374 replies to this topic

[Kish]

I don't desire to turn BG2 in a mix between 2nd and 3rd

Turn? It already is one. What do you call a game with THAC0, lower AC being better, monks, sorcerers, barbarians, multiclassing only for demihumans, dual-classing only for humans, and unlimited demihuman level advancement?

[T.G.Maestro]

What do you call a game with THAC0, lower AC being better, monks, sorcerers, barbarians, multiclassing only for demihumans, dual-classing only for humans, and unlimited demihuman level advancement?

True-true. This is exactly what I keep talking about.

And about Inner Focus: my mistake, I truly misunderstood a few things, I will boost this ability with a few bonuses (still, don't expect anything grand!) after the beta-testing.

BTW Kish, your point on the mage/wizard issue is a good one, I'll try to revise all the documents and descriptions mentioning them in time.

[Littiz]

I thought they just used some of the COUNTLESS addition rulebooks of the 2nd edition.

[jester]

@Rathwellin: try to give us some credit. Sure, something will be unbalanced, but what about the original HLA system? Imho ours is more fitting and more balanced already, at the very least.
In addition, you can give your feedback for possible future adjustments, something you couldn't do again with the Bioware's version of the tables

Your mod will be the one of the two reasons (dorotea's RtlR being the other) I am going to play that bloody linear c**p that was dubbed ToB again. Hows that for credits and be sure the real nagging starts around V2 or 3.

[T.G.Maestro]

Thanks jester - no more comments, you get the meaning.

[Jinnai]

I still think a posion ability for monks

You know we've been discussing this before, but I truly don't think that monks shoudl ever have poison based abilities - I just cannot understand how a monk would possibly sweat posion on his/her palms... much like an evil clerical or necromany spell. IF the monk wouldn't be immune to poison, then I'd add an ability that removes poison and disease effects from the monks body, and TRANSFERS them to the hads, resulting in poisonous attacks for 1-2 rounds. But I won't accept that they can simply "poison their fists".

I know this is a bit dated, but i haveto reply to this...

Read classical chinese (esp) and japanese literature and you'll see it is a semi-common theme for neutral and evil monks and D&D monks, even in FR (i would say esp in FR as opposed to other D&D worlds) are based off of our RL mythology and practices of old.

[T.G.Maestro]

I'll consider this for the second edition, but only if I find an equal counterpart for good monks.

[Rathwellin the Bard]

Mage:

********************
Arcane Knowledge
As they spend more and more time studying the arcane arts and various magical artifacts, wizards become capable to learn and memorize an even greater variety of magic. This passive ability grants the mage a permanent 1 point bonus to Intelligence and 10 point bonus to Lore.

********************

Cleric:

********************
Enlightenment
A high level priest is able to create a much closer and stronger connection to his/her deity. By this, the priest is able to cast more high level spells without resting.
Enlightenment will allow the priest to cast two additional 7th level spells.

********************

Druid:

********************
Bless of Nature
High-level druids maintain a closer link to Nature herself. Developing an even stronger connection to the powers of Water, Fire and Wind will grant the druid a permanent +1 bonus to Wisdom, and 10% bonus to Fire, Cold and Lightning resistances.

********************

Sorcerer:

********************
Inner Focus
To enhance their magical capabilities, Sorcerers must advance to a higher level of inner focus. Learning this ability grants the Sorcerer +1 bonus to Charisma and to save vs. spells permanently.

********************

As far as I can tell the above are the proposed ?passive? HLAs planned for spellcasters. To my biased eyes it looks like Clerics get the best end of this stick by far, Druids do fine, Mages are shortchanged, and Sorcerers are totally hosed.

The above 4 HLAs do not look *at all* balanced next to one another as far as I am concerned.

I?ve never seen it stated anywhere by you guys, but are you actively trying to nerf mages and really nerf sorcerers as part of your rebalancing efforts? I don't mean to be confrontational but I would *never* play a sorcerer or a pure mage with the proposed HLAs.

