Continue shaman or play bard?

[Roth]

I have an 18 shaman, but I rerolled a bard planning to take it to teal... level 5. I've decided at this point not to go to teal and just stay green and needing some help making a decision. I have experience playing a shaman but have never played a bard before.

-How much demand will there be for shamans in groups vs bards?(don't sugarcoat answer please) It seems like there are way more shamans and druids on this server than there are bards, and I always consider bards to be pretty useful.

-Does the lack of mana song on green hurt bards significantly?

-Are bards annoying to play at later levels?


Thanks in advance.

[Khorza]

Hard to say, the shaman would probably have a slightly easier time finding a group but that's mostly because people don't quite realize how subpar shamans are pre-Kunark.

Bards are in pretty good shape right now. It might be hard to find CC since less people are playing Enchanters due to some of the changes, and it can be hard to find a puller since a lot of those classes are unpopular atm (people waiting for Iksar to roll Monks, etc).

Of course the main drawback of bards is the exp penalty, and it'll be up to the group to decide if you're going to contribute enough to be worth that penalty. So the group will need to be in a pretty obvious need of a puller and/or CC.

People are a lot more likely to add a shaman "for the hell of it" since they'll only come with a 10-20% exp penalty depending on their race, and people feel safer with the extra buffs and heals. But honestly you just want a cleric in vanilla EQ.

-Are bards annoying to play at later levels?

This is a super preference thing that no one can answer for you. Song twisting has always been annoying to me and I've never been able to get into it. However, shamans have a very similar thing going on at 60 once you get your spells, since you're always losing efficiency any time you're not casting something. Bard is pretty much always a super active class, but Shamans become just about as active at the high end.

[Viyro]

Play what you find fun. Give the bard a real chance (20+). If you find one more fun then the other play it.

I'd suggest googling some footage and / or look up some vods on twitch of a person playing a bard and see if its something you'd enjoy. Its a much more active game style then Shaman if that's your question. (Pulling, cc, instrument swapping etc)

[Baler]

Shaman level rather slowly in classic. Come kunark is when they pick up speed.

note that bard has a -40% exp penalty till 2001 jan patch.

[Swish]

You'll die a lot on the bard if you choose to play one, song aggro is going to get you killed... but turn off songs on incoming and you can mitigate that somewhat <3

[turbosilk]

Bards are higher value end game and an active class if you are an active player.

[korzax]

Hand breaking monotony is in store for those that wish to play a bard.

[Waedawen]

that's mostly because people don't quite realize how subpar shamans are pre-Kunark.


what a dreadfully misinformed thing to say and pass off as truth.

[Lordess]

I played a bard up to 40 on Blue and I always just felt like a sub par enchanter; rerolled an enchanter and didn’t regret it one bit. Bards are good pullers, but it’s not like you’re ever going to get fade AA and monks have FD so I’d say bard pulling is niche at best. Shaman can solo and will always be a welcome addition to groups with their ability to haste and slow (the latter being almost necessary in Kunark+ when mobs start to hit really damn hard). Personally I’d go Shaman. Easier to level, no annoying song twisting (carpal tunnel anyone?), and great buffs/debuffs that are at least on par with bard songs, if not better (bard slow caps out at 35% and shaman is 70%).

Edit: Also I remember when I got mana song a lot of groups would want me to just stand next to the casters the whole time since the range is abysmal. Very exciting gameplay. On raids I remember seeing bards grouped with 5 clerics and then just standing their playing mana song the whole time. I think if you want to play bard you have to be very passionate about the class or it’s going to be very boring for you.

[Swish]

no annoying song twisting (carpal tunnel anyone?)

It is annoying with the twisting, but part of the charm <3

[galahad1st]

I played a bard to mid 50s on blue. I definitely got tired of the constant song twisting in raiding situations. I rerolled enchanter and liked it much more than bard since the CC aspect of bard was what I really liked.

Being able to kill 25 mobs at once was pretty cool. Definitely ruined my expectations for what good exp is. I got almost a whole level on one pull at ~30 in Overthere in about 20-25 minutes.

Currently level 16 shaman and it's slow and painful. Missing a lot of the shaman kit until 24 with regen and cannibalize. Then 34 is when shaman really pops off with companion spirit and a host of other useful spells.

