What would be the consequences of unrestricted crafted armor?

Urbanna · 02-21-2008, 05:39 PM

What would be unbalanced about making all crafted armor and maybe treasured (not fabled or legendary) unrestricted, so any class could wear any piece? I'm not going into the pvp aspect, just pve.

Things I could see -

-Scouts could tank a bit better for instances/solo (though they already are able to do this a bit) but still wouldn't dominate due to a shortage of taunts. That might make needing a plate tank not as necessary.

-Healers (non-plate already) could solo better.

-Mages *might* be able to solo/group with a bit more survivability, but would sacrifice DPS by not using gear with the bonuses they need + a mage would still get intterrupted constantly if he was being beat on.

I'd like to hear *why* this would be a bad idea...it would definitely be nice for armorers, and would add a ton more customizability and options for what all non-current plate classes can wear. Since most class enhancement stats/procs are on the armor made for your class, the benefits of going for something else would be limited in that sense. I understand that plate-wearers would be annoyed that other classes could now wear plate, however as long as it's kept to treasured/crafted there would be zero increase in competition for drops and all of the really good items would still only be available to the original classes.

KBern · 02-21-2008, 05:50 PM

I am not going to say it is a bad idea, but from the very basics of the fantasy genre, in any form, there are acceptable standards and your idea seems to break that.

Mages wearing plate? How would they be able to cast or access spell components....scouts sneaking plate? A fighter tanking in only a robe and cloth?

Just seems out of the norm (for even a fantasy realm where anything goes) and would seriously change the mechanics of the present game system.

Can you see a monk in plate?

epyon333 · 02-21-2008, 05:55 PM

Ok your going to give everyone else plate what are you doing to do for those that already wear it?

I already were plate can i have heals and nukes too.

you cant do it cuz it would upset the blance of the game. if you need a someone wearing plate to tank a mob get a tank.

Vendolyn · 02-21-2008, 06:03 PM

You have to pay the price for having abilities. Do you know why mages wear cloth? Because they do remarkable direct damage. Why do druids wear leather? Because they have utility and can buff their own personal mitigation, not to mention they have many paths to walk. Why do raid tanks wear plate? Because their DPS isn't that of a scout.

Aurumn · 02-21-2008, 06:07 PM

Well, if you feel like everyone looks alike now, wait until everyone on your server is running around in plate.

On a more serious note I doubt armorers would ever sell another piece of chain again, except for appearance slots. The scouts would wear plate MC/Treasured and upgrade to class appropriate legendary/fabled once they can get it I'd imagine.

It would be terribly confusing for new players when they inevitably pop onto the forums with their first post of "what type of armor should my [insert class here] wear?" They'd get absolutely slammed with a flood of varying suggestions on the merits of all 4 armor types and their various stats rather than debating between 2 or 3 suits of stats.

Furies could grab a set of SK stat plate and absolutely blast through mobs. I'd imagine a warlock would take the SK set for a whirl, too. Or at least the old Fury Leather set with INT.

On the up side, the first plate brawler out the gate might have a blast showing what an awesome MT a brawler can be with a full suit of plate to soak up the hits he doesn't dodge.

Personally I'd rather see fluff only stuff added for those who want to RP an unorthodox look and have the existing armor itemization improved where needed. Of course, I still don't understand the logic of a martial artist (brawler) wearing leather. /shrug I won't bregrudge them the mit, though.

Urbanna · 02-21-2008, 06:09 PM

epyon333 wrote:

Ok your going to give everyone else plate what are you doing to do for those that already wear it?
I already were plate can i have heals and nukes too.
you cant do it cuz it would upset the blance of the game. if you need a someone wearing plate to tank a mob get a tank.

Pallys have heals and nukes already. So do plate healers. I'd like to know *why* that would be unballancing though, how would a mage wearing crafted plate be much better combat-wise than if he wore mage specific gear? All plate wearers can already wear all cloth so I don't see why that should be a problem. Crafted gear isn't so good as to be unbalancing.

For the roleplay perspective I'd say we've already gone way beyond that by allowing tanks to wear cloth and having many many multiple skills allow people in full plate be sneaking (in stealth) and huge races as well. Not to mention appearance tabs.

So in what circumstance would this be unbalanced? Keep in mind CRAFTED/TREASURED gear only...not class defining or fabled stuff.

Bramwe · 02-21-2008, 06:15 PM

A swash/brig wearing plate wouldn't need taunts. This would make every fighter class obsolete pretty much especially in heroic content. Even Guards/Zerkers who do decent dps do not need to use taunts with the various tranfers and junk from other classes...

Urbanna · 02-21-2008, 06:18 PM

Mezzmyrelda@Unrest wrote:

Well, if you feel like everyone looks alike now, wait until everyone on your server is running around in plate.
On a more serious note I doubt armorers would ever sell another piece of chain again, except for appearance slots. The scouts would wear plate MC/Treasured and upgrade to class appropriate legendary/fabled once they can get it I'd imagine.
It would be terribly confusing for new players when they inevitably pop onto the forums with their first post of "what type of armor should my [insert class here] wear?" They'd get absolutely slammed with a flood of varying suggestions on the merits of all 4 armor types and their various stats rather than debating between 2 or 3 suits of stats.
Furies could grab a set of SK stat plate and absolutely blast through mobs. I'd imagine a warlock would take the SK set for a whirl, too. Or at least the old Fury Leather set with INT.
On the up side, the first plate brawler out the gate might have a blast showing what an awesome MT a brawler can be with a full suit of plate to soak up the hits he doesn't dodge.
Personally I'd rather see fluff only stuff added for those who want to RP an unorthodox look and have the existing armor itemization improved where needed. Of course, I still don't understand the logic of a martial artist (brawler) wearing leather. /shrug I won't bregrudge them the mit, though.

