Mystics

[Tonedog19]

<DIV> <P><SPAN>I hope this in the right section, sorry if it isn't.  I couldn't find a good place for it.  Anyways, this is about mystics, who used to be shamans in EQ1.  What is the deal?  We got the shaft!!!  First off in EQ1 mystics and defilers were the same, just different lvl shamans.  Why are defilers so much better at soloing than mystics while the rest is pretty much the same?  Anyways, there are more important issues here.</SPAN></P> <P><SPAN>First off, our slows.  I get that we have better heals in EQ2 and that this is a different game, but most of the characters kept their main abilities, but we lost everything.  It seems like Mystics were forgotten after they were first developed.  In EQ1 our slows were up to 75%, now we get like 25% with a refresh time.  That is pretty much useless.  I never notice a difference where in EQ1 that was our job!!!</SPAN></P> <P><SPAN>Secondly, how could you take away cannibalization?  That was another attribute that defined Shamans in EQ1.  We still have Torpor in EQ2 but what good is it?  It slows your run speed and your attack speed, so you can't use it on the tank, and you can't use it on yourself when you get really low because you might have to run.  The whole point for Torpor on EQ1 was so we could use it with cannibalization.  Now that we don't have canni, it is pretty useless if you keep it how it was on EQ1.  You should just take the slowing effect off.  It makes not since. </SPAN></P> <P><SPAN>Next, our pets!?!?!?  Seriously, why even give them to us?  They rarely actually land a hit, and if they get hit by anything even the weakest of mobs they die in a few hits.  In EQ1, as a shaman, I used my pet to pull mobs that were very hard for me to solo.  My pet could even tank it as long as I healed, and rooted the mob.  Witch is another thing you took away that you should not have, root!!!  Anyways, our pets don't have to be conj, or necro type, just able to take enough hits so they don't die before we can ward them.  Or how about you give us a real pet instead of an AA one?  We were a pet class on EQ1!!!  Once again leading me to believe that we are a forgotten class.</SPAN></P> <P><SPAN>Finally, the thing I probably have the least beef with SoE about, but still a beef.  Why did you take away all our kewl little spells like invis, levitation, and invis to undead?  Those were fun spells and the undead one was one that only shamans had.  We are a class that should have those types of things.  We are not "healers".  We might be a priest type, but not healers.  That is clerics.  We were supposed to have some heals yes, and if you want us to have the wards and be healers, that is find, but give us a bone here.  It isn't enough you forgot about us in every other department, but you gave us near worthless AAs also.  Everything that defined Shamans is gone.  This may be a new game, but it is EQ2 and according to the story line we are the same people as before just with less land. </SPAN></P> <P><SPAN>So, I guess I am begging you to please take a close look at the mystic and defiler class, the mystics particularly because the defilers are pretty tuff already.  At least think about giving us a little better pet and maybe cannibalization back, and if you can't do that at least take the slowing effect off Topar. </SPAN></P> <P><SPAN>Thank you and I hope you guys listen,</SPAN></P> <P><SPAN></SPAN> </P> <P><SPAN><BR>Kanorf</SPAN></P> <P><SPAN><FONT size=3><FONT face="Times New Roman"></FONT></FONT></SPAN> </P></DIV>

[Morfi]

