extremely dissapointed with "new" pets.

[Durelli]

<DIV>I dinged 38 earlier today and got my adept 3 rotting thrall. Same old zombie but hey he's nice and big now. Pretty cool. Log in after the update, excited to see how he'll be improved..  Nope!! Downgraded to a boring normal zombie. Yawn.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Shadowy stalker adept 3 improved? Nope! He's been downgraded to his old App 1 visage. Who thought that would be a good change? Idiocy.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Grim thullian doesn't look any different. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>One day I'll learn not to get excited by promises by the developers of these sort of games. They only ever come through with a half hearted, lazy result.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I was expecting to be buffed with exciting looking pets after LU18, instead my existing pets are more boring than ever. Good job!</DIV>

[Chabisu]

They spread out pet models and at your range you essentially have all the old ones. At level 60 there are quite a few new ones.Diseased Servant, Grim Thulian (48 pet's name I think), and Nightshade all have new improved looks.I totally dig the new Nightshade look, though her and the mage will make some ciikos I group with happy... <img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />

[gr8scott]

<DIV>Not too impressed with the master grim terror.  It is the lamia model except she has dark red skin with blackish clothes and white eyes.  Not nearly as striking imo as the old master look mostly because the contrast is so low she looks a lot like a blob.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>The adept 3 nightshade was a surprise also.  Kind of a female swashbuckler looking model.  White skin, funny hat, and unclear race (looks a bit halfelfish lol).  </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I didn't have a chance to try them out this morning.  Three cheers for giving the models some attention, but still a bit underwhelmed....</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>GS</DIV>

[Durelli]

<DIV>Yeah, some of the new pets at other tiers are quite cool.. but why change the tier I am at so the pets look less impressive?</DIV> <DIV>Rotting thrall shrinking? Shadowy stalker back to app 1? Makes no sense. Did they think people would enjoy having a less impressive pet?</DIV>

[Lovelessangel]

<DIV>to say I was impressed would be an understatement</DIV>

[Viromage]

<P>The Diseased Servant Adept III looks pretty BAD [Removed for Content] if you ask me, Skele warrior with armor and a shield..  Had great animation.  HELL of a lot better than the zombie graphic standing there looking [Removed for Content]...  This thing actually has battle graphics!</P> <P> </P>

[Elik]

<DIV>Any picks of the Nightshade?</DIV>

[Nosewar]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Durellius wrote:<BR> <DIV>I dinged 38 earlier today and got my adept 3 rotting thrall. Same old zombie but hey he's nice and big now. Pretty cool. Log in after the update, excited to see how he'll be improved..  Nope!! Downgraded to a boring normal zombie. Yawn.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Shadowy stalker adept 3 improved? Nope! He's been downgraded to his old App 1 visage. Who thought that would be a good change? Idiocy.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Grim thullian doesn't look any different. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>One day I'll learn not to get excited by promises by the developers of these sort of games. They only ever come through with a half hearted, lazy result.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I was expecting to be buffed with exciting looking pets after LU18, instead my existing pets are more boring than ever. Good job!</DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>Uh, that's because you're still only 38.  The pets should become more rewarding in appearance as you gain in rank. I suppose a 20 necro should complain that his pet is not impressive at adept3?  Your pet at 38 should not be as impressive as mine at 60.

[quamdar]

Grim Terror Master 1 <img src="http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c278/quamdar/EQ2_000018_edited.jpg"> Diseased Servant Master 1 <img src="http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c278/quamdar/EQ2_000021_edited.jpg"><img src="http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c278/quamdar/EQ2_000020_edited.jpg"> <img src="http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c278/quamdar/EQ2_000019_edited.jpg"> Nightshade Adept 3 <img src="http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c278/quamdar/EQ2_000022_edited.jpg"> <div></div>

[Durelli]

<P>Did it look more impressive than yours 2 hours ago before patch, Nosewarts?</P> <P>I'm just wondering why they changed it at all. It looked so much better before!</P>

[quamdar]

personally i think they did a GREAT job on the Diseased Servant and the nightshade is ok but i am still mad they didn't give us a spectre and the Grim Terror just, well, it sucks. <div></div>

[Durelli]

<DIV>... The high level pets look [expletive haxx0red by Raijinn] sweet I'll give you that.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Still I want my giant zombie back! I'm not budging..</DIV> <DIV> </DIV>

[May Ham]

I am disappointed they took away the master pet titles. My *Fallen hero*( Diseased Servant master) is now just a *Diseased Servant* *sigh*. I can only asssume its the same for all master titles now...

[Spakka]

Diseased Servant Master 1   ... wow !   <div></div>

[Tinantier]

<div></div>Nightshade adept 3 is a vampire(hmm, did quote a previous message with this reply, but that doesnt seem to be working, but there you go <img src="/smilies/69934afc394145350659cd7add244ca9.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />)<div></div><p>Message Edited by Tinantier on <span class=date_text>12-20-2005</span> <span class=time_text>11:02 AM</span>

[Owlbe]

<P>I like some of the new models.  Well, some of them anyways.  I have a problem with them using Lamia models as they are not undead.  They are demons.  Necro's are the master of undead so vampires, skeletons, wraiths, wights, zombies, ghosts, etc etc etc are all fair game.  Plus throwing a red wash over a model like that is kinda lazy/bad/ugly.</P> <P> </P> <P> </P>

[Windego]

<DIV>Poor Grim Terror M1 went from hot to not =(  the other models seem okay, especially diseased servant m1, undecided on the nightshade.  Would have been nice if they had kept the master titles also on the pets instead of making everyone generic..</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>EDIT:  well I take it back, new m1 grim look seems to be growing on me now that i've seen it in game, i like it's nice little whip too!</DIV><p>Message Edited by Windego on <span class=date_text>12-20-2005</span> <span class=time_text>01:56 PM</span>

[gr8scott]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Spakka wrote:<BR>Diseased Servant Master 1   ... wow !   <BR> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>/agree!

[Sonic X]

Uh lockeye hinted at spectres i don't see a spectre in these pics unless master  1 nightshade is it, even then i am dissappointed i wanted a spectre...<div></div>

[Nosewar]

<DIV>That 52 master looks awesome. MUCH improved over than lame stay-puffed marshmallow doughboy before it.  I like my new nightshade but I am itching to see master version of her.  And I agree on 48 grim terror...it would have been an easy fix just to make it a spectre for the master.  Not like they just stuffed a chile pepper in the rear of the adept3 and called it a master.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>But nice changes all around.  Curious how the conj pets look...</DIV>

[YouDontCa]

Wow I love the Diseased Servant M1 <div></div>

[Sarkoris]

<DIV><BR></DIV> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Sonic X wrote:<BR>Uh lockeye hinted at spectres i don't see a spectre in these pics unless master  1 nightshade is it, even then i am dissappointed i wanted a spectre...<BR> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV><BR>I think the quote from Lockeye was that it was a "bit soon" for us to be controlling spectres. Leads to the suspicion it will be the warlock pet at say level 62, the next upgraded pet.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Sark.</DIV>

[Sonic X]

That would be stupid. Considering spectres were added in this expansion and what necros got in EQ1 at 60.  Lamia's and the new tank pet are great. I dont understand [expletive haxx0red by Raijinn] they gave us a vampire at all..

[Pon]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> gr8scott wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Spakka wrote:<BR>Diseased Servant Master 1   ... wow !   <BR> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>/agree! <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>/agree your agree. I wanna go home now and play with my new pets...

