Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

Playing Iksar or thinking of playing Iksar? Read first.Follow

#1 Dec 01 2004 at 3:26 PM Rating: Decent
**
976 posts
Oh, thought you might find this interesting. I did once I sat down and compared.

Strength: 18 Alignment: Evil
Agility: 22 Starting City: East Freeport
Stamina: 18 Homeland: Kunark
Intelligence: 20 Language(s): Sebilisian
Wisdom: 22

Traditional Role(s): Fighter , Mage

These are game actual starting stats. These below are the OLD stats before they changed them right before the game was released. These are the stats you will see in your EQ2 booklet, but they are not the correct stats. All race stats were changed just before the game was released, and they didn't bother to update the book.

Str: 20
Agi: 20
Stamina: 25
Intelligence: 20
Wisdom: 15

Now, looking at the actual game stats .... eh, they have low strength...but their traditional role is fighter?? Heck, their Wis is higher than Int., but they're also traditional mages? SOE messed up a bit, methinks. Heck, they'd make better scouts than fighters or mages according to start out stats. Original stats do show them being more for fighter than Priest, most definately.

Bad for all those Iksar fighters who weren't aware of the Stat change. Good for me I guess, but I don't think it's very fair overall to everyone playing Iksar. At least they should have updated the book and put traditional role as Priest or Scout so as not to cheat people.

Edited, Wed Dec 1 15:31:12 2004 by Ivven
#2 Dec 01 2004 at 3:36 PM Rating: Decent
**
494 posts
STR: 18
AGI: 22
STA: 18
INT: 20
WIS: 22


Overall, the stats are pretty even across the board. Besides, with class-specific gear, all those starting stats mean squat for the most part.

To me, as a Crusader, I am more interested in AGI, STA, and WIS. Even more important is the raw +HP, +AC, and +POW.

#3 Dec 01 2004 at 3:36 PM Rating: Decent
I agree with you about the stats seeming off, however I'd stand behind what they listed as the traditional roles... although I would add priest.

"Tradition Role" IMHO points toward a lore perspective on what they typically are, rather than whta they'd be most statistically suited for. In the old empire, they WERE mostly either Fighters (Warriors in the Army, Shadowknights, or Monks(Bruisers in this case)), Mages (The Necromancers), or Priests (Shaman)... and they had a fairly strict caste system if I remember my Iksar lore correctly.
#4 Dec 01 2004 at 6:11 PM Rating: Decent
**
976 posts
I agree it CAN be done (Iksar Fighter or Mage) but really I don't see the Iksar having less strength than a human. At least I think they should have updated the manual, or as mentioned...added Priest. It makes sense to me anyway, the Priest thing... considering the Iksar were supposed to have been very devout followers of their Faceless god.

Still, I think they did indeed nerf a little on the strength.
#5 Dec 01 2004 at 8:48 PM Rating: Decent
**
786 posts
As i said in an earlier post on another thread.....big lizards would have a higher strength and stamina especialy compared to say....a human or elf (which thankfully it is higher then an elf). We were nerfed. Bad vision and lowered stats....I still look bada$$ though and though I may feel gimped, Im not. Dont be detered by all this, iksars are still viable fighters, preists, etc. and fun to boot. 8P

Edited, Wed Dec 1 22:00:44 2004 by WasteOfSpace
#6 Dec 01 2004 at 10:19 PM Rating: Default
http://www.universalrealms.com/ShowPost.aspx?PostID=1005

Stats for all the races.
#7 Dec 01 2004 at 10:28 PM Rating: Good
Well, in the long run, your starting stats aren't going to make or break you. I say play what you want and have fun with it. :)
#8 Dec 01 2004 at 10:30 PM Rating: Decent
**
976 posts
I agree. You can play just about anything you want and I'm sticking with Iksar regardless.

#9 Dec 01 2004 at 10:34 PM Rating: Decent
**
786 posts
Aye. My crusader aint goin no where.
#10 Dec 01 2004 at 10:52 PM Rating: Decent
*
97 posts
All the races stats were changed, some aspects worse some better.

Overall i'm glad they changed the stats the way they did. I didn't like them all being multiples of 5. And dwarves should have never had higher wisdom than the high elves. God.
#11 Dec 01 2004 at 11:11 PM Rating: Good
**
976 posts
LMFAO dwarves had higher WIS than elves???

Elf: Greetings my dwarven companion. Would you like to group today and slay many evil villanious creatures?

Dwarf: Aye laddy...I be goin with ya, Priest I am. Now git me some ale, eh? Ah, aye...tis a good draught I'm wishin for.


Elf: <_<;;; uh.... you're a priest?

Dwarf: Aye *hic* now will ya stop gaping at me like that eh?? 'Efore I knock ya upside the skull there with me fist!!





Edited, Wed Dec 1 23:14:04 2004 by Ivven
#12 Dec 02 2004 at 4:02 AM Rating: Decent
*
70 posts
Rated up for making me laugh /wink
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 90 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (90)