Best Trio That Doesn't Use Enchanter

[Toxigen]

No enchanters allowed because lets face it they're way too powerful.

I'll start:

Necro / Shaman / Monk

All iksar, start together at level 1, bigly RP lizardbros, can do well with low budget twinking or self-found, great off-meta Kunark leveling route.

There you go DSM, you finally got your Shaman in a "Best Group" hypothetical.

[Ripqozko]

necro necro cleric, keep to undead charm spots once able

[Troxx]

I'll start:

Necro / Shaman / Monk.

100% agree

The synergy there is out of this world.

[Rimitto]

Ranger / Cleric / Bard

It's a surprisingly decent combination. I don't know if it's "the best", but it's relatively sturdy since the ranger can handle pulling with harmony and roots usually, the bard is buffing, mana pumping, and support dps.

Cleric can usually handle around the same level at this point, so there's only a real need to "stop" pulling when the bard needs to mana pump from a bad pull.

That's my view from a cleric point anyways. I've had decently good parties with this type of setup. You can replace the ranger with paladin or shadowknight too, but they tend to pull slower or rely on the bard to pull.

[Vexenu]

Very hard to make a case against NEC/SHM/MNK for best/most powerful, but I think Paladin/Bard/Druid would be fun, strong and versatile. Tons of mobility, easy pulls with lull/harmony, stacking damage shields, outrageous amounts of healing/regen. DPS is a little low, but you'd manage, especially if you prioritize Druid and Bard charms when possible.

[Jimjam]

Can we use pocket enchanter for haste, c, etc?

[Troxx]

Can we use pocket enchanter for haste, c, etc?

Of course. We will obviously have pocket 60 cleric for aegolism and rez and pocket druid and wiz for poets.

:p

[Troxx]

Necro healing and torpor stack for 425hp/tick. This trio can heal anything really that is doable with a non-charming trio. Shaman regens and heals and necro heals and taps are just bonkers when you consider these classes trade hp for mana.

High dps.
Very capable pulls
Strong cc
High survivability

I can’t think of a stronger trio if enchanters are specifically excluded.

[Vexenu]

Another idea is PAL/MAG/SHM. But this is basically just a variation of NEC/MNK/SHM with less synergy. I think a more interesting question is eliminating both Enchanters and Shaman. MAG/MAG/CLR would be very strong in that case. The Cleric provides all the CC the Mages lack and obviously healing as well. On tough kills can alternate between Mages pet spamming and Cleric CHing pets, so you basically have three full mana bars worth of pets to throw at what you're fighting.

[bcbrown]

Ranger / Cleric / Bard

It's a surprisingly decent combination. I don't know if it's "the best", but it's relatively sturdy since the ranger can handle pulling with harmony and roots usually, the bard is buffing, mana pumping, and support dps.

I don't think this can compete with monk/shaman/necro as "best", but I bet it would be a ton of fun. Some of the most fun I've had in EQ was in a static trio enchanter/cleric/bard where I played the cleric, although a lot of that was because the other players were cool, chill people, and we all were on discord so could easily coordinate what we each were doing on bad pulls.

But, like, you could probably swap the cleric to a necro, as then you have great bard/necro synergy and still plenty of healing power. And then if you swap the bard for a shaman, you'll improve the burst healing, have better haste and slow, still have good synergy with the necro with regen. And for pulling/tanking/dps the monk is probably better, albeit with less utility.

I wonder what bard/shaman/necro would be like. You'd be able to shift health and mana around in an unparalleled fashion. But when what do you do with all that mana? One scenario I'd love to see would be the bard pulling a whole mess of mobs and kiting them around with the aoe snare. Then necro and shaman can root-cc, dropping splurt and shaman epic on each. Would be messy and chaotic but I bet the dps would be off the charts.

Edit: Ah, splurt and shaman epic don't stack. Too bad.

[Keebz]

If you bring a melee (MNK), shaman is a strong choice if not kind of an auto-include.

But you could go for pets instead, where once again Shaman is useless.

BRD / NEC / MAG

BRD / NEC / NEC

DRU|CLR / NEC / NEC

Some good options here. I like BRD for sieves, mez, pump, and general utility.

The most obvious advantage of the caster approach is no gear check and strength while leveling.

[cd288]

What's the goal for the group? Feel like in the late 50s especially a Monk might not be very tankey unless you have it geared. So I feel like things like slow become way more important for example.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

If you bring a melee (MNK), shaman is a strong choice if not kind of an auto-include.

But you could go for pets instead, where once again Shaman is useless.

BRD / NEC / MAG

BRD / NEC / NEC

DRU|CLR / NEC / NEC

Some good options here. I like BRD for sieves, mez, pump, and general utility.

The most obvious advantage of the caster approach is no gear check and strength while leveling.

Shamans do a lot for charmed pets:

1. Torpor tanking removes the need for pet healing most of the time. They can heal them when needed too.
2. Torpor tanking makes positioning easier.
3. Torpor tanking increases pet DPS because the pet is attacking from behind.
4. Malo reduces the number of charm breaks.
5. Shamans can buff the pets.
6. Shamans help with charm breaks via root, blind, slow, aoe slow, and heals.

Enchanter/Shaman/Monk is a powerful trio, and a Shaman's synnergy with charmed pets is a factor in the power of this trio. Enchanters are not allowed in this thread, but Druid/Necro charming is being discussed.

[Snaggles]

I think Pally - Shaman - Monk works very well.
Or maybe Ranger - Shaman - Monk.

In either case the hybrid just a +1. Just a matter which spell book you want more.

[Penish]

jokes on you ill box everything

[Troxx]

What's the goal for the group? Feel like in the late 50s especially a Monk might not be very tankey unless you have it geared. So I feel like things like slow become way more important for example.

Monks are perfectly tanky at all levels. Not a huge gear requirement either

[Keebz]

Of course. We will obviously have pocket 60 cleric for aegolism and rez and pocket druid and wiz for poets.

The pocket shaman for Malo + pre-slow opens up a lot of options.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

Of course. We will obviously have pocket 60 cleric for aegolism and rez and pocket druid and wiz for poets.


The pocket shaman for Malo + pre-slow opens up a lot of options.

It's easier to make a 60 Shaman as your main, and then pocket a level 49 Cleric. Same with other pocket characters like Mages, Druids, and Wizards. 55 for CoTH mage, 44 for druid ports, and 46 for wizard ports including planes.

You'll spend a lot less time and money this way.

[Zuranthium]

Not the pocket crap again. It's not more beneficial to main a Shaman to begin with. You want a Level 60 Cleric with good gear, so they have the best buffs and max mana to do as many heals as possible for the hard fights where it's needed. Shaman just needs to buff/Malo/slow, it doesn't require any gear.

[Keebz]

Let me clear a few things up for you, clerics cast spells other than rez, aego is a lvl 60 spell, and necros already have access rez.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

Let me clear a few things up for you, clerics cast spells other than rez, aego is a lvl 60 spell, and necros already have access rez.

And Shamans cast more spells than Malo and Slow.

Plenty of people make sub 60 Clerics for all of their cleric needs. You could even do something like Chardok Royals with a 52 Cleric, meaning you don't need Aego for that fight.

Less "level 60 pocket Shamans" are made, because leveling to 60 takes a lot longer, and sharing your level 60 Torpor Shaman's account information is riskier than a minimally geared level 52 Cleric. Especially with reimbursements being backed up these days.

[Zuranthium]

Bard / Bard / Wizard

Fastest travel and the fastest to 60 LOL. You can dual swarm kite (each Bard tagging a different set of 25 MOBs) and the Wizard adds some PBAOE nukes. When it comes to non-kiting scenarios, the Wizard is spamming root while the Bards do their charming and DOTs. Other casters can be more than just a root bot in that scenario, but still!

Bard / Monk / Cleric if wanting a trio that can do the hardest content possible. Need C-heal for some things, it's just unavoidable. Shaman is nicer than Cleric for overall gameplay though. The common denominator is Bard in a universe where Enchanter doesn't exist. No other class has a charm ability that works everywhere, and their overall versatility is great.

[Troxx]

Not the pocket crap again.

Yeah it was brought up as a joke. DSM took us too literally. Nobody was seriously advocating for pockets.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

Yeah it was brought up as a joke. DSM took us too literally. Nobody was seriously advocating for pockets.

Troxx brought up an off-topic joke to attack another poster. I am allowed to respond. He always attempts to derail new threads when he loses a debate in another thread.

I discussed the topic directly to prevent Troxx from going even more off the rails. He simply cannot help himself unfortunately.

Pocket characters are allowed in this thread too right now by the way. OP hasn't restricted it.

[Troxx]

Can we use pocket enchanter for haste, c, etc?

No DSM. I did not bring it up. Try reading the thread again. Please keep your drama out of here.

[Keebz]

And Shamans cast more spells than Malo and Slow.

No thanks. The all pet group doesn't need stat buffs or low DPS.


Plenty of people make sub 60 Clerics for all of their cleric needs. You could even do something like Chardok Royals with a 52 Cleric, meaning you don't need Aego for that fight.

Not sure where this arbitrary royals situation came from, but yea Clerics are a really good class even before 60. There are even clerics that have solo'd the royals. They can do some amazing stuff with enchanters.


Less "level 60 pocket Shamans" are made, because leveling to 60 takes a lot longer, and sharing your level 60 Torpor Shaman's account information is riskier than a minimally geared level 52 Cleric. Especially with reimbursements being backed up these days.

I don't get why in this scenario the group members don't trust each other, but I guess you have trust issues which checks out. Also, a 52 pocket cleric doesn't unlock any challenging content. It just helps if you die a lot. Given your videos, I see why you're focusing on it.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

Also, a 52 pocket cleric doesn't unlock any challenging content.

Can you name any "challenging" content a level 60 Cleric unlocks for this trio that can't be done with with a 52 Cleric?

[DeathsSilkyMist]

No DSM. I did not bring it up. Try reading the thread again. Please keep your drama out of here.

The post history is clear:

Of course. We will obviously have pocket 60 cleric for aegolism and rez and pocket druid and wiz for poets.

:p

It is clear you are referencing the other thread. Please stop derailing threads.

[Troxx]

lol someone else brought it up, I just replied

[DeathsSilkyMist]

lol someone else brought it up, I just replied

Indeed. Learn some self control so you do not derail more threads.

[Penish]

yeah pockets are tods viableh

[Keebz]

Can you name any "challenging" content a level 60 Cleric unlocks for this trio that can't be done with with a 52 Cleric?

This is a weird direction to take the argument, but yes a geared 60 cleric is noticeably better than a 52 cleric. There's a reason they give DKP to take cleric bots to 60. The only reason people stop at 52 is because that's when DL caps out for PLing.

If you're low manning something, the extra HP, mana, and levels go a long way not to mention better spells like Aego and CE. Heck, in a trio with 60's a 52 cleric isn't even going to be able to lull or stun reliably.

[Jimjam]

Monks are perfectly tanky at all levels. Not a huge gear requirement either

My 52 monk feels tankier than my 52 war or sk. For reference the monk is wearing crystalline silk (basically cured silk but with +magic resist … ie terrible ac for lvl 52) whereas my sk is wearing HoT plate.

I think it’s the huge avoidance, ac clicky buffs and block. Oh and redic short mend/stonestance reuse timers.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

This is a weird direction to take the argument, but yes a geared 60 cleric is noticeably better than a 52 cleric. There's a reason they give DKP to take cleric bots to 60. The only reason people stop at 52 is because that's when DL caps out for PLing.

If you're low manning something, the extra HP, mana, and levels go a long way not to mention better spells like Aego and CE. Heck, in a trio with 60's a 52 cleric isn't even going to be able to lull or stun reliably.

I see you couldn't name any "challenging" content that is unlocked with a level 60 Cleric for this trio. Chardok Royals can be done with a level 52 Cleric.

What content is more challenging than Chardok Royals that this trio would be attempting?

[Troxx]

Can you name any "challenging" content a level 60 Cleric unlocks for this trio that can't be done with with a 52 Cleric?

Such a dumb fucking question.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

Such a dumb fucking question.

Why is it a dumb question? It should be trivial to answer.

[Troxx]

It’s a dumb fucking question because the implication is that a 52 cleric is just as viable as a level 60 cleric. Nevermind the 8 level difference as it relates to resists on lull/stuns - you literally are missing all spells 53-60. No divine light. No stun command. No Elixir HoT.

Why level a cleric to 60 when you can just leave it 52?

Jesus you’re such a myopic twat

[Zuranthium]

Chardok Royals can be done with a level 52 Cleric.

Chardok Royals have been done unreliably with a 52 Cleric and a couple of 60 ENCHANTERS. Like, hello?!? Something is wrong with the processing unit upstairs. Please for your own sake, look into a better diet and exercise regime, I am betting something is going very awry there. Need to drink more water, cut out processed food and excess sugars, intake more essential vitamins and minerals, do stretches and aerobics, get the blood flowing, gain clarity, find centering.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

It’s a dumb fucking question because the implication is that a 52 cleric is just as viable as a level 60 cleric. Nevermind the 8 level difference as it relates to resists on lull/stuns - you literally are missing all spells 53-60. No divine light. No stun command. No Elixir HoT.

Why level a cleric to 60 when you can just leave it 52?

Jesus you’re such a myopic twat

I understand you don't like it. The reality is a 52 cleric can handle Chardok Royals, as an example. This is why Cleric is a good pocket character. They don't need to be 60 to do what people want them to do. I am just looking at the reality of how people play the game. I see you also couldn't name any content either.

[Troxx]

I understand you don't like it. The reality is a 52 cleric can handle Chardok Royals, as an example. This is why Cleric is a good pocket character. They don't need to be 60 to do what people want them to do. I am just looking at the reality of how people play the game. I see you also couldn't name any content either.

lol this was a situation you were unaware of - both in acknowledging it required a cleric or at what low level it had been accomplished…. Until someone else told you about it quite recently in that other thread.

Now you have just assimilated another bullshit talking point you are disingenuously representing … for reasons beyond my comprehension.

There is quite a power curve between a 52 cleric and a 60 cleric.

You really are clueless

[DeathsSilkyMist]

lol this was a situation you were unaware of - both in acknowledging it required a cleric or at what low level it had been accomplished…. Until someone else told you about it quite recently in that other thread.

Now you have just assimilated another bullshit talking point you are disingenuously representing … for reasons beyond my comprehension.

There is quite a power curve between a 52 cleric and a 60 cleric.

You really are clueless

You were the one who couldn't name Chardok Royals as a camp for tens of pages, dodging and trolling instead.

I see you still haven't named a camp where the 60 cleric can do it, while the 52 cleric can't for this trio. More dodging.

