Ranger or Monk?

[Klaq]

So I played P1999 for about a year, and just now starting up again. I have a 40's Ranger and 40's Monk (and various other low-levels). I also have a fungi and about 100k.

My question WAS going to be, which should I focus on equipping (twinking) up, getting to 60, etc.

But, I know everyone will say the Monk. Any arguments for going Ranger? Are they in need at all? The server seems to have a sh!t ton of monks already is all.

If it makes a difference, I mostly solo due to playing odd hours. Thanks for any tips.

[Sajan]

http://i.imgur.com/KPm41F3.jpg

[Lojik]

Might be easier to get some ranger drops in planes due to less competition, and rangers get some nice sky items. Not sure how in demand tracking will be in Velious but tbh I don't think it makes it worth it to roll a ranger, unless you really like the class. A rangers life will be much easier come velious though with xp penalty removed and panic animal.

[SamwiseRed]

http://i.imgur.com/KPm41F3.jpg

lol

[Glasken]

http://i.imgur.com/KPm41F3.jpg

I lul'd very hard. Thanks for posting =)

[Klaq]

Thanks for the ideas. I guess I'll be going with my Monk (for now anyway, since the Ranger has the class penalty until Velious). Besides, the chart (thanks Sajan) makes some excellent points ;)

[Kylenorr]

I sat and laughed out loud at my computer while reading that chart.

[Rupertox]

If you know / learn how to play a Monk correctly, you will love that class, more Than anything

[gotrocks]

rofl, love the 'hi yendor!' part.

'You're like a weak monk'

[Ephirith]

The server seems to have a sh!t ton of monks already is all.

It's always fun to show up at LCY and the group is like a shaman and four monks.

Then you go to the zoneline and it looks something like this:

http://i.imgur.com/WfVUtuZ.jpg

[Ele]

Love the flow chart.

[citizen1080]

Love the flow chart.

^

[Thulack]

As a ranger the chart made me have a good chuckle and it's pretty accurate.

[danceparty]

ranger flow chart. best ever omg.

[Lanuven]

Sajan's post was epic!

[Cyph]

Heh, funny post Sajan ;)

I've grouped with a number of rangers lately, all whom have been twinked to some degree and I concur that when twinked they are ok. If you're starting fresh then perhaps roll a Monk as you can 1) pull effectively, and b) do nice damage.

[webrunner5]

Monks will be pretty much over the top in Velious. Not that they are that far behind now. But you have to be good at pulling and know all the zones. Not something most people are great at. But Rangers in Velious tend to be more of a solo class than even here now. Mobs will hit just WAY too hard for a Ranger to tank. A Monk can tank in Velious. Not the number one choice, but hey.

In Velious a Ranger pretty much is a Arrow Shooter and a fear animal type killer. Gets pretty damn boring. But with track can find what they need versus running all over hell as another class looking for stuff to kill in their range. Quests are easy as hell for a Ranger because of the Tracking also. If you don't get hit much a Ranger is pretty cheap to equip. Monk really needs to be a Iksar. Free fungi at high levels.

I guess you could get both of them up level wise. Lot of people have 2 or 3 60's if you put your mind to it.

[Orotiagito]

LOLOLOL @ Flow chart

Love the flow chart.
Fellow programmer! =

[fadetree]

People play Rangers *because* it's hard. Any fool can play a Monk. It takes a special kind of fool to play a Ranger to 60.

[Rupertox]

A Monk isnt that easy Man, i can tell you that ia hardest than a ranger, if you want to be a good Monk, of course.

[koros]

Lol no it's not.

[Ryba]

The only thing difficult about classic EQ was putting in the time. There is no such thing as a hard class to play, just different amounts of your free time getting consumed. Either way, you press 3 buttons and hope the random number generator is feeling benevolent today.

Rocket surgery, amirite

But only one class in classic has no unique role whatsoever, and it is one of your options. And it isn't the monk.

[Rupertox]

Or The only thing difficult about classic EQ was putting in the time. There is no such thing as a hard class to play, just different amounts of your free time getting consumed. Either way, you press 3 buttons and hope the random number generator is feeling benevolent today.

Rocket surgery, amirite

But only one class in classic has no unique role whatsoever, and it is one of your options. And it isn't the monk.


Lol here is a guy that doesnt know how to Play a Monk.

A Monk well played can PULL whatever, or about whatever, same as can drag whatever from wherever, like from example, kING camp Cr in sebilis, trust me, a good Monk makes diff.

