SORCEROS VS WIZARDS

[andrewas]

Dude I think you have it the other way around. The mage can cast whatever he wants and a sorceror is stuck with only a small handfull of spells. And what in the 9 hells you mean if he has spells memorized he can't use them? In a tight spot a mage casts what he cans and hope it works!!! DUDE what planet are you from! The last sentance oh my goodness. Dude everything you say is messed up reverse that and you got that right![/QB]

A mage can memorise as good selection of spells, but if he wants to have versatility he can only have a few of each level. A sorc can cast acid arrow as many times as he needs, without having to stop, switch out other level 2 spells and rest to memorise. I run into a troll and I have 3 mirror images available. But I also have 3 acid arrows available. I can cast 3 level 2 spells, but which spells are my choice, at the time. Not my choice, last night.

Your mage may be able to learn more spells, but who cares how many you have in your spellbook? What you have memorised is whats determines your offensive capability, and the sorcerors spellcasting system means he dosent have to choose ahead of time what to take into battle.

Of course, a sorceror who make poor spell choices is far inferior to a mage, since a sorceror cant correct later. This is why mages are easier to play. But easier to play does not mean they are more powerful.

[Sever]

Originally posted by Sythe: DUDE what planet are you from! The last sentance oh my goodness. Dude everything you say is messed up reverse that and you got that right![/QB]

Ah, dude? What have you been smoking? Thinking about your thread topics and arguements before posting them will save you much embarrassment.

[SixOfSpades]

When arguing (or at least disagreeing) with Dundee about Sorcerers, there are precisely three options.
1) Dundee is right, and you are wrong.
2) Dundee is wrong, and you are right.
3) You and Dundee are both wrong.

The option that IS the case, has always BEEN the case, and will always BE the case is #1 -- especially if you don't know jack sh*t about Sorcerers.

In a similar vein, don't argue with me about Thieves.

[Pyrenk]

People need to learn....dont argue with dundee. One, he is the source on sorcerers...and two, he is a mod [img]smile.gif[/img]

Anyway...a mage has nothing on the sorcerer. Sure, he can memorize almost all the spells in each level..but think about it-how many are you actually going to use? There are only about 5 worth-while spells per level, and a sorc automatically gets the ability to cast a large number. And I prefer versatility to numbers, dont you?

[Alson]

In my opinion, the Mage has but a single advantage over the Sorcerer - the option to be "dualed to" and the ability to be a part of a multiclass.

Everyone needs HP (and no, this is not hidden advertizing [img]tongue.gif[/img] ). Period. It's simple - the more, the merrier. Now, considering the fact that a dualed Fighter/Mage can have about 3 times the HP of a Sorcerer with similar XP, i think it can certainly be considered as an advantage. Not to mention the ever-popular Kensai/Mage and Berserker/Mage combos, whose abilities are well known.

ToB HLA Spoilers
*
*
*
*
*
Second, the multiclassed Fighter/Mage, Cleric/Mage or Thief/Mage will all have one big advantage over the Sorcerer - having two pools of abilities to pick from. Time Stop + GWW, Time Stop + Harm, Spike Traps and the like are all effects the the Sorcerer will find hard to simulate.

Now, don't get me wrong - i am a Sorcerer fan.
I just think that this matter is not one sided as it seems. [img]smile.gif[/img]

[ 01-14-2003, 05:06 PM: Message edited by: Alson ]

[Butterfingers]

Well, two little things a Mage has going for them, both minor, but, important for some reasons to some folks. Warning, minor spoilers!
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~

A Mage can be imported from BG. After using all of the books, a mage could potentially have better stats, and, because of this, slightly more options for a few select situations that a Sorcerer would not have. By ToB, a mage could have 20 con if rollled properly, possibly even higher, allowing for their own regeneration, not all that useful really, but, fun for role playing purposes. Also there is a good chance at having better wisdom for Wish spells.

Two, a Mage can legally get the Golden Pantaloons for the Big Metal Unit. With out cheating. Now, I don't have ToB, but, from what I have read, the Scorcher is a darn good weapon.

[Pyrenk]

Yes, I know, I know. Thief/Mage is one of my favorite multi's. However, Kensai/Mage is too strong. Kensai alone is incredible, but kensai with timestop, shapechange, alacricity (sp), and all the others?

