Splitting the Enchanter into 2 classes

[Zuranthium]

What would it look like if this very overpowered class was instead separated into 2 classes - the "Enchanter" and the "Psionicist"? A thought experiment, mapping out the abilities each class gets. Let's see if they would each still be viable.

ENCHANTER

-Physical based debuffs, and enchantment removals
-Physical based buffs, also including INT/WIS/CHA and Magic Resist
-Animation pets
-Roots
-Blind and Fear
-Rune line (damage absorption)
-Damage shield (I wonder how many people forget the EQ Enchanter has a quite good one)
-DoT spell line
-Illusions, faction modifiers, and trade skill enchantments

Enchanters are about shaping the world around them. They are wanted in groups and raids for their Slow and Haste type abilities; mitigating the damage of opponents and increasing the damage of melee allies. They can add further DPS to a group with their pet, by taking initial aggro or using Root/Blind proximity mechanics. Don't forget the damage shield too. Enchanters have some standard crowd control ability and can solo with an Animation pet that gets buffed up. Without the "pet steals 50% of your exp for not outdamaging it" rule, it's actually fairly easy and effective to solo with this spell list up to level 52.

Would this be a particularly exciting class? No. Are Haste and Slow super powerful mechanics in EQ? Yes.

PSIONICIST

-Charms
-Stuns
-Mesmerizes
-Memory Wipes
-Lulls
-Magic based debuffs (tash, mana drain)
-Magic based buffs (mana regen, mana pool increase)
-Direct damage spell line
-"Vision" based spells (Bind Sight, Sentinel)

Psioncists are about controlling the mind. They have access to the most powerful mechanic in EQ, give or take Complete Heal: Charming. Their spell list supports the ability to manage charmed pets and provides crowd control ability. The mana regeneration capability they provide to others makes them desired in both groups and raids, and their unresistible magic resist debuff can also be crucial for some content.

Would this be a particularly exciting class? Anywhere they can utilize Charm, yes. Is their overall power level enough to be competitive with what the majority of other classes can contribute? Yes.

[loramin]

I love the idea, but I think EQ needs more classes that can fulfill a role, not less. Like, in later expansions Druids became first-class healers in groups and on raids, and I think that was a real improvement to the game. Suddenly instead of groups/raids needing clerics, a bunch of players they didn't need before could help. More players getting to play + more groups/raids not falling apart for lack of healers = better game in my book.

Similarly here, we already only have Bards and Enchanters for CC, so I'd hate to see half as many CCers available. I'd want both Enchanters and Psionicists to "do crowd control" in some way. It'd be ok (and probably more interesting though) if they didn't both have mez, but instead Enchanters had a more unique mechanism.

[Rang]

In this scenario the enchanter class is completely gimp and no one would play it. Currently enchanters strength are the following: charm, mana regen/haste, CC, and slow. It would have been smart for the game devs to separate the class.

One class would have buffs (mana regen, haste), charm, and a short term single target stun/mez to regain control of charm pets (not enough cc to suffice for a standard group scenario)

One class would have long term/ae mez, calm and debuffs (slow, tash)

[GnomeCaptain]

In this scenario the enchanter class is completely gimp and no one would play it.

I play only Enchanter.

This quote approximates my initial response to the proposed Enchanter.

But the idea is creative and well-presented.
So thank you for that.

ETA: I don't regard my class, Enchanter, as OP. It just seems to have a unique risk/reward proposition, with huge upside potential if played well and if luck (i.e. the Charm break situation) goes your way.

We die a lot. And we have the fairly unique stress in common groups due to our deadly Charm pets.

[Zuranthium]

We already only have Bards and Enchanters for CC, so I'd hate to see half as many CCers available. I'd want both Enchanters and Psionicists to "do crowd control" in some way.

Bards and Enchanters are hardly the only CC in Everquest; Root is an extremely powerful mechanic that works the majority of the time (and even in certain places where Mesmerize doesn't - against Giants). Some people forget about how crazy strong Root actually is: a long-lasting, fast-recharging 100% movement reduction for very little mana would be considered absurdly broken in any PvP game. It already makes a lot of EQ content trivial as it is.

As for your thoughts on Druids/Clerics though, I agree and would definitely change the way they work, if I had the keys to the kingdom.