I don't think *everyone* would run around in plate. Plate doesn't = the best look in the game any more so than Cloth does and even though every single person can wear cloth, you don't see everyone doing it. People would buy what they want to look like...I dunno if crafted chain armor is so poor that scouts would all use crafted plate instead of quested chain. As long as it was only treasured/crafted, no class would be able to use another class' set gear anyway, so a warlock wouldn't get much out of wearing plate. I definitely see brawlers/healers/scouts getting better with plate to a point....but they'd be sacrificing class-specific stats (i'd have to look, but I bet the fabled brawler gear is still better mit-wise than crafted plate or very similar).

Urbanna · 02-21-2008, 06:22 PM

Bramwell@Guk wrote:

A swash/brig wearing plate wouldn't need taunts. This would make every fighter class obsolete pretty much especially in heroic content. Even Guards/Zerkers who do decent dps do not need to use taunts with the various tranfers and junk from other classes...

Swashy/brigs can already tank alot of heroic content and have always been meant to be able to. You're right, a plate tank would be less necessary for groups, but not obsolete....nothing would be taken from them.

Jehannum · 02-21-2008, 06:26 PM

Fury. Rare Mastercrafted plate. Strength. Int. Wisdom. Win.

With a swashy in plate, who needs a tank?

Heck, for that matter, consider a group of 4 plate-armoured warlocks, a plated troubadour and an inquisitor with Punishments. In-freaking-sane. As if the cleric or trouby is ever going to take aggro - but it won't matter if the 'locks can take a beating.

For raids, forget that guardian BS. You put your wizard in plate, and your warlock in plate, and you trade them off based on the encounter composition. The warlock tanks anything AE, and the wizard tanks the singles. They can hold aggro no problem, they can avoid a little (moreso with buffs any tank receives) and they can mitigate as well as any plate tank at that point - so why trust a taunt that can be resisted when Fusion's so much more effective?

Honestly, if you can't see why this is a dangerous notion then you either don't want to listen or you lack the objectivity required to assess balance.

Aurumn · 02-21-2008, 06:35 PM

A little clarification from the OP please... When you say "crafted" are you including both HANDcrafted and MASTERcrafted gear? If so, I think you need to take another look at MC gear. It can replace some legendary gear (if you're not big on resists anyhow). MC > Treasured > Handcrafted.

Give MC plate with the right stats to a class that previously had to wear a lighter armor type (ie, the Fury example or heck, mage in SK plate) and you get the same class with the same stats and more Mitigation. It basically removes the tradeoff of DPS for Mit.

Also, are you debating use of other armor types just for appearance slots or for actual equipped use with the benefits of stats, effects and such?

**Edit: Yikes! I can't spell.**

Urbanna · 02-21-2008, 06:36 PM

Jehannum wrote:

Fury. Rare Mastercrafted plate. Strength. Int. Wisdom. Win.
Yup it would help non-plate healers solo.
With a swashy in plate, who needs a tank?
Swashies can already tank alot of heroic encounters.
Heck, for that matter, consider a group of 4 plate-armoured warlocks, a plated troubadour and an inquisitor with Punishments. In-freaking-sane. As if the cleric or trouby is ever going to take aggro - but it won't matter if the 'locks can take a beating.
AND? It would be fun, but nothing a normal group can't do and certainly wouldn't obsolete a normal group
For raids, forget that guardian BS. You put your wizard in plate, and your warlock in plate, and you trade them off based on the encounter composition. The warlock tanks anything AE, and the wizard tanks the singles. They can hold aggro no problem, they can avoid a little (moreso with buffs any tank receives) and they can mitigate as well as any plate tank at that point - so why trust a taunt that can be resisted when Fusion's so much more effective?
Have you ever played a caster? If a caster is being hit, he isn't going to get much off because of interrupts, so he's not going to have agro for long if he ever got it and wouldn't get it back. Yes they could take a hit, but why the hell would a caster trade off DPS for taking a hit on a raid? He wouldn't.
Honestly, if you can't see why this is a dangerous notion then you either don't want to listen or you lack the objectivity required to assess balance.
You're looking at all the pluses of armor and ignoring all the deficencies of being a different class.

Urbanna · 02-21-2008, 06:43 PM

Mezzmyrelda@Unrest wrote:

A little clarification from the OP please... When you say "crafted" are you including both HANDcrafted and MASTERcrafted gear? If so, I think you need to take another look at MC gear. It can replace some legendary gear (if you're not big on resists anyhow). MC > Treasured > Handcrafted.
Give MC plate with the right stats to a class that previously had to wear a lighter armor type (ie, the Fury example or heck, mage in SK plate) and you get the same class with the same stats and more Mitigation. It basically removes the tradeoff of DPS for Mit.
Also, are you debating use of other armor types just for appearance slots or for actual equipped use with the benefits of stats, effects and such?
**Edit: Yikes! I can't spell.**

I was meaning regular crafted, not MC since it's been bumped up. However, I have a feeling even MC wouldn't be THAT unbalancing.

As for the trade-off of DPS for MIT that has been totally thrown out the window with scouts and mages being on par or swapping the top DPS spots.

