Wizards vs Sorcerers.

[Delfestra Ruinvorn]

Ok! This will be a discussion on balance between the two in the current HG environment. And, I will present you with MY conclusion and the reasons for it. Hopefully, useful suggestions will follow. If you're opinion differs, feel free. If you're Archmage...shush, and remember that where you're concerned, wizards are always better . Else, what would we have to "discuss" during those long wyrm runs?

The Conclusion:
Wizards and sorcerers are no longer (relatively) balanced. Sorcerers are truly hideously powerful, and are the most powerful class around individually. Something needs to be done to bring the power of wizards and sorcerers back into relative, yet different, balance.

The Reasons:
The difference in balance between wizards and sorcerers has normally been summed up like this:

1) Wizards have more spell variety, yet sorcerers have more spells per use, and can cast as many as they wish of a specific spell.

This historically has been relatively balanced. Wizzies can do things a sorcerer can't, but a sorcerer can probably adapt something to a given situation, and they never run out of buffs. Wizzies plan ahead, sorcerers adapt on the fly.

Now, this is no longer a useful distinction on the wizzy side. With the changes in Mords scrolls, and the advent of unlimited caster shields, and the prevelance of shadow shield on items...the ability to do a wider variety of things is useless. Sorcerers can now drop Mords entirely, and can rely on items for shadow shield, gust, BBoD, Time Stop, Spellbreaches, Stone to Flesh, Clarity, Mind Blank, or even GS. Their weakness of limited spell selection is counteracted by being able to get many spells elsewhere, many which do not require enhanced caster levels to be effective. As such, the constraint of limited spell selection is no longer a constraint!

Indeed, the unlimited spell items, for wizzies, give us something we can already do. For sorcerers, it gives them something they probably can't do.

For wizzies, wide spell selection is less effective in Hell, since monster SR/HP/immunities...and the need for grabbing, means that even if you could experiment with esoteric and unusual spell combinations without the party yelling at you, chances are they wouldn't work. Being able to cast PWK when a sorc can't has no meaning when they've got over 1350 hps. Being able to cast Grease, or Darkness, or even CoB will get you yelled at. Same with any other fog-based spell, no matter if you've got an enemy weak vs fire or acid - clouds are gusted on sight.

Palemasters already know that negative energy isn't functional. Prismatic spray is a joke, unreliable damage *types* when the right type of damage is more important than ignoring SR. Fort saves, made to stand up to implosion, render F-t-S an iffy choice, especially when shifters do it better. Even with my Legendary Illusion, Phantasmal Killer won't see the light of day when Ice Storm is sooo useful. Even things that don't take cold take bludgeoning plenty often. And there are more examples too, if you think about it a bit.

End result? Wizzy advantages of spell depth mean much less, and the trade offs for sorcerers of limited spell selection is no longer a limitation.

2) Pure Wizzy bonuses vs Sorcerer Saves:

This historically as well has been relatively balanced. Pure wizzies have better Spell pen, and slightly higher damage on spells, and slightly better defenses on spell buffs. +2 Spell pen, 2d6 for most spells, and slightly better conceal. Sorcerers, who frankly always splash monk/paladin, and thats the REAL WORLD FACT we're talking about here, have truly absurd saves.

However, before Hell, this wasn't that big a deal. True, sorcerers could ignore most enemy spells due to evasion/reflex saves - but I could put up an empowered spellmantle, that they don't have normally, and soak the meteor swarms or implosions for a time. True, their Fort saves are better, high enough to resist certain insta-death effects - but my slightly higher conceal did help in that regard. Plus, I can eyeball certain of those creatures, and sorcerers can't. There was some give and take there.

Now, forget it. Saves saves saves saves. Hell's all about the saves. Tons of things require HIGH saves, and have nasty consequences for failure. And we all know its not just the creatures that make you need to make a save. The sorcerer bonus of high saves is ABSOLUTELY HUGE.

SORCERERS HAVE THE HIGHEST SAVES OUT THERE. They're about +26-+28 to all saves, and they get evasion to boot. Thats higher than rogues, higher than str tanks, higher than paladins. I bet they even beat bards. Caster bards *might* come close. Might. If they have paladin, which I bet many don't.

However, the pure wizard bonus of slightly higher SR, +2d6 damage, and slightly better conceal are next to meaningless. Yes, SR is high in Hell, but sorcerers with their new mords scrolls do just fine. +2d6 damage is nothing on a creature with well over 2.5k hps. And conceal...well it was reduced from 90% to 80% for pure casters, and many things in Hell completely disregard it anyway.

End result? The sorcerer advantage is absolutely mind bogglingly huge and important. The wizard advantage is next to meaningless.

EVEN IF a wizard did the same thing, and splashed paladin and monk, they would lose their benefits and not obtain the sorcerer benefits. A wizzy can, at BEST, get +8 or +10 (if they somehow had an 18 charisma at character generation, don't ask me how they'd do this without sacrificing int or con to fatal amounts). That means even doing the same thing, a wizzy would get about 1/3rd the benefit a sorcerer does, while sacrificing all the benefits of pure wiz level.

3) Caster Shields
Historically, neither class could use shields without fatally sacrificing spell benefits from Ev/Premonition etc. So, the fact that Sorcerers get shield feat as a free gift along with their silly saves was completely irrelevant.

Now, we have EV safe shields. Sorcerers are covered with glee over this, since they get the shield feat free, before level 40, and can use even the UR shields immediately upon receipt of one. And in using the shields, can lessen their limited spell selection class constraint.

Wizards would have to either sacrifice their pure build benefits, or sacrifice a feat, just to use the silly things. Or...temporarily obtain the feat in a somewhat indirect manner. ALSO, without shield feat as a permanent part of your character build, shields unequip themselves on login/logout or *crash*, and mess up your inventory and unmemorize any extra spells. Which is a pain to deal with if you forget on intentional logout, and can be a REAL pain when you log in after a crash with less spells, less AC, and a junked inventory...in the middle of a fight. And it can be a fatal pain if this happens in someplace like Phlegethos...

And another point on shields - to USE the unlimited spell effect on the caster shields, you must currently have the shield feat active on you at the time of use. Which means that Sorcerers can instantly and automatically use their shield spell effects, and wizards seldom if ever can. Details withheld on purpose and will not be discussed on the forums.

End result? Sorcerers now get higher AC faster and easier, and immediate access to the spells on the shields, and can go right back into combat after a crash without junked inventories or spell slot loss/reconfiguration. Wizards, if they can ever even can use the shields at all, can seldom use the effects and get a (bioware coded) hassle in event of a crash or forgetting to unequip to permabuff.

4) Wands and scrolls

Historically, the ability to create scrolls has been pretty unimportant. They're only really needed in 1 LL area at all, and even then a wizzy in the party would suffice more than the scroll. Mords scrolls now may take the place of mords itself in most sorcerers repetoires, but at the time it didn't.

And as for wands, they were entirely useless. The only spell you absolutely had to have cast on you in LLs was level 8, and couldn't be wanded.

Now, in hells, scrolls are highly useful - not just Mords for the new properties attached to it, but quite a looooong list of other scrolls aswell. Those who know, know...those who don't, take my word for it - plenty of scrolls are useful.

This is a case where Wizards beat Sorcerers. Wizzies get craft scroll free. No combat oriented sorcerer will ever take the craft scroll feat. Ever. None have that I know of. Feats are too necessary for epics, or +cha, or metamagic. Why waste a feat when you can make a bot, or ask a wizzy? Its not like a sorcerer has the spell depth to truly benefit from it anyway. They want scrolls to do what they cannot do, not what they can do. For wizzies, we can cast the spell already, so much of the time, why would we want to cast off a scroll at a lower casting level, shorter duration, weaker Spell pen?

As to wands - well, wizzies kinda lose out on this one just as much as sorcerers. Yes, we have the spell selection to make it worth our time...but...NO COMBAT ORIENTED MAGE WILL TAKE THE CRAFT WAND FEAT. Because...its easier to make a bot, or feats are to necessary for epics, +int, or metamagic. Or more LL focuses. Just as no sorcerers take scribe scroll, don't expect wizards to take craft wand.

