Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

Bard's Tale The Bard's Tale Series

Sceptic

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Mar 2, 2010
Messages
10,871
Divinity: Original Sin
I love megaseries and I love playing through the entire series in one go, importing the same party into the next game whenever possible. I've done it before with Gold Box, Might and Magic, Ultima, Wizardry, and all the talk in the Gold Box thread has made me want to do it again. Then I realized I never actually played through the entire Bard's Tale trilogy with the same party (in fact I don't think I ever finished BT2). I'm coming out of an extremely busy time with work, and I think that's what I want to do with my soon to be found extended free time.

I've decided to play the DOS versions, especially now that most of the bugs and annoyances with BT3 DOS are fixed (and, at one game or the other, every platform IIRC has bugs or probems and not one is clearly superior). Are there any bugs or anything I should be wary of for BT1 an BT2 in DOS?

I remember multiclassing mages was a big thing, especially in BT3. The manuals are unfortunately completely worthless and I haven't touched any of the games in almost 25 years. Was the best approach to start with one magician and one conjurer, and eventually make both archmages? You can't go back to one of the classes once you change, right? So this means you HAVE to get ALL the spell levels BEFORE switching, every single time, to ever make it to Archmage, correct?

Annoyingly I forgot that Chronomancer loses ALL his previous mage spells, so I'm eventually gonna have to sacrifice one of my archmages from BT1-2. I don't suppose you can go back from Chronomancer to any of the other mage classes can you? And what's the deal with the Geomancer? Is it worth losing the special abilities of a fighter for those spells? Speaking of which, the BT3 manual lists all the fighter classes and the ability they lose when going Geomancer.... but doesn't mention the Paladin. Is it a manual oversight, or do they actually get to keep their special?

I'm pretty sure having a Bard is essential. I thought Rogues were pretty useless but I vaguely remember you HAD to have one BT3, anyone remember if this is true?

I thought Monks were great but octavius recommends against it, and going with a hunter instead. I don't even remember what hunters do or if they have any special abilities or items. Is their critical hit actually worth it?
 

Metro

Arcane
Beg Auditor
Joined
Aug 27, 2009
Messages
27,792
Yeah, just make a conjurer and magician and alternate until you hit Archmage. If I remember 3 right the first dungeon (which you can skip if you import characters from 2) awards you enough experience at the end to boost your characters to a high level and get your casters to archmage. You'll be fine with one Archmage and one Chronomancer. Not sure about Geomancer. I don't remember mine being particularly indispensable so you can probably get by without one. Rogues are indeed really useful in BT3. Octavius is a fag. Monk > hunter.
 

Gregz

Arcane
Joined
Jul 31, 2011
Messages
8,511
Location
The Desert Wasteland
Was the best approach to start with one magician and one conjurer, and eventually make both archmage?

Yes, although I would highly recommend making 3 wizards that way. The front 3 of 6 are just there to tank and absorb damage (the last 3 of 6 are outside melee range). There are certain weapons only useable by certain classes etc. but I don't recall any one melee class outshining any other in a meaningful way. You don't need or want a bard. The best approach to BT1 was 3 tanks and 3 conj/mag -> 3 sorcerers to learn MIBL. Then find the 99x4 berserker fight, and farm it for XP to advance the sorcerers to wizards.

That was the definitive power leveling approach in BT1. The XP in that fight was nerfed in the DOS version, but it's still by far the fastest way to power level your party, which is very necessary to beat the game.

I can't speak for BT2 or BT3 because I don't remember them well enough, and I'm certain I didn't finish either one.
 
Last edited:

Metro

Arcane
Beg Auditor
Joined
Aug 27, 2009
Messages
27,792
THREE archmages? Unnecessary crutch. Three melee types (paladin, monk, hunter, warrior), bard, thief, conjurer, and magician. The other stuff is confused/muddled. There technically isn't even an archmage level/class in Bard's Tale 1. It was only added in 2.

You don't need or want a bard.
GTFO.

Also for shame Jaesun brofisting such bad advice!

