Previous Thread
Previous
Expand All
Collapse All
Ignore Author
Reply
I think sorcery could really stand from some direction and definition. Since the 90s we've been listless, not knowing where we fit.
So an official statement, a rewriting of the official profession description, (not just some GM's opinion, an official policy statement), saying something like...
"Sorcery's long stick is X. It is intended they be the best at X, and their skill in X is what is balanced by all the short sticks they hold, which are too numerous to list here. To achieve X we plan the following changes, 1, 2, 3. "
We've really not had a definition since we lost CS mastery in the 90s. We're the leftover profession, mediocrity, the remainder of an equation.
With the number of short sticks we hold we need a really really long one to balance it out, else each little short stick issue needs to be addressed, starting with training costs.
Virilneus for "Sorcerer Guru GM-Virilneus"!
Vote this 2012!
I'm a little sad I didn't get a response to my inquiry about the status of Strathspey and/or Pure GM team member working on Sorcerers. I have a feeling the answer is that there is a current lack of resources, and the individuals who are seeing none due to this lack are Sorcs/Wizards, but I couldn't say for certain.
Vote this 2012!
I'm a little sad I didn't get a response to my inquiry about the status of Strathspey and/or Pure GM team member working on Sorcerers. I have a feeling the answer is that there is a current lack of resources, and the individuals who are seeing none due to this lack are Sorcs/Wizards, but I couldn't say for certain.
>>I'm a little sad I didn't get a response to my inquiry about the status of Strathspey and/or Pure GM team member working on Sorcerers. I have a feeling the answer is that there is a current lack of resources, and the individuals who are seeing none due to this lack are Sorcs/Wizards, but I couldn't say for certain.
Strathspey is still around, but on a project for improved GM utilities at the moment, and we have a new dev GM, Draxun, who wants to do Wizard/Sorcerer stuff. We've also been talking about Sorcerers as a team, but you probably already knew that.
GameMaster Oscuro
Strathspey is still around, but on a project for improved GM utilities at the moment, and we have a new dev GM, Draxun, who wants to do Wizard/Sorcerer stuff. We've also been talking about Sorcerers as a team, but you probably already knew that.
GameMaster Oscuro
Personally, one aspect of Sorcery which is often hinted at but rarely used to our advantage, is the concept that we are masters of essence/mana. We may not be as "magical" as Wizards, but we were, supposedly, better with mana than Wizards (I guess because at the time, Mental was MIA, so our diversity equaled mastery, while the Elemental focused Wizards were limited). Given the training point differences between the two classes, I think we would be justified in having a MTP cost reduction on Harness power from 0/4 to 0/3.
I was just running the numbers, and there is a pretty serious discrepancy in our training costs, at least for runestaff users (which virtually all Sorcerers are, Wizards not being so limited in this fashion).
For a regular build (2x spells, 1x relevant controls, 1x MIU/AS, 1x relevant Lore, 1x Harness Power, 2x Spell Aim), it costs Wizards 6 PTPs and 43 MTPs (92 PTPs once converted) while it costs Sorcerers 9 PTPs and 47 MTPs (103 PTPs once converted). This stems from Wizards having a lower cost for Spell Aiming, MIU, and AS than us, while to be viable with several of our spells, we have a dual-control requirement, vs their single control requirement (3 per level for 2 controls vs 4 per level for 1 control).
We do have two paltry benefits from this set up. First, this results in 10 Magic Ranks per level vs 9. Second, due to a second control, we get an additional 1 mana per pulse for every 20 ranks (5 mana at cap, 10 mana max for a 2xer of BOTH controls). That said, Wizards can very easily pick up additional AS/MIU for an additional rank per level and still have a lower training cost than us, and can even 2x Harness power for 108 converted PTPs per level, while we would have to spend 119 to do the same.
Where are we winning here? Despite our trivial bonus mana from SMC/EMC (a benefit we do not recieve until level 20, with 1 mana per, and which is shared with Empaths), we are the weakest pure class in the game in regards to mana recovery. If the MTP cost of Harness Power were reduced to 0/3, we would be 46:43 with wizards instead of 47:43, and could double HP for 52:51. We are in the most need of mana, with our combined weakest viability as a melee class (in the whole game) and the least outside sources of mana recovery. (I feel at this time it is worth mentioning the oft cited 725 mana capacity feature. A feature which is unusable until level 25, not applicable with all demonds, and caps out at 44 mana [minus sending penalty] if you use ONE of nine demons, and are capped and fully 2xed in Demonology. This brings our maximum mana regen to about 130ish+40ish at cap with a specialized build.)
Furthermore worth mentioning the ONE mana regen option we do have serious access to, Wracking (which everyone else has too) actually CONFLICTS with Sacrifice due to the Spirit Drain. That would be like if Wizard's Mana Steal was prevented by the use of Wracking, but it isn't. So a Wracking Wizard can wrangle up 1000 mana in a minute or two at 3x HP/cap, but a Sorcerer with a Shien demon, 2xed in Demonology, sacrificing a level 100 target, can pull off about 680ish and lose -7 Spirit, risking spirit death! Clerics and Empaths of course can't regen it in such short bursts, but they can get an additional 10ish mana per MINUTE (so 20 per pulse) from Manna Bread/Heroism and get a boosted mana regen from meditation, what looks to be variable but in the realm of 15-25 mana per pulse, so thats another 40ish mana per pulse that we don't get.
For all our mastery of mana, we have the highest need for it and the lowest ability to regenerate it. That a 3x Harness power at cap Wizard could generate 500 additional mana to our 170 tops is pretty tragic. I know training point costs are not lightly changed, but this is one area where I truly feel its warranted. I've heard the rants before about changing Arcane Symbols, and I get that "despite scroll infusion, you guys just don't have anything on Wizards", but either that or Harness Power would be fair on the simple level of our required training plan requires more points than a Wizard, and for all of it, we are less lethal.
Of course, maybe this is all barking up the wrong tree and we have nothing to do with mana. (looks at Mana Disruption, Corrupt Essence, Energy Maelstrom, Dark Catalyst, 2 required controls, Illusion skill etc)
I also think that Sacrifice suffers from the same issue as MD, where it doesn't really improve with level. Sure, the mana recovered improves, but so do our mana requirements (since its scaled to target level). I think its 20 minute cooldown is way too long, at least for capped players. Its not like its free, it DOES take spirit to use, and induces 15 RT (oh look, that dangerous enemy just walked in. Then it prepped a spell. Ohh, now I'm dead.). Make it trainable down to 5 minutes or so by cap.
I was just running the numbers, and there is a pretty serious discrepancy in our training costs, at least for runestaff users (which virtually all Sorcerers are, Wizards not being so limited in this fashion).
