Best 4 person all caster/priest group

[Troxx]

I'd rather double post than chain edit each post for the next 30 minutes.

We all know what pocket characters are. You just seem to think they are relevant here. You only keep talking about this because you acknowledge that the value of cheal, rez and all the other things clerics do are invaluable.

To steal a line from you:

Thank you for conceding the point that a cleric is actually better than shamans for this. I appreciate you conceding that you are wrong by trying to make "pocket clerics" a thing for this.

Tally ho!

[DeathsSilkyMist]

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

We all know what pocket characters are.

If you know what a pocket character is, explain this:

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

If you are allowed to pocket whatever you want but don't have on the side what is the point of restricting this theoretical group to only 4 and only casters?

Why do you keep insisting you can pocket any class? You need to explain what a pocket character is in your view.

[bcbrown]

If one group of four can fight effectively, and another group of four can only be effective with a pocket character, the former group is better than the latter.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

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

If one group of four can fight effectively, and another group of four can only be effective with a pocket character, the former group is better than the latter.

The group with the Shaman doesn't need the pocket cleric. Not sure where you saw me say that. But pocket clerics are easy to make, and plenty exist already. There's no reason to run a Cleric full time just for the occasional res, which is why people make pocket clerics.

If your group needs a lot of reses, you are playing poorly anyway, regardless of the team comp. You need to fix the skill issues, rather than rely on the Cleric to res you all the time.

The idea is that the pocket cleric is rarely used, because you shouldn't need a lot of reses to begin with. It's more of a convenience that a lot of people already take advantage of. With the Shaman tanking, the pets don't need lots of healing either.

A 60 Torpor Shaman isn't a pocket character. It's better to have 4 level 60 characters that aren't pocket characters, and then pocket the classes that are easy to do so.

This is because it takes less time and money to make a 49 cleric or a 55 mage. It's really that simple. You also don't want to share your account information for a main character that has a lot of time and money put into it.

[Troxx]

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

If one group of four can fight effectively, and another group of four can only be effective with a pocket character, the former group is better than the latter.

this?

[Troxx]

Lol DSM is the Marjorie Talyor Greene and Lauren Boebert of p99?

[Troxx]

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

Actually ... name every single camp out there you can think of that needs a shaman where 2x enchanter + cleric + literally any other caster would not be sufficient.

Do it.

What named?

What camp?

You will not and can not because it does not exist.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

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

Do it.

What named?

What camp?

You will not and can not because it does not exist.

I already did multiple times. Shaman is better for Fungi King and West Waste Dragons compared to a Cleric. Those are two easy examples. You have yet to name a camp a Cleric is better at, or needed at. As usual, you never provide anything, and just keep asking for evidence after it's already provided.

Just look at the Mage DPS debate. You still haven't posted the logs, and I posted multiple videos with logs for my Shaman points.

You haven't explained what a pocket character is either. You clearly don't know what pocket characters are, since you keep insisting they can be any character for some strange reason.

The reality is you are afraid to be wrong, so you don't want to put any information out. It's sad. It's ok to admit you were wrong sometimes.

[Troxx]

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

I already did multiple times. Shaman is better for Fungi King and West Waste Dragons compared to a Cleric.

"Better" (subjective) is not the same as "needs a shaman". Congratulations. You have come up with 2 situations that are subjectively easier with a shaman. I could assert that either could actually be better with a CLERIC when you have 2x enchanters + another actually good caster class.

Fungi? Biggest issue there is actually the PULL. Cleric with DA to help a NECROMANCER split is actually a hell of a lot better than what a shaman could do.

Sorry you failed.

Thank you for conceding DSM....

God that's gotta hurt!

Thank you for conceding DSM!

DSM has conceded!!!

DSM HAS CONCEDED SO THREAD IS OVER!!!! REJOICE!!!

Thanks for conceding DSM! Thread is over?!



Thank you for conceding. You are the MTG of p99.

Tally ho ...

[bcbrown]

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

I already did multiple times. Shaman is better for Fungi King and West Waste Dragons compared to a Cleric.

Perhaps better, but not required, right?