|
Post by desocupado on Mar 7, 2014 11:03:21 GMT
So, the new ideas around: I'd add:
|
|
|
Post by Yojimbo on Mar 7, 2014 13:44:12 GMT
So, the new ideas around: I'd add: #1: A drunk suggested the extra spell effects and Im not too keen on it though it wasn't all bad and it wasn't all spell edits it was also about more spells in general. #2: It seemed was more of a remark of how the Pen and Paper version worked in comparison to how the game works though I am not sure I am opposed to this myself #3: Additional SP is one of the effects of Channeling and would step too much in the realm of Sorcs though I could see this as a bonus to Specialization if it is not currently. #4: Auto Meta is interesting but seems Overpowered to me or complicated to determine what auto meta it will be #5: Well this is just crazy that would give pure wizards 3 uses of their epics, 4 if the have the PSK, this is just clearly OP I think improvements to Specializations could help as well a pure wizard carrot. Some of this also brought up something that I do have a small issue with the spell slot bonus of the Sorc works, granted to a lesser degree, for QCs but a Wizard has no bonus that follows to its QCs namely the caster focused QC of Theurge which were doubly hurt but the spell slot nerf having to split their gear somewhat. I can't think of anything that can be done for a Wizard, other than some of the mentioned changes effecting spell consumption, that would allow that cross over but just something to throw out and maybe turn some gears.
|
|
|
Post by FunkySwerve on Mar 7, 2014 16:02:07 GMT
I play 2 wizards, 1 pure demi2 @ lvl 80, and 1 lootmage @ 78. That's pretty much all i play anymore. I don't have a school spec in either one and have no probs soloing areas or play in party. I am by my own admission a fair player, I.E., middle of the pack so to speak. I'm no pro by any means. I also have a lvl 60 sorc that although i know packs more punch, i am loath to play due to the usual limitations ( spells schools/spell selection ) I find a wiz or wiz/rogue much more adaptable to any area i go , whether alone or with others. A few of you posting admitted not even playing a wiz, yet you want to change them. Why? IF IT AIN'T BROKE, DON'T FIX IT. Some may think differently and that's cool, but think about this; if Funky does go and implement any of these changes , you can be SURE that 6 months from that happening, people will start whining about how "wizards are too powerful, yada yada yada. . . A couple from this post even. And then it will start again, like we all have seen over the years, another nerf. I have so many toons i don't even play anymore due to past nerfs, hours lost, some are demi toons- only to find their damage has been cut by 1/3, or major loss to spell slots, etc. People have up and left the game because of this, and we don't need that at all. I have never played a theurge, or a Herald, or even a Palemaster for that matter, and i would never assume to think how they should work in the first place unless i have taken the time to make one and play it for a few months. Would i like to see the wizard more powerful? Who wouldn't. But don't. It's fine just the way it is. I'm done. Let er rip. Pin This post made me wish you were open to being a DM. Bravo. Funky
|
|
|
Post by Raj on Mar 7, 2014 17:35:20 GMT
It's funny when the wizard player doesn't want to receive a power boost while sorcs players feel bad and want to buff him Anyway, people shall play both. Those who did know where the imbalance lies.