I'm debating the use for equipping the items, as I think it would do more good than harm. Appearance would still be nice.

epyon333 · 02-21-2008, 06:57 PM

Oh ok i see your a necro that wants to ware plate. cant you solo good enough already.

and a scout wearing mc plate wouldnt be that damaging? what would be the point of zerkers/guards?

and bruisers in mc plate with there already high avoidence?

if any other classes that dont wear plate started wearing plate some classes would be obsolete.

And yes every class can wear cloth, even plate wearers. but you know why they dont, because the mit is way to low. so thats not even a good point to aruge as to why everyone else should ware plate.

Aurumn · 02-21-2008, 06:59 PM

I get what you're saying about the interrupts. In my experience though the shorter cast spells will get off with pretty good reliability, though. Clerics are slow soloers, but they can manage after all.

Now obviously if one person is getting pounded by 10 mobs at once that's gonna interrupt darn near everything. However, here's what I see... give mages the same mit as a plate tank and holding agro isn't as much of an issue any more. When everyone has high mit, agro can bounce all over the place and as long as the healers don't go down you'll eventually pull it off. It'd be sloppy as all get out, but if mages/scouts can burn the mobs down fast enough it won't matter. This would enable the higher DPS classes to really unload without having to hold back for the tank to keep agro. The plate tanks may still be around to serve as rescue bots, but everyone else would steal a lot of their thunder. I'd see tactics getting even simpler than "tank and spank" and going to "burn, baby burn".

It's not that the proposed change would necessarily turn the entire world on its head, but at the very least it would sknock things out of whack and potentially result in a cascade of nerfbat see-sawing. If the original aim was to allow all the classes to just "look" anyway they want, then add fluff slot gear. Personally I don't see that the benefits of the proposed change would outweigh the upheaval it would cause.

Jehannum · 02-21-2008, 07:18 PM

Urbannaja wrote:

Jehannum wrote:
Fury. Rare Mastercrafted plate. Strength. Int. Wisdom. Win.
Yup it would help non-plate healers solo.
With a swashy in plate, who needs a tank?
Swashies can already tank alot of heroic encounters.
Heck, for that matter, consider a group of 4 plate-armoured warlocks, a plated troubadour and an inquisitor with Punishments. In-freaking-sane. As if the cleric or trouby is ever going to take aggro - but it won't matter if the 'locks can take a beating.
AND? It would be fun, but nothing a normal group can't do and certainly wouldn't obsolete a normal group
For raids, forget that guardian BS. You put your wizard in plate, and your warlock in plate, and you trade them off based on the encounter composition. The warlock tanks anything AE, and the wizard tanks the singles. They can hold aggro no problem, they can avoid a little (moreso with buffs any tank receives) and they can mitigate as well as any plate tank at that point - so why trust a taunt that can be resisted when Fusion's so much more effective?
Have you ever played a caster? If a caster is being hit, he isn't going to get much off because of interrupts, so he's not going to have agro for long if he ever got it and wouldn't get it back. Yes they could take a hit, but why the hell would a caster trade off DPS for taking a hit on a raid? He wouldn't.
Honestly, if you can't see why this is a dangerous notion then you either don't want to listen or you lack the objectivity required to assess balance.
You're looking at all the pluses of armor and ignoring all the deficencies of being a different class.

Here goes... SMILEY

1. It would severely unbalance the healers, in favour of druids and to the complete detriment of clerics, especially templars.

2. ...but at present still tank worse than fighters.

3. If you think a pack of 4 warlocks, in a group with a troubadour and cleric, can AE-nuke indiscriminately against multiple Kunark heroics without eating dirt, try running that group.

4. Yes, I've played a caster. Why, would it invalidate my objectivity if I hadn't? And yes, interrupts are still an issue - that wasn't the point (though with the right trouby buff, Focus will be jacked too) The point is that with high mitigation and hp buffs to bolster them, sorcs could quite easily trade off aggro just by nuking 'til they're blue in the face (or some kind of even darker hue, for tier'dal) - and because of the plate mitigation, could actually survive the beating until the other sorc's damage flipped the aggro.

5. No, I'm not. I'm looking at the armour's benefits and considering the synergistic effect it would have in concert with classes which are specifically designed with the fact in mind that they cannot use such armour.

To be honest, I hadn't even considered the most egregious example of how it'd flip things... Because one of the intervening posters is absolutely correct in this:

Nobody wants a warrior or crusader if a brawler can wear plate. Absolutely nobody. Feign, heal, avoidance and plate mitigation? The only benefit a plate tank might retain would be shields, but those are crafted too. I'll take a bruiser with a side of imbued incarnadine, and an order of incarnadine tower shield for those really rough encounters.

Gladiia · 02-21-2008, 07:26 PM

Wow....my monk is already an amazing tank...If I could put plate on him I have NO doubt that I could crush a guardian's tanking ability in a raid, or ANY other situation. It would be flat out sick!

I'm sorry, but I have to say that this is probably one of the absolute worst ideas I have ever seen on the boards. The difference in damage taken while wearing plate versus while wearing cloth is huge, and classes are balanced as such.

Todra_B · 02-23-2008, 04:19 AM

To me the armor worn is more of a class defining issue. Casters trade DPS for weak armor, The fighters taking hits is supposed to be draped in metal. Everyone in plate, Boring, even if the casters wore plate and put robes in the appearance tab I think it changes the game too much.

