What classes are considered cheesy?

[el_kalkylus]

I don't quite understand. If the sorcerer is cheesy with project image, shouldn't a mage be cheesy as well? It's all about resting. My sorcerer last game (first time through ToB) didn't give my party immense power, the archer did. Maybe that had something to do with the fact that he didn't have the 'Lower Resistance' or 'Project image' spells.

[Userunfriendly]

Originally posted by el_kalkylus: I don't quite understand. If the sorcerer is cheesy with project image, shouldn't a mage be cheesy as well? It's all about resting. My sorcerer last game (first time through ToB) didn't give my party immense power, the archer did. Maybe that had something to do with the fact that he didn't have the 'Lower Resistance' or 'Project image' spells.

a mage can be cheesy with project image...however its the sorceror's ability to cast many spells...you see, certain spells get more and more powerful the more times you can cast them in the same battle...like lower resistance, and animate dead...a mage always has to preplan his spell tables, and choose the spells he thinks he's going to use in the next battle, and almost always tries to give himself a more flexable spell selection, so he's ready for unforseen events...so he's not going to have, usually more than one lower resistance, and one animate dead or spook spell....but a sorceror will always have several casts of each of these spells, and by putting them in spell triggers or sequencers, you vastly magnify their power...a spell sequenced spook makes dragon hunting dead easy...a triggered lower resistance, and dead dragon...a project image supercheese, like summoning 5 planetars must be planned out by a mage in advance, a sorceror is always ready to do it anytime he/she wants...

mages can do cheese...with planning and rest...but a sorceror is always ready to be cheesy...

in fact, the cheese guide was written for parties with a pc sorceror...

[Ares]

Sorcerer abusing certain spells leads my list
Next would probably be Kensai/Mage
Third..I'd say Cavaliers at high levels

[Nerull]

Originally posted by SixOfSpades: Classes don't cause cheese. Cheesy players, who abuse certain classes, cause cheese. (Caveat to Statement 2: Different classes have different standards of "abuse." For example, even installing the Overbalanced Shapeshifter falls under "abuse.")

Amen.

Originally posted by SixOfSpades: Well, I look at the trade-off in this manner: Ranger Archer: Is able to Stealth and cast 3 spells from Druid Levels 1-3. Cannot Dual-class. Fighter Archer: Can place 2 stars in melee weapons. Can Dual to Cleric, Druid, Thief or Mage. Now, I consider that fair. But, you see, there's more: Fighter Archer: Can achieve Grandmastery in Sling and Darts. This unbalances the Fighter/Ranger scale. But I don't blame Weimer at all for this: It's a weakness of the way the Ranger kit was implemented, since they should have had Slings and Darts as well. But, this I can blame Weimer for: Fighter Archer: Levels up at the rate of a Fighter, yet gains skills at the same rate (per level) as a Ranger Archer, thus getting a better THAC0 and more Called Shots & HLAs. If I were Weimer, I would slow the Generic Archer's Archer-kit bonuses down just a tad, so that a Ranger Archer and a Generic Archer's THAC0 will be as equal as possible throughout the game. There's nothing to be done about the HLAs, though.

Maybe add slings and darts to the ranger archer, then take away called shot for the fighter archer? That might make it more balanced.

Originally posted by SixOfSpades: So....you would have Ranger/Clerics have Cleric levels 1-7, and Druid levels 1-3, is that it? Or are you objecting to the two sides of the Priest scroll being combined at all?

The first one. That's how it would work in PnP; they would be able to cast the few druid spells that they got before they dual-classed, and cast whichever cleric spells they earn from there. However, the only real way to do this in BG might be to separate the "spell books" into cleric and druid books (like the priest and mage ones do currently).

[el_kalkylus]

Originally posted by Userunfriendly: mages can do cheese...with planning and rest...but a sorceror is always ready to be cheesy... in fact, the cheese guide was written for parties with a pc sorceror...

Yes, mages rest more. Funny there is a cheese guide though. I will have to look into it, perhaps someday.

[Dundee Slaytern]

If you have ToB installed, Mages and Sorcerers need not rest anymore once they hit level 18-20+. Sorcerers have greater flexibility with their cheesibility though.

To summarise the issue,

Mages have great versatility in their spell memorisation, but lack flexibility with their spell selection during combat.

Sorcerers have a limited spell library, but have absolute flexibility with their spell selection during combat.

This is particularly important when you consider how both classes restore their spells during combat. It is also the reason why Sorcerers can spam multiple MSwords along with RRRs during their combat as compared to the Mage.

This is especially emphasised with the introduction of level 9-10 spells.

[Userunfriendly]

Originally posted by el_kalkylus: quote: Originally posted by Userunfriendly: mages can do cheese...with planning and rest...but a sorceror is always ready to be cheesy... in fact, the cheese guide was written for parties with a pc sorceror...

Yes, mages rest more. Funny there is a cheese guide though. I will have to look into it, perhaps someday. [/QUOTE]http://www.sorcerers.net/Games/BG2/cheese_guide.zip

[Userunfriendly]

Originally posted by Dundee Slaytern: If you have ToB installed, Mages and Sorcerers need not rest anymore once they hit level 18-20+. Sorcerers have greater flexibility with their cheesibility though. To summarise the issue, Mages have great versatility in their spell memorisation, but lack flexibility with their spell selection during combat. Sorcerers have a limited spell library, but have absolute flexibility with their spell selection during combat. This is particularly important when you consider how both classes restore their spells during combat. It is also the reason why Sorcerers can spam multiple MSwords along with RRRs during their combat as compared to the Mage. This is especially emphasised with the introduction of level 9-10 spells.

exactly!!! exploiting endless spells or wish spell abuse makes it evil...

the edge still comes out with sorcerors though...

i mean once you actually learn the spell tables in bg2, you find maybe 3-5 spells per level that you actually use, because the other spells are not very good... you end up filling a mage slots with a few spells, multiple copies...for example, you generally end up filling most of level 4 slots with stoneskin...

i personally would never use anything other than a sorceror unless i was multiclassing with mage fighter or dualling a berserker...

and there is a lot of fun running "theme" sorcerors...

like a "blaster" sorceror, specializing in invocation spells, loading up on fireball, skull traps and flame arrows...

or a "summoner" sorceror, loading up on animate dead, mordy swords, and haste and mass invisibility (to buff summons)

me, i tend to combine the two, making "blast and summon" spell selections...leave stuff like knock, elemental protection and other useful spells to my normal mages...

sorcerors rock!!!

[Leslie]

Originally posted by Userunfriendly: and there is a lot of fun running "theme" sorcerors... like a "blaster" sorceror, specializing in invocation spells, loading up on fireball, skull traps and flame arrows... or a "summoner" sorceror, loading up on animate dead, mordy swords, and haste and mass invisibility (to buff summons) me, i tend to combine the two, making "blast and summon" spell selections...leave stuff like knock, elemental protection and other useful spells to my normal mages... sorcerors rock!!!

Huh, any challenge left when you play with 2 sorcerors and other mages ?
(and probably some R/C or F/M also)

You should seriously consider no reloads challenge.

[ 12-02-2003, 03:54 PM: Message edited by: Leslie ]

[Ironbar]

Wow! That was an interesting read, thanks to all involved.

[ 12-02-2003, 04:38 PM: Message edited by: Ironbar ]