End result? Wizzies will make scrolls, but only bots will make wands.

[5] Feats:

Wizards get 4 more feats than sorcerers. This has been a strength for us, because we usually take them for metamagic. This is still a strength, but not as necessary. Sorcerers I know today manage to get along with 1 or 2 meta feats, not all four. Pre-hell you wanted all four. I still have all four. I figure, since my strength is spell depth, I better be able to modify them to suit the need.

Its not as important for sorcerers anymore, since they can tailor their metamagic to the limited spell selection they have, and mitigate any weaknesses in duration with their superior casting number per rest.

Still, four feats is four feats. Wizzies take this one, even if its not as necessary anymore.

The Conclusion Restated, in case you forgot:
When you look at it as I've lined things up ad vs disad, I think you'll come to the conclusion that wizzies and sorcerers are simply not in balance with each other. Not even remotely. While its always been a relative balance, which is to say they're comparable though having different specialties, now the disparity in power is really quite stark. This is more important than, say, balance between druids and paladins, because wizzies and sorcerers are far more related and fulfill similar, or even the same, party niches.

Something needs to be done to bring them back into relative, albeit different, balance. Now, I'm not saying nerf the tar out of sorcerers, but there are some tweaks that may help close the gap somewhat, without breaking the server balance as a whole. Which brings us to...

The Suggestions:
In no particular order:

1) Increase the benefit for pure builds.
Wizzies make pure builds regularly, to benefit from the Spell pen/damage increase/spell maxes. And also because pally/monk doesn't get us nearly as much as it does a sorcerer. I propose increasing the level 60 only benefits in a non-linear manner for CERTAIN spells, to increase the advantages wizzies already have to help counterbalance sorc save benefits etc.

Proposed spells:
- Ethereal Visage: I'd say give us back the 90% at level 60. However, that was once deemed too much, even though I think it should be there again. How about 85% for level 60?

- Globe of Invulnerability: The progression stops at 50ish...could I propose level 8 immunity at 60?

- Endure Elements: 10% at 60 is nice, but only 2% more than a 58/1/1 sorc. Could I propose 12 or 15% at 60, with 9% at 59?

- Premonition/Greater Stoneskin: I do not know what the monster +ab is, since I don't know their stats. However, this has a linear progression as well, and I'd recommend that the level 60 tier be increased in a way that doesn't break game balance.

- Energy Buffer: Again, the difference between a level 58 and a level 60 is slight. Especially in the amounts of damage we're talking about in the Hells, and their frequency. I'd propose another non-linear increase for level 60 only for this spell.

- Mestil's Acid Sheath: Caps at 20% immunity, can we hear 25% for 60?

You'll note thusfar, I've made defensive suggestions, that are almost all caster only. Other buffs in this line, like Spellmantles, or Tensers, or Elemental Shield/Mestil's Acid Sheath, could be improved for level pure 60s. Also, being self only and defensive, this helps balance the benefit of +28ish to all saves and evasion of sorcerers without breaking offensive balancing for monster durability. Plus, scripted attacks would still kill us dead.

There is only one offensive proposition I have - increasing the HP caps on PWK and PWStun for pure 60 wizards. The amount I'll leave to those who understand monster HP totals better, and also that this may infringe on what is now arguably a palemaster domain. I don't expect anything higher than 50 or 100, though, which still makes it unusable in Hell either way.

I've not proposed increased damage for pure builds in a nonlinear fashion, because I bet it'd be insane to code. Plus it'd threaten game balance as a whole in that higher damage output makes fights easier.

2) Caster Shields / Unlimited Spells:

There are several useful propositions here, feel free to take all or none.

- Add Shield Feat to more lower-level wizzy only items.
The benefit of this would mean that lower-level wizzies could use UR Caster shields before getting a level 60 BUR, without massive gear sacrifices or indirect means. Plus, with items that have shield feat on them, they could ALSO use the spells aswell. That would make wizzies more-equal to sorcerers of the same level.

- Make more caster shields wizzy only.
This is to limit again the ability of sorcerers to use spells that they can't already cast. They get limited spell selection as a class constraint, enforcing wiz only on caster shields intended to be so does keep this constraint in place, which enhances the wizzy class benefit of spell versatility.

- Create UR or Rare feat books.
Wizzy only, Non UMDable. Grants shield feat permanently. This not only allows wizzies to use shields without sacrificing their class benefit of pure builds, and also allows them to USE the spells on the shields, but it also stops that pain in the neck spell shifting/inventory repair on a crash or relog without removing it.

And it'd stop suprise AC loss on a crash also. And remove the need for indirect methods of shield use. Plus, making it UR or even Rare would allow lower level people to trade it to higher level ones, which may boost the economy to allow them to trade for things *they* need.

- Wands.
Ok, now that they're useful, how about a UR or Rare book (or even a magic wand ) that gives Craft Wand Feat? Wizzy only, non UMD able. Why? Because its better for *people* to work together than it is to just make a BOT. Plus, adding this feat would let wizzies in combat craft wands on the spot and pass them out if needed. Bots can't do that, and this could benefit a party in a way that sorcerers can't.

So. Those are my thoughts and suggestions. I yield the floor.

[cathedralmaster]

Have you considered using the extra feats wizards get to free up the space necessary to take save feats?

[nohmask]

Whew...somebody drank their coffee today! I would also like some more of a bonus for a pure caster build, would like to use some of my XP to make clarity, gust, rblindness and haste wands, and I like the idea of shield use added to the wiz secret or some of the tia items perhaps? Having never used a sorcerer (other than my low level wand maker), I would like to see you do a follow up Delfestra listing the spells per level that you would take if you were a sorcerer, and then list what would be lacking (as a wiz being able to take them all). Its always seemed to me that there's always one or two per level that one would take that you cant' with a sorcerer....but Ive never done the math. Thanks, I look forward to seeing this...and hopefully it will add to your argument.

[dodrudon]

That would defeat the advantage wizzys have (more feats) while still not bringing them to an equal level as sorcs (saves will still be worse).

Also, I usually take a level of ranger for the free spell feat, though I might splash pally/monk now to get saves up, and evasion seems to be important esepecially if you don't have uber saves.

I wouldn't agree with making spells different for wizzys and sorcs. It just doesn't seem right, and it also seems like it'd be a pain to implement or incur lots of overhead.

Some suggestions:
1) Create powerful monsters that, though killable, will die from a single specific spell, like ray of enfeeblement. This gives the more obscure spells, and thus the wizards, an advantage. The problem is, with several of these different creatures, wizzys would have to devote many spell slots to a variety of spells. This would be easier if you had a sorc, then you need only get the spells the sorc doesn't have, but again, it still eats into your valuable spell slots. This might work better for a creature that is vulnerable to, say, Enervation, the level 9 level drain, where a wizard would only need to sacrifice only a few lvl9 spell slots (assuming these creatures spawn as often as balors on the immo bridge), and a self-respecting sorc would never have this spell. This would work well for other level 8 and 7 spells. Forgot to mention that scrolled spells would not work for the insta-death effect.

2) Add a UR book that gives +1 to int, allowing thids to get +1 DC and allowing other builds to have more flexibility spending points. This would screw up game balance terribly, however.

3) Scale level 7-9 spells to be more effective. For instance, give the level 9 spells that are not commonly chosen by sorcs (not MS, Wail, Weird, Bigby, PWK) useful scaled bonuses. Three levels from Enervation? Not worth it imo. It has its uses, but I'd rather use those slots on precious Wails and MSes. Maybe give TS a GS effect as well, or change BBoD to add an aura that lowers saves/ab etc that scales with levels, or Mords that lower saves by 1 at 50 and 2 at 60. This would give wizzys access to better abilities that sorcs would need to make big sacrifices for. Scrolls would cast at low levels and not be affected of course. The major disadvantage would be needing to rebalance spells.