[Mystaf]

<DIV>ok...so my super hot Grim temptress that I had yesterday is now red, I can barly see how hot she is, and now she's a Grim Terror...I mean give her some [expletive haxx0red by Raijinn]in horns or something and a damned pitchfork...then my Shadowy Destroyer....magically lost his cool huge weapons for these 2 tiny pos weapons that are a lil cooler than adept 3's...he's also just a Shadowy Assassin now...I mean the 52 tank pet is amazing...way better than the Hero look, but at least let us have the 'cool' pet names if we have a master...stupid game *smirk*</DIV> <DIV>Mystafet</DIV> <DIV>59 Necro</DIV> <DIV>60 Sage</DIV> <DIV>Tribe of the Seven Moons</DIV> <DIV>Mistmoore</DIV> <DIV> </DIV>

[Nosewar]

Bah who cares about shadowy assassin, get off your 59 butt and cap out to 60 and you'll have the nightshade.  I swear you people will never be happy. Summoners been asking for an overhaul for ages and we finally got it.

[Nosewar]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Sonic X wrote:<BR>That would be stupid. Considering spectres were added in this expansion and what necros got in EQ1 at 60.  Lamia's and the new tank pet are great. I dont understand [expletive haxx0red by Raijinn] they gave us a vampire at all..<BR><BR><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>...and if this were EQ1 necros would still be able to uber fear kite and have pets capable of soloing entire end-game dungeons. And vampires happen to be undead. It's the lamias who have questionable relevance to necros and should have their lore examined.</DIV>

[TunaBoo]

I have master nightshade but afraid to scribe it atm. If I ever do I can get a pic of her.. not many master shades around I know as its a 60 spell.<div></div>

[Sonic X]

<div></div><div></div><span><blockquote><hr>Nosewarts wrote:<div></div><blockquote><hr>Sonic X wrote:That would be stupid. Considering spectres were added in this expansion and what necros got in EQ1 at 60.  Lamia's and the new tank pet are great. I dont understand [expletive haxx0red by Raijinn] they gave us a vampire at all..<hr></blockquote><div>...and if this were EQ1 necros would still be able to uber fear kite and have pets capable of soloing entire end-game dungeons. And vampires happen to be undead. It's the lamias who have questionable relevance to necros and should have their lore examined.</div><hr></blockquote></span>Thank you again captain obvious. Conjurors get a classical spell from EQ1 no reason we can't get something that resembles the old game that a majority of the people here would like.<b>la·mi·a</b>   <a href="https://secure.reference.com/premium/login.html?rd=2&u=http%3A%2F%2Fdictionary.reference.com%2Fsearch%3 Fq%3Dlamia" target="_blank"><img src="http://cache.lexico.com/dictionary/graphics/AHD4/JPG/[Removed for Content].jpg" alt="Audio pronunciation of " border="0"></a><span>(</span><span> P </span><span>)</span>  <a target="_blank" href="http://dictionary.reference.com/help/ahd4/pronkey.html"><b>Pronunciation Key</b></a>  (l<img src="http://cache.lexico.com/dictionary/graphics/AHD4/GIF/amacr.gif" alt="" height="15" width="7"><img src="http://cache.lexico.com/dictionary/graphics/AHD4/GIF/prime.gif" alt="" height="22" width="4">m<img src="http://cache.lexico.com/dictionary/graphics/AHD4/GIF/emacr.gif" alt="" height="15" width="7">-<img src="http://cache.lexico.com/dictionary/graphics/AHD4/GIF/schwa.gif" alt="" height="15" width="6">)<i>n.</i> <i>pl.</i> <b>la·mi·as </b>or <b>la·mi·ae</b> (-m<img src="http://cache.lexico.com/dictionary/graphics/AHD4/GIF/emacr.gif" alt="" height="15" width="7">-<img src="http://cache.lexico.com/dictionary/graphics/AHD4/GIF/emacr.gif" alt="" height="15" width="7"><img src="http://cache.lexico.com/dictionary/graphics/AHD4/GIF/lprime.gif" alt="" height="22" width="3">)<ol><li>also <b>Lamia</b> <u><i>Greek Mythology.</i></u> A monster represented as a serpent with the head and breasts of a woman that ate children and sucked the blood from men.</li><li>A female vampire.</li></ol><p><b>lamia</b></p><p>n : (folklore) a corpse that rises at night to drink the blood of the living [syn: <a target="_blank" href="http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=vampire">vampire</a>]</p><p></p><p>And on the eq2.com page they show images of the lamia and call it a succubus(folklore demon). Sorry if it's just me but i don't see a necro controlling a vampire period. Regardless of whether or not they're undead, they have a mind of they're own and are supposed to be considered intelligent, powerful and fearsome foes. Not something i raise from the dead.. wait all vampires have already rose themselves from the dead... So i guess necros can now teleport vampires and mind control them infinitely to do their bidding.</p>Then again a necro would have to be a vampire to turn other things into a vampire...Controlling a demon(or something with undead qualities from a differing planar origin) still makes allot more sense, just like a spectre would...I wouldn't be surprised if the master was a big rat.Here and now i start the give me a flippin spectre protest :p<div></div><p>Message Edited by Sonic X on <span class=date_text>12-20-2005</span> <span class=time_text>03:07 PM</span>

[Anganos]

Nicely put Sonic!