For a regular build (2x spells, 1x relevant controls, 1x MIU/AS, 1x relevant Lore, 1x Harness Power, 2x Spell Aim), it costs Wizards 6 PTPs and 43 MTPs (92 PTPs once converted) while it costs Sorcerers 9 PTPs and 47 MTPs (103 PTPs once converted). This stems from Wizards having a lower cost for Spell Aiming, MIU, and AS than us, while to be viable with several of our spells, we have a dual-control requirement, vs their single control requirement (3 per level for 2 controls vs 4 per level for 1 control).
We do have two paltry benefits from this set up. First, this results in 10 Magic Ranks per level vs 9. Second, due to a second control, we get an additional 1 mana per pulse for every 20 ranks (5 mana at cap, 10 mana max for a 2xer of BOTH controls). That said, Wizards can very easily pick up additional AS/MIU for an additional rank per level and still have a lower training cost than us, and can even 2x Harness power for 108 converted PTPs per level, while we would have to spend 119 to do the same.
Where are we winning here? Despite our trivial bonus mana from SMC/EMC (a benefit we do not recieve until level 20, with 1 mana per, and which is shared with Empaths), we are the weakest pure class in the game in regards to mana recovery. If the MTP cost of Harness Power were reduced to 0/3, we would be 46:43 with wizards instead of 47:43, and could double HP for 52:51. We are in the most need of mana, with our combined weakest viability as a melee class (in the whole game) and the least outside sources of mana recovery. (I feel at this time it is worth mentioning the oft cited 725 mana capacity feature. A feature which is unusable until level 25, not applicable with all demonds, and caps out at 44 mana [minus sending penalty] if you use ONE of nine demons, and are capped and fully 2xed in Demonology. This brings our maximum mana regen to about 130ish+40ish at cap with a specialized build.)
Furthermore worth mentioning the ONE mana regen option we do have serious access to, Wracking (which everyone else has too) actually CONFLICTS with Sacrifice due to the Spirit Drain. That would be like if Wizard's Mana Steal was prevented by the use of Wracking, but it isn't. So a Wracking Wizard can wrangle up 1000 mana in a minute or two at 3x HP/cap, but a Sorcerer with a Shien demon, 2xed in Demonology, sacrificing a level 100 target, can pull off about 680ish and lose -7 Spirit, risking spirit death! Clerics and Empaths of course can't regen it in such short bursts, but they can get an additional 10ish mana per MINUTE (so 20 per pulse) from Manna Bread/Heroism and get a boosted mana regen from meditation, what looks to be variable but in the realm of 15-25 mana per pulse, so thats another 40ish mana per pulse that we don't get.
For all our mastery of mana, we have the highest need for it and the lowest ability to regenerate it. That a 3x Harness power at cap Wizard could generate 500 additional mana to our 170 tops is pretty tragic. I know training point costs are not lightly changed, but this is one area where I truly feel its warranted. I've heard the rants before about changing Arcane Symbols, and I get that "despite scroll infusion, you guys just don't have anything on Wizards", but either that or Harness Power would be fair on the simple level of our required training plan requires more points than a Wizard, and for all of it, we are less lethal.
Of course, maybe this is all barking up the wrong tree and we have nothing to do with mana. (looks at Mana Disruption, Corrupt Essence, Energy Maelstrom, Dark Catalyst, 2 required controls, Illusion skill etc)
I also think that Sacrifice suffers from the same issue as MD, where it doesn't really improve with level. Sure, the mana recovered improves, but so do our mana requirements (since its scaled to target level). I think its 20 minute cooldown is way too long, at least for capped players. Its not like its free, it DOES take spirit to use, and induces 15 RT (oh look, that dangerous enemy just walked in. Then it prepped a spell. Ohh, now I'm dead.). Make it trainable down to 5 minutes or so by cap.
>Strathspey is still around, but on a project for improved GM utilities at the moment, and we have a new dev GM, Draxun, who wants to do Wizard/Sorcerer stuff. We've also been talking about Sorcerers as a team, but you probably already knew that.
Thats really good to hear! Even if Strath isn't actively working on us, its always a shame to have a GM leave, so I'm glad he is still around. Thanks for the info!
Would love to meet this Draxun!
Thats really good to hear! Even if Strath isn't actively working on us, its always a shame to have a GM leave, so I'm glad he is still around. Thanks for the info!
Would love to meet this Draxun!
>Personally, one aspect of Sorcery which is often hinted at but rarely used to our advantage, is the concept that we are masters of essence/mana. We may not be as "magical" as Wizards, but we were, supposedly, better with mana than Wizards (I guess because at the time, Mental was MIA, so our diversity equaled mastery, while the Elemental focused Wizards were limited). Given the training point differences between the two classes, I think we would be justified in having a MTP cost reduction on Harness power from 0/4 to 0/3.
Believe it or not, it has been officially stated in the past that clerics are the masters of mana. You can't make this stuff up.
>>Believe it or not, it has been officially stated in the past that clerics are the masters of mana. You can't make this stuff up.
I bet I'd be really jonesing for that Mana Leech if I were a Cleric then.
EDIT: Looks like I was reading some bad info on Mana Leech, which I had as comparison in my posts. I'm not entirely sure how it works then, so take it with a grain of salt that I over-estimated Wizard mana regen severely.
I bet I'd be really jonesing for that Mana Leech if I were a Cleric then.
EDIT: Looks like I was reading some bad info on Mana Leech, which I had as comparison in my posts. I'm not entirely sure how it works then, so take it with a grain of salt that I over-estimated Wizard mana regen severely.
>EDIT: Looks like I was reading some bad info on Mana Leech, which I had as comparison in my posts. I'm not entirely sure how it works then, so take it with a grain of salt that I over-estimated Wizard mana regen severely.
Mana leech is actually very good. Properly trained, assuming a wizard is hunting something with mana, you can get tons of mana back. There is a cooldown, but it isn't that functionally different from spirit cost, and it doesn't hurt your as/ds.
The other thing is you need to be able to ward (and just ward, its basically pass/fail) with your 500 circle, but it works out if you're hunting in an area with critters of different age ranges. You can cast 516 on the young things that you have no chance of failing against. And wizards tend to try to boost the 500 CS anyways for all the other spells in the circle so it isn't as if there is a choice that has to be made there.
Where it doesn't work is if you're up hunting and there are no critters in the area you can reliably ward (in which case, stop uphunting), or if for some reason you're hunting all mana-less creatures. But such areas are not very common.
If there is a downside it is that it isn't as effective at low levels (sub level 30 lets say).
I had been under an assumption that the maximum mana return before hitting cooldown was the same as your maximum mana capacity, but rereading some documentation, I can't tell anymore.
Last time I made some incorrect statements about spells, I got corrected for like, two days, so I figured I'd call my potential mistakes now.
