Hey everyone!

I just started a new game and for a change I created a full party of 6 adventurers instead of just one Charname.

So what I created is the following party:

Elven Archer
Dwarwen Swashbuckler
Half-Ork Fighter/Cleric
Half-Elf Cleric/Mage
Human Monk
Human Skald

What do you think about that party? Have you created a full party for the game before?

Off-hand, it looks like you've got a lot of magic and support, but you don't have much in the way of Tank material, especially for the first few levels. Your Cleric/Mage might be able to wear heavy armor, but they won't be able to cast mage spells while doing so. The only other character who can really wear heavy armor is the Fighter/Cleric. Just something to keep in mind.

If you plan on going through BG2 as well with this party, you'll need a single class arcane caster. Things can get nasty in the second game if you don't have one. You'll encounter some mages that cast heavy protection on themselves which is nearly impossible to breach without proper spells. Multi-classed arcane caster might not be enough. I'd throw away Cleric/Mage and create a specialist Mage or Sorcerer if you know which spells to pick on level up. As mentioned above, it's also a good idea to pick one more character which can use heavy armors. You can take a Fighter, Cleric or Paladin. Tanking is especially important until your mage can blow things from a distance (which won't happen until level 6 and above). However if you're planning to play on lower difficulty levels, you can be less restrictive on choosing your characters. Keep that in mind.

The Swashbuckler (basically a F/T that emphasizes the T more than the F) and Monk can help shore up the front line by BG2. The first few levels in BG1 are going to be rough though, with only one (F/C) and a half (C/M) characters able to wear heavy armor; there isn't anyone to fill the gap while the primary tank steps back for a heal, and the C/M loses the M half while wearing armor.

I hadn't considered higher difficulty levels. I figure the C/M is basically Aerie; the character will do fine with cleric and arcane casting, and the Skald (a bard) should be able to provide arcane casting too, iirc.

Considering you are suggesting two substitutions, which slot would you drop besides the C/M? I'm guessing the archer, bard, or monk.

I agree. Monks are quite weak in the early levels. By the time they gain decent fighting capabilities it's already endgame in BG1. In my opinion, if the author of the topic switched one character to a single class arcane caster, the party would do quite fine in BG2. It would be very hard in the beginning of BG1 though. I never found Aerie really useful. Cleric should be near the front lines to provide healing and other buffs. To do that he needs a decent protection. Mage is the opposite. He stays behind and takes things down from a distance. These two classes are in a utility conflict. Both are casters, but serve different purposes. Skald is an arcane caster of course, but he's quite weak in this role. He gains access to Breach on level 13, which is very late in my opinion. That's right. It depends on the individual preferences. Considering the fact that ranged weapons are overpowered in BG1, Archer might be a good candidate to stay. That leaves us with Bard or Monk. In BG1 not, but he'll complicate himself things a lot, if he won't have one in BG2. To be honest, in BG1 you don't need an arcane caster at all. It's easier to have one in the late part of the game (for Haste and Fireball purposes), but it's not a necessity.

I'm used to be very cautious and micromanage my fights very much (I grew up with Wizardry and Might & Magic, you don't stay alive in those without), so yeah, I know I'll have to pause a lot in fights.

The Monk is more a kite right now, that's for sure; just have to make sure first contact for the enemy is the Swashbuckler or Fighter/Cleric and it usually works out. Just for clarification, the F/C is for frontline combat and healing, while the C/M is more on buffing/debuffing and ranged support duty. As such I feel they are complementing each other quite nicely, at least for now.

The Skald was my last pick and I wasn't sure what to pick. An Inquisitor, Barbarian or a Dragon Disciple (never played one of these btw, are they pulling their weight?) would have been my other potential picks on that one.

And yes, F/C, Archer and Swashbuckler are totally set. Got pretty lucky with my Archer anyway and rolled an 18/94 on Strength, so no problem employing him on the frontline whenever needed.

I'm not ragging on the F/C, I'm just saying that for the first couple of character levels the F/C might end up trying to tank everything by himself, which is not good for any level 1 or 2 character. If the Archer can wear heavy armor, then that would help out a lot. The same thing applies with the C/M; tossing some heavy armor on will help keep bad guys off your softer party members. However, an Archer and a C/M are both sacrificing part of their primary function (archery and mage spells) by putting on that heavy armor. This might work fine for the first few levels, just be aware of what you're setting up.