<p><span>Tonedog1980 wrote:</span></p><p><span></span></p><hr size="2" width="100%"><p><span>I hope this in the right section, sorry if it isn't.  I couldn't find a good place for it.  Anyways, this is about mystics, who used to be shamans in EQ1.  What is the deal?  We got the shaft!!!  First off in EQ1 mystics and defilers were the same, just different lvl shamans.  Why are defilers so much better at soloing than mystics while the rest is pretty much the same?  Anyways, there are more important issues here.</span></p><p><span></span></p><hr size="2" width="100%">Defilers are not better healers than Mystics; Their buffs are also relatively close, Bolster aside. <p><span></span></p><hr size="2" width="100%"><p><span>First off, our slows.  I get that we have better heals in EQ2 and that this is a different game, but most of the characters kept their main abilities, but we lost everything.  It seems like Mystics were forgotten after they were first developed.  In EQ1 our slows were up to 75%, now we get like 25% with a refresh time.  That is pretty much useless.  I never notice a difference where in EQ1 that was our job!!!</span></p><p><span></span></p><hr size="2" width="100%">25% is a lot; As you said, its not the same game. I *definately* notice it when the tank is being beat on by a mob that isn't slowed, because it means I have to heal a lot more on raids. In groups healing is so easy it doesn't make much difference except perhaps in Halls of Fate; Solo I imagine it'd be a helpful thing, if anything for 25% less melee-based interrupts.<p><span></span></p><hr size="2" width="100%"> <p><span>Secondly, how could you take away cannibalization?  That was another attribute that defined Shamans in EQ1.  We still have Torpor in EQ2 but what good is it?  It slows your run speed and your attack speed, so you can't use it on the tank, and you can't use it on yourself when you get really low because you might have to run.  The whole point for Torpor on EQ1 was so we could use it with cannibalization.  Now that we don't have canni, it is pretty useless if you keep it how it was on EQ1.  You should just take the slowing effect off.  It makes not since. </span></p><p><span></span></p><hr size="2" width="100%">There are definately uses for Torpor; That you can't concieve them, doesn't mean they do not exist =) But no, its not as useful as its EQ1 counterpart. But that doesn't matter, because its not the same game.<p><span></span></p><hr size="2" width="100%"> <p><span>We were a pet class on EQ1!!!</span></p><p><span></span></p><hr size="2" width="100%">... What ? No, you weren't. Not even in paraphrasal, not even in an alternate universe, was the Shaman in EQLive a pet class.<p><span></span></p> <p><span></span></p><hr size="2" width="100%"><p><span>We are not "healers".  We might be a priest type, but not healers.  That is clerics.  We were supposed to have some heals yes, and if you want us to have the wards and be healers, that is find, but give us a bone here.  It isn't enough you forgot about us in every other department, but you gave us near worthless AAs also.  Everything that defined Shamans is gone.  This may be a new game, but it is EQ2 and according to the story line we are the same people as before just with less land. </span></p> <p><span>So, I guess I am begging you to please take a close look at the mystic and defiler class, the mystics particularly because the defilers are pretty tuff already.  At least think about giving us a little better pet and maybe cannibalization back, and if you can't do that at least take the slowing effect off Topar. </span></p> <p><span>Thank you and I hope you guys listen,</span></p><p><span></span></p><hr size="2" width="100%">Shamans *ARE* most definately healers; ALL priests are healers, nothing else. There might be one or two of them able to do a small amount of DPS (Fury, Warden and arguably Defiler with enough gear), but ALL priests are healers. Not just clerics.It seems to me like you are hanging on to outdated concepts of the game that in part didn't even hold true in EverQuest 1. Shamans were healers in EverQuest 1, shamans are healers in EverQuest 2. They are NOT the same class. They should NOT be. This isn't the game game, the same rules don't apply, combat is vastly different and while it functions under the same presumptions (Debuffs, buffs, AoEs, tanking, CCing) it works differently.The mystic class is, in large part, fine; At least, nothing you've raised here is an issue with the Mystic class. They have strong buffs, good debuffs, very good heals.<p><span></span></p><div></div>

[Dman4]