In this scenario the enchanter class is completely gimp and no one would play it.

I disagree. The haste buffs they have are virtually essential for Raids, as can be Magic Resist during certain eras/encounters, and having more people around to land Slow for certain fights never hurts either. "Rune" is also pretty essential for fighting Venril Sathir during Kunark era.

The power of Slow and Haste for general group content is often quite game-changing. Using only those abilities, an Enchanter in a typical 6-person group is already creating more DPS than any single melee character, while simultaneously preventing more damage than any ability outside Complete Heal. That's just 2 abilities out of their skillset, already doing "better numbers" than what a lot of other classes can.

Would this new version of Enchanter be a highly played class? No, it's too subtle. But it would be strong; already better than a Mage or Wizard the majority of the time, if looking at Kunark or Velious era and doing the number crunching.

[Cen]

Ive always been more one to propose combining magician and wizard to create a class balanced with necro and enchanter ;p

and honestly, even if wizard and mage were combined and could dual wield those epics together, it probably might not even be as awesome as an enchanter.

[NegaStoat]

Ive always been more one to propose combining magician and wizard to create a class balanced with necro and enchanter ;p

and honestly, even if wizard and mage were combined and could dual wield those epics together, it probably might not even be as awesome as an enchanter.

This. The Wizard and Magician both feel like 'half done' classes when compared to Enchanters and Necromancers. Mashing the two together and bringing in the overall power with a revised spellbook and values to those spells to be close to a Druid would have been a great move.

[Orionsaight]

nothing lasts forever. change is inevitable. im sure it could happen one day if EQ is still around.

[Zuranthium]

Wizard and Magician both feel like 'half done' classes when compared to Enchanters and Necromancers. Mashing the two together and bringing in the overall power with a revised spellbook and values to those spells to be close to a Druid would have been a great move.

Mages and Wizards were pretty well designed for how the game played pre-Kunark (Mages were too powerful, but not the most OP). Unfortunately the expansions made their role as "Nuke" classes increasingly irrelevant, while skyrocketing the power of Rogue/Monk/Warrior/Shaman/Cleric. Enchanters got even stronger too, when they were already the most powerful class in the game, post Necromancer pet nerf (although people didn't quite realize it for awhile).

If I was looking to balance the game better without splitting the Enchanter into 2 classes, then I would nerf Charm (make it cost more mana / cast a little slower / have NPC's unable to dual wield if they aren't naturally supposed to), and move all of their Mana-related spells over to Wizards. They would still be crazy powerful with those changes, but at least it would tone down their insanely high Charm DPS, require more of an investment for the huge return they do still get, and level the playing field more in terms of how many ubiquitous buff capabilities they have.

[kjs86z]

Are you upset you don't play an enchanter?

[Legidias]

Take away buffs from enchanters, put them on wizards. Boom you have 2 full classes that are now balanced out

[Quizlop]

Additional balance suggestion: Swap Torpor and Nature's Touch.

[Zuranthium]

Take away buffs from enchanters, put them on wizards. Boom you have 2 full classes that are now balanced out

That's bad class design though. Enchanters having a good number of buffs, pertaining to altering the characteristics of people, is inherent to their class identity. They enchant things. Similarly, a class that was built around doing nuke damage (Wizard) shouldn't suddenly be given Haste buffs and such to compensate for their nuke capabilities being poorly balanced in later eras of the game.

I think the current Enchanter class just has so many amazing tools that it would be enough to fill 2 classes. Ideally in a game, I would want Illusion type spells to be more powerful as well, because that's a really interesting mechanic. So that further pushes the concept of wanting 2 separate classes to house all of these abilities.

Are you upset you don't play an enchanter?

I've played all the caster classes to high levels; it IS generally upsetting to play characters that do so much less, and to have groups suffering so much because of the game revolving around certain busted mechanics, of which the Enchanter class has access to nearly all of them, and few other classes have access to any at all.

[Legidias]

Maybe doesnt fit lore, but it fits a balanced gameplay design

[Raev]

The single biggest balance problem with classic EQ is doling out cheap 'control' spells that are hugely effective against what would otherwise be far more powerful NPCs. Since raid bosses had to be immune to those spells, they made them all fully MR, which made casters gimp on raids, so they give Wizards lures, and well, here we are. But this was more an issue in Classic/Kunark than Velious.

