ranger cleric dual class

[subtledoctor]

1 hour ago, Guest Morgoth said:

any way to force the ranger/cleric dual class to access also the druid HLA?

For the R/C multi, you can just add lines from LUDR01.2da to LUCR01.2da.

For the dual R->C, you could put those lines into LUCL01.2da, but then all clerics would get them. To do it selectively you would have add custom spells LUCL01 table with conditional effects gated by the presence of  the OriginalClass(Ranger) bit. It would be a  fair amount of work. But also weird and kind of unnecessary, because dual classes are not supposed to get HLAs or HLA-related benefits from their original classes. If you dual from ranger to cleric, yer a wizard harry cleric.

Edited October 28, 2022 by subtledoctor

[Guest Morgoth]

1 hour ago, subtledoctor said:

For the R/C multi, you can just add lines from LUDR01.2da to LUCR01.2da.

For the dual R->C, you could put those lines into LUCL01.2da, but then all clerics would get them. To do it selectively you would have add custom spells LUCL01 table with conditional effects gated by the presence of  the OriginalClass(Ranger) bit. It would be a  fair amount of work. But also weird and kind of unnecessary, because dual classes are not supposed to get HLAs or HLA-related benefits from their original classes. If you dual from ranger to cleric, yer a wizard harry cleric.

Current Ranger HLA(s), even with refinements, are so bad that I would gladly renounce to their original HLA to get druid one. Thanks for telling how to get them. Hopefully I will succeed.

By the way, I take I could also remove the getting of ranger HLA?

[subtledoctor]

43 minutes ago, Guest Morgoth said:

Current Ranger HLA(s), even with refinements, are so bad that I would gladly renounce to their original HLA to get druid one.

You don't get Ranger HLAs either! If you dual to cleric, you're a cleric - period, end of story. You only get cleric HLAs.

[polytope]

12 hours ago, subtledoctor said:

But that hardly means the R/C is "pointless." In exchange for better saving throws, Turn Undead, and having to be a dwarf, you get stealth and three levels of druid spells. And, y'know, you get to be a Strider-like ranger(/cleric) instead of a grumbly stony fighter(/cleric)! That may not balance the mechanics, but there is certainly a point to it.

Aesthetic preferences for a race other than Dwarf aside, obviously. Saying that other mage robes are pointless besides the robe of Vecna is also true, even if you think its vanilla game colors and appearance ugly. Stealth isn't particularly useful for a character that can cast Sanctuary and cannot backstab.

12 hours ago, subtledoctor said:

And not to mention, in the PnP rules dwarves had level limits.  Fracking level limits, man. And in PnP Forgotten Realms, ranger/clerics could use weapons like longbows. Bioware chose to ignore certain rules and enforce other rules when they converted the  2E rules into a RTwP tactical combat game, and they didn't seem to care much about whether it made certain classes appear "pointless." But if they had adhered to all the rules, a ranger-cleric certainly would not be.

Yeah, so did half elves. Admittedly, the cap was 16th level ranger & 14th level cleric for a half-elf versus 15th level fighter & 10th level cleric for a Dwarf, but humans are obviously preferable to either in very high level play.

Bioware chose to ignore the demihuman level limits, as well as the connection between intelligence and maximum level of arcane spellcasting ability for a very good reason, the trilogy was designed to be played until epic levels and they didn't want to make some recruitable NPCs non-obviously worse picks that a player would be surprised by the ineffectiveness of in the late game, this is in contrast to PnP when you're never sure how long your campaign will last or what level anyone will survive to.

Edit: Also, btb regarding two of the most contentious spells a R/C gets, Ironskin is from the Dark Sun setting, shouldn't be available to Forgotten Realms clerics or druids, whereas Insect Plague should be accessible to any priest with the Combat sphere.

Edited October 29, 2022 by polytope

[subtledoctor]

6 minutes ago, polytope said:

Aesthetic preferences for a race other than Dwarf aside, obviously. Saying that other mage robes are pointless besides the robe of Vecna is also true, even if you think its vanilla game colors and appearance ugly. Stealth isn't particularly useful for a character that can cast Sanctuary and cannot backstab.

It's not about preferences, it's about options. You may love dwarves, but once in a blue moon get a hankering to play a half-elf. Should half-elves not exist because they don't get the save bonuses? Isn't the game better for having both options? In which case, half-elves are not pointless. Also I rarely actually use the Robe of Vecna, there are plenty of other good robes, like IR's Robe of the Battlemage or that robe in my last game that gives you a free Spell Sequencer. Also stealth is WAY better than Sanctuary. Also my rangers can  backstab. 

Also my rangers have a larger visual range, and the Tracking ability (for whatever that's worth) and can move fast like Barbarians. And my R'Cs get a selection of spell spheres that includes a lot of high-level druid spells.