An item I would like to see would be a fabled charm or jewelry item that increases overall armor mit by 25%. When activated it would look like the user was wearing a ghost set of vangard armor over their current clothes. Maybe give the armor the color of the spiritsteed. This would be a real help to cloth and leather wearers but not totaly unbalance the classes of armor. Comments?

epyon333 · 02-24-2008, 07:28 PM

well ok i could see that working. jsut really would have to be a short timer and low chance of it processing. kind of just to help in a group when the mage pull aggro off the tank.

LygerT · 02-24-2008, 08:14 PM

sweet, everyone could wear plate then so you wouldn't need me anymore. later!

this is the most stupid thread i've ever seen on this forum. alot of your tanks are already leaving this game so think before you continue playing with fire, some dev may take this seriously and screw this game up even further.

Ookami-san · 02-29-2008, 11:48 AM

Urbannaja wrote:

What would be unbalanced about making all crafted armor and maybe treasured (not fabled or legendary) unrestricted, so any class could wear any piece? I'm not going into the pvp aspect, just pve.
Things I could see -
-Scouts could tank a bit better for instances/solo (though they already are able to do this a bit) but still wouldn't dominate due to a shortage of taunts. That might make needing a plate tank not as necessary.
-Healers (non-plate already) could solo better.
-Mages *might* be able to solo/group with a bit more survivability, but would sacrifice DPS by not using gear with the bonuses they need + a mage would still get intterrupted constantly if he was being beat on.
I'd like to hear *why* this would be a bad idea...it would definitely be nice for armorers, and would add a ton more customizability and options for what all non-current plate classes can wear. Since most class enhancement stats/procs are on the armor made for your class, the benefits of going for something else would be limited in that sense. I understand that plate-wearers would be annoyed that other classes could now wear plate, however as long as it's kept to treasured/crafted there would be zero increase in competition for drops and all of the really good items would still only be available to the original classes.

If they were to implement this, they'd need to put detriments on armor. For instance, plate might reduce mage skills by 20% or sneaking CA damage by 20%, etc. There would have to be some downside to it. Obviously, stats could play a big role as well. Sure... you might have more mit in plate as a wizard, but if your spells do 15%-20% less damage because there is no INT on the armor, etc. then you have a tough choice to make.

As for fantasy archtypes... it's all BS. Name any archtype... and I'll give you a contradiction.

Mage who uses a sword and dual wields - Gandalf

Fighter who tanks with no armor - Conan

Ranger who wears plate - Tanis in Dragonlance

Monk who wears plate - just watch chinese kung fu flicks enough... you'll see it

Let's face it... it's.... FANTASY... you should be able to do whatever you want... so long as you accept the consequences. If you want to tank in a robe, you'll have less mitigation. If you want cast spells in plate, the spells would do less damage. If you want to sneak in plate, there will be a chance it will break.

Regholdain · 03-03-2008, 06:23 PM

OK, so here's an idea...

Swipe the feat and skills system from D&D and make it so that every class has certain class defining abilities, combat bonuses, and skills, but leave it up to the player to decide best how to burn those limited upgrade choices. In that way, for example, you could have a player with a mage choose to be "proficient" in wearing plate armor, but in doing so sacrifice the next upgrade to a class-defining spell.

Here's the thing: Scouts cannot sneak in plate armor, rendering sneak attacks usesless; the armor just makes too much noise for enemies to be unaware of their presence, no matter how sneaky they try to be. Metal armor restricts the ability of a caster to gather the forces of magic, causing there to be a chance his spells will fizzle / fail OUTRIGHT or worse yet, BACKFIRE, and will also incurr a penalty to focus because the mage has to concentrate harder while fighting the limitations of the armor to even make a spell work properly. Druids wearing plate could not shapechange and use their speed buffs, and their own divine attacks would be limited as their dieties would frown on them for using such an "unnatural" armor. Monks and bruisers wouldn't get the benefit of their natural avoidance, as they are unaccustomed to fighting in heavy metal armor. Indeed, they would also incurr penalties to damage because the armor would slow down their normally fluid movements.

The problem is that there are architypes in every fantasy game. These all suppose a certain set of class skills, knoweldge, and abilities are learned by the character prior to his adventuring life - say at an academy, college, or from the military or local mage tower, monastary, or whatnot. This is why a guardian would start out as a guardian - he had some prior martial training and learned how to use swords, shields, and all armors effectively. He even learned how to enrage an opponent and keep his attention (hopefully) off his comrades.

Taking the concept of the architypes into view, it is obvious why all classes do not wear plate and are not meant to. A mage, as he studied, did not have the time to learn how to fight wearing armor and wielding sword and shield. His studies in the arcane were so strenuous the most he could be educated on was how to protect himself with the simple tools he already used for his class - daggers, wands, rods, and staves. He was also taught to fight at a distance, to let the warriors close in for melee when at all possible.

A monk or bruiser were taught the mysteries of mystical inner forces, and how to use those powers to toughen their bodies, hit as if their fists were metal weapons, and they were conditioned to fight in light armor to make use of their lightning reflexes and hurricane punches and kicks. This training is so rigorous and intense, they had no time to learn the intricacies of tactics when fighting in plate mail or chain. In fact, they were encouraged to let their inner strength give them a tougher hide, to avoid and roll with the hits as often as possible - flow like water, sting like bee. Druids worship nature and are taught to abhore metal armor (and in truth weapons, but, eh..) and so they avoid it as it is unnatural, manmade, and corrupted. The druid abhorance of metal armor is their choice based on religion.