<DIV><FONT color=#ffff00>In EQ1 our slows were up </FONT><FONT color=#ffff00>to 75% I never notice a difference where in EQ1 that was our job!!!</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00></FONT> </DIV> <DIV>At level 60 I have 3 spells that stack to over 75%, a single target slow, a group slow, and a dps debuff.  You're doing it wrong.  Stack the three and it's very much usefull, infact NEEDED for raid situations.  After the tanks 30 second buffs and bolster and all that wears off, if the encounter isn't debuff'd, it's pretty much game over.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ffff00>We still have Torpor in EQ2 but what good is it?  It slows your run speed and your attack speed, so you can't use it on the tank</FONT></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>The tank is exactly the person you use it on.  Tanks auto-attack DPS is very low.  All their hate comes from taunts and combat abilities.  They have very little need to move.  It's also useful when solo'ing because your pet does most of the auto-attack damage.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><SPAN><FONT color=#ffff00>Next, our pets!?!?!?  Seriously, why even give them to us?</FONT></SPAN></DIV> <DIV><SPAN></SPAN> </DIV> <DIV><SPAN>Shaman in EQ1 were hardly a pet class.  Necro's and Mage's were pet classes.  I guess this is a point of arguement, but Shaman were just as much a pet class as Shadowknights.  And we can take hits much better than we could in EQ1, so we replaced our pet in terms of tanking while solo'ing, while the pet can serve as a DPS friend.  As to why they give them to us... well they didn't, until this expansion.  It's not a defining characteristic of the shaman class but because it fits the lore it makes sense to give them a pet.  Whatever -- The AA are only based on the pet if you chose them to be.  There are plenty of non-pet dependant AA.</SPAN></DIV> <DIV><SPAN></SPAN> </DIV> <DIV><SPAN><SPAN><FONT color=#ffff00>Secondly, how could you take away cannibalization?</FONT></SPAN></SPAN></DIV> <DIV><SPAN><SPAN></SPAN></SPAN> </DIV> <DIV><SPAN><SPAN>Get a moonstone.  Cannibalization is hardly a big deal.  Out of combat mana regen is rediculous as it is, what do you need canabalize for?  There's very little time in combat for cannibalize.</SPAN></SPAN></DIV> <DIV><SPAN><SPAN></SPAN></SPAN> </DIV> <DIV><SPAN><SPAN><FONT color=#ffff00>you took away that you should not have, root!!!</FONT></SPAN></SPAN></DIV> <DIV><SPAN><SPAN></SPAN></SPAN> </DIV> <DIV><SPAN><SPAN>Root - rotting was awful anyway.  We have a snare now that is just as good as that root was.  Shaman root lasted about 10 seconds and probably had the same chance to break as our current snare.</SPAN></SPAN></DIV> <DIV><SPAN><SPAN></SPAN></SPAN> </DIV> <DIV><SPAN><SPAN><FONT color=#ffff00>Why did you take away all our kewl little spells like invis, levitation, and invis to undead?  Those were fun spells and the undead one was one that only shamans had</FONT></SPAN></SPAN></DIV> <DIV><SPAN><SPAN></SPAN></SPAN> </DIV> <DIV><SPAN><SPAN>Not only did you say "kewl" but you got your facts straight wrong.  This leads me to believe you have NO IDEA what you are talking about.  Shaman had standard invis.  Only cleric's and maybe some other class had undead invis.  Undead always saw shaman invis.  And we didn't get it till much later in the game than anyone else (actually embarassingly late).</SPAN></SPAN></DIV> <DIV><SPAN><SPAN></SPAN></SPAN> </DIV> <DIV><SPAN><SPAN><FONT color=#ffff00>We are not "healers".  We might be a priest type, but not healers.  That is clerics.</FONT> </SPAN></SPAN></DIV> <DIV><SPAN><SPAN></SPAN></SPAN> </DIV> <DIV><SPAN><SPAN>One of the issues EQ2 sought to address was the single point of dependance.  It was not a fair situation that only 1 class could tank and 1 class could heal.  It is a much more balanced world with multiple healing classes.  In any case, Shaman were healers and still are.  Clerics remain better healers still, but shaman can do a wonderful job by properly utilization their debuffs.  This follows along the shaman lore perfectly from EQ1 to EQ2.</SPAN></SPAN></DIV> <DIV><SPAN><SPAN></SPAN></SPAN> </DIV> <DIV><SPAN><SPAN>I normally don't bash posts or tell people they are straight off wrong because I encourage creative thought and varying opinions.  But your post is 100% complain and offers no alternatives except for "I want to play EQ1".  So please, go play eq1.</SPAN></SPAN></DIV>

[Besual]

This is EQ2 and not EQ1. Beside the name of the game and the name of some locations / zones these games have nothing to do with each other. You can find tons of postings about this topic here on the board. I played a highend raiding shaman in EQ1 too. And to be hornest our 75% slow was one of the most broken things in EQ1. That's why mobs started to mitigate slows. In EQ2 you can stack slows (I guess there is a slow-cap too). Slowing the mob <b>and</b> land your other debuffs helps to keep your tank up with less heals / wards. At least when you fight yellow mobs and nameds. Usualy a group kills white / blue fast enough to skip the debuffing. Canni was a blessing and a curse in EQ1. Our spells had such huge mana requirement because we had canni. But canni was an active skill: you had to stand still and cast canni for 2.5sec(?). During this time you could do nothing else. Compare this to the passive mana regen of a necro: He could run around / cast other spells and still convert his HPs to mana. Anyway, in EQ2 mages can convert HPs into power. And for torpor... in EQ2 every class has a single target small direct heal, a single target big direct heal, a group heal, a single target special heal and a group special heal. Mystics get an extra heal: torpor. Torpor might not the best heal for melee classes but it's still perfect to heal a caster. Even in EQ1 shaman never were a pet class. We only had a companion. I have to agree that dogdog could tank at least a little bit in EQ1. In EQ2 our doggy can't tank and you have to finish the strenght-line of your AP-Skill to give him at least some survibility to AEs. May be we will get some improvment here with the next expansion. And finaly in EQ2 mystic / defiler <b>are</b> healers as fury / warden and templar / incquisitor. You can use any priest class as main healer in a group. With wards and debuffs shaman are one of the stronger healing classes. No class has a levitation spell. In EQ1 you could use levitation to exploit some z-axis problems. I guess this is the main reason for no levitation in EQ2. Sure, it would be nice to have an invis spell. But EQ1 shaman had only "invis to animal" in EQ1 either. In EQ2 you can buy invis totems to get the same effect.<div></div>

