To Brad (Please Read): The Paladin Class
BELL NEWS
what I think the paladin class is, and what it shold be (or what should be
improved).
First, I am a lvl 38 Paladin on Errolsi Marr, and have been playing EQ since
Phase 2 BETA, and have played other 'high level' characters who I care not
to mention. Here are a two main quips about the paladin Class.
--- START RANT -----
1// There Healing spells.
----------------------
Up to lvl 29 paladins truly lack in the healing department.
- when i started a 'paladin' i was under the assumption that we were to be
the only class other then Shaman's and Clerics to receive 'healing' spells.
I was also under the impression that a paladins healing spells would only be
second to the Cleric. However, healing lacks HORRIBLY in a paladin. Up to
lvl 29, I healed a mere 30HP of damage per cast (this is ridiculous -
rangers heal the same about [yet receive dual wield, DD spells, tracking,
critical hits via BOW, etc]). Why do rangers have healing in the first
place? There DD spells (crit hits) more then offset this.
SOLUTION: perhaps increase amount of HP regenerated via a spell or give the
healing spells sooner in the game to a paladin (up to lvl 29 heck a bard
with his mana song could heal more then me).
NOTE: Our healing is utterly useless up to lvl 38 to any groups who have
either a shaman/Druid/Cleric/Bard in there group. (by useless, it's NEVER
used in battle, and if a bard is in the group, it is rarely used for
'reducing' down time, especially soloing in GUK where a paladins uses the DD
spells against the undead frogies)
2// Melee Ability
---------------
Another area I believe paladins are lacking. We do the least damage of any
melee class (bards/rangers/warrios/sk's), all dish out more damage
(considerably more) then us paladins. If our healing did offset this
decreased damage, I would be pleased, however, it doesn't come close.
SOLUTION: perhaps critical hits via a shield considering some of the most
used weapons by paladins are 1h weapons (mainly the ghoulbane)
3// The Holy Swords
------------------
My Opinion: LACKING
Why? Paladins should be the most skilled swordsman in the game, and thus
receive the greatest and most prized swords via 'holy' means. Anyone who
post 'the fiery avenger shol be useable by all classes' is ridiculous.
Current Swords i have seen or have used:
Ghoulbane - good sword against undead, however, most 2h do more damage then
the ghoulbane used with a shield (perhaps critical hits via a shield would
solve this)
Soulfire - more a piece of show then anything - anyone who is able to aquire
this sword woul rather have a Mithril 2h which deals out more damage.
Fiery Avenger - never seen/never used. Can't comment. However, i can say
that this sword should not be included in any means of evaluating the
paladin class considering NO ONE has found it it 7months and most likely
there iwll never be more then 3-4 on a server when the quest does become
obtainable.
DeepWater Harpooon - good addition, however, I believe a paladins swords
should be mostly 1h, and this item is beginning to be farmed by many.
SOLUTION: create more paladin 1h slashing swords, with GOOD stats. Something
with better stats then a ghoulbane, maybe a 1h slashing swords with 20dmg,
40 delay?
SIDENOTE - the greatest swords in the game shold be paladin based, and they
are not. the Mithril 2h is arguably the greatest, and it is not paladin
only.
CONCLUSION
------------
Paladins are out meleed by every single melee class, and are 'outhealed' by
every class that receives the heal spell other then rangers (who are equals
up to lvl 29). I was always under the belief that paladins were 'holy
fighters', 'great figthers', but being outdamaged by a bard merely sucks! I
was also under the premise that we were the second best healers in the game.
We are a distant 4th!
To emphasis a point, it seems verant did intend us to be good healers, in
that they gave us 'revive'. We are the only other class other then a cleric
to receive this spell. However, we should receive better heals, and sooner
in our lives.
BEFORE YOU SAY....
-----------------
1. Paladins Get the BEST SWORD - give me a break - I will never have it -
and most paladins will never have it.
2. Paladins Get LOH - it is great - however it's a once a game day
thing......and truly does nothing for a group. If someone in a group is
about to die, then there should be several other people almost ready to die
if you played the fight right. You never just let 1 tank take all the
damage, and as such, LOH woul merely save 1 life, and let the others fall,
eventually claiming the life of the person who was the receiver of LOH.
Thanks for listening to my rant =) Brad and verant, you have tweaked almost
every class, SK/DRUIDS/WARRIOS, and as such, have left paladins in the dust.
--------------
Andrew 'Fuzzy' Munk [ABLAZEN HOLYSWORD EQ]
WEBMASTER/ADMINSTRATOR/OWNER
~ Only Toons Network (onlytoons.com)
WEBMASTER
~ S T O M P E D (stomped.com)
~ ICQ: 35411286
~ AIM: andmunn
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
"Veni, vidi, vici." [I came, I saw, I conquered.]
- Gaius Julius Caesar
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Jim
>Up to lvl 29 paladins truly lack in the healing department.
You're joking, right?
"Lay on Hands" is my fav tool for rescuing people.
I see someone low on points, gonna lose to a critter and
then *bamf* I do the "Lay on Hands" and they win!
If you want to be a proper band-aid, be a cleric.
If you want to be a hero, play the Paladin!
>healing lacks HORRIBLY in a paladin. Up to
>lvl 29, I healed a mere 30HP of damage per cast
LAY ON HANDS
>SOLUTION: perhaps increase amount of HP regenerated via a spell or give
>the healing spells sooner in the game to a paladin (up to lvl 29 heck a
>bard with his mana song could heal more then me).
NO. I want to play a Champion, not a Twinky.
>NOTE: Our healing is utterly useless up to lvl 38 to any groups who have
>either a shaman/Druid/Cleric/Bard in there group.
Ha. Play a cleric and quit whining.
>2// Melee Ability
>---------------
>Another area I believe paladins are lacking.
If you powerlevel your melee ability will suck.
That's the price of stupidly grasping for levels.
>SOLUTION: perhaps critical hits via a shield considering some of the
>most used weapons by paladins are 1h weapons (mainly the ghoulbane)
NO TWINKY BONUSES, PLEASE! =P
>3// The Holy Swords
>------------------
>My Opinion: LACKING
>
>Why? Paladins should be the most skilled swordsman in the game,
And, the warrior? He gets ... what??
The warrior should be the BEST swordsman.
Paladins should be SECOND BEST - and I am one!
Every class is balanced - if one class can do it ALL,
(fight, heal, etc) then you don't need groups. In fact,
why play anything but the superclass?
>DeepWater Harpooon - good addition, however, I believe a paladins swords
>should be mostly 1h, and this item is beginning to be farmed by many.
If a twinky loves it, maybe Verant should ditch it.
>CONCLUSION
> However, we should receive better heals, and sooner
>in our lives.
"Soft on the outside, creamy filling on the inside"
--
Jim
"Worship my magic space monkey or he'll napalm you."
Harass
loh is not everything... i would much rather kick then loh....
have you even played a pal ?
Jim wrote in message <8E69148C2Khe...@news.pacbell.net>...
>BELL NEWS wrote:
>
>>Up to lvl 29 paladins truly lack in the healing department.
>
>You're joking, right?
>
>"Lay on Hands" is my fav tool for rescuing people.
>I see someone low on points, gonna lose to a critter and
>then *bamf* I do the "Lay on Hands" and they win!
>
>If you want to be a proper band-aid, be a cleric.
>If you want to be a hero, play the Paladin!
>
>>healing lacks HORRIBLY in a paladin. Up to
>>lvl 29, I healed a mere 30HP of damage per cast
>
>LAY ON HANDS
>
>>SOLUTION: perhaps increase amount of HP regenerated via a spell or give
>>the healing spells sooner in the game to a paladin (up to lvl 29 heck a
>>bard with his mana song could heal more then me).
>
>NO. I want to play a Champion, not a Twinky.
>
>>NOTE: Our healing is utterly useless up to lvl 38 to any groups who have
>>either a shaman/Druid/Cleric/Bard in there group.
>
>Ha. Play a cleric and quit whining.
>
>>2// Melee Ability
>>---------------
>>Another area I believe paladins are lacking.
>
>If you powerlevel your melee ability will suck.
>That's the price of stupidly grasping for levels.
>
>>SOLUTION: perhaps critical hits via a shield considering some of the
>>most used weapons by paladins are 1h weapons (mainly the ghoulbane)
>
>NO TWINKY BONUSES, PLEASE! =P
>
>>3// The Holy Swords
>>------------------
>>My Opinion: LACKING
>>
>>Why? Paladins should be the most skilled swordsman in the game,
>
>And, the warrior? He gets ... what??
>The warrior should be the BEST swordsman.
>Paladins should be SECOND BEST - and I am one!
>
>Every class is balanced - if one class can do it ALL,
>(fight, heal, etc) then you don't need groups. In fact,
>why play anything but the superclass?
>
>>DeepWater Harpooon - good addition, however, I believe a paladins swords
>>should be mostly 1h, and this item is beginning to be farmed by many.
>
>If a twinky loves it, maybe Verant should ditch it.
>
>>CONCLUSION
>> However, we should receive better heals, and sooner
>>in our lives.
>
anon
changed, brad loves paladins, and they have whip ass wpns. as for healing,
you aren't a cleric, if you wanted to heal, you shouldve played a cleric,
get over it, you are a fighter, i have a 49 necro and a 35 bard, necros cant
even research our high level pets due to bugs and bards have many broken or
useless songs, and you're worried about your healing spells? paladins are
brads "baby" class, go ask a rogue how balanced they think paladins are.
BELL NEWS wrote in message <6dzQ3.23834$up3....@news21.bellglobal.com>...
Sam Schlansky
<6dzQ3.23834$up3....@news21.bellglobal.com>:
>I Hope when i complete this litte 'note' it will be a a good
>synopsis of what I think the paladin class is, and what it shold
>be (or what should be improved).
If you want brad to read something, email it to him. I guarantee you
he won't respond to this post-- he never responds to class balance
posts. But let's go through it anyway, shall we?
>First, I am a lvl 38 Paladin on Errolsi Marr, and have been
>playing EQ since Phase 2 BETA, and have played other 'high level'
>characters who I care not to mention. Here are a two main quips
>about the paladin Class.
Here it comes...
>--- START RANT -----
>
>1// There Healing spells.
Don't you mean "their"? And you're a webmaster? Did you pass the
fourth grade?
>----------------------
>Up to lvl 29 paladins truly lack in the healing department.
>- when i started a 'paladin' i was under the assumption that we
>were to be the only class other then Shaman's and Clerics to
>receive 'healing' spells. I was also under the impression that a
>paladins healing spells would only be second to the Cleric.
Where did you get that impression? Paladins are 3/4 warrior, 1/4
cleric. It says so right in the class description.
>However, healing lacks HORRIBLY in a paladin. Up to lvl 29, I
>healed a mere 30HP of damage per cast (this is ridiculous -
>rangers heal the same about [yet receive dual wield, DD spells,
>tracking, critical hits via BOW, etc]). Why do rangers have
>healing in the first place? There DD spells (crit hits) more then
>offset this.
That's got to be one of the stupidest things I've read on this
newsgroup... and I've read a lot.
You get light healing at level FIFTEEN. Rangers get it at 22.
You get healing (up to 100 health) at 30. Rangers get it at 39.
You get GREATER healing (up to 300 health) at 39. Rangers NEVER get
it.
So, at 15 you get 30HP, at 30 you get 100HP, and at 39 you get 300HP.
At 22 (one circle later) rangers get 30, at 39 (one circle later)
rangers get 100... and we NEVER get greater healing.
Bitching about healing spells is just about the stupidest fucking
thing a paladin could possibly do. You make yourself look like a
brainless mongoloid turd by doing it. Stop it.
Imagine using a 30 point healing spell at level 38, and THEN start
bitching again.
>SOLUTION: perhaps increase amount of HP regenerated via a spell or
>give the healing spells sooner in the game to a paladin (up to lvl
>29 heck a bard with his mana song could heal more then me).
YOU'RE A TANK.
Live with it.
