Wizards to Get Crack!!! Holy Tunare!!!
keeb...@my-deja.com
http://eq.castersrealm.com/viewarticle.asp?Article=1650
The following spells are on the Test Server:
The spell Harvest adds between 171 and 301 mana every ten minutes, so
it doesn't seem to be as powerful as either breeze or clarity. The
only cost is that the wizard is stunned for 10 seconds after casting
the spell which is no biggie if the wizard is in a safe area. The
spell can be cast only once every ten minutes.
In my opinion, it's about time that wizzies got some sort of mana
replenishment spell. Downtime is much too long for this class compared
to other casting classes. Too bad this is a level 34 spell and not a
level 14 spell.
Rangers receive a new spell called Jolt at level 55 that lowers the
aggression of monsters. Verant's justification of the spell is that
Rangers have such an awsome damage output at high levels that MOBS
continually aggro on the Ranger. So much for the argument that rangers
are underpowered at high levels.
Shamans will receive a charm animal spell similar to the druid pet
spell line. My question is "why?". Shaman's already have the ability
to summon pets which are much more loyal than Druidic pets. Why would
a shammy want to charm an animal that will aggro on him when the spell
wears off?
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Dennis Francis Heffernan
|Rangers receive a new spell called Jolt at level 55 that lowers the
|aggression of monsters. Verant's justification of the spell is that
|Rangers have such an awsome damage output at high levels that MOBS
|continually aggro on the Ranger. So much for the argument that rangers
|are underpowered at high levels.
Uh, no.
Because of the way the hate list works, you build hate every time you
swing at a mob, whether you hit or not. Since Rangers usually Dual Wield with
fast weapons, we promote ourselves up the hate list at warp speed, and the
plate classes (who are supposed to be takeing the damage) can't taunt off us.
Then, because the mob targetting system also looks at AC and HP, the mobs
see a soft and squishy Ranger they really hate and jump on us first. Never
mind that there's a Warrior or Monk easily dealing much more damage. For real
fun, put a Ranger into a group with a Rogue -- the Evade button might as well
say KILL RANGER.
Which is not meant as a dig on Rogues, because they had the exact same
problem and required Evade to fix it. Rangers are going to need it as well;
Jolt is not the answer because a) it is too high level (the problem starts at
45, not 55) and b) takes far too long to cast (if you need to Evade, you don't
HAVE 3.5 seconds to cast a spell to do it). They should take away our Taunt
and put in Evade. We're not Warrior hybrids and never were. We have Rogue
armor, Rogue HP, Rogue skills, Rogue fighting style and Rogue balance problems
-- we're Rogue hybrids.
Dennis F. Heffernan EQ: Venture Fletcher(E'ci) dfra...@email.com
Montclair State U #include <disclaim.h> ICQ:9154048 CompSci/Philosophy
"And I say now these kittens, they do not get trained/As we did in the days
when Victoria reigned!" -- T.S. Eliot, "Gus, the Theatre Cat
Undisclosed
> Which is not meant as a dig on Rogues, because they had the exact same
> problem and required Evade to fix it. Rangers are going to need it as well;
> Jolt is not the answer because a) it is too high level (the problem starts at
> 45, not 55) and b) takes far too long to cast (if you need to Evade, you don't
> HAVE 3.5 seconds to cast a spell to do it). They should take away our Taunt
> and put in Evade. We're not Warrior hybrids and never were. We have Rogue
> armor, Rogue HP, Rogue skills, Rogue fighting style and Rogue balance problems
> -- we're Rogue hybrids.
Oh please NO... do NOT take away the taunt from rangers! 8( I group with a ranger
most all the time lately (when I'm not with an enchanter) and trust me -- that key
is DESPERATELY needed! Otherwise I couldn't heal the tank, couldn't do any
nuking/dotting at ALL -- because, well, I'd be Dead. Dead. Dead.... and Dead. hehe
Andrew
on the live servers because we need it REAL bad! Im a 28 wiz and all I do
is stare at my damn spellbook most of the time, unless my enchanter friend
is on.
keeb...@my-deja.com wrote:
> From EQ Casters' Realm
> http://eq.castersrealm.com/viewarticle.asp?Article=1650
>
> The following spells are on the Test Server:
>
> The spell Harvest adds between 171 and 301 mana every ten minutes, so
> it doesn't seem to be as powerful as either breeze or clarity. The
> only cost is that the wizard is stunned for 10 seconds after casting
> the spell which is no biggie if the wizard is in a safe area. The
> spell can be cast only once every ten minutes.
>
> In my opinion, it's about time that wizzies got some sort of mana
> replenishment spell. Downtime is much too long for this class compared
> to other casting classes. Too bad this is a level 34 spell and not a
> level 14 spell.
