Sorcerers vs. Mages - An unfair comparison

Remove all ads!

Yes, I guess we could agree that Death Spell, Chain Lightning and Protection from Magical Weapons are more important than Protection from Magical Energy. However, there is still the Belt of Inertial Barrier which gives a 50% resistance to magical-based attacks (Skull Trap, Abi-Dalzim's) and can be obtained pretty early in the game.

Regarding protections, it depends on the situation at hand. If you are facing mostly melee opponents, your Stone Skin will protect you long enough. If you are facing spellcasters or other creatures that can cast spells, you have a huge deal of options here. A very nice tactic, for example, is to cast a Mislead and send the decoy away from the fight.

Basically, if you are paranoid about having quite a lot of protections, you can become immune to everything the game can throw at you (excluding the game's buit-in defenses against you screwing up a major quest). The only small exception is Spellstrike.

 

JanusDamien

Wrong.
He can reach level 20 and can cast two level 9 spells per "day".

StressedE

I too use that spell whenever I have it available. Usually put it on the frontline fighters as well as any particularly weak character and of course on the character who is waiting with all the Skull Traps.
And resting is not a problem because the spell lasts long enough.

What, are you high or something?
Just teasing you, but seriously, how can you possibly forget to cast Stoneskin?

I do agree with you that mages are, at least potentially, fragile and in danger of quick deaths.
IMO in BG2:ToB a mc F-24/M-20 is extremely powerful, while in BG2:SoA a dc F-9/M-17 were equally outstanding.

The sorcerer can almost eliminate this problem by making a wise selection of spells.
For reference here is my spell selection chart for a BG2 (SoA & ToB) sorcerer:

Not many spells that are useless in that list, even at top levels.


Person_Persival wrote

Wrong.
A mage gets to cast four level 9 spells a day at level 31. A sorcerer in comparison gets to cast six level 9 spells at level 20.

* My point of view *
Sorcerers are better in BG2 than single class mages/specialist mages/wild mages.

[This message has been edited by Earl Grey (edited July 02, 2002).]

 

"The sorcerer can almost eliminate this problem by making a wise selection of spells."
I miss the part where the mage can't select these spells?

A wild mage can cast 6 level 9 spells at level 13. With a bit of luck

My barbarian has 90% resistance to blunt damage. I also have a kensai mage. The kensai mage is on a script casting stoneskin prot mag weapons and tenser's transformation. He is still always the first one to die (Even with ring of gaxx, staff of magi, robe of the good)

 

My point - obviously - is that a major drawback of being a sorcerer is the restriction on the number of spells you know. It was pointed out earlier in this topic that a very large part of the spells are not very useful and/or can be handled just as well by other spells.

and in my reply I showed how a sorcerer does not have to have this problem.




[This message has been edited by Earl Grey (edited July 02, 2002).]

 

Thank you for the correction, Earl Grey.

Anyway, I highly believe that fighter/mages, either dual or multiclassed, are better off using spells to augment their fighting capabilities rather than trying to be full-time spellcasters. They can still be pretty good spellcasters, but not as good as a high level, single-classed sorcerer or mage.

Also, and as StressedE pointed out, making an early dual class to mage could be very helpful for the extra hit points, but then you would end up with a plain mage.

In regards to wild mages and mages, in my opinion Wild Mages are much better than regular mages and specialists. They get 1 extra memorization slot per level without having to give up a school of magic. The only drawbacks (if they can be considered a drawback at all) are the wild surges.

Btw StressedE, why are you using the Staff of the Magi with your Kensai/Mage? My suggestion would be to get him a better melee-oriented weapon so that he can wreak some serious havoc on the frontlines.

 

A better melee oriented weapon? I have yet to find one in the entire game.

Do you have any idea of the power that weapon has?

 

Lets sum it into two things shall we?

Sorcerers are versitile in the fact that they can use whatever spell they have(if they have uses left that day) whenever they want.
Mages are more versitile in the over all. Because they have the ability to have a much larger spell book, and a greater choice of waht to use.

If mages werent able to be versitile, then so many people wouldnt like to play as them.

In BGII the mages are slightly better because of the fact that they can dual/multi-class. Simple as that.
Sorcerers are strong, but in a roleplaying sense, your not going to know exactly what spells will be handy in the future.
And a mage has the ability to back off, and memorize something else in his book if he had the wrong thing initially.

 

Staff of the Magi: 1d6 +1 damage.

Staff of the Ram +6: 1d6 +12 crushing, +1d4 piercing damage.

Sure, the Staff of the Magi grants Invisibility, +2 AC and Saving Throws, and strikes as a +5 weapon. But then, its melee damage is totally pathetic in comparison to the Staff of the Ram, or even the Cleric's Staff. IMO, the Staff of the Magi is nice for sneak attacks thanks to the invisibility, but I would switch to a different weapon for actual bashing.

In BGII the mages are slightly better because of the fact that they can dual/multi-class. Simple as that.

As I have said before, I highly disagree with this statement. And as I have said before, the only class that can truly harness the destructive power of spells in BG2 and ToB in the most effective and efficient way is the Sorcerer. The Wild Mage comes in second place, thanks to Nahal's Reckless Dweomer.

