Only Charisma important for conversational options?

[Klorox]

Originally Posted by Crucis

Because the "talky skills" open up conversation options that aren't linked to those stats.

So, how high do you need in Bluff, Intimidate, and Diplomacy to get all the options?

[Crucis]

Originally Posted by Klorox

So, how high do you need in Bluff, Intimidate, and Diplomacy to get all the options?

It varies by how early or late in the game you are. Off the top of my head, I can think of at least 3 or 4 places where those skills is useful, and I'm sure that there are more. It's hard to build a character who will be well skilled in all 3 talky skills. You'd need to be a rogue to have all 3 as in-class skills. And if you're taking lots of talking skills at the expense of other rogue skills.

Diplomacy, IIRC, is considered the most useful of the three. After that, I'd say that Intimidate is next most useful. I can think of one situation where you either want a high Intimidate or a high Alchemy skill to resolve a certain situation later in the game. Of the three, Bluff is the least critical, although I know of at least one or two minor situations where Bluff can be useful.


Klorox, I wouldn't worry so much about having the ultimate uber-perfect, "cover every eventuality" party. Even with "only" 6 characters, it's not really possible to cover all of the bases to perfection.

That said, an interesting build that I've used once or twice is a ftr X/rogue 2. I start the character as a rogue and max out the talking skills. I also have the character have a DEX 14, so that he'll have a decent enough DEX to take advantage of rogue evasion at 2 levels of rogue. I switch over to fighter for a few levels, then take the second level of rogue after 4-5 levels of fighter, and max out the talking skills again. (BTW, any excess goes into the stealth skills.) This sort of build ends up being a chain mail-wearing fighter with a reasonably silvery tongue. Not exactly a powergaming build, but a more than competent fighter with the ability to talk to anyone. And you won't feel bad about having such a character in the #1 slot to be the party's spokesperson. No risk of turning down rewards or placing a weak mage out in front of your tanks.

[Jelaweb]

If you have NearInfinity, you can search for CheckSkill, CheckSkillGT and CheckSkillLT in every DLG file.

I remember doing this a while ago - I think 17 is the maximum for one of the diplomatic skills. Remember though, if it is 17, you won't need to put his many points in it, as your CHA bonus would boost it.
So a character with a CHA of 18 would "only" need 13 skill points spent - 11-12 if you cast Eagle's Splendor.

[Tokse]

Originally Posted by Crucis

That said, an interesting build that I've used once or twice is a ftr X/rogue 2. I start the character as a rogue and max out the talking skills. I also have the character have a DEX 14, so that he'll have a decent enough DEX to take advantage of rogue evasion at 2 levels of rogue. I switch over to fighter for a few levels, then take the second level of rogue after 4-5 levels of fighter, and max out the talking skills again. (BTW, any excess goes into the stealth skills.) This sort of build ends up being a chain mail-wearing fighter with a reasonably silvery tongue. Not exactly a powergaming build, but a more than competent fighter with the ability to talk to anyone. And you won't feel bad about having such a character in the #1 slot to be the party's spokesperson. No risk of turning down rewards or placing a weak mage out in front of your tanks.

Hmm..not bad, not bad at all.. What kind of stats would you give him (or her)? If he gains one level of ranger as well he could achieve the two-weapon fighting benefits when wearing studded leather, but than he should have more dexterity to get the max dexterity bonus . 20 dexterity I think, but that would of course mean less str, con, cha, wis, int.

[Crucis]

Originally Posted by Tokse

Hmm..not bad, not bad at all.. What kind of stats would you give him (or her)? If he gains one level of ranger as well he could achieve the two-weapon fighting benefits when wearing studded leather, but than he should have more dexterity to get the max dexterity bonus . 20 dexterity I think, but that would of course mean less str, con, cha, wis, int.

Well, Tokse, the Ftr X/Rogue 2 that I have in a party that I intend to play soon has a stat line of (human) STR 16, DEX 14, CON 16, INT 12, WIS 8, CHA 10. I went with a DEX of 14 so that a) she could have a chance to make a Reflex save when trying to evade and b) so that she could take some of the Feats that have a DEX 13 prerequisite. I don't remember why I set INT at 12, probably something to do with # of skill points. Before you (or anyone else) ask, I don't completely drive down stats like INT or CHA. I'm not a powergamer, not a total roleplayer. But I'm probably much closer to a roleplayer than powergamer.


Yes, you could go with a DEX-style fighter, but I'm not sure that max DEX, leather wearing fighters do all that well as a frontline primary tank, but I could be wrong. I suppose you could go with a 20 DEX build, but at that point, you might have a character better suited to be an archer who only engages in melee when absolutely necessary.

