Quote:
I played a pally in EQ as my main for a long time, and had a blast with it. The only thing that really hindered that character (besides getting banned) was the fact that, once I reached the higher levels, I just couldn't tank as well as a warrior, so I'd get passed up in groups. How does a paladin compare to a warrior as far as tanking ability?
Well the best information or maybe the most negative information can be found on the WoW Class message boards.
Paladins are tanks and somewhat like EQ bards in that they have some group buffs - if your group is without a warrior, a paladin will suffice. Yes, a warrior will and should be the MT more often than not. But Paladins are great secondary tanks and backup healers. I played a Warrior to 60 and loved it, but I am enjoying the Paladin. Many people say that a playing a paladin is the easiest class to play. Yes and no.
Paladins can do ok at soloing, but they lack range capability (at least at lower levels (I know of one item in your mid-40s mid 50s range where Paladins can use a boomerang). They do have an Exorcise Undead spell that can be cast from a distance at the undead - and there are plenty of undead in the game - skeletons, ghouls, etc.
Still, their tanking ability and healing ability can make them last for quite the distance in a fight. They have one spiffy stun ability move that is nice. Otherwise, they are rather bland fighters as they just swing and bonk. Warriors, Rogues, and Hunters all outshine in the fighting moves department as well as DPS (damage per second). But the tradeoff is none of them can heal themselves during a fight unless they have healing potions.
Groups are where Paladins truly shine. The are quite complex when first looking at all their abilities - but read the Paladin Class boards on the WoW website and look for Paladin guides for more detail. As I mentioned before, I am usually the primary healer and secondary tank all-in-one lately, and it's a challenging task. God knows I'm not the best healer out there by any means. Thank goodness for rez capability! Anyhoo, paladins are welcome in groups for their multifunctionality.
You can only choose between Humans and Dwarves to be Paladins. I should mention that Humans racial mount are horses anyhoo, but the Paladin steed stands out nicely. Dwarven mounts are normally rams, but if you play a Dwarven Paladin, you will also get a horse. As a longtime fan of Dwarves, I prefer playing other classes for my Dwarven characters as I love the Ram mounts. I think they're spiffy!
Despite Exodus's naysaying about the big hammer, I think it's pretty cool. There is a level 20 series of quests that rewards you with Verigan's Fist, an awesome 2hd hammer that will last you from level 20 to your early level 40s.
Another perk of the Paladin - like Warlocks, free mount at level 40. Other classes have to pay out about 90 gold (normally a 100 gold, but if you faction with your home city/racial starting point is Honorable, the cost is reduced to 90 gold). The epic mounts at level 60 cost 900 gold with Honorable faction. Paladins and Warlocks have to undergo another series of grueling quests and there is some cost of gold factored in as well. But the level 40 mount is free.
Quote:
Also, how does a druid stack up against a priest? Is the druid similar to a bard in EQ, without the songs?
They do very well - while priests have a larger mana pool and wider variety of healing spells, druids are excellent single target healers and healing over time spells (regen). Druids have been fixed (i.e., Blizzard did a talents review on them) and Priests will have their talents reviewed and patched in patch 1.10 (next big patch).
I would say that Druids are very versatile like bards, but Paladins are probably more similar to EQ bards in terms of buffage. They both have a wide variety of things they can do.
Whew! Sorry for the long post - I'm sure some things may be argued here, but this is from my experience playing a lev 60 Warrior, lev 40 Druid, and lev 47 Paladin (first character on first server I played long time ago).