>NOTE: Our healing is utterly useless up to lvl 38 to any groups
>who have either a shaman/Druid/Cleric/Bard in there group. (by
>useless, it's NEVER used in battle, and if a bard is in the group,
>it is rarely used for 'reducing' down time, especially soloing in
>GUK where a paladins uses the DD spells against the undead
>frogies)
Abso-fucking-lutely, and that's how it should be.
>2// Melee Ability
>---------------
>Another area I believe paladins are lacking. We do the least
>damage of any melee class (bards/rangers/warrios/sk's), all dish
>out more damage (considerably more) then us paladins. If our
>healing did offset this decreased damage, I would be pleased,
>however, it doesn't come close.
>
>SOLUTION: perhaps critical hits via a shield considering some of
>the most used weapons by paladins are 1h weapons (mainly the
>ghoulbane)
No, that's a stupid idea too. Also, bards do less damage, and
shadowknights do around the same damage as paladins.
Sorry to burst your bubble there, Einstein.
>3// The Holy Swords
>------------------
>My Opinion: LACKING
>
>Why? Paladins should be the most skilled swordsman in the game,
No they shouldn't. Warriors should be best with melee weapons,
period.
>and thus receive the greatest and most prized swords via 'holy'
>means. Anyone who post 'the fiery avenger shol be useable by all
>classes' is ridiculous.
The fiery avenger is a paladin-only sword.
>Current Swords i have seen or have used:
>
>Ghoulbane - good sword against undead, however, most 2h do more
>damage then the ghoulbane used with a shield (perhaps critical
>hits via a shield would solve this)
You're a TANK. You're not there to do damage, you're there to absorb
it. Imagine yourself as a shadowknight, using a piece of shit 2H-
sword with no shield, and then bitch to me again.
>Soulfire - more a piece of show then anything - anyone who is able
>to aquire this sword woul rather have a Mithril 2h which deals out
>more damage.
Not true. Soulfire is much easier to get than the mithril 2HS.
>Fiery Avenger - never seen/never used. Can't comment. However, i
>can say that this sword should not be included in any means of
>evaluating the paladin class considering NO ONE has found it it
>7months and most likely there iwll never be more then 3-4 on a
>server when the quest does become obtainable.
Okey-dokey.
>DeepWater Harpooon - good addition, however, I believe a paladins
>swords should be mostly 1h, and this item is beginning to be
>farmed by many.
... and since it's farmed, you'll no longer use it? Is that it?
>SOLUTION: create more paladin 1h slashing swords, with GOOD stats.
>Something with better stats then a ghoulbane, maybe a 1h slashing
>swords with 20dmg, 40 delay?
The general idea is that the 1HS swords are inferior to the 2HS
swords, since they can be used for a shield. Any 20dam 40delay 1HS
paladin-only sword should be a level 45+ item.
>SIDENOTE - the greatest swords in the game shold be paladin based,
Why? I think they should be warrior and shadowknight-based.
>and they are not. the Mithril 2h is arguably the greatest, and it
>is not paladin only.
Yup!
>CONCLUSION
>------------
>
>Paladins are out meleed by every single melee class, and are
Untrue.
>'outhealed' by every class that receives the heal spell other then
>rangers (who are equals up to lvl 29). I was always under the
As it should be. Who cares about level 1-29 anyway?
>belief that paladins were 'holy fighters', 'great figthers', but
>being outdamaged by a bard merely sucks! I was also under the
>premise that we were the second best healers in the game. We are a
>distant 4th!
As it should be.
>To emphasis a point, it seems verant did intend us to be good
>healers, in that they gave us 'revive'. We are the only other
>class other then a cleric to receive this spell. However, we
>should receive better heals, and sooner in our lives.
No you shouldn't.
>BEFORE YOU SAY....
>-----------------
>
>1. Paladins Get the BEST SWORD - give me a break - I will never
>have it - and most paladins will never have it.
Fuck 'em. Let paladins sweat to get good weapons like rangers.
>2. Paladins Get LOH - it is great - however it's a once a game day
>thing......and truly does nothing for a group. If someone in a
>group is about to die, then there should be several other people
>almost ready to die if you played the fight right. You never just
>let 1 tank take all the damage, and as such, LOH woul merely save
>1 life, and let the others fall, eventually claiming the life of
>the person who was the receiver of LOH.
It's better than tracking, shared with 2 other classes! At least you
GET a special ability!
>Thanks for listening to my rant =) Brad and verant, you have
>tweaked almost every class, SK/DRUIDS/WARRIOS, and as such, have
>left paladins in the dust.
Right where they fucking belong.
Quit trolling.
If you want to bitch, bitch about the Armor of Ro, not about this
pansy-ass bullshit.
Tip: have a point next time.
Sam
--
/| Sam Schlansky <sam[at]operation3d[dot]com>
/| I speak for myself only unless noted otherwise.
/| PGP Key ID: 0x63A9D707
/| 3DNews.net: News With Perspective!
/| 3DHardware.net: Taking Your Machine To The Third Dimension!
/| Remove "deletethis" to email.
sma202
Sam Schlansky <s...@deletethis.operation3d.com> wrote in message
news:8E69346B2vi...@208.11.224.91...
Jim
>blah...
>
>loh is not everything... i would much rather kick then loh....
>
>have you even played a pal ?
LOL.
I'm playing a Paladin right now.
Dude, READ posts before you answer them!
--
Jim
"Worship my magic space monkey or he'll napalm you."
"Yes, my e-mail address is valid, it just doesn't look valid"
Sam Schlansky
<IABQ3.1$Nm5...@typhoon.nyu.edu>:
(snip entire two page post, since he quoted the entire thing adding no
content whatsoever)
This isn't a message board, you stupid fucking prick. Keep your "nt"
posts on EQVault where they belong.
Also, it's spelled "you". People who abbreviate on usenet piss me off.
It's not like you're running from a train or anything, WRITE IT OUT.
Oh, I almost forgot, one last thing.... fuck you.
sincerely,
Sam
Dennis Francis Heffernan
|Up to lvl 29 paladins truly lack in the healing department.
|- when i started a 'paladin' i was under the assumption that we were to be
|the only class other then Shaman's and Clerics to receive 'healing' spells.
|I was also under the impression that a paladins healing spells would only be
|second to the Cleric.
Never assume.
What made you think that your hybrid class was in any way, shape or form
going to stack up to a dedicated support class in an area like healing?
|critical hits via BOW, etc]). Why do rangers have healing in the first
|place? There DD spells (crit hits) more then offset this.
Probably because we're Druid hybrids.
|SOLUTION: perhaps increase amount of HP regenerated via a spell or give the
|healing spells sooner in the game to a paladin (up to lvl 29 heck a bard
|with his mana song could heal more then me).
Don't need it.
|NOTE: Our healing is utterly useless up to lvl 38 to any groups who have
As a Ranger I have never found my healing ability to be 'useless' in a
group; I've found that groups can use all the healing they can get.
|Another area I believe paladins are lacking. We do the least damage of any
|melee class (bards/rangers/warrios/sk's), all dish out more damage
|(considerably more) then us paladins.
If you can't outdamage a Bard then u suk. Bards never get Double Attack,
meaning that starting at L20 at the latest all they're doing is waving pointy
things around in front of mobs. They're a support class.
There is no difference, _ceteris paribus_, between Paladins and
ShadowKnights as far as melee ability goes; you get the same skills. Of
course, they can be Trolls or Ogres and you can't, but the STR difference
doesn't enter the picture until L20.
As for Rangers and Warriors (and Rogues, whom you left out), the only way
they can outdamage you is by using Dual Wield, and that doesn't get the edge,
mathematically, until around L30. At L22 I am DWing a Gladius and a Dragoon
Dirk (weapons that Don't Suck) and there is no way in hell I can keep up with
a Paladin wielding a Blackened Iron Bastard Sword (one KSed a Werewolf from me
a few days ago). The Warrior is supposed to beat you (all he does is Kill
Stuff); the Ranger gets less armor (especially telling at that level.)
|SOLUTION: perhaps critical hits via a shield considering some of the most
|used weapons by paladins are 1h weapons (mainly the ghoulbane)
Don't need it.
|Why? Paladins should be the most skilled swordsman in the game, and thus
Justify this. Free clue: you can't. Warriors get that title.
|SOLUTION: create more paladin 1h slashing swords, with GOOD stats. Something
Don't need it. Your weapons are fine, better than most classes get.
|SIDENOTE - the greatest swords in the game shold be paladin based, and they
|are not.
Absolutely not, they should be Warrior only. Again, all they GET is the
ability to Kill Stuff. They don't get Lay Hands and a buttload of spells.
|Paladins are out meleed by every single melee class, and are 'outhealed' by
|every class that receives the heal spell other then rangers (who are equals
|up to lvl 29). I was always under the belief that paladins were 'holy
|fighters', 'great figthers', but being outdamaged by a bard merely sucks!
|I was also under the premise that we were the second best healers in the game.
|We are a distant 4th!
So basically your point is that you should be an unstoppable force. Um,
no.
Dennis F. Heffernan EQ: Venture Fletcher(E'ci) dfra...@email.com
Montclair State U #include <disclaim.h> ICQ:9154048 CompSci/Philosophy
"There's no easy way to be free."
-- Pete Townshend, "Slip Kid"
Xenomorph
else is ranting about Rangers)
anon wrote in message <7uuiue$gnd$0...@208.207.70.13>...
Xenomorph
you have NO CLUE what a Paladin is!!
- Healing
WHY would you think they are great healers?
The Main Healers (In order from the best to the worst):
Cleric
Druid/Shaman
Paladin (Cleric Warrior Hybrid)
Ranger (Druid Warrior Hybrid)
Paladins were never meant to be healers, they are fighters! And they are
better healers than Rangers! Plus the whole Lay on Hands thing helps a
lot...
Paladins are not meant to heal, they are meant to fight/tank. Healing is to
offset downtime.
- Melee
Paladins are naturally better fighters than Bards (higher skill caps). You
are about equel to SKs (dont know about Rangers). A warrior and monk should
be able to out damage you better.
- Swords
First off, who the hell said Paladins are the most skilled swordsmen? That
is the WARRIOR.
Pretty much every class that can melee has its own class specific weapon.
Paladins are said to be better than the others because they are "holy". It
would change balance somehow to make sure they get more Paladin only weapons
that are better than anything else.
- Conclusion
I suggest you chose another class, or WAKE UP from this fantasy you've been
having.
BELL NEWS wrote in message <6dzQ3.23834$up3....@news21.bellglobal.com>...
>I Hope when i complete this litte 'note' it will be a a good synopsis of
>what I think the paladin class is, and what it shold be (or what should be
>improved).
>
>First, I am a lvl 38 Paladin on Errolsi Marr, and have been playing EQ
since
>Phase 2 BETA, and have played other 'high level' characters who I care not
>to mention. Here are a two main quips about the paladin Class.
>
>--- START RANT -----
>
>1// There Healing spells.
>----------------------
>Up to lvl 29 paladins truly lack in the healing department.
>- when i started a 'paladin' i was under the assumption that we were to be
>the only class other then Shaman's and Clerics to receive 'healing' spells.
>I was also under the impression that a paladins healing spells would only
be
>second to the Cleric. However, healing lacks HORRIBLY in a paladin. Up to
>lvl 29, I healed a mere 30HP of damage per cast (this is ridiculous -
>rangers heal the same about [yet receive dual wield, DD spells, tracking,
>critical hits via BOW, etc]). Why do rangers have healing in the first
>place? There DD spells (crit hits) more then offset this.
>
>
>2// Melee Ability
>---------------
>Another area I believe paladins are lacking. We do the least damage of any
>melee class (bards/rangers/warrios/sk's), all dish out more damage
>(considerably more) then us paladins. If our healing did offset this
>decreased damage, I would be pleased, however, it doesn't come close.
>
>
>3// The Holy Swords
>------------------
>My Opinion: LACKING
>
>Why? Paladins should be the most skilled swordsman in the game, and thus
>receive the greatest and most prized swords via 'holy' means. Anyone who
>post 'the fiery avenger shol be useable by all classes' is ridiculous.
