Razorchain

I might try a Potd run without a priest. If people can solo this darn game I guess I should manage without a priest.

LOL. I mean my wizards usually top my damage chart, even when they are rolling with Ciphers, Monks, Barbarians and Druids. Priests have saved my party on more than one occasion and are useful for their variety of healing, buffs and offensive spells. Sir I supsect you are a troll

I did it for the loot!!!! After sneaking my way through first couple of times, in my third playthrough I went through the basement and assaulted the keep from the inside. Found out I had forgotten to take supplies with me so I fought my way out the front gate to go shopping. Great fun. So what was your reason?

Sure. 'Course the game is already a commercial success with hundreds of thousands sold just on Steam, 90 Metacritic, etc. If the game flopped expansions would not already be in production. A couple of surly forum posters complaining about how their favorite OP builds got nerfed (and will continue to be nerfed) will affect nothing. Well, that begs the question: What is the purpose of the so-called balancing if the game was good enough at release? There are indeed couple of posters here - the same few dozens posting - while another few dozens who used to post here left as they got their achievements already. As I said before, I do not remember BG, for example, being constantly rebalanced and if I am to understand balance the way its presented here by players like you then BG had zero balance. Yet its legend, its standard for this genre. In other words, its not balance what makes a game "good" or "popular" let alone "fun". By the time the alleged Balance Man, in the woods lol, will be done balancing there will be few playing the game as players move to other games. The game does not have "solid mechanical foundation" like D&D for example. If the balancing going on here will achieve the said foundation is yet to be seen. Still, people play games because they are fun not because they are balanced. PS You never saw me complaining about something being "unbalanced" or about nerfs/buffs, well, except my remark on Wiz Veil because that is lol. I do not really care about that. I am just wasting my time here questioning the purpose of the holy grail balance seems to represent for some. Yep, AD&D was never balanced. At higher levels the wizard became the powerhouses in the game and the other characters would defend the wizard so he could cast his most powerful spells in battle. Here I am talking about pen and paper which I played for many years. In Baldur's gate you could go the Kensai/Sorcerer or Kensai/Wizard dual class route and make a ridiculously powerful character. As for "solid mechanical foundation" of D&D, then I must say I don't exactly know....yes it has gone through many editions but lot of the rules in AD&D were utter crap. Especially with all the class handbooks and additions. The THAC0 system was really weird and unnecessary and got changed to flat + bonuses to the die roll in later editions. So yes...how did a game using such an imbalanced system reach such a cult status? The story was good and the game was fun. But most important you felt your character was special, he was the spawn of Bhaal and you felt you really made a mark on the world and the story revolved around your character. Best game master tips ever: Get your players involved, make their character feel special and they'll love you for it.

I'm just wondering now that I am on my second potd run is how important is the priest. On both runs I've taken a priest but this time around I have a druid as well and find the priest most useful in the early game to buff Accuracy and DR and for healing. Else he mostly shines on the tough encounters where his buffs are invaluable but else I find myself saving (hoarding ) his spells for tough encounters whereas I have no reservation blasting with my ciphers, wizards or druids. This might be because I take with me a priests of maghran and they do a decent damage with their Arquebus. Also with one talent they get +10 acc to arquebus. But then again I might be better of with a rogue or ranger. So the question is will I notice if I replace my priest with something else?

Thanks for the info, I had been wondering why proofing my Plate against shock damage did benefit so little. Better use that enchanting slot for crush...as I am wearing the blunting belt.

A wild orlan male and a squirell I guess. I mean a Orlan+squirell= wild orlan

Well if anyone should know how to do go through the game stark naked it should be you

Not really. As you gain more health and endurance then those 30-40 points will always count for less and only delay the inevitable; resting. At lower levels you'll mostly be resting to regain your per rest spells and abilities and field triage and wound binding will be very situational. If it would scale with level it might be worth taking but I'd rather spend my abilities on something that benefits my characters from not getting hurt in the first place.

It depends with what you mean by no items? As I interpritate no items then you are talking about going stark naked through the game. No weapons and no armour whatsoever. Then no I could not do it with 2 characters. If you are taking about items in your item slot, like figurines, potions,scrolls and consumables then I don't know. I've never done a solo run and don't have much interest in it.

Maybe with casters and monks?

I must disagree, playing a low level caster is actually useful in this game. Gone are the days when I spent my 2 magic missiles, did pitiful damage and contributed almost nothing to a fight the first few levels. Even the low level "spells" are good through the whole game. It's your choice if you wan't to blanket the battlefield with CC's and afflictions. You could always go with a Fighter, Paladin, Monk, Rouge, Barbarian, Ranger in your party and limit yourself to a couple of casters or even one. The chanter is even a pseudo caster as you'll almost never manage more than 1 or 2 casts per fight, even when I played lower difficulty than Potd there were so many instances that the fight was over when I could cast my first "Spell". It doesn't mean that every spell has to be nerfed to the ground, where is the fun in that? Well I'm opposed to balancing nitpicks, I'm all right with a semblance of balance, not giving a wizard a 1st level spell that does 100 points of damage with accuracy +50. But I have no problem with some classes being more powerful than others. I've played around with most of the classes and finished the game with most of them on both hard and Potd (Ranger excluded though I had Sagani in my party for some time) and I enjoy what most of them contribute to the game though the Paladin, one of my personal favorites from other games, has a bit of lackluster abilities. Yes there will be people who go through the game with 6 ciphers and brag about how potd is easy when you spam charms and paralyze. Yes there will be people make 6 moon godlike monks and spam Torments Reach or stack retaliation items and will brag about how they pwned the adra dragon. But you know what, I don't care as long as they are having fun and I'm having fun.

