Near-newb questions

[Derakon]

I generally play priests as Orb/device monkeys for the early and mid-game. Their DEX is so bad even with a decent race that you're not going to have worthwhile melee until post-stat gain anyway. Needing an extra couple of Dexterity potions to get there is not a big deal in my book. But I concede that not everyone thinks that way. Likewise I think we can agree to disagree on rogue/ranger races.

[Ingwe Ingweron]

Of course, you are by no means required to only choose complementary race/class combinations. Wasn't there someone on these forums that got a win with every single combination?

Yeah, some idiot did that. He didn't come up with any "perfect" race/class combo though. More often than not, combinations had surprising results in terms of turncount, playability, challenge, etc. The luck of the draw on what equipment and consumables you find has a much greater effect in the long run.

[Sky]

orcs make better rogues than anything else. trolls make better mages, and humans make better anything else.


look, the thing is that empirically, HE are the worst race in the game. you will probably beat the game around CL44~46 before youc an be bothered to grind for !EXP. this means that, from a practical point of view, you have less HP than anyone else, you fail spells more often, and have less SP.
You will go through the game grinding for mobs with an inferior XP value and a higher XP target with inferior spells, AND ALL THIS because you wanted seeinvisible at CL1.


oh and by the way, the SP regen that half trolls have more than makes up for the lack of SP, which anyway quickly disappears when you chug !Intellect and !Intelligence.

half-orcs are the best rogues, too. i dont play Priest so i've never played a dwarf.

[Mondkalb]

I prefer my rogues stealthy and therefore I like hobbits, kobolds, and gnomes better.

[PopTart]

Still confused about inferiority of high elves. Wouldn't a level 40 high elf have better stats than say a level 40 human of the same class? And all you have to do is kill twice as many monsters.

[Derakon]

Still confused about inferiority of high elves. Wouldn't a level 40 high elf have better stats than say a level 40 human of the same class? And all you have to do is kill twice as many monsters.

You're right, at the same level a high-elf will be strictly better than a human (except for WIS, where they're 1 point poorer). But having to kill twice as many monsters is a pretty substantial burden; it means twice as long in the dungeon, and thus twice as much time for something really bad to happen. More realistically, the way it tends to play out is that at a given point in the game the high-elf will be a level or two behind where the human would be. That means fewer HP/SP and higher failure rates, later access to spells, and a few other minor things.

If you play a high-elf and then play a human, the difference will be pretty stark.

[Pete Mack]

You have better stats, sure. And a HE character at CL 38 is stronger in melee in any case. It's really only for mage that the HE limitations can be a issue. It takes a loooong time to level up after CL 40 or so. All other classes do just fine taking on M at CL 44 For Mage, it's really nice to have zero-fail on mass banishment.

Still confused about inferiority of high elves. Wouldn't a level 40 high elf have better stats than say a level 40 human of the same class? And all you have to do is kill twice as many monsters.

[Pete Mack]

Derakon: sure. But a HE can cruise faster thru the first 30 levels. It's only towards the end where he bogs down.

[kandrc]

And it's not twice as many monsters, because those higher base stats and better skills allow you to hunt bigger prey all along the way.

[Sky]

i used to play ony HE warriors. Then only Dunedain warriors. Then Dunedain rangers, which can be a bit slow at the start, but become unkillable at high levels, becuase they can melee, they have godlike archery, and can cast spells including CLW, and have very solid stats, including strong CON.
Then i played for fun a half orc Rogue and a Troll mage and i don't want to play anything else
These races are inferior on paper, but practically, they are better.

The troll mage starts with high STR (makes it easy to carry stuff, which is otherwise a bane of ALL mages) and Regen, which means in the early game you will not need to pick between Helm of Regen and Helm of INT, as you will always go with Helm of INT, and that's +2 INT. You lose some SP to having fast SP regen and can even melee a little if necessary. Also, solid HP and you sustain STR.

The Half Orc Rogue has no SP for the first few levels, but can melee reasonably well. rDark means you ignore the blind effect from dark hounds. You will eventually get enough SP to cast the basic spells you need, such as Phase, Detect Object and Detect Monster, which is all you need, and in the endgame you have maxed out stats, so who cares. Lower XP and STR/CON buff are worth the small XP penalty.

Playing HE Mage, i keep thinking "if i was a human, i'd be 2 CL higher, lower spell fail rate, and access to TO sooner".

[Pete Mack]

@Sky--try Kobold rogue instead of Half-orc. The melee is worse, but rPoison is better than rDark, and the stealth more than makes up for melee. I like to play HE because it forces diving: without killing high-EXP targets, you cannot advance. But kobold (or gnome) rogue is a classic.

[kandrc]

@Sky--try Kobold rogue instead of Half-orc. The melee is worse, but rPoison is better than rDark, and the stealth more than makes up for melee. I like to play HE because it forces diving: without killing high-EXP targets, you cannot advance. But kobold (or gnome) rogue is a classic.

I think hobbit rogue is the easiest combo out there. Object detection and the best stealth in the game. Melee is worse than bad, but you don't need to kill anything until you're ready; if it's not generated awake, you can dance circles around it. Avoid all fights and pick up gear and potions, then get deep and level up in no time.

[Pete Mack]

You don't need to go all the way to Hobbit. Any of the stealthy races will do, and kobold is a bit better at melee. (INT doesn't matter much until CL 30+ in any case. There are only a handful of low-cost spells you need until then.)

[Sky]

i dont think i could cope with having 6 STR.

[PowerWyrm]

i dont think i could cope with having 6 STR.

I don't see any way I would start a character with only 6 STR. Even a hobbit mage. Kobold rogue starts with -1 STR, 0 INT, +5 DEX, +1 CON, so it's quite easy to get good starting stats. A 16+18/50 or 17+18/40 STR/DEX combo is enough to get 2bpr (if you decide to start with 10 INT and completely forget about spells).