Paladin
Monk
Warrior (upgrade to Geomancer if you feel like but, again, not necessary)
Bard (how the fuck can you truly play Bard's Tale without a bard?!?!?!)
Thief (insanely useful with hide in shadows/assassinate against ranged casters)
Conjurer (alternate spell schools with the Magician)
Magician (alternate spell schools with the Conjurer)
 
Last edited:

Sceptic

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Mar 2, 2010
Messages
10,871
Divinity: Original Sin
Three melee types (paladin, monk, hunter, warrior), bard, thief, conjurer, and magician.
Wait.... you could create 7 characters? I thought the 7th slot was reserved for NPCs. I might make both hunter and monk in this case... I'll then decide who becomes the Geomancer in BT3.
 

Metro

Arcane
Beg Auditor
Joined
Aug 27, 2009
Messages
27,792
Thought it was 7+npc. If not just go with two melee types.

Nvm, it is 6+npc. Two melee types then. Only wimps use three casters. Again, memory is hazy but melee type I'd probably say Warrior>Monk>Paladin>Hunter. The big problem is making one into Geomancer takes away most of the benefits of them being their particular class.

Edit-fest: I think you can actually have 7 characters but most people kept a free slot for an npc. This might have changed between the first and second game (that is, they didn't allow it until 2). Though you can get some pretty OP npcs to fill that last slot. I don't remember the name of the spell that permanently charms a character but it works on damn near everything including the 'named' bosses/mini-bosses in 2: Oscon, Fanskar, Fanskar's 'friend' (dragon). Then there's summon spells like HERB(!) and the infamous Brothers Kringle.

Thief is the hardest class you'll find to fit into a party. You can certainly get by without one but, again, really useful in certain battles. Including the final fight against Tarjan. It's basically a choice between a thief and a third stronger melee type. If you think you want a Geomancer, probably best to go with a third melee than a thief.
 
Last edited:

Daemongar

Arcane
Joined
Nov 21, 2010
Messages
4,706
Location
Wisconsin
Codex Year of the Donut
THREE archmages? Unnecessary crutch. Three melee types (paladin, monk, hunter, warrior), bard, thief, conjurer, and magician. The other stuff is confused/muddled. There technically isn't even an archmage level/class in Bard's Tale 1. It was only added in 2.

You don't need or want a bard.
GTFO.

Also for shame Jaesun brofisting such bad advice!

Paladin
Monk
Warrior (upgrade to Geomancer if you feel like but, again, not necessary)
Bard (how the fuck can you truly play Bard's Tale without a bard?!?!?!)
Thief (insanely useful with hide in shadows/assassinate against ranged casters)
Conjurer (alternate spell schools with the Magician)
Magician (alternate spell schools with the Conjurer)

In BT2, there are 7 slots, with the expectation that you'll use one of the slots for NPC's. Now, you may be tempted to add 7 players, but the snares sometimes require a special NPC to lead... in fact, it happens quite often! Same thing with the first dungeon (rescue the princess) in Tangramane (holy shit, I'm typing this from memory... played that game too much.)
You need to add a winged creature to the party to make it over a spot, then bring the princess back, both in that extra slot

Also, Bard's serve a more practical purpose. They can regen mana and hps in dungeons, as well as produce light in anti-magic zones. They also can use firehorns and other mass damage instruments, unlike say Hunters or Monks. The party above is a great setup, but the monk is kind of boring: can never attack more than one opponent, but has all that free space to carry stuff. Makes inventory management a lot easier.
 

Gregz

Arcane
Joined
Jul 31, 2011
Messages
8,511
Location
The Desert Wasteland
THREE archmages? Unnecessary crutch. Three melee types (paladin, monk, hunter, warrior), bard, thief, conjurer, and magician. The other stuff is confused/muddled. There technically isn't even an archmage level/class in Bard's Tale 1. It was only added in 2.

You don't need or want a bard.
GTFO.

Also for shame Jaesun brofisting such bad advice!

Quit being such an insufferable cunt. My advice is perfectly sound and indeed optimal for BT1. I specifically said that I didn't remember BT2 or BT3, if my suggested party is not optimal for progressing into those games, just say so and why, you fucking shithealed douchebag.
 

