Necromancer vs. Conjurer

Remove all ads!

The reasons why everybody choses the mighty Sorcerer over the Mage are obvious and shall not be posted here. However, the Mage has more spells per level and is free to do some nasty experiments, which the Sorcerer lacks (it's true, there are scrolls for this, obviously). A experimented player will never require more than 5 spells per level.
So the Mage has his advantages and it is a powerful class to play with. Howerver, a plain Mage is rather penalized compared to a Mage kit (a specialist mage gains +1 spell/level, but can't cast spells from their opposition school). So most of the players go for a dualed or multiclassed mage (I don't know why, but the penalization does not apply to those characters; they act like specialists in any concern).
But what for the gamers between us who just want to go with a mage (maybe for roleplaying reasons)? Well, somewhat the new kit Wild Mage has resolved the problem. Still...
So, if anyone wants to go for a wizard is rather limited (Wild Mage and Sorcerer being the best choices). Anyway, if one would go for a specialized mage (excepting the Wild Mage), which one would be? Now this brings us to the topic itself. From what I've read so far on the message boards, this would be the Conjurer. Now why is that? Most of you guys would say that the Conjurer, becausehe gets to cast the most important spells, being just a few left that are good to something, but belongs to the opposite school (namely True Sight), while in a party a Inquisitor or a Cleric is just as good for this purpose.
Well, I've made some documentation, and my bets are on the Necromancer. Why is that? Well, first of all because the stat required (besides Intelligence) is Wisdom, which is more useful than Constitution for a Mage (especially ifyou go for the Wish spell). Another difference (which is somehow a drawback for the Necromancer) is that he must be human (being a half-elf does not make any difference to me, but can still be considered a drawback).
So... the Conjurer's opposite school is Divination, while the Necromancer's opposite school is Illusion.
The spells included in the Illusion school are the following: Blindness (L1), Reflected Image (L1), Spook (L1), Blur (L2), Deafness (L2), Invisibility (L2), Mirror Image (L2), Invisibility 10' Radius (L3), Improved Invisibility (L4), Shadow Door (L5), Mass Invisibility (L7), Project Image (L7), Simulacrum (L8).
So, these are my arguments:
- the invisibility-like spells: maybe most of you would miss them. I don't, because I never used them. i found out that they lead to cheap tactics. They don't even work all the time, always being someone with a True Sight spell around, especially in ToB. One more reason: being the main spellslinger of the party, your main concern would be to destroy enemies, not protecting allies. And if you would ever want, for any reason, to become invisible, Staff of the Magi is more than enough, trust me.
- Blur & Mirror Image: well, this is what I regret the most. Good protecting spells for the beginning of the game, but after I got Stoneskin I rarely used them anyway. Spirit Armor and Fireshields should be perfect replacing those spells.
- Project Image & Simulacrum: yes yes there are some good tactics with this, I know. But these are better spells for a Sorcerer, who lacks a good number of spells per level, so you shouldn't bother with them anyway.
The best argument is that all the spells from this school can be dispeled by a simple True Sight. So this is why I value this spell more than the entire school of Illusion, and it seems to me a major drawback for the Conjurer not to cast it.
All of this being said, I think I explained to all why a Necromancer is by far superior to a Conjurer (the only good Conjurer I know of is Edwin, for obvious reasons), and I ensure you all that is at least as exciting playing a Necro as playing with a Conjurer.
Arguments anyone?

 

From a powergamish perspective I still consider the conjurer the most powerful specialist mage. However, role-playing wise it seems very cool to me to play an evil necromancer.

And, thinking about it, a big plus for the necromancer is his requirement of 16 wisdom. It is the perfect excuse to create a mage with both high wisdom and intelligence (intelligence being the mage's primary stat). Normally I would consider that kinda powergamish, since it allows you to make such great use of the wish spells. And I think it is quite uncommon in the real world for people to have both high wisdom and intelligence (certainly when they are 20 or so, like the PC).

 

I have to say I do not agree with mirrior image been useless after getting stone skin as I use it all the time as defense against area effect spells like fireball ABHW and Firekrages breath weapon since it nearly alway's absorbs the attack for the caster but I'm in a hurry and can not argue any further for the moment so peace.

 

@casey: I didn't say that Mirror Image is useless, on the countrary. But... it can be replaced. I said that Blur & Mirror Image are the most important spells from this school (OK, maybe Simulacrum, too ). It is a necessary loss.

 

Hyperion, personally I'd agree with you totally. I mean sure Invisibility can be a nifty spell but thats what Rogues are there for really.

Apart from that I've always thought Necromancers are cool and am currently playing one on this board/forums where roughly once or twice a month we all meet up (there are a few hundred of us) at gaming conventions to roleplay our characters etc. Good fun

Anyway, back on topic, I would agree with you as there are indeedly some divination spells that are actually quite handy etc.

 

I'd say an Evoker would be an even better choice. The only usefull spell they lose, although this hurts a lot, is Greater Malison. No other enchantment spell (their opposite) is worth casting. So since you lose only one spell, I'd say this makes the Evoker the best specialization for a mage.

And before anyone replies by saying that they also lose conjuration type spells, this isn't the case. They lose conjuration in BG1 (and maybe AD&D 2nd ed.) but not in BG2.

 

Your right, the Evoker is the most powerful specialist mage I have used but I like Necromancers and in contrast to my favor of the evoker one of the best games I have had was taking an enchantress to seduce the world. I gave the game up after a while as it was frustrating when enemies kept making saves - but I might try again some day.
Back to the topic though, I'd say the Necromancer is the better of the two.

 

I agree with your point about losing those Illusion spells to gain True Sight. Combined with the Robe of Vecna and the Amulet of Power it finally has an acceptable casting time. A cleric can also cast it but it is so slow you hardly have any advantage of it except if you manage to cast it right before it is needed. BTW you don't really need those illusions since the best way to protect a mage is to keep him far enough of damage sources. The range of the usefull spells is great enough to manage this. So yes I'd go with the Necromancer as most powerfull (although I'd never play one for roleplaying reasons)

 

Lol! Necromancers are fun to play

 

The main reason why Conjurers are a better choice than Necromancers in this game are Keldorn, and that the game has too many clerics/druids.
Necromancer VS Conjurer and you have a spell battle - Project Image/Simulacrum VS True Sight/Remove or Dispell Magic.
Solo wise, the latter wins. Party wise, the former does.