Not sure what class to play

[NirrtiXXX]

I jsut want to play something fun for starting out.

I have played classic EQ extensively but never maxed out a toon, consider me an altoholic. I am interested in playing a non caster class such as a Bard or Shadow Knight. The question is are the downsides to the classes that do not have gate or bind affinity an issue? I know that the SK is gear dependent, but I am not worried about that. I just do not want to be needing a Bind affinity all the time and have no one to do it for me.

Also are some classes like Rangers and Paladins just dead classes that are worthless? Is race that big of a deal? I know some racials like ogres anti stun is a big deal, but do Erudite Paladins or Shadow Knights just suck?

[Videri]

At level 50, you can use a Worker Sledgemallet to "gate" as a melee.

Ports aren't that hard to find. It's a group game anyway, so why not make friends with porters and donate or help them out in return?

Some odd race-class combos have upsides. Erudite and Human clerics can get an insta-click Deadeye helmet (see invis + infravision); Halfling and Wood Elf warriors have the highest agility and with Velious gear are the only warrior races that can get close to mazing Agi; Gnome enchanters have lower cha, but can look through walls... I think the verdict many times before has been: play the race that inspires you most.

[Videri]

I think rangers wish they were rogues, and paladins wish they were warriors. Then again, their versatility makes them great for small-group content. Problem is, once you hit 60, you start to run out of small-group content to do and look toward raiding, where rangers and paladins are of limited usefulness.

[NirrtiXXX]

Understandable... do Shadowknights at least have usefulness in Raids? I am not worried about min/maxing I just want to play a class that always feels like it has some use to a group to a degree.

[geckamus]

First off, I wont speak about end game, because I've never been there. But Ive played about half the classes up to 40s and 50s.

In groups I find any tank valuable. Shadowknights and Paladins definitely fit the bill. I've played a Paladin and found that the ability to do mini heals was useful in a pinch. Also it feels good to save people with little heals. SKs have a bit more utility and you get to invis yourself; making your corpse runs and travels far safer.

I typically have the most fun teaming in this game; but Ive also enjoyed soloing as a Necromancer. I tend to like the pet/dot style rather than the outdoor kiting style of druids and bards. The reason for this: I am rather social and like to type. Twisting spells, casting spells, and running all over makes it hard to do this.

Theres something to be said for Clerics and Enchanters. Ive enjoyed both. People seem to treat you well and it can be the cleric or chanter that is the catalyst for a group to maximize its potential. In a sense, this goes for all three tanks (warrior, paladin, SK) too.

Roll a character and try it out. If you dont like it, reroll, and transfer your wealth from one character to the next. Eventually something will feel right.

[Swish]

Understandable... do Shadowknights at least have usefulness in Raids? I am not worried about min/maxing I just want to play a class that always feels like it has some use to a group to a degree.

Trash tanking is their forte...quick snap aggro with disease cloud/shadow vortex/etc makes them a go-to ahead of warriors who are saved for the big stuff.

In a pinch they can pull in place of a monk/bard.... or assist with splitting. Add in things like snare/fear, lifetaps and light dots... and you've got good times ahead :)

[JurisDictum]

If you want to play a tank, just play Paladin instead of Shadowknight. Paladins are pretty at good raiding (unique hp buff, loh, FTE squad), and they are really good at grouping as well. They can't really pull in any special way like SKs, but there are a lot of monks on this server anyway.

Paladins are great at snap aggro, and they can save groupmate's lives very easy. Paladin/Enchanter work great together in a group.

Paladins tend to be the cheapest tank to gear as well. Their Epic looks cool, but its crap compared to Velious weapons (ones that are easy to get in a raid guild).

Id probably roll Half Elf just to look cool. But Dwarf has the best stats.

[kjs86z]

If you want to play a tank, just play Paladin instead of Shadowknight. Paladins are pretty at good raiding (unique hp buff, loh, FTE squad), and they are really good at grouping as well. They can't really pull in any special way like SKs, but there are a lot of monks on this server anyway.