[Troxx]

Different thread, same bullshit.

Jesus Christ.

For the record, this is the right answer:

No enchanters allowed because lets face it they're way too powerful.

I'll start:

Necro / Shaman / Monk

All iksar, start together at level 1, bigly RP lizardbros, can do well with low budget twinking or self-found, great off-meta Kunark leveling route.

There you go DSM, you finally got your Shaman in a "Best Group" hypothetical.

I’m not sure why you’re going full retard talking pockets and 52 vs 60 clerics.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

Different thread, same bullshit.

Jesus Christ.

For the record, this is the right answer:



I’m not sure why you’re going full retard talking pockets and 52 vs 60 clerics.

The post history shows that you and Jimjam started discussing pocket characters first. I didn't start this. You need to learn some self control, so you stop derailing threads. You do this all the time. Same bullshit indeed.

Keebz said this:


Also, a 52 pocket cleric doesn't unlock any challenging content.


This implies a higher level cleric does unlock challenging content for this trio. I was curious to see what that content was. You then attacked my question and derailed the thread further. You've also been unable to answer it.

[Jimjam]

I only asked whether they were open to discussion as I knew it is a touchy subject for groundrules of these kind of topics and particularly desired clarification on how strict the no enc rule was. It seemed a no brainer to get that position agreed on, or dictated by op, from the start.

I’ve been grouping with a lot of pocket druids and enchanters recently, they provide a substantive boost. Based on those recent experiences my question felt pretty applicable, especially whether the no enc rule was only for the ‘main’ group members or if we could assume outside buffs every thirty minutes.

Having potg/c2 on demand(or not) for my wizard is night and day.

[Toxigen]

because if enc were allowed it would be enc/enc/cleric lol

i really want to do a static trio necro / sham / monk - no twinking, self funded (not found... trying to simulate brand new p99 players)

all my alts were medium to mega-twinked, been there done that

[Jimjam]

because if enc were allowed it would be enc/enc/cleric lol

i really want to do a static trio necro / sham / monk

so pocket enc for buffs is fine then? just it can't be played for pve?

That is a strong static. Unironically you should film it if you can get a reliable crew together :)

[Toxigen]

so pocket enc for buffs is fine then? just it can't be played for pve?

That is a strong static. Unironically you should film it if you can get a reliable crew together :)

no pocket chars thats dumb

but yeah, would like to do an off-meta route too... a kickin-it-kunark flavor

[Snaggles]

The tangible difference between a 52 and 60 cleric is the difference between getting your old childhood bike down from the attic and going for a ride or throwing all new equipment on a credit card.

Sure, technically both include “going for a ride” but your chances of dying is way higher with one path.

[Toxigen]

The tangible difference between a 52 and 60 cleric is the difference between getting your old childhood bike down from the attic and going for a ride or throwing all new equipment on a credit card.

Sure, technically both include “going for a ride” but your chances of dying is way higher with one path.

lol that was a pretty good one

[Vear99]

Very hard to make a case against NEC/SHM/MNK for best/most powerful, but I think Paladin/Bard/Druid would be fun, strong and versatile. Tons of mobility, easy pulls with lull/harmony, stacking damage shields, outrageous amounts of healing/regen. DPS is a little low, but you'd manage, especially if you prioritize Druid and Bard charms when possible.

Agreed. On the other side of the equation, I think Warrior/Cleric/Mage is very strong at 60 when well geared. When you have 6000 HP and 1500 AC, you just don't need slow, and damage shield/potions become extremely effective. Throw in Boots of Bladecalling and an epic pet and the Mage is bringing a lot of damage. Plus mod rods can at least numb the pain of losing clarity a little. They are kind of like a boxer with only one punch, but it's a good one.

Can you name any "challenging" content a level 60 Cleric unlocks for this trio that can't be done with with a 52 Cleric?

When duoing with an enchanter, a good cleric will always stun the charmed pet rather than healing the enchanter. Stun costs 35 mana and can prevent thousands of damage if the enchanter is getting interrupted - unless it gets resisted, and going from L52 to L60 dramatically decreases this chance. In addition, clerics get their first and only AE stun at L55, which is extremely convenient when the enchanter gets summoned. Also, a geared L60 cleric can probably sustain CH around 50% longer than a L52 pocket cleric, who is by definition poorly geared. Of course the more gear and skills his group mates have the more they can compensate for this, so you can quibble over the definition of unlocked, but clerics definitely enjoy a nice increase in power through the 50s.

[Penish]

i think its all about how you work those pocket toons, i mean lik how else you gonna play eq

[Vear99]

no pocket chars thats dumb

but yeah, would like to do an off-meta route too... a kickin-it-kunark flavor

You could also try to do all of the special iksar quests at an appropriate level, although it's really sad the final ones aren't in here. I got the 8th Cudgel on TAKP but not in time to really get much benefit from the Carnage click.

[Toxigen]

Agreed. On the other side of the equation, I think Warrior/Cleric/Mage is very strong at 60 when well geared. When you have 6000 HP and 1500 AC, you just don't need slow, and damage shield/potions become extremely effective. Throw in Boots of Bladecalling and an epic pet and the Mage is bringing a lot of damage. Plus mod rods can at least numb the pain of losing clarity a little. They are kind of like a boxer with only one punch, but it's a good one.


lol wat

theres no way this trio out performs shaman / monk / necro at any stage of the game

even with a truncheon

[Penish]

vear is dsm, btw

[Toxigen]

vear is dsm, btw

lmao no way

[Penish]

who else could make a claim that fucking stupid? lol

[DeathsSilkyMist]

When duoing with an enchanter, a good cleric will always stun the charmed pet rather than healing the enchanter. Stun costs 35 mana and can prevent thousands of damage if the enchanter is getting interrupted - unless it gets resisted, and going from L52 to L60 dramatically decreases this chance. In addition, clerics get their first and only AE stun at L55, which is extremely convenient when the enchanter gets summoned. Also, a geared L60 cleric can probably sustain CH around 50% longer than a L52 pocket cleric, who is by definition poorly geared. Of course the more gear and skills his group mates have the more they can compensate for this, so you can quibble over the definition of unlocked, but clerics definitely enjoy a nice increase in power through the 50s.

Enchanters can surive charm breaks just fine without a Cleric and their stuns. A level 52 Cleric has enough mana to CH Chardok Royals. What content would this trio be doing that a 52 cleric couldn't do when compared to a 60 cleric. Nobody is answering the question. I can only assume they don't have an answer.

[Troxx]

/facepalm

The salty bitch who’s never leveled a cleric is telling the rest of us who have about how the power curve changes for clerics with the final 8 levels of their spell book and character progression. All because he heard (like literally last week) from somebody that they managed to squeak a success on chardok royals by the skin of their teeth (a feat a shaman can’t accomplish).

All the sudden it’s ok if all the clerics stop logging in at level 52 lol

What a fucking tool.

[Vexenu]

WAR/MAG/CLR would be good but you'd definitely want a Truncheon for slow 50+ and you would be leaning very heavily on the Cleric for all CC and lull splitting, which would bite you in the ass after awhile. I wouldn't want to play this unless the Warrior and Cleric (the latter with a nice CHA set) were both well-twinked from the jump. This trio would be a fun non-stop chainsaw through low blue mobs, but I think the best you can say about it is that it would be an easy way to level two very in-demand raid classes and a CoTH bot at the same time.

[Penish]

WAR/MAG/CLR would be good but you'd definitely want a Truncheon for slow 50+ and you would be leaning very heavily on the Cleric for all CC and lull splitting, which would bite you in the ass after awhile. I wouldn't want to play this unless the Warrior and Cleric (the latter with a nice CHA set) were both well-twinked from the jump. This trio would be a fun non-stop chainsaw through low blue mobs, but I think the best you can say about it is that it would be an easy way to level two very in-demand raid classes and a CoTH bot at the same time.

pretty sure the thread is called BEST TRIO, not viable trio's

cool story bro

[DeathsSilkyMist]

/facepalm

The salty bitch who’s never leveled a cleric is telling the rest of us who have about how the power curve changes for clerics with the final 8 levels of their spell book and character progression. All because he heard (like literally last week) from somebody that they managed to squeak a success on chardok royals by the skin of their teeth (a feat a shaman can’t accomplish).

All the sudden it’s ok if all the clerics stop logging in at level 52 lol

What a fucking tool.

More projection. This post sounds very salty indeed. You were the one who couldn't name Chardok Royals when I asked you what camps a Cleric were needed at. PatChapp answered in one post. You spent like 50 pages trolling and dodging, and didn't answer the question.

I'll continue to live in reality, where people use sub 60 pocket clerics to do content. Still waiting on the answer to my question about what camps a 52 Cleric couldn't do that a 60 Cleric could do with respect to this trio. Like the other thread, you keep dodging.

For someone who is supposedly very knowledgeable, you can't answer a lot of questions.

[Troxx]

no pocket chars thats dumb

This is Tox’s thread. He makes up the rules. Shut the fuck up about pockets.

[Rimitto]

I don't think this can compete with monk/shaman/necro as "best", but I bet it would be a ton of fun. Some of the most fun I've had in EQ was in a static trio enchanter/cleric/bard where I played the cleric, although a lot of that was because the other players were cool, chill people, and we all were on discord so could easily coordinate what we each were doing on bad pulls.

But, like, you could probably swap the cleric to a necro, as then you have great bard/necro synergy and still plenty of healing power. And then if you swap the bard for a shaman, you'll improve the burst healing, have better haste and slow, still have good synergy with the necro with regen. And for pulling/tanking/dps the monk is probably better, albeit with less utility.

I wonder what bard/shaman/necro would be like. You'd be able to shift health and mana around in an unparalleled fashion. But when what do you do with all that mana? One scenario I'd love to see would be the bard pulling a whole mess of mobs and kiting them around with the aoe snare. Then necro and shaman can root-cc, dropping splurt and shaman epic on each. Would be messy and chaotic but I bet the dps would be off the charts.

Edit: Ah, splurt and shaman epic don't stack. Too bad.
You just agreed and replaced the entire party 1 class at a time :rolleyes:
It's not even the same anymore lol.

Cleric with ranger and bard has solid synergy, not only in the fact that it's protected by some good defensive and HP buffs, but also superior healing, as well as bard buffs to further reinforce the hardyness and dps of the party, as well as mana for cleric.

I'm not trying to downplay your shaman, necro strats, but there's just not that much actual synergy or options between it.
Necro has 1 buff, DMF.. and 1 mana regen "twitch" which only the shaman can benefit from. It's jenky.

Cleric and Ranger both benefit from mana pumping bard, same with strengthening songs, and both bard and ranger benefit from cleric buffs, same with ranger stuff like roots or harmony, both cleric and bard benefit.

It's just a matter that there's WAY MORE synergy in the build I proposed. If you replaced the ranger and cleric with shaman and necro it wouldn't be able to handle as much, and would be more limited, but possibly more lethal, but still more limited.

[Rimitto]

More projection. This post sounds very salty indeed. You were the one who couldn't name Chardok Royals when I asked you what camps a Cleric were needed at. PatChapp answered in one post. You spent like 50 pages trolling and dodging, and didn't answer the question.

I'll continue to live in reality, where people use sub 60 pocket clerics to do content. Still waiting on the answer to my question about what camps a 52 Cleric couldn't do that a 60 Cleric could do with respect to this trio. Like the other thread, you keep dodging.

For someone who is supposedly very knowledgeable, you can't answer a lot of questions.

Pocket clerics are banned.
If pocket clerics are allowed, then pocket enchanters are allowed.
Since enchanters are not allowed, that means pocket clerics and any pockets are banned.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

This is Tox’s thread. He makes up the rules. Shut the fuck up about pockets.

You brought them up before I did. Maybe take your own advice? It is always funny to see Troxx bring up a topic first, and then attack other people for responding to the topic he brought up. He dodged the question again too.

[Troxx]

I'm not trying to downplay your shaman, necro strats, but there's just not that much actual synergy or options between it.
Necro has 1 buff, DMF.. and 1 mana regen "twitch" which only the shaman can benefit from. It's jenky.

What?

Shamans turn hp into mana. Shamans can turn mana into hp (heals). Necros turn hp into mana. Necros turn mana into heals via taps. Necro can ALSO turn their hps into healing of others.

That loop right there is simply absurd with regards to synergy all by itself. It ignores all the other ways each of these classes complement each other so beautifully. That … and with regrowth + torpor + necro heal you’re looking at the equivalent of an on demand 440hp HoT … which is frankly more than enough healing for any groupable trophy kill in the game once it is slowed.

For the pre-60 and pretorpor game, necro/shaman synergy means there will always be mana for buffs, heals, slows … no real med breaks needed

It’s a high dps group that has healing coming out of its ears, strong tanking, plenty of CC and her perfect pull potential with 2 FD classes.

I can’t think of any 3 classes that compliment each other better than 2x ench and cleric

[Vexenu]

pretty sure the thread is called BEST TRIO, not viable trio's

cool story bro
Best trio was literally settled in the OP by unanimous consensus, thread is now about viable trios and DSM posts.

[Rimitto]

What?

Shamans turn hp into mana. Shamans can turn mana into hp (heals). Necros turn hp into mana. Necros turn mana into heals via taps. Necro can ALSO turn their hps into healing of others.

That loop right there is simply absurd with regards to synergy all by itself. It ignores all the other ways each of these classes complement each other so beautifully. That … and with regrowth + torpor + necro heal you’re looking at the equivalent of an on demand 440hp HoT … which is frankly more than enough healing for any groupable trophy kill in the game once it is slowed.

For the pre-60 and pretorpor game, necro/shaman synergy means there will always be mana for buffs, heals, slows … no real med breaks needed

It’s a high dps group that has healing coming out of its ears, strong tanking, plenty of CC and her perfect pull potential with 2 FD classes.

I can’t think of any 3 classes that compliment each other better than 2x ench and cleric

You've just perfectly highlighted the problem. :cool:

Everything the shm-nec synergy can do is only tied to HP and Mana.

pacify? nope.
roots? basic ones.
buffs? shm only nec has no buffs.
stuns? nope.
memblur? nope.

There are many things that shaman-necro cannot do, that the other classes in the rng-cle-bar CAN do.

It's the versatility vs viability argument. Since the original argument is to not allow enchanters in, I'm throwing in the extra rule of no-charming. Necro at this point is just a battery, your shaman isn't gonna be outputting that much dps, and your bard is your tank???
How do you even kill anything when all you have at that point are hp/mana defenses? :rolleyes:

Dedicated rolls don't need to play patsy around their sole synergy setup to function, they rely on the synergy as a backup while their main class rolls ARE synergy.
A ranger for example is a partial tank and partial puller. They excel at both of those things when they have a full healer or full CC. Bard is a partial CC, cleric is a full Healer. Ranger benefits solely from the synergy of being around them.