Clerics have a place on the field of battle, so they must learn to use martial armors and weapons just as the plate-toting warriors must. They have to be able to be field medics, and have to be there side-by-side when the warriors go down or take lethal blows. Their dieties encourage this strength in protection and warfare, and so they are encouraged to bare the armor of their kin, to be courageous as fighters and to honor them on the field of battle.

Scouts are trained to scout, and must be stealthy and agile for purposes of reconnaisence (sp?) and the somewhat sneaky missions they are required to undertake. They are trained up to the use of chain, and how to move fluidly and stealthily in said armors, how to strike from the shadows and unseen. They could do this in lighter armors to be sure, but their training is so that they could survive the field of battle insomuch as they could return with their all-important information, or avoid capture and death at the hands of the law and the just. Simply put, they could not accomplish the stealth required for their missions if they were to bear clunky and heavy plate armors.

I would guess that these themes would be some of the developers' premisses regarding the class architypes. Sure, there are examples in fantasy of other possibilities, as stated by another poster. But in the fantasy world of EQ2, this is how it works. It would be nice to see a system in which a player could customize his class in these areas somehow - like a berserker being able to truely fight like a roman spartan or a grecian berserker, or even like a barbaric wildman of the ancient germanic tribes. Sure, there would be trade-offs to this within the system, somehow, as there always is. Typically this becomes the sacrifice of dps or abilities in favor of other strengths and weaknesses. I am not so sure EQ2 could make this customizable a system work with the current architypes.

For the most part, EQ2 has crossed some architype lines through the AA system. For example, rogues being able to tank sacrifices some dps or other useful abilities in their AA trees. Sorcerers and enchanters often have to choose between dps, utility, and resistability in order to define their characters' niche. Summoners have to choose what their favored pets are and whether to boost dps or utility spells, making them unique amongst others of their classes. Guardians can be towers of physical protection and hate gathering, or dps wild fighters. Some of the AA trees and the options available aren't that favorable because the class architype might be a difficult one to justify certain options. Many options are situational, and thus create a 'specialist' area that no one really wants because they'd rather play the class another direction.

Regardles... should all classes be able to wear plate? No. It's not necessarily unbalancing. It just plain and simple doesn't make sense for the class architypes in the EQ2 setting.

firexcracker · 03-03-2008, 06:45 PM

Saurakk@Guk wrote:

Mages wearing plate? How would they be able to cast or access spell components....scouts sneaking plate? A fighter tanking in only a robe and cloth?

Sorcerers in Diablo II could wear plate armor, if they had enough strength SMILEY

Todra_B · 03-04-2008, 05:33 AM

Mage who uses a sword and dual wields - Gandalf

I don't want to be picky, and knowing this is all fantasy, but Gandalf is not a comparison to player character mages.

In Tolkien's mythology Gandalf was an assistant to deities. He, Sauron, and the Balrog in our game terms would be equal or greater than Avatars ("This foe is beyond any of you....Run!&quot SMILEY . Yes, there were a few Elves in the first age of the sun that slew Balrogs but they had all come from Valinor and could not be compared to elves of the third age (except for Galadriel) or player characters in Norrath.

Sorry for being a Tolkien Nerd!

02-21-2008, 05:39 PM	#1
Urbanna General Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 326	What would be unbalanced about making all crafted armor and maybe treasured (not fabled or legendary) unrestricted, so any class could wear any piece? I'm not going into the pvp aspect, just pve. Things I could see - -Scouts could tank a bit better for instances/solo (though they already are able to do this a bit) but still wouldn't dominate due to a shortage of taunts. That might make needing a plate tank not as necessary. -Healers (non-plate already) could solo better. -Mages might be able to solo/group with a bit more survivability, but would sacrifice DPS by not using gear with the bonuses they need + a mage would still get intterrupted constantly if he was being beat on. I'd like to hear why this would be a bad idea...it would definitely be nice for armorers, and would add a ton more customizability and options for what all non-current plate classes can wear. Since most class enhancement stats/procs are on the armor made for your class, the benefits of going for something else would be limited in that sense. I understand that plate-wearers would be annoyed that other classes could now wear plate, however as long as it's kept to treasured/crafted there would be zero increase in competition for drops and all of the really good items would still only be available to the original classes. __________________

02-21-2008, 05:50 PM	#2
KBern Loremaster Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 2,372	I am not going to say it is a bad idea, but from the very basics of the fantasy genre, in any form, there are acceptable standards and your idea seems to break that. Mages wearing plate? How would they be able to cast or access spell components....scouts sneaking plate? A fighter tanking in only a robe and cloth? Just seems out of the norm (for even a fantasy realm where anything goes) and would seriously change the mechanics of the present game system. Can you see a monk in plate? __________________

02-21-2008, 05:55 PM	#3
epyon333 Loremaster Join Date: Jul 2005 Posts: 248	Ok your going to give everyone else plate what are you doing to do for those that already wear it? I already were plate can i have heals and nukes too. you cant do it cuz it would upset the blance of the game. if you need a someone wearing plate to tank a mob get a tank. __________________ Juggernaut Berserker 90 Leader Remnants of Ancient Norrath Butcherblock

02-21-2008, 06:03 PM	#4
Vendolyn Lordette Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: The Valley of the Techs Posts: 458	You have to pay the price for having abilities. Do you know why mages wear cloth? Because they do remarkable direct damage. Why do druids wear leather? Because they have utility and can buff their own personal mitigation, not to mention they have many paths to walk. Why do raid tanks wear plate? Because their DPS isn't that of a scout. __________________