4) Create spell combos. For instance, cast this spell followed by this spell followed by another spell (and so on as long as you want) will create such an effect. For example, cast Enervation followed by Gate followed by Delayed Blast Fireball causes a 5x power Meteor Swarm. Disable this from being used by scrolls. Not sure how feasible this would be however, could be too laggy to implement. Or maybe put it on an item that automatically checks and removes the appropriate spell uses (think I remember Acaos pointing out a function that checks what spells are in your spell slots).

[thedomicron]

i think that increasing the effectiveness of spells is the best way to affect balance. i like playing sorcs more than wizards but because of style not because sorcerers are the current powerhosues (though that helps)

i certainly think that there should be better advantages for building pure, and i think that defensive bonuses are a fantastic place to begin. i think a wizard item for making scrolls is a much easier solution to the wand issue, so they can put it on in order to scribe and then take it off.

damage wise, i don't think there is any reason to grant more than a 2d6 increase to most spells, but it might be interesting to grant certain advantages for 60 caster levels. for instance if the L9 bigby's spell has a save for arcane failure, or if there is a L60 verson of the summon creature 9.

i believe there to be plenty of ways to balance which aren't simply making them more damaging.

[archmage]

Ok, quick off the cuff response, will flesh out more detail later when I have time:

Sorcs do not get the shield feat for free, they get it when they take a paladin lvl at the cost of not going pure. I understand this does not affect the standard cheese paladin build, but it does prevent them from going pure. Which leads me to, wizarda already greatly benefit from going pure greatly, which is nigh out of reach for sorcs, with premonition alone its worth it. ask Aessa how many times she laughed at the hamatula while they took me out in one round, due to her premonition, which mine wont absorb anything from a hamatula. Saving throws are indeed better for sorcs, if go cheese at the cost of not being pure. But then again wizards have 4 more feats then sorcs, which leads me to believe that thye could certainly use them for saves, if they're truly that worried about saves. They could also use one of these feats to take *gasp* shield proficiency. Wizards when pure also have another advantage over sorcs, its called spell penetration. This is the difference illustrated by the little puff of smoke over hamatula's heads when i try to grasp them without breaching them first vs. when a pure wizard grasps one and sees instead of the white smoke a target grasped message. Are sorcs powerful? Yes. Are wizards powerful? Yes. and there are a lot of spells I had to pass on that I would dearly love to have, like for example weird, greater spell breach, spell mantles all 3 varieties. I recall another post where you said rather then give up a ring slot for implode protection, you would just throw uip an extended mantle to cover you. Guess what? Sorcs cant do that. They each have their own uses, and when you cant figure out what they might be, you can always go make me scrolls.

Edited: Forgot to add, wizards also dont have to rebuild every time the cursed DM's change a spell.

[FunkySwerve]

If I could take this thread a little more seriously I would respond at length, but this is well travelled ground and there is little new to be said. The only trend of significance in the sorc/wiz power balance is the continual increase in the number of useful spells, which favors wizards over sorcerers. The shields you mention granting unlimited castings of some spells were a minor check on that trend, though they give advanatage to wiards as well, saving them from having to memorize any of that spell. The fact that they require shield proficiency is negilgible, as that can be gained via items purchasable in town, and swapped out after. Or, you could splash pally for saves and proficiencies, like a sorc. The 'massive' saving throw bonus you put in the advantage column for sorcs is mostly wasted, as saves were balanced around classes without huge CHA taking a level of splash pally for +6 - +8 saves (or legedanary saves feats, later), and is nothing new, for that matter. Scrolls have always been available to offset some of the limitations of playing a sorc, and the mords spell you mentioned is EXACTLY as it has ALWAYS BEEN (not my first time telling you that). So, without passing judgment on the initial balance of power between sorcs and wizzes back in the day, I can tell you that you conclusions about the direction of that trend are completely wrong.
Funky

[Delfestra Ruinvorn]

Cath: Using the wizzy bonus feats won't work, since they're all at nonepic levels and only let you take magic based skills. And even if you used other non-epic feats, that lets you take at best the nonepic save feats. +2 is no where near +28. It just doesn't reduce the gap.

Archmage: You're absolutely right, that shield isn't truly "free". However, you know as well as I do that every sorcerer alive has taken Paladin already for reasons of saves. If a sorcerer did wish to forgo saves and free shield feat, then they would absolutely be free to make that choice and benefit from the bonuses to pure caster.

And for any sorcerer that did that, you would be the first to laugh at them. Way back when Ssithrak was the top of the HG food chain and Dachy was the big SR critter, you yourself told me that the benefits of splash pally monk sooooo far outweighed the benefits of pure build that even I as a pure wizzy was foolish to have taken them. Indeed, you told me this while watching me franticly run around dodging Dachy breath that killed me every time...and giggling as you stood in his breath up to your eyeballs with out even blinking.

I think its fair proof that the benefits of pure build are so severely outweighed by splash pally monk in that I have never ever seen a pure sorcerer. Not once. ALL of them are splash pally monks. That was true before Hells, and its true now. The thing is, nowadays that gives sorcerers more than it used to for the reasons outlined above. While the wizard benefits mean less.

And, with your millions of mords scrolls that I make you, can you truly say that you'd rather have +2 Spell pen over +28 saves? 'cause I get that nice white wisp trying to grab Hamatulas and Ossys too.

And despite my 80% conceal and +15 reduction, melee things in Hell clobber me. If Aessa outlives you, I don't think its because of premonition - more likely, I think its because of equipement...in that he has different setsups than mine...as his buffs and mine are the same, and I don't sit there laughing at anything hitting me off premonition.

Also, you're absolutely right that I said I'd rather toss up a spellmantle than use an implosion ring. Well what is the sorcerer answer? Stand inside the implosions and laugh until you roll a 1. Your saves are higher than their DC. Mine aren't, so I have to soak up the spam until my spellmantle runs out, and then I die horribly. You could die at any time, but only 1 in 20 of them.

Plus, you said in another post, that you find yourself only doing grasps, meteors, and ice storm down in Hell. Where is the benefit spell diversity if the necessary or useful spells are distilled down into a small list?!?!? Have you found a time yet in Hell when acid fog, incendiary fog, prismatic spray, hold monster, dismissal, phantasmal killer, flame arrow, control undead, create undead, Mordenkein's sword, planar binding, greater planar binding, summon monster 1-9, confusion, fear, or darkness would EVER be useful? Would the time it takes casting them ever be party beneficial? Or would they (for us who menorize) subtract from useful or necessary spells like MS, Grasps, or ice storm? Or even one of the other elemental offense types?

Even acid fog and incendiary fog, which arguably are good elemental damages for a mass of grasped or stoned things...would be gusted in an instant for the framerates even if they weren't gusted to get rid of something worse.

But if you want Spellbreaches - well there's an infinite shield out there with lesser spellbreach that you can use that I cannot 'cause of the shield feat thing. Or you can go with tons of GSB scrolls, like you already do. The benefit to you of using each method would make it the same as if I had cast them in combat, but I need to use slots for them, and you can use an ocean of scrolls, and get the same result. So the GSB line isn't much of a restraint on you.

Funky: You're right in that this was brought up once before. However, I think it deserves further examination. Now that the Hells are out, you have to agree that they have totally change the nature of the module. Class roles and party formation from pre hell to hell zones are totally redefined, and require entirely different methods of play and party balance, teamwork etc that has been the goal of HG but is simply not necessary below Hell.

I have tried to point out the ways in which Hell changes a lot of the issues brought up before, and how the Hells make what was before decided to be relatively balanced into something that I feel is NOT so. And I'm not the only one who feels this way. While our feelings don't really matter, in the end, since balance decisions belong to the staff...you should take seriously the fact that there are zero pure sorcerers, and most of the wizzies attempt to splash in some way to not die. Pure builds are few. Because the benefits of purity even for wizards may not be enough. And no sorcerer thinks the benefits of purity outweigh the benefits of splash pally monk. NOT ONE. I'd say thats a significant fact, wouldn't you?

