5 slots, 7 classes to choose from - ID: 386
FORUM: Gossip - The rusty dagger tavern
This topic was started by thecasualoblivion on 25/01/2012, 07:38:35
I'm really trying to work out how to build the best party. As far as I'm concerned, two casters are fixed and the other 5 slots are open. I really can't decide how to fill them:
1. Warrior--Hits hard and has a pile of HP
2. Paladin--As tough as the Warrior, decent attacker, and can raise the dead and do it early though lacking MP
3. Hunter--High crit rate at range
4. Monk--High damage and crazy AC, lackluster HP, and lots of item storage
5. Bard--Crap offense but the songs are actually nice, as are the horns
6. Rogue--I've been using one the whole time and haven't been impressed, though I have been using the skills.
7. A third mage--Mages are powerful, if expensive, and you can't have enough.
I've been using Warrior/Paladin/Monk/Bard/Rogue so far, and I can't say I'm completely satisfied. I got a Thief's Dagger out of a treasure chest, and I've gotten good a picking locks, but the whole Hide/Backstab thing has been disappointing. Throwing knives would add more range and make a better assassin-type, but the Rogue would contribute less in grindy fights. I'm happy with Warrior/Paladin/Monk for the most part, though they all kind of do the same thing with only minor wrinkles. The Paladin can Raise Dead and hits hard enough not to be a liability, the Monk is great for storage(he has only two equipped items), and the Warrior is simply powerful. My Bard has a bow and doesn't hit worth anything, but the healing song has been money and I'd really like to keep the Bard around, as the MP regen song and horns are in her future. I'd really love to add a ranged Hunter into this party, but I don't know who to cut, and I'd really rather not carry arrows for two archers. Back when I played Bard's Tale I usually used three mages, but I can barely afford the two I have, so while I'd be tempted to train a third mage, its not currently economically viable(I'm level 11ish heading into the burial mound). If anything, I'd be most open to switching out the Rogue or dare I say it, the Warrior who despite being awesome doesn't really do anything unique.
$0.02 YMMV
ROGUE:
I've found the Rogue to be extremely underwhelming. His hide in shadows/critical ability is by far inferior to the Hunter. And his other skills can eventually be duplicated by Mages. I did use the Rogue in the beginning but was very happy to swap him out later.
PALADIN:
I also found the Paladin to be less than satisfactory after a while because the Paladin's "magical" skills are eventually replaceable with Mage spells. Why have an inferior fighter with redundant and inferior magical ability? I eventually replaced my Paladin with another Fighter and was happy with the result. The one thing that the Paladin can do which cannot be duplicated by a Mage is the Paladin's prayer which increases the players' abilities "to hit". However, after your guys are a high enough level, they rarely miss whether or not they have the bonus, which obviates the need for the prayer. Think about it this way--eventually you want a fighter-type who can kill most monsters in one round of fighting. Anything less is very inefficient and can get irritating.
HUNTER:
The most useful fighter-type is actually the Hunter, IMHO. After his critical hit ability is a high enough level, he can kill practically anything with one hit, and if he's ranged that's simply amazing. It should be noted that it isn't long before the amount of actual non-magical point damage that a Hunter/Rogue/Bard/Mage does is almost totally useless. The monsters have so many hit points that you'll almost never kill one unless your doing hundreds of points of damage, and only Fighers, Monks, and Paladins can do that. And, Paladins do less than the other two.
Because one of the Hunter's main stats is DEX, his armor class can keep up with Fighters who have better equipment.
The only reason not to have 4 Hunters eventually is that there are a few monsters in the very late game who seem to be immune to critical hit. So if you don't want to use 50-100 magic points to kill them, you'll need Fighters/Monks.
MONK:
The Monk eventually does the most melee damage by far. Mine easily does over 1000 damage. And it's true that having those extra items slots is great. But actually, if it wasn't for those slots, I don't know if I'd have kept my Monk. His lower HP becomes extremely irritating in the late game. Though his amazing AC means he gets hit very rarely (my hobbit monk has a ridiculous -60 AC), late game monsters are so strong that it doesn't take that many hits before you need to heal him. Without those item slots, he wouldn't be worth it.
BARD:
The reality is that the Bard is useless for non-magical damage. Who cares how powerful his weapon is? You HAVE to have multiple hits or critical capability in order to have a useful attack. Horns are useful, but they do a lot less damage than the more powerful mage spells. I'll admit that I stopped using my Bard before he got all the songs, but the only song I've heard of that sounds worth getting that does something that a spell can't is magic regeneration. This may indeed be a reason to keep the Bard but I was too impatient and eventually swapped him out for...