If you want to argue natural synergy vs forced synergy, feel free.
I've played in groups of natural synergy and the exp and levels flew by.
I've played in groups of forced synergy, and it was "decent" exp but very stressful, not the best parties.

The question is "best trio", which I would describe as a group that doesn't have issues partying anything/everything they attempt while not being a burden or taxing to the party at the same time.
If you can go 10 hours in a party with very little breaks, then clearly that's the best party.
If you have to break every 20 minutes or less, then clearly it's a forced synergy.

[Jimjam]

WAR/MAG/CLR would be good but you'd definitely want a Truncheon for slow 50+ and you would be leaning very heavily on the Cleric for all CC and lull splitting, which would bite you in the ass after awhile. I wouldn't want to play this unless the Warrior and Cleric (the latter with a nice CHA set) were both well-twinked from the jump. This trio would be a fun non-stop chainsaw through low blue mobs, but I think the best you can say about it is that it would be an easy way to level two very in-demand raid classes and a CoTH bot at the same time.

Can also Midnight Mallet? 3 toons to hold charges on emergencies! Don't forget pocket toon for recharges *dodges rotten fruit*

[bcbrown]

You just agreed and replaced the entire party 1 class at a time :rolleyes:

That was the point I was making. It's good and would be fun, but I don't think it would be best at anything. You're making a good argument for it though.

[Zuranthium]

A level 52 Cleric has enough mana to CH Chardok Royals.

No. They. Don't.

As already talked about, and which you continually ignore, that was done (barely) with ENCHANTERS - the most powerful class in the game. Look at the title of the thread.

There are plenty of other encounters where the Cleric is going to be needed too. We don't have to list them for you. That's your own lack of experience if you don't know and it's pointless to talk about since you are not qualified to discuss it.

Cleric with ranger and bard has solid synergy, not only in the fact that it's protected by some good defensive and HP buffs, but also superior healing, as well as bard buffs to further reinforce the hardyness and dps of the party, as well as mana for cleric.

Definitely agree that Bard + Cleric is the necessary setup to beat the hardest encounters, but Monk is better than Ranger. Monk tanks better and does more DPS and has FD pulling.

Best trio was literally settled in the OP by unanimous consensus

No it wasn't. Necro/Monk/Shaman is strong, probably the easiest trio, but not the absolute best.

[Toxigen]

I'm not trying to downplay your shaman, necro strats, but there's just not that much actual synergy or options between it.
Necro has 1 buff, DMF.. and 1 mana regen "twitch" which only the shaman can benefit from. It's jenky.


holy shit you're bad at eq

before torpor the necro is the main healer with the shaman there for emergency burst heals

[Vivitron]

Can also Midnight Mallet? 3 toons to hold charges on emergencies! Don't forget pocket toon for recharges *dodges rotten fruit*

Before Tox said no pockets I was going to suggest that we should assume the standard "pants rule" -- each player gets two main pockets, two back pockets (bank mules), and one weird little pocket. You've solved the mystery of the purpose of the weird little pocket -- it's the charger pocket.

[Toxigen]

and one pocket pussy

[DeathsSilkyMist]

No. They. Don't.


Yes they do. Unless you are claiming PatChapp is lying. I've done CH duty on sub 60 pocket clerics too.


There are plenty of other encounters where the Cleric is going to be needed too. We don't have to list them for you. That's your own lack of experience if you don't know and it's pointless to talk about since you are not qualified to discuss it.


In other words, you can't name the camps where a level 52 cleric couldn't do it, but a level 60 cleric could do it in the context of a trio. If you were "qualified", you'd be able to list them instead of dodging the question and attacking me instead.

[Toxigen]

Yes they do. Unless you are claiming PatChapp is lying. I've done CH duty on sub 60 pocket clerics too.



he said he did it, but also said it was dicey AF

and hes a very good enchanter

id be willing to bet he would agree that having a 60 cleric would increase rate of success by quite a bit

[DeathsSilkyMist]

he said he did it, but also said it was dicey AF

and hes a very good enchanter

id be willing to bet he would agree that having a 60 cleric would increase rate of success by quite a bit

Sure. Nobody said a 60 Cleric is bad. At the end of the day a skilled group can do it with a sub 60 Cleric. That is why people make pocket Clerics. It's less time, effort, and money to main an Enchanter or Shaman, and then pocket a 52 Cleric.

[plzrelax]

Bard and a couple wizards for leveling

[Vexenu]

No it wasn't. Necro/Monk/Shaman is strong, probably the easiest trio, but not the absolute best.
What do you rank above it?

[Vear99]

theres no way this trio out performs shaman / monk / necro at any stage of the game

I agree, but a thread with only '+1' would be boring! And I think that at 60, and with a lot of raid gear, WAR/CLR/MAG isn't that far off. Leveling untwinked it's not close unless you make a huge friends list of enchanters.

vear is dsm, btw

dude

but I think the best you can say about it is that it would be an easy way to level two very in-demand raid classes and a CoTH bot at the same time.

This made me laugh, but when I wrote this I was thinking about how I used to sell demon fangs MQs by fighting Xenevorash straight up (no guard cheese) with Warrior/Cleric. It was always a rush because the heals had to be extremely well timed. I think Kunark dragons or General V'ghera might be a possibility too. On TAKP someone 3-boxed Telkorenar and Vindi WAR/CLR/CLR in Luclin.

Another interesting area might be Siren's Grotto; any group without a cleric would really struggle with the huge damage shield on the icy servants, and they could be easily slowed with a truncheon. The problem would definitely be pulls, but you can try some crazy shenanigans like casting AOE stun and then running back with whatever resists, getting a COH, and trying to tag the back end of the train if it doesn't look too bad. The Sirens themselves barely do any damage to a well geared melee; I used to solo them on my monk or duo them non-stop with a Druid. I think you could do the spore king with this trio as well, although for sure it would be a million times smoother with MNK/SHM/NEC.

[Zuranthium]

Yes they do. Unless you are claiming PatChapp is lying.

You have a serious problem. Repeating for the 3rd time, THAT WAS WITH ENCHANTERS, and it barely worked. Does this thread allow Enchanters? NO.

In other words, you can't name the camps where a level 52 cleric couldn't do it, but a level 60 cleric could do it in the context of a trio. If you were "qualified", you'd be able to list them instead of dodging the question

There have already been others listed throughout the course of the discussions in the past week. You simply never listen. People who are qualified don't need to waste more time talking to riff raff like you, someone who can't even comprehend a simple discussion and makes ludicrous strawmans about completely different scenarios. People also don't necessarily want to give privileged info either.

Bard and a couple wizards for leveling

I brought that up earlier, 2 Bard and a Wizard is best. Swarming being justly limited to 25 MOBs means there is benefit to doing 2 swarms simultaneously, and 2 Bard is wayyyyyyy better in general than 2 Wiz.

What do you rank above it?

Bard + Monk + Cleric/Shaman

Whatever the group is, it can't claim to be the overall best if it doesn't have a Bard. The universal charm ability and incredibly versatile toolkit, along with the fastest run speed in the game, is such a powerful package. In places where undead charms are available a Necro can outperform, but that's not everywhere, so Bard is better overall.

[Penish]

bard / monk / cleric is the cleanerist

[DeathsSilkyMist]

You have a serious problem. Repeating for the 3rd time, THAT WAS WITH ENCHANTERS, and it barely worked. Does this thread allow Enchanters? NO.


I would love for you to name a camp this trio (without Enchanters) would be doing that a 52 Cleric couldn't do, but a 60 Cleric could do. My Chardok Royals example simply shows that higher end single group content can be done with pocket characters.


There have already been others listed throughout the course of the discussions in the past week. You simply never listen. People who are qualified don't need to waste more time talking to riff raff like you, someone who can't even comprehend a simple discussion and makes ludicrous strawmans about completely different scenarios. People also don't necessarily want to give privileged info either.

Please link the posts that mention these camps. Alternatively, summarize. You seem to be suggesting you read these posts that supposedly exist. It would take you less time to do that as opposed to dodging the question.

I am not sure how information that was supposedly already posted earlier this week is "priviledged". It's pretty tough to hide camp information these days too. P99 has been around for 14+ years at this point.

[Troxx]

A posting trend is emerging ….

Tox I think your thread is being hijacked

[Penish]

surprise, surprise, dsm is an idiot /cough

also lol

[Vexenu]

MAG/MAG/MAG would struggle versus really challenging stuff but would be stupidly powerful and fun while leveling. Three air pets (throw in some Gnoll Hide Lariats when possible) to keep mobs perma-stun locked, along with triple Burnt Wood Staff spam. Mobs melting as fast as they can be pulled, pets barely taking damage.

[Keebz]

Chardok Royals can be done with a level 52 Cleric.

Yea clerics are really good when logged in and actively played. That's my whole point.

[PatChapp]

I'm sorry I did this to everyone.

[Solist]

Who in their fucking mind said ranger for anything? Obviously have only ever played ranger here, or have never played ranger. There is no point where you have played a ranger AND something else where you would suggest a ranger is useful for anything in the game, let alone part of a 3man group. These forums never cease to amaze me when rangers which are inherently (by mechanics and bugs) broken here are ever spoken about.


Anyway back on topic.
I'd make the argument that CLE / SHM / MNK is the best.

The addition of pacify, memblur, cheap rezboxes, stun interrupts, and hitpoints cant be scoffed at, a properly played cleric is something this server mostly hasnt seen. There's like 5 people who aren't inbred on this class.

I would suggest the endurance would be higher on single fights with this over necro given the extra HP and healing efficiency. The general agility of the group with the addition of a charisma buff is fairly solid. Great ability to save the cleric on a fail.

For general levelling the necro would be superior especially from low 50's. From 60 onwards except for crawling with undead charmable I'll take the mnk/cle/sham almost exclusively.

[Rimitto]

Definitely agree that Bard + Cleric is the necessary setup to beat the hardest encounters, but Monk is better than Ranger. Monk tanks better and does more DPS and has FD pulling.

I've been in this party setup before and I can attest to it's durability, however, it has it's limitations as well. The monk doesn't have any specialty to it other than taking a beating, and if the monk becomes overwhelmed by pulling 2 many mobs or some type of magic like a DoT or root, then the conversation immediately goes from "is he the better tank" to "is there a cleric with a good ress in the zone". Monks are a niche class that really can only do things in a single way, and once that paradigm is broken, they can't do much else. The bard and cleric would additionally have to pick up the slack for rooting any adds, pops, or extras that the monk doesn't have, which would cause more stress on them.

Ranger also has a larger HP pool than monk which is noticable. You can buff the HP pools and AC of the tank/puller as a cleric, which is something that other combos like necro/shaman just simply don't do or can't do. The closest is what, shaman's talisman's? In other words, the cleric can turn a ranger into a psuedo-warrior, but the monk's best can be a psuedo-ranger in durability.

I'm talking about real-time parties btw, not enclosed situations in a bubble. Shit goes down all the time, and you need to react to it. In those moments you never think "oh darn, I think we really needed a monk to help us out of this jam". It's always "a ranger would've helped", "could use a bard", or "some good healing would be nice."

The question really comes down to Shaman vs Cleric as healing goes, and the statements of shaman utility vs clerics superiority comes into question, but having a Ranger in the party cuts down on Shaman's utility, while Cleric's usefulness is only multiplied by having a class that can tank.

At that point, you'd have to start a different argument of what's better...
Shaman-Necro-Bard vs Ranger-Cleric-Bard


holy shit you're bad at eq

before torpor the necro is the main healer with the shaman there for emergency burst heals

before 60 the necro is the main healer.... is a better way to say that statement. :rolleyes:

It's factually wrong, but keep going with that.
The reason people keep playing clerics is because of the sheer difference in their healing ability vs other classes that simply get by from having healing.

It's like having a glass of water on a hot day vs swimming in a pool or a lake on a hot day. The cleric's innate superior healing abilities allow the parties to pull more and harder targets. You can claim that the necro "is a better healer" if your party isn't taking damage, but the second that shit goes down, you'll be praying your ass off that there's a cleric in the zone. That's why people have pocket clerics to begin with, if they truly didn't need them, the concept of "pocket" wouldn't even exist.

Anyone arguing otherwise and still arguing FOR pockets is just in denial about this hard fact.

[plzrelax]

MAG/MAG/MAG would struggle versus really challenging stuff but would be stupidly powerful and fun while leveling. Three air pets (throw in some Gnoll Hide Lariats when possible) to keep mobs perma-stun locked, along with triple Burnt Wood Staff spam. Mobs melting as fast as they can be pulled, pets barely taking damage.

I’m early green, weren’t there some relatively low level all mage/necro groups that were able to go in pretty deep into zones like lguk pretty early on in the server? I don’t think enchanters were part of those groups (maybe they were)

I think the answer to this question can change depending on the stage of the server. A power trio early on can help fund the shaman/monk/bard or whatever later on in the server’s life

[Solist]

drool

You're the dude talking about rangers being more useful?

You've never played a ranger. Or you've never played anything but a ranger.

[Solist]

I’m early green, weren’t there some relatively low level all mage/necro groups that were able to go in pretty deep into zones like lguk pretty early on in the server? I don’t think enchanters were part of those groups (maybe they were)

I think the answer to this question can change depending on the stage of the server. A power trio early on can help fund the shaman/monk/bard or whatever later on in the server’s life

Mages on green's pets capped at level 29. Yes on lguk, but after mid 30's that all fell apart fairly rapidly. You had to carry a mage after that, big burdon on the grp.

[Penish]

BURDON

lol

[Jimjam]

Who in their fucking mind said ranger for anything? Obviously have only ever played ranger here, or have never played ranger. There is no point where you have played a ranger AND something else where you would suggest a ranger is useful for anything in the game, let alone part of a 3man group. These forums never cease to amaze me when rangers which are inherently (by mechanics and bugs) broken here are ever spoken about.


Anyway back on topic.
I'd make the argument that CLE / SHM / MNK is the best.

The addition of pacify, memblur, cheap rezboxes, stun interrupts, and hitpoints cant be scoffed at, a properly played cleric is something this server mostly hasnt seen. There's like 5 people who aren't inbred on this class.

I would suggest the endurance would be higher on single fights with this over necro given the extra HP and healing efficiency. The general agility of the group with the addition of a charisma buff is fairly solid. Great ability to save the cleric on a fail.

For general levelling the necro would be superior especially from low 50's. From 60 onwards except for crawling with undead charmable I'll take the mnk/cle/sham almost exclusively.