In Planes of Power they fixed this with specific immunities and being extremely stingy with the control spells, e.g. Enchanters don't get AE stun, AE mez, or even a 1 minute+ mesmerize, liberally gave out immunities to mez/stun/charm/snare, and made nukes harder to resist.

[loramin]

The single biggest balance problem with classic EQ is doling out cheap 'control' spells that are hugely effective against what would otherwise be far more powerful NPCs. Since raid bosses had to be immune to those spells, they made them all fully MR, which made casters gimp on raids, so they give Wizards lures, and well, here we are. But this was more an issue in Classic/Kunark than Velious.

In Planes of Power they fixed this with specific immunities and being extremely stingy with the control spells, e.g. Enchanters don't get AE stun, AE mez, or even a 1 minute+ mesmerize, liberally gave out immunities to mez/stun/charm/snare, and made nukes harder to resist.

Yeah, pretty much the same thing was true of slow.

In classic the slow spell line scaled nicely to higher percentages, but then when the game continued getting more powerful, they couldn't really make slow do any more slowing, because it was already a percentage-based effect (ie. it already worked just as well on a PoP mob as it did on a Kunark mob).

IIRC they maybe added one slightly higher slow before they pretty much just had to give up and stop adding to the spell line (although they did add disease-based slows ... again, differentiating by mob resists to keep things interesting).

[Zuranthium]

The single biggest balance problem with classic EQ is doling out cheap 'control' spells that are hugely effective against what would otherwise be far more powerful NPCs. Since raid bosses had to be immune to those spells, they made them all fully MR, which made casters gimp on raids, so they give Wizards lures, and well, here we are. But this was more an issue in Classic/Kunark than Velious.

Hmm, why do you think it's less of an issue in Velious? It's much worse there I think, with the raid targets having absurd health totals. Rogues and Monks are inherently doing more DPS than any caster can possibly do regardless of resists for those fights (except for maybe a Necro who could stack every single DoT they have), because mana runs out and melee costs nothing.

Some raid targets being immune to MR based spells isn't a big issue to me, so much as the overall resists in general. There are a lot of non-Magic Resist type DoT's and DD's that simply don't land, which means Mages/Druids/Necros/Rangers can't contribute much/any spell damage.

[Keza]

I feel like it's a bit extreme for balancing the class, but if you want to theorycraft splitting enchanters into two halves they already did it in EQ2. For classic EQ I just think slow/charm are brokenly OP. Could probably nerf mez as well, but it's the other two that make them gods. Shams with slow/canni/torpor as well.

In either case you would have to create new spells (or reappropriate future spells) to make it function as an entire class. Well.. a fun class anyway. I suppose there's an argument to be made that several of the classes are incredibly dull. You yourself say this revamped enchanter would be boring. In that case why split them instead of just nerfing it?

[Izmael]

The problem with classic EQ isn't IMO supposed class "imbalance", but rather the fact that the content is 20 years old, static and all figured out.

Enchanters aren't feeling OP in HS, Velk or Seb when they have to learn the place. They do feel OP in there when they go there for the 100th time, though.


Maybe Blue could have some custom content which wouldn't break the whole classicness of the server, like content where you wouldn't acquire any new loot, but rather just experience (for alts?) maybe.


That content could be hard and balanced in a way so it's a challenge to everyone.

[Zuranthium]

I suppose there's an argument to be made that several of the classes are incredibly dull. You yourself say this revamped enchanter would be boring. In that case why split them instead of just nerfing it?

I mean ideally I would fill the 2 classes out with more than just the current Enchanter spell list, while also lowering the power level of Slow for the Enchanter (actually removing it altogether and replacing with "Distortion" type Illusion effects that mitigate damage), and removing the dual-wield capability of NPC's who can't already do it for the Psionicist. But, it says a lot that if the current spell list was split into 2 classes, each of those classes would still be very powerful:

Desired for every raid (even if it's just for 1 unique buff sometimes), able to provide huge assets for general grouping content, and able to solo well too. Enchanter would clearly be lesser than Psioncist for soloing at the high levels, but still better than quite a few other classes - a buffed up Animation pet is plenty capable of defeating 70% slowed, STR/AC debuffed enemies. While not able to do as game-breaking things soloing, the Enchanter would more frequently be better than a Psioncist for general grouping. The overall power level of Slow/Haste is just so high, and hell, as long as the group can chip in for some Peridots, an Enchanter can even be the "healer" for some group content with their Rune line (because Slow already does most of the work).