[Nosewar]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Sonic X wrote:<BR> <BR><SPAN><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Nosewarts wrote:<BR> <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Sonic X wrote:<BR>That would be stupid. Considering spectres were added in this expansion and what necros got in EQ1 at 60.  Lamia's and the new tank pet are great. I dont understand [expletive haxx0red by Raijinn] they gave us a vampire at all..<BR><BR><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>...and if this were EQ1 necros would still be able to uber fear kite and have pets capable of soloing entire end-game dungeons. And vampires happen to be undead. It's the lamias who have questionable relevance to necros and should have their lore examined.</DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR></SPAN>Thank you again captain obvious. Conjurors get a classical spell from EQ1 no reason we can't get something that resembles the old game that a majority of the people here would like.<BR><BR><B>la·mi·a</B>   <A href="https://secure.reference.com/premium/login.html?rd=2&u=http%3A%2F%2Fdictionary.reference.com%2Fsearch%3 Fq%3Dlamia" target=_blank><IMG alt="Audio pronunciation of " src="http://cache.lexico.com/dictionary/graphics/AHD4/JPG/[Removed for Content].jpg" border=0></A><SPAN>(</SPAN><SPAN> P </SPAN><SPAN>)</SPAN>  <A href="http://dictionary.reference.com/help/ahd4/pronkey.html" target=_blank><B>Pronunciation Key</B></A>  (l<IMG height=15 alt="" src="http://cache.lexico.com/dictionary/graphics/AHD4/GIF/amacr.gif" width=7><IMG height=22 alt="" src="http://cache.lexico.com/dictionary/graphics/AHD4/GIF/prime.gif" width=4>m<IMG height=15 alt="" src="http://cache.lexico.com/dictionary/graphics/AHD4/GIF/emacr.gif" width=7>-<IMG height=15 alt="" src="http://cache.lexico.com/dictionary/graphics/AHD4/GIF/schwa.gif" width=6>)<BR><I>n.</I> <I>pl.</I> <B>la·mi·as </B>or <B>la·mi·ae</B> (-m<IMG height=15 alt="" src="http://cache.lexico.com/dictionary/graphics/AHD4/GIF/emacr.gif" width=7>-<IMG height=15 alt="" src="http://cache.lexico.com/dictionary/graphics/AHD4/GIF/emacr.gif" width=7><IMG height=22 alt="" src="http://cache.lexico.com/dictionary/graphics/AHD4/GIF/lprime.gif" width=3>) <OL> <LI>also <B>Lamia</B> <U><I>Greek Mythology.</I></U> A monster represented as a serpent with the head and breasts of a woman that ate children and sucked the blood from men.</LI> <LI>A female vampire.</LI></OL> <P><BR> </P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Eh, when I said lore you should assume that I'm referring of course to Everquest lore. Since when were EQ lore and Greek lore strongly linked?  If you want to use that line of logic then you should use the greek mythological context of necromancers to dispute the relevance of lamia or vampires under the control of necros.  I don't believe there even is any Greek mythology covering necromancers per se, but feel free to google and try and prove me wrong.  If anything, everquest owes most of its lore to D&D roots as do practically every other fantasy mmo.</P> <P>In EQ necromancers hold power of death and give unnatural "life" to the unliving, ergo the undead. This would include vampires.  Consider the class-defining spell Lich form and the historical context and contemporary use of the term (origin: D&D lore).  In fact, EQ necromancers are pretty much consistent with AD&D edition 3.5 ruleset.</P> <P>From wikipedia:</P> <P>===============================</P> <P>The term <I><B>lich</B></I> comes from the <A href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_English_language" target=_blank>Old English</A> <I>lic</I>, (pronounced the same) which means "corpse"; an alternative spelling is "liche". The word is cognate with <A href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_language" target=_blank>modern German</A> <I>Leiche</I>, meaning "corpse"; for the linguistic background see <A href="http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lich" target=_blank>lich</A> on the <A href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_language" target=_blank>German language</A> <A href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia" target=_blank>Wikipedia</A>.</P> <P><FONT color=#ff0000>In the <I><A href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dungeons_%26_Dragons" target=_blank>Dungeons & Dragons</A></I> </FONT><A href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fantasy" target=_blank><FONT color=#ff0000>fantasy</FONT></A><FONT color=#ff0000> </FONT><A href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Role-playing_game" target=_blank><FONT color=#ff0000>role-playing game</FONT></A><FONT color=#ff0000>, a <B>lich</B> is a </FONT><A href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magic_%28paranormal%29" target=_blank><FONT color=#ff0000>spellcaster</FONT></A><FONT color=#ff0000> who seeks to defy death by magical means. Liches convert themselves into an </FONT><A href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Undead" target=_blank><FONT color=#ff0000>undead</FONT></A><FONT color=#ff0000> state by means of </FONT><A href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_magic" target=_blank><FONT color=#ff0000>black magic</FONT></A><FONT color=#ff0000> and </FONT><A href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Necromancy" target=_blank><FONT color=#ff0000>necromancy</FONT></A>, storing their <A href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soul" target=_blank>souls</A> in magical receptacles called <A href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phylactery" target=_blank>phylacteries</A>. In some sources this is referred to as the Ritual of Endless Night..</P> <P>As a consequence, the only permanent way to kill a lich is to destroy its phylactery; otherwise, it will be able to recreate a new body for itself. Occasionally, this <A href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metamorphosis" target=_blank>metamorphosis</A> occurs by accident as a result of life-prolonging magic. A lich retains the abilities that it possessed in life, but it has a virtual eternity to hone its skills and inevitably becomes quite powerful.</P> <P><FONT color=#ff0000>Some argue that liches are the most powerful of the undead</FONT>. The gods <A href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vecna" target=_blank>Vecna</A> from the <A href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greyhawk" target=_blank>Greyhawk</A> campaign setting, <A href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Velsharoon" target=_blank>Velsharoon</A> from the <A href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forgotten_Realms" target=_blank>Forgotten Realms</A> campaign setting and The <A href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drow" target=_blank>Drow</A> goddess <A href="http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Kiaransalee&action=edit" target=_blank>Kiaransalee</A> had been liches before ascending to <A href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deity" target=_blank>godhood</A>. The <A href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Githyanki" target=_blank>githyanki</A> lich-queen <A href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vlaakith" target=_blank>Vlaakith</A> CLVII has been attempting to attain godhood as well. <A href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vol" target=_blank>Vol</A>, in the <A href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eberron" target=_blank>Eberron</A> campaign setting, chief diety of the <A href="http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Blood_of_Vol&action=edit" target=_blank>Blood of Vol</A> religion, is a lich, also.</P> <P>...</P> <P>While the term "Lich" is particular to <A href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dungeons_%26_Dragons" target=_blank>Dungeons & Dragons</A>, the underlying idea of eluding death by means of arcane study and black magic is not. It can be traced to <A href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Middle_East" target=_blank>Middle Eastern</A> <A href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Folklore" target=_blank>folklore</A>, and the method of achieving immortality by placing one's soul in a jar (which is usually hidden in some vast fortress) is suggestive of the burial practices of <A href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egypt" target=_blank>Egypt</A>. This would make the Lich a very-far-from-its-roots mythologization of Egyptian <A href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pharaoh" target=_blank>pharaohs</A>. It should be noted that for the Ancient Egyptians, they did not fear death (they were not eluding death) and the creation of the <A href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mummy" target=_blank>mummy</A> is for the soul to fly back to; it was free to exist in both the <A href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afterlife" target=_blank>afterlife</A> and physical world (to commune with its descendants).</P> <P><BR><A href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lich" target=_blank>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lich</A></P> <P>==================================================</P> <P>In Everquest lore, the lich form is the class defining spell of a necromancer.  The lich hold dominion over all forms of lesser undead according to the fantasy lore that created it in the first place.  Vampires are undead and therefore lower on the pecking order than a powerful necromancer who is lord of the undead, controls death, and can take the form of a lich.</P> <P>The devs were right and consistent with EQ lore and the role of necromancers.  It's really quite silly you dispute this when they are the ones who are most familiar with the lore, not to mention where that lore will lead in the future.</P>

[StueyMonst]

<DIV>Grim Terror changes are laughable.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>No time at all spend on giving the Grim Terror any love imho.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I'm hoping this is just a temp fix in what the art department (not just the sunbed department) has in store for this pet line.</DIV>

[Za]

<blockquote><hr>StueyMonster wrote:<DIV>Grim Terror changes are laughable.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>No time at all spend on giving the Grim Terror any love imho.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I'm hoping this is just a temp fix in what the art department (not just the sunbed department) has in store for this pet line.</DIV><hr></blockquote>Wow, some people just don't get it!The changes are fantastic across the board. Some stuff is newer than others, some stuff is cooler than others. But the goal was to vary the pets across level and tiew, and I applaud the results!

