 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion Groups Platforms PCXboxPlayStationNintendoGames ActionStrategyRole Playing GamesSimulatorsSport Games |
Game Forum / Role Playing Games / EverQuest / July 2005Are monks still viable?
I've got a monk and I seem to be outdamaged by rangers, rogues, beastlords, and beserkers. I watch SK's and bards pull at least as well as me. I get smacked around like a 2 dollar whore. And have next to no mitigation. I love the toon, it was my first. And will play it as an alt as long as I play EQ. This is not a bitch fest nor a flame war spark, just a question. I don't have the time to become uber with gear or AA's, so my monk will be forever mediocre in those terms. Curiosity is all really. Thanks. ~F > I've got a monk and I seem to be outdamaged by rangers, rogues, > beastlords, and beserkers. I watch SK's and bards pull at least as [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > don't have the time to become uber with gear or AA's, so my monk will > be forever mediocre in those terms. Curiosity is all really. The grass is always greener innit. "Lief" <ask.me.for@it.com> wrote in news:LD%ze.26454$y86.17631@newsfe1- win.ntli.net: >> I've got a monk and I seem to be outdamaged by rangers, rogues, >> beastlords, and beserkers. I watch SK's and bards pull at least as [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > The grass is always greener innit. It's what people always said about BL's on the mage forums .. then I leveled one to 65 and discovered what clover tasted like after years of a steady crabgrass diet :)  SignatureArch Convoker Mairelon Snapbang Feral Lord Bosra Snowclaw Lanys T'vyl (Retired) Mairelon, 36th Paladin Silverhand > I've got a monk and I seem to be outdamaged by rangers, rogues, > beastlords, and beserkers. I watch SK's and bards pull at least as [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > don't have the time to become uber with gear or AA's, so my monk will > be forever mediocre in those terms. Curiosity is all really. The Ranger won't outdamage you unless he put in 45 AAs. 45 AAs will take you a long way toward improving your own DPS or mitigation. Once the Ranger gets to that point, his potential for increased DPS is much poorer than yours. For every piece of plat, AA, or raid time you spend on either one, you will improve the monk's DPS faster. I have trouble believing that a comparably-equiped berzerker or even BL will out-damage you. Yes, the rogue will probably stay a step ahead of you but then they have their own disadvantages. I believe you still have the 4th best mitigation in the game? I dont think the chain classes can out-mitigate you. Bards are great at chain pulling, indoors or outdoors, where lots of mobs are stacked on top of each other. The bard's advantage is mostly erased if there is very little stacking, I believe? You do get to pacify one mob at a time don't you? You are the best puller in many situations though. Mobs that cant be pac'd, raid targets, etc.. You get the best, and one of the only, feigns in the game. You get some pretty cool discs. All-in-all I would say that on a budget, the monk would be one of the best all-round performers, not the worst. > > I've got a monk and I seem to be outdamaged by rangers, rogues, > > beastlords, and beserkers. I watch SK's and bards pull at least as [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > out-damage you. Yes, the rogue will probably stay a step ahead of you > but then they have their own disadvantages. Archery is sh.t DPS. > I believe you still have the 4th best mitigation in the game? I dont > think the chain classes can out-mitigate you. Monks are not tanks dunno why they want to tank tbh. > Bards are great at chain pulling, indoors or outdoors, where lots of > mobs are stacked on top of each other. The bard's advantage is mostly > erased if there is very little stacking, I believe? Bard > all. You do get to > pacify one mob at a time don't you? You are the best puller in many > situations though. Mobs that cant be pac'd, raid targets, etc.. Wrong. Monks are the best pullers in a small number of situations, where you actually need a FD puller. > You get the best, and one of the only, feigns in the game. Shaman, SK, Necro all get FD, sometimes the snaring ability of Nec / SK means their FD is actually more useful. > You get some pretty cool discs. > > All-in-all I would say that on a budget, the monk would be one of the > best all-round performers, not the worst. Monks are fine imo. > > > I've got a monk and I seem to be outdamaged by rangers, rogues, > > > beastlords, and beserkers. I watch SK's and bards pull at least as [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > > Archery is sh.t DPS. Tell me about it. > > I believe you still have the 4th best mitigation in the game? I dont > > think the chain classes can out-mitigate you. > > Monks are not tanks dunno why they want to tank tbh. At lower levels, a lot of classes end up as tanks. > You do get to > > pacify one mob at a time don't you? You are the best puller in many > > situations though. Mobs that cant be pac'd, raid targets, etc.. > > Wrong. Monks are the best pullers in a small number of situations, where > you actually need a FD puller. You told me I was wrong, and then restated what I wrote... > > You get the best, and one of the only, feigns in the game. > > Shaman, SK, Necro all get FD, sometimes the snaring ability of Nec / SK > means their FD is actually more useful. Sometimes, yes. Is your point to tell him that his monk is indeed worthless? > Tell me about it. > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > At lower levels, a lot of classes end up as tanks. At lower levels monks can tank just fine. Hell I've been in groups lvl 50+ where the enchanter tanks. (gets big aggro fast, and holds onto it; healers prop him up while nukers and lousy taunt- high dps classes (e.g. rogues/monks/etc) tear the mob to shreds. It doesn't work everywhere of course... but if you happen to have a group with strong healing, high dps, and no tanks... enchanters can stand up pretty well to slowed mobs that only get to swing a few times before they are dead... (stuns help mitigate damage even further) It works well into the upper midgame at least. A modestly equipped 3-4k buffed robewearer can live plenty long enough against 50-60th level mobs that hit for under 500 a round (and that's LOTS of mobs)....especially if they can be reliably slowed, (and ideally snared) (Seen it done in places like Veksar, Fungus Grove, Natimbi etc...) > > You do get to > > > pacify one mob at a time don't you? You are the best puller in many [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > You told me I was wrong, and then restated what I wrote... No. You you monks are the best puller in *many* situations. Lief said monks are the best puller in a *small number* of situations. > > > You get the best, and one of the only, feigns in the game. > > > > Shaman, SK, Necro all get FD, sometimes the snaring ability of Nec / SK > > means their FD is actually more useful. > Sometimes, yes. Is your point to tell him that his monk is indeed > worthless? No. I think he's saying that that your assertion that monks have the best FD should be tempered with the fact that FD (even lesser FD) is often better when coupled with snare. That doesn't make monks worthless. It just further underscores that monks often aren't the best puller, even when FD pulling is required. Even if the monks weren't 'best' at something so what? Most classes aren't the best at something outside limited special cases. Mages, Necros, Knights, Druids, Bezerkers, Beastlords etc all have to come to grips that they aren't the best dps, healers, pullers, cc, or tanks. That hardly makes them worthless. Monks aren't the best pullers but they pull well. Monks aren't the best DPS class but they are still very good dps. Most groups in need of dps or a puller will gladly take a monk. > > Tell me about it. > > [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > > (Seen it done in places like Veksar, Fungus Grove, Natimbi etc...) ...just realized that his monk is level 65, so this is mostly moot. > > > You do get to > > > > pacify one mob at a time don't you? You are the best puller in many [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > No. You you monks are the best puller in *many* situations. Lief said > monks are the best puller in a *small number* of situations. If I had written "most" then he might have a point. 