|
Post by thomascovenant on Mar 7, 2020 14:09:20 GMT
Buffing the familiar would be one way, but would be very time-intensive as balancing summons is a real pita This would be great to have the wizz pet receive the same buffing a wizz receive from his buf, i mean when wizz buff himself in the same time his pet receive the exactly same buffing. Some pets like from Shime of summoning have have no weapon then impossible to buff them weapons is this can be possible to make te same as weapon buff apply on them ?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 7, 2020 15:52:00 GMT
One could argue that you only need to make one wiz, ever. But to be effective in different areas, you have to make several sorcs. Abo sorc... Hell/Ely sorc... Abyss sorc and finally Limbo sorc. Perhaps even a mechanus sorc. Each one is tailored to that area although there is some overlap. But to be the most effective, essentially they are built with those areas in mind.
To be most effective, the sorc is either reincd with each new area or you level a fresh one. That timesink is a type of balance imo. The spontaneous spellbook is absolutely why I love to play a sorc. My wiz opens the AA.
|
|
|
Post by simpetar on Mar 7, 2020 16:56:18 GMT
One could argue that you only need to make one wiz, ever. But to be effective in different areas, you have to make several sorcs. Abo sorc... Hell/Ely sorc... Abyss sorc and finally Limbo sorc. Perhaps even a mechanus sorc. Each one is tailored to that area although there is some overlap. But to be the most effective, essentially they are built with those areas in mind. It is very difficult, if not outright impossible to fit all the required schools and foci for all areas. Wizards get 4 more pre-epic feats over sorcs which, if arranged carefully, translates to 1 more LSF. That is not enough to cover everything. With new areas the meta changes - for instance very few people would even touch Abjuration or Enchantment before Abyss, and these 2 schools are very desiarble in Limbo now. It is easier and more cost (effort) effective to level up a new specialized sorc than a new specialized wizard who will suffer in the end game anyways because all the reasons described thousand times over.
|
|
|
Post by chirality on Mar 7, 2020 18:03:22 GMT
1. Cantrips Character with 30 levels of wizard (not LL) may cast spells using lvl 1 slots for free at will. Lvl 1 spell slots are protected from any kind of amnesia. At wiz lvl 35, these benefits apply also to slots of lvl 2, and at wiz 40 for slots lvl 3. - thought behind this: This would give wizards some degree of on-the-fly flexibility that sorcs have. Low level spells are by definition weaker than high level ones (so nothing too OP), and this way wizards can still have some answer to most situations. i like this alot, altho to make a quick derail, this, as well as @deso suggestion for preserving or recharging slots etc, i think stuff like this (esp rn) is best achieved using some simpler bruteforce mechanic like "give +30 L1 slots" (that would effectively be the same as free at will), and "wizard is given amni imm @ L X if meeting class combo/quasi status Y and Z" <-- sounds OP but hey no i think this would be legit. seriously give wizards amni imm bro. that's not even that crazy, makes sense, fits flavor theme balance even (seriously wizards getting amnied is really bad, esp if you JUST redid your book for that map and then it's almost time for next one by the time you get back from resting--seriously it's really funkilling) 3. More damage increase For legendary non quasi wizards, Spellcraft increases exotic (and wannabe exotic like desiccating or force, but not esoteric) damage of spells the same way Lore increases elemental damage. That is, exotic damage of spells increases by +1% per point of Spellcraft above 20, up to +100% at Spellcraft 120. this idea rules, implement it asap please if possible 4. Slightly off-topic, but related: Buff Greater Ruin Greater Ruin gains +1 DC per 2 Paragon Levels the caster has, up to DC 75 at caster level 80. In addition, if the target is vulnerable to Dismissal, Banishment or Unname, they will also be destroyed if they fail the saving throw, regardless of other immunities. not sure if he's specifically saying this should be a general buff (not just for wizards) but yeah, definitely agreed, implement this asap plz if possible
|
|
|
Post by chirality on Mar 7, 2020 18:35:12 GMT
