Best 4 person all caster/priest group

[PlsNoBan]

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

Shaman/Enchanter/Monk trio is so strong

You're the only person I've ever seen praise this trio so much. It's not one that is particularly popular in my experience. People either run Monk/Shaman which is a great duo or Enchanter/Cleric which is probably the strongest overall duo in the game. Monk/Shaman is better in certain situations though for sure. Have no problem admitting this. Seems kinda weird to shoehorn an enchanter into a monk/shaman duo. I'm sure it works fine. Not sure I'd call it the best trio though. Charm pets at endgame have like 8k hp. It's a lot to heal with torpor (I know I've done it) and it directly nerfs your groups damage by a pretty significant amount. A cleric would easily be a better choice here since the enchanter can slow and has all the CC you'd ever need.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

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

You're the only person I've ever seen praise this trio so much. It's not one that is particularly popular in my experience. People either run Monk/Shaman which is a great duo or Enchanter/Cleric which is probably the strongest overall duo in the game. Monk/Shaman is better in certain situations though for sure. Have no problem admitting this. Seems kinda weird to shoehorn an enchanter into a monk/shaman duo. I'm sure it works fine. Not sure I'd call it the best trio though. Charm pets at endgame have like 8k hp. It's a lot to heal with torpor and it directly nerfs your groups damage by a pretty significant amount. A cleric would easily be a better choice here since the enchanter can slow and has all the CC you'd ever need.

The Enchanter offers the amazing CC to get into camps that require things like lull. Obviously they have their great charmed pet for DPS too. This covers for the weakness of the Shaman, which is no lulls and no mez. Not every camp is simply rootable for splitting purposes.

The Shaman offers a wide range of spells, and the ability to Torpor/slow tank mobs. This covers the weakness of the Enchanter, which is they cannot always charm well due to mob levels in the zone. Torpor and slow is more than sufficient for any content a trio would be doing mitigation-wise.

The Monk offers the ability to FD, offers good white damage DPS, and ability to tank. This covers the weakness of both the Enchanter and Shaman of not being able to single pull certain camps due to not having FD.

Put them together and you have a group that does high DPS, while being able to do basically any camp a trio could do. The only thing you are missing here is res and teleport. But if the players are experienced, as we keep claiming, then you can easily cover these by buying reses, buying ports, or making pocket characters to cover these deficiencies.

[PlsNoBan]

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

The Enchanter offers the amazing CC to get into camps that require things like lull. Obviously they have their great charmed pet for DPS too. They cover for the weakness of the Shaman, which is no lulls. Not every camp is simply rootable for CC.

The Shaman offers a wide range of spells, and the ability to Torpor/slow tank mobs. They cover the weakness of the Enchanter, which is they cannot always charm due to mob levels in the zone. Torpor and slow is more than sufficient for any content a trio would be doing.

The Monk offers the ability to FD, offers good white damage DPS, and ability to tank. This covers the weakness of both the Enchanter and Shaman of not being able to single pull certain camps due to not having FD.

Put them together and you have a group that does high DPS, while being able to do basically any camp a trio could do. The only thing you are missing here is res and teleport. But if the players are experienced, as we keep claiming, then you can easily cover these by buying reses, buying ports, or making pocket characters to cover them instead.

Yeah I understand EverQuest DSM. I just explained that enc/clr and mnk/shm are 2 of the strongest duos in the game. I just don't typically see people mashing them together in this way and this trio never stuck out to me as particularly popular or talked about as the best trio or anything of the sort. I'm sure this trio is plenty strong and capable of most any content that is trio-able. I don't think a non biased sane person could or would argue that a cleric is probably a better option to go with enc/mnk than shaman though. The charm is doing the lion's share of the DPS and tanking and CH is honestly just miles better than torpor for maintaining charms. There's not really any argument about this from people that don't have an unrealistic borderline unhealthy view on the shaman class for whatever reason.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

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

Yeah I understand EverQuest DSM. I just explained that enc/clr and mnk/shm are 2 of the strongest duos in the game. I just don't typically see people mashing them together in this way and this trio never stuck out to me as particularly popular or talked about as the best trio or anything of the sort. I'm sure this trio is plenty strong and capable of most any content that is trio-able. I don't think a non biased sane person could or would argue that a cleric is probably a better option to go with enc/mnk than shaman though. The charm is doing the lion's share of the DPS and tanking and CH is honestly just miles better than torpor for maintaining charms. There's not really any argument about this from people that don't have an unrealistic borderline obsessive love for shaman for whatever reason.