And as to the unlimited shields, you're WRONG that it saves me from having to memorize any of that spell. I don't know if you caught this part, but since you were explicit, I shall be. Unless you have the shield feat on you at the time you attempt to activate the shield, you cannot activate the spells. That means that simply putting on a shield feat granting item, putting on the shield, and taking off the shield feat granting item...lets you wear the shield, but you can NEVER use the spells upon it. It won't work. You get the "you cannot use that item" message.

Plus, I think you'll agree that in essence, the "indirect method" you described of equipping something with the shield feat, equipping the shield, then unequipping the item with the feat...is in essence AN EXPLOIT. It lets you keep something on you, that you don't have the feats for. It's no less an exploit than the Pixie Push was.

And that can be discouraged by implementing any of the shield suggestions I put out...from books that give the feat to putting shield feat onto wizzy items like Lamentation's Call, or heck even Ruinvorn's Claw...and maybe the Tia belt. That would actually let wizards use the spells on the shield, which you clearly intended that they be able to do. Other than that, wizzies are forced to wait until they obtain a BUR Amulet, which they may never do, and level 60. I don't think thats what you had in mind.

Indeed, maybe adding it to the shield itself may not hurt, as even if you needed cheese means to get it equipped, once you had it on you could at least use it.

As to the saves being wasted...well, I am not privy to balance info, so I don't know where DCs cap. However, I would say they are *not* wasted, because of the things that *reduce* saves. A sorcerer can cope with a significant reduction in saves and still be virtually immune to anything out there. That's still a benefit.

And indeed, if it truly so insignificant, why does every single sorcerer on the entire server have it? And have traded off pure spell benefits for it? Answer has to be 'because its better'.

100% of sorcerers agree that saves + evasion > level 60 spell benefits.
And a good chunk of wizards trade away the benefits too...for rogue levels and evasion, or pally monk for the same, or even a ranger level for a free feat. Thats a trend of significance also.

As to the continual increase in the number of useful spells...outside of Hell I completely agree with you. In pre-hell areas, spell variety is wonderfully helpful. There are times when esoteric spells are great.

In hell though, thats simply not true. I look at my spellbook regularly, trying to figure out what I need in each Hell area - and the answer's the same. Elemental damage flavor of the area, ICE STORM, Grasps, and Meteors. Plus SR reduction and BBoDs. Gusts. Buffs. Thats basically it.

A sorcerer has all elemental damage types, ice storm, grasps, and meteors. SR reduction, Gusts, BBoDs...they can get off shields or from scrolls - and thats exactly what they do. They don't even need a real wizard to supply them, they can just use a Bot. And Bots reduce teamwork and real person interplay.

If one can distill down the list of useful or necessary Hell spells into something that short, then I say that spell depth is IRRELEVANT. Who cares that I can cast Acid Fog when everything's gusted? Who cares I can cast Incendiary Fog when everything's gusted and I should be using those spells for more grasps anyway? And those two examples are at least elemental damage types, and there are hell creatures that can be well effected by use of intelligent use of that damage type.

I listed a plethora of spells responding to Archmage that are totally useless there. The list is by no means exhaustive. Go to Hell sometime in DM mode and just watch what is cast. You will see X elemental damage for X creature, ice storm, grasps, and meteor swarm. Occasionally you'll see weird. You'll also see Mords/Gusts/BboD. Probably half the time from bards and rogues off scrolls

You won't see spell depth. You won't see a wizard doing things a sorcerer cannot duplicate. You will see in effect that spell variety just isn't relevant to the area.

Now, if you listen to everything I say and decide that balance isn't warped, and no changes are needed, well thats your perogative. You know as well as I that reasonable people can view the same facts and come to different conclusions that are both valid.

I've tried to give you a constructive post here, one which identifies what are from my perspective balance problems that are brought on or emphasized by the way in which the Hells change the nature of HG. I've tried to give you useful reasoning, point by point comparisons, and in the end useful suggestions that are crafted to minimize DM time spent while being mindful of not knocking over PvE balance by increasing offensive ability directly. I've even given you a way to avoid a minor exploit and also cure a complete pain in the ass brought on by how Bioware does inventory loading.

If you disagree, fine. If you decide, as is your DM perogative, that no changes are needed, thats ok too - after all, the decision belongs to you and the staff, period. But, I'd thank you to take my post seriously, since it's exactly the kind of constructive post with useable suggestions that *you yourself ask for* when confronted with griping. You may not agree with the conclusions and decide not to use the suggestions, but at least give me *that* much credit?

[FunkySwerve]

I'm gonna respond piecemeal for the most part, mainly because I would rather spend the time building than rehash this again. You'll have to pardon the zingers.

delfestra said:

Cath: Using the wizzy bonus feats won't work, since they're all at nonepic levels and only let you take magic based skills. And even if you used other non-epic feats, that lets you take at best the nonepic save feats. +2 is no where near +28. It just doesn't reduce the gap.

You can use the feats you save with the wizard feats to take whatever feats you like, including the four nonepic save feats prerequisite to the legendary feats. This rather neatly demonstrates the problem with these posts - you are looking at things mostly only from one perspective, the one which favors your conclusions.

Archmage: You're absolutely right, that shield isn't truly "free". However, you know as well as I do that every sorcerer alive has taken Paladin already for reasons of saves. If a sorcerer did wish to forgo saves and free shield feat, then they would absolutely be free to make that choice and benefit from the bonuses to pure caster.

Just as you are free to splash pally monk. If anything the hells reduced the efficacy of the cheese sorc, because the saves are geared toward normal cha splash pally, or use of save feats, as already mentioned. More later when you return to this.

I think its fair proof that the benefits of pure build are so severely outweighed by splash pally monk in that I have never ever seen a pure sorcerer. Not once. ALL of them are splash pally monks. That was true before Hells, and its true now. The thing is, nowadays that gives sorcerers more than it used to for the reasons outlined above. While the wizard benefits mean less.

I didn't see those reasons above, and I'm not seeing them now. What I do see is me repeating myself, which I'm not particularly fond of. See dc scaling remarks above.

And, with your millions of mords scrolls that I make you, can you truly say that you'd rather have +2 Spell pen over +28 saves? 'cause I get that nice white wisp trying to grab Hamatulas and Ossys too.

Again, you get to make the same choice as a wiz, though its probably +8 rather than +28 if you do. That whole extra 20 points does little to cut your 5% fail rate, which is what nearly all of the hells were targeted at for non-cha splash pal or leg save feats (yes, including the penalties). The fact that you didn't splash is a totally seperate decision from sorc - wiz, and is only confusing your arguments. Yes, in later levels, sorcs get a little padding. Is it the earthshattering thing you make it out to be? No, they die just as fast from damage, and wizzes aren't significantly less survivable, as the wizard who came with us through Nessus can tell you. Hell, he might've been more survivable.

Also, you're absolutely right that I said I'd rather toss up a spellmantle than use an implosion ring. Well what is the sorcerer answer? Stand inside the implosions and laugh until you roll a 1. Your saves are higher than their DC. Mine aren't, so I have to soak up the spam until my spellmantle runs out, and then I die horribly. You could die at any time, but only 1 in 20 of them.

Sigh. Again, saves are blanced so thast you can achieve the 5% rate, though you need either leg feats or splash pally. Same as all classes.

Plus, you said in another post, that you find yourself only doing grasps, meteors, and ice storm down in Hell. Where is the benefit spell diversity if the necessary or useful spells are distilled down into a small list?!?!?

I can't speak to what arch said, but I know he uses more than those three spells. I also know he wishes he had certain spells he doesn't. Rattling off a list of unused spells isn't going to convinvce me of anything, especially when many of them aren't even hg modded. You seem to be assuming that wizards must have access to a huge array of spells that sorcs don't in order to find a balance between the two, and that's just not the case. Again, you are looking at things from an extremely colored perspective. You don't even mention the tradeoffs. Yes, sorcs get unlimited spell use, which is nice, because they needn't know how many of x spell to prepare in advance. However, if you know an area, and know what spells you cast there, that advantage is largely mitigated with regard to wizards. So when you say, 'only xyz spells are useful in areas abc', you are also saying 'gee its easy to prepare spells for these areas'. Furthermore, the other advantage of the sorc is spells slots. That advatange has been getting diluted more and more with the increase in spell slot items in hg, a trend I know you are more than passingly familiar with. 2 extra spells per level is a FIFTY PERCENT advantange over wizards. As soon as you add spellslot gear, this advanatage is diluted, and by the time you reach the hells, its roughly a 18/255, or 7% difference. Except, as you well know, there is a spell slot cap at 255, and wizards can reach it, so a huge advanatage in spellslots for the sorc is reduced to NOTHING, and in fact prevents them from getting as many high-level slots. And yet, in this analysis of yours, which you claim is intended to be unbiased, I see absolutlely no mention of this rather remarkable fact. How curious.

