Previous Thread
Previous
Expand All
Collapse All
Ignore Author
Reply
>Why exactly is it a problem that they don't have 2 unique spell lists the way Wizards do?
This is a really important, yet difficult question. I will try my best to give it justice, with fair logic and a more or less basic approach.
I must say, firstly that sorcerers are still #1 at killing. Focused Implosion literally ruins things. I tend to prefer Bolts in many situations, but for most sorcerers the CS is so high that well...the warding spells just wreck everything in sight so, yeah.
But as to the query on the spell circles, I beg the author to consider that rogues and warriors, sufficiently post-cap, can access to the spells 140 and 435. Those are square professions! So the Sorcery circle is essential to our success. Look at all the other pure classes. Empaths and Clerics have their unique spheres and share the major spiritual, that no other classes access. Wizards have their professional circle and a monopoly on major elemental.
There was a time that it was considered to take major spiritual away from empaths, as they were moved to partially the mental sphere. This was rejected, and appropriately so I think, now seeing the Minor Mental circle. Also, too many rescuing spells or other things would need to be duplicated comparing to the designs. (213, 220, 225...were all considered standard for empaths and clerics.)
Anyway, your question was why it was a problem. Well actually, the Sorcerer Base circle is very powerful. But besides a few details, this more or less defines our class. That's why we have Cloak of Shadows that verily provides some +100 DS to well-trained characters, or why Phase has so many tricks. Some other spells are lacking flexibility or love, but when 712 is the only unique defensive spell sorcerers have as a class, it's very important that the spell is powerful. Sorcerers are a pure class, and pures are mostly defined based on what spells they access. So that might suggest to any observer the issue of sorcerers only accessing one spell circle.
And that, itself, points a nasty finger at the Lores. Indeed, it's why the sorcerer circle is so heavily over-trained as a standard. Anything else is a mutant path! We have Elemental, Sorcerous, and Spiritual Lore that affect our spells. So that's a thing, too. Wizards just train in Elemental Lore.
I'm sure my explanation missed some things...
>An officer of the Sorcerer Guild arrives and glances around. "Ah, there you are, Vathon!" he says in a slightly agitated tone. "I have come to formally declare that your membership privileges have been revoked."
>Until that bottle is capped, training in any other skills will be evaluated in a false light, I believe. I don't really see any other way to discuss the bolt spell attacks presented here.
Well, when I'm comparing anything to one-shot kills with 717, it's pretty unfair.
My original post is arguing that my 90 ranks of training in demonology is mostly a roleplaying choice. We've discussed some other play styles where those ranks might be more mechanically useful but I'm not convinced that I really need to use 713 that often or that I need to use phase to manage encumbrance. So, even as I stare down the barrel of adding more demonology ranks at 24ptps per, I'm still calling that a RP choice.
Well, when I'm comparing anything to one-shot kills with 717, it's pretty unfair.
My original post is arguing that my 90 ranks of training in demonology is mostly a roleplaying choice. We've discussed some other play styles where those ranks might be more mechanically useful but I'm not convinced that I really need to use 713 that often or that I need to use phase to manage encumbrance. So, even as I stare down the barrel of adding more demonology ranks at 24ptps per, I'm still calling that a RP choice.
Thanks for the response Daid. I was genuinely curious and not trolling. :)
I can see from your response what you are saying, I just don't see a solution that is likely to ever occur. As a balance it would seem to me that symmetry would suggest the Sorc should lose MnS and gain MjE, to share it with Wizards. Then you'd have two pures with MjE and two with MjS. However, I just can't see Sorcs with MjE. They would need to move some spells and change others, and I just don't see Simu putting that much dev work into it.
I can see from your response what you are saying, I just don't see a solution that is likely to ever occur. As a balance it would seem to me that symmetry would suggest the Sorc should lose MnS and gain MjE, to share it with Wizards. Then you'd have two pures with MjE and two with MjS. However, I just can't see Sorcs with MjE. They would need to move some spells and change others, and I just don't see Simu putting that much dev work into it.
>>with scroll infusion I consider myself to have access to every spell circle in the game. I do wish there was some way to train to negate the lore penalty from casting from a scroll. That would be a sweet sorcerous skill.
Good viewpoint. Even without scroll infusion, it's almost that way, but in the hands of a sorcerer it is much better, true.
I don't understand the 'lore penalty' comment, though. Are you referring to applying lore for a 'native' spell versus 'non-native'? Could you please amplify that a bit?
Doug
Good viewpoint. Even without scroll infusion, it's almost that way, but in the hands of a sorcerer it is much better, true.
I don't understand the 'lore penalty' comment, though. Are you referring to applying lore for a 'native' spell versus 'non-native'? Could you please amplify that a bit?
Doug
>I don't understand the 'lore penalty' comment, though. Are you referring to applying lore for a 'native' spell versus 'non-native'? Could you please amplify that a bit?
From the 'pedia:
>A character may train in elemental, mental, or spiritual lores to gain additional benefits from spells activated by arcane symbols. The bonuses applied by lore training are identical to those provided if cast through spell research training or spell knowledge enhancive items. However, major spell circles (major elemental and spiritual) require double the lore ranks to unlock the same bonuses and professional circles (cleric, bard, empath, paladin, ranger, sorcerer, and wizard base) require triple the training (Raise Dead (318) is an exception and does not require additional training). Minor circles (minor elemental, mental, and spiritual) do not require additional training in this way.
yes, casting non-native circle spells. What if we could train that off some way either fully or partially. To me that would make up for wizards having a lower AS training cost.
From the 'pedia:
>A character may train in elemental, mental, or spiritual lores to gain additional benefits from spells activated by arcane symbols. The bonuses applied by lore training are identical to those provided if cast through spell research training or spell knowledge enhancive items. However, major spell circles (major elemental and spiritual) require double the lore ranks to unlock the same bonuses and professional circles (cleric, bard, empath, paladin, ranger, sorcerer, and wizard base) require triple the training (Raise Dead (318) is an exception and does not require additional training). Minor circles (minor elemental, mental, and spiritual) do not require additional training in this way.
yes, casting non-native circle spells. What if we could train that off some way either fully or partially. To me that would make up for wizards having a lower AS training cost.
>>yes, casting non-native circle spells.
Thanks. I always considered it bonus rather than penalty.
>> What if we could train that off some way either fully or partially.
I would look to profession first. For example, specialists (wizards, empaths, clerics) work well in this scenario. But the sorcerer has an advantage in the hybrid nature of the profession. So sorcerers should be able to get full rank benefits for lores in major circles, and 1/2 rank benefits for profession specific lists.
One of the advantages to offset some specific disadvantages for the hybrid class. . .
