Surprised no one has commented / complained about this yet.

lucy.fnord.net/spell.html...ource=Test (http://lucy.fnord.net/spell.html?id=3683&source=Test)

lucy.fnord.net/spell.html...ource=Test (http://lucy.fnord.net/spell.html?id=3684&source=Test)

lucy.fnord.net/spell.html...ource=Test (http://lucy.fnord.net/spell.html?id=3694&source=Test)

lucy.fnord.net/spell.html...ource=Test (http://lucy.fnord.net/spell.html?id=3695&source=Test)

lucy.fnord.net/spell.html...ource=Test (http://lucy.fnord.net/spell.html?id=3693&source=Test)

lucy.fnord.net/spell.html...ource=Test (http://lucy.fnord.net/spell.html?id=3692&source=Test)

Level 44 pally's will out heal level 55 druids, clerics get a lower level aego, shaman get a lower level torpor, and druids get to debuff vs cold.

I like our new spells.

Don't have a problem with the paladin spells.

Mini-aego is just stupid.

Thanks for overwriting my PotC again you bastards.
I DON'T WANT YOUR DAMN MGB AEGO THX.

If this new spell goes live, it looks as if a level 44 paladin will be able to heal better than a 55 druid. WAY better. 1.5 second cast time, 400 hps over 4 ticks to a single target for only 150 mana. Sure! Why the hell not? Paladins are already super beings at the top end of the game. Why not start them on the road to glory a bit earlier!

They have more HPs than warriors in many cases due to all of their self buffs, hold aggro better than warriors with all of their stuns and quick heal spells. As a result, they are superior tanks on any mob not requiring a defensive or evasive discipline. But as if this wasn't enough, they heal like a cleric too! My warrior boyfriend gets to sit on his butt for 95% of raids now while the pallies do all the tanking (cept the uber boss mob that requires a /disc). And I get to feel like a failure when I can't keep my group alive yet the paladin casts a 1.5 second heal and saves everyone!

I don't have much of an opinion on the other spells. The cold debuff for druids at an earlier level is nice. Can't comment on the earlier "torpor" like spell. Dunno about the earlier "aego" thing. Won't that make Heroic Bond and Symbol of Marzin obsolete?

Oh well, it's only on test, right? :mad:

Asperia Whisperwind
Storm Warden, Innoruuk Server

250 Tailoring-200 Baking-205 Brewing-190 Smithing
193 Jewelcraft-182 Fletching-173 Pottery-200 Fishing

Why the hell didn't they just improve Heroism? It is already in the game and is 6 levels higher. It will now be completely obsolete (even if it wasn't before).

Sometimes they don't seem to think this stuff through before they make it. Or the testers and designers have been 60 so damn long that they have forgotten the old spell lines entirely.

A bizarre change...irrelevant to me at this stage since it is already Aego I need to run from...but sometimes, I just think they don't even look...or that the designers with toons of a given class simply don't play them.

To clear up small confusion in my original post I should have said lvl 52 pally can outheal a 55 druid.

The lvl HoT is lvl 52 for paladins. The lvl 44 pally spell is very similar to CB does 410 vs CB's 425 and is faster casting. The downside to the level 44 paladin heal is it has a 7 sec recast time and takes 200 mana making it more of a save spell than a chain heal I don't think the 44 spell would make a paladin a main healer in a 40's group although at the same level a druid is still working with greater healing chain healing for 300 each.

The small Torpor makes the shaman a great back up healer for a cleric during the mid 40 low 50's. Just as with Torpor it would rarely be used to heal the main tanks due to the slow/root portion of the spell but can be used to heal casters and the cleric. Add this to shaman's slow and haste package and they are still in the prefered back up healer position.

Mini Aego I don't know what to think about this spell. It virtually removes the use for most other cleric buffs of similar level while at the same time reducing the number of buff slots taken up by clerics spells. It also increases the cost of cleric buffing at lower levels which knowing the number of peridots and the cost of those peridots my cleric goes through at level 52 and the normal reimbursement percentage for that cost makes me hurt for non twink clerics. I'll let the clerics argue the advantages or disadvantages of their buff line up though it's too late at the moment for me to want to do all the math. The buff doesn't really hurt druids any more than any other cleric buff though. Clerics will still be the best hp/ac buffers at any particular level range and that's just a given.

For the druid line up the spells are decent in my opinion. A double cure poison/disease means one less spell you gotta keep changing out in places where both are bound to happen. And they cure 1 count more than the counteracts.

Druids have in the past asked for cold debuffs similar to the ro's line Eci from PoP was the first one added but it came in at level 63 which is just a bit too late. This new one Frost Zephyr is very similar to Ro's Fiery which is considered the best of the druid fire debuffs. Only problem is that Ro's is a lure and this one isn't. Make this a lure and I'll be happy with it make it a lure and give me a cold based dot similar to BoR and I'll be extremely happy with our debuffing abilities.

The only real concern I have with these spells is that if they are added the druid is placed back into fourth spot healer at a lower level. The druid spell line up in the 40's is very anti grouping. Druids get better experience soloing and groups get better experience without gimping a druid in. So druids are forced into soloing and don't learn the necessary group skills which should be well known by the time a druid starts to become a good addition to a group in their 50's.

The cold debuff makes sense. The rest is pure crap and only undoes the class balancing they or some team at SoE worked so hard to achieve and now Pop and stuff like this has made just totally irrelavent.

I'm sure this is just the beginning of them working on revamping lower level healing and buffing on all classes.

/nod

WE are just hated :/ poor druids :/

I was waiting until this stuff went live to comment on it. But I'll do it now since there's already a thread.

I really don't know what they are thinking here. I like paladins, but for a tank/melee class to outheal a priest of the same level is rediculous.

At level 44 druids have one viable healing spell: Greater healing 300hp/150mana 2hp/mana (3.75 sec cast) This will give paladins a relatively big, fast emergency heal--something even a cleric of that level does not have--(which is actually slightly more efficient than greater healing) as well as greater heal which they already have. The only thing druids would have over paladins at this point is a larger mana pool and specialization checks.

Shaman spell: if anything it will help to increase their mana regen from cannibalize. It would definately make shamans considerably better healers in groups than druids...not that they already weren't, but this will give them an additional boost.

Mini-aego: I don't see the point of this at all. Don't think it's overpowering, just don't see the point. Clerics of this level can rarely afford to symbol anyway unless they're twinks. I guess in the 50's it will make more of a difference. But if you're going to make other classes viable healers from 44 on, why not toss clerics a mini hammer, or improve their yaulp spell at that level to scale with yaulp 5?

cold debuff: definately a nice spell although not that needed at 44. I guess it could be used for our cold rains but other than that we aren't going to be casting cold spells that much until 57 with frost.

I have said for a long time that the huge gap between the 40s and level 58 in regards to healing needs to be closed. Are they finished? Who knows. But I hope they rethink improving the other secondary healers and not druids.

No one is really complaining because after I while you get screwed so much it quits hurting and you just ignore it.

The biggest concern I have of that batch of spells is the pally healing and the mini-aego.

That mini aego will make all druid hp buffs pointless up till PotC/G, and as usual, PotC/G will only be useful for the mana regen.

The pally heals will truly hurt lower level druid desireability in a group.

That being said, these are only on the Test spell list. We don't even know if they've actually been implemented on test. It could just be the dev's playing around and testing stacking issues with lower level spells or some such crap.