[Versch]

Might be easier to get some ranger drops in planes due to less competition, and rangers get some nice sky items.

This right here. Always thought rangers got some of the best Sky quest items. That cloak is (relatively) easy to get and awesome.

[fadetree]

Playing any character really well takes some doing. But, its more noticeable with some classes. In my opinion, Rangers are 'harder' in two senses :
1. The exp penalty and lack of groups make it difficult to keep going. When you see a ranger > 55 you know that person has some toughness and resourcefulness. Or masochism, take your pick.
2. Rangers don't have a standard role in groups, or a particular unique mechanic like FD. You can be very noticeably good, but you really have to know the class and use ALL of its capabilities in creative ways.

[YendorLootmonkey]

Yendor doesn't snare diligently?

If "diligently" means re-snaring when the mob starts running because the group's bard overwrote my snare with their stupid 18-second snare song and we took longer than 18 seconds to kill it because they added me instead of a rogue or monk.... then, no.

[Tenlaar]

If "diligently" means re-snaring when the mob starts running because the group's bard overwrote my snare with their stupid 18-second snare song and we took longer than 18 seconds to kill it because they added me instead of a rogue or monk.... then, no.

This made me feel so bad for rangers. I should try to group with one tonight.

[mtb tripper]

id go ranger specifically for the uniqueness

[webrunner5]

I would wait till Velious comes out to roll a Ranger. Without the STUPID XP penalty and with fear animal they will be easy to level.

There is NOT going to be that many level 50 thru 60 areas for people to fight or level in at the start. TMO, FE, BDA with have them tied up for 6 months or more.

So, why not get one at say level 25 or 30 and start there. A hell of a lot more zones to play in.

[Rupertox]

Im talking about playing the character, not about winning exp, by the way, Human Monk 20% exp penalti, iksar Monk 44%....

[Cyph]

My suggestion is roll both and see which you prefer. I've grouped with plenty of both and they've worked well. In fact, regardless what class you play, I believe that any class played well is worth its weight. A ranger can deal decent damage as well as being better placed to provide root/snare whilst a monk can also deal damage as well as pull/FD.

[Pan]

Having played a ranger on live (exclusively as main) from release until L85, three things come to mind.

1) The Kunark era is the absolute nadir of the power curve for the class.
2) Playing the class well is a lot tougher than others (monk, shaman here). The ranger toolkit has incredible breadth and there a whole lot of potentially gamechanging skills that not all rangers seem to have/get.
3) A well-played ranger brings TONS to the table...but you're most likely to notice what's missing once he/she leaves the group rather than perceive what's going on in real time. A good ranger is like grease in the cogs.

It's not easymode and it's pretty nuanced.

And finally...if, at the end of the day, you end up with a 'toon that's nothing more than a weak monk, you need to re-roll. You're just doing it wrong.

[webrunner5]

And finally...if, at the end of the day, you end up with a 'toon that's nothing more than a weak monk, you need to re-roll. You're just doing it wrong.

A Ranger IS a weak Monk lol. They are NEVER going to be a Monk DPS wise. They are pretty close to a Warrior DPS wise and really not that. I am not knocking a Ranger, but they are what they are.

I play one on live still. And a Ranger is, even in this day and age, and 10,000 AA"s, still is the worse melee in the game. And the worse Tank. Even a Bard is a better Tank than them now, and that is saying something. The devs have never got it right and never will with them. They are the Redheaded Stepchild of EQ. :D

[Pan]

A Ranger IS a weak Monk lol. They are NEVER going to be a Monk DPS wise. They are pretty close to a Warrior DPS wise and really not that. I am not knocking a Ranger, but they are what they are.

I play one on live still. And a Ranger is, even in this day and age, and 10,000 AA"s, still is the worse melee in the game. And the worse Tank. Even a Bard is a better Tank than them now, and that is saying something. The devs have never got it right and never will with them. They are the Redheaded Stepchild of EQ. :D

If dps/tanking is all you want to talk about, you're right...and you support my final point very, very well.

[fadetree]

Yah, the unperceived Irony is strong with that one. I agree with Pan completely, also having played a ranger main from release to L75.

[webrunner5]

Oh come on. I like Rangers. I have one on every EQ game I play. But no one is going to break up a group because THE RANGER left. They just don't bring anything to the table worth really inviting one. Or going, ahh shit bob the ranger is leaving. Plz, Plz stay.

