What Class Does This Group Need?

[Faywind]

Regardless, any class would bring more to the table than a wizard... It's sad that they lack so much compared to other classes and I would never recommend it to another player unless they want to raid hardcore...

[thufir]

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

Regardless, any class would bring more to the table than a wizard... It's sad that they lack so much compared to other classes and I would never recommend it to another player unless they want to raid hardcore...

You don't have to tell me. I played one until 59 on live during this era (63, if you count when I came back during PoP). My regrets about picking a wizard as my main are part of why I play here at all. They just don't do very much and what they do do is not really well suited for the XP grind that characterizes much of this game. Kunark era killed them, imo; their burst DPS was a decent tradeoff for their lack of sustain when melee had crappy weapons and mobs had crappy hp.

But if that's what the OP wants that's what they want. They do have some utility so it won't be as bad as all that. Have to level up a wizard somehow. And it is nice when you get to the very end and have Hsagra's Wrath and Porlos's Fury (expensive, though).

[Atmas]

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

You don't have to tell me. I played one until 59 on live during this era (63, if you count when I came back during PoP). My regrets about picking a wizard as my main are part of why I play here at all. They just don't do very much and what they do do is not really well suited for the XP grind that characterizes much of this game. Kunark era killed them, imo; their burst DPS was a decent tradeoff for their lack of sustain when melee had crappy weapons and mobs had crappy hp.

But if that's what the OP wants that's what they want. They do have some utility so it won't be as bad as all that. Have to level up a wizard somehow. And it is nice when you get to the very end and have Hsagra's Wrath and Porlos's Fury (expensive, though).

I actually think Velious was the worst for wizards. It's pretty much a melee xpac. I guess you are referring to leveling though. Wizards were great raid mob dps in Kunark.

I played a wiz on live. Velious high hpt non-bannable mobs don't work out well for them. However, when AAs came out and during PoP my wizard was awesome. At the top or in the top few of DPS charts on raids. Also had so much mana regen/mana conservation ability that I was viable dps for normal groups. However, quadding or AoE groups were also way better xp than normal groups. Geared wizards were pretty stellar during PoP. The prevalence of high end weapons here does make it harder for wizards leveling now.

My apologies to OP for a bit of derailment.

[jarshale]

Necro pet/dots might make up some DPS. also low level darkness is an easy snare replacement imo. also some poor mans cc's with a shit mez and root around lvl 30 something

[iruinedyourday]

yea but when a wizard gets lazy, they just sit there, when any other class they at least auto attack or pet dps..

and lets be honest, its ez to get lazy on p99

[Daywolf]

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

yea but when a wizard gets lazy, they just sit there, when any other class they at least auto attack or pet dps..

and lets be honest, its ez to get lazy on p99

A little exaggerated there. Such as druids don't really have auto (not worth a damn anyway) or sustainable pet. I'd party with a wiz over a bard though, unless I know the bard didn't just roll a bard to take advantage of the strafing bug, which imo is worse than lazy. But you know quickly if a wizzy is being lazy, and either they get booted or get themselves killed because they are nuking too early for the kill. And of course too late and it's just a waste of mana. But there are good bards, and good wizards, and it's still just a matter of liking the class you play, at least as it's meant to be played.

[Troxx]

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

I'd party with a wiz over a bard though

Even an afk bard singing hymn of restoration (under 55) or cantana (55+) with a lute equipped will do more for a group than a wizard.

As for what the OPs group needs ...

There are a lot of classes that could round that group out nicely.

-Rogue brings consistent high dps, corpse dragging, and pick lock for those few awesome cash spots like crypt/emperor in seb. Without pick lock, there are a few camps your premade can't really enjoy.

-Mage brings solid dps, malo, and CoH.

-Shaman ... this class is just a powerhouse. While some might consider it redundant for your group (and having shaman, cleric a druid in a group is a bit of a waste), this class brings the strongest slows to the table, malo, and frees up the enchanter to focus solely on pet dps and crowd control - monk can go hog wild with overpulling as your slower and cc'r aren't the same toon.

-Bard ... bards make every group better. The draw-back to bringing a bard to the table is that it doesn't really help the group kill faster. 3 out of your 6 toons would enjoy a huge jump to mana regen, and 6 out of 6 toons would benefit from the extra background healing, freeing up more druid mana for nuking and possibly allowing your cleric to go to sleep in most xp camps the game has to offer. Lull in a lot of camps allows the bard to pull more quickly/safely than the monk (especially when there are casters around). The big draw back here is bards don't add jack diddly for damage output. If your group didn't have a druid (ie had another higher damage toon like a rogue or mage) I'd recommend bard for sure.

-Monk - always solid dps - always a good stand-in tank - always a great puller. A monk will fit into literally any group that covers the basics of healer and cc/slower. You could have a group of 4 monks, a cleric and a chanter/shaman that would own most content.

For the 6th man to YOUR group, I'd recommend rogue. Barring that, mage will probably add more to your group than most other options.

[Daywolf]

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

Even an afk bard singing hymn of restoration (under 55) or cantana (55+) with a lute equipped will do more for a group than a wizard.

Yet in context of what I said, I'd still rather group with a wizard (paying attention) over a bard (the ones that only rolled bard to take advantage of the strafing bug for easy/fast/safe gameplay).

Someone that plays a wizard - plays a wizard, because they actually like the class and the game. So more likely to make the effort to contribute to a group and not drop off when things get a little boring or challenging.

Just like as it holds true for Cleric. Many reach cap, or near cap, and realize it's not all that great for them, then they burn out. Some people love Cleric though, I mean really really like the class, and play for no other reasons than that they just enjoy it with the good and the bad.

But when you roll something, because it's easy, or fast, or min/max, or etc, other than you just really like the class, the likelihood of you playing that class bad or burning out is significantly higher than if you just played what you wanted to play regardless of the consequences.

[Victorio]

Rogue or a second enchanter

[JurisDictum]

Rogue or Mage would be the best. With proper gear -- Rogue will out dps anything except certain charms. Rogue's are also able to help CR a group with hide/sneak and open doors that are really annoying to get keys for.

But on low gear, Mage deals a lot of damage. They also have mod rods, pet weapons and the ability to summon people eventually.

Ranger is a possibility too. Tracking can be useful and extra dps is always nice. They get a few cool buffs late in the game as well. But I think a Rogue or a Mage would add the most.