Many of the changes have me excited about the prospect of playing a Barbarian, Paladin, Bard, etc. But I look at these same HLAs and think that I would be crazy to play a sorcerer....

Many of the proposed changes are 'cool' but to me they don't look balanced at all.

[T.G.Maestro]

The above 4 HLAs do not look *at all* balanced next to one another as far as I am concerned

Nor should they. They are connected to the specific HLA table - and intend to balance it properly.

are you actively trying to nerf mages and really nerf sorcerers as part of your rebalancing efforts?

Strange that you see things this way. Actually, pure mages became significantly stronger - their bonus spells are all forged into one greater boost, the table increases their intelligence, they get a greater variety of (powerful) HLA spells. Exactly what do you think was nerfed???
About Sorcerers - are you saying that a character that can cast Time Stops in 0/1 second is nerfed? One that cannot be silenced, one that is immune to any spell failure effects, one that can recall many spells without resting, one that can raise its Magic Resistance to a most considerable value, one that can destroy magical protections of opposing spellcasters by ease, one that can have VERY useful elemental abilities, and one that can clear the whole screan with one HLA...? I think I don't see the reasoning in your words here Rathwellin...

I would be crazy to play a sorcerer

Again, strange. I already tried a Sorcerer through ToB using the new table, and it was equally powerful, though it required absolutely different tactics.

[T.G.Maestro]

Really Ratwellin, the problem is that you are still seeing the Sorcerer class as the old one, and expect the old methods and tactics to be working. Well, they aren't. Yet they receive MANY boosts, and you seem to miss them entirely. Have you noticed that all of the Sorcerer HLAs (except Energy Blades) are innates instead of spells? This would grant much more useable spells/abilities per day to this class, and the stackable passives are considerable too.
Again, please TRY this class in action, you'll see that you were wrong .

And about mages - I'm stunned in silence that you call them nerfed... one of the most powerful classes/kits in Refinements.

[Caedwyr]

The one abilty that would definately be nice for Sorcerers to have is Improved Alacrity back. I know that this is an ability that I would probably miss the most playing as a sorcerer with the current Refinements package (and no, I have not playtested the Refinements sorcerer modifications, so this is definately subject to change )

[T.G.Maestro]

The one abilty that would definately be nice for Sorcerers to have is Improved Alacrity back

Heh, I know that you'd like to get it back - that's exactly why it was taken away . No, jokes aside, it was necessary to drop that one, or even better replace it with other boosts.
Note that some of the HLAs *MAY* change in power during the testing (for example we can increase the number of picks on Spellcasting Speed Increase to 5 from 3), but it is very unlikely that we will add/remove anything until v2.

[Rathwellin the Bard]

Re: the sorcerer?.

First off I?ll agree much with the above posts in that I don?t see Sorcerers and Mages as being all that different. Yes one studies and the other just intuitively knows how to cast magic but both use the *exact* same spells and given that IMO they should share many, if not all, HLAs. If anything to my mind they are much like a kit. Maybe 1 to 3 unique abilities is fine, but overall they should look like mages. It is *very* jarring for me to see radically different tables for one and see something that bears no resemblance to the other.

That?s were I come from to start with.

Then there are the abilities themselves.

-Energy Blades
I know that this is a useful ability. I give it to Aerie every once in a while. But I can honestly say that of the 3 high level sorcerers I?ve played (PC, Tashia, & Kelsey in different parties) I haven?t used this spell once for any of them. In the existing set of HLAs there are others that I find a lot more useful. I?ll grant you personal choice on this one ? but this is simply an existing HLA that I just don?t use. To see it as the *only* existing HLA that made it over to your new HLA was disheartening to me to say the least.


-Energy Storm* (requires: Inner Focus*)
I?ll reiterate something I said above. This is a cool PnP idea. It has no place in ToB. The description is pretty clear that it dishes out major damage to the caster & usually kills him. Last strike is cool in PnP. Last Strike is reload time in BG2 though.