[StueyMonst]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Zald wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> StueyMonster wrote:<BR> <DIV>Grim Terror changes are laughable.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>No time at all spend on giving the Grim Terror any love imho.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I'm hoping this is just a temp fix in what the art department (not just the sunbed department) has in store for this pet line.</DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR><BR><BR>Wow, some people just don't get it!<BR><BR>The changes are fantastic across the board. Some stuff is newer than others, some stuff is cooler than others. But the goal was to vary the pets across level and tiew, and I applaud the results!<BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>I applaud the changes, don't get me wrong, but if you read my post you will understand my comments are about 1 pet.  Changing the colour of a pet does not fulfill the statement:</P> <P>- Summoned pets in a given spell line have a distinct look at each quality tier. For example, the Necromancer's Diseased Servant spell summons a skeleton warrior. As the spell is increased in quality tier (Apprentice I, Adept I, etc.), the skeleton looks more impressive.</P> <P>And as I said imho (In MY honest opinion).<BR></P>

[Sonic X]

<div></div><div></div><span><blockquote><hr>Nosewarts wrote:<div></div> <blockquote> <hr> Sonic X wrote: <div></div> <div></div><span> <blockquote> <hr> Nosewarts wrote: <div></div> <blockquote> <hr> Sonic X wrote:That would be stupid. Considering spectres were added in this expansion and what necros got in EQ1 at 60.  Lamia's and the new tank pet are great. I dont understand [expletive haxx0red by Raijinn] they gave us a vampire at all.. <hr> </blockquote> <div>...and if this were EQ1 necros would still be able to uber fear kite and have pets capable of soloing entire end-game dungeons. And vampires happen to be undead. It's the lamias who have questionable relevance to necros and should have their lore examined.</div> <hr> </blockquote></span>Thank you again captain obvious. Conjurors get a classical spell from EQ1 no reason we can't get something that resembles the old game that a majority of the people here would like.<b>la·mi·a</b>   <a href="https://secure.reference.com/premium/login.html?rd=2&u=http%3A%2F%2Fdictionary.reference.com%2Fsearch%3 Fq%3Dlamia" target="_blank"><img alt="Audio pronunciation of " src="http://cache.lexico.com/dictionary/graphics/AHD4/JPG/[Removed for Content].jpg" border="0"></a><span>(</span><span> P </span><span>)</span>  <a href="http://dictionary.reference.com/help/ahd4/pronkey.html" target="_blank"><b>Pronunciation Key</b></a>  (l<img alt="" src="http://cache.lexico.com/dictionary/graphics/AHD4/GIF/amacr.gif" height="15" width="7"><img alt="" src="http://cache.lexico.com/dictionary/graphics/AHD4/GIF/prime.gif" height="22" width="4">m<img alt="" src="http://cache.lexico.com/dictionary/graphics/AHD4/GIF/emacr.gif" height="15" width="7">-<img alt="" src="http://cache.lexico.com/dictionary/graphics/AHD4/GIF/schwa.gif" height="15" width="6">)<i>n.</i> <i>pl.</i> <b>la·mi·as </b>or <b>la·mi·ae</b> (-m<img alt="" src="http://cache.lexico.com/dictionary/graphics/AHD4/GIF/emacr.gif" height="15" width="7">-<img alt="" src="http://cache.lexico.com/dictionary/graphics/AHD4/GIF/emacr.gif" height="15" width="7"><img alt="" src="http://cache.lexico.com/dictionary/graphics/AHD4/GIF/lprime.gif" height="22" width="3">) <ol> <li>also <b>Lamia</b> <u><i>Greek Mythology.</i></u> A monster represented as a serpent with the head and breasts of a woman that ate children and sucked the blood from men.</li> <li>A female vampire.</li></ol> <hr> </blockquote> <p>Eh, when I said lore you should assume that I'm referring of course to Everquest lore. Since when were EQ lore and Greek lore strongly linked?  If you want to use that line of logic then you should use the greek mythological context of necromancers to dispute the relevance of lamia or vampires under the control of necros.  I don't believe there even is any Greek mythology covering necromancers per se, but feel free to google and try and prove me wrong.  If anything, everquest owes most of its lore to D&D roots as do practically every other fantasy mmo.</p> <p>In EQ necromancers hold power of death and give unnatural "life" to the unliving, ergo the undead. This would include vampires.  Consider the class-defining spell Lich form and the historical context and contemporary use of the term (origin: D&D lore).  In fact, EQ necromancers are pretty much consistent with AD&D edition 3.5 ruleset.</p> <p>From wikipedia:</p> <p>===============================</p> <p>The term <i><b>lich</b></i> comes from the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_English_language" target="_blank">Old English</a> <i>lic</i>, (pronounced the same) which means "corpse"; an alternative spelling is "liche". The word is cognate with <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_language" target="_blank">modern German</a> <i>Leiche</i>, meaning "corpse"; for the linguistic background see <a href="http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lich" target="_blank">lich</a> on the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_language" target="_blank">German language</a> <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia" target="_blank">Wikipedia</a>.</p> <p><font color="#ff0000">In the <i><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dungeons_%26_Dragons" target="_blank">Dungeons & Dragons</a></i> </font><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fantasy" target="_blank"><font color="#ff0000">fantasy</font></a><font color="#ff0000"> </font><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Role-playing_game" target="_blank"><font color="#ff0000">role-playing game</font></a><font color="#ff0000">, a <b>lich</b> is a </font><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magic_%28paranormal%29" target="_blank"><font color="#ff0000">spellcaster</font></a><font color="#ff0000"> who seeks to defy death by magical means. Liches convert themselves into an </font><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Undead" target="_blank"><font color="#ff0000">undead</font></a><font color="#ff0000"> state by means of </font><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_magic" target="_blank"><font color="#ff0000">black magic</font></a><font color="#ff0000"> and </font><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Necromancy" target="_blank"><font color="#ff0000">necromancy</font></a>, storing their <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soul" target="_blank">souls</a> in magical receptacles called <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phylactery" target="_blank">phylacteries</a>. In some sources this is referred to as the Ritual of Endless Night..</p> <p>As a consequence, the only permanent way to kill a lich is to destroy its phylactery; otherwise, it will be able to recreate a new body for itself. Occasionally, this <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metamorphosis" target="_blank">metamorphosis</a> occurs by accident as a result of life-prolonging magic. A lich retains the abilities that it possessed in life, but it has a virtual eternity to hone its skills and inevitably becomes quite powerful.</p> <p><font color="#ff0000">Some argue that liches are the most powerful of the undead</font>. The gods <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vecna" target="_blank">Vecna</a> from the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greyhawk" target="_blank">Greyhawk</a> campaign setting, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Velsharoon" target="_blank">Velsharoon</a> from the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forgotten_Realms" target="_blank">Forgotten Realms</a> campaign setting and The <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drow" target="_blank">Drow</a> goddess <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Kiaransalee&action=edit" target="_blank">Kiaransalee</a> had been liches before ascending to <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deity" target="_blank">godhood</a>. The <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Githyanki" target="_blank">githyanki</a> lich-queen <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vlaakith" target="_blank">Vlaakith</a> CLVII has been attempting to attain godhood as well. <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vol" target="_blank">Vol</a>, in the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eberron" target="_blank">Eberron</a> campaign setting, chief diety of the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Blood_of_Vol&action=edit" target="_blank">Blood of Vol</a> religion, is a lich, also.</p> <p>...</p> <p>While the term "Lich" is particular to <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dungeons_%26_Dragons" target="_blank">Dungeons & Dragons</a>, the underlying idea of eluding death by means of arcane study and black magic is not. It can be traced to <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Middle_East" target="_blank">Middle Eastern</a> <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Folklore" target="_blank">folklore</a>, and the method of achieving immortality by placing one's soul in a jar (which is usually hidden in some vast fortress) is suggestive of the burial practices of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egypt" target="_blank">Egypt</a>. This would make the Lich a very-far-from-its-roots mythologization of Egyptian <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pharaoh" target="_blank">pharaohs</a>. It should be noted that for the Ancient Egyptians, they did not fear death (they were not eluding death) and the creation of the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mummy" target="_blank">mummy</a> is for the soul to fly back to; it was free to exist in both the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afterlife" target="_blank">afterlife</a> and physical world (to commune with its descendants).</p> <p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lich" target="_blank">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lich</a></p> <p>==================================================</p> <p>In Everquest lore, the lich form is the class defining spell of a necromancer.  The lich hold dominion over all forms of lesser undead according to the fantasy lore that created it in the first place.  Vampires are undead and therefore lower on the pecking order than a powerful necromancer who is lord of the undead, controls death, and can take the form of a lich.</p> <p>The devs were right and consistent with EQ lore and the role of necromancers.  It's really quite silly you dispute this when they are the ones who are most familiar with the lore, not to mention where that lore will lead in the future.</p><hr></blockquote></span>You don't read very well do you. The word Lamia is derived from greek mythology period, general EverQuest lore is taken from D&D, LOTR, as well as Greek & other cultures mythology. EQ has tons of monsters copied from Greek Mythologies: Minotaurs, Sirens, Centaur, Lamia and more. Those things were around before D&D used them. As well as Necromancy mythologies being around before those things as well.On the class page it says: Necromancers summon the dead and imbue them with unnatural life.In the bloodline chronicles we find dark elfish vampires. They can turn others into vampires, for example the guy from the brethren of night quests that you later find out about. It's stated in the lore and through the obvious layouts of the zone that the vampires themselves use necromancy, the raid vampire mobs in living tombs summon things to do bidding aswell. Yes we all know that they are "considered undead". Here is the difference though.Most of the pets we have are undead, usually considered to be mindless material corpses re-animated from the grave. Even the rotting thrall climbs up as if he was raised from his burial point. As well as dead spirits like the shadowy assassin. Now the Lamia/Succubus is considered a demon and the word lamia(from greek mythology and derived from) was usually vampiric(fed on blood, not afraid of garlic ;p ) in nature creature. EQ lore states lamias/succubuses to be creatures from a different planar origin(think conjuror pet's). Which makes way more sense for us to rip them from their world and then control. The word demon itself is used loosely, but we usually consider them a being with 2 horns and red in appearance. Most lore and mythology states vampires to be a demon who has taken over an undead corpse.In EQ2 the vampires we see are perceived as Dark Elf's who became one. They are also shown as sentient beings with a will of their own and their own hierarchy. Lamia's on the other hand seem to serve the Nightblood. Knowing all this vampires are way higher up on the ladder then other undead. They need to obviously be created by another vampire(though unclear on the how or if's), by choice or someone elses forced will. EQ2 could even consider it a disease because of the descriptions and live event associated with it.I can understand re-animating a corpse to serve me.I can understand ripping demons from different planar origins to serve me.i can NOT undersand magically teleporting a vampire to serve me granted they have their own will and would be hard to control(it's like creature hanlders in SWG i said [expletive haxx0red by Raijinn] when i saw them with Rancor pet's), also the vampire isn't created by us it is created by other vampires, hell we would have to be a vampire then go to a corpse and bring them back no? So basically we can teleport and control something that makes no logical sense. I can understand maybe using control undeath on a vampire because they would use their will to break the control, and since they are undead. Even the named vampires had some very powerful enchanter-like abilities so again i doubt they would be a snap to control or be a persistent pet.It makes no sense based on facts and all the other pets shown. Hell maybe next we should be able to summon the ghost of vox o ye masterfulls of undead! Also Lich means corpse as the word, and master of the undead from D&D, this aint D&D. Lich makes us undead in appearance an grants us undeadish abilities. We can't do any of those things listed in the D&D lore. I doubt the vampires under nektulos would be so easily controlled, and if were so powerful give us a spectre because their a normal mob in the desert. They are the image of death and not the literal reaper of norrath(just do the spectre quest in maj'dul).PS: i like most of the pet graphic changes. EXCEPT for the vampire. It got a huge w-t-f from me. I was really hoping for a spectre. And fix consumption SOE!<div></div><p>Message Edited by Sonic X on <span class=date_text>12-20-2005</span> <span class=time_text>06:03 PM</span>