Last time I made some incorrect statements about spells, I got corrected for like, two days, so I figured I'd call my potential mistakes now.
>I had been under an assumption that the maximum mana return before hitting cooldown was the same as your maximum mana capacity, but rereading some documentation, I can't tell anymore.
For the most part it is. Now for instance if a wizard spreads out the casts, part of the cooldown occurs. If a wizard has 100 mana total and leeches 100 mana in like 2 minutes, he won't be able to leech more for a bit. Formula for the time based on EMC ranks and max mana exists, probably on Krakii. If that same 100 mana is leeched over the course of like 15 minutes, the wizard will be able to leech additional mana. Of course, if you're a wizard and out hunting for 15 minutes, you're likely not hunting just for a fry or bounty task but just to hunt or farm treasure. I capped two wizards and was given several more by folks leaving of various ages. Any hunt that takes longer than 2 or 3 minutes means I've done something wrong. Typically from belled on node to fried to back on node again is about 1 min 15 seconds - but I've come up with a few self-taught tricks along the way that haven't seemed to have made it to the boards, official or otherwise.
Your build for a typical wizard in your post is pretty much way off the mark too. I won't even criticize it. And before anyone asks, I have a capped sorcerer and a few mid level sorcs that I hunt, so I too feel the pain but feel that nuking other professions to fix it or doing a partial comparison with one other pure profession and omitting the remaining pures is entirely the wrong direction to go.
- Anonymous
For the most part it is. Now for instance if a wizard spreads out the casts, part of the cooldown occurs. If a wizard has 100 mana total and leeches 100 mana in like 2 minutes, he won't be able to leech more for a bit. Formula for the time based on EMC ranks and max mana exists, probably on Krakii. If that same 100 mana is leeched over the course of like 15 minutes, the wizard will be able to leech additional mana. Of course, if you're a wizard and out hunting for 15 minutes, you're likely not hunting just for a fry or bounty task but just to hunt or farm treasure. I capped two wizards and was given several more by folks leaving of various ages. Any hunt that takes longer than 2 or 3 minutes means I've done something wrong. Typically from belled on node to fried to back on node again is about 1 min 15 seconds - but I've come up with a few self-taught tricks along the way that haven't seemed to have made it to the boards, official or otherwise.
Your build for a typical wizard in your post is pretty much way off the mark too. I won't even criticize it. And before anyone asks, I have a capped sorcerer and a few mid level sorcs that I hunt, so I too feel the pain but feel that nuking other professions to fix it or doing a partial comparison with one other pure profession and omitting the remaining pures is entirely the wrong direction to go.
- Anonymous
>>I had been under an assumption that the maximum mana return before hitting cooldown was the same as your maximum mana capacity, but rereading some documentation, I can't tell anymore.
This is correct. And if a wizard hunts the right things they can leach like level just fine even at 16. However, at 16 a string of bad rolls could end ones hunt a bit earlier but more often then not mana leach will let one hunt longer, so it more then balances out. The only time you see trouble mana leaching things is when someone is more focused on enchanting then hunting.
This is correct. And if a wizard hunts the right things they can leach like level just fine even at 16. However, at 16 a string of bad rolls could end ones hunt a bit earlier but more often then not mana leach will let one hunt longer, so it more then balances out. The only time you see trouble mana leaching things is when someone is more focused on enchanting then hunting.
>Typically from belled on node to fried to back on node again is about 1 min 15 seconds - but I've come up with a few self-taught tricks along the way that haven't seemed to have made it to the boards, official or otherwise.
Wow, that would be nice. I'm 5-10 minutes minimum.
>Your build for a typical wizard in your post is pretty much way off the mark too. I won't even criticize it. And before anyone asks, I have a capped sorcerer and a few mid level sorcs that I hunt, so I too feel the pain but feel that nuking other professions to fix it or doing a partial comparison with one other pure profession and omitting the remaining pures is entirely the wrong direction to go.
As someone else mentioned, definitely baseline. Both classes have way more points to work with than this, but a non-melee build is unlikely to be found without all of the things mentioned (1x in all important magic skills, 2x in spells and spell aim, give or take the lore). The fact that additional training (magic speaking, I'm not getting into things like Perception, Fitness, Climb/Swim, etc) only amplifies this situation. Say you are a wizard and you want extra magic ranks for runestaff defense? Thats fine, double AS/MIU for 4 MTPs per level and watch your ranks per level go from 10 to 12. A sorcerer would have to pay 8 for the same benefit. That a warmage may deviate heavily from this build is near irrelevant, because as sorcerers, we would be hard pressed to follow that path, having absolutely no AS boosting spells except E Targetting (to Wizards 40-65ish AS and Haste, Clerics 55 AS, and Empaths absurd 110 AS potential) I am speaking merely from a runestaff pure perspective.
These are the skills that, for a runestaff pure, you almost certainly will have as a minimum. Lores may rise to 2x or be abandoned entirely, Spell Aim for some sorcerers (I'm not and never have been 2x in Spell Aim, though I am working towards it), but you would normally expect all of those skills to be at those predicted training levels or higher. Its from there that you take the remaining points and customize your build as you see fit, except we have less points to work with and some of those things we might want to increase (Arcane Symbols or Spell Aim, for instance) will take more to train additionally in that for Wizards.
I do want to point out that I have absolutely NO desire to see anything changed in other professions (other than a lingering, half-serious thought that Minor Acid, being unaffected by lores and being acid would fit right into our spell circle and bolting needs). When Oscuro said that Boneshatter is "too good" because Empaths aren't using Wither, it actually made me a little sad . . . I don't want to see it nerfed. And yes, there is a reason to compare to "only one" profession, because Wizards and Sorcerers are akin in that they are the pures who "have to hunt" while Clerics and Empaths can live off of service (though the decreased number of players these days seems to make a raise-only cleric less viable than a few years ago).
To reiterate; no desire to see others nerfed. I want Wizards and Empaths and Clerics to be as perfectly awesome as they are, forever. I just want sorcerers to be part of the cool club again too.
Wow, that would be nice. I'm 5-10 minutes minimum.
>Your build for a typical wizard in your post is pretty much way off the mark too. I won't even criticize it. And before anyone asks, I have a capped sorcerer and a few mid level sorcs that I hunt, so I too feel the pain but feel that nuking other professions to fix it or doing a partial comparison with one other pure profession and omitting the remaining pures is entirely the wrong direction to go.