>
> Rangers receive a new spell called Jolt at level 55 that lowers the
> aggression of monsters. Verant's justification of the spell is that
> Rangers have such an awsome damage output at high levels that MOBS
> continually aggro on the Ranger. So much for the argument that rangers
> are underpowered at high levels.
>
Dennis Francis Heffernan
| Oh please NO... do NOT take away the taunt from rangers! 8( I group with a ranger
|most all the time lately (when I'm not with an enchanter) and trust me -- that key
|is DESPERATELY needed! Otherwise I couldn't heal the tank, couldn't do any
|nuking/dotting at ALL -- because, well, I'd be Dead. Dead. Dead.... and Dead. hehe
Once you get to the levels where it will start to matter, you'll find that
a Ranger has no trouble taunting even without the button. (Around L40 most
Rangers take Taunt out of their hotkey selection anyway.)
Matt Frisch
into the ether:
>Yeah I saw that about the Harvest spell, they better goddamn give it to us
>on the live servers because we need it REAL bad! Im a 28 wiz and all I do
>is stare at my damn spellbook most of the time, unless my enchanter friend
>is on.
Just like most every other caster. Big deal.
Mr Foo Bar
something productive while they med.
The problem with wizzies imo is not so much one of balance in terms of power
(although it is) but in terms of playability. Mages and Necros are still
useful even oom because of their pets (and because of their pets they are
less likely to be oom in the first place.) Mages, Necros and Enchanters all
have mechanisms to escape from mobs (mages and necros sacrifice their pets,
enchanters- the arch-escape artists, get about a zillion spells that allow
them to escape.) Wizzies don't. They don't even deal more damage than the
other classes, which would make up for it a bit.
My summary of the int-casters (and I've played all of them) is:
+Necros: You can tell Gordon plays one. Is there anything this class can't
do ? It almost feels like Gordon wakes up one morning thinks I'd really like
to play a (most recently cleric, but previously enchanter) and instead of
starting up such a char he gets some of their spells added to the necro's
list (ress, mess, group mana sharing, etc etc etc).
+Enchanters: Powerful but balanced because they require brains to play well.
+Mages: Nice mix of DD, damage shield and pet spells. Summon spells are a
nice bonus.
+Wizzies: Seriously screwed-up. Almost everyone gets to do more damage than
them AND get their class specific goodies. Wizzies get TPs which are great
but basically what that means is I use my Wizzie as a travelling merchant.
Matt Frisch <matu...@yahoo.spam.me.not.com> wrote in message
news:393b3703...@news.earthlink.net...
Mason Barge
>In my opinion, it's about time that wizzies got some sort of mana
>replenishment spell.
Amen! I think that I and about 100 other people have suggested this repeatedly
to Verant.
Actually, I think they should just give wizards clarity. Wizards are so weak
that they need something GOOD, and enchanters are so strong that they are not
going to suffer by sharing it.
>Shamans will receive a charm animal spell similar to the druid pet
>spell line. My question is "why?". Shaman's already have the ability
>to summon pets which are much more loyal than Druidic pets. Why would
>a shammy want to charm an animal that will aggro on him when the spell
>wears off?
Properly used, the charm animal spell is the best pet in the game, and the
aggro problem is not that bad. I would rather have a sonic bat on my team than
a shaman doggie, and I don't think I have ever seen a druid killed by his pet.
"If this is coffee, please bring me some tea. If this is tea, please bring me
some coffee."
- Abraham Lincoln
Joel Weaver
>From EQ Casters' Realm
>http://eq.castersrealm.com/viewarticle.asp?Article=1650
>
>The following spells are on the Test Server:
>
>The spell Harvest adds between 171 and 301 mana every ten minutes, so
>it doesn't seem to be as powerful as either breeze or clarity. The
>only cost is that the wizard is stunned for 10 seconds after casting
>the spell which is no biggie if the wizard is in a safe area. The
>spell can be cast only once every ten minutes.
>
>In my opinion, it's about time that wizzies got some sort of mana
>replenishment spell. Downtime is much too long for this class compared
>to other casting classes. Too bad this is a level 34 spell and not a
>level 14 spell.
I'm betting that most wizards who have been complaining about their
class will not be satisfied with this new spell, even though it is
exactly what they have been asking for.
Joel Weaver
jwe...@bayou.uh.edu
Kormek
being the "supreme" magic users, shouldn't be able to regen mana
at a slightly increased rate. I mean, they spend their entire
lives dedicated to the magic arts and you are telling me they
only med just as fast as a Necro or Cleric?
Hmm... you can also look at it this way, and I may be changing
my point here but... In EQ specifically, Wizards are no more
pure casters than Necros, Clerics, Enchanters, etc... They just
have a different set of spells and specialties. All of the
casting classes, excluding hybrids, have dedicated their whole
lives to magic. So in the RP and EQ sense they should all
regain mana at the same rate.
I was really trying to help but logic fails me again.
* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!