I also think the DPS of the Animation pet is very underrated for grouping and shouldn't be ignored. Yeah, it's no Charm, but it doesn't turn around and attack you sometimes either, nor cost additional mana to maintain. While most players would not find the class very exciting in that state, I'd quite enjoy it still, because it's subtly very powerful, and actually pretty funny to need a hit at the start of a fight in order for the pet to go in swinging. It requires more positioning and planning than just pressing the "Pet Attack" button, as compared to a typical summoned pet (although I do quite enjoy the laziness of that sometimes too). Being determined to get that DPS in for the group is what would separate a buff bot Enchanter from one is getting the most out of their profession.

[derpcake2]

Pretty sure an enchanter split OP's mom.

[kjs86z]

OP is thinking way too hard about something that will never happen.

[fortior]

Stop pretending that using the animation instead of a charm is a minor difference in dps that is made up for by the additional safety. It's like dealing ten times less damage.

[Mblake81]

OP is thinking way too hard about something that will never happen.

ere com de otsteppah

https://i.imgur.com/MkrWGFR.jpg

Maybe doesnt fit lore, but it fits a balanced gameplay design

Maybe tighten up the graphics a little bit (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kAFLfx3mvIg)

[Mblake81]

Stop pretending that using the animation instead of a charm is a minor difference in dps that is made up for by the additional safety. It's like dealing ten times less damage.

I will push away from the dinner table. This min/max video game nonsense has turned my stomach.

[Halfcell]

Similarly here, we already only have Bards and Enchanters for CC, so I'd hate to see half as many CCers available. I'd want both Enchanters and Psionicists to "do crowd control" in some way. It'd be ok (and probably more interesting though) if they didn't both have mez, but instead Enchanters had a more unique mechanism.

I dont know that I would go so far as to say they are the only CC. On my shaman slowing the adds, then pulling them away and rooting them can often be more stable and effective CC than even mezing.

[Zuranthium]

Stop pretending that using the animation instead of a charm is a minor difference in dps that is made up for by the additional safety. It's like dealing ten times less damage.

Nobody said the DPS difference is minor. It's hardly 10x less though. The best Animation pet quads for 56 damage a hit and can be max hasted without any downside. You ain't charming things that quad for 560, much less max hasting a charm pet like that. The typical charm pet is hitting for like 150, which is a bit less than 3x more damage. That's still a wide gap, but the DPS of the Animation is quite significant and makes a big difference over not using a pet at all.

Animation pet, Haste, Slow, and Root is already adding more to the majority of groups than any other single class can. Think about that for a moment.

[loramin]

Bards and Enchanters are hardly the only CC in Everquest; Root is an extremely powerful mechanic that works the majority of the time (and even in certain places where Mesmerize doesn't - against Giants). Some people forget about how crazy strong Root actually is: a long-lasting, fast-recharging 100% movement reduction for very little mana would be considered absurdly broken in any PvP game. It already makes a lot of EQ content trivial as it is.


I dont know that I would go so far as to say they are the only CC. On my shaman slowing the adds, then pulling them away and rooting them can often be more stable and effective CC than even mezing.

Ok agreed, Bards/Enchanters aren't the only CCers. But they're the only classes many people will accept for that role in a group. Try doing Seb King without either one for instance, and telling people "I'm a Shaman, I've got root, we'll be fine".

I'm not saying it's impossible, but what might be harder than actually doing it is just convincing people to do it without an "official CCer class" (heck, I got pushback just for having a Bard instead of an Enchanter once).

Groups need (or at least think they need) two core roles, and then depending on the camp possibly up to three others (and then as much DPS as they can get for the rest). They need a healer and a tank, and then possibly also a puller, slower, and/or CCer.

Whenever you want to do a camp that needs a role, and you don't have it, no one gets to play. So all I'm saying is, if you take away the ability for half the Enchanters out there to fulfill a role, people aren't going to get to play a lot of those camps .

