Continue shaman or play bard?

[Bazia]

most bards just play regen and do dogshit melee dps, theres a reason they arent that coveted and its not the class its the way most people play it

[pink grapefruit]

MMM the main reason I didn't go bard on green. 100% sure that if I had, the GMs would be hassling me lol.

[Cyrillious]

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

MMM the main reason I didn't go bard on green. 100% sure that if I had, the GMs would be hassling me lol.

A long time ago that happened...I told the Guide that eventually came along that the party referred to me as a mana bot...and I wanted to show them something new... [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

...I was told to rock on with my bad self...

[Aaramis]

I absolutely, absolutely love Bards.
But after you've played one on live with /melody, it's hard to go back to song twisting - especially with only 6 hotkeys.

I'm not sure whether P99 Bards get my eternal respect, or sympathy.
Maybe a bit of both.

[kaluppo]

I had a bard join our orc hill group the other day and it was a godsend. The monk could not keep aggro and I was going 00m all the time because the monk, wizard and rogue were all taking damage on every pull. Then the Bard joins and becomes the "tank" and to my surprise was able to hold aggro so I only had one person to heal. Plus they played a regen song to help heal up a bit during pulls.

But that said I would think Shaman would be an easier life as time goes on. People want shamans for main healer when no clerics are available or slower/buffer even when a cleric is in the group. It's rough for either class during classic but you can look ahead to kunark and velious to see which class will be more fun for you to play down the road.

[Tecmos Deception]

I explained myself as much as I can be bothered to on this topic. If you didn't notice it or understand it as such, that just makes me feel better about not wanting to put more effort into this than I did already :P

[Khorza]

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

If you didn't notice it or understand it as such

So you're just going to pretend like I didn't just respond to every single point you just made in depth? What exactly am I not noticing or understanding? Why are we being so vague all of a sudden?

Are you going to refute any of the points that I just made? Or are you going to just stubbornly stick to your position despite being unable to defend it? It's okay to admit that you're wrong once in awhile, you know. It's a good look, too.

[Keza]

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

So you're just going to pretend like I didn't just respond to every single point you just made in depth? What exactly am I not noticing or understanding? Why are we being so vague all of a sudden?

Are you going to refute any of the points that I just made? Or are you going to just stubbornly stick to your position despite being unable to defend it? It's okay to admit that you're wrong once in awhile, you know. It's a good look, too.

You're making gigantic posts claiming your experience on a shaman as proof of intelligence and nitpicking shit like the short-term 'malo' by saying the actual spell 'malo' didn't exist until Kunark.

Responding isn't the same as being right.

[Khorza]

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

You're making gigantic posts claiming your experience on a shaman as proof of intelligence

I have no idea what this is supposed to mean. Not only is it not a very coherent statement, this conversation has nothing to do about my intelligence (???). It's about the quality of the Shaman class in vanilla EQ.

As far as experience, you don't have to be any sort of expert to understand what a class is capable of. The wiki is publicly available to everyone. Anyone can browse the spell lists, compare abilities between classes, and determine relative strengths and weaknesses. Anyone should be able to do these things, however apparently they're unable to. And even when someone does the work for them, the current meta is to stubbornly cling to your original opinion no matter how much people prove it to be incorrect.

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

Responding isn't the same as being right.

Um, okay, sure. You seem to be trying to suggest that I was incorrect about something, so do you want to actually contribute to the discussion and state what you feel was incorrect?

[Gatorsmash]

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

So you're just going to pretend like I didn't just respond to every single point you just made in depth? What exactly am I not noticing or understanding? Why are we being so vague all of a sudden?

Are you going to refute any of the points that I just made? Or are you going to just stubbornly stick to your position despite being unable to defend it? It's okay to admit that you're wrong once in awhile, you know. It's a good look, too.

Oh so your one of those fucking idiots, lol I stopped reading after "Stat buffs aren't incredible because stats in EQ aren't incredible..... EQ is literally all about maxing stats.