Undisclosed
> Once you get to the levels where it will start to matter, you'll find that
> a Ranger has no trouble taunting even without the button. (Around L40 most
> Rangers take Taunt out of their hotkey selection anyway.)
Yes, but I'm a mere level 38 (almost 39) and my usual grouping partner is a level
49 ranger... trust me, his taunting saves my life frequently. My other usual
groupmate is a level 37 enchanter -- he needs to have one of his taunt-o-matic
spells up so we can switch it off when we pingpong, since I aggro most of the mobs
we fight pretty quickly.
I just LIKE taunt. heh
Alx
should get a mana regen bonus. Then again, are we all
sure that mana does in fact regen at the same rate
across all classes?
I would love to play a Wiz, tried once, but it really
isn't a huge amount of fun.
Alex
--
Remove the Z if replying by email.
"Kormek" <joldham...@houston.rr.com.invalid> wrote in message
news:1e2344aa...@usw-ex0103-019.remarq.com...
Hans-Juergen Braendle
A self only clarity will do - we are not the buffers in EQ, but hell we are
dealing with mana every second of our live, for sure we should be able to
research the mystics of mana creation.
Jodowein
Bagart
Dennis Francis Heffernan <dfra...@email.com> wrote in message
news:q6iljskolikotcru9...@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 04 Jun 2000 17:17:37 GMT, Undisclosed <shadow...@yahoo.com>
wrote:
>
> | Oh please NO... do NOT take away the taunt from rangers! 8( I group
with a ranger
> |most all the time lately (when I'm not with an enchanter) and trust me --
that key
> |is DESPERATELY needed! Otherwise I couldn't heal the tank, couldn't do
any
> |nuking/dotting at ALL -- because, well, I'd be Dead. Dead. Dead.... and
Dead. hehe
>
> a Ranger has no trouble taunting even without the button. (Around L40
most
> Rangers take Taunt out of their hotkey selection anyway.)
>
>
Well IMHO you are a pretty sucky Ranger if you dont have taunt Hotkeyed. Ok,
so we cant take hits like Warriors etc. but when the Mob heads for the
Cleric or Wiz you should be hitting that Taunt key as well as doing
everything else to get it off the caster as it is better off on you than a
caster, and this happens just as much at high lvls as low lvls.
Dennis Francis Heffernan
|Well IMHO you are a pretty sucky Ranger if you dont have taunt Hotkeyed. Ok,
Your opinion is worthless.
Go to the Rangers' Glade or the EQRangers eGroup (formerly Onelist), and
read. Most common line from L40+ Rangers is "I am NOT taunting!" Usually
said to Clerics chain-casting Superior Heals trying to keep the Ranger alive.
Dan Harmon
Mr Foo Bar <f...@bar.com> wrote in message
news:960191330.13944.0...@news.demon.co.uk...
> The big deal is that every other int caster gets a pet. So they get to do
> something productive while they med.
>
> The problem with wizzies imo is not so much one of balance in terms of
power
> (although it is) but in terms of playability. Mages and Necros are still
> useful even oom because of their pets (and because of their pets they are
> less likely to be oom in the first place.) Mages, Necros and Enchanters
all
> have mechanisms to escape from mobs (mages and necros sacrifice their
pets,
> enchanters- the arch-escape artists, get about a zillion spells that allow
> them to escape.) Wizzies don't. They don't even deal more damage than the
> other classes, which would make up for it a bit.
I thought wizzies got some escape spell at level 4. Maybe level 8. Escape,
then Gate...sounds reasonable...what's the flaw?
BTW, wizards aren't a solo class and now that enchanters get breeze at level
16, mana isn't really something this guy needs to be bitching about.
Bo...@usenet.net
>|Well IMHO you are a pretty sucky Ranger if you dont have taunt Hotkeyed. Ok,
>
> Your opinion is worthless.
>
> Go to the Rangers' Glade or the EQRangers eGroup (formerly Onelist), and
>read. Most common line from L40+ Rangers is "I am NOT taunting!" Usually
>said to Clerics chain-casting Superior Heals trying to keep the Ranger alive.
>
worth anything? Oh wait - you read it on a message board so it MUST be
true. Give up the crusade bud, you dont have what it takes to be one
of the proud, the few (well not so few), the Rangers...
- Boone
mida...@my-deja.com
Dennis Francis Heffernan <dfra...@email.com> wrote:
> We have Rogue armor, Rogue HP, Rogue skills, Rogue fighting style and
> Rogue balance problems
> -- we're Rogue hybrids.
Except for the part about "Rogue fighting style", this sort of makes
sense.
You (rangers) are high damage output, lightly armored melee
characters...like rogues and monks. But unlike those two, you get no
real escape skill. I guess that's the motivation for giving you guys
an "evade" spell. But 40+ (where the serious trouble starts) to 55 is
an awfully loooooooooong haul.
