new player SK, Iksar or DE?

[bulleteer]

Ok so I never really played much old EQ, I played until 14 on a friends account back in 2000 but that's it.

I'm going to play an SK and my choices are down to Iksar or Dark elf. Can anyone give me a good breakdown of the trade offs?

Also what starting stats do I pump?

[gotrocks]

Iksar is the superior choice by far.

Essentially any class that can be an iksar is best as an iksar come velious, and generally on par with other races for that class in kunark.

Problem is you're eating a 68% xp penalty as an iksar sk, which is fucking BrutAl in every sense of the word.

If you're up to punishing yourself, and want to be among that special class of uber badasses who pick the lizardfolk, go iksar.

[pallius]

+1 to what gotrocks said

[Nogdar]

Iksar is somewhat more min/max and more exp intensive.
Just pick the race which you think is cooler. Or be smart and do Ogre! ;)

[Vega]

Essentially any class that can be an iksar is best as an iksar come velious, and generally on par with other races for that class in kunark.

I'd argue about shaman with the first sentence, as well as plate classes with the second. But he's right, if you're willing to tough it out till Velious, you can't go wrong with an Iksar SK. Greenmist eventually is a pretty big argument for aswell.

[Gustoo]

Any class that can be an ogre is better off an ogre. So, monks and necros are best as iksars.

But iksar SK way better than DE sk, a close second to ogre.

[Splorf22]

Ogre is the best SK in my opinion. Ogre Shamans (slowed mob = 1 bash every 30 seconds, oh god) and warriors (no stuns = 5% extra dps/aggro) are very good of course, but Ogre SKs are just on another level. Stun immunity oscillates from 'very convenient' while you are casting aggro spells to 'lifesaving' when you are trying to FD with 4 mobs on you.

Iksars will be great in Velious with both AC and Regen bonuses, and have the additional advantage of not looking dumb like ogres. Trolls will have regen only but not AC, and Humans, Erudites, and Dark Elves will have nothing useful but at least they'll finally cap stamina and have comparable HP to Ogres and Trolls.

Realistically though, I can't think of a good reason to play a Shadowknight over a Monk until monk AC is finally nerfed in PoP. Monks actually tank better than SKs, do way, way more damage, can hold aggro decently with the adamantite club if they choose, have a much easier epic, and can FD instantly.

[Berendar]

Realistically though, I can't think of a good reason to play a Shadowknight over a Monk until monk AC is finally nerfed in PoP. Monks actually tank better than SKs, do way, way more damage, can hold aggro decently with the adamantite club if they choose, have a much easier epic, and can FD instantly.

That's interesting. I've been looking at playing a tanky type for when I just feel like hitting things in the face without too many spell inductions and buffs to worry about.

Monk and SK were the options as I like the flavour of both and I just assumed the SK would be more tanky. Do your comments mostly relate to end game or is it noticable leveling up as well?

[Nogdar]

Realistically though, I can't think of a good reason to play a Shadowknight over a Monk until monk AC is finally nerfed in PoP. Monks actually tank better than SKs, do way, way more damage, can hold aggro decently with the adamantite club if they choose, have a much easier epic, and can FD instantly.

I can see why you would say that, and I'll agree that monks are totally overpowered, being comparably good tanks and with a far superior DPS. It's fair to assume that besides far superior DPS, with block, they have superior damage mitigation too.

However, I think saying they render SKs useless is going a stretch too far:

1. I believe SKs have more total HPs than monks. This is capital for CHs.

2. While Mend certainly is worth a shitload of HPs at max lvl & well geared, it hardly compares to the amounts of HPs a 60 SK full mana/under C2 can tap between vampiric embrace, vampiric curse and lifetaps, + possibly some nice proc (Zealot Incarnadine Sword, or Epic) + a rune spell; IMO.

Let's assume a SK is Ogre/Troll, not even DE or some smarter guy, and with average gear, it's safe to say he has 2000+ mana (my ogre is 58 and almost at 2000). On a rough pull, let's assume you keep 500 mana for aggro purposes (DC being 10 and SV 40, 500 is large). That means you got 1500+ mana to spend in lifetaps when shit happens. Vampiric Curse is 144 mana and will net you 189 hps, let's assume you get the time to cast it twice on a rough fight, 288 mana and so 378 HPs earned already. 1500-288 = 1212 spare mana to spend on Drain Spirit, the lvl 60 lifetap spell. That's enough to cast 6.4 times the spell, so assuming you had C2 when you started the fight, we can say you could cast up to 7. Drain Spirit heals for 226 hps. 226 x 7 = 1582 hps earned through direct lifetaps.

So we're at 1582 + 378 = 1960 HPs. That's without any procs accounted for, which will easily net you 500+ more HPs if epicce'd, and vampiric embrace of course.

Mend doesn't come anywhere close to healing that much, and is on a 6 minutes cooldown. All those tapped hitpoints are saved mana for the healer in a rough pull.

3. SKs have spells. Monks don't. From a "Is this class fun to play?" perspective, SKs are more competitive IMO.

4. Monks can't snare, rune or cast other utility spells the SK brings to the table (locate corpse, resist cold, what have you.)

So, I could be wrong and obviously since I play a SK I'm biased, but I objectively think saying there's no point to play a SK is pushing it too far. I love my SK and I think they're absolutely competitive tanks, even in raid situations - especially if warrior discs are down, although it's obviously in group content that SKs and pallies shine whereas warriors shine in raids.

[kaev]

Are you a munchkin?
Yes: the only possible reason not to play an Ogre is to play an Iksar
No: play whatever the hell you want

[big league chew]

i can punch large bats to death on a naked level 4 druid
does any pve really matter?

[Splorf22]

Dagorn, from a fun factor perspective I like hybrids. I just got a chance to play a 60 paladin in HS and like Shadowknights they have a lot of tricks they can pull. If they just got defensive or evasive to make them viable raid tanks I would be totally down to play one.

That being said, I think you are totally underestimating the OP factor of monks. Nlaar (DE SK) and Bugen (Iksar Monk) did an AC test once; their conclusion was that monk block and SK hps just about canceled out with complete heal. If you check out Daltheb's videos you can see that both he and Perun regularly tanked Trakanon:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ap5xiEQcMdY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QWX2adECIk8

Some of that is whirlwind disc of course. So basically in Kunark, monks can tank almost anything, do almost as much DPS as rogues, and are the best pullers (plus they have an easy epic!) In Velious high-end monks are going to be even more sick when the hit the AC cap with 60AC legs off of the Avatar of War and tons of ALL/ALL gear from NTOV and pick up 16/19 weapons from Vulak. They won't be main tanking stuff, but then neither will Shadowknights.