Looking for a "Knightly" build please see header

[Deathgrowl]

Valefort already gave you a good idea, I think?

As I said earlier, fighter12/maa11 is a good start for a heavy armour kind of character.

Any build is "pvp viable", whatever that means. If you want to win PvP all the time, though, you may want to consider a game with less RP story focus? Either way, winning PvP is mostly about the player anyways. And you'll be at a certain disadvantage without HiPS or spells.

And you can't get high damage + high defense without going cleric or favoured soul.

[Ironclad]

Any build is "pvp viable", whatever that means. If you want to win PvP all the time, though, you may want to consider a game with less RP story focus? Either way, winning PvP is mostly about the player anyways. And you'll be at a certain disadvantage without HiPS or spells.

As a nwn1 veteran I'm well aware that some builds are optimised for pvp and that many other builds are anything but "pvp viable" and whilst there are many differences in nwn2, fundamentally this principle will still be the case as the rule set is the same or similar.

I'm looking for a build that is most certainly pvp optimised aka pvp viable I hope this clears that point up?

And you can't get high damage + high defense without going cleric or favoured soul.

Which is why I set out priorities in their correct order and defence was above damage in priority because I want this build to have sustained damage to compliment high defences thus allowing the fight to go long and the sustain damage will potentially perform better than very little defences but extremely high burst.

[Deathgrowl]

As a nwn1 veteran I'm well aware that some builds are optimised for pvp and that many other builds are anything but "pvp viable" and whilst there are many differences in nwn2, fundamentally this principle will still be the case as the rule set is the same or similar.

I'm looking for a build that is most certainly pvp optimised aka pvp viable I hope this clears that point up?

It does! But it begs the question of why someone so familiar with pvp optimisation is asking for build advice.

If you want to always "win", you're likely going to be disappointed, I'm afraid. If not with the mechanical PvP, then at least with the RP following it.

As I said, though. Purely mechanically, you're at a disadvantage without the utility of spells or hips. The only thing that can really compare, is Karond's dwarven defender. But even then, you're looking at the utility of cleric spells from scrolls and whatever else you can get with 12 UMD.

[Ironclad]

It does! But it begs the question of why someone so familiar with pvp optimisation is asking for build advice.

I said I'm a veteran of the game not building and especially not pvp building, but the nwn1 server I play on although its an RP server it has grown and evolved (devolved...some say) to be very much about min maxing for pve and as a lot of the RP events revolved around pvp the min maxing has naturally skewed to a more pvp emphasis.

Point of fact I made it clear I'm no build expert and even if I were in nwn1 there are many subtle differences not mention dozens of classes that simply don't exists in nwn1 that it merely common sense to seek advice from those with more experience.

So yeah stop trying to assume things and trying to belittle me with those assumptions, why would you even post in that style?

If you want to always "win", you're likely going to be disappointed, I'm afraid. If not with the mechanical PvP, then at least with the RP following it.

I really don't know why you are still inferring and assuming such prejudicial things I have neither said nor implied I want to "win all the time" so get off it please. There is a clear and obvious difference to being viable in pvp and being built specifically for pvp

Look as I said before I welcome all relevant and constructive comments but if this thread and my request for advice is somehow triggering you to form all these unwarranted negative assumptions about me as a player then I invite you to discuss it privately rather than keep offering these little cuts and digs, it feels like you are trying to pick a fight here for some reason even though I want to assume you are not.

Anyway I have enough to go on and some builds to read up on so I think were good here.
Thanks to you all.

[Deathgrowl]

There is a clear and obvious difference to being viable in pvp and being built specifically for pvp

Then I'm sorry, your previous explanation didn't entirely clear up what you meant. I thought optimisation for pvp meant specifically building for PvP.

I also apologise if you took it as unwarranted criticism. It was not meant that way.

[chad878262]

The point stands that the type of character you are looking to build is not going to be viable in pvp against a very large portion of character types. Rogues will HiPS and sneak away if they can't overpower you with their sneak attacks, Barbarians in rage are more powerful than you will likely be and casters will either be gishes that can buff up to have better AC, AB and damage than you or DC Casters that will throw whatever save or lose spell is their favorite (after incapacitating you with bigby, grease, web, or whatever).

Now, if you are a skilled player (I am not) than often times you will defeat an unskilled player (like me) simply by virtue of them not being very good at activating the right skill/ability/spell at the right time...But that has nothing to do with your build...as DG said, it is more about player skill/ability than character.

[Valefort]

High AC, saves, normal-low damage knight type is not high on the PvP ladder, it's tough but can't kill anything fast. No detection means you're mostly a mice to play with for sneakers, with normal damage you're unlikely to kill any caster (but if you use UMD intelligently some will have trouble killing you, a stalemate situation). Damage dealers such as WM/FB will overwhelm you in a couple of rounds.

If PvP matters a lot for you you'd better drop the knightly build concept imo.