One thing to note on Torpor jr. is that is has decrease movement by 100%. So not just a snare its an effective root. They wont be using it all on folks that need to move.

44 cleric buff bigger than the 63 Druid buff.


All I can say is that's Interesting.

The cold debuff will be usefull a lot earlier that level 57. We have a level 49 spell called ice. And we will also debuff for the wizard ice dd to (and weapons that proc cold based effect to).

I will have loved to have it when I was doing a raid vs the good odl Naggy. And I will love it vs mobs immute (or very resistant) to fire.

And never forget lower the level spell = lower the fizzle rate.

And a good question to: do the ac part of ours fire and cold debuff will stack ot not?

The cure poison-desease combo spell is interesting.

Eridalafar

We have been discussing the new paladin spells on PoN and we can't figure out why they chose the levels they did. General consensus seems to be that paladins should get the direct heal at the same time druids/shamans get chloroblast and not before.

<strong>Only problem is that Ro's is a lure and this one isn't.</strong>

Would be nice if this was a lure or at least had some negative on it to help land E'ci, which can be a nuiscence to land.

Low level healing is still pretty abysmal. Actually "sucks hard" between about 2 levels after druids get greater up to Tunare's would be a more accurate description. I got a kick out of them adding the group versions of our useless low level skin lines, guess they figured they already patched up one big hole in the low level druid spell lineup. =) Still think they should simply move Nature's Recovery from 60 to like 45 or 50 where it would do some good.

Still waiting on our animal slow. I wouldn't mind the Pally's getting their new heal if they would just lower the level on our heals. Make superiour heal a lvl 44 spell and so forth. That way druids would be wanted from levels 40-57.

<strong>Still waiting on our animal slow.</strong>

Thank you, I'll wait on useful spells.

There aren't enough animals around for this to be useful, it's as simple as that. Slow is useful in groups and there is practically nowhere that there are enough animals that a group would want a slower for animals. It's rare enough that undead slow is useful for necros and I can name half a dozen spots with primarly undead enemies to fight.

For soloing if there are enough animals around that an animal only slow would be useful, then there are enough animals around to simply charm a mob and sick it on another and kill both instead of keeping a single pet and thereby doubling your XP.

I'd rather have a high level charm plant/insect, although that isn't exactly something I'd have memmed very often either. Better, some form of cheap generic slow like a 50% slow for 100 mana, you know, like enchanters get at level 24 or shamans at 29 because it's a wimpy spell... *tries to hold in the laughter*

There are animals in Plane of Earth.

There are plenty of animals in PoP zones, in Umbral Plains, and for mid levels in dawnshroud peaks.

The Paly healing spells -- keep in mind paladins already got their defense up to warrior levels and have access to godly 2h weapons these days and an improved 2h weapon damage table so they don't really need to be great backup healers too. I don't understand why they keep buffing up the hybrids. At the rate verant is going, they might as well remove the cleric and warrior classes.

You have to remember that the L44 cleric buff in question is aegolism jr. And because that it is the cleric ac/hp, ac, and hp buffs all in one cast. I did the math and it is only 25hps more than casting resolution and symbol of naltron.
Both of which can be cast by a 40's cleric already.

Ya'll seem to be looking over something. A paladin at lvl 44 will have an abysmally small mana pool. Sure, you may have a nice heal, but you'll only be able to cast it 2-3 times before being out of or very low on mana.

All the talk about paladins being so great isn't quite right. At the highest levels of the game, the gear a paladin can get will really close the gap on a warrior. If your not in the best gear however, you won't be equal to a warrior at all.

Other then the windblade, you have to be in ntov or high end ssra to see those awesome 2hdrs your talking about. Even with a windblade at 63, I average about 40 or so dps. That is still the lowest out of all the classes in my guild when I parse fights.


The new spells that are suggested for paladins are nice, but in no way change the role paladins have. Absor has posted that the vision for paladins is emergency healers and spot tanks to keep a group alive on bad pulls. The only problem with this vision is that in the very high end the gear available gives paladins too much of an edge. This does not mean that paladins in lower tiers have this advantage. From all that I've seen, until you get past ntov paladins and warriors are balanced pretty good with each other.

I gotta agree with Chav,

Paladins do have some great spells but a very small mana pool.
Healing wave of Prexus is a rockin spell but a couple casts can really plow through a Pallys mana.

Sil

This is what we are talking about:
<table>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td>Spell</td>
<td>HP at 44</td>
<td>Hp at 50</td>
<td>AC at 44</td>
<td>AC at 50</td>
<td>Mana at 44</td>
<td>Mana at 50</td>
<td>Cast Time in s</td>
<td>Duration h:mm</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Resolution </td>
<td>232</td>
<td>250</td>
<td>15</td>
<td>16</td>
<td>110 </td>
<td>110</td>
<td>3.5</td>
<td>1:03h</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Symbol of Naltron</td>
<td>406</td>
<td>525</td>
<td>

</td>
<td>

</td>
<td>315</td>
<td>315</td>
<td>5</td>
<td>0:54h</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Armor of Faith</td>
<td>

</td>
<td>

</td>
<td>25</td>
<td>

</td>
<td>150</td>
<td>

</td>
<td>6</td>
<td>1:03h</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Shield of Words</td>
<td>

</td>
<td>

</td>
<td>

</td>
<td>31</td>
<td>

</td>
<td>300</td>
<td>8</td>
<td>1:12</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td colspan="9">
<hr width="100%"></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Sum</td>
<td>638</td>
<td>775</td>
<td>40</td>
<td>47</td>
<td>575</td>
<td>725</td>
<td>~20</td>
<td>~1h</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td colspan="9">
<hr width="100%"></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Temperance</td>
<td>800</td>
<td>800</td>
<td>48</td>
<td>48</td>
<td>550</td>
<td>550</td>
<td>9</td>
<td>1:40h</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td colspan="9">
<hr width="100%"></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Skin like Diamond</td>
<td>178(L39)</td>
<td>200</td>
<td>13</td>
<td>13</td>
<td>200</td>
<td>200</td>
<td>5</td>
<td>0:54

</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top">Protection of Diamond

</td>
<td valign="top">178(L39

</td>
<td valign="top">200

</td>
<td valign="top">13

</td>
<td valign="top">13

</td>
<td valign="top">450

</td>
<td valign="top">450

</td>
<td valign="top">8

</td>
<td valign="top">0:54

</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Skin like Nature</td>
<td>

</td>
<td>250</td>
<td>

</td>
<td>16</td>
<td>

</td>
<td>300</td>
<td>6</td>
<td>1:12</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>


With the new cleric buff, there will be no changes in buffing without using
a component.



Using a component the gap widens from 460 to 622 at 44, from 525 to 550 at
L49. Since most clerics won't have the money to use Temperance much anyways,
i think its a moot issue.



I stongly feel druids need a progressive heaing upgrade between 44 and
58. With the tanks getting more and more HP at lower levels due to better
equipment, a 300HP heal just does not cut it. THe healing efficiency upgrades
are now at 29, 51 and 58. It would be much more logical to put them at 29,
44 and 58, i.e. lower Superior heal from 51 to 44.



This would also put the druid above Paladins again in healing power.





Taippo L46 Druid

Nindor L62 Cleric

Edit Gah, i have no idea how to fix the table on EZboard, it looks ok if viewed outside. Anyone here that can fix?

<blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>Paladins are already super beings at the top end of the game. Why not start them on the road to glory a bit earlier![/quote]
Sounds good to me! :D

<a href="http://www.magelo.com/eq_view_profile.html?num=448052"><span style="color:red;font-family:Times New roman;font-size:x-small;"><em>Baron Saduin Damodred</em></span></a>
<span style="font-size:xx-small;">Crusader of Marr</span><a href="http://pub63.ezboard.com/bhouseofaegis"><span style="font-family:Times New roman;font-size:x-small;"><em> Loyal to the House of Aegis</em></span></a>

boo freakin hoo


if you think pally's are so ub3r-377t try playing one

I have aauan. They can rez, heal, loh, tank as good as a warrior on non-uber mobs, crit for 243 on undead starting at level 30, they have it far easier than other melees I've played.

Druids could maybe use a bit of a bump in healing sub 58. But it's not really THAT big an issue; you can get any character to level 50 in a few weeks with KEI and even crappy twink gear. Newer players who don't have this sorta stuff aren't gonna be making fine distinctions about which classes can heal better-they probably aren't even gonna have a clue. I got well past level 50 with gimpy greater heal...it's easily done. But if they bump up druid healing sub 58 at some point down the road, fair enough.

Anyway, as a previous poster said, paladins have teeny tiny mana pools (especially if they are not twinked...if they're twinked, they're probably soloing anyway), and they aren't gonna be regening mana standing whacking at stuff. If they start acting as main healers in groups, they aren't gonna be pulling, and they probably aren't gonna be meleeing much.

Mini aego is a non-issue. Druids got the group skin casts a year or what ago, with no corresponding cleric upgrade. SLN adds a small amount of hp regen, and PoTG adds mana regen. Both have their advantages (and disadvantages) over Aego Jr. Anyway, the aego line is purty much a mainstay of clerics...the skin line is just one more feature druids bring. And, as a previous poster said, mini aego doesn't add much over what clerics already have, and at the cost of a component.

The cold debuff is sorta nice. Yay for us. Too bad a lot of posters are too busy complaining about what other classes got...

Really, none of this is any big deal. It's not gonna even modestly effect anyone's gameplay. No need to go on some anti paladin/cleric griping.

And please, drop the whole "when am I gonna get my slow" thing...that just sounds ridiculous. Give druids slow, and clerics instantly drop below them as desired healers any place it is useful. By the way, the low level enchanter/shaman slows start out around 30 percent or so, and moves up to 50 percent quite a bit later. More often then not, it's not even worth slowing mobs till 50+, when fights start taking longer, and damage starts catching up. Adding a 50 percent slow, even at level 65, is not nearly analagous to simply giving druids a level 24 or 29 spell when considered in those terms. Just like giving clerics SoW at level 60 would be outta line...even though it's only a level 9 spell for shaman.

One last note...I'm not sure WHY they keep adding stuff sub 50. It's not like gameplay at that level is difficult to begin with. And balance really isn't that big an issue so early in the game...

"The Paly healing spells -- keep in mind paladins already got their defense up to warrior levels and have access to godly 2h weapons these days and an improved 2h weapon damage table so they don't really need to be great backup healers too. I don't understand why they keep buffing up the hybrids. At the rate verant is going, they might as well remove the cleric and warrior classes. "

:evil:

<blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>crit for 243 on undead starting at level 30[/quote]
No

<a href="http://www.magelo.com/eq_view_profile.html?num=448052"><span style="color:red;font-family:Times New roman;font-size:x-small;"><em>Baron Saduin Damodred</em></span></a>
<span style="font-size:xx-small;">Crusader of Marr</span><a href="http://pub63.ezboard.com/bhouseofaegis"><span style="font-family:Times New roman;font-size:x-small;"><em> Loyal to the House of Aegis</em></span></a>

Mardil, yes. Well I may be off slightly on the exact number because I recall that it scales up a little bit, it starts a little less than that then scales up as the paly gets a few more levels past 30, but it's called instrument of nife and my paladin used it to devastating effect on undead from 30 to his current level of 45.

Anyway, I'm not here to bash Paladins, I like them and was glad they got improved some, they were too weak in the kunark era. But there was no reason to make them powerful backup healers as well as the solid tanks they are now too. Too late on that though, it's been done, long before this little new spell. :)

My usual tank in PoP groups are sk's and palys, they do just fine.

<blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>They can rez, heal, loh, tank as good as a warrior on non-uber mobs, crit for 243 on undead starting at level 30, they have it far easier than other melees I've played.[/quote]

Are you and I talking about the same class? I've almost quit my paladin numerous times because I don't tank as well as a warrior. The non-uber mob these days hits for 500 (PoN spidahs anyone) and can plow through the average level 60 pally's life incredibly fast. Someone earlier stated it well: Unless yer a post NTOV pally, there's a signifigant difference in pally and warrior tanking. The vast majority of the EQ paladin population have in fact NOT progressed past NTOV. Granted, it's alot easier being a low-level pally these days than 2 years ago, but I'm surprised at the outcry of pally-envy I see here. If you think we're so ubah, play one to 60 and go compare yourself to a decently equipped warrior. You'll find yourself being overshadowed, and easily. I think some of you don't take into account how handy the war discs are. You pull 2 500pt hittin spidahs and if you don't have a disc, yer splatter on the ground.

Nevermind, you already mentioned the correct proc spell, it's not a crit. So he was correct in saying no.

(Note to self: read more carefully when tired)

If you rely on a proc to be your main source of damage you are really not doing much damage. Besides, if you really want to use the undead proc argument... once you get out of guk, you will not see enough undead to bother memming the spell. There aren't enough undead from any expansion to say that a single proc spell makes paladins awesome. Nice try though.

Backup healer... not unless you got 200+ wis and kei. And then you had better be in a raid where you are only healing AE damage.

Emergency healer... yes



Primary tank... not really. Yes we can fill in, but a warrior in similar gear will ALWAYS tank better. Taunt is messed up, but that is a different subject.

Backup tank... sure, we can tank in emergencies when needed. Better us then a ranger.


Damage dealer.... HAHAHAHAHAAHAHAH. I parsed a fight with gozz last nite. Using epic I had 37dps. With windblade on the previous fight I had 47dps. That sure is awesome. I had the lowest dps of everyone there of comparable level and gear. That is with me having speed of vallon and 41% plane of sky quest belt.


It's not all roses playing a paladin like you are trying to imply. Personaly I love my class and will never switch. I think the new heals are nice and will really help out the lower levels with the now stated vision of paladins being emergency healers. That being said I can understand some changes for druid heals to help them with their job of group healer.

<blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>Surprised no one has commented / complained about this yet.[/quote]

Gee, back on the PoN boards we discuss and test.

<blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>The pally heals will truly hurt lower level druid desireability in a group.[/quote]

And? Pally desireability in groups? Low at best. Can't really say there's anything bad about druids losing desireability in groups if it improves pally desireability. As of now, druid desireability is much greater than that of paladins. Will this spell be something that causes "/shout looking for backup healer, paladin, not druid because of that one spell"? No. In my opinion, druids had more right to whine much louder about CC than this. It had much more effect on the game than this will if implied in it's present state. That increased Paladin soloing ability greatly, and we all know how druids should have a stranglehold on soloing abilities...

<blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>That way druids would be wanted from levels 40-57.[/quote]

Right. Because druids have to be wanted for every level of their in game lives. Talk to any 49-55 paladin on your server (go ahead, most of us paladins are quite nice in game) about the crap they're putting up with trying to level and the troubles they're having getting groups, or experience for that fact.