I disagree. CH is nice for the pets, but it doesn't allow you to do camps that Enchanters cannot do, like West Waste Dragons. You can still do those with Torpor, CH isn't needed.

You are putting far too much emphasis on CHing pets. With a Shaman's 75% slow your pet isn't going to be taking a ton of damage, so Torpor is fine for healing. Why do you think Shamans can Torpor/Slow tank really hard mobs? The same logic applies, only the person/pet tanking the mob differs. If anything it is better when a charmed pet is tanking, because a charmed pet is going to tank better than a Shaman. They will have more dodge/riposte/parry, and NPC AC works a bit different than player AC.

And if you don't want to lose DPS on the Charmed pet via occasional Torporing, the Shaman or Monk can tank instead.

[PlsNoBan]

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

I disagree. CH is nice for the pets, but it doesn't allow you to do camps that Enchanters cannot do, like West Waste Dragons. You can still do those with Torpor, CH isn't needed.

You are putting far too much emphasis on CHing pets. With a Shaman's 75% slow your pet isn't going to be taking a ton of damage, so Torpor is fine for healing. Why do you think Shamans can Torpor/Slow tank really hard mobs? The same logic applies, only the person/pet tanking the mob differs. If anything it is better when a charmed pet is tanking, because a charmed pet is going to tank better than a Shaman. They will have more dodge/riposte/parry, and NPC AC works a bit different than player AC.

Why exactly could Shm/Mnk/Enc do WW dragons and Clr/Mnk/Enc could not? More than likely the monk would end up tanking and the enchanter can slow. The cleric can objectively output more healing than shaman. Their HoT is pretty close if not the same healing as torpor and doesn't reduce DPS. Their single target direct heals (without even mentioning CH) are way way better. The enchanter isn't doing much either way most likely. What makes shaman so important here? 5% more slow? Get fuckin real kiddo.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

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

Why exactly could Shm/Mnk/Enc do WW dragons and Clr/Mnk/Enc could not? More than likely the monk would end up tanking and the enchanter can slow. The cleric can objectively output more healing than shaman. The enchanter isn't doing much either way most likely. What makes shaman so important here? 5% more slow? Get fuckin real kiddo.

There are some camps that Enchanters cannot do due to how charm works. West Waste Dragons are an example of this, because they have an AoE dispel + damage.

Cleric/Monk/Enchanter will struggle with this because the Enchanter is going to have a hard time keeping up their pet due to the dispel, and they are going to be taking AoE damage. The Cleric's 10 second Complete Heal works against them, because they need to heal multiple people at the same time due to AoE damage. The Cleric can use Celestial Elixir obviously, but it isn't as efficient as Torpor or Complete Heal. Celestial Elixir is 300 mana for 1200 HP (4 hp per mana) vs Torpor which is 1200-1500 HP (depending on the tick) for 200 mana (6-7.5 hp per mana).

Shamans can solo WW Dragons already. They can maintain healing multiple players more efficiently due to Torpor being superior to Celestial Elixir, and they have Cannibalize to recover mana faster during the fight. They can Slow the mob easier via Malo and they have a better Slow. This means mitigation is more efficient, on top of their healing being more efficient.

[Keebz]

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

There are some camps that Enchanters cannot do due to how charm works. West Waste Dragons are an example of this, because they have an AoE dispel + damage.

Enchanters can solo WW dragons just fine. Bury the charm, rune yourself, bam.

Most people just use the water to block the AoE's, but I believe that's against the rules so I can't condone it.

[slard271]

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

...snip... due to Torpor being superior to Celestial Elixir ...snip...

Just sayin' but this is pretty darn subjective, imo. There are pretty hardcore tradeoffs between CE and torp than just mana efficiency. It's disingenuous to suggest otherwise, but that's par for the course at this point.