MAGE:
Magic users are extremely powerful in the late game. That being the case, I took the suggestion that someone else made in this forum and made a 3rd Mage. If you look at your Mages and think of what you could do with almost 50% more magic points than you currently have, well... A 3rd Mage more than makes up for the lack of Paladin/Rogue-specific skills, and that extra bank of spell points should mostly balance out the lack of the Bard's spell-regen song, particularly if you take into account that the Mage can do way more damage than the Bard and is more flexible, to boot.
I don't know what late game Bards' horns do for damage, but I doubt they can match up to something like Demon War, and maybe not even to Sodar's Cleansing. Someone can correct me if I'm wrong on this. And if there are other extremely powerful Bard songs, I wouldn't know about those either.
CONCLUSION:
Pros and Cons of my end game party (which hasn't won yet but probably will soon from what I've been reading) is as follows:
FIGHTER - massive damage, lots of HP
FIGHTER - massive damage, lots of HP
MONK - massive damage, low hit points, lots of item carrying capability
HUNTER - one shot kills even over distance (he has both a bow and a katana) and lots of HP
3 ARCHMAGES - lots of HP, more than 1800 spell points, crazy group damage, permanent party effects for detect secret/AC buffing/light/direction/stairs detection, healing
I cut my teeth on Wizardry and Bard's Tale and was totally enthralled. Silversword is a very worthy successor to those games. The one criticism to these types of games is that end game dynamic changes so that Mage usefulness far outweighs any other class. Instant heal capability. Permanent effects. Massive group damage. In the late game, monsters always have either high HP, are in large groups, or both. Mages are the only logical and efficient solution.
Powerful Mages are tons of fun, of course, but they make other classes much less useful. Just for kicks, I almost want to try making a party of 7 Archmages. With 4500-5000 (or more) spell points at your disposal, would you ever feel the lack of a fighter?
Replacing Paladin and Rogue with 3rd mage and bow Hunter, so we'll see how that works. Actually bought 100k gold becausee its the only way I can afford the 3rd mage.
That'll speed things up, but in the late game money from monster-killing comes a lot faster than early. I didn't have a whole lot of problems affording spells...but I did have to put off experimenting with runes. I STILL don't know how good a gold rune is.
The paladin and rogue are useful early on. Once you get into the lv12 range the rogue sucks fast. Around lv20 the paladin starts to suck. You don't need the +tohit prayer anymore and the minor ac buff isnt that great. I still find my bard useful for the spell point song but I imagine that will change soon.
Incidentally, I've discovered that a party of 7 Archmages would have been a bad idea. Don't want to give away any spoilers, but I didn't want anyone to waste a lot of time trying that out...
Incidentally, I've discovered that a party of 7 Archmages would have been a bad idea. Don't want to give away any spoilers, but I didn't want anyone to waste a lot of time trying that out...
Is that really a bad idea? Im not so sure, honestly. You wouldnt start with 7 casters, but once you hit a certain level you would start swapping out other characters for new casters. For your original two casters, make sure their stat points go into DEX so their AC's are low enough to evade melee attacks.
Note I havent completed the game yet, so Im not sure if you actually require a melee type at some point to finish the game.
There were some fights (including the final one) where some foes were magic immune or damn near close.
This was an extremely helpful post - thank you so much! I have four arch mages, but had started building another three, thinking the same thing - what could be better? I only have one melee fighter worth writing about, a level 56 warrior who does 1300-1400 damage each round. Otherwise, I'm trying to level up a monk and a hunter to play with four mages. So far, results are less than thrilling. I also have a decent paladin, but becoming disillusioned, and had posted in another recent thread, asking if paladins are required for completion of any part of the game. Had not heard back yet. (Reason I ask, there are a few high value items in the compendium that only a paladin could use, and not sure if you could defeat certain foes/quests without possessing and utilizing said weapon.)
Since you have obviously finished, maybe you could tell me this - would it be wise to go with six mages and one warrior? Or do you need several melees to help survive any magic-impervious characters?
Also, I have developed two hunters - an elf with the Bow+, and a barb with the critical hit and armsmaster+. If you want to use both ranged and melee weapons, with enough leveling, will both do a fine job, or should you only use an elf for the ranged attacks? (To be honest, I really don't know how to calculate the value of the bow+.) I think I'd rather use the barbarian, and equip him with a steal heartwood I found in Paradosa, and see what results I get.
Love your thoughts, and thanks to the many posters that make this a fabulous experience!
Todd