Doug
Thanks. I always considered it bonus rather than penalty.
>> What if we could train that off some way either fully or partially.
I would look to profession first. For example, specialists (wizards, empaths, clerics) work well in this scenario. But the sorcerer has an advantage in the hybrid nature of the profession. So sorcerers should be able to get full rank benefits for lores in major circles, and 1/2 rank benefits for profession specific lists.
One of the advantages to offset some specific disadvantages for the hybrid class. . .
Doug
>>To me that would make up for wizards having a lower AS training cost.
I guess I should have read a bit more carefully - the suggestion about enhancing lore bang for the buck for sorcery is fine. But the concept of 'AS training costs for other professions' as a justification isn't a winning one, in my view.
Like the idea, but would recommend we not become overly alarmed about who has what - just what the profession should have that could still fit within existing frameworks.
Doug
I guess I should have read a bit more carefully - the suggestion about enhancing lore bang for the buck for sorcery is fine. But the concept of 'AS training costs for other professions' as a justification isn't a winning one, in my view.
Like the idea, but would recommend we not become overly alarmed about who has what - just what the profession should have that could still fit within existing frameworks.
Doug
>Well, when I'm comparing anything to one-shot kills with 717, it's pretty unfair.
>My original post is arguing that my 90 ranks of training in demonology is mostly a roleplaying choice. We've discussed some other play styles where those ranks might be more mechanically useful but I'm not convinced that I really need to use 713 that often or that I need to use phase to manage encumbrance. So, even as I stare down the barrel of adding more demonology ranks at 24ptps per, I'm still calling that a RP choice. - Silvean
I'll buy that for a dollar. My sorcerer in Plat is past 1.5x cap and creeping towards 2x, and he only has 40 demon/30 necro for lore ranks: 40 demon to incant 740, 30 necro to activate the top 711 threshold. He also has no spell aiming at all. There's nothing mechanical in those training paths that would make him even a little bit more powerful than his current build and style, and bolting or the lores in general have no particular RP angle for him (he's, uh, a bit of a nonconformist), so I have no plans to add to them.
If evaluating things purely based on maximizing raw hunting power, there's nothing in the secondary skills bracket that I would consider an essential TP purchase for a sorcerer. I don't think that's true of any of our fellow pures. For pure destruction, train the 700s, then the 400s, then the 100s: that's it, you won. You can train other things, but all they do is make less effective play-styles a bit more interesting. I would love to have a reason to diversify, but the benefits would have to match the costs in some way. For me, in the absence of an RP motivator to do so, they don't.
Dave, Brandain's Bard
>My original post is arguing that my 90 ranks of training in demonology is mostly a roleplaying choice. We've discussed some other play styles where those ranks might be more mechanically useful but I'm not convinced that I really need to use 713 that often or that I need to use phase to manage encumbrance. So, even as I stare down the barrel of adding more demonology ranks at 24ptps per, I'm still calling that a RP choice. - Silvean
I'll buy that for a dollar. My sorcerer in Plat is past 1.5x cap and creeping towards 2x, and he only has 40 demon/30 necro for lore ranks: 40 demon to incant 740, 30 necro to activate the top 711 threshold. He also has no spell aiming at all. There's nothing mechanical in those training paths that would make him even a little bit more powerful than his current build and style, and bolting or the lores in general have no particular RP angle for him (he's, uh, a bit of a nonconformist), so I have no plans to add to them.
If evaluating things purely based on maximizing raw hunting power, there's nothing in the secondary skills bracket that I would consider an essential TP purchase for a sorcerer. I don't think that's true of any of our fellow pures. For pure destruction, train the 700s, then the 400s, then the 100s: that's it, you won. You can train other things, but all they do is make less effective play-styles a bit more interesting. I would love to have a reason to diversify, but the benefits would have to match the costs in some way. For me, in the absence of an RP motivator to do so, they don't.
Dave, Brandain's Bard
>He had chores. But you're going to have a hard time convincing me that it would have made so much of a difference that using Balefire over Evil Eye is anything more than a mechanical amusement or RP choice in Nelemar. I'm saying it's equivalent to hunting with a Claidhmore. You might do it for RP. You might do it just for fun. But it doesn't stack up mechanically.
This is without a doubt a case of right tool for the job...I don't use a hammer to tighten a screw or a screwdriver to drive a nail.
Against combatants...evil eye...no question...granted, if you have a heirloom task, limb disrupt/balefire is amazing.
You gesture at a triton combatant.
You hurl a ball of greenish-black flame at a triton combatant!
AS: +465 vs DS: +164 with AvD: +12 + d100 roll: +86 = +399
... and hit for 151 points of damage!
Muscle and bone blasted to pieces by searing wave of energy!
The combatant's brine-stained parma falls to the ground.
A flexuous dingy maroon abyran'sa shudders slightly as chaotic energy is drawn from its form and fused with the attack.
(Your dingy maroon abyran'sa loses 2 mana.)
... 70 points of damage!
The triton combatant's midsection swells painfully then bursts, sending the triton combatant everywhere.
The triton combatant gurgles once and goes still, a wrathful look on her face.
The ball of greenish-black flame strikes a triton combatant, blossoming into a much larger sphere of flame upon impact.
Cast Roundtime 3 Seconds.
That said...against radicals, DC...except if the first cast doesn't kill...the second cast just plinks...disintegrate is worse...for reasons I can't figure out...balefire on the other hand...
You trace an intricate sign that contorts in the air while forcefully invoking Dark Catalyst...
Your spell is ready.
You gesture at a triton radical.
The dull golden nimbus surrounding a triton radical suddenly begins to glow brightly.
CS: +540 - TD: +423 + CvA: +25 + d100: +2 == +144
Warding failed!
... and hits for 28 points of damage!
A triton radical is suddenly engulfed in flames of pure essence!
... 40 points of damage!
Flames cook a triton radical's chest. Looks about medium well.
... 30 points of damage!
Darn! Frozen ribs take longer to cook, and broken ones to boot!
... 5 points of damage!
Light shock to right arm. That stings!
... 20 points of damage!
Light blow to left arm.
You feel 5 mana surge into you!
Cast Roundtime 3 Seconds.
>713 rad
A triton radical brings a hand forward, pointing at you!
A scintillating, blue-white aura encompasses you.
CS: +412 - TD: +447 + CvA: -6 + d100: +26 - -5 == -10
Warded off!
>
You trace an intricate sign that contorts in the air while forcefully invoking Balefire...
Your spell is ready.
>
You are now in an offensive stance.
>
You gesture at a triton radical.
You hurl a ball of greenish-black flame at a triton radical!