One of these days something TRULY unbalancing is going to come along and then the dev's are going to be too sick of hearing the druid's wails and shrieks to pay them any mind.


Avethar

non-named giants in plane of storms hit for 700-750 when i tank them, thats with ~5600hp, 1250 ac, and they stomp a mud hole in me.

without lvl 65, ND3 CA3 CS3 PD3, we just can't keep up with warriors. we can do it good enough to get the job done, but it's neither effecient nor fun for me to "crunch" on every single hit. and these aren't even the named.


but this is slightly off-topic, leveling a paladin is hell, i consider what i said above to be the green grass on the other side of the fence. at least i'm IN a group, getting exp. my all time record was 2 weeks without a single group when i was leveling up. thats hitting every exp zone imaginable, and it's only gotten worse with PoP.

<blockquote style="padding-left:0.5em; margin-left:0; margin-right:0; margin-top:0; margin-bottom:0; border-left:solid 2">Can't really say there's anything bad about druids losing desireability in groups if it improves pally desireability.</blockquote>

Feeling self-righteous, are we? :D

Light of Life Detail | History | Raw Data


Slot Description
1: Increase Hitpoints by 410


Mana: 200 Skill: Alteration
Casting Time: 1.5 Recast Time: 7
Fizzle Time: 2.5 Range: 200
Location: Any

I don't care about the spell itself...won't change enything in the game at the point I am playing, and I remember very well how entirely incapable druids were as healers in the 40s. Being bad enough to be undesireable didn't get any worse in a material way because someone else got another heal. Do agree druids need a bump somewhere in there but I am too out of touch with the specifics to take strong opinions about it.

My off topic point though...

If a spell has a casting time of 1.5, and a fizzle time of 2.5, what does that mean? I always assumed fizzle time was how far into the cast the spell might fizzle. Is it a reset delay that gets added? Or (if it works the way I always thought it did) would this spell be effectively unfizzleable? Or perhaps, it can fizzle at any time up to 2.5 secs, and it just happens to be a 1.5 cast spell which can fizzle at any time during its cast?

<hr />

The mini Aego though. I will mourn that a bit. Time was I would know that I (at 60plus) could give a nice buff to a cleric that was 59 or below that gave me a rez...helped their whole group at once. Now that will no longer be true. Anyone saying the component cost will make it not be cast has not been playing the same game I have. They would just have used the components on a symbol before.

the new heals are nice but i dont think they will make druids less disireable than they are at the moment.

Paladins have a small mana pool as has already been said, they cannot efficiently heal in groups for long periods of time, in an emergency yes, but not as effective as you want to believe.

Unless you are uber (well lets use ntov plus as has been said) you sacrafice either alot of ac, and or hit points to gain a decent mana pool as a paladin, its not efficient. also, one thing i dont believe i have seen mentioned is paladins cannot specialize, and fizzle a good amount, coupling that with our less than stellar mana pool equals big problems fizzling spells like Healing wave of prexus or our new single target heals. cast, fizzle.. oops there goes 10 percent of your mana. that goes for any of our spells, we are not the healers you claim we are.

leveling a paladin is difficult, but there are stereo types about many classes that make it difficult to get groups, i have seen paladins get denied groups because the group said paladins arent tanks, the same way druids arent clerics. its the person not the class that will help you more.

I don't mind any of the classes getting those spells. that's nothing that changes gameplay drastically. in fact, a combo of druid/pally could do extremely well as healers in a group.


1 thing to pally tanking in PoP. in my guild xp groups with me as mainhealer maintanks are either 65 warrior, sk or pally. we normally fight in PoV or BoT. the group taking the least damage usually is the group with the pally maintank, not the warrior.

reason? warrior needs some time to gain aggro, while mob is beating on him unslowed. then tash and slow/malo and slow, and pray you waited long enough when you have a chanter as slower or he gets squished.

pally? chanter tashes on inc, pally stuns, hardly ever resisted, chanter slows, voila, slowed mob, and he's going for the pally, not the chanter.

with a pally as maintank, I got enough mana to nuke from time to time, with a warrior I can hardly do more then heal and maybe debuff.

on a tier 2 and up named mob, a pally stands no chance, though. defensive is a must there.

cu
Turrwin Trickle
Hierophant
Innoruuk

<blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>Can't really say there's anything bad about druids losing desireability in groups if it improves pally desireability.[/quote]

Think you missed my point. Think of it this way -- Druid desireability in groups 70/100, Paladin desireability in groups 30/100. So if these new changes make both 50/100, what's so bad about that? That druids become as desireable as paladins? Who's to say that druids should be more wanted in groups in the first place? The druid community? Hehe. Seems self-righteous to me.

Avethar

---------------------------------------------
Besides, if you really want to use the undead proc argument... once you get out of guk, you will not see enough undead to bother memming the spell. There aren't enough undead from any expansion to say that a single proc spell makes paladins awesome. Nice try though.
----------------------------------------------

I disagree. Here are a few zones that have LOTS of undead and undead camps.

Umbral Plains
Maiden's Eye
The Grey
Howling Stones
Acrylia Caverns
Chardok
PoN?

Racmoor

Yeah, but the proc is not enough in itself to justify saying that it gives paladins some great advantage. Yeah, if you happen to get to an undead spot, the proc is nice, but it in no ways makes paladins some rogue like dps class when fighting undead. You might get maybe 2-3 more dps out of the proc overall.

I think the point of the discussion was the possiblility of new healing spells in the 40's. It seems to have gotten away from that into the discussion of paladins in the 50's and in PoP. So I'll comment on the original topic. Being a paladin in the levels that these changes would affect it is very difficult to get a group. The only reason I levelled as easily as I did was due to friends who let me come along. These spells would help pallys at that level be more likely to get into a group. Does it need some tweaking? Perhaps. But I hardly think it would affect druids. As stated before, paladins at that level don't have much of a mana pool, thus thinking that a group would take a paladin over a druid for healing purposes is a joke. Paladins at high levels are great for emergency heals and to help with AoE damage. It would be nice if the mid level pallys also had those benefits to make them more desirable for groups. I don't think druids have anything to worry about (though I do agree that maybe chloroblast should be made available to druids earlier).

Kakar Smakar
59 Knight of Bushido Clan

Fizzle time is how long before you can recast it when you fizzle.

I play a paladin and a druid (and a cleric, and a bard hehe, none power leveled at all... I've just been playing since release); the paladin is my main, but the druid is 59 and the cleric is 60.

I would agree that I wished for more healing power on my druid from about lvl 44-58. But then I don't like to solo and usually played her as main or co-healer in groups; druids have some powerful non-healing abilities at those levels which arguably need to be balanced by lower ability to heal.

My paladin never broke 120 wisdom before level 60.

Lemme say that again. My paladin never broke 120 wisdom before level 60.

(she's a half elf hehe)

Even at 65 with reasonably decent gear my pally's wisdom is 199 with KEI. (I've focused more on my HP really). In contrast both my druid and cleric have been at 255 wisdom easily for several levels with non-uber gear (mostly stuff I can purchase or camp in single groups, the cleric has some hate/pog stuff).

