Let me compare to two games I'm quite familiar with: BGI and BGII. In BGI, not hing was better than an archer-type character. In BGII, it was next to worthless.

How will an Archer fare in this game? I was even considering playing a Fighter to 4th level, and maybe multiclassing to Wizard, but I don't know if I'll be able to afford the proper stats. Since an archer needs a high DEX, an Elf is a good choice and with a high DEX, you really don't need heavy armor. Heck, Bard might work as well (but as a Human or Dwarf, I guess).

Casting spells like "Cat's Grace" on himself, this sounds like it could be a good character.

What do you think?

First of all, archery in IWD2 isn't all that great. I mean, yeh it was superb in BG1 wasn't it! But here, damage isn't too hot ... even if you have something like the Arc of Gold (very nice bow :D !). As always, though, archers are still good to have around. Although archery in HofF is pointless. If you don't know why that is ... test it out for yourself ... Goblins with about a million HP against a few piercing damage!

Now, regarding your other question, go with an Elf if you want a good archer. Purely because you get the bow feat for free and a higher dexterity.

By the way, you can go all the way up to Lv. 30 ... so you can keep progressing in your fighter class to get more feats if you want

Thanks for the reply!

Any fighter (or barbarian, rogue, paladin and ranger) gets the bow feat for free, in addition to any elf.

I am also considering throwing in a level of barbarian, since a hit and run character (if I play one) would benefit from some speed (I think a Fighter 4/Barbarian 3/Bard X might be a tough build though), so maybe it isn't a good idea (besides, Fighters get so many feats that I could just add "Dash" if I need it). I think I will go with Bard instead of Wizard though, for the higher BAB.

That's true ... but I'd go with the wizard so you get a greater amount of spells that are more potent. Sometimes i use a Sorcerer 19/Bard 11, which is an interesting combination as the bard has his best song and they both have charisma as their prime attribute.

As for the hit and run, save your time by getting some boots of speed ... unless ur multi-classing to a barbarian for the extra HP or rage or resistances

I use archery in HoF :o . its not THAT bad they are quite good archers they do round 12 or 13 max damage per hit with just an unenchanted returning arrow, sure they cant do that much but they can still finish of enemies. And seeing as its just my wizard and sorcerer using bows it keeps them alive and out of battle when they arent/dont need to cast any spells. So its not ENTIRELY useless but i guess a devoted archer in a class like ranger would be useless. But if you want to be ranged and stay out of battle try using a throwing axe you can get LOTS and LOTS of enchanted axes that return when you throw them and some are quite good and even add strength bonus to damage.

[ November 13, 2005, 08:55: Message edited by: Goon66 ]

Yeh, i used to have a couple of archers when i first started playin, but then i found a better way to cause damage ... 3 arcane spell casters!!! No one escapes, no one lives, and enimies die a lot quicker than if i was using archers. You could say archers are just a used occassionally if your spellcasters (mine who are elves with high dex) if they run out of spells

If you have a melee heavy party that casts Executioner's Eyes often then it never hurts to have a bow and a hell bolter plinking away. Sure an unenchanted arrow max's out at 13, but that's 39 on a critical, and you will get lots of criticals.

But couldn't this 'spot' in the party be better used by a offensive caster, like a pure sorcerer/wizard/druid?
I just don't think there's a need for it in IWD2. I like the Hell Bolter and the Arc of Gold ... I just hate the damage!

Yup, DoomBolter/HellBolter has excellent attack/round, and clerics can use them as they have simple weapon proficiency required, so it can give your defensive/buffer/healer type cleric some ranged packed power, but building an entire character upon ranged attack sounds lame and weak, to tell you the truth.

YES! That's what I mean Silver! I'd rather make a powerful offensive spell-caster than just an entire ranged character. Maybe I should just make an elven sorcerer with a high dex ... AHA! problem solved!!! :D

Archery is good, especially for characters relying on Dexterity and Weapon Finesse for combat. For example, my Fighter(4)/Ranger(3)/Monk(3)/Paladin(x) character was able to do around 30 damage pretty often already against the orcs early in the game, while I can't recall her dishing out so much in close quarters. And, mind you, she had no archery feat whatsoever. Just a high DEX score but still nothing too uber (not sure if she ever got to 20 before buffs and items).