But again, I'd totally be in favor with Enchanters getting a way to fulfill that role without mez. Give them a 95% slow that turns into a 50% haste the moment anyone attacks the mob, for instance (but can easily be dispelled by the Enchanter if they do so on purpose while it's still a slow). You thought mez breaks were bad? ;)

[Zuranthium]

Root is a 100% slow as long as nobody hits the target (for summoning level mobs) or stands next to it. This isn't a challenging mechanic to execute. You don't need mesmerize to do Seb King (or even Root - it can be FD pulled). Mesmerize is something that's most impactful against groups of damage-dealing casters, which isn't a common thing in the game. There's usually just 1 powerful caster in a given aggro area, which you just pull and kill first while rooting everything else.

[loramin]

Root is a 100% slow as long as nobody hits the target (for summoning level mobs) or stands next to it. This isn't a challenging mechanic to execute. You don't need mesmerize to do Seb King (or even Root - it can be FD pulled). Mesmerize is something that's most impactful against groups of damage-dealing casters, which isn't a common thing in the game. There's usually just 1 powerful caster in a given aggro area, which you just pull and kill first while rooting everything else.

Right, I don't disagree with most of that. You don't need a CCer for many camps in the game.

But you do for some, and then as a compounding factor there's people's expectations of what you need. It doesn't matter how certain you are that you can do camp X without role Y: if that camp requires role Z, and the only Z player won't join without a Y, it amounts to X requiring Y. Between the two (need CC and think they need CC), there's enough camps that I'd still want more CCers, not fewer.

And again they don't have to be mezzers. My slow/haste idea was dumb (I don't even play an Enchanter), but I'm sure there are other ways besides mez to disable casters temporarily that a creative person could imagine.

[Zuranthium]

as a compounding factor there's people's expectations of what you need. It doesn't matter how certain you are that you can do camp X without role Y: if that camp requires role Z, and the only Z player won't join without a Y, it amounts to X requiring Y.

Not a compelling argument to me. It amounts to saying ignorant people shouldn't be educated, but rather catered to at their level only. Just link them a Youtube video of people doing the camp with different setups or something, to show them they are wrong.

[Tethler]

OP is thinking way too hard about something that will never happen.

[Jibartik]

I bet if you made

Enchanter: CC/Buffs

Psyonocist: Charm/DPS

You'd have a more balanced set of classes.

I love the addition of the psyonocist to EQ!

Also I sad enchanters were so powerful they rarely, if never at all, appeared in any other fantasy game/mmo since :(

that said ,enchanter is the funnest EQ class IMO but it always felt like you were playing the game with a game genie to me :P

[loramin]

Not a compelling argument to me. It amounts to saying ignorant people shouldn't be educated, but rather catered to at their level only. Just link them a Youtube video of people doing the camp with different setups or something, to show them they are wrong.

We've both played on this server for awhile. Personally I've convinced exactly zero strangers in-game to join a group they didn't want to join (for any reason, not just because they thought we needed an Enchanter, or some other class, and I didn't have one) ... by sending them a link to a Youtube video.

How many times have you?

You can rail about ignorance and education all you want, but at the end of the day this is a game played with other people, and "other people" are often set in their ways.

[Zuranthium]

https://i.imgur.com/tNPJCRS.gif

[Jibartik]

Ok here is my stupid Psyoncist pitch:

Bard/caster, movment while casting, but with a wide range of cast times and durations for spells.

Spells cost mana but this class can regenerate mana and meditate like a caster.

Since cast times and duration have various lengths you can 'twist' any hypothetical number of spells balance would allow, giving you the ability to charm and control multiple pets! (a unique class ability)

The strategy for this class is burst CC and DPS to take a train and lock it down and then make it all kill itself.

mana for spells when locking down and controlling multiple pets should be so that they encourage the Psyconocist to kill large amounts of creatures quickly, and if not, they run out of mana and are useless.

Maybe they would invis into a room, then appear, and then agro everything and do some tornado of mind control to lock it down with dazling lights and colors while they twist in dark shadowed imagry that fill the room with dread and hate to the point of madness that drives them to all rip themselves to pieces!