Paladins are great at snap aggro, and they can save groupmate's lives very easy. Paladin/Enchanter work great together in a group.

Paladins tend to be the cheapest tank to gear as well. Their Epic looks cool, but its crap compared to Velious weapons (ones that are easy to get in a raid guild).

Id probably roll Half Elf just to look cool. But Dwarf has the best stats.

This. I'd definitely roll a Paladin over SK.

The only viable raid tank is Warrior, though.

Bard is an excellent choice as a first character, too. They're versatile in groups, not very gear dependent, and you have the option to swarm kite solo if you just wanna kick it by yourself.

And yes, Ranger is seen as a rather dead class...but I know a few capable players that make the class work.

[Cambiant]

SK if you want to tank, bard if you don't. Both extremely fun classes. I didn't have fun on my pally until end game. There's so much to do with a sk/bard while leveling. Soloing is fun on both though far less efficient as an sk. Racial stats have never been as important as environment and esthetics for me. I roll dark elf sks and half elf bards and love them on every box.

[maskedmelon]

A well played paladin can make a shitty group good. An average paladin is pretty useless.

A well played ranger can do the same, but also contribute meaningfully in a good group.

The problem is, I have never grouped with a well played paladin and only ever grouped with perhaps one well played ranger. Most don't understand what they can/should do.

Shadow Knights cast disease cloud and sometimes feign death. I have never seen one do anything impressive.

Warriors are absolutely awful, but can be useful with root and are indispensable with their defensive discipline.

Erudite Paladins are absolutely awful statistically. Even with a Shield of the Stalwart Sea, a naked dwarf has better stats. They are fashionable though and therefore are the best choice.

[Jimjam]

Shadow knights have a cool trick of being able to send a low level pet in to pull for them, which helps give a little space for FD.

Classically if a pet got 1 rounded, the mob that killed it wouldn't call assist, but that doesn't seem to happen here, sadly.

[Laugher]

I'd agree that a well played ranger can be a decent tank, particularly in classic zones. I have enjoyed alt o holicing pallies for a couple years now, usually break 12 before starting off elsewhere, but they have so much utility at later levels.

I also thought it worth mentioning there was a casual guy here a couple years back who was able to solo a paladin to 59 over a year lol. Probably not the funnest avenue, but he made it :p

If otherwise I'd recommend sk over war unless you plan to be a raid tank. Warriors are difficult with aggro earlier on if you don't have some kind of proc weapons (ideally stun) as soon as you can, and sks get a snap aggro spell pretty early on.

[Jotei]

I am not sure I fully understand the original topic, though the discussion seems to center on the merits of the lesser martial disciplines. It seems to me that most paladins are constrained by prudish inhibitions with many reluctant to flash their adversaries. It is a fiercely effective tactic though, one indeed that I have practiced myself with mixed results. The key to consistent results though seems to be rooted in the associated words of power. There are few who possess this ability and paladins are trained in its use for a reason. If more paladins worked to perfect the technique it would make a world of difference.

[Vexenu]

I wouldn't concern yourself at all with the lack of Bind Affinity. The server has a healthy population and it's very easy to find someone willing to bind you at almost any hour of the day and in any city. At the very worst, you could probably summon up a Dial a Porter to port in and bind you for a small fee. It's really just not an issue worth any consideration.

Much more important is what kind of gameplay you enjoy. There's been good discussion here about the SK, but not much about the Bard, so I'll hit on that. The Bard is really a fantastic class, but takes a certain type of player to get the most out of it. It's a very busy class that requires a lot of attention and active gameplay (running/moving around constantly, pressing a lot of buttons). The Bard is also an extremely powerful and useful class in the hands of a skilled player. It is easily the most skill intensive class in the game, and the difference between a skilled Bard and a bad one is night and day. There's just an absurd amount of utility available with the Bard songs. Bards make exceptionally good pullers. They can lull, snare, mez and charm. They're indispensable for raiding with their resist buff songs. Mana and health regen songs are extremely useful. Selo's makes crossing huge Velious and Kunark zones easy.

