Judicator

Actually, I just tested this and it does work that way. I killed an enemy with my party, then I reloaded and replaced one of the chars with a level one character, then I killed the same enemy again and got more xp. So an ecl heavy party should eventually even out with a non-ecl party level wise. It will be a hard first few levels though.

No, I understand that ecl character are always going to be behind the normal ones. I guess I didn't make my self clear. I remember reading that the xp you get from monsters is calculated based on party level. So if you have some ecl characters it brings the total party level down and you get more xp per kill. It was like that in Neverwinter Nights 2, having Neeska in the party made you get slightly more xp because she was always one level lower than you.

So what does that mean? That an ECL party would eventually catch up? I figured Paladin spells aren't very useful. Might as well just pump Strength, Constitution, and Charisma. That way he'd essentially end up as a Fighter with Smite Evil, limited healing, good saves, and the Holy Avenger. Sounds pretty good to me.

Not sure if this is the right place to ask this, but I figure a lot of people have played Icewind Dale 2 around here. So I finally got the game and I'm having a blast. I don't know why I haven't played it before. Anyway, here are my questions. First, how do ECL characters and monster xp work? I've been thinking of having my next playthrough be with a party consisting of 2 Aasimars, a Deep Gnome, a Drow, a Wild elf (or maybe a human), and a Dwarf. By my estimates my party's level should be roughly 2 levels under what it normally would be. Does this mean the party will get more xp like in Neverwinter Nights 2 until it eventually evens out? My second question concerns paladins. Is there any point in putting points in wisdom? Their spell list is nothing worth talking about and is redundant with a cleric in the part. Also which would be a better build Paladin 8/Fighter X or Fighter 4/Paladin X? Essentially Smite Evil and Lay on Hands vs. bonus feats.

On regular attacks, fighters do have more consistent damage output than rogues due to two things: a) Weapon Specialization and b) Confident Aim. They hit more often and their average damage is higher. Rogues are really offensive powerhouses but without shoring up their defenses they can go down quickly. Paladins can also spike damage a bit through Flames of Devotion and Sworn Enemy but yeah, overall they are support-oriented. That said, they do benefit from their own auras, which is nice. Barbarians are the best at dealing damage to groups at close range. Like D&D barbarians, it's hard to give them the Flanked condition so it's safer for them to take on multiple opponents. Their Carnage passive ability lets them progressively melee-AoE groups to death. And of course, they can Frenzy. We still have a lot of tuning to do, but I genuinely enjoy playing all of the melee-oriented classes for different reasons. As a fighter, I miss the rogue's ability to spike someone really hard when I need to. As a rogue, I miss the fighter's ability to hold a line, self-heal, and actively avoid/passively absorb seemingly endless damage. As a barbarian, I miss the fighter's longevity and "stickiness" as well as the paladin's support abilities, etc. When you play these characters, we want you to feel very happy with the abilities your class has, but we also think it's important for you to recognize that other classes have things to offer that your class lacks. It makes those other classes feel valuable in their own ways. Thanks for the detailed answer. From the other thread, but some interesting new stuff here. Bleak Walkers, ravaging battlefields, zealous devotion, ambiguous moral codes ... the paladin class is going to be all that and a bag of morning stars. A Death Godlike Paladin keeps sounding better and better.

Godlike Paladin for my first playthrough. Disciplined, motivated, and dedicated to his cause. My second will probably be a Aumaua Barbarian or maybe a Fighter.

Oh, I know that. I play BG2 with the true grandmastery mod, but I was referring to the vanilla version where grandmastery is pointless.

How do you guys figure Fighters used to do more damage before? With Grandmastery nerfed they were about as good as Paladins, Rangers, and Barbarians.

We talked about this indepth in other threads, this is the info we know so far. I never said it was 100% confirmed, but it was implied a couple of times by Sawyer when we talked about it. No it wasn't implied, they said that rogues and rangers are the best single target damage dealer not that they are the only one that deal "real" single target damage. see quote below: A paladin is always a good supporter, but you can build a more offensive paladin through talents. This paladin will not be as good as a rogue with single target damage, but he stll has good support abillities that the rogue doesn't have. If Eternity Paladins are similar to their BG counterparts then I'm happy. They were perfectly capable in combat and had some of the best kits in the game.

Exactly. There's just something really satisfying about re-rolling for an hour and finally getting the stats you wanted. That and rubbing them in Sarevok's face. You want rolling because its more realistic, but then you just roll for an hour until you get the stats you want anyway. A perfect illustration of why rolling is pointless. I do hope that your beginning stats remain pretty much unchanged for the whole game though. That makes character creation a lot more meaningful. When I say realistic I mean that not all people are born equal, some are simply stronger, or faster, or smarter, or whatever. I enjoy re-rolling because I want my characters to be as good as possible. I'm a big proponent of self-improvement in what ever way possible, to be best I can be. The chars I usually play share that characteristic. I agree that stats shouldn't change, it gives them more weight. IMO the best option would be to have both a point-buy system and a rolling system like in ToEE. We talked about this indepth in other threads, this is the info we know so far. I never said it was 100% confirmed, but it was implied a couple of times by Sawyer when we talked about it. Fighters are tanks with taunt, Barbarians are AoE, and Paladins are buffers. My interpretation is that Fighters are defensive chars while Barbarians are all about pure aggression and AoE melee attacks like two-handed warriors in Dragon Age II. Paladins act as leaders and buffers. What I don't know is do they have the same attack bonuses and health that Fighters have. I'm not even sure if Eternity has different Base Attack bonuses for different classes like DnD.

Exactly. There's just something really satisfying about re-rolling for an hour and finally getting the stats you wanted. That and rubbing them in Sarevok's face.

Yeah, I've seen the wiki. Good stuff. I really like the idea of making the Paladin devoted to a certain ideal/cause instead of being just a holy warrior. I also like being at the front of a battle swinging my sword into somebody's face so I would be pretty disappointed if I Paladins turnout to be completely out-performed by the other warriors. I'm surprised to see all the hate for stat rolling, point-buy never made any sense to me. It makes all characters somehow born equal and identical even though in real life we know some people are simply more gifted than others. I guess ideally they could make the system like in Temple of Elemental Evil where you can choose between rolling or point-buy.

Too bad, I hate how every character has the exact same potential with that system. It was great how you could make some really gifted characters in BG.

Hi, I've been following Eternity since it's kickstarter, and it looks fantastic so far. I have a couple of questions about the game. First, how combat effective will Paladins be? I get that they have a bunch of abilities geared towards buffing their allies, but how good will they be at fighting monsters? Are they going to be like DnD Paladins where they can compete with other warriors like Fighters or Barbarians? My second question is about the attributes. Is it going to be like in Baldur's Gate where you roll your stats at the begining and they stay like that way until the end (not counting the usage of things like tomes) or is it going to be like Dragon Age where you get stat increases every level? I'd prefer the first option, there's something very satisfying about rerolling.