<p>I'm just kicking around an idea. There are quite a few classes in game that have trouble soloing. While that can all be overcome with equipment, spell upgrades, and experience some classes will never solo nearly as well as others. This isn't a huge deal in old world content, because we've gained a lot of new abilities since then. But the difference between EoF and RoK was huge. Its still a bit of a shock for under-AAed, under equipped players that hit RoK for the first time. Potentially, SF could be the same kind of experience for the same kind of player.</p><p>What if a new mechant was added to certain zones that would rent you a pet? Call it a mercenary, or a loyal companion. Have it cost coin, status, quests, whatever. Have it only purchasable if you are not grouped, and have it go away if you enter a group or leave the zone. It would be even better if each NPC was a buff with a long duration (say 4 hours) that didn't go away if you logged, died, or even left the zone or joined a group but the NPC would despawn in those conditions. This way you could help someone real fast and not loose what you've paid for. If you went LD you'd still have the pet when you came back. If you had to enter a special instance to finish a quest or call back to home to empty your bags, as long as you came back in time you'd get the rest of the benifit from your NPC.</p><p>I'd suggest a small variety of NPCs. DPS types, Tanking types and maybe even a priest type. For solo content, a priest type really shouldn't be needed. Limiting the NPCs to certain zones should prevent people from abusing them too much. The pets shouldn't compair favorably with a real player from that class, but good enough that its a real help. Maybe something as effective as a single down solo mob?</p>

<p><cite>Meirril wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p>I'm just kicking around an idea. There are quite a few classes in game that have trouble soloing. While that can all be overcome with equipment, spell upgrades, and experience some classes will never solo nearly as well as others. This isn't a huge deal in old world content, because we've gained a lot of new abilities since then. But the difference between EoF and RoK was huge. Its still a bit of a shock for under-AAed, under equipped players that hit RoK for the first time. Potentially, SF could be the same kind of experience for the same kind of player.</p><p>What if a new mechant was added to certain zones that would rent you a pet? Call it a mercenary, or a loyal companion. Have it cost coin, status, quests, whatever. Have it only purchasable if you are not grouped, and have it go away if you enter a group or leave the zone. It would be even better if each NPC was a buff with a long duration (say 4 hours) that didn't go away if you logged, died, or even left the zone or joined a group but the NPC would despawn in those conditions. This way you could help someone real fast and not loose what you've paid for. If you went LD you'd still have the pet when you came back. If you had to enter a special instance to finish a quest or call back to home to empty your bags, as long as you came back in time you'd get the rest of the benifit from your NPC.</p><p>I'd suggest a small variety of NPCs. DPS types, Tanking types and maybe even a priest type. For solo content, a priest type really shouldn't be needed. Limiting the NPCs to certain zones should prevent people from abusing them too much. The pets shouldn't compair favorably with a real player from that class, but good enough that its a real help. Maybe something as effective as a single down solo mob?</p></blockquote><p>EQ1's mercenaries system?</p><p>By the way, what is "party"?</p>

<p><cite>Meirril wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p>There are quite a few classes in game that have trouble soloing. While that can all be overcome with equipment, spell upgrades, and experience some classes will never solo nearly as well as others.</p></blockquote><p>Actually, they are no classes in game that have trouble soloing. There are only classes in game that solo faster and some that solo slower. But all are capable of killing even solo mobs without trouble. DPS classes naturally are faster than defensive classes, but this is obvious.</p><p>And of course does spell upgrades, equipment and AAs play a big role in this. Someone who does not give crap about his stuff will have trouble for sure. But that is the same for every class. A conjuror with all apprentice spells and handcrafted (or outleveld) gear will loose against solo mobs the same as a templar will with the same gear.</p><p>I'm not sure if mercenaries will solve that "problem".</p><p>Also what you're suggesting is like a pet for every class (for special zones), but then this is exactly what a summoner is. This classes have exactly those "mercs" you suggest: tank, mage or scout. But they sacrifice something (mainly dps from character itself) for this help.</p>

