Worst trio possible

[Yasi]

I am copying the idea of this thread from another forum.

Imagine you're starting a trio with two friends for green99.

What would be the worst possible combo (classes/races) you could come up with? Let's say you can't choose the same class more than once. So sorry, no rogue/rogue/rogue.

Feel free to include obstacles like "We're going to have a Barbarian and a Gnome and want to start playing together at Level 1" to fuck up your starting position even more.

[EQElTodd]

No heals (ever) & no pets would be my first go to rule for this.

So...
Human Freeport rogue (worshiping Innoruk)
Gnome warrior (worshiping Bertoxxulous)
Human Qeynos wizard (worshiping Bertoxxulous)

[Mentathiel]

Well, it has to start rogue-wizard; the two quintessential damage-dealers have no hope of surviving aggro, so it's either lots of death or nuke to death and wait for mana / health to come back. That will get pretty old after a few levels. At higher levels, they probably won't survive many fights.

Warrior-rogue could be as bad; tank and DPS sounds fine, but think of the downtime without a healer. Add in that difficult stretch from 20-30 where the rogue will keep grabbing aggro and neither taunt nor evade will be reliable enough to fix it. Again, adding a number 3 is hard without fixing their flaws.

Combine those and you have what could almost sound perfect - lots of DPS and a tank to hold aggro - except that you spend more time waiting around between fights than fighting.

Edit: And while I was typing, it seems someone else had the same idea.

[Tethler]

rogue, wizard, mage (rogue is never gonna BS, and have fun splitting)

or warrior, paladin, SK (lol dps)

Really though, with no doubles, it's hard to find just an unplayable combination. The best (worst) case scenario is that one member of the trio is left ineffective, like the above rogue.

[Yasi]

I was also wondering if combining hybrids and the pure caster would make sense. E.g. a ranger+druid or a cleric+paladin. But although the hybrid would lose half of his power due to the pure caster being able to cast the better version of all the spells, having a healer would already make you not that horrible of a team.

I guess cleric, druid, pala would be able to do stuff, but they would be slow as hell in doing it [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[Mentathiel]

I think it's the melees who suffer, especially without heals. Most casters would just root with no tank. Add in pets and you can basically add value to anyone who is not a rogue.

[Yasi]

But having a wizard + rogue could potentially have some kiting potential at some Point.

How about the triangle of tanking Warrior, Paladin and Shadow Knight?

[Mentathiel]

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

How about the triangle of tanking Warrior, Paladin and Shadow Knight?

I actually think the heals from the paladin and DPS from the shadowknight would make that trio semi-viable. Put them up against undead and make sure the warrior is properly geared, I'd play it.

[jolanar]

Pretty sure you can pick any 3 classes and do really well here. At that point the worst is probably just the trio with the lowest dps.

Cleric, Paladin and Shadowknight perhaps.

[theonesler]

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

Pretty sure you can pick any 3 classes and do really well here. At that point the worst is probably just the trio with the lowest dps.

Cleric, Paladin and Shadowknight perhaps.

I think I may agree with this. All melee groups actually are doable since the DPS would be considerable and heals could be handled by bind wound. Honestly, 3 melee bindwounding someone is significant. And given the combat bind wound macro, that also helps even more.

So I'd say the weakest/worst trio would be something that has low DPS, like the combo mentioned by jolanar.