Previous Thread
Previous
Expand All
Collapse All
Ignore Author
ReplyYou know, way back when I started playing we had a long stick, it was CS hunting. My first character was a bard, but I hated how critters could turtle up and be hard to hit. So when AOL went unlimited and I switched and had to roll up someone new, I thought, I'll be a sorcerer, I'll hunt in guarded, and nothing can turtle up on me. So I did.
Sorcery was pretty awesome back then. The first time I saw DC cast, during a glad games, I was shocked. MD was also very strong (as it needed to be, since it had to work for us until we could use DC). We were officially "masters of destruction" as per the official prof description. The common complaint from other professions, which was constant, sorcerers are too powerful, its unfair, they can hunt from guarded. We had our long stick though, CS hunting, hunting from guarded stance, warding spells. That was our long stick, we were without a doubt the best at that. It was a bigger deal then than now too. Internet speeds were slower and typeahead lines were fewer. Wizards having to stance dance was a big deal.
Sure, clerics could use 302 (on undead only), and wizards had 409 or 415, 110 exists for clerics and empaths but it too was largely ineffective, but they did not compare to what sorcerers had, and critter TDs were much lower than they are now, many were just 3*level, we could actually uphunt like wizards did (and still do). It was stated this was by design by more than one GM, this was balance. The game was balanced then. Wizards were the best at AS spells, but had no effective CS spells. Sorcerers were the opposite. Clerics could hunt kinda okay with spells, but only against undead, and kinda okay with weapons, to best effect against undead, in exchange for being able to get XP by raising the dead. Empaths of course were not hunters at all, because they were given such a good non hunting xp gaining system (later, when they were made able to effectively hunt, it was said they'd have to choose to be good at one or good at the other, I still laugh at that). It was also said that our hunting prowess was balanced by our lack of utility spells. Also, way back when, we actually had the fewest implemented spells, after bards, and eventually bards passed us.
So we had a long stick, then it was all taken away. Now everyone CS hunts from guarded. The best CS hunters are probably pure bards or empaths. I guess I should have stayed a bard if I liked CS hunting so much. It certainly is not sorcerers anymore. Our unique thing was taken away.
So, whats our new thing? What is our long stick? What do we excel at so much as to balance out all the short sticks in the hand?
>>But really, that is sort of the issue. Where is the long stick?
We are clearly the coolest and deepest of the professions in the game. Everything else is a penalty imposed upon us for being better than everyone else in that sole regard.
Honestly though, I agree . . . I was thinking about this the other day.
Melee build pures:
Clerics have reduced physical training costs.
Empaths have massive AS boosters, Stun verbs and Stun breakers, easy PF for maneuver avoidance (also, Sunfist), and self-healing.
Wizards have Haste-based warmages.
Sorcerers are tied for the worst training costs, have no stun verbs, and no special features benefiting melee builds.
Componentry:
Clerics have a few component spells such as Holy Receptacle (cost is gem), Spirit Servant/Major Sanct (100% optional) and 340 (which I think is a heck of a weird and probably worthless spell, to be honest).
Empaths have Spirit Servant/Major Sanct (100% optional)
Wizards have the optional Familiar bonuses, and also Create Magic Item and Recharge Item. They also have Enchant, the most component expensive spell in the game, but one that doesn't really require "hauling" stuff, and also the most lucrative spell in the entire game.
Sorcerers have 4 Profession circle spells which REQUIRE components to use. All but one require two or more components at a time. Minor Summoning is not fully usable by the vast majority of players. 740 is the second most costly spell in the game. The only spell which can compare to 730 in errand running is Ranger Resistance, which, for about the same component collection effort, provides serious long term benefits and huge income.
Alchemy:
Wizards can haste through foraging and many tasks, and selling a wizard spell up for rare gems or a Ranger to forage is much more viable than selling a Sorcerer spell up(har,har, prolly involves limb disruption)
Clerics/Empaths can make Manna bread for mana/spirit regen, vital to several easy recipes.
Empaths can more easily train to forage, also can grow their own herbs for some very easy recipes.
Sorcerers had actually entered their guild before.
Non-Alchemy Guild Stuff:
Sorcerers actually have another skill. Unfortunately, many would say it is one of the most poorly implemented ideas ever, especially since its mastery is required to use one of our many component based spells. Demon illusion audience reps for the win. But technically, we are at 4/6 vs everyone else being 3/6. Sorcerers win the day . . . ?
Maneuvers:
Empaths: Empathic Focus boosts maneuver defense, Heroism grants maneuver evasion for some maneuvers. REGEN verb for post maneuver stuns, Troll's Blood for the same. Cheaper Fitness cost grants bonus to maneuver defense.