The defensive properties of the Monk and Swashbuckler aren't going to come online until they've picked up several levels. The Swashbuckler is basically a vanilla Thief and the Monk is basically a naked dude until they've leveled up several times; a lot of their class features require several levels to become effective. Again, this might work out well since the Archer needs a few levels for HIS primary powers to become effective and he can use a sword in the meantime, and the C/M won't get much out of Mage casting anyway until the Mage has a few levels.

The Skald could work out, and at high levels he'll be able to provide Improved Bard Song even if he can't do anything else (but he should be able to help in other ways too). An Inquisitor or a Barbarian would both solve the Front-Liner problem for you through out the complete saga; both classes are geared toward getting in the enemy's face.

I don't know anything about Dragon Disciples.

F/C is not your major problem. Give it 3 levels, and it's good.
The C/M if you ask me, just sucks. It levels up so slow, it'll never cast anything. Also heavily lacking on HLA-department.

The Swashbuckler levels up fast, and has an ok offense, so 2-3 levels, and it will turn useful.
Monk on the other hand is terrible on low levels, so needs 5-8 level to be able to do anything

The Skald's singing will help you a lot on early levels, but you'll have to use the Archer for those first levels to stand the hits, so no shooting arrows for it until then.

If you have problems, there'll always be potions and wands. Go with your team. It'll be interesting.
If you just have to "fix" it, switch monk to barbarian, and duh, you're covered. But that sounds boring.

In my opinion your C/M won't be useful enough. On the lower levels he can't cast anything that's really good and when you level up him a little, it'll be already endgame. In BG2 you'll have trouble gaining access to higher level spells with any of these classes. It's not worth it. Picking a single class mage or cleric in his place is a wiser choice. Sorcerers are great and often overpowered in overall (except first levels that is), but you have to know the spell effects to make them powerful enough. You can't add spells to your spell book through reading scrolls. You select them on level up and get only five per level. You can't even exchange them later on. So when picking spells you have to be careful not to take useless ones and make your Sorc useless. They also gain access to new level spells one character level higher than mages, but I don't consider it a major downside. All of this is offset by the number of spells he can cast per day. As for Dragon Disciple, it gets some bonuses sacrificing the ability of casting one spell per day. Standard Sorc gets to cast up to six spells per day in each spell level. This number drops to five for DD. Not a major downside and the bonuses are decent: Condition points, armor class, bigger chance for high ability scores during character creation and Dragon Breath ability which is useful especially in the early faze of BG1. You would do fine picking any of them and I think these classes are a lot better than specialist Mages.

Sorceress is bloody overrated. Lategame it all falls back to Magic Missle Massacre, where actualy simple sorcerers win by wearing two 2*level 1 spells ring. And Edwin beats all player mages.
Wild Mage would even beat everybody lategame with its 100% success casting, only you have to reach there first.

I was playing with Monk, Swashbuckler and F/C on the frontline, with either the Skald or Archer as exchange character if the frontline takes too many hits. Otherwise, both are ranged fighters (bow and crossbow respectively).

I know that Monk and Swashbuckler will get stronger later on, but they ain't too bad right now already. The monk's speed is also very useful to disengage combat.

Having a C/M and thus 2 sources for my spells probably comes from my Wizardy 8 experience, where I generally play with a Lord/Valk, Samurai, Monk, Archer, Bishop and Gadgeteer, with every hybrid class covering one of the 4 spellbooks and the Bishop all 4 by himself, with the Gadgeteer as an utility character. Having a second source for healing, buffing or damaging spells in a pinch can be very useful there, but yeah, much less so here, especially later on

If it is already working for you, then great! Carry on! :)

I will definitely continue with this one, I was just thinking about what would be good changes for next time. Will probably take a Dragon Disciple and Inquisitor instead of a C/M and Bard next time and see how that will work out

That's how I like to play. Not to maximize my party, but to have the opportunity to succeed without the best chance by taking alternative paths to the solution. Have fun!