It is past time we were allowed shortie hybrids

[LordRayken]

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

I would think There's a big difference between adding the combos that Sony added in 2002 and coming up with new ones. For the 2002 combos the vendors/GMs/quests/item info is all out there, just has to be added/enabled/whatever. I'm sure it's work, but not as much work as coming up with stuff from scratch. Big difference between adding combos that have been in everquest for 85% of it's life vs making up stuff based on server pop!

I'm not even looking past Velious. Whatever is added would need to be created in the vein of the EQ, Kunark, and Velious world. I don't want anything from 2002 "enabled" but instead would prefer to see it as if it always existed in the original era.

Barbarian Shadow Knight is still one of the most interesting ones to me.

Or Barbarian Monk.

[Danth]

Halfling Rangers and Iksar Rogues are both cases where I routinely forget they're NOT options in the game already.

Half elven Clerics seem to me to be another flagrant omission. I understand that some peoples might discriminate against the half-breed race and refuse to ordain them (even if they'll train them as Paladins) but I cannot accept that absolutely ALL the many different factions in the world would discriminate equally. That's one heck of a deep conspiracy.

On the other side of it, Troll and Ogre Shadow Knights make little sense, as both are primitive monster races which have no notion of a knightly code of honor. In reality they exist because 989/VI wanted all races to have at least three options and the SK was the "least bad" choice for the monster races. Sometimes game design becomes a case of shoehorning something in then coming up with an excuse for it after the fact.

Danth

[loramin]

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

Barbarian Shadow Knight is still one of the most interesting ones to me.

Or Barbarian Monk.

Personally I don't think either of those fit. Barbarians are too ... barbaric to be monks. I mean, a giant Scotsman (what they basically are) is almost literally as far away as you can get (geographically and conceptually) from a Buddhist Monk.

As for Shadow Knights, Barbarians have always been a "good" race. Heck, even their "evil" members (Rogues) are less evil than most: they're not lurking in some sewer or something, they're running the town bank! [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

On Sullon Zek Barbarians actually got to be Paladins, and I think that fits better than Shadow Knights (though still not great).

Plus ... Barbs would make terrible SKs for the same reason Erudites make great SKs: SKs require intelligence (and Barbs are dumb). In fact, the more I think about it, the more I remember Barbarians and Erudites are meant to be opposites (Barbs are humans taken to the dumb/strong extreme, and Erudites are humans taken to the smart/weak extreme). Really the two should never overlap class-wise.

[pink grapefruit]

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

On Sullon Zek Barbarians actually got to be Paladins

nope

[PieOats]

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

Personally I don't think either of those fit. Barbarians are too ... barbaric to be monks. I mean, a giant Scotsman (what they basically are) is almost literally as far away as you can get (geographically and conceptually) from a Buddhist Monk.

As for Shadow Knights, Barbarians have always been a "good" race. Heck, even their "evil" members (Rogues) are less evil than most: they're not lurking in some sewer or something, they're running the town bank! [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

On Sullon Zek Barbarians actually got to be Paladins, and I think that fits better than Shadow Knights (though still not great).

Plus ... Barbs would make terrible SKs for the same reason Erudites make great SKs: SKs require intelligence (and Barbs are dumb). In fact, the more I think about it, the more I remember Barbarians and Erudites are meant to be opposites (Barbs are humans taken to the dumb/strong extreme, and Erudites are humans taken to the smart/weak extreme). Really the two should never overlap class-wise.

HIGHLY DISCRIMINATORY (and inflammatory) post riddled with overtly *racist and bigoted* themes.

Among them:

1st.) casting Barbarians as savage subhumans incapable of martial discipline or INNER FOCUS *strokes phantom beard contemplatively*
TWOnd) regarding shadow knights, a diverse lot of corpsefncking noblemen with varied and COMPETING allegiances as a single religious sect.
3rd.) suggesting Erudites are somehow uniquely suited to the profession of ennobled corpsfnckery.

Rogean, please ban Loramin.

[LordRayken]

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

Personally I don't think either of those fit. Barbarians are too ... barbaric to be monks. I mean, a giant Scotsman (what they basically are) is almost literally as far away as you can get (geographically and conceptually) from a Buddhist Monk.

As for Shadow Knights, Barbarians have always been a "good" race. Heck, even their "evil" members (Rogues) are less evil than most: they're not lurking in some sewer or something, they're running the town bank! [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

On Sullon Zek Barbarians actually got to be Paladins, and I think that fits better than Shadow Knights (though still not great).

Plus ... Barbs would make terrible SKs for the same reason Erudites make great SKs: SKs require intelligence (and Barbs are dumb). In fact, the more I think about it, the more I remember Barbarians and Erudites are meant to be opposites (Barbs are humans taken to the dumb/strong extreme, and Erudites are humans taken to the smart/weak extreme). Really the two should never overlap class-wise.

I think Barbarians are wise and noble beings and can easily adhere to the kind of disciplined martial prowess Monks display. I can see them meditating in the cold north with nothing but a kilt on against the elements, fighting with fists and kicking.

also - I was kind of imagining a "corrupt" Barbarian sect that started in Neriak or something as SKs. Ogres and Trolls are dumb too and they're SKs so.

But yeah, Halfling Ranger, Gnome SK, Iksar Rogue, Wood Elf Shaman, Half-Elf Cleric, all seem like legitimate combinations.

[loramin]

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

On the same token I can understand why Erudite society would not foster Warriors but some could be trained as Shadow Knights.

This one actually makes sense to me. The Erudites are all about ... erudition [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.] They won't embrace any profession that doesn't require intelligence and thought.

A Shadow Knight still has to study books, and therefore makes sense as an Erudite: a Warrior doesn't.

[Jimjam]

Iksar rogues are in the game as NPCs.

[Sonark]

I'd think Rogues are probably too cowardly and low-key for Iksar.

Rogues don't really qualify for a number of reasons.

[Sonark]

Barbarian rogues don't seem to make sense until you remember your introduction to Conan the Barbarian.