A tour of norrath, need some advice

[Ferok]

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

You definitely want a cleric to make all thngs possible. A Druid simply can not cut it for heals in many dungeon scenarios. You could dump the druid and let the cleric take that spot if you don't add another member to your cadre. This would leave the Wizard where he is and still leave you with port capability. Pity to loose the Druid though - lot of utility there. Maybe the Wizard could play a Druid and the Cleric could fill in for the vacated Wizard spot. You'd still have heals and a Druid can be played at begging or expert levels - room to grow. Of course, the guy that was gonna play the Druid might not be to happy playing a Cleric. I dunno. [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Or a Shaman for the Druid. You need either enchanter/shaman slow or a cleric. You can't not have both. It won't be a cute fun 'different' group post-45. It will be awful.

[Slave]

Here's something that will put it into perspective: ask literally any Druid or Wizard who's played more than a few months how many groups they get. And they'll probably tell you they don't deserve them, either.

Because Druid and Wizard are not grouping classes. At all. They are probably the worst two classes for a group when compared to almost any replacement.

You're asking for advice? Well, the original group makeup is not going to be viable at higher levels with a Druid and Wizard taking up critical slots, without a Cleric and devoted slower. You will not gain experience in anything like a fun and efficient fashion.

The Bard and Druid are absolutely not capable of decently healing the party after level 40, period. The Bard will be primary target of any mob that he begins slowing, and you have no snap-aggro tank to take it off him. Your warrior is nothing but DPS at that point (or the mob is unslowed), you will have insufficient heals on a low-HP and low-AC tank because you have no good buffs... the list goes on.

It is an extremely problematic group makeup at any level over 39, in my opinion.

If the Druid became a Cleric and the Wizard became a Rogue, it would be a very STRONG group, conversely.

[SCB]

I don't understand where the "Druids can't heal" thing comes from. I could solo-heal groups on my druid through Velks on live without issue. Were they pulling as fast an a perfectly min/maxed group? No. Were we surviving just fine? Yep.

Again, not comparing Druid efficacy to that of a Cleric (or even Shaman, with his slow/etc), but the class can most assuredly keep a group up and running.

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

The Bard and Druid are absolutely not capable of decently healing the party after level 40, period. The Bard will be primary target of any mob that he begins slowing, and you have no snap-aggro tank to take it off him. Your warrior is nothing but DPS at that point (or the mob is unslowed), you will have insufficient heals on a low-HP and low-AC tank

This, for instance, is just flat-out, objectively wrong.

[Ephirith]

The only justification for that class makeup would be that they are playing the classes they like at the cost of efficiency and they are aware of it-- at which point any other choice would be the wrong one.

It's not a good combo but it's not completely terrible. If the monk can single pull even a little, their bard is good, and their melees wiggle into some decent gear the group will bump along satisfactorily until around 45 when mob HP goes nuts.

Unfortunately their reasoning seems misguided- a wizard because they are worried about somebody having responsibility? Having a lackluster combo is going to give every member more responsibility than if you just pick efficient classes and play them badly.

This, for instance, is just flat-out, objectively wrong.

Don't forget the bard isn't geared in full cultural or even lambent, more than likely. They don't have an ubertwinked fungi monk dps etc. Remember, druids are still using a 300 point heal all through the 30's, 40's and early 50's. Shamans too but at least they have canni and slows to make the situation halfway efficient. Especially in the later range, the bard IS going to have agro and he IS going to be taking major damage, and it's going to OOM the druid quickly.

[SCB]

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

Unfortunately their reasoning seems misguided- a wizard because they are worried about somebody having responsibility? Having a lackluster combo is going to give every member more responsibility than if you just pick efficient classes and play them badly.

This I agree with. Plus, "not having responsibility" in EverQuest is just code for "gonna wipe everyone nonstop".

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

Don't forget the bard isn't geared in full cultural or even lambent, more than likely. They don't have an ubertwinked fungi monk dps etc. Remember, druids are still using a 300 point heal all through the 30's, 40's and early 50's. Shamans too but at least they have canni and slows to make the situation halfway efficient. Especially in the later range, the bard IS going to have agro and he IS going to be taking major damage, and it's going to OOM the druid quickly.