Metro

Arcane
Beg Auditor
Joined
Aug 27, 2009
Messages
27,792
Quit being such an insufferable cunt. My advice is perfectly sound and indeed optimal for BT1. I specifically said that I didn't remember BT2 or BT3, if my suggested party is not optimal for progressing into those games, just say so and why, you fucking shitheal of a douche.
You, sirrah, are the most insufferable cunt of them all. I think you actually require a Bard to finish Bard's Tale 1 by some game mechanic. And, anyway, as pointed out above they are extremely useful above and beyond their (lack of) raw combat prowess.

I will not have the good name of this game sullied by the likes of thee!
 

Gregz

Arcane
Joined
Jul 31, 2011
Messages
8,511
Location
The Desert Wasteland
Go fuck yourself Metro. I love BT1, I've replayed it half a dozen times and theorycrafted the shit out of it. What Daemonger says is true, but if you know the maps and want to plow over the game, a 3 wizard party is far and away the optimal party.

Take your 'good name' and stick it up your ass.
 
Last edited:

Metro

Arcane
Beg Auditor
Joined
Aug 27, 2009
Messages
27,792
How dare you ping me, Gregz . You sir have the manners of a goat and the countenance of a yak!
 

octavius

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Aug 4, 2007
Messages
19,185
Location
Bjørgvin
Sceptic, first of all I would strongly recommend against using the same party throughout the series, for various reasons:

1. BT2 will be too easy and too boring with a transfered party. Besides the beginner dungeon in BT2 is one of the best dungeons in the whole series.
Transfering from BT2 to BT3 OTOH may be worth it, since the beginner dungeon in BT3 is among the weaker dungeons.

2. The Hunter's Critical Hit ability was bugged in the Amiga versions of BT1 and/or 2, and probably also in the DOS versions. Seems to be an overflow bug, so that the skill resets back to a 5% chance every 16th level. I haven't tested the Hunter in BT3, but I assume they work correctly with the patch. Combined with a different combat systems in BT1-2 compared to BT3, the Monk is superior to the Hunter in BT1-2, but vice versa in BT3. In BT1-2 the chance to hit is based on AC, so a Monks will be able to hit things other characters have problems with. In BT3 Monks don't deal eneough damage to kill even one enemy for most of the game, so are useless. Warriors and Paladins can use Stone Blades and Hunters have their Critical Hits; Monks have nothing to compensate.

3. Rogues are useless in BT1-2 due to no sneak attacks and mages' cheap Trap Zap spells, but should be mandatory in BT3, even though supposedly you can still kill Tarjan without the Thief of Fate in your party.

So you need different parties in different games. No Rogue in BT1-2 and no Monk in BT3. And be wary of Hunters in BT1-2.

The Paladin is an excellent party leader, at least in BT3 (and probably in BT1-2 as well), since he has much better saving throws than other party members. Enemy spells targeted at the party is checked against the party leader's resistance, and in BT3 I noticed a huge difference those times the Paladin was not in front.

The Geomancers in BT3 have excellent spells and I recommend turning a fighting type (but not the Paladin since he most probably loses his leadership ability) into one.

In general I recommend developing Sorcerers, Wizards and Archmages ASAP. Start with base Conjurer or Magician class, then change to Sorcerer at level 7/spell level 3, and if possible switch back to the other base class after having gained the Sorcerer and Wizard lvl 7 spells. Gaining levels in the base classes is much faster than for the advenced classes, and current class level determines initiative (I'm fairly certain) and saving throws.
There are some differences between the games; no Archmage class in BT1, for example, so this is general advice.

EDIT:
Recommende parties (assuming the Hunter is bugged in BT1-2):

BT1-2:
Paladin
Monk
Bard
Conjurer
Magician
Conjurer/Magician

Turn one mage into Archmage (learn all the spells), one into master Sorceror ASAP and the third into master Wizard ASAP.
In BT1 have them all end their careers in the opposite base class of that which they started in.
In BT2 the Archmage is a class.


BT3:
Paladin
Hunter
Bard
Rogue
Conjurer
Magician

Turn Hunter into Geomancer.
Develop one mage into Archmage, the other as Chronomancer.

