I have started an SK and Wizard duo and wanted to add healer. I have an100 Druid and 95 cleric collecting dust. Just curious, would it be worth checking out a shaman (one class I have not played much)? I PL'd one to 81, but not sure if it's worth the effort to continue. What does everyone think?
this dude on evilgamer has a sk wiz enc sham 4 box combo he seems to do ok, he says he has cleric as well and prefers sham+merc , there's also a warrior wiz sham boxer on forums he seems to do ok too.
I think druid would be great for the sk/wiz synergy. SKs do a lot of direct damage (lifetaps), and wiz, which DRU add a lot to (black wolf, frost aura).
Druid all the way for that group. Druids have good caster adps and support that will help both the SK's tap-healing, and the wizard's dps. And the druid can easily kick in more personal dps than a wiz merc would be able to.
I am on a TLP server and currently use a shm wiz sk trio. the shaman is clutch in the earlier years of EQ. From what I have read on here though, the druid really seems to become stronger and stronger as slow becomes less effective, and the addition of the druid debuffs and buffs to boost the casting damage. If I may add a question, when/if would a druid pull ahead of a shaman as the third for a sk/wiz duo?
Tbh, if the wiz is in the group, you'd be better off with a shaman. Wizard makes druid nukes gimpy and druid ports redundant. Shammy brings haste and slow. Heals are about on par between druid and shammy and the shaman buffs / lion are good for Sk, Sk pet and shaman pet. If not for the wiz though, I would definitely say go druid.
You give ruin all the fun. I was trying to find a reason to play a healer. However, I guess they are completely redundant in groups.
A druid is really good in that group. I run dru+sk as my box, with a clr and wiz merc. On trash, just let the merc heal and push dps on the druid. On named and harder mobs, the druid can main heal with backup from the merc. In most situations, DPS wins or gets more exp/hour, and a druid definitely helps that more than the other two priests for your group.
I have a druid that I box with a mage. Just wanted to play a real healer. Seems they are not really needed in most group content. However, the druid seems a bit redundant with wizard and sk.
druids are awsome. they bring tons of stuff to any group they join. druids are "Real" healers in the right hands
This thread was about Shaman VS cleric. Not interested in playing a druid. There is nothing you can say to make me want to play one.
That intention was completely in your head. The initial question didn't even hint at your objection to the most powerful option
Since you've clarified that, forget about the Shaman as that's a way distance 4th place behind even the healer merc in your SK/Wizard combo. Go Cleric
Shaman offers you a bit of CC that you probably won't use very often. It gives a bit of melee dps boost, but that's not a big deal when your only melee is the SK. Shaman gives you slow, which is nice, but cleric healing power is probably better at this point. You also have the cleric already. Use it. If you don't like it, then start levelling up a shaman.
For me clerics not having invis was a huge issue but the healing power of the cleric is far superior to the other classes. The cleric group heal is instant refresh (global cool down applies), the druid's has a delay, the shaman's group heal is a HoT. Paci works in all zone types, shining bulwark and the auras add ~40K hps(?), you can battle rez, and I can use 3 wizard mercs for most content. I had zero mana issues while spamming group heals.
Well perhaps you can, my experience playing since 2000 has given me a strong preference against ever grouping with Shaman if there's any possible way I can avoid it. They've always just been that terrible and they always have a huge ego to boot