One could argue that you only need to make one wiz, ever. But to be effective in different areas, you have to make several sorcs. Abo sorc... Hell/Ely sorc... Abyss sorc and finally Limbo sorc. Perhaps even a mechanus sorc. Each one is tailored to that area although there is some overlap. But to be the most effective, essentially they are built with those areas in mind. To be most effective, the sorc is either reincd with each new area or you level a fresh one. That timesink is a type of balance imo. The spontaneous spellbook is absolutely why I love to play a sorc. My wiz opens the AA. Yeah, that final line is all my wizard does too. But seriously, I want to do my best to address this because this really highlights what I've long tried to get across in regards to the sorc v wiz or just wiz period discussions. So first of all, and this is not to nitpick or troll, but I disagree about one wizard. If wizard was really really good and attractive (aka if I had to pick between playing a sorc, or playing a wiz that's inherently amni imm for example ;P ), I would definitely have more than 1, of slightly varying builds, for differing purposes, just like sorc for sure. Once you're at the point of 1 DC, or even 2 DC, not being necessarily the end of the world, wizard opens up a lot of options in terms of meaningful build decisions, because (since generalist is basically universal) you can load up on an extra school or 2 for more epics, or maybe take some non-spell-oriented feats to be tankier (kind of like the tanky variant limbo sorc concept) or whatever. And I definitely wouldn't have an 8 school wizard only, or a specialized Run1InstakillSchool1+School2 wizard only, I'd have both, and a Run2PreferredSchool1+School2 specced one too. Anyway though, back on topic, this is the thing that I may have some difficulty locating atm, but I swear I have read in the past wrt wizards. I dunno it probably wasn't funky himself but I swear I read stuff along the lines of like "sorc you have to make a bunch and wizard you can just have 1 so that's balanced" and I always do my best to rail against this as a balancing mechanism because it's so nonsensical from a standpoint of what class is more popular in the meta and for what reason(s). Like the thing with sorcs is they're better, and pros don't care about having a minimum amount of toons in their vault or something, it's not like anyone ever was like "oh god I have 1 sorc already I can't make another one, I'll just make a wizard instead", I mean everyone has multiple sorcs because it's the better class and HG is balanced in a way that no single caster build can be 100% optimal across the entire mod, again, if wizards were clearly stronger than sorcs, everyone would just have hell wizard, Abo wizard, and so forth still. No one would just play 1 wizard supoptimally in every zone for the sake of only having one arcane toon to play. That's just not how the minmax mindset works. Now this is interesting to harp on when I also recently mentioned using reincing and the vault environment (vs the ingame what class is played rn at a given time) as useful tools to help buff wizards. So why does that make sense? Well, because what I'm saying is let wizards reinc virtually free or whatever; this would allow you to mess around with a wizard with no penalty! you could endlessly reinc into the best wizard possible for the given run. then maybe you COULD have only one wiz, ever (not really though that's still a lot of work, reincing on the fly for a PUG isn't what I mean--maybe more like a scheduled weekly). But aside from that, you could go back into another (better, lul) class any time. So I think it would create more wizards and more carrot to play them, simply by introducing a novel thing to do. fast food advertising logic, i dunno. Offtrack again but look, the sorc vs wiz debate is predicated on their ingame power, period. At least for the minmax balance that has to kind of be the ultimate factor for arbitration. Maybe some people do find "needing" multiple sorcs to make them play wizards more, but I doubt it, and if so, they're obviously casuals (no offense meant). On the note of "needing" multiple sorcs tho, I didn't even touch on this yet but, there's a large amt of forum discussion over the years pointing out with very detailed analysis, that (even still today, altho admittedly limbo changed the meta a bit and obviously mechanus will again) sorc really has so much flexibility that even an average "minmax minded vet" can easily have *one* sorc that performs at 100% or virtually optimal capacity in nearly any pre-limbo run (yes, abyss ely hells, abo exception cuz of prismatic spray, i'll allow that one spell to make a bigger than 1-5% margin of error on optimal minmax performance!--being the classic pre-limbo-update RG, ESK:VI for chainlightning,PWKmordsED,transnecillusevo,w/gsfdiv swapon for pwk when RARELY! needed), and with only 2 sorcs, you have completely covered either limbo and prelimbo content minus abo, or all prelimbo content, within almost 100% optimal excellence; only thing lacking is "max" DC on abj/div and some useful epics, but again sorc is so OP it realllllllllllly doesn't matter. i don't consider u2d nearly as big of an impact in ely as a long pygros fight is in abos, so yes I really do think the hell/abyss sorc is 100% suited for ely. anyway, yeah. not only is sorc far more flexible than what should be reasonable, but also wizard isn't a one build miracle class either, again HG is better balanced than that--the closest we get is sorcs, which again *basically is the one build miracle class* but i'm so tired of circling around and around this for years. maybe i need to just copy and paste some old threads too for background material.