As for mages with a high DEX score, yes, they work great early in the game and even later if they spells run out or if you're being stingy. Their Cat's Grace spell should also help. Note also that DEX applies to Finesse-based melee attacks, so it's not so rare that a rogue or mage should have a higher attack bonus than the tanks (as happened to me in ToEE). It's just you don't want them to hang around in the frontline too much.

For a successful archer, consider the benefits of the Rogue, Ranger, Monk, Barbarian and Fighter class. Skill points and Evasion; free dual-wielding feats when wearing light armour; Evasion and WIS bonus added to AC when without armour; increased movement speed and most weapon/armour proficiencies; all starting weapon/armour proficiencies plus Weapon Specialisation, respectively. Point Blank and Rapid Shot are your archery feats in this game, as well as Weapon Focus and Specialisation in bow, if available to your character.

Whoa ... Chevalier did you mean 30 damage per round near the early stages of the game (because later it gets easy) or damage???

I was just saying before that even though you may get like around 5 attacks per round, archery wouldn't be worth it. I'd rather an arcane spellcaster or tank dealing out damage. Archers would just be last resort things for me.

Per shot rather, although not always. She clearly dealt a lot of damage with a bow, compared to her dual-wielded short swords.

I have never seen that kind of damage, specially early in the game. :jawdrop: What equipment were you using Chev?
I am not sure I can even believe that :eek:

Don't remember. Plain longbow, perhaps with Specialisation. Specialisation would give +4 damage on a critical hit. I didn't really have items above +1 back then.

I think everyone in the party needs some archery skill. In my typical 6 man party, I have 3 bows, 2 Xbows, and one slinger. Even late in the game, long range damage can take out alot of enemies before they can reach you. Perfect for disrupting enemy spellcasters, or sitting behind a fence and firing away.
Why give the opposition free hits on your tanks by moving them in for melee early in the fight. Some damage before the melee round can sway the battle your way.
Besides, using the fog of war to your advantage is a useful tool in these games.

I've always preferred to have everyone wield a ranged weapon with some skill to soften the opposition before melee. At times such as when I play a given game the Nth time, I go for fast and total melee but my classic style is everyone firing from range and then everyone switching to melee weapons when the enemy arrives in close quarters. Magic other than buffs when necessary or particularly convenient.

I use ranged weapons all the time, but of course not exclusively. I think it's a wee bit strange that people consider archery to be "next to useless" in other games than BG1. I guess it's just the contrast to the absolute overkill in BG1.

I like to take advantage of the short time before the enemy closes in, and only then engage them in melee. I rarely put non-combative classes in melee at all. If spellcasters have no spells left or no suitable spells for the situation, there's no better option for them than to use ranged weapons to support the warriors. And ranged weapons are priceless against enemy spellcasters who hide behind their warrior allies.

Also, in most of these games enchanted arrows, bolts, bullets and darts are found in such abundance that you can "waste" them pretty freely if, for example, an opponent is trying to run away. And if there are only a handful of opponents, with concentrated attacks you can whack them all before they get close.

But like i was saying before, in HoF, archery is quite useless. Unless you have PLENTY of executioner's eyes on hand and ALOT of +3 or more arrows you won't be doing much damage against a 250 HP goblin will you!!! :(

A specialist on the other hand ... :D

I find archery very usefull! Just save all the special arrows for more dangerous foes! HoF is a lot harder but if all your characters have a few points in archery and quick shot they can be quite devestating

Meh ... archery ... in IWD2 ...

is my point made clear enough!

If not - 3 Fully loaded archers or how about 3 sorcerers pumping the room full of Fireballs, Chain Lightenings and Wail of the Banshees ... What do you think is better ... :D !!!

3 archers could probably disrupt your spell with a little luck and criticals(expecially if you were casting a high level spell like wail of the banshee) and thus kill your sorcs :p

Oh yes ... 3 archers would REALLY take down my 3 sorcerers (sensing any sarcasm here?)