AS: +465 vs DS: +321 with AvD: +39 + d100 roll: +42 = +225
... and hit for 70 points of damage!
Muscle blasted away from the triton radical's arm exposing scorched bone!
A flexuous dingy maroon abyran'sa shudders slightly as chaotic energy is drawn from its form and fused with the attack.
(Your dingy maroon abyran'sa loses 2 mana.)
... 35 points of damage!
Flesh and muscle stripped from the triton radical's stomach.
The ball of greenish-black flame strikes a triton radical, blossoming into a much larger sphere of flame upon impact.
... 15 points of damage!
Insignificant burns to the triton radical's neck.
Cast Roundtime 3 Seconds.
>You are now in a guarded stance.
>713 rad
A triton radical steeples her clawed fingers together, murmuring a quick incantation.
>
You trace an intricate sign that contorts in the air while forcefully invoking Balefire...
Your spell is ready.
You are now in an offensive stance.
>
You gesture at a triton radical.
You hurl a ball of greenish-black flame at a triton radical!
AS: +465 vs DS: +313 with AvD: +39 + d100 roll: +40 = +231
... and hit for 77 points of damage!
Sizzling arc of plasma blows the triton radical's kneecap off!
The triton radical collapses, gurgling once with a wrathful look on her face before expiring.
The dully illuminated mantle protecting a triton radical begins to falter, then completely fades away.
A white glow rushes away from a triton radical.
The dull golden nimbus fades from around a triton radical.
The brilliant aura fades away from a triton radical.
The very powerful look leaves a triton radical.
The white light leaves a triton radical.
A triton radical seems slightly different.
The ball of greenish-black flame strikes a triton radical, blossoming into a much larger sphere of flame upon impact.
Cast Roundtime 3 Seconds.
It's rare it takes 2 casts...but I got these kills quick between normal hunting just to respond to this post. Typically DC knocks them on the ground and balefire does well over 100 damage...of course I had to go through about a dozen radicals not to 1 shot one with DC.
Against Magus in a room filled with water...balefire followed by disintegrate once it's stunned...they are squishy that way.
admittedly, I have 102 demonology, 100 necro, and always wear bravery and strength...but what else is scroll infusion good for?
The day this game has a single answer for all questions is the day I stop playing. Tactics are what make it interesting.
--Jurp
This is without a doubt a case of right tool for the job...I don't use a hammer to tighten a screw or a screwdriver to drive a nail.
Against combatants...evil eye...no question...granted, if you have a heirloom task, limb disrupt/balefire is amazing.
You gesture at a triton combatant.
You hurl a ball of greenish-black flame at a triton combatant!
AS: +465 vs DS: +164 with AvD: +12 + d100 roll: +86 = +399
... and hit for 151 points of damage!
Muscle and bone blasted to pieces by searing wave of energy!
The combatant's brine-stained parma falls to the ground.
A flexuous dingy maroon abyran'sa shudders slightly as chaotic energy is drawn from its form and fused with the attack.
(Your dingy maroon abyran'sa loses 2 mana.)
... 70 points of damage!
The triton combatant's midsection swells painfully then bursts, sending the triton combatant everywhere.
The triton combatant gurgles once and goes still, a wrathful look on her face.
The ball of greenish-black flame strikes a triton combatant, blossoming into a much larger sphere of flame upon impact.
Cast Roundtime 3 Seconds.
That said...against radicals, DC...except if the first cast doesn't kill...the second cast just plinks...disintegrate is worse...for reasons I can't figure out...balefire on the other hand...
You trace an intricate sign that contorts in the air while forcefully invoking Dark Catalyst...
Your spell is ready.
You gesture at a triton radical.
The dull golden nimbus surrounding a triton radical suddenly begins to glow brightly.
CS: +540 - TD: +423 + CvA: +25 + d100: +2 == +144
Warding failed!
... and hits for 28 points of damage!
A triton radical is suddenly engulfed in flames of pure essence!
... 40 points of damage!
Flames cook a triton radical's chest. Looks about medium well.
... 30 points of damage!
Darn! Frozen ribs take longer to cook, and broken ones to boot!
... 5 points of damage!
Light shock to right arm. That stings!
... 20 points of damage!
Light blow to left arm.
You feel 5 mana surge into you!
Cast Roundtime 3 Seconds.
>713 rad
A triton radical brings a hand forward, pointing at you!
A scintillating, blue-white aura encompasses you.
CS: +412 - TD: +447 + CvA: -6 + d100: +26 - -5 == -10
Warded off!
>
You trace an intricate sign that contorts in the air while forcefully invoking Balefire...
Your spell is ready.
>
You are now in an offensive stance.
>
You gesture at a triton radical.
You hurl a ball of greenish-black flame at a triton radical!
AS: +465 vs DS: +321 with AvD: +39 + d100 roll: +42 = +225
... and hit for 70 points of damage!
Muscle blasted away from the triton radical's arm exposing scorched bone!
A flexuous dingy maroon abyran'sa shudders slightly as chaotic energy is drawn from its form and fused with the attack.
(Your dingy maroon abyran'sa loses 2 mana.)
... 35 points of damage!
Flesh and muscle stripped from the triton radical's stomach.
The ball of greenish-black flame strikes a triton radical, blossoming into a much larger sphere of flame upon impact.
... 15 points of damage!
Insignificant burns to the triton radical's neck.
Cast Roundtime 3 Seconds.
>You are now in a guarded stance.
>713 rad
A triton radical steeples her clawed fingers together, murmuring a quick incantation.
>
You trace an intricate sign that contorts in the air while forcefully invoking Balefire...
Your spell is ready.
You are now in an offensive stance.
>
You gesture at a triton radical.
You hurl a ball of greenish-black flame at a triton radical!
AS: +465 vs DS: +313 with AvD: +39 + d100 roll: +40 = +231
... and hit for 77 points of damage!
Sizzling arc of plasma blows the triton radical's kneecap off!
The triton radical collapses, gurgling once with a wrathful look on her face before expiring.
The dully illuminated mantle protecting a triton radical begins to falter, then completely fades away.
A white glow rushes away from a triton radical.
The dull golden nimbus fades from around a triton radical.
The brilliant aura fades away from a triton radical.
The very powerful look leaves a triton radical.
The white light leaves a triton radical.
A triton radical seems slightly different.
The ball of greenish-black flame strikes a triton radical, blossoming into a much larger sphere of flame upon impact.
Cast Roundtime 3 Seconds.
It's rare it takes 2 casts...but I got these kills quick between normal hunting just to respond to this post. Typically DC knocks them on the ground and balefire does well over 100 damage...of course I had to go through about a dozen radicals not to 1 shot one with DC.