You mentioned in a follow-up that there are ways to mitigate the damage to the caster. Which to me implies the following:

1. The description isn?t accurate. Instead of nearly always causing the death of the caster it will rarely do so if you plan ahead.

2 This is not a spell that can be cast ?on the fly? in combat if you want your caster to survive. My play style is to walk in without much ?pre-buffing? if at all possible for most fights ? that means that I like my mages to be able to cast spells without having to cast 3 spells beforehand just to make a ?big gun? work.

3. You are encouraging ?Reload tactics? ? well darn it everyone died last time, so I?m going to have Jahiera cast Regeneration on my sorcerer while he casts spells that will grant him the appropriate energy resistances. Now it should be safe for him to cast Energy Storm when I try this time. Or you are encouraging using foreknowledge gained from previous runs of the game in knowing when you can exploit Energy Storm. Either way this ability will encourage meta-gaming ? always a bad thing IMO.


-Resist Magic*
This ability is OK, but is out of character IMO. Sorcerers if anything should be more ?open? to magic than resistant to it. Honestly, in play, with items like the cloak of cheese out there I am unlikely to use this ability.


-Channel Magic* (requires: Resist Magic*)
Another ability that is duplicated by existing spells and items. Odds are good that my ToB sorcerer will have the Staff of the Magi making this ability irrelevant & thus never chosen. It?s not a bad idea in theory. Certainly it is more appropriate than, say, Resist Magic, but even in games where I don?t go after the Staff of the Magi I can?t say that this HLA would excite me that much.


-Aqua Mortis* (excluded by: Scion of Storms*)
-Idol of Frost* (excluded by: Spirit of Flame*)
-Scion of Storms* (excluded by: Aqua Mortis*)
-Spirit of Flame* (excluded by: Idol of Frost*)
I?m sorry, but I hate all four of these. I?m sure that they all have really neat visuals and you?ve obviously spent a fair amount of time thinking about them given the names and descriptions ? but I simply cannot stand any of them. I don?t use the word hate lightly either. Usually I just dislike ?x? or don?t agree with ?y? ? but I really do hate what I?ve seen of these. These HLAs are completely against my concept of the BG2 Sorcerer class. And then there are the abilities ? they just don?t look like something that I would have my sorcerer do in combat. I just can?t think of many times where my PC has *needed* 110% Fire resistance or whatever. As for extra damage & whatnot ? well by ToB if my sorcerer is in Melee combat then something is *seriously* wrong.


-Inner Focus*
I don?t really like this ability. First off I?m not a big fan of ?passive gateway? HLA selections. You don?t see them in the existing tables & I don?t think that they fit well. Why should my mage or sorcerer be more bound in his selection of HLAs than say a Paladin? It is one of the ways in which I see you ?nerfing? spellcasters. After 2 HLA sections they will have 1 useable ability where the fighter types will have 2.

Secondly it?s just too weak. +1 CHA isn?t bad but to balance it out this HLA just needs a bit more. If my sorcerer really wants +1 CHA all he has to do is be good in the Hel trials or use the Machine of Lum the Mad.


-Spell Restoration* (requires: Inner Focus*)
This ability is OK, but pretty lacking when compared to similar cleric spells and existing HLAs.


-Shatter Magic* (requires: Inner Focus*)
Jury is out on this one for me. Conceptually though I have a small problem with Sorcerers being ?anti-magic? mages.


-Spellcasting Speed Increase* (requires: Inner Focus*)
This is OK ? but doesn?t go far enough. If you really want sorcerers to be the ?fastest guns in the west? type spellcasters *and* you want to take away Improved Alacrity then I suggest taking a page out of the Druidic Sorcerer kits book of tricks. Let them cast two spells a round after taking the right HLA. Keep Spellcasting Speed Increase if you must but create a second HLA ?Greater Spellcasting Speed Increase? that requires SSI and that can only be chosen once.


