Nether Void/Mass Enervation

[Zaal]

clerics have been casting mass death ward like it would prevent all deaths since it came out. they use it in part 4 of shroud, they use it in von 6, they use it in the reaver, they use it soloing korthos island unless this spell also spawned a couple beholders, i doubt it would have any affect on a party even if it did affect friendlies.

Good point.

[Wizzly_Bear]

I'm not exactly sure how this thread came to be about sorc/wiz balance. How exactly would adding, say, a spell tip the balance scales? Sorcerers can take it if they wish. Even a feat....I don't really see it.

While a wizard may be able to fit it in easier, they still will have to give up something they had before. Sure, maybe it's something non-essential like enlarge.

That being said, I can't think of pretty much anything they could add that would significantly tip the scales in favor of the wizard.

agreed. I love Wizzly's setup, but many of his feats are just nice and definitely not necessary - they just work for me (eschew, enlarge, dual spell pen, sf necro, quicken, toughness, extend)

[sephiroth1084]

Sure, new spells and feats are always welcomed, but I don't think they should just be added w/o revisiting caster balance. Like I stated before, I believe the 2 classes are relatively balanced now, so adding in a bunch of things that would benefit only 1 vs. the other would grossly tip the scales.

I just don't see how adding a few spells or feats would upset the quasi-balance that exists now all that much. I referenced Asp's thread about nuking because it represented a fair number of people who were more than willing to give up "must haves" like Greater Spell Pen., Spell Pen., and/or Extend, as an example of how sorcs are already able to make adjustments and define their characters with their more limited feat slots.

And I wonder how many above play both a level 20 wizard and a level 20 sorc? I know Asp doesn't. I know I do, and find them quite balanced.

I don't, I'll admit. I've considered making a sorc, but despite their greater power, I just enjoy leveraging spell selection too much--I like being able to use niche spells occasionally, especially in PvP!

Maybe it's just me, but I find my wizard with around 2300 mana to usually be pretty ok in all quests when it comes to mana usage. There are enough shrines around that I don't find myself wishing for more mana all that often. The addition of things like the bauble adds further insurance in regards to mana usage.

A lot of the time I'd agree, but that's mostly due to 20 levels spent learning mana conservation and how to maximize efficiency in many quests. On epic, particularly in Offering and DQ 1, mana gets really tight. And there are other situations, some necessary, and some simply a matter of fun. I may know how to conserve mana, but that doesn't make standing around and holding back any less fun.

[Chimaira]

Man you people are craaaazy. No way sorcerers are better then wizards. The only way a sorcerer is better then a wizard is if you count the fact that a sorcerer can go 2 pally for saves. And even then, they can't get evasion AND the good saves (whereas a wizard can get high reflex save with insightful reflex, AND evasion aswell as being the best frigging trap monkey possible).

The thing is, wizards have a massive advantage in this game because of the SP system. Normally, wizards have to prepare spells. That means that if you prepared 2 fireballs and 3 hastes, and halfway through the dungeon you need an extra fireball, your SOL until you can rest and replace it. Sorcerers can just cast whichever spell they want, this is a massive advantage that sorcerers have and because of the large amount of spells and metamagic they are much more limited in what they can choose. This advantage of being able to cast whatever they want doesn't exist because SP pretty much grants all spellcasting classes "spontaneous spellcasting". Now, I BELIEVE there are feats (epic feats? Im not sure) that give wizards spontaneous spellcasting similar to sorcerers in pnp, but this does take up another slot for a feat.

Saying wizards aren't going to get overpowered by adding metamagic feats that the sorcerer is never going to be able to add (They already have to make choices, which really are already limiting them) is silly at best. Combine that with the fact that the absolute best arcane casters (Warforged) have -2 CHA and there really isn't a reason to "buff wizards".

[Surrealistik]

Aspenor's nuker thread and the voices of agreement from everyone who posted seem to demonstrate fairly clearly that sorcs can give up a few feats we consider necessary without much heartache--Extend being the biggie that I recall.

Extend can be dropped, but it is still painful. As for your feedback, aside from the misplaced Glitterdust, that list is pretty much spot on. Wanding RoE would be an idea if it didn't require a min caster level of 10 for its full effect, and most of the alternatives that the Sorc doesn't have slots for weren't so terrible. Yes, not every level is full up, but in most cases, you have maybe one spell slot to play around with, and that is barring everything that is non-essential, even stuff like Scorching Ray that is very good; this does demonstrate just how few options Sorcs really have.