As someone else mentioned, definitely baseline. Both classes have way more points to work with than this, but a non-melee build is unlikely to be found without all of the things mentioned (1x in all important magic skills, 2x in spells and spell aim, give or take the lore). The fact that additional training (magic speaking, I'm not getting into things like Perception, Fitness, Climb/Swim, etc) only amplifies this situation. Say you are a wizard and you want extra magic ranks for runestaff defense? Thats fine, double AS/MIU for 4 MTPs per level and watch your ranks per level go from 10 to 12. A sorcerer would have to pay 8 for the same benefit. That a warmage may deviate heavily from this build is near irrelevant, because as sorcerers, we would be hard pressed to follow that path, having absolutely no AS boosting spells except E Targetting (to Wizards 40-65ish AS and Haste, Clerics 55 AS, and Empaths absurd 110 AS potential) I am speaking merely from a runestaff pure perspective.
These are the skills that, for a runestaff pure, you almost certainly will have as a minimum. Lores may rise to 2x or be abandoned entirely, Spell Aim for some sorcerers (I'm not and never have been 2x in Spell Aim, though I am working towards it), but you would normally expect all of those skills to be at those predicted training levels or higher. Its from there that you take the remaining points and customize your build as you see fit, except we have less points to work with and some of those things we might want to increase (Arcane Symbols or Spell Aim, for instance) will take more to train additionally in that for Wizards.
I do want to point out that I have absolutely NO desire to see anything changed in other professions (other than a lingering, half-serious thought that Minor Acid, being unaffected by lores and being acid would fit right into our spell circle and bolting needs). When Oscuro said that Boneshatter is "too good" because Empaths aren't using Wither, it actually made me a little sad . . . I don't want to see it nerfed. And yes, there is a reason to compare to "only one" profession, because Wizards and Sorcerers are akin in that they are the pures who "have to hunt" while Clerics and Empaths can live off of service (though the decreased number of players these days seems to make a raise-only cleric less viable than a few years ago).
To reiterate; no desire to see others nerfed. I want Wizards and Empaths and Clerics to be as perfectly awesome as they are, forever. I just want sorcerers to be part of the cool club again too.
Another little bit of fun. Did some vague calculations of self-spelled DS at cap, under the assumption of 100 ranks of primary circle, and 50 in each secondary spell circle, which I realize isn't always realistic, but thats why its vague, and came to the following results:
Clerics 283
Wizards 277
Empaths 265
Sorcerers 262
Major Spirit circle is junk for DS, so as a Cleric or Empath, swapping ranks over to Minor Spiritual would be beneficial. Same with Sorcerers, who could specialize in Minor Spirit for extra DS per rank, but would be sacrificing CS from Elemental Targetting. The difference is slim, I will admit, and the fact that it favors Clerics, who have high magic training costs, seems fair. But its another case of the short end of the stick. Just one of many.
If you bump it up to 100 in primary, 66 in each secondary, Sorcerers manage to catch up to Empaths.
Cleric 304
Wizard 297
Empath 286
Sorcerer 286
Clerics 283
Wizards 277
Empaths 265
Sorcerers 262
Major Spirit circle is junk for DS, so as a Cleric or Empath, swapping ranks over to Minor Spiritual would be beneficial. Same with Sorcerers, who could specialize in Minor Spirit for extra DS per rank, but would be sacrificing CS from Elemental Targetting. The difference is slim, I will admit, and the fact that it favors Clerics, who have high magic training costs, seems fair. But its another case of the short end of the stick. Just one of many.
If you bump it up to 100 in primary, 66 in each secondary, Sorcerers manage to catch up to Empaths.
Cleric 304
Wizard 297
Empath 286
Sorcerer 286
>lots of 'proof' of magical ranks and training on why sorcerer's are doing badly.
You forgot some skills like armor and other ancillary, but quite required to get certain places in game when older, skills that are offset other increased training costs, the fact that sorcerers get heavier armor in compariosn with less hinderance than some pures, etc. Again, if putting forth an arguement, please try to make sure ALL sides are presented, not only the one that makes the profession look terrible and in dire need of improvement. We all can look at the 'facts' with whatever skew or slant we choose. Try to present them accurately is all I suggest.
This, too, is the reason I said a comparison with other professions or saying how sorcerers don't necessarily stack up likely is not a good tactic to take. For instance:
Does 702 or 705 benefit from lore training? No Do you as a sorcerer feel 702 is powerful enough for 2 mana? Personally yes, but enough others seem to think that 2 mana should give the moon. Do you as a sorcerer feel 705 is powerful enough for 5 mana? No. How can we improve it? Insert actual ideas here to improve the spell rather gripe or spout 'we're terrible vs other pures'. I will even leave my ideas out of this as I have already successfully expressed them to people and need not reiterate them here.
- Anonymous
You forgot some skills like armor and other ancillary, but quite required to get certain places in game when older, skills that are offset other increased training costs, the fact that sorcerers get heavier armor in compariosn with less hinderance than some pures, etc. Again, if putting forth an arguement, please try to make sure ALL sides are presented, not only the one that makes the profession look terrible and in dire need of improvement. We all can look at the 'facts' with whatever skew or slant we choose. Try to present them accurately is all I suggest.
This, too, is the reason I said a comparison with other professions or saying how sorcerers don't necessarily stack up likely is not a good tactic to take. For instance:
Does 702 or 705 benefit from lore training? No Do you as a sorcerer feel 702 is powerful enough for 2 mana? Personally yes, but enough others seem to think that 2 mana should give the moon. Do you as a sorcerer feel 705 is powerful enough for 5 mana? No. How can we improve it? Insert actual ideas here to improve the spell rather gripe or spout 'we're terrible vs other pures'. I will even leave my ideas out of this as I have already successfully expressed them to people and need not reiterate them here.
- Anonymous
>Typically from belled on node to fried to back on node again is about 1 min 15 seconds - but I've come up with a few self-taught tricks along the way that haven't seemed to have made it to the boards, official or otherwise.
Oh and as addendum, my sorcerer takes approximately 1 min 30 seconds to 1 min 45 seconds from belled on node to fried and back on node. So 15 to 30 seconds slower but still within the realm of a single mana pulse. None of my guys use scripts during hunts and barely use macros. It's pretty much 95% or better manual typing. I do use a travel script to and from the hunting grounds.
- Anonymous
Oh and as addendum, my sorcerer takes approximately 1 min 30 seconds to 1 min 45 seconds from belled on node to fried and back on node. So 15 to 30 seconds slower but still within the realm of a single mana pulse. None of my guys use scripts during hunts and barely use macros. It's pretty much 95% or better manual typing. I do use a travel script to and from the hunting grounds.
- Anonymous
>You forgot some skills like armor and other ancillary, but quite required to get certain places in game when older, skills that are offset other increased training costs, the fact that sorcerers get heavier armor in compariosn with less hinderance than some pures, etc. Again, if putting forth an arguement, please try to make sure ALL sides are presented, not only the one that makes the profession look terrible and in dire need of improvement. We all can look at the 'facts' with whatever skew or slant we choose. Try to present them accurately is all I suggest.