[Tecmos Deception]

I played a bard to mid 50s on blue. I definitely got tired of the constant song twisting in raiding situations. I rerolled enchanter and liked it much more than bard since the CC aspect of bard was what I really liked.

Being able to kill 25 mobs at once was pretty cool. Definitely ruined my expectations for what good exp is. I got almost a whole level on one pull at ~30 in Overthere in about 20-25 minutes.

Currently level 16 shaman and it's slow and painful. Missing a lot of the shaman kit until 24 with regen and cannibalize. Then 34 is when shaman really pops off with companion spirit and a host of other useful spells.

You poor, new bards who had to deal with low-hp aggro changes and 25-mob aoe caps. You have no idea what fast bard aoe is! :D

Sham is definitely a grind up into the 20s. Sham races have shitty wisdom so you're always like one resist away while soloing from having to run to the zoneline or die. In groups few of your buffs make much of a difference at low levels, you aren't being mana efficient unless you heal with inner fire up until 19+, your awesomest ability at high levels (slow) is awful until the 20s and still not great at that point, etc. But shamans get by and only get stronger as 24 and 34 come. Eventually they're basically uber when solo, duo, trio, or in groups, and while their role in raids isn't flashy, their buffs are phenomenal (melee with love you) and heals and malo and root CC and slows don't hurt either.

I played a bard on blue as well and the comments here are pretty accurate imo. You're powerful and versatile, but not fully understood by most people and so sometimes shunned from groups while they continue to look for an enchanter or shaman or a dedicated tank or dps. Twisting can either annoy the hell out of you or become second nature depending on the person I think. Most people don't expect you to tryhard 4-song twists or to pulse CCC instead of just leaving it autorepeating. You're a great puller, which makes your life even busier. Your resist songs are absolutely essential in raids.

[Keza]

Well shamans and bards are both amazing in groups and both can solo effectively, so it's more a preference of how you want to play. *Although ultimately bards are pullers/buffbots while shamans are gods. But again, depends on if you plan on soloing things with puppet strings.

Bard is a class I've always wanted to play but never bothered with because the meta seems annoying. I'm the kind of person who can't stand half-assing it, but bards are so tedious that I'd be fine if any bards I'm with were slacking a bit. Twisting is demanding but it's fun, swapping weapons/instruments constantly however is just annoying. I can't deal with that without hotbuttons. FFXI's bard seems heavily inspired by EQ's but isn't expected to melee. Imagine EQ's bard but with buffs lasting a couple minutes. They pull, CC and buff their group accordingly with a short-range pbaoe songs, but most importantly in FFXI you can bind equipment swaps and spells into the same hotbutton rather than needing to manually swap constantly. EQ bards being fun are more of an ideal than a reality to me. Like people who want to theoretically be a ranger but don't want to be useless.

As far as later levels it's basically just pulling. Does anyone expect a bard to melee in groups when people are in kunark/velious gear? In raids you're just a resist buffbot afaik.

[Deathrydar]

I must be losing my mind. Who the hell wouldn't invite a Bard to a group? What's going on out here these days?

[galahad1st]

You poor, new bards who had to deal with low-hp aggro changes and 25-mob aoe caps. You have no idea what fast bard aoe is! :D

Sham is definitely a grind up into the 20s. Sham races have shitty wisdom so you're always like one resist away while soloing from having to run to the zoneline or die. In groups few of your buffs make much of a difference at low levels, you aren't being mana efficient unless you heal with inner fire up until 19+, your awesomest ability at high levels (slow) is awful until the 20s and still not great at that point, etc. But shamans get by and only get stronger as 24 and 34 come. Eventually they're basically uber when solo, duo, trio, or in groups, and while their role in raids isn't flashy, their buffs are phenomenal (melee with love you) and heals and malo and root CC and slows don't hurt either.

I played a bard on blue as well and the comments here are pretty accurate imo. You're powerful and versatile, but not fully understood by most people and so sometimes shunned from groups while they continue to look for an enchanter or shaman or a dedicated tank or dps. Twisting can either annoy the hell out of you or become second nature depending on the person I think. Most people don't expect you to tryhard 4-song twists or to pulse CCC instead of just leaving it autorepeating. You're a great puller, which makes your life even busier. Your resist songs are absolutely essential in raids.

