DC Fighter(9)/Cleric replaces Paladin?

[darkmage]

At say, 3 million exp, a dual class Fighter(9)/Cleric would have better protection spells AND more of them PLUS heaps of healing spells compared to the Paladin.

And he would have similar Thaco given his grand mastery of weapons AND more times to hit compared to the Paladin.

Would'n that make the Paladin obsolete as a Tank?

[Marty4]

True, but a paladin has no weapon restrictions that a cleric would have. Also, paladins would have quite a few protections spells of their own, lay on hands, and the Sword. A paladin can also use bows.

[Dundee Slaytern]

Not to mention Paladin-Only equipment.

[Aerich]

Nah, in a six-character party, the paladin will never be obsolete as a tank. A paladin has an innate protection from evil spell that stacks with other protection from evil spells (10' radius, for example). Moreover, a paladin get a class based -2 to saving throws, and will have slightly better hitpoints. The protection/healing spells can be covered by a cleric, leaving the paladin free to fight most of the time. It's nice to have a main healer plus a backup healer that's a better fighter.

That said, I've used a multiclass Fighter/Cleric dwarf as my main tank, and not lost anything by it. The difference in efficiency is slight, really.

However, I will admit that a F/C may have the advantage over a paladin in a party of 4 or smaller, depending on the classes of the other characters.

[darkmage]

I didn't really like a cleric, really ....

Its like a healer on hot wheels

Druids are better

[Dundee Slaytern]

A Half-Elven Cleric/Ranger comes to mind.

[darkmage]

Uh huh.
I played a FMT and a R/C some time ago and they rock ....

I love playing with 2 character.

[NobleNick]

Originally posted by darkmage: At say, 3 million exp, a dual class Fighter(9)/Cleric would have better protection spells AND more of them PLUS heaps of healing spells compared to the Paladin. And he would have similar Thaco given his grand mastery of weapons AND more times to hit compared to the Paladin. Wouldn't that make the Paladin obsolete as a Tank?

Darkmage,

~

~ Weapon spoiler below

~

Hmm... lets see... Well, first off, 3M XP = 3000K XP is a lot of XP. Your character will need the expansions to attain this in a 6 member party. Let's assume this is your intent, and compare:

Ground rules: The Pally uses a +7 THAC0 (and +7 damage!) melee weapon, and +4 THAC0 Long Bow. Clerics and Cleric mixes use +4 melee weapon and +3 Sling.

At 3M expo the DC character would be about a F(9)/C(20), with a boatload of spell slots and a natural THAC0 of about 8 with fists. (After both classes are active, the best THAC0 dominates, which, in this case, belongs to the F[9].) If the Fighter was a good boy and stacked his PP, then he could achieve a natural THAC0 of 5 with, say, a Mace; and 6 with Sling. So his best natural THAC0 is about 1 and 3; and ApR is 3.0 and 2.0, respectively, plus temporary magic (e.g. spell) bonuses.

The Pally, with 3M expo would be about CLVL 18 and have a natural THAC0, including effects of PP, of about 1 and 1 (melee/ranged). If he stacked in Longsword and Bow, then he should be able to achieve weapon bonuses of +7 and +4, yielding a final THAC0 of -6 and -3; and ApR of 2.5 and 2.5, plus temporary magic bonuses.

So the Pally(18) can attain a 7 and 6 point advantage over the F(9)/C(19), in melee and ranged, respectively, with overall ApR slightly worse than the F/C. The THAC0 advantage is very significant and makes the slight ApR disadvantage a second order effect. Add to that the protection against evil and the 2 point advantage in saving against spells (mentioned above by Aerich and long touted by Dundee Slaytern) that the Pally enjoys and you can start to see that this guy is no dud.

Now, having defended the Pally, let me hasten to add that I personally prefer the F/C and C/R for games that include the expansions, just built a bit differently than you have proposed.

At 3000K, a DC F(13)/C(15) can attain a natural THAC0 of 0 and 2 with PP bonuses. Given melee/ranged weap bonuses of 4 and 4, his final THAC0 is -4 and -2, with ApR of 3.5 and 2.5, plus temporary magic bonuses. The Pally enjoys only a slight THAC0 advantage over this build, and the Fighter's ApR advantage is no longer a second order effect. HP is about the same for both builds. The F/C must use Sling, whereas the Pally can use the more lethal Long Bow. If you stood these guys toe to toe in a purely physical contest, I honestly don't know who would win. Slight edge to the Pally at range and slight edge to the F/C for melee, I think; but both of these guys can tank and hit.