Another EDIT:
When playing BT3, I noticed something weird. I had one character go Magician 3 -> Conjurer 7, and when trying to Class Change the only option was Sorcerer. However my other mage went Conjurer 7 -> Magician 7 and could also choose Chronomancer (and Wizard IIRC), so the manual is wrong about the reqs to change to Chronomancer; it says you need all spell levels in three mage classes.
Fortunately I changed one of my guys to Chronomancer before facing Brilhasti, so instead of going from Archmage to lvl 1 Chronomancer with 0 XP, he is now a lvl 36 Chronomancer with 444 HP and 479 SP, while my lvl 11 Archmage's numbers are 375 and 350.
 
Last edited:

Metro

Arcane
Beg Auditor
Joined
Aug 27, 2009
Messages
27,792
Too late Gregz you've already been exposed for the fraud you are! Fargo himself rebukes thee!
 

Sceptic

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Mar 2, 2010
Messages
10,871
Divinity: Original Sin
Thanks for all the great advice.

Thief is the hardest class you'll find to fit into a party. You can certainly get by without one but, again, really useful in certain battles. Including the final fight against Tarjan. It's basically a choice between a thief and a third stronger melee type. If you think you want a Geomancer, probably best to go with a third melee than a thief.
Yeah I remember the Rogue being a bit useless in BT1, but great in BT3. If I follow octavius's advice and have separate parties then it won't matter, as I can make the per-game ideal party as I see fit. I don't remember if the geomancers were good enough but octavius is speaking highly of him, and I may go for it anyway just to see their special spells, and because I think they're the only true fighter/mage class in the entire system

There are certain weapons only useable by certain classes etc. but I don't recall any one melee class outshining any other in a meaningful way. You don't need or want a bard. The best approach to BT1 was 3 tanks and 3 conj/mag -> 3 sorcerers to learn MIBL. Then find the 99x4 berserker fight, and farm it for XP to advance the sorcerers to wizards.
I'm definitely taking a bard, sorry :P I remember some class-specific items and octavius mentioned the hunter had their own ones too, in fact one of the reasons I'd rather have a hunter over the monk is that the monk doesn't even seem to get much from items since he fights better (or is supposed to....) bare-handed. As for grinding I'm hoping I can keep this to a minimum (and it was the main reason I didn't want to create a new party for every game, despite the absurd levels everyone will reach otherwise; I may just import some but not all characters, which would allow cycling classes between each game too). I remember the early BT1 is terrible about grinding but hopefully it's not worse than MM1.

In BT2, there are 7 slots, with the expectation that you'll use one of the slots for NPC's. Now, you may be tempted to add 7 players, but the snares sometimes require a special NPC to lead... in fact, it happens quite often!
Hah, I just remembered that you needed one in the very first snare, to carry the torch or something like that. I was wondering if it might be worth having a 7th "rotating" melee character (whichever class is less useful in the particular game) and switch him out for NPCs as needed, but if that happens as often as you say then it's probably not worth the hassle.

1. BT2 will be too easy and too boring with a transfered party. Besides the beginner dungeon in BT2 is one of the best dungeons in the whole series.
Transfering from BT2 to BT3 OTOH may be worth it, since the beginner dungeon in BT3 is among the weaker dungeons.
I know it completely unbalances the already-broken games, but transferring the same party is actually one the reasons I even thought of doing this run. I may do what I said earlier and only transfer some of the characters, we'll see.

2. The Hunter's Critical Hit ability was bugged in the Amiga versions of BT1 and/or 2, and probably also in the DOS versions. Seems to be an overflow bug, so that the skill resets back to a 5% chance every 16th level. I haven't tested the Hunter in BT3, but I assume they work correctly with the patch. Combined with a different combat systems in BT1-2 compared to BT3, the Monk is superior to the Hunter in BT1-2, but vice versa in BT3. In BT1-2 the chance to hit is based on AC, so a Monks will be able to hit things other characters have problems with. In BT3 Monks don't deal eneough damage to kill even one enemy for most of the game, so are useless. Warriors and Paladins can use Stone Blades and Hunters have their Critical Hits; Monks have nothing to compensate.
This is all good to know, thanks. Shame about hunters being bugged in BT1-2. I'm gonna look and see if there's a workaround. I'm sure the bug would be super easy to fix for someone who knows programming. Maybe I should find the contact information of the guy who made the BT3 patch and bug him about it :P

I noticed no one has mentioned warriors yet. Are they as bland and boring as they sound? The manual mentions extra attacks, but don't paladins get these as well? What advantages do warrios have, if any?