<p>I would love to see the mercenary system brought to eq2. Due to their experience with it in EQ1 I don't think I would worry about them having trouble doing it right.</p><p>Sure my bruiser solo's fine - but I would certainly rent a wizzy npc to run around and keep him company - NPC's don't mind my frequent random afk's...</p><p>My dirge could sure use a tank NPC (at least on oasis, dirges have become a dime a dozen, so getting a group is not much easier than being a bruiser lfg anymore)</p><p>My defiler -while he can get groups easy, solo content can be such a timesink that more often than not I don't even log him in.</p><p>Sure I could two box, and in fact I did to get my dirge and defiler to 80 before I transferred my bruiser to the same account - but not everyone has that option.</p><p>I think mercs would add a nice dynamic to the game for some people. If you are a class who doesn't need one to solo effeciently - don't buy one - or DO get one and get things done even faster /shrug, I just don't see a downside to the idea myself.</p>

<p><cite>Meirril wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p>I'm just kicking around an idea. There are quite a few classes in game that have trouble soloing. While that can all be overcome with equipment, spell upgrades, and experience some classes will never solo nearly as well as others. This isn't a huge deal in old world content, because we've gained a lot of new abilities since then. But the difference between EoF and RoK was huge. Its still a bit of a shock for under-AAed, under equipped players that hit RoK for the first time. Potentially, SF could be the same kind of experience for the same kind of player.</p><p>What if a new mechant was added to certain zones that would rent you a pet? Call it a mercenary, or a loyal companion. Have it cost coin, status, quests, whatever. Have it only purchasable if you are not grouped, and have it go away if you enter a group or leave the zone. It would be even better if each NPC was a buff with a long duration (say 4 hours) that didn't go away if you logged, died, or even left the zone or joined a group but the NPC would despawn in those conditions. This way you could help someone real fast and not loose what you've paid for. If you went LD you'd still have the pet when you came back. If you had to enter a special instance to finish a quest or call back to home to empty your bags, as long as you came back in time you'd get the rest of the benifit from your NPC.</p><p>I'd suggest a small variety of NPCs. DPS types, Tanking types and maybe even a priest type. For solo content, a priest type really shouldn't be needed. Limiting the NPCs to certain zones should prevent people from abusing them too much. The pets shouldn't compair favorably with a real player from that class, but good enough that its a real help. Maybe something as effective as a single down solo mob?</p></blockquote><p>I'd sure love to see this.</p><p>I 2-box a lot, but it's kinda exhausting to do that.</p><p>I'd rather group of course, but nobody on my server is doing the content I want to do,at least that I can find.</p><p>Also, during the week I only have like 1.5 hours a night to play (I play 20 hours overthe weekend).</p><p>So sure would be nice to be able to do more during my 1.5 hours during the week.</p><p>I only played eq1 up to velliious.. i don't remember a mercenary system... musta beenafter vellious.</p>

<p>The only way I can see this being a valid addition to EQ2 is if they remove all solo content and replace it with small group content.</p><p>If they don't do that, go out and solo the solo content.</p>

<p><cite>Pervis wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p>The only way I can see this being a valid addition to EQ2 is if they remove all solo content and replace it with small group content.</p><p>If they don't do that, go out and solo the solo content.</p></blockquote><p>I'd be in favor of mercanaries only if they worked in heroic content.  Basically enabling small groups to fill needed class roles they may not be able to locate at that time.  So long as the mercinary was 50% as good as an average live player at the same task...</p><p>But as others have said, solo content isn't really a challenge for any class and is already trivial.  There is no need to further trivialize it.</p>

<p>One of the road blocks I see to this.</p><p>1. SOE wouldnt like it because it would possibly cut down on people who like to 2 box there by eliminating one paying account.</p><p>  Of course given SOE's current trend they would probably not put the NPC in game but make it avaiable for station cash and or LoN.   </p>

<p>I don't think they're needed just for doing existing solo content.</p><p>They'd be very nice for doing small group content and for filling out a group.  If your group is about to go to zone xyz which requires class abc this would be nice to have if you can't get a player character of the right class.  They might even be handy for raids which need some class but simply can't get one (it happens).</p><p>Mercenaries should be fairly crappy.  A player character of the same class and level should be able to easily out perform one if they've been paying any attention at all to gear and spells.</p>

<p>Sorry but this is one reason why I quit EQ1.  The effect on several classes can be catastrophic.  Now I know EQ2 is not EQ1 and soloing is much easier to begin with so the effect might not be as great but Atan may have a solution, namely, limit it to certain zones or instances.  Otherwise I think it is really unnecessary.  I solo mostly and, while<em> I may never see some content because of that I can live with it.</em></p>

