Why no warrior/wizard hybrid?

[Maurk]

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

More like Rogue/Cleric.

ogres are stupid.

[fuji]

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

paladin:
has lower level cleric spells.
has taunt and bash like warrior.
has no sneak/hide like rogue
has no backstab or anything like it
yeah its probably rogue/cleric.

They can create poison. Wait, nvm.

[nalkin]

Because a warrior/wizard would be able to do nothing beneficial for a group, nor would they be able to solo. A warriors purpose is tanking, so why would you want to lose some of that for being a crappy wizard too. A wizard is dps, so why would you lose dps so you can not tank well.

[fuji]

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

Because a warrior/wizard would be able to do nothing beneficial for a group, nor would they be able to solo. A warriors purpose is tanking, so why would you want to lose some of that for being a crappy wizard too. A wizard is dps, so why would you lose dps so you can not tank well.

Rangers are not good tanks, but they can solo well(snare + fear animal) and they have good dps for groups. So why were they created?

[Aadill]

Sadly fear animal isn't in game yet, but this is exactly the sentiment I came to post.

[fuji]

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

Sadly fear animal isn't in game yet, but this is exactly the sentiment I came to post.

Really? When did rangers get it? I remember having it for my alt in Velious.

[nalkin]

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

Rangers are not good tanks, but they can solo well(snare + fear animal) and they have good dps for groups. So why were they created?

Rangers are basically dps for a group. What would a warrior/wiz be? Would it be tanking or would it be for dps? Neither because it wouldn't be able to efficiently do any of those.

Plus I think the concept of a warrior/wizard is dumb. They are to far down the spectrum for one another.

Also, not to offend anyone but in classic eq there isn't much reason for a ranger the way they were designed. In POP they really started to become a legitimate dps class.

The bottom line is, classes need a role they are supposed to perform, and what role would a wiz/warrior be in a group?

[hedbonker]

Paladin: Tanks like a cleric. Heals like a warrior.

I think fear animal is velious. I remember using it on dire wolves in Iceclad.

Speaking of Velious - I wonder if we are going to have the same boat model we have now for going from Ro to Iceclad. I liked the old SteamPunk boat...

[fuji]

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

Rangers are basically dps for a group. What would a warrior/wiz be? Would it be tanking or would it be for dps? Neither because it wouldn't be able to efficiently do any of those.

Plus I think the concept of a warrior/wizard is dumb. They are to far down the spectrum for one another.

Also, not to offend anyone but in classic eq there isn't much reason for a ranger the way they were designed. In POP they really started to become a legitimate dps class.

The bottom line is, classes need a role they are supposed to perform, and what role would a wiz/warrior be in a group?

The same role as any hybrid. You dont need a pally or sk in a group either, but they are still great classes to play.

[Kassel]

Becouse the "battlemage" war/wiz hybrid destroyed UO.