The Paladin is an excellent party leader, at least in BT3 (and probably in BT1-2 as well), since he has much better saving throws than other party members. Enemy spells targeted at the party is checked against the party leader's resistance, and in BT3 I noticed a huge difference those times the Paladin was not in front.
Awesome, I didn't realize that party-targeted spells check ONLY against the leader's resistances, not individual members. Definitely making a paladin leader. Now all I need to do is figure out of they lose the resistance bonus when going Geomancer. If not they'd make the best one, since this means the hunter would keep its critical hits for the whole game.

The Geomancers in BT3 have excellent spells and I recommend turning a fighting type (but not the Paladin since he most probably loses his leadership ability) into one.
.... never mind you just answered my question :lol:

In general I recommend developing Sorcerers, Wizards and Archmages ASAP. Start with base Conjurer or Magician class, then change to Sorcerer at level 7/spell level 3, and if possible switch back to the other base class after having gained the Sorcerer and Wizard lvl 7 spells. Gaining levels in the base classes is much faster than for the advenced classes, and current class level determines initiative (I'm fairly certain) and saving throws.
You're right about initiative and saves, but I'm pretty certain that you CANNOT go back, so if I want all spells I HAVE to advance the base class to 13 before switching. Or at least that's what the manual claims (could it be wrong?)

Turn one mage into Archmage (learn all the spells), one into master Sorceror ASAP and the third into master Wizard ASAP.
In BT1 have them all end their careers in the opposite base class of that which they started in.
Oh I see what you mean now. So your suggestion here is to have 2 of them NOT become archmages but switch them ASAP at level 7 and never look back, and since each ends in the opposite school at least the party ends up with all the spells.

In BT2 the Archmage is a class.
Would it make more sense then to have all mages end as Archmage? or only just one, as in BT1?

When playing BT3, I noticed something weird. I had one character go Magician 3 -> Conjurer 7, and when trying to Class Change the only option was Sorcerer. However my other mage went Conjurer 7 -> Magician 7 and could also choose Chronomancer (and Wizard IIRC), so the manual is wrong about the reqs to change to Chronomancer; it says you need all spell levels in three mage classes.
Maybe it's using requirements similar to Sorcerer, where you need level 7 in 2 mage classes to get it. On that note though... how did your mag3/conj7 turn into a Sorcerer anyway?? Something's definitely not right with the manual claims.

Fortunately I changed one of my guys to Chronomancer before facing Brilhasti, so instead of going from Archmage to lvl 1 Chronomancer with 0 XP, he is now a lvl 36 Chronomancer with 444 HP and 479 SP
This definitely seems like the better option, especially since the Chronomancer doesn't retain anything useful from the previous classes anyway, so switching him ASAP is definitely preferable.
 

Gregz

Arcane
Joined
Jul 31, 2011
Messages
8,511
Location
The Desert Wasteland
There are certain weapons only useable by certain classes etc. but I don't recall any one melee class outshining any other in a meaningful way. You don't need or want a bard. The best approach to BT1 was 3 tanks and 3 conj/mag -> 3 sorcerers to learn MIBL. Then find the 99x4 berserker fight, and farm it for XP to advance the sorcerers to wizards.
I'm definitely taking a bard, sorry :P I remember some class-specific items and octavius mentioned the hunter had their own ones too, in fact one of the reasons I'd rather have a hunter over the monk is that the monk doesn't even seem to get much from items since he fights better (or is supposed to....) bare-handed. As for grinding I'm hoping I can keep this to a minimum (and it was the main reason I didn't want to create a new party for every game, despite the absurd levels everyone will reach otherwise; I may just import some but not all characters, which would allow cycling classes between each game too). I remember the early BT1 is terrible about grinding but hopefully it's not worse than MM1.