Have you found a time yet in Hell when acid fog, incendiary fog, prismatic spray, hold monster, dismissal, phantasmal killer, flame arrow, control undead, create undead, Mordenkein's sword, planar binding, greater planar binding, summon monster 1-9, confusion, fear, or darkness would EVER be useful? Would the time it takes casting them ever be party beneficial? Or would they (for us who menorize) subtract from useful or necessary spells like MS, Grasps, or ice storm? Or even one of the other elemental offense types?

Seeing as you are speaking to arch here, this is a pretty silly question. As a sorc, he doesn't have the opportunity to try these things - because he lacks the spells.

But if you want Spellbreaches - well there's an infinite shield out there with lesser spellbreach that you can use that I cannot 'cause of the shield feat thing. Or you can go with tons of GSB scrolls, like you already do. The benefit to you of using each method would make it the same as if I had cast them in combat, but I need to use slots for them, and you can use an ocean of scrolls, and get the same result. So the GSB line isn't much of a restraint on you.

In fact, you CAN use the shield, if you have something with the feat equipped. Or take the feat. Or splash the class. But that's a build decision, not the sorc/wiz thing you are trying to make it out to be. In fact, I'm adding shield proficiency as one of the coming feat books - but scribe scroll will be another.

Funky: You're right in that this was brought up once before. However, I think it deserves further examination. Now that the Hells are out, you have to agree that they have totally change the nature of the module. Class roles and party formation from pre hell to hell zones are totally redefined, and require entirely different methods of play and party balance, teamwork etc that has been the goal of HG but is simply not necessary below Hell.

Sure, I'd agree with the notion that the Hells changed a lot. However, I think your conclusions are drawn from a shallow and incomplete examination of the issues, as I point out above.

I have tried to point out the ways in which Hell changes a lot of the issues brought up before, and how the Hells make what was before decided to be relatively balanced into something that I feel is NOT so. And I'm not the only one who feels this way. While our feelings don't really matter, in the end, since balance decisions belong to the staff...you should take seriously the fact that there are zero pure sorcerers, and most of the wizzies attempt to splash in some way to not die. Pure builds are few. Because the benefits of purity even for wizards may not be enough. And no sorcerer thinks the benefits of purity outweigh the benefits of splash pally monk. NOT ONE. I'd say thats a significant fact, wouldn't you?

Significant how, with regard to what? I'm inclined to agree that splashing is more favorable in general, but that is, again, apples and oranges to the sorc-wiz debate.

And as to the unlimited shields, you're WRONG that it saves me from having to memorize any of that spell. I don't know if you caught this part, but since you were explicit, I shall be. Unless you have the shield feat on you at the time you attempt to activate the shield, you cannot activate the spells. That means that simply putting on a shield feat granting item, putting on the shield, and taking off the shield feat granting item...lets you wear the shield, but you can NEVER use the spells upon it. It won't work. You get the "you cannot use that item" message.

Covered above.

Plus, I think you'll agree that in essence, the "indirect method" you described of equipping something with the shield feat, equipping the shield, then unequipping the item with the feat...is in essence AN EXPLOIT. It lets you keep something on you, that you don't have the feats for. It's no less an exploit than the Pixie Push was.

Yup, but as with all things on the server, you are free to do em if you can. That one, I can pretty much guaranteee, will never be addressed, as the unfair advanatage/difficulty in fixing ratio is very very low. It'd also be easy to do without realizing.

And that can be discouraged by implementing any of the shield suggestions I put out...from books that give the feat to putting shield feat onto wizzy items like Lamentation's Call, or heck even Ruinvorn's Claw...and maybe the Tia belt. That would actually let wizards use the spells on the shield, which you clearly intended that they be able to do. Other than that, wizzies are forced to wait until they obtain a BUR Amulet, which they may never do, and level 60. I don't think thats what you had in mind.

See above re: the feat book. It actually is pretty much what I had in mind, as overcoming drawbacks of build decisions should not be easy, to help preserve balance.

As to the saves being wasted...well, I am not privy to balance info, so I don't know where DCs cap. However, I would say they are *not* wasted, because of the things that *reduce* saves. A sorcerer can cope with a significant reduction in saves and still be virtually immune to anything out there. That's still a benefit.

Again, this is a specious argument, as I discuss above. Use your logs, check dcs.

And indeed, if it truly so insignificant, why does every single sorcerer on the entire server have it? And have traded off pure spell benefits for it? Answer has to be 'because its better'.

If that were true we wouldn't have phrases like 'specious allure'. Hell, most have no idea what the saves in hell even are. You claim not to.

100% of sorcerers agree that saves + evasion > level 60 spell benefits.
And a good chunk of wizards trade away the benefits too...for rogue levels and evasion, or pally monk for the same, or even a ranger level for a free feat. Thats a trend of significance also.

Again, significance how, with respect to what? Failing to connect the dots indicates to me that you really haven't thought this through very well. If you want to convince me, state your premises and conclusions directly. And stop repeating yourself, please, without responding to my remarks in previous posts, or this will get nowhere even quicker. This is all well and good, but bears more on dual classing vs going pure, not sorc vs wiz.

As to the continual increase in the number of useful spells...outside of Hell I completely agree with you. In pre-hell areas, spell variety is wonderfully helpful. There are times when esoteric spells are great.

In hell though, thats simply not true. I look at my spellbook regularly, trying to figure out what I need in each Hell area - and the answer's the same. Elemental damage flavor of the area, ICE STORM, Grasps, and Meteors. Plus SR reduction and BBoDs. Gusts. Buffs. Thats basically it.

The fact that you've not found uses for other spells yet doesn't mean those uses aren't there. In fact, I know some of them most definitely are there. You rule out a whole caegory of spells because you say thet'll be gusted, but only about half the hells levels have creatures requiring frequent gusts, and even that doesnt render them completely useless. You don't even mention stone to flesh, I suspect because you think 'shifters can do it better', and a whole host of useful spells. You only list the ones you think are useless, many of which have ALWAYS been useless because they aren't modded for HG, to scale to level 60. Nothing about the hells has made those spells any less useful.

From what I've seen, you problem is that you're taking your cues from a sorcerer on what to cast. The hells are not radically different from other areas with respect to critter immunes, though death and mind immunity are naturally somewhat more prevalent. You argue, for instance, that pwk is not useful simply because it doesn't allow instakill without any previous damage, because of increased hps, but that seems shortsighted at best - it can replace a half dozen damage spells, if you target groups already wounded. That might require a different party strategy than the one currently in use by your party but it definitely comes up big in sme partys - imagine it as a one-two punch with a smiter, for instance. Reminds me somewhat of people that claim shifters only have one (or two) useful forms in the hells.

If one can distill down the list of useful or necessary Hell spells into something that short, then I say that spell depth is IRRELEVANT. Who cares that I can cast Acid Fog when everything's gusted? Who cares I can cast Incendiary Fog when everything's gusted and I should be using those spells for more grasps anyway? And those two examples are at least elemental damage types, and there are hell creatures that can be well effected by use of intelligent use of that damage type.

Even if this were true, and it isn't, all you succeeded in showing is that wizards,like sorcerors, have one of the class advatanges over the other neutralized in the hells. Sorcerers still have spell flexibility, though the value of that is decreased by experience with areas, and wizards still have 4 free feats - an epic plus one. Give me a break.

I listed a plethora of spells responding to Archmage that are totally useless there.