Against Magus in a room filled with water...balefire followed by disintegrate once it's stunned...they are squishy that way.
admittedly, I have 102 demonology, 100 necro, and always wear bravery and strength...but what else is scroll infusion good for?
The day this game has a single answer for all questions is the day I stop playing. Tactics are what make it interesting.
--Jurp
>with scroll infusion I consider myself to have access to every spell circle in the game. I do wish there was some way to train to negate the lore penalty from casting from a scroll. That would be a sweet sorcerous skill.
Well, there are definitely spells on the exclusion list -- so every circle yes but very shy of every spell. And skip offensive spells and short duration ones mostly, because scroll vs. knowledge is huge there. Still, accessing every circle by this means may or may not be the powerful statement you're after (although surely I have provided no new information for you, but mainly for the discussion).
Negating lore penalty and so on would be nice; we have some advantage from the hybrid status that we can train a variety of lores for a fairly low cost. 3x in Arcane Symbols for sorcerers might help a little, though. Anyway, it seems like AS ranks should do some offset or combination with the lore penalty rather than somehow wrapping that into demonology and necromancy. Or a third lore of Arcane Studies or whatever that does this and lots of other stuff.
>I can see from your response what you are saying, I just don't see a solution that is likely to ever occur. As a balance it would seem to me that symmetry would suggest the Sorc should lose MnS and gain MjE, to share it with Wizards. Then you'd have two pures with MjE and two with MjS. However, I just can't see Sorcs with MjE. They would need to move some spells and change others, and I just don't see Simu putting that much dev work into it.
Well, I didn't actually pose a solution. If asked for a solution, rather than why it's a problem that sorcerers don't have two circles (my first reply), I think sticking to our guns on the Sorcerer Base and lores in general (sorcery but also elemental and spiritual) is the most reliable course of action. The other thing is, some way to shift the general wisdom that "sorcerers train lots of spells" as a path. I'm fine with that path existing, but I'd like to see variety more approachable for the class.
Now honestly, if I was going to ask for an existing spell circle, screw MjE. I want the Arcane Circle. Not going to happen, but I can dream, too. Screw scrolls, give me 1750. It's actually not the most insane idea I've ever suggested. 1701 isn't so different from how we use 703. And personally I'd like more than three bolt spells (but few other sorcerers would generally back me here). Everyone loves...yeah okay I'll just not rant about this right now and I'll just twitch and make barking sounds dreaming about it in my sleep later.
To keep on topic, I'll try to point out where lores specifically can be implemented further.
Star Curse should, for instance, give melee AS perks. Do it with necromancy lore.
We need a 50th level spell of DOOM. And it can have lore perks, too. A difficult point with this one is if it should be demonology or necromancy based (of old it should be major summoning). Maybe there is some way to enforce a hybrid spell but each character only gets one of them. I don't like permanent attunement (see my arguing on reset options for elemental attune), but certainly it shouldn't be something switched regularly (but possible via fixskill or an Adv Guild, SimuCoins for less than $200, etc). Dunno, have it check your lore training and give you the demon or necrotic side depending on which lore is greater.
716 should be canned, already. Honestly, as far as I'm concerned, literally delete the spell or move it into 715 already, even without a replacement. At least it gives me hope and we can really see it as a free spell circle.
We deserve some native and unique maneuver defense spell. Wizards have Blurs, Empaths have Empathic Focus, Clerics have Prayer, and sorcerers have the butthole. Maybe that can be the demonology lore bonus can provide the age-old "defensive phase". At level 4 it's not too crazy if it's only activated via some serious lore training. Dauntless 1606 gives the same benefit as Mobility 618. Or you know, stick the moonstone cubes in the 1700 circle and give us Arcane. Yeah, yeah, yeah! (That spell kind of sucks, but anyway)
Ideally if a lore-review is a once in a blue moon kind of deal, it would be nice to see the slots 716 and 750 populated first, and then a more comprehensive review is possible that doesn't depend on unknowns.
Maybe sorcerers need a third lore of some kind? It definitely has the least of them all. Some Arcane Studies or whatever? No idea ATM. But if we get a third one, the perks of existing lores could have the thresholds decreased.
I think ideally a lore review could consider dropping the training cost of sorcerous lore but we've never seen any TP changes since GS4 rolled in so, don't hold your breath.
>An officer of the Sorcerer Guild arrives and glances around. "Ah, there you are, Vathon!" he says in a slightly agitated tone. "I have come to formally declare that your membership privileges have been revoked."
Well, there are definitely spells on the exclusion list -- so every circle yes but very shy of every spell. And skip offensive spells and short duration ones mostly, because scroll vs. knowledge is huge there. Still, accessing every circle by this means may or may not be the powerful statement you're after (although surely I have provided no new information for you, but mainly for the discussion).
Negating lore penalty and so on would be nice; we have some advantage from the hybrid status that we can train a variety of lores for a fairly low cost. 3x in Arcane Symbols for sorcerers might help a little, though. Anyway, it seems like AS ranks should do some offset or combination with the lore penalty rather than somehow wrapping that into demonology and necromancy. Or a third lore of Arcane Studies or whatever that does this and lots of other stuff.
>I can see from your response what you are saying, I just don't see a solution that is likely to ever occur. As a balance it would seem to me that symmetry would suggest the Sorc should lose MnS and gain MjE, to share it with Wizards. Then you'd have two pures with MjE and two with MjS. However, I just can't see Sorcs with MjE. They would need to move some spells and change others, and I just don't see Simu putting that much dev work into it.
Well, I didn't actually pose a solution. If asked for a solution, rather than why it's a problem that sorcerers don't have two circles (my first reply), I think sticking to our guns on the Sorcerer Base and lores in general (sorcery but also elemental and spiritual) is the most reliable course of action. The other thing is, some way to shift the general wisdom that "sorcerers train lots of spells" as a path. I'm fine with that path existing, but I'd like to see variety more approachable for the class.
Now honestly, if I was going to ask for an existing spell circle, screw MjE. I want the Arcane Circle. Not going to happen, but I can dream, too. Screw scrolls, give me 1750. It's actually not the most insane idea I've ever suggested. 1701 isn't so different from how we use 703. And personally I'd like more than three bolt spells (but few other sorcerers would generally back me here). Everyone loves...yeah okay I'll just not rant about this right now and I'll just twitch and make barking sounds dreaming about it in my sleep later.
To keep on topic, I'll try to point out where lores specifically can be implemented further.
Star Curse should, for instance, give melee AS perks. Do it with necromancy lore.