I agree with your assessment of bards and (from what I've seen so far) shamans.

Also, senpai noticed me! Your enchanter videos were the reason I re-rolled an ENC and played until 54. I learned so much from you. I would really appreciate some videos of your green journey. I loved the relaxed, calming commentary style so much!

[galahad1st]

Twisting is demanding but it's fun, swapping weapons/instruments constantly however is just annoying. I can't deal with that without hotbuttons.

DuxaUI was a life saver for swapping weapons/instruments. I wouldn't play a bard without it.

[Tecmos Deception]

I agree with your assessment of bards and (from what I've seen so far) shamans.

Also, senpai noticed me! Your enchanter videos were the reason I re-rolled an ENC and played until 54. I learned so much from you. I would really appreciate some videos of your green journey. I loved the relaxed, calming commentary style so much!

Id love to do some videos once my sham gets a few more.levels. Videos of him before 24 would be like videos of a level 8 chanter though imo, haha

[oldhead]

It might be hard to find CC since less people are playing Enchanters due to some of the changes,

what changes with enc???

[Siege]

Both classes require a lot of busywork. Bard with song twisting, and shaman with rank 1 Canni dancing (brutal at higher levels), keeping track of buffs on a per-person basis (this can be a big pain in the ass in a full group, especially with people rotating in and out), slowing/debuffing mobs, managing pet, etc. If you're in the main heal slot, you need to do all of these things on top of staring at and filling HP bars. You basically don't have a moment's rest. Don't go back to shaman thinking you'll get a break on the button-pressing end.

[pink grapefruit]

Bard is easily best class in the game, and twisting is a LOT less annoying than keeping track of everyone's buffs as a shaman. The limited UI is maybe a dealbreaker though, unless playing with inventory open is something you can put up wiith. Bards have a lot of buttons to press and if 4 of your 6 hotkey spaces are taken up by inventory/weapon slots you're pretty limited. How you gonna track and forage and assist and spam your /group roleplay macros??

Anyway you should play a bard in spite of these limitations. Bard class best class. Make sure you pick a good deity though. An agnostic bard is an rpg sin :O

[NegaStoat]

Bard is easily best class in the game, and twisting is a LOT less annoying than keeping track of everyone's buffs as a shaman. The limited UI is maybe a dealbreaker though, unless playing with inventory open is something you can put up wiith. Bards have a lot of buttons to press and if 4 of your 6 hotkey spaces are taken up by inventory/weapon slots you're pretty limited. How you gonna track and forage and assist and spam your /group roleplay macros??

Anyway you should play a bard in spite of these limitations. Bard class best class. Make sure you pick a good deity though. An agnostic bard is an rpg sin :O

Bards can pick Rallos Zek. The Imbued cultural armor has all the str / sta in dropable gear that a wimpy wood elf (or other bard race) could ever want. Cha comes from swappable jewelry anyway. Plus you get the perk of role playing a Skald and having Barbarians everywhere think you're pretty cool.

[Jimjam]

RZ is a decent neutral race, makes sense for velious where you start to get really involved in actual wars.

Personally I went for Mith Marr as I think this is the kind of deity that will have followers songing hymns of praise. Just looking at the cultural items they seem pretty decent (if incredibly difficult/rare/expensive to source the gems)!

[pink grapefruit]

Rallos Zek, Erollisi Marr, Quellious, Rodcet Nife, Tunare, and Veeshan are the deities I would consider. You can't really go wrong though, so long as you avoid agnostic and Brell the Bitch.

My OG bard was Tunare, as half elves on VZ could not worship any other deity lol. ELF TEAM!!! xD

[Cyrillious]

Bards are an under appreciated class. They can make all the melees swing faster/harder, casters save on mana from not having to heal as much. If you spend enough time in a group, you can directly see the number of pulls and kills increase gradually as the pullers/tanks/DPS realize they are now a bit more...better?

Solo, they're tons of fun. Can fear kite. Charm kite. DoT kite. Travel is a breeze...nobody is faster.

