Best 4 person all caster/priest group

[Troxx]

Originally Posted by Troxx [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Riddle me this? If the OP had stipulated that no pockets are allowed - would that change your answer? Or would you still drop the cleric?

If you can’t have a picket cleric. Would you still commit this group to not having a cleric.

Yes or no

This is really easy and as far as most of are concerned - we know the answer.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

Originally Posted by Troxx [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

If you can’t have a picket cleric. Would you still commit this group to not having a cleric.

Yes or no

This is really easy and as far as most of are concerned - we know the answer.

If I answer your question now, you will simply dodge the previous question I asked you.

This is your normal tactic for avoiding tough questions, which has been proven more and more with every message you post.

The question that Troxx is dodging: "Where does the no pocket character restriction come from?"

Thus far, we can conclude Troxx has made the restriction up, due to the evidence already provided here:

https://www.project1999.com/forums/s...postcount=5435

[Troxx]

I will repeat:

Riddle me this? If the OP had stipulated that no pockets are allowed - would that change your answer? Or would you still drop the cleric?

Why are you so scared to answer? No evidence is needed. In an alternative thread where the above were true … what is your answer?

[DeathsSilkyMist]

Originally Posted by Troxx [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I will repeat:

Riddle me this? If the OP had stipulated that no pockets are allowed - would that change your answer? Or would you still drop the cleric?

Why are you so scared to answer? No evidence is needed. In an alternative thread where the above were true … what is your answer?

The answer is irrelevant to this thread, as we both know there is no objective restriction on pocket characters. You admitted your pocket character restriction is completely subjective.

I said Shaman/Cleric/Enchanter/Enchanter on page one. For someone who is supposedly rereading the entire thread, I am suprised you picked that question as your dodge. Did you skip the first page?

[Troxx]

Page 101

Originally Posted by Troxx [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

100 pages is a huge accomplishment. I have never seen so little said in so many words. Special thanks to those who kept things rolling along. DSM should receive special recognition for his accomplishments within the field of Pathological Absurdity.

My only regret is that DSM never actually attempted to do the one thing he spent so long claiming he could do with his napkin math.

Jolly good job fellas.

[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Troxx’s closing diagnostic impression of DSM

[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Purpose achieved. Fun times we’re had but now it’s time to

[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Little did we know 440+ more pages would follow

[DeathsSilkyMist]

Another dodge, with Troxx continuing to talk to himself. It appears that Troxx has conceded the point. He does not have an answer for where the restriction of no pocket characters came from. He has made it up out of thin air.

Here is the evidence that supports Troxx has made the pocket character restriction up out of thin air:

1. OP did not say pocket characters were prohibited.
2. Pocket characters are a common practice on P99 already.
3. If you claim OP meant that you can only play four main characters and nothing else, then that would exclude mules too. OP didn't say this either.
4. Why would a normal person take a thread who's only rule is "best four person all caster/priest group", and stop using mules and pocket characters when they've already used them in the past?

His arguments against pocket characters are invalid until he can show where this restriction came from.

[Elizondo]

550 pages in and DSM still can't admit he's wrong even though a video of him playing shaman so badly refutes all of his 'arguments'

[Troxx]

lol he still won’t answer the simplest yes/no question

Btw I made myself laugh. Thank you me from years ago

https://www.project1999.com/forums/s...postcount=1177

[DeathsSilkyMist]

Originally Posted by Troxx [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

lol he still won’t answer the simplest yes/no question

Btw I made myself laugh. Thank you me from years ago

https://www.project1999.com/forums/s...postcount=1177

The post history shows that I asked him about where the pocket character restriction came from first. He then asked this question later in an attempt to dodge it.

I will answer his question (which has been already answered in this thread) after he answers the pocket character restriction question.

If I answer his question now, he will just pivot to that topic to avoid the pocket character restriction question. He always does this when he cannot answer a question.

Thus far the evidence shows Troxx has made up this pocket character restriction: https://www.project1999.com/forums/s...postcount=5435

[Snaggles]

Again, if someone wants to play a shaman…fine. It’s just not bringing much that any other class can’t bring.

- Worse heal than Celestial Elixir (probably won’t mem for this group)
- Debuff line similar to a Mage
- Pet that does like 1/4th dps of a Mage air without a 3-4 second stun
- No premium or free DS
- No way to share their mana with anyone

Outside the quad-ench path I like the Ench/Ench/Cleric/Mage since there is very little overlap of abilities and it mixes two stressful and two very relaxed jobs. The shaman in comparison has to work very hard to be a very committed (and poor) tank. They are doing horrible DPS since it’s likely anything they would survive tanking won’t last the time for the epic to go full-course. Meaning they will have to Bane to maybe keep up with a robe-click DS.

If not for the mage (depending on how helpful mala/o and Malasini is), I would much rather mix in a necro or druid over the shaman if only for snare and more CC, let alone the treasure trove of utility they bring to the table. If hunting outdoors you have three classes that can fear and none that snare. Hell…a SK or ranger would be better than a shaman.