Specialist Mages v Sorcerers

MegaToerist · Post by **MegaToerist** » Wed Jun 13, 2001 3:02 am

@Vehemence: You can always carry some scrolls too. How many times did you need Acid Resistance? And, if you need Protection from Normal Weapons, it means your warrior companions have been disabled...not a very healthy situation IMO.

Vehemence · Post by **Vehemence** » Wed Jun 13, 2001 3:09 am

Originally posted by MegaToerist:
@Vehemence: You can always carry some scrolls too. How many times did you need Acid Resistance? And, if you need Protection from Normal Weapons, it means your warrior companions have been disabled...not a very healthy situation IMO.

Oh I see, so your adding scrolls to the equation now are you? So while your fumbling about in your scroll box looking for some scrolls, some dude has just launched a cone of cold, which incidently you didn't avoid since you were after the acid protection.

It's not a case of how often does some bozo come at you with a weapon dipped in acid or frost for that matter, it's a simple point stating that no matter what, a sorcerer can never fully be prepared for any battle. The game is too diverse for that and that's one of the great points!

I guarantee that if a mage and your sorcerer went up against eachother, theres a good chance your sorcerer would win first. However, the second and unlitmately infinite amount of times thereafter, the sorcerer would lose. Why? Because with the knowledge of the spells that the sorcerer doesn't have, the wizzard can prepare spells for next time that the sorcerer can't avoid.

I'll restate this just to make my point crystal clear, the sorcerer cannot defend against every attack, therefore is flawed.

I should also note that yes, I know, every class is flawed, that's the fun of it all!

ReignsOfPower · Post by **ReignsOfPower** » Wed Jun 13, 2001 3:27 am

I said it once and I'll say it again.
AMEN Vehemence!!!

Being prepared is the only way to win!
Thats one vote for you!

Garcia · Post by **Garcia** » Wed Jun 13, 2001 3:40 am

@ Vehemence
the sorc. is more than powerfull enough to find alternative ways to kill a foe. even as a specialist you don't go around with fire pro and cold pro. lighning pr. acid pro. then the additional amoung of spells will soon be used up. you can also select your spells so that you will be able to do in any give situation if you think that pro. from acid is vital then you pick that of course ( just an example

) The 3 times I have completed BG2 with a sorc. I had never experienced that I lacked a vital spell or haveing problems taking down a foe.
there are 4 kinds of spells:

1. must have spells (ex. magic missile, Lower Resistance)

2. really good spells (ex. Improved Invisibility, Stoneskin)

3.nice to have spells (ex. Protection From Fire, Protection From Normal Weapons)

4. more or less usless spells (ex. Grease, Know Alignment)

as a sorc. start from the top and then go down the 4 kinds of spells depending how vital they are.

Xyx · Post by **Xyx** » Wed Jun 13, 2001 4:19 am

As I see it, the Sorcerer's main drawbacks are:

Unable to effectively use the trigger spells (Sequencers/Contingencies). They take up the place of too much other good stuff in your would-be spellbook. This changes in ToB, when you can learn up to 6 spells of every level.
Unable to dual into. If I could, I'd rather dual my Kensai into a Sorcerer than a plain vanilla Mage. Dualling solves the greatest wizard drawback of feeble Hit Points (besides adding some other fun stuff, of course).
Unable to effectively use the clone spells (Project Image and Simulacrum). Again, these spells get in the way of Abi-Dalzim's Horrid Wilting, Power Word Blind, and all that. Again, will change in ToB.

Garcia · Post by **Garcia** » Wed Jun 13, 2001 4:40 am

A sorc. don't need hitpoints that's the essens in a sorc. just spells and lots of them

Xyx · Post by **Xyx** » Wed Jun 13, 2001 8:07 am

A sorc. don't need hitpoints that's the essens in a sorc.

Everybody needs Hit Points. Are you saying you could play the game in any reasonable manner (i.e. no cheese) with only 20 or so Hit Points? One Fireball from a Demon or Efreeti and you're toast.

fable · Post by **fable** » Wed Jun 13, 2001 8:36 am

I'll say it again: the arguments about whether a mage specialist or a sorc is better relate to playing style, and cannot arrive at any satisfying result. I've played 'em both, I like 'em both. For adaptablity, there's nothing a mage. For power-at-hand, you have to have a sorc.

For experience while reading scrolls, when I'm running a sorc, I keep a mage in my party--usually Jan (if it's a good group) or Edwin (if it's evil).

Zelgadis · Post by **Zelgadis** » Wed Jun 13, 2001 8:36 am

Originally posted by Xyx:
Everybody needs Hit Points. Are you saying you could play the game in any reasonable manner (i.e. no cheese) with only 20 or so Hit Points? One Fireball from a Demon or Efreeti and you're toast.

