Revised Newbie Guide

[Estu]

Inspired by this thread (http://www.project1999.org/forums/showthread.php?t=123953), I revised the preexisting newbie guide on the Wiki, which I found to be rather lacking in some ways. Here is the new version (http://wiki.project1999.com/Players:Newbie). I added several sections, including one for people entering Norrath for the first time ever (the guide in general is tailored more to rusty veterans, IMO).

I tried to stay with the general tone and content of the old guide except where there were major issues, so it's not necessarily what I would write if it was just me writing a guide, but check it out and link your newbie pals to it if you like! And feel free to offer suggestions for change (or just change it yourself).

[Cribanox]

I skimmed through it but one thing that caught my eye was this

I want to tank but I want to do other things too like cast spells
Shadow Knight > Paladin > Bard > Ranger > Monk
SKs and Paladins are both great tanks in EXP groups, and SKs have the added bonus of being able to solo somewhat. Bards are good tanks and have a huge array of other useful abilities. Rangers and monks are both decent tanks; rangers are better at holding aggro, but monks are better at DPSing.

Wat

bards cant tank and monks have flying kick and FD so maybe that counts as "other things" but even other classes can kick / stab and either hide or something.

[Estu]

I've heard very good arguments made that bards are actually quite good tanks, the basic idea being that they can gear well for HP and hold aggro well, and that there is not a major difference in damage mitigation between them and other tanks. I haven't had much first-hand experience, but I'd be interested in hearing opinions (or, better yet, data).

[zanderklocke]

I've heard very good arguments made that bards are actually quite good tanks, the basic idea being that they can gear well for HP and hold aggro well, and that there is not a major difference in damage mitigation between them and other tanks. I haven't had much first-hand experience, but I'd be interested in hearing opinions (or, better yet, data).

Bard can hold aggro very well, but needs to have some pretty solid gear to tank. They will probably also be worse than other tanks, but they can hold their own with keeping aggro if you have a good healer. I have tanked for fungi king groups as well as Master Yael when A-Team didn't have any warriors around.

[Estu]

Bard can hold aggro very well, but needs to have some pretty solid gear to tank. They will probably also be worse than other tanks, but they can hold their own with keeping aggro if you have a good healer. I have tanked for fungi king groups as well as Master Yael when A-Team didn't have any warriors around.

So do you think it's fair to say that bards are better tanks than rangers or monks?

[heazels]

wow someone helped me thanks =p. I've been updating it from time to time.

[heazels]

some of the stuff you put is not quite accurate though.

[webrunner5]

A Rogue is a better tank than a Bard. Good god man. They suck. Where did you think the term "paper tank" came from?

[Estu]

wow someone helped me thanks =p. I've been updating it from time to time.

some of the stuff you put is not quite accurate though.

Hey dude, I'm assuming you're Meadtj on the Wiki. I'd love to work on the guide with you. I saw the changes you made recently (after my overhaul) and I have to dispute a few of them, though. I added notes in the discussion page for that Wiki page; we can talk about it there and try to come to a consensus. Since you started the guide (I think?) I want to defer to you whenever possible, but I also want to avoid giving absolutely wrong information.

[fishingme]

If the bard has some gear and knows his songs, they are adequate tanks. Paper tanks imo was more towards casters wearing cloth. Ya know, paper, cloth. It's paper man it's dry paper!!

[Getsmurfed]

I'll chime in here, I've been a point of contention for some people regarding my love of bard tanking. I've tanked N and W HS with groups with ease. I hit 3.5k HP and 150 MR in a basic suit of various Imbrued and odds/ends. Granted N/W HS isn't much of an accomplishment I generally end up tanking, ccing, and splitting my own pulls with much success I do not think I've yet to had a wipe in any of my groups (and these are quite regular). The thing about tanking outside raids is that you need to have a high hp pool and magic resistance esp with a cleric. A cleric is more mana efficient with complete heals the higher an HP pool on a tank is. I've also been in for reets juggs and tanked juggs without an issue.

