What small changes would you make to the unpopular classes?

[Snagglepuss]

I think some of the class balance issues could be fixed with better itemization. This would avoid having to dramatically change a class role or lore. As Kunark arrived (and later with epics), monks and rogues got sick items that weren't necessarily hard to acquire (or even that uncommon). On P99 these classes are just so well twinked and itemized that it makes other classes look horrible when in reality I don't think the gap would have been as noticeable on a normal timeline for most players.

Wizard- There's really nothing in between a Solist's clicky and a rend robe. At least mages get a burnt wood staff. I think if there were a mid level clicky then it would help with the lack of sustained dps for groups. Right click wand or robe that does like 400 dmg. Maybe a mid-level wand that does 150 dmg. Long cast times on both (12 sec or so)

Warrior- I remember vanilla and kunark were pretty horrible for agro weapons. And it didn't help on P99 that nearly every monk and rogue had amazing gear. Besides when geared with top-end stuff, a warrior was a horribly inconsistent group tank compared to a pally or SK. There wasn't a lot in between a sarnak warhammer / whip and a RMoY and BOTBDE / VP / Epics. Monks got T staffs and adamantite clubs, and warriors got the decent agro weapons they could get removed. Velious addresses this somewhat with infestation, frostbringer, etc, but still nothing like BOTDE was easily attainable for a grouping warrior. Also maybe, something like a warrior only hate clicky (similar to the root net) with a cool down would have been nice and put them on par with disease cloud spamming SKs and blind / stunning pallies.

Rangers- I would make bow dps better either through mechanics, adding a backstab type bow based attack, or better itemization. I liked how in Vanguard that rangers could charm animals too. I think that's a cool lore thing that would help them add dps to groups. Imagine a ranger charming a direwolf or a chokidai and helping with group dps.

[mefdinkins]

Once you get a character to level 60 you can sacrifice them and take one their skills for your other chars.

Imagine a rogue or bard with feign death. A pally or SK with defensive disc. A shaman with charm, a monk with slow, a warrior with complete heal, a wizard with manasong!?!

[Lhancelot]

Wizards = crits on nukes
Rangers = sustained/increased bow damage
Rogues = practical useable poisons
Warriors = working taunt
SK/paladin = improved defensive disciplines
Monk = fix sneak pulling/aggro dump on FD
Druid = indoor/outdoor harmony
Cleric = add damage proc buff spell line for melee attacks
Magician = strengthen pet tanking ability of pets

***Shaman, necromancer, enchanter are fine

[mefdinkins]

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

Hate to break the news but you can

hahah aint nobody got time for clickies!

[Soothsayer]

Giving warriors some kind of aggro ability besides a taunt that barely works would make them less of a headache to play, and I'm baffled to this day as to why they weren't given any unique abilities. They're certainly not underpowered -- they're one of the strongest classes in Velious, to be sure -- but they're so reliant on those damned proccing weapons.

From a class design perspective, warriors in classic EQ are heinously underdeveloped. Not giving warriors abilities to hold aggro with is almost tantamount to not giving clerics any heal abilities and telling them to go and find clicky equipment they can use to heal with. It's stupid. And it makes them rather dull to play, at times.

The main tank class doesn't have any abilities with which to do one of two of his primary responsibilities, which is to ensure that he, and not his group, is the one sustaining damage. Well, except for the aforementioned barely working taunt.
Meanwhile, knights get access to abilities which cause hilarious amounts of aggro for no logical reason, like that disease cloud which does almost no damage but somehow pisses mobs off enough that you practically don't even need a weapon as a SK. In what realm does that make the slightest modicum of sense? Ah, right -- in the realm of Everquest, where things purposefully make no sense because the developers were probably on crack at the time.

Let's hope Pantheon gives warriors a little more love than the autoattack button. [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[mickmoranis]

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

Wizards = crits on nukes
Rangers = sustained/increased bow damage
Rogues = practical useable poisons
Warriors = working taunt
SK/paladin = improved defensive disciplines
Monk = fix sneak pulling/aggro dump on FD
Druid = indoor/outdoor harmony
Cleric = add damage proc buff spell line for melee attacks
Magician = strengthen pet tanking ability of pets

***Shaman, necromancer, enchanter are fine

Damn dude. These are legit.

[ZiggyTheMuss]

Make Druid harmony work indoors.

[Aalderon Crystafire]

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

Give bards their long duration charm back. We had it in classic, but was removed because "not classic".

I was regrettably not a Bard back in the day but if this is true please make a thread in the Bug forums with quality evidence!



For unclassic changes I would have given Bards either Feign Death (which makes sense from an drama/acting angle) or Mem Blur. As far as AoE and swarm kiting goes I was glad to see it nerfed. I would be okay with it being brought back if there was some way to create artificial FPS drops and latency to authentically emulate how video cards and internet circa 1999 would've handled massive swarms of mobs.

All that being said, I wouldn't touch any class until poor Wizards were fixed.

[skarlorn]

Give wizards monster condoms for their magnum dongs

Frank is a gnome, and all wizzies are gnomes

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

[Jimjam]

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

Giving warriors some kind of aggro ability besides a taunt that barely works would make them less of a headache to play, and I'm baffled to this day as to why they weren't given any unique abilities. They're certainly not underpowered -- they're one of the strongest classes in Velious, to be sure -- but they're so reliant on those damned proccing weapons.

From a class design perspective, warriors in classic EQ are heinously underdeveloped. Not giving warriors abilities to hold aggro with is almost tantamount to not giving clerics any heal abilities and telling them to go and find clicky equipment they can use to heal with. It's stupid. And it makes them rather dull to play, at times.

The main tank class doesn't have any abilities with which to do one of two of his primary responsibilities, which is to ensure that he, and not his group, is the one sustaining damage. Well, except for the aforementioned barely working taunt.
Meanwhile, knights get access to abilities which cause hilarious amounts of aggro for no logical reason, like that disease cloud which does almost no damage but somehow pisses mobs off enough that you practically don't even need a weapon as a SK. In what realm does that make the slightest modicum of sense? Ah, right -- in the realm of Everquest, where things purposefully make no sense because the developers were probably on crack at the time.

Let's hope Pantheon gives warriors a little more love than the autoattack button. [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Melee stun was meant to be similar aggro to the spell equivalent, so if you could imagine what procing a stun every 10 seconds would do for warrior aggro, the class makes much more sense.

On top of that, I think the game was built around the idea of root tanking, even if it wasn't so popular live.