Further, the actual definition of analysis is really quite divorced from your concept of it; analysis is not rooted in baseless projection, which is precisely what assuming recursions of past precedent constitutes. X subject to different parameters, as it is in this case, may not still be X, and you are asserting at the very least that it is likely to be, because it was so in the past; a blatant logical fallacy. In addition, you saw fit to make another completely unqualified comment, that "past trends tend to project fairly well in DDO". Well I guess I better just take your word for it, given how totally *right* you've been on so many other occasions, /sarcasm.

The person you quoted seems to have never played epic content, and likely doesn't contribute all that much in tight-mana quests on his wizard--I know that I'm hard-pressed on mana in many quests at 2300 w/ Bauble. Sorcs also most definitely get more spells out over a given period of time, which meas they can nuke better. Their DC is ONE less, and I already addressed that with my comment about Yugoloth potions.

So according to you, anyone who has a Wizard who reports otherwise has "never played epic content". Wow, how completely presumptuous and self-serving; how totally you. Here's a tip Sephy; arguments are better served by not assuming you are the hub around which all creation lovingly revolves. I find it ironic you accuse me of "ignoring" points when you are precisely guilty of that right here, not even bothering to mount an informed and qualified counterargument to irivan's post.

[sephiroth1084]

Extend can be dropped, but it is still painful. As for your feedback, aside from the misplaced Glitterdust, that list is pretty much spot on. Wanding RoE would be an idea if it didn't require a min caster level of 10 for its full effect, and most of the alternatives that the Sorc doesn't have slots for weren't so terrible. Yes, not every level is full up, but in most cases, you have maybe one spell slot to play around with, and that is barring everything that is non-essential, even stuff like Scorching Ray that is very good; this does demonstrate just how few options Sorcs really have.

The point was that obviously sorcerers can get by without some of the spells that you, and I, would have otherwise considered staples, like the Spell Pen. feats. And the greater point, was that sorcerers are supposed to be a class about hard decisions, already made much easier in DDO, and that giving them yet another is insufficient reason to not include more metamagic feats or spells in the game. Is every lowbie sorc crying that they have to now choose amongst Electric Loop, Fireball, Scorching Ray, Acid Splash, Frost Lance, Chain Missile, Lightning Bolt and Force Missiles? Not that I've seen. Now, they simply have more spells from which to select, and around which to mold their enhancements.

Further, the actual definition of analysis is really quite divorced from your concept of it; analysis is not rooted in baseless projection, which is precisely what assuming recursions of past precedent constitutes. X subject to different parameters, as it is in this case, may not still be X, and you are asserting at the very least that it is likely to be, because it was so in the past; a blatant logical fallacy. In addition, you saw fit to make another completely unqualified comment, that "past trends tend to project fairly well in DDO". Well I guess I better just take your word for it, given how totally *right* you've been on so many other occasions, /sarcasm.

Do you eve play the game, or do you simply troll about the forums making an ass of yourself? There is nothing "baseless" about observing trends over the course of two years and then making projections about the near future. That is how the world functions.

New content comes out, and everyone has a period of uncertainty about what tactics will be useful and where, what spells need to be brought along,, which staples are no longer very effective.

During this period, wizards tend to be slightly better, as they can adapt to the new demands, though sorcs aren't left completely out in the cold, since they can leverage their greater SP in bludgeoning their way to a shrine if those tend to be spread out. After about a week, most sorcs that I've spoken to and played with have adjusted their spell selections to be more effective in the new content, possibly sacrificing some effectiveness in the old, but as we learn quests, they get easier anyway.

So according to you, anyone who has a Wizard who reports otherwise has "never played epic content". Wow, how completely presumptuous and self-serving; how totally you. Here's a tip Sephy; arguments are better served by not assuming you are the hub around which all creation lovingly revolves. I find it ironic you accuse me of "ignoring" points when you are precisely guilty of that right here, not even bothering to mount an informed and qualified counterargument to irivan's post.

Do you even listen to yourself? Yes, in some quests, wizard mana of 2300+clickies is more than enough for what needs to be done, though that wizard likely isn't nuking along the way, and probably isn't landing all of his spells, so the impact of his presence is lessened considerably.

A sorc can either keep going, doing the same thing as the wiz, for longer, or can go for the same period of time, but contribute more damage (or possibly more CC, simply by assaulting the monsters with more casts, increasing the chance of showing failed saves). There's some balance here, as wizard's CC is more efficient, somewhat, but in some quests, where there's a lot of stuff to deal with per shrine, mana gets tight.

DQ 1 epic has one shrine and there is a lot of ground to cover. The sorcerer I was with was having some mana issues, and he was holding back a bit. Does that necessarily apply to everyone? No, but if you read the accounts provided by others, a couple of the epic quests really put a strain on such resources, sorc or wiz. And if we're discussing endgame effectiveness, and how sorcs and wizards differ, why quibble over easy content, where anyone can get by?


