Forums » The Shaman

Anyone else thinks Shaman should to be a class that can res?

    • 16 posts
    November 24, 2018 3:31 PM PST

    Iksar said:

    stormzee said:

    I found that by concentrating on the the thing I was best suited to, damage mitigated and augmentation, I was generally o.k. for groups, and so can't really say that I have experience of feeling less desirable in a group just because of one spell.

    In a game with a stinging death penatly many/most players will gravitate toward the healer that can best reduce the harshness of death. With all healing being equal, if only cleric had rez then they would stand above the other two healers almost always.

    I agree, Iksar, and think can live with that quite happily, as long as whatever class I might choose has something valuable of its own to bring to the party, or is a viable soloer when the situation calls.

    • 2314 posts
    November 25, 2018 4:57 PM PST

    stormzee said:

    Iksar said:

    stormzee said:

    I found that by concentrating on the the thing I was best suited to, damage mitigated and augmentation, I was generally o.k. for groups, and so can't really say that I have experience of feeling less desirable in a group just because of one spell.

    In a game with a stinging death penatly many/most players will gravitate toward the healer that can best reduce the harshness of death. With all healing being equal, if only cleric had rez then they would stand above the other two healers almost always.

    I agree, Iksar, and think can live with that quite happily, as long as whatever class I might choose has something valuable of its own to bring to the party, or is a viable soloer when the situation calls.

    So long as whatever class you pick is fine, both wanted in groups and able to solo, then to hell with the non-cleric priest classes?   The game is based upon archetypes and each class in the archetype should be as equally desirable in a group.  Having the only XP returning rez spell in the hands of the Cleric is completely counter to that approach.

    • 1 posts
    November 28, 2018 11:20 PM PST

    We could make resurrection a more impressive ability depending on the class using it.  For example, Shamans can see the past and future.  Therefore, bringing someone from the past (a dead ally) back into the present may have disastrous future outcomes.

    If a Shaman resurrects a player, a tether from the past is placed between the Shaman and the resurrected ally, if the ally dies within a set time frame, let's say 5 minutes for this example, then the Shaman either dies themselves or suffers large amounts of damage.

    • 246 posts
    November 29, 2018 11:53 AM PST

    "Shamans live in every age at once." true, but they have no ability to manipulate time let alone bring another being through time.

     

     As to Shamans and rez I would say, no. Clerics get their power from a diety. Shaman are tribal witch doctors, their power is derived from communing with powerful spirits and the elemnts.

     

     But with that "Shamans live in every age at once." They should have an ability to intervene just before their ally dies. 

    • 13 posts
    December 3, 2018 10:06 PM PST
    I assumed that they would be able to...
    • 2 posts
    December 17, 2018 11:17 AM PST

    Vandraad Said:

     

    It is a matter of give and take. The EQ1 Shaman was vastly more adaptable because of its broad utility than the narrow focused cleric.  Why were they different?  Honestly because the cleric had rez.  If you keep the EQ1 shaman broad utility and add to it a rez, the class becomes overpowered.  You'll have to take something away from the shaman to give it a rez...and that will mean lessening out utility. 

     

    I really must disagree that every 'priest' class needs a rez.  That's just lazy design.  I never, as a Shaman, ever felt left out or unwanted in groups (even as the sole healer) because I did not have a rez spell.  You know why?  Because I had a reputation as a damn good Shaman and the level of players I ran with were willing to risk not having a cleric in the group.  It was not needed.  Why?  Because invariably there was a cleric somewhere nearby who, when we asked nicely, would rez us when we dragged over our corpses.

    Here's the thing to remember about a rez...you do not need it right away.  EQ1 had a very long timer before that rez clock ran out.  Just had to leave some useless item on the corpse and go about your camping.  Later, you get your necro friend to summon the bodies and a cleric to rez and you're good to go.  A rez while you are there is convenient, but not a requirement! 

     

    I agree, with a shot of clarity (wheather from chanter or potion) and cannabalize, many a time I was down to a sliver of health and had no prob main healing, you just have to learn the limits of your character. And what I thought was very cool about EQ was that class diveristy, where you had to call out to the community for help sometimes when things when bad and build relationships, whether it was nearby adventures you implore to come to your aid or guildmates that rally up and venture to you, and in turn you maybe needed to help them in the future, thats how community's are built. No reason for the shaman to have a rez, just a bonus. 

    • 104 posts
    January 18, 2019 11:29 AM PST

    Vandraad said:

    stormzee said:

    Iksar said:

    stormzee said:

    I found that by concentrating on the the thing I was best suited to, damage mitigated and augmentation, I was generally o.k. for groups, and so can't really say that I have experience of feeling less desirable in a group just because of one spell.

    In a game with a stinging death penatly many/most players will gravitate toward the healer that can best reduce the harshness of death. With all healing being equal, if only cleric had rez then they would stand above the other two healers almost always.

    I agree, Iksar, and think can live with that quite happily, as long as whatever class I might choose has something valuable of its own to bring to the party, or is a viable soloer when the situation calls.

    So long as whatever class you pick is fine, both wanted in groups and able to solo, then to hell with the non-cleric priest classes?   The game is based upon archetypes and each class in the archetype should be as equally desirable in a group.  Having the only XP returning rez spell in the hands of the Cleric is completely counter to that approach.

     

    Are you ok with Clerics getting combat pets and teleports then?  After all, having those things make druids and shaman clearly superior to clerics in some situations just like a cleric's xp rez makes them better in some situations.  This is the problem with the whole everyone that can heal does so equally paradigm-making the non-healing stuff also equivalent so it doesn't make classes obsolete just like being inferior at healing would...


    This post was edited by Zyellinia at January 18, 2019 11:30 AM PST