Multiclassing greatly dwarfs your mage's ability to use 8 and 9 level spells, where you will find the best damaging spells (Abi-Dalzim's Horrid Wilting and Dragon's Breath). To resume it in this way, any multiclassed mage can't benefit from the Time Stop + Improved Alacricity + Dragon's Breath combo, which is one of the strongest combos in the game (Dragon's Breath ignores magic resistance). Second, multiclassed mages that want more than 1 Time Stop must give up their ability to use Improved Alacricity.

Also, I must say that dual-classing has been somewhat crippled in ToB because of the addition of the HLAs. Either you get the HLAs of one class, or you split them up between the two and you only get 2 or 3 HLAs per class.

Now, if we are going to compare a single-classed mage against a sorcerer, we have that even a single-classed mage can't match the destructive power of the Sorcerer with well-made spellpicks at maximun level (31).

Sorcerers are strong, but in a roleplaying sense, your not going to know exactly what spells will be handy in the future. And a mage has the ability to back off, and memorize something else in his book if he had the wrong thing initially.

If we talk about pen and paper, then the mages are better because of what you just said. But then, in BG2, the computer game, where after playing it for the first time you know everything the game can throw at you, then you can carefully make your spellpicks to tear through everything the game can throw at you. And let's not forget that halfway through SoA almost 60% of the spells are obsolete or useless, and by the time you reach ToB, only about 20% of the spells remain in good shape.

 

JanusDamien knows what he's talking about and I agree with everything said in his latest post here.

IIRC the Staff of the Magi only has a THAC0 bonus of +1, while it counts as a +5 weapon for what it can hit.It's a fantastic weapon, but after erecting that super (cheesy?) Spell Trap I would switch to a more combat oriented weapon if it were my F/M.

 

The bloody staff of the bloody magi casts bloody DISPELL MAGIC with each bloody hit. I'd say that's bloody good, wouldn't you? It's sorta mini bloody carsomyr.

 

THANK YOU Vukodlak!!!

I'd like to see you fighting a mage with that staff of the ram, it won't even get past the prot magical weapons and when that works out you'll be hitting the stoneskin instead of the mage.

Also my kensai mage had a nice +6 vorpal edge halberd in the second slot.

 

If I am a Fighter/Mage specializing in staves, I would use the Staff of the Magi to erect a Spell Trap and to sneak behind an enemy for a free attack, then I would switch to a better melee-oriented staff to bash the enemy.

The Dispel Magic per hit that comes with the Staff of the Magi is not necessary for a F/M because he has other ways of dispelling protections, such as Pierce Shield, Remove Magic, Breach, Khelben's Warding Whip, Spellstrike (although very limited due to a maximun of 2 slots at level 9). It is also likely that your F/M is wearing the Robe of Vecna and the Amulet of Power, a combination that greatly reduces the casting time of your spells, meaning that most of the dispelling spells will be fired off almost immediately.

A clever F/M can put some Remove Magic spells in a trigger and fire them simultaneously at the target. Let us remember that a F/M only needs to take away the basic combat-oriented protections in order to be able to tear the offending mage to shreds with his melee weapon.

Lastly, if you really like the Dispel Magic per hit of the Staff of the Magi, simply use it alongside Improved Haste until the Dispel Magic successfully works, and then switch to a better melee weapon. As simple as that.

 

No my kensai/mage did not have robe of vecna because my wild mage has it. I don't see how using your spells is better than bashing in melee? You can use your spell slots for other things when using the staff of the magi.

Right so you suggest I switch weapon 3 times a fight (contigencies) instead of just sitting back and letting the AI kick it?

 

Just have your Wild Mage cast the Breach then. The fact is that the SotM does less damage and has worse THAC0 bonus any other weapon you are likely to use.

I'd go with no proficiency in Staffs for my F/M and use Flail of the Ages or Celestial Fury in SoA.
Once you get into ToB the number of great weapons are endless.

 

I can cast 1 breach per round, I can do 10 dispelling attacks.

 

But all you need is a single Breach, not ten dispels, right?

 

1 breach for stoneskin, prot. mag. weapons, fireshield and possible other protections which protect him from my mages?

 

By my friends, Eathlon and Mad mac
http://hem.passagen.se/redvenom/BCsorc.txt

Read this and be enlightened.

 

They make an excellent case of the superiority of the sorcerer. Experienced sorcerer players will recognize from their own experience the points they make.

Their thesis on the dc Berserker/Cleric is valid as an argument for why dual classing is good in BG2:SoA. In ToB, which they mention at several places, this thesis is no longer valid. Multiclass characters are stronger than dual class in ToB.
They make no mention of Berserker/Mage, which IMO is stronger than Berserker/Cleric, and I think that is because they want to make a point with their idea of Positive Merging.

 

They make an excellent point why the sorcerer is better than the plain mage.

What they do not do is prove the sorcerer is better than the kensai mage or mc fighter/illusionist... So I don't think you can call the sorcerer a superior class just on the basis of that file. If I play a plain mage it is always sorcerer or wild mage. So much is true, but I do not agree sorcerer is the most powerful magic user in the game.