We need a 50th level spell of DOOM. And it can have lore perks, too. A difficult point with this one is if it should be demonology or necromancy based (of old it should be major summoning). Maybe there is some way to enforce a hybrid spell but each character only gets one of them. I don't like permanent attunement (see my arguing on reset options for elemental attune), but certainly it shouldn't be something switched regularly (but possible via fixskill or an Adv Guild, SimuCoins for less than $200, etc). Dunno, have it check your lore training and give you the demon or necrotic side depending on which lore is greater.
716 should be canned, already. Honestly, as far as I'm concerned, literally delete the spell or move it into 715 already, even without a replacement. At least it gives me hope and we can really see it as a free spell circle.
We deserve some native and unique maneuver defense spell. Wizards have Blurs, Empaths have Empathic Focus, Clerics have Prayer, and sorcerers have the butthole. Maybe that can be the demonology lore bonus can provide the age-old "defensive phase". At level 4 it's not too crazy if it's only activated via some serious lore training. Dauntless 1606 gives the same benefit as Mobility 618. Or you know, stick the moonstone cubes in the 1700 circle and give us Arcane. Yeah, yeah, yeah! (That spell kind of sucks, but anyway)
Ideally if a lore-review is a once in a blue moon kind of deal, it would be nice to see the slots 716 and 750 populated first, and then a more comprehensive review is possible that doesn't depend on unknowns.
Maybe sorcerers need a third lore of some kind? It definitely has the least of them all. Some Arcane Studies or whatever? No idea ATM. But if we get a third one, the perks of existing lores could have the thresholds decreased.
I think ideally a lore review could consider dropping the training cost of sorcerous lore but we've never seen any TP changes since GS4 rolled in so, don't hold your breath.
>An officer of the Sorcerer Guild arrives and glances around. "Ah, there you are, Vathon!" he says in a slightly agitated tone. "I have come to formally declare that your membership privileges have been revoked."
>He had chores. But you're going to have a hard time convincing me that it would have made so much of a difference that using Balefire over Evil Eye>
You haven't trained well for balefire if you're tossing up a 383 AS at cap.
>incant 713
You chant a prayer to Fash'lo'nae while tracing a glowing yellow slit-pupiled eye in the air as your eyes flare with yellow light.
Your spell is ready.
You gesture at a war griffin.
You hurl a ball of greenish-black flame at a war griffin!
AS: +720 vs DS: +278 with AvD: +39 + d100 roll: +51 = +532
... and hit for 210 points of damage!
The war griffin's leg is consumed in an intense field of plasma reducing it to ash!
The war griffin screeches loudly as it cradles its mangled left leg.
The war griffin writhes in agony, its wings flapping fruitlessly as it dies.
The guiding force leaves you.
The ball of greenish-black flame strikes a war griffin, blossoming into a much larger sphere of flame upon impact.
A burst of flame from your ball of greenish-black flame flies off and hits an Ithzir scout.
... 20 points of damage!
Blistering strike to leg shrivels skin and causes excruciating pain.
A burst of flame from your ball of greenish-black flame flies off and hits an Ithzir scout.
... 25 points of damage!
Precise burst of energy causes the Ithzir scout's neck to blacken and peel.
The Ithzir scout is stunned!
A burst of flame from your ball of greenish-black flame flies off and hits a war griffin.
... 10 points of damage!
Plasma scalds the war griffin's stomach leaving painful red streaks.
A burst of flame from your ball of greenish-black flame flies off and hits a war griffin.
... 10 points of damage!
Flash burns to eye momentarily blind the war griffin.
Cast Roundtime 3 Seconds.
My splashes can hit up to 20 whatever critters in the room, and in invasions, where for whatever reason GMs design things with 600 TDs but 300 DSs, bolt spells are the only option you have.
If you train for it, it really is a quite nice spell.
You haven't trained well for balefire if you're tossing up a 383 AS at cap.
>incant 713
You chant a prayer to Fash'lo'nae while tracing a glowing yellow slit-pupiled eye in the air as your eyes flare with yellow light.
Your spell is ready.
You gesture at a war griffin.
You hurl a ball of greenish-black flame at a war griffin!
AS: +720 vs DS: +278 with AvD: +39 + d100 roll: +51 = +532
... and hit for 210 points of damage!
The war griffin's leg is consumed in an intense field of plasma reducing it to ash!
The war griffin screeches loudly as it cradles its mangled left leg.
The war griffin writhes in agony, its wings flapping fruitlessly as it dies.
The guiding force leaves you.
The ball of greenish-black flame strikes a war griffin, blossoming into a much larger sphere of flame upon impact.
A burst of flame from your ball of greenish-black flame flies off and hits an Ithzir scout.
... 20 points of damage!
Blistering strike to leg shrivels skin and causes excruciating pain.
A burst of flame from your ball of greenish-black flame flies off and hits an Ithzir scout.
... 25 points of damage!
Precise burst of energy causes the Ithzir scout's neck to blacken and peel.
The Ithzir scout is stunned!
A burst of flame from your ball of greenish-black flame flies off and hits a war griffin.
... 10 points of damage!
Plasma scalds the war griffin's stomach leaving painful red streaks.
A burst of flame from your ball of greenish-black flame flies off and hits a war griffin.
... 10 points of damage!
Flash burns to eye momentarily blind the war griffin.
Cast Roundtime 3 Seconds.
My splashes can hit up to 20 whatever critters in the room, and in invasions, where for whatever reason GMs design things with 600 TDs but 300 DSs, bolt spells are the only option you have.
If you train for it, it really is a quite nice spell.
Were I King of the Gemstone, I'd change lores to assume that a sorcerer will 1x+1. Doubling should not be required. Lores are too expensive to double as a normal training path.
Besides, double training is a silly concept for our lores. I can't think of any advantage for someone other than a sorcerer to train in them, so what are we doubling against? Can a wizard train necro-lores and get a return on investment for using our wands? I don't know. Assuming another class could do that, I'd ask them "why?" because the answer is bound to interesting on some level or another.
When sorcerers trains for the benefits of elemental or spirit lores, we can make a comparison to classes because we share a few of the same spells. I think a point or two should be shaved off the cost. Why? Because spirit and elemental lores are kind of written into our characters and the utility of these skills is on par with a wizard with necromancy lores wiggling wands. By this standard, perhaps sorcerer's lores should be a titch cheaper for non-sorcerers. Shaving off 20% of the cost for a wizard isn't going to make them more versatile by any standard, nor will it upset the apple cart of ranks for runestaves. Yes, this a benefit to other classes more than sorcerers due to the dubious utility of the training of sorcererous lores.
When a sorcerer "doubles" his or her lores, we should really be talking about training once each in both of them or twice in one of them. Should a sorcerer forego one lore to double another, I would expect their abilities to be overpowered. These aren't cheap skills; they aren't parlor magic. There should be a return for the price. The thresholds for lore effects should be lowered, while the lore price stays the same.