Ranger wildly acclaimed as worst, yet most fun, melee with lots of gear options, including self-gearing up during levelling. One of the moat [ed: most🥂🍾 typo kept for prosperity] important aspects of a static is maintaining the commitment - ie psychological, and ranger plays into that best.

[Zuranthium]

Monks are a niche class that really can only do things in a single way. Ranger also has a larger HP pool than monk which is noticable. In other words, the cleric can turn a ranger into a psuedo-warrior, but the monk's best can be a psuedo-ranger in durability.

Niche class?? LOL. Feign Death opens things up that Ranger simply can't, who cares about "1 way of doing things" in the scope of this discussion, when it's better. Monk tanks better than Ranger. It's about avoidance. Rangers barely have more HP, that's nothing compared to other factors. Monk also does more DPS.

Your argument that it's "more stress" for a Cleric to root an add is preposterous. They don't have much else they need to be doing and a "best" group is not going to get themselves into many situations they can't handle. Monk has better numbers than Ranger and gives the trio a powerful ability it wouldn't otherwise have, that's what's matters most. Not having an extra person to cast root.

Mages on green's pets capped at level 29. Yes on lguk, but after mid 30's that all fell apart fairly rapidly. You had to carry a mage after that, big burdon on the grp.

Even if they didn't get new pets after Level 29 for some reason, a 29 pet + damage shield + nukes is still more DPS than a level 40 melee in that era. "Burden" :rolleyes:

[Elizondo]

The reason why Paladin is the best knight is because of his access to cleric spells

Having root / lull alone on a tank class is almost OP if you plan your stats accordingly

[Swish]

The reason why Paladin is the best knight is because of his access to cleric spells

Having root / lull alone on a tank class is almost OP if you plan your stats accordingly

I'm not lugging bags of charisma gear around. Go team SK!

[Snaggles]

I'm not lugging bags of charisma gear around. Go team SK!

Without swapping gear on low level blues your crit fail chance is still pretty low. I did Seb ABC at 60 and got maybe 3 crit resists in 2hrs. A full room in seb is more alarming than an extra geonid.

[Rimitto]

Niche class?? LOL. Feign Death opens things up that Ranger simply can't, who cares about "1 way of doing things" in the scope of this discussion, when it's better. Monk tanks better than Ranger. It's about avoidance. Rangers barely have more HP, that's nothing compared to other factors. Monk also does more DPS.

Your argument that it's "more stress" for a Cleric to root an add is preposterous. They don't have much else they need to be doing and a "best" group is not going to get themselves into many situations they can't handle. Monk has better numbers than Ranger and gives the trio a powerful ability it wouldn't otherwise have, that's what's matters most. Not having an extra person to cast root.


You're contradicting yourself with your argument... you say root doesn't matter but somehow FD "opens things up"? :rolleyes:
You're just trading one Semantics for the other now.
What about harmony? damage shields? secondary (albeit shitty) healing? pretty sure rangers get something called wolf form too, as well as invisibility.

But no, the only thing you care about is how to make monk work.
Because FD is your god. Don't mind that the entire party will be stuck trying to get into a place and be sitting there for 10 minutes waiting for either regen or to take out a monster that is undead and see's through your invis.
The party setup I stated deals with that easily, and it's a very common issue in many areas.

you keep saying "best" but what is best? Monk doesn't fit anywhere in the "best" category. I know you love FD but monk isnt' the best tank, It's not the best puller, it's not even the best DPS. Monk is a utility class. It's an offtank puller. The only reason it's an offtank puller is because of it's FD.

take away it's FD and what does it actually do better than any other class? Nothing.
You say it's the best DPS, I say necro can charm undead, I say zerk-dancing a warrior is far superior dmg, I say aside from very specific classes like cleric, that most of the classes in the game can out damage an inflated monk's dps ego.

A level 20 monk and a level 20 paladin fighting things in unrest. That paladin is gonna have ghoulbane, and you're arguing that the monk is going to be best.

a level 30 monk and a level 30 ranger fighting in highkeep basement. The ranger is gonna have harmony, and you're arguing that the monk is going to be the best.

a level 40 monk and a level 40 warrior fighting in city of mist. The warrior is going to be geared at this point, and you're arguing that the monk is going to be the best.


You need to learn about roles and what they exist for. Or at least play the game once in your life.

fool

I actually have played ranger, and I know their capabilities and incapability. I've also played paladin and warrior so I know how to tank pretty well, as well as what each class is capable of. Personally I found monks to be the worst tanks that think they're the best. I can also attest to this as a cleric that has had to deal with ALL of them, including bards that think they're also tanks. :rolleyes:

In ranking order, best to worst:
Warriors
Shadowknights
Rangers
Paladins
Bards*
Monks

This is the listing order of best to worst tanks I've experienced in P99.
A proper warrior is fields and realities better as a tank than the best shadowknight.
A good shadowknight is fields and realities better than the best ranger.
A good ranger is about the same as a mediocre or bad warrior/shadowknight.
A good paladin is about the same as a decent ranger.
A good bard is about the same as a mediocre ranger or paladin.
A good monk is about as good as a bad ranger or mediocre bard.

I earnestly don't know how hard you'd have to twink a monk to think they are "the best tanks ever" but, if you put even an ounce of effort into a warrior or shadowknight instead, the difference wouldn't even be laughable.

[Toxigen]

You're contradicting yourself with your argument... you say root doesn't matter but somehow FD "opens things up"? :rolleyes:
You're just trading one Semantics for the other now.
What about harmony? damage shields? secondary (albeit shitty) healing? pretty sure rangers get something called wolf form too, as well as invisibility.

But no, the only thing you care about is how to make monk work.
Because FD is your god. Don't mind that the entire party will be stuck trying to get into a place and be sitting there for 10 minutes waiting for either regen or to take out a monster that is undead and see's through your invis.
The party setup I stated deals with that easily, and it's a very common issue in many areas.

you keep saying "best" but what is best? Monk doesn't fit anywhere in the "best" category. I know you love FD but monk isnt' the best tank, It's not the best puller, it's not even the best DPS. Monk is a utility class. It's an offtank puller. The only reason it's an offtank puller is because of it's FD.

take away it's FD and what does it actually do better than any other class? Nothing.
You say it's the best DPS, I say necro can charm undead, I say zerk-dancing a warrior is far superior dmg, I say aside from very specific classes like cleric, that most of the classes in the game can out damage an inflated monk's dps ego.

A level 20 monk and a level 20 paladin fighting things in unrest. That paladin is gonna have ghoulbane, and you're arguing that the monk is going to be best.

a level 30 monk and a level 30 ranger fighting in highkeep basement. The ranger is gonna have harmony, and you're arguing that the monk is going to be the best.

a level 40 monk and a level 40 warrior fighting in city of mist. The warrior is going to be geared at this point, and you're arguing that the monk is going to be the best.


You need to learn about roles and what they exist for. Or at least play the game once in your life.



I actually have played ranger, and I know their capabilities and incapability. I've also played paladin and warrior so I know how to tank pretty well, as well as what each class is capable of. Personally I found monks to be the worst tanks that think they're the best. I can also attest to this as a cleric that has had to deal with ALL of them, including bards that think they're also tanks. :rolleyes:

In ranking order, best to worst:
Warriors
Shadowknights
Rangers
Paladins
Bards*
Monks

This is the listing order of best to worst tanks I've experienced in P99.
A proper warrior is fields and realities better as a tank than the best shadowknight.
A good shadowknight is fields and realities better than the best ranger.
A good ranger is about the same as a mediocre or bad warrior/shadowknight.
A good paladin is about the same as a decent ranger.
A good bard is about the same as a mediocre ranger or paladin.
A good monk is about as good as a bad ranger or mediocre bard.

I earnestly don't know how hard you'd have to twink a monk to think they are "the best tanks ever" but, if you put even an ounce of effort into a warrior or shadowknight instead, the difference wouldn't even be laughable.

all these words and you could have just typed "im bad at eq"

[cd288]

all these words and you could have just typed "im bad at eq"

Yeah once he mentioned those comments at the end about Bards and Monks it's clear he doesn't know what he's talking about

[grims]

Warrior/ monk, shaman and necro imo.

Warrior or monk has great dps / very tanky. Shaman for haste, slow, regen and heal. Necro can help heal both maximizing heal ticks, fd split, interupt spells and mes with extra pet damage

[Troxx]

I smoke bath salts.

Sorry … that’s the only thing I took away from your post.

[Duik]

Ranger 3rd best tank. Monk shit dps. Paly worse tank than ranger.
I wanna see (the hilarious video of) rimitto and dsm grouping.

[Troxx]

I didn’t think it could be possible, but this joker makes DSM look like a Rhodes Scholar.

[Rimitto]

Ranger 3rd best tank. Monk shit dps. Paly worse tank than ranger.
I wanna see (the hilarious video of) rimitto and dsm grouping.

Ranger is a better tank than Paladin.
Maybe you've never had the honor of healing a ranger, healing a paladin.
I can tell you this from my experiences, a properly geared ranger can hold much better than a properly geared paladin.

I've had several parties where the ranger would have to tank simply because we didn't have a proper warrior or shadowknight, The ranger bleeds, but their HP holds and they can pull shenanigans if things go south.

Paladins NEVER pull shenanigans when things go south, and when they start to bleed, the hemorrhage like an anemic walrus after a shark attack. When paladins start to drop, there's usually very little I can do to save them other than to try a quick heal, followed by a stun, followed by another quick heal, and hope that's enough to get a CH off or some other bigger heal. They drain my mana reserves like it's candy and think they're the best tanks in the world.

Rangers bleed normally. I can warn my party when rangers tank when I get lom, with paladins, it's death all at once.
Warriors and Shadowknights are obviously the best tanks. There's no comparison.

Monks bleed HARD by comparison to the other 3. Bards have a unique * by their name because they have the capability of psuedo-tanking up to, what, 25 mobs at once? They have capabilities that exceed monk and ranger, but they're also unique in their playstyle and how they actually "tank", aka holding aggro.

On that note of holding aggro, paladin has 2 ways to really hold aggro, that of root and blind.

Ranger often has the higher dps, and gets DPS aggro, but they also have root as well. In addition they have a few spells that give higher/lower levels of aggro like flame lick*(supposedly the aggro on this was reduced or removed????) and harmony.

Maybe you've never played the healer role, but there's a clear difference for me when I'm partying with a warrior, a ranger, a monk, or a paladin.

all you guys are doing is insulting now. makes me think you don't actually play the game. haven't heard one testimonial from any of you. :rolleyes:

@duik @troxx @toxigen @cd288
Are you all these "bots" you keep clamoring on about? reply with insults if you're a bot.

[Toxigen]

what the fuck did i just read?

[Vexenu]

Not sure what kind of retarded and/or massively undergeared Paladins you've been grouping with, but the class, properly played, is in no way inferior to Rangers as a tank.

[Rimitto]

Not sure what kind of retarded and/or massively undergeared Paladins you've been grouping with, but the class, properly played, is in no way inferior to Rangers as a tank.

I've yet to see what a "properly played" paladin looks like that is somehow this mythical amazing, better than warrior or shadowknight, tank.

They mostly bleed from my experience. Rangers bleed slightly less.

[PatChapp]

How much mescaline did you smoke before writing that

[cd288]

what the fuck did i just read?

He turned the chat bot back on for that one

[Troxx]

Ranger is a better tankthan Paladin.


https://media2.giphy.com/media/s0eghiB10oDN84St9b/200w.gif?cid=6c09b952n8zncv4vkgq150o26e3mn1jpr6i04 urkdd433so5&ep=v1_videos_search&rid=200w.gif&ct=v

[Zuranthium]

They mostly bleed from my experience. Rangers bleed slightly less.

WTF are you talking about. Look at the actual numbers in the game coding. Monks have the highest damage reduction. Then Pally/SK. And then Ranger (who also have less HP than Pally/SK).

This is inarguable. The random shit you're saying is wrong.

Rangers bleed normally. I can warn my party when rangers tank when I get lom, with paladins, it's death all at once.

Ranger often has the higher dps, and gets DPS aggro, but they also have root as well.

If we're talking things besides their damage reduction and HP when it comes to tanking, this is still not very accurate. Paladins have root and better heals than Rangers. They don't have an issue gaining aggro and they generally stop more damage than Rangers can, not just from their base stats but also from their other abilities.

There are a few things that can be argued in favor of Rangers:

1.) Snare - this is mostly irrelevant to the situations you're talking about. Root already provides crowd control. Where snare does help is keeping a Charm pet snared, providing more room and time to react on breaks.

2.) Access to 50% slow proc (whereas otherwise slow will just be 35%). While this can help, it's not reliable, and a Ranger tanking a 50% slowed target is still going to take more damage than a Monk tanking a 35% snared target. Compared to a Pally/SK, the Ranger may have a small advantage in damage reduction. I'd need to see some more detailed number crunching for that. However, the Pally getting a bigger return from C-heal and having better healing of their own certainly tips the scale in their favor overall.

3.) Better DPS (things dying faster = less damage taken). Some direct testing will be required to further debate this. I'd very much like to see someone set up a Paladin vs Ranger test scenario (will require "equal level" of gear) where the trio has to kill some very hard MOB. Let's see in which scenario the Cleric ends the fight with more mana. What I do know for sure is MONKS have the highest DPS and damage reduction, plus the amazing feign death addition, making them the best choice of any melee class for this trio.

[Vexenu]

The trio of non-Enchanter POWER trios for maximum style and effectiveness:

Monk/Shaman/Necro
IKS/IKS/IKS

Monk/Shaman/Bard
HUM/BAR/ELF

Mage/Mage/Mage
GNM/GNM/GNM

[Rimitto]

WTF are you talking about. Look at the actual numbers in the game coding. Monks have the highest damage reduction. Then Pally/SK. And then Ranger (who also have less HP than Pally/SK).

This is inarguable. The random shit you're saying is wrong.



If we're talking things besides their damage reduction and HP when it comes to tanking, this is still not very accurate. Paladins have root and better heals than Rangers. They don't have an issue gaining aggro and they generally stop more damage than Rangers can, not just from their base stats but also from their other abilities.

There are a few things that can be argued in favor of Rangers:

1.) Snare - this is mostly irrelevant to the situations you're talking about. Root already provides crowd control. Where snare does help is keeping a Charm pet snared, providing more room and time to react on breaks.

2.) Access to 50% slow proc (whereas otherwise slow will just be 35%). While this can help, it's not reliable, and a Ranger tanking a 50% slowed target is still going to take more damage than a Monk tanking a 35% snared target. Compared to a Pally/SK, the Ranger may have a small advantage in damage reduction. I'd need to see some more detailed number crunching for that. However, the Pally getting a bigger return from C-heal and having better healing of their own certainly tips the scale in their favor overall.