If I had had these proposed heals in my 40s and low 50s, I sure as hell wouldn't have been main healing for a group :D

Now I know on Paladins of Norrath we have been discussing when these spells come and many folks have suggested that the heals should be reversed in order, out of respect for class balance. Please don't flame us without understanding that most of us don't want druids hurt by improvements to us. Also please keep in mind the context. We mostly don't have priest mana pools.

Valya puts it well if you care what I think. My main is a paladin, so I have some frame of reference. :)

hehe I'm a puppy

/em wags her tail

yes, it is a shame that they have not come up with a good heal spell for druids in the same range since we are priests...

But no way in hell that a group in the 40's would take a pally INSTEAD of a druid for a healer.

A group without acess to a shaman, cleric, or druid might get by on a pally for a while in that level range, but unless massively twinked there would be a lot of downtime for that pally.

I just don't see this as an us versus them issue.

However, it remains true that druid healing in the 40's is pitiful. I was an exclusively group druid until I got to about 42 or 43. Became virtually exclusively solo until I got to mid 50's. Could get a group sometimes as a nuker, but when I tried to heal...it was just pitiful. I remember some excrutiating grouping in KC. Not that KC isn't excruciating anyway ; ).

Back to the original topic:

Absor. Hi. Summon pet please, same one other pet classes get. Thanks.

the summon pet thing is never going to happen, unless it applies only to booboo... for the same reason necro and chanters will never be able to use their summon companion on their charmed pets: because it would give the ability to summon a mob for killling to a differtent location than intended.

of course, if what youre asking is for a booboo summon, then it might happen :)

no, im afraid the only fix for charmed pet pathing will remain.. fixing pathing.

<blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>Absor. Hi. Summon pet please, same one other pet classes get. Thanks. [/quote]

What? I'm lost. Where did this come from?


kegulik kookiekeeper

Yall complain about high lvl magi's out nuken ya now your all complain'n about palys out healing ya at mid lvl's.

It was said once before druid is the EASY button on eq. ya'll get lots of stuff and can do just about anything in EQ with your ablitys and this lvl 44 heal for paly's is gonna what to druids.. (Make them less wanted in groups) take a look around foolish Druid but 90 percent of people like the easy way to play so they play a druid..

Some of you all will say I dont know what it's like for being a druid. I got a 20 on xev quit due to bordom, but wait before you retaliate I have a 40 on Tholuxe for port bitch pre Sol+POP. Dont wanna forget to mention my 41 druid on Sullon.

I have a 40 paly there vision is to help us be fast healer's in times there is need this spell is not needed, however it helps a group out.

Here's a good veiw for ya.. You wanna heal or buff better then a cleric be one.. If you wanna nuke better then a Magi agian then be one. Look yall got the whole EQ libray of spells handed to ya as you lvl and if one even comes close on infringing you get all jumpy..

It's not what you have it's how you use it. Use it well and everyone will wanna have you on there team. If you sit back and wonder why O why dont they all want me in there group? Do a /who all druid and find that there are probly 40+ other's in your lvl range doing the same thing LFG.

A paladin with a DW bp in the high 40s (casts mana-less 400hp symbol buff in 10 seconds) was unable to efficiently heal a group I was in. Heals about the same amount of hps in the same time, but without mana. During this time a druid could get 2 gheals in, healing for 600hps. The druid is able to do this many more times than a paladin (At lvl 50 i could cast 6 gheals with a reasonable lvl of wis, if I remember correctly). I don't see your fears in a paladin replacing a druid as a main healer, because this mana-less 400hp "heal" that is very comparable to the new lvl 44 paladin heal was unable to act as efficiently as a druid typically can.

<blockquote style="padding-left:0.5em; margin-left:0; margin-right:0; margin-top:0; margin-bottom:0; border-left:solid 2">It's not what you have it's how you use it. Use it well and everyone will wanna have you on there team.</blockquote>

Sure, it's how you use it, but a strap-on is a strap-on is a strap-on. All your wisdom about "be this, be that" is totally trite, Q, because it ain't nothing we haven't heard before, but you know, druids don't want to be wizards or clerics because of our versatility and then some. And yes, I can use a strap-on like any of the best, so thank you and leave the advice to the pros.

<blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>It was said once before druid is the EASY button on eq. [/quote]

Personally I wish <span style="text-decoration:underline">all</span> trolls would just copy that clip and use it at the beginning of every post. Imagine the time it would save! Thank YOU for saying it so early, to let people know they don't need to bother reading your whole post expecting you to make a valid point about anything.

Kinda like wearing a t-shirt that says:
"I can't think of anything original to say right now but uhh.. umm... you're a doodoo head! So there!"

~Firemynd

<blockquote style="padding-left:0.5em; margin-left:0; margin-right:0; margin-top:0; margin-bottom:0; border-left:solid 2">Kinda like wearing a t-shirt that says:
"I can't think of anything original to say right now but uhh.. umm... you're a doodoo head! So there!"</blockquote>

lol

What a great way to start a Friday morning!

Thanks dear.

I thought "Q"s post was pretty darn funny . . . and then kinda sad once I realized he thought he was being serious.

After all, where would us long time druids be, you know the ones that have played this class day in and day out for the last three years, have learned how to eek out every possible ounce out of our abilities through trial and error, know what every spell can do inside and out, without Joe Level 40 pally to come along and tell us how to play our class, or to tell us what problems we don't have.

Thanks for the input Q, thankfully you came along and told us your terribly original deep thoughts and set us straight . . .

HAHAHA all he has are port b*tches and he proceeds to tell us how to play our class?

Ok, I've read some people comments on paladins. Well let me replace this mis-information with some true, real to life (life ingame that is) about the paladin class at level 44. At level 44 a paladin does not tank as well as a warrior at the same level, reason is.....he doesn't have as many hitpoints or a higher damage mitigation. This is even true at level 65. A warrior will always have better damage mitigation than a paladin, bottom line.

Now lets talk about paladins being better healers than a druid. Hmmmmm, I don't know where you come off saying something like this. I don't know if you've ever leveled a paladin to level 44 and actually casted a heal spell at that level with the mana it costs. A paladin's mana pool stinks. Druid's mana pool is far more superior than a paladin. Maybe a paladin has a "better" heal, but surely he cannot heal better. His mana pool will never allow him too, unless of course this level 44 paladin is in VT or NTOV gear :evil:


Don't worry Druids, paladin's will never replace you as a healer in exp groups or raids. We're too busy keeping the mobs off of you over nukers. Thanks, and have a good day.

As a paladin, I am still waiting on a AE nuke. Look at lightening blast, AE DD 477 (yes thats 1908 DD every 8.6 seconds). Do you realize how long it takes me to do 1908 damage? And currently paladins dont get any real healing upgrades between 39 and 57. So paladins in their 50s have less DPS than beastlord, druid, magician, monk, necro, ranger, rogue, SK, warrior, and wizard (I havent seen reliable numbers for bard, enchanter, or shaman, they may be up there too), and they are trying to heal with a cleric level 24 spell Greater Healing (the 24 cleric actually heals more HP and uses less mana than the 56 paladin). I think this mid level upgrade has been a long time coming. Also, the one zone where paladins used to be able to solo for xp in the low to mid 50s (Guk) has been taken away by the AE people who now monopolize the whole zone for the sole purpose of getting faction. So not only can you not get groups due to your low DPS and weak healing ability, you can't effectively solo anymore either. The one bright spot that has already been mentioned is that you can hold agro, which will allow you to get into PoP groups at maybe level 55.

