yep If you can have a bad apple in a bunch, why can you not have a good apple in a bad bunch. You can also have a throw back from genes, which could make them good.
Classes will never be balanced, given the systems they use in their games right now. "Class Balance" has been a topic of discussion since.... forever. Druids were adapted to be secondary "clerics" with PoP. When they shifted to the 72-man raid interface and increasing the difficulty of encounters, the reliance/limitation of one true healer became overly apparent. Druids were then granted a lesser CH and shifted their balance closer to 50/50 DPS/Healer. Not long after, shaman recieved similar treatment with group heals and increased direct heal power. I was there. I held a big part in the discussion during testing. They could balance out all of the classes. Next expansion, the balance would be broken. They didn't set definitions properly when the classes were formed. To do it properly, you'd basically have a new game on your hands... it will simply be an ongoing "whack-a-mole," given what we've got.
I didn't ask what the Druid's role was during PoP. I ask what it is right now, in comparison to Clerics and Shamans. Since classes are so out of balance, and they are having such apparent issues with balancing the current 16 classes..obviously that means they should throw more in?
Source? Unkempt Druids/Rangers: http://www.elitegamerslounge.com/home/lore/book_tud.html Ranger class info: http://www.elitegamerslounge.com/home/lore/rangers.htm I just don't see anyhting that says: "Nature means good, not evil." Though EQ lore is extensive, and this is just a tiny sample quickly from my bookmarks.
No.. no you did not. In fact, you didn't specify anything: Right now, Druids and Shaman are both still hybrid reminants of their former self, with an increased focus on their healing prowess. Shamans retain their buffing and debuffing potency, druids retain their DPS aspect. As for classes... Why not? You can't stop the ocean... roll with the tide.
The only lore/Diety Combos that made sense are the iksar zerker ( tying in recent events a nice touch) but since it's not a popular class, and was the last class added, at a time when raids and groups already were in balance, I can see it losing to the next most logical combo of woodelf beast lord, since beast and beast spells so tied to nature. Although Shaman not a wood elf class, and beastlord being a subclass of such. But at least the stats ( high wis) go well with the class too. Glad to see Dwarf Shadowknight failed big time, I mean Dwarfs are good aligned, even if gruff race! Plus being a strong Wis race but not so much INT, why be a Dwarf Sk, when Pally fits better? No point in making race combos that don't fit well, so only unknowing newbies, or players who grind so hard so fast, that stats don't mean much, although from what ive seen now on new expansion stats of toons just MIGHT mean more, now again, harder to hit cap with new cap aa's but gear not boosting stats more then before last I checked. Which I think is a good thing!
I am sorry for assuming that when I asked for what the class role of a Druid was, I was refering to todays game..not what happened in PoP. I felt it obvious that the role of the druid would have a direct comparison to the only other classes within its archetype. My bad. But lets look at your example. Druids have their DPS aspect. Shaman have their buffing and debuffing aspect. I will throw in clerics. They have their buffing and greater healing aspect. Only one of these classes can not perform their "secondary" role while performing their first unless the content is trivial. This would be like telling a shaman they can pick to either buff/debuff OR heal, but rarely can they do both at the same time. Having to pick between a limited healing set and a limited dps set, and lacking ways to use them fluidly together, is not a clear class role. If I wanted to only heal, I would have rolled a cleric. If I wanted to only nuke, I would have rolled a wizard. I want to be able to mix fluidly the dps and healing aspects. I am not asking to heal like a cleric and nuke like a wizard at the same time. Currently, I often feel like I am being asked which knife I want to bring to a gun fight. Anyways, I did not mean to take this particular thread this route. I sometimes get caught up in the moment. Sorry.
Not sure why...but folks fail to mention that shamans can put out some decent DPS if they know the class. So to claim a shaman is buff/debuff and heal only is silly. However, as I understand it...druids are still better at DPS than a shaman...again...if they know the class.
It would be nice if the vote manipulations could be filtered out on a quicker schedule, rather than letting the entire vote appear to be going one way, and then flipping 180 after the vote is closed.
A treant is not exactly a tree either. There's no good reason to assume so narrow or literal a definition for the word "beast". Our words wouldn't necessarily have the same definitions in the much different world of Norrath. In our world, it makes sense for a word like "beast" to draw a distinction between plants and animals. We do not have plants that behave like animals to any significant degree. But what would a treant be, if not a beast? Certainly not a plant in the common sense of the word. Words like creature or monster are often used synonymously with beast, and would maybe be more acceptible, but I'm sure you wouldn't consider a tree to be one of those either. But a treant isn't a tree. "Beast" as a term to describe a being that exhibits animalistic behavior makes more sense, as does "beastlord" being one who forms a quasi-spiritual bond with their pet, regardless of its biological classification. "Beast" doesn't need to mean "animal" any more than "lord" needs to indicate nobility or peerage. It's just one possible definition.
In this case... they actually do: "Beastlords are the masters of raw nature, who focus this energy into themselves and their warder pets. Beastlords are primarily a melee class, with the ability to wear leather armour and wield blunt weapons, or use their bare hands to attack. Beastlords prepare for battle by calling on their animal warder and increasing the creature's natural abilities with spells. Beastlords share every battle with their warders, fighting along side these fierce companions or falling back to heal and aid. Beastlords also gain spells to slow or damage their opponents. Beastlords can heal and add to an ally's health and mana regeneration as well, making them a well-rounded ally in battle. Beastlords can adventure solo well in many places. They depend upon coordination with their warders and well planned spells to finish every fight, but they can also aid a group through their spells and melee abilities. The beastlord is a great class for players who like the option of solo melee fights, but want to be able to help in a group." (They're evil races also btw.. for the DE ranger nay-sayers)
Agreed. All of the combos you mentioned are better than any of the combos provided to us. Aside from Iksar berserker, which was the only tolerable combo.
You forgot Gukta beastlords! (no reason why not, now both parent classes can be frogs) Or Drakkin Beastlords with a dragon pet - Monks can already be drakkin.