Considering they CAN cast Wail of the Banshee don't think they'd be protected by Stoneskin and Mirror Image (among the many protective spells) and just be able to blast the sh!t out of your pathetic archers ...

Sorry Goon ... I don't like when people bag Sorcerers!!! Oh, and I'm having a bad day! But do you really think 3 archers could take on 3 arcane users ... or did you mean if they just meant and no spells (protective included) had been cast? If that's the case then I'm sorry!

yea i meant before casting buffs cause thats kind of cheap in this case cause it would cause me to be wrong and since . i OBVIOUSLY realise with stoneskin and especially mirror image the sorcs would win even without those buffs precast since they could cast mirror image all but isntantly at the start of the "dual".

But i was mainly talking bout them just meeting and likely just casting attack spells since you didnt earlier mention any protections.

But i really really like arcane casters as well particularly the sorc mainly cause they dont need to pre memorise which makes them more versatile IMO. And i hate archers(i just give my arcane characters bows) i was just arguing for the sake of it sorry.

Ah OK! Sorry my bad! OMG that's what I do with my arcane users as well! We all know that during the start they run out of spells soooo quickly eh, and when that happens that's really the only time i use archers!!!

Sorry about the misunderding Goon!!! If we had 3 level 30 archers fully equiped and 3 fully loaded sorcerers and wizards (no spells cast yet) do you think the archers would be able to take them straight away ...

Well if the archers are really well equipped, still not.
First the sorc casts Mirror Image (elemental missiles will punch through stoneskin, perhaps disrupting them.) Next they cast Improved Invisibility on themselves. Finally while one casts animate dead, the others cast Horrid Wilting and Wail of Banshee. At the end of round 3, the arechers are dead.

A dedicated archer is probably less useful than even a full thief in IWD II. Better to stick a bow or xbow in the hands of your sorcs so they have something to do while not casting spells.

By the way Glass Darts +1 & Darts of Flame +5 probably do the maximum damage of all missiles in the game.

OOOHHHH! I have just fallen in love with your statment Shrikant! Anyone agree with that! :D

I've never played a "dedicated" archer. But also I'd say it's a bit silly to neglect ranged weapons completely. You'll get the best results by combining several strategies.

If a wizard is protected by Globe of Invulnerability and you don't have 5+ level spells at hand, archers will naturally do better in taking the mage down. If a wizard is protected by Protection From Arrows/Stoneskin, and has a high Concentration skill, of course spells work better.

Of course, the *best* way to take wizards down would be to cast Cloudkill etc. type of area effect spells *and* bombarding them with missiles so you don't have to walk your warriors into your own Cloudkill.

As for ranged weapons in HOF, if there aren't many enemies around, just a couple of strong ones, you can exploit the stubborn enemy AI and have one of your characters run around as a decoy while the others turn the enemy into a pincushion.

Well, I've decided to go forth without a dedicated archer, but all of my characters use missile weapons to soften up the enemies before they get into melee.

This also gives me time to get my tanks into proper position, which has helped a ton with my tactics.

Amen Klorox ... Amen :D !

btw i agree with what shrikant said about the sorcs winning cause of mirror image as i said in my previous post the almost instant casting time gives them an advantage. But with a LOT of luck theres always a chance that the archers could disrupt each sorc while they tried casting mirror image and then finish them off from there but thats VERY unlikely

Yes i did as well! I'm just agreeing with his view that archers should be used as a back up ... or in my case, a last resort when spells run out

Oh i aint referring to your last post its just when you asked the queston you said my name in the same paragraph so i wasnt sure if you were directing it at me.

My bad again!!! Nah archery is ok, i just hardly ever use it. If someone creates a mod so it because how it was back in BG ... :D !!!

Everyone keeps talking bout how it was so great in BG1 what was soo good about it then? (i started my RPG gaming with BG2

The damage was insane ... EXTREMELY INSANE!!!

I think your strength determined how much damage you did (unlike IWD2) and so if you had a fighter with a composite long bow with 20 strength with 3 attacks per round ... hehe :D !!!

Then add things like magical bows and arrows and then WOW!!! Massive damage every round, and that was something i really enjoyed, but now IWD2 doesn't offer that :(

Nah, STR was added to Slings, not Bows. What made ranged attacks so great was:

A) Most baddies didn't use them, and with Fog of War you killed most of them before they reached you.