[Sir Alex]

i am going to have to say i am extremly happy with the changes my scout pet still kicks [expletive haxx0red by Raijinn] my warlock pet is greatly improved at ad1 ( didnt upgrade to ad 3 as pet was useless back before patch) so will be upgrading pet tonight. i think sony did a pretty good job on the models as well there is variety now which is something we have wanted for sometime. so over all i like the changes

[TunaBoo]

Conj mage pet does ~500 dpsnecro mage pet does ~250 dpsgood balance devs<div></div>

[Nosewar]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Sonic X wrote:<BR> <P><BR><SPAN><BR><BR></SPAN>You don't read very well do you. The word Lamia is derived from greek mythology period, general EverQuest lore is taken from D&D, LOTR, as well as Greek & other cultures mythology. EQ has tons of monsters copied from Greek Mythologies: Minotaurs, Sirens, Centaur, Lamia and more. Those things were around before D&D used them. As well as Necromancy mythologies being around before those things as well.<BR><BR>yada yada yada...</P> <P><BR><BR> </P> <P>Message Edited by Sonic X on <SPAN class=date_text>12-20-2005</SPAN> <SPAN class=time_text>06:03 PM</SPAN><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>If you can't comprehend the simple concept here, you are beyond help.  Necromancers by definition are masters over death and the undead.  Vampires are undead. Ergo, necros are masters of vampires. Very simple.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>The devs implemented the pets as they did while considering their inside knowledge of EQ lore, ensuring consistency.  Do you know the lore better than they do? No.Therefore you are wrong. Thx for playing.</DIV>

[quamdar]

<span>don't really understand why we are focusing on whether lamias should be controlled by necros or whatever but i am more concerned with stuff like this:<blockquote><hr> TunaBoo wrote:Conj mage pet does ~500 dpsnecro mage pet does ~250 dps<div></div><hr></blockquote>now i haven't verified this myself but i trust that he has and if this is in fact true that is just rediculous.</span><div></div>

[Leawyn]

<span><blockquote><hr>StueyMonster wrote: <blockquote> <hr> Zald wrote: Wow, some people just don't get it!The changes are fantastic across the board. Some stuff is newer than others, some stuff is cooler than others. But the goal was to vary the pets across level and tiew, and I applaud the results! <hr> </blockquote> <p>I applaud the changes, don't get me wrong, but if you read my post you will understand my comments are about 1 pet.  Changing the colour of a pet does not fulfill the statement:</p> <p>- Summoned pets in a given spell line have a distinct look at each quality tier. For example, the Necromancer's Diseased Servant spell summons a skeleton warrior. As the spell is increased in quality tier (Apprentice I, Adept I, etc.), the skeleton looks more impressive.</p> <p>And as I said imho (In MY honest opinion).</p> <div></div><hr></blockquote>I agree with you Stuey. I just went out and bought a master level of Grim Terror and was HUGELY disappointed to see my lamia go from a sorta-sunburned lamia at adept 3 to what appears to be a darkly toasted lamia. You can't even tell her skin or hair apart, and her clothes you can only really see if you put your mouse over her. Very sad. I thought they were supposed to look BETTER, not worse. This looks AWEFUL. Makes me wish I hadn't upgraded.</span><div></div>

[Yirabeth]

<span><blockquote><hr>Sonic X wrote:That would be stupid. Considering spectres were added in this expansion and what necros got in EQ1 at 60.  Lamia's and the new tank pet are great. I dont understand [expletive haxx0red by Raijinn] they gave us a vampire at all..<hr></blockquote>I hate to say the old saying again..but we're not EQ1 <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />  I really don't want them to try to follow eq1 even...it's a different game, with different rules, and we should follow those... Perhaps we need some time to learn to control those spectres that showed up with DoF, which would explain why we get it at 62 instead of 60 (aside from the way the spells tier here is upgrades every 14 levels.) I think we'll get our spectres. I don't know exactly when...I'm glad they did diversify our pets. ~Yira</span><div></div>