Since I am talking about skills, spell aiming should be looked at. Should we be doubling this skill? It's cheapness is the only reason I can think of.
It effects Implosion, Maelstrom, Balefire, Limb Disruption plus Fire Spirit. Were I to pick a spell that is not under my control, Maelstrom is it. It is a semi-disabler, chasing off creatures instead of killing them or slowing them down when it fails. There are the spectacular head hits, but that really isn't an amusing use of 10 mana points (or maybe it is). Focused Implosion and the bolt spells are fine with spell aiming, but should have a little more "uumph!" when we double. Perhaps doubling creates a chance of instantly killing one creature who was simply too close, the implosion or ball spell went right through them on the way to the target. This shouldn't be a purely sorcererous effect, everyone should get it. It should be rare, like the instant kill feature of disintegrate.
Limb Disruption is problematical with spell aiming. My issue with it is that a highly trained sorcerer has a chance of trying to knock off the same limb twice and waste 8 points of mana. This shouldn't be the default setting of a highly trained person. If a sorcerer is trained in necro and spell aiming, this should improve the spell. Should they accidentally set their aim for right hand and cast twice, training should kick in to PREVENT them from wasting mana. Either make the spell fail to go off, or have it target randomly when this happens.
Just my two silvers that should have been saved for the ale fund.
Magarven the Mad
Besides, double training is a silly concept for our lores. I can't think of any advantage for someone other than a sorcerer to train in them, so what are we doubling against? Can a wizard train necro-lores and get a return on investment for using our wands? I don't know. Assuming another class could do that, I'd ask them "why?" because the answer is bound to interesting on some level or another.
When sorcerers trains for the benefits of elemental or spirit lores, we can make a comparison to classes because we share a few of the same spells. I think a point or two should be shaved off the cost. Why? Because spirit and elemental lores are kind of written into our characters and the utility of these skills is on par with a wizard with necromancy lores wiggling wands. By this standard, perhaps sorcerer's lores should be a titch cheaper for non-sorcerers. Shaving off 20% of the cost for a wizard isn't going to make them more versatile by any standard, nor will it upset the apple cart of ranks for runestaves. Yes, this a benefit to other classes more than sorcerers due to the dubious utility of the training of sorcererous lores.
When a sorcerer "doubles" his or her lores, we should really be talking about training once each in both of them or twice in one of them. Should a sorcerer forego one lore to double another, I would expect their abilities to be overpowered. These aren't cheap skills; they aren't parlor magic. There should be a return for the price. The thresholds for lore effects should be lowered, while the lore price stays the same.
Since I am talking about skills, spell aiming should be looked at. Should we be doubling this skill? It's cheapness is the only reason I can think of.
It effects Implosion, Maelstrom, Balefire, Limb Disruption plus Fire Spirit. Were I to pick a spell that is not under my control, Maelstrom is it. It is a semi-disabler, chasing off creatures instead of killing them or slowing them down when it fails. There are the spectacular head hits, but that really isn't an amusing use of 10 mana points (or maybe it is). Focused Implosion and the bolt spells are fine with spell aiming, but should have a little more "uumph!" when we double. Perhaps doubling creates a chance of instantly killing one creature who was simply too close, the implosion or ball spell went right through them on the way to the target. This shouldn't be a purely sorcererous effect, everyone should get it. It should be rare, like the instant kill feature of disintegrate.
Limb Disruption is problematical with spell aiming. My issue with it is that a highly trained sorcerer has a chance of trying to knock off the same limb twice and waste 8 points of mana. This shouldn't be the default setting of a highly trained person. If a sorcerer is trained in necro and spell aiming, this should improve the spell. Should they accidentally set their aim for right hand and cast twice, training should kick in to PREVENT them from wasting mana. Either make the spell fail to go off, or have it target randomly when this happens.
Just my two silvers that should have been saved for the ale fund.
Magarven the Mad
>You haven't trained well for balefire if you're tossing up a 383 AS at cap. (ASPEN)
I have 2x spell aiming, nearly max (unenhanced) relevant stats, and 73 ranks of MnE. It wasn't the training, it was the lack of enhancives and AS increasing spells.
You make all of the relevant about the potential usefulness of the spell in your post: invasion TD vs. DS, splash damage, and the mutability of spell AS through enhancives and additional spells.
Silvean's Player
I have 2x spell aiming, nearly max (unenhanced) relevant stats, and 73 ranks of MnE. It wasn't the training, it was the lack of enhancives and AS increasing spells.
You make all of the relevant about the potential usefulness of the spell in your post: invasion TD vs. DS, splash damage, and the mutability of spell AS through enhancives and additional spells.
Silvean's Player
Did you have curse of the star up?
I really can't fathom 383 as if you're fully 2x in SA. It isn't just the extra enhancives and AS increasing spells I wear, you should still be around 100 points higher. Unless your dex is tanked completely or something.
Plus, another thing to remember, no one says you always have to use it. When a critter is prone or without an arm their defense to DC is exactly the same as if they're standing and whole. This is not the case with bolt spells. Even if you're not optimally trained it can be a great finisher.
My original post was about lore reviews and how I felt that my own high training in demon lore was primarily a RP decision. I believe we need a lore review. This created a diversion about hunting with bolt/ball spells since demon lore modifies the DF of that spell. Some people are passionate about defending bolt spells and I think we have covered all of the relevant advantages.
In the example, where I was making an unfair but not entirely useless comparison with Evil Eye, I did not use any AS enhancements. No curse of the star. No society powers. If I recall correctly, those easily applied abilities alone would have added ~75 to the attack strength. Of course, I do not have to go through the trouble when using warding spells.
Spirit barrier does not negatively impact bolt AS. I think it used to back in the day but that has changed.
You can look back at my original post to see the list of demon lore benefits and why I feel they do not provide much mechanical benefit to my style of playing, i.e. a CS hunter who often makes round trips from town in less than two minutes. Incidentally, I plan to buy even more expensive demon lore in the future since I feel strongly about that aspect of my character's RP.
Silvean's Player
In the example, where I was making an unfair but not entirely useless comparison with Evil Eye, I did not use any AS enhancements. No curse of the star. No society powers. If I recall correctly, those easily applied abilities alone would have added ~75 to the attack strength. Of course, I do not have to go through the trouble when using warding spells.
Spirit barrier does not negatively impact bolt AS. I think it used to back in the day but that has changed.