AND while I am dreaming, new playable race that Ill just make up a name for and entire zone/lore: Illit'kiths the mindflayers! The planar faydwellers (zones that you can enter in fay, and are shadowlike planer-zones of the ones we travel in)

[Jibartik]

Illit'kith Racial ability: Unfearable
Can be anything but healers :confused:

Psyoncist Spell line: Advocate - unstun/unfear/umez/uncharm allies during group/raids

Man think how cool a tentacle faced rogue would look in eq, like a predator with human black plate :flex:

[Demoraliser]

well it is the most op class

[Muggens]

Illit'kith Racial ability: Unfearable
Can be anything but healers :confused:

Psyoncist Spell line: Advocate - unstun/unfear/umez/uncharm allies during group/raids

Man think how cool a tentacle faced rogue would look in eq, like a predator with human black plate :flex:

Hehe ive played a mindflayer psionic in tapletop dnd. Long time ago

[Vx36]

I've always liked the enchanter but it's too OP for me to be interested in playing it much. I actually prefer how they split the class in EQ2.

[Jibartik]

How much does enchanter rely on C to successfully have their advantage? Ive played one a lot and I cant think of an answer to this one, mana was never a concern for me like ever as far as I can remember.

Enchanter should be reduced in power by 20% to make it balanced IMO

I love playing them, and I love their power, but IMO they should not be more powerful than a necro, so whatever you need to do to lower that by a bit, I think would make the game overall better.

Like for example, move C to wizard, and give charm for enchanters the same mana reduction effect that bards have when charm is active, and you probably have a balanced everquest class.

Also torp should have a 200 mana increase.

[jacobar]

What would it look like if this very overpowered class was instead separated into 2 classes - the "Enchanter" and the "Psionicist"? A thought experiment, mapping out the abilities each class gets. Let's see if they would each still be viable.

ENCHANTER

-Physical based debuffs, and enchantment removals
-Physical based buffs, also including INT/WIS/CHA and Magic Resist
-Animation pets
-Roots
-Blind and Fear
-Rune line (damage absorption)
-Damage shield (I wonder how many people forget the EQ Enchanter has a quite good one)
-DoT spell line
-Illusions, faction modifiers, and trade skill enchantments

Enchanters are about shaping the world around them. They are wanted in groups and raids for their Slow and Haste type abilities; mitigating the damage of opponents and increasing the damage of melee allies. They can add further DPS to a group with their pet, by taking initial aggro or using Root/Blind proximity mechanics. Don't forget the damage shield too. Enchanters have some standard crowd control ability and can solo with an Animation pet that gets buffed up. Without the "pet steals 50% of your exp for not outdamaging it" rule, it's actually fairly easy and effective to solo with this spell list up to level 52.

Would this be a particularly exciting class? No. Are Haste and Slow super powerful mechanics in EQ? Yes.

PSIONICIST

-Charms
-Stuns
-Mesmerizes
-Memory Wipes
-Lulls
-Magic based debuffs (tash, mana drain)
-Magic based buffs (mana regen, mana pool increase)
-Direct damage spell line
-"Vision" based spells (Bind Sight, Sentinel)

Psioncists are about controlling the mind. They have access to the most powerful mechanic in EQ, give or take Complete Heal: Charming. Their spell list supports the ability to manage charmed pets and provides crowd control ability. The mana regeneration capability they provide to others makes them desired in both groups and raids, and their unresistible magic resist debuff can also be crucial for some content.

Would this be a particularly exciting class? Anywhere they can utilize Charm, yes. Is their overall power level enough to be competitive with what the majority of other classes can contribute? Yes.

go away

[Bardp1999]

Instead of inventing a class there is a much simpler solution.

1) Give Wizards the Clarity line along with chanters
2) Only Enchanters can charm/mez humanoids
3) Only Druids can charm/mez animals
4) Only Necros can charm/mez undead
5) Leave Bards the same
6) Eq is officially balanced

[Snagglepuss]

I think the nuking classes, i.e., mage and wizard, do pretty well in vanilla with respect to damage as others have mentioned. I think people forget how poorly itemized many pure melee classes are in that era. (Hello rogues with Gloom Poon and Polished Steel Dirk). The nuke classes didn't scale as well as the pure melee did in the next two expansions, especially given that wizards didn't really have a viable clicky nuke outside of VP until Velious.

On a side note, I liked how Vanguard essentially combined the mage class with the druid class. Druids now have elemental pets and better elemental nukes.