Add in a little more utility with corpse location/selos/levi/invis...and lots of folks just want to be around you :)

And last but not least...they can be some pretty interesting pranksters too...(Melanie's Mellifluous Motion anyone?).

Yes, you need to be a bit more engaged with what you are doing...but that's part of the fun...I get bored sitting waiting for mana... :)

[Bazia]

most bards just play regen and do dogshit melee dps, theres a reason they arent that coveted and its not the class its the way most people play it

[pink grapefruit]

MMM the main reason I didn't go bard on green. 100% sure that if I had, the GMs would be hassling me lol.

[Cyrillious]

MMM the main reason I didn't go bard on green. 100% sure that if I had, the GMs would be hassling me lol.

A long time ago that happened...I told the Guide that eventually came along that the party referred to me as a mana bot...and I wanted to show them something new... :)

...I was told to rock on with my bad self...

[Aaramis]

I absolutely, absolutely love Bards.
But after you've played one on live with /melody, it's hard to go back to song twisting - especially with only 6 hotkeys.

I'm not sure whether P99 Bards get my eternal respect, or sympathy.
Maybe a bit of both.

[kaluppo]

I had a bard join our orc hill group the other day and it was a godsend. The monk could not keep aggro and I was going 00m all the time because the monk, wizard and rogue were all taking damage on every pull. Then the Bard joins and becomes the "tank" and to my surprise was able to hold aggro so I only had one person to heal. Plus they played a regen song to help heal up a bit during pulls.

But that said I would think Shaman would be an easier life as time goes on. People want shamans for main healer when no clerics are available or slower/buffer even when a cleric is in the group. It's rough for either class during classic but you can look ahead to kunark and velious to see which class will be more fun for you to play down the road.

[Khorza]

what a dreadfully misinformed thing to say and pass off as truth.

Wow way to substantiate on your claim with any sort of information whatsoever.

Shamans are sub-par in vanilla. I'm sorry if that hurt your feelings somehow but I'm sure that anyone who understands classic EQ would agree.

They're kind of like a hybrid. The toolkit is nice, but they don't excel at anything. Their primary role becomes healing, but the best heal spell they get is Greater Heal. Greater Heal is not good. It's the same heal that Paladins have. And Shamans can potentially push out a bit more healing than a Druid or a Paladin through cannibalize, but you don't have the endless reservoir of mana without Torpor. Enchanter slow is even a bit better than Shamans' until Kunark.

Like I said in my last post, Shamans are incredible once Kunark is out. But they're mediocre in vanilla. There's just too much of a gap between Clerics and the other Priest classes.

[Tecmos Deception]

Wow way to substantiate on your claim with any sort of information whatsoever.

Shamans are sub-par in vanilla. I'm sorry if that hurt your feelings somehow but I'm sure that anyone who understands classic EQ would agree.

They're kind of like a hybrid. The toolkit is nice, but they don't excel at anything. Their primary role becomes healing, but the best heal spell they get is Greater Heal. Greater Heal is not good. It's the same heal that Paladins have. And Shamans can potentially push out a bit more healing than a Druid or a Paladin through cannibalize, but you don't have the endless reservoir of mana without Torpor. Enchanter slow is even a bit better than Shamans' until Kunark.

Like I said in my last post, Shamans are incredible once Kunark is out. But they're mediocre in vanilla. There's just too much of a gap between Clerics and the other Priest classes.

Shaman doesn't have to be overpowered to be better than "sub-par." If you're playing one like a gimpy cleric, no wonder you think they're not great. Their slow may be second best in classic, but it's still miles ahead of the other option. Stat buffs are incredible in a world of classic itemization. Root CC, malo, pet dps are all nice. Etc. Sham is in a good place in classic and only gets stronger going forward.

Hybrids and wizards are subpar. Not shamans.

[Gatorsmash]

Wow way to substantiate on your claim with any sort of information whatsoever.

Shamans are sub-par in vanilla. I'm sorry if that hurt your feelings somehow but I'm sure that anyone who understands classic EQ would agree.