Thing is, I'm not seeing these other skills that are offset. Aside from Clerics having several magic skills which require more (which is, I assume, their trade off for easier physical skills), we are, for the most part, equal to or lesser with these skills. Armor? We are tied with empaths for the worst armor TP needs in the game. Wizards can train in armor easier than Sorcerers can, and Clerics are half. Wizards are, truthfully, suffering from more spell hindrance penalty than Sorcerers, but Sorcerers are second worst in that regard, while both Clerics and Empaths can go to town in doubles unhindered. Sorcerer penalties are only a step behind Wizard/MjE all the way through full plate.
I have tried to address all sides, especially sides that make Sorcerers look better than other classes. In the case of the armor hindrance, we are only "second worst", as opposed to best. We are very much THE worst in a significant number of areas. Self spelled DS, maneuver avoidance, powerful, low mana CS spells, low level bolts, AS boosters for melee. Those areas in which we are not the worst, we are often tied (strangely enough, usually with Empaths) or second worst, but never best.
What are these strengths which I am failing to present? A verstile TD against both Spirit and Elemental magic? I suppose thats something we have a pretty good handle on. What are these skills we have which "offset" other increased training costs? I would hear them.
That said, I posted half a dozen suggestions for both 702 and 705, which I would love to see implemented. The comparisons are my justification for these changes, since we have ever seen a policy of "if it ain't broke, don't fix it", and the message I'm trying to convey is that it is broken. I'll summarize my ideas in my next post for you. I've posted them before, and I will post them again, plus some from years back which haven't been posted in quite a while.
Thing is, I'm not seeing these other skills that are offset. Aside from Clerics having several magic skills which require more (which is, I assume, their trade off for easier physical skills), we are, for the most part, equal to or lesser with these skills. Armor? We are tied with empaths for the worst armor TP needs in the game. Wizards can train in armor easier than Sorcerers can, and Clerics are half. Wizards are, truthfully, suffering from more spell hindrance penalty than Sorcerers, but Sorcerers are second worst in that regard, while both Clerics and Empaths can go to town in doubles unhindered. Sorcerer penalties are only a step behind Wizard/MjE all the way through full plate.
I have tried to address all sides, especially sides that make Sorcerers look better than other classes. In the case of the armor hindrance, we are only "second worst", as opposed to best. We are very much THE worst in a significant number of areas. Self spelled DS, maneuver avoidance, powerful, low mana CS spells, low level bolts, AS boosters for melee. Those areas in which we are not the worst, we are often tied (strangely enough, usually with Empaths) or second worst, but never best.
What are these strengths which I am failing to present? A verstile TD against both Spirit and Elemental magic? I suppose thats something we have a pretty good handle on. What are these skills we have which "offset" other increased training costs? I would hear them.
That said, I posted half a dozen suggestions for both 702 and 705, which I would love to see implemented. The comparisons are my justification for these changes, since we have ever seen a policy of "if it ain't broke, don't fix it", and the message I'm trying to convey is that it is broken. I'll summarize my ideas in my next post for you. I've posted them before, and I will post them again, plus some from years back which haven't been posted in quite a while.
>Oh and as addendum, my sorcerer takes approximately 1 min 30 seconds to 1 min 45 seconds from belled on node to fried and back on node. So 15 to 30 seconds slower but still within the realm of a single mana pulse. None of my guys use scripts during hunts and barely use macros. It's pretty much 95% or better manual typing. I do use a travel script to and from the hunting grounds.
What are you hunting and with what spells?
Don't need the secrets, just curious about that part.
What are you hunting and with what spells?
Don't need the secrets, just curious about that part.
>What are you hunting and with what spells?
Gemstone IV creatures with sorcerer spells. Details beyond that I will not give. I like the relative solitude of the where I hunt, and I love the treasure being beyond compare with any other profession or hunting grounds I've done so far. You have met three of my sorcerer's before with at least one of your guys (two if the other is yours and I'm not mistaken).
- Anonymous
Gemstone IV creatures with sorcerer spells. Details beyond that I will not give. I like the relative solitude of the where I hunt, and I love the treasure being beyond compare with any other profession or hunting grounds I've done so far. You have met three of my sorcerer's before with at least one of your guys (two if the other is yours and I'm not mistaken).
- Anonymous
>Your build for a typical wizard in your post is pretty much way off the mark too. I won't even criticize it. And before anyone asks, I have a capped sorcerer and a few mid level sorcs that I hunt, so I too feel the pain but feel that nuking other professions to fix it or doing a partial comparison with one other pure profession and omitting the remaining pures is entirely the wrong direction to go.
For the record, four of my 6 most played pcs are wizards. Capped wizard, 77 wizard, 54 wizard, 39 wizard. I also have a 2x capped empath and a 3x capped sorcerer in my top 6 of course.
Several of the recent suggestions I've made, as well as others I've made several years ago, as well as a handful I've had on my mind.
701
1. With higher level training, allow additional effects to occur. I imagine a hard spell ranks requirement for these, think Cleric spells. Bleed from multiple wounds. I do not advocate an increased damage per cast for this spell.
702
1. Mana infusions boosting damage, increasing DPS.
2. Mini-DC, flares/crit modifier for mana heavy targets
3. Spell evolution, becomes a stronger version at higher levels like several Cleric spells.
4. Skill implementation boosting crit/damage modifier.
5. Lores adding acid/degen flares with Necro, unbalance/void flares with Demonology.
6. Autokill chance.
7. Increased efficacy against stunned targets.
703
1. Longer duration (Seed 1 of Summation chart for Mana Control ranks, capped at 30 seconds)
2. Stackable
3. Prevent prepping
4. Improved benefits from skill; "corrupt" essence chance, giving status debuff causing failure rate on casts for period of time
5. Improved benefits; make casting under influence have a chance of backfire
704
1. Second biggest Sorcerer pipe-dream, Phase Maneuver benefits. Allow % chance to Phase ala Ithzir, avoiding maneuver. Unlocked and/or modified by lore.
705
1. Combo bonus against phased non-corp, dealing DoT cycles ala Trolls/Fire
2. Bolt spell form, fits our low level bolting needs, a Virilneus concept.
3. Necromancy lore adds "pervasive disintegration" effect, allowing chance for DoT cycles
4. Casts leave behind residue which applifies upon itself on multiple casts.
5. Bounce effect, % to hit additional target either on all casts or upon target death. Synergy with residue effect, or bolt only feature.
6. Also, the spell could use a second crit cycle. For all the disintegration, it just does a lot of health damage, and little wounding.