B) Slings added STR damage.

C) Bows had 2 attacks per round, so you really peppered those guys before they got close.

Since BG1 is a relatively "low level" game, the relatively lower damage from missile weapons really didn't matter much.

Yeah but i remember my character and then others like Coran and Kivan doing sh!tloads of damage from each shot ... lik around 15+ and then later on they were doing around 20

You must have been using enchanted composite longbows (I don't have BG so I don't know if there are any enchanted composite longbows in BG I). These add base damage to arrow, so if you get a crit-hit ...

@Goon66
Start a BG II game with two identical fighters, one with GM in greatswords and the other in longbows. Who gets more attacks with less risk?
This only works with a low levels game like BG I.

This is no longer the case with IWD II. Using a bow no longer automatically nets you a +1 attack. Also using a two-handed weapon adds 1.5Str bonus damage. All in all ranged weapons have no advantage now.

Just as little trivia, in BG2 slings did get bonus damage from strength. There was a "special" sling that had that listed as a special feature, but it in fact affected all slings. Just try the difference between using a sling with a STR 10 and then with a Girdle of Giant Strength. The logic is that STR affectes thrown weapons.

I'm not sure if this is the case in IWD2.

Meh ... slings

Actually, I think that if you used Near Infinity, you'd find that in BG2, most slings did NOT add any sort of STR bonus to damage, except for the one that specifically mentioned it in the description. OTOH, IIRC, slings do add the STR bonus in IWD2 last I looked in NI.


Slings and thrown weapons are actually better than bows for high STR characters in IWD2 for this very reason. Well, except that you need to be aware that certain thrown weapons are rather short ranged. That said, darts in IWD2 should REALLY be used by high STR tanks and not mages, since they a) get the STR bonus and b) are so short ranged that your mage might actually run out in front of your party to get in range of the target and expose himself to the enemy.


On the question of archery and dedicated archers, I have no problem with dedicated archers. Sure they're not going to be use purely destructive as a sorc. So frigging what! I've managed to make it thru normal and HOF a good number of times with a pure ranger/archer in my party who was primarily an archer with dual wielded short swords as his backup melee option.

The key is to not expect that a dedicated archer will be a total killing machine. They're perfectly acceptable at disrupting spellcasters and delivering the coup-de-grace on nearly dead monsters. Also, there are times when the enemy you're facing is so dangerous in melee that you want to stay out of range. It's nice to have a long ranged option in your party and not just a crossbow in the hands of your mage when he's not spellcasting.

@crucis

Are you sure that Darts and Slings take Str bonus? Which rolls does it apply to, attack or damage. If that is right I will surely hand over the Darts to my Barbarian. Throwing Axes have such short a range :(

Shrikant, I just looked in Near Infinity to verify.

Yes, darts and slings (and Th hammers and Th Axes and Th Daggers) to received STR bonuses to damage.


Also, Th Axes have a range of 10, Th Hammers and darts have a range of 20, and slings have a range or 40 or 50 (it varies with most good enchanted slings having the higher range). And nearly all (except one, Final Word with a range of 30) throwing daggers have a range of 10.

A couple of exceptions... The 2handed Th Axe, Big Death, has a range of 20. And the 1H Th Axe, Cloudkiss, has a range of 75. (almost seems to be a mistake)


FYI, Xbows and longbows have a range of 100 and short bows have a range of 75. (Sophia's Flight, the longbow with +50% range, has a range of 150.)


With this info, it seems pretty clear that darts are really much better used by melee characters or perhaps by clerics you want to keep just behind the melee wall, not by mages that you want to keep well behind the lines. And they're best used by strong characters who can get some advantage out of the added STR bonus.

But given their really short range, the situations where you can use them are going to be limited. That said, one situation would be if you've webbed or entangled an enemy and don't want to get close enough to them so that they can reach you with their melee weapons. Just whip out your darts or th daggers while you're just barely out of reach of their swords and start playing darts with'em.

"Hey, Hartan, betcha can't hit the orc in the nose!"