They are pretty much a solo class and that is it. Like I have said before, sort of a cat and mouse class. Neat, but just not needed unless you want a Tracker.

[Ciroco]

I play one on live still. And a Ranger is, even in this day and age, and 10,000 AA"s, still is the worse melee in the game. And the worse Tank. Even a Bard is a better Tank than them now, and that is saying something. The devs have never got it right and never will with them. They are the Redheaded Stepchild of EQ. :D

I'll admit I haven't played on Live since 2008, but I'm surprised by your comments because at that time Rangers were becoming more and more powerful with each expansion. I tanked for most of my groups and parsed on top for a couple of raid fights.

[Ciroco]

They are pretty much a solo class and that is it. Like I have said before, sort of a cat and mouse class. Neat, but just not needed unless you want a Tracker.

...What exactly do Rangers solo effectively?

[K|mm Barely]

Play what's most fun to you even if it's masochistic.

[deneauth]

I like playing rangers because of their ability to track and their utility in groups, in an out door zone you can't go wrong with harmony. Works in Fear and Hate too. Soloing Allizewsaur in OOT on my 60 ranger right now so they do have solo ability. Quillmane cloaks, Hunter/Forager cycle in TT for farming if you are into that sort of thing, and comic relief haha!

[webrunner5]

...What exactly do Rangers solo effectively?

Animals, just like a Druid does. Bow Kiting now and Fear kiting when Velious comes out.

Now, in Kunark, as a Ranger, you need to root or snare kite a mob down to like 60% with arrows then engage them Melee, snare and they turn at like 18%. So you only really get hit like 40% of the mobs health.

In Velious you just snare, fear animal, and Melee or shoot them in the ass with arrows when they run. Or Snare kite normal mobs like above in Kunark.

Either way it is a SLOW process and takes a lot of time and a shitpot full of arrows lol. On live or EQmac you get the AA Endless Quiver so you pretty much never run out of arrows and you only need one killer damage arrow. But here you can get the Tolan's Bracer but arrows suck damage wise. But a giant help non the less.

A Ranger is a pretty cool class solo. With Harmony easy to pull mobs outdoors. They just don't work out well in groups sad to say.

[webrunner5]

I'll admit I haven't played on Live since 2008, but I'm surprised by your comments because at that time Rangers were becoming more and more powerful with each expansion. I tanked for most of my groups and parsed on top for a couple of raid fights.

To address this statement the last 2 expansions have upped the HP, Damage that mobs do now are through the roof. Almost impossible to solo anything now. Like 3 expansions ago a Mage COULD solo but even that isn't happening now.

So a Ranger is just not able to survive anymore Tanking. Not a monk anymore either. I have pretty much stopped playing the 90 through 100 level zones because I like to solo and that ain't happening now. Mobs are just WAY over the top.

And now you have to do 50 Million Quests to even get into the high end zones. Almost impossible Solo.

[Ciroco]

Yeah, that's not what I consider effective.

Love being a Ranger, but "solo class" isn't one of the phrases I'd used to describe them.

[Clark]

Monk

[koros]

Rangers suck solo at the moment... one of the absolute worst solo classes in terms of kills/hour. But they rock in groups, no idea why you'd claim otherwise, especially so outdoors. I handled root CCing 5 mobs at a time while stuff was repopping for a total of 10 mobs in a KC basement group with no chanter and a dead cleric (no druid or sham either) last night. We made it no problem. Only a pally would have been able to pull off a similar feat and live (or maybe a good necro).

A ranger with clarity can put out near monk DPS, snap aggro, root CC, cast regrowth, tank well enough for almost all group content, pull outdoors, etc. This bs about rangers sucking in groups is well, bs.

[kaev]

Rangers suck solo at the moment... one of the absolute worst solo classes in terms of kills/hour. But they rock in groups, no idea why you'd claim otherwise, especially so outdoors. I handled root CCing 5 mobs at a time while stuff was repopping for a total of 10 mobs in a KC basement group with no chanter and a dead cleric (no druid or sham either) last night. We made it no problem. Only a pally would have been able to pull off a similar feat and live (or maybe a good necro).

A ranger with clarity can put out near monk DPS, snap aggro, root CC, cast regrowth, tank well enough for almost all group content, pull outdoors, etc. This bs about rangers sucking in groups is well, bs.