1) The Bard specific items of value like the fire horn or frost horn are very useful at the start of the game, you can attack a single group with that item and wipe it out, but, those items have charges and there is no way in the game to recharge them, and they are random drops. As the game progresses these instruments become next to useless, and there are no scaled substitutions in the end-game. You will be stuck with an offensively weak and very dubious utility character.

2) If a single member of your top 3 characters dies, he gets moved to the bottom of the list, subsequently raising one of your casters into the melee group. As soon as a caster gets moved into melee range, you might as well reload there and then. If you are choosing tank-tank-bard-3casters I highly recommend reconsidering because the bard has very weak defense and will be a chink in the armor of your party.

3) If you decide tank-tank-tank-bard-2casters you will be denying yourself the unholy power that is MIBL, by far the most powerful spell in the game. A spell which damages all monsters in every group when cast. It's the fireball of Bard's Tale, exept even more OP. Having 2 casters with this spell is powerful, having 3 basically gives your party +50% attack power in the mid-late game. Also, the dungeons are deep and terrible, you will find spinners, anti-magic zones, and every kind of nasty thing...including the inability to teleport out. This is where you need to look at your party's total mana pool. Here again, 2 mages is good, but the 3rd mage gives you +50% more mana. That is a livesaving advantage.

If for whatever reason you are bringing the bard because he gains value in BT2 or BT3, then ignore all of the above as I am not well versed in the sequels, but trust my every word about bards in BT1, and the lack of value you receive by trading either a tank or caster for that bard. Either case is a major strategic hamstring.
 
Last edited:

octavius

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Aug 4, 2007
Messages
19,185
Location
Bjørgvin
Sceptic, since I don't have DraQ's mad quoting skillz:

Grinding: not needed in BT3, nor in BT2 IIRC. If anything BT3 is too easy and you are better off running from half the battles than grinding. But grinding will be needed if you want to survive the upper levels of Mangar's Tower in BT1.

I agree about the Bard. They have such unique skills and items that it would be a crime not to include one. Especially in BT3 they are powerful. Also the Hunter seemed like it would be a fun class to play in BT3 with all their unique items. Best thing to be said about the Monks is that they make good mules...

I'd definitely have only six party members, so thay you can recruit wandering monsters, summon Wind Dragons (they rule BT1 until the endgame) and Demons, or capture bosses like Oscon and Fanskar in BT2.

The guy who wrote the BT3 patch actually posted earlier in this thread. Paging Doctor drifting.

Warriors are not bad, but a bit bland. I think Paladins can use all the items a Warrior can use; so a Paladin is superior. When Warriors get Stone Blades they become more reliable killers than Hunters, but in BT3 at least Hunters have more interesting items.

The reason to get Sorcerors and Wzards ASAP is to get their key spells ASAP, like Wind Dragon and the ressurrection spell. In BT3 Archmages level very slowly, and they probably do in BT2 as well. So assuming they don't get significantly better saving throws for being Archmages instead of Conjurers or Magicians, it's probably better to aim for only one Archmage, and have the one or two other spell casters being base mages who level quicker, getting more SP and HP, and better saving throws.

I think there's different advancement rules for the different games. In BT1 you could go Conjurer 3 -> Sorcerer 3 -> Wizard. Don't remember about BT2, but I think the only real difference was introducing the Archmage as a class. In BT3 things are a bit more confusing with all the extra classes, and the manual being wrong.
 
Last edited:

octavius

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Aug 4, 2007
Messages
19,185
Location
Bjørgvin
Gregz, the Bard rules in BT3. The Death Horn (doing Critical Hit damage!) that I haved saved for most of the game killed most of Tarjan's minions in the final battles. The Bard also has some very powerful songs that are like getting one of the most powerful damage spells for free.

In all the games the Bard also gets some unique items that helps with the AC. They are still more vulnerable than pure fighters, but if you want both a Bard and three mages you need to put the Bard in the front slot.
 

Gregz

Arcane
Joined
Jul 31, 2011
Messages
8,511
Location
The Desert Wasteland
Gregz, the Bard rules in BT3. The Death Horn (doing Critical Hit damage!) that I haved saved for most of the game killed most of Tarjan's minions in the final battles. The Bard also has some very powerful songs that are like getting one of the most powerful damage spells for free.

