If you could make a new class for p99

[Hasbinbad]

Equally or lesser geared Paladins and Shadowknights work as well - if not better - as tanks than warriors for any grouping situation currently available, as far as I know.. At the higher levels, Monks are doing quite well now when properly geared out as well.

Other than that, I agree that Tank/Cle/Enc is by far the strongest base for a group. This base hardly makes irrelevant the other classes, rather it allows them to fulfill their potential. Shamans, rogues, monks, necros, etc., all come into their own when paired with this group base. Sure, you can DO stuff with an alternative base, but give me a tank/cle/enc base to start from and I guarantee I will clear a given camp more efficiently than your Shaman/Ranger/Bard base..

SHOULD it be that way? Fuck yes. This is fucking Everquest, not your stupid made-up game. Nobody wants to play your stupid made-up game bro. Take that shit to Blizzard, maybe they will change WoW for you, as they are wont to do.

This thread is about fantasy classes for EVERQUEST, not your dumb ideas about your stupid made-up games.

Like I said, WoW is that way: ------>

[Daywolf]

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

Equally or lesser geared Paladins and Shadowknights work as well - if not better - as tanks than warriors for any grouping situation currently available, as far as I know..

Undead. I mean sure yeah, we would always run with the tanks that could better handle undead in those places, but doing like KC on the castle with a well equipped warrior was pretty easygoing (though Pal/SK in the back). I mean by 50, everyone is pretty well equipped, so the SK or Pal probably would need to be twinked beyond belief I guess, but so too could the warrior be. But for most of the expansions, there wasn't a whole lot of good undead spots, though I lost track after titanium.

Same as the deal with drui/rng and using harmony, which is really good compared to the enc, but only good outdoors which is more rare for groups than good high exp dungeons where harmony doesn't work. Even then, it's not so great w/o the enc there for mind crack [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[Hasbinbad]

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

Undead.

No. Spell taunts > taunt. HP pool doesn't really matter with a good cleric, unless yer in a raid situation.

[Daywolf]

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

No. Spell taunts > taunt. HP pool doesn't really matter with a good cleric, unless yer in a raid situation.

Sure, my mains on live were ranger and cleric. My buddies that I camped with the most were pally(w/drui alt), wizard and warrior. Even on my ranger with the warrior I often had to back off, and same went for our pally, as spell damage took aggro. Always breaking away to save the wizard of course. Damage shields only on the warrior helped a lot, along with cleric or pally buffs. On my Cleric I always rather see aggro on our warrior, but especially when we lacked an enchanter. If you have 2 of the 3, you can do well, but 3 seemed to work the best for what we hunted, though it was hard to keep enchanters around later on when they could just loiter in town and sell crack. Then again we were not twinked, not even on our alts (when we could), so we played by the natural strengths of the classes.

[Hasbinbad]

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

Sure, my mains on live were ranger and cleric. My buddies that I camped with the most were pally(w/drui alt), wizard and warrior. Even on my ranger with the warrior I often had to back off, and same went for our pally, as spell damage took aggro. Always breaking away to save the wizard of course. Damage shields only on the warrior helped a lot, along with cleric or pally buffs. On my Cleric I always rather see aggro on our warrior, but especially when we lacked an enchanter. If you have 2 of the 3, you can do well, but 3 seemed to work the best for what we hunted, though it was hard to keep enchanters around later on when they could just loiter in town and sell crack. Then again we were not twinked, not even on our alts (when we could), so we played by the natural strengths of the classes.

What the hell are you talking about?

[Daywolf]

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

What the hell are you talking about?

HP pool does matter. Add resistance and damage shield to the warrior improves the situation by keeping aggro well enough. Still comes down to warrior, enchanter and cleric (then add DPS'), while I never saw warrior interchangeable with other tanks but in a few situations. Speaking along the lines of full groups of course, and taking red con on the norm. Guess that's why they called it the holy trinity, was pretty exclusive for some time on only the three.

So as far as dreaming up additional classes, still comes down to DPS, or it throws off the balance and makes for solo player classes, or destroying existing classes that can do nothing else than their single designed role for the most part.

And that is why my main pick is Arcane Archer, as it's a solid DPS class, which EQ having no real archer class for some time.

[Kika Maslyaka]

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

Like I said, WoW is that way: ------>

If you so desperate, please go, they are waiting for you [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]