02-21-2008, 06:09 PM	#6
Urbanna General Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 326	epyon333 wrote: Ok your going to give everyone else plate what are you doing to do for those that already wear it? I already were plate can i have heals and nukes too. you cant do it cuz it would upset the blance of the game. if you need a someone wearing plate to tank a mob get a tank. Pallys have heals and nukes already. So do plate healers. I'd like to know why that would be unballancing though, how would a mage wearing crafted plate be much better combat-wise than if he wore mage specific gear? All plate wearers can already wear all cloth so I don't see why that should be a problem. Crafted gear isn't so good as to be unbalancing. For the roleplay perspective I'd say we've already gone way beyond that by allowing tanks to wear cloth and having many many multiple skills allow people in full plate be sneaking (in stealth) and huge races as well. Not to mention appearance tabs. So in what circumstance would this be unbalanced? Keep in mind CRAFTED/TREASURED gear only...not class defining or fabled stuff. __________________

02-21-2008, 06:07 PM	#5
Aurumn Server: Unrest Guild: Executioners Rank: Teen of chaos (2 weeks + 6,857 astatus) Loremaster Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: USA Posts: 1,328	Well, if you feel like everyone looks alike now, wait until everyone on your server is running around in plate. On a more serious note I doubt armorers would ever sell another piece of chain again, except for appearance slots. The scouts would wear plate MC/Treasured and upgrade to class appropriate legendary/fabled once they can get it I'd imagine. It would be terribly confusing for new players when they inevitably pop onto the forums with their first post of "what type of armor should my [insert class here] wear?" They'd get absolutely slammed with a flood of varying suggestions on the merits of all 4 armor types and their various stats rather than debating between 2 or 3 suits of stats. Furies could grab a set of SK stat plate and absolutely blast through mobs. I'd imagine a warlock would take the SK set for a whirl, too. Or at least the old Fury Leather set with INT. On the up side, the first plate brawler out the gate might have a blast showing what an awesome MT a brawler can be with a full suit of plate to soak up the hits he doesn't dodge. Personally I'd rather see fluff only stuff added for those who want to RP an unorthodox look and have the existing armor itemization improved where needed. Of course, I still don't understand the logic of a martial artist (brawler) wearing leather. /shrug I won't bregrudge them the mit, though.

02-21-2008, 06:15 PM	#7
Bramwe General Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 492	A swash/brig wearing plate wouldn't need taunts. This would make every fighter class obsolete pretty much especially in heroic content. Even Guards/Zerkers who do decent dps do not need to use taunts with the various tranfers and junk from other classes... __________________ width="485" height="151"

02-21-2008, 06:18 PM	#8
Urbanna General Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 326	Mezzmyrelda@Unrest wrote: Well, if you feel like everyone looks alike now, wait until everyone on your server is running around in plate. On a more serious note I doubt armorers would ever sell another piece of chain again, except for appearance slots. The scouts would wear plate MC/Treasured and upgrade to class appropriate legendary/fabled once they can get it I'd imagine. It would be terribly confusing for new players when they inevitably pop onto the forums with their first post of "what type of armor should my [insert class here] wear?" They'd get absolutely slammed with a flood of varying suggestions on the merits of all 4 armor types and their various stats rather than debating between 2 or 3 suits of stats. Furies could grab a set of SK stat plate and absolutely blast through mobs. I'd imagine a warlock would take the SK set for a whirl, too. Or at least the old Fury Leather set with INT. On the up side, the first plate brawler out the gate might have a blast showing what an awesome MT a brawler can be with a full suit of plate to soak up the hits he doesn't dodge. Personally I'd rather see fluff only stuff added for those who want to RP an unorthodox look and have the existing armor itemization improved where needed. Of course, I still don't understand the logic of a martial artist (brawler) wearing leather. /shrug I won't bregrudge them the mit, though. I don't think everyone would run around in plate. Plate doesn't = the best look in the game any more so than Cloth does and even though every single person can wear cloth, you don't see everyone doing it. People would buy what they want to look like...I dunno if crafted chain armor is so poor that scouts would all use crafted plate instead of quested chain. As long as it was only treasured/crafted, no class would be able to use another class' set gear anyway, so a warlock wouldn't get much out of wearing plate. I definitely see brawlers/healers/scouts getting better with plate to a point....but they'd be sacrificing class-specific stats (i'd have to look, but I bet the fabled brawler gear is still better mit-wise than crafted plate or very similar). __________________

02-21-2008, 06:22 PM	#9
Urbanna General Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 326	Bramwell@Guk wrote: A swash/brig wearing plate wouldn't need taunts. This would make every fighter class obsolete pretty much especially in heroic content. Even Guards/Zerkers who do decent dps do not need to use taunts with the various tranfers and junk from other classes... Swashy/brigs can already tank alot of heroic content and have always been meant to be able to. You're right, a plate tank would be less necessary for groups, but not obsolete....nothing would be taken from them. __________________

02-21-2008, 06:26 PM	#10
Jehannum Loremaster Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 651	Fury. Rare Mastercrafted plate. Strength. Int. Wisdom. Win. With a swashy in plate, who needs a tank? Heck, for that matter, consider a group of 4 plate-armoured warlocks, a plated troubadour and an inquisitor with Punishments. In-freaking-sane. As if the cleric or trouby is ever going to take aggro - but it won't matter if the 'locks can take a beating. For raids, forget that guardian BS. You put your wizard in plate, and your warlock in plate, and you trade them off based on the encounter composition. The warlock tanks anything AE, and the wizard tanks the singles. They can hold aggro no problem, they can avoid a little (moreso with buffs any tank receives) and they can mitigate as well as any plate tank at that point - so why trust a taunt that can be resisted when Fusion's so much more effective? Honestly, if you can't see why this is a dangerous notion then you either don't want to listen or you lack the objectivity required to assess balance.

