Quote:
Originally Posted by Lhancelot
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
Smart man. ^^^
My take on the two classes...
Shaman might not kill things quite as fast, but the shaman is not as limited as to what it can fight. Due to OP'd slows, the shaman can tank mobs while the necro has to rely on pouring damage out quick enough so as to not lose it's pet and to not end up having to facetank a mob. There's only so much a class can do without slows when it comes to soloing higher end mobs.
The cons of a shaman is how much money you have to invest. Whether it's spells, a fungi tunic or gears, a shaman is extremely expensive to gear up.
Also, shamans are a slower developing class. You really won't feel how the class plays until much later in the 50s, wheras a necro develops it's play style quite a bit earlier.
Necros are very sufficient without having to have uber gears and their spells generally are fairly affordable whereas a shaman benefits greatly when using a fungi, having torpor, and other extremely expensive spells that literally cost thousands of plats each.
Necros have a lower ceiling in performance but also are easier to gear and are still a very strong solo class.
If you want a strong solo class for dungeons or higher end mobs, I would go with either a shaman or enchanter and then perhaps a necromancer.
Enchanters are equally cheap to gear like a necro, and ultra powerful solo or in groups so you might consider playing one them over a necro or a shaman.
|
My main question is about my options doing higher end grouping with either class. I REALLY like grouping in dungeons, so if a necromancer is not wanted in SEB groups for example that might be a reason for me not to play a Necro anymore.