10% of the time can be "many" times as long as it is something that makes your class worth playing. > > > > You get the best, and one of the only, feigns in the game. > > > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > That doesn't make monks worthless. It just further underscores that > monks often aren't the best puller, even when FD pulling is required. Yes and having the ability to pacify one mob can make the monk's FD better than the SK/Necro's, along with the fact that you can feign while running without having to stop, turn, cast...precious fractions of a second that do make a difference. My point is that the monk has lots of things going for him. It seemed like Leif was intent on proving that monks have nothing going for them at all. > > > Tell me about it. > > > [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > > ...just realized that his monk is level 65, so this is mostly moot. Anyone can tank, any class, all that matters is gear. Its all about efficiency. > > > > You do get to > > > > > pacify one mob at a time don't you? You are the best puller in many [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > can be "many" times as long as it is something that makes your class > worth playing. Mkay. So do you agree with me or not or you just bitching for the sake of it? ;p > > > > > You get the best, and one of the only, feigns in the game. > > > > [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > like Leif was intent on proving that monks have nothing going for them > at all. What the hell are you talking about. Just because another class can do a similar thing doesnt stop monks doing it, or mean that they have nothing going for them now does it, Bael. Monks can also get a snare item I believe, most abilities of all classes have been made fairly easily available (one of the reasons I stopped playing, 15 classes, all the same...zzzzzz). That is what whining about balance gets you. I was trying to disprove or prove anything, I dont give a sh.t I dont play anymore, I was just stating facts as I see em, if you dont like them, well, tough :) In some situations monks are better pullers, in some, sk / necro are better pullers, others bards or rangers are better pullers. You dont NEED any one class to do a pull of any kind. In the modern game pulling is fairly irrelevant anyway. No class in the game sucks, its only the people who play them that think they do. Every class forum has whiners x class is better than my class!! Waaa. Gets old after a while, if you aint having fun, turn the fuckin pc off. > > > > > You do get to > > > > > > pacify one mob at a time don't you? You are the best puller in [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > Mkay. So do you agree with me or not or you just bitching for the sake of > it? ;p I know that you saw my post as another chance to display your big brain to everyone, but the fact is that it came off wrong. The original poster was complaining about the monk class, specifically how monks don't do anything better than anyone else. I pointed out that there are *some* things that monks do better than anyone else, and that some of the advantages other classes may have are transitory. You replied to me explaining why I was "wrong" and whoing why monks are almost always outshined by another class. For example, everyone knows that Necros' and SKs' ability to snare can give them an advantage when pulling in some cases. Snaring a mob so that it doesn't return to its spawn point is something I was doing with my necro long ago. There were only two reasons for you to bother mentioning this one advantage that SKs and Necros have over monks. 1) You want to convince the original poster that monks are indeed a horrible class, outshined by many others. 2) You want to prove how smart you are to everyone reading. "Beal" <bealrabbitslayer@hotmail.com> wrote in message > You want to convince the original poster that monks are indeed a > horrible class, outshined by many others. 2) You want to prove how > smart you are to everyone reading. So I should post complete bullshit to pander to somebodies ego? I dont think so. None of what I said makes monks a bad class. I said they were fine or did you just choose to ignore that bit in your effort to display your 'big brain' I dont have anything to prove or disprove, unlike you it seems. Every class is outshined by another in some way or another, get a clue please. > "Beal" <bealrabbitslayer@hotmail.com> wrote in message > > You want to convince the original poster that monks are indeed a > > horrible class, outshined by many others. 2) You want to prove how > > smart you are to everyone reading. > > So I should post complete bullshit to pander to somebodies ego? Hell post whatever you want if it gives you validation. You won't get it from me though bub. I think you're a putz. > > "Beal" <bealrabbitslayer@hotmail.com> wrote in message > > > You want to convince the original poster that monks are indeed a [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > You won't get it from me though bub. I think you're a putz. Oh you were just upset cos I disagreed with you. /plays the worlds smallest violin just for you. Carry on posting bullshit if it makes you happy! > > > "Beal" <bealrabbitslayer@hotmail.com> wrote in message > > > > You want to convince the original poster that monks are indeed a [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > Oh you were just upset cos I disagreed with you. That's the saddest part about the whole affair--you didn't disagree with me. > > > > "Beal" <bealrabbitslayer@hotmail.com> wrote in message > > > > > You want to convince the original poster that monks are indeed a [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > That's the saddest part about the whole affair--you didn't disagree > with me. Oh yes I did. Except I didnt stoop to random insults to try and get the last word in, I can if I want. You erm....fool chewing a.s fat manure spreader!!! Too drunk too care tright now so, whatever dewd!!!1 Snip opinionated correcting of other's posts :-) > Shaman, SK, Necro all get FD, Shaman get FD? Is that an AA listed with the snare and full xp res they also get? What is this Shaman FD called and how do I get it? >What is this Shaman FD called and how do I get it? It's called "Loading, please wait". You get it at level 1. wrat@panix.com (the wharf rat) wrote in news:datpa2$8gv$1 @reader2.panix.com: >>What is this Shaman FD called and how do I get it? > > It's called "Loading, please wait". You get it at level 1. Rangers too - or as we used to say "rangers never fake it" SignatureArch Convoker Mairelon Snapbang Feral Lord Bosra Snowclaw Lanys T'vyl (Retired) Mairelon, 35th Paladin Silverhand : >What is this Shaman FD called and how do I get it? : It's called "Loading, please wait". You get it at level 1. Not quite true. There is a plane of sky quest for a shaman only FD clicky ring. K > Snip opinionated correcting of other's posts :-) > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > get? > What is this Shaman FD called and how do I get it? PoSky quest. "Lief" <ask.me.for@it.com> wrote in news:iUxAe.95$C62.18@newsfe5- win.ntli.net: >> Snip opinionated correcting of other's posts :-) >> [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >> > PoSky quest. Must be one of those extremely fun PoSky quests that almost noone does because it is impossible to actually find others willing to go to Sky with you for the interminable amount of time it will require. I'll look it up though, just in case it's actually doable. SignatureOn Erollisi Marr in <Sanctuary of Marr> Ancient Graeme Faelban, Barbarian Soothsayer of 70 seasons On Steamfont Graeme, 36 Dwarven Mystic, 24 Sage, Treasure Hunter <Tempest> Aviv, 15 Gnome Brawler, 30 Provisioner > "Lief" <ask.me.for@it.com> wrote in news:iUxAe.95$C62.18@newsfe5- > win.ntli.net: [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > with you for the interminable amount of time it will require. I'll look > it up though, just in case it's actually doable. Its doable. Just horrible. Not difficult...just time consuming ala traditional EQ. Think one of the drops is from the eye which means speaking to Sirran the Loon IIRC (to get the right stuff spawned...its hazy memory). Best two items on sky, which are still two of the best items in the game imo, the rechargable shaman FD ring, and the instant 50% clicky ranger cloak. I think I solod sky before up to isle 4 or something, only need a group / possibly duo at most, maybe soloable by some characters with lvl70 and nice gear, wouldnt be good to die there...