Paladins lack in weapon selection?

[BadBoyMc2]

I seem to find that paladins our restricted to our weapon access, dont know if any1 else has a problem with it, but i do. We cant use piecing weapons, ranged weapons, dual wield or use tower shields (i know its a different case). Now our paladins cant be that good we have to lose out on three different weapon arch-types im sure. It seems a shame when i go on broker (being a fighter as well) that i am restricted to use 1h sword/axe or 2h sword/axe... i took slashing over crushing but i dont believe crushign has anymore weapons, so does SoE have any plans in the future of making our weapon variety any better if we our getting nerfed for our dps & being put more in line with guardians? Also its not just weapons restriction for the damage that bothers me, its the fact is if you dual-wield and have a ranged weapon equiped thats quite a bit more stats which would help us along. When i see paladins running about i always see them with basic mace/sheild or sword/shield, yet when i see a guardian/berserker there either DW, "Tower Shield" & slashing/crushing/piecing weapon of their choice, or 2h weapon of there choice, also using a bow which gives them a very nice stat boost. I would just like to see a slight change in our equipment selection if you our gonna make us more in line with guardians. <div></div>

[SanJ]

<DIV>It is true the only two weapon categories we wield are crushing and slashing.  It's perfectly fine to choose one type over the other.  Personally, I like the look of a Paladin with a long sword and kite shield.  However, you'll eventually run into mobs that are immune to slashing damage.  For this reason, you need to keep a mix of both slashing and crushing weapons in your inventory for such emergencies.  I also recommend that you keep both skill types capped as some mobs are immune to crushing damage.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Although we don't have a bow/arrow combination for ranged pulls, we do, at higher levels, have 4-5 spells that are ranged attacks that help offset the lack of a ranged equipment slot.  The unfortunate part is that we are missing out on stat modifiers, resists, etc. that tend to come with a bow.  You'll love the pull distance on spells like Refusal of Grace and Shatter Will.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Now that weaponsmiths may imbue items, its a lot easier to find a decent weapon with variety in categories such as crushing and slashing, but we have to live with no piercing types for now.  Perhaps a future LU or expansion pack may include something new such as lances when we are mounted.  Who knows? <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I don't have a problem with a Paladin being limited to round and kite shields.  Some of the better kite shields in-game are very on par with some of the better tower shields.  Likewise, the last "testing" notes I read stated that tower and kite would block the same.  I really don't have a problem with us being different from other tank-classes.  If we were not, why not just make a single class called tank that is all the same?  I'm not arguing that some things seem to be out of balance, but when you compare an A-Z list of all our skills to other tank-class A-Z skills not just HP or mitigation or aggro mangement, Paladins are a nicely balanced class in my opinion.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>We do have issues with high mana cost for extended combat situations, especially raids, but I'm pretty pleased with our arsenal and I'm glad we are not identical to Guardians, Monks, Beserkers, SK's, etc.  Perhaps a lot of this will change post combat revamp, but we'll have to wait and see.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Thanks,</DIV> <DIV>Kalen</DIV>

[RSta]

Nope we can't use them, why would you want too?  I don't see piercing and DW's in the role of a Paladin.  At one time we coudn't use axe's we can now, it would be nice to use a lance, or get something for the range slot to add to our attributes. <div></div>

[Boli32]

You have to remeber that whlie we are limited in WEAPON choice... ie.. only crushing and slashing we can do a damage type that warriors cannot do: <font color="#ccffff"><b>Divine Damage</b></font>. Half our abilities deal this damage - sure it'll take longer as we won't have an autoattack but while warriors get Slashing, Crushing AND Piercing, we get Slahing Crushing AND Divine. And yes, I conceed that the ranged slot item is a sore point for us - as it is for many classes. Lance, I'm never sure upon myself afterall it only works once at the charge and only then on horseback, (just imagine a knight trying to fight in close quaters with a lance on foot - not exactly dignified), so unless they are bringing in mounted combat (more so that just a fancy graphic) I wouldn't worry about the lance too much as it stands. <div></div>

[RSta]

Yes I was refering to horse back. <div></div>

[Rellikd]

Paladins use spears. Paladins are holy warriors. They know how to use all weapons (not as good as a warrior) and they know how to heal (not as good as a priest). I had a paladin on eq1, his weapon of choice was a 2 tined corpse pitchfork for the longest of times. I like useing 2 handed swords and mauls though on eq2, wouldnt mind being able to use a bow to pull things though. Not something great dammage wize, but at least something to pull from afar. <div></div>

[RSta]