|
|
|
Post by FunkySwerve on Mar 7, 2020 19:00:06 GMT
Offtrack again but look, the sorc vs wiz debate is predicated on their ingame power, period. 100% agree. The number you have to make is not a factor I'm going to consider. On another note, I'm also not going to consider another unlimited school for wizard - I'm reticent enough about one. Bottom line is we probably need to reduce sorc's bonus slots. This is the core of the problem, but no one wants to suggest it, likely out of fear of alienating fellow players. That said, I'm a fan of classical conservatism, which suggests small changes. And I don't want to change anything until we get to Mechanus, to avoid over-long run times. And, I recognize that sorcs have had too many slots for a long time now, and while I don't regard that as creating an entitlement to them, I completely understand if people get upset at the idea of a nerf. So, I'm going to plan to reduce them incrementally, while looking for small tweaks to wizards, judging them by these criteria: 1. Low dev time cost 2. Unique to the wizard class 3. In theme with the wizard class 4. Unlikely to create more balance issues than they solve 5. (Corollary to 4) Incremental in power difference In short, I want to shape wizards thematically without stepping on the toes of other classes, and increase their power slowly. The familiar edits fall afoul of #1. The free casts i specialty school, of 5, and maybe 4. I think that with a reduction in sorc slots, it might be spot on, and it definitely fits 1 and 3. 2...sort of. The idea of giving wizards more epics is interesting, but sort of in violation of #3. Their hallmark is breadth of knowledge, in contrast to sorcs. That suggests making new spells for them, but that falls afoul of #1 until we have more dev time available (I'm intent on pushing Mechanus quickly). I've added new spedific spell vulns to Mechanus, and am aiming to have enough of each in a given run that a sorc will have great difficulty in covering them all, though that may be infeasible given the number of runs and the areas various monsters will be spawning in - too early to tell. I like the thrust of some of the smaller edits, and would like to continue brainstorming until we can fix this. Funky
|
|
|
Post by woqued on Mar 7, 2020 19:36:34 GMT
I don't mind the sorc slot nerf, but I don't understand how it makes wizards better. They will still stink, and pariah/theurge are superior to a wizard even after Sorcs have been nerfed - and sorcs will still be superior to wizards just force them to use one slot piece more, or invest heavier on augs.
It's not about pissing off fellow players,, no alienation or anything among those lines. Just completely disagree with the goal and method aligning in this scenario.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 7, 2020 19:49:31 GMT
If sorc slots are nerfed, I would still not play a wiz. I would just invest in slot gear and/or rest more /bio. Sounds like it would just slow down the game which to me is more annoying.
|
|
|
Post by woqued on Mar 7, 2020 19:55:45 GMT
If sorc slots are nerfed, I would still not play a wiz. I would just invest in slot gear and/or rest more /bio. Sounds like it would just slow down the game which to me is more annoying. Well I mean sorcs have a crapton of slots, they would do fine with the amount Pariahs have. But that won't fix wizards.
|
|
|
Post by desocupado on Mar 7, 2020 20:06:22 GMT
Well reverting the amount of (bonus) slots between wizards and sorcerers might be a way to make them preferable to sorcerers in a way. However I don't think this will make either any more fun to play.
It might be simpler to remove the wizards altogether, because they have nothing unique besides 4 bonus feats and specialization. It is more fun to play a sorcerer because of spontaneous casting.
More extra feats could be thematic - let's say reading two tomes of epic arcane knowledge instead of one. For all I care they could read all of them and I'd still prefer the current sorcerer over them due spontaneous casting. Still eating lots of tomes (all of them) does seem pretty thematic. It'd bring the fantasy of "being able to go anywhere with a perfect selection of spells" to life too. So at least it'd be quite appropriate.