They're kind of like a hybrid. The toolkit is nice, but they don't excel at anything. Their primary role becomes healing, but the best heal spell they get is Greater Heal. Greater Heal is not good. It's the same heal that Paladins have. And Shamans can potentially push out a bit more healing than a Druid or a Paladin through cannibalize, but you don't have the endless reservoir of mana without Torpor. Enchanter slow is even a bit better than Shamans' until Kunark.

Like I said in my last post, Shamans are incredible once Kunark is out. But they're mediocre in vanilla. There's just too much of a gap between Clerics and the other Priest classes.

Strongest buffs
Strongest debuffs
Haste, slow, heals (+regen) and can tank, play with a group or one of the strongest solo classes even in classic from lvl 1 to 50.

Yaaaa real dogshit class that shaman

[NegaStoat]

Wow way to substantiate on your claim with any sort of information whatsoever.

Shamans are sub-par in vanilla. I'm sorry if that hurt your feelings somehow but I'm sure that anyone who understands classic EQ would agree.



I don't agree. The route to leveling from 1-24 is painful unless you're grouping. From 24 to 34 isn't that much fun either excepting the rare cases you can make use of your animal charm for that last push. Permafrost comes to mind with the wolf you can grab. But at level 34 shaman are strong, and my feelings absolutely aren't hurt with how wrong you are when you look at a 49 shaman's full spell book. If they want something dead in Classic that isn't a straight up raid target, they will make it dead. If they want an undergeared melee to become a tenacious, heroic killer their buffs and slow will make it happen.

[Khorza]

Shaman doesn't have to be overpowered to be better than "sub-par."

I didn't think I had to define this, but sub-par means below average. That means at least 7 other classes are more useful or perform their roles better than Shaman. I think I could come up with about 9 classes that I'd generally rather have in my group over a Shaman. Therefore they are absolutely sub-par.

I've said this repeatedly throughout the thread, but the mistake that everyone is making is that they remember how amazing Shamans are at 51+, and they think that power must have been a continuation from the state of the class in vanilla. Unfortunately that is not the case, and I've already explained why but I guess I'll do it again because people are stubborn and they choose to believe what they want to believe over actual factual information.

If you're playing one like a gimpy cleric, no wonder you think they're not great.

Well, I've played a Shaman since 2000, I was one of the top Shamans on Blue when I played, and I frequently played with you and never heard that I sucked. So I'm doubting that the truth is that I'm just bad at the game like you seem to be suggesting.

I don't know what "playing a Shaman like a gimpy cleric" means. That's how the class was designed. There's no player skill that can overcome Greater Healing being your best heal spell, and the 15% healing penalty compared to Clerics. This isn't a "just play better" thing. Don't get mad at me, I didn't design this game. But all of those things are objectively the truth. Shamans get an underpowered heal spell. Non-clerics receive a healing penalty. That is just reality that we live in.

Their slow may be second best in classic, but it's still miles ahead of the other option.

Okay sure but this is irrelevant to the discussion. My point was that if you want a slower in your group in vanilla EQ, then you generally want to invite an Enchanter, not a Shaman. This is significant because vanilla EQ is the only time when that's true. That's why I mentioned it.

Shamans also aren't very good at mezzing, stunning, interrupting, charming, lulling, or any of the other utility that an Enchanter would provide. Inviting a Shaman for slow is like inviting a Ranger to tank. Sure they can do it, but only because the better option wasn't available. How is that a point in their favor?

Also worth mentioning that slow in general just isn't as good in vanilla as it in in future expansions. Most things in raids are magic-immune, and everything else in vanilla dies so quickly that the slow isn't as significant. It's also a very mana intensive spell with its cost and chance to be resisted, so it's difficult to utilize without later improvements like unresistable Tash, Malo, Clarity 2, Cannibalize 3, Torpor, etc. The meta in Kunark+ of slowing every mob that you fight just isn't as much of a thing in vanilla EQ.

Stat buffs are incredible in a world of classic itemization.

Stat buffs aren't incredible because stats in EQ aren't incredible. Your best stat buff is +40 Stamina. That's 180 HP on a level 50 Warrior if they're not capped. Resolution gives 250 HP and 16 AC. How does that prove that Shamans aren't second-rate Clerics? Sure, they stack, but you're still contributing less.