Quote:

Don't worry Druids, paladin's will never replace you as a healer in exp groups or raids. We're too busy keeping the mobs off of you over nukers. Thanks, and have a good day.


I can state from personal experience that we often use pallys as healers on raids. Particularly on AoE fights. Not as often as we used to, true, but in our HoT farming days Pallys had it hands down over druids with Wave of Prexus.

Sure that the healing options of a level 44 pally are limited...but then the druid ones suck too. Nothing has changed below 50 for druid healing since Kunark if I am remembering right. And even in Kunark era zones a druid simply cannot play healer in their 40's. You need to at least get Superior Heal, and better still CB, before you can begin to play quasi cleric.

I don't by any means begrudge pallys this heal, but the druid healing in the same range is appalling and is certainly as deserving of attention.

Druids get Greater Heal at 29, and then no other direct heal spells until Superior Healing at 51. Shamans were in a similar boat but also have a mini Torpor in test for level 44.

I think Paladins do need something around lvl 44, maybe a defensive skill or an up in mitigation or dmg output. But I think all the Paladins coming on the board are completely missing the point. YOU are NOT a priest class, therefore should NOT get a better heal before any of the priest classes. It makes no difference whether or not you can cast it 10 times or 2 times with the amount of mana you have. Shm/Clr/Dru should ALWAYS have better heals then everyone else at earlier lvls. Move supheal to 44 for shaman and druids and move this new heal to 49 for paladins.. That would help to keep the class distinction between priest and hybrids.

How do you think a Cleric would feel if Paladins had a 96% rez 7 lvls before them? Do you think they would say oh well they can only cast it a few times before they run out of mana?


Another example:
Do you think wizards would get pissed if they came in and gave shadow knights a 650 dd spell for 180 mana in 1.5 secs at lvl 44? Does it matter if they only have the mana to cast it 2 or 3 times? NO

4 pages of discussion, and it could have been summarized in one sentence:

hybrids dont need any more work, and especially not these spells... in the ever-shifting balance of power, hybrids are currently at or near the top.

Oldoaktree, name an incident where a paladin was prefered as main healer over a cleric, druid, or shaman, other than an AE fight...........


EDIT: Lipponcott, paladins are part warrior part cleric, we are not part warrior part druid, thats your ranger brothers and sisters. I coulda swore EQ was a <strong>ROLEPLAYING GAME</strong>, your arguments hold no water. The way you're saying it, every class in the game should have a part of each class. Why not give paladin's gate? Or give Shadowknights the ability to teleport? Well that would be ridiculous now wouldn't it? Sometimes I wish I could port around the world or solo kite 4 mobs in the Grey, or cast an invis spell. I mean I'm a knight for MY DIETY, and I can't even use thier faithstone! This is so :evil:

I could name a lot. Prexus is simply more mana efficient in a lot of spots.

I also would say before PoP, when big @#%$ heals were not needed to hold a camp. Sometimes the best path there was to have a big dmg dealer to kill mobs faster (and so take less dmg) rather than have a pally and druid pair to heal. Of course, those were the days when people could farm FG for exp and they are gone.

I did not say all the time, I said OFTEN. I am in a raid guild. We raid a lot of AoE mobs. On an AoE fight, a group heal shines.

I don't need to give more examples than that. I am not disputing that I am happywith how I can heal NOW post 58 with the advent of TR. Just pointing out that the prior poster was incorrect in saying that paladins were NEVER preferred to druids. That is definitely not the case.

<blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>Druids get Greater Heal at 29, and then no other direct heal spells until Superior Healing at 51.[/quote]

And other than a grossly inefficient heal thats on test now, we have to wait till 57 to get our upgrade to Greater healing. So sorry, but you're not getting any pity from me.

Paladins saves lives, why should our spell setup reflect anything but that? Even if it is grossly inefficient. Hell you want to be good at both Soloing AND grouping? Not going to happen and you know it.

Paladins focus on Here and Now healing. It's fast, have refresh timer delays and is inefficient. Combine that with a lower meditate cap, lower manapools due to having to focus on 5 stats at the same time and casting penalties (they are still in effect till you hit level 60) and I doubt you will see a paladin outheal a druid.

What can this spell do? Save lives. Thats why it has such a huge mana cost, and a refresh timer. It's obvious that SoE do not want us to have chain castable spells of that kind, it's more like a fire and forget kind of thing ;) Hopefully we can save that party member in time for the real healers to get their better heals off.

Verant have many great ideas, and I like this Light of Life spell. Because it will save lives. Just like Divine Favor can save lives, even if it's only a 150hp rune that we get at 55 where it's outdated.

So relax and get back to quadding, you know you want to

I don't give a fig about this pally spell. Happy to see you get it. Said so several times already.

You have, from a post in which I said just that, said essentially that "no druids, a priest class, should not get their healing looked at between 29 and 51 even though Shamans and Paladins both are right now."

I trust you understand why I am disregarding your post. I got nothing against pallies..nothing in my posts says I do.

But if I hear one more moronic "but you can solo!" I will drag this lovely thread to rants forum faster than a woodelf can scamper off into the bushes with someone.

And just to wrap it up, I will give you back my earlier post here on this topic...

<hr />

Whole druid v Pally thing is very odd...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
yes, it is a shame that they have not come up with a good heal spell for druids in the same range since we are priests...

But no way in hell that a group in the 40's would take a pally INSTEAD of a druid for a healer.

A group without acess to a shaman, cleric, or druid might get by on a pally for a while in that level range, but unless massively twinked there would be a lot of downtime for that pally.

I just don't see this as an us versus them issue.

However, it remains true that druid healing in the 40's is pitiful. I was an exclusively group druid until I got to about 42 or 43. Became virtually exclusively solo until I got to mid 50's. Could get a group sometimes as a nuker, but when I tried to heal...it was just pitiful. I remember some excrutiating grouping in KC. Not that KC isn't excruciating anyway ; ).

NT

Heh Well, You *can* solo, so I guess it's off to the flame forums then.

I'd like SoE to sit down and revisit ALL classes spell lists and make them make more sense, will it happen though? Doubt it, they are too buzy working on the next money making idea.

If you notice both the new pre 50 spells have drawbacks.

The paladin one hits us with three different drawbacks

High manacost, Refresh timer (aka, can't spam heal with it) and the hybrid casting penalty.

The shaman one slows the target so much that it's almost a root. Hows that for disadvantage. I'd hate to have something like that cast on me if I were tanking anything, thats for sure. It's also a Heal over time, not a direct heal. Meaning you'd have to wait for it to take effect, and at 44 clerics just got their Celestial healing.

Now, I can only speak for Paladins, but I think druids should sit back and relax a bit. You got something nifty as well and I'm sure you could ask it to get moved a bit lower, or get another lower level version.

Just stop the crying, the spell is balanced because of the drawbacks. Not because you don't get a spell like it.

I really like the paladins I know...bless their pointed little heads.

But congratulations! You are troll 33,710 to blither nonsense about soloing and how the ability should block a class from being able to do something else!

Not gonna waste time dragging up the quote, but SoE themselves said that argument was invalid, and that all priest classes when properly balanced should be able to bring about hte same level ability to groups, to solo and to raids. Ability to solo is irrelevant ... the question is do druids have viable healing in the mid levels. I have never, ever, ever seen any druid that says otherwise. Even the ones that were opposed to a TR style spell never said anything that innane. And you are clearly not qualified to comment on it.