It's stupid, anyway. It detracts from the flavor of the ranger as a
class. IMHO, the real solution is to seriously upgrade ranger archery
at higher levels to make it a "viable" source for damage, inferior to
melee, but enough to make a serious contribution to a group. It would
give the ranger a "unique" skill, and be in keeping with the image of
the class. It would make a lot of rangers ecstatic, and could be
balanced to avoid making rangers an uber-class. And as a side benefit,
it would attenuate the "crowding" problem sometimes seen around high
level MoBs.
But standoff "melee" damage is outside "The Vision", I guess.
Mark Bradshaw
<dfra...@email.com> wrote:
>On Mon, 5 Jun 2000 17:04:26 +0100, "Bagart" <chr...@Lineone.net> wrote:
>
>|Well IMHO you are a pretty sucky Ranger if you dont have taunt Hotkeyed. Ok,
>
> Your opinion is worthless.
>
> Go to the Rangers' Glade or the EQRangers eGroup (formerly Onelist), and
>read.
Just wondering, Dennis, have you ever been able to form an opinion for
yourself?
cohal...@my-deja.com
Maybe they get better at level 12 or higher, (the highest I've played a
wizard is 10) but those escape spells suck dirt at 4 and 8. There isn't
a whole lot of escape happening after teleporting 2 steps from where you
started.
Silverlock
<dfra...@email.com> wrote:
>On Mon, 5 Jun 2000 17:04:26 +0100, "Bagart" <chr...@Lineone.net> wrote:
>
>|Well IMHO you are a pretty sucky Ranger if you dont have taunt Hotkeyed. Ok,
>
> Your opinion is worthless.
>
> Go to the Rangers' Glade or the EQRangers eGroup (formerly Onelist), and
>read. Most common line from L40+ Rangers is "I am NOT taunting!" Usually
>said to Clerics chain-casting Superior Heals trying to keep the Ranger alive.
>
>
>Dennis F. Heffernan EQ: Venture Fletcher(E'ci) dfra...@email.com
>Montclair State U #include <disclaim.h> ICQ:9154048 CompSci/Philosophy
>"And I say now these kittens, they do not get trained/As we did in the days
>when Victoria reigned!" -- T.S. Eliot, "Gus, the Theatre Cat
What level is your Ranger now? You ever play other classes?
--
Silverlock, ICQ 474725, MSN Passport: Sylve...@hotmail.com
AIM Screen Name:Sylverlok
Household Pests? The SW-404 'SpitFire' APRL cleansing system
will remove them, we Guarantee IT! Not responsible for damage
to persons or structures from use of this product.
Dial 1-800-FRY-THEM for info and a home demonstration.
Sang K. Choe
wrote:
>I thought wizzies got some escape spell at level 4. Maybe level 8. Escape,
>then Gate...sounds reasonable...what's the flaw?
Fade/Shadow Step takes you a whopping 5 to 20 feet from the mob--guess
how long it takes for that mob to close that distance (which they do
unerringly). WAY the hell less than the 5 seconds it takes to cast
gate.
In dungeons, you can step to a random place in the middle of a fully
spawned room in a loc you have no earthly idea of for the same
attempt.
Fade/Shadow Step/Yonder are all largely useless spells as far as my
wizard was concerned. Better to try and channel gate.
>BTW, wizards aren't a solo class
Sure they are.
JBoots + Bonds of Force makes a wizard a better soloer than 90% of
druids in the game.
-- Sang.
mida...@my-deja.com
cohal...@my-deja.com wrote:
> Maybe they get better at level 12 or higher, (the highest I've
> played a wizard is 10) but those escape spells suck dirt at 4 and 8.
> There isn't a whole lot of escape happening after teleporting 2 steps
> from where you started.
Ummm.....shadowstep, then root, then gate? Always worked for me.
And shadowstep is not as bad as all that. In some of the more open
zones, it sometimes teleports you amazing distances.
Adam Russell
> wizard is 10) but those escape spells suck dirt at 4 and 8. There isn't
> a whole lot of escape happening after teleporting 2 steps from where you
> started.
Beg to differ. Shadow step at level 8 is a life saver. It doesn't always
work so well, but can be recast pretty quickly. The trick though is to cast
it from a hill not a valley. When it works right it can easily take you far
enough to cast a gate.
keeb...@my-deja.com
mason...@aol.comnospam (Mason Barge) wrote:
> >Shamans will receive a charm animal spell similar to the druid pet
> >spell line. My question is "why?". Shaman's already have the
ability
> >to summon pets which are much more loyal than Druidic pets. Why
would
> >a shammy want to charm an animal that will aggro on him when the
spell
> >wears off?
>
> Properly used, the charm animal spell is the best pet in the game,
I can't agree with this statement. Druids can only charm animals and,
although some animals are very powerful (griffons for example), there
are many zones that have no animals worth charming. Necros or mages
can conjour up a relatively powerful pet anywhere as long as they have
the necessary regeants.