And a level 50 Warrior is the best scenario. Stamina gives a level 50 caster 80 HP. Wow, incredible. That's one extra Manastone click.

Strength is in a bit of a similar situation. Sure it's going to improve melee dps a bit, but it's not massively significant like it might be in other MMOs that are more stat-based. Dexterity and Agility are niche tank buffs. These aren't game-breaking advantages like you seem to be suggesting.

And other classes get buffs too. Druids get some great buffs like thorns. They get what is essentially Resolution (one of the best buffs in the game) with additional HP regen tacked on. Why don't we discuss how amazing Druid buffs are in groups and raids? Oh yeah, because they don't become amazing in Kunark like Shamans do, so they're relegated to "bad class" territory even though they suffer the same exact problems that Shamans do in vanilla.

And you know what buffs are actually good in EverQuest? Stuff like haste, which Enchanters do much better, mana regeneration, which only Enchanters and Bards do at all, etc.

Root CC

You're listing Root as a reason that Shamans aren't mediocre Clerics? Maybe you would be surprised to know that Clerics also receive Root. I'm pretty sure you know this already so I don't why you tried to bring it up like it was relevant.

malo

Shamans don't get Malo in vanilla. Again, memory clouded by great Kunark spells. Shamans get Malosi at 44 that reduces resists by 60 for 175 mana. Magicians get Malaisement at 44 that reduces resists by 40 for 100 mana. Neither are unresistable like Malo is, so they're much weaker and more niche spells.

So cool, Shamans can do something slightly better than another class. It's mostly only relevant when grouping with a charming Enchanter. In fact Enchanter + Shaman is a decent duo... if the Enchanter can't find a Cleric to duo with.

pet dps

Okay now you're really grasping. Shamans are the second worst pet class in the game. A lot of times you can't even use them because of aoes/pathing. Very cool.

Hybrids and wizards are subpar. Not shamans.

Now I'm very confused by the way that you evaluate classes. You think that Shaman, which excels at nothing, is better than Paladins or Shadow Knights which are the best group tanks in the game? An extremely underplayed and valuable group role?

I didn't include Ranger in the "9 classes better than Shaman" list I formulated in my head, but how are they significantly worse than Shamans? They perform consistent DPS, they're even better at cc (root+snare), they can tank in a pinch. With Mistwalker they're absolutely ridiculous, and Shamans don't get any sort of potential like that in Vanilla. And Bards have a way deeper utility kit too.

Wizard is generally one of the most recruited classes for raid guilds in vanilla EQ. You're literally required to have a few of them to enter Plane of Hate or Sky, and the mobility that ports in general afford you is a huge advantage that always gets glossed over whenever Wizards are discussed.

Again, they have better CC than Shamans (root, stun, snare) and they're a competent DPS class that does unfortunately get screwed a bit by bad game design and the resists of high tier raid mobs. But like Shamans they improve by quite a bit in future expansions.

I don't know, I don't see hybrids or Wizards as being significantly worse than Shamans but maybe you can expand on why you think that a bit more.



Strongest buffs

I already explained why this is false. The best buffs in the game are haste and mana regeneration. Shamans get a lame haste spell (Shamans don't get Enchanter's vanilla haste SLTW until Planes of Power), but it's still their best buff just because of how good haste is. They don't get any form of mana regeneration buff.

So no, Shamans do not get the best buffs. Nothing that Shamans get are as good as SLTW or Clarity. And it just so happens that the same class gets both of those. I guess that would make that class the best at buffing.

The next best buffs are magic resistance and the raw HP/AC buffs. The best magic resistance buff is yet again exclusive to Enchanters, and Clerics get the best HP/AC buffs. Talisman is pretty good, though.

I guess that makes Shamans the third best buff class in vanilla EQ.

I've been ignoring Bards because they don't get static buff spells. But if you include them, Shamans drop to 4th for obvious reasons.

So the class that's known for buffing is the 3rd or 4th best buffing class in the game. Doesn't that just scream "above average" to you?

Strongest debuffs

The best debuff is slow, and Enchanters do that slightly better. So this seems false as well. They can debuff resists slightly better than Magicians, as I mentioned above. They get the same melee debuff that Enchanters do (Incapacitate).

