Is the Female Healer actually the ultimate earlygame spellcaster?

[Liminori]

This is something I've been wondering about for a while, as the numbers keep bringing me back to this question.
Here's a quick rundown.
Base Mage / Base Cleric(Female)
40% HP | 80% HP
100% SP | 100% SP
50% ATK | 70% ATK
40% DEF | 70% DEF
110% INT | 100% INT
80% SPD | 80% SPD
70% HIT | 70% HIT
110% RES | 100% RES

Now I realize that this split is a bit situational, but in my opinion, the aptitudes make the Clerics more helpful due to their better rounded stats; survivability and such, and the ability to make use of weapons better (assuming you would use them, you silly person) such as guns and especially bows.
Of course, I mean to say that using the Master/Pupil system is a given.

So in all honesty, is Survivability > 10% more INT/RES?
Feel free to leave your thoughts below.

[Tomberry Blue]

Seeing as int is the only stat that matters. Mage > Cleric

[HoneyDrake]

we are talking about early game, in which case the cleric will not cast any damage spells, and the mages can not heal.

mid game you should/could have unlocked angels and knights, which are considered straight upgrades to those 2 classes.

late game you want to get the highest class spells from the mages and clerics, afterwards you can chose whatever to reincarnate into.

[ShinkuTear]

Originally posted by Dancingstein:

we are talking about early game, in which case the cleric will not cast any damage spells, and the mages can not heal.

mid game you should/could have unlocked angels and knights, which are considered straight upgrades to those 2 classes.

late game you want to get the highest class spells from the mages and clerics, afterwards you can chose whatever to reincarnate into.

You got Mid and Late game flipped, somewhat. You will have likely Tier 6 Cleric before you have Angels, since, if I am correct, both have a common requirement of a Cleric type at Level 100 or higher, while Angel also needs 2 other classes at 100 or higher.

Angels are arguably upgrades *and* downgrades of Magic Knights, and MKs are a downgrade from Mages for magic capability. MK and Angel get 1 random element, and only up to the 3rd form at best, Angel also gets healing magic and overall superior stats. MK can cast a random spell they have as follow up to a standard attack.

Mages let you pick an element if low tier, and high tier mages are only relevant if they have been the low tier forms, or you have low tier forms to teach the spells. Galaxy Mage is statistically the best, but only learns up to the 4th versions of each element... the 4 single elemental mages get the 5th versions of their spell at Level 100.

[Blueberry Cheesecake]

The ultimate spell casters in LATE-game are the majins since they have the highest aptitudes in the game. Plus they have S rank mastery on all weapons.

[Bomb Bloke]

My spell casters are mostly just there in the early game to follow my fighters around and teach them every spell available.

[Liminori]

Originally posted by Dancingstein:

we are talking about early game, in which case the cleric will not cast any damage spells, and the mages can not heal.

I kinda disagree with this, because even in extremely early game you can give a cleric attack spells, and mages healing spells- Again, via the Pupil/Master system, that is assuming you can manage to get said characters enough mana.

I'd like to point out that overall, the Cleric has better rounded stats at base level, wheras the Galaxy Mage has 10% more Speed, Hit, Int, and Resist.
In comparison to the Cleric's highest rank, Saviour, it's back to the same 10% better Resist and Int for the mage, and way worse everything else *Besides SP, of course.)

Basically, what I'm trying to ask is if 10% better INT is worth it, because it really doesn't sound like it to me; A mage that can also double as a tank sounds pretty damn appealing.

And yes, I realize that a MageKnight would probably do an even better job at tanking while defending, however I find Knights less appealing due to their B rank weapon mastery and generally more squishiness.
Example; Female Cleric starts and ends with better defense than the (mage)Knight, sporting better overall aptitudes than the Knight at max rank.
Seriously, why are the Cleric's aptitudes so damn good?

[Dragoonseal]

There's a reason people tend to have Flonne as their primary spell caster, for those sweet 100% aptitudes across the board.

Just pupil her a Cleric, then pupil that Cleric a Mage, and you're good to go. You don't have to keep the Cleric or Mage's levels up anywhere near your primary characters, they can lag behind significantly and still have plenty good spells to pass up the line.

[Blueberry Cheesecake]

Originally posted by Liminori:

Originally posted by Dancingstein:

we are talking about early game, in which case the cleric will not cast any damage spells, and the mages can not heal.