>and the
> aggro problem is not that bad. I would rather have a sonic bat on my
team than
> a shaman doggie, and I don't think I have ever seen a druid killed by
his pet.
Nor have I but I don't know any druids who use the charm animal spell.
I've experimented with the level 14 charm spell and was able to charm a
level one bat for all of thirty seconds and a caiman for two minutes.
If you know any secrets to sucessfully charming animals I'd love to
here them.
David
don't work for toffee (ie. tp you 2 feet in a random direction)
and mobs can and do teleport to your location in many zones
quite rapidly.
As noted above, it's also worse than useless in dungeon zones
because you just really can't zap yourself anywhere remotely
safe.
My approach as a non-jboots wearing wizard was generally to
just try and channel a gate. Later in life I could actually
channel through 3-4 mobs beating on me, which was kind of nice.
If nothing else, it made the corpse retrievals easier, which is
a big part of being a wizard without jboots.
My exception to this would be if the mobs were stunning, in
which case you really have no other choice but to attempt
a shadowstep. Better cross your fingers.
As for the 'breeze' spell wizards now get at 34, it's a good
step in the right direction but IMO rogues/monks/even fighters
if they have good kunark gear will still outdamage wizards with
zero down time and a much higher survival factor(ie. decent ac
and defensive skills). I'm still not starting mine back up.
Sang K. Choe
>Ummm.....shadowstep, then root, then gate? Always worked for me.
"Always"?
I don't think so. The odds of this working is about the same as,
channeling root, stepping back and gating. Which is basically what my
wizard always did. Of course, with multiple mobs I just tried to
channel gate instead.
>And shadowstep is not as bad as all that. In some of the more open
>zones, it sometimes teleports you amazing distances.
I tried it with my druid in S Karana and pretty much sucked across the
board. I used the item that the shadowmen drop with shadowstep as a
charged effect.
-- Sang.
Pat Cole
>although some animals are very powerful (griffons for example), there
>are many zones that have no animals worth charming. Necros or mages
>can conjour up a relatively powerful pet anywhere as long as they have
>the necessary regeants.
Yes, however...
>Nor have I but I don't know any druids who use the charm animal spell.
>
>I've experimented with the level 14 charm spell and was able to charm a
>level one bat for all of thirty seconds and a caiman for two minutes.
>If you know any secrets to sucessfully charming animals I'd love to
>here them.
Well, here you go. You have a very powerful spell called Ensnare (or just snare
if you're lower level). This makes a monster crawl around for approx. 11 min or
so. When using charm animal, I pick my two targets, ensnare both, run a good
ways back, charm one, sic him on the other. Watch to see who's winning. You
don't care in the least if charm breaks because you have them both snared and
you are sitting and medding while 2 monsters kill each other for you. Keep an
eye on whoever's winning, make sure that's the one you have charmed when the
fight is over. Bam, XP. And you still have a pet. Depending on mana, you can
then wait for charm to break and kill your still-slowed, now beat-to-shit
monster (speeding it up by invising if necessary) or go ensnare yourself
another critter and play rock em sock em again. My record so far with charming
is using a white sabretooth tiger (white at 38) to kill FIVE various low/high
blues in the Overthere, finishing with killing the tiger and being oom. That's
SIX creatures on one mana bar. While at the high end of the bell curve, except
for "Days of Cursed Druid Charm" a few weeks ago when charm wouldn't stick AT
ALL I can usually get at least 2-3 monsters out of a mana bar, which is much
more efficient than snare blast blast blast blast blast blast blast for one
kill per mana bar.
If done right, and you know the zone you are in, and keep yourself SoWed and
the monsters snared (in other words, if you are playing a druid correctly) this
tactic carries with it almost zero risk and can reap significant XP rewards.
Pat
Knot: 39 Druid Lanys T'vyl
Who likes to charm, but only after snaring
Mr Foo Bar
Dan Harmon <deha...@bigfoot.com> wrote in message
news:6tS_4.7018$Fe.2...@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
>
> Mr Foo Bar <f...@bar.com> wrote in message
> news:960191330.13944.0...@news.demon.co.uk...
> > The big deal is that every other int caster gets a pet. So they get to
do
> > something productive while they med.
> >
> > The problem with wizzies imo is not so much one of balance in terms of
> power
> > (although it is) but in terms of playability. Mages and Necros are still
> > useful even oom because of their pets (and because of their pets they
are
> > less likely to be oom in the first place.) Mages, Necros and Enchanters
> all
> > have mechanisms to escape from mobs (mages and necros sacrifice their
> pets,
> > enchanters- the arch-escape artists, get about a zillion spells that
allow
> > them to escape.) Wizzies don't. They don't even deal more damage than
the
> > other classes, which would make up for it a bit.
>
Escape,
> then Gate...sounds reasonable...what's the flaw?