(wait, EQ has no punishment for death / stupidity now I forget). What a way to make dungeon crawling dull :( >> > I've got a monk and I seem to be outdamaged by rangers, rogues, >> > beastlords, and beserkers. I watch SK's and bards pull at least as [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > >Archery is sh.t DPS. True,and it is obvious that SOE dont want Archery as a dps tool,have a look at the AAs since PoP,there is not a single one which specially helps Archery,but tons of melee AAs. Uland 67,235 Ranger > >> > I've got a monk and I seem to be outdamaged by rangers, rogues, > >> > beastlords, and beserkers. I watch SK's and bards pull at least as [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > a look at the AAs since PoP,there is not a single one which specially > helps Archery,but tons of melee AAs. (with the small exception of those stupid OoW archery procs). The problem is that they took a class that was once a pretty good damage dealer, (before, and for a while after PoP) and decided to take it in a new direction. But the AAs and weapons rangers get seem to keep them only about in line with the other non-rogue/monk melee. The other spells and abilities are definitely worth something though, so I try not to complain too much. I do think that Rangers need some more DPS help, but I know I'm biased. >> >> > I've got a monk and I seem to be outdamaged by rangers, rogues, >> >> > beastlords, and beserkers. I watch SK's and bards pull at least as [quoted text clipped - 32 lines] >try not to complain too much. I do think that Rangers need some more >DPS help, but I know I'm biased. I wasnt complaining,just stating the facts,I have fun with *both* of my Rangers. =) The problem with the Ranger class is not so much lacking dps or missing utility,it is the Beastlord class.Why should any group want a Ranger,when they can get a Beastlord,which brings a full set of Shammy buffs,more dps than any dps class,double the hps of a Ranger,topped by a mana regeneration buff. Oh yeah,we have snare. :p Uland 67 Hunter Melforge 55 Ranger >>> >> > I've got a monk and I seem to be outdamaged by rangers, rogues, >>> >> > beastlords, and beserkers. I watch SK's and bards pull at least as [quoted text clipped - 44 lines] >Uland 67 Hunter >Melforge 55 Ranger Let me add,Beastlords are another fine example by the totally wrong businees strategy of SOE. The only reason the class exists in its totally overpowered state is, that SOE wanted to sell more copies of the Luclin expansion. I would bet they lost a lot of players on the other hand,who were disgruntled about making their years-long efforts to build a powerful character worthless,besides dps classes I am thinking especially of Shamans. Seems a bad move to me,trying to get some more one time revenues by loosing monthly paying players. Meldur > >>> >> > I've got a monk and I seem to be outdamaged by rangers, rogues, > >>> >> > beastlords, and beserkers. I watch SK's and bards pull at least as [quoted text clipped - 55 lines] > Seems a bad move to me,trying to get some more one time revenues > by loosing monthly paying players. They compensated by later releasing the berzerker which is pretty unremarkable in every respect. I can't even remember the last time I grouped with one. >> Let me add,Beastlords are another fine example by the totally wrong >> businees strategy of SOE. [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > unremarkable in every respect. I can't even remember the last time I > grouped with one. Umm, it would be hard to argue that they were overpowered as a marketing move since they were remarkably underpowered up until just before PoP. After is another story. SignatureArch Convoker Mairelon Snapbang Feral Lord Bosra Snowclaw Lanys T'vyl (Retired) Mairelon, 36th Paladin Silverhand >> >>> >> > I've got a monk and I seem to be outdamaged by rangers, >> >>> >> > rogues, beastlords, and beserkers. I watch SK's and bards [quoted text clipped - 57 lines] > unremarkable in every respect. I can't even remember the last time I > grouped with one. I have actually never once grouped with a berserker, not by choice, just don't see them around at my level anyway. SignatureOn Erollisi Marr in <Sanctuary of Marr> Ancient Graeme Faelban, Barbarian Soothsayer of 70 seasons On Steamfont Graeme, 36 Dwarven Mystic, 24 Sage, Treasure Hunter <Tempest> Aviv, 15 Gnome Brawler, 30 Provisioner >> >>> >> > I've got a monk and I seem to be outdamaged by rangers, rogues, >> >>> >> > beastlords, and beserkers. I watch SK's and bards pull at least as [quoted text clipped - 59 lines] >unremarkable in every respect. I can't even remember the last time I >grouped with one. Well,some time ago,I would have agreed with your statement about Berserkers,their AAs beyond the level 59 ones werent even in game when the class went live and even not finished when a Berserker friend of mine ran out of AAs,he could spend points on efficiently,some months later.(I spare me every comment on this,we are not talking about unfinished content here :p). But nowadays they do not seem to be that rare,of course there are much more Beastlords around. :p In pickupgroups they are as common as one of the other less played classes like,hm lets say,Mages,Monks or Shamans(Shamans! :p). In a recent DoN I did with a pickupgroup we had a 70 Berserker,I have all melee hits turned off,all other combat spam,magic and crits,goes in one window,messages usually scroll through so fast,that it is hard to follow,sometimes making it difficult to read important stuff like "Quarm begins to cast the gating spell" :p. The messages produced by the criticals of the Berserker looked like this: Berserker scores a critical hit for 1031 damage Berserker scores a critical hit for 978 damage Berserker scores a critical hit for 867 damage Berserker scores a critical hit for 665 damage Berserker scores a critical hit for 978 damage Berserker scores a critical hit for 1019 damage This came up every 6 seconds,with no interruption by other combat messages. Unremarkable? Uland 67,240 Hunter > >> >>> >> > I've got a monk and I seem to be outdamaged by rangers, rogues, > >> >>> >> > beastlords, and beserkers. I watch SK's and bards pull at least as [quoted text clipped - 91 lines] > > Unremarkable? I've often heard that they're actually quite good. (Although I know so few myself I can't comment.) However, we seem to agree that when the class was released it was particularly underpowered (unfinished). That's all I meant...and as far as dps class goes they never really come up in conversations when people are comparing rangers/monks/rogues... so I really don't know how balanced they are these days. At any rate, no one accuses them of being over powered, whether they are out damaging rangers and rogues or being able to solo, heal, slow, buff, FD, clarity, and port... etc ;) < snip > >>The problem with the Ranger class is not so much lacking dps or >>missing utility,it is the Beastlord class.Why should any group want >>a Ranger,when they can get a Beastlord,which brings a full set of >>Shammy buffs,more dps than any dps class,double the hps of >>a Ranger,topped by a mana regeneration buff. >>Oh yeah,we have snare. :p < snip > > Let me add,Beastlords are another fine example by the totally wrong > businees strategy of SOE. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > Seems a bad move to me,trying to get some more one time revenues > by loosing monthly paying players. Don't know about the marketing angle, but I do agree that BL's in their current implementation are part of what's wrong with EQ. SignatureRumble "Write something worth reading, or do something worth writing." -- Benjamin Franklin > Don't know about the marketing angle, but I do agree that BL's in their > current implementation are part of what's wrong with EQ. OK, I'll bite. Could you please explain this further? My main is a 60 beastlord, so I am undoubtedly biased, but I'm willing to listen. To me, what makes the beastlord stand out is that is a melee class that can actually solo effectively. Granted, my best strategy is to go for mobs near the blue/light blue border and mow them down, rather than tackling high blues. Just about every other "solo" class (druid, necro, etc.) operates on the principle "if it never hits you, its DPS doesn't matter". Beastlords have slow, haste (at 60+), SoW, a powerful pet, healing spells (weak, but far better than nothing), a mana regen buff, weak melee buffs, and are built for melee. We are very diverse. The main reasons I chose a beastlord were because I could effectively solo, I could kill things by melee (for me, more fun), and I could throw buffs around in groups or to passing strangers. On the other hand, we don't challenge the specialists. I throw very few buffs when grouped with a shaman (or people who got Focus of Whatever before leaving PoK), and having a shaman or enchanter around means my slow sits idle. Mage pets are stronger, and a group is in trouble, if a beastlord is main healer. Other classes give better DPS. In my experience, I have rarely been in a full group (not counting groups of 2-3) where there was not a specialist (shaman, enchanter, etc.) that did something better than I did, so I have rarely felt that my diversity