|
|
|
Post by desocupado on Mar 7, 2014 21:05:09 GMT
Cutting on less Spell school would be a good carrot for pure wizard (and would incentive specialization). So at 41, they would go to the spell altar, and "due their intensive arcane training", they would recover a lost school. For the sake of simplicity I'd add a few simpler carrots for specialized wizard (regardless of being pure): [/font] +2 to spell penetration with spells from spec school.[/ul] Yeah, it's a significant amount of spell penetration, but, that would make a Rogue 1 splash wizard, get the same SP (with just one school) as a pure sorcerer gets with all of them. How about a Legendary Polymath feat as well? (Requiring High lore)
|
|
|
Post by chirality on Mar 7, 2014 21:42:25 GMT
I don't understand why you think a loot wiz should have comparable SP to a pure sorc (or should be the beneficiary of any improvement intended to benefit specialist wizards with the intent of having a more powerful caster). Sure, if wizard overall gets some improvement that hits lootmage then I won't complain, but having a lootmage specialist with better firepower than current pure wizard seems a bit off, especially since the lootmage option seems to me a primary reason for why wizards have lasted this long lurking in sorc's shadow: it's hard to justify wiz buff, and hard to prove "sorc vs wiz" argument, when there's plenty of loot wizards running around (and surely always will be until CL ego is removed or 1rogue splash is nerfed) and nearly everyone agrees that they're decently valuable and useful. "Respectably powerful enough to get job done mage" + rogue duties; it's not designed as pure caster powerhouse from the start; it's a "powerful" build option that never faded in popularity. There's really no shortcoming for rog splash wizard; it's awesomely synergistic and it provides a "useful" (or at least decently-popular) party member; there's really no shortage of rog1/wiz39 toons to be found, nor is there any real complaint that this build option needs an improvement. It's pretty hard to concretely indicate exactly in what ways a pure wizard is a better option than rog splash, especially after considering elf race as well--perfect as well, offering perfect rogue skill complements (fast searching + Able Learner) and even immunity to annoying sleep. After CL ego it's no contest vs. a pure wiz (loss = what, 1 potential DC from lacking potential DC ego, and DC arena is already fail for wiz vs. sorc). I don't mean to keep ranting about rog splash wiz, but I think "sorc vs wiz" improvement train is doomed to fail (again) without clearly stating that wizards aren't "bad" (100% solid class by any independent measure of "is it strong enough to pwn the game"; just lacking when compared to sorc) and that loot mages aren't a good indicator of balance health for pure wizards. (just considering based on past discussions with Funky about it and his recent post which seems to indicate complete lack of mercy We gotta make a better case or otherwise the wiz apologists like Pin will win!
|
|
|
Post by desocupado on Mar 7, 2014 22:00:06 GMT
I don't understand why you think a loot wiz should have comparable SP to a pure sorc (or should be the beneficiary of any improvement intended to benefit specialist wizards with the intent of having a more powerful caster). Sure, if wizard overall gets some improvement that hits lootmage then I won't complain, but having a lootmage specialist with better firepower than current pure wizard seems a bit off, especially since the lootmage option seems to me a primary reason for why wizards have lasted this long lurking in sorc's shadow: it's hard to justify wiz buff, and hard to prove "sorc vs wiz" argument, when there's plenty of loot wizards running around (and surely always will be until CL ego is removed or 1rogue splash is nerfed) and nearly everyone agrees that they're decently valuable and useful. "Respectably powerful enough to get job done mage" + rogue duties; it's not designed as pure caster powerhouse from the start; it's a "powerful" build option that never faded in popularity. There's really no shortcoming for rog splash wizard; it's awesomely synergistic and it provides a "useful" (or at least decently-popular) party member; there's really no shortage of rog1/wiz39 toons to be found, nor is there any real complaint that this build option needs an improvement. It's pretty hard to concretely indicate exactly in what ways a pure wizard is a better option than rog splash, especially after considering elf race as well--perfect as well, offering perfect rogue skill complements (fast searching + Able Learner) and even immunity to annoying sleep. After CL ego it's no contest vs. a pure wiz (loss = what, 1 potential DC from lacking potential DC ego, and DC arena is already fail for wiz vs. sorc). I don't mean to keep ranting about rog splash wiz, but I think "sorc vs wiz" improvement train is doomed to fail (again) without clearly stating that wizards aren't "bad" (100% solid class by any independent measure of "is it strong enough to pwn the game"; just lacking when compared to sorc) and that loot mages aren't a good indicator of balance health for pure wizards. (just considering based on past discussions with Funky about it and his recent post which seems to indicate complete lack of mercy We gotta make a better case or otherwise the wiz apologists like Pin will win! Do you have a loot mage with spec (and 2 less schools). You didn't get any buff per last suggestion. (unless we have a Legendary Polymath feat - which is far from a sound sugestion)
|
|
|
Post by chirality on Mar 7, 2014 22:17:22 GMT
No, I don't have such a toon.