Worthless in a dungeon.
>
> BTW, wizards aren't a solo class
Didn't say anything about soloing. Enchanters can't solo but they're still
great.
> and now that enchanters get breeze at level
> 16, mana isn't really something this guy needs to be bitching about.
*Shrug* so that makes Enchanters even better at low levels, reduces the
begging for clarity I have to suffer but it makes Wizzies more desirable how
exactly ? "Hmm we can have an enchanter with breeze and some nice buffs and
an ok dd and mezz or, we can have a Wizard." No brainer.
Mr Foo Bar
Cast it in Lower Guk and you're probably dead.
Only long term use for shadow step and its siblings is in duels.
Adam Russell <ad...@speakeasy.org> wrote in message
news:OoV_4.155885$MB.28...@news6.giganews.com...
Mr Foo Bar
<keeb...@my-deja.com> wrote in message news:8hhbf1$qfn$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
> In article <20000605072328...@ng-md1.aol.com>,
> mason...@aol.comnospam (Mason Barge) wrote:
>
> > >Shamans will receive a charm animal spell similar to the druid pet
> > >spell line. My question is "why?". Shaman's already have the
> ability
> > >to summon pets which are much more loyal than Druidic pets. Why
> would
> > >a shammy want to charm an animal that will aggro on him when the
> spell
> > >wears off?
> >
> > Properly used, the charm animal spell is the best pet in the game,
>
> I can't agree with this statement. Druids can only charm animals and,
> although some animals are very powerful (griffons for example), there
> are many zones that have no animals worth charming. Necros or mages
> can conjour up a relatively powerful pet anywhere as long as they have
> the necessary regeants.
>
> >and the
> > aggro problem is not that bad. I would rather have a sonic bat on my
> team than
> > a shaman doggie, and I don't think I have ever seen a druid killed by
> his pet.
>
> Nor have I but I don't know any druids who use the charm animal spell.
>
> I've experimented with the level 14 charm spell and was able to charm a
> level one bat for all of thirty seconds and a caiman for two minutes.
> If you know any secrets to sucessfully charming animals I'd love to
> here them.
>
>
hughes
and
> the monsters snared (in other words, if you are playing a druid correctly)
this
> tactic carries with it almost zero risk and can reap significant XP
rewards.
Yep same method enchanters use for soloing spectres from 34-47 . BUT druids
are not nearly as good at it . And good animal targets bunched together are
really hard to find . Root dot with our previously sucky roots (before the
upgrade that nerfed the stick hard if they stick portion of our roots), and
snare blast with ae spells are boith just as good or better. And up untill
40th or so snare blast is still better since you only have to look for one
target not 2 or more. My druid does use charm animal . But i use it as crowd
control on multiple pulls , not as a soloing tactic . My enchanter uses
charms as a soloing tactic but it was always risky.
Adam Russell
constantly. Saved my life many many times. Please don't say it's
worthless. For the young solo wizard it is so needed.
Mr Foo Bar <f...@bar.com> wrote in message
news:960276009.12436.0...@news.demon.co.uk...
Dan Harmon
> *Shrug* so that makes Enchanters even better at low levels, reduces the
> begging for clarity I have to suffer but it makes Wizzies more desirable
how
> exactly ? "Hmm we can have an enchanter with breeze and some nice buffs
and
> an ok dd and mezz or, we can have a Wizard." No brainer.
Enchanters aren't nukers. No enchanter that I've ever grouped with did any
serious nuking, and my level 21 only has DD up if 1) I'm soloing, or 2) I'm
in a great group and don't need a lot of the basic enchanter spells. There
are more than 8 non-offensive spells that my enchanter would love to keep up
(around 10, I think)...he RARELY has room for either (that's right, only 2,
one of which SUCKS!) of his offensive spells. My enchanter's DD does
around 95 damage with a VERY long recast time (it's got to be over 10
seconds).
Enchanters aren't nukers. We'll leave that to wizards (common groupers) or
magicians (rare groupers).
Wizards can whine all they want, but they're still masters of group DD.
Mr Foo Bar
> No, not in a dungeon. Yes it does work in the out of doors. I used it
> constantly. Saved my life many many times. Please don't say it's
> worthless.
In the context of this thread which was not about newbie wizards,
Fade/SS/Yonder are worthless.
> For the young solo wizard it is so needed.
Yes it is.
>
> Mr Foo Bar <f...@bar.com> wrote in message
Tim
have jboots, and start off with bonds of force. If it gets
resisted I just hit Yonder and repeat until I get bonds of force
to stick, at times Yonder will throw you quite a ways, at others
only 20 feet.
Odan - 45 Wizard E Marr
Adam Russell
> Adam Russell <ad...@speakeasy.org> wrote in message
> news:AO6%4.157951$MB.29...@news6.giganews.com...