<p>It wouldn't actually fix any imbalance in the solo ability between classes, though, unless only certain classes were allowed to use it.  A merc might help a templar solo as fast as a necro... but then it'll let a necro solo as fast as, well, two necros.</p><p>More likely, though, you'd see the strong-solo classes chewing through group content with the system, which would still leave the weak soloers frustrated by comparison.</p>

<p><cite>Lokimor@Venekor wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p>It wouldn't actually fix any imbalance in the solo ability between classes, though, unless only certain classes were allowed to use it.  A merc might help a templar solo as fast as a necro... but then it'll let a necro solo as fast as, well, two necros.</p></blockquote><p>Thing is, they adjusted the templar specialization choices to make soloing a templar much, much easier.  Sure, its a bit slow till you get your aa built up a little, but once you've unlocked steadfast + flurry, soloing a templar isn't much slower than soloing most other classes.</p>

<p>I am fine with Hirelings if implemented somewhat similar to how they where introduced in EQ1. </p><p>1) They are a purchase made with multiple ranks, can only own one at once.</p><p>2)  Costing plat over time during use. ( Gold over time at low levels )</p><p>3)  They cannot be activated in solo areas, only herioc zones</p><p>4)  Two basic types, Tank or Healer.</p><p>5)  Less effective then an average player.</p><p>I will note that in eq1 folsk are still two and three boxing, they just tend to fill out the rest of the party with hirelings. ( sometimes those hirelings are much better then an average player though)</p>

<p><cite>Atan@Unrest wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p><cite>Pervis wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p>The only way I can see this being a valid addition to EQ2 is if they remove all solo content and replace it with small group content.</p><p>If they don't do that, go out and solo the solo content.</p></blockquote><p>I'd be in favor of mercanaries only if they worked in heroic content.  Basically enabling small groups to fill needed class roles they may not be able to locate at that time.  So long as the mercinary was 50% as good as an average live player at the same task...</p><p>But as others have said, solo content isn't really a challenge for any class and is already trivial.  There is no need to further trivialize it.</p></blockquote><p>While I see no issue with one (and only one) in a full group while running full group content, I know full well that implementing something like that will get watered down to a full blown NPC groups for hire situation before long.</p><p>If it was implemented only for heroic content, soloers would complain that they are missing out, that its not fair that groups can get an NPC but they can't etc. SoE will cave in to them before long (probably while its still on test), and allow an NPC for solo content, which in turn will see players complain about the one per group restriction. The complaint will be that they form a group with one, run an instance, and just before the last mob someone has to bail. They are now stuck with a group that can't kill the mob, and that no one wants to join, so they think they should be able to get a second NPC in to kill the mob.</p><p>Once again, SoE will cave in. Given 9 - 12 months of this being live, the restrictions on it will be non-existant, other than what a player or group of players can afford.</p><p>Due to the nature of the heroic game now, there would need to be a way to scale the NPCs avalible. An NPC that is capable of functioning at a basic level in PoF will make DF trivial to even a chroniclly undergeared group. This will lead the developers to implementing a system whereby an individual player can increase the ability of the NPCs they hire (individual encounter difficulty levels, as seen in MPS, will prevent them from having the NPC level set to the zone).</p><p>Combine the ability to have multiple NPCs at a time with the ability to increase their strength, and I can see the possibility for players soloing content that really should not be soloed, especially when the second T9 expansion is released.</p><p>So yeah, one NPC hireling in a full group isn't the end of the world, but when combined with the complaints of a hundred angry soloers, SoEs desire to please all things anti-social, and the needs associated with scaling difficulty within a level range, and you have a recipe for absolute disaster.</p><p>Just. Say. No.</p>