[Laromor]

<DIV>EQ2 is not EQ1.  The two games may be set in similar sorroundings and some of creatures living in Norrath may share a common history across games.  But... its two completely different games and should be seen as such.  Over the course of 500 years races and classes have evolved (and revolved) seperately, relearning the Magic which were forgotten in the process of the land shattering.</DIV> <DIV>Most classes pocess abilities similar to what they did 5 centuries ago, but most abilities have been shuffled around or vanished... while new ones have been discovered.</DIV> <DIV>A Mystic (and Defiler) may share the same background as the Shaman of EQ1... but that is as far as it goes.</DIV> <DIV>Reintroducing 75% slows, complete heals or whatever, would unbalance the game as it is... and ultimately make it into a better clothed version of EQ1.  I for one do not want that.</DIV> <DIV>As for Mystics and Defilers not being healers.... well... that is definately debatable.  The statement of Clerics being healers is true, but the one about Mystics not being healers may not go down too well.... again... EQ1 and EQ2 are two very different games.. and you can not compare classes from the two.</DIV>

[Nightfire]

I am in my only be in the high 30's atm in EQ2 but I did have a couple lvl 70 charaters in EQ1, one being a shaman and I think Morfina and Hooliganman covered everything and said it best.

[Moonspinn]

<DIV>Is the original post meant as a joke?</DIV>

[Mystiq]

<div></div>Mystics are the way they are in THIS game for a reason - the EQ1 Shaman already exists. What possible reason is there for the shamans in EQ2 be carbon copies?The extreme slowing ability of the EQ1 shaman was ultimately realized to be an overpowering mistake that was purposefully prevented in EQ2.The cap on slows and DPS debuffs is 50% total, period. The unfortunate part is that a few other classes have slow spells, making the fact that Mystics and Defilers can both EASILY hit those caps ALONE an admittedly shortsighted situation in a raid. If anything could use some looking at as far as shamans in this game go, it's this.Modest hard cap on debuffs + no one class being <i>the slower</i> to avoid class dependancy debacle + necessary spell upgrades toward an inevitable stall = <span><span>:smileyindifferent:</span>:smileysad:</span>Yes, our pet is lame, and I don't like having to blow half of my achievement points just to keep it alive thru an AE. Forget about melee damage...ward it and pray. It's not a tank pet. It's not supposed to take a lot of damage. It's not supposed to turn us into the pet class we never were. I think someone might have us confused with Beastlords or something. It does help us solo better...something that neither Mystic nor Defiler are particularly adept at. Well hey guess what, we're priests now, for all intents and purposes. We can still [Removed for Content] a mob and beef up a group. There's more than one way to skin a moss snake.To the OP, I fail to see your point regarding his ultimate "beef" with the class. I never played a shaman in EQ1, but even I can see the similarities between the shaman class, then and now. How is everything that defined the shaman gone? Let's see what we still have...Torpor - Mystic <font size="2">(You want the EQ2 Mystic to be more like the shaman in EQ1, yet you want Torpor's snare/slow effects removed? I don't get it...we don't have Quiessence (yet) so that's not happening)</font>Cannibalism - Defiler <font size="2">(Did you miss this little gem?)</font>Slows - both, checkHeals - checkPet - checkCures - checkBuffs to stats and resists - checkResist debuffs - checkSoW - checkAvatar - checkSpears - checkDoTs - checkAnd I'm probably missing a few things...maybe Banditman can chime in since he did play a shaman in EQ1. Things like levi and shrink...well guess what nobody has. As for invis, since all scouts and all mages get it, the rest of us are what make invis valuable. One priest (Fury) and one fighter (Monk) get some form of invis. It's really not a big deal. Due to purchasable totems that grant invis, sow, even charm, you basically have a pocket version of any class at your disposal, if you can afford it.While we may be "forgotten" classes according to some of the more cynical shamans around here, we're certainly close enough to the shaman of EQ1 not to be called any other class.<div></div>

[icetower]

<p>Message Edited by icetower on <span class=date_text>05-04-2006</span> <span class=time_text>07:03 AM</span>

[icetower]

<BR><p>Message Edited by icetower on <span class=date_text>05-04-2006</span> <span class=time_text>07:03 AM</span>

[icetower]

<BR><p>Message Edited by icetower on <span class=date_text>05-03-2006</span> <span class=time_text>09:46 PM</span>