Said nobody ever: "We just have too many skilled Bards around."

But that being said, it really is both mentally and physically difficult to play a Bard well, especially for hours at a time. Most players cannot or will not do it. If you don't think you'd enjoy that sort of intensive playstyle, I'd recommend anything else over the Bard.

[fadetree]

Also are some classes like Rangers and Paladins just dead classes that are worthless?

No, rangers and paladins are not worthless. Paladins are on a par with SKs generally speaking. Rangers are utility classes that are extremely useful when played correctly. Because it's harder than just spamming attack, most people do not play Rangers well. They make fine tanks up until about 50 or so, and remain very useful after that. Raids they are pretty much DPS, except for Weaponshield which can be a valuable tool in landing slows, tank transfer, and positioning. Rangers can also provide 'ranger clarity' by spamming liching necros or shamans with heals. They can also be useful peeling adds from casters and parking.

I think rangers wish they were rogues, and paladins wish they were warriors. Then again, their versatility makes them great for small-group content. Problem is, once you hit 60, you start to run out of small-group content to do and look toward raiding, where rangers and paladins are of limited usefulness.

This is pretty much accurate, although I have NEVER wished I was a rogue, they are the worlds most boring class. I think warriors more often wish they were knights than the other way around, at least in non-raid situations.

If you want a test of skill and intestinal fortitude, play a ranger. If you want to be a raid hero, play one of the trinity.

[Lammy]

My two classes of choice are rogue and mage. You can be effective with the least amount of responsibility!

[DrKvothe]

I wouldn't worry too much about the raid scene. I'm hardly the person to ask about it, but I'm pretty sure most people here would agree it's a toxic cesspool. It's definitely worth it to experience the encounters once or twice, but obtaining pixels usually means repeatedly subjecting yourself to those encounters. There's so much to do in this game, solo and in various sized single groups, that raiding shouldn't be a top priority. Hell, once you're 60, you can farm the plat to PL an alt, or twink it with a fungi and OP weapon and solo your way there very quickly.

Ranger is a fun class, imo. It's not the min/max dps slot like rogue, but you can snare, snap aggro from a loose mob, SoW, and pull really effectively in outdoor zones with harmony (a lot of dungeons are outdoors). You'll probably have to put a lot of your own groups together, but what's wrong with that?

SK and Pally are tougher to enjoy, IMO, because you really need at least a 4 person group to really kick ass. You're fantastic aggro, but not great damage, so you'll also need a healer, slower, and some dps. Best would be full groups. That's not a problem if you don't mind sticking to the most overcamped zones, but you'll probably miss out on a lot of the less popular but still amazing leveling zones. You've also got no speed buff and long corpse runs since you can't bind yourself, which isnt a great combination.

Bards are really excellent for pretty much anything you want to do other than high melee dps, though you can solo mobs face to face using your dots + health regen songs or other various strategies. You get your run speed buff at level 5, which is flat out fantastic, and you can get some really good instruments for under 50 pp each. You can level faster than anyone else by aoe kiting, or your can use any number of different strategies to solo smaller groups. You're hugely beneficial in groups as a puller, crowd control, charm dps, and hp/mana regen + dmg absorb buffer. You can actually solo casters without using fear, which is actually quite the feat. Bards have a single major downside: they're by far the most active class to play, to the point where it's pretty exhausting to play at even half of your total potential. Doing nothing but playing health and mana regen songs is more work than most classes have to do.

Shaman and enchanter are the big name solo hunters. Enchanters do it with cheaper gear, but are more likely to get f'd by RND. Shaman need to farm a lot of plat for torpor (>100k) to realize the majority of their potential, although I find mine very fun without it.

Clerics have no problem finding groups, make pretty great cash passively at high levels from tips for rezes in whatever zone you happen to be in, and they can join groups a few levels earlier than other classes, which expands your options for leveling. A lot of people seem to find this class boring, but I don't. You can duo/trio to great effect for a lot more excitement.