02-21-2008, 06:35 PM	#11
Aurumn Server: Unrest Guild: Executioners Rank: Teen of chaos (2 weeks + 6,857 astatus) Loremaster Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: USA Posts: 1,328	A little clarification from the OP please... When you say "crafted" are you including both HANDcrafted and MASTERcrafted gear? If so, I think you need to take another look at MC gear. It can replace some legendary gear (if you're not big on resists anyhow). MC > Treasured > Handcrafted. Give MC plate with the right stats to a class that previously had to wear a lighter armor type (ie, the Fury example or heck, mage in SK plate) and you get the same class with the same stats and more Mitigation. It basically removes the tradeoff of DPS for Mit. Also, are you debating use of other armor types just for appearance slots or for actual equipped use with the benefits of stats, effects and such? Edit: Yikes! I can't spell.

02-21-2008, 06:36 PM	#12
Urbanna General Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 326	Jehannum wrote: Fury. Rare Mastercrafted plate. Strength. Int. Wisdom. Win. Yup it would help non-plate healers solo. With a swashy in plate, who needs a tank? Swashies can already tank alot of heroic encounters. Heck, for that matter, consider a group of 4 plate-armoured warlocks, a plated troubadour and an inquisitor with Punishments. In-freaking-sane. As if the cleric or trouby is ever going to take aggro - but it won't matter if the 'locks can take a beating. AND? It would be fun, but nothing a normal group can't do and certainly wouldn't obsolete a normal group For raids, forget that guardian BS. You put your wizard in plate, and your warlock in plate, and you trade them off based on the encounter composition. The warlock tanks anything AE, and the wizard tanks the singles. They can hold aggro no problem, they can avoid a little (moreso with buffs any tank receives) and they can mitigate as well as any plate tank at that point - so why trust a taunt that can be resisted when Fusion's so much more effective? Have you ever played a caster? If a caster is being hit, he isn't going to get much off because of interrupts, so he's not going to have agro for long if he ever got it and wouldn't get it back. Yes they could take a hit, but why the hell would a caster trade off DPS for taking a hit on a raid? He wouldn't. Honestly, if you can't see why this is a dangerous notion then you either don't want to listen or you lack the objectivity required to assess balance. You're looking at all the pluses of armor and ignoring all the deficencies of being a different class. __________________

02-21-2008, 06:43 PM	#13
Urbanna General Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 326	Mezzmyrelda@Unrest wrote: A little clarification from the OP please... When you say "crafted" are you including both HANDcrafted and MASTERcrafted gear? If so, I think you need to take another look at MC gear. It can replace some legendary gear (if you're not big on resists anyhow). MC > Treasured > Handcrafted. Give MC plate with the right stats to a class that previously had to wear a lighter armor type (ie, the Fury example or heck, mage in SK plate) and you get the same class with the same stats and more Mitigation. It basically removes the tradeoff of DPS for Mit. Also, are you debating use of other armor types just for appearance slots or for actual equipped use with the benefits of stats, effects and such? Edit: Yikes! I can't spell. I was meaning regular crafted, not MC since it's been bumped up. However, I have a feeling even MC wouldn't be THAT unbalancing. As for the trade-off of DPS for MIT that has been totally thrown out the window with scouts and mages being on par or swapping the top DPS spots. I'm debating the use for equipping the items, as I think it would do more good than harm. Appearance would still be nice. __________________

02-21-2008, 06:57 PM	#14
epyon333 Loremaster Join Date: Jul 2005 Posts: 248	Oh ok i see your a necro that wants to ware plate. cant you solo good enough already. and a scout wearing mc plate wouldnt be that damaging? what would be the point of zerkers/guards? and bruisers in mc plate with there already high avoidence? if any other classes that dont wear plate started wearing plate some classes would be obsolete. And yes every class can wear cloth, even plate wearers. but you know why they dont, because the mit is way to low. so thats not even a good point to aruge as to why everyone else should ware plate. __________________ Juggernaut Berserker 90 Leader Remnants of Ancient Norrath Butcherblock

02-21-2008, 06:59 PM	#15
Aurumn Server: Unrest Guild: Executioners Rank: Teen of chaos (2 weeks + 6,857 astatus) Loremaster Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: USA Posts: 1,328	I get what you're saying about the interrupts. In my experience though the shorter cast spells will get off with pretty good reliability, though. Clerics are slow soloers, but they can manage after all. Now obviously if one person is getting pounded by 10 mobs at once that's gonna interrupt darn near everything. However, here's what I see... give mages the same mit as a plate tank and holding agro isn't as much of an issue any more. When everyone has high mit, agro can bounce all over the place and as long as the healers don't go down you'll eventually pull it off. It'd be sloppy as all get out, but if mages/scouts can burn the mobs down fast enough it won't matter. This would enable the higher DPS classes to really unload without having to hold back for the tank to keep agro. The plate tanks may still be around to serve as rescue bots, but everyone else would steal a lot of their thunder. I'd see tactics getting even simpler than "tank and spank" and going to "burn, baby burn". It's not that the proposed change would necessarily turn the entire world on its head, but at the very least it would sknock things out of whack and potentially result in a cascade of nerfbat see-sawing. If the original aim was to allow all the classes to just "look" anyway they want, then add fluff slot gear. Personally I don't see that the benefits of the proposed change would outweigh the upheaval it would cause.