Clerics: Prayer and Heroism provide maneuver defense against maneuvers which can be evaded. Cheaper physical training costs allow for more physical build (with maneuver bonuses inherent in some of these training options)
Wizards: Elemental Deflection provides shield based maneuver benefits, Blurs give phantom dodge ranks (debatable benefit), Temporal Reversion gives a chance to avoid maneuvers. Hasted wizards (read, any warmage) will happily see the 20 seconds of maneuver RT reduced down to something far more manageable.
Sorcerers: Jack all!
AS Spells:
Wizards, need I say more.
Clerics have a 6 mana water/acid bolt, in addition to 111, which basically everyone has (Major Fire).
Empaths have a 10 mana bolt with at least 1 free CS warding roll, trainable for more, 111 as well.
Sorcerers have a 13 mana ball with a damage booster through 725, 111 as well. That the ever-present 111/Major Fire is our LOWER mana spell is . . . yeesh. No low level AS spell period.
CS Spells:
We have them in spades, but many of them are disablers which require 40+ endrolls to be viable. Otherwise, they are either low crit/low mana or high crit/high mana. I'd say we are equal with Wizards in CS regards (who then have better AS options), but vastly inferior to Clerics and Empaths.
Maneuver Spells:
We have the most maneuver spells that I can tell, but we also get hit the hardest with "watch out for collateral damage". Honorable mention to Wizards and Meteor Swarm, that must suck.
Training Costs:
Sorcerers are 100% inferior or equal to Wizards in ALL TRAINING AREAS except for non-Wizard sphere skills (Spirit Lore, SMC) and ONE relevant skill which they both share, EMC, which I presume is the sole justification for our training plan assuming dual controls (6 MTPs per level instead of 3). They even outdo us by a point here or there in virtually all physical combat skills. Oh, and we can 2x Survival and they can't (wtf?).
Cleric own us day in and day out on everything physical.
Empaths suffer the same multi-lore/control situation we have, but have significantly reduced costs for Physical Fitness. That said, despite a mess of lores (8!), all of their primary circle attack spells are benefitted by 1 single lore. We can't say that about ours.
Mana:
Clerics and Empaths can use Manna Bread and meditate for bonus mana. Heck, sanct in a hunting ground, bread/med, and in one pulse, you are probably good to go again. Improved use from spirit regen in regards to Wracking.
Wizards can steal 100% of their mana supply in mana.
Sorcerers can sacrifice an enemy for what seems to be about 1.25x the enemies mana, which would mean about 125 mana tops. 20ish minute cooldown?
Empaths make GoS look like a mana dispenser.
Outside EXP source:
Clerics can raise, which is a slow but steady way to level once you hit 18.
Empaths, need I say more.
Wizards: The enchanting thing is . . . debatable, but I suppose it does grant SOME bonus. A 100% devoted enchanter would eventually gain a good bit due to XXX.
Sorcerers: Can devote their lives to being an illusions slave and teach other people for reps. If anyone is interested, that is.
"Depth" to our spells:
Empaths are pretty lacking in any depth or complexity, pretty cross the board.
Wizards have Enchanting, thats about the long and short of it.
Clerics have a lot of stuff that, if I were playing a cleric, would probably make me pretty mad, but they have a lot of depth from Commune and Symbol and such.
Sorcerers, need I say more. We win this one.
I'm going to go on a limb and say the only non-shortest sticks we have are depth to our spells (a double edged sword, since depth usually means SILVER SINK), Maneuver spells, we are the only pure with a non-Alchemy guild skill, and coolness factor, which we have in spades.
We are clearly the coolest and deepest of the professions in the game. Everything else is a penalty imposed upon us for being better than everyone else in that sole regard.
Honestly though, I agree . . . I was thinking about this the other day.
Melee build pures:
Clerics have reduced physical training costs.
Empaths have massive AS boosters, Stun verbs and Stun breakers, easy PF for maneuver avoidance (also, Sunfist), and self-healing.
Wizards have Haste-based warmages.
Sorcerers are tied for the worst training costs, have no stun verbs, and no special features benefiting melee builds.
Componentry:
Clerics have a few component spells such as Holy Receptacle (cost is gem), Spirit Servant/Major Sanct (100% optional) and 340 (which I think is a heck of a weird and probably worthless spell, to be honest).
Empaths have Spirit Servant/Major Sanct (100% optional)
Wizards have the optional Familiar bonuses, and also Create Magic Item and Recharge Item. They also have Enchant, the most component expensive spell in the game, but one that doesn't really require "hauling" stuff, and also the most lucrative spell in the entire game.