You can look back at my original post to see the list of demon lore benefits and why I feel they do not provide much mechanical benefit to my style of playing, i.e. a CS hunter who often makes round trips from town in less than two minutes. Incidentally, I plan to buy even more expensive demon lore in the future since I feel strongly about that aspect of my character's RP.
Silvean's Player
>I believe we need a lore review. This created a diversion about hunting with bolt/ball spells since demon lore modifies the DF of that spell. Some people are passionate about defending bolt spells and I think we have covered all of the relevant advantages.
I think, overall, everyone agrees some kind of lore review for sorcerers would be appropriate. Even posting the bolt-casting logs was probably a mistake and de-railed the entire thread. The main fact is that the lore DF benefits to 713 are very comparable to all other bolt DF lore training benefits. So whether or not 713 is a spell someone uses or likes, or needs a review itself, the lore benefits for 713 are more or less spot on and I don't expect that aspect to change at all.
As far as the lore benefit, just my two cents:
701: crap
708: crap
711: awesome
716: no comment
730: no idea, I only use the spell for fun or rescues
735: crap (the weekly limit doesn't change, and it just means you could hunt for a slightly shorter time to get the same necrotic power)
704: awesome
712: awesome
713: fair and in line with all other DF increases by lore
718: this spell is junk
725: lore benefits good, Illusions etc is horribly tedious
740: lore benefits seems more like a requirement, which must mean they are good.
I'm sure many people will have varying opinions, but from my own count, that's "1 awesome" vs. "2 awesome" so Demonology lore is mechanically better than Necromancy lore in by book, but not by any margin to write home about. But if we count "good or better" we get 5/6 for Demonology and 1/6 (or at best 2/6) for Necromancy. But anyway, this is mostly personal taste I suppose. Though when I evaluate the mechanics that way, it's sad to hear of anyone who trains in Demonology for RP but doesn't see any of the benefits I see.
>Any sorcerer lore review needs to add benefits to the 100s and 400s circles from sorcerer lores.
Something along these lines is the main point I would make about a lore review. Not necessarily this exact point, but I wager to guess Necromancy and Demonology are tied for the two worst lores in terms of the number of spells they affect. And again, we're stuck at 3 circles, 3 lore skills each with several options. 715 is influenced (in a fairly useless way) by Summoning Lore. So I'm not personally particular which way the lore review goes, and maximizing the options and appeal of lores for sorcerers in general is a good idea.
Again, as a player also of a Paladin, just the 1600 circle seriously tempts me with awesome benefits of three types of spiritual lore. I'd definitely like to see more 'unlock' type lore benefits for sorcery. (Like Web Bolt, Tonis Bolt, or Aid the Fallen on yourself, etc.)
>An officer of the Sorcerer Guild arrives and glances around. "Ah, there you are, Vathon!" he says in a slightly agitated tone. "I have come to formally declare that your membership privileges have been revoked."
I think, overall, everyone agrees some kind of lore review for sorcerers would be appropriate. Even posting the bolt-casting logs was probably a mistake and de-railed the entire thread. The main fact is that the lore DF benefits to 713 are very comparable to all other bolt DF lore training benefits. So whether or not 713 is a spell someone uses or likes, or needs a review itself, the lore benefits for 713 are more or less spot on and I don't expect that aspect to change at all.
As far as the lore benefit, just my two cents:
701: crap
708: crap
711: awesome
716: no comment
730: no idea, I only use the spell for fun or rescues
735: crap (the weekly limit doesn't change, and it just means you could hunt for a slightly shorter time to get the same necrotic power)
704: awesome
712: awesome
713: fair and in line with all other DF increases by lore
718: this spell is junk
725: lore benefits good, Illusions etc is horribly tedious
740: lore benefits seems more like a requirement, which must mean they are good.
I'm sure many people will have varying opinions, but from my own count, that's "1 awesome" vs. "2 awesome" so Demonology lore is mechanically better than Necromancy lore in by book, but not by any margin to write home about. But if we count "good or better" we get 5/6 for Demonology and 1/6 (or at best 2/6) for Necromancy. But anyway, this is mostly personal taste I suppose. Though when I evaluate the mechanics that way, it's sad to hear of anyone who trains in Demonology for RP but doesn't see any of the benefits I see.
>Any sorcerer lore review needs to add benefits to the 100s and 400s circles from sorcerer lores.
Something along these lines is the main point I would make about a lore review. Not necessarily this exact point, but I wager to guess Necromancy and Demonology are tied for the two worst lores in terms of the number of spells they affect. And again, we're stuck at 3 circles, 3 lore skills each with several options. 715 is influenced (in a fairly useless way) by Summoning Lore. So I'm not personally particular which way the lore review goes, and maximizing the options and appeal of lores for sorcerers in general is a good idea.
Again, as a player also of a Paladin, just the 1600 circle seriously tempts me with awesome benefits of three types of spiritual lore. I'd definitely like to see more 'unlock' type lore benefits for sorcery. (Like Web Bolt, Tonis Bolt, or Aid the Fallen on yourself, etc.)
>An officer of the Sorcerer Guild arrives and glances around. "Ah, there you are, Vathon!" he says in a slightly agitated tone. "I have come to formally declare that your membership privileges have been revoked."
Personally I'd rather see sorcerer lores go away and their effects be given over to spiritual and elemental lores but I've given up on that idea. The other option is to have sorcerer lores provide benefits to our minor circle in some way. As it stands now
Perhaps instead of giving sorcerer lores unique minor circle effects they could count as half a rank of another lore in minor circles. Each rank of demonology lore could count as half a rank of spirit summoning lore in the minor spirit circle and (not that it matters) maybe fire lore in the minor elemental circle. Necromancy lore could count as half a rank of blessing (cursing) in the spiritual circle and earth lore in the minor elemental circle. Again the elemental benefits don't matter until the elemental review goes in and I'm just grasping at what makes the most sense for those.
Why yes, this would allow dedicated sorcerers to reach higher lore thresholds on minor circle spells. Let's call that a hybrid bonus to start offsetting our hybrid penalties. As it stands now lores for each profession look like this:
Note: # in () is if empaths had minor mental instead of major spirit like they should.
Blessing
Summoning
Religion
Transformation
Telepathy
Manipulation
Divination
Transference
Water
Fire
Earth
Air
Necromancy
Demonology
As we can see clerics and empaths have the most spells per lore affected, followed by rangers and paladins. This is because the spiritual lore review has already taken place, while the elemental lore review has never been completed. Bards and wizards come next and both will receive a substantial boost to their numbers if the elemental lore review is ever completed as it was originally outlined. Sorcerers get as much use from spiritual lores as squares and have one spell with a minor benefit from elemental lores. The lores that affect the least spells overall for any profession? Necromancy and Demonology.