[Buggrit]

This spell is Apprentice 1 Grim spellbinder lvl 20  Warlock pet <img src="http://i31.photobucket.com/albums/c390/wildwynd/EQ2_000008.jpg" height="745" width="1280"> <div></div>

[Buggrit]

This is Adept 3 Tellurian recruit lvl 10 Warrior pet <img src="http://i31.photobucket.com/albums/c390/wildwynd/EQ2_000007.jpg"> <div></div>

[Nosewar]

<DIV>I'm glad the lower levels get a lot of variety too. Makes getting new pets and paying for upgrades a lot more fun.  It's nice seeing lots of different pets running around the zones now.</DIV>

[spath]

What good came out of changing the model for the level 10 pet, considering 9 out of 10 people that dont have alts with cash cant afford to buy the adept off the broker, due to overpricing [Removed for Content]. Instead of taking away the scarab, and spider at adept 1 (not sure what adept 3 and master were) and making the entire spell from app 1 to master the same crawler with just different colors, they should have left it like it is and focused more on the higher level pets, like the red hot Lamia.<div></div>

[Xalmat]

<a href=http://eq2.eqsummoners.com/viewtopic.php?t=439 target=_blank>http://eq2.eqsummoners.com/viewtopic.php?t=439</a>Should interest you if you want to see the entire progression, as [expletive haxx0red by Raijinn] near as I can complete it.

[hammong]

<P>Holy moses, the Grim Terror Master I looks TERRIBLE.    She went from total hottie to something you can barely see due to the overuse of red tint.   I would avoid upgrading my Adept III to Master I just because it looks like a big red [Removed for Content]. </P> <P>The Diseased Servant lineup looks fantastic!</P> <P>- Salsa Picante, 54 Necro, Mistmoore ~ Relics ~</P>

[GurgGuardianLord]

<P>god im so jealous.</P> <P> </P> <P>I want diseased servant master I lollol.</P> <P> </P> <P>That guy looks AWESOME!</P>

[Jai1]

I really like the new changes. Long past overdue.

[XBr]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> GurgGuardianLord wrote:<BR> <P>I want diseased servant master I lollol.</P> <P>That guy looks AWESOME!</P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>I ran around MD and SS for a couple hours yesterday with Fluffy following me, and I must have got like 15 /tells and /says saying "wow that's a really cool pet" and stuff.</P> <P>(9 plat on the broker on Master Madness day, my broker find of teh year <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> )<BR></P> <p>Message Edited by XBrit on <span class=date_text>12-21-2005</span> <span class=time_text>10:03 AM</span>

[Tallika_Runwithbears]

<span><blockquote><hr>hammong wrote:<p>Holy moses, the Grim Terror Master I looks TERRIBLE.    She went from total hottie to something you can barely see due to the overuse of red tint.   I would avoid upgrading my Adept III to Master I just because it looks like a big red [Removed for Content]. </p> <p>The Diseased Servant lineup looks fantastic!</p> <p>- Salsa Picante, 54 Necro, Mistmoore ~ Relics ~</p> <div></div><hr></blockquote>the big change i'd make to the Grim Terror is as its skin shifts to the red, her outfit should shift toward the white to provide contrast and definition to her form.</span><div></div>

[Dalin]

<DIV>All I have to say about the new Nightshade is..... Thank you...</DIV>

[Dalin]

By the way WOULD LOVE to see Master I Nightshade graphic, I'm sure VERY few people even have it. Not sure if it's even been discovered on Permafrost yet. Nevertheless if possible would be much appriciated.

[Sonic X]

<div></div><div></div><div></div><div></div><hr>Nosewarts wrote:<div>If you can't comprehend the simple concept here, you are beyond help.  Necromancers by definition are masters over death and the undead.  Vampires are undead. Ergo, necros are masters of vampires. Very simple.</div><div> </div><div>The devs implemented the pets as they did while considering their inside knowledge of EQ lore, ensuring consistency.  Do you know the lore better than they do? No.Therefore you are wrong. Thx for playing.<hr></div>Uh the lore is there sped ed. Vampires are undead but not RUN OF THE MILL MINIONS. They think and USE NECROMANCY to help defend themselves and are SENTIENT BEINGS. Necros raise things that have already died and MAKE THEM UNDEAD. Vampires became undead through means of OTHER VAMPIRES. By this logic i guess we could raise lady vox from the dead and control a dragon, but you will say no because she is powerful but wait you contradict yourself! lol. It's not even CLEAR WHETHER OR NOT A VAMPIRE IS A CURSE/DISEASE/MAGIC INDUCED. You argue because they are UNDEAD that bam the lore fits but it DOES NOT.The vampires are UNIQUE, they don't tra de [Removed for Content] la all through norrath mindlessly killing people. If it was so simple i guess Lucan could have controlled them and told them well hey come live in FP! Teleporting a vampire and permanently controlling it does not make sense MATSERS OF THE UNDEAD doesnt mean we can CONTROL THE SPIRIT OF VOX, WE CANT CHARMED NAMES, AND VAMPIRES ARE NOT MINIONS.Hell vampires could even be considered a race we can't play. [expletive haxx0red by Raijinn] does it take for you to understand raising and summoning corpse, vs intelligent undead who use necromancy also. Give me my level 60 undead dragon pet now please, cause she is sooooooo undead! Hell give me T'haen he aint [expletive haxx0red by Raijinn] either! la la la<p>Message Edited by Sonic X on <span class=date_text>12-21-2005</span> <span class=time_text>01:42 PM</span>

[Sonic X]

<div></div>YirabethNo one said they had to follow it exactly a dev hinted at it, and i don't see it. A vampire made go [expletive haxx0red by Raijinn] period.<div></div><p>Message Edited by Sonic X on <span class=date_text>12-21-2005</span> <span class=time_text>01:42 PM</span>

[TunaBoo]

Ill try and get shade going.. I got only one on LS I know.<div></div>

[Nosewar]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Sonic X wrote:<BR> <BR> <DIV> </DIV><BR>Uh the lore is there sped ed. Vampires are undead but not RUN OF THE MILL MINIONS. They think and USE NECROMANCY to help defend themselves and are SENTIENT BEINGS. Necros raise things that have already died and MAKE THEM UNDEAD. Vampires became undead through means of OTHER VAMPIRES. By this logic i guess we could raise lady vox from the dead and control a dragon, but you will say no because she is powerful but wait you contradict yourself! lol. It's not even CLEAR WHETHER OR NOT A VAMPIRE IS A CURSE/DISEASE/MAGIC INDUCED. You argue because they are UNDEAD that bam the lore fits but it DOES NOT.<BR><BR>The vampires are UNIQUE, they don't tra de [Removed for Content] la all through norrath mindlessly killing people. If it was so simple i guess Lucan could have controlled them and told them well hey come live in FP! Teleporting a vampire and permanently controlling it does not make sense MATSERS OF THE UNDEAD doesnt mean we can CONTROL THE SPIRIT OF VOX, WE CANT CHARMED NAMES, AND VAMPIRES ARE NOT MINIONS.<BR><BR>Hell vampires could even be considered a race we can't play. [expletive haxx0red by Raijinn] does it take for you to understand raising and summoning corpse, vs intelligent undead who use necromancy also. Give me my level 60 undead dragon pet now please, cause she is sooooooo undead! Hell give me T'haen he aint [expletive haxx0red by Raijinn] either! la la la<BR><BR> <P>Message Edited by Sonic X on <SPAN class=date_text>12-21-2005</SPAN> <SPAN class=time_text>01:42 PM</SPAN><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>Why are you bothering to argue about something when you are so obviously wrong?  The devs apparently agree with me because they implemented things the way they did.  Hm, let's see...some nobody Sonic [expletive haxx0red by Raijinn] on forums thinks it should be that way, and EQ2 devs think it should be this way.  Yeah, I think I'll err on the side of caution here and go with the experts.  I know its a <EM>stretch</EM> and all, but somehow I suspect they know the lore better than you do.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>OMG OMG why teh xmas treh in evil freeports??!!</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV>