Sorcerers have 4 Profession circle spells which REQUIRE components to use. All but one require two or more components at a time. Minor Summoning is not fully usable by the vast majority of players. 740 is the second most costly spell in the game. The only spell which can compare to 730 in errand running is Ranger Resistance, which, for about the same component collection effort, provides serious long term benefits and huge income.
Alchemy:
Wizards can haste through foraging and many tasks, and selling a wizard spell up for rare gems or a Ranger to forage is much more viable than selling a Sorcerer spell up(har,har, prolly involves limb disruption)
Clerics/Empaths can make Manna bread for mana/spirit regen, vital to several easy recipes.
Empaths can more easily train to forage, also can grow their own herbs for some very easy recipes.
Sorcerers had actually entered their guild before.
Non-Alchemy Guild Stuff:
Sorcerers actually have another skill. Unfortunately, many would say it is one of the most poorly implemented ideas ever, especially since its mastery is required to use one of our many component based spells. Demon illusion audience reps for the win. But technically, we are at 4/6 vs everyone else being 3/6. Sorcerers win the day . . . ?
Maneuvers:
Empaths: Empathic Focus boosts maneuver defense, Heroism grants maneuver evasion for some maneuvers. REGEN verb for post maneuver stuns, Troll's Blood for the same. Cheaper Fitness cost grants bonus to maneuver defense.
Clerics: Prayer and Heroism provide maneuver defense against maneuvers which can be evaded. Cheaper physical training costs allow for more physical build (with maneuver bonuses inherent in some of these training options)
Wizards: Elemental Deflection provides shield based maneuver benefits, Blurs give phantom dodge ranks (debatable benefit), Temporal Reversion gives a chance to avoid maneuvers. Hasted wizards (read, any warmage) will happily see the 20 seconds of maneuver RT reduced down to something far more manageable.
Sorcerers: Jack all!
AS Spells:
Wizards, need I say more.
Clerics have a 6 mana water/acid bolt, in addition to 111, which basically everyone has (Major Fire).
Empaths have a 10 mana bolt with at least 1 free CS warding roll, trainable for more, 111 as well.
Sorcerers have a 13 mana ball with a damage booster through 725, 111 as well. That the ever-present 111/Major Fire is our LOWER mana spell is . . . yeesh. No low level AS spell period.
CS Spells:
We have them in spades, but many of them are disablers which require 40+ endrolls to be viable. Otherwise, they are either low crit/low mana or high crit/high mana. I'd say we are equal with Wizards in CS regards (who then have better AS options), but vastly inferior to Clerics and Empaths.
Maneuver Spells:
We have the most maneuver spells that I can tell, but we also get hit the hardest with "watch out for collateral damage". Honorable mention to Wizards and Meteor Swarm, that must suck.
Training Costs:
Sorcerers are 100% inferior or equal to Wizards in ALL TRAINING AREAS except for non-Wizard sphere skills (Spirit Lore, SMC) and ONE relevant skill which they both share, EMC, which I presume is the sole justification for our training plan assuming dual controls (6 MTPs per level instead of 3). They even outdo us by a point here or there in virtually all physical combat skills. Oh, and we can 2x Survival and they can't (wtf?).
Cleric own us day in and day out on everything physical.
Empaths suffer the same multi-lore/control situation we have, but have significantly reduced costs for Physical Fitness. That said, despite a mess of lores (8!), all of their primary circle attack spells are benefitted by 1 single lore. We can't say that about ours.
Mana:
Clerics and Empaths can use Manna Bread and meditate for bonus mana. Heck, sanct in a hunting ground, bread/med, and in one pulse, you are probably good to go again. Improved use from spirit regen in regards to Wracking.
Wizards can steal 100% of their mana supply in mana.
Sorcerers can sacrifice an enemy for what seems to be about 1.25x the enemies mana, which would mean about 125 mana tops. 20ish minute cooldown?
Empaths make GoS look like a mana dispenser.
Outside EXP source:
Clerics can raise, which is a slow but steady way to level once you hit 18.
Empaths, need I say more.
Wizards: The enchanting thing is . . . debatable, but I suppose it does grant SOME bonus. A 100% devoted enchanter would eventually gain a good bit due to XXX.
Sorcerers: Can devote their lives to being an illusions slave and teach other people for reps. If anyone is interested, that is.
"Depth" to our spells:
Empaths are pretty lacking in any depth or complexity, pretty cross the board.
Wizards have Enchanting, thats about the long and short of it.
Clerics have a lot of stuff that, if I were playing a cleric, would probably make me pretty mad, but they have a lot of depth from Commune and Symbol and such.
Sorcerers, need I say more. We win this one.