was putting someone else out of work. I frequently solo or end up in small groups (one or two guildies, generally), but I attribute that to a consequence of playing off-peak hours. One of a beastlord's greatest challenges is the effort required to "keep up". If a ranger gets his first 21% haste item, his DPS goes up 21%, a wizard with Improved Damage gets a flat 10% DPS boost, and a monk with a new weapon can look straight at the damage/delay ratio to compute his overall DPS boost. A beastlord's DPS is divided among many different sources (DoT, nuke, melee, pet), so one upgrade has a much smaller impact for us than for anyone else. Anyway, I agree that beastlords are a strong class. For what it's worth, the consensus on the beastlord forums is that our class is generally in good shape, but we start to fall behind somewhere around the 65+/Time+ level of progression. As I am only 60, that is beyond my experience. However, I do not understand how they are something "wrong with EQ". I have never met a group that was unwilling to go until a beastlord joined up, or until getting beastlord buffs in PoK. I have not noticed a flood of beastlords, such that most groups either have at least 2 or are competing with a nearby solo-er. It seems to me that we are right where we ought to be. I would like to hear your perspective. >> Don't know about the marketing angle, but I do agree that BL's in >> their current implementation are part of what's wrong with EQ. > > OK, I'll bite. Could you please explain this further? My main is a > 60 beastlord, so I am undoubtedly biased, but I'm willing to listen. Didn't mean to sound baiting. I meant no offense to any BL's out there. I just feel that the beastlord class is perhaps the most over-powered or overly useful classes in the game. They took the best things from way too many classes and rolled them up into the BL. A reduction in effectiveness where those abilities are concerned would be the natural balancing tactic, but that didn't happen to enough of a degree in this case. > To me, what makes the beastlord stand out is that is a melee class > that can actually solo effectively. Granted, my best strategy is to [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > fun), and I could throw buffs around in groups or to passing > strangers. Well, you're making my case for me. ;) More on that in a moment... > On the other hand, we don't challenge the specialists. I throw very > few buffs when grouped with a shaman (or people who got Focus of > Whatever before leaving PoK), and having a shaman or enchanter around > means my slow sits idle. Mage pets are stronger, and a group is in > trouble, if a beastlord is main healer. Other classes give better > DPS. I play both a mid-level enchanter and shaman, so I do tend to frequent their respective class boards. Though I take a lot of class grumbling/envy with a grain of salt, I try to pay attention to any hard facts presented. According to them, the beastlord slow has gotten to the point where it is only like 5% less effective than the shaman, and comparable to that of the enchanter. I can't speak to the viability of your buffs, but I do know what on the raids I've attended, BL buffs are assured to be on the list. Naturally, I don't consider the BL a primary healer, but do you do it as well as a Ranger or Paladin? > In my experience, I have rarely been in a full group (not counting > groups of 2-3) where there was not a specialist (shaman, enchanter, > etc.) that did something better than I did, so I have rarely felt that > my diversity was putting someone else out of work. That has been the gripe I've heard most. If your backpack only has 6 slots, why take both a knife and a small pruning saw, when your Swiss Army knife has both and only takes up one slot? You may not perform some of your abilities *quite* as well as the specialists, but it would seem you do it well enough to warrant using that extra group slot for another high-DPS class in addition to your own added DPS. It's not that you do it better or even as well, it's that you do so much of it well enough. > One of a > beastlord's greatest challenges is the effort required to "keep up". [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > different sources (DoT, nuke, melee, pet), so one upgrade has a much > smaller impact for us than for anyone else. Not a very big problem in the grand scheme of things. Though I'm surprised to hear that you don't see the same benefit from haste items as, say, the ranger class. Either way, seems like a more than fair trade-off if you ask me, considering the myriad of abilities you possess. > Anyway, I agree that beastlords are a strong class. For what it's > worth, the consensus on the beastlord forums is that our class is [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > me that we are right where we ought to be. I would like to hear your > perspective. I think it all boils down to the fact that the BL can really do it all, melee, pet, heal, slow, haste, mana regen, buff, SoW, and do them very well. It is the Swiss Army knife of EQ without the drawbacks of miniaturization and compactness. The downside seems to be *very* minimal. I just think they wrapped up way too much functionality into that one class. /shrug SignatureRumble "Write something worth reading, or do something worth writing." -- Benjamin Franklin "Rumbledor" <Rumbledor@hotspamsuxmail.com> wrote in message According to them, the beastlord slow has gotten to the > point where it is only like 5% less effective than the shaman, and > comparable to that of the enchanter. If the mob mitiagates the % doesnt really matter. > I can't speak to the viability of your buffs, but I do know what on the > raids I've attended, BL buffs are assured to be on the list. > > Naturally, I don't consider the BL a primary healer, but do you do it as > well as a Ranger or Paladin? Beastlords have the same heals as rangers. And slow. And a pet. But rangers look cool cos they have a bow an stuff :/ At the high end bsts arent actually that great though. > I play both a mid-level enchanter and shaman, so I do tend to frequent > their respective class boards. Though I take a lot of class > grumbling/envy with a grain of salt, I try to pay attention to any > hard facts presented. According to them, the beastlord slow has gotten > to the point where it is only like 5% less effective than the shaman, > and comparable to that of the enchanter. That one you have to be careful of: Is a 65% slow really only 5% worse than a 70% slow? (these are pop level spells, I don't know the OoW ones) On a 100DPS mob the 70% slow makes it a 30DPS mob, the 65% slow makes it a 35DPS mob - the tank tanking the BL slowed mob is taking 16.666% more damage. With Shaman it's even more dramatic: The shaman slowed 100DPS mob only puts out 25DPS, so the tank tanking the BL slowed mob is taking 40% more damage than if it were shaman slowed. Additionally, shaman have a very low aggro un-resistable debuff to help them land their slow. When mobs are near the limit of a group's ability, the difference betwen shaman slows and BL slows is huge. In the sewers it was very common to get resisted the first time and have to recast and take some hits. And that's with my mage backing me up with Mala/Malosini. Fortunately I could just use my disc and tank it until I got it slowed. > I can't speak to the viability of your buffs, but I do know what on > the raids I've attended, BL buffs are assured to be on the list. > > Naturally, I don't consider the BL a primary healer, but do you do it > as well as a Ranger or Paladin? I have been primary slower, haster, stat-buffer in exp groups many times with my BL. It means I don't use nukes, but that is the price of being able to even handle those tasks at all. The ability to trade off DPS for utility, then switch back when we gain a shaman is huge. >> In my experience, I have rarely been in a full group (not counting >> groups of 2-3) where there was not a specialist (shaman, enchanter, [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > It's not that you do it better or even as well, it's that you do so > much of it well enough. Ooops, should have read your entire response - this is precisely the point: My BL didn't DPS as well as my mage, slow/buff as well as a shaman or tank as well as a plate class -- but I could step into each of these roles and fill them "well enough" in standard XP groups. >> One of a >> beastlord's greatest challenges is the effort required to "keep up". [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > trade-off if you ask me, considering the myriad of abilities you > possess. Actually, this is the primary problem for both mages and BL's -- pets simply don't scale with gear the way melee DPS/mitigation does. Moreover