>
>
Abe
classes, he just assumes his is worst.
Banky
help. This paladin guy is a fool.
The Mad Warrior
Harass wrote:
> loh is not everything... i would much rather kick then loh....
Check your combat logs sometime to see how big a "difference" kick makes.
>
>
> have you even played a pal ?
Yes
MW
The Mad Warrior
> 1// There Healing spells.
> ----------------------
....are only the best healing spells that any of the hybrids get. Not to
mention you completely forgot LoH. Paladins are the best pure combat support
hybrids in the game because heals don't need to stack (most ranger spells are
obsoleted by druids in the party; most SK spells are obsoleted by necros in the
party).
> second to the Cleric. However, healing lacks HORRIBLY in a paladin.
Compared to what, a medevac to ER?
> rangers heal the same about [yet receive dual wield, DD spells, tracking,
> critical hits via BOW, etc]).
Rangers heal the same about? Uh yeah, discounting that whole "Paladins have LOH
and Greater Heal" and Rangers have "no LOH and Healing". Rangers *should* have
DD spells, and paladins shouldn't -- it's not in character if you ask me. You
think paladins should be allowed to have crit hits with a bow and tracking? And
do you think crit hits with a bow means anything at all in battle? Finally, I'm
surprised paladins got archery at all since bows are considered a "commoner's"
tool and dishonorable.
> NOTE: Our healing is utterly useless up to lvl 38 to any groups who have
> either a shaman/Druid/Cleric/Bard in there group. (by useless, it's NEVER
> used in battle, and if a bard is in the group, it is rarely used for
> 'reducing' down time, especially soloing in GUK where a paladins uses the DD
> spells against the undead frogies)
Oh, I'm sorry, didn't you say paladins didn't have DD spells? Oh, that's right,
DD spells only against *undead*, and we all know that there just aren't that
much undead in the game. Rangers, on the other hand, get their supremely useful
anti-summoned line of spells...whoopie!
> 2// Melee Ability
> ---------------
> Another area I believe paladins are lacking. We do the least damage of any
> melee class (bards/rangers/warrios/sk's),
This is flat out incorrect. A bard does not get anywhere near a paladin in
damage. A paladin with Ghoulbane vs. undead will outdamage anything up to and
probably including a warrior with dual ykesha.
A paladin with a mithril 2HS or GZ is roughly equivalent to an SK in pure damage
capability, and maybe just a bit behind a ranger (depending on the ranger's
gear). The paladin gains nice AC buffs, plate mail, heal, and LoH.
> all dish out more damage
> (considerably more) then us paladins.
Once again, this is purely incorrect. Check some combat logs from a good
group. Assuming equivalent quality weapons and buffs, a paladin and SK should
do about the same damage (SK may do a bit more because they can be a troll or
ogre with higher innate STR), and a ranger may do a bit more because of dual
wield if they have really good weapons. A rogue and warrior will then do more,
and finally a monk will be tops.
> 3// The Holy Swords
> ------------------
> My Opinion: LACKING
>
> Why? Paladins should be the most skilled swordsman in the game
Gee, then why bother having any other melee class in the game? Let's make a
plate wearing, buff casting, healing hybrid also the best swordsman in the game.
> SOLUTION: create more paladin 1h slashing swords, with GOOD stats. Something
> with better stats then a ghoulbane, maybe a 1h slashing swords with 20dmg,
> 40 delay?
Absurd. Monty Haul at its worst...create new weapons to make an already well
balanced class more powerful. If you want to bitch about something, bitch that
your new armor quests suck (because they do).
> SIDENOTE - the greatest swords in the game shold be paladin based
> Paladins are out meleed by every single melee class, and are 'outhealed' by
> every class that receives the heal spell other then rangers (who are equals
> up to lvl 29).
First, paladins are not out meleed by every single melee class. They are better
than bards and roughly equivalent to rangers and SKs. This can be backed up
with combat logs, something I doubt you've bother to verify. Paladins have the
best healing of any of the hybrids, by far, even if you don't take into account
LoH.
> 1. Paladins Get the BEST SWORD - give me a break - I will never have it -
> and most paladins will never have it.
At least paladins get a questable holy sword (Soulfire) and a campable sword of
immense power (Ghoulbane). SKs have the Dark Reaver, and that's it (discounting
PoF). And the DR kinda sucks. Rangers have the Ebony Blade and Short Sword of
Morin at this time. Bards have nothing. Rogues have the Serrated Bone Dirk
that they have to use for 20 levels.
> 2. Paladins Get LOH - it is great - however it's a once a game day
> thing......and truly does nothing for a group. If someone in a group is
> about to die, then there should be several other people almost ready to die
> if you played the fight right.
LOH is for those situations when things didn't go as planned.
> You never just let 1 tank take all the
> damage, and as such, LOH woul merely save 1 life, and let the others fall,
> eventually claiming the life of the person who was the receiver of LOH.
Uh, LOH is better than no LOH, we can agree on that, right? And LOH has saved
my life (and many others) on numerous occasions when for whatever reason you
simply cannot taunt a mob off a party member (like, say, a bard).
MW
Darryl
LOL
Jim is obviously fulla shit :)
BFC
sounding like an ass. jeez. Who gave you the right to speak like that to
someone that is only expressing his opinion? You kill every point you are
trying to make by comming off like you did. servers no purpose.
Sam Schlansky <s...@deletethis.operation3d.com> wrote in message
news:8E69346B2vi...@208.11.224.91...
Dennis Francis Heffernan
|As for Amour and AC issue, I dont ever remember seeing a Man-at-ams with better
|armour than a Knight? What Book, History, or Movie are you using to say Warriors
|and Rangers should have better armour than a Knight?
The Warriors are ALSO knights.
Sorry, you just can't make a case for Paladins (or any other hybrid)
getting better melee equipment than Warriors. Melee is all they get.
mida...@my-deja.com
"Harass" <har...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
> blah...
>
> loh is not everything... i would much rather kick then loh....
>
>
Uhg. Then go play a ranger. Anyone who would trade away LOH for Kick
is a fool.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Steven Arrowsmith
fighters they make up the armies of Norrath, who are led by Knights. Paladins and
ShadowKnights are true Knights, and wear Full plate.
Thats why crafted armour is so good, and they have 3 times the weapons Paladin and
ShadowKnights get.. In fact they can us the Unholy SK weapons also.. I dont think I
was asking for better EQ just showing that ours should be closer to theirs..
Steven
adam connor
>Wow, something must be wrong with me, I actually agree with Dennis...
Had the same thought.
--
adam connor / remove "_nospam" and "spamlite." to email
Sam Schlansky
<38134ca3$0$24...@motown.iinet.net.au>:
>Ok, as a level 46 paladin, i know what i am talking about.
>Firstly:
(snip)
/em yawns
JubJub McRae
summarized as:
1.) Paladins can't heal as well or better than shaman or druids.
2.) Paladins are not better warriors than warriors.
Enough said.
Scott
complaining about their healing ability? They get (by far) more class specific
weapons than any other class and you complain about their weapons? You expect
them to be second in healing ONLY to a cleric and you still expect to be a
tank? Sorry bro, you might want to set your sights a little lower.
BELL NEWS wrote:
-----------== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ==----------
http://www.newsfeeds.com The Largest Usenet Servers in the World!
------== Over 73,000 Newsgroups - Including Dedicated Binaries Servers ==-----
Sam Schlansky
<BrJQ3.6121$U3.6...@typhoon1.tampabay.rr.com>:
>Sam why you gota speak to this guy like that? Your the one that
>comes off sounding like an ass. jeez. Who gave you the right to
>speak like that to someone that is only expressing his opinion?
>You kill every point you are trying to make by comming off like
>you did. servers no purpose.
(snip)
I have the right to speak any way I please.
Tip: next time don't quote a five page message for a five line comment.
Steven Arrowsmith
> Jesus Christ, dude. Paladins get a 300 point heal at level 39 and you're
> complaining about their healing ability? They get (by far) more class specific
> weapons than any other class and you complain about their weapons? You expect
> them to be second in healing ONLY to a cleric and you still expect to be a
> tank? Sorry bro, you might want to set your sights a little lower.
>
>
I will skip the Healing part for now, we all know how much healing Mr. Christ does..
As for the Weapon part, please look at any spoiler page. Add Paladin (4) now add
Ranger (3) now add Warrior (10+) so I dont understand any of your comments here..
We are the only other ones to get Res, and Greater healing - that makes us 2nd only
to Clerics in the healing area, correct?
I think you need to set your sights right also, bro..
Steven
Steven
sma202
bandwidth issues? get a better isp? yea i know your going to read this and
I know your going to get pissed off but who gives a shit, looking at all
your posts, "u" sound like a raving lunatic. moron. oh yea dont tell me
how to write unless you want me to do the same. no one made you god asshole
so get as mad as you want cuz no one is gonna listen.
Sam Schlansky <s...@deletethis.operation3d.com> wrote in message
news:8E694CF32vi...@208.11.224.91...
sma202
bandwidth issues? get a better isp? yea i know your going to read this and
I know your going to get pissed off but who gives a shit, looking at all
your posts, "u" sound like a raving lunatic. moron. oh yea dont tell me
how to write unless you want me to do the same. no one made you god asshole
so get as mad as you want cuz no one is gonna listen.
Sam Schlansky <s...@deletethis.operation3d.com> wrote in message
Clinky
Armour : Sniff my ass (hehe) Armour of Ro sucks, and not many people will
get PoF armour soon. I dont see any paladin in steel, rather stuff like
barbed, crested Blood Stained etc.
Weapons : Firstly, the soulfire aint that good, i would duel two yestras or
whatever as all my bard/warrior/ranger/rogues friends. The Ghoulbane is
good, but once agian, it cant outdamage or even get close to the weapons
other people are duel wielding. Maybe some kind of kick ass shield or crits
with shields will fix this. And noone has found the fiery avenger, so lets
not start on that. We cant have piercing remember,.... or kick.... or slam..
and bash maxxes early and often misses, no duel wield.
Spells : Well, they are only OK. AT levle 49, greater healing sucks. Only
good thing is Valor. Maybe another healing spell? A better res spell? And
please, a better DD spell, i dont think our god wants us to be weak (as
another paladin stated "I am in full PoF armour with a Mithril Two Hander
and I have difficulties solo'ing a leve 35 Giant") I have seen level 40
rangers in etched ivy solo'ing giants at that level. I think we just need
some more spells.
LoH : I dont know for sure, but I believe LoH has been nerfed. Lately, it
does random healing (3 - 5 bubbles of health) and it has even been
interupted!!! And for those who think we can solo with LoH, we cant. And
also, we often use our LoH to save your ass, so be grateful and support us
when we ask to be assessed by Brad. It is not something we can live off.
Personally, I dont want to see a paladin kicking , as that is against the
moral obligation of a paladin to use such low handed skills. I dont think we
should use piercing, for the same reason. Though, a paladin is meant to be a
lonely class, helping those in need.
I think the paladin would be perfect if we get holy shields (aswell as the
cleric) and some better higher level spells (maybe superior healing? A
better DD? A spell only used for us (paladin only?)) I dont think it is fair
rangers get Form of Wolf, 1 healing worse, equal shielding buff, DD spells,
DoT spells, Root Spells, Utility spells (self buffs and that shaman stuff)
at level 49. Aswell as all their meleeing powers. Personally, druids are
meant to be in robes (made of nature stuff leaves etc) and same as
rangers,,, but then that would be harsh on them, just leave everything the
way it is and give the paladin a hand, then all the classes would be equal
(to some extent i guess)
Thanks =)
Cyphous AuraBlade
Lvl 46 Paladin
Xegony
Clinky
Twilight
exactly , i did agree that the holy sword bit is abit lacking( 2
holy weapons ) but that i assume will come in form of quests later.
Other than that he has no ground.
"I can picture in my mind a world without war , a world without hate . And I can picture us attacking that world because they'd never expect it. " -Jack Handey
Dennis Francis Heffernan
|A Troll Knight I dont think so,
Why not? The Troll civilization would certainly have some equivalent to
knights.
|not unless its a ShadowKnight.. Warriors are common
|fighters they make up the armies of Norrath, who are led by Knights. Paladins and
|ShadowKnights are true Knights, and wear Full plate.