TL;DR Bards generate insane amounts of threat, enough that an epic SK can have trouble pulling of a bard who is trying. High HP and MR make a bard just as tanky as most other classes, but will never tank in raids nor is there a need for them to. A bard can bring a well balanced tank that gives mana song, CC, AS slows, single pulls, and insane threat gen.

Edited: TL:DR

[Getsmurfed]

-

[doeda]

please don't turn this into RNF

[Elements]

Remember this is a newbie guide. I really wouldnt associate bard with the word tank at all in a newbie guide. At any point when a bard is going to be geared enough or supoorted enough to tank, a shaman, ranger, monk, rogue, or any of the actual tanks is going to tank better in terms of taking damage.

Sure a super geared bard with propper support can tank something but if newbie bards start joining groups claiming to be tanks I think you will have done them a diservice.

[fadetree]

Yeah, geared rangers can be fairly good tanks too for grinds, also due to aggro gen, etc., but your average ranger is not going to be a durable tank. Same goes for bards I think.

[Estu]

I've reworded that section a bit, here's the new version:

---

I want to tank but I want to do other things too like cast spells or pull mobs and feign death
Shadow Knight > Paladin >> Monk > Bard > Ranger
SKs and Paladins are both great tanks in EXP groups, and SKs have the added bonus of being able to solo somewhat. Some of the melee classes can also be passable tanks with the right gear and know-how. Bards have excellent aggro generation, can wear plate, and have a huge array of other useful abilities. Rangers and monks can both be acceptable tanks; rangers are better at holding aggro, but monks are better at DPSing.

---

Note, I don't necessarily think monks are better tanks than bards; that was someone else's change, but I don't think there is enough data to show one way or the other.

[Volibear]

You really lack the insight as far as game mechanics to be writing a guide. Just because a bard can wear plate and stack hip gear does not mean he is an efficient tank. Reducing damage comes down to two components. Mitigation and avoidance. Bards can wear plate but only mitigate slightly better than a cleric and significantly worse than a sk/pal/warrior. Avoidance is where they really get hit hard. With caps of 75 for riposte and parry even rangers will do a better job of absorbing damage.

[webrunner5]

Monks are almost better tanks than Anything but a Warrior. :cool: And when Velious comes out they are OP as Tanks. They are scary good at DPS and Tanking then.

[DrKvothe]

Just because a bard can wear plate and stack hip gear does not mean he is an efficient tank. Reducing damage comes down to two components. Mitigation and avoidance. Bards can wear plate but only mitigate slightly better than a cleric and significantly worse than a sk/pal/warrior. Avoidance is where they really get hit hard. With caps of 75 for riposte and parry even rangers will do a better job of absorbing damage.

Everything you said is true, but I think it's pretty much a given that a group's survivability comes down to more than the tank's mitigation and avoidance. I certainly can't speak for 50+, but quick and reliable cc, snares, and taunts are pretty significant things to offer a group.

If you don't have a warrior, sk, pally, or monk to tank, presumably you've got a bunch of squishies that can bring dps, cc, or heals, but probably can't pull or take hits. A bard could probably turn this into a decent dungeon crawling group.

For most dungeons that I've experienced, if a group couldn't handle things with a competent bard pulling/tanking, they probably wouldn't do very well with a real tank instead.

It's certainly worth mentioning in a newbie guide that as a bard you can, under certain circumstances and when properly played, act as the group tank. I think people here may just be uncomfortable with the phrasing the OP used? I mean, the ability for a group to keep up with respawns after their tank bails isn't negligible.

[Estu]

You really lack the insight as far as game mechanics to be writing a guide. Just because a bard can wear plate and stack hip gear does not mean he is an efficient tank. Reducing damage comes down to two components. Mitigation and avoidance. Bards can wear plate but only mitigate slightly better than a cleric and significantly worse than a sk/pal/warrior. Avoidance is where they really get hit hard. With caps of 75 for riposte and parry even rangers will do a better job of absorbing damage.