<p><cite>Nero wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p><cite>Meirril wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p>I'm just kicking around an idea. There are quite a few classes in game that have trouble soloing. While that can all be overcome with equipment, spell upgrades, and experience some classes will never solo nearly as well as others. This isn't a huge deal in old world content, because we've gained a lot of new abilities since then. But the difference between EoF and RoK was huge. Its still a bit of a shock for under-AAed, under equipped players that hit RoK for the first time. Potentially, SF could be the same kind of experience for the same kind of player.</p><p>What if a new mechant was added to certain zones that would rent you a pet? Call it a mercenary, or a loyal companion. Have it cost coin, status, quests, whatever. Have it only purchasable if you are not grouped, and have it go away if you enter a group or leave the zone. It would be even better if each NPC was a buff with a long duration (say 4 hours) that didn't go away if you logged, died, or even left the zone or joined a group but the NPC would despawn in those conditions. This way you could help someone real fast and not loose what you've paid for. If you went LD you'd still have the pet when you came back. If you had to enter a special instance to finish a quest or call back to home to empty your bags, as long as you came back in time you'd get the rest of the benifit from your NPC.</p><p>I'd suggest a small variety of NPCs. DPS types, Tanking types and maybe even a priest type. For solo content, a priest type really shouldn't be needed. Limiting the NPCs to certain zones should prevent people from abusing them too much. The pets shouldn't compair favorably with a real player from that class, but good enough that its a real help. Maybe something as effective as a single down solo mob?</p></blockquote><p>EQ1's mercenaries system?</p><p>By the way, what is "party"?</p></blockquote><p>Party is what a certain other MMORPG calls groups.</p>

<p><cite>Alenna@Guk wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p><cite>Nero wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p><cite>Meirril wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p>I'm just kicking around an idea. There are quite a few classes in game that have trouble soloing. While that can all be overcome with equipment, spell upgrades, and experience some classes will never solo nearly as well as others. This isn't a huge deal in old world content, because we've gained a lot of new abilities since then. But the difference between EoF and RoK was huge. Its still a bit of a shock for under-AAed, under equipped players that hit RoK for the first time. Potentially, SF could be the same kind of experience for the same kind of player.</p><p>What if a new mechant was added to certain zones that would rent you a pet? Call it a mercenary, or a loyal companion. Have it cost coin, status, quests, whatever. Have it only purchasable if you are not grouped, and have it go away if you enter a group or leave the zone. It would be even better if each NPC was a buff with a long duration (say 4 hours) that didn't go away if you logged, died, or even left the zone or joined a group but the NPC would despawn in those conditions. This way you could help someone real fast and not loose what you've paid for. If you went LD you'd still have the pet when you came back. If you had to enter a special instance to finish a quest or call back to home to empty your bags, as long as you came back in time you'd get the rest of the benifit from your NPC.</p><p>I'd suggest a small variety of NPCs. DPS types, Tanking types and maybe even a priest type. For solo content, a priest type really shouldn't be needed. Limiting the NPCs to certain zones should prevent people from abusing them too much. The pets shouldn't compair favorably with a real player from that class, but good enough that its a real help. Maybe something as effective as a single down solo mob?</p></blockquote><p>EQ1's mercenaries system?</p><p>By the way, what is "party"?</p></blockquote><p>Party is what a certain other MMORPG calls groups.</p></blockquote><p>It is also the way that Dungeons and Dragons has refered to groups of adventurers for over 30 years...</p>