<div></div><div></div><font color="#ff0000"> Paladins use spears. Paladins are holy warriors. They know how to use all weapons <font color="#66ff00">What's your source on this?  BTW EQ1 is not the definitive source for what a Paladin is. I'll give you a few pointers and something to back it up, in spears/lances are used interchangable in passages or yore.  They are used by holding and charging on horseback, not throwing.  Noble weapons are used in hand to hand combat, weapons not considered noble are throw weapons.  Bows fall in the not noble category, they are something that footman use, not knights.  Likewise rapier's/stilleto's (assasin weapons). http://www.tirbriste.org/dmir/ArmsArmor/01/0107/0107.html </font> </font><div></div><p><span class="time_text"> </span></p><p>Message Edited by RStahl on <span class=date_text>05-26-2005</span> <span class=time_text>09:05 AM</span>

[Edminime]

You got to like this, one uses EQ1 the other uses a poem,

[GilfalasElaandrin]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Edminime wrote:<BR>You got to like this, one uses EQ1 the other uses a poem, <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>I'll use EQ 2: Paladins (and shadowknights) don't us any form of ranged weapons or most peircers (the flamberge is a peircning weapon if memory serves and we CAN use it, it is a one handed weapon using greats sword skill).</P> <P>While EQ 2 Paladins (and shadowknights) have a special bond with horses, we are not known for massed lance attacks, and for that matter almost no one in the world is.</P> <DIV>This is EQ 2. It is a new game. It is based in classic FRP but it is it's own setting. Deal.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>We have more than enough weapons to choose from. Limitations on classes are one of the thnigs that make them unique, as well as their powers. If you cannot abide the weapon selection limitation play a guardian or berserker as they will probably suit you more.</DIV>

[RSta]

<font color="#ff0000"> You got to like this, one uses EQ1 the other uses a poem, <font color="#66ff00">Let's see 3 posts why bother with this one.  A poem from the period of offers the feeling of what it is/was like at the time.  This was offered on short notice, I could start rattlling off several other sources to get you to a point of understanding, a good deal of these would be in verse as well as this was the method at the time.</font> </font><div></div>

[RSta]

<div></div><div></div><div></div><div></div><font color="#ff0000">I'll use EQ 2: Paladins (and shadowknights) don't us any form of ranged weapons or most peircers (the flamberge is a peircning weapon if memory serves and we CAN use it, it is a one handed weapon using greats sword skill). <font color="#66ff00">Your correct the wrong type was allowed us. If the correct Flamberge had been added we would have been correct. <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> Unfortunately we got the wrong one of the 2. http://www.ancientedge.com/product_18_detailed.html http://www.thesteelsource.com/html/r2630flamberge.htm Unfortunately we got the rapier/kris version <img src="/smilies/9d71f0541cff0a302a0309c5079e8dee.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> http://www.armouronline.com/encyclopedia_of_historical_weapons/f/flamberge Maybe we should petition for a new correct flamberge ehh Gil <span>:smileywink: I'd gladly give up the one hander for a wavy blade 2hder.  Let the DW'ers use the 1hder and change makes it's use the same as sabers and falchions. </span> There is a lot of confusion out there, luckily I grew up in a corner of the world with a ton of castles, and had plenty of exposure to history.   The thought of a knight in heavy plate wielding a piercing weapon makes me laugh, first off the armor completely ruins a persons agility, which is required for the piercing weapons (think fencing), hence knights in armor used heavy slashing/crushing weapons (some had spikes). </font></font><div></div><p>Message Edited by RStahl on <span class=date_text>05-26-2005</span> <span class=time_text>11:18 AM</span>

[froglockpalad]

<DIV>well you wouldn't want to fence in big heavy armor on horse but spears and lances are piercing weapon and are very effective at killing things while on a horse or agianst people on horses.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>but truely and honestly any one should be able to use any weapon to some degree maybe not dual weild but what realy makes me mad is that warriors are the only ones who can use a darn great spear <img src="/smilies/9d71f0541cff0a302a0309c5079e8dee.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> they litterly have there own weapon class even tho brawlers do to but theres no other class that i could see useing fist weapons ecept beastlord but there not in eq 2</DIV><p>Message Edited by froglockpaladin on <span class=date_text>06-14-2005</span> <span class=time_text>05:09 PM</span>

[Harovan]

Lances are not piercing weapons. And not only that, they aren't weapons meant to do deal damage at all. Their sole purpose was to push the opponent from his horse, after which the combat was continued using swords or morningstars. Often the opponents pushed eachother from their steed simultaneously. In terms of damage (if you can speak about damage at all) the blow the lance deals, is crushing. It happened very rarely, that a lance penetrated the opponent's armor, and it was not really meant for that. Adding a sharp edge to the lance (effectively turning it into a spear) was considered unknightly.

