: pritchke ]

[Dancing Virginia]

Originally posted by pritchke: quote: Originally posted by ister: Don't take the bard instead of the thief - you need one thief to take out traps. Or use the clerical detect traps spell.

Then have your bard take out the trap with a mirror image. [/QUOTE]Just be careful in Dragon's Eye using the mirror image tactic. Some of the traps reset and can be very damaging to your entire party.

[ 02-08-2005, 03:51 PM: Message edited by: Dancing Virginia ]

[Serak Moonblade]

just to counter your points, i feel that find traps of the cleric is quite a useless spell as there are often several traps beyond the fog and they don't see to figure up.

secondly even if the traps were detected they cannot be dismantled by a bard or by spell (to my knowledge).

possible spoilers for the novice!
*
*
*
*
*
*
this is even more critical in the yuan-ti's last line of defence before yxunomei which are almost all confusion traps. they leave you with less fire and/or spell power. especially in insane when yuan-ti shamen attack you fropm behind a few moments after you engage yxunomei.
*
*
*
*
*
end spoiler!

but i must agree that a bard would make the game more challenging by making your team handicapped in some aspects though there are a few minor positives such as a lightly enhanced role-playability...

[Dundee Slaytern]

The solution is quite simple. Instead of replacing the Thief/Mage, replace the Fighter/Mage with a Bard.

[ZFR]

er... If you look at my post there is some hidden text.

I was only joking. I dont really mean that "bard would make the game more challenging by making your team handicapped in some aspects though there are a few minor positives such as a lightly enhanced role-playability... " (if it was my post that you were referring to)

I havent yet played an IWD game without a bard. And mine too spends all time singing the warchantofsith.

[NobleNick]

Originally posted by ZFR: I was only joking.... " (if it was my post that you were referring to) I havent yet played an IWD game without a bard. And mine too spends all time singing the warchantofsith.

Whew!! What a relief. Here I thought I was going to have to chase you around the forums posting "Unclean!! UNCLEAN!!!"

--------------------
What's a party,
without a song?
Bards ROCK!
Party On!!

[Serak Moonblade]

all the discussion above just shows how differently each one of us would have left our own individual mark on the dale and its people.

ZFR, the idea was yours but i didn't refer to your post. i guess that on reading all the posts yours seemed to impress itself in my mind.

dundee, my idea behind the fighter mage is that, during melee i send only two tanks ahead. when they seem reasonably hurt, i pull them back and send in my remaining two fighters(see party in first post for details) and bring the first two back wherefrom they supplement with ranged weapons.

[Dundee Slaytern]

*shrugs*

I play on HoF with one frontliner. Remember, summons are some of your best friends in IWD.

In most cases though, two would be sufficient. Anything more than two can be overkill and will tax your other options for party members.

[ 02-10-2005, 11:53 AM: Message edited by: Dundee Slaytern ]

[Serak Moonblade]

dundee: which means that you would be having more spellcasters who could summon more monsters. it is a good tactic but i use it when i have a lot of ammunition for ranged weapons.