Nah you don't have to reroll, if you play a little more you'll soon pick up more npc's or you can even hire a couple more. Your character is more of an off tank or you could even make your character harder to hit through talents like Superior Deflection (+5) or Cautious attack (-20% speed, +10 deflection) and then there are items that add to your deflection and add to your Perception and Resolve stats that will raise your deflection as well. Also remember your Character gets +3 deflection per level, so leveling up will make you harder to hit as well.

For me the Aumaua and Elf ones are decent but situational. Hearth Orlan one is nice as well. Moon Godlike is very good, especially for Monks and Barbarians. So my party usuall consists of these races

I'm planning on grabbing that triple crown as well. The party I'm planning is a custom one. Paladin Shieldbearer as my main. Yeah I know boring meatbag but it works, and no I won't be taking might 2. His role is to cast Shielding flames to beef up his fellows deflection and will be running a zealous endurance for that extra DR. This frees up some spells and actions for the priest who can skip casting Circle of Protection and DR buff at early levels (which are the hardest IMO). I'm still deciding if I'll make him a coastal Aumaua for that extra knockdown and stun resistance or a Pale Elf for extra Fire/Ice DR (Great for tanking Shades) Barbarian Battlerager, Moon Godlike. Who needs deflection? The idea is to stack DR with the Zelous Endurance, DR from crucible knights,Thick Skin ability and put him in at least exceptional plate and the blunting belt. Max might and max dex and dual wield sabers. The alternative is to make him a Fire Godlike for that extra DR when under 50% endurance but I think the healing benefits the party more. Pale Elf Druid offensive tank. Heavy armour and a shield. High Might, Int and Resolve as to not get interrupted while she casts her spells. Ranged Cipher. I'm still trying to decide if I'll go wood elf or coastal aumaua? +5 accuracy for spells and guns is very nice but also an extra arquebus. As I'll have to spend my talents on weapon focus, Marksman,Gunner and Quic Switch, skippin arms bearer might be worth it. Ranged Priest of Maghran. I'll think I'll have him a wood elf with an Arquebus. Ranged support, heals and buffs. Pale Elf Wizard. Thinking of making a spellsword hybrid with a Quick Switch talent so I can easily switch between nukes and self buffs. All in all I feel like I'm playing it rather safe with 2 Shield tanks and an off tank dmg dealer and 4 casters who can provide CC, Buffs, Heals and Damage.

I agree, I use lot's of buffs and debuffs that I had no need for on hard, and I actually use potions, scrolls and foodstuff (sometimes). Even classess that I felt irrelevant on hard are good in Potd (I'm looking at you chanter)

The thing that irks me most about the paladin is the small aura and that it doesn't stack with things. I made a shieldbearer paladin and took endurance aura and shielding flames. The idea was to boost my party defenses on Potd, freeing up my priest from casting DR boosts and Circle of Protection. Then I found out that shielding flames doesn't stack with Faith and Conviction...yay!! So only the other party members inside my limited aura benefitted from shielding flames.

I must say that I don't always choose what is best, but all of those weapons are solid choices. In my current potd run I have a warbow rogue and a arquebus priest of maghran. Both work well, in my earlier run I had an arbalest ranger which was also nice

Disagree, my monk super tank build could get higher Deflection with gear but I want to get hit in solo to get Wounds for TR. However I can assure you- you can put him in front and he will dish out more DPS than your DPS fighter with Torments Reach. Never underestimate Torments Reach. And he will still tank as good as tank paladin. Not as good as Fighter but he will at least dish super AOE (cone) DPS every second unarmed! Don't understand what your monk has to do with the discussion and where I'm talking about my fighter? And a monk tanking like a paladin? It's a joke, yes? No. That was to you saying "how you build your tank they will always do very low damage compared to casters". All I wanted to say that you can build monk for a tank and he will do great DPS. Thats all. And yes, my monk can tank as good as your paladin, becasue he will actually kill stuff 4x faster while doing so and being very capable against any CC in game. Tested in solo 2x runs, so in party that would be tank in the park. No, your monk will never do "great" DPS compared to a caster - that was my point. There's a difference between surviving and tanking - the paladin would probably finish most battles close to full life while your monk would need to rest after nearly every fight. When your monk will be able to tank the adra dragon then you can compare him to a paladin. I must disagree on this. Tank is somebody who can take a lot of damage, you put him in front of your softer party members to soak the damage and prevent them from taking damage. The tanks role is to survive the onslaught and protect your weaker party members from getting engaged in melee. Then it is your choice if you want to take a Might 2 Paladin and Fighter whose job is to stand there and look pretty while the enemy tries to hit them. You can also take a offensive built Monk or Barbarian or whatever to fullfill the role. At this moment I'm using a Barbarian, Druid and Fighter as my tanks in Potd. My fighter has an estoc, my Barbarian is dual wielding sabers and I had to give my druid a shield...she was just too squishy. But the druid is a melee caster with the second role as a tank to prevent the enemy to reach my wizard, ranged rouge and priest. My frontliners are actually contributing to the fight and dishing out damage as well as taking it, both the fighter and the barbarian have 18 in might and 16 in dex. The druid had to make some compromises and only has 16 in might and 13 in dex as she had to have some points in Int and Resolve so she doesn't get interrupted while casting spells. I'm a huge strategy fan and this is just like other games where you harass the enemy with your light skirmishers before retreating them behind your heavy infantry because else they will get slaughtered in melee.