Things that are gone from your HLA that irk me the most?.

Loss of all the spells in general. Sorcerers *are* for all intents and purposes a kind of mage. They should be innately able to learn 10th level spells as well as a mage can. Yes it was somewhat abusive in that they could cast so many spells compared to a mage this way ? but then a decent Wild Mage could cast even more?..

Loss of Dragon?s Breath. In particular this spell is super appropriate for sorcerers if they really are ?dragon blooded.?

Loss of Summon Plantar. This spell is super useful for solo sorcerers or casters in small parties. I don?t really have a ?concept? reason for wanting it, but in play I used this one & would really miss it.

[Rathwellin the Bard]

Loosing Summon Plantar is a major ?nerf.?

Loosing Improved Alacrity is even bigger nerf. None of your new stuff even comes close to replacing this.


Death Field is too restricted to be useful.

Aegis looks OK (you?ve convinced me on this one).

Scribe Scrolls is way cool but is less powerful than previous spells.

Arcane Knowledge is simply too weak. It needs just a little more *umph* to it. +10% MR as I suggest above or *something*.

Spell Worm does nothing for me. Something similar to Natures? Beauty would be better for an Enchanter IMO.


On the ?anti-nerf? side I?m a bit concerned about Mirrored Clones being too powerful (though I am at a loss to give another suggestion ? and I?m aware that you can cheese in more than one PI as is).

I don?t think that your HLA nerfs Mages nearly as much as Sorcerers.

[T.G.Maestro]

I don?t see Sorcerers and Mages as being all that different. Yes one studies and the other just intuitively knows how to cast magic but both use the *exact* same spells and given that IMO they should share many, if not all, HLAs. If anything to my mind they are much like a kit. Maybe 1 to 3 unique abilities is fine, but overall they should look like mages. It is *very* jarring for me to see radically different tables for one and see something that bears no resemblance to the other.

This is the first point where our opinions would never get any closer. I see Sorcerers much different then wizards. Both are mages, yet they have very distinctive abilities, that is really hidden in BG2. The only main difference in the unmodded game is that mages cast spells from a book while sorcs cast them at will. Refinements changes this. It adds the sorcerer class (which is NOT a mage kit, and with a good reason - it is a unique class and should be treated as such) much unique flavour. We intend to work out the "at will" part as much as possible.
***

-Energy Blades
I know that this is a useful ability. I give it to Aerie every once in a while. But I can honestly say that of the 3 high level sorcerers I?ve played (PC, Tashia, & Kelsey in different parties) I haven?t used this spell once for any of them.

You see, thats the problem - you are still talking about the old sorcerer class, which is obviously gone. Compare this type of character with other modded classes/kits, not to the original sorcerers. It doesn't really matter what was there before Refinements. And again - try to think on sorecerers as a NEW class, and forget the old tactics and strategies. This class will require MUCH different ways to survive.
***

It has no place in ToB. The description is pretty clear that it dishes out major damage to the caster & usually kills him. Last strike is cool in PnP. Last Strike is reload time in BG2 though.

Only if the PC dies.

The description isn?t accurate. Instead of nearly always causing the death of the caster it will rarely do so if you plan ahead.

Hmm. Are you saying than that every single spell description in the game is non-accurate? If I "plan ahead", Finger of Death, Breach or Fire Storm won't do any harm to any of my characters. So this is a dead point. Every single effect in the game can be counetered somehow, Energy Storm is not different.

This is not a spell that can be cast ?on the fly? in combat if you want your caster to survive. My play style is to walk in without much ?pre-buffing? if at all possible for most fights

Again, are you saying that you use defensive spells only BEFORE combat? I think many of them can be very useful in a difficult situation - you needn't cast any spells before a battle on the character - even if you cast ES without protective spells, there is a slight chance to survive its effects. Only a fool would count on these only though. As I mentioned, ther are more than a few LEGIT ways to escape death this time - just think.

