Baldur's Gate 1

[Walsingham]

I am at a certain point in the game and am wondering if I shouldn't swap out a certain ultra-snooty mage lady and replace her with a gruff yet redoubtable dwarf cleric fighter.

 

NO SPOILERS, please.

 

I already have a scandinavian sounding cleric lady in the party, and two paladins, plus a loveable animal friendly ranger. And a thief.

 

My character concept is more comfortable with the priest than the mage. But i don't want to get royally shafted by specialising.

[Gfted1]

I dont remember BG1 well enough to know who youre referring to but I would never be completely without a mage. Why do you want 2 clerics anyway?

[Walsingham]

I dont remember BG1 well enough to know who youre referring to but I would never be completely without a mage. Why do you want 2 clerics anyway?

 

1. Because my main chaaracter is a paladin, and I'm aiming on being an Inquisitor in Baldur's Gate 2. So not liking wizards is par for the course.

 

2. I like a challenge.

 

3. The path less travelled, and all that.

[Gromnir]

I am at a certain point in the game and am wondering if I shouldn't swap out a certain ultra-snooty mage lady and replace her with a gruff yet redoubtable dwarf cleric fighter.

 

NO SPOILERS, please.

 

I already have a scandinavian sounding cleric lady in the party, and two paladins, plus a loveable animal friendly ranger. And a thief.

 

My character concept is more comfortable with the priest than the mage. But i don't want to get royally shafted by specialising.

 

observation:

 

none of the specialist wizards available as joinable npcs in bg1 is what we woulda' chosen for ourself. on the other hand, there is multiple clerics available in the game, and some o' 'em has nifty powhaz that make 'em extreme effective. from a pure practical pov, choosing the weezard is the right choice.

 

am not sure if is counting as spoilers, but you may wanna at least look at a list o' the available jnpcs for bg1...might help make your choice for you... or not.

 

btw, choosing cleric does not make game harder. clerics is extreme powerful in bg, and fighter/clerics with the right equipment can almost solo the game.

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

proviso-- there is one super-powerful specialist mage available in bg1, but he gots "issues" with other party members.

Edited April 15, 2011 by Gromnir

[Walsingham]

Thanks for the advice, Grom. However, I'm not clear on the message.

 

You say clerics are powerful. But you're also saying that the wizard is the right choice?

 

I think I'm goin gto go for the two cleric option, just for the novelty value. But keep those views coming. I'll let you know how it goes.

 

~~

 

I'm not using the 'best' wizard because of said animal friendly ranger.

[Gromnir]

Thanks for the advice, Grom. However, I'm not clear on the message.

 

You say clerics are powerful. But you're also saying that the wizard is the right choice?

 

I think I'm goin gto go for the two cleric option, just for the novelty value. But keep those views coming. I'll let you know how it goes.

 

~~

 

I'm not using the 'best' wizard because of said animal friendly ranger.

 

yes, wizard is A right choice, and clerics is powerful. as with most d&d party-based games, relative power o' the player is pointless if your party dynamic... sucks. wizards, from the mid point o' the game onward, is also very powerful... but there is a big difference 'tween the efficacy o' a bg1 conjurer or necromancer and a bg1 enchanter or diviner. as the wizard choices in the game is all kinda lame, it makes sense to build-your-own. on the other hand, there is no specialist clerics. clerics all gets access to the same spell lists... and they all got a special power that the pc cleric won't have. you already got the cleric o' tempus with her mighty hammer, right? each cleric gots a powha that is kinda nifty and very useful.

 

ranger/clerics is probable the most powerful multi-class in the game, with fighter/clerics right behind 'em. dual-class options is even more powerful, but is kinda silly to voluntarily play a gimped character for 1/3 to 1/2 of the game just so you can be superman for the remainder.