708
1. Increased efficacy for endrolls above 141. 141 or 441 do identical results.
710
1. New crit tables and flavor text.
2. Lore implementation.
3. Improved effectiveness for both versions (I open 'stromed two targets 40 levels younger than me and it took about 10 cycles to kill either of them. The other walked away.). If we have to sit and stare at the target waiting for 20 or so seconds, it should be dangerous. Might as well use Call Lightning at that point.
4. Focused should be able to be SHIFTed, a Virilneus concept.
712
1. Melee Sorc functionality; physical AS booster and shadowdeath flares, modified by Demonology Lore.
715
1. Consider a decreased mana cost for curses other than guarded TD curse.
716
1. Mass warding spell.
2. If not mass warding, contagious. Spell will burst out of body dealing wound, and have a chance to infect other targets.
3. Inflicts damage cycles which deal wounds and stuns. Think somewhere between Torment and Empathic Assault, continued CS warding rolls (more cycles modified by Necromancy, with TD pushdown). Potential for RT, proning, stance reduction, stun.
4. All wounds on target increase damage dealt, or cause TD drop. Every rank 1 on the body -2 TD, rank 2s, -4 TD, rank 3s, -6 TD, etc.
717
1. Ditch the "target runs away forever" bracket. Drop auto-death bracket to 175. If not that, bring previous tier up to 190, then 190 kills.
719
1. Increase mana return.
2. Chain DC, a Virilneus suggestion.
725
1. Make the required demonology ranks a more gradual gain. As it stands, the success rates work on a 1 rank:1% system, where summoning a specific demon requires 100 ranks, and at 0 ranks you have 0% chance to summon. Make that 50% chance to summon, and make it function on a 2 ranks:1% system. Even valence stones, in a chamber, have a 25% chance of failure for any sorcerer without Demonology ranks, which is pretty sad for some 3x post cap character who should be a master of Sorcery.
730
1. Ditch the salts OR ditch the gem. Make them bonuses, like Major Sanct/Familiar/Spirit Servant runestones. Baseline functionality should be viable without both. Use salts/gem to reactivate expired animates.
740
1. Massive reduction to inter-realm chalk cost, due to new premium travel system.
2. Incorporate "adjacent" realms middle range chalk.
3. Reduce demonology requirement for cross-realms travel by half, allow additional training above certain threshold to allow small group transport. 200 ranks for 2 companions?
4. Allow highly skilled Sorcerers (70+) to train off 5% fumble rate at least to 1%. The spell is based on Familiar Gate, but FG is a 30th level spell, and Planar Shift is 40th. It should be superior. Especially since Wizards now have a gate rune which improves success. We deal with dangerous energies, but that is our specialty. 5% fumble rates on a short range transport are so 2004.
Sacrifice
1. Allow high level training to reduce cooldown, but not entirely negate. Barring that, allow "additional", lesser sacrifices before cooldown is hit (think Mana Leech), again, trainable through levels/spell ranks.
Illusions
1. Remove audience reps, for life.
2. Allow the shop to sell overpriced Igaesha runestones. The overprice will prevent abuse, but will allow a sorcerer to get Igaesha for early Demon reps.
701
1. With higher level training, allow additional effects to occur. I imagine a hard spell ranks requirement for these, think Cleric spells. Bleed from multiple wounds. I do not advocate an increased damage per cast for this spell.
702
1. Mana infusions boosting damage, increasing DPS.
2. Mini-DC, flares/crit modifier for mana heavy targets
3. Spell evolution, becomes a stronger version at higher levels like several Cleric spells.
4. Skill implementation boosting crit/damage modifier.
5. Lores adding acid/degen flares with Necro, unbalance/void flares with Demonology.
6. Autokill chance.
7. Increased efficacy against stunned targets.
703
1. Longer duration (Seed 1 of Summation chart for Mana Control ranks, capped at 30 seconds)
2. Stackable
3. Prevent prepping
4. Improved benefits from skill; "corrupt" essence chance, giving status debuff causing failure rate on casts for period of time
5. Improved benefits; make casting under influence have a chance of backfire
704
1. Second biggest Sorcerer pipe-dream, Phase Maneuver benefits. Allow % chance to Phase ala Ithzir, avoiding maneuver. Unlocked and/or modified by lore.
705
1. Combo bonus against phased non-corp, dealing DoT cycles ala Trolls/Fire
2. Bolt spell form, fits our low level bolting needs, a Virilneus concept.
3. Necromancy lore adds "pervasive disintegration" effect, allowing chance for DoT cycles
4. Casts leave behind residue which applifies upon itself on multiple casts.
5. Bounce effect, % to hit additional target either on all casts or upon target death. Synergy with residue effect, or bolt only feature.
6. Also, the spell could use a second crit cycle. For all the disintegration, it just does a lot of health damage, and little wounding.
708
1. Increased efficacy for endrolls above 141. 141 or 441 do identical results.
710
1. New crit tables and flavor text.
2. Lore implementation.
3. Improved effectiveness for both versions (I open 'stromed two targets 40 levels younger than me and it took about 10 cycles to kill either of them. The other walked away.). If we have to sit and stare at the target waiting for 20 or so seconds, it should be dangerous. Might as well use Call Lightning at that point.
4. Focused should be able to be SHIFTed, a Virilneus concept.
712
1. Melee Sorc functionality; physical AS booster and shadowdeath flares, modified by Demonology Lore.
715
1. Consider a decreased mana cost for curses other than guarded TD curse.
716
1. Mass warding spell.
2. If not mass warding, contagious. Spell will burst out of body dealing wound, and have a chance to infect other targets.
3. Inflicts damage cycles which deal wounds and stuns. Think somewhere between Torment and Empathic Assault, continued CS warding rolls (more cycles modified by Necromancy, with TD pushdown). Potential for RT, proning, stance reduction, stun.
4. All wounds on target increase damage dealt, or cause TD drop. Every rank 1 on the body -2 TD, rank 2s, -4 TD, rank 3s, -6 TD, etc.
717
1. Ditch the "target runs away forever" bracket. Drop auto-death bracket to 175. If not that, bring previous tier up to 190, then 190 kills.
719
1. Increase mana return.
2. Chain DC, a Virilneus suggestion.
725
1. Make the required demonology ranks a more gradual gain. As it stands, the success rates work on a 1 rank:1% system, where summoning a specific demon requires 100 ranks, and at 0 ranks you have 0% chance to summon. Make that 50% chance to summon, and make it function on a 2 ranks:1% system. Even valence stones, in a chamber, have a 25% chance of failure for any sorcerer without Demonology ranks, which is pretty sad for some 3x post cap character who should be a master of Sorcery.
730
1. Ditch the salts OR ditch the gem. Make them bonuses, like Major Sanct/Familiar/Spirit Servant runestones. Baseline functionality should be viable without both. Use salts/gem to reactivate expired animates.