I'd really like to see some parses of this purported gigantic difference in mitigation and avoidance, especially comparing bards to rangers and monks, but also to knights and warriors.

[Barkingturtle]

All this debate over whether bards can or cannot tank is really moot in the context of a newbie guide.

I mean, newbs should not be playing bards, anyway.

[Wrench]

I'd really like to see some parses of this purported gigantic difference in mitigation and avoidance, especially comparing bards to rangers and monks, but also to knights and warriors.

then do the research and THEN start writing guides

dont just spew crap out because you think it 'makes sense' to you

hey! clerics wear plate and get stuns for great aggro generation, you should put them in ahead of monks and rangers too

[Estu]

then do the research and THEN start writing guides

dont just spew crap out because you think it 'makes sense' to you

hey! clerics wear plate and get stuns for great aggro generation, you should put them in ahead of monks and rangers too

I'm not pulling it out of nowhere. I know bards who have tanked difficult group content effectively, like the guy posting earlier about taking HS. This guide is extremely broad - it covers a lot of different things. Some of them I have more personal experience with than others, but that doesn't mean that a guide for newbies shouldn't cover these things. And the reason I made this thread was to get input from people about areas where my knowledge might be limited. So I really don't see the need for all your vitriol. Maybe take it to R&F.

[Estu]

All this debate over whether bards can or cannot tank is really moot in the context of a newbie guide.

I mean, newbs should not be playing bards, anyway.

Well, I dunno. Certainly I wouldn't recommend a bard for every newbie, but for someone who likes hardcore gaming who isn't afraid to try something new and intense, a bard could be a good choice. I made sure to stress in the guide that bards are difficult to play, but I didn't want to leave them out of the discussion altogether by pretending they don't exist.

[DrKvothe]

but for someone who likes hardcore gaming who isn't afraid to try something new and intense, a bard could be a good choice

IMO, just learning what you're doing from 1-20 is hardcore gaming. I mean, I got killed 3 times before lvl 2 on my shaman (damn vengeful soloists, and kos yellow cons!). I think it's fair to say that if you're new and you want to be a tank, you will probably regret it. If you're new, you want to be a tank, and you choose to create a bard, you will CERTAINLY regret it.

There are some other debatable parts of the guide:
"I want to be able to get groups and level quickly
Enchanter > Cleric > Warrior/Shadowknight/Paladin > Rogue > Monk > Shaman > Bard"

I've had no problems finding groups as a shaman, and we're always happy to have a bard along. Most bards are out soloing OT or DL, so finding one to group with is always nice. The chance you'll be sitting around in a dungeon waiting for a group is more about how necessary you are AND how many of your class are competing for group spots. Rogues are relatively easy to twink and require groups pretty early, so I'd argue it's easier to get into a group as a shaman or bard than as a rogue. Enchanters are extremely useful, but there are quite a few of them as well. Do magicians and necros really have such a hard time finding groups? I never mind having them along.

[Lojik]

I'd say it's a pretty good guide for newbies. What I have issue with is the glowing recommendation of Iksars as tanks with only a mention in passing to the fact that they can't wear plate until velious comes out. For a noob i think this is a pretty big deal as A) who knows when velious will actually come out and B) if velious does come out, it may be a while until you can actually get that thurg/SS/Kael quested plate armor on your iksar, and until then they'll have to wear ranger armor.

Also, does frontal stun immunity not work vs. level 52+ mobs? I do not know from experience so I can't say. I would think Ogre warrior is still the ideal tank in velious, as is it really that easy to max stamina as a non ogre/troll tank?

[Lojik]

IMO, just learning what you're doing from 1-20 is hardcore gaming. I mean, I got killed 3 times before lvl 2 on my shaman (damn vengeful soloists, and kos yellow cons!). I think it's fair to say that if you're new and you want to be a tank, you will probably regret it. If you're new, you want to be a tank, and you choose to create a bard, you will CERTAINLY regret it.

