For the record, my party was not stupidly powerful. I had one Sorcerer and one Druid who each knew both full spell sets, and one Sorcerer who was born a Sorcerer. I had one Wizardess-turned-Assasssin who knew up to RAZORS or so and had 200 SP (used almost exclusively for DISARM), and two Knights-turned-Assassins with no spellcasting ability.

I didn't see much use in having spellcasters up front, since by the end I never ran out of healing magic, and fast Assassins hurt more than spellcasters unless you intend to use 30 SP per attack. Basically every hit from a fast, strong Assassin is like having a SEIZE spell that always works.

I even lost an Assassin to paralysis from what I think was Murkon's first hit. If that was the case, I couldn't have protected him with an AC spell anyway. So it is possible to beat the game with a sub-optimal party (as long as it's quite good).

^v^:)^v^
FB

> > I don't know if Druids get more SP than Wizards or Sorcerers.
>
> They do, provided that the average of their IQ and wisdom is comparable to the IQ of a sorcerer of the same level or the wisdom of a wizard of the same level.
>
> My advice on building spell power? Change wizards to sorcerers and vice versa, but change knights and rogues to druids.
>
> A common misconception is that the natural "destination" class for a knight is an assassin. Actually this is the least helpful way to build an assassin. You're better off changing *spellcasters* to assassins, and changing your knights and rogues to spellcasters. This results in a greater total number of spellcasters, and you can still end up with the melee powerhouse of three assassins (actually, at a certain sufficiently high level, you're better off with knights, as they eventually become able to kill monsters just as dead as assassins can -- 600 damage kills a dragon as well as 800 damage does -- while having far more hit points) in the front ranks.
>
> If you want to build the best possible party, I'd say that it's three knights (that know all the spells) and three druids (ditto). If you're up at a stupidly high level, like level 50 or so, the druid's AC-gaining power will have made up for the lack of armor, and they'll have the extra spell points that sorcerers and wizards won't get. The knights won't do as much raw damage as the assassins will, but they'll still be taking out an entire monster group per round. The HP/damage trade-off only swings in the assassin's favor when fighting the two strongest unique monsters on level 10.
>
> However, that is ridiculous overkill. You don't even need to be *close* to that powerful to win the game. Consequently, unless you just want to build a crazily powerful party, it probably makes more sense to go with assassins (that each know one full spell set) and wizards (that also know all sorcerer spells). This is probably the most powerful party for characters in the level 20-40 range.
>
> And, actually, that's *still* far more powerful than you need to be. Most of the parties currently in the Hall of Fame managed with 3-4 spellcasters, some of whom only knew one spell set. So, in the end, it's ok to forget about all of the above, because basically *any* party can win the game if you level them up enough.