Best 4 person all caster/priest group

[DeathsSilkyMist]

I'll make this as simple as possible.

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

Adults do not ignore all the other adults around them and make up their own rules.

Agreed. That has been my point the entire time. This includes yourself. Remember that consensus by itself is not a rule.

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

Nobody made up a pocket restriction

Correct. This is what I have been telling you for 80+ pages now. OP did not post a pocket character restriction. The title of the thread does not have a pocket character restriction.

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

OR admission

There is no rule on these forums stating pocket characters must be admitted into a thread before they can be discussed. The proof of this is the thread with Crede:

https://www.project1999.com/forums/s...d.php?t=418868

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

Level a cleric and have people log it in as needed. I have an epic cleric that’s been 54 since 2014 and he has done countless rezzes. Just a phenomenal class that everyone should have at least one of.

That thread does not have an explicit rule stating pocket characters are allowed, or not allowed. Crede posted about a pocket cleric anyway, and nobody said "pocket characters are not allowed".

If you still want to claim you haven't admitted you are wrong after you literally said there is no pocket character restriction, that just doesn't make sense.

[Keebz]

What I don't get is what DSM things the pocket cleric is even for. This group wants the cleric logged in and playing. You can't CH my pet from character select.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

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

What I don't get is what DSM things the pocket cleric is even for. This group wants the cleric logged in and playing. You can't CH my pet from character select.

Almost all fights this group can do can be Torpor tanked. This means you do not need to CH the pets.

The poclet Cleric is used for Chardok Royals and the occasional res when you need it.

[Keebz]

If you can torpor tank something an enchanter can probably just solo it. That's a pretty low bar.

[bcbrown]

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

There is no rule on these forums stating pocket characters must be admitted into a thread before they can be discussed. The proof of this is the thread with Crede. That thread does not have an explicit rule stating pocket characters are allowed, or not allowed. Crede posted about a pocket cleric anyway, and nobody said "pocket characters are not allowed".

If you still want to claim you haven't admitted you are wrong after you literally said there is no pocket character restriction, that just doesn't make sense.

Of course there's no rule about when pocket characters can be discussed. You're always free to bring up pockets in your arguments. But, crucially, anyone (or everyone) else is free to disregard any argument that relies upon pocket characters. No one else agrees with you, as far as I can tell. You haven't convinced anyone. Sorry.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

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

Of course there's no rule about when pocket characters can be discussed. You're always free to bring up pockets in your arguments. But, crucially, anyone (or everyone) else is free to disregard any argument that relies upon pocket characters. No one else agrees with you, as far as I can tell. You haven't convinced anyone. Sorry.

Glad we agree there is no rule against pocket characters. This means all arguments claiming there was a rule are irrelevant, and are no longer part of the discussion.

More people on P99 play with pocket characters than people who disagree with me in this thread. Crede included, who's had a pocket cleric since 2014. This means more people agree with me via their actions than you. That is reality.

If you want to close your eyes to the world and claim you've won via consensus, you are free to do so. But you haven't convinced anyone to stop using pocket characters. They will still do so. The illusion of consensus is all you have.

[Troxx]

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

Of course there's no rule about when pocket characters can be discussed. You're always free to bring up pockets in your arguments. But, crucially, anyone (or everyone) else is free to disregard any argument that relies upon pocket characters. No one else agrees with you, as far as I can tell. You haven't convinced anyone. Sorry.

Bolder and highlighted that for DSM. He seems to have stopped reading after the first sentence. DSMs case for shaman is so un-compelling and weak that that the only way viability is possible is if pockets are allowed.

Funny how shamans will need a pocket cleric but clerics do not need (or want pocket shamans).

This entire side debate is even more straightforward than the early arguments where the clerics was guaranteed a spot and we were bickering/dickering about who should be 4th

[DeathsSilkyMist]

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

Bolder and highlighted that for DSM. He seems to have stopped reading after the first sentence. DSMs case for shaman is so un-compelling and weak that that the only way viability is possible is if pockets are allowed.

Funny how shamans will need a pocket cleric but clerics do not need (or want pocket shamans).

This entire side debate is even more straightforward than the early arguments where the clerics was guaranteed a spot and we were bickering/dickering about who should be 4th

Troxx didn't read the first sentence, where Bcbrown agrees that no rule exists against pocket characters.

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

Of course there's no rule about when pocket characters can be discussed.

Troxx forgets that his entire argument against pocket characters was based on an imaginary rule agsinst them.

He can discuss groups without pocket characters freely. But he cannot shut down other peoples discussions of groups with pocket characters via an imaginary rule and trolling.

[Elizondo]

So apparently the shaman is torpor tanking, heaiing enchanters during bad charm breaks, rooting 5 mobs to dot at the same time and maloing on charm breaks too

Not to mention keeping buffs up

Did I forget anything?

[Duik]

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

So apparently the shaman is torpor tanking, heaiing enchanters during bad charm breaks, rooting 5 mobs to dot at the same time and maloing on charm breaks too

Not to mention keeping buffs up

Did I forget anything?

I postured the same question god knows how many pages back.

I bet you dont get an answer either.