Working on !sb load !sb save are worth way more the effort and does buff them at the same time.
|
|
|
Post by Paradoom on Mar 7, 2020 20:09:53 GMT
I think noone suggested to nerf the slots of sorcs, because it doesnt solve any of the wizard problems. It just weakens sorcs a little in having to rest more, but will not encourage any wizard playing. Increasing the slots for wizards on the other hand has an impact, since it allows to use more of that spell variety and/or make better use of metamagics. As Sorc I can just silience/extend/empower/maximize anything I want whenever I want (good part of what makes them so much more popular). Having a decent chance of not using up a spell would also grant some more flex as wizard, as is one of the change suggestions. Reason: You see Wizards as broad knowledge characters. But it is also deep knowledge and making them use their spells much more efficiently and need less power with the same result (that´s how I see it at least).
Let me spin that idea of many different spells required a bit: If I have to use like 5-6 different spells randomly in random amounts per slot level during a run, I become overburdend to manage that as wizard or rather makes it stressful just to not dare to use the wrong spell. I doubt it will be fun to play. And I could add another quickslot bar or two as it is already. Also, if you make a run demanding that many different specialized spells, you´ll hear the sorcs whining again about "needing" more spells (not slots). On top of all that I can have one LL foci (costly!) more than a sorc. Not sure that is really enough for foci amounts and power wise.
|
|
|
Post by chirality on Mar 7, 2020 20:21:11 GMT
Would rather reduce sorcs to make them line up before adding for wiz. I recognize that sorcs have had too many slots for a long time now, and while I don't regard that as creating an entitlement to them, I completely understand if people get upset at the idea of a nerf. Just to be clear, I don't think fear of alienation is preventing anyone from suggesting this, and I also think that no one suggested it because no one wants it, not in a "greedy" way (to continue taking advantage of something that's OP) but rather just in a "it's the benchmark" way. I didn't really get into that in any of my posts, but I don't think nerfing sorc slots is a solution. My feeling--fact or not, in practice it's pretty much accurate--is that sorc got a bit overbuffed with channelling and bonus slots, to make up for inherent vanilla weakness. I don't think the overbuff nature of these customizations was readily apparent for a long time, let alone at first; and I think the evolution of the mod itself just organically grew to favor sorcs more than wizards due to spontaneous casting (again, even aside from getting into raw SP/DC factors such as channel etc). And to be super extra clear on that note--about spont casting being favored--it's NOT an issue; the reason spontaneous casting is so extra good here is because of randoms and varied runs and blahblah, let's leave it at that. So if spontaneous casting is a huge factor in making sorcs OP, but we shouldn't change that, then what do we do? Well, buff wizards more. Anyway, offtrack again...so yeah about sorc slot nerf, Some of the more recent changes were well-intended and did achieve a bit of progress toward the future goal of re-adjusting the tank meta, but ultimately they resulted in a bit sloggier runs. I think right now anything that even remotely threatens to increase runtime or negatively impact efficiency is just not only a bad thing for balance but will be universally reviled. I mentioned lately but in regards to the meta since RG nerf, tanks really had to "take over" and pull more weight in terms of raw DPS output, essentially covering what was previously (not always, ofc, but for a while since RG/fiss and PLs) also held as a job by shifter and arcane and druid a lil too. So now we have more reliance on more glasscannon tanks for dps, now when casters got another nerf in the form of dex-favoring (in theory/intent) mob changes, 2hers further got pressed into an actually expanding list of bash targets and a lower list of caster insta trash targets! crazy, well anyway so now we have like just some nerfs that make stuff sloggier and sorcs getting handed a slot nerf would just be aggravating and again, not really close the gap between wizard, in that the gap is primarily created by 2 other factors than the bonus slots; to wit, spontaneous casting (again, just a fact of life, it's fine, just we'll need to give wiz extra love to compensate) and channelling (directly responsible for the raw quantifiable SP/DC difference). So, I know buffing wizard to sorc level sounds like a poor balance choice, but I think the nuances of this comparison should make for a case where, heretically, actually buffing something to be closer to the OP thing's level, isn't bad. I know it's just a cardinal sin, I know. I'm just saying though, I didn't go into detail above but this is really important stuff to consider. The fact that wizards can't spontaneously cast, spellbook