 

*shrug*

 

we typical played as a cleric in bg1, but from a pure practical pov, if we were wanting to make the best use o' available jnpcs, we would makes a weezard pc.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Tigranes]

You won't be shafted by leaving the wizard behind, really. I'm a huge wizard fan but there aren't any situations where a lack of one would seriously screw you over.

 

Am unsure how fun playing 2 pals + 2 clerics is though, I personally prefer a variety so I can keep using different skills.

[Nepenthe]

I wouldn't dream of playing bg1 without someone who can cast fireball.

[Enoch]

Two sidenotes:

 

1) An alternate way to "make your own" wizard is to dual-class a particular thief who happens to have a conspicuously high INT. You'll lose her thief abilities until her Wiz level > Thief level, but she becomes more useful, generally. And BG2 assumes that she has taken this path.

 

2) Also be aware that ditching the "mage lady" might also cost you the Ranger. If it's the ranger & mage I think it is, the only way to split them up is to kill one off.

 

 

Personally, I'd pick up the Dwarf and ditch the human Cleric. You could think of it as an alignment-based conflict with your Paladin. (IIRC, she's TN.)

Edited April 15, 2011 by Enoch

[HoonDing]

I'm a huge wizard fan but there aren't any situations where a lack of one would seriously screw you over.

I can think of a few situations.

[Enoch]

Early-mid game, there isn't much that Wizards make easier.

 

Late game, the best reasons to have a Wiz in the party are Haste and the capacity to (ab)use Wands of Monster Summoning.

[Hurlshort]

If you have a bard or rogue, can't they use staffs and scrolls to cast pretty much the same stuff as a wizard?

[Enoch]

If you have a bard or rogue, can't they use staffs and scrolls to cast pretty much the same stuff as a wizard?

My recollection of AD&D2E rules isn't fantastic, but I think the answer as to the important stuff is no. Some items (e.g., Wands of Magic Missile) are kosher for thieves, but I think that using mage scrolls and fancier magic items was a high-level ability, well outside BG1's range. Not sure about Bards, though-- they get some spell powers, and might even get to read scrolls, but I don't know about the better wands and such. Never really played with one.

[Tigranes]

Certainly Haste is a gamewinner, but if you're determined you can get by without them, and Wand of Monster Summoning can arguably be substituted by two pally tanks + two cleric backups if played right. Again, its definitely easier with a mage in there but I don't think it's crucial.

[Deraldin]

If you have a bard or rogue, can't they use staffs and scrolls to cast pretty much the same stuff as a wizard?

My recollection of AD&D2E rules isn't fantastic, but I think the answer as to the important stuff is no. Some items (e.g., Wands of Magic Missile) are kosher for thieves, but I think that using mage scrolls and fancier magic items was a high-level ability, well outside BG1's range. Not sure about Bards, though-- they get some spell powers, and might even get to read scrolls, but I don't know about the better wands and such. Never really played with one.

 

Bards can use wands.

[Gromnir]

rogues couldn't use such stuff in bg1 levels, and for bards to use wands were frequent inconvenient or costly. bards were combat and spell-casting duds in bg1... which were a frequent complaint from bard fans.

 

actual, Gromnir rare utilized the wand o' monster summons save for a couple o' battles. have a bard just so we could use for 4 or 5 battles in the game? also, we preferred animating undead for our meat(less) shields. undead were immune to poisons, so were ideal to use in conjunction with stinking cloud at lower levels. were also immune to mind affecting spells... so no ogre mage or siren shenanigans. mages had some very nice spells, particular as some low level spells scaled to very powerful... likes magic missile and acid arrow.

 

aside-- fighter/thief were also extreme effective in bg1, but that weren't on walsh's list o' possibilities. the most difficult traps in the game could be disarmed with a 4th level thief, and if you were needing to pickpocket, there were potions that could boost such skills when rare needed. play fighter/thief would save having to waste a party member slot o a rogue character, while providing very deadly combat support.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Minchi]

I should go back to this game sometime as well o.o;;; but right about now I'm still kinda hooked on Arcanum and other old classics o.o;;;

[Walsingham]

I know what you mean about having trouble imagining playing with fireball, but that's a very good reason for doing it. Besides. Now I can use fireball with wands if the occasion arises. I just can't speculatively loft them out in front like some sort of fantastical Soviet set piece offensive.