3.) Better DPS (things dying faster = less damage taken). Some direct testing will be required to further debate this. I'd very much like to see someone set up a Paladin vs Ranger test scenario (will require "equal level" of gear) where the trio has to kill some very hard MOB. Let's see in which scenario the Cleric ends the fight with more mana. What I do know for sure is MONKS have the highest DPS and damage reduction, plus the amazing feign death addition, making them the best choice of any melee class for this trio.

You guys keep saying it's "the best" but every time I see a monk die in my party trying to pull something I keep thinking to myself "why didn't they just roll ranger or something useful". I can share a story of highkeep basement.. very mellow group at the time, had a ranger, a shaman, a wizard, myself. It was an okay party and we were splitting raiders and warriors fairly well thanks to harmony. An iksar shaman came down and wanted to party, he was a few levels above us, and had that fabled holgresh beads. He was using the eye to pull things, and completely messed up the camps we had split, which eventually lead to a huge train and killed the wizard and nearly everyone else. I think the ranger might have also died near the bank trying to run away. This monk got uppity after that and when called out for his lack of skill, he ranted off about how he has the best gear in the game and then logged off. After that the ranger began pulling again and things went smoothly from that point on for a few hours until the party ended.

That's just one example of the type of monks I've dealt with.


Paladins aren't all that much better from my experience. Sure they can tank, but I've seen rangers tank better, warriors and shadowknights are clearly the best tanks since they require so little healing simply by comparison. Paladins are about on average with the same as rangers, they both bleed, but rangers have higher technical skills than paladin. I've seen paladins struggle heavily with aggro before, and when they finally do get it, they just bleed. I've honestly NEVER seen a ranger have problems holding aggro, which is one of the primary rolls of the tank archetype. Yes, that's right, I've seen paladins fail to hold aggro, and when they do, they bleed.
Rangers bleed too, but they actually kill the monsters. Doesn't take a genius to see the enormous difference in these 2 statements, the dps actually matters from a healing standpoint, especially when talking about the "Best Trio" that doesn't include enchanter.

I'll try to explain this in mathematics since you're focused more on the code than the results. lets' say it takes me 12% mana to heal a paladin or a ranger from half health to full health. If the med time it takes for me to regenerate that 12% mana is more than the health loss of said paladin/ranger, I will be playing a losing game trying to catch up mana and will eventually have to call to stop pulls. That's simple math.
Let's say, for example, I only regenerate 6% mana before needing to heal again. This means that eventually I WILL have to call for a stop. At that point, the only difference in the party will how many monsters will be killed in that time. You can argue what things should be and how they're coded all day, but time is a factor that cannot be ignored, abused, or sidelined. Even a single round can be life or death, which leads to minutes of recovery, which leads to minutes of loss.

Trying to calculate all of these variables leads to one ultimate conclusion, that the "best" option is the most viable and least outlandish.
Much like how Tom Brady was the best Quarterback in the NFL, despite being so mediocre, the best party combination is the same way. It's stability that the BEST needs, not arbitrary stats.

Rangers can tank.
Rangers can pull.
Rangers can do CC.
Rangers can DPS.

These are inarguable facts.

I'll give you this question to think about....
Why do Monks always die on pulls but rangers never die on pulls? :rolleyes:

[plzrelax]

That reminds me of a time when I was in a group in KC and there was this fancy ranger that joined in and he had all these fancy items like his epics and cool looking armor and stuff but then he literally died three times while we were playing and eventually just left and I was just sitting there laughing like lmao rangers suck

[Rimitto]

That reminds me of a time when I was in a group in KC and there was this fancy ranger that joined in and he had all these fancy items like his epics and cool looking armor and stuff but then he literally died three times while we were playing and eventually just left and I was just sitting there laughing like lmao rangers suck

willing to bet his main was a gnome.
pretty sure the monk I had issues with was also a main gnome.

[Toxigen]

I'm convinced Rim has never had a char higher than 40.

Guy is either clueless or the best troll we've seen in a while.

[Elizondo]

Paladin's ceiling for making big plays far exceeds any other tank class

It's not even close

[Troxx]

lol … this guy is a hoot

[plzrelax]

I'm convinced Rim has never had a char higher than 40.

Guy is either clueless or the best troll we've seen in a while.

Iirc he is the same person that tried to make serious arguments in favor of using the enchanter pet and throwing knives as a superior stategy to charming a few years back. Could be nothing but a master troll

[Jimjam]

I'm convinced Rim has never had a char higher than 40.

Guy is either clueless or the best troll we've seen in a while.

You never grouped with an eyeball shaman that is also a monk?!

[Duik]

Someone seems to have an encyclopedic knowledge of anything that can be scraped from the interwebs.
Tom Brady. Pokemon. Bags in bags. Ranger tanks. Gameshark cheat codes.

What a guy.

[Duik]

I'll try to explain this in mathematics since you're focused more on the code than the results. lets' say it takes me 12% mana to heal a paladin or a ranger from half health to full health. If the med time it takes for me to regenerate that 12% mana is more than the health loss of said paladin/ranger, I will be playing a losing game trying to catch up mana and will eventually have to call to stop pulls. That's simple math.
That's alot of if and buts and a couple a coconuts. Your sentence forming algo is a bit awry. You come of as an adult in a room full of children.
Try to dial it back a bit to bot operator trying to pass of a badly developed bot as knowledgeable.
As an aside it seems to take many cues from the and only dsm.
Wise choice

[Zuranthium]

I've seen paladins struggle heavily with aggro before, and when they finally do get it, they just bleed.

Paladins have the same base tanking ability as SK's, which you keep talking about as being such great tanks, and they have root + better heals on top of it.

I'll give you this question to think about....
Why do Monks always die on pulls but rangers never die on pulls?

This isn't a thing that happens. You don't seem to have any experience playing with a high level or well geared Monk.

[Penish]

lol this dude is on par with dsm

lol

[Vexenu]

they just bleed

https://i.ytimg.com/vi/hmUhXSEx78A/hqdefault.jpg

[Knuckle]

No enchanters allowed because lets face it they're way too powerful.

I'll start:

Necro / Shaman / Monk

All iksar, start together at level 1, bigly RP lizardbros, can do well with low budget twinking or self-found, great off-meta Kunark leveling route.

There you go DSM, you finally got your Shaman in a "Best Group" hypothetical.

I imagine there is some content where maybe a warrior/cleric is superior. For those situations I would say Warrior/Cleric/Shaman for the slows/torpor/CH. I imagine that combo can tank the toughest content in the game short of major raids.

[Jimjam]

I imagine there is some content where maybe a warrior/cleric is superior. For those situations I would say Warrior/Cleric/Shaman for the slows/torpor/CH. I imagine that combo can tank the toughest content in the game short of major raids.

Shaman also adds huge dps with potions on content that needs ALL the heals, if we are assuming no economy/ entirely self found trio.

In self found there would be no enchanted jewelcraft (except maybe silver depending on timeline point). Assuming no silver fire wedding rings (2 30), etc what jewellery would the characters wear levelling up / peak?

[Snaggles]

Sure maybe killing Ixi with an extended kite to preslow but most really hard things need tash and OOS to reliably slow. That and the cost for the good Shaman DS pot is like 36p for 7 minutes.

For low-man stuff, especially slowable, swap the warrior for a monk. At least then you can pull and be shaman isn’t forced to keep haste up every 15 mins for their entire playing existence.

[sajbert]

I like Sham + Pal + Monk.

Strong healing with celestial cleansing + torpor + LOH and soulfire.
Decent damage mitigation.
Decent DPS
Haste, Slow and Malo.

Necro is cool but only truly shines in Undead zones.

[Vexenu]

I like Sham + Pal + Monk.

Strong healing with celestial cleansing + torpor + LOH and soulfire.
Decent damage mitigation.
Decent DPS
Haste, Slow and Malo.

Necro is cool but only truly shines in Undead zones.

Paladin would definitely be good but I think Necro is overall slightly better. Just having snare is super helpful in dungeons, and Screaming Terror for mez would also be very useful for helping the Monk split groups of casters. Necro healing is also stupidly efficient when you dispel the recourse, and over time will blow away the healing that the Paladin can sustain, especially without access to Clarity. And even without a charm pet, Necro DPS is still very respectable with just the hasted summoned pet and nukes/poison DoTs. There's also the obvious synergy with Shaman regen on the Necro allowing for more Lich and the Necro heals on the Shaman allowing for more Canni. The Paladin is really solid but just doesn't have the same level of synergy as the Necro.

[sajbert]

Paladin would definitely be good but I think Necro is overall slightly better. Just having snare is super helpful in dungeons, and Screaming Terror for mez would also be very useful for helping the Monk split groups of casters. Necro healing is also stupidly efficient when you dispel the recourse, and over time will blow away the healing that the Paladin can sustain, especially without access to Clarity. And even without a charm pet, Necro DPS is still very respectable with just the hasted summoned pet and nukes/poison DoTs. There's also the obvious synergy with Shaman regen on the Necro allowing for more Lich and the Necro heals on the Shaman allowing for more Canni. The Paladin is really solid but just doesn't have the same level of synergy as the Necro.
Snare is good, monks can snare with anklesmasher or the tunare 1hb though and paladins can root and also stun.

The necro definitely does provides a level of sustain that the Paladin can't match even with FT items. Question is if you need strong sustain or be able to take a harder beating during a shorter time window.

[Troxx]

I honesty don’t dispel the recourse on my necro - just tap through it.

[plzrelax]

I played a solid trio 55-60 druid, shaman, and cleric in chardok

[Vivitron]

I honesty don’t dispel the recourse on my necro - just tap through it.

I did dispel some on my necro 44-48 (post pact of shadow pre bond of death) but trying to keep the heal recourse top slot and protect good buffs with junks was an exercise in pain.

In that case I was duoing with a monk. When I hit 49 on the necro it was such a breath of fresh air; lich and bond of death are huge.

With the shaman I doubt I would dispel; I think between getting chloroplast if I'm not self dispelling, the shaman's slow reducing the healing burden, and already disliking the dispel I'd avoid it.

[Solist]

Cle sham monk clearly best.

[Zuranthium]

Cle sham monk clearly best.

Lack of DPS. Boring.

If we're measuring "best" in terms of "best farming potential", then it's not worth it. Maybe there's a couple relevant NPC's you can kill with Monk/Shaman/Cleric that can't be done with other trios under this restriction, but other compositions will be able to kill far more and thus get more drops.

[Rimitto]

Paladins have the same base tanking ability as SK's, which you keep talking about as being such great tanks, and they have root + better heals on top of it.

Paladins do not have the same base tanking ability as SK.
You just assert that they do because they are "light-dark" inversion in your mind.
Treat them as separate classes like they should be and you'll see SK are far better than paladin tanks.

"If you want to make this real stupid then I can go that route too... *AHEM* SK/Paladin/Ranger are just the Light/Dark/Nature inversions of each other. They all are the same, and have the same basic tanking abilities."

^-- see that up there, that's me putting stupid, like you're doing, into the equation.
I wouldn't compare a necro to an enchanter just because they can both charm undead, have fear spells, and roots, and can give others mana. Stop comparing SK to Paladin, they're different classes entirely, solely because of their skillsets.

I partied with a shadowknight yesterday down in guk, because of their ability to drain compared to heal, they could keep up the action without tiring the cleric out.(I was not the cleric in this party). A paladin in the same situation would lose time healing, and as such, would make the party clunkier. You could argue ghoulbane or some other shenanigans but there's a clear difference between SK and Pal.

Pal's are fun as heck to play, but they are far from the best tanks in the game. Warrior and ShadowKnight are simply superior. Maybe you've just never seen a truly good ShadowKnight and can't tell the difference. I've seen quite a few and they're on their way upwards.


This isn't a thing that happens. You don't seem to have any experience playing with a high level or well geared Monk.
oooaaaaayyyyy lololololololololol.

literally all the fking time rofl. :D

failure monk death(fmd for short), a term I just invented, is how I learned how to target corpses and drag them back to safe zones.

you can talk smack on the monks all you want, but monks dying is the standard. :rolleyes:

It goes like this, on the scale of possible death chart:
Enchanter -> Monk -> Wizard -> Cleric(myself) -> Druid -> everyone else.
If you can't figure out how or why that is, it's fairly clear you don't even play. ;)

[Elizondo]

Pretty sure necro dispelling the self damage of their heal isn't a thing anymore

It used to be top slot, but if I remember correctly they patched that out

It's random now

[Rimitto]

Iirc he is the same person that tried to make serious arguments in favor of using the enchanter pet and throwing knives as a superior stategy to charming a few years back. Could be nothing but a master troll
I still use zumaiks to this day. :rolleyes:
Throwing knives were actually incredibly useful in some situations too since it saved mana and an undergeared enchanter can't feasibly charm in lower levels.

There are also other things you don't know about them but, I really don't feel like sharing because you haven't earned it.:rolleyes:

[Duik]

Best.
Troll.
Ever.

[PatChapp]

I use zumaiks for some stuff, it has its uses. 3 zumaiks can kill verina tomb,you'll need to resummon as they die.

[cd288]

I partied with a shadowknight yesterday down in guk, because of their ability to drain compared to heal, they could keep up the action without tiring the cleric out.(I was not the cleric in this party). A paladin in the same situation would lose time healing, and as such, would make the party clunkier. You could argue ghoulbane or some other shenanigans but there's a clear difference between SK and Pal.

SKs have a slight edge over Pallys but this is definitely not why. And you are clearly making this story up because an SK relying on consistently lifetapping to avoid killing the Cleric's mana will kill it's own mana kind of quickly and then have to med up. It's also not a viable strategy as you level up for the pure reason that the SK lifetaps aren't level equivalent for the content they are doing and therefore will be insufficient later on.

[Zuranthium]

Animation pet was OP during p99's early years, doesn't seem like Rimitto was playing during that time though. If you're playing mostly AFK and just camping a single spawn the pet is still useful, can unload your mana bar on direct damage spells while the pet tanks, return to AFK, then when you get back you're full mana with a pet still ready to go. Also if you're grouping somewhere that only has higher level MOBs compared to your level, then charm will break a lot and it can be nice to just use the animation to add safe DPS.

Paladins do not have the same base tanking ability as SK.

Yes they do. Exact same HP/AC/Defense formulas and skillcaps.

And the big thing you were trying to talk about before was aggro and crowd control. How are SK's doing that better?

I partied with a shadowknight yesterday down in guk, because of their ability to drain compared to heal, they could keep up the action without tiring the cleric out.(I was not the cleric in this party)

I'm assuming you must mean DPS when you say "their ability to drain".

