Best Trio That Doesn't Use Enchanter

[plzrelax]

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

MAG/MAG/MAG would struggle versus really challenging stuff but would be stupidly powerful and fun while leveling. Three air pets (throw in some Gnoll Hide Lariats when possible) to keep mobs perma-stun locked, along with triple Burnt Wood Staff spam. Mobs melting as fast as they can be pulled, pets barely taking damage.

I’m early green, weren’t there some relatively low level all mage/necro groups that were able to go in pretty deep into zones like lguk pretty early on in the server? I don’t think enchanters were part of those groups (maybe they were)

I think the answer to this question can change depending on the stage of the server. A power trio early on can help fund the shaman/monk/bard or whatever later on in the server’s life

[Solist]

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

drool

You're the dude talking about rangers being more useful?

You've never played a ranger. Or you've never played anything but a ranger.

[Solist]

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

I’m early green, weren’t there some relatively low level all mage/necro groups that were able to go in pretty deep into zones like lguk pretty early on in the server? I don’t think enchanters were part of those groups (maybe they were)

I think the answer to this question can change depending on the stage of the server. A power trio early on can help fund the shaman/monk/bard or whatever later on in the server’s life

Mages on green's pets capped at level 29. Yes on lguk, but after mid 30's that all fell apart fairly rapidly. You had to carry a mage after that, big burdon on the grp.

[Penish]

BURDON

lol

[Jimjam]

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

Who in their fucking mind said ranger for anything? Obviously have only ever played ranger here, or have never played ranger. There is no point where you have played a ranger AND something else where you would suggest a ranger is useful for anything in the game, let alone part of a 3man group. These forums never cease to amaze me when rangers which are inherently (by mechanics and bugs) broken here are ever spoken about.


Anyway back on topic.
I'd make the argument that CLE / SHM / MNK is the best.

The addition of pacify, memblur, cheap rezboxes, stun interrupts, and hitpoints cant be scoffed at, a properly played cleric is something this server mostly hasnt seen. There's like 5 people who aren't inbred on this class.

I would suggest the endurance would be higher on single fights with this over necro given the extra HP and healing efficiency. The general agility of the group with the addition of a charisma buff is fairly solid. Great ability to save the cleric on a fail.

For general levelling the necro would be superior especially from low 50's. From 60 onwards except for crawling with undead charmable I'll take the mnk/cle/sham almost exclusively.

Ranger wildly acclaimed as worst, yet most fun, melee with lots of gear options, including self-gearing up during levelling. One of the moat [ed: most🥂🍾 typo kept for prosperity] important aspects of a static is maintaining the commitment - ie psychological, and ranger plays into that best.

[Zuranthium]

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

Monks are a niche class that really can only do things in a single way. Ranger also has a larger HP pool than monk which is noticable. In other words, the cleric can turn a ranger into a psuedo-warrior, but the monk's best can be a psuedo-ranger in durability.

Niche class?? LOL. Feign Death opens things up that Ranger simply can't, who cares about "1 way of doing things" in the scope of this discussion, when it's better. Monk tanks better than Ranger. It's about avoidance. Rangers barely have more HP, that's nothing compared to other factors. Monk also does more DPS.

Your argument that it's "more stress" for a Cleric to root an add is preposterous. They don't have much else they need to be doing and a "best" group is not going to get themselves into many situations they can't handle. Monk has better numbers than Ranger and gives the trio a powerful ability it wouldn't otherwise have, that's what's matters most. Not having an extra person to cast root.

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

Mages on green's pets capped at level 29. Yes on lguk, but after mid 30's that all fell apart fairly rapidly. You had to carry a mage after that, big burdon on the grp.

Even if they didn't get new pets after Level 29 for some reason, a 29 pet + damage shield + nukes is still more DPS than a level 40 melee in that era. "Burden" [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[Elizondo]

The reason why Paladin is the best knight is because of his access to cleric spells

Having root / lull alone on a tank class is almost OP if you plan your stats accordingly

[Swish]

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

The reason why Paladin is the best knight is because of his access to cleric spells

Having root / lull alone on a tank class is almost OP if you plan your stats accordingly

I'm not lugging bags of charisma gear around. Go team SK!

[Snaggles]

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

I'm not lugging bags of charisma gear around. Go team SK!

Without swapping gear on low level blues your crit fail chance is still pretty low. I did Seb ABC at 60 and got maybe 3 crit resists in 2hrs. A full room in seb is more alarming than an extra geonid.

[Rimitto]

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

Niche class?? LOL. Feign Death opens things up that Ranger simply can't, who cares about "1 way of doing things" in the scope of this discussion, when it's better. Monk tanks better than Ranger. It's about avoidance. Rangers barely have more HP, that's nothing compared to other factors. Monk also does more DPS.

Your argument that it's "more stress" for a Cleric to root an add is preposterous. They don't have much else they need to be doing and a "best" group is not going to get themselves into many situations they can't handle. Monk has better numbers than Ranger and gives the trio a powerful ability it wouldn't otherwise have, that's what's matters most. Not having an extra person to cast root.

You're contradicting yourself with your argument... you say root doesn't matter but somehow FD "opens things up"? [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
You're just trading one Semantics for the other now.
What about harmony? damage shields? secondary (albeit shitty) healing? pretty sure rangers get something called wolf form too, as well as invisibility.

But no, the only thing you care about is how to make monk work.
Because FD is your god. Don't mind that the entire party will be stuck trying to get into a place and be sitting there for 10 minutes waiting for either regen or to take out a monster that is undead and see's through your invis.
The party setup I stated deals with that easily, and it's a very common issue in many areas.

you keep saying "best" but what is best? Monk doesn't fit anywhere in the "best" category. I know you love FD but monk isnt' the best tank, It's not the best puller, it's not even the best DPS. Monk is a utility class. It's an offtank puller. The only reason it's an offtank puller is because of it's FD.

take away it's FD and what does it actually do better than any other class? Nothing.
You say it's the best DPS, I say necro can charm undead, I say zerk-dancing a warrior is far superior dmg, I say aside from very specific classes like cleric, that most of the classes in the game can out damage an inflated monk's dps ego.

A level 20 monk and a level 20 paladin fighting things in unrest. That paladin is gonna have ghoulbane, and you're arguing that the monk is going to be best.

a level 30 monk and a level 30 ranger fighting in highkeep basement. The ranger is gonna have harmony, and you're arguing that the monk is going to be the best.

a level 40 monk and a level 40 warrior fighting in city of mist. The warrior is going to be geared at this point, and you're arguing that the monk is going to be the best.


You need to learn about roles and what they exist for. Or at least play the game once in your life.

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

fool

I actually have played ranger, and I know their capabilities and incapability. I've also played paladin and warrior so I know how to tank pretty well, as well as what each class is capable of. Personally I found monks to be the worst tanks that think they're the best. I can also attest to this as a cleric that has had to deal with ALL of them, including bards that think they're also tanks. [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

In ranking order, best to worst:
Warriors
Shadowknights
Rangers
Paladins
Bards*
Monks

This is the listing order of best to worst tanks I've experienced in P99.
A proper warrior is fields and realities better as a tank than the best shadowknight.
A good shadowknight is fields and realities better than the best ranger.
A good ranger is about the same as a mediocre or bad warrior/shadowknight.
A good paladin is about the same as a decent ranger.
A good bard is about the same as a mediocre ranger or paladin.
A good monk is about as good as a bad ranger or mediocre bard.

I earnestly don't know how hard you'd have to twink a monk to think they are "the best tanks ever" but, if you put even an ounce of effort into a warrior or shadowknight instead, the difference wouldn't even be laughable.