- Forums
- EverQuest
- General Discussion
- SK+DRU+ENC
SK+DRU+ENCFollow
is this a good trio? do you think i could lvl these 3 toons from 20 to 65 grouping the whole way and not needing to find other grp members?
In order for the enc to make a significant impact, he would want to charm. If you have a charmed mob tanking, it would be better not to have the SK. If the enc won't be charming, why not switch to shaman for backup heals, haste and slow. If you switch from enc to shaman, then the druid becomes nothing but a port bot since most things that the druid does, the shaman does earlier in level (heals, regen). You could retain the ports but get better dps by switching to a wizard.
SK, SHM, WIZ is my choice. That being said, I think your combo is viable and if you are 3-boxing, would leave you with less to do on the enchanter bot letting you concentrate more on the SK which needs the most attention during combat.
SK, SHM, WIZ is my choice. That being said, I think your combo is viable and if you are 3-boxing, would leave you with less to do on the enchanter bot letting you concentrate more on the SK which needs the most attention during combat.
Drac...I know little about multi player but I do spend a ton of time with a Shammie that two boxes with his Rogue. At lower levels Shammies may not bring a lot but I think the Shammie idea is good. I have seen this Shammie handle adds and hold them at bay, heal and the buffs higher end are killer. The Wiz can still port and succor just like the Druid. Shammie can heal as the Druid so the Wizzy may not be a bad alternative. Since I know little about tri-boxing....how would you handle the agro on the on the other toon till the SK could gain it back?
The Shammie I play with is higher level than his Rogue so was able to take the pounding till things were under control.
The Shammie I play with is higher level than his Rogue so was able to take the pounding till things were under control.
Shammy's are very weak healers at 50+, you could not hunt the planes with either set but both are viable.
The major problem i fore-see is aggro issue's, an sk really has to work on aggro especially if you are throwing slows early <which you will need to without a cleric in that group at later levels.>
i disagree with losing the chanter though since mana regen and crowd control is important with a 3 box. My friend at work uses Sk/Shammy/mage and his primary cause of death is adds he can't cope with.
He likes the mage in the trio since he can launch the pet and forget about it in a tough fight, a beastlord could also take the slows at higher levels i suppose.
The major problem i fore-see is aggro issue's, an sk really has to work on aggro especially if you are throwing slows early <which you will need to without a cleric in that group at later levels.>
i disagree with losing the chanter though since mana regen and crowd control is important with a 3 box. My friend at work uses Sk/Shammy/mage and his primary cause of death is adds he can't cope with.
He likes the mage in the trio since he can launch the pet and forget about it in a tough fight, a beastlord could also take the slows at higher levels i suppose.
tarv wrote:
an sk really has to work on aggro especially if you are throwing slows early
SK or Pally though, I would consider this the primary 'box' in a 3 box set. By this I mean it is the box you need to concentrate most of your attention on. Pulling, holding aggro, fear kiting, it all happens here. In situations where CC is needed, focus switches to either the enc or the shaman for mez or root parking/off tanking. I think here is where the multi-box setup becomes weak. Once attention is focused on CC, it becomes hard to control the tank-aggro generator properly. While mez is preferable to root parking, I think handling 3 boxes gives an edge to the shaman who can take a lot more abuse than a chanter. If Dracoid thinks he could keep the chanter alive here, then it becomes a better choice than the shammy.
I also like the idea of either a mage or a beastlord in the 3rd slot, if ports/evacs aren't a primary concern. Either can generate great dps without relying on pure mana like the Wiz. The bst might be a bit better choice since they have slow + mana regen at higher levels.
yes thanks for the replies smatman, forgot to add, i am 2 boxing and i have another person to play the 3rd char but i may 3 box at times, not sure tarvs response was realted to my question too much and josette's wasnt close. TY all for replying, any more responses are appreciated.
This isn't the same thing, but I reguarly play my 65 bard with a friend who two boxes a 64 ranger and a 63 druid. We can roll through lower level places like Nadox and get decent AAXP, could probably do Tier 1 planes easily enough though I don't see where they'd be worth the effort (we do Nadox to casually grind AA and get gems/coin.. something lacking in most T1 camps) but after that the druid can't really keep up with the ranger. We were having no problem doing 3 person LDoNs in Ruj Hills up until we started breaking 62 and getting lvl 65 dungeons where, again, the druid couldn't keep up heals on the ranger. Granted, a SK is a much better tank than a ranger is -- I'm just giving my own experiences.
