Quote:
Originally Posted by Ronnie555
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
I forgot they can't do shit in EQ.
Can't gate to town, can't sow. Can't even fawking bind myself. I rely on casters like a 2 year old kid relies on his parents. Can't port of course, can't solo or camp good mobs. At least I'm a monk so I can dungeon crawl at higher levels w/ FD, get to the good stuff, etc. Would be a lot worse as another melee I suppose.
I'm not sure why I'm complaining, that's just how the game is I guess. But it seems terribly unbalanced to the point where I'm kicking myself for not making yet another mage or necro =/
|
Well, you might want to consider rolling a new character in a class which you feel is at an advantage. You need to consider your play style as well. If you plan on soloing a lot, then you want a class which will do better in this regard (Necro's for example).
It's a fact that pure melee types were at a soloing disadvantage. It was a fact back in the day and there was no end to the long forum posts decrying the injustice of such an imbalance. Of course we all know that this marked the beginning of the long spiral into mess which we now know as EQ Live as classes classes were retooled to nerf or add abilities. The interdependence of classes is what made EQ so great in the early days. Yes, some people could solo but you could always tell who they were because they sucked when they grouped. The reason for them sucking is because they never really learned how to effectively play their class in groups. I played an enchanter and made sure that I grouped as much as possible and it showed then and shows now as I can effectively play in a group.
I rolled a warrior and for a while in old EQ and my first character ever was a paladin on Fennin Ro so I know your pain. I wound up rolling a Wizard on Fennin Ro as I had a need to solo a lot due to real life stuff..