Why a Bard?

[Laurentius]

its astoundingly, but i got the impression the lesser member you got in your party, the faster you can go through the game and the bard plays the biggest part in this

started with a usually 6-membered adventuring group, ive now played with a 3-member-combo:
Fighter/Thief - Gnome (for high strength/dexterity), blocking and bashing monsters
Druid - Human, area spells, summon spells
Bard - Halfelf, first a good archer, later the singing medician
(later means after finished dragons eye, she could healing by singing)

btw: even if the F/T got a AC of -16 he's hitten very often, lucky punches ?

[Fljotsdale]

Laurentius? I never dual/multi a thief with fighter for that very reason. It is good to have elf or half-elf for dex, but they have a penalty to constitution, and maybe gnomes do to - not sure. If you want to multi/Dual a Thief, a Mage is a better option, imho.
And yes, the fewer people in your team the faster they will rise in level, since the points are shared between fewer people The major disadvantage of Multi characters is that their share of the points is divided between their classes, so they take longer to level up. Single class characters are MUCH better, but you DO need some to Dual or Multi to get a balanced team).

------------------

[Leafy]

Hey Gaelic,
suggestion for your party composition? Don't dual class your characters so soon. I dualed a thief into a fighter at level 8 once just cuz i wanted a scout who could find traps and fight. Thief mages are cool but they die real quick too. I agree with everyone when they say try a single classed cleric for the heal spells and turning abilities (clerics can get very powerfull), but i've never really played with a single classed cleric. Of course, i've never played with more than 4 characters in my party, so if two are dual classed, it doesn't really hurt the xp ratio. I do think the fighter druid is a must if you're going to druid at all. I'd suggest being the druid until about 14th level (i think that's spell level 7?) then dual into a fighter. That, or make it a multiclass (but that gets tedious as the levels get higher and harder to attain)
Personally, i'd trash the paladin. But since i haven't played a paladin in HoW, i can't knock it yet. there are some cool new features for them. However, Rangers are stronger than paladins cuz they get the extra attack and some cooler druidic spells as well as cleric spells.

[Axterix]

>>Incidently, how do you know the resistances of a Shambling Mound? Is it listed somewhere obvious?

Yah, in the damage messages I'd notice quite a few: takes 1 (9 resisted)... or things along that ratio for blunt... and takes 5 (5 resisted) for slash and pierce. With the bard song, those resistances increased by 10% each... so that it changed to SomeBluntUsingCritter: Shambling Mound was immune to my blunt damage... and for slash/pierce, it became takes 4 (6 resisted). Bard songs effect everything with green circles, so that includes summonings. Which is what makes shambling mounds so great... they have good resists already and the bard adds to it and they last 8 hours, so you can heal them up with the bard song and adventure on.

[Axterix]

Originally posted by Gaelic: Who would you drop in favor of a bard? My party is: Paladin Ranger Mage Fighter/Thief Fighter/Cleric Druid Thoughts?

Well, bard + druid go great together, so you want to keep the druid. Druid can also cast heal, which handles any big heals, so you don't have to wait for the bard to heal the party. Great summonings and decent low level attack spells (at both level 1 and 2)... unlike a cleric, who sucks at both those things.

Clerics see a pretty big change in role. With a bard in the party, once the bard has war chant, they won't be doing much healing. However, they are still useful for buffing spells and their ability to remove bad effects (using dispel magic, remove paralysis, cure poison, etc). Raise dead and ressurrection can come in very handy. Make your cleric good aligned, of course.

You could dump the ranger. Druid casts the same spells. Fighters fight better. If you want a ranger, you could make your cleric a ranger/cleric. However, I believe this stops you from casting 7th level cleric spells. Haven't played a ranger/cleric, so not sure how well it works, but it's a pretty popular combo for people that play the game with just 1 character. Since a multiclass fighter can't grandmaster, you are not really losing any fighting skills (though you advance slower) but gain access to a wider variety of spells.

Another option is to lose the fighter/thief. But you'd want a thief somewhere, so there's a few options for that. You could run with a thief dualed into a cleric. This requires some timing, as you'll need your thieving abilities in Serpent's Eye. You should be able to crank up the vital 2 skills (pick locks, detect traps) to max pretty quickly, as well as maybe acquiring some stealth. You'd be relying upon just the druid early on to handle healing... well, and some potions. The same could be done with a thief/mage. A mage with evade (but keep in mind you can't evade your own spells), slightly higher hp's, not too shabby. Or you could just use a multiclass thief/mage. This will slow down the mage side levels though... dual class is probably better.

