I'm just trying to plan out the higher levels of my party, and I was wondering if it was even worth advancing my spellcasters past level 20 in the magic using classes (Cleric, Druid, Wizard, Sorcerer).

If it's not really worth it, a level or two of Rogue, Monk, Ranger, Fighter, Paladin, Bard and Barbarian all provide some pretty sweet bonuses (even if it's just a +2 to a saving throw). Just an idea...

It depends on what you want your characters to be. Looking at spell progression tables, spellcasters do keep gaining new slots all the way to level 30. Sorceres in particular can really benefit from this since you do get more "spells known". In fact, I think spellcasters' benefits are far more substantial that a warrior class at these higher levels (a +1 to BAB and more hit points don't compare to more spell, especially when you hit the high 20s and get extra level 8 and 9 spells)

Cleric: You get a few extra spell slots but I don't think it is worthwhile. Cleric level 21 gives an extra Heal and Sanctuary. After that I suggest nine levels of Monk for Improved Evasion (must stick to light armor) and other goodies.

Druid: They can't raise dead, so you might as well get a sorcerer instead. But if you insist on playing a druid, there is little reason to go past 20. I've heard there is a mod out there that makes shapeshifting ridiculously overpowered, instead of useless. Possibly the mod benefits from extra druid levels.

Wizard: No extra high level spells, but you do get improved shadow summons and additional damage for some spells. Shadow summons stop improving at 27, so that's where I'd think about adding another class.

Sorcerer: Like wizards except you also get more spells known.

Well, it sounds like it's worth going all the way as a Sorcerer (heck, who am I kidding, I can't avoid 2 levels of Pally somewhere along the way! ;) ), because they have a limited number of learned spells.

With a Cleric, I may as well add Paladin or Rogue or Bard or Barbarian or Monk (depending on alignment, ect) after level 21. Each class improves at least one Save category by two (the Monk adds +2 to all Saves!). The same applies to Wizard, but I will probably go to 27 since the summons are important, especially in HoF mode if what I'm reading is true.

I think I'm going to go for a chatterbox Druid who will only reach level 18 or 19, as a Bard rocks at level 11 or 12. He will be a support guy.

Thanx!

Too lazy to think up an answer so I'll just quote from my own post on the page http://www.sorcerers.net/ubb/ultimatebb.php?/topic/14/1153.html

Practically everyone has dead zones from L21 - L24. Between those levels they gain spells at a slow rate.

Sorcerer spell progression past L20 happens only at every alternate level. However since they gain atleast 3 spells each time, leveling further continues being useful. From L20-L30 a Sorcerer gains 17 spells, atleast one each at all levels.

Wizards have a blank spot for L22 - L24. They don't learn any spell for these 3 levels. So best stop at L21. After L21, you gain the ability to cast 3 spells (1 each of L3,L4,L5) only.

Druids seem to gain atleast 1 spell per level. You could stop at L21. Druids get their last L9 spell (and an extra shapechange) at L26.
Clerics have the same spell progression as Duirds. The only difference being that Druid L9 spells are actually useful.

Bards. I really cant believe the spell charts I have. A Bard will always know more spells than he can cast. The Bard will gain spells slowly between L11 - L20. After that he gains spells at a respectable rate.

I hope you don't take Paladins and Rangers for their spells :rolleyes:

Shrikant, the sorcerer gains are of spells *known*, not spells per day, so they are only marginally useful, because for the most part there aren't enough spells worth learning (unless you spent early picks learning spells like Sleep and Fireball).

Sorcerers also gain a few spells per day, but only L1-5, so not important.

Cleric level nine spells aren't *useless* -- there is Gate.

I really don't give a damn for Spells cast per day since I almost always run out of L4 spells due to Improved Invisibility, Stoneskin and have to rest anyways. :heh: And dont knock Fireball :nono:
Knowing more spells makes the Sorcerer more well rounded imo.

As far as Cleric 'Gate goes, I use it once, with the lich in the Fields of Slaughter. Otherwise if I'm using summons, I want as many as possible and Gate does not allow for that. Unless you cast Protection from Evil on your summons ... :hmm:

Big frowny face for improved invisibility. Are you playing unpatched?

The Gate demon (Gelugon) typically won't attack your party and summons until/unless they get closer to him than the enemy. So if there are enough enemies, and you position your Gate spells carefully, you don't *need* Pro: Evil. But to make things simple you can run over to your summons and cast Magic Circle Against Evil.

Improved Invisibility without the patch :grr: Thats perhaps the worst part of the game ever. Atleast if the game had True Sight in it ...
Still II gives you a greater chance of being missed outright so you don't have to worry about AC. Cast Stoneskin on the Shield, II on the Beserker and let them have their fun. I never have to worry about the outcome.

As far as Gate goes, I scout then summon then walk into the fight. So with my style, Gate is really useless. Now if I were to play your way, walk into the fight and then cast summons as you go along perhaps Gate would be more useful.

There is one big benefit in higher levels: longer spell duration !

Buffing spells like improved invisibility, mass haste, barkskin, recitation, magic circle against evil, bless, prayer,... last longer, your whole party benefits if your caster keeps levelling, if he takes levels in another class like monk or ranger only the caster benefits.

Since buffing up your party takes quite some time you'll be happy about every round you don't have to rebuff again.

Wizzy? Sorcerors? Yes. Longer spell duration, more die of damage for various damage causing spells, increased DC for various spells.


Clerics? Probably not. After level 20, I prefer to just take fighter levels to make my cleric tougher in melee. I suppose that I'm losing the benefits that I've descibed above for sorcs, but since I tend to have my cleric engaged in melee vastly more often than my sorc, I find that improving his fighting skills to be worth the trouble.


Druids? Don't know. Never played that many druids, and never in IWD2. I'd tend to think that they're similar to clerics in this regard, but cannot say with any certainty.


Bard? Another don't know.

crucis:

Extra caster levels never increase spell DC.

[ January 03, 2006, 21:57: Message edited by: JT ]

Sorry. My bad.

Cleric level 9 spells are few and SUCK. I don'T think even a level 17 cleric is THAT needed unless the domain spell is something HOT. (like WoB perhaps)

The reason why it is worth go up to lvl 30 is not the amount of spells, no. Its their power and duration which increases. Generally 33% stronger which is a LOT.

A bunch of weak spells is not yet powerful just because of the name.

Cleric's 2nd lvl spell Draw Upon Holy Might grants f.e. on lvl30 +10(yes ten) on STR, CON and DEX and laughs at barbarian rage. And Cleric has them plenty.There is nothing a few fighters level can do but cripple the member.

Same applies to sorcs.
improved haste lasts 33% longer
skull trap deals 33% more damage
and so on