Yeah I prefer SK's as a whole because they do more DPS and fear kiting can be very strong. That doesn't mean they are a better "tank". Against really hard NPC's the Paladin healing is better too, SK spells get resisted.

[eqravenprince]

Why are you guys even bothering to respond to this guy?

[Duik]

Humans love to be subjugated. They are just welcomimg their Binary Overlords.
Nice work people. You never let me down.

[Jimjam]

Why are you guys even bothering to respond to this guy?

Single player mode unlocked!

I'm assuming you must mean DPS when you say "their ability to drain".

As the context was not overstretching clerics, I’d assume ‘drain’ meant tap tanking / vampitic embrace to reduce the amount of healing the tank requires.

[Zuranthium]

Paladin heals for more than SK's lifetap themselves, so that doesn't make sense. It would make sense if he means the SK is taking less damage overall because it kills faster.

[Troxx]

Paladins do not have the same base tanking ability as SK.
You just assert that they do because they are "light-dark" inversion in your mind.
Treat them as separate classes like they should be and you'll see SK are far better than paladin tanks.

Lol …

-They share the same melee tables.
-They have the same hp returns on stamina.
-They have the same ac softcaps.
-Their gearing choices are near identical.
-They will both face the same struggles juggling mana depending on buffs/group.
-They both lock and hold aggro equally well
-They are basically equal with regards to ease of healing until you factor in the below.
-from a tanking standpoint both are preferable to most all other classes as you have a plate tank with fully controllable, on demand aggro lock

SK pros:
-invis (instaclick if you have a prenerf)
-FD
-potential for dot DPS, but you probably won’t have the mana to use it often
-potential for pet DPS … but you rarely see them using it and it is mild
-inefficient but somewhat effective self healing potential (best is 1.5 hp per mana)
-buff proc for lifetap (quite good) cheap cast 20 min duration 50hp tap proc - does net an average of 100hp heal (about 10/tick) per minute combat for low cost
-snare +/- fear
-epic and greenmist procs are legit cool but ToV raid weapons are rot vs budget

SK cons:
-no root
-no blast heals or out of combat heals
-can’t heal others
-no cleric line of buffs (adds lots of value depending on group)
-no stun
-no rez
-no lull
-aggro spells less mana efficient
-no Yaulp

Paladin pros:
-capable at healing self and others (3.11/3.88 hp per mana HoT vs 2.1hp mana blast)
-clicky DW helm/BP for cheesy OP healing
-can stun
-can lull
-can root (tank powered crowd control - sk lacks)
-can cast unique hp buff and cleric line
-can rez
-super cheap aggro spam spell options (flash of light)
-Yaulp $$
-emergency LoH complete heal
-instaclick complete heals

Paladin cons:
-no FD
-no snare
-no innate invis capabilities
-fewer options to ramp up dps on demand
-no fear kiting

—————————————

Prior to level 59 in a pure routine tank and spank situation with 1 mob in camp and 1 mob hitting the tank, I’ll give the slight advantage to the SK as the passive lifetap procs will have them self healing efficiently and passively. After 59, even ignoring LoH and Cheal clicky, it isn’t even close. With a rapid cast time a paladin can self heal 700-875hp for 225 mana. At 60 the SK will spend that same 225 mana for a 338hp heal … and at level 59 would be spending 189 mana for a 226.

Between fights? Sk ain’t healing anyone (self or other) out of combat. Paladin can use mana for self heals … or 45+ has hugely OP clicky heals on self and others.

But remember - things get messy. Paladins can use cheap root for CC if multiples are in camp thus avoiding unnecessary extra damage on self/others, can stun casters on demand to keep fights shorter (no healing mobs) or avoid nasty damaging spells.

————————

Lol at Rimitto thinking SKs are the superior tank or placing paladins below rangers? Sorry, but for MOST content the list of tanking power in group situations is actually …

1. Paladin
2. SK (** Warrior)
3. Monk/ranger (**Warrior)
4. Bard (** Warrior)

** depends entirely on how well geared Warrior is from a threat generating standpoint. A very well geared Warrior beats them all for straight up dps and toe to toe tanking … Paladin will win by a college mile due to the abundance of #other they can do.

[Toxigen]

Rim is the most vocal noob I've ever seen here.

Guy is clueless...


...or trolling.

[Snaggles]

Rim is the most vocal noob I've ever seen here.

Guy is clueless...


...or trolling.

Master troll but doing great things for Ranger PR.

[Troxx]

Master troll but doing great things for Ranger PR.

A counter argument is that he risking Ranger reputation by totally over-selling how good they are at tanking?

A counter to that counter argument is that no risk exists because the community knows he is full of BS?

/popcorn


I still vote monk/necro/shaman.

[Snaggles]

A counter argument is that he risking Ranger reputation by totally over-selling how good they are at tanking?

A counter to that counter argument is that no risk exists because the community knows he is full of BS?

/popcorn


I still vote monk/necro/shaman.

You can’t risk what you don’t have (Rep)
Nobody believes rangers can tank stuff.

I take far more heat for ranger dps comments :)

[Troxx]

Yeah it never ceases to amaze me just how badly a higher level drolvarg guardian in KC can beat down my 59 fungi/chloro/SLN Ranger at times (bad luck) without an early slow proc. My monk, paladin, and warrior never had issues 55+ with those mobs unslowed. I’d say the same for my bard in that it took less damage per unit time … but with craptastic dps the fights solo lasted longer.

Rangers have snap aggro. With a healer they can get the job done for sure … but they take a lot more damage than alternatives (gear being equal).

[Solist]

Dude my ranger has/had vulak gear and red legs and stacked AC. Absolutely stacked it…. Since abandoned that build and stacked HP. Doze ear/fesh neck/koi orb/telk ring etc deleted. Still wear vulak boots for the resists but I think that’s only 0hp item. Spent a lot of time seeing what they could be capable of. Haha what a waste.

Doesn’t tank face to face any mob as good as a 55 monk in cheap tradable EC gear. With like 1300ac she takes the same or more damage on every test.

She also takes identical damage to when she has at 900ac

Rangers are broken on p99. At all levels they’re just broken. The stat does nothing for them past like a tiny worn cap of like 80 or something.

Both my rangers tank identically as they currently sit. One has 200ac more.

Yet AC is the best possible stat for nearly every other class for most gameplay.

[Ripqozko]

Dude my ranger has/had vulak gear and red legs and stacked AC. Absolutely stacked it…. Since abandoned that build and stacked HP. Doze ear/fesh neck/koi orb/telk ring etc deleted. Still wear vulak boots for the resists but I think that’s only 0hp item. Spent a lot of time seeing what they could be capable of. Haha what a waste.

Doesn’t tank face to face any mob as good as a 55 monk in cheap tradable EC gear. With like 1300ac she takes the same or more damage on every test.

She also takes identical damage to when she has at 900ac

Rangers are broken on p99. At all levels they’re just broken. The stat does nothing for them past like a tiny worn cap of like 80 or something.

Both my rangers tank identically as they currently sit. One has 200ac more.

Yet AC is the best possible stat for nearly every other class for most gameplay.

Rangers tank badly cause of broken ac, they do however dps better than most know with cek sword , 1h is garbage.

[Jimjam]

I’ve found rangers are almost entirely reliant on spell AC to tank. I swear unbuffed mine gets ragdolled even compared to my wizard. Lol.

[Rimitto]

Animation pet was OP during p99's early years, doesn't seem like Rimitto was playing during that time though. If you're playing mostly AFK and just camping a single spawn the pet is still useful, can unload your mana bar on direct damage spells while the pet tanks, return to AFK, then when you get back you're full mana with a pet still ready to go. Also if you're grouping somewhere that only has higher level MOBs compared to your level, then charm will break a lot and it can be nice to just use the animation to add safe DPS.

actually, that's more or less 1:1 how I used my animations. :rolleyes:
I'm not stupid cindy, I know monsters do 'more' damage in some cases, but animations are far more reliable, and in some situations, reliability trumps dps.
If magic were a weapon, the animation spells would have the finesse quality on it. :cool:

I'll give an example, albeit an odd one. I could go to seafury island, charm something, watch both monsters die and then go for the snipe double-kill. This leaves me with less mana but then I repeat the process.
Alternatively I could take the exp-hit, summon an animation, and just rely on that to kill seafurries. There's no risk of charm break, or wasting of any mana to double-kill at the end. The exp loss is definitely there, but is easily rectified by adding 1 other person to a party. Even without that party, it's still faster in the sense that I can focus more on keeping a steady flow of exp rather than deep diving into charm double-kill hope-it-works tactics. (this is the #1 cause of enchanter deaths, don't even argue that charmbreak isn't)
It's simply a question of steady vs risky from my point of view.
I prefer steady.
people that choose risky just simply cannot understand that methods outside of trying to kill yourself in the stupidest way possible exist.
in example: hurrdurr don't mind me, I"m just gonna charm this super GM mob, give him maximum haste, dual-wield him, give him buffs, yup he's a murder machine noCHARMBREAK ohshitsohstihoshit. *proceeds to blame the cleric*



Yes they do. Exact same HP/AC/Defense formulas and skillcaps.

And the big thing you were trying to talk about before was aggro and crowd control. How are SK's doing that better?

Well offhand, I figure they probably have better dps. I've only seen and experienced SK as tanks before, and only have experience as paladin. I've experienced other paladin tanks as well before, so I understand that paladin is mostly a 1-trick pony relying on blind/darkness. I'm assuming SK probably gets additional aggro from their spells, and probably have a decent assortment of weapons that are generally more focused on higher dps, which naturally would get them far more aggro.

as far as HP/AC/Defense, I simply do not see them being comparable in any way shape or form. I'll even take it a step further to add insult to injury on this one. If you're comparing a human paladin to a troll shadowknight, the regen factor alone is going to make the SK better. If you're comparing an dwarven paladin to an ogre shadowknight, the fact that ogres have frontal stun immunity is going to make a world of difference.
It's just a simple matter of logistics that the evil races getting shadowknight are simply better at tanking because of their racial bonuses.
We can keep going by comparing an erudite paladin to an iksar shadowknight if you want....

They're better at tanking, just admit it.



I'm assuming you must mean DPS when you say "their ability to drain".

Yeah I prefer SK's as a whole because they do more DPS and fear kiting can be very strong. That doesn't mean they are a better "tank". Against really hard NPC's the Paladin healing is better too, SK spells get resisted.

combined with the above reasons of why SK are better tanks, the "ability to drain" aka lifetap line, doesn't break them out of combat, like paladins would need to do. They don't change targets either. One thing I've noticed, maybe you could explain, is that whenever I'm in combat with my paladin and go to heal, after the heal he tries to "makeup" the rounds he's missed in the next round. Usually since he's self-targetting, the extra hits get nullified. This wouldn't happened with lifetap abilities since the targeting never changes.

You may be noticing at this point that I'm making quite a few small points here and there. What I'm truly getting at is that every single one of these small things adds up to a greater whole. Every single one of these small details is what makes SK the better tank. That's why it's recognizable to me, who is always picky about the small things, that there's a huge difference between paladin and shadowknight.

Even rangers are better overall tanks when properly geared.
notice the wording I used there... "overall tanks".. You mentioned earlier that there are specific cases where paladins are better, but this isn't a "what is better" topic it's the "what is best" topic, which means that you are REQUIRED to at minimum, look at all the possible spots that each class would be applied to. That means in the 10's, the 20's, the 30's, the 40's, the 50's, and 60's.

If you're going to argue raid tank, then that's well outside the concept of "best trio".

[Rimitto]

Yeah it never ceases to amaze me just how badly a higher level drolvarg guardian in KC can beat down my 59 fungi/chloro/SLN Ranger at times (bad luck) without an early slow proc. My monk, paladin, and warrior never had issues 55+ with those mobs unslowed. I’d say the same for my bard in that it took less damage per unit time … but with craptastic dps the fights solo lasted longer.

Rangers have snap aggro. With a healer they can get the job done for sure … but they take a lot more damage than alternatives (gear being equal).
so you're basing your ranger experience on how well you can SOLO a drolvarg? :eek:

Doesn't that, ya know, kind of defeat the purpose of "BEST TRIO" lol....

besides, in your little breakdown earlier you forgot to mention one of SK's abilities, aka harm touch, which is about equal to LoH. Honestly, just gonna say it's equal because we're saying everything else is equal too. Comparing a human paladin's health regen to an iksar shadowknights health regen is equal, so why not HT = LoH? :rolleyes:

Don't get me wrong, I've seen rangers crumble before, but overall, they've been steadier than paladins for me. Add on the bard for mana regen to that, and they basically are energizer rabbits.
My party nomination of Ranger - Cleric - Bard still stands, undefeated, undaunted.

[plzrelax]

HT kinda sucks it gets resisted a lot. It’s more of an unreliable emergency taunt than some big source of damage, in my experience anyway

[Zuranthium]

SK are better tanks, the "ability to drain" aka lifetap line, doesn't break them out of combat, like paladins would need to do.

Casting a heal doesn't break you out of combat. You just target yourself after an attack swing and start casting, then switch back to the target you're attacking.

The stuff you keep saying about Rangers is just crazy.

I could go to seafury island, charm something, watch both monsters die and then go for the snipe double-kill. Alternatively I could take the exp-hit, summon an animation, and just rely on that to kill seafurries. There's no risk of charm break, or wasting of any mana to double-kill at the end. The exp loss is definitely there, but is easily rectified by adding 1 other person to a party. Even without that party, it's still faster in the sense that I can focus more on keeping a steady flow of exp rather than deep diving into charm double-kill hope-it-works tactics.

Dunno what level you're talking about, but you shouldn't have any problem charming Seafuries at 50+. There's no real risk, you just root the non-charm target and stand back and wait to re-charm the other one if it breaks.

[Snaggles]

Celestial Cleansing is a 1.5 second cast. Your swing timer on a 40 delay 2h fully hasted is 2 seconds. You don’t miss a swing, it will occur the moment you are done casting.

Paladins can cast Divine Purpose which is 8hp/3mana regen conversion but it has limited uses. Since most things you tank even slowed do significantly more dps than 1.33.

I’m not touching the ranger > tank thing with a 10 foot pole because it’s just stupid.

A ranger - cleric - bard can kill stuff but even a BiS trio would be hard pressed to compete with another better combination. An actual tank or monk, an actual slower (70-75%). Unless your goal is to kill cliff golems or something in which case…sure, what the hell?

Rimitto, I would suggest you ask more questions than make assertions. There is a lack of fundamental logic, whether by less actual high end play experience or ChatGPT is failing you. Either way I’m afraid you are going to spend thousands of hours only to come to the same understanding a well placed question mark would bring you. Try it for once, it’s the key that look like the upside down “j”.