I kinda disagree with this, because even in extremely early game you can give a cleric attack spells, and mages healing spells- Again, via the Pupil/Master system, that is assuming you can manage to get said characters enough mana.

I'd like to point out that overall, the Cleric has better rounded stats at base level, wheras the Galaxy Mage has 10% more Speed, Hit, Int, and Resist.
In comparison to the Cleric's highest rank, Saviour, it's back to the same 10% better Resist and Int for the mage, and way worse everything else *Besides SP, of course.)

Basically, what I'm trying to ask is if 10% better INT is worth it, because it really doesn't sound like it to me; A mage that can also double as a tank sounds pretty damn appealing.

And yes, I realize that a MageKnight would probably do an even better job at tanking while defending, however I find Knights less appealing due to their B rank weapon mastery and generally more squishiness.
Example; Female Cleric starts and ends with better defense than the (mage)Knight, sporting better overall aptitudes than the Knight at max rank.
Seriously, why are the Cleric's aptitudes so damn good?

Mages >>> Cleric

10% more int is way more viable than 10% more def and resist. As you transition to mid to late- game, you can just one-shot enemies 10+ panels away, no need to tank. Mages are better than Clerics not only because of their extra 10% int, but they can also learn offensive spells (e.g fire,wind,ice,star) NATURALLY as they level.

For Cleric, you need to have it create a mage pupil to learn offensive spells, then as you level up the cleric, you'll need to have more powerful spells such as Tera Fire, which means you also need to level up the pupil mage for the cleric to learn the most powerful spells. That's a pain in the ass if you ask me.

If I were you, just stick to a mage, and if you want to feel safe, have the mage learn a singular healing spell.

[ShinkuTear]

Originally posted by Blueberry:

10% more int is way more viable than 10% more def and resist. As you transition to mid to late- game, you can just one-shot enemies 10+ panels away, no need to tank.

Minor detail: End game, unless you have some craaaaazy offense you will be tanking hits again. The super bosses are actually fair fights when you first reach them, and depending a bit on how awesome your gear is, Baal could reasonably give a DM a hard time, since you don't have SRS yet, let alone Level 100 SRS.

[Blueberry Cheesecake]

Originally posted by ShinkuTear:

Originally posted by Blueberry:

10% more int is way more viable than 10% more def and resist. As you transition to mid to late- game, you can just one-shot enemies 10+ panels away, no need to tank.

Minor detail: End game, unless you have some craaaaazy offense you will be tanking hits again. The super bosses are actually fair fights when you first reach them, and depending a bit on how awesome your gear is, Baal could reasonably give a DM a hard time, since you don't have SRS yet, let alone Level 100 SRS.

Well the fight with Baal is easily exploitable, just have 1 sacrificial character to lift baal before ending a turn, that way Baal's turn is wasted and you get free attack on him. You can also have a thief to steal Nemesis and SRS to significantly weaken his atk and def.

The fight with Priere is also easy and exploitable, you'll just need to throw her in that lone panel at bottom where she can't do anything. Those 2 Succubus and Nekomata besides her are squishy, if you have enough int or atk, you can kill both of them in 1 turn.

And the tactics for Marjoly is also the same for baal, you just need to kill those 2 clerics besides her before dealing with her.

The only hard fight where you need to have fully equipped Rank 40 weapon + 3 lvl 100 SRS are Zetta, and Adell and Rozalin at the end of Demon Hall Mirror.
Edit: Also item world and Item Gods at Max SEBs.

[ShinkuTear]

Originally posted by Blueberry:

The only hard fight where you need to have fully equipped Rank 40 weapon + 3 lvl 100 SRS are Zetta, and Adell and Rozalin at the end of Demon Hall Mirror.

Except for the fact that all three can be beaten without R40 gear or SRS.

Unless I am mistaken, Level 9999 enemy!Zetta is weaker than Level 4000 Baal, and Level 2000/2500 enemy!Adell/Rozalin are weaker still.

Zetta is, really, a bit of a joke.

[Bomb Bloke]

I suspect Zetta is stronger, but he's very limited in how he can act - the main "challenge" of his stage is the layout of the geo panels. Once you deal with those you can pretty much beat him up without risk.

But in any case you don't "need" such gear for any stage, even maxed-difficulty Etna-mode Baal (which I'm going to peg as the hardest fight in the game). Adell and Rozalin in particular are merely the gatekeepers of yet another training map.

[AGA | prinnyuber]

Make a mage first then transmigrate it to a cleric later.