I?m going to have Jahiera cast Regeneration on my sorcerer while he casts spells that will grant him the appropriate energy resistances.

Sorry, the latter won't work - ES slowly "eats up" all your protections, it is in the description.

You are encouraging ?Reload tactics? ? well darn it everyone died last time, so I?m going to have

I think only a madman would cast this spell with the PC without any planning - this is has nothing common with reload tactics, it only suspects some intelligence from the players part .
***

Resist Magic*
This ability is OK, but is out of character IMO. Sorcerers if anything should be more ?open? to magic than resistant to it. Honestly, in play, with items like the cloak of cheese out there I am unlikely to use this ability.

Why should they be more "open" to magic?? They are the typical innate spellcasters, and should be able to such tricks with the arcane energies flowing in their veins that normal wizards would only dream of. I really don't understand why think it unfitting for a magical character (and NOT simply magic-using). Not to mention that you are suggesting to alter abilities because they are not harmonizing with some items. The trick: use different items instead. You really can't expect that sorecerers would "change their skills" just because a mysterious magical item has similar powers somewhere in Faerun...
***

I?m sorry, but I hate all four of these.

Sorry, but this is the second point where our thoughts and opinions will never meet . Personally we like them very much, and they can be used in MUCH more situations than you imagine - again, please try to THINK a bit before the comment. Are you thinking us maniac fools to give sorcerers a pure melee ability? No, the melee effects are only an additional flavour to these abilities.
***

Inner Focus*
I don?t really like this ability. First off I?m not a big fan of ?passive gateway? HLA selections. You don?t see them in the existing tables & I don?t think that they fit well.

Well, the third obvious clashing point . I really like these passives, they are something that the unmodded game lacked the most. This one will be boosted however, since it doesn't work as intended.
***

-Spell Restoration* (requires: Inner Focus*)
This ability is OK, but pretty lacking when compared to similar cleric spells and existing HLAs.

Could you be more specific? What clerical spells ar more powerful? Wondrous Recall maybe? The one that recalls 2(!) maximum 5th level spells?
***

-Spellcasting Speed Increase* (requires: Inner Focus*)
This is OK ? but doesn?t go far enough.

I consider allowing 5 picks from this one instead of 3.

Let them cast two spells a round after taking the right HLA

A nice idea, I'll think on it .
***

Things that are gone from your HLA that irk me the most

Just as they should, there is nothing wrong with such feelings!
Still, innate powers come at a price...

[Caedwyr]

This is the first point where our opinions would never get any closer. I see Sorcerers much different then wizards. Both are mages, yet they have very distinctive abilities, that is really hidden in BG2. The only main difference in the unmodded game is that mages cast spells from a book while sorcs cast them at will. Refinements changes this. It adds the sorcerer class (which is NOT a mage kit, and with a good reason - it is a unique class and should be treated as such) much unique flavour. We intend to work out the "at will" part as much as possible.

I think the issue here, is that for BGII, the sorcerer has been a mage with a slightly different spellcasting system and spell selection. Other than that, they are basically a wizard. What you are proposing is to take them in a new direction, not add to the old class. What I think that people are looking for, is a way in which the classes are made more unique through the new HLA tables, without loosing any of their previous characteristics. What it sounds like you are proposing/doing, is to change the entire focus of the class. This unfortunately invalidates many of the common play styles, and people will all of a sudden have their familiar sorcerer completely change his focus when he starts to get his ToB HLAs, due to the new focus of the HLAs.

You see, thats the problem - you are still talking about the old sorcerer class, which is obviously gone. Compare this type of character with other modded classes/kits, not to the original sorcerers. It doesn't really matter what was there before Refinements. And again - try to think on sorecerers as a NEW class, and forget the old tactics and strategies. This class will require MUCH different ways to survive.