However, if the goal is just to aggravate and this is all a ruse, bravo. Keep it up, the charade is brilliant.

[Duik]

Generating Provocative Transcripts.

[PatChapp]

100% a bot.
You don't charm a seafury, you charm allizewsaur and clear the whole island. Or even the Pali from oracle island.
Anything but a seafury.

[Rimitto]

Celestial Cleansing is a 1.5 second cast. Your swing timer on a 40 delay 2h fully hasted is 2 seconds. You don’t miss a swing, it will occur the moment you are done casting.

Paladins can cast Divine Purpose which is 8hp/3mana regen conversion but it has limited uses. Since most things you tank even slowed do significantly more dps than 1.33.

How does this tactic fair at level 20? :rolleyes:
YOU PEOPLE always seem to forget that "BiS" doesn't automatically mean "level 60 max tov gear". If it did, it would be called "Best Raid Trio" which is a stupid argument to begin with. Start Over.


I’m not touching the ranger > tank thing with a 10 foot pole because it’s just stupid.

A ranger - cleric - bard can kill stuff but even a BiS trio would be hard pressed to compete with another better combination. An actual tank or monk, an actual slower (70-75%). Unless your goal is to kill cliff golems or something in which case…sure, what the hell?
I had a pretty darn good party recently in karnor's basement, with a ranger and a bard. Obviously myself playing as the cleric. We had a rogue too that increased the DPS. Basically mowed down everything and was invincible.
Don't mind me, I'm just giving my experiences here compared to your idealisms.
Was kinda funny too, we had about 2-3 sticky situations where pops or pulls got stacked and we had to deal with way too many mobs. Handled it with ease though. The synergy of the party was through the roof, just like I told everyone previously.
It's almost... like.. I have.... experience... and not... ideals. :rolleyes:

Personally, the funniest and saddest thing I always see paladins do is failing to break up mobs. Rangers learn that by instinct, I guess paladins are just dumb? *shrug*

Rimitto, I would suggest you ask more questions than make assertions. There is a lack of fundamental logic, whether by less actual high end play experience or ChatGPT is failing you. Either way I’m afraid you are going to spend thousands of hours only to come to the same understanding a well placed question mark would bring you. Try it for once, it’s the key that look like the upside down “j”.

However, if the goal is just to aggravate and this is all a ruse, bravo. Keep it up, the charade is brilliant.
I question the point of you posting this part of your post, what was it's purpose? :cool:
I can answer that, because that's how 2006 it is, but I'll let you tell it.



@solist in game character name?
@patchapp ingame character name?
@duik I already know you only play on red server, get on a real server. :D

[Jimjam]

Rangers have unresistable targeted aoe lull via harmony (doesn’t require line of dight to target either). It is very good. I’ve found ranger players tend to be more dynamic pullers than that though. E.g on a room of 3 one mob will get rooted, another snared the other comes straight in. Creates a nice stagger to the pulls, useful if you don’t have aoe cc.

[Troxx]

my chat gpt has unusual elfquest opinions

[zelld52]

I had a pretty darn good party recently in karnor's basement, with a ranger and a bard. Obviously myself playing as the cleric. We had a rogue too that increased the DPS. Basically mowed down everything and was invincible.


anecdotal evidence. rangers get shit returns on AC over softcap. they take a shit ton of damage.

on a raid, tank list looks like this (lets say all classes have top-tier gear)

1) Warrior
2) SK
3) Paladin
4) Monk
5) Ranger

on raids Rangers are bump bots and buff bots. yes, flame lick is good aggro yes they get harmony, but they also have shit AC, and do shit damage. SK does way more damage than ranger with top-tier gear. (Much better weapon availability, ie: Tuna sword, Palladius Axe, etc)

in a group - same thing. under level 50 it wont matter if its a twinked melee with a Fungi - yeah ranger might do pretty good. but not as good as a warrior with fungi - and not as good as a paladin with fungi.

damage mitigation is the second part of tanking that you seem to be forgetting about, not just threat generation and crowd control. since rangers are not a plate class, they get piss-poor mitigation AC. as a cleric, id rather have a a knight who can go through 3-4 fights before needing a complete heal over a ranger who will need heals on every fight.

[Snaggles]

How does this tactic fair at level 20? :rolleyes:
YOU PEOPLE always seem to forget that "BiS" doesn't automatically mean "level 60 max tov gear". If it did, it would be called "Best Raid Trio" which is a stupid argument to begin with. Start Over.


Answer: Who cares about level 20? Same goes for your KC story.

Classes aren’t even coming into their element until nearly 60. It doesn’t take long though for rangers to realize they take a lot of damage where monks, knights and warriors do not. They literally are given two jolt spells…

I know this is me coming off as an elitist prick but there are a lot of things that separate a fun trio from “the best trio” or “the best trio without charm”. Capable people with capable gear can pull off some tricks. I can often contribute more with my ranger than other classes but if we need a tank I don’t log it in. Full stop. Also, I have a comparably geared ranger and paladin…so my actual experience with them over years > your fireside story.

Outside tanking slowed stuff so the sham healer doesn’t have to torp the whole group I don’t tank stuff with the ranger. Or outside raids when I tank brilliantly for 20 seconds plus one or two extra combat rounds.

SK does way more damage than ranger with top-tier gear. (Much better weapon availability, ie: Tuna sword, Palladius Axe, etc)


Agree to disagree. Outside some cherry picked parses or comparing a multi-AoB avatar Tuna sword SK to a generic ranger, they do less on raid bosses. Unless the ranger just doesn’t care about using the right weapons and getting buffs.

[Rimitto]

Answer: Who cares about level 20? Same goes for your KC story.

Classes aren’t even coming into their element until nearly 60.


All iksar, start together at level 1, bigly RP lizardbros, can do well with low budget twinking or self-found, great off-meta Kunark leveling route.

There you go DSM, you finally got your Shaman in a "Best Group" hypothetical.


It's literally in the first friggin post guy. :cool:
The very first post... The first... I know it's hard to read THE START of something, but c'mon man.... At least READ before forming an opinion based on preconceived values.

The basic premise of the question was "Best Trio" starting at level 1.
That means 20 is in play, that means karnor is in play, that means everything is in play.

I keep saying this over and over that this wasn't a "best raid group" topic, simply because that's not only a stupid argument, but also factually off topic.


"What's the best level 1 group guys?"
"WeLl U sEe PaLaDiNs ArE bEsT rAiDeRs"


That's literally, physically, and entirely the argument you guys are giving.


I'll even go further as to make a bold statement here.
Personally speaking, I view the game as "beaten" once you hit 60.
Raids, are literally just bonus content. They're no different than extra dungeons outside the main plotline of an RPG. Sure it feels good to go stomp on some sort of demi-god, but at the end of the day, defeating cthulu doesn't add any extra story.
In that same statement, the concept of "best at 60" is negligible and anecdotal itself.

[bcbrown]

Personally speaking, I view the game as "beaten" once you hit 60.

I agree. Hell, I think it's beaten at level 50. Even so, at level 20 paladins are as good or better as tanks than SKs. 11hp lifetap vs 30hp heal. Paladins have lull, Sks have fear. Both have their aggro spell.

[Snaggles]

It's literally in the first friggin post guy. :cool:
The very first post... The first... I know it's hard to read THE START of something, but c'mon man.... At least READ before forming an opinion based on preconceived values.


You should read that post again.

First two lines: Clarification of thread title
The rest: OP’s suggestion.

I’m sure Toxigen started this thread concerned about balancing those first 20 levels. Breaking a derv camp is no laughing matter.

[Rimitto]

You should read that post again.

First two lines: Clarification of thread title
The rest: OP’s suggestion.

I’m sure Toxigen started this thread concerned about balancing those first 20 levels. Breaking a derv camp is no laughing matter.

enchanter - enchanter - enchanter... all 60, tov gear.
solved, finished, thread over. :rolleyes:

[Duik]

Bot bot bot.

[Elizondo]

Paladins are so much better than SK

It's not even close

[Zuranthium]

SK does way more damage than ranger with top-tier gear. (Much better weapon availability, ie: Tuna sword, Palladius Axe, etc)

Rangers have higher stats on their offensive skills, they do more DPS with Shovel of Harvest than an SK/Pally does with Tunare sword. Ranger who wants to put the effort in can 2-hand dual wield too. Although the SK can add pet DPS a lot of the time.

Ranger is also adding +ATK buffs to a party/raid though. Their overall offensive contribution is definitely higher.

[zelld52]

Rangers have higher stats on their offensive skills, they do more DPS with Shovel of Harvest than an SK/Pally does with Tunare sword. Ranger who wants to put the effort in can 2-hand dual wield too. Although the SK can add pet DPS a lot of the time.

Ranger is also adding +ATK buffs to a party/raid though. Their overall offensive contribution is definitely higher.

Agreed. You could get away with having no knights, but having no rangers means you're missing out on juicy juicy Call of the Predator.

[fortior]

knight dps is a joke, even with palladius, lol.

make a monk tank

[Duik]

Dunt dunt dahhh.

[Snaggles]

knight dps is a joke, even with palladius, lol.

make a monk tank

The weighted ratio of a Meljeldin is less than 1% worse than a Palladius (if you disregard the mountain of stats and proc). The Tuna 2h is about 5% better than the Meljeldin w/o considering the proc. The 25 less offense and 25 less weapon skill hamstrings a knight on the really high level stuff. It’s basically putting them 5 levels (or an avatar proc) behind the other melees. The Shovel isn’t much worse. These are two very attainable weapons for a warrior, monk, or ranger.

None of this matters though because knights aren’t valued for their dps. Those two big league weapons are cool AF though. Certainly worth picking up for any knight if they can.

[fortior]

The weighted ratio of a Meljeldin is less than 1% worse than a Palladius (if you disregard the mountain of stats and proc). The Tuna 2h is about 5% better than the Meljeldin w/o considering the proc. The 25 less offense and 25 less weapon skill hamstrings a knight on the really high level stuff. It’s basically putting them 5 levels (or an avatar proc) behind the other melees. The Shovel isn’t much worse. These are two very attainable weapons for a warrior, monk, or ranger.

None of this matters though because knights aren’t valued for their dps. Those two big league weapons are cool AF though. Certainly worth picking up for any knight if they can.

I agree with all of this but if you go for big dick weapons, tunare fist lets a monk root tank. Knights are cool but man, in a 3 man thats a big sacrifice

[Jimjam]

I agree with all of this but if you go for big dick weapons, tunare fist lets a monk root tank. Knights are cool but man, in a 3 man thats a big sacrifice

With self haste and no need for mana a monk synergises better with no enc too.

[Snaggles]

I agree with all of this but if you go for big dick weapons, tunare fist lets a monk root tank. Knights are cool but man, in a 3 man thats a big sacrifice

Yea I agree. My mind was creeping a bit from the premise.

[Vexenu]

I agree with all of this but if you go for big dick weapons, tunare fist lets a monk root tank. Knights are cool but man, in a 3 man thats a big sacrifice

Counterpoint: It's a hell of a long road until the average Monk acquires a Fist of Nature, and by then the trio is already fully leveled and likely close to maximally geared anyway. At that point, how much difference does it make anyway? Especially considering Necro/Shaman can both root on demand (versus Monk proc root) and won't be hurting for mana.

I mean, I feel like the focus of these hypotheticals is either "what trio levels the best" or "what trio can kill the toughest mob", so I don't see how the Tuna fist proc is relevant to either consideration. Am I missing something?

[Snaggles]

The Tstaff parses as good or better than a priceless but the irresistible stun is beastly for a trio killing stunnable npcs. In fact, decent worn haste and an IFS or PB is still a wrecking ball.

[Rimitto]

Counterpoint: It's a hell of a long road until the average Monk acquires a Fist of Nature, and by then the trio is already fully leveled and likely close to maximally geared anyway. At that point, how much difference does it make anyway? Especially considering Necro/Shaman can both root on demand (versus Monk proc root) and won't be hurting for mana.

I mean, I feel like the focus of these hypotheticals is either "what trio levels the best" or "what trio can kill the toughest mob", so I don't see how the Tuna fist proc is relevant to either consideration. Am I missing something?
I view this in a very simple way.
"What trio levels the best".

There's no point in the concept of "what trio can kill the toughest mob" since you can just add +1 of anything to kill said mob easier or faster.

The reverse is not true however, because adding +1 to leveling slows down the leveling unless that extra class can not only pull their weight, but also synergize to make the exp rate faster.

[Zuranthium]

There's no point in the concept of "what trio can kill the toughest mob" since you can just add +1 of anything to kill said mob easier or faster

There is a point: you don't always have any number of players you want, and the less people you need to kill something, the less you have to split the loot.

[Toxigen]

Gear for gear a monk shits on a knight at all levels of the game.

The knight brings other things.

None of those things are useful to a good trio like Sham/cle/mnk.

To knight focused trios the monk is probably better in a lot of them.

Really the only time the knight is better is if you have a rogue.

Thats it.

[Zuranthium]

Don't need a knight for that, just use root proximity aggro if the Rogue's evade isn't sufficient to keep the Monk on top of the aggro list most of the time.

[Danth]

There's no point in the concept of "what trio can kill the toughest mob" since you can just add +1 of anything to kill said mob easier or faster.

If my wife and I are perfectly content duo'ing and we're not inclined to invite random twits along, then the question of low-numbers capability is very much relevant. That applies to trios as surely as a duo.


There is no content I know of that monk/shaman duo that shadowknight/shaman cannot. Monk's advantage is reduced to that of increased speed, something I acknowledge but can't get excited about. Is there any content a monk-based trio can do that a knight-based trio, cannot? After all, we're limited to the content that actually exists in-game, not hypotheticals. If killrate is the main advantage, that's not something I care overmuch about. Since we're limited to extant content, it could be the defacto case of several compositions having about the same ceiling.

[fortior]

Counterpoint: It's a hell of a long road until the average Monk acquires a Fist of Nature, and by then the trio is already fully leveled and likely close to maximally geared anyway. At that point, how much difference does it make anyway? Especially considering Necro/Shaman can both root on demand (versus Monk proc root) and won't be hurting for mana.

I mean, I feel like the focus of these hypotheticals is either "what trio levels the best" or "what trio can kill the toughest mob", so I don't see how the Tuna fist proc is relevant to either consideration. Am I missing something?

If you're talking monk/necro/shaman then necro can FD aggro on demand and shaman is perfectly fine tanking slowed mobs while the monk builds aggro to maximize regen healing. I really don't think a trio needs the snap aggro of a knight, since honestly usually in an xp group with regen spells/abilities it's a waste to only have 1 player get beat on, and in a group hunting super tough stuff, well, at that point you have clickies and proc weapons and what-not to take care of it.