for mages, caster DPS doesn't scale as well with gear. This leads to the syndrome (for mages at least) of looking REALLY good when an expansion first comes out (ding 61, get a PoP air pet and FoT and you get this MASSIVE boost to DPS over the 60 mage.) then stagnating while the more gear dependent classes start gearing up. The best solution I've seen yet is to have pets get a percentage of your +HP/AC/Atk from your gear. The difference between an Anguish Mage's pet and a non-raiding mage's pet if remarkably small (in both DPS and mitigation) compared to the difference between Anguish geared melee and non-raiding melee. > I think it all boils down to the fact that the BL can really do it > all, melee, pet, heal, slow, haste, mana regen, buff, SoW, and do them [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > I just think they wrapped up way too much functionality into that one > class. /shrug Which is exactly why, if I ever come back to EQ, it will be my BL I play, not my mage. :) In WoW I'm applying the lessons I learned in EQ -- don't get too attached to one particular character/class. I'm leveling up a Paladin, Warrior, Rogue, Hunter, Druid and a Shaman. This way I'll always be able to change if I feel my current character got the shaft :) Now, I just have to finish these dang mod coding projects I started so I can get back to leveling :) (they have so much promise to improve my play, plus the whole mod programming thing is a game in itself) SignatureArch Convoker Mairelon Snapbang Feral Lord Bosra Snowclaw Lanys T'vyl (Retired) Mairelon, 36th Paladin Silverhand >> I play both a mid-level enchanter and shaman, so I do tend to frequent >> their respective class boards. Though I take a lot of class [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > When mobs are near the limit of a group's ability, the difference > betwen shaman slows and BL slows is huge. Shaman also got a new slow recently, 75% slow, 1.5 minute duration, -60 MR adjust. Level 69 OOW rune turn in. SignatureOn Erollisi Marr in <Sanctuary of Marr> Ancient Graeme Faelban, Barbarian Soothsayer of 70 seasons On Steamfont Graeme, 36 Dwarven Mystic, 24 Sage, Treasure Hunter <Tempest> Aviv, 15 Gnome Brawler, 30 Provisioner >Didn't mean to sound baiting. I meant no offense to any BL's out there. No offense taken. If someone has a rational reason why my class is busted, I'd prefer to understand it before the nerf bat strikes. :) >> On the other hand, we don't challenge the specialists. > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > point where it is only like 5% less effective than the shaman, and > comparable to that of the enchanter. You're close, the high end slows are 75% (shaman), 70% and 65% (beastlord). Look at it from the other angle though. After the slow has landed, the mob is attacking at 25%, 30% or 35% of its base rate. A beastlord slowed mob is delivering 40% more damage than if it had been slowed by a shaman (35/25=1.4). I won't try to engage in the debate about how/whether Slow has wrecked EQ, but I understand that a better slower is noticeable. I'll agree that beastlord slows beat the heck out of an unslowed mob, though. At lower levels, the effect is less dramatic. At 20, we get a 15-22% slow (depending on caster level) - nice, but not drastic. Segue to a long stretch until 50, when we get a 35% slow - a third less damage is definitely significant, but not by itself overpowering. At 60, I just got a 50% slow. Half off all melee damage is a lot, I'll admit. Now we're entering the realm where one could argue that the existence of slow itself is breaking EQ. :) If I 50% slow two mobs, I may as well have mezzed one instead. > I can't speak to the viability of your buffs, but I do know what on the > raids I've attended, BL buffs are assured to be on the list. To which, I say, thank goodness. We only pass out a few, but it's nice to have *something* unique that isn't superceded by someone else. Rangers and Paladins have HP/ATK buffs that compete favorably with ours, and Rangers have a DS that stacks with others, I think. Every class should have something unique to offer, I feel. > Naturally, I don't consider the BL a primary healer, but do you do it as > well as a Ranger or Paladin? Beastlord healing is on par with Ranger healing. Paladins are somewhat better at it. A recent patch message (a few months ago) re-affirmed the developers' intentions to keep ranger and beastlord healing at the same level. >> In my experience, I have rarely been in a full group (not counting >> groups of 2-3) where there was not a specialist (shaman, enchanter, [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > high-DPS class in addition to your own added DPS. It's not that you do > it better or even as well, it's that you do so much of it well enough. I have heard that LDON was the best thing that ever happened to the group desirability of beastlords, rangers, druids and shaman. The versatility of a hybrid is a good thing, but comes with a tradeoff. A druid can't beat cleric healing, but they bring other things to the table. In an ideal world, the specialists should bring enough to the table to be competitive with the hybrids. I can slow almost as well as an enchanter, but my crowd control (off-tanking, basically) isn't nearly as good, and my mana regen and haste buffs are inferior, to say nothing of lacking Lull or Charm. Where a beastlord shines is that we can substitute for a number of classes in a group. If we have a shaman or enchanter, I can stop duplicating their talents and concentrate instead on dealing more damage (e.g. swap out my buff or slow spellgem for another nuke). If I'm the main slower and buffer, that's takes away time and mana from killing things quicker. I have heard the same thing about us supplanting others, which is why I mentioned my limited experiences. Perhaps yours are different. As a beastlord, my perspective is skewed - I can only observe whether I am invited to groups with specialists who supercede me. Have you ever been part of forming a group in which someone said, "let's take the beastlord instead of the shaman", for no other reason than that? In a group with a ranger, I'd rather invite the shaman, but starting with a druid, I'd rather take the beastlord - it becomes situational. Or, I'd rather invite a friend than a stranger. Sometimes, I'll take whomever I can actually find, but that's another story. :) >> One of a >> beastlord's greatest challenges is the effort required to "keep up". [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > trade-off if you ask me, considering the myriad of abilities you > possess. Oh, I'm not complaining. At least at 60, I don't feel left behind on the power curve, all things considered. As to haste, rangers/tanks/rogues/monks all get double attack. Beastlords do not, although we can get up to 15% double attack with AA abilities. That alone makes haste less effective for us, although one might argue that we're on par with knights, who do not get dual wield. In fact, one of the more viable strategies for improving beastlord (and bard) melee damage is to go for weapons with big procs (e.g. Delightful Orb, Dedgerex's Cudgel, Ethereal Destroyer, etc.) instead of more favorable damage/delay ratios, especially since we can self-buff our dexterity to help the procs fire more often and get AA's to boost proc spell effects. Anyway, no one is seriously arguing that beastlords need double attack, since we already deal substantial damage with our pets, which, say, rangers don't have. I haven't done any parses, but my informal experience suggests that my pet outdamages me. If my pet and I are each fighting a different mob, he usually kills his before I kill mine. At the very high end, some beastlords have complained that this is no longer true (this is part of an argument for more/better pet foci). At the end of the day, when I upgraded from a 22% to 31% haste item, my total DPS did not go up by a factor of (1.31/1.22), but only a part of that - since I failed to likewise upgrade my damage from pet, nukes, etc., which are substantial fractions of the total. Making beastlords scale correctly is a difficult challenge, regardless of whether you think we're underpowered at the high end or overpowered at the low end. > I think it all boils down to the fact that the BL can really do it all, > melee, pet, heal, slow, haste, mana regen, buff, SoW, and do them very [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > I just think they wrapped up way too much functionality into that one > class. /shrug So, while beastlords are only second best, they are a lot closer to first place than to not having the functionality at all? I can understand what you're trying to say. Where I continue to disagree is your assertion that beastlords are