What I'd propose, is to separate the components then. In the HLA section, give the sorcerer the Mage HLA table, and include the current changes in a Sorcerer Redesign component. That way you keep both sides happy. Those who want the new abilities and focus of play style can just install the Sorcerer Redesgin component, and those who want to play their pseudo-mages can continue to do so, with the new Mage HLA tables for their sorc.

I?m sorry, but I hate all four of these. 

Sorry, but this is the second point where our thoughts and opinions will never meet . Personally we like them very much, and they can be used in MUCH more situations than you imagine - again, please try to THINK a bit before the comment. Are you thinking us maniac fools to give sorcerers a pure melee ability? No, the melee effects are only an additional flavour to these abilities.

Currently, I don't have a solid opinion on these abilities. My initial impressions is that they make the Sorcerer have too much of a Elementalist/melee focus, and force something of a certain playstyle onto the sorcerer. That being said, I'll wait until I properly try them out, since I don't think I have the best grasp on what they are atm. However, I don't think that just because they have had some nice graphics made/designed for them, that they should go in. The spells should be there with a purpose other than eye candy.

Spell Worm does nothing for me. Something similar to Natures? Beauty would be better for an Enchanter IMO.

This is one that I originially came up with and designed. During the review process, the additional saves and magic resistance checks were added and the duration was shortened (originally it would eat through 90 spell slots, 1 per round, and was non-hostile). I'd like to hear people's feedback on this one so it can be further refined and made worthy of a HLA slot.

[T.G.Maestro]

What I'd propose, is to separate the components then. In the HLA section, give the sorcerer the Mage HLA table, and include the current changes in a Sorcerer Redesign component

An interesting thought, though it would result in chaos - players would argue for every single class that changed from the original concept (monks, for example, changed the same way as sorcerers). If I would add a Sorcerer Redesign component, then it would easily lead into a Monk Redesign component, followed by clerical and barbarian components - not something I would like to start. At all.

I don't think that just because they have had some nice graphics made/designed for them, that they should go in. The spells should be there with a purpose other than eye candy.

Both Littiz and myself argued many times about their role in the sorc table. These should represent the sorcerers innate ability to channel magic - the caster can become one with the selected element for a limited time. And again, as we already mentioned, that would only mean 2 "elemental" abilities. Not something that would turn a character into an elementalist.

About Spell Worm: it changed in the last version. Here is the current description:

Spell Worm (Enchantment/Charm)
Level: 10
Range: Visual sight of caster
Duration: 5 Turns
Casting Time: 6
Area of Effect: 1 creature
Saving Throw: Special

This high level spell infects the subject with progressive forgetfulness. On a failed save, every round the subject loses his highest-level spell or spell slot. Each subsequent round the subject loses another spell or spell slot, moving to lower level spells once all the higher level spells are gone. In the first round the target is allowed a saving throw vs. spells at a -4 penalty. Every round thereafter there is a chance that the affected victim will lose a spell from the repertoire. The chance of this spell loss is reduced every 5th round by 5% (e.g. the target has 100% chance to lose a spell every round in the first five rounds, and only 75% in the 26-30th rounds). While fighting the effects of a Spell Worm, the caster has a 25% greater chance of spell failure every time he attempts to cast a spell, unless a successful save vs. spell (at -4) is made in the first round. The spell lasts for 5 turns.

[Jinnai]

Sorcerors, Barbarians and Monks are based of 3rd edition rules. There is no denying that if you compare the 3.0 rules to how they're implimented in BG2. This needs to be understood 1st.

Another thing is that most seem to be looking at this the wrong way, from the end result, not the way it happens. Sorceros are not mages any more than a paladin is a ranger. They may have similar aspects, esp if the ranger is LG and follows the same god, but no matter how much alike they seem at their core of essense they are fundimentally different.