Just saying, rangers getting stealth and low-level druid spells is a trade-off. If people don't think it's a good trade-off they have LOTS of options to make it better. Moaning about it on reddit is among the worst of those options.

[polytope]

2 minutes ago, subtledoctor said:

I rarely actually use the Robe of Vecna, there are plenty of other good robes, like IR's Robe of the Battlemage or that robe in my last game that gives you a free Spell Sequencer. Also stealth is WAY better than Sanctuary. Also my rangers can  backstab. 

Also my rangers have a larger visual range, and the Tracking ability (for whatever that's worth) and can move fast like Barbarians. And my R'Cs get a selection of spell spheres that includes a lot of high-level druid spells.

I was specifically referring to the implementation of R/C vs F/D and F/C as published by Bioware and then Beamdog's iteration? Third party mods are an entirely different kettle of fish, which does not contradict my initial claim that the vanilla F/D multi pre EE is mechanically worse than a vanilla R/C multi (bugged), yet the EE R/C is by default worse than a F/C.

[subtledoctor]

Well, setting aside whether Bioware's iteration should be put  on a pedestal, I think that this is a bit apples/oranges. Yes F/D is almost strictly inferior to a Bioware R/C. (There is the mild XP advantage...  and Belm//Boomerang/Firetooth I guess. But that's it.) But there are actual substantive differences between a Beamdog R/C and a F/C, both in terms of flavor and tactics. Stealth and low-level druid spells let you do things that a F/C can't do, things that a player might actually, reasonably want to do. That's my only point.

[ahungry]

Don't forget charm animal!

It'd be sort of neat if it made a permanent companion summonable daily via an item like the spider item from bg2 or drizzt's panther.

[polytope]

27 minutes ago, subtledoctor said:

Well, setting aside whether Bioware's iteration should be put  on a pedestal, I think that this is a bit apples/oranges.

What am I "pedestalizing"? I said quite clearly that Bioware's original R/C is overpowered due to a bug relative to F/D.

Druids can use Belm (that's a bug in itself actually, speed weapons granting more APR to the mainhand weapon if placed in the offhand), but dual wielded with what? Best weapon available to them by the time you've found Belm is the Blackblood club, Spectral Brand is not guaranteed to be won without save-scumming. Other decent druid weapons like Impaler and Ixil's Spike are two-handed.

[jmerry]

For a fighter/druid, there's nothing wrong with using Belm and a shield. Sure, you'll need to switch to something else when you run into an enemy that's immune to +2 weapons, but those are rare. (Also, Jaheira's just not built for dual-wielding.)

[Guest Morgoth]

Will the number of spell slots from ranger be summed up with the cleric ones?

[jmerry]

No. To calculate the number of spell slots, find which class has the most slots at each spell level. This includes the wisdom bonus on the cleric side but not on the ranger side. Then, at each spell level, take whichever number is higher.

I gave an example earlier in this thread: a cleric 2/ranger 17 with 18 wisdom (BG series). That's 2+2 level 1 slots as a cleric, 3/3/3 slots in the first three levels as a ranger. Combine the two, and the character gets 4/3/3 slots of spell levels 1 through 3.

[Guest Morgoth]

Interesting, thanks. So basically reaching level 16 with ranger would be useless, unless I'm extremely interested with THAC0.

People are fixated that level 13 should be the maximum level you should reach, but I doubt very much you have enough Thac0 to hit Amelyssan consistently. Well, of course you should cast mostly spells, because mages > fighter damage, but still..

[jmerry]

Hitting Mel consistently ... she has -8 base AC and 20 Dex. She doesn't use any AC-boosting spells (in the base game). Final AC -12.

A level 13 melee warrior with 19 strength, a +4 weapon, and specialization has THAC0 zero; that'll get you to a 45% chance of hitting her. And that's a very conservative setup; you'll likely have higher strength by default, a more powerful weapon, and/or other THAC0-boosting equipment.

Now we add the cleric buffs. DUHM or Righteous Magic will get you to 25 strength, another four points on your to-hit bonus. Holy Power will bump your base THAC0 to 1 instead of 8 for a seven-point boost at caster level 20+ (and the 18/00 strength will get bumped to 19 from a holy symbol, or 25 with a strength-boosting spell as well). Just two mid-level cleric spells, and you have a THAC0 of -11. Hit on a 2. If your off-hand weapon is +5 and you have three points in dual-wielding, you can hit on a 2 with your off hand as well.

Yes, you absolutely can hit Amelyssan consistently with a ranger 13 -> cleric 20+.

[subtledoctor]

2 hours ago, Guest Morgoth said:

People are fixated that level 13 should be the maximum level you should reach, but I doubt very much you have enough Thac0 to hit Amelyssan consistently

Clerics have very good thac0 progression, they reach thac0 6. That plus STR plus magic weapons plus some buffs is totally good enough to hit any enemy in the game.

The level 13 dual is solely about the 1/2 APR bump.

Edited November 4, 2022 by subtledoctor