[icetower]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Morfina wrote:<BR> <P><SPAN>Tonedog1980 wrote:</SPAN></P> <P><SPAN></SPAN></P> <HR width="100%" SIZE=2> <P><SPAN>I hope this in the right section, sorry if it isn't.  I couldn't find a good place for it.  Anyways, this is about mystics, who used to be shamans in EQ1.  What is the deal?  We got the shaft!!!  First off in EQ1 mystics and defilers were the same, just different lvl shamans.  Why are defilers so much better at soloing than mystics while the rest is pretty much the same?  Anyways, there are more important issues here.</SPAN></P> <P><SPAN></SPAN></P> <HR width="100%" SIZE=2> <BR>Defilers are not better healers than Mystics; Their buffs are also relatively close, Bolster aside.<BR><BR><BR> <P><SPAN></SPAN></P> <HR width="100%" SIZE=2> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>You didn't read this paragraph properly. He said defilers are better SOLOERS than mystics, not better healers, and in that he is correct.</P> <P>Furthermore, Defilers do in fact buff considerably "better" than Mystics. We use 5 buffs to effectively accomplish what they do with just 3, allowing them to have in effect 2 freed up spell slots above mystics.</P> <P>As to the OP's other points.</P> <P>Invis - don't sweat it. Invis totems are cheap, so I'd rather get some made for 1-2gp than waste a spell slot on it. </P> <P>Levitate - was a really fun spell but nobody gets it in eq2 unfortunately.</P> <P>Invis v undead - we never had it in eqlive, and clerics considered it a waste of a spell anyway.</P> <P>Root - yeah, I miss this one. Wardens get it, making them able to tackle tougher mobs solo, but if you look at their forums, they are asking for better buffs and debuffs like we have. No class has the best of everything in eq2. (but to the guy who said our snare is just as useful as root, you gotta be kidding me bud).</P> <P>Cannibalise - what a pita that was, and I never run out of mana in eq2 anyway.</P> <P>Pet - yes its has way too little hps, and it annoys me being forced to take the full str line just to keep the pet alive. Even more annoying that str is the absolute last stat I want more of.</P> <P>I do agree that Mystics need to be looked at, but I have to disagree that torpor and cannibalise are the areas of any value.</P> <P>I would prefer our stamina buffs particularly to be brought up to par, avatar to be turned into something useful, and cast times on our nukes to be reduced to reflect the pitiful damage that they put out.</P><p>Message Edited by icetower on <span class=date_text>05-03-2006</span> <span class=time_text>09:45 PM</span>

[Besual]

<div><blockquote><hr>Mystique wrote:<div></div>[snip]Torpor - Mystic <font size="2">(You want the EQ2 Mystic to be more like the shaman in EQ1, yet you want Torpor's snare/slow effects removed? I don't get it...we don't have Quiessence (yet) so that's not happening)</font>Cannibalism - Defiler <font size="2">(Did you miss this little gem?)</font>Slows - both, checkHeals - checkPet - checkCures - checkBuffs to stats and resists - checkResist debuffs - checkSoW - checkAvatar - checkSpears - checkDoTs - check[snip]<div></div><hr></blockquote>Defilers don't have canni, we have "forced cannibalization". Forced canni is a DoT doing some damage (very small like 30 / tick) to a mob and give the defiler some power back. Without a mob we can't use the spell and when we use it we are in combat mode. Don't get me wrong. It's still a very good spell but it's different then the normal canni.BTW only mystics get avatar. And in EQ1 the avatar-line was a PITA to keep up.</div>

[treewhisper]

<P><FONT color=#3366cc size=3>Well I am seeing exactly what I was going to say to all. I do want to say as a 70 mystic that I have spent a lot of time soloing with no problem. I may not take the BIG mobs or the hardest, but done properly a mystic is a fine soloer. </FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#3366cc size=3>Mystics are awsome healers. I have been the only healer in many situations and in MT group healer in raids. If you aren't happy with a mystic in EQ2 maybe a mystic isn't for you. OR maybe EQ2 isn't for you. </FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#3366cc size=3>I hope that you are able to find your character<BR>Safe journeys<BR>Kitty of Blackburrow<BR> <A href="http://www.smileycentral.com/?partner=ZSzeb001_ZUxdm082YYCA" target=_blank><IMG alt="Kitty 7" src="http://smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/36/36_22_20.gif" border=0></A> <BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><A href="http://www.smileycentral.com/?partner=ZSzeb068_ZUxdm082YYCA" target=_blank><IMG src="http://www.smileycentral.com/sig.jsp?pc=ZSzeb068&pp=ZUxdm082YYCA" border=0></A></FONT></P>