> > No, not in a dungeon. Yes it does work in the out of doors. I used it
> > constantly. Saved my life many many times. Please don't say it's
> > worthless.
>
> In the context of this thread which was not about newbie wizards,
> Fade/SS/Yonder are worthless.
Maybe earlier posts were about something else but the message I was replying
to was talking about low level wizards.
mida...@my-deja.com
Sang K. Choe <sa...@choenet.com.remove.this.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 05 Jun 2000 22:08:25 GMT, mida...@my-deja.com wrote:
>
> >Ummm.....shadowstep, then root, then gate? Always worked for me.
>
> "Always"?
>
> I don't think so. The odds of this working is about the same as,
> channeling root, stepping back and gating. Which is basically what my
> wizard always did. Of course, with multiple mobs I just tried to
> channel gate instead.
Ummm...no.
The trick is to repeat if you are still too close.
Shadowstep costs only 10 mana, is about the fastest casting spell
around, and in open zones it will transport you a fair distance every
third cast or so. Its occasionally a large enough distance that it can
be seriously inconveniant when grouped.
I have had enormous success with it as an escape spell in the Karanas
and Commonlands at lower levels. It is a seriously underutilized
spell, especially by necromancers, who often don't even purchase it.
Most people older than 12 or so are a bit lazy intellectually. If its
not straightforward, they don't want to bother with it. In EQ thats a
bit of a shame.
mida...@my-deja.com
"Mr Foo Bar" <f...@bar.com> wrote:
>
> Dan Harmon <deha...@bigfoot.com> wrote in message
> news:6tS_4.7018$Fe.2...@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
[snip]
>> BTW, wizards aren't a solo class
>
> Didn't say anything about soloing. Enchanters can't solo but they're
> still great.
[snip]
> "Hmm we can have an enchanter with breeze and some nice buffs and
> an ok dd and mezz or, we can have a Wizard." No brainer.
Geeeeeeeeeeeeeezus....
If you know enchanters who can not solo AND use their DD a lot, you
know the WRONG enchanters.
Sang K. Choe
>In article <qugojssrpcmte10d5...@4ax.com>,
> Sang K. Choe <sa...@choenet.com.remove.this.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, 05 Jun 2000 22:08:25 GMT, mida...@my-deja.com wrote:
>>
>> >Ummm.....shadowstep, then root, then gate? Always worked for me.
>>
>> "Always"?
>>
>> I don't think so. The odds of this working is about the same as,
>> channeling root, stepping back and gating. Which is basically what my
>> wizard always did. Of course, with multiple mobs I just tried to
>> channel gate instead.
>
>Ummm...no.
Ummm, yes.
>The trick is to repeat if you are still too close.
>
>Shadowstep costs only 10 mana, is about the fastest casting spell
>around, and in open zones it will transport you a fair distance every
>third cast or so.
It takes you a random distance in a random direction--it can just as
easily take you 5 feet one direction and on the next cast 5 feet the
oppisite direction (giving you a net of 0).
But the real problem is that you do not know how far you just stepped
until you get your bearing. By that time, the mob is already on you
because those critters *never* get confused which way you just stepped
to.
I found I ended up wasting more mana repeatedly shadowstepping than I
did just casting gate--at least I know once gate works, I'm outta
there. The other major problem with shadow step is that even
outdoors, and even with it's ridiculous short range, it's a great way
to lose your corpse.
-- Sang.
Adam Russell
> did just casting gate--at least I know once gate works, I'm outta
> there. The other major problem with shadow step is that even
> outdoors, and even with it's ridiculous short range, it's a great way
> to lose your corpse.
Funny how some things work for some folks and don't work for others. I
depended on shadowstep a lot and it worked fine for me. Now that I have
started an enchanter it is one of the spells I miss.
Sang K. Choe
Good grief, enchanters have a 1.0 second casting AE stun that stuns
mobs for 4 seconds. Why the hell would you need shadowstep?
Stun, root, gate. That works SO much better at getting out of sticky
situations than shadowstep ever did.
-- Sang.
Mr Foo Bar
Sang K. Choe <sa...@choenet.com.remove.this.com> wrote in message
news:b1sqjscq7h6pe719h...@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 6 Jun 2000 11:13:11 -0700, "Adam Russell"
> <ad...@speakeasy.org> wrote:
>
> >> I found I ended up wasting more mana repeatedly shadowstepping than I
> >> did just casting gate--at least I know once gate works, I'm outta
> >> there. The other major problem with shadow step is that even
> >> outdoors, and even with it's ridiculous short range, it's a great way
> >> to lose your corpse.
> >
> >Funny how some things work for some folks and don't work for others. I
> >depended on shadowstep a lot and it worked fine for me. Now that I have
> >started an enchanter it is one of the spells I miss.
>
> Good grief, enchanters have a 1.0 second casting AE stun that stuns
> mobs for 4 seconds. Why the hell would you need shadowstep?