something "wrong with EQ". Beastlords are not sufficiently overpowered that everyone is dumping their main for a beastlord. I understand that necros still put everyone else to shame for soloing prowess, and there are plenty of druids and such around too. Beastlords are not perceived as a "make-or-break" class, like cleric healing or warrior tanking or KEI/Focus/Virtue buffing might be. Beastlords do not have a monopoly on any abilities that "break" the game. I am inclined to agree that EQ would be a better game if Complete Heal disappeared and high-end Slow were toned down to saner levels (with the attendant required rebalancing) - lack of either of these abilities can change whole encounters from go to no-go. However, I don't see the beastlord class as having, in and of itself, a deterimental effect on the game. If beastlords are overpowered, it is not by enough to tip the game as a whole. In other words, I disagree with you about the scale of the problem, because I don't see the evidence for it being that large. "Prelgor" <prelgor@aol.com> wrote in news:1121129372.562562.160600 @z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com: >> I think it all boils down to the fact that the BL can really do it all, >> melee, pet, heal, slow, haste, mana regen, buff, SoW, and do them very [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > first place than to not having the functionality at all? I can > understand what you're trying to say. I think closer to the point would be to say that they are too close to first place in too many areas. > Where I continue to disagree is your assertion that beastlords are > something "wrong with EQ". Beastlords are not sufficiently overpowered > that everyone is dumping their main for a beastlord. No, the flavor-o'-the-month demographic doesn't rule EQ quite as badly as in most other MMORPG's, thank God. SignatureRumble "Write something worth reading, or do something worth writing." -- Benjamin Franklin > To which, I say, thank goodness. We only pass out a few, but it's nice > to have *something* unique that isn't superceded by someone else. > Rangers and Paladins have HP/ATK buffs that compete favorably with > ours, and Rangers have a DS that stacks with others, I think. Every > class should have something unique to offer, I feel. No ;) Ranger DS doesn't stack, and I have yet to meet people who want ranger buffs over BL buffs, like spiritual purity and their ATK/HP lines. But... This isn't necessarily a problem with the BL buffs; and I'm not convinced rangers are particularly hurting. The problem is that the BL does so well in so many areas compared to other classes that are weak in some areas and strong in others. If you take a single aspect of BL's and compare it to the best class everything may look fine - Look! Shamans slow better than us! Rangers buff + heal almost as well as us! Mages do a bit more DPS than us! ... etc ... But... all these other classes do pretty much *one* thing well; BL's are competing with ALL of them at a very comparable level. Thats where the problem lies. You break the Support/Dps/Tank paradigm by being... everyting. > for another nuke). If I'm the main slower and buffer, that's takes > away time and mana from killing things quicker. Sure; but if you're main slower and buffer, screw it, we can do without the shaman, we'll have the cleric pacify pull so lets drop the enchanter, and hey, we get so much more DPS from the extra DPS classes and your pet, etc, that we dont miss their 'better' skills because the mobs are dead before that extra DPS they have from the small slow difference or lack of long duration mezzing can make a difference. > rather invite a friend than a stranger. Sometimes, I'll take whomever > I can actually find, but that's another story. :) I've been in groups where we've said 'Nah, dont ask the shaman - we already have the BL' ;) I've been in groups in PoFire and DoN with BL tank/slowers. *shrug* > Oh, I'm not complaining. At least at 60, I don't feel left behind on > the power curve, all things considered. As to haste, > rangers/tanks/rogues/monks all get double attack. Beastlords do not, And they all get hasted *by you* ;) > although we can get up to 15% double attack with AA abilities. That > alone makes haste less effective for us, although one might argue that Oh, you mean items ;) > part of that - since I failed to likewise upgrade my damage from pet, > nukes, etc., which are substantial fractions of the total. Making And also an issue rangers face ;) > So, while beastlords are only second best, they are a lot closer to > first place than to not having the functionality at all? I can > understand what you're trying to say. And its not just 'second best DPS' or whatever; its second best at a whole lot of things in one toon. > as having, in and of itself, a deterimental effect on the game. If > beastlords are overpowered, it is not by enough to tip the game as a > whole. In other words, I disagree with you about the scale of the > problem, because I don't see the evidence for it being that large. I tend to agree; if someone else is having fun , good for them. At the end of the day if the beastlord means a shaman isnt invited, then it means an extra rogue *is*; you're not reducing the total size of groups. Just dont expect the shaman to be happy about it ;) M <pingu@keg.zymurgy.org> wrote: > No ;) Ranger DS doesn't stack, and I have yet to meet people who want > ranger buffs over BL buffs, like spiritual purity and their ATK/HP lines. GoE (whatever that means, tanks ask for it and I know it's a DS which is why it doesn't stack with my own personal clicky DS). And the only beastlord buff anyone ever has on a raid is spiritual ascendence, and that perfection of spirit thingy they MGB on tough fights. Nobody ever takes vigor over hunter or brells, depending on whether people want hp or atk. I'm not sure anything actually blocks the spiritual line though. It always seems to land no matter what buffs I have up. ><pingu@keg.zymurgy.org> wrote: >> [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >I'm not sure anything actually blocks the spiritual line though. It always >seems to land no matter what buffs I have up. Tanks want Call Of Earth not for the 10 point damageshield,but for the 34 AC which gives the buff too,and it stacks with Virtue or Druid skins. Uland 67 Hunter > No ;) Ranger DS doesn't stack, and I have yet to meet people who want > ranger buffs over BL buffs, like spiritual purity and their ATK/HP lines. I was thinking of the Call of Earth line. It does not stack with your self-only DS, but it does stack with your other cast-on-others DS (and with mage/druid DS). It's small, but at least it's something. I thought the ranger buffs had better +ATK. My understanding was that paladins had the best HP buff, rangers had the best ATK buff, and beastlords had a compromise. I would have guessed that rogues, monks and rangers (non-tank melee DPS) would all prefer the ranger buff. I will agree that rangers have no parallel to the Spiritual Light line. > I've been in groups where we've said 'Nah, dont ask the shaman - we already > have the BL' ;) I'm trying to find a way to call this fair (i.e. the group is just rounding out its skill sets). However, this is really the worst possible thing that can be said for my case. A shaman wasn't perceived to bring *enough* over already having a beastlord. > I've been in groups in PoFire and DoN with BL tank/slowers. I don't have a problem with a beastlord slower; we can do that job acceptably, if not optimally. I hope that the beastlord tank was making the cleric sweat bullets. I can tank things at the dark/light blue border, but if I pull aggro in a group facing whites, I regret it, praise every Taunt trick the warrior had up her sleeve, and back off on the DPS for a bit. >> part of that - since I failed to likewise upgrade my damage from pet, >> nukes, etc., which are substantial fractions of the total. Making > >And also an issue rangers face ;) I had thought your weapons were a much larger fraction of your DPS. I stand corrected. >> To which, I say, thank goodness. We only pass out a few, but it's >> nice to have *something* unique that isn't superceded by someone [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > ranger buffs over BL buffs, like spiritual purity and their ATK/HP > lines. I know plenty of DPS types that take the ranger buffs over BL buffs. SignatureOn Erollisi Marr in <Sanctuary of Marr> Ancient Graeme Faelban, Barbarian Soothsayer of 70 seasons On Steamfont Graeme, 36 Dwarven Mystic, 24 Sage, Treasure Hunter <Tempest> Aviv, 15 Gnome Brawler, 30 Provisioner >>> To which, I say, thank goodness. We only pass out a few, but it's >>> nice to have *something* unique that isn't superceded by someone [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > >I know plenty of DPS types that take the ranger buffs over BL buffs. Sometimes Rogues want Strength of Tunare,but thats it,I wouldnt call this "plenty of DPS types". =) In fact I usually go out of buff range when I cast SoT in a group. :p Uland 67 Hunter >>>> To which, I say, thank goodness. We only pass out a few, but it's >>>> nice to have *something* unique that isn't superceded by someone [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > call this "plenty of DPS types". =) > In fact I usually go out of buff range when I cast SoT in a group. :p Most people I play with that are doing melee dps, not tanking or pulling, want SoT over SV or BBB. SignatureOn Erollisi Marr in <Sanctuary of Marr> Ancient Graeme Faelban, Barbarian Soothsayer of 70 seasons On Steamfont Graeme, 36 Dwarven Mystic, 24 Sage, Treasure Hunter <Tempest> Aviv, 15 Gnome Brawler, 30 Provisioner >>>>> To which, I say, thank goodness. We only pass out a few, but it's >>>>> nice to have *something* unique that isn't superceded by someone [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] >Most people I play with that are doing melee dps, not tanking or pulling, >want SoT over SV or BBB. Sorry to say but most people are mad for hitpoints,you should see the whining for conviction when I do a pickupgroup with my 66 Cleric,some go so far to head to PoK for conviction and let the group wait. *sigh* Mheldur 66 (140 AAs,FT 18)Cleric >>>>>> To which, I say, thank goodness. We only pass out a few, but >>>>>> it's nice to have *something* unique that isn't superceded by [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > whining for conviction when I do a pickupgroup with my 66 Cleric,some > go so far to head to PoK for conviction and let the group wait. *sigh* Guess I mostly play with a different crowd of people. Do I prefer Conviction to Virtue? Sure, who wouldn't? Will I leave a group hanging so I can go get a buff? Never. It's stupid, people who do that are stupid, and don't deserve a spot in any group. I quite happily make do with whatever buffs are available in the group I am in, and have fun. SignatureOn Erollisi Marr in <Sanctuary of Marr> Ancient Graeme Faelban, Barbarian Soothsayer of 70 seasons On Steamfont Graeme, 36 Dwarven Mystic, 24 Sage, Treasure Hunter <Tempest> Aviv, 15 Gnome Brawler, 30 Provisioner < snip > >> Sorry to say but most people are mad for hitpoints,you should see the >> whining for conviction when I do a pickupgroup with my 66 Cleric,some [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > happily make do with whatever buffs are available in the group I am > in, and have fun. Testify. My sentiments exactly. SignatureRumble "Write something worth reading, or do something worth writing." -- Benjamin Franklin >>>>>>> To which, I say, thank goodness. We only pass out a few, but >>>>>>> it's nice to have *something* unique that isn't superceded by [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] >stupid, and don't deserve a spot in any group. I quite happily make do >with whatever buffs are available in the group I am in, and have fun. Sadly the vast majority of EQ players "suck",and it has become worse since OoW,gladly I have some friends with whom I can group regularly, funny incident on last open Saryn raid was they took my *65* Sk friend as main tank,I really would like to have seen the faces of all the higher level sucker tanks. =) Mheldur 66 cleric > Sorry to say but most people are mad for hitpoints, Yer, mostly ebayed (or pseudo) melee DPS who dont know what atk does.. you should see the > whining for conviction when I do a pickupgroup with my 66 Cleric,some > go so far to head to PoK for conviction and let the group wait. *sigh* Instant group kick imo. Half the time these buffs just run down without even being used....people have no brains sometimes (or sometimes they have brains...) > > Sorry to say but most people are mad for hitpoints, > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > even being used....people have no brains sometimes (or sometimes they have > brains...) So many people are deathly afraid of dying that they'll happily cripple their output to ensure they'll have a chance at escaping death... from the clerics who have gate memmed to the shadowknights with multiple FDs and harmshield memmed.... (I mean, sure if they're doing some fancy trick FD pulling... but for more run of the mill combat insisting on tying up three spell slots with spells you'll hopefully never use is nuts. I can't for the life of me figure out -why- people are so paranoid. > So many people are deathly afraid of dying that they'll happily cripple > their output to ensure they'll have a chance at escaping death... from [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > I can't for the life of me figure out -why- people are so paranoid. Well its not even like death matters AT ALL anymore, aside from lost time....and they probably lose more time looking for these buffs in the first place. > > So many people are deathly afraid of dying that they'll happily cripple > > their output to ensure they'll have a chance at escaping death... from [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > time....and they probably lose more time looking for these buffs in the > first place. Well, duh! That's why people are so afraid of dying! If they die, they'll have to spend forever looking for all those buffs again! /sarcasm off But seriously, this may be part of the issue. I know that, when I set out from PoK, I'll often pause to get some level-appropriate buffs/MGBs; after all, the content I'll be facing has often been tuned to expect me to have those buffs. And often, especially if I'm grouping with friends, we're all in PoK and all of us are getting those buffs, so I'm not holding up the group. If I die, though, I won't make the rest of the group wait just so I can find the buffs again before I rejoin them. (And if I'm being rezzed, I can't keep any PoK buffs anyway.) That means that, if I die, my output afterward will be lower because I'll be missing some buffs. This doesn't paralyse me, but it does mean I may skew my tactics to reduce the chance of dying. Of course, from a role-playing view, this isn't necessarily a bad way to skew. :-) -- Don. --------------------------------------------------------------------- -- See the a.g.e/EQ1 FAQ at http://www.iCynic.com/~don/EQ/age.faq.htm -- -- Sukrasisx, Monk 56 on E. Marr Note: If you reply by mail, -- Terrwini, Druid 52 on E. Marr I'll get to it sooner if you -- Wizbeau, Wizard 36 on E. Marr remove the "hyphen n s" -- Teviron, Knight 21 on E. Marr >>Most people I play with that are doing melee dps, not tanking or >>pulling, want SoT over SV or BBB. > > Sorry to say but most people are mad for hitpoints,you should see the > whining for conviction when I do a pickupgroup with my 66 Cleric,some > go so far to head to PoK for conviction and let the group wait. *sigh* That would be those people who are clueless as to what the various buffs actually do for them. For someone who is not going to be hit much, and is a melee class, SoT > SV > BBB. They also like to have Champion or FA tossed in as well as the lowly Bih'Li. For melee types, ATK is quite important, to a point. If their attack is already so high that they are at the point of diminishing returns, then it might be reasonable to take more hp instead. SignatureOn Erollisi Marr in <Sanctuary of Marr> Ancient Graeme Faelban, Barbarian Soothsayer of 70 seasons On Steamfont Graeme, 36 Dwarven Mystic, 24 Sage, Treasure Hunter <Tempest> Aviv, 15 Gnome Brawler, 30 Provisioner "Prelgor" <prelgor@aol.com> wrote in news:1121107557.372318.37320 @g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com: > Anyway, I agree that beastlords are a strong class. For what it's > worth, the consensus on the beastlord forums is that our class is [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > least 2 or are competing with a nearby solo-er. It seems to me that we > are right where we ought to be. I would like to hear your perspective. No, my BL doesn't match my mage for pure DPS -- but he's in the same ballpark and brings slow, mana regen, haste etc. to the table. As a BL with pre-elemental gear I operated as MT in Tier 3 PoP, primary slower in the sewers (Purifying Plant) over the enchanter, mainly because I didn't wait until the mob was under 70% to slow. I also occasionally offtanked those mobs with the druid healing me while the cleric healed the warrior. On my BL I found getting PU groups far easier than getting them on my mage because of all the extras he brought to the table. SignatureArch Convoker Mairelon Snapbang Feral Lord Bosra Snowclaw Lanys T'vyl (Retired) Mairelon, 36th Paladin Silverhand > On my BL I found getting PU groups far easier than getting them on > my mage because of all the extras he brought to the table. This would be the kind of evidence that would get me to concede that beastlords are overpowered and should perhaps be taken down a notch. I still believe that EQ has bigger (albeit perhaps less tractable) systemic problems. :) "Prelgor" <prelgor@aol.com> wrote in news:1121130002.734190.294490 @f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com: >> On my BL I found getting PU groups far easier than getting them on >> my mage because of all the extras he brought to the table. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > still believe that EQ has bigger (albeit perhaps less tractable) > systemic problems. :) I wouldn't use the phrase "overpowered", maybe overly skilled in too many areas? SignatureArch Convoker Mairelon Snapbang Feral Lord Bosra Snowclaw Lanys T'vyl (Retired) Mairelon, 36th Paladin Silverhand > "Prelgor" <prelgor@aol.com> wrote in news:1121130002.734190.294490 > @f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com: [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > I wouldn't use the phrase "overpowered", maybe overly skilled > in too many areas? You say potato... Actually, I agree with you there. It's there high level of effectiveness in many different areas that is the issue. SignatureRumble "Write something worth reading, or do something worth writing." -- Benjamin Franklin > If a ranger gets his first 21% haste item, his DPS goes up 21%, a Hi, Ranger spell nuke/dot DPS + archery specific haste requirements ;) Not to mention heal focii, mana focii, etc, etc ;) Sure you have those issues too; but so do other classes. Ranger is a generalist really, just a weaker one than BL's. > wizard with Improved Damage gets a flat 10% DPS boost, and a monk with > a new weapon can look straight at the damage/delay ratio to compute his > overall DPS boost. A beastlord's DPS is divided among many different > sources (DoT, nuke, melee, pet), so one upgrade has a much smaller > impact for us than for anyone else. But you're focusing solely on DPS - and obviously its not just about DPS. That monk needs AC and HP too, maybe a coin purse and some weight reducing bags, pulling tool clickies/summoning devices, etc ...which means... more upgrades ;) You can't say 'They increase their DPS with one upgrade, but we have to upgrade all these other facets of our class', because they also have to upgrade all these other facets of their classes; mana regen, spell foci, utility tools, hp, ac, resists, etc, etc. Everyone is gear dependant to operate well, and only the real specialists begin to get away from this. Rogues, perhaps. Wizzies still have to sustain their DPS via mana regen, capacity, focii, etc. Damn, rogues are lucky ;) > Anyway, I agree that beastlords are a strong class. For what it's > worth, the consensus on the beastlord forums is that our class is [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > least 2 or are competing with a nearby solo-er. It seems to me that we > are right where we ought to be. I would like to hear your perspective. You're almost entirely self sufficient and can round out any group, so its far easier to get a group; specialists, unlike you, are looking for a partciular *slot* in the group, and cant fill any other role if its already taken. Really, its jealousy partly - EQ is based around competition between classes and Beastlords have a pretty easy life. They do, to a degree, break the EQ dependancy paradigm. Its probably just a matter of persepctive about whether this is a good or bad thing ;) M > You're almost entirely self sufficient and can round out any group, so > its far easier to get a group; specialists, unlike you, are looking > for a partciular *slot* in the group, and cant fill any other role > if its already taken. So, this seems to be the essence of it. A beastlord can replace the shaman or enchanter on Slow duty. We can replace the rogue on DPS duty. We can replace the enchanter on mana regen duty. Heck, somebody box a cleric on over for a backup rez, and let's just take a group of 6 beastlords. :) In other words, when we are called on as "backup", a group isn't giving up enough by taking a beastlord. Contrast this with, say, asking a ranger to tank, which is doable, but widely perceived as sub-optimal. Indeed, beastlords are quite self-sufficient. I can see how they break a model where a cleric, warrior and enchanter form the core of a great group but are each helpless individually. "Prelgor" <prelgor@aol.com> wrote in news:1121183110.935483.146100 @g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com: >> You're almost entirely self sufficient and can round out any group, so >> its far easier to get a group; specialists, unlike you, are looking [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > a model where a cleric, warrior and enchanter form the core of a great > group but are each helpless individually. That's not the model they break. They break the model that strives for a role for as many classes as possible, as the beastlord can effectively all but eliminate the need for several different classes all at once and all by itself in too many scenarios. SignatureRumble "Write something worth reading, or do something worth writing." -- Benjamin Franklin >>Don't know about the marketing angle, but I do agree that BL's in their >>current implementation are part of what's wrong with EQ. [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > sources (DoT, nuke, melee, pet), so one upgrade has a much smaller > impact for us than for anyone else. Except shadowknights, who have an identical spread of DPS sources, with a lower total. The flipside of course, is that if you DO upgrade several areas, you get quite a *serious* dps boost. I currently have ID5 and BA5 on my SK, and frankly, no comment ;) > Anyway, I agree that beastlords are a strong class. For what it's > worth, the consensus on the beastlord forums is that our class is [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > least 2 or are competing with a nearby solo-er. It seems to me that we > are right where we ought to be. I would like to hear your perspective. To be honest, it is my belief that the only thing between your class and a serious nerfing is your low numbers. In a group that has a beastlord, I will usually forgo either a chanter or a shaman in favor of yet more DPS. Historically, nerfs have occurred when one class impinges heavily on the area of another. (one of the key causes for this is a lack of clear class definition in the first place) The famous monk tanking nerf, chanters doing more dps with charmed pets than dps classes, etc. If beastlords were as common as both enchanters and shaman put together, we would see sufficient complaints for Sony to have to get off their collective a.s and nerf you. cheers, James "Lief" <ask.me.for@it.com> wrote in news:dt6Ae.3449$f77.337@newsfe2- gui.ntli.net: >> > I've got a monk and I seem to be outdamaged by rangers, rogues, >> > beastlords, and beserkers. I watch SK's and bards pull at least as [quoted text clipped - 41 lines] > Shaman, SK, Necro all get FD, sometimes the snaring ability of Nec / SK > means their FD is actually more useful. Um, I do? Wow, can you tell me how to activate my FD ability? I'll make a wild assumption that you meant Monk, not shaman? SignatureOn Erollisi Marr in <Sanctuary of Marr> Ancient Graeme Faelban, Barbarian Soothsayer of 70 seasons On Steamfont Graeme, 36 Dwarven Mystic, 24 Sage, Treasure Hunter <Tempest> Aviv, 15 Gnome Brawler, 30 Provisioner "Graeme Faelban" <RichardRapier@netscape.net> wrote in message > > Shaman, SK, Necro all get FD, sometimes the snaring ability of Nec / SK > > means their FD is actually more useful. > > Um, I do? Wow, can you tell me how to activate my FD ability? I'll make > a wild assumption that you meant Monk, not shaman? Yes rechargeable item quest from PoSky (pita quest but, worth it)as you saw in other post, this more for benefit of any who missed that part of thread)). I think you can get FD in a bottle now also? > "Graeme Faelban" <RichardRapier@netscape.net> wrote in message > > > Shaman, SK, Necro all get FD, sometimes the snaring ability of Nec / [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > you saw in other post, this more for benefit of any who missed that > part of thread)). I think you can get FD in a bottle now also? Beats me, have not checked out the new potions yet, been away on vacation. SignatureOn Erollisi Marr in <Sanctuary of Marr> Ancient Graeme Faelban, Barbarian Soothsayer of 70 seasons On Steamfont Graeme, 36 Dwarven Mystic, 24 Sage, Treasure Hunter <Tempest> Aviv, 15 Gnome Brawler, 30 Provisioner |
Enable EMail Alerts
Start New Thread
Reply to this Message