Seriously now, you people all need to solo a Paladin (or for the true masochist, a Warrior) at 40+ before announcing that class Xxx sucks at solo. Not being a demi-god solo (Enchanter, Necro, Druid) is not the same as sucks at solo. There are classes that define sucks at solo, and Ranger is not one of them.

But I agree, a well-played Ranger is great to have in a group.

[koros]

At 55, I have insane downtown soloing level 40ish dogs in KC if slow doesn't proc quickly. Warriors at least take way less damage, can heal with bloodpoints (and at 55 can solo almost non-stop), and Paladins also take way less damage for only a marginal dps fallout, and have better healing spells. Trust me.

Pre 50, rangers do solo alright. But I'd say that we're worse than any class but rogue after 50 in terms of potential kills/hr for xp.

[fadetree]

its true. This is primarily why I am waiting for Velious at 52. Plus it'll be fun not being 60 when vel drops.

[webrunner5]

[QUOTE=koros; A ranger with clarity can put out near monk DPS, snap aggro, root CC, cast regrowth, tank well enough for almost all group content, pull outdoors, etc. This bs about rangers sucking in groups is well, bs.[/QUOTE]

You are on Drugs if you think a Ranger can nearly out damage a Monk. They can't out damage a Warrior. Warriors are really not made to DPS like hell. Just take hits, hold agro.

There is a REASON nobody wants them. I have one myself. Good luck getting into a group or even soloing over 50. Hell even over level 30 is not easy.

[phacemeltar]

if youre playing on this server, i would recommend monk. all you get as a ranger is hate from players due to the xp penalty (which is in place for a reason), unless you can find a static group.

as far as the better class, i would say ranger hands-down. FD is great sometimes, but tends to get the cleric killed in a group. snare is imo the best in-game mechanic, plus forage and track make you a viable asset to lots of groups. Also if u can manage to make it to level 39 you can cast SoW.

my ranger has used arbitors sword and fbss since level 20 and the dps is noticeable when casting between swings, according to many groups ive had. Also dpsing with arrows/nukes is fun as hell, even though its broken until velious.

[fadetree]

? I can out-damage a warrior, and knights too for that matter. If you can't you might be doing some things less than optimally.

[Lanuven]

You are on Drugs if you think a Ranger can nearly out damage a Monk. They can't out damage a Warrior. Warriors are really not made to DPS like hell. Just take hits, hold agro.

There is a REASON nobody wants them. I have one myself. Good luck getting into a group or even soloing over 50. Hell even over level 30 is not easy.

Id sure like to see your comparison of these classes against each other with "on par" gear. You do realize rangers have spells that you cant parse unless you are the ranger right ?

Are you comparing epic monk to non-epic ranger? Then yeah, a ranger without 41% haste isnt going to keep up. Ive seen some of the weps warriors use in pickup groups and they are far from "good dps" weapons. 9/20 and 8/22 ( sarnak warhammer and yak skimmy) are the most popular from what I've seen. Then take into effect the DS the ranger should be casting if no one else is. Your not seeing the big picture of the ranger class. They don't do 1 or two things very well, they do multiple things about average. Utility class means just that.

[Tecmos Deception]

? I can out-damage a warrior, and knights too for that matter. If you can't you might be doing some things less than optimally.

Too many people see rangers on a parse that someone posts for a 25-second raid kill and think their damage is shitty overall. They totally neglect to consider the lower damage of pure melee who aren't under the effects of a disc for the whole parse, rangers dealing damage with procs and spells, etc.

[Stinkum]

Rangers can dish out pretty respectable DPS, track better than anyone in the game, root park adds like a champ, single pull outdoors, DS, and snare runners. Flame lick is an extremely OP snap aggro spell, and even untwinked Rangers can tank group content pretty well if you have a slower.

The problem is the vast majority of players in-game want specialists: specialist tanks and specialist DPS classes. Not generalists with moderate DPS. Add to that the hybrid penalty stigma, and the fact that at any given time there's a million and a half Monks asking to fill a group's last DPS slot, and you have a shitload of permanently LFG Rangers.

[webrunner5]

Yeah and that is why EVERYONE on the server is just killing them selves to find a Ranger to join their group. You people are really drinking the Kool Aide. :p

[Tecmos Deception]

The hell are you talking about, web?

[koros]

You're the one who's high on something. Rangers can cheaply get a weapon with a better damage than almost any war combo and toss out an additional 10 dps sustained with CoF. More with Calefaction 59+.