I'm going to go on a limb and say the only non-shortest sticks we have are depth to our spells (a double edged sword, since depth usually means SILVER SINK), Maneuver spells, we are the only pure with a non-Alchemy guild skill, and coolness factor, which we have in spades.
>Maneuver spells, we are the only pure with a non-Alchemy guild skill, and coolness factor, which we have in spades.
You had a good summary until here, I think it is wrong to lump area spells in with manuever spells, and in any case rangers have the best manuever spells. I would put wizards second, us third. I'd rather have boil earth than focused implosion.
>You had a good summary until here, I think it is wrong to lump area spells in with manuever spells, and in any case rangers have the best manuever spells. I would put wizards second, us third. I'd rather have boil earth than focused implosion.
It completely crossed my mind that Rangers outdo us in manuever spells, but I figured this was a pures on pures debate, so I didn't bother mentioning it. I do think they are #1 in that area. I'm not sure I would back the Wizards bit, but you definitely know your classes more than I do, so I'll defer to you on that one.
It completely crossed my mind that Rangers outdo us in manuever spells, but I figured this was a pures on pures debate, so I didn't bother mentioning it. I do think they are #1 in that area. I'm not sure I would back the Wizards bit, but you definitely know your classes more than I do, so I'll defer to you on that one.
OK, indeed this is mostly about comparing pures. Semis are rather a different story since they have toally different skill sets, in general. Namely more weapons, armor, shield, cmans etc. Nature's Fury in the hands of a well trained older ranger can be scary, and Bardic song of disruption is always a crowd pleaser.
So if we are just talking about the 4 "pure" casting classes, I have to rate them as follows:
1) Empaths, hands down. Not as many attack spells, but ... I can cure my wounds in the field! I can cast attack spells from the empath spell circle no matter how badly I am damaged! I can cast bone shatter with no arms, no legs, 3rd level nerve damage and no eyes and half a head. Take that, mighty sorcerers! Oh, and I haven't even mentioned the Regen spell ... which can be used with NO mana and basically cures all wounds. A life saver.
2) Wizards: enough air lore and MjE spell ranks, and you are perma hasted. Oh dear, my mage was knocked down, e-waved, feinted, thrown into 20 seconds RT? Sounds bad ... oh wait, I am perma hasted, my RT is down to 7. Be back up in a second, and then ... cone you all! Oh, and want to buy a 7x maul for 8 million? I just happen to have one for sale.
3) Clerics: Alas, you have to be dead to really appreaciate Miracle, as well as have 50 mana in reserve. Not as spectacular as empathic Regen, but being able to raise yourself from the dead is a definite perk. Just be sure you have enough herbs to heal your wounds before the sanctuary drops. Good selection of combat spells also.
4) Sorcerers: umm, they can ... infuse scrolls? Yeah, right ...
What I'd like to see is summoned demons being actually useful in combat. Ok, make them harder to control, and if you get stunned in combat they turn on you and rip your lungs out; but if you stay in control, they whack the heck out of whatever you are fighting. I mean, they are demons! They hate being summoned and controlled, they hate you, but if they can't get at you, they should want to vent their fury on anything living they can get their claws on. They should be at least as effective in combat as a ranger's Companion animal; probably more so since they are temporary summonings and not permanent.
Animate dead? Remove the need for silly components! Learn the spell, cast it on a critter (or dead PC) and voila! It takes effect! Heck, no other spell casting class needs components (unless you count orb gems for clerical spell storage or wizards charging items). With enough necromancy lore, be able to animate several dead and have them fight for you at the same time.
The bells of Hell
go ting-a-ling-a-ling
for you but not for me
So if we are just talking about the 4 "pure" casting classes, I have to rate them as follows:
1) Empaths, hands down. Not as many attack spells, but ... I can cure my wounds in the field! I can cast attack spells from the empath spell circle no matter how badly I am damaged! I can cast bone shatter with no arms, no legs, 3rd level nerve damage and no eyes and half a head. Take that, mighty sorcerers! Oh, and I haven't even mentioned the Regen spell ... which can be used with NO mana and basically cures all wounds. A life saver.
2) Wizards: enough air lore and MjE spell ranks, and you are perma hasted. Oh dear, my mage was knocked down, e-waved, feinted, thrown into 20 seconds RT? Sounds bad ... oh wait, I am perma hasted, my RT is down to 7. Be back up in a second, and then ... cone you all! Oh, and want to buy a 7x maul for 8 million? I just happen to have one for sale.
3) Clerics: Alas, you have to be dead to really appreaciate Miracle, as well as have 50 mana in reserve. Not as spectacular as empathic Regen, but being able to raise yourself from the dead is a definite perk. Just be sure you have enough herbs to heal your wounds before the sanctuary drops. Good selection of combat spells also.