No, Paladins and ShadowKnights are members of religious fighting orders,
and nothing else. This does not presume any superior social status or
fighting ability, except insofar as they (and Rangers) would be considered
elite troops because of their magical training.
Insofar as the game goes, once more with feeling: all a Warrior can do is
Kill Stuff. So they get the best toys that deal with Killing Stuff. The.
End. It's the way it has to be. It doesn't even go far enough -- the
absolute master of combat, over and above any other class including ANY
caster, should be the Warrior, because that is all they do.
Tony Kwan
Knights are known for their Honour, their words and their chivalry.
The ability to wear Full Plate is more to do with ones training and class.
Thus you would not see a wizard wear Full plate and this would hamper his
casting abilities.
A warrior in EQ has the MOST hit points of ANY class. Why would making him
be the master of Combat be required. By definition a Monk is the Master of
Melee and a Wizard is the master of Direct Damage.
Dennis Francis Heffernan <dfra...@email.com> wrote in message
news:3814fbfd.30634120@news...
Tek Knight
Clinky <foti...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:38135549$0$24...@motown.iinet.net.au...
> What am I talking about? Just my opinion.
>
>
Slithey Tove
>Where did you get this information from?
>
>Knights are known for their Honour, their words and their chivalry.
No, that's a paladin.
I think you misunderstand what 'knight' means. It's a non-hereditory
noble title, that was awarded to accomplished fighters in Europe in the
Middle Ages. These fighters' job was to protect their lord and his domain,
and for their lord to send to help his king and protect *his* domain. That's
what feudalism means. Warriors were awarded knighthoods for their usefulness
to their leige lord; it had nothing to do with their virtue. A fighting man
might drink beer all day, and molest every wench in the manor village, and
many did, but if he could ride and wield a sword well, their lord might
reward him by making him a knight, and giving him a bit of land and its
serfs to support them with rents.
Some knights were honorable and chivalrous; many were not. Accounts of
the Merovingian court -- early medieval France -- for example, sound like
that society, and its lords and ladies, knights and clerics, resembled that
of modern street gangs, or something out of a gangster movie, or perhaps
'The Sopranos'.
Incidentally, I think our understanding of the word 'paladin' is
largely a creation of TSR and AD&D, and in the real middle ages, it meant a
military leader, but did not imply any special religious virtue. There
apparently *were* knights who spent their lives righting wrongs, and seeking
to do good as they saw it. They were called 'knights errant', or 'wandering
knights', because they traveled from place to place, seeking evil to fight
and oppressed people to help. I wish TSR had decided to use that term rather
than Paladin, but now I guess we're stuck with the latter.
== Tove
Ebonio
moron. You come here changing the subject line , making it nt, quoting
the entire fricking message without bothering to add anything
constructive, and you expect people to treat you with respect? I
believe the correct term for you would be "web board fuckwit". Read a
f.a.q. or something and get a fricking clue.
On Sun, 24 Oct 1999 21:38:38 -0400, "sma202" <sma...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
Dennis Francis Heffernan
|Where did you get this information from?
Here and there.
|Knights are known for their Honour, their words and their chivalry.
In our culture. A Troll knight would be known for trollish virtures.
|The ability to wear Full Plate is more to do with ones training and class.
|Thus you would not see a wizard wear Full plate and this would hamper his
|casting abilities.
And your point is?
|A warrior in EQ has the MOST hit points of ANY class. Why would making him
|be the master of Combat be required.
Because that's all he does.
|By definition a Monk is the Master of Melee and a Wizard is the master of Direct Damage.
Which is wrong.
Warriors can Kill Stuff. That's it. That's all they do. They are 100%
focussed on that goal.
Monks can Kill Stuff. Oh, and Feign Death. Oh, and Safe Fall. Oh, and
Mend. Oh, and they don't need a buttload of expensive equipment to operate.
That means they should get _less_ ability to Kill Stuff than the Warrior.
That's _balance_.
Wizards can Kill Stuff. Oh, and teleport (tactically _and_
strategically). Oh, and become invisible. Oh, and scout entire zones with
the Glimpse and Bind Sight series of spells. Again, that means they are
entitled to _less_ combat ability _in general_ than the Warrior. And they're
the most one-dimensional casters in the game -- don't even get me started on
Druids.
Personally I always get a big laugh out of complaints like the one that
started this thread. Fighting classes shouldn't be complaining about their
balance relative to one another (Monks are the only ones out of joint there)
when we're ALL getting fucked over by casters.
Dennis Francis Heffernan
| Incidentally, I think our understanding of the word 'paladin' is
|largely a creation of TSR and AD&D, and in the real middle ages, it meant a
It is.
|military leader, but did not imply any special religious virtue. There
'Paladins' were Charlemange's elite fighters. That's it.
Gordon Chapman
Heffernan) wrote:
>|A warrior in EQ has the MOST hit points of ANY class. Why would making him
>|be the master of Combat be required.
>
> Because that's all he does.
>
>|By definition a Monk is the Master of Melee and a Wizard is the master of Direct Damage.
>
> Which is wrong.
>
> Warriors can Kill Stuff. That's it. That's all they do. They are 100%
>focussed on that goal.
>
> Monks can Kill Stuff. Oh, and Feign Death. Oh, and Safe Fall. Oh, and
>Mend. Oh, and they don't need a buttload of expensive equipment to operate.
>That means they should get _less_ ability to Kill Stuff than the Warrior.
>That's _balance_.
>
A monk can take less damage than a warrior, thusly he is not better at
killing stuff since he can only last half as long in combat. A
warrior just stands there taking hits and dishing them out. A monk
has a higher rate of attack but for a much shorter time.
At the end of the day, I would expect a warrior standing there for
twice as long to do more damage than the monk who has to feign death
halfway through the fight, even if they have a higher rate of damage
while he's fighting
THAT is balance.
G.
--
Software engineering is an ongoing battle between software
engineers constantly striving to create bigger and better
idiot-proof programs and the Universe constantly striving to
create bigger and better idiots.
Right now the Universe is winning.
Gordon W. Chapman
--Lead Artist
--Climax Group
--gor...@climax.co.uk
Matt Frisch
scribed into the ether:
>1// There Healing spells.
>----------------------
>Up to lvl 29 paladins truly lack in the healing department.
>- when i started a 'paladin' i was under the assumption that we were to be
>the only class other then Shaman's and Clerics to receive 'healing' spells.
>I was also under the impression that a paladins healing spells would only be
>second to the Cleric. However, healing lacks HORRIBLY in a paladin.
Then you should blame yourself for false assumptions, not verant for their
game design. I'll accept paladins being second in healing to clerics on the
conditions that paladins also go to a *4 melee skill set like clerics do.
Is that an acceptable trade to you? No, I didn't think so.
>Up to
>lvl 29, I healed a mere 30HP of damage per cast (this is ridiculous
Try being a warrior. You'll dream of when you could heal up 30 points of
damage with a single keystroke.
>NOTE: Our healing is utterly useless up to lvl 38 to any groups who have
>either a shaman/Druid/Cleric/Bard in there group. (by useless, it's NEVER
>used in battle, and if a bard is in the group, it is rarely used for
>'reducing' down time, especially soloing in GUK where a paladins uses the DD
>spells against the undead frogies)
Ah, here we go..the root of the problem. He can't solo in one of the more
difficult dungeons in the game, so his class needs upgrading. Should have
seen THAT coming.
>3// The Holy Swords
>------------------
>My Opinion: LACKING
>
>Why? Paladins should be the most skilled swordsman in the game,
So second best healing, AND best swordsmanship? Could you perchance explain
to me why ANYONE would play a warrior? Again, the problem is that you made
your character based on false assumptions, and an inborn need to play the
Best Class, irregardless of play balance to the rest of the world.
>Ghoulbane - good sword against undead, however, most 2h do more damage then
>the ghoulbane used with a shield (perhaps critical hits via a shield would
>solve this)
If I am to understand you correctly, you are surprised that you cannot hit
as hard swinging with one hand as other people can swinging with two?
Plus you handily ignore the ENOURMOUS speed advantage the ghoulbane has
over a 2H.
>SIDENOTE - the greatest swords in the game shold be paladin based
Why?
Matt Frisch
>A Troll Knight I dont think so, not unless its a ShadowKnight..
If you are actually going to try and place real world medieval happenings
in this game, then here is a little bubble burster for you: Knighthood is
not based on moral code, fighting ability, or shiny armor...it is based on
money, and birth. No reason why a troll could not be a knight. His ideals
would clash with a human's in all likelihood, but would mesh perfectly with
those of his own people, which is where he gets his knighthood from anyway.
>Warriors are common
>fighters they make up the armies of Norrath, who are led by Knights. Paladins and
>ShadowKnights are true Knights, and wear Full plate.
In that case, there needs to be something done to earn the status of
paladin. If they are meant to be so much greater, then there is ZERO
incentive to be a warrior. Level to 50 as a warrior, give up all your items
and money, and become a level 1 paladin. *Then* you could justify your
position, because the paladinhood has been EARNED, and not just clicked on
at the character generation screen.
Even in D&D a paladinhood needs to be earned, the extremely high stat
requirements dictate it. No such check exists in EQ.
>Thats why crafted armour is so good, and they have 3 times the weapons Paladin and
>ShadowKnights get..
They get all these things, because without them: WARRIORS REALLY SUCK.
And they are bad enough *with* them!
Matt Frisch
scribed into the ether:
>On Mon, 25 Oct 1999 15:23:11 GMT, dfra...@email.com (Dennis Francis
>Heffernan) wrote:
>> Monks can Kill Stuff. Oh, and Feign Death. Oh, and Safe Fall. Oh, and
>>Mend. Oh, and they don't need a buttload of expensive equipment to operate.
>>That means they should get _less_ ability to Kill Stuff than the Warrior.
>>That's _balance_.
>>
>
>A monk can take less damage than a warrior, thusly he is not better at
>killing stuff since he can only last half as long in combat. A
>warrior just stands there taking hits and dishing them out. A monk
>has a higher rate of attack but for a much shorter time.
There is a rather large and radical difference between killing stuff, and
tanking stuff. Monks make inferior tanks to other melee classes, but they
can sure as hell deal out the whoop-ass. Class balance there, miladdie.
Except warriors should be better at both. Monks have a "get out of death
free card" in the form of feign death. Warriors get to zone 4 times naked
to recover their corpse.
>At the end of the day, I would expect a warrior standing there for
>twice as long to do more damage than the monk who has to feign death
>halfway through the fight, even if they have a higher rate of damage
>while he's fighting
In any kind of intelligent group, the warrior is doing the tanking, and the
monk is hitting a lot and *maybe* leaning in to take one for the team once
in a while to keep the edge off the damage the warrior takes.
Brian Asai
This has the portential to be a Truely pathetic post according to "Bizbee." Watch your Int statistic!
Now, Sam has brought up some good arguements against the Paladin class, but i had a problem with him saying that Tanks "are not there to do damage, you're there to absorb it." Has EQ turned into something so simplistic as to say:
Fighters/Paladins/Shadow Knights your job is to stand there and take as much damage as possible. Mage types, blast and med as fast as you can. Clerics, heal and med, heal and med. Shamen and Druids, your job is to keep us SoW'd and give us buffs when you can.
I don't believe this was how EQ was intended to be played. Perhaps we are missing the RolePlaying factor? Hmm, but i stray from original topic..
IMO, Paladins should be weaker than a fighter in melee, and weaker in healing vs clerics. Why? Well, Paladins split their time between fighting and learning healing arts! Warriors should be have the highest Melee, second to Paladins/Shadow Knights, with rangers maybe trailing in a close fourth! As for Holy Swords? Well, i love looking at a Paladin with a special sword, and i am glad that they are rare! I would hate to see 30,000 paladins with a special sword! There is nothing wrong wht the Ghoulbane either. Paladins are holy men, that will smite undead with a word, and again, they are weaker in general than the fighters. As for the Soulforge, well that weapon is a mark of accomplishment in Norrath! It has a great strengh and wisdom addition, with charges of complete healing to boot! I'd like to see a Mithril 2H do something like that! Who cares if it does more damage? The Soulforge is a definite goodie to have for a time. Well that's my 2 coppers, hope it wasn't too pathetic!