See my remarks abve about your list. Dismissal? Oh yeah, that was a real powerhouse before the hells came out.

The list is by no means exhaustive. Go to Hell sometime in DM mode and just watch what is cast.

Hey, great idea! Out of curiosity, why on earth do you assume I haven't?

You won't see spell depth. You won't see a wizard doing things a sorcerer cannot duplicate. You will see in effect that spell variety just isn't relevant to the area.

Again, see my remarks above.

Now, if you listen to everything I say and decide that balance isn't warped, and no changes are needed, well thats your perogative. You know as well as I that reasonable people can view the same facts and come to different conclusions that are both valid.

No, it's my prerogative (sorry, pet peeve - damn you Bobby Brown! ). And that depends entirely on how reasonable they are.

I've tried to give you a constructive post here, one which identifies what are from my perspective balance problems that are brought on or emphasized by the way in which the Hells change the nature of HG. I've tried to give you useful reasoning, point by point comparisons, and in the end useful suggestions that are crafted to minimize DM time spent while being mindful of not knocking over PvE balance by increasing offensive ability directly.

Which post are we discussing again? Because all I saw in this one was a one-sided diatribe motivated by rent-seeking for a person's favored class. Again.

I've even given you a way to avoid a minor exploit and also cure a complete pain in the ass brought on by how Bioware does inventory loading.

In all seriousness, where was that?

If you disagree, fine. If you decide, as is your DM perogative, that no changes are needed, thats ok too - after all, the decision belongs to you and the staff, period. But, I'd thank you to take my post seriously, since it's exactly the kind of constructive post with useable suggestions that *you yourself ask for* when confronted with griping. You may not agree with the conclusions and decide not to use the suggestions, but at least give me *that* much credit?

No, it isn't. In legal terms, what I want is an objective memo, and you're handing me a position paper - and a badly skewed one at that. I recommend at the very least you try playing a sorcerer, because as it stands right now your bias is slice-it-with-a-knife apparent. Worse yet, its mostly the same tired old arguments we see every time, recast for the Hells without regard for the fit. In any event, I hope I've made clear why I find it difficult to take posts like this seriously.
Funky

[Delfestra Ruinvorn]

funkyswerve said:

delfestra said:

Cath: Using the wizzy bonus feats won't work, since they're all at nonepic levels and only let you take magic based skills. And even if you used other non-epic feats, that lets you take at best the nonepic save feats. +2 is no where near +28. It just doesn't reduce the gap.

You can use the feats you save with the wizard feats to take whatever feats you like, including the four nonepic save feats prerequisite to the legendary feats. This rather neatly demonstrates the problem with these posts - you are looking at things mostly only from one perspective, the one which favors your conclusions.

You're quite right that this comes from only one perspective. I don't think I've ever pretended otherwise. I'm not familiar enough with building or scripting to discuss it from that perspective, so I don't pretend to. I play only a wizard and a cleric, really, so I can't comment intelligently on the issues facing meleers. My understanding of sorcerers is limited to seeing them in action, and sharing their spell repetoires. I'm also not privy to the saves/ab/monster balance side of the module either. I can thus only talk about what I've observed through doing myself, or seeing others do. I can't come at it from the perspective of someone who already knows all the strengths and weaknesses of each monster or the intended balance for each area because they built them, or can look them up.

As to whether or not my perspective favors my conclusion, well, thats because based on what I see, my conclusion is the one I've arrived at. If I had all the information that you do, I may come to a different conclusion. Its not like I went shopping for favorable perspectives simply to reach an ends.

Out of curiosity, have you played a wizard as any of your build types? Since I cannot truly share your prespective, I wonder if you can see things from mine?

Just as you are free to splash pally monk. If anything the hells reduced the efficacy of the cheese sorc, because the saves are geared toward normal cha splash pally, or use of save feats, as already mentioned. More later when you return to this.

I'm afraid I don't see where the sorcerer's exceeding the intended saves balance point actually weakens their efficacy. If they didn't splash, they wouldn't reach the intended saves balance point...which would be definately painful.

Again, you get to make the same choice as a wiz, though its probably +8 rather than +28 if you do. That whole extra 20 points does little to cut your 5% fail rate, which is what nearly all of the hells were targeted at for non-cha splash pal or leg save feats (yes, including the penalties). The fact that you didn't splash is a totally seperate decision from sorc - wiz, and is only confusing your arguments. Yes, in later levels, sorcs get a little padding. Is it the earthshattering thing you make it out to be? No, they die just as fast from damage, and wizzes aren't significantly less survivable, as the wizard who came with us through Nessus can tell you. Hell, he might've been more survivable.

Ah. If the balancing is indeed such including penalties, then there isn't some impossibly large advantage/gap that I had thought there was.

Still, I don't see the question of splash/no splash as seperate from wizzy/sorcerer. Probably because I don't see the whole picture involving other classes, in that I don't play them or stat with them in mind.

But the questions are related, in my mind, because the ease of splash pally for sorcerers, vs a tougher fit for wiz/pal/monk due to CHA being the sorcerer favored stat, while wizards may sacrifice other stats to get it to levels that would justify the splashing. Of course, then one could say
that the wiz/rogue is delicious due to the absolutely silly amount of wizzy skillpoints...while a sorc/rogue just isn't as clean a combination.

Still, I'm stuck with the perspective of the wizzy on the ground. I look around and see that all sorcerers are splash pally monk. Wizards, well, some are pure, some are rogue, some are ranger, and some are even pally monk.

Perhaps a better question would be the balance between splash anything and pure build? And whether the pure spell benefits are roughly equal to the splash benefits from a balance point of view?

I can't speak to what arch said, but I know he uses more than those three spells. I also know he wishes he had certain spells he doesn't. Rattling off a list of unused spells isn't going to convinvce me of anything, especially when many of them aren't even hg modded. You seem to be assuming that wizards must have access to a huge array of spells that sorcs don't in order to find a balance between the two, and that's just not the case.

I do assume something like that. Since the benefit of wizard is spell depth, at some point it needs to be useful for a wizard to do something that a sorcerer just plain can't...in the same way that the sorcerer's benefit is never running out of their buff spells or being able to cast on the fly without planning beforehand.

Again, you are looking at things from an extremely colored perspective. You don't even mention the tradeoffs. Yes, sorcs get unlimited spell use, which is nice, because they needn't know how many of x spell to prepare in advance. However, if you know an area, and know what spells you cast there, that advantage is largely mitigated with regard to wizards. So when you say, 'only xyz spells are useful in areas abc', you are also saying 'gee its easy to prepare spells for these areas'.

I wouldn't've put it in exactly that way, but you're right that another class difference is that wizzies plan ahead, and sorcerers adapt on the spot.

But I don't agree that foreknowledge mitigates their no need to prep advantage. A sorcerer with foreknowledge also knows which of their spells to cast when on what thing and with what metamagic attached. The difference is that they may have a shorter list to test.

Whether or not someone has experience in an area isn't a class advantage.

Furthermore, the other advantage of the sorc is spells slots. That advatange has been getting diluted more and more with the increase in spell slot items in hg, a trend I know you are more than passingly familiar with. 2 extra spells per level is a FIFTY PERCENT advantange over wizards. As soon as you add spellslot gear, this advanatage is diluted, and by the time you reach the hells, its roughly a 18/255, or 7% difference. Except, as you well know, there is a spell slot cap at 255, and wizards can reach it, so a huge advanatage in spellslots for the sorc is reduced to NOTHING, and in fact prevents them from getting as many high-level slots. And yet, in this analysis of yours, which you claim is intended to be unbiased, I see absolutlely no mention of this rather remarkable fact. How curious.

You're right in that the %advantage is greatly reduced with spellslot gear. Indeed, my gear (though Archmage tells me I sacrifice too much when I'm bleeding on his shoes) is geared towards spells. However, I'd been under the impression that the spell cap problem really applied only to wiz/cleric/druid. I mean, our books have spell slots we need to fill. Sorcerers do not have the same book interface, and thus don't have slots to fill in the same way.