I think the snap aggro of a knight is much more valuable as the group/raid gets bigger, because with aggro 100% fixed, you can just add more rogues until you win, as long as the knight can stay up. But monks are also better at staying up...

[zelld52]

There is no content I know of that monk/shaman duo that shadowknight/shaman cannot.

Pretty accurate assumption. Monk get Instant FD which is helpful in "oh shit" moments, makes splitting a bit easier. But SK get Death Peace at 60, and much more HP to deal with "oh shit" moments.

Monk has way more DPS than Knight - and doesn't require any mana - so no meditate breaks needed on a monk. Monk also has a 25% self-heal every 6 minutes and bind wound to 70% - but shaman gets Torpor at 60 and all other healing is irrelevant.

At end-end game with great gear - monk does have the edge on damage mitigation. Block (monk only skill) stops way more incoming damage than Parry (every other melee gets this instead). Monk also get Stonestance which is 60% dmg reduction on a 6-minute cooldown. Not enough to last a whole fight, but enough to stop a monk from dying. ?Possibly? better than lifetaps because it doesn't require mana or cast time?

All that stuff is pretty much nitpicking the differences though - the only real benefit to Monk over SK is the increased damage output - and faster kills. (Helped by not needing mana)

[Snaggles]

Unless you compare apples to oranges the average knight has far more hps than the average monk. Like 50% more. Plus a 12pt DS that stacks with Ring8. Plus a lot of other tricks.

It’s not quite as powerful but I’d argue a sk/mage/sham group is an alternative to the necro /sham / monk. Unless the latter is undead charming I bet they are pretty close.

[Zuranthium]

Unless you compare apples to oranges the average knight has far more hps than the average monk. Like 50% more.

That's really not true. Knights only have 30% more base HP, before accounting for +HP items and +HP buffs. Buffs obviously affect everyone the same, so that lowers the differential, and in Velious people are using pretty much the same +HP items, so that lowers the difference even more. It's really just 12-15% difference in the end, depending on gear.

In the context of a trio with no Cleric, then a Paladin could actually get to that 50% difference because of self HP buffs, but what's the point really? Max HP loses a ton of value without Complete Heal. Monks stop more damage than Knights at their base tanking ability, because they block more attacks. That's more important.

[Snaggles]

That's really not true. Knights only have 30% more base HP, before accounting for +HP items and +HP buffs. Buffs obviously affect everyone the same, so that lowers the differential, and in Velious people are using pretty much the same +HP items, so that lowers the difference even more. It's really just 12-15% difference in the end, depending on gear.

In the context of a trio with no Cleric, then a Paladin could actually get to that 50% difference because of self HP buffs, but what's the point really? Max HP loses a ton of value without Complete Heal. Monks stop more damage than Knights at their base tanking ability, because they block more attacks. That's more important.

In the mid-tier game people gear differently. If you have your 5th Vulak slot the HPs between knights and monks tend to get more close.

My ranger has solid gear but more MR with a bit of STR over raw hps. My paladin only stam/hps with many slots without any MR or STR. The difference is about 1200 base hps. If the ranger (or monk) was more HP focused that gap might only be 600 or so.

Nobody is going to dispute monks being able to tank admirably. Hit for bit better than knights. I just don’t think on blue cons they will do 2x the dps and the hybrid spellbook is worth something. If you have the patience to babysit it, the top SK pet alone is a notable dps bump.

[Duik]

Did DSM die?

[Toxigen]

That's really not true. Knights only have 30% more base HP, before accounting for +HP items and +HP buffs. Buffs obviously affect everyone the same, so that lowers the differential, and in Velious people are using pretty much the same +HP items, so that lowers the difference even more. It's really just 12-15% difference in the end, depending on gear.

In the context of a trio with no Cleric, then a Paladin could actually get to that 50% difference because of self HP buffs, but what's the point really? Max HP loses a ton of value without Complete Heal. Monks stop more damage than Knights at their base tanking ability, because they block more attacks. That's more important.

also mend

[Zuranthium]

I don't count Mend as an advantage, because knights have their own self-heals. Even more accurately, Paladins with their healing spells and lay hands can "tank better" than a Monk over a given timeframe, but that's not the entirety of how the game works. Paladins are doing a lot less DPS than a Monk, so they end up taking more damage in the long run, since things die slower.

[Rygar]

Paladin / Rogue / Rogue

[Troxx]

Did DSM die?

No posts in 3 week. Hopefully he’s just on a long, relaxing, enjoyable vacation in real life. I do hope he is well.

[fortior]

I think every monk gears for regen, ac, hps because of mend and how they solo

[Toxigen]

I don't count Mend as an advantage

lol k dude

[PatChapp]

Mend is so much better than any paladin heal.
Monks are the best group tanks for small man stuff.

[Rimitto]

There is a point: you don't always have any number of players you want, and the less people you need to kill something, the less you have to split the loot.
It's kinda still a moot point though. The toughest mobs typically require their own strategies ya? You wouldn't use the exact same strategy for vox that you would for pineal(screw however you spell that fish's name) or vindi.

That's also why I view "the best trio" as a leveling group, rather than a loot group.

EDIT: besides, almost 100% of any of those "best trio" groups for loot would include an enchanter.

Did DSM die?
Misty from Pokemon died the other day.
Also known as Mystina from the game Valkyrie Profile.
Maybe DSM was actually a celebrity and you were mocking them the entire time. :rolleyes:

[Toxigen]

Mend is so much better than any paladin heal.
Monks are the best group tanks for small man stuff.

yeah zura spreads some pretty bad misinfo here

[Jimjam]

yeah zura spreads some pretty bad misinfo here

With 4khp it is basically an extra fungi.

[Toxigen]

With 4khp it is basically an extra fungi.

yeah who would think a resource free, insta cast, low cooldown heal would be an advantage?

zura is a clown

[Zuranthium]

Good job continuing to prove what a clown you are Toxicant. Constantly spamming without substance and can't even do basic math.

Mend is so much better than any paladin heal

That's not true at all. 2 casts of Celestial Cleansing is better than Mend (or at least equal if the Monk has best gear and buffs). Paladin can certainly manage 2 casts of it every 6 mins, and in ideal circumstances with lots of mana regen buffs around, Celestial Cleansing far outperforms Mend.

Then add Lay Hands on top, and also Deepwater Breastplate for downtime healing.

[Toxigen]

That's not true at all. 2 casts of Celestial Cleansing is better than Mend (or at least equal if the Monk has best gear and buffs). Paladin can certainly manage 2 casts of it every 6 mins, and in ideal circumstances with lots of mana regen buffs around, Celestial Cleansing far outperforms Mend.

Then add Lay Hands on top, and also Deepwater Breastplate for downtime healing.

lmao

dense as diamond

[zelld52]

If a monk has 5k HP, mend does 1.25k HP heal.

Every 6 minutes, no mana, no reagent. No cast time. Shit monk can even mend while feigned death. The only downside is that it's self only.

Zura I can't help but think you have little experience on a monk.

[Snaggles]

6 mins of standing mana regen on a paladin with c2 will let you cast just over 3 celestial cleansing for free. Averaging 4 and 5 tick heals, that’s 2475hps. Assuming a Reaver pally to a Tstaff monk the dps isn’t equivalent but picking up a generic ToV 2h the gap closes a bit on blue cons.

I still think monk is the answer but less of a default or requirement. Swap out the necro for a mage and the dps average over the necro makes up for the monk to knight handicap.

Or just roll with the three classes people want to play since the game isn’t that hard.

[Toxigen]

Even a paladin with a 100k plat advantage in items aint gonna keep up with a monk.

[zelld52]

6 mins of standing mana regen on a paladin

while levelling paladin dont get celestial cleansing. monk get mend at level 1.

[Jimjam]

6 mins of standing mana regen on a paladin with c2 will let you cast just over 3 celestial cleansing for free. Averaging 4 and 5 tick heals, that’s 2475hps. Assuming a Reaver pally to a Tstaff monk the dps isn’t equivalent but picking up a generic ToV 2h the gap closes a bit on blue cons.

I still think monk is the answer but less of a default or requirement. Swap out the necro for a mage and the dps average over the necro makes up for the monk to knight handicap.

Or just roll with the three classes people want to play since the game isn’t that hard.

Enchanters are banned in this thread. Please sit down (and med ur pal).

[Zuranthium]

lmao dense as diamond

Yep, that's you. Constantly ignore facts and don't have anything relevant to say, while attempting to spam pathetic insults like a sad little playground bully.

Enchanters are banned in this thread.

Bards aren't. The discussion had also branched out to talking about hybrids in general.

If a monk has 5k HP, mend does 1.25k HP heal.

Every 6 minutes, no mana, no reagent. No cast time.

So what? That's less than what Celestial Cleansing can do. Far less, most of the time. It doesn't cost a reagent and the cast time is irrelevant since it's very fast.

Mana isn't relevant in the comparison. Monks don't have mana and Paladin isn't spending their mana on anything else in a head-to-head comparison of "who can tank longer". Even with zero extra mana regen, the advantage of Celestial Cleansing over Mend is massive when looking at a single fight. Let's say the Monk can even Mend twice in the time frame - that's still only 2.5k HP, compared to Celestial Cleansing generating like 10k worth of healing from the Paladin's full mana bar, and the Paladin has Lay Hands as well.

The only time Celestial Cleansing would be worse than Mend is if the Paladin is attacking with zero downtime for several hours, in a group with zero mana regen buffs (including the Paladin not having a Flowing Thought item). Very rare. Realistically, the Paladin will be able to catch some meditate ticks and/or will gain enough mana while perma standing. If Monks were offered the choice of gaining mana/meditate and Celestial Cleansing, instead of Mend, they would take that trade.

[Jimjam]

Didn’t realise bards can cast c2. Fair play zu.

[Zuranthium]

Didn’t realise bards can cast c2. Fair play zu.

C'mon, you're not this daft. They have Cantata of Replenishment, and can pump even more mana than that if they want to.

[Troxx]

The only time Celestial Cleansing would be worse than Mend is if the Paladin is attacking with zero downtime for several hours, in a group with zero mana regen buffs (including the Paladin not having a Flowing Thought item). Very rare. Realistically, the Paladin will be able to catch some meditate ticks and/or will gain enough mana while perma standing. If Monks were offered the choice of gaining mana/meditate and Celestial Cleansing, instead of Mend, they would take that trade.

https://wiki.project1999.com/Celestial_Cleansing

I love my paladin but you do realize that you’ve got 58 long level to complete before it even enters the equation right? And if we are only considering the end game … well by then the shaman has torpor (doesn’t stack with celestial cleansing) and a well played necro will be juggling the lions share of the healing with a 125/tick recourse heal that stacks with torpor.

The beauty of mend is not for the average hp healed over time - it is that it is instant and available on a short refresh timer. With a necro and a shaman healing … you aren’t going to need self-heals routinely. When you do, an emergency instant heal is better than a heal over time. Yes … paladins do have LoH … but how long is the refresh on that again?

Sorry bud … you ain’t right here

[Vexenu]

Yeah, I'm a big advocate for Paladins, but the Monk is clearly better with Shm/Nec. You can talk about throwing a Paladin in a non-Enchanter trio if you also throw in a Bard for mana regen (hence my earlier suggestion of PAL/BRD/DRU). But at that point you really can't call it a power trio, just one with fairly good synergy with a lot of room to play around and experiment.

[Zuranthium]

I love my paladin but you do realize that you’ve got 58 long level to complete before it even enters the equation right

So what? That's what was being discussed. People are trying to talk about how much Mend heals on a 60 Monk.

And if we are only considering the end game … well by then the shaman has torpor (doesn’t stack with celestial cleansing)

Torpor reduces DPS. If that's even the healer the group has. Bard/Monk/Cleric has been argued as a top choice.

The beauty of mend is not for the average hp healed over time - it is that it is instant and available on a short refresh timer. When you do, an emergency instant heal is better than a heal over time. Yes … paladins do have LoH … but how long is the refresh on that again?

If you only need Mend in an "emergency" then it's not that often and Lay Hands does the job better. Paladins have superior healing for a more direct heal as well, which actually works on other party members.

It's crazy to argue that Mend is better than having an entire mana bar and set of heals to work with.

[PatChapp]

Mend is rediculously powerful

[Troxx]

Oh well.

I tried.

[fortior]

It’s not just mend, it’s also the massively better dps and mitigation

I’d do 3 nec HS though, or seb with crypt pets (prolly want a cleric to keep them alive then)

[Zuranthium]

It’s not just mend, it’s also the massively better dps and mitigation

Yes, exactly. Mend is NOT better than Paladin healing. Monks are simply better than Paladins as a whole.

[BigChief]

Rush

[Rygar]

All iksar, start together at level 1, bigly RP lizardbros, can do well with low budget twinking or self-found, great off-meta Kunark leveling route.


Bros, we failed. Didn't read. Must be all Iksar (and apparently male too, Toxigen sexist like that), so we gotta stop talking about paladins.

Would need to be Necro / Monk / Monk. Remember we talking level 1 and low budget. This is what gets you through them early levels good, monks can tank and dps. 2 necros not bad but feel they may get shredded when too much hits the fan and i don't know if DoT stacking is a problem early on.

Feel that is a good balance from crushing early levels and handling all the leveling spots in mid-late game.


If you lift the restrictions Paladin / Rogue / Rogue is a shredder, Paladin / Rogue / Necro can be amazing.

Not understanding the Torpor talk around here, waiting for anything above level 34 spells to be effective is just horrible for a good group experience.

[Duik]

Since everything has already been done, my vote (if there was one) would be iksar bros mnk/nec/shm kunark style.

Never done an sk to any level so as an exercise sk/mnk/nec would also appeal. Guild <SirFlopsalot>

[Jimjam]

Thinly veiled Toxigen forming a lizardbros crew thread.

[Duik]

Thats just me.
You may wanna do all barb rog/shm/war.
It doesnt matter.
Its all been done.
Did a six man all gnome pvp in early 2000's with irl friends. That sucked. Or maybe we did.

[shovelquest]

Human paladin, High elf paladin, Dwarf paladin.

Or 3 Dwarf paladins.

[Troxx]

Never done an sk to any level so as an exercise sk/mnk/nec would also appeal. Guild <SirFlopsalot>

A+

[Toxigen]

(and apparently male too, Toxigen sexist like that)



wtf lol

[shovelquest]

Female iksar tails look like shriveled up little jerkies.

[fortior]

I have Floppenheimer parked for a future iksar SK