is crap QoL, these things just are not gonna change (many have tried, RIP autofill, but all have failed). I know from all this it seems logical to say that well you claim sorc was overbuffed so just nerf it a little then and it solves the problem right? But this is more about inventing replacement pegs to fit into holes that got a peg nerfed out of existence or shapechanged so it no longer fits, than it is about changing the holes to fit the pegs. Wtf? I know, I know, okay what I mean is we need to fill the void left by OP stuff. Like I think overnerf is worse than overbuff. Overbuff goes along naturally with powercreep and you can always make the game harder. Overnerf just leaves a trail of broken spells and classes and items, and usually leaves something else still OP anyway. FunkySwerve also, thanks for the response above on this page, the writeup is very helpful and informative for purpose of suggestions/progressing these themes
|
|
|
Post by woqued on Mar 7, 2020 20:50:08 GMT
Would rather reduce sorcs to make them line up before adding for wiz. I recognize that sorcs have had too many slots for a long time now, and while I don't regard that as creating an entitlement to them, I completely understand if people get upset at the idea of a nerf. the gap between wizard, in that the gap is primarily created by 2 other factors than the bonus slots; to wit, spontaneous casting (again, just a fact of life, it's fine, just we'll need to give wiz extra love to compensate) and channelling (directly responsible for the raw quantifiable SP/DC difference). Overnerf just leaves a trail of broken spells and classes and items, and usually leaves something else still OP anyway. FunkySwerve also, thanks for the response above on this page, the writeup is very helpful and informative for purpose of suggestions/progressing these themes These points. Now personally I wouldn't mind Sorcs being dropped to the 33% slots mark, that would be completely fine for what it's worth, I just wouldn't do it with the goal of boosting wizards. Sidenote: I still won't make more sorcs than the one I have, nor wizards - I might make a Pariah again if they become uniquely fun again as 20/20 class spread somehow. Not everyone has multiple sorcs with complete domination of different areas in the module in mind. Paraphrasing bale from another conversation: (sorry if I butcher it) Pure sorcs got boosted to make it worth to not have every sorc splash paladin -> ok, autochanneling, that'll do. Pure wizards got boosted to make it worth to not have every wizard be a lootmage -> ok, they are pure now. Now what, wait we didn't get anything except the 1 wizard level. (hint: we need something equivalent in power to Auto-channeling and channeling) and the gap has significantly diminished. Unequal treatment among the classes is what lead to this on top of one of them just happens to be plain more fun to play than the other, at least in group environment doing stuff we've done many times already. I don't know if that had anything to do with the reasoning why Autochanneling ever became a thing, or what reason there was to add all those slots - but wizards wouldn't mind getting something similar.
|
|
|
Post by madzapper on Mar 8, 2020 1:34:47 GMT
If sorc slots are nerfed, I would still not play a wiz. I would just invest in slot gear and/or rest more /bio. Sounds like it would just slow down the game which to me is more annoying. Well I mean sorcs have a crapton of slots, they would do fine with the amount Pariahs have. But that won't fix wizards. It may not fix wizards, but one aspect to consider is when party wants to rest. As a wizard, you absolutely need to rest more often. You become the one holding up the party or unable to participate. Reducing the slots on sorc has an effect of allowing the wizard to contribute more rather than being told "There's only one or two spawns left"... Sure, I'll stand around for a while watching everyone do the work while I wait till it's time to rest.
|
|
|
Post by FunkySwerve on Mar 8, 2020 1:41:26 GMT
I have to admit I get a kick out of player reactions to proposing nerfs. I think at least 4 of you posted that it won't fix the problem with wizards, but I didn't suggest it would, only that it would help bring them closer together, which is the goal. There was a time when sorcs never got play because of lack of spell diversity, which changed when we introduced all the edits. Those classes serve roles which are to an extent non-replaceable, and so balancing them is inextricably linked. Yes, we also need to consider balance against other classes, but that was contemplated by my post, and my explicitly saying we wouldn't do anything to slow runs in the interim. Sorc edits are part of what caused this problem, and constantly upping class power in response to imbalance is not sustainable. That said, I know people are happy with sorcs atm, so any edits will be incremental, to reduce the disparity. As I said, wizards will also get thematic increases to improve the class. I'll respond to specific posts later, but want to get some work in on Mechanus. Funky
|
|