So Grats! Stand by that altar you have built to a fallacy!

I have nothing but contempt for people who casually drop by class boards when they clearly are fairly ignorant of the class in question and spout nonsense about what the class can or cannot, should or should not do.

On the spells themselves, first let me say again...I DO NOT BEGRUDGE THEM. Fine, enjoy. Your analysis of both is fairly ludicrous of course. Anyone who has played with a shaman healing at all knows how effectively torpor can be used in a group...it is perfect to heal with BETWEEN fights on the MA and DURING fights on those not in melee (and who have moved out of range), and being so immensely mana efficient it is the best choice. When I group with a shaman and no cleric, shaman ALWAYS torpors the MA between fights...always. This spell will be the same.

Yes there is a reset on the pally spell, so you would need to fall back on Greater Heal if you really needed to chain. But heal spells are a kit...you have some that are slower and more efficient, others that are faster but have some kind of handicap. For the record though, this spell is more mana efficient than Greater Healing so your "mana cost" argument is completely bogus.

Were I even remotely interested in furthering this I would flame you in a way that would move this garbage thread out of the substantive sections of the board into rants where it really belongs, but I find that more and more I just dont care when I see someone trot out the same lame @#%$ arguments that they used when they were /played 3 days and didn't know up from down.

I find it funny how many of the preceding posts seem to think that hybrids are too powerful. Lots of people would argue that they are too weak, at least the Shadowknights and the paladins. We provide utility, nothing great nothing bad. Druids provide utility, nothing great nothing bad. Bringing up the druids ability to quad is perfectly relevant because that is by far the most effective method of solo'ing. So you are on of the best classes at solo'ing, where do paladins fit? The middle, maybe. You don't want us to gain a spell that may actually help us get groups for fear that it may somehow damage your ability to get groups at the same time. Try getting groups if you are a paladin lvl 35-55. I did and at no point did I effectively find a group. A druid will find a group faster then a paladin at this lvl range, typically. But say the druid can't find a group. Druid just says "oh well, time to go quad." Paladin cant get a group, paladin says "lets hope the 4-5 places i can actually solo aren't camped." So what if paladins become slightly more attractive to a group? Does it really effect you so much that we should not have it? I myself have no problem giving you a new heal somewhere between 40 and 50, but don't complain that we got one. The overall attitude I reiceved from the druid side of the argument is to get rid of this spell. This spell will have barely any effect on the druid community if it goes into play. It seems the druid argument comes down to "No fair, he got something. What about me?". Lets look back towards the end of the summer when numerous classes, most notably shaman and druids, got revamped. Paladins got squat. Think of this as VIs delayed response to maintain spell balance. You get your new heal at 57, we get a new heal at 44.

Scroll back few months and this is the same discussion that clerics had with druids getting CH. Clerics didn't want it and complained about losing desirability in groups (this look familiar?). Druids wanted the CH, for more desirability in groups... (see where this is going?)

Now the shoe is on the other foot and druids don't want to lose desirability in groups as healer...go figure.

Also, Paladins are a hybrid of a cleric, druids are not. Sure druids are priests, doesn't mean they have to be as great a healer as a cleric...

Give the Paladins better healing. If they are going to give it to druids, then why not Pally's?

For the love of god, all you druids stop whining! You are already at the top of your class. Get over yourselves!

<blockquote style="padding-left:0.5em; margin-left:0; margin-right:0; margin-top:0; margin-bottom:0; border-left:solid 2">For the love of god, all you druids stop whining! You are already at the top of your class.</blockquote>

Really? Druids are at the top of the druid class?

Virtually all the posters here are so far past hte point that level 44 spells matter it is not even funny. I guarantee you, no one posting here is afraid for themselves.

Every druid posting here went through those levels when they suddenly began to suck at healing. The same has been true for both Shaman and Paladins.

SoE just added spells that help the Shamans and Paladins but not the druids.

Why are level 60 plus people trying to turn this into an us versus them kind of thing? I don't WORRY about paladins. SOMETIMES they are better suited to heal in groups in the end game. That is just fine.

But the histrionics of the posters coming here saying druids are gunning for this mid level pally spell are just ridiculuous.

READ THE POSTS. All people are saying is gee, druids have hte same problem in the same level range, and in the interests of those WHO COME AFTER US, gee, something should be done for druids too.

There a few relevant factors.

As a cleric, Ive got no problems with Sup Heal getting moved to 44. I do have problems with what I know will follow.

Either
1) There will be an outcry to move Tunare's renewal down in levels
2) Or there will be an outcry to get a spell that heals in equivalence to Divine Light in the early 50s.

As far as temperence goes, dropping the reagent to an opal for 5pp wouldnt be a large stretch. Id say from a package standpoint of the spells that are stacking that a 44 cleric will be able to buff better than a 60 Druid. In one respect and thats sheer HPs. POTG will still buff better than a non-reagent spell, and thats the tradeoff, along with no mana regen which is >all for casters.

Please dont attempt this. Druids can buff strength, wolf forms (outdoors), regens, run speed, infravision, invis, see-invis, mana regen with HPs, and damage shields. Clerics can buff str (that goes backwards eventually :P ), HPs/AC and IVU. Thats it. Dont enter into this farcical one section of your buff lineup versus the strength that clerics hold in only one category of buffing. Its silly.


Belkram Marrwolf

<blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>As far as temperence goes, dropping the reagent to an opal for 5pp wouldnt be a large stretch. Id say from a package standpoint of the spells that are stacking that a 44 cleric will be able to buff better than a 60 Druid. In one respect and thats sheer HPs. POTG will still buff better than a non-reagent spell, and thats the tradeoff, along with no mana regen which is >all for casters. [/quote]

I'd gladly let there be a reagent on PotG/C if they increased the HP on it... and made it so that crappy @#%$ aego doesn't overwrite it of course.

<blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>Please dont attempt this. Druids can buff strength, wolf forms (outdoors), regens, run speed, infravision, invis, see-invis, mana regen with HPs, and damage shields. Clerics can buff str (that goes backwards eventually :P ), HPs/AC and IVU. Thats it. Dont enter into this farcical one section of your buff lineup versus the strength that clerics hold in only one category of buffing. Its silly. [/quote]

Str buffs. Useless.
Wolf form makes stuff that's normally indifferent come kick your @#%$.
Runspeed, Hi innate run 3, jboots and sow potions.
Regen, yeah, we're good at that.
Infravision, umm no we don't unless it comes with wolf form.
Invis, yeah, just like rangers, enchanters, wizards, magicians, beastlords, shaman and bards.
See invis. Bloody useful one here. Bracer of the hidden, or a plethora of worn see invis or see invis containing vision effects.
Mana regen with HP. Yeah, the same one that clerics keep overwriting when they do unnannounced aego bombs.
Damage shields. Not with a mage around.

Everquest's buff logic would, if I am not mistaken, allow Temperence to overwrite a level 65 druids Blessing of the Nine.

If I remember the prior discussions about spell stacking right, greater hp on a buff will cause it to overwrite any buff regardless of level. The game doesn't have a lot of finesse about how it determines what is "best," so for hp oriented buffs, greatest hp wins.

So, by game logic, a level 44 cleric buff is greater than a level 65 druid one.

Now, a 65 druid is already dealing with this with Aego and Virtue, so this is really no different. But I wish they would do SOMETHING about the way this is done. It is a nuissance to try to protect your POTC/POTN.