I guess I can sort of understand that, but if theyre a group of buddies rolling together, not taking the time to do everyone's sol ro (and crafted) quests seems silly. Those quests, at the very least, send you all over the Classic-era zonelist which seems to be a priority for them. I'd recommend a Shaman at the very least for their specific group but if their buddy is dead-set on a Druid they can definitely make it work. Again, we're taking "optimal" completely out of the equation for "what I want to play".

[Slave]

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

I don't understand where the "Druids can't heal" thing comes from. I could solo-heal groups on my druid through Velks on live without issue. Were they pulling as fast an a perfectly min/maxed group? No. Were we surviving just fine? Yep.

Again, not comparing Druid efficacy to that of a Cleric (or even Shaman, with his slow/etc), but the class can most assuredly keep a group up and running.




This, for instance, is just flat-out, objectively wrong.

ITT: Druids can now MH for high level groups, even in Velious!

You are dead wrong. I'm shocked you actually typed this blatantly obvious falsehood, because in all fairness you should either be avalanched with ridicule or completely ignored now.

The only reason Shamans can do it is because 75% less damage is coming in. And their effectiveness as MH tails off dramatically as you climb the 50s. (until 60th and Torpor)

Everyone that has ever tried to group at these levels with a Druid knows this and it is not in any kind of question.

[Picked]

Lot of hate for the Wizards still I see. They are fairly problematic without clarity I will admit. If I was going to make the group up under these circumstances I would say keep the Wiz, have the bard or monk play an Enchanter and switch the Druid to Cleric. No sense in having two pullers.

Giving you Cleric, Ench, War, Wiz, Bard or Monk depending on which switches. Wizards get a bad rap. But with Ench and Bard in group later in levels? He will be as good DPS as anyone. Not to mention the burst when needed. With Ench charmed pet and Monk or Bard, DPS will be nice.

[SCB]

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

ITT: Druids can now MH for high level groups, even in Velious!

You are dead wrong. I'm shocked you actually typed this blatantly obvious falsehood, because in all fairness you should either be avalanched with ridicule or completely ignored now.

The only reason Shamans can do it is because 75% less damage is coming in. And their effectiveness as MH tails off dramatically as you climb the 50s. (until 60th and Torpor)

Everyone that has ever tried to group at these levels with a Druid knows this and it is not in any kind of question.

I did it first-hand, so no, you're wrong. I rolled with a group of Monk, Bard, Ranger, Druid, Wizard, Warrior, and we did fine. Definitely wasn't top-end xp or anything, but we wanted to play together and that's what we all happened to be. Only our bard was even super-geared at the time.

Don't know what to tell you, dude.

[Furniture]

Seriously, listen to the people in this thread, your group composition is seriously flawed and can not last, if you really want your group to be able to last by itself 40+ then do switch out the druid for a cleric and the wizard for a rogue or even a mage, id even say get rid of the shitty bard and insert an enchanter and your group will be amazing


Your group will die a lot, and you wont be able to res yourself or even kill at an enjoyable rewarding pace once you get high enough level. Your gear is going to be way below average since you wont really be able to take any of the profitable camps that require a proper group, so its just even more crap in this shit sandwich, so your really just dooming yourselves in all aspects of your experience here, Its going to take you half a year of like 4-5 hours a day to even get to high levels if this group is how you want to do things

[Ferok]

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

I don't understand where the "Druids can't heal" thing comes from. I could solo-heal groups on my druid through Velks on live without issue. Were they pulling as fast an a perfectly min/maxed group? No. Were we surviving just fine? Yep.

Again, not comparing Druid efficacy to that of a Cleric (or even Shaman, with his slow/etc), but the class can most assuredly keep a group up and running.

With an enchanter, sure. Otherwise, nope. Shaman have two things going for them: one is slow, the other is Canni - they just have more mana at their disposal. An enchanter can put you on an even or even positive playing field in this regard. Not going to cut it sitting at the wall outside of Karnors, let alone in Velks.

Edit: Velks is pretty trivial difficulty once you hit about 56 or 57 downstairs, so sure, at higher levels I can see that just about any group would work. Especially since melee classes solo in Velks. Grouping in velks I take to mean kobalds and gargoyles.