Oyama Shadowbane, Cleric of Marr, of the 20th rank
Brian Asai
soulforge... Doh doh doh!
Sam Schlansky
<3814DE80...@sonoma.edu>:
>*ALERT*
>This has the portential to be a Truely pathetic post according to
>"Bizbee." Watch your Int statistic!
<sam mode>
Lose the fucking HTML, you rat bastard!
</sam mode>
Heh.
>Now, Sam has brought up some good arguements against the Paladin
>class, but i had a problem with him saying that Tanks "are not
>there to do damage, you're there to absorb it." Has EQ turned
>into something so simplistic as to say:
>
>Fighters/Paladins/Shadow Knights your job is to stand there and
>take as much damage as possible. Mage types, blast and med as
>fast as you can. Clerics, heal and med, heal and med. Shamen and
>Druids, your job is to keep us SoW'd and give us buffs when you
>can.
Well.... in most, MOST occasions, yes. When you're doing really big stuff like
dragons and PoF creatures, you get a LOT of resists. In those occasions, the
tanks actually have to do most of the work.
In my experience in "normal" 45+ groups, the tanks get the monster down to 49%
of health or so, then it's nuked to oblivion.
So it isn't that simplistic, no. I've even been in 5 tanks/1 healer groups
where we did fairly well... but it took a lot longer to take down mobs, the
cleric was always OOM, and if we had one bad pull we'd have to run.
>I don't believe this was how EQ was intended to be played.
Perhaps it was, perhaps it wasn't. Either way, it's the way it turned out.
>Perhaps we are missing the RolePlaying factor? Hmm, but i stray
>from original topic..
You sure did. I'm not talking about the "roleplaying factor", I'm a powergamer.
>IMO, Paladins should be weaker than a fighter in melee, and weaker
>in healing vs clerics. Why? Well, Paladins split their time
>between fighting and learning healing arts!
Obviously.
>Warriors should be
>have the highest Melee, second to Paladins/Shadow Knights, with
>rangers maybe trailing in a close fourth!
I don't agree. As far as damage-dealing, it should go:
1) Monks (boring to play, not much else they can do except pull)
2) Warriors (semi-boring to play, no spells)
3) Shadowknights (no real healing spells... remember their best lifetap is 45
damage!)
4) Rangers (in the middle.)
5) Paladins (defensively oriented)
>As for Holy Swords?
>Well, i love looking at a Paladin with a special sword, and i am
>glad that they are rare! I would hate to see 30,000 paladins with
>a special sword! There is nothing wrong wht the Ghoulbane either.
Never said there was anything wrong with Ghoulbane. For a level 35-ish item,
it's AWESOME. But after 45 or so, GB just doesn't deal out enough damage
compared with 2H-swords or dual-wielding.
> Paladins are holy men, that will smite undead with a word, and
>again, they are weaker in general than the fighters. As for the
>Soulforge, well that weapon is a mark of accomplishment in
>Norrath! It has a great strengh and wisdom addition, with charges
>of complete healing to boot!
I imagine you're talking about Soulfire.
The STR and WIS are useless, and it only has five charges of complete healing--
that's 5 "get out of death free cards". No proc. It's dam/delay ratio is
mediocre for the difficulty in getting it, too.
>I'd like to see a Mithril 2H do
>something like that! Who cares if it does more damage?
Everybody does. That's why Soulfire is a piece of shit and the mithril 2-hander
is God.
>The Soulforge
Soulfire.
>is a definite goodie to have for a time. Well that's my
>2 coppers, hope it wasn't too pathetic!
Thanks for trying, but you're wrong.
Sam
(html shit snipped)
Steven Arrowsmith
left out a big problem with Paladins low save vs Magic - we need to have the
Endure magic spell added..
Instead of the Crit with shield Idea I would like to see a shield parry added..
We can use a shield to bash, why not parry with it too...
Yes all Holy Swords should be 1H slash - for only Paladins use shields in the
game at upper lvls.. I would like to see a upper lvl (40+) replacement for
Ghoulbane.. 20/40 would be great..
As for Amour and AC issue, I dont ever remember seeing a Man-at-ams with better
armour than a Knight? What Book, History, or Movie are you using to say Warriors
and Rangers should have better armour than a Knight?
Steven
Sam Schlansky
>... heh, before i get flamed, i really did mean soulfire, not
>soulforge... Doh doh doh!
Too slow! :)
Sam
Joseph M Leonard
: In article <dhAQ3.11123$P3.1...@ozemail.com.au>,
: "Harass" <har...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
: > blah...
: >
: > loh is not everything... i would much rather kick then loh....
: >
: > have you even played a pal ?
: >
:
: Uhg. Then go play a ranger. Anyone who would trade away LOH for Kick
: is a fool.
I'm not the biggest role playing person you'll meet. But even I have to
wince at the thought of a paladin kicking or dual wielding for that
matter. It's just not their nature to use such "dirty" tactics in a
fight. Kicking? hahaha.. paladins don't kick!!!! Lifting your leg to do
damage? I mean come on! Very unpaladin-like. =)
--
Joe
Maelfyn Sinifay 43rd ranger Fennin Ro
Marcus Barnes
> orders, and nothing else.
The same can be said for monks. However I disagree ... Paladins and
Shadowknights are knights, nobles. Given superior training and expensive
equipment my their liege lords and patron rulers. Warriors are soldiers
... grunts.
As knights, they should have far and away the best full plate armor in
the game. Warriors and clerics should be second with plate mail and the
like. No other classes should be wearing full plate or plate mail.
> This does not presume any superior social status or fighting ability,
Yes it does ... in any historical or fantasy liturature. Even in EQ, a
Shadowknight of Night Keep can gain the favor of Da Bashers, but not the
otherway around though.
> Insofar as the game goes, once more with feeling: all a Warrior
> can do is Kill Stuff.
No they can't. Their ability to deal damage is awful compared to most
other classes. They can stand and take a beating long enough for the
wizards to kill the enemy, and even then they often need healing help
during combat.
Warriors are living root spells, not effective killers.
/ooc Ullik
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Derek J. Ludwig
anon wrote:
> kiss my ass, paladins are one of the few classes that dont need to be
> changed, brad loves paladins, and they have whip ass wpns. as for healing,
> you aren't a cleric, if you wanted to heal, you shouldve played a cleric,
> get over it, you are a fighter, i have a 49 necro and a 35 bard, necros cant
> even research our high level pets due to bugs and bards have many broken or
> useless songs, and you're worried about your healing spells? paladins are
> brads "baby" class, go ask a rogue how balanced they think paladins are.
>
> BELL NEWS wrote in message <6dzQ3.23834$up3....@news21.bellglobal.com>...
> >I Hope when i complete this litte 'note' it will be a a good synopsis of
> >what I think the paladin class is, and what it shold be (or what should be
> >improved).
> >
> >First, I am a lvl 38 Paladin on Errolsi Marr, and have been playing EQ
> since
> >Phase 2 BETA, and have played other 'high level' characters who I care not
> >to mention. Here are a two main quips about the paladin Class.
> >
> >--- START RANT -----
> >
> >1// There Healing spells.
> >----------------------
> >Up to lvl 29 paladins truly lack in the healing department.
> >- when i started a 'paladin' i was under the assumption that we were to be
> >the only class other then Shaman's and Clerics to receive 'healing' spells.
> >I was also under the impression that a paladins healing spells would only
> be
> >second to the Cleric. However, healing lacks HORRIBLY in a paladin. Up to
> >lvl 29, I healed a mere 30HP of damage per cast (this is ridiculous -
> >rangers heal the same about [yet receive dual wield, DD spells, tracking,
> >critical hits via BOW, etc]). Why do rangers have healing in the first
> >place? There DD spells (crit hits) more then offset this.
> >
> >SOLUTION: perhaps increase amount of HP regenerated via a spell or give the
> >healing spells sooner in the game to a paladin (up to lvl 29 heck a bard
> >with his mana song could heal more then me).
> >
> >NOTE: Our healing is utterly useless up to lvl 38 to any groups who have
> >either a shaman/Druid/Cleric/Bard in there group. (by useless, it's NEVER
> >used in battle, and if a bard is in the group, it is rarely used for
> >'reducing' down time, especially soloing in GUK where a paladins uses the
> DD
> >spells against the undead frogies)
> >
> >2// Melee Ability
> >---------------
> >Another area I believe paladins are lacking. We do the least damage of any
> >melee class (bards/rangers/warrios/sk's), all dish out more damage
> >(considerably more) then us paladins. If our healing did offset this
> >decreased damage, I would be pleased, however, it doesn't come close.
> >
> >SOLUTION: perhaps critical hits via a shield considering some of the most
> >used weapons by paladins are 1h weapons (mainly the ghoulbane)
> >
> >3// The Holy Swords
> >------------------
> >My Opinion: LACKING
> >
> >Why? Paladins should be the most skilled swordsman in the game, and thus
> >receive the greatest and most prized swords via 'holy' means. Anyone who
> >post 'the fiery avenger shol be useable by all classes' is ridiculous.
> >
> >Current Swords i have seen or have used:
> >
> >Ghoulbane - good sword against undead, however, most 2h do more damage then
> >the ghoulbane used with a shield (perhaps critical hits via a shield would
> >solve this)
> >
> >Soulfire - more a piece of show then anything - anyone who is able to
> aquire
> >this sword woul rather have a Mithril 2h which deals out more damage.
> >
> >Fiery Avenger - never seen/never used. Can't comment. However, i can say
> >that this sword should not be included in any means of evaluating the
> >paladin class considering NO ONE has found it it 7months and most likely
> >there iwll never be more then 3-4 on a server when the quest does become
> >obtainable.
> >
> >DeepWater Harpooon - good addition, however, I believe a paladins swords
> >should be mostly 1h, and this item is beginning to be farmed by many.
> >
> >SOLUTION: create more paladin 1h slashing swords, with GOOD stats.
> Something
> >with better stats then a ghoulbane, maybe a 1h slashing swords with 20dmg,
> >40 delay?
> >
> >SIDENOTE - the greatest swords in the game shold be paladin based, and they
> >are not. the Mithril 2h is arguably the greatest, and it is not paladin
> >only.
> >
> >CONCLUSION
> >------------
> >
> >Paladins are out meleed by every single melee class, and are 'outhealed' by
> >every class that receives the heal spell other then rangers (who are equals
> >up to lvl 29). I was always under the belief that paladins were 'holy
> >fighters', 'great figthers', but being outdamaged by a bard merely sucks! I
> >was also under the premise that we were the second best healers in the
> game.
> >We are a distant 4th!
> >
> >To emphasis a point, it seems verant did intend us to be good healers, in
> >that they gave us 'revive'. We are the only other class other then a cleric
> >to receive this spell. However, we should receive better heals, and sooner
> >in our lives.
> >
> >BEFORE YOU SAY....
> >-----------------
> >
> >1. Paladins Get the BEST SWORD - give me a break - I will never have it -
> >and most paladins will never have it.
> >
> >2. Paladins Get LOH - it is great - however it's a once a game day
> >thing......and truly does nothing for a group. If someone in a group is
> >about to die, then there should be several other people almost ready to die
> >if you played the fight right. You never just let 1 tank take all the
> >damage, and as such, LOH woul merely save 1 life, and let the others fall,
> >eventually claiming the life of the person who was the receiver of LOH.
> >
> >Thanks for listening to my rant =) Brad and verant, you have tweaked almost
> >every class, SK/DRUIDS/WARRIOS, and as such, have left paladins in the
> dust.