So, Shamans are competent at debuffing. They don't excel at debuffing since Enchanters have an edge until Kunark.

Again, maybe you're confusing Kunark Shamans with Vanilla Shamans.

Haste, slow, heals (+regen) and can tank, play with a group or one of the strongest solo classes even in classic from lvl 1 to 50.

Yaaaa real dogshit class that shaman

You're doing this thing that people on the internet do when they realize that they're arguing a position that's factually insufficient. You're trying to change my position by suggesting that I called Shamans "dogshit." I in fact never once said that Shamans were dogshit, I said they were sub-par or below average. There's a pretty big difference there.

So let's use your own list to once again summarize why that is. You mention haste, but their haste is half as effective as an Enchanter's, and it only lasts a few minutes. Shamans had to wait over 3 and a half years just to receive the same haste spell that Enchanters get in vanilla.

You mention slow, but Enchanters do that better. You mention heals, but Clerics do that way better. You mention regen, but Druids get the same regen spell. They can "tank," but worse than Warriors, Shadow Knights, Paladins, Monks, Rangers, and possibly more.

So please explain, how is this class above average?

[Tecmos Deception]

I'm very confused by the way that you evaluate classes.

Ditto :)

[Khorza]

Ditto :)

Well at least I can rationalize and explain my position. Yours seems to be arbitrarily picked out of the ether, and defended without any sort of logical reasoning.

[Tecmos Deception]

I explained myself as much as I can be bothered to on this topic. If you didn't notice it or understand it as such, that just makes me feel better about not wanting to put more effort into this than I did already :P

[Kron]

Do you want to train your body to handle pain?

Do you want to physically train to move those fingers in twisting twitching motions!

Do you want to smell like Bangay and rock a wrist wrap?

Then the Bard is the class for you.

*MOM! MOM! GET THE BENGAY! OOoooo The clicking numbs the body.

[Gustoo]

The reason the shaman is a powerful class is their versatility. They may have marginally inferior versions of haste and slow, but they combine them with other utility that makes them a powerful class. Their ability to regenerate their own mana rapidly make them extra powerful and constantly useful.

Bards also great.

[Khorza]

If you didn't notice it or understand it as such

So you're just going to pretend like I didn't just respond to every single point you just made in depth? What exactly am I not noticing or understanding? Why are we being so vague all of a sudden?

Are you going to refute any of the points that I just made? Or are you going to just stubbornly stick to your position despite being unable to defend it? It's okay to admit that you're wrong once in awhile, you know. It's a good look, too.

[Keza]

So you're just going to pretend like I didn't just respond to every single point you just made in depth? What exactly am I not noticing or understanding? Why are we being so vague all of a sudden?

Are you going to refute any of the points that I just made? Or are you going to just stubbornly stick to your position despite being unable to defend it? It's okay to admit that you're wrong once in awhile, you know. It's a good look, too.

You're making gigantic posts claiming your experience on a shaman as proof of intelligence and nitpicking shit like the short-term 'malo' by saying the actual spell 'malo' didn't exist until Kunark.

Responding isn't the same as being right.

[Khorza]

You're making gigantic posts claiming your experience on a shaman as proof of intelligence

I have no idea what this is supposed to mean. Not only is it not a very coherent statement, this conversation has nothing to do about my intelligence (???). It's about the quality of the Shaman class in vanilla EQ.

As far as experience, you don't have to be any sort of expert to understand what a class is capable of. The wiki is publicly available to everyone. Anyone can browse the spell lists, compare abilities between classes, and determine relative strengths and weaknesses. Anyone should be able to do these things, however apparently they're unable to. And even when someone does the work for them, the current meta is to stubbornly cling to your original opinion no matter how much people prove it to be incorrect.

Responding isn't the same as being right.

Um, okay, sure. You seem to be trying to suggest that I was incorrect about something, so do you want to actually contribute to the discussion and state what you feel was incorrect?

[Gatorsmash]

So you're just going to pretend like I didn't just respond to every single point you just made in depth? What exactly am I not noticing or understanding? Why are we being so vague all of a sudden?

