New D&D experiences

[Atreides]

I've always favoured mages/sorcerers when picking my character classes. Sometimes fighter/rogue combos but not much beyond that.

 

I'm looking for a different playing experience when I start up Shadows of Undrentide. I was thinking of going cleric/blackguard, but that paladin part seemed boring. Now I'm considering going druid/?. What would you guys recommend?

 

Btw I'm not playing as a bard yet.

[Cantousent]

Clerics are popular and powerful characters. I think NWN generally favors fighters more than mages. Clerics combine the best of both for the NWN environment. I haven't played NWN in quite some time, but that was my impression the last time I played.

 

Druids can provide an interesting class in DnD, especially with spontaneous summons. However, I don't believe NWN follows the spontaneous summons rule and druids seemed a bit nerfed to me. However, that's completely off the cuff, since I didn't play a druid during my runs.

 

Whatever you decide, come back and tell us how it stacks.

 

BTW: That's almost exactly my choice as well. Mage types and then maybe a fighter/thief combo.

[Atreides]

Ok. I've started with a druid, lvl 2 now so I'm still open to multiclassing (depending on requirements). Talking to animals is interesting but being able to summon a dire wolf at lvl 1 struck me as really (too?) powerful.

[Kaftan Barlast]

Druids kind of spoil the mood. I remember our GMs sad look when we beat an evil necromancer by spamming enlarged dire apes into his lair.

 

 

..and a random question, do sorcerers use spell components in PnP or can they just chuck out spells as they please?

[Judge Hades]

Baseline sorcerer uses components so that is why I use Monte Cook sorcerer which does not. The Baseline sorcerer is the weakest class of them all and MC Sorcerer makes the class more balanced with the other classes. Of course spells with expensive components eat away at the sorcerers experience point pool. (Gold cost of the material components divided by 25 round up).

[Kaftan Barlast]

But that doesnt make any sense. If a sorcerer casts spells through an innate ability without ever having to look in spellbooks and stuff.. why would they still need to use spell components?

 

 

I played a Sorc when we played a campaign of D&D3.5 at uni, just so I wouldnt have to concern mysel with all the fuss wizards do.

[Judge Hades]

It is how WotC designed it.

 

If you get the Complete Book of Eldritch Might from Malhavoc Press the MC sorcerer is in there. Also he gave the Sorcerer a different spell list and focused on spells with instant effects, increased teh hit die to 1d6 and gave them a wider variety of weapon choices than the wizard.

 

Since magic is suppose to be innate and atural to them Monte figured that opened the Sorcerer to learn different abilities and make them more non-magical combat effective than wizards since wizards have to spend all their time learning magic through books.

Edited July 1, 2006 by Judge Hades

[Atreides]

Why should arcane users lose experience when they cast spells?

[Volourn]

"Why should arcane users lose experience when they cast spells?"

 

Because it is their 'enegry' symbolized by their xp that powers that spells. Divine clerics also suffer this depending on the spell.

 

 

"But that doesnt make any sense. If a sorcerer casts spells through an innate ability without ever having to look in spellbooks and stuff.. why would they still need to use spell components?"

 

Sure, it does. The spells naturally come to them; but it's still the same spell that wizards learn so it still follows the same rules for that spell.

 

 

Atriedes: Just play anything. They're all solid choices for the game. I have to disagree with eldar ( ); but I find NWN actually favors arcane casters closely followed by clerics then throw in the warrior in third. Though, rogues/bards are still very very solid.

 

Try a rogue/cleric. It's a cool combination though one of the SOU companions uses that. "

Edited July 2, 2006 by Volourn

[Atreides]

Rogue/cleric sounds interesting. Does a rogue still get insane sneak attack bonuses when they're attacking with Improved Invisibility on?

 

Anway druids seem really powerful. I've got a dire wolf tagging along, a few black bears I charmed that's just mowing down everything.

[Atreides]

Are monks fun to play? I'm thinking of multiclassing with something like a rogue for sneak attacks or some kind of arcane or divine magic user. Thing is I've heard that they have strict rules on what they can multiclass into.

[Kaftan Barlast]

From what Ive understood, Monks are not meant to be a class that can be multiclassed successfully but rather one that you follow all the way to lvl 20 and beyond.

 

 

"But that doesnt make any sense. If a sorcerer casts spells through an innate ability without ever having to look in spellbooks and stuff.. why would they still need to use spell components?"