[TunaBoo]

<div></div>here is master shade. She has a katana but is pierce damage still.<img src="http://www.thetunaman.com/eq2/shade.jpg"><div></div><p>Message Edited by TunaBoo on <span class=date_text>12-21-2005</span> <span class=time_text>05:32 PM</span>

[StueyMonst]

<P>Thanks TunaBoo</P> <P>See, that's how you make a pet look cool.  This is an example of a job well done Mr & Mrs Art Dept.</P> <P>Looking forward to getting mine</P> <P><img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></P> <P> </P>

[jeanjuedi]

<DIV>Umm slight problem.  Does that mean she does not duel wield anymore?  Guess we don't have to worry about not proccing the off hand!</DIV>

[TunaBoo]

Mm she draws out 2 weapons.. just only see 1 holster.. dps is basically adept 3+ 5-10%.. no huge deal. The debuffs do a little more, defense debuff is 29 instead of 25 of adept3.. think the agi debuff is 89 instead of the 82 of adept<div></div>

[Nosewar]

Hm, not nearly as impressive as the 52 master vs adept3.  Oh no! It's a vampire! How can it be with teh necro??!! 

[Boran]

Having seen the new pet art I am loving the changes (granted the tinting on the master 1 caster needs looking at). Having a vampire rather than the blob at 60 is a great addition. I am in total agreement with Yirabeth too, If I wanted to play EQ1 I wouldn't have moved over to EQ2. Different game different stuff.

[Leawyn]

Wow...... gotta get master nightshade even more than ever now! WOW! Beautiful! P.S. Fix Grim Terror. Or at the very least give the girl some aloe, that sunburn looks like it hurts! <div></div>

[Supa Mint Flava]

<DIV>I have the Grim Terror at Master I and find myself constantly remembering "that day in Hawaii without sunscreen"..... </DIV>

[Shonin]

<P>Wow we can argue about anything and never be happy.  So is this a game or a History, linguistics program.  I have a degree in history and could get into this debate, but what is the point, this is Everquest 2 an ever changing world that is created by a hugely diverse group of people with input from the paying population.  Stop trying to keep things so static and realize things change.  If you are unhappy make a crtical comment that will make sense.  For example Tuna's parse of dps issuse between necro and conj.  If you don't like certain art that is a personal taste factor, make your comments heard by all means, but be sure for everything you hate there is another that loves it.  This game isn't about you it is about us.  Mob rules! And remember the most popular choice isn't always your choice.  </P> <P>And I hate you Tuna like a step brother who gets all the toys.  Just kidding love the Master I Shade, very sweet.  I am 58 now and have my adept III waiting for me.  Can't wait.  </P>

[TunaBoo]

<div></div>Shade was mine but I gave it away, it belongs to xiggy our new necro. I am busy stealing guardian toys to steal necro ones too. I'll get the second one that drops prolly.<div></div><p>Message Edited by TunaBoo on <span class=date_text>12-22-2005</span> <span class=time_text>04:21 PM</span>

[Nosewar]

<DIV>But where did the nightshare master drop?  I don't think anyone has it on our server.</DIV>

[metalo]

EQ Lore is dead since we killed The Sleeper in eq1 /nod Let Sonic voice his opinion since i learned a great deal about Mythology through rpg and i see no reason to mix up words and give them new meaning so Babylon can arise again and none understand the other. Just saying i agree here with Sonic to some degree and he has a point. be nice =) <div></div>

[BrutalBilly]

<P>So most of the new models are for high levels....good thinking that.</P> <P> </P> <P>Necromancers don't spend their whole playing time at high levels, just the last bit.</P> <P> </P> <P>The SOE plan seems to be "bore them to tears for the 45 levels they spend most of their playing time in, and if any are stubborn enough to be happy gazing at an unmoving zombie midget for 45-50 levels, then we finally do something about it.</P> <P> </P> <P>To me a better business plan is to help first the 80%, not the 20%</P>

[TunaBoo]

Im not 100% sure.. but in t5 adepts and masters of 50s only dropped off epics.. so it would follow adepts and masters of 60 spells only drop off EPICS.We got ours off an epic, terrortula, and it was a server discovery.<div></div>

[soulrais]

brutal that is accualy backwards for most ppl ... they go 1-45 fairly FAST .. .and then slow down leveling and stay in the higher lvls for long hall  .. i know for myself i was 50 like 4 month before DoF even came out ... would been 60 but got new job and work more now

[Nosewar]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> TunaBoo wrote:<BR>Im not 100% sure.. but in t5 adepts and masters of 50s only dropped off epics.. so it would follow adepts and masters of 60 spells only drop off EPICS.<BR><BR>We got ours off an epic, terrortula, and it was a server discovery.<BR> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>Well that explains it. None of the wannabe ubah phat lewtz d00dz on our server have defeated terrorantula yet.

[quamdar]

the conjurer scout pet dropped for a guild on our server out of poets the return, would assume ours can also drop from their too along with any other level 60 spells. <div></div>

[Shonin]

<P>No doubt you will Tuna.  But why would only necro master's drop off epics, I have been in groups that have looted several T6 masters that did not drop off epics, so I don't think it stands to reason only necro's drop off epics, just that the frequency and chance for all master's improve dramatically at that level.  And grats to you all for killing that big ugly nasty spider, I carry a can of Raid with me all the time just incase she aggros me.  <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />  None the less a killer looking pet.</P> <P> </P> <P>For all people that want things to stay the same all the time, just remember if that happened we wouldn't be here, things change get over it and learn to adapt.</P> <P> </P> <P> </P>

[Boran]

Shonin, the reason for this is that technically lvl 60 is tier 7. Therefore, lvl 60 masters tend to only drop in tier 7 zones (eg LT, SC etc raid zones) or tier 7 raid / contested mobs

[Shonin]

I see what you are saying, I just woke up and posted, considering it is a level 60 master that would make sense, just curious how does that apply to the albino spiders in the tables that are 62^^^, any thoughts on this. 

