Quote:
Originally Posted by Benanov
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
Was in Paw last night, Enchanter had a charmed gnoll pet. The Mage gave the pet two Swords of Runes. It was not fair. It was not remotely fair.
(The only other time I have seen "not remotely fair" is fear-kiting with 3 rogues in the group.)
When people say chanters are OP, this is the scenario we're talking about. We didn't need a tank, and we didn't need DPS. We had a full group simply because we took all comers.
And yes, part of it is group support. When charm breaks, I had Holy Might ready to go (plus I Courage Line/Symbol chanters when they're charming). Its 6 second stun is generally enough time to get any charmed mob back under control.
Saying chanters have to be able to solo named rooms if they're to be considered OP is a valid request but honestly being able to replace entire roles in a typical pickup group (tank, DPS) while at the same time bringing other requested functions (CC, Clarity) is what makes them OP.
|
Your post clearly sums up the situation. There is a serious discussion to be had about enchanters and their effects on the game as a whole. There is a camp of people (non-min/maxers) that believe p99 enchanters trivialize classic content. In the interest of playing on a classic server, to emulate a classic experience, enchanters should be rebalanced to reflect how they actually were played on live. Its really not an outrageous view point. Perhaps if it were articulated less as an attack on enchanters and more as a discussion about the health of the game, like your post, then people wont get so defensive about it.
Classic mechanics argument doesn't matter at his point. The dev's have made plenty of executive decision for the health of the server. Now if they dev's are happy with things as they are, then i wish they would make a statement, so we can put this whole thing to rest, accept it and move on.