Talk:Shaman/@comment-85.144.252.218-20160927161455/@comment-88.117.72.250-20190514223124

Spell casters are always superior to warriors from mid to high levels in D&D, that's a feature of the system where warriors have a linear power progression and spellcasters a quadratic one. The difference is somewhat less pronounced in crpgs than in pnp because the spell selection is more limited and what the spells can do is more constrained but it's still there. Mages, and to a lesser extent priests and druids can do so much more than a fighter and when a guy with a big stick is really needed, they can generally summon one (or several). There really is no competition on a raw power comparison. Spellcasters are better than warriors.

Of course the devs may set up fights in such a way that warrior types can really shine and mages are relatively weak. But that's a deliberate choice that's been made precisely because generally, spellcasters are more powerful.

Concerning SCS, given the fact that they've made spellcasters smarter and better prepared in that mod, it's unavoidable that spellcasters, especially mages, are even more important. The mod makes it tougher for everyone but it's not possible to make enemy spellcasters smarter and at the same time make it tougher for PC spellcasters compared to warrior types. If a mage in this game is well prepared, no warrior (not even an Inquisitor with Carsomyr) has a chance against them in a straight up fight (if you don't just hide and wait out spell durations - that's always possible against the AI but it's painfully tedious). You need a mage to get through the defenses. Divine spellcasters aren't that much more powerful but still, they have an edge that a warrior just can't match.

As for the argument that spontaneous spellcasters is more advantageous for mages compared to divines, that's just silly. Priests and druids have a smaller selection of spells than mages and fewer really good ones. That means they give up less when casting spontaneously and being able to spam the few good ones they have is more beneficial. That's just how it works.

As for clerics being more powerful than druids, true, but druids have a different niche than clerics, not so much buffers/supporters as summoners/damage dealers. The Shaman fills that niche really well, much better than the druid. In the overlap the cleric and the druid have, healing, the cleric is usually strictly better but that has been turned on it's head with the shaman. The shaman gets raise dead and a very useful status effect removal spell and the spontaneous spellcasting & more casts/day overall makes the Shaman have better healing output than the cleric, that's just a fact. The only thing that clerics have over shamans in that department are restoration spells but that can be done with scrolls.

Not being able to dual is indeed a drawback but, oh well. You never need more than 2 warrior types in a party anyway and as summoners, shamans can pull their weight even when it comes to hitting things.

Conclusion is Shamans are very powerful and very useful, at least after they've reached mid levels. They're not at the very top, the druid spell list isn't good enough for that but they're without a doubt the best healers in the game, arguably the best summoners until mages can summon planetars and very decent direct damage dealers with some minor crowd control capabilities. It's a great class with great versatility that will beuseful in almost any party.