Gaining XP as a wizard

[Coldaine]

Is there any way to gain XP as a solo wizard without wanting to cry? I'm only 4, and it's already a chore. Worse than I remember from original EQ =(

[ko37qtl]

As a solo wizard, you probably know the drill. You hit things until they die, either with spells or a weapon. I've been working on a wizard myself recently and while it's not skipping through fields of wildflowers, it's been going a little better than I remembered. I think playing an enchanter might help a bit just in the sense of nukes. Enchanters might have a generally easier time but their nukes are singularly unimpressive and it's nice to have a zap that works.

[Tecmos Deception]

Originally Posted by ko37qtl [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Enchanters might have a generally easier time but their nukes are singularly unimpressive

Lol [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I know enchanter nukes are lame, but really, wizards only have two single-target nukes that hit significantly harder than a same-level enchanter's nukes do.

[Estu]

As a solo wizard you'll be pretty slow until you hit 29 and can quad kite (this will also require about 200 INT to pull off). Even then you're slower than several other soloing classes. Moreover, you'll find that you won't be in high demand for groups because your sustained DPS is awful (takes a lot of time to med up from nukes). Overall, if you want to play a wizard, you should have a very good reason for it, because in many ways they're a bad class - they arguably give rangers a run for their money as the worst class in classic through Velious EQ. What they are good for is AE groups (which are rare and mostly occur in the higher levels) and raid boss DPS (since you're taking down a single target from full mana rather than a steady stream of targets as in a regular group setting).

Originally Posted by ko37qtl [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I think playing an enchanter might help a bit just in the sense of nukes. Enchanters might have a generally easier time but their nukes are singularly unimpressive and it's nice to have a zap that works.

No offense to this poster but this is pretty much nonsense. Playing an enchanter is completely different from playing a wizard because enchanters can summon pets and charm monsters, and also have much better crowd control, and have clarity. The nukes are pretty irrelevant. Enchanters are far superior soloers (and groupers) than wizards.

[fugazi]

One big problem with wizards is that the higher level spells are more mana efficient. This means you'll want to use them, but they also cost the most mana. The result is that when you do something, it counts, but you can't keep that 'something' up.

Another problem is that your most mana efficient spells are AoE and groups prefer to take mobs one a one-by-one basis. The downside of AoE's are that they do not deal enough damage to kill mobs so you'll need more AoE'ers in your group to make it worth it. As said by Estu, this is hard to do at lower levels and requires specific groups.

The wizard IS good at nuking down a big target fast though. The wizard also has a wide variety of stuns at his disposal that can turn menacing casters/gaters into easy xp. The obvious problem with this is that they mostly happen at higher levels and with the former, you'll be out of mana afterwards.

Wizards thrive in guilds and raids. If you want to play an easy to level nuker, roll a mage. If you want to be a desired class, play an enchanter.

Also, try to group up till you're at least 12+.

[ko37qtl]

Originally Posted by Estu [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[snipped]No offense to this poster but this is pretty much nonsense. Playing an enchanter is completely different from playing a wizard because enchanters can summon pets and charm monsters, and also have much better crowd control, and have clarity. The nukes are pretty irrelevant. Enchanters are far superior soloers (and groupers) than wizards.

I see I worded this badly. What I meant to say was that playing an enchanter increases my appreciation for wizard nukes. Obviously enchanter play solo or grouped is different than with a wizard but despite their many advantages enchanter nukes (when I need them) rankle due to their slowness and frequency of resistance. I was not suggesting that the OP start an enchanter in order to feel better about a wizard.

[Swish]

I think its the same drill as with rangers. They're both "less desirable" to a lot of groups, so think about getting a group started and networking with as many people as possible. If you're friends (or in the same guild) as those you group with then you'll stand a much better chance of regular groups.

Not to mention you can port your group from A to B if you're gathering in EC or somewhere (34 onwards for the good port locations IIRC, but GFay is good for 29 and getting people towards Unrest/Mistmoore).

Overall, don't overnuke - its a pet hate of tanks who have to then get the mob back off you. Give a mob til 70-75% health to launch your first one, and try and nuke once per combat to show you're not one of the afk variety.

All of that will help...the greatest challenge is getting to 20ish I'd say.

[Raavak]

You can maybe melee and nuke until your low teens, then root/nuke until you get Pillar of Fire at 16 along with some SoW potions and can quad kite (without snare).

Try to form AE groups with other wizards and enchanters as soon as you can. I don't know what level that becomes viable, but I remember doing some Mistmoore Castle years ago, with a fleet footed bard to pull.

One warning, once you taste PBAE exp you won't ever want to go grind solo ever again.

[Splorf22]

So if a 60 wizard and 60 enchanter are in a group and both do nothing but nuke, the enchanter will do more damage. The wizard is somewhat more efficient at nuking (Dementia: 675 damage for 250 mana, 2.7:1 vs Draught of Ice: 720 damage for 215 mana, 3.34:1) but the Enchanter gets 50 mana per tick while the wizard gets 30 (and that is assuming they have clarity).

[Tecmos Deception]

ToT > harvest, by a couple orders of magnitude.