Err we were talking about Wizards not enchanters.
>
> Stun, root, gate. That works SO much better at getting out of sticky
> situations than shadowstep ever did.
*Shrug* stun, stun, entrance, run or gate or something works even better.
(Two stuns, one to give time for the second longer lasting one).
>
> -- Sang.
Bryan Youmans
> The big deal is that every other int caster gets a pet. So they get to do
> something productive while they med.
Huh? like what? "Hey Jobab, how about teaching me some more Enchanter Animation
Language basics while I med up here...."
Mr Foo Bar
Bryan Youmans <byou...@mitre.org> wrote in message
news:393E564F...@mitre.org...
Like bashing the mob duh!
Bryan Youmans
So you are talking about during battle. Ok, have you ever played an
enchanter? True, the animation components only cost 1 sp each, but if you
continually rely on your animations to tank away while you med up in battle,
hope you have a full backpack of tiny daggers...
Taylor
charisma.
Although I can charm an animal to fight another one, my song lasts between 0
and 10 seconds. It takes a lot of effort to constantly juggle my charm,
snare, and sow songs. I usually finish the fight with half health from both
critters attacking me when charm breaks. So I get one kill, then run to
zone from my old pet.
Must be nice to cast a few spells then med for the entire fight. Druids
have it too easy in this case.
Pat Cole <jspec...@aol.comxxx> wrote in message
news:20000605222440...@ng-cg1.aol.com...
> >I can't agree with this statement. Druids can only charm animals and,
> >although some animals are very powerful (griffons for example), there
> >are many zones that have no animals worth charming. Necros or mages
> >can conjour up a relatively powerful pet anywhere as long as they have
> >the necessary regeants.
>
> Yes, however...
>
> >Nor have I but I don't know any druids who use the charm animal spell.
> >
> >I've experimented with the level 14 charm spell and was able to charm a
> >level one bat for all of thirty seconds and a caiman for two minutes.
> >If you know any secrets to sucessfully charming animals I'd love to
> >here them.
>
> If done right, and you know the zone you are in, and keep yourself SoWed
and
> the monsters snared (in other words, if you are playing a druid correctly)
this
> tactic carries with it almost zero risk and can reap significant XP
rewards.
>
Sang K. Choe
>> >Funny how some things work for some folks and don't work for others. I
>> >depended on shadowstep a lot and it worked fine for me. Now that I have
>> >started an enchanter it is one of the spells I miss.
>>
>> Good grief, enchanters have a 1.0 second casting AE stun that stuns
>> mobs for 4 seconds. Why the hell would you need shadowstep?
>
>Err we were talking about Wizards not enchanters.
Read the last sentence I responded to--"...I have started an enchanter
is it one of the spells I miss". My point: Given the AE stuns, an
enchanter has no reason to ever miss shadowstep unless you want to
lose your corpse somewhere.
>> Stun, root, gate. That works SO much better at getting out of sticky
>> situations than shadowstep ever did.
>
>*Shrug* stun, stun, entrance, run or gate or something works even better.
>(Two stuns, one to give time for the second longer lasting one).
Stuns recycle at 12 seconds.
Root takes about 2 seconds to cast. The lowest level stun lasts 4
seconds. So to escape, stun, root, gate. If any of them is resisted,
then toss in another stun.
-- Sang.
t...@halcyon.com
>Fade/Shadow Step takes you a whopping 5 to 20 feet from the mob--guess
>how long it takes for that mob to close that distance (which they do
>unerringly). WAY the hell less than the 5 seconds it takes to cast
>gate.
In West Commons, jumped by a Kodiak and a couple YK's at around level 14,
Shadow Step took me far enough that when my Gate finished, the bears were
only about half of the way to me.
I certainly got lucky that time, but in the areas I would fight most of
the time from levels 8 to around 14 (West Commons, East Commons, Nektulos),
two or three Shadow Steps would almost always get me far enough away to
Gate.
--Tim Smith
mida...@my-deja.com
Sang K. Choe <sa...@choenet.com.remove.this.com> wrote:
> My point: Given the AE stuns, an
> enchanter has no reason to ever miss shadowstep unless you want to
> lose your corpse somewhere.
You think AE stun is reliable and shadowstep is not? Seriously,
outdoors?
Sang K. Choe
>In article <524tjssjn29icglim...@4ax.com>,
> Sang K. Choe <sa...@choenet.com.remove.this.com> wrote:
>
>> My point: Given the AE stuns, an
>> enchanter has no reason to ever miss shadowstep unless you want to
>> lose your corpse somewhere.
>
>You think AE stun is reliable and shadowstep is not? Seriously,
>outdoors?
Yep. My enchanter has had great success at getting out sticky
situations with AE stun. My wizard died many times shadowstepping
from a bandit to be almost immediately smacked from behind (or
backstabbed) by the same bandit I tried to get away from.
-- Sang.