He bis saying hitpoints are less vital to a sorcerer. Sure, one fire spell could kill him, but there are several spells that would protect him (globe of invunerability and others)

Xyx · Post by **Xyx** » Wed Jun 13, 2001 9:10 am

I'd hate to have my Sorcerer waste his precious learning "slots" on stuff like Resist Fire, Globe of Invulnerability or Protection from Energy or the like. None of these spells provides full cover (or even half...).

OTOH, Mirror Image, Mislead and Spell Immunity will protect against most damage spells.

Kovi · Post by **Kovi** » Wed Jun 13, 2001 11:08 am

It is true that a specialist mage can be better prepared for a specific encounter (if he know it in advance). But a good sorcerer (with a balanced set of spells) is always prepared.
And it seems that nobody mentioned the biggest advantage of the sorcerer: as it don't have to memorize it can dinamically cast spells (of the same level). Which means that the sorcerer could remain prepared for a lot of battles without resting.

Garcia · Post by **Garcia** » Thu Jun 14, 2001 1:54 am

Originally posted by Xyx:
Everybody needs Hit Points. Are you saying you could play the game in any reasonable manner (i.e. no cheese) with only 20 or so Hit Points? One Fireball from a Demon or Efreeti and you're toast.

"NEED" hitpoints = VITAL to the class
A tank "NEEDS" hitpoints, a sorc. don't. He is not ment to be a powerhouse of hitpoints like a barb or a fighter. imagine giving the sorc. 160+ hitpoints and a fighter 60. the fighter will be no good because he needs his hitpoints a sorc. has no use for his unless he fells like lettig a kobolt slapping him for half an hour.

White Rabbit · Post by **White Rabbit** » Thu Jun 14, 2001 2:09 am

Lets look at this from a role-playing point of view, specificly, disregarding reloads. At this point the argument that specialist mages are better, falls apart. You cannot be prepared for something you don't know about. Therefor a sorcerer is better. Mages are only good for dual/multi classing.

Xyx · Post by **Xyx** » Thu Jun 14, 2001 2:09 am

imagine giving the sorc. 160+ hitpoints and a fighter 60

Not arguing with that! I know 60 Hit Points will get you by as Sorcerer. You only have to be careful in healing fully after every battle.

Vehemence · Post by **Vehemence** » Thu Jun 14, 2001 2:14 am

Originally posted by White Rabbit:
Lets look at this from a role-playing point of view, specificly, disregarding reloads. At this point the argument that specialist mages are better, falls apart. You cannot be prepared for something you don't know about. Therefor a sorcerer is better. Mages are only good for dual/multi classing.

White Rabbit: Who said anything about either one being better than the other? I think the main point people should look at is that they are both equally as powerful in different situations. No one class is more superior than any other. Anyone who thinks that theres one class that can beat any other every time has their head so far up their *ss, they can probably smell what they're shovelin' and the fumes are effecting their judgement

Just chill people and realise that each has their benefits and weaknesses. That's the fun, not this My class is better than yours crap. What are we kindergarten kiddies or something?

[ 06-14-2001: Message edited by: Vehemence ]

White Rabbit · Post by **White Rabbit** » Thu Jun 14, 2001 2:17 am

Actually I don't play either mage or sorc, I prefer bards, paladins, druids etc. I just find the sorc to be more powerful one on one. And no were not in kindergarden! NOW SHUT UP OR MY DADDY WILL KICK YOUR DADDY'S ARSE!

Garcia · Post by **Garcia** » Thu Jun 14, 2001 2:20 am

Originally posted by Xyx:
Not arguing with that! I know 60 Hit Points will get you by as Sorcerer. You only have to be careful in healing fully after every battle.

then we agree

ReignsOfPower · Post by **ReignsOfPower** » Thu Jun 14, 2001 2:23 am

Since This Post is quite popular, could someone asnswer my Question On BG1 ?

The Topic is called 'Baldur's Gate 1'

Thanks

violence · Post by **violence** » Thu Jun 14, 2001 11:14 am

As a sort of side not, have any of you compared a solo mage to a solo sorcerer? I think that in solo a sorcere is five or six times better. It is annoying to solo a mage because you never know which spells you are going to need. With a sorcerer, you are actually more prepared for whatever may come because even though you have less total spells you can utilize the ones that you have more efficiently and effectively. >just my 2 cents.

Craig · Post by **Craig** » Thu Jun 14, 2001 1:08 pm

Originally posted by ReignsOfPower:
We all know that the Abjurer is the best specialist mage, so we will use him as an example.

WTH Abjurer???? sphere of chaos, haste/improved, knock, MMM STONESKIN, wizard eye Lower resistance(does that count?), Tenser transformation, Shape change, spellstrike, and time stop Gezzzzeeessssss Do you have a manual!!!Conjourer!!!
(P.S just my PoV

)