New possible playable races and rune priest class

What would be the point of such a bland, good-at-nothing class?

People would want to play it? There is a warrior class on almost every other game out there. Not everyone wants to specialize.

What games out there have a class like this? It basically sounds like a guy that just hits things, but not as well as the people whose specialty is to hit things, and gets hit, but can't take the hit as well as the guy whose job it is to get hit, but that's ok because he can't taunt so he won't be getting hit anyway. You'd never get a group with it because you'd bring nothing to the table other than taking up a slot that someone more useful, like a merc, could be using.

You'd have to call it something other than "warrior" since we have that already.

Don't get out and about much in the gameworld, do you?

Games that have a warrior class: GW2, GW1, FF14, WoW, Lineage 2, BDO, AoC...to name a few.

I would like to see the existing 26 classes balanced before adding any new ones. A warrior that isn't specialized into anything is basically a Bruiser with a sword in the appearance slot.

EQ and EQ2 have warriors as well. And in most of these games the warrior class(es) serve a specialized role, usually associated with aggro management, damage absorption, and control, or conversely as a melee damage specialist. What you're describing is a specialist in nothing and thus serves no purpose other than for someone who doesn't ever want to group, be effective at anything, or really think about what they're doing at all

I didn't describe anything beyond a dps class that could wear plate & call it a warrior.
No details, just part of a personal wish list.

Someone needs to take a chill pill.

You are pretty much describing swashbucklers and brigands. They're scouts, they're not the highest DPS, and they can tank a little if they must.

Without the snark, you are not playing any of the games you listed. You are playing EQ2, which has too darn many character classes already, and where they can't manage good class balance among the ones we have, so we REALLY don't need new classes. If you just must have the exact type of class, go play a game that has that class.

More productively, tell us about what your desired class has, and we can guide you to the most similar EQ2 classes.You've more or less done this, though you haven't couched it in these terms.

EQ2 has a Warrior subclass... that's Berserkers and Guardians, both of which are tanks. Their job is to hold aggro in a group while others kill the monsters, just as with the other tanks.

As I mentioned above, I think a Rogue (Swashbuckler or Brigand) would fit your basic "warrior" description. They wear chain. They don't do as much damage as, say, an Assassin, but they are a DPS class (and all are scouts). Another option would be a Brawler (Monk or Bruiser), which are leather-wearing tanks that have a bit more DPS.

If you just want a plate appearance, there is plate-appearance level 1 cloth armor --check your broker-- you can stick it in the Appearance tab of your Character Window or in the Wardrobe tab and equip it to Appearance from there. You can also buy (or loot) regular plate armor and stick it in the Wardrobe and use it for appearance, regardless of whether you could actually equip the armor.

You're getting attitude back because you've been pretty snarky to people yourself. I prescribe chill pills all the way around.

I think I will just disagree with all of you on this issue, lol.

I'm formally asking the devs for a warrior class. I don't know how it would work & honestly I don't care. Error got a frickin duck, I want a warrior class.

Realistically, however...I have about as much chance of getting my warrior as Obano does of getting all the classes re-balanced.

And in most those games warrior can be played as a true dps class, not as "medium" damage useless load

You guys are acting like I'm soliciting your opinions. I'm not. Really, I could give a fat rat's patookas.

I don't have to justify to my fellow elves what I want the Kander Klaus to bring me in this xpac or future xpacs.

What I'm understanding, Raff is actually asking for is a standard "fighter" class (warrior is already taken and in EQ/eq2 warrior has always = tank).


So basically a berserker that doesn't have to tank & does more damage?


I hate to rain on your parade Raff, but we'd be more likely to see an aa tree that expands the roles of existing classes. I think the last thing EQ2 actually needs is more classes. More variety within classes would be welcome though.

They could add aa to necromancers or something & recreate something like the Bloodmages in Vanguard (that was an interesting class).

I once played a Jordain Vizier in D&D, they are kind of a fighter/monk class that is forbidden to cast spells, or handle, or use magic items, and was highly resistant to magic. Would be fun to have them in EQ2, maybe as a fighter or dps class, and maybe take the magic resistance aspect to another level, in that, when fighting mobs that cast spells, there could be a combat mechanic that when the spell is resisted, it is turned back on the mob, with a random beneficial effect for the player, or debuff for the mob. Would be cool to see something outside of the box like that introduced to the game, but I hold no illusions that it will actually happen, just a fun idea. I would however, remind the folks saying "Devs would never do this", or "this will never be in game"....there was a time when even mentioning the beast lord class got threads locked...and here we are, lol

The Vah Shir lived on Luclin-- see my post above.

The Drakkin were created due to results of events that happened after the timeline split, so it's canonically impossible for them to exist in EQ2's timeline without completely recreating the events that convinced the dragons to create a new race of guardians much the same as what Kerafyrm did when creating the Aerykin in EQ2.

There are a lot of players out there that want a tank class but will never / ever tank a group. However,
I'd be good with an AA tree that changed the nature of taunts / aggro generation to pure dps.
Subtle Strikes, imo, doesn't really work all that well.

I am well aware that the Vah Shir were on Luclin, but figured that they would require a new/modified skeleton and that is out of the question. Even if the Drakin were created one way in the EQ1 timeline, there is nothing saying that they can't be created again in this timeline, but in a different way. There is no rule that says that a particular race can only be created in only one way!