[EDIT] Speaking of listening to yourself...:

[Surrealistik]

The point was that obviously sorcerers can get by without some of the spells that you, and I, would have otherwise considered staples, like the Spell Pen. feats. And the greater point, was that sorcerers are supposed to be a class about hard decisions, already made much easier in DDO, and that giving them yet another is insufficient reason to not include more metamagic feats or spells in the game. Is every lowbie sorc crying that they have to now choose amongst Electric Loop, Fireball, Scorching Ray, Acid Splash, Frost Lance, Chain Missile, Lightning Bolt and Force Missiles? Not that I've seen. Now, they simply have more spells from which to select, and around which to mold their enhancements.

Can, and should are two different things. Hell, I can *technically* get by with some very suboptimal builds, but why on earth would I? There's hard decisions, and then there's penalizing the class by essentially offering a slew of relatively pain free new, obligatory metamagic toys for the Wizards, which already do quite well, while simultaneously leaving the Sorcs out in the cold. I *dare* you to disagree with the obvious, and say that Split/Chain is not obligatory despite the brutal synergy it has with E Drain and Enervation. Why is this necessary? What does it really contribute to the game? Wizards are (more than) fine.


Do you eve play the game, or do you simply troll about the forums making an ass of yourself? There is nothing "baseless" about observing trends over the course of two years and then making projections about the near future. That is how the world functions.

New content comes out, and everyone has a period of uncertainty about what tactics will be useful and where, what spells need to be brought along,, which staples are no longer very effective.

During this period, wizards tend to be slightly better, as they can adapt to the new demands, though sorcs aren't left completely out in the cold, since they can leverage their greater SP in bludgeoning their way to a shrine if those tend to be spread out. After about a week, most sorcs that I've spoken to and played with have adjusted their spell selections to be more effective in the new content, possibly sacrificing some effectiveness in the old, but as we learn quests, they get easier anyway.

Again, what *proof* do you have that it'll be the same in this case? Where is your *evidence*? I see projection, much of it baseless, I see theorizing, much of it unsubstantiated, but I don't see proof; nothing to really justify this smarmy confidence of yours. The bottom line is that you are guessing. You are not telling it "like it is" or how it "will be", you are taking a stab in the dark based tenuously on prior occurrences which feature some modicum of commonality with the present endgame. Even in cases where projections based on prior data are utilized in an attempt to make prediction, there is the acknowledgment that said predictions could most certainly prove wrong, and there is most certainly the understanding that the future could deviate quite substantially from the past; in fact, most such projections count on it. You on the otherhand, throw around personal anecdotes (many of which are self-serving and selectively detailed I'm sure, if not outright fabricated) and prior experience like it is de facto, concrete evidence that you are correct; doesn't work that way in the real world I'm afraid.


Do you even listen to yourself? Yes, in some quests, wizard mana of 2300+clickies is more than enough for what needs to be done, though that wizard likely isn't nuking along the way, and probably isn't landing all of his spells, so the impact of his presence is lessened considerably.

A sorc can either keep going, doing the same thing as the wiz, for longer, or can go for the same period of time, but contribute more damage (or possibly more CC, simply by assaulting the monsters with more casts, increasing the chance of showing failed saves). There's some balance here, as wizard's CC is more efficient, somewhat, but in some quests, where there's a lot of stuff to deal with per shrine, mana gets tight.

DQ 1 epic has one shrine and there is a lot of ground to cover. The sorcerer I was with was having some mana issues, and he was holding back a bit. Does that necessarily apply to everyone? No, but if you read the accounts provided by others, a couple of the epic quests really put a strain on such resources, sorc or wiz. And if we're discussing endgame effectiveness, and how sorcs and wizards differ, why quibble over easy content, where anyone can get by?

Again, the pacing experienced by others differs with that of your own (and according to you, who I'm disinclined to believe, a couple of others), and you have, as per usual, completely missed the point; it's not about what a Sorc can theoretically do, it's about how their performance *actually* stacks up against the Wizard in endgame content. Speaking of which, it is quite easy to shore up the increasingly irrelevant SP discrepancies between the two classes when absolutely necessary (man, it sure is easy to get mana potions these days), thus basically eliminating one of the single greatest advantages of the Sorcerer.


[EDIT] Speaking of listening to yourself...:

Lol, how quick we are to devolve into juvenile, petty flaming (not that I'm at all surprised). Don't phase me bro! Again, so totally *you*. By the way, projecting one's deficiencies is entirely counterproductive to resolving them.