Which is why I'd assumed they weren't susceptible to the slot problem. Of the two people I am aware of that had that issue crop up, neither were sorcerers. Granted, there may be more than I was aware of, and also I am quite clearly not familiar with how the engine works...but the reason why I didn't bring up spell slots is not that it didn't occur to me, but because you asked me not to mention it.

In fact, you CAN use the shield, if you have something with the feat equipped. Or take the feat. Or splash the class. But that's a build decision, not the sorc/wiz thing you are trying to make it out to be. In fact, I'm adding shield proficiency as one of the coming feat books - but scribe scroll will be another.

Hurray for coming feat books! And there's no reason scribe scroll shouldn't be another. After all, anyone can take the feat, though no one actually does so. Sorcerers, as well as clerics or druids, will be overjoyed. Out of curiosity, do you plan on craft wand or brew potion to come out as feat books? Personally I think it would be interesting if they did. I mean, *no one* uses brew potion. Anything that replaces bots with real people is good in my book.

And, well, as a function of gear...you're right in that I can equip the shield, but as to being able to *use* the spell effect on the shield, there are two caster items I'm aware of that it'd be survivable to wear that grant the shield feat, and enable use of the shield *including the ability to use the spells*. Both are BUR, which also require level 60.

I'd still advocate adding Shield Feat to the shields, so that once you get them equipped, one can use the spell effect.

And you're right, not taking a feat or splashing a class is a build choice. However, it *is* related to sorc/wiz because in HG, every single sorcerer is a splash pally monk. That may be their build choice, but this whole class of new items caters to that build choice much easier than to pure build types.

Sure, I'd agree with the notion that the Hells changed a lot. However, I think your conclusions are drawn from a shallow and incomplete examination of the issues, as I point out above.

Well, clearly, I can't have a truly complete examination of the issue when I don't have access to all the information on which the mod is built. Of course, I never pretended my views could be exhaustive or truly objective. I've got the perspective of a player, and a wizzy class player. All I can tell you is what I see. Whether or not that moves you to alter anything is your Bobby Brown

Significant how, with regard to what? I'm inclined to agree that splashing is more favorable in general, but that is, again, apples and oranges to the sorc-wiz debate.

Significant in regards to which is more powerful or effective. In the same way that once upon a time, there were no druids. Everyone had a choice to play one, but everyone knew they were awful, weak, and nigh useless.

People tend to do things for a reason, and if everyone chooses splash over pure, then that's potentially an indicator that the choice between splash and pure is no choice at all, in the same way that before the spell alterations and druid epics...the choice to play a druid or a mage wasn't much of a choice either.

And I admit that splashing shows up most in sorcerers, because the combination fits so easily. But since you can splash wizzy with rogue easily, perhaps the debate should be about pure build benefits vs splash class benefits...and whether or not there's a balance issue there.

Yup, but as with all things on the server, you are free to do em if you can. That one, I can pretty much guaranteee, will never be addressed, as the unfair advanatage/difficulty in fixing ratio is very very low. It'd also be easy to do without realizing.

Understood.

See above re: the feat book. It actually is pretty much what I had in mind, as overcoming drawbacks of build decisions should not be easy, to help preserve balance.

aaaaaw shucks, and here I was hoping that Tenser's AB would triple so I could out AB the AAs.....

But really, feat books, I'm delighted over, if for no other reason than to not have my inventory pushed all over the place whenever I crash.

Again, this is a specious argument, as I discuss above. Use your logs, check dcs.

If that were true we wouldn't have phrases like 'specious allure'. Hell, most have no idea what the saves in hell even are. You claim not to.

Aaah logs, those things I keep turned off since I feel they slow my poor beleagured laptop down with crazy shifter kickback melee battlespam.

As to saves in Hell, I know that the Falling-From-The-Sky is 60, as I was trying to find out why Malbolg was clobbering me every 5 seconds the first time down (remember after the first Stygia run? Everyone had the treat of watching me get hammered...only one in the party, comically)

I believe cinderscale slagging is about 100, and Styx water 60 also...but in truth, I keep my logs off and that battle window minimized as a matter of course. So I don't truly know what the saves are.

Again, significance how, with respect to what? Failing to connect the dots indicates to me that you really haven't thought this through very well. If you want to convince me, state your premises and conclusions directly. And stop repeating yourself, please, without responding to my remarks in previous posts, or this will get nowhere even quicker. This is all well and good, but bears more on dual classing vs going pure, not sorc vs wiz.

When you put it that way, it makes more sense. I'd been focusing on sorc v wiz because no sorcerers are pure, and some wizards are. Perhaps pure benefits vs splash benefits and their relative balance is a better question. Though, the information on actual and intended save balance including penalties does drastically change the analysis.

The fact that you've not found uses for other spells yet doesn't mean those uses aren't there. In fact, I know some of them most definitely are there. You rule out a whole caegory of spells because you say thet'll be gusted, but only about half the hells levels have creatures requiring frequent gusts, and even that doesnt render them completely useless.

I do rule out clouds in Hell, but not just because they'll be gusted by accident when aiming for enemy cloud effects. I rule them out also because the party will yell at you for reducing their framerate. That drawback when combined with accidental gusting makes them much less desireable. After all, you've said yourself that spells should benefit the party, not harm it, and smashed framerates benefit no one.

You don't even mention stone to flesh, I suspect because you think 'shifters can do it better', and a whole host of useful spells. You only list the ones you think are useless, many of which have ALWAYS been useless because they aren't modded for HG, to scale to level 60. Nothing about the hells has made those spells any less useful.

I think you mean flesh to stone. Still, a shifter *can* do it better. But if you're putting "spell depth" as a big feather in the wizard hat, there needs to be real spell depth. A big chunk of useless spells does undermine the arguments for spell depth as an advantage, because it isn't meaningful to have a wide arsenal of things that don't work.

And Hells only makes that distinction sharper, as spells that you could get away with using in earlier areas simply have no application there. And not just Dismissal (oddly useful on drow clerics when they had their shadow summons, btw), but things like Summon 1-9, which IS HG modded and useful until Ssithrak, and Prismatic Spray, which is HG modded heavily, and STILL totally sucks. And then there's Sunburst, which I keep suggesting changes to make it into something that is remotely useful on the intended monster target (undead). It is HG modded and uncapped, and completely without meaningful application in Hell, or anywhere else for that matter! And I don't see Balagorn's Iron Horn working in Hell...but the next run I go on, I promise to use it on every creature type I see just to be sure.

Forgive my snarkiness, but I'm yet to come up with a spell combination that would be outside what a sorcerer normally picks, and is useful in Hell. For spell depth to be meaningful, it has to have applications outside what a sorcerer can or would pick spellwise. Elsewise its an arsenal of uselessness. Which, in pointing out what isn't HG modded in the first place, you kinda help confirm.

From what I've seen, you problem is that you're taking your cues from a sorcerer on what to cast. The hells are not radically different from other areas with respect to critter immunes, though death and mind immunity are naturally somewhat more prevalent. You argue, for instance, that pwk is not useful simply because it doesn't allow instakill without any previous damage, because of increased hps, but that seems shortsighted at best - it can replace a half dozen damage spells, if you target groups already wounded. That might require a different party strategy than the one currently in use by your party but it definitely comes up big in sme partys - imagine it as a one-two punch with a smiter, for instance. Reminds me somewhat of people that claim shifters only have one (or two) useful forms in the hells.

Mmm you may be right, in that once I came back from my hiatus, my first Hell runs were following Archmage around and learning from him. Much like I did in Ssithrak way back when it was the top of the food chain.

Still, I sincerely doubt that PWK for instance will see much use, and CERTAINLY not as an AoE, because the monster HPs of things I have controlled all exceed 2k, and I have no idea how many HPs mind immune things have. With a HP cap of 1300/650 AoE, when you have no idea where the monster's current HPs actually are and no way of ever finding out in most cases...its a bad risk I think to plan using it, when you know you need other things. And 650 is so low on the monster hp scale that I don't see it ever being effectively used radius wise, even if you have a collection of deathmagic-vulnerable things together and all wounded. You can waste almost as many castings as you'd use with damage spells that way.

