|
Post by bingthehonest on Apr 16, 2024 21:34:25 GMT
guys can i tell you a secret? there hasn't been a remotely meaningful update for this server in over 3 years! besides we already know what the answer to any wizard balancing ideas is... "wait until mechanus is out in 2030 before making any suggestions, its totally gonna change everything yo!!11!!"so not really sure why y'all keep trying to pitch these ideas that have 0% chance of ever happening. good luck to all the daydreamers
|
|
|
Post by chirality on Apr 16, 2024 23:06:00 GMT
nice bait but i'll take it seriously can't wait for your post #3 after another 5-year interlude, so that should line up with your 2030 timeframe slated new spell updates for wizard like spell matrix/spell engine would be helpful, depending on how exactly they're implemented. if it's good and strong, it would go a long way toward fixing the spellbook/slot issue. i am not personally a fan of the concept because it seems too difficult to implement and/or employ by the player successfully--too complicated. however, that doesn't detract from the point and/or the angle. the "new spells/new areas" angle has always been a really bad argument unfortunately, but at least as of several years ago, i know there was some dev team acknowledgement that something other "than new spells that worked in new areas" simply isn't enough, hence an approach like spell engine and some nifty proposed school-specific perks for specialization. i would favor a +CL/DC scheme that scales with level as a very simple and effective way to improve wizard brute power. it's fun and rewarding in a way to play the class when you know the run and the mobs really well and can set up your spellbook "optimally" based on the party and the run, but there are 2 glaring downsides, or 3, if we count total lack of slots. ignoring that, for the moment, though, the first issue is that setting up spellbook is time-consuming and annoying, and the impact of this on the run enjoyment dramatically increases the more powerful/skillful the party is/the faster the run goes. the second issue is that due to the "low" (again, compared to sorc, anyway) slots and lack of a powerful zero-time-investment SP booster like pm or pariah, and with DC booster limited to only spec school (if applicable, which again, is not rewarding enough to be worth 2 banned schools for normal wizards), even an "optimal" spellbook loadout isn't really that rewarding or impactful, due to the difference of 2-3 wasted spells combined with the impact of varying spawns+randoms. i don't favor nerfing sorc slots at this time because it would only swing the game even more into a low-finesse, low-skill, xr-tank-wielding slugfest, which already became slower after 2h% nerf. i don't think nerfing sorc slots is a solution to making the game more fun or make wizards better. the complaint of sorc tank quasis not having enough slots is something that needs to be fixed within those quasis and is really tangential to a discussion about buffing wizards. i haven't played pariah in a long time but my feeling with pariah was that the lack of slots vs sorc is definitely noticeable and lame but it's not nearly as soul-crushing as wizard or bk/bfm. pariah should probably just get full sorc 33% bonus slots, as there isn't really any good reason for it not to. i think the solution is making wizard stronger and more fun, which something like spell matrix/spell engine would hopefully do, as well as (hopefully/probably) reward the skill/knowledge of players, as well. however, a scheme like OP, which has been suggested in various forms in the past as well, is a really simple way to give wizards more bang for their slot buck, which is really what the spellbook management and low slot issue comes down to. i also don't think that specialization banning 2 schools is inherently a failed concept--it's just that the rewards are not great enough. as i mentioned above, the fact is simply that arcane prepared spell caster in this mod doesn't work as a "versatile generalist" but it is successful as a specialist, which is why pm is valued across the entire mod. specialization only working for pm and to abuse splashes is a really sad thing, but it could be fixed by making specialization better, which is again something that was proposed by giving spell-specific perks to schools with specialization. that's one way of doing it, but another way would also to just making the DC/SP stronger. i think giving (non-quasi, CC) wizards a DC/SP boost across the board like +1 or 2, like OP, and then a further bonus to spec school, would be great. the rebuttal to this line of thought has historically been "raw power is sorc thing so let's make wizard better in a different way" but i still think a baseline DC/SP boost would be appropriate.
|
|
|
Post by chainlink on Apr 17, 2024 6:40:28 GMT
I agree that the Wizard is suffers as while they have an overall versatility, including more feats for more foci, they lack in spontaneous versatility and possibly the endurance due to how many useful spells can you memorize. In many ways this makes me think the spell slot bonus of Sorc really belongs more to Wizards. I like those that Specialization is basically a unique feature of Wizard and there are 2 bonuses that Wizards do get that are unique to them one of which ties to specialization the other just to the class. #1 Specialized Wizards can take PSK w/o only PSF, the exact wording isn't clear if you need just ESF & the Epic spell or need LSF & the Epic Spell #2 Polymathy any non-barred Paragon spell w/o any focus or epics in the school either Which maybe another option is Pure Wizards get a free specialization w/o needing to bar any school. You MUST have the Epic spell stone to be able to take PSK (which is why you can't take PSK in the test chamber if you've ever tried) but if you are specialised you can then take PSK at level 63 without taking PSF or LSF whist gaining the SF benefits of both of these feats. That said specialisation on a Wizard (master of all spells) seems like a significant disadvantage whereas specialisation on a Pale Master is pretty much a 'No brainer'.
