Why do people do this? Someone asks for help and you recommend they just make a choice in a vacuum. Newplayer_01 "Hey, I want a class that can solo well all the way to max level...any thoughts?" Veteranplayer_99 "Don't be a follower your whole life - grow a pair and stop letting people tell you what to do! Just play whatever sounds fun to you." Newplayer_01 "Oh, ok...Warrior it is!!!"
The reason people do this is because of personal experience. They've seen too many people come into the game and start a "flavor of the week" character or a character that's "needed" and then really suck at playing that character.
I've played both classes. My first character in '99 was a pally. I find SKs to be much better. The biggest thing is FD!! Getting aggro on my pally and not being able to feign it off sucks. Having to run like a little girl to the zone line gets old. But stuns are awesome. Pally are just more defensive and just not as fun to play. SKs were crazy awesome before the swarming nerfs, which was why you saw a million SKs running around. . Was fun to be able to plevel my alts.
I think both are amazing in their own ways. Pallies are single target agro kings, SK's are ae agro kings. If you have a chanter or bard in your group that can mez you can do the ae agro with a pally then keep the best agro on singles. With a SK you can do ae agro click their epic and go to town, once every 5 mins. As for fun, the pallies are now a very active class that when played right your going to be clicking all the time. They can have their defensive and offensive spell lineups at the same time, something a SK cannot do as easily. SK has more passive healing while Pally has more active healing and more defensive abilities. As for the FD that is great for pulling and wiping agro, but with pally baleful they can do the same. They also have paci so they can pull almost as good as SK, there are certain situations where sk is better at pulling. The stuns of a pally are amazing and fun to play with, the lifetaps and ae lifetap are fun with SK. Both are equally fun I picked a SK because I like the evil side and lifetaps, doing damage to heal myself. My wife choose the pally because she liked the good side and the active healing.
There are thousands of threads that answer that exact question, and 2 minutes reading any brief guide like http://everquest.allakhazam.com/wiki/EQ:Classes will let you know which ones those are. It's not like the info isn't every where, if you look. Even the in-game descriptions give a good idea, it's just they hint at it, instead of outright saying. And like code-zero said, you have these conversations, give the answers. They take it to heart and pick what they think is the most wanted / valued and hate it and/or suck at it and it is just no fun. Only way they're gonna make a choice in a vacuum is if they decide to do it that way. The basic info is every where. And just like the classes, the basic roles haven't really changed, it's only the tools they get at higher levels have changed and make the minutia of the game play slightly different. Or every once in a while gives them a tactic / strategy for power leveling better than they did previously. Not that you play in a group any different. Yther Ore.
Because the power levels of each class consistently change, every expansion at the minimum. There really is no "best" class. That's the beauty of EQ - class diversity - each has a niche and each can function pretty well on it's own. When all of the raid guilds choose to completely bench a specific class, then the choice will matter. I tried playing a pally. I hated it. If I had stuck with it because someone told me they were better on raids than an SK, I probably would have quit. I stayed with the SK because it suited my playstyle and I'm still playing and my guild still needs SKs on any given night.
I have spent a lot of time playing both classes. I prefer the SK only because I do a lot of dumb things, and Feign death, Soul leach and Harm Touch really help out.
No they do it because it makes them feel nice. You can't know what you want to play until you play it. Simple as that. Especially in this game where classes change how they play at higher levels. For example a buddy of mine played a Pally on FV till about level 80ish. He then dropped it and tried a SK and got it to almost 90. Then picked up a Pally again when we switched servers and this time got it above 90. Found out he liked it heads and tails more than the SK. So there is merit in telling people what to play based on need. At least they have a higher chance of getting higher level if there is a need due to grouping. If they suck at it, so what? Sucking at something is fixed by getting better. Which is done by playing it. And if someone gets to 95 and decides they don't like what they are playing, whats the harm in that? They played a class to 95. Which means they have 95 levels of experience. Meaning when they group with that class they know what to expect from it. If they are a group leader they know just a little more about how different classes work with each other. Playing a needed class gets your foot in the door when grouping. This makes friends. This builds networks. Networks means you can get groups even with classes that are in low demand. So eventually you can play something you like playing. Simply put, "Play what you like" is the most redundant and least helpful advice to give. Anyone want to debate this? Start by telling me how you know what you will like at level 10, 20, 30, 40, 50, 60, or 70? None of the classes in the game play like they do at any of those levels like they do 90+
Actually, at 86 Paladins get an aggro wipe coupled with invis, Balefire Burst, on a shortish (3 min) cooldown.