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
I would replace the SK, with a paladin for three reasons. You get Rezz, better/more buffs, and additional healing capacity. The paladin with his buffs, the druids, and the enchanters make a more complete tank.
Off topic some, I know this is probably not in your cards but a trio of a Paladin,Bard, and druid would be cool. It's like a nice alt. to the holy trinity. Also your friend would probably have to play the bard. Good luck with whatever direction you go.
Off topic some, I know this is probably not in your cards but a trio of a Paladin,Bard, and druid would be cool. It's like a nice alt. to the holy trinity. Also your friend would probably have to play the bard. Good luck with whatever direction you go.
ty all i will take what you have said into account
tarv of the Seven Seas wrote:
Shammy's are very weak healers at 50+, you could not hunt the planes with either set but both are viable.
The major problem i fore-see is aggro issue's, an sk really has to work on aggro especially if you are throwing slows early <which you will need to without a cleric in that group at later levels.>
i disagree with losing the chanter though since mana regen and crowd control is important with a 3 box. My friend at work uses Sk/Shammy/mage and his primary cause of death is adds he can't cope with.
He likes the mage in the trio since he can launch the pet and forget about it in a tough fight, a beastlord could also take the slows at higher levels i suppose.
The major problem i fore-see is aggro issue's, an sk really has to work on aggro especially if you are throwing slows early <which you will need to without a cleric in that group at later levels.>
i disagree with losing the chanter though since mana regen and crowd control is important with a 3 box. My friend at work uses Sk/Shammy/mage and his primary cause of death is adds he can't cope with.
He likes the mage in the trio since he can launch the pet and forget about it in a tough fight, a beastlord could also take the slows at higher levels i suppose.
LoL, you really have no clue how powerful a sk/sham combo is then do you. heck i have lost count how many times ive gone to T2 zones with nothing but a few sk, nec (self) and a good sham and kicked major butt.
you are bonkers if you think a SK has to work at keeping and gaining agro. of the 3 tanks in the game a SK has the easiest means at gaining and keeping agro. yes even better then a pally stun spell. the larger portion of the SK spell base is exclusivly for building and keeping agro.
that is not saying a sham is the best healer out there. in fact of the 3 healing classes the sham is the weakest at healing, but with their slows, dots, and #1 mana regen they more then make up for it.
sk, sham, chanter is extreemly powerful group. i would personaly replace the chanter with a necro, but then i prefer the evil classes and a good chanter is unstoppable and very hard to pass up.
so just replace the druid with a sham and you have a much more viable group then with a druid.
pro of a druid:
port (but who really needs them except to get to CS)
#2 DS in game
#2 healer in game
ok regen spells
ok DD
weak DoTs
SoW at 14th
pro of sham:
SoW at 9th
#2 dots in game
#1 slower
#3 healer, but with a slow you will use less mana on heals
#1 regen spells
can melee if need be
#1 mana regen in game, yes that coming from a necro.
#1 friend to all melee with stat buffs(this includes pets)
#2 AC/HP combo buffs to max out the tanks powers
can solo ADDs if he can not park them even indoors
his roots do not break mez
pet, weak, but still once they get their AA they have some very powerful petS (yes more then 1) for added DPS to the group.
im sure that list goes on, but for now that is enough to think about.
i agree that a SK/chanter combo with a healer is a good way around things. i personally would go with cleric or sham over druid any day of the week. both classes bring so much more to the hunt then a druid do. at least with a cleric (very low dps, but #1 healer) you get also the #1 rez in the game and get rezes much sooner. add if you are going after undead (and you can undead for a lot of levels) a cleric will be more powerful then a sham for DPS, but i do not know if a cleric gets undead slows like a necro does or not.
Quote:
of the 3 tanks in the game a SK has the easiest means at gaining and keeping agro.
this is what i thought, the rest of the post was great, ty for all that, was very helpuful.
i think i will stick with those 3 classes i have cause of the mezzing from the ench
Recent Visitors: 248
All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (248)
- Forums
- EverQuest
- General Discussion
- SK+DRU+ENC
© 2024 Fanbyte LLC