Are you going to refute any of the points that I just made? Or are you going to just stubbornly stick to your position despite being unable to defend it? It's okay to admit that you're wrong once in awhile, you know. It's a good look, too.

Oh so your one of those fucking idiots, lol I stopped reading after "Stat buffs aren't incredible because stats in EQ aren't incredible..... EQ is literally all about maxing stats.

[Danth]

Khorza is correct; Shamans are middle tier during the pre-expansion era. Funny watching him go up against the hive-mind that's been trained "Shaman is OP" due to P1999 being Kunark+ since 2011. Middle tier power is still strong enough to do what it'll want to do, though, and even in this era it's usually a nicer melee duo partner than Clerics are. Its multi-role nature makes it an excellent "6th man" for groups since it can handle numerous roles in the event somebody else leaves.

Bards are Bards, and players tend to either love them or loathe them. their mechanics are sufficiently unique that I find it hard to recommend the class: If a player will enjoy it, he generally doesn't need to be told.

Danth

[zanderklocke]

what a dreadfully misinformed thing to say and pass off as truth.

Petros, I just looked at your stream, and you kind of look like me in real life. See signature photo below.

[bwe]

Since there aren't enough hybrid tanks, can shamans realistically main tank in classic leveling groups?

[Modwolf]

Since there aren't enough hybrid tanks, can shamans realistically main tank in classic leveling groups?

Having been in all sham groups in SRO. I'd say sub-par.

[Frug]

Oh so your one of those fucking idiots, lol I stopped reading after "Stat buffs aren't incredible because stats in EQ aren't incredible..... EQ is literally all about maxing stats.

That people do it doesn't mean it's effective. And it's "you're", Mr. Einstein.

[MrPanther]

That people do it doesn't mean it's effective. And it's "you're", Mr. Einstein.

Yeah I've always wished EQ classic had more variability from stats. Like I wish the curve was a bit deeper i.e. items with actual stats were available at lower levels and I wished those stats made more meaningful impacts to the game.

I'm definitely nitpicking but all the questing and looting for low-level gear didn't really do much of anything for any of the classes, and what it turned into was farming plat in order to head to the tunnel to buy level 30-40+ farmed gear to use while you are level 10-15. Would have been nice to have slightly more powerful armor available at lower levels - and a way to have done that would be to give higher multipliers to stats.

[Zeboim]

In a Classic world being a Jack of All Trades is more than sufficient. Theres only 6 slots in a group after all, and most places in Classic cannot support 6 people anyways. In a duo or trio that flexibility makes a Sham well above average.

But everyone knows the main reason to play a sham in classic is to be level 50 and ready to go when Kunark drops.

Having been in all sham groups in SRO. I'd say sub-par.
A Sham in Sro has maybe 5% of their toolkit and is basically a melee with inner fire to heal.

[Frug]

Yeah I've always wished EQ classic had more variability from stats. Like I wish the curve was a bit deeper i.e. items with actual stats were available at lower levels and I wished those stats made more meaningful impacts to the game.

I'm definitely nitpicking but all the questing and looting for low-level gear didn't really do much of anything for any of the classes, and what it turned into was farming plat in order to head to the tunnel to buy level 30-40+ farmed gear to use while you are level 10-15. Would have been nice to have slightly more powerful armor available at lower levels - and a way to have done that would be to give higher multipliers to stats.

Yup, 100% agree. EQ classic was "magic" to a lot of us since it almost literally WAS "magic" in that no one knew anything about what any of it did, and there was nothing coming out of Verant to confirm or deny anything.

Then, ShowEQ. Everyone was like, wait, what? That's all? And what are these penalties? And why doesn't <attribute> actually work like you said?

[bwe]

Having been in all sham groups in SRO. I'd say sub-par.

Interesting. They seem to have decent defense, almost as high of a melee cap, can wear chain, and have good low mana aggro generation (flash of light, drowsy). I would have thought an ogre or troll shaman with their massive stats would be able to hold aggro especially compared to say a high elf paladin

[Zeboim]

They do but not that early. SRo grouping is like level 5 to 10 on Orcs and maybe to 15 on trash. Shams at that level dont have the mana to cast much(absolutely not worth it to drowsy every orc)and are just a melee mob with low downtime from inner fire heals.