<p><cite>Pervis wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p><cite>Atan@Unrest wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p><cite>Pervis wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p>The only way I can see this being a valid addition to EQ2 is if they remove all solo content and replace it with small group content.</p><p>If they don't do that, go out and solo the solo content.</p></blockquote><p>I'd be in favor of mercanaries only if they worked in heroic content.  Basically enabling small groups to fill needed class roles they may not be able to locate at that time.  So long as the mercinary was 50% as good as an average live player at the same task...</p><p>But as others have said, solo content isn't really a challenge for any class and is already trivial.  There is no need to further trivialize it.</p></blockquote><p>While I see no issue with one (and only one) in a full group while running full group content, I know full well that implementing something like that will get watered down to a full blown NPC groups for hire situation before long.</p><p>If it was implemented only for heroic content, soloers would complain that they are missing out, that its not fair that groups can get an NPC but they can't etc. SoE will cave in to them before long (probably while its still on test), and allow an NPC for solo content, which in turn will see players complain about the one per group restriction. The complaint will be that they form a group with one, run an instance, and just before the last mob someone has to bail. They are now stuck with a group that can't kill the mob, and that no one wants to join, so they think they should be able to get a second NPC in to kill the mob.</p><p>Once again, SoE will cave in. Given 9 - 12 months of this being live, the restrictions on it will be non-existant, other than what a player or group of players can afford.</p><p>Due to the nature of the heroic game now, there would need to be a way to scale the NPCs avalible. An NPC that is capable of functioning at a basic level in PoF will make DF trivial to even a chroniclly undergeared group. This will lead the developers to implementing a system whereby an individual player can increase the ability of the NPCs they hire (individual encounter difficulty levels, as seen in MPS, will prevent them from having the NPC level set to the zone).</p><p>Combine the ability to have multiple NPCs at a time with the ability to increase their strength, and I can see the possibility for players soloing content that really should not be soloed, especially when the second T9 expansion is released.</p><p>So yeah, one NPC hireling in a full group isn't the end of the world, but when combined with the complaints of a hundred angry soloers, SoEs desire to please all things anti-social, and the needs associated with scaling difficulty within a level range, and you have a recipe for absolute disaster.</p><p>Just. Say. No.</p></blockquote><p>Just a question:  You <strong><em>seem</em></strong> a tad judgmental on this issue, with terms such as 'a hundred angry soloers', or 'all things anti-social' - if these people strike you as being these things, you would logically not be interacting with them, nor even (presumably) be interested <strong><em>in</em></strong> interacting with them.  My question is thus, why would this be an issue for you?</p><p>Granted, I prefer grouping for group content...but to be quite honest, I really couldn't care less if a feature like this is introduced, because I wouldn't use it, and if someone else does use it, it isn't affecting  me or <em><strong>my</strong></em> game.  I would much rather have an option like this, that enables someone to finish certain aspects of, say, a quest arc that <strong><em>needs</em></strong> an extra person, rather than have that individual standing and forlornly calling out for a group that won't materialize because people aren't interested in doing whatever content is being advertised, because everyone is occupied with endgame content (or whatever)....for an hour or two or even longer. </p><p>At what point does their not being able to experience the game when all other avenues have been exhausted cease to be an issue?  How long does that person have to just stand there and advertise, or send tells to people who, for whatever reason, have no interest in assisting them?  No one can say that this hasn't happened, or that it doesn't happen, because that would be incorrect.  It has happened, and it does happen.</p><p>If it ends up making the game boring for them - too bad for them.  They made the choice.  The only person they will be able to blame <em><strong>for</strong></em> that choice is themselves.</p>

<p>I played EQ for a while after they introduced mercs. I saw the same worries and complaints. No one seemed to be any less social. The multi-boxers I know didn't change their spending habits. They keep their second accounts because actual characters with all their abilities are still the best for whatever task. Due to the costly nature of mercs, they are generally for emergency purposes, like when a healer dies or a mob is turning out to be tougher than expected. If I remember correctly, they're not even allowed into raids or instances. I would expect the same to be true here, which will limit their use severely. With all the varied and complicated fights, I doubt you'd see much use of anything other than a healer merc. Even those aren't perfect in EQ1.</p>

<p>There are heroic dungeons where I can't get a group to save my life.</p><p>A healer merc would be a godsend for those places.</p>

<p>What is with all the *I want to single player my way to end game, please kkthanks* posts all the sudden? (or the opposite, I want to group but there arent any so just make me level 80 please kkthanks)</p><p>You cant solo something? Find a duo/ group.  There IS a reason it's called MULTIPLAYER for pete's sake ... wow, unreal.</p><p>(edit, fixed bad grammer least the grammer police find something to nit pick)</p>

<p><cite>Krooner wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p>One of the road blocks I see to this.</p><p>1. SOE wouldnt like it because it would possibly cut down on people who like to 2 box there by eliminating one paying account.</p><p>  Of course given SOE's current trend they would probably not put the NPC in game but make it avaiable for station cash and or LoN.   </p></blockquote><p>lololol</p><p>It would be a good system IF they don't make it like NWN2...god I hate backseat "driver" type companions.</p><p>Make it like MUDs where you can hire them, yet more skilled the NPC the more money it'll cost. Would make it cost prohibitive to use all the time, but excellent for questers stuck on killing some boss that has HPs higher than their power supply can keep up (I often don't need a group, just a Dirge and/or healer. Hate asking for someone to travel all the way to Timbuktu to help kill a boss, when I just need power. Wastes everyones' time).</p>

<p><cite>Gilasil wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p>They might even be handy for raids which need some class but simply can't get one (it happens).</p></blockquote><p>As long as they bring their pots, know when to cure themselves, know which mit gear to equip and know all the moves to the dances with mobs, bring them on! <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" /> I'll take 23 of them right now.</p>