[Stinkum]

I often don't know what the hell web is talking about.

[koros]

I often don't know what the hell web is talking about.

I don't think anyone does.

[Champion_Standing]

The hell are you talking about, web?

Kool Aid

[myriverse]

Yeah and that is why EVERYONE on the server is just killing them selves to find a Ranger to join their group. You people are really drinking the Kool Aide. :p
They certainly aren't using Warriors for DPS, that's for sure.

[fadetree]

Web, you're right about the lack of desire for rangers in groups, but you are very wrong about ranger dps and a few other issues. As are, it seems, most people.

[webrunner5]

I am not saying again I hate Rangers. I have one on here, EQMac. Sleeper and Live. I know what they can do. I had a dual epic one one live in 2001.

They just are gimped as hell on here and you guys know it. Without AA's they sort of suck. Endless Quiver AA made a hell of a difference on them. But that isn't happening here. I never turn one down on here in a group but they are not the top choice anyone is looking for either.

Being a Ranger or a Wizard is a sucky way to go on this server. And you are not ever going to tell me as a assist melee in a group they are going to be a BIG TIME dps machine. They will close to a Warrior DPS and that is that. Not going to cast damage spells and crap. Will snare and that is it mostly on mobs. Which is THEIR job to do.

[Lojik]

Being a Ranger or a Wizard is a sucky way to go on this server..

wat

[Lanuven]

I am not saying again I hate Rangers. I have one on here, EQMac. Sleeper and Live. I know what they can do. I had a dual epic one one live in 2001.

They just are gimped as hell on here and you guys know it. Without AA's they sort of suck. Endless Quiver AA made a hell of a difference on them. But that isn't happening here. I never turn one down on here in a group but they are not the top choice anyone is looking for either.

Being a Ranger or a Wizard is a sucky way to go on this server. And you are not ever going to tell me as a assist melee in a group they are going to be a BIG TIME dps machine. They will close to a Warrior DPS and that is that. Not going to cast damage spells and crap. Will snare and that is it mostly on mobs. Which is THEIR job to do.

I've come to realize now from your post that you really have no idea what you're talking about. First off stop comparing rangers from live to other classes based on AA's. We are a Kunark era server and everything else is beyond the point I think you are trying to make.

Short and sweet, rangers do as much dps as warriors or monks with equivalent gear, plus have beneficial spells to enhance the group overall. You don't invite a ranger to the group because you want the best dps, or the best cc, you invite the ranger to balance the shitty group makeup you already have and he/she balances it out.

[webrunner5]

You are crazy as hell to think a Ranger is going to do as much DPS as a Monk. Good God Man.

[spoils]

I've come to realize now from your post that you really have no idea what you're talking about. First off stop comparing rangers from live to other classes based on AA's. We are a Kunark era server and everything else is beyond the point I think you are trying to make.

Short and sweet, rangers do as much dps as warriors or monks with equivalent gear, plus have beneficial spells to enhance the group overall. You don't invite a ranger to the group because you want the best dps, or the best cc, you invite the ranger to balance the shitty group makeup you already have and he/she balances it out.

must be comparing a vp geared tmo ranger to a 45 <BDATakenDivinity> monk

[fadetree]

I agree with web on this one; equally geared, a ranger is not going to consistently outdamage a monk unless the monk is bad. Then again, monks can't snare, DS, heal, or root, so it evens out.

[dancingclown22]

If it makes a difference, I mostly solo due to playing odd hours. Thanks for any tips.

If you are mostly soloing, why bother with either of those classes?

[bigsykedaddy]

Monks are WAY better than Rangers... Rangers are the worst class on this server.

[Klaq]

If you are mostly soloing, why bother with either of those classes?

Because its fun, and both of them (well the Monk anyway) are very different than what I played on live (Chanter, Druid).

So I've gone with the Monk, and he seems to be able to solo quite well. Will probably mess with the Ranger more post-Velious.

Now I'm working on the Monk's epic - got my purple headband (the old fashioned way), the Raster Idol, the Red Sash, and now trying to find someone who can sell loot rights or mq for Targin's drop in SolB (Code of Zan Fi). Then I'll have the first robe.

Then I'll need the pipes to get my RotWF. :/

[webrunner5]

Just to piss you guys off I am going to start playing my Ranger again. :D I have seen the light.

I REALLY do like a Ranger, really. They do bring a lot to the table both solo and grouped.