> >
> >
> >--------------
> >Andrew 'Fuzzy' Munk [ABLAZEN HOLYSWORD EQ]
> >WEBMASTER/ADMINSTRATOR/OWNER
> >~ Only Toons Network (onlytoons.com)
> >WEBMASTER
> >~ S T O M P E D (stomped.com)
> >~ ICQ: 35411286
> >~ AIM: andmunn
> >-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
> >"Veni, vidi, vici." [I came, I saw, I conquered.]
> >- Gaius Julius Caesar
> >-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
> >
> >
Dennis Francis Heffernan
wrote:
|The same can be said for monks. However I disagree ... Paladins and
|Shadowknights are knights, nobles.
No, they are not. That is contingent upon setting and is clearly not
operative in EQ.
|Warriors are living root spells, not effective killers.
That is because the design is flawed.
n...@noway.com
Hey you Pallys ain't clerics. when you solo you can heal yourself,
root, stun, have anti-undead spells, etc.
Shadowknights? Well, they suck. No self heal worth a shit.
Warriors outdamage you, and so do many other classes.
Heres a clue: Don't fight alone. Go find a necromancer to work
with. My 32 necromancer and a 40 paladin broke up the spawn in the
shin lords room, and kept it for almost 4 hours before we left.
What? Why a necromancer?
Well, we have a pet, we don't outdamage you and get annihilated by
pissed off mobs, if you are messed up you can retreat a bit and my pet
WILL eventually get it off you (assuming it doesn't die first).
When I have a choice of a partner as a necromancer, I will always take
a Paladin before any other. They can root. (I can't yet) They can
stun. (I can't yet) They can tank (I never can) They can pull (I
never can) and they can heal AND have the oh fuck button LOH (I never
can outside of combat/never).
So say what you wish about your class. Yeah yeah at level 49 you
still have greater heal and aren't terribly effective.
Hey figure it out, don't be a cleric. You can cast GHeal what, 8
times at that level? When your casters/aux classes (bard, rogue,
shaman) start getting pounded on, HEAL them. Makes for a very
effective taunt, same for your cleric. YOU can take a beating, they
can't.
And ya know, that paladin armor? Someone on my server has most of
the pieces now, because he WANTED to. And though the AC stats etc
are LOWER, he takes LESS damage. Maybe there is more to the
paladin armor than meets the eye, eh? Kind of like rubicite vs
crafted/steel; you end up with only a few dozen points armor diff, but
boy my warrior takes a HELL of a lot more damage when hes wearing
rubicite (borrowed from a friend) than when he wears his crafted (or
my friends steel).
Thought I must say most of the stats for this armor are pretty bad, I
mean, why would melee classes want +int? Gimme a break. You wanna
stop camping, figure it out. Make ALL of that armor 2nd to none
except POF, and hey all the level 50 assholes will stop farming items
(I can only hope).
Ayama, Povar
Matt Frisch
>In article <3814fbfd.30634120@news>,
> dfra...@email.com (Dennis Francis Heffernan) wrote:
>>
>> No, Paladins and ShadowKnights are members of religious fighting
>> orders, and nothing else.
>
>The same can be said for monks. However I disagree ... Paladins and
>Shadowknights are knights, nobles. Given superior training and expensive
>equipment my their liege lords and patron rulers. Warriors are soldiers
>... grunts.
>
>As knights, they should have far and away the best full plate armor in
>the game. Warriors and clerics should be second with plate mail and the
>like. No other classes should be wearing full plate or plate mail.
When a player has to do something tangible to EARN the status as a
shadowknight or paladin, I will agree with this statement, but when the
only requirement is clicking a button in the character creation screen,
paladins need to be..repeat NEED TO BE inferior fighters to warriors,
otherwise...why be a warrior at all?
>> Insofar as the game goes, once more with feeling: all a Warrior
>> can do is Kill Stuff.
>
>No they can't. Their ability to deal damage is awful compared to most
>other classes. They can stand and take a beating long enough for the
>wizards to kill the enemy, and even then they often need healing help
>during combat.
>
>Warriors are living root spells, not effective killers.
Which is due FAR more to the fact that the warrior class is weak than
anything to do with historical accuracy. Making warriors a decent class is
a matter of having them fulfill their role in the game, which is the very
best fighters/tanks available...only paladins should rival warriors for
tanking, and ONLY if they use lay hands. Here is what warriors need:
A 15% hp increase over and above their 20-30-40-50 hp bonuses verant put in
a couple months back.
Triple attack skill at level 40 (No other class gets it at all)
All melee skills (Those being: Offense, Defense, 1HS, 2HS, 1HB, 2HB,
Pierce, Dodge, Parry, Riposte, Disarm) capped at 235, leaving room to
expand to 255 if the level limit is raised with the release of the
expansion set. No other class should get their melee above what they
already have (subject to a slight increase if the level limit is raised)
except rogues who should get piercing to 235.
Whatever weapon they wield, acts as though its damage rating were 1 pt
higher at level 25, 2 pts higher at 35, and 3 pts higher at 45. At level
50, any weapon they wield has its delay time reduced by 2.
And *that* will make the warrior fulfill its given role in the game
universe. Your ideas on paladins are laughable, and a not-very-well-veiled
attempt to create a superclass.
Gordon Chapman
Heffernan) wrote:
>
>|Warriors are living root spells, not effective killers.
>
>
>
wizards are for, if you make warriors comparable with wizards damage
wise, then a wizard just becomes a warrior who can't take any damage,
he becomes redundant.
Warriors are, by design, a damage sink, they aren't designed to do
phenomenal amounts of damage, they're designed to keep the MOB
occupied while the artillery (wizards and other casters) do the bulk
of the damage.
Consider a military engagement where you have to fight everything at
close quarters instead of just blasting them with artillery and
airstrikes, it's going to take longer isn't it ? Or the difference
between pummeling/hacking at someone in armour or just shooting them,
which is quicker ?
Warrior's advantages lie in the fact that they aren't completely
useless if they run OOM, because they don't have any in the first
place.
If you want to deal damage, be a wizard, warriors are grouping
characters just like clerics (or at least they function better in
groups than solo - pair a warrior with a cleric and you're laughing),
if you want to solo, you picked the wrong class, warriors are too
one-dimensional to solo, they have very few options open to them if
things start to go badly.
Brent Burkholder
Matt Frisch wrote in message <38166708.28775423@news>...
>A 15% hp increase over and above their 20-30-40-50 hp bonuses verant put in
>a couple months back.
>
Lets not be silly. Having their Defense skill go up faster is a different
issue.
>Triple attack skill at level 40 (No other class gets it at all)
>
>All melee skills (Those being: Offense, Defense, 1HS, 2HS, 1HB, 2HB,
>Pierce, Dodge, Parry, Riposte, Disarm) capped at 235, leaving room to
>expand to 255 if the level limit is raised with the release of the
>expansion set. No other class should get their melee above what they
>already have (subject to a slight increase if the level limit is raised)
>except rogues who should get piercing to 235.
>
>Whatever weapon they wield, acts as though its damage rating were 1 pt
>higher at level 25, 2 pts higher at 35, and 3 pts higher at 45. At level
>50, any weapon they wield has its delay time reduced by 2.
>
Shouldn't have this AND triple attack.
>And *that* will make the warrior fulfill its given role in the game
>universe. Your ideas on paladins are laughable, and a not-very-well-veiled
>attempt to create a superclass.
And yours aren't? :)
Matt Frisch
scribed into the ether:
>On Tue, 26 Oct 1999 22:51:02 GMT, dfra...@email.com (Dennis Francis
>Heffernan) wrote:
>>
>>|Warriors are living root spells, not effective killers.
>>
>> That is because the design is flawed.
>>
>>
>Well you can't make warriors ultra powerful damage wise, that's what
>wizards are for, if you make warriors comparable with wizards damage
>wise, then a wizard just becomes a warrior who can't take any damage,
>he becomes redundant.
Unless fighting a specifically magic immune mob, wizards still inflict more
damage than warriors, and would even with the beefing I posted the other
day.
>Warriors are, by design, a damage sink, they aren't designed to do
>phenomenal amounts of damage, they're designed to keep the MOB
>occupied while the artillery (wizards and other casters) do the bulk
>of the damage.
Which they are unable to do unless they can inflict enough damage to keep
the mob's attention. The alternative is to vastly increase the
effectiveness of taunt.
>Warrior's advantages lie in the fact that they aren't completely
>useless if they run OOM, because they don't have any in the first
>place.
Yes, but they are completely useless when they run out of hp, and they
don't have enough of that.
>If you want to deal damage, be a wizard, warriors are grouping
>characters just like clerics (or at least they function better in
>groups than solo - pair a warrior with a cleric and you're laughing),
>if you want to solo, you picked the wrong class, warriors are too
>one-dimensional to solo, they have very few options open to them if
>things start to go badly.
Notice how you don't mention wizards being a grouping class because with
their outlandish ability to blast damage, they CAN solo, particularly
greens. And wizards are not just limited to hitting. Their transport
capability is an ENOURMOUS advantage that warriors (and melee classes in
general) have no comparable match to.
Wizards are valuable outside of combat...warriors are not. Therefore
warriors should be more desirable IN combat.
In a well designed text mud, this kind of imbalances don't exist, and its a
result of the game engine. The warriors tank/high hp and wizards damage/low
hp exists in exactly the same fashion, but in text muds, wizards get
chopped to pieces by low level stuff even at very high level, because their
defense is SO pathetic, and their hp is SO low. This is how it should be.
No level 50 warrior can solo a griffon without 2 hours of time, journeyman
boots, and 8 backpacks full of arrows.
Any level 50 wizard could inside of 10 minutes. Naked.
Plus the wizard can teleport. And bind himself anywhere. And is not reliant
on equipment. That is a HUGE inequity.
Matt Frisch
scribed into the ether:
>
>Matt Frisch wrote in message <38166708.28775423@news>...
>
>>A 15% hp increase over and above their 20-30-40-50 hp bonuses verant put in
>>a couple months back.
>>
>
>Lets not be silly. Having their Defense skill go up faster is a different
>issue.
If warriors are relegated to being living walls to keep the mobs off of the
finger wagglers, then the 15% is in fact too low, make it more like 30.
Since they now no longer are "warriors" but "walls" they should be able to
do their proscribed duty better.
>>Triple attack skill at level 40 (No other class gets it at all)
>>
>>All melee skills (Those being: Offense, Defense, 1HS, 2HS, 1HB, 2HB,
>>Pierce, Dodge, Parry, Riposte, Disarm) capped at 235, leaving room to
>>expand to 255 if the level limit is raised with the release of the
>>expansion set. No other class should get their melee above what they
>>already have (subject to a slight increase if the level limit is raised)
>>except rogues who should get piercing to 235.
>>
>>Whatever weapon they wield, acts as though its damage rating were 1 pt
>>higher at level 25, 2 pts higher at 35, and 3 pts higher at 45. At level
>>50, any weapon they wield has its delay time reduced by 2.
>>
>
>Shouldn't have this AND triple attack.
Ok, 1 pt damage at 30, 2 pts at 45. Cap triple attack moderately low, say
150 or so.
>>And *that* will make the warrior fulfill its given role in the game
>>universe. Your ideas on paladins are laughable, and a not-very-well-veiled
>>attempt to create a superclass.
>
>And yours aren't? :)
I don't have any warrior characters.
Brent Burkholder
Matt Frisch wrote in message <381800d5.5880695@news>...
>On Wed, 27 Oct 1999 11:31:17 -0400, "Brent Burkholder" <bb...@bicnet.net>
>scribed into the ether:
>
>>
>>Matt Frisch wrote in message <38166708.28775423@news>...
>>
>>>A 15% hp increase over and above their 20-30-40-50 hp bonuses verant put
in
>>>a couple months back.
>>>
>>
>>Lets not be silly. Having their Defense skill go up faster is a
different
>>issue.
>
>If warriors are relegated to being living walls to keep the mobs off of the
>finger wagglers, then the 15% is in fact too low, make it more like 30.