[Imrahil]

The other (granted, minor) advantage a Mage has over a Sorcerer is the ability to scribe scrolls for LVLx1000 XP. It's not a big advantage, particularly when soloing (since XP comes so fast), but in a party game, it can be a big help. Three Mages scribing every single spell possible (with help from Potions of Genius for poor little Aerie or Jan, of course) can be worth an extra 2.25 million XP to the party. Nothing to sneeze at, certainly, & can be improved upon by having "disposable" characters scribe extra scrolls or having one of your Mages erase a spell then scribe it again.

- Imrahil

[Dundee Slaytern]

Originally posted by Pyrenk: People need to learn....dont argue with dundee. One, he is the source on sorcerers...and two, he is a mod [img]smile.gif[/img] ~~

I better clarify something before people start getting the wrong impression. My Moderator status does not mean you cannot disagree with me over game matters. When I debate, I debate as a gamer, not as a Moderator.

I only invoke my Moderator status( indicated by a Ironworks Hammer in my posts) when I deal with forum matters. I consider it in bad taste to abuse authority.

[Dundee Slaytern]

Originally posted by Alson: In my opinion, the Mage has but a single advantage over the Sorcerer - the option to be "dualed to" and the ability to be a part of a multiclass. Everyone needs HP (and no, this is not hidden advertizing [img]tongue.gif[/img] ). Period. It's simple - the more, the merrier. Now, considering the fact that a dualed Fighter/Mage can have about 3 times the HP of a Sorcerer with similar XP, i think it can certainly be considered as an advantage. Not to mention the ever-popular Kensai/Mage and Berserker/Mage combos, whose abilities are well known. ToB HLA Spoilers * * * * * Second, the multiclassed Fighter/Mage, Cleric/Mage or Thief/Mage will all have one big advantage over the Sorcerer - having two pools of abilities to pick from. Time Stop + GWW, Time Stop + Harm, Spike Traps and the like are all effects the the Sorcerer will find hard to simulate. Now, don't get me wrong - i am a Sorcerer fan. I just think that this matter is not one sided as it seems. [img]smile.gif[/img]

Well... the Mage has to be given some advantages. Can you imagine the cheeseeee factor if the Sorcerer was allowed to dualclass or multiclass? Kensai->Sorcerers are the stuff of dreams. After all... the Sorcerer is not a kit, but a class.

That said and done though... you know very much as I do that a high-level Wizard can have diddly-squat for hitpoints and still last longer and far better than a high-level Warrior or Rouge. Hitpoints is nice to have, but a Sorcerer can survive just as well with low hitpoints.

You did mention the Cleric/Mage though, and this is actually one of the classes that I feel can outshine a pureclassed Wizard. The cheese potential of this combination is very promising, but I never got around to really experimenting with it.

In a debate of pureclass versus pureclass though, the Sorcerer still rewards more than the Mage.

Originally posted by Butterfingers: Well, two little things a Mage has going for them, both minor, but, important for some reasons to some folks. Warning, minor spoilers! ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ A Mage can be imported from BG. After using all of the books, a mage could potentially have better stats, and, because of this, slightly more options for a few select situations that a Sorcerer would not have. By ToB, a mage could have 20 con if rollled properly, possibly even higher, allowing for their own regeneration, not all that useful really, but, fun for role playing purposes. Also there is a good chance at having better wisdom for Wish spells. Two, a Mage can legally get the Golden Pantaloons for the Big Metal Unit. With out cheating. Now, I don't have ToB, but, from what I have read, the Scorcher is a darn good weapon.

Yes, this is an advantage I admit, but it is not the Sorcerer's fault that its' class was not included in BG1. Given equal opportunity, a Sorcerer will be quite fearsome in BG1 as Sorcerers have immensely superior firepower even at the low levels. Mmmmm... a Sorcerer in BG1 with the BG1 Ring of Wizardry. [img]graemlins/hehe.gif[/img]

Originally posted by Imrahil: The other (granted, minor) advantage a Mage has over a Sorcerer is the ability to scribe scrolls for LVLx1000 XP. It's not a big advantage, particularly when soloing (since XP comes so fast), but in a party game, it can be a big help. Three Mages scribing every single spell possible (with help from Potions of Genius for poor little Aerie or Jan, of course) can be worth an extra 2.25 million XP to the party. Nothing to sneeze at, certainly, & can be improved upon by having "disposable" characters scribe extra scrolls or having one of your Mages erase a spell then scribe it again. - Imrahil

The ironic thing of course, is that the XP is spread out among the party, making the XP contribution at most, mediorce. It would be faster and easier to just head over to a quest and beat up some monsters to gain the quest reward. The class that benefits the most from scroll-scribing is the Bard and the Thief/Mage.