Ah, but the physical is not everything; and Priests and Paladins typically travel in parties. The F(13)/C(15) has 37 slots, with access to a wide array of Cleric spells up to and including SLVL 7 spells! Lots of these are really powerful party buffing spells. The Pally has, relative to the F/C, a very limited number of slots for spells up to and including SLVL (4?). Advantage goes to F/C.

Another neat build would be the C(12)/R(x). At 3000K this would be a C(12)/R(15). With wise choices, and +4/+3 weapons; he could attain THAC0 of 0 and 1, and ApR of 3.5 and 2.5: That is significantly worse than the Pally's -6 and -3; but the R/C gets an extra melee ApR, all the Ranger skills; and 29 slots for Cleric Spells up to and including SLVL 6 and Druidic spells up to and including SLVL 4.

The real advantage can be seen when these guys team up: Compare a Pally(18) and Cleric(21) to a team using a DC F(13)/C(15) and DC C(12)/R(15). The F/C is equivalent in melee to the Pally. Meanwhile, the C/R would quickly beat the snot out of the Cleric before turning to help the F/C do in the Pally. So in a purely physical match up, the SC team is toast. The DC team sports two full casters with a combined 66 slots topping out at SLVL 7 Cleric, and up to 29 of which can be used for Druidic spells; while the SC team sports about 50 slots, again up to SLVL 7, but virtually all of which must be Cleric spells, and virtually all of which must be cast by only one member (the Cleric). So, in a purely magical match up, it is a full Cleric caster and a full Cleric-Druidic caster against one excellent Cleric and a weenie-whomper: the SC team is toast again. The only big drawback to the DC team is that during their adventures they would have a window after the C(12) DCs but before the F(13) DCs where their party would be without Clerical aid: a good reason to have a Bard along.

I hope you found this interesting.

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


[ 05-18-2005, 08:47 AM: Message edited by: NobleNick ]

[darkmage]

Noble Nick,

Thanks man ...

Jezzz, to answer like that, you must have played iwd more than twice eh?

[NobleNick]

...to answer like that, you must have played iwd more than twice eh?

Well, technically, no...

I'm gunning for top honors for the longest running IWD party. I started a party in IWD (no HoW) in March of 2001, and got through Dragon's Eye before discovering the benefits of HoW.

With HoW installed, I started a second new party with 4 or 5 new characters (forget how many) and one imported from the first party. I got the new party to Severed Hand before realizing that some of my characters weren't exactly what I wanted. So, part of my first party got imported to my third start of IWD to help a few youngsters get to SH. Once there I consolidated 11 of my best characters into 2 parties. I freely exchanged characters between the two parties (so that I was always playing with a party of 6) and (IIRC) got both parties most of the way through SH before picking a party from the pieces to move on.

With this blended party I finished IWD then went back to a save at the latest point in IWD that would allow me to take the same party through HoW. I intended to do TotLM in line but inadvertently missed the opportunity, and so finished HoW with the party without doing TotLM. So, after finishing HoW I went back to the latest save in HoW that would allow me to enter TotLM with the blended party. Currently this party is (as best I can guess) just moments away from the climactic battle of TotLM. After that, I intend to take them through the rest of HoW (again) and the last of IWD (again).

All this has been done while taking long side trips into other games like Diablo 2, Halo, and the StarCraft and AoE series. But I enjoy keeping up with the boards and have thus picked up quite a bit to augment my own gaming knowledge. I also enjoy tinkering, and have built and rapidly experienced many test characters (using DaleKeeper) to find out what their capabilities are.

I had a recent computer crash that has forced me to reformat the HDD. I saved the IWD games; but need to reinstall on a different machine.

So, to summarize a long winded answer to what may have been simply a rhetorical question: I've played the early IWD game 3 times; the mid-game 2 times; the late game once; HoW once; and virtually all of TotLM once. In addition I have done test builds, and accelerated aging, of at least 12 other characters. I also have done spreadsheet battle analyses of several builds to test physical battle effectiveness (IWD battles are typically physically intensive). Finally, I have, with the exception of several 3-month sabbaticals for classes, actively participated in the Ironworks IWD board for over 4 years.

One of the reasons I feel that I can give good advice on the Cleric mixes is that I have two of them in my current party: I have a C(12?)/F and a R(12?)/C. Both of these guys draw front line AND buffing duty, and are a really hot combo; but I think a more optimum mix, for those taking on the expansions, would be to do it the way I outlined for you (Neutral F[12 or 13]/C and Good C[11 or 12]/R). This allows the F/C, who will tank, to get much higher HP; while the C/R, who is easily your nastiest and most powerful priestly spellcaster, can get by with less HP if the F/C is tanking for him. The way I had built it, my best spellcaster was also my best tank: not an efficient allocation of abilities.

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


[ 05-18-2005, 10:25 AM: Message edited by: NobleNick ]