Strength buffs are NOT useless at the level range we are talking about. Keep in mind the level range involved here is 44 to 60. Wolf forms are for HUNTING. Once you get to a pull spot you use it, not before, use your head.

Invis, Clerics do not do this, stay on point this is discussing Cleric buffs versus Druid buffs and I didnt set this point someone else did regarding a 44 Cleric being able to buff better than a 63 Druid. Aego argument is pointless here, a 44 to 59 Cleric cant cast the thing. Damage shields are used in grouping they are a buff you get.

This is completely typical. You discount every option that you have and because its 98 percent of what another class has you dismiss the ability. Maybe for raiding but not for hunting in a group and at the level ranges discussed there will be a lot more hunting than raiding.

The issue is whether a 44 Cleric can buff better than a 63 Druid. Someone HERE stated this. Its a ludicrous arguement. They buff better in ONE aspect, the Druid will buff better in a multitude of areas that a cleric cant even begin to touch. Stop the class envy and realize that every class has its tradeoffs and lacks things that others have. Its part of the game. Its MEANT to be part of the game.


Belkram Marrwolf

<blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>Strength buffs are NOT useless at the level range we are talking about. Keep in mind the level range involved here is 44 to 60.[/quote]

Guess what? They're still useless.

<blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>Wolf forms are for HUNTING. Once you get to a pull spot you use it, not before, use your head.[/quote]

Tell this to the group that gets eaten by Gorenaire because their friendly neighborhood druid group wolfed them. Also, some people have horses (no wolf form for them). Some have self buffs that prevent wolf form (lich). There's also a few debuffs that will strip wolf form but not SoW/SoE (forget what it was exactly though).

<blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>Invis, Clerics do not do this, stay on point this is discussing Cleric buffs versus Druid buffs and I didnt set this point someone else did regarding a 44 Cleric being able to buff better than a 63 Druid.[/quote]

Yet you still mentioned it in your last post.

<blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>Aego argument is pointless here, a 44 to 59 Cleric cant cast the thing.[/quote]

Temperance is Mini-Aego. Temperance is level 44. So far we can only assume that Temperance will have the same moronic stacking issues as PotG/Pot9. IE. level 44 cleric's Temperance will overwrite level 65 druid's Pot9.

<blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>This is completely typical. You discount every option that you have and because its 98 percent of what another class has you dismiss the ability. Maybe for raiding but not for hunting in a group and at the level ranges discussed there will be a lot more hunting than raiding. [/quote]

Most people have been talking about raiding. Discounting the trolls of course.

<blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>The issue is whether a 44 Cleric can buff better than a 63 Druid. Someone HERE stated this. Its a ludicrous arguement. They buff better in ONE aspect, the Druid will buff better in a multitude of areas that a cleric cant even begin to touch.[/quote]

Unfortunately that one area is the area that is weighted most heavily in importance, both for raiding and grouping.

<blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>Stop the class envy and realize that every class has its tradeoffs and lacks things that others have. Its part of the game. Its MEANT to be part of the game. [/quote]

I don't see any class envy from druids, just OTHER classes saying that we can str buff and sow so we shouldn't get hp buffs that aren't overwritten by a cleric 20 levels lower.

<strong>The issue is whether a 44 Cleric can buff better than a 63 Druid. Someone HERE stated this. Its a ludicrous arguement. They buff better in ONE aspect, the Druid will buff better in a multitude of areas that a cleric cant even begin to touch. Stop the class envy and realize that every class has its tradeoffs and lacks things that others have. Its part of the game. Its MEANT to be part of the game.</strong>

HPs are pretty key. Everyone can use more all the time. Druid strength and wolf form buffs are rarely useful however,

wolf form: outdoors, no ranger in group, no enchanter in group, no primal, willing to lose slam etc. abilities and tolerate the annoying perspective.

strength: no shaman in the group (and no lingering focus), no primal.

Needless to say I don't cast these much.

Over clerics that basically just leaves the mana component of Pot9, FoE which PoP has made useful finally with all the outdoor zones (huzzah, a second buff) and the greater FR/CR buffing of PS, which still is so far behind what a bard can do it's pretty sad and if it wasn't for all these n300 resist AEs it'd be a completely pointless buff too, certainly useless anywhere pre PoP where a bard can take you over 250 resist without trying.

Wolf Form = Aside from the indifferent mobs suddenly hating you, you ALSO have to deal with a) People who can't stand wolf form. This comes up a lot more than people believe. b) OUTDOORS... You want to do Dreadlands from 44-60? hehe. I don't think so...

Str Buff = useless. It is. Some warriors used to bother me for str, but the little tiny bit of ATK it generates is pointless.

Damage shields = Yeah, they are ok. Except if you have someone slowing in your group, or you have a mage. And chances are, you probably will have a chanter, beast, or shaman. Note DS's become infinitely less useful as your level goes up. The increase in damage is pathetic vs the increase in mob hp/damage output. I seriously think damage shields at 60+ should be around 100 pts at least. Not 34-40. When a mob is hitting me for 550 a hit, I want it to notice.

The spell range that this thing will be cast is 44 to 59. Protection of the Nine wont GET cast in all likelihood on people within that casting range. Bringing up the 61 to 65 problems should be a separate thread from discussing spells meant to address grouping and raiding on the 44 to 59 crowd.

Strength spells are incredibly important in overall game context to melees. I dont know what game you are playing but until you acquire primals (again, note that people 44 to 59 with primals will be a very SMALL percentage) strength adds to your attack rating. More attack = more damage. This is quite basic. Dismissing strength buffs as useless is an argument that wont hold water.

I agree HPs are pretty key. But for casters getting the mana regen stacked with Marzin and an AC buff is what they want. Mana Regen is more important to a caster than 400 HPs. We both know this L1nd. Think back to hunting pre 58 or so. Almost no one is going to have primal pre 60, that argument is flawed.

Wolf form argument is also flawed. You can hunt exclusively outdoors now with PoP. You dont need to venture into a dungeon now at all to get experience from level 1 to level 65.

This spell is intended to be more convenient for a cleric from the level 44 to 59 for buffing. It makes buffing more efficient for them. It does increase the buffing cost overall because most clerics dont start using reagent spells in everyday hunting before level 50 or so. A cleric can ALREADY buff to the extent of that spell for a little more mana. The only thing the spell does is to make it more efficient and convenient for the cleric. How this becomes a class envy issue is really beyond me. It just doesnt make a lot of sense to me.

Saying that the cleric can buff better than a 63 Druid...well he always could by your reasoning. He simply had to cast 3 spells to do so instead of one. This is all over making it more convenient for another class, and you are arguing against this?

Belkram Marrwolf

PS Alueia, look at my post count. Im not a troll, Im just not agreeing with you or the current wisdom of the board.

Scroll back few months and this is the same discussion that clerics had with druids getting CH. Clerics didn't want it and complained about losing desirability in groups (this look familiar?). Druids wanted the CH, for more desirability in groups... (see where this is going?)


Grats! You have passed reading incompetance 1 please retreat to the early part of this thread and begin again.

Druids have little to no desirablity in groups 41-49

Are druids upset that pally's and shaman may get a heal with disadvantages at lvl 44? NO

Would druids like to have the druid groupabilty for 40-49 looked at? YES

The only way the new paladin and cleric spells can be justified is by moving Superior Heal to 44 for druids - otherwise Druids lose the small spec of group desirability they have in the pre-CH levels.