740
1. Massive reduction to inter-realm chalk cost, due to new premium travel system.
2. Incorporate "adjacent" realms middle range chalk.
3. Reduce demonology requirement for cross-realms travel by half, allow additional training above certain threshold to allow small group transport. 200 ranks for 2 companions?
4. Allow highly skilled Sorcerers (70+) to train off 5% fumble rate at least to 1%. The spell is based on Familiar Gate, but FG is a 30th level spell, and Planar Shift is 40th. It should be superior. Especially since Wizards now have a gate rune which improves success. We deal with dangerous energies, but that is our specialty. 5% fumble rates on a short range transport are so 2004.
Sacrifice
1. Allow high level training to reduce cooldown, but not entirely negate. Barring that, allow "additional", lesser sacrifices before cooldown is hit (think Mana Leech), again, trainable through levels/spell ranks.
Illusions
1. Remove audience reps, for life.
2. Allow the shop to sell overpriced Igaesha runestones. The overprice will prevent abuse, but will allow a sorcerer to get Igaesha for early Demon reps.
>You forgot some skills like armor and other ancillary, but quite required to get certain places in game when older, skills that are offset other increased training costs, the fact that sorcerers get heavier armor in compariosn with less hinderance than some pures, etc. Again, if putting forth an arguement, please try to make sure ALL sides are presented, not only the one that makes the profession look terrible and in dire need of improvement. We all can look at the 'facts' with whatever skew or slant we choose. Try to present them accurately is all I suggest.
Huh?
Dude.... seriously you need to get with the facts. Less hinderance than "some pures"? Plural, really?
First of all, sorcerers are second to last in what thickness of armor we can easily wear, only slightly ahead of wizards, who are last (its the only thing wizards are last in by the way).
Second of all, read this:
http://www.virilneus.com/blog/2009/05/14/sorcerer-training-costs/
It is all straightforward mathematics, the numbers are naked for all to see.
Or you know I can just go like this:
who prof sor: 11
who prof wiz: 48
who prof cleric: 23
who prof empath: 25
Survey says: sorcerers get the short stick.
>IRVINETOMOE
By the way, you keep saying "Clerics pay higher magical costs in some skills"
That is also inaccurate. They pay higher costs in one skill vs sorcerers or empaths, the cost increase is 1 MTP to Spell Aiming. It is nominal to say the least and does not balance anything on the physical side.
>>That is also inaccurate. They pay higher costs in one skill vs sorcerers or empaths, the cost increase is 1 MTP to Spell Aiming. It is nominal to say the least and does not balance anything on the physical side.
I swear I just saw more than that while I was making cross comparisons, but upon a closer look, I see that is not the case. I'm awesome, clearly offending BOTH sides with my blatant lack of accurate facts!
>>Gemstone IV creatures with sorcerer spells. Details beyond that I will not give. I like the relative solitude of the where I hunt, and I love the treasure being beyond compare with any other profession or hunting grounds I've done so far. You have met three of my sorcerer's before with at least one of your guys (two if the other is yours and I'm not mistaken).
Dude, I don't want to steal your hunting ground. Its more a matter of the fact that it makes me wonder if the target in question is particularly "weak" to sorcerer spells (ie, a hunting ground full of high mana, low TD pures for DC).
As an aside, what other guy of mine did you mean? Just curious if you are correct.
I swear I just saw more than that while I was making cross comparisons, but upon a closer look, I see that is not the case. I'm awesome, clearly offending BOTH sides with my blatant lack of accurate facts!
>>Gemstone IV creatures with sorcerer spells. Details beyond that I will not give. I like the relative solitude of the where I hunt, and I love the treasure being beyond compare with any other profession or hunting grounds I've done so far. You have met three of my sorcerer's before with at least one of your guys (two if the other is yours and I'm not mistaken).
Dude, I don't want to steal your hunting ground. Its more a matter of the fact that it makes me wonder if the target in question is particularly "weak" to sorcerer spells (ie, a hunting ground full of high mana, low TD pures for DC).
As an aside, what other guy of mine did you mean? Just curious if you are correct.
<Furthermore worth mentioning the ONE mana regen option we do have serious access to, Wracking (which everyone else has too) actually CONFLICTS with Sacrifice due to the Spirit Drain.>
I've been staying out of this conversation for the most part, though I do feel the need to comment on this statement.
I don't know how many other sorcerers are in Voln, but Symbol of Mana shouldn't be overlooked. It may not return as much mana as Wracking, but it doesn't require spirit, can be used for favor only every 3-5 minutes (depending on which part of Krakiipedia is correct), and can be used as often as you like if you don't mind burning through deeds (may be more or less of a drawback, depending on how you get your deeds).
Actually, with the recent changes to Voln, I use symbols far more then I would signs.
Starchitin
A severed gnomish hand crawls in on its fingertips and makes a rude gesture before quickly decaying and rotting into dust. A gust of wind quickly scatters the dust.
I've been staying out of this conversation for the most part, though I do feel the need to comment on this statement.
I don't know how many other sorcerers are in Voln, but Symbol of Mana shouldn't be overlooked. It may not return as much mana as Wracking, but it doesn't require spirit, can be used for favor only every 3-5 minutes (depending on which part of Krakiipedia is correct), and can be used as often as you like if you don't mind burning through deeds (may be more or less of a drawback, depending on how you get your deeds).
Actually, with the recent changes to Voln, I use symbols far more then I would signs.
Starchitin
A severed gnomish hand crawls in on its fingertips and makes a rude gesture before quickly decaying and rotting into dust. A gust of wind quickly scatters the dust.
Dont mean to derail but how does curse of the star work? Is that Bolt AS only? Also, outside of areas like the rift that routinely dispell foreign spells some of the raw numbers mentioned seem misleading. Especially once you factor in practical ways to enhance them and paint a different picture due to scroll infusion. However, outside of that I really do feel for you guys and think that there are many hoops that must be jumped through for no reason.
I actually very much approve of the Voln changes. I remember reading that Symbol of Mana "might" take a deed, and that was just too much chance for me to ever bother with it. I like its new functionality.
That said, the entire reason I brought up Wracking was because, as the best mana regen society power in the game, it has a seemingly adversarial relationship with Sorcerers, since it is fueled by the same thing as our only other mana regen power.
Symbol of Mana though . . . seems fine to me. Same with the GoS symbol, which favors Empaths but at least is fairly equal for the other three.
That said, the entire reason I brought up Wracking was because, as the best mana regen society power in the game, it has a seemingly adversarial relationship with Sorcerers, since it is fueled by the same thing as our only other mana regen power.
Symbol of Mana though . . . seems fine to me. Same with the GoS symbol, which favors Empaths but at least is fairly equal for the other three.
