Same classes chosen twice in the 6-hero team.

[IamNOOB]

Hi guys. I got some doubts about using 2 or 3 companions from the same class effectively in my team. So I got some noob question for you. Here it goes:

1. I felt that no one talks about two priests in a team and that I want to try it. Does it make sense to you? Ideas are simple: One priest will curse the enemies and shoot them with a bow and Durance will cast useful buffs and heals. OR Durance casts one + stats buff on me and the other priest casts a different one, then they both heal the team.

2. Is it useless to get 2x warriors [fighters] to tank together? One should be a shield warrior and the other - a two handed DPS master with heavy armor. Is it OK?

3. What is your opinion on a gunpowder team, i.e. like this: 2 chanters with pistols + 1 ranger with arcebuses / or 3 chanters and in front of the monk, paladin, Eder <???I have never tried it and I think it might suck.


4. people mentioned somewhere around the forum a 6 druid build, now this can be OP but I feel it is kind of boring and "unnatural", although in a world where babies are born with no soul it may be acceptable to fAck variety in favour of OP druid spells. ???
Thanks.

[Boeroer]

More than one chanter gets really OP once you reach lvl 9.

 

Two priests can be great. Most of the time the start of an encounter is the most critical phase and it's best to be quick. So, two priests could cast Inspiring Radiance and Devotions simultaneously, wasting no time. Same with things like Circle of Defence + Shields for the Faithful or Crowns for the Faithful.

The more quickly the buffs are up, the sooner your CC guys can start to do their thing with boosted ACC.

 

And not to forget that priests can be great damage dealers at higher levels.

Edited January 28, 2017 by Boeroer

[the streaker]

I personally wouldn't even take one fighter. A paladin and chanter/monk/barbarian make a better combo. Cipher is the only class I usually take more than one of, because their powers are very good and can be spammed without need for rest.

 

Priest spells are usually duration-based, which one priest can keep up by himself.

 

I think gunpowder teams are great, but not optimal and it's hard to find enough good enchanted guns compared to all the other weapons. Also, you have to screw around with quick switch and manually cycling through your guns if you really want to make the most of it. It's tedious.

[IamNOOB]

How about 3 -4 wizards? I have the feeling they will be insta-killed if not using deflections bonuses and that they kind of suck when they 3 or 4

[MaxQuest]

^ 3-4 wizards can work fine.

Get a main-tank paladin, priest, 2 control-freak wizards (1h+shield, cc-offtanks) and two blasting wizzies with duplicated Golden-Gazes.

 

As for O.T:

1. two priests sound really fine. They will buff the team twice as fast and start dishing their aoe damage way sooner (shinning beacons + cleansing flames are a super strong combination).

2. personally I don't like the idea of having two fighters in a team. I am fine with having one dps oriented if it's my main. Otherwise I have a feeling there are stronger alternatives.

3. gunpowder team for me wound be: 1 chanter + pallegina + 4 rangers. Later on, rangers could become frontliners, encased in plate and all with quick switch + powder burns if you want maximum burst (~4x300 cone aoe), and don't mind switching micro.

Edited January 28, 2017 by MaxQuest

[Boeroer]

The more wizards the easier the playthrough. Just add one priest.

 

Wizards with shield + Wizard's Double + Arcane Veil make awesome tanks in the early levels. The deflection is so high that you only catch grazes if you get hit at all. Add Chillfog for -20 ACC and your front line is untouchable. You need to rest a bit in the early levels of course.

[IamNOOB]

What does the term cc-offtanks mean ? Wizards ofc have to be able to defend themselves vs melee high-damage enemies BUT I think that the arcane veil is too OP and that what Boeror said it true [but NOT balanced at all] A tanking wizard is really a contradiction in the classic RPG theory. Not that I mind basically NOT dying with Aloth...

[MaxQuest]

What does the term cc-offtanks mean?

An offtank spellcaster specialized on crowd-control.

Think of something like: 2/14/14/19/19/10 wizard or 2/15/7/20/19/15 chanter, wild-orlan with small shield and a hatchet, or utility weapon.

Add there defensive talents, plus Aspirant's Mark, Enigma's Charm and paralysis scrolls, and there you go.

 

A tanking wizard is really a contradiction in the classic RPG theory. Not that I mind basically NOT dying with Aloth...

Tbh, I always found it weird when a warrior was tanking something big, say a dragon; risking being smashed like a can.

It was especially funny to see a gnome warrior in WoW, being the size of boss' toe, taking the hit.

 

Imho, 'realistically' speaking, warriors and plate+shield wearers should tank enemies of relatively equal size, mostly humanoids.

While evasive, jumping from point-to-point rogues, covered by deflection shields cast by their supportive spellcasters, should "tank" (read keep enemy's attention) when it is something really big.

Edited January 28, 2017 by MaxQuest

[Boeroer]

I love it that you can tank with any class if you build it right. Well, some don't make super good tanks, but even a rogue can be build in a way that he can stand his ground against 3 attackers and still deal good damage.

The Bilestomper wizard tank I did some time ago was a lot of fun for example.

[IamNOOB]

Well I just do not like it - some classes should be paper, some classes should be dps with no AOE and no crowd control, that is how I like it The rogue in dragon age was exaclty how they are - great 1v1 dps and great crits BUT no health a no AOE, while the wizard had great AOE. Depends - some people are more conservative than others

[Boeroer]

I think that's very boring - but to each its own.