I think Arcane Assault is one of the best abilities in the game, even at lower levels my wizards are outdamaging Ciphers and as the game goes on the gap only widens. The only reason for this is probably arcane assault. I often manage to cast it on 4-6 enemies x2 raw damage, no DR....and it debuffs them as well with the Dazed effect. The only problem at Potd is hitting....but then again my cipher has problem hitting as well at the lower levels.

I went through my first playthrough with a Wizard PC and Aloth. At level 9 every fight became a joke. Aloth cast a Slicken and my Wizard Chill fog. Then Aloth just spammed slicken to keep everybody on their assess while my Wizard flanked and spammed Fan of Flames

On potd I'm currently playing with Aumea fighter wielding an estoc Moon godlike barbarian dual wielding sabers Pale Elf Druid with mace and shield Wood Elf Rogue with a warbow Wood Elf Priest of Maghran with an arquebus Pale Elf wizard with a wand and Estoc

Eh...the perfect party will always be a custom party where you are in full control over stats/race/class/abilities I dont think there exist such a thing as a perfect party but you can make a party that has a good synergy with passive buffs, buffs, debuffs and damage. I like to try out different builds and party synergies and there are lots of viable builds and party compositions, even on the hardest difficulty. I mean if people can solo the game on Potd then you should be able to win even with a badly optimized 6 man party.

You sort of missed the point, where being hit by lightning is bound to hurt a lot more (ie. deal more damage) than being hit by a sword. One leaves you as a lump of charcoal and the other makes a cut / hole. Realistically, both might be as deadly (such as putting a sword through an eye, into the brains) but a sword can in no way compare to a lightning bolt in actual damage done. The game is already balanced in this account by giving wizards/druids limited amount of times they're able to reduce a target to a lump of charcoal. No further balance should be needed. Literal 1:1 balance you're talking about would be more feasible for a competitive PvP based game, such as Guild Wars or WoW PvP. But it has no place in an actual single player roleplaying game. And fantasy is about warriors being able to take multiple foes and surviving (which they do) and being able to take on bears and dragons (which they can). It is not about swords dealing as much damage as lightning bolts and fireballs. No, it's you who missed my point. You talk about realism in a fantasy game - ie lightning should do more damage than a sword. What I said was that a warrior doing that kind damage with his sword isn't more ridiculous than the idea of a guy calling the lightning. It's not about balance, it's about not limiting choices and not forcing players into stereotypes. If a fighter is able to kill a dragon by himself (like it seems you agree) he won't certainly do it using a toothpick and trying to outlast the dragon... Talking about realism in a fantasy game is ridiculous. A poisoned dagger wielded by a nimble fighter who can reach the weak spots of a dragon could be just as deadly - you just need imagination (the literature abounds in fighter vs dragons fights...). But these days people seem more influenced by the mmo culture where the idea of hero doesn't exist anymore and people are always forced to play in large groups to be able to achieve something. Anyway this is my last post on this topic. I just posted an opinion and I don't like when other people are trying to impose their own as the right one... Dagger doesnt carry enough poison to kill the dragon, you poison the hafling in the group. He is resistant to poison (in D&D) then you send him to scout out the dragon lair. Then the dragon eats him and gets poisoned and dies. Then you have gotten revenge on the hafling for eating all your supplies.

Those names have historic roots, based on history, The History, that actually happened, sadly most are named after massacred and extinct Native Americans, not only states but many cities and counties too. I just looked at what Mississippi meant and, surprise, it means "The Father of Waters" We know Massachusetts, Paris, Berlin, Cairo, Copenhagen, because we live on earth. When someone tells you they live in Copenhagen, you understand perfectly well what they mean. I do not intend to read the "Collected Volumes on the History of Dyrwood" or keep a "Concise Engwithian Dictionary" with me while I am trying to enjoy a story. Well but Copenhagen isn't the real name it's København. It's just foreigners to Scandinavia that call it Copenhagen. In old norse it's called Kaupmannahøfn which literally means Merchant City. So for me calling things something other than standard english words is no problem