4) Sorcerers: umm, they can ... infuse scrolls? Yeah, right ...
What I'd like to see is summoned demons being actually useful in combat. Ok, make them harder to control, and if you get stunned in combat they turn on you and rip your lungs out; but if you stay in control, they whack the heck out of whatever you are fighting. I mean, they are demons! They hate being summoned and controlled, they hate you, but if they can't get at you, they should want to vent their fury on anything living they can get their claws on. They should be at least as effective in combat as a ranger's Companion animal; probably more so since they are temporary summonings and not permanent.
Animate dead? Remove the need for silly components! Learn the spell, cast it on a critter (or dead PC) and voila! It takes effect! Heck, no other spell casting class needs components (unless you count orb gems for clerical spell storage or wizards charging items). With enough necromancy lore, be able to animate several dead and have them fight for you at the same time.
The bells of Hell
go ting-a-ling-a-ling
for you but not for me
>Animate dead? Remove the need for silly components! Learn the spell, cast it on a critter (or dead PC) and voila! It takes effect! Heck, no other spell casting class needs components (unless you count orb gems for clerical spell storage or wizards charging items). With enough necromancy lore, be able to animate several dead and have them fight for you at the same time.
While I appreciate the effort and depth that was put into the spell by such folks as GM-Nilven . . . I think it is time. Make the only component a gem. If not that, then make the only component the salts. It shouldn't be such a process, with an immediate financial drain AND gathering of ingredients which A) require us on our knees in the dirt and B) require us basically going to a single hunting ground to get "optimal" troll's blood. The lack of sea water was a serious concern I recall, and all that nonsense and we still have to carry it around. If all that work seems "balanced", then so be it, but ditch the crystal. Or keep the junk, but make it spread/cast.
Back when the spell came out, animates were rare enough. Barring Querthose and Rheisia, I don't recall seeing more than a mere handful of animates ever. I have certainly not seen one in the past month.
While I appreciate the effort and depth that was put into the spell by such folks as GM-Nilven . . . I think it is time. Make the only component a gem. If not that, then make the only component the salts. It shouldn't be such a process, with an immediate financial drain AND gathering of ingredients which A) require us on our knees in the dirt and B) require us basically going to a single hunting ground to get "optimal" troll's blood. The lack of sea water was a serious concern I recall, and all that nonsense and we still have to carry it around. If all that work seems "balanced", then so be it, but ditch the crystal. Or keep the junk, but make it spread/cast.
Back when the spell came out, animates were rare enough. Barring Querthose and Rheisia, I don't recall seeing more than a mere handful of animates ever. I have certainly not seen one in the past month.
>Back when the spell came out, animates were rare enough. Barring Querthose and Rheisia, I don't recall seeing more than a mere handful of animates ever. I have certainly not seen one in the past month.
What? No me? AFAIK I was the most dedicated necromancer at the time of release.
But, to echo your point, do you know how many times I animate someone to rescue them and have had them tell me "I've never been animated before." This is a person who has presumably hunted from 0-100 without having occasion to have been rescued by an animating sorcerer. Many have never seen it done before even or encountered it. I take the corpse to the dais and clerics and healers don't know what to make of it, they don't know that you can heal and raise someone who is under animation. All of this underlines how rarely the spell is used. Demons are rarely used as well as evidenced by how rarely you see them, or them illusioned, about, most don't mess with them, they aren't worth it.
As for changes, I want to see micromanagement with animate dead (tell animate magic 401), but I wouldn't get rid of crystals, just like I wouldn't get rid of expensive chalk for 740. Easier to just shift the function. So, with 730, you could say "gem only to animate, crystals to reanimate or extend duration" or something like that. Animate with just a gem for x duration, gem + crystals for longer. Components are fine for a premium, a bonus, just don't require them for a baseline.
>>What? No me? AFAIK I was the most dedicated necromancer at the time of release.
Think it was a matter of where people hung out. While I'm pretty sure you are an OTFer most of the time, I see you only rarely, while Q and Rheisia hung out in Illistim proper a lot of the time, which is where I am if I'm not in Cysaegir. Off the top of my head, only other time I remember seeing one was some capped sorc who animated something out in Vaalor for fun.
Think it was a matter of where people hung out. While I'm pretty sure you are an OTFer most of the time, I see you only rarely, while Q and Rheisia hung out in Illistim proper a lot of the time, which is where I am if I'm not in Cysaegir. Off the top of my head, only other time I remember seeing one was some capped sorc who animated something out in Vaalor for fun.