|
|
|
Post by johannhowitzer on Apr 17, 2024 11:34:38 GMT
Central to Wizards is knowing what to expect and planning ahead. This is why they have more spells known, and more feats to use on spell foci. They are preparers, not improvisers. Thus their greatest HG-specific weakness is the random spawn. Take away random spawns from the Hells and beyond, and Wizards suddenly look a lot shinier. Pre-Hells, Sorcerers cannot quite match a Wizard's ability to handle every situation. There's a lot of spells Sorcerers would never take, that Wizards have at their disposal and would be useful for specific runs.
Which is not to say Wizards are useless when a random shows up. Just that Sorcerers can adapt more gracefully. Wizards kinda have to hedge their bets on which spells will be needed. However, due to wider spell selection, Wizards -CAN- hedge their bets more flexibly as well. Especially true of lower-level spells, just as a simple example, a Wizard can call upon all 5-6 orb types from all three tiers, where a Sorcerer kinda has to pick one or none per element. This is a bit reductive, but just to demonstrate how this can be applied without going on at any more length... a Wizard could go into Dustbone with a Barbarian, and knowing Xevils won't need to be Clapped much, can load up for tons of cold damage, both AOE and single target.
A Sorcerer has a catch-all spellbook that has SOME spells for the run you're on, but other stuff that's not situationally useful. A Wizard comes to the party with an ENTIRE SPELLBOOK tailored exactly to that run.
|
|
|
Post by chirality on Apr 17, 2024 13:26:28 GMT
these are the kind of arguments that have been offered for the last 15 years about wizards and they fall flat. none of the points you make hold water, and wizards are not only worse than sorcs, but less fun to play, as a result.
random spawns are not their hg-specific weakness. non-set spawns and the need to redo spellbook in abyss every map are the wizard's hg-specific weakness. random spawns are an issue but less important than those two, which is also less important than having less slots than sorc, with less DC/SP on those slots.
i am not sure what exactly you mean by "hedging bets" nor do i understand what you mean by wizards can do that (whatever it is) more flexibly. wizards don't have any advantage with lower-level spells, because the useful/optimal lower-level spells can be known by sorc, with very few (like, less than 5) exceptions compared to wizard. sorcs also have basically endless low-level slots, thanks to the caster slotgear update, which gave wizards "a solid amount" of low-level slots, but sorc an insane amount. sorcs cast those low-level spells at higher DC and SP than wizards and can spam them and channel them to be even more successful. gust is a great example of this, where sorcs can spam it more, can channel it, and have better base DC (no one specializes in evo). on the other hand, damage spells that don't rely as heavily on DC are also leveraged more effectively by sorc, who can choose the appropriate metamagic conditioner on the fly and have way more slots of all levels.
orbs are really bad and the idea that a wizard can "prepare" the "perfect" damage type of orb and be more successful is an illusion. sorcs don't need to know low-level orbs, because they have access to all the right damage types and can spam them perfectly on the fly, allowing them to conserve higher-level slots overall as appropriate. low-level orbs are a waste of time and there are very few counterexamples to being able to use combust, melf, or elec/acid grasp spontaneously with spontaneous metamagic boost.
this has all been repeated many times over the years so, like the above example of pwk, it's very strange to still see anyone arguing for wizard flexibility and versatility.
your example with xevils in db is strange and also ironic given that (as i mentioned above) db is an example of a run where the entirely-set spawns and mob statting allows a wizard to prepare their spells "optimally" (damage-wise, anyway, but as soon as you introduce instakills to the equation, that also goes out the window, because save-or-fail spells always work against a wizard's spellbook). this is because the mobs all share the same elemental vulnerability schema and every spawn is exactly the same. the sad part is that even in this example sorc still dominates because, just like every other area in the game, sorc knows enough spells to have either the perfect or second-best damage type available at all times, and can switch between non-meta'd, emp'd, or max'd nukes on the fly to suit the remaining hp of mobs in the spawn. the example of barb meaning xevils won't need to be clapped as much is weird and although i'm sure it was just an off-the-cuff thing, it's silly.