I agree specialization needs an improvement to be worth considering as a "powerful class feature akin to channel/extra slots". It even needs improvement to be less than that (to even be legit) in light of post-abyss world. I guess if specialization is improved then naturally rog splash specialist should receive the buff. But my point was that it seems obfuscating to use that as a specific example in your post (why compare theoretical lootwiz specialist vs. pure sorc)--I'm talking about trying to focus on what class option (pure or splash) needs improvement.
And given lack of pure carrot (such as in sorc case) it's really not the supercool int-based mage with full rogue skills that needs improvement; it's the pure option that not only fails vs looter but total fails vs. pure sorc. But sure, if I understand your point correctly, then you're right I was offtrack with the rog splash SP argument. Nevermind.
What is Legendary Polymathy meant to be? I saw you mentioned it before (requiring high lore?) but I'm not clear on what this does?
|
|
|
Post by desocupado on Mar 7, 2014 22:21:56 GMT
No, I don't have such a toon. I agree specialization needs an improvement to be worth considering as a "powerful class feature akin to channel/extra slots". It even needs improvement to be less than that (to even be legit) in light of post-abyss world. I guess if specialization is improved then naturally rog splash specialist should receive the buff. But my point was that it seems obfuscating to use that as a specific example in your post (why compare theoretical lootwiz specialist vs. pure sorc)--I'm talking about trying to focus on what class option (pure or splash) needs improvement. And given lack of pure carrot (such as in sorc case) it's really not the supercool int-based mage with full rogue skills that needs improvement; it's the pure option that not only fails vs looter but total fails vs. pure sorc. But sure, if I understand your point correctly, then you're right I was offtrack with the rog splash SP argument. Nevermind. What is Legendary Polymathy meant to be? I saw you mentioned it before (requiring high lore?) but I'm not clear on what this does? Paragon of Polymath (existing paragon feat) grants the use per day of any Paragon Arcane spell, a legendary version would grant the use of any arcane epic spell. It was an idea to give a slight buff to a wizard. Perhaps, a Pure wizard could get such feature for free (thus giving a cool carrot, and eliminating this lousy suggestion as a feat) - or learn a single (not changeable) Epic spell he doesn't qualify for. edit - In addition to the suggestion given earlier - less specialization penalty
|
|
|
Post by mish on Mar 7, 2014 22:36:57 GMT
Remove spell school restrictions from specializing for pure wizard only.
|
|
|
Post by desocupado on Mar 7, 2014 23:20:01 GMT
Remove spell school restrictions from specializing for pure wizard only. In this light: How about 1 blocked school for non-pure, and no blocked schools for pure?
|
|
|
Post by azpride on Mar 8, 2014 1:34:10 GMT
Anyone who knows me knows I have never played a sorc, nor will I ever. I am a Wizard and Pale Master player. I have played both pure wizard and lootmage.
Do sorcs have more of a draw than wizards, yes. I like it that way. I love being the "underdog" so to speak. I enjoy having 1/3 the spell slots and still being able to outplay most, if not all sorcs. For me, it is about proving that you don't need to play an overpowered class to be an overpowered player.
I will take my wizards over any sorcs on the server. We don't need to buff wizards, players just need to be motivated and actually learn the toon and its advantages, rather than begging for upgrades so they can be lazy like sorcs are, for the most part. Work at your craft and you will be rewarded.
My 2 cents,
Az
|
|
|
Post by mish on Mar 8, 2014 11:11:47 GMT
In this light: How about 1 blocked school for non-pure, and no blocked schools for pure? The point people were trying to make is splash wiz/loot mage are perfectly fine, with little to no carrot for taking 1 more level.
|
|
|
Post by theultimatesin on Mar 8, 2014 12:21:54 GMT
Why I got to get called lazy for preferring sorcerers to wizards?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 8, 2014 13:34:39 GMT
Why I got to get called lazy for preferring sorcerers to wizards? I think you are also lazing for taking Great Charisma X. Play with Great Charisma 2 like a real man and see how the game is meant to be played.
|
|