>
Defense skill = HP for all intents and purposes. Being able to neglect
more of the damage being dished out every round makes them last longer in
combat just as well, if not better than, having more HP. The difference is
that if a spellcasting NPC starts blasting on them, the Defense skill isn't
going to amount to a hill of beans, and it SHOULDN'T. I personally think
it's a bit silly that warriors get an HP bonus at all, why does a warrior
have mroe hit points than a paladin or ranger? Being able to take half
damage from a hit more often than the others is a different issue.
In actuality, higher defense skill as opposed to higher hp is actually
beneficial in many cases, as there's less damage to be healed up after the
fight.
>Since they now no longer are "warriors" but "walls" they should be able to
>do their proscribed duty better.
>
>>>Triple attack skill at level 40 (No other class gets it at all)
>>>
>>>All melee skills (Those being: Offense, Defense, 1HS, 2HS, 1HB, 2HB,
>>>Pierce, Dodge, Parry, Riposte, Disarm) capped at 235, leaving room to
>>>expand to 255 if the level limit is raised with the release of the
>>>expansion set. No other class should get their melee above what they
>>>already have (subject to a slight increase if the level limit is raised)
>>>except rogues who should get piercing to 235.
>>>
>>>Whatever weapon they wield, acts as though its damage rating were 1 pt
>>>higher at level 25, 2 pts higher at 35, and 3 pts higher at 45. At level
>>>50, any weapon they wield has its delay time reduced by 2.
>>>
>>
>>Shouldn't have this AND triple attack.
>
>Ok, 1 pt damage at 30, 2 pts at 45. Cap triple attack moderately low, say
>150 or so.
>
The point being that triple attackw would alreazdy give plenty of damage
bonus. I don't see either happening anyway, since then warriors would be
able to outdamage Monks, which can't be allowed to happen.
>>>And *that* will make the warrior fulfill its given role in the game
>>>universe. Your ideas on paladins are laughable, and a
not-very-well-veiled
>>>attempt to create a superclass.
>>
>>And yours aren't? :)
>
>I don't have any warrior characters.
Just because you don't have a warrior doesn't mean that you can't be trying
to create a super-class, just not for purely selfish reasons.
Marcus Barnes
>
> |The same can be said for monks. However I disagree ... Paladins and
> |Shadowknights are knights, nobles.
>
> not operative in EQ.
>
>
> That is because the design is flawed.
So the second point is a design flaw and the other is not? By such
characterizations you attempt to paint your assertions with correctness.
<chuckle> Warriors are designed correctly and Paladins and Shadowknights
are flawed. How about that?
Marcus Barnes
> >
> >As knights, they should have far and away the best full plate
> >armor in the game. Warriors and clerics should be second with
> >plate mail and the like. No other classes should be wearing
> >full plate or plate mail.
>
> When a player has to do something tangible to EARN the status as a
> shadowknight or paladin, I will agree with this statement,
Interesting point ... considering that class based RPG systems all
require that the choice of class be made at character creation time. In
any event, advanced (class defining) equipment is always earned, except
if a the game enables twinking like EQ does.
> but when the only requirement is clicking a button in the character
> creation screen,
A very common and acceptable requirement. A druid is a druid on
creation. They get spells and equipment by acheivement. I fail to see
your line of reasoning here.
> paladins need to be..repeat NEED TO BE inferior fighters to warriors,
> otherwise...why be a warrior at all?
They can have few fighting skills than warriors. That is not the point.
My point is they are knights and should have the very best full plate
armor. The is equipment they must strive to earn and should be available
to Paladins and Shadowknights as befits their calling.
Verant has instead given them class specific quest armor that is
inferior to all other class armors. It is patently wrong.
> >Warriors are living root spells, not effective killers.
>
> Making warriors a decent class is a matter of having them fulfill
> their role in the game, which is the very best fighters/tanks
> available...only paladins should rival warriors for tanking, and
Yes and Shadowknights (anti-paladins).
> ONLY if they use lay hands.
No. As knights they should also have superior (expensive) equipment to
nearly all warriors. This great equipment should be hard to get and
class specific, requiring achievements in character for those two
classes.
A Paladin should get a holy sword, like Ghoulbane, by defeating a great
evil that has captured the weapon, not a Froglok paladin who is using
it. A Shadowknight should not get an unholy sword, like the Bonebladed
Claymore, by killin a fellow shadowknight (well not generally ;-).
Swap the loot on these two NPCs and create good quests to
motivate players to defeat the enemy and reclaim the lost treasure.
Instead, Verant has us killing NPCs of the same class and purpose who
are using the valued item. For SKs it's mostly in character but for
Paladins it's completely wrong.
> Here is what warriors need:
>
> A 15% hp increase over and above their 20-30-40-50 hp bonuses verant
> put in a couple months back.
So that we can sit healing for even longer? No. Verant needs to tone
down the super abilities of the MOBs to be inline with PCs of the same
class/level.
MOBs are still dumber than players, and usually outnumbered. Have fewer
lone MOBs and more group behavior for them too. Frogloks are a good
example of this. They run early and bring back tougher reinforcements.
Froglok casters actually cast buffs and heals, almost like a group of
players would. More MOB AI is needed.
> Triple attack skill at level 40 (No other class gets it at all)
They just increased the frequency of critical hits.
> All melee skills (Those being: Offense, Defense, 1HS, 2HS, 1HB, 2HB,
> Pierce, Dodge, Parry, Riposte, Disarm) capped at 235, leaving room to
> expand to 255 if the level limit is raised with the release of the
> expansion set.
No skills should be capped. It is ineffective to design classes around
statistical caps that make them useless at higher levels. Characters
getting worse and worse at their skills, relative to the NPCs, as they
advance in level? That's silly. That's what Verant has done.
> Whatever weapon they wield, acts as though its damage rating were 1 pt
> higher at level 25, 2 pts higher at 35, and 3 pts higher at 45. At
> level 50, any weapon they wield has its delay time reduced by 2.
Interesting. I'd rather see such tweaks come as the result of skill
advancement. An expert swordsmen gets extra damage and or weapon speed
when using a sword. More so for a master swordsmen etc.. I can be level
50 but awful at 2h blunt and so not deserve any weapon rating modifiers.
Marcus Barnes
Not at all. They are separate factors in a simple statistical simulation
that computes the durability of a character moment by moment.
> Being able to neglect more of the damage being dished out every
> round makes them last longer in combat just as well, if not better
> than, having more HP.
Right. See? they are not the same thing.
> The difference is that if a spellcasting NPC starts blasting on them,
> the Defense skill isn't going to amount to a hill of beans, and it
> SHOULDN'T.
Right again. The pros and cons of high AC/Defense vs high HP distinguish
between a knight and a warrior. They can both surive in combat, but not
in the same way and not equally against all enemies.
Verant is so far making a mess of things between warriors getting out of
character magic resistance and knights getting inferior armor. There are
more mistakes ... but it's all been said before.
> I personally think it's a bit silly that warriors get an HP bonus at
> all, why does a warrior have more hit points than a paladin or ranger?
Because it's a simple measure of the tough and hardy warrior who does
not lead the pampered palace or temple life of a knight. Likewise their
constant and grueling training makes them tougher even than the ranger.
I do think that rangers could have a bit more HP than knights, since
they live a rugged outdoor life. But then I don't believe rangers should
have any healing spells either.
Dennis Francis Heffernan
|On Tue, 26 Oct 1999 22:51:02 GMT, dfra...@email.com (Dennis Francis
|Heffernan) wrote:
|>
|>|Warriors are living root spells, not effective killers.
|>
|> That is because the design is flawed.
|>
|>
|Well you can't make warriors ultra powerful damage wise, that's what
|wizards are for,
Well, that would be WHY the design is flawed.
No one is going to get these games right until they accept that magic must
be utterly useless in combat.
Dennis Francis Heffernan
wrote:
|So the second point is a design flaw and the other is not? By such
|characterizations you attempt to paint your assertions with correctness.
|
|<chuckle> Warriors are designed correctly and Paladins and Shadowknights
|are flawed. How about that?
It doesn't fly because the Warrior's deficiencies are a matter of game
mechanics, whereas the purported status of Paladins and Shadowknights as
nobility is merely a detail of setting.
guess away
dfra...@email.com (Dennis Francis Heffernan) wrote:
> Well, that would be WHY the design is flawed.
>
> No one is going to get these games right until they accept that
> magic must be utterly useless in combat.
Still stuck on that bullshit line, Heff? No shocker there, but it is
amusing to look in once in a while if only to point and laugh. DD type
magic is a staple of the best RPGs, and will be so until the genre dies.
The *only* class in the game that can be viewed objectively as
significantly more powerful than the others in the end are necros, and
Verant is a few very short steps away from solving that little problem
as well.
Lwalgee
more powerful than the rest, not greatly, but a bit. Why? It is know as
difficulty of play, if you want to run a hard to play, KOS everywhere
character, then you should get benefits and if this translates into a slightly
stronger class at the top levels, so be it.
Malvolin
Lwalgee <lwa...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:19991108084503...@ng-ch1.aol.com...
> Yes and IMHO that is a crock. I expect high level Necros and SKs to be a
bit
> more powerful than the rest, not greatly, but a bit. Why? It is know as
> difficulty of play, if you want to run a hard to play, KOS everywhere
> character, then you should get benefits and if this translates into a
slightly
> stronger class at the top levels, so be it.
And it was that way, and it still is, and will more than likely continue to
be. The Lifetap "Nerf", as it turns out, isn't such a big thing, and I
overreacted to it. The only thing it does is make it resistable against mobs
6 or more levels higher. Unless you're a kiting(stupid) Necro, it shouldn't
affect you; I've stil not seen it resisted personally.
I didn't choose a Necro because it was an Uberclass, I chose it because it
was arguably the most soloable class in the game along with Magicians, as
well as because it would be an interesting character from a roleplaying
standpoint. It remains just as soloable and just as interesting.
guess away
lwa...@aol.com (Lwalgee) wrote:
> Yes and IMHO that is a crock. I expect high level Necros and SKs to
>be a bit more powerful than the rest, not greatly, but a bit. Why? It
>is know as difficulty of play, if you want to run a hard to play, KOS
>everywhere character, then you should get benefits and if this
>translates into a slightly stronger class at the top levels, so be it.
Having more powerful spells is one thing, but being able to flagrantly
exploit things isn't. The only thing that needs to be changed for
necros is that feign death should have the same effect on pets as invis
does, ie it makes summoned pets die and charmed pets uncharm. That's
all. That's the only real flaw left that necros exploit for all they're
worth. No class should be able to solo the frenzy room or ghoul lord,
period.
--
Level 1 - I wonder if that griffin will hurt me?
Level 21 - I wonder if I can take the Avatar?
Level 42 - Here dragon! Here dragon!
pereg...@my-deja.com
> be. The Lifetap "Nerf", as it turns out, isn't such a big thing, and I
> overreacted to it. The only thing it does is make it resistable
against mobs
> 6 or more levels higher. Unless you're a kiting(stupid) Necro, it
shouldn't
> affect you; I've stil not seen it resisted personally.
The problem with the lifedrain nerf is that it is an all-or-nothing
resist. Also, the life drain's resist rate has a much narrower range
of levels affected as opposed to ice comet at upper levels.
Here's an example: Several L50 necromancers complained that they could
no longer land a single spell on Lord Nagafen even when standing under
his belly. One L50 necro was 0 for 12 with the L49 drain in a row,
which is utterly ridiculous. However, other caster (druids, wizards,
magician, etc.) were casting at normal effectiveness, with some spells
landing or partially resisted. One druid had all spells land without a
single resist.
When Verant did the drain nerf, they did it disproportionately to all
other classes. Not only is the drain very non-mana efficient and slow
casting, but it is less reliable when hunting L50+ yellows and reds.
Drains are very reliable to blues and whites, but drop dramatically in
success rate from yellows and up. If the 6-level spell-window is
supposed to be uniform, then that window seems much narrower with the
necromancer.
I do agree that low level necro trying to kite deep reds should get
resisted, but the high-level (L49+) necro should still be able to
affect dragons and other high-level mobs at similar resist rates as
other classes. This is not the case on LIVE servers now. The drain
nerf went on the production servers without any notice in any
documentation, and its impact has been noticed by the high-level
necromancer community. Please check into the matter.