sorcerer doesn't miss any critical spells and characterizing them has having a "catch-all spellbook" is correct, because it's true. it's not a "catch-all" with "SOME" of the right spells for the run, it's all the right spells. emphasizing that the wizard has the "ENTIRE SPELLBOOK" tailored exactly to that run just returns to the point that it's an illusion, with the spellbook being filled with the wizard's guess of how many of each spell will be needed, which is never correct and always results in precious slots being wasted rather than used, combined with not having enough of the right spell at the right time, all after the fact that there's less spells and lower DC/SP to begin with.
|
|
|
Post by Methes on Apr 17, 2024 13:36:27 GMT
Just make wizards have a % chance to refund spells cast. Close to 100% of school they are specialized in, less to all if a they're a generalist.
|
|
|
Post by Yojimbo on Apr 17, 2024 16:09:08 GMT
Just make wizards have a % chance to refund spells cast. Close to 100% of school they are specialized in, less to all if a they're a generalist. I think anything above 65% would be too excessive as you could look at it as a different mechanic to effectively get to the slot bonus of a Sorcerer. I look at it as every spell not burn would be a bonus spell slot effectively it is not the same but the effect would be very similar in the end I push it to 65% instead of the same 50% as one I am not sure how equivalent it would be as it is a chance vs a set bonus as well if we have a bonus to the chance for specialist and this spells it would need to be a little extra. I would look at a base chance to not burn the spell as maybe 55% with a 5% or 10% bonus to the specialist. I have also for my thinking wished Wizard could craft wands and their CL, or some fraction of it, be the CL of the Wand crafted this could work for even quasiclasses with just perhaps a small added reduction to CL for them but allow them a measure of spontaneous casting by having "emergency" wands which could also be bound to the caster as a further restriction. I see lots of options for Wizards to help balance them vs Sorcerers and while I agree they need more slots more so than Sorcerers I also agree that removing slots from Sorcerers is not any answer either. If both primary arcane classes need more slots why not remove the bonus and bump the slots on gear other than it does incentivize more levels in the arcane class if the bonus is tied to levels of the specific class so I can see keeping a bonus if it is scaling. I haven't played a BFM/DSM or Pariah enough but I have played a HoS some and I haven't felt too much need for more slots but since soup is the big thing for them you can often cast once and just hang out for a minute so it is a tough comparison to the other 2 casting Sorc QCs I discount BK a bit as it is more often run as a buff tank with benefits than as a caster so I don't know how much it will hurt from lacking bonus slots either. I think of the QC Pariah probably hurt the most from the reduced spell slot bonus since they can have more options to cast vs BFM/DSM being effectively 90% evo only and HoS being effectively just Conj & Ench with maybe 1 or 2 outside that focus. The BK has 3 foci of any not Evo, Div, & Abj when you look at for spells and buffs which is pretty limiting for usable or worthwhile spells so again the slot bonus being reduced I'm doubtful of it hurting them so much. I look back at a Pariah and while Trans is #1 there isn't really anything about the QC that makes other foci effectively worthless so a Pariah might need the slots bonus far more than any other Sorc based QC. If I take this same thought line to the Wizard and its QC, or similar, You have mostly GI & SM which both have little need of high slot count as the rely on buffs and little to no offensive casting. The Theurge is the real pain point as a Wizard CC needing as many spell slots as a standard Wizard on getting mild relief in the sense that the Cleric class and slots can provide many of the buffs allowing more slots to be allocated to offense vs defense on the Wizard side. I would lastly point to PMs while not a QC they are specialist in effectively 2 schools and don't need to worry about the variety in the same manner as the Sorcerer QCs resulting in less need for bonus slots. TLDR: most QCs shouldn't be as hurt be reduced bonus spell slots due to more specialized casting reducing worthwhile spells to know. Pariahs while specialized casters are not restricted from non-specialized spells. Side note: I would like to see some improvement to Sorcerer PMs mainly wish they could get some bonus/free Extra Spell Known Feats effectively maybe 1 extra spell every 2 levels of PM beginning at 4th level of PM. This could be granted retro actively in LLs as iirc that feat only works in LLs or something.
|
|
|
Post by simpetar on Apr 18, 2024 6:46:36 GMT
(which is why you can't take PSK in the test chamber if you've ever tried) The Trainer will give you epic spell tokens when you ask nicely, if you've ever tried. Sometimes even tokens you don't deserve / qualify for, but nobody's perfect.
|
|
|
Post by chainlink on Apr 18, 2024 8:35:19 GMT
(which is why you can't take PSK in the test chamber if you've ever tried) The Trainer will give you epic spell tokens when you ask nicely, if you've ever tried. Sometimes even tokens you don't deserve / qualify for, but nobody's perfect. I obviously haven't used the [Test] characters for enough casters
|
|
|
Post by Yojimbo on Apr 18, 2024 13:51:48 GMT
I notice certain epics you won't get and I am not sure I have ever gotten one I didn't qualify for.
|
|