The Best Character and Strategy

[ZFR]

And in general:

Having high intelligence means good tactical decisions. It is important for mages, alchemists, inventors who need to know how to learn, analyze data, solve concrete problems... The opposite of that is stupidity.

Having high wisdom means good strategical decisions. It is important for priests, druids, clerics, paladins who need to see the "big picture". The opposite of that is foolishness.

So for example we can have an intelligent-foolish con who can daily cheat people out of some money, but spends it recklessly and is always penniless anyway, and a wise-stupid farmer, who gets "cheated" in the market daily, but in the long run manages to keep his farm running and his family fed.

Though of course often they go together. People who can make good short term decisions can also make good long term ones, and people who are stupid are also foolish...

EDIT:
And seeing how I went off topic here, to answer Rockstar's question:
For me the best character I liked was a solo kensai->mage dualled at levelled 21 with the wirlwind attack taken as HLA. Though I can see how a sorcerer with a good spell choice might be better.
I liked the pure kensai class before he got dualled. And might try a pure kensai once... in a party.

[ 04-14-2007, 06:20 PM: Message edited by: ZFR ]

[Armen]

i'm revisiting a solo that i abandoned a litle while ago

assassin (until UAI) -> cleric

all the benefits of both
with the addition that UAI means you get to keep your assassin edged-weapon prof's - a multi cleric/thief can eventually use swords but not be proficient (choose a swashie (or rogue-rebalancing) for 3 *s in dual-wield)
and you can keep the cool hooded thief avatar you get wearing leather while casting spells which is more than you can say for thief/mage duals

[Rockstar]

ZFR, I think you hit the nail right on the head when it comes to the distinction between wisdom and intellegence. And yes, the medievil era does not mean that people were stupid. Because somebody does not study does not mean they are stupid. But mages and clerics 'study' magics of one sort or another, so this again proves how untrue this is.

Hey Armen, looks like you've chosen a challenging but formidable solo. Let us know how it goes!
Personally I would have chosen an alternative to dual wielding a solo with stud leather and gone a) single long sword (+2 AC) and quickswap shortbow, or single long sword and shield (and buff the shield for the missle protection) Let us know how you go with leveling up the cleric when you get to it. Sounds like a sweet build tho! I've never dualed to a cleric so update us on it! [img]smile.gif[/img]

[Iron Greasel]

Originally posted by ZFR: quote: Originally posted by Iron Greasel: But since the society is mostly pseudo-medieval, the average is rather low.

Son, you obviously don't understand what intelligence means. The fact that they were less technically advanced doesn't tell anything about their intelligence. [/QUOTE]Ah, but it does mean they were less educated. I see intelligence also as theoretical knowledge of the underpinnings of the universe, which would be very useful for wizards and rather sparse in medieval farmers. Geometry and stuff.

[ 04-15-2007, 03:16 PM: Message edited by: Iron Greasel ]

[ZFR]

Originally posted by Iron Greasel: Ah, but it does mean they were less educated.

Again, no. Education has nothing to do with intelligence and nothing to do with technological advancement.

And I would say their theoretical knowledge of the underpinnings of the universe was waaay higher than it is now. They maybe knew a little less about "geometry and stuff", but knew much more about, say, magic and stuff. They could make a potion that can comopletely remove any poison, another one to fully heal you and one to make you go invisible. A feat that no one today can even come close to achieving.

[Klorox]

How is 10 above average?

10.5 is exactly average according to dice rolls, and if you say IQ= INT x10, then a 10 INT is exactly average.

BTW, a Sorcerer with all 18's (or higher) in every stat is easily the most powerful character. And any strategy other than hiring (or summoning) a few meat shields to keep enemies away from you while you're blasting aren't needed (and even these are only needed at low levels).

[ 04-15-2007, 07:38 PM: Message edited by: Klorox ]

[Dundee Slaytern]

The system is not linear in D&D. 8 is considered the average in D&D. 9, if your DM is feeling generous. Also, there is no linkage between the rolls and IQ. That is merely conjecture on your part.

Cheers.

[Kyrvias]

Ah, but most, if not all townsperson NPC's are to have an Intelligence of 9. Ergo, 9 is the average in BG II. Subsequently, 10 being one higher than 9, is above average.

Hooray for math!

[Klorox]

Dundee: The IQ rules came from AD&D 1st edition. I know they don't really apply, but that's the only "real world" comparison made in any of the editions. I have no idea where you got 8 being the average. If you can name a source, please do.

Kyrvias: Where did you find that all townspeople have an INT of 9?

[Iron Greasel]

Originally posted by ZFR: quote: Originally posted by Iron Greasel: Ah, but it does mean they were less educated.

Again, no. Education has nothing to do with intelligence and nothing to do with technological advancement.[/QUOTE]Perhaps it has something to do with basic society structures then. In any way, in modern Europe most people can read and write. In medieval Europe this was not the case. I'm not sure if literacy rate is mentioned anywhere in the sourcebooks, but I don't think it can be very high. Same for higher mathematics. In short, more people went to school. Certainly one may argue that Intelligence does not measure whether a character can read, write and measure the volume of a cone, but it most certainly measures his ability to learn. And school does teach you how to learn.

Also originally posted by ZFR: And I would say their theoretical knowledge of the underpinnings of the universe was waaay higher than it is now. They maybe knew a little less about "geometry and stuff", but knew much more about, say, magic and stuff. They could make a potion that can comopletely remove any poison, another one to fully heal you and one to make you go invisible. A feat that no one today can even come close to achieving.

But magic and potion making have their own rules to handle them. Geometry (AFAIK) does not.