 

Current sop is to have the clerics hold onto their skeleton powers until a proper fight ensues then pop skeletons like bony chaff all over the damn place. The clerics job then is to act as medics, which they do passably well.

 

The biggest difference is that unlike having a wizard around I don't have to try and enforce a battle line. Everyone in the party can more or less tank, so it's a lot less stressful and a lot more fun.

 

WRT the wizard lady. Yes, due to a 'lapse of tactical judgement' she attempted to rush a room full of hobgoblins and tragically got cut into tiny tiny bits. A brief moment of reflection later and I acquired my second cleric.

 

I may ditch my second paladin He is a bit rubbish. But I can't find a straight good fighter.

Edited April 16, 2011 by Walsingham

[Tigranes]

Yeah, you get a ton of potions, oils and wand uses in BG1, especially if you sell & rebuy wands near endgame with the extra cash.

 

But I can't find a straight good fighter.

 

One of the reasons I love tutu/etc is that you can retool some of the more stupidly designed NPCs (or just give them kits) - i.e. Kivan is deadly as an archer. I'm not sure, but the vanilla version of a certain dwarf in Beregost is a pretty meaty fighter, no?

 

Always liked the way you pick him up, no nonsense, no romance, just a appropriate backdrop, easy 2-dimensional character and go.

 

Had to abandon my previous BG Trilogy playthrough as that megamod lagged way too much later on, might go back to Tutu double install and play through again.

[Monte Carlo]

I may ditch my second paladin He is a bit rubbish. But I can't find a straight good fighter.

 

There's a Lawful Evil dwarf dude in Beregost, he's OK and of course there's Shar-Teel the crazy CE fighter up near the basilisks in the NE wilderness region. Adjantis the paladin is crap, I agree, as is Jaheira and her husband both of whom were stripped naked and sent ogre hunting whenever I played BG1.

 

My party was invariably my fighter/thief, Imoen d/c to mage, Minsc, Coran (on more or less pure archer duty because BG1 archery is sick) and the Viking cleric chick, was it Branwen?

 

You can also make a pretty good fun evil party too.

[Ice9]

There is no real reason why you would be unable to complete the game without a mage. Parts would be harder, but it is still doable.

[Hassat Hunter]

I would have never beaten Saravok if it wasn't for monster summoning.

Turn of auto-pause though...

 

Then again, I am not as good as you guys in BG (2). You make it sound so easy, and I still get plattered in BG2 in most fights .

[WDeranged]

How are you guys finding the default font?

 

When I got my 1080p screen I decided to give Baldurs Gate a try but the font size is on the uncomfortable side of small, there's a mod on Spellhold Studios but it's a bit rough and it seems the author has abandoned it.

 

I wish Ghostdog would port his font size mod from Planescape, lovely clean fonts

[Deraldin]

How are you guys finding the default font?

 

When I got my 1080p screen I decided to give Baldurs Gate a try but the font size is on the uncomfortable side of small, there's a mod on Spellhold Studios but it's a bit rough and it seems the author has abandoned it.

 

I wish Ghostdog would port his font size mod from Planescape, lovely clean fonts

 

I don't have a problem with the default font size when scaling up the resolution. By the time the font becomes too small for me, everything else is smaller than I would like as well. I found that 1680x1050 was a good stopping point for me that kept everything at a good size while making good use of the screen real estate on my 24".

[GreasyDogMeat]

I would have never beaten Saravok if it wasn't for monster summoning.

Turn of auto-pause though...

I would save all of my wands of summoning for that final battle and unleash a massive horde of skeletons and gibberlings on Sarevok then trounce him while he was busy swatting them away.