TLDR: Lore disparity is huge. Elemental Lore review is long overdue, followed by a Sorcerer lore review.
Keith/Brinret/Shiun
Be nice to Wyrom or I will cut you!
Perhaps instead of giving sorcerer lores unique minor circle effects they could count as half a rank of another lore in minor circles. Each rank of demonology lore could count as half a rank of spirit summoning lore in the minor spirit circle and (not that it matters) maybe fire lore in the minor elemental circle. Necromancy lore could count as half a rank of blessing (cursing) in the spiritual circle and earth lore in the minor elemental circle. Again the elemental benefits don't matter until the elemental review goes in and I'm just grasping at what makes the most sense for those.
Why yes, this would allow dedicated sorcerers to reach higher lore thresholds on minor circle spells. Let's call that a hybrid bonus to start offsetting our hybrid penalties. As it stands now lores for each profession look like this:
Note: # in () is if empaths had minor mental instead of major spirit like they should.
Blessing
| Class | # of Spells |
| Cleric | 20 |
| Empath | 17 (12) |
| Sorcerer | 6 |
| Ranger | 14 |
| Paladin | 14 |
| Warrior | 6 |
| Rogue | 6 |
| Monk | 6 |
Summoning
| Class | # of Spells |
| Cleric | 16 |
| Empath | 15 (9) |
| Sorcerer | 7 |
| Ranger | 16 |
| Paladin | 13 |
| Warrior | 7 |
| Rogue | 7 |
| Monk | 7 |
Religion
| Class | # of Spells |
| Cleric | 12 |
| Paladin | 7 |
Transformation
| Class | # of Spells |
| Empath | 11 (14) |
| Monk | 3 |
Telepathy
| Class | # of Spells |
| Empath | 5 (9) |
| Monk | 4 |
| Bard | 7 |
Manipulation
| Class | # of Spells |
| Empath | 5 (8) |
| Monk | 3 |
| Bard | 4 |
Divination
| Class | # of Spells |
| Empath | 0 (1) |
| Monk | 1 |
Transference
| Class | # of Spells |
| Empath | 0 (2) |
| Monk | 2 |
Water
| Class | # of Spells |
| Wizard | 5 |
| Sorcerer | 1 |
Fire
| Class | # of Spells |
| Wizard | 4 |
| Sorcerer | 1 |
Earth
| Class | # of Spells |
| Wizard | 5 |
| Sorcerer | 1 |
Air
| Class | # of Spells |
| Wizard | 8 |
| Sorcerer | 1 |
| Bard | 5 |
Necromancy
| Class | # of Spells |
| Sorcerer | 4 |
Demonology
| Class | # of Spells |
| Sorcerer | 5 |
As we can see clerics and empaths have the most spells per lore affected, followed by rangers and paladins. This is because the spiritual lore review has already taken place, while the elemental lore review has never been completed. Bards and wizards come next and both will receive a substantial boost to their numbers if the elemental lore review is ever completed as it was originally outlined. Sorcerers get as much use from spiritual lores as squares and have one spell with a minor benefit from elemental lores. The lores that affect the least spells overall for any profession? Necromancy and Demonology.
TLDR: Lore disparity is huge. Elemental Lore review is long overdue, followed by a Sorcerer lore review.
Keith/Brinret/Shiun
Be nice to Wyrom or I will cut you!
Not sure how you replied after me and counted "necromancy" as 4 and "demonology" as 5. I showed clearly that, technically, they are both six.
>An officer of the Sorcerer Guild arrives and glances around. "Ah, there you are, Vathon!" he says in a slightly agitated tone. "I have come to formally declare that your membership privileges have been revoked."
>An officer of the Sorcerer Guild arrives and glances around. "Ah, there you are, Vathon!" he says in a slightly agitated tone. "I have come to formally declare that your membership privileges have been revoked."
> Demonology lore is mechanically better than Necromancy lore in by book...
Not a chance! The benefits to 711 and 735 (including extra ensorcell flares) outweigh everything on the demonology side. Whenever a sorcerer asks me about training and the mechanically superior lore, I tell them it's necromancy even though my character is weighted toward demonology.
>But anyway, this is mostly personal taste I suppose. Though when I evaluate the mechanics that way, it's sad to hear of anyone who trains in Demonology for RP but doesn't see any of the benefits I see.
It is personal taste. I don't know if "sad" is the right word but I explain my play style and perspective on things in the first post. The issue is that the benefits to 704 and 712 don't help me. I'm always unencumbered and the rare deaths don't leave a lot of room for 712 to proc. Maybe I will try binding 130 or 740 to it again.
Not a chance! The benefits to 711 and 735 (including extra ensorcell flares) outweigh everything on the demonology side. Whenever a sorcerer asks me about training and the mechanically superior lore, I tell them it's necromancy even though my character is weighted toward demonology.
>But anyway, this is mostly personal taste I suppose. Though when I evaluate the mechanics that way, it's sad to hear of anyone who trains in Demonology for RP but doesn't see any of the benefits I see.
It is personal taste. I don't know if "sad" is the right word but I explain my play style and perspective on things in the first post. The issue is that the benefits to 704 and 712 don't help me. I'm always unencumbered and the rare deaths don't leave a lot of room for 712 to proc. Maybe I will try binding 130 or 740 to it again.
Two minutes of hunting doesn't produce too many boxes. I don't have much trouble with carrying them. Of course, this assumes I pick them up, see the original post in this thread:
http://forums.play.net/forums/GemStone%20IV/Game%20Design%20Discussions/Treasure%20System/thread/1658842
http://forums.play.net/forums/GemStone%20IV/Game%20Design%20Discussions/Treasure%20System/thread/1658842
I think you're probably in a gs3 style of hunting mindset. You hunt until you're fried, then you quit.
Most people nowadays are doing bounties, which means they hunt until the bounty is completed, which usually takes longer than just frying, hence more boxes. Or, many sorcerers will hunt until mana is depleted entirely because they're trying to max out necrojuice for ensorcell, more boxes then too.
There are a lot of ancillary skills that will be not very useful to a minimalist hunter.
Generally, I hunt in that GS3 way until I'm done with Lumnis to maximize time on node with logic enhancives; give or take an easy bounty. If I have time to hunt after those six hours, I do pick up boxes or spend more time in the field for more difficult bounties. This seems a legitimate way to play for maximum xp gain while giving me the freedom to roleplay or write IC essays while on a node. You're right that our lore benefit to phase could be useful; it may be the most useful of the demon lore benefits.
I think our need for a lore review is obvious to everyone. It is piled up with a number of other important development areas for the game.
I think our need for a lore review is obvious to everyone. It is piled up with a number of other important development areas for the game.