Actually, despite my relative disinterest in bolting, Curse of the Star is one of the coolest concepts I've seen in a while; its a debuff which you gain by killing. Which is very sorcerous, and in my opinion, not TOO difficult to "pull off" early in a hunt, or even maybe before a hunt on a weaker target, since it lasts fairly long.
General gist is thus; its a CS based warding debuff that reduces target AS by 10, up to 38 points for a capped, 1x Sorc spell sorcerer. Upon the targets death, you then recieve that AS penalty as an bolt AS BUFF, for a duration of 15 minutes + 30 seconds per target level (though in my experience, it wore off a lot earlier than that). Supposedly its stackable too, which would mean you could spam it up in some junk hunting ground then go rest on node and keep it that way.
This is one of those spells where I can look at it, say I probably will rarely use it, and yet simultaneously absolutely love everything about it.
General gist is thus; its a CS based warding debuff that reduces target AS by 10, up to 38 points for a capped, 1x Sorc spell sorcerer. Upon the targets death, you then recieve that AS penalty as an bolt AS BUFF, for a duration of 15 minutes + 30 seconds per target level (though in my experience, it wore off a lot earlier than that). Supposedly its stackable too, which would mean you could spam it up in some junk hunting ground then go rest on node and keep it that way.
This is one of those spells where I can look at it, say I probably will rarely use it, and yet simultaneously absolutely love everything about it.
>you then recieve that AS penalty as an bolt AS BUFF, for a duration of 15 minutes + 30 seconds per target level (though in my experience, it wore off a lot earlier than that).
The timer on it is very buggy, and has been reported as such multiple times. 405 will also report 45 minutes+ remaining shortly before it wears off.
>I don't know how many other sorcerers are in Voln, but Symbol of Mana shouldn't be overlooked. It may not return as much mana as Wracking, but it doesn't require spirit, can be used for favor only every 3-5 minutes
You are correct Starchitin, but the changes to symbol of mana are only a month or so old. Most of what fuels the passion of this conversation is at least a decade old, so it's easy to overlook.
I'm likely speaking out of turn here, but much of the frustration of current day sorcerers comes from a time when DC shredded anything you could hit with it, implosion was such a terrifying and destructive spell that items imbedded with it where marked and tracked by GMs and consequences were severe, and empaths spent their days gossiping at the center of town because they could barely hunt anything they could learn from and survive.
Sadly, much like American economy, when moving towards a global balance, sorcerers (circa 1996ish) only had one way to go...down. Though I don't agree with some about the extent of it, there has clearly been some overtoggle.
Is it too early to start looking at the 2013 Simu goals list? Can we move Savants from RSN to NSSN and focus on the existing professions for a bit?
--Jurp
You are correct Starchitin, but the changes to symbol of mana are only a month or so old. Most of what fuels the passion of this conversation is at least a decade old, so it's easy to overlook.
I'm likely speaking out of turn here, but much of the frustration of current day sorcerers comes from a time when DC shredded anything you could hit with it, implosion was such a terrifying and destructive spell that items imbedded with it where marked and tracked by GMs and consequences were severe, and empaths spent their days gossiping at the center of town because they could barely hunt anything they could learn from and survive.
Sadly, much like American economy, when moving towards a global balance, sorcerers (circa 1996ish) only had one way to go...down. Though I don't agree with some about the extent of it, there has clearly been some overtoggle.
Is it too early to start looking at the 2013 Simu goals list? Can we move Savants from RSN to NSSN and focus on the existing professions for a bit?
--Jurp
>Sadly, much like American economy, when moving towards a global balance, sorcerers (circa 1996ish) only had one way to go...down. Though I don't agree with some about the extent of it, there has clearly been some overtoggle.
The problem is, much like governments, they swirved, and went too far in the other direction. Then we were simply forgotten about, literally. Melissa, when she was product manager, had to apologize to us when they forgot to release anything for sorcery during Hot Summer Nights 2 years in a row, I saved the post somewhere. Phase 1 of GS4 released we also were left out of. I'm thoroughly convinced sorcery had no advocate at the table in the GS4 conversion, no one paying attention, which is how we ended up with the costs & benefits we have today, which I firmly believe would not have happened had any logical and reasonable person been paying attention.
Free choice is the ultimate expression of which professions are better, in all the little intangible ways and in the big obvious ways, than others. We can sit and compare numbers and do the math (which I have done) and it'll show sorcery in need. But the free choice of players shows this better, in a way that cannot be refuted.
At any time of day you can do a survey of how many of each profession are playing, and sorcerers are always near the bottom, its usually us and the expansion teams (new professions). Players have made the free choice not to pursue this profession, and that didn't happen out of random chance.
>At any time of day you can do a survey of how many of each profession are playing, and sorcerers are always near the bottom, its usually us and the expansion teams (new professions). Players have made the free choice not to pursue this profession, and that didn't happen out of random chance.
Random sample from right this moment:
Wizard: 54
Rogue: 27
Empath: 27
Cleric: 22
Ranger: 20
Bard: 13 (lolz, I remember when Bards were always at the bottom)
Sorcerer: 10
Monk: 9
Paladin: 8
Warrior: 8 (that sucks, warriors shouldn't be this low)
It kind of makes me want to retire my Wizard for life, if only to "do my part" to get away from this problem.
On some level, I don't WANT there to be lots of Sorcerers, in the same way that I don't want there to be tons of Faendryl. It kind of cheapens it when everyone is an evil dark elf sorcerer. On the other hand, mechanical benefits WILL determine, for the most part, where the popular choice falls, with an element of RP making a small adjustment in one direction or the other.
So either we can be good and overused, or bad and special.
Random sample from right this moment:
Wizard: 54
Rogue: 27
Empath: 27
Cleric: 22
Ranger: 20
Bard: 13 (lolz, I remember when Bards were always at the bottom)
Sorcerer: 10
Monk: 9
Paladin: 8
Warrior: 8 (that sucks, warriors shouldn't be this low)
It kind of makes me want to retire my Wizard for life, if only to "do my part" to get away from this problem.
On some level, I don't WANT there to be lots of Sorcerers, in the same way that I don't want there to be tons of Faendryl. It kind of cheapens it when everyone is an evil dark elf sorcerer. On the other hand, mechanical benefits WILL determine, for the most part, where the popular choice falls, with an element of RP making a small adjustment in one direction or the other.
So either we can be good and overused, or bad and special.
>I am on a lot and you won't find me on that list. People can choose not to show their profession and quite a few of us take that option.
True, but that list of professions comes to 198 total players, and the total playing at the time was 227. So about 14% of the players were not showing their profession, and I've never known Warriors to be particularly common to want to hide their profession. That that for what you will.
True, but that list of professions comes to 198 total players, and the total playing at the time was 227. So about 14% of the players were not showing their profession, and I've never known Warriors to be particularly common to want to hide their profession. That that for what you will.