[Memmoch]

I have to agree that the necro pets are pretty disappointing over all when compared to the conjuror pets.  They have some sweet looking pets throughout the levels instead of just endgame.  They should of gotten rid of the zombie pet all together and brought out some interesting and new pets for us (think instead of a zombie have a undead Orc or the Ogre's!) some new pets all together would of been better.  This is just another example of the DEV team promising something spectacular and then either getting lazy in the middle or being rushed by SOE so putting out a product that appears half [Removed for Content] at best.  I mean come on, the app 1 Rotting thrall looks EXACTLY the same as the master 1 lol.  Oh well. <div></div>

[Nosewar]

<DIV>^^^</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Go read the dev forum for LU18 feedback.  A ton of conjurors are unhappy their pets were changed at all and they're [Removed for Content] about necros getting good revamps.</DIV>

[Nosewar]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Boran wrote:<BR>Shonin, the reason for this is that technically lvl 60 is tier 7. Therefore, lvl 60 masters tend to only drop in tier 7 zones (eg LT, SC etc raid zones) or tier 7 raid / contested mobs<BR><BR><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>That doesn't make any sense. When I scribe a 50 adept3 spell, it requires a T5 rare because it is a T5 spell.  Same thing as you go down in tiers, 40 requires a T4 rare because it's a T4 spell.  And as a 60 sage there is no book for 60 recipies, level 60 spells are in the 59 books -- again, because they are T6 spells and require T6 rares/components.</P> <P>Level 61 to 70 spells in a future expansion would be T7 according to the current pattern.</P>

[TunaBoo]

<font color="#ff3300">No doubt you will Tuna.  But why would only necro master's drop off epics, I have been in groups that have looted several T6 masters that did not drop off epics,<font color="#ffffff"></font><font color="#ffffff">huh? lvl 60 spells of all classess only drop off t6 epics.. 51-59 drop off any mob. Necro is no difff then any other class.its not because lbl 60 is t7 cuz it is not. Its because lvl 60 spells are "special" and they decided to make them epic drop only just like level 50s were in t5.</font></font><div></div>

[quamdar]

yeah i never saw a level 50 spell drop off anything but epics until the expansion except for torrential plague, now they drop in clefts though got my lich from there and an ice comet dropped in there too.<div></div>

[Boran]

Nosewarts, as far as im aware your wrong. Level 10 is tier 2, 20 is tier 3, 30 is tier 4 and 40 is tier 5. Level 50 was different because it was end game and as Tunaboo stated you could only get the masters from epics. Until DoF came out I never saw a level 50 adept 1 either.<div></div>

[Xalmat]

What Boran said. As far as spells go:Tier 1: Level 1-9Tier 2: Level 10-19Tier 3: Level 20-29Tier 4: Level 30-39Tier 5: Level 40-50Tier 6: Level 51-60Level 50 spells are found in level 49 Sage/Jeweler/Alchemist books, while level 60 spells are found in level 59 Sage/Jeweler/Alchemist books. Meanwhile, level 50 recipe books contain recipes for the next tier up.I anticipate this pattern will continue whenever there are level increases.<p>Message Edited by Xalmat on <span class=date_text>12-26-2005</span> <span class=time_text>07:52 PM</span>

[Boran]

Thanks Xalmat, and sorry Nosewarts I didn't mean to be quite so abrupt. Guess I shouldn't write things when I'm hungover and my new telly has gone boom :/

[Sonic X]

<div></div><div></div><div><span><blockquote><hr>Nosewarts wrote:<blockquote><hr>Sonic X wrote:<div></div><div></div><div></div><div></div><div> </div>Uh the lore is there sped ed. Vampires are undead but not RUN OF THE MILL MINIONS. They think and USE NECROMANCY to help defend themselves and are SENTIENT BEINGS. Necros raise things that have already died and MAKE THEM UNDEAD. Vampires became undead through means of OTHER VAMPIRES. By this logic i guess we could raise lady vox from the dead and control a dragon, but you will say no because she is powerful but wait you contradict yourself! lol. It's not even CLEAR WHETHER OR NOT A VAMPIRE IS A CURSE/DISEASE/MAGIC INDUCED. You argue because they are UNDEAD that bam the lore fits but it DOES NOT.The vampires are UNIQUE, they don't tra de [Removed for Content] la all through norrath mindlessly killing people. If it was so simple i guess Lucan could have controlled them and told them well hey come live in FP! Teleporting a vampire and permanently controlling it does not make sense MATSERS OF THE UNDEAD doesnt mean we can CONTROL THE SPIRIT OF VOX, WE CANT CHARMED NAMES, AND VAMPIRES ARE NOT MINIONS.Hell vampires could even be considered a race we can't play. [expletive haxx0red by Raijinn] does it take for you to understand raising and summoning corpse, vs intelligent undead who use necromancy also. Give me my level 60 undead dragon pet now please, cause she is sooooooo undead! Hell give me T'haen he aint [expletive haxx0red by Raijinn] either! la la la<p>Message Edited by Sonic X on <span class="date_text">12-21-2005</span><span class="time_text">01:42 PM</span></p><hr></blockquote><div>Why are you bothering to argue about something when you are so obviously wrong?  The devs apparently agree with me because they implemented things the way they did.  Hm, let's see...some nobody Sonic [expletive haxx0red by Raijinn] on forums thinks it should be that way, and EQ2 devs think it should be this way.  Yeah, I think I'll err on the side of caution here and go with the experts.  I know its a <em>stretch</em> and all, but somehow I suspect they know the lore better than you do.</div><div> </div><div>OMG OMG why teh xmas treh in evil freeports??!!</div><div> </div><div> </div><hr></blockquote>Hah god forbid someone has a different opinion.Aww man you hurt my feelings, i forgot about this thread lol. I feel bad to be a necro with you on these forums because anytime someone has an opinion you make some lame [expletive haxx0red by Raijinn] l33t comment about it. Hell all over the forums thats all you do anyways. God forbid someone else doesn't agree that it fits in with the lore. Because being a developer means the developers can do no wrong, but wait they just recently "revamped" the entire game. I guess since they aren't wrong we can go back to having all zombies.Point is, Vampire characters may be undead but considering that people like Mayong Mistmoore can become a demigod like he is now in EQ1. I do not think controlling them so easily without explaining a reason is why it is odd and doesn't fit in with the lore, if they want to just give us stuff at random like i said give us dead dragons just because they are dead. The Bloodline Chronicles built them up to be these foes that could possibly overtake the cities, they had smarts, they weren't mindless undead zombies.The devs agree with you? Im sure they came here and consulted you, some people here agree with me on my facts based on all the lore we "know" in eq2. The developers didn't ask anyone they just decided to make something cool and unique, they make stuff and change it based on feedback. Most people including me think it looks cool, but doesn't fit with OUR OPINIONS of what a necromancer could control. And i am also one for tyring creative things because you can only use zombies so many times.Your whole argument is based on the fact that if the developers did it, it must be right just because they work on the game(hello even the developers admit continuity errors since EQ is a big franchise). Do you think when they were deciding what would look cool if lore wise it would make sense? No they gave us a vampire because it looked cool which wasn't bad in general, and it was considered undead, so boom new pet. There are allot of spells in the game which have a reasoning behind them. Like spirit of the wolf should be self-explanatory, summoning a corpse, a demon, or a shadow is simple in nature.Summoning something that had to be turned into the undead before hand and are technically already dead before we "summon" stuff from the dead needs more reasoning behind it then if its dead i can teleport it to me and tell it what to do.Of course i'm sure there is another reply coming with "if its in the game it must be right!". Yea um ever heard of having and giving an opinion and not following the heard.Yes the Vampire looks cool, lore wise it's very iffy on the hows and whys we can control it. I would think vampires themselves could use magic to defend against mind control too..But im not gonna try and give an opinion because god forbid i have one on a game i pay for.Remember you got smart [expletive haxx0red by Raijinn] with me first, don't come into the kitchen if you can't take the heat.PS: the m1 looks cool i have every master but that [expletive haxx0red by Raijinn] pet it's [Removed for Content] me off.</span></div><p>Message Edited by Sonic X on <span class="date_text">02-10-2006</span><span class="time_text">09:07 PM</span></p><p>Message Edited by Sonic X on <span class="date_text">02-10-2006</span><span class="time_text">09:09 PM</span></p>