Quote:
Originally Posted by fortior
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
faction and cumbersome size never become irrelevant. players can eventually mitigate them, sure. but players can also mitigate racials (stats) through gear. FSI is an outlier but it's not like you need FSI to raid tank for the biggest baddest guilds, or solo big bad content, etc etc. gear is king
|
True, gear is the great equalizer, though not all races can use some of that gear. Still, the point wasn't that these innate abilities are OP and should be offset to level the playing field, but that the choice of race ought to have required more consideration from a min/max perspective. By granting abilities of greater value to the player, whether from the start or through experience, race levels gained in tandem with class levels, the game would have played very differently between each main and alt. EQ being an old game, that's no fault of its own of course and could have ruined a good thing by reaching too far, the way Vanguard did graphically.
Even for how well-rounded they are, monks serve as a good example of how the game plays very differently compared to other classes. The contrast between pros and cons leaves no room for ambiguity. A monk outperforms a shadow knight more often than not and in more ways than one. Both have access to feign death, but in different forms. That's where things get interesting imo, when the pros and cons are more situational. The same meaningful distinctions are not there between say, wood elves and dark elves or humans and erudites. By and large, the substantial race differences that exist are tied to size, unintentionally, with gnomes having wall vision and ogres being able to form a wall at Tunare fights.