<p><cite>WeatherMan wrote:</cite></p><blockquote>My question is thus, why would this be an issue for you?</blockquote><p>Because the eventual likelihood of where the game would end out with this implemented is no different from where the game would end out if they simply made solo versions of all heroic instances, and left the same drops in.</p><p>It would diminish the social aspects of this game down tremendously. This is something that would not only affect every player in the game, reguardless of whether they use them or not, but it would also affect the way the game procedes to be developed from that point onwards.</p><p>Saying that someone that does not use this would not notice the effects of it is about as thoughtless as saying someone that does not use the Research Assistant would not notice the effects it has had. The effects of both are <strong><em>FAR</em></strong> greater than their immediate usage.</p>

<p><cite>Gilasil wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p>There are heroic dungeons where I can't get a group to save my life.</p><p>A healer merc would be a godsend for those places.</p></blockquote><p>A healer friend should be enough.</p>

<p><cite>Alenna@Guk wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p><cite>Nero wrote:</cite></p><p>Party is what a certain other MMORPG calls groups.</p></blockquote><p>We used to call it a party in EQ1 as well, way back when it was first released and a <em>certain </em>other MMORPG was still a long ways off. I think they stole it from us. <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/b2eb59423fbf5fa39342041237025880.gif" border="0" /></p>

<p><cite>Atan@Unrest wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p><cite>Lokimor@Venekor wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p>It wouldn't actually fix any imbalance in the solo ability between classes, though, unless only certain classes were allowed to use it.  A merc might help a templar solo as fast as a necro... but then it'll let a necro solo as fast as, well, two necros.</p></blockquote><p>Thing is, they adjusted the templar specialization choices to make soloing a templar much, much easier.  Sure, its a bit slow till you get your aa built up a little, but once you've unlocked steadfast + flurry, soloing a templar isn't much slower than soloing most other classes.</p></blockquote><p>If I use just autoattack on my templar, She can kill faster than my T2 geared Monk on autoattack.  lol   BUT is does kinda suck to have to have two complete different sets of gear for soloing/grouping.</p>

<p>Mercs were a fantastic addition to EQ1. But there are major differences between that game and this one.The main reason was that unlike EQ2, clerics were by far the best healers. Few people would accept a druid, and fewer still would accept a shaman. Clerics were snapped up the instant they went LFG, for the most part. So when they introduced cleric mercs, most of the complaints came from Clerics. But I never saw these huge lines of out-of-work Clerics. If you didn't completely suck, you were way better than a merc. They were basically good for buffs and very rudimentary healing.For tanks like me, they were a godsend. Now you could actually do stuff without begging a healer to come with you. Now those 5 people sitting around looking for a healer could go <em>do stuff</em>. And if they did see a healer, they could easily drop the merc and do <em>more</em> stuff. There was only 1 healer I ever met that I would rather choose a merc over. And that's only because he would always box a ranger alt and not actually heal. Mercs in no way made clerics obsolete. They just made it so you weren't SOL if you couldn't find one.So IMO, mercs were needed. Here, I don't think there is as great a need. There is lots of solo content that is very rewarding. In EQ1, you could solo, but unless you were very good at it, it was a very very boring and slow grind. But still, there is a lot of older group content I'd like to do, but it's difficult to find someone willing to do it with you.</p>

<p><span></span></p><p>No way.  Some classes SHOULD have a harder time soloing to the top.  It adds to the ''<em>wow, you got here in that broken down X class due to your resourcefulness, dedication and cleverness!</em>'' factor.   Please don't take away any more opportunities for personal accomplishment in this game. <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" /></p>

<p><cite>Pervis wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p>It would diminish the social aspects of this game down tremendously.</p></blockquote><p>What diminishes the social aspects is the negativity; the showboating; the sitting in chat from silver perches; the plucking off wings of flies for "fun" such players get; and general depressing rhetoric from actually depressed folks.../slit wrist types.</p><p>A NPC that can help to close a quest isn't the end of EQ2. It can actually breathe new life into the game.</p>

<p>We already have many players who think its too easy now.   IF everyone started having a NPC tagalong it wouldn't be long before content was designed with that in mind.  Invariably what you'd end up with is that you would HAVE to have the NPC just do run simple quests.  While it may sound nice to have one tagging along I surely don't want to create a condition where I must have one.</p><p>Finding another player to help when needed is a much better solution.</p>