In all the games the Bard also gets some unique items that helps with the AC. They are still more vulnerable than pure fighters, but if you want both a Bard and three mages you need to put the Bard in the front slot.

I believe you, I haven't played BT3 in over 20 years.

It really boils down to whether or not Sceptic chooses to keep the same party or not. If so, BT1 will be a difficult and slow grind if he brings a bard. The bard may pay dividends in the sequels as you say, but having 3 sorcs with MIBL in the 99 zerkers XP farm fight is a lock for mid to endgame power leveling. It greatly reduces grind time.
 

Luzur

Good Sir
Joined
Feb 12, 2009
Messages
41,396
Location
Swedish Empire
THREE archmages? Unnecessary crutch. Three melee types (paladin, monk, hunter, warrior), bard, thief, conjurer, and magician. The other stuff is confused/muddled. There technically isn't even an archmage level/class in Bard's Tale 1. It was only added in 2.

You don't need or want a bard.
GTFO.

Also for shame Jaesun brofisting such bad advice!

Paladin
Monk
Warrior (upgrade to Geomancer if you feel like but, again, not necessary)
Bard (how the fuck can you truly play Bard's Tale without a bard?!?!?!)
Thief (insanely useful with hide in shadows/assassinate against ranged casters)
Conjurer (alternate spell schools with the Magician)
Magician (alternate spell schools with the Conjurer)

In BT2, there are 7 slots, with the expectation that you'll use one of the slots for NPC's. Now, you may be tempted to add 7 players, but the snares sometimes require a special NPC to lead... in fact, it happens quite often! Same thing with the first dungeon (rescue the princess) in Tangramane (holy shit, I'm typing this from memory... played that game too much.)
You need to add a winged creature to the party to make it over a spot, then bring the princess back, both in that extra slot

Also, Bard's serve a more practical purpose. They can regen mana and hps in dungeons, as well as produce light in anti-magic zones. They also can use firehorns and other mass damage instruments, unlike say Hunters or Monks. The party above is a great setup, but the monk is kind of boring: can never attack more than one opponent, but has all that free space to carry stuff. Makes inventory management a lot easier.

Tanglemane
 

Daemongar

Arcane
Joined
Nov 21, 2010
Messages
4,706
Location
Wisconsin
Codex Year of the Donut
Thanks for all the great advice.

In BT2, there are 7 slots, with the expectation that you'll use one of the slots for NPC's. Now, you may be tempted to add 7 players, but the snares sometimes require a special NPC to lead... in fact, it happens quite often!
Hah, I just remembered that you needed one in the very first snare, to carry the torch or something like that. I was wondering if it might be worth having a 7th "rotating" melee character (whichever class is less useful in the particular game) and switch him out for NPCs as needed, but if that happens as often as you say then it's probably not worth the hassle.
I've done that, as I took a party from BT1 to BT2 and had a lot of players > level 80. I swapped out the mages with a hunter and something else in Oscon's Fortress (Mages Beware: Oscon allows none to glory... etc.) At the time, there were some pretty awesome items with no description that were were class specific, and it's nice to have party members that can test them out. Even the hint book for BT2 really doesn't have much in the way of helping you understand the difference between a Pureblade or a Holy Sword. Now, you can just Google items instead of creating a new character and such, so the value of extra party members is diminished. Also, even if you had a party of 6 warriors, only the first 3 could attack. So adding one extra one is cool to take the bard out of melee range, but adding more than one is not that useful.
 
Last edited:

Daemongar

Arcane
Joined
Nov 21, 2010
Messages
4,706
Location
Wisconsin
Codex Year of the Donut
Sceptic

2. The Hunter's Critical Hit ability was bugged in the Amiga versions of BT1 and/or 2, and probably also in the DOS versions. Seems to be an overflow bug, so that the skill resets back to a 5% chance every 16th level.

DOS version is bugged in BT2. BT1 looks good. Patched BT2 version.
Patched DOS version
This file doesn't seem to work for me. DKP.exe in Dosbox doesn't do anything. Any thoughts?
 

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom