Shattered Kingdoms

Sorcs are fragile because they have low HP and don't get heavy armor or shield block, and because charms are also less survivable than PCs.

Sure, they get mirror image and stone skin, but so does every other caster class, and if the sorc is targeted those two spells are gone within the first 2-3 rounds or less. Sure, you can use magical devices, but so can every other class which gets those.

[url=http://sk.[REDACTED].com/show_log.php?feed=2145&html_parse=ON]This[/url] was against hunting spears, most of which were humming, and I didn't even have sanctuary.

Our difference is that your definition of survivability involves not dying, while my definition of survivability means how combat effective you can be without dying. Sure, any sorc or caster can zap ethereal and recall at almost any time because they're not front rank, but doing so virtually guarantees that they will not kill any PCs worth killing. Sorcs are the most fragile class because if targeted they go down just as fast (if not faster) than any other caster, and if they are quaffing heal vials then that means they aren't casting, zapping, brandishing or reciting aggressively: Whereas any melee class can quaff heals and suffer no loss of damage output. Any sorcerer whose enemies are unable (or not smart enough) to not target his charms or other allies instead of him is going to look awesome, whereas any sorcerer who faces enemies that place him in danger is going to have to play it safe and quaff heals or go ethereal, or risk dying by taking aggressive action through zaps/casts and lagging himself, and it's very possible for a sorc who's focused by 2-3 people to go from 100% HP to dead or nearly dead in the lag of reciting one scroll. Sorcs are a class that require finesse to both play correctly and win against.

For example, in one battle Antiira, Draklos and Renn fought Farine, Ershya and Stratis. If Farine had Bog'ed me (I was a delf to allow for 2 charms at the time), stratis had circle stabbed me, and had they walked in with holy words, I would have died in 3 combat rounds and probably the charms would have been cancelled too.

However, instead they didn't walk-in holy word, Stratis recited aggressive scrolls on Draklos, and Farine just sat up front and died instead of BoGing. As a result I was able to recite 3 powerful scrolls in 4 rounds (one of which failed), and kill Stratis with spell damage around the same time that Farine died from physical damage. If they had, however, come in with the right game plan, I would have died or been forced to recall at 3 rounds before any of that happened, and I was the main source of both physical and spell damage in that fight.

Also, it isn't even possible as a deep-elf to recite petrification or FoD scrolls with 2 charms anymore, and you also can't order moods, meaning that the offensive capability of all sorcs was also hit hard.

Your example is silly. I guess your point is that a delf sorc is fragile when fighting against a swash + rogue + paladin who are fully prepped and enchanted and who choose the best strategy. I guess I could concede that. The fact is that those guys could have dropped 4 h-bombs upon entering, so your side shouldn't have stood a chance. I remember reading that log and boggling at how three veterans could botch things so badly.

Whenever we get into one of these arguments, you present these scenarios in which the sorc's opponent does everything perfectly and in which he has incredible saves. It's true that against a prepared, intelligent enemy who is drowning in saves, the sorc will be hard pressed to land the kill. But he could go fight that enemy ten times without dying, and eventually he will secure the kill. Also, against an enemy who doesn't think of the best plan or who doesn't have 50 willpower, the sorc wins with minimal effort.

The log you posted shows you tanking decently well (and chugging heal potions) for several rounds before running away. I also doubt those wraiths were berserked with GS and haste.

I count 30 attacks a round from the eight undead alone, leaving 3-4 attacks a round for each one. They were probably furied, yet not hasted (There are no auto-berserks despite the battle lasting eight rounds). At the same time, I didn't have sanctuary: And if I'd had anyone else there capable of cross rank damage or holy word it'd have been an easily won battle for team not-necro.

My -point- is, I lasted longer against an entire armed undead horde than most people that Antiira fought did against two charms, and hammer or not, I'm playing a freaking GNOME MERCENARY. I mean, I could link to plenty of logs where a merc or barbarian stomped all over 3-4 people and be all like "man, barbs and mercs are overpowered," except that given the right circumstances any class can be awesome. Sorcs -were- overpowered, and now they're pretty close, except obviously imbalanced when it comes to people who aren't geared well; But that's generally how caster classes are: If your enemies have crappy saves, they're powerful, and if your enemies have good saves, they're meh. On top of that, the more (smart) enemies you're fighting against, the more likely it is that they can either take you out directly with physical damage or cancel your charms and turn them against you, forcing you to recall and leave whatever enchanted weapon you lost to be left behind.


I mean, if your point is "Sorcs can totally destroy noobs with crappy gear that don't prep," then I guess you're right, but I don't really see that as a bad thing. It makes sense.

Now that sorcs can't scribe charm person, can't order moods, and can't use powerful scrolls without available concentration, they are not overpowered.

You don't need crappy saves to get charmed. You could give me a 1000 willpower, 1000 fortitude, 1000 reflex, 1000 MP suit, and I still would avoid fighting a sorcerer because charm person would still land on me 1/10 times or so. 1/10 is good enough when the sorcerer can enter every fight with no risk to himself.

In a 1v1 fight between a sorcerer and a fully prepared and enchanted opponent, things are about even, except that the sorcerer won't have to take any risks, and his opponent will. In a 1v1, 1v2, 1v3, or 1v4 fight in which the sorcerer's opponents are not fully prepared and drowning in enchants, the sorcerer has an edge and only takes minimal risk to himself. Sorcerer is still top of the food chain and is still somewhat OP, though it's nowhere near as bad as it used to be.

Oh nooooooooo, whenever I get into a fight with a sorc there's a 10% chance I'll lose to a 2-round cast spell that takes half the sorcs concentration to cast! Man, they're so OP, I should quit SK, because it's all about winning. I can't tell if the crux of your argument is that charm person is OP thusly sorcs are OP, but honestly, if the sorc you're fighting against is doing nothing but trying to spam charm person and recall if it breaks, then you can just avoid them because they're a tool. It isn't difficult to see the spell coming, and frankly there are a million much better choices than charm person when it comes to sorc tactics. I only killed people via charm person a precious few number of times compared to the vast majority of my kills with Antiira, if only because I was having too much fun running around with two charms and a damage wand.

It's established that sorcs are amongst the most powerful 1v1, if both players are cabal-less, sure. But, put tribunal guards and cabal abilities into the mix and even in a 1v1 sorcs aren't quite as scary: And the thing is, there's no reason at all that you -need- to engage a sorc unless you're crazy or there are mitigating circumstances such as tribunal guards or other PCs/NPCs involved.

lol. under what circumstances is a sorc with an extra GM-level NPC not quite as scary?

Whatever, that GM NPC is going to wander off and get killed by smart defenders whenever you attack another city, and then you have to deal with the defending PCs that have their own trib guards and spawning trib bounty NPCs: And yes, I realize that I just only referenced fighting a sorc defensively, and that's because unless you're crazy there's no way that you'll try to attack a sorc's city without either ranged damage, taunting or rogues (Or remove compulsion priests, or someone with a remove compulsion scroll)

You keep pointing out that there are countermeasures that when executed perfectly by a well-enchanted and prepared opponent, will force the sorcerer to withdraw from the battle. This doesn't mean that sorcs aren't OP or that they aren't the most versatile and most dangerous class in the game.

Can you guys just admit that sorcerers and spellcasters in general got the necessary wimps that they needed and now we can focus on reigning in the defensive stance?

The nerfs to spellcasters were great. There are still a few spells that need to be tweaked (charm person and sleep being the big offenders). There are some magical devices that could probably use the nerf bat as well.

Mood defensive gives an absurd boost to AC and should probably be nerfed.