 

Sure, it does. The spells naturally come to them; but it's still the same spell that wizards learn so it still follows the same rules for that spell.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

Does this mean that Demons etc. who cast spells as natural abilities also need to use spell components?

[Judge Hades]

I had a very successful halfling rogue/monk build that was pretty much untouchable.

[Dark_Raven]

I had a very successful halfling rogue/monk build that was pretty much untouchable.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Just the image of that makes me laugh. A hairy runt making kung fu moves on a group of baddies.

[Judge Hades]

He took on dragons with nary a scratch.

[213374U]

Does this mean that Demons etc. who cast spells as natural abilities also need to use spell components?

No, those are "spell-like abilities". Yes, it's real lame.

 

I never have participated or GM'd a campaign that made use of the material components rules, except for the more powerful spells. I just don't see how that contributes to role-playing or, for that matter, fun.

[Volourn]

"Does this mean that Demons etc. who cast spells as natural abilities also need to use spell components?"

 

No. They're treated differently as theya re different. I believe there is a section about spells the reasons for the differences, and why it works.

 

 

"I never have participated or GM'd a campaign that made use of the material components rules, except for the more powerful spells. I just don't see how that contributes to role-playing or, for that matter, fun."

 

Your logic is illogical. If this is lame or unfun like you claim why do you bother using material components for more powerful spells? Hmmm...

 

And, it can eaisly contribute to role-playing, and fun. Your groups seems to agree or else you wouldn't use material components AT ALL.

Edited July 3, 2006 by Volourn

[Atreides]

Ok here's an update.

 

I've been playing my druid4/fighter1 for awhile and while I dig the talking to animals and stuff I'm not really enjoying the character as a whole. While it's awesome having a dire wolf, charmed grizly bear and dire boar mowing through kobolds and gnolls, the druid herself feels more like a fighter type more than a caster. I've got Sleep, Entangle, Magic Fang (what's the deal with this? I can't cast it on my summons) etc but she hardly feels like a caster. Maybe she'll become a more active caster later?

 

Just last night I started a monk/rogue and so far she's more fun though without any summons at all I can see some difficult battles ahead until she's able enough to handle herself.

[213374U]

No. They're treated differently as theya re different. I believe there is a section about spells the reasons for the differences, and why it works.

"It works" just because. No satisfactory reason is given at all, except that creatures possessing spell-like abilities, "just have them".

 

 

Your logic is illogical. If this is lame or unfun like you claim why do you bother using material components for more powerful spells? Hmmm...

 

And, it can eaisly contribute to role-playing, and fun. Your groups seems to agree or else you wouldn't use material components AT ALL.

I always get a laugh when you criticize other people's logic.

 

Anyway, it makes perfect sense to forego material components rules for all but the most expensive. Again, having the wizard (and sorcerer, meh) player waste time managing components and carry around a load of different components is only good to clutter the game for that player, and possibly the others as well (as I explained before and you failed to understand). It makes sense to use material components for powerful spells (Wish, Miracle, etc), so as to prevent casters from spamming those spells to victory everytime. Stoneskin can hardly break the game. Wish, on the other hand, is a very different matter.

[Kaftan Barlast]

Isnt there a rule/tips in the rulebook that you should disregard spell components that cost less than 1000 gold?

 

 

But on the whole, D&D 3.5 has the best and most fun magic system that Ive seen in PnP gaming... except for the fantasy port of my own "Kaftan's magnificient ruleset" ( which only require spell components for ritual spells )

[Judge Hades]

I like the Arcana Evolved version of handling spell components. Most spells require a focus. A magister fcus his spells through his staff, a mage blade would focus his spells through his athame, and so on. More exotic spells would still require expensive components. Also you can still caste spells without the focus but they would cost a higher spell slot.

[Atreides]

Ok, I got a great idea! Since I love casting I'll go druid/sorc. The high level destructive power should be epic! Plus I can have my charmed grizly bears and elder elementals around. Be very afraid.

[Gfted1]

Isnt it usually a bad idea to dual/multi a caster as you will hit the level caps loooong before you reach the true powers that a solo caster could?

[Darque]

Isnt it usually a bad idea to dual/multi a caster as you will hit the level caps loooong before you reach the true powers that a solo caster could?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

It depends on the dual/multi.

 

Some of the prestige classes are custom built to allow for high end spellcasting.

 

For instance, a Wizard/Druid -> Mystic Theurge -> "something I can't remember" Heirophant is an extremely powerful wizard/druid mix.

 

And with Wizard/Fighter/Arcane Knight (I think it's called) you can fight well and cast 9th level spells.