I'd try and keep 3+ fighters, if you can. More is better and it helps War Chant of Sith (which will heal 2 points per round on your whole party). Spread the damage around and it all heals faster.

Originally posted by Gaelic: What I was considering was keeping the Paladin, and doing some dual classing for improved armor class opportunities. Fighter to Mage, Fighter to Druid, for example. Then add the Bard for all the reasons listed. My Cleric is a problem because he's a multi-class and takes ages to level. Maybe do him over as a dual fighter to cleric. I already have a dualed Fighter to Thief. I dualed him late (level 9 or so) but he is kicking butt right now. The others I would dual at level 3ish, maybe. (Any suggestions there?) This way, depending on the situation, anyone could melee if needed to free the thief, cleric, mage, or bard to do their business.

what i found was good, is to dual fighters to what ever you want (mage, thief, cleric) etc at 7 or 8 lvl (ice).. high hitpoints (if 18 constit), and also extra specialisation in short sword for thief.... need i mention tensors transformation? my fighter mage, has 80+ hp, and has a 2 handed sword, casts invisible on herself... walks into a group casts sunfire (has amulat to boost damage 20%) and then kicks butt.... (stoneskin is also good here)

its easier for bg2, i dualed my figters at 13 or 11...

so my bgii party comprises of
a monk (kick arse)
fighter/cleric (dual)
fighter/mage (dual)
fighter/thief (dual) (would love a fighter/assasin)
paladin
and minsc
.....

[Gaelic]

The big benefit to the Paladin is Pale Justice. Can I still max the levels if I dual a druid to fighter at 14? Let's see...

Dual Fighter/Thief (already have one, better than single thief)
Cleric (must make one)
Bard (must make one)
Paladin (maybe switch to a straight fighter)
Druid (maybe dual to fighter)
Ranger OR Mage (maybe Fighter dualed to mage early for armor benefits)

I am afraid this leaves me light on "tanks."



------------------
Gaelic

[Axterix]

Dualing all the guys isn't necessary. Single classes work just fine. Not like the game is that hard, even on HoF mode

I'd advise against dualing the druid to a fighter. Stalkers is a level 7 spell. Druid spells rock. More versatile than a cleric. And with the bard and druid in the group, you don't need a single class cleric in the group. Matter of fact, if I could make my group again, I'd have a pure mage instead of a cleric/mage simply because the bard + druid make an evil cleric useless. Of course, a good cleric can cast useful spells like shield of lathander, raise dead, and ressurrection, but you shouldn't need those too often, hopefully Feel free to keep him as a fighter (or go with a multiclass cleric/mage).

That would leave you with a paladin, a fighter/thief, and either another tank type (if you go cleric/mage) or a fighter/cleric.

[Cloudbringer]

Well, I don't know if it'll help your party choice Gaelic, but these are the parties I've used. Beat the game with : Paladin, Ranger, Mage, Fighter/Cleric, Bard, Thief. IWD that is... and I found out how much I liked the bards with that game. Very versatile and if out of spells, can wear any armor at hand. So I treated my bard as a mage when he had spells left and as a fighter when he didn't. Axterix notes all the best reasons for using he bard so I won't repeat them here.

I am now playing a mulit-player game online and my partner and I each have to pc's. Bard, Cleric, Fighter/mage, Thief. We are only to Dorn's Deep, starting the Palace and my Bard is a level 14 already. Of course the 4 of us sharing all the xp makes us level faster! My BARD has now got the merry shorthorn, bardic horn of valhalla, lyre of progression, horn/ pipe (?)of Owain and another item I just got some kind of viola that imparts courage/takes fear away. She is using up to 5th level spells and is doing pretty darned well for being in a 4 person party! And and F noted. Clerics are so necessary! LOL

Cloudy

------------------
Raindancer of the Laughing Hyenas Clan
Storm-Queen
StormCloud of the Black Knight
Heart Mind Soul Forever

[This message has been edited by Cloudbringer (edited 05-30-2001).]

[Gaelic]

Argh! I have just become so attached to all my folks that I don't want to dump anyone, but I do want the Bard. I will probably dump the Multi Fighter-Cleric I think.



------------------
Gaelic