Quote:
Originally Posted by yoga
Bard is a nice character.
If You do not mind i will play with 6-members team.
......
3 last characters shown.
Let bet who will passed the game first?
ha ha ha |
Yes,a full team is much more interesting for the first couple of times until you figure out to judge even from pure look which character is good and which sux, or simple don't fit in your group. And you get familiar with the story, so pay less attention to the interactions of NPCs.
For example while everyone praises Aerie I HATED her slow progress, she was always behind the group by capability. And while the baby is nice, she IS a whiner, which might be attractive in real life, but not in the BG-series.
(PUN: BG, like Bulgaria!)
On the other hand Viconia is a machine of destruction. The semi-low HP of her did not bother me at all ever.
But 1 solo playthrough actually widens a player's look on the game, for thing like the above mentioned Sunfire spell, which will never be used with party, but when you don't have to hesitate for harming your allies, it rocks (this was a pun by the way pointing the best BG2 sling-ammunition).
On the other hand bard is a
terrible character in itself (check first bard-post).
Yes, it has one of the more appealing strongholds (warriors, magelings and bard have way better strongholds then the others), and Blade is a nice party-leader with the spins, or Skald is a freaking ultimate support character (its song is bloody powerful), but otherwise quite horrendous with its terrible offensive power (and lack of defense). It has no thac0, the spell-resource is very limited, not to mention don't really have any worthy special abilities (and when HLAs come to play, it'll choose the same as a thief, which can be dual/multi to fighter to help on the taco, or thief/mage which is pretty much bard on steroid - rly, if you wand to play a bard, play instead thief/mage!).
I honestly play it for the challenge-factor.