The fact that a sorceros gets his spells inately vastly changes the whole way of thinking and learning. While he may still be required to have spell components, not wear armor (because of body movement) and rest to cast more spells, he does not haveto worry about memorizing, he does not have the same inherant intellect as a wizard because a wizard is constantly on the search for more spells for his spellbook and having to consider "will i need this spell today or not." This is a fundimental shift in the thinking and thus implimentionation. He does not have to worry about whether or not to think about memorizing his chain lighting or not. This tends to have further ramifications i tend to agree with T.G.Maestro on, ie that sorceors are suppose to speed casters. This is because they tend to think more on their feet rather than planning ahead what spells they might need.

In all seriousness, i would make all level 10 spells scrolls and make new abilites for mages that aren't spell specific. This is because even at such high levels mages never instant "know" spells, they still haveto find the scrolls for them (i'd put 1 scroll total for each spell), but this is less likely to happen than my push to have monks have a chance to get perm resistance to damage.

As to the magical resistance that one is up in the air. The 3rd edition books do not help here, so i leave it up to the author of the mod to decide.

-Aqua Mortis* (excluded by: Scion of Storms*)
-Idol of Frost* (excluded by: Spirit of Flame*)
-Scion of Storms* (excluded by: Aqua Mortis*)
-Spirit of Flame* (excluded by: Idol of Frost*)

I haveto agree with Rathwellin here that they aren't appropriate, but not for the same reason. These are all elemental based and a sorceror if anything he leans toward is battle magic, not elemetal magic. Yes, these are all battle magic ones, but it would be better if they were elemental-neutral ones or focused solely on the combat magic area.

Essentially because a sorceror does not have to spend time memorizing spells or praying for them, i think feats that focus more on the ehancement of his spells would better reflect this, such as double damage to all spells, increase duration, etc. But that's just me.

I'll consider this for the second edition, but only if I find an equal counterpart for good monks.

I dunno if i can be as much help here, because also in those same litatures, the hero is almost always inferior to the villian, but generally wins because the villian is cocky and the hero is also very determined compared to the villian.

There is one idea, but its not a good one. There is living proof that one can regulate their own interal body tempatures as their are a group of monks in the Himalyas that do so. This could be expanded upon in the game to allow the character to give high restiance to cold and heat damage (50%), but again its not the best idea and this would be something that either side would/could theoritically use....

About all i can say is that it might be better to think in the way of some passive martial arts styles here. FE giving him a +5 AC penalty, against melee attacks, -1 attack/round to get all criticals (all attack rolls will be 20 for the next round) and +5 damge. This is based upon one of the more passive types in that you wait until your opponent is at his most vulnerable (which means you must make yourself quite vulnerable) before you strike. Another might be based on something closer to tai-chi-wan, such as extending the melee range of the character or allowing the character to push/pull the oppoent.

[T.G.Maestro]

Another thing is that most seem to be looking at this the wrong way, from the end result, not the way it happens. Sorceros are not mages any more than a paladin is a ranger. They may have similar aspects, esp if the ranger is LG and follows the same god, but no matter how much alike they seem at their core of essense they are fundimentally different.

Right to the point Jinnai.

In all seriousness, i would make all level 10 spells scrolls and make new abilites for mages that aren't spell specific. This is because even at such high levels mages never instant "know" spells, they still haveto find the scrolls for them

You know, this is a GREAT idea! I love it, really. Though it would need a few touches here and there, yet I see this as a most intriguing addition to v2. Thanks for this one!

[Caedwyr]

Actually, for the level 9 & 10 spells, the casters would be more likely to have researched the new spells on their own, rather than finding a spell scroll lying around....


All I ask with regards to the balance and focus of the new abilities is that you listen to the beta testers and the reaction of the users. If, for example, many/most people feel that a change is for the worse and detracts from the new class then listen to them as you have done so far. Remember, the creative process is something of a bartering system. You propose one thing, I counter your proposal and propose another, until we are both happy with the compromise.