[Karit]

<DIV>"Lances are not piercing weapons. And not only that, they aren't weapons meant to do deal damage at all. Their sole purpose was to push the opponent from his horse, after which the combat was continued using swords or morningstars. Often the opponents pushed eachother from their steed simultaneously. In terms of damage (if you can speak about damage at all) the blow the lance deals, is crushing. It happened very rarely, that a lance penetrated the opponent's armor, and it was not really meant for that. Adding a sharp edge to the lance (effectively turning it into a spear) was considered unknightly. "</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>ummm sorry man but youre talking about tourney lances.. ie Games.. not battle</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>battle lances were very very pointy <img src="/smilies/69934afc394145350659cd7add244ca9.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> and thier purpose was to run a man through, they were peircing weapons having a point  behind which was the weight of a charging destrier and a man in plate armour..   youd better believe that would sting a bit</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>all your reference material must relate to jousts, in which people werent meant to be killed, but frequently were, where the combat used blunted lances and points were scored for breaking the lance or unhorsing your opponent, unhorsing was actually quite rare, and deemed such a cool thing to do, that the unhorsed knight lost his horse to the opponent</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>lances in battle were a very different thing, and yes combat frequently continued with melee weapons, mainly because its very hard to get your pointy lance back out of a man after the force of the blow that impales him <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></DIV>

[Naldiian]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Karitas wrote:<BR> <DIV>"Lances are not piercing weapons. And not only that, they aren't weapons meant to do deal damage at all. Their sole purpose was to push the opponent from his horse, after which the combat was continued using swords or morningstars. Often the opponents pushed eachother from their steed simultaneously. In terms of damage (if you can speak about damage at all) the blow the lance deals, is crushing. It happened very rarely, that a lance penetrated the opponent's armor, and it was not really meant for that. Adding a sharp edge to the lance (effectively turning it into a spear) was considered unknightly. "</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>ummm sorry man but youre talking about tourney lances.. ie Games.. not battle</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>battle lances were very very pointy <img src="/smilies/69934afc394145350659cd7add244ca9.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> and thier purpose was to run a man through, they were peircing weapons having a point  behind which was the weight of a charging destrier and a man in plate armour..   youd better believe that would sting a bit</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>all your reference material must relate to jousts, in which people werent meant to be killed, but frequently were, where the combat used blunted lances and points were scored for breaking the lance or unhorsing your opponent, unhorsing was actually quite rare, and deemed such a cool thing to do, that the unhorsed knight lost his horse to the opponent</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>lances in battle were a very different thing, and yes combat frequently continued with melee weapons, mainly because its very hard to get your pointy lance back out of a man after the force of the blow that impales him <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>Aye, and more importantly when talking about combat was that that one did whatever was neccesary to survive the fight! Nobody in their right mind would limit their choice of weapons based on ideals and honor in the middle of a field battle. If you had access to something that was terribly effective at cutting down your enemy in the fight, you used it to the greatest extent you could. A huge, heavy club with a sturdy four-inch spike on each side was a fantastic weapon for slaughtering heavily armored foes - you better believe the most noble of knights grabbed one and used as much as he could when facing that type of opponent, and didn't think for a moment that it was too barbaric for knights to use.</P> <P>Not using bows was simply a matter of the purpose of the knight being to charge into the enemy and devastate them as much as possible - not something you would do with a bow in hand. The important thing to remember with that in mind is that because of this, they had little or no training with a combat style bow, meaning the archers were immensly more capable with them than the noble knights - so they would not want to use them anyway for the most part.</P> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>All that said, this is a fantasy world with knights that can heal and use divine powers, and part of that fantasy is that these Paladins are guided by thier divinity to use certain weapons and act certain ways. It could be based on honor or skills they choose to learn, or maybe by the rules of their faith instead, but regardless of the reasoning it is a limitation that helps to differentiate the class and provide uniquness. It also provides a restriction to add difficulty to the class choice, a challenge to overcome if you will. Imagine that! A challenging part of a game!! (Not that it really does add any difficulty or anything, but that is the idea)</DIV>

[froglockpalad]

<DIV>yes it increases class diversity but not character diversity. I still would like to see crusaders givin the option of great spears even tho if you were rping a paladin you wouldn't consider it honerable on the other hand if you were rping a shadowknight why not have spear there brutal and painful.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> But they should be at least be given the option now i care less if we get one handed spears. also warrior already get tower shields as there unqiue equip so its not like i'am trying to take that from them they can keep that i don't realy see a knight riding horse to have one there too cumbersome.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>also i would like to see why scouts don't get  great spear skill it fits them perfectly. </DIV><p>Message Edited by froglockpaladin on <span class=date_text>06-15-2005</span> <span class=time_text>03:52 PM</span>