Thank you.
-Shadora- (42nd level necromancer, Tunare)
Marcus Barnes
> game mechanics, whereas the purported status of Paladins and
> Shadowknights as nobility is merely a detail of setting.
Hardly! At high levels a Paladin or SK become increasingly ineffective
do to low skill caps. Their archery is useless. Their taunt is useless.
Their limited melee damage is next to useless. Given these facts, they
fail in their role as 75% warrior.
Knights cannot keep MOBs off of the casters with these low skills. No
wonder the other classes all got better armor than these poor knights.
They don't get hit while swinging and missing at a MOBs back!
Warriors are living root spells, with some DOT ability. Paladins and SKs
are merely living DOTs that get resisted more and more at higher levels.
Nothing noble or well designed about that role in any context.
/ooc Ullik
Dan Harmon
<pereg...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:80a4dl$i9r$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
> Here's an example: Several L50 necromancers complained that they could
> no longer land a single spell on Lord Nagafen even when standing under
> his belly.
If this is true, obviously they need to do some tweaking of the spell. I
hope those "several" necros all sent in /bug and/or /feedback reports.
Matt Frisch
ether:
>Yes and IMHO that is a crock. I expect high level Necros and SKs to be a bit
>more powerful than the rest, not greatly, but a bit. Why? It is know as
>difficulty of play, if you want to run a hard to play, KOS everywhere
>character, then you should get benefits and if this translates into a slightly
>stronger class at the top levels, so be it.
Nonsense. My characters (who are not necros or shadowknight) are KOS in
99% of the game. And Necros and SKs can, with effort, get enough faction to
go basically anywhere (except halas), so this is a meager downside at best.
Malvolin
Matt Frisch <matu...@yahoo.spam.me.not.com> wrote in message
news:3828f7af...@news.earthlink.net...
> On 08 Nov 1999 13:45:03 GMT, lwa...@aol.com (Lwalgee) scribed into the
> ether:
>
> >Yes and IMHO that is a crock. I expect high level Necros and SKs to be a
bit
> >more powerful than the rest, not greatly, but a bit. Why? It is know as
> >difficulty of play, if you want to run a hard to play, KOS everywhere
> >character, then you should get benefits and if this translates into a
slightly
> >stronger class at the top levels, so be it.
>
> Nonsense. My characters (who are not necros or shadowknight) are KOS in
> 99% of the game.
Then they're Ogres and Trolls. Same diff, faction wise, you may as well be a
Necro or SK.
And Necros and SKs can, with effort, get enough faction to
> go basically anywhere (except halas), so this is a meager downside at
best.
ROFL!!
Roll a Dark Elf Necro and play him high enough to get through
Highpass(careful, you're KOS there, better hope invis stays up). When you
get to Qeynos Hills(Woah! Look out for Holly and Cros! They won't even wait
for you to smack a wolf!), go to Blackburrow and start killing Gnolls.
What's that? you've killed about 300, and they *still* wanna disembowel you
on sight? Hmm.
Better yet, roll an *Erudite* Necro, and try to get him off Odus before
about 9 or 10. Wizard/Druid Teleports don't count. (Hint: Don't rely on the
entrance to the Aqueduct system under the Qeynos Docks, you'll get a big
surprise).
Matt Frisch
scribed into the ether:
>
>Matt Frisch <matu...@yahoo.spam.me.not.com> wrote in message
>news:3828f7af...@news.earthlink.net...
>> On 08 Nov 1999 13:45:03 GMT, lwa...@aol.com (Lwalgee) scribed into the
>> ether:
>>
>> >Yes and IMHO that is a crock. I expect high level Necros and SKs to be a
>bit
>> >more powerful than the rest, not greatly, but a bit. Why? It is know as
>> >difficulty of play, if you want to run a hard to play, KOS everywhere
>> >character, then you should get benefits and if this translates into a
>slightly
>> >stronger class at the top levels, so be it.
>>
>> Nonsense. My characters (who are not necros or shadowknight) are KOS in
>> 99% of the game.
>
>Then they're Ogres and Trolls. Same diff, faction wise, you may as well be a
>Necro or SK.
No, barbarians mostly. I go to everfrost, I am KOS by the gnolls, goblins,
orcs, leopards, ice giants, ice bone skeletons, martar icebear.
I go to Qeynos hills, I am KOS by the gnolls, the skeletons, the dread
bones, the various necromancer spawns...
I go to nektulos, I am KOS by the mummies, skeletons, piranah, DE guards,
kodiaks, iron/stone guardians
I go to Solusek and I'm KOS by the goblins, imps, giants, and whatever else
is in there.
Except for several of the comparatively tiny cities, I am KOS in every zone
in the game.
>And Necros and SKs can, with effort, get enough faction to
>> go basically anywhere (except halas), so this is a meager downside at
>best.
>
>ROFL!!
>
>Roll a Dark Elf Necro and play him high enough to get through
>Highpass(careful, you're KOS there, better hope invis stays up).
I went to highpass, and an hour of killing orcs and gnolls brought me from
dubious to amiable. I've seen DE necros who were not uberleveled to where
the guards are green walking right past the guards without being touched.
> When you
>get to Qeynos Hills(Woah! Look out for Holly and Cros! They won't even wait
>for you to smack a wolf!), go to Blackburrow and start killing Gnolls.
>What's that? you've killed about 300, and they *still* wanna disembowel you
>on sight? Hmm.
Depends on which 300. Kill scrawnies and pups and you'll be waiting a
while, kill commanders and tranixx when he spawns, and it changes in a big
hurry. Tranixx in particular...sometimes after killing him, my faction
stops going up with any of the up races, and all I see is down with the
sabretooths.
Malvolin
> >
> >Matt Frisch <matu...@yahoo.spam.me.not.com> wrote in message
> >news:3828f7af...@news.earthlink.net...
in
> >> 99% of the game.
> >
>
> orcs, leopards, ice giants, ice bone skeletons, martar icebear.
So is everyone else.
> I go to Qeynos hills, I am KOS by the gnolls, the skeletons, the dread
> bones, the various necromancer spawns...
So is everyone else.
> I go to nektulos, I am KOS by the mummies, skeletons, piranah, DE guards,
> kodiaks, iron/stone guardians
*whistles*
So is everyone else, the one exception being Dark Elves, Ogres and Trolls
with the Guards and Guardians.
> I go to Solusek and I'm KOS by the goblins, imps, giants, and whatever
else
> is in there.
So is *Everyone Else*...
> Except for several of the comparatively tiny cities, I am KOS in every
zone
> in the game.
SO IS EVERYONE ELSE.
> >And Necros and SKs can, with effort, get enough faction to
> >> go basically anywhere (except halas), so this is a meager downside at
> >best.
> >
> >ROFL!!
> >
> >Roll a Dark Elf Necro and play him high enough to get through
> >Highpass(careful, you're KOS there, better hope invis stays up).
>
> I went to highpass, and an hour of killing orcs and gnolls brought me from
> dubious to amiable. I've seen DE necros who were not uberleveled to where
> the guards are green walking right past the guards without being touched.
With your barbarian, no doubt. Whoopdy.
As far as the DE's you mention are concerned, they must have been adamant
about gaining faction. Rather than kill Orcs and Gnolls by the hundred to
raise faction with some insignificant Humans, I'll just pop through invis.
Thanks.
Sophist
says...
>
> The problem with the lifedrain nerf is that it is an all-or-nothing
> resist. Also, the life drain's resist rate has a much narrower range
> of levels affected as opposed to ice comet at upper levels.
>
> Here's an example: Several L50 necromancers complained that they could
> no longer land a single spell on Lord Nagafen even when standing under
> his belly. One L50 necro was 0 for 12 with the L49 drain in a row,
> which is utterly ridiculous. However, other caster (druids, wizards,
> magician, etc.) were casting at normal effectiveness, with some spells
> landing or partially resisted. One druid had all spells land without a
> single resist.
>
> When Verant did the drain nerf, they did it disproportionately to all
> other classes.
<snip>
I wonder if this is something specific to higher level scenarios
like you mentioned above? Since the patch I haven't had any problems
with the tap spells with my level 16 Necro. But then he doesn't
really fight anything much more than 4 levels above him.
The gap between level 50 and, say, Nagafen might be large enough
that the tweak is really noticeable at that point. But it sounds
like the problem is isolated to these higher realms. That certainly
isn't meant to suggest that it isn't a problem, but only that it
seems to be somewhat isolated.
Sophist
Nick Ferrar
Personally I'm pretty happy with my Paladin (lvl 43). But there are some
glaring oversights (rangers can out damage me with their DD spell at 39-48,
ranger's quest armour has better AC than Paladin's etc etc). I DO think
Paladin only weapons are lacking (and they should all be no drop) there are
just no optons between Ghoulbane and Mithril 2 Hander/Razing Sword + Sash.
Oh nad yes - LoH is pretty irrelevant, once every 90 minutes and not a
complete heal (i.e. lvl 39+ clerics have a spell that is better than a
Paladin's unique ability).
But then I could have chosen an SK or Rogue so I count my blessings :)
Jim wrote in message <8E693106AKhe...@news.pacbell.net>...
>Harass wrote:
>
>>blah...
>>
>>loh is not everything... i would much rather kick then loh....
>>
>>have you even played a pal ?
>
>LOL.
>
>I'm playing a Paladin right now.
>Dude, READ posts before you answer them!
>
>--
>Jim
>"Worship my magic space monkey or he'll napalm you."
>
>"Yes, my e-mail address is valid, it just doesn't look valid"
JSPoof
Nick Ferrar <nickf...@clara.co.uk> wrote in message
news:dE0Y3.766$XP1....@nnrp4.clara.net...
> SO what level are you?
>
> Personally I'm pretty happy with my Paladin (lvl 43). But there are some
> glaring oversights (rangers can out damage me with their DD spell at
39-48,
> ranger's quest armour has better AC than Paladin's etc etc). I DO think
> Paladin only weapons are lacking (and they should all be no drop) there
are
> just no optons between Ghoulbane and Mithril 2 Hander/Razing Sword + Sash.
>
> Oh nad yes - LoH is pretty irrelevant, once every 90 minutes and not a
> complete heal (i.e. lvl 39+ clerics have a spell that is better than a
> Paladin's unique ability).
>
> But then I could have chosen an SK or Rogue so I count my blessings :)
Just thought I'd toss in a few coments here, as my only two characters worth
a damn are..
You guessed it, a Rogue and a Shadowknight.
Yes, I am a fan of Underdog.
I think Paladins are one of the most well looked over classes in the game,
with a plethora of Paladin-only gear, they get a FLAMING sword,
they get good armor, have an insanely good special ability that is
irresitable and never fails not to mention the insane faction everywhere. I
say, leave paladins alone.
But I've never played one, so don't flame me too hard.
To recooperate for this, ShadowKnights should have harm touch signifcantly
buffed up (I'd say make it Level x 15 +1) and make it irrestable, therefore
making it a valid fighting tool instead of a "Uh-oh, I'm going to die, I
might as well off this baddie to make up some of the exp I'll lose."
And rogues. I sob for rogues. Give them Kick. Give them Critical attacks.
Give them a DECENT starting weapon. Make throwing viable. Make poisoning
useful.
It just seems every patch I ever see is
"This spell was buffed up.."
"Wizards are now more powerful.."
"Magicians pets now come in designer colors.."
"Wizards can now just click on your kill and they get the experience,
because they're all killstealing little.."
I want to see this patch message just once: "The bug in code for
spellcasters was fixed, now they are not the demi-gods they were.."
Sorry.. :)
JSPoof
Jason Rochelle
<snip>
> ranger's quest armour has better AC than Paladin's etc etc). I DO think
That is messed up. Paladins can wear PLATE-TYPE armor, RANGERS are
limited to CHAIN-TYPE. How can their equal-level armor have BETTER AC?
BTW, in no way do I wish to see ranger armor nerfed. Just increase the
AC of the PLATE type classses.
--
Jason Rochelle