Quote:
Originally Posted by Tenlaar
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
At higher levels rangers can give themselves 12 hp/tic regen through spells, which actually puts them at a higher regen rate than an iksar.
|
Yep, although it is quite a bit of upkeep. Chloroplast only lasts about 20 minutes and depletes a lot of mana. I think I'm at 32 hp/tick on my ranger with Fungal Regrowth, Chloroplast, and Skin like Nature. Iksar innate regen is comparable to Chloroplast when sitting - it's 11 more hp per tick than standard innate regen sitting, 9 more feigning death, and 8 more standing. That's pretty significant. I feel bad for human monks.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Danth
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
If you're on a 25K budget things like fungis or cloak of flames or t-staffs are out of the question. Which brings us back to Monk....it's a fine class, but not for 20K. Some folks have been using expensive gear for so long I suspect they've forgotten what it's like to be low-end. A Monk with maybe a Peacebringer, a FBSS for haste, no epic, and no regen makes for a really lousy soloist. Either the Ranger or the Shadow Knight will fare better than the Monk would on the budget discussed. The Monk becomes a really attractive option if you plan to play through to the high end (north temple veeshan or equivalent) since the class benefits so strongly from that top-end gear.
|
I disagree - you could roll a monk with absolutely nothing except a fungi tunic and do extremely well, assuming you can afford just the fungi. They have naturally high AC as long as you stay under the weight limit - just equip a bunch of cheap stuff like Wu's and fill in the upgrades as you go. Fists by themselves are decent, and monk weapons are pretty cheap. You can't use your epic until level 51 anyway. I guess haste would be your only other concern, and you could grab SCHW for real cheap, or pay a little more for Sash of the Dragonborn or something.