Search the Community

I'm planning on running: Fighter Barbarian War Chanter Battle Mage or Regular Wizard Wizard Rogue Build suggestions welcome. Or should I sub a Priest in?

I've been thinking of starting a solo triple crown run with a druid, and I'm looking for suggestions. I haven't used druids much since the beta, and I've only used tank characters in a solo environment, so any input would be useful. In terms of race, I'm thinking probably Wood Elf, Aumauauauaua, Moonlike ... I dunno. Like I said, any input. For the attribute spread, max Int/Might and minimum Perception are obvious, but I'm not sure whether to bother with Con and Dex. I hear Fast Runner or whatever it's called is good for lighter characters in solo play, as well as Deep Pockets. Is that accurate? Aside from that, should I just stick to the elemental damage bonus talents? And obviously spiritshift trails off pretty quickly, but since it's supposedly good at early levels: what's a reliable shift to start with?

So, been wondering this for a while: does the One-Handed Style talent negate Weapon & Shield Style, or vice versa? I honestly don't think it does but just wanted to check.

I've seen mentions of retaliation monks who use their fists here and there, but not much the particulars of how people have actually built them. I'm curious, and thinking of starting one up, and while a few things occur to me, I'm not quite sure how to approach building the character. How would you/do you/have you made an unarmed monk focused around retaliation?

So, I won't be playing the game for at least a few more hours. Got a job interview with Lego soon. Anyone want to recommend builds for this party set-up?: Chanter Fighter Rogue Eothas Priest Bleak Walker Paladin Wizard 2nd Fighter/Barbarian

A simple thread for community brainstorming, suggesting possible feats or traits that allow different builds and methods of role-playing. Weak of body/Strong of mind You were born the runt of the litter, weak of body and with a Soul that was broken and shattered, and you suffered. But you would not give up, you would not die and you would not accept that only the strong deserve life. You fought against this injustice, you struggled tooth and claw to survive, against everything that life could throw at you. Your resolve became as iron, and your will was unbreakable. Effect: Might suffers a substantial penalty but all Soul powers and spells (but not physical melee and ranged attacks) gain a significant damage bonus from Resolve, allowing the classic archetype of the frail but powerful spellcaster to be built. Restriction: Can only be taken by spellcasters, Ciphers, Wizards, Druids and such.

There's a fair bit of discussion here about game balance and various subsystems, such as armor, weapons, dual-wielding etc. Josh Sawyer in particular has discussed the utility of skills a fair bit. Magic has been discussed a bit too. One thing that hasn't been done well in any cRPG I've played, though, is situational utility of combat skills (and equipment). I think it would be a great way to add variety to the gameplay and encourage creativity in character and party builds. By situational utility I mean making different types of combat skills be more or less effective in different situations, or against different opponents. I think this sort of thing would be relatively easy to model in a game system, and it would be pretty easy to have them contribute to the verisimilitude of the game as well. A few examples off the top of my head. Large weapons with lots of reach would work better against large creatures and beasts but be significantly hampered in confined spaces. Heavy armor gives a great deal of protection against damage but would take time to equip and would fatigue you more quickly, which means you would only be able to use it if you had time to prepare for combat, and you'd have to find a way to conserve or restore your stamina during combat if it dragged on. A character would need to be physically very strong and fit to be able to manage this, but would not need to be acrobatically nimble. On the other hand, dual-wielding two light weapons gives an advantage to feinting and parrying. This means it's more effective against human(oid)s, but less effective against beasts and suchlike. Dual-wielding requires higher dexterity, which means trading off something else, resulting in a particular type of fighter. His blows are light but precise, and his skills are honed for one-on-one duels with humans. Piercing weapons would be useless against unliving enemies, but perhaps more effective at getting through magical protection; firearms could be a more powerful version of the same, but with slow reload rates. You'd have a better chance against a battlemage with a gun and a rapier than with a longsword or a sling, but you'd be advised to bludgeon a skeleton or a golem into submission rather than trying to ineffectively poke holes into it. If the game system had these types of complexities, and a variety of combat challenges to match them, it would make party and character-building very interesting. One party could be a collection of specialists, with the one with the right skills taking point in each encounter and the others moving to support her; another could go for a set of well-rounded characters able to perform at their best in most situations, and would use that tactically to their advantage. Both would be viable strategies for victory, but would require very different tactics. Additionally, no build would be objectively better in all circumstances. Our nimble dual-wielding Scaramouche might be able to best heavily-armored Sir George of Joustalot in a duel, with a skilful stab in a vulnerable spot -- but Sir George would run a raging magic giant wild boar right through with his lance where Scaramouche's best bet for survival would be to climb a tree. N.b.: I'm not arguing for any of these mechanics specifically; rather, I would like to see a system of mechanics balanced out to function differently in different circumstances. I don't really care about the details. Thoughts?