[Tokse]

Originally Posted by Crucis

Yes, you could go with a DEX-style fighter, but I'm not sure that max DEX, leather wearing fighters do all that well as a frontline primary tank, but I could be wrong. I suppose you could go with a 20 DEX build, but at that point, you might have a character better suited to be an archer who only engages in melee when absolutely necessary.

I`m in doubt myself. What if he has the feat weapon finesse and uses two short swords. Wouldn`t he be quite deadly then, as well as having a good AC, even without a shield? If not the weapon finesse feat is disabled when using two weapons at once..hmm. I think I read that the off-hand had to be free.

[Crucis]

Originally Posted by Tokse

I`m in doubt myself. What if he has the feat weapon finesse and uses two short swords. Wouldn`t he be quite deadly then, as well as having a good AC, even without a shield?

Dual wielding isn't exactly all that big a deal in IWD2. Frankly, I think that the best benefit from dual wielding is probably the opportunity to pick up some potent and useful special abilities. The extra attack may be nice, but in terms of overall damage, you certainly get more damage output from a good 2H weapon.


There's no doubt that you can have an effective character wielding a pair of short swords with weapon finesse, high DEX, and good leather armor. I think that the real question is whether such a character would be AS effective as a low DEX, plate-wearing, 2H-weapon wielding tank, offensively and/or defensively. I've never played a "finesse tank" as a full time front line tank. The closest that I've come is playing a medium DEX (14), chain-wearing tank.

In fact, my favorite party's paladin was an elven, 14 DEX, chain mail wearing, longsword-wielding "medium" tank. And she was plenty effective. Come to think of it, this party had a max DEX, mid STR ranger who was primarily an archer, but who was a bit of a dual-wielding badass in melee. Still, for whatever reason, I never really felt that this ranger was suited to hang in the blood and gore of melee for very long, although he had pretty much as many HP and my normal tanks and a perfectly good, high AC.

So, I suppose that if you're looking for a change of pace in tankage, maybe a finesse tank would be an interesting diversion.

If not the weapon finesse feat is disabled when using two weapons at once..hmm. I think I read that the off-hand had to be free.

Not exactly that. If you carry a SHIELD, you have to apply the shield's Armor check penalty to your attack roll. The Weapon Finesse feat description says nothing about having a light weapon in your off-hand.

[Tokse]

Originally Posted by Crucis

I've never played a "finesse tank" as a full time front line tank. The closest that I've come is playing a medium DEX (14), chain-wearing tank.

But even with that character I think a full plate(or light weight full plate a la Oswald Fiddlebender) would be a better option than chainmail, as it will earn you 2 more AC even with dex 14.(3 more AC with dex 12).

[Crucis]

Originally Posted by Tokse

But even with that character I think a full plate(or light weight full plate a la Oswald Fiddlebender) would be a better option than chainmail, as it will earn you 2 more AC even with dex 14.(3 more AC with dex 12).

Well, unchanted Chain Mail is +5 AC, +2 Max DEX Bonus (MDB) for a total of +7. And unenchanted full plate is +8 AC, +1 MDB for a total of +9. Yes, that is a difference of 2.

Now, my 14 DEX elven pally also took the Dodge feat cuz of her 14 DEX, although I suppose that it would still work in Plate, even though she couldn't use her full DEX. (I suppose that one could argue that one shouldn't be able to use a Dodge feat if you're wearing heavy armor, regardless of your DEX, but that's neither here nor there.)

I never did put her in plate as I recall, but it's been a LONG while since I played that party. I really, really did enjoy playing that party and that character in particular. Her name was Nya Arenthel and she was the daughter of some pretigious elven mages, but for whatever reason was not blessed with the intelligence ( INT 8 ) to be a wizard, but was blessed with wonderful atheletic gifts (good STR, DEX, and CON) and ended up being chosen by Mystra herself to be one of her paladins rather than a practitioner of the the arcane arts. Ahhhh, those were the days.

[Jelaweb]

I have use Weapon Finesse/Dual Wielding decoys.

When I have done this, they have usually had a Monk level thrown in. Without the Monk level, I usually carry a shield instead. Dual-wielding works for this kind of decoy - they won't cause much damage, but the high DEX and Weapon Finesse will cause them to hit.
Their purpose is not about causing damage, so the whole dual-wielding vs 2-handed weapon argument is redundant.

And also note that hitting an enemy stops them from hitting you (I've seen many Orc archers unable to fire arrows because I hit them)!