I'd say the most radical change immunity wise is that negative energy and magic are almost univerally weak or ineffective. Which does hurt spell depth also, since it rules out 9 spells I can think of off hand. Plus, monster kickback reduces the usefulness of 3 of those even if they did work, and another on top that isn't magic based anyway.

In addition, both the wizard damage epics are magic based. And one is multitarget, which reduces the damage further and adds the kickback danger to you and your party. Magic was once the favored exotic attack form, now it's shifted to the second weakest, with negative the weakest.

Which means, that immunity wise, Hells place wizards *and* sorcerers in the weakest position exotic damage wise. That IS a radical change immunity wise...as even in the Black Pyramid, things immune to two exotics are vulnerable to two, so it bites every class in its own way.

But, thats creeping away from the point, so to bring us back...the effect of the magic/neg immunity levels is to reduce spell depth.

Even if this were true, and it isn't, all you succeeded in showing is that wizards,like sorcerors, have one of the class advatanges over the other neutralized in the hells. Sorcerers still have spell flexibility, though the value of that is decreased by experience with areas, and wizards still have 4 free feats - an epic plus one. Give me a break.

Well, 4 free feats can't make an epic I don't think, since they're limited to pre-epic feats and thus can't take the epic focus. And with the epic spell foci / pen / epic stat / legendary feats all being well after them, I don't think it'd work out quite like that. However, they're great to take 4 metamagics with. Then you have true spell versatility, since you can do whatever you want with the spells you have

See my remarks abve about your list. Dismissal? Oh yeah, that was a real powerhouse before the hells came out.

Oh yah, those drow priestesses never knew what hit them

Hey, great idea! Out of curiosity, why on earth do you assume I haven't?

Oh, you mean you're not chained to the desk and forced to write scripts all day long??!?! Color me astonished.

(Really, that was me being bitchy, I apologize...)

No, it's my prerogative (sorry, pet peeve - damn you Bobby Brown! ). And that depends entirely on how reasonable they are.

LOL...I missed that one, and you're right...it is. Curse him and his dance moves, curse them...

As to reasonableness, well, if we want a view other than a subjective one, we'd better go line up the world history of philosophy...

By reasonable I mean in this case 'not completely insane' with a dash of 'honestly believed'.

Which post are we discussing again? Because all I saw in this one was a one-sided diatribe motivated by rent-seeking for a person's favored class. Again.

Now, that goes too far. I'll make allowance for you being irrate, in this case, because you should know better than to think I really care about personal gain, or expect anything to flow my way.

I spoke up about what I honestly saw as an issue that effects anyone playing the class. Again. I want good things for the server as a whole, not me personally. Game balance is in *everyone's* interest.

And I talk about 'my favored class' because I'm not stupid enough to think I can talk intelligently about the problems of fighters or rogues in relation to party viability or game balance. I don't know anything about either class, so I don't waste time with baseless griping or useless observations not based upon personal experience.

Please don't try and claim I have some self serving interest in boosting myself at the expense of others. I don't, and the suggestion that I am at all that kind of person is quite offensive to me.

In all seriousness, where was that?

Oh, that was about the feat book for shield. Feat unequipping is the minor exploit, and the fact shields land in and displace the inventories even if you're wearing feat granting items is the PAIN in the @$$ due to Bioware's inventory loading method, as you explained it to Mish in another post.

No, it isn't. In legal terms, what I want is an objective memo, and you're handing me a position paper - and a badly skewed one at that. I recommend at the very least you try playing a sorcerer, because as it stands right now your bias is slice-it-with-a-knife apparent. Worse yet, its mostly the same tired old arguments we see every time, recast for the Hells without regard for the fit. In any event, I hope I've made clear why I find it difficult to take posts like this seriously.
Funky

Ah. That makes more sense. And, I'm at least advocating for a position I can discuss things from. Indeed, my bias must be clear as its built in due to the limitations of my perspective. I don't have the creator's eye view of the mod as a whole, only one little class's view from within it. But indeed, the balance of pure vs splash may be a better fit...my fault for being clouded by the fact that all sorcerers splash. Indeed, a pure sorc should benefit from purity aswell, if one was to ever be played.

(And besides, I can never play a sorcerer, or Archmage would never let me hear the end of it...and then what could we 'discuss' during all those wyrm runs?? )

[cathedralmaster]

delfestra said:

So I don't truly know what the saves are.

highergroundpoa.proboards3.com/index.cgi?board=Tavern&action=display&n=1&thread=3623

You should also check out Littlekins logs:
www.sti15.com/nwn/chat/logs.html

Well, 4 free feats can't make an epic I don't think, since they're limited to pre-epic feats and thus can't take the epic focus. And with the epic spell foci / pen / epic stat / legendary feats all being well after them, I don't think it'd work out quite like that. However, they're great to take 4 metamagics with. Then you have true spell versatility, since you can do whatever you want with the spells you have

You get 11 pre epic save feats (12 if human), 13 epic feats, and 7 LL feats. That's enough for two spell focuses from regular to LL (not including using a book), Toughness, both combat castings, regular to LL spell penetration, 10 Great Intelligences, Still, empowered, and maximize with 3 epic or LL feats left over - enough for another spell focus or better saves.

Assuming a lvl 60 human 38 wizard, 1 pally, 1 monk with a base of 16 con, 8 dex, 8 wisdom, 12 charisma and assuming you maxed the bonus to stats:

Fort: 6 + 10 + 5 + 9 (con bonus) + 20 (items) + 7 (Paladin) = 57
Reflex: 6 + 10 + 5 + 5 (dex bonus) + 20 (items) + 7 (Paladin) = 53
Will: 12 + 10 + 5 + 5 (wis bonus) + 20 (items) + 7 (Paladin) = 59

So take Luck of Heroes on first level, lightning reflexes on one of the multiples of 3, and then take LL Luck and LL reflexes bringing your saves to:

Fort: 61
Reflexes: 66
Will: 63

I'd perfer a little higher fort save cause I tend to ignore Osys but you really don't need higher saves than that as a caster in my opinion. Sure, Arch has saves around 80 but I doubt the extra really helps him that much if at all (which I believe is the point Funky was trying to make with efficacy - sorc saves are less of an advantage now that everyone can get decent saves).

So it certainly is possible to use the 4 extra feats to get good saves if you so desired. It would mean only 3 spell focuses and being non-pure but that's a build choice.

So yes, the issue your trying to hit at is pure vs. cheese, not wizard vs. sorc, druid, cleric, or what-have-you.

Indeed, a pure sorc should benefit from purity aswell, if one was to ever be played.

Talk to Mish.

EDIT: Made a slight error and re-wrote it to make more sense.

[FunkySwerve]

Well, I can't spend the time doing up another lengthy response, but you will be pleased to know that some of the mods to hells for pms will help sorc/wiz as well. I already more or less agreeed with your suggestion for sunbeam (or burst, whichever), not that it will help in the hells, and I expect continued spell edits will continue to favor wiz over sorc. If you want to see the end result, look at nwn2 (read: neutered sorc). I suspect to keep the class viable there we'll have to have spell slot items give sorcs 50% more slots than others, a step I haven't (and won't) take on hg1. I'd also like to have some more specific vulnerability to certain spells in the hells, or maybe 2 or three critters, spells of a more esoteric type. But that would be more because I've always wanted to advance build diveristy and tactics, rather than to help out the ever-strengthening wiz. There are other incorrect points in your post, that propbably should be addressed, but frankly I'm out of patience. Like the part about not mentioning spellslots - you did, in fact, mention them, saying that sorcs got more while neglecting to compare their advantage in slots down the road. It's 'oversights' like that which make your posts on this topic so slanted, and force me to write longwinded replies.
Funky

[thedomicron]

for sunbeam (or burst, whichever)

always a good sign...

[DragonChyld]

Your both Lawyers right? I think I read that somewhere...

Which one of you guys is a prosocuter, and who works for the Defense team? The Truth shines though

[chainlink]

Stop it you two my heads hurting.