There are some other debatable parts of the guide:
"I want to be able to get groups and level quickly
Enchanter > Cleric > Warrior/Shadowknight/Paladin > Rogue > Monk > Shaman > Bard"

I've had no problems finding groups as a shaman, and we're always happy to have a bard along. Most bards are out soloing OT or DL, so finding one to group with is always nice. The chance you'll be sitting around in a dungeon waiting for a group is more about how necessary you are AND how many of your class are competing for group spots. Rogues are relatively easy to twink and require groups pretty early, so I'd argue it's easier to get into a group as a shaman or bard than as a rogue. Enchanters are extremely useful, but there are quite a few of them as well. Do magicians and necros really have such a hard time finding groups? I never mind having them along.

I think I agree with Estu on this one for the most part. Shaman is great but A) there are so damn many of them on the server and B) two shaman in one group is kind of useless. However duos are probably the best exp groups on the server and shaman is the king of duo groups so maybe you're right, but if we're talking strictly the standard 6 man group I think that order is not bad.

[Estu]

IMO, just learning what you're doing from 1-20 is hardcore gaming. I mean, I got killed 3 times before lvl 2 on my shaman (damn vengeful soloists, and kos yellow cons!). I think it's fair to say that if you're new and you want to be a tank, you will probably regret it. If you're new, you want to be a tank, and you choose to create a bard, you will CERTAINLY regret it.

There are some other debatable parts of the guide:
"I want to be able to get groups and level quickly
Enchanter > Cleric > Warrior/Shadowknight/Paladin > Rogue > Monk > Shaman > Bard"

I've had no problems finding groups as a shaman, and we're always happy to have a bard along. Most bards are out soloing OT or DL, so finding one to group with is always nice. The chance you'll be sitting around in a dungeon waiting for a group is more about how necessary you are AND how many of your class are competing for group spots. Rogues are relatively easy to twink and require groups pretty early, so I'd argue it's easier to get into a group as a shaman or bard than as a rogue. Enchanters are extremely useful, but there are quite a few of them as well. Do magicians and necros really have such a hard time finding groups? I never mind having them along.

The guide's not saying that shamans and bards have a hard time finding groups; it's saying that they're good to get groups with, but not as good as the other listed classes. Of course, it's debatable what the exact ranking should be, but the reasoning I used was that 1) enchanters are incredibly useful and don't have several other classes filling their role's slot (just bard, arguably), 2) clerics for the same reason, 3) tanks for obvious reasons, 4) rogues and monks because melee DPS is king in groups and more than one melee DPS is always good, and then shamans and bards because they are both super-useful but not necessarily in as high demand as the others: shamans don't get that good until around level 25 or later, and you wouldn't really want two shamans in a group, while bards are super-useful but carry a large EXP penalty.

I'd say it's a pretty good guide for newbies. What I have issue with is the glowing recommendation of Iksars as tanks with only a mention in passing to the fact that they can't wear plate until velious comes out. For a noob i think this is a pretty big deal as A) who knows when velious will actually come out and B) if velious does come out, it may be a while until you can actually get that thurg/SS/Kael quested plate armor on your iksar, and until then they'll have to wear ranger armor.

Also, does frontal stun immunity not work vs. level 52+ mobs? I do not know from experience so I can't say. I would think Ogre warrior is still the ideal tank in velious, as is it really that easy to max stamina as a non ogre/troll tank?

Yeah, the stuff you mentioned wasn't written by me. I wouldn't necessarily recommend an Iksar as the first choice for a tank. Don't know about the frontal stun thing either.

I think I agree with Estu on this one for the most part. Shaman is great but A) there are so damn many of them on the server and B) two shaman in one group is kind of useless. However duos are probably the best exp groups on the server and shaman is the king of duo groups so maybe you're right, but if we're talking strictly the standard 6 man group I think that order is not bad.

The focus in this guide is almost entirely on standard groups since I feel like they're somewhat more accessible to newbies (easier to find, easier to get help with, you're not being relied on as much, etc.). It's also pretty much the quintessential EverQuest experience (in my opinion, anyhow).