Quote:
Originally Posted by PlsNoBan
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
So... Necromancer? Provides greater safety than you in the form of FD/EE Rez if playing in a bad group that wipes. Can also easily get you to camps not easily reachable via having the whole group die and flop drag them to a camp and rezzing the cleric. If you wipe with a shaman you're still running back from bind. Can also heal and do similar DPS. Provides utility that isn't redundant. Can bring enchanter level additional DPS to the group if undead mobs are available.
If your group with 2 encs and a cleric is in danger of wiping (lol) and safety is actually your concern then necromancer is clearly superior and should be the obvious choice. Yet somehow it still seems to be shaman in your head. I wonder why that is? Maybe something to do with your completely ridiculous and illogical preference for the shaman class in every situation?
|
Honestly it depends on the camp at that point. If you want to do Enchanter/Enchanter/Cleric/X, it would depend on what you want to do. Mage would be better for something like Chardok Royals, where CoTH is necessary. Necro would be better for pulling at Fungi King Camp. Shaman would be better at Ixiblat Fer for the better Malo -> Malosini -> Slow.
If you want everything at once, Shaman/Necro/Enchanter/Mage + pocket cleric would be the best. You hit the 200 DPS breakpoint, you have enough utility/safety to do every camp, and the Shaman can swap to the Cleric for res or occasional CH to save the Necro/Mage spell reagents. That is what OP ended up picking, possibly minus the pocket cleric.