02-21-2008, 07:18 PM	#16
Jehannum Loremaster Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 651	Urbannaja wrote: Jehannum wrote: Fury. Rare Mastercrafted plate. Strength. Int. Wisdom. Win. Yup it would help non-plate healers solo. With a swashy in plate, who needs a tank? Swashies can already tank alot of heroic encounters. Heck, for that matter, consider a group of 4 plate-armoured warlocks, a plated troubadour and an inquisitor with Punishments. In-freaking-sane. As if the cleric or trouby is ever going to take aggro - but it won't matter if the 'locks can take a beating. AND? It would be fun, but nothing a normal group can't do and certainly wouldn't obsolete a normal group For raids, forget that guardian BS. You put your wizard in plate, and your warlock in plate, and you trade them off based on the encounter composition. The warlock tanks anything AE, and the wizard tanks the singles. They can hold aggro no problem, they can avoid a little (moreso with buffs any tank receives) and they can mitigate as well as any plate tank at that point - so why trust a taunt that can be resisted when Fusion's so much more effective? Have you ever played a caster? If a caster is being hit, he isn't going to get much off because of interrupts, so he's not going to have agro for long if he ever got it and wouldn't get it back. Yes they could take a hit, but why the hell would a caster trade off DPS for taking a hit on a raid? He wouldn't. Honestly, if you can't see why this is a dangerous notion then you either don't want to listen or you lack the objectivity required to assess balance. You're looking at all the pluses of armor and ignoring all the deficencies of being a different class. Here goes... 1. It would severely unbalance the healers, in favour of druids and to the complete detriment of clerics, especially templars. 2. ...but at present still tank worse than fighters. 3. If you think a pack of 4 warlocks, in a group with a troubadour and cleric, can AE-nuke indiscriminately against multiple Kunark heroics without eating dirt, try running that group. 4. Yes, I've played a caster. Why, would it invalidate my objectivity if I hadn't? And yes, interrupts are still an issue - that wasn't the point (though with the right trouby buff, Focus will be jacked too) The point is that with high mitigation and hp buffs to bolster them, sorcs could quite easily trade off aggro just by nuking 'til they're blue in the face (or some kind of even darker hue, for tier'dal) - and because of the plate mitigation, could actually survive the beating until the other sorc's damage flipped the aggro. 5. No, I'm not. I'm looking at the armour's benefits and considering the synergistic effect it would have in concert with classes which are specifically designed with the fact in mind that they cannot use such armour. To be honest, I hadn't even considered the most egregious example of how it'd flip things... Because one of the intervening posters is absolutely correct in this: Nobody wants a warrior or crusader if a brawler can wear plate. Absolutely nobody. Feign, heal, avoidance and plate mitigation? The only benefit a plate tank might retain would be shields, but those are crafted too. I'll take a bruiser with a side of imbued incarnadine, and an order of incarnadine tower shield for those really rough encounters.

02-21-2008, 07:26 PM	#17
Gladiia Server: The Bazaar Guild: Driven Rank: Regent Seer Join Date: Jun 2007 Posts: 1,234	Wow....my monk is already an amazing tank...If I could put plate on him I have NO doubt that I could crush a guardian's tanking ability in a raid, or ANY other situation. It would be flat out sick! I'm sorry, but I have to say that this is probably one of the absolute worst ideas I have ever seen on the boards. The difference in damage taken while wearing plate versus while wearing cloth is huge, and classes are balanced as such.

02-23-2008, 04:19 AM	#18
Todra_B Loremaster Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Kithicor; Nebraska Posts: 119	To me the armor worn is more of a class defining issue. Casters trade DPS for weak armor, The fighters taking hits is supposed to be draped in metal. Everyone in plate, Boring, even if the casters wore plate and put robes in the appearance tab I think it changes the game too much. An item I would like to see would be a fabled charm or jewelry item that increases overall armor mit by 25%. When activated it would look like the user was wearing a ghost set of vangard armor over their current clothes. Maybe give the armor the color of the spiritsteed. This would be a real help to cloth and leather wearers but not totaly unbalance the classes of armor. Comments?

02-24-2008, 07:28 PM	#19
epyon333 Loremaster Join Date: Jul 2005 Posts: 248	well ok i could see that working. jsut really would have to be a short timer and low chance of it processing. kind of just to help in a group when the mage pull aggro off the tank. __________________ Juggernaut Berserker 90 Leader Remnants of Ancient Norrath Butcherblock

02-24-2008, 08:14 PM	#20
LygerT Loremaster Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: las vegas, NV Posts: 2,144	sweet, everyone could wear plate then so you wouldn't need me anymore. later! this is the most stupid thread i've ever seen on this forum. alot of your tanks are already leaving this game so think before you continue playing with fire, some dev may take this seriously and screw this game up even further.

02-29-2008, 11:48 AM	#21
Ookami-san Loremaster Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Allentown, PA Posts: 336	Urbannaja wrote: What would be unbalanced about making all crafted armor and maybe treasured (not fabled or legendary) unrestricted, so any class could wear any piece? I'm not going into the pvp aspect, just pve. Things I could see - -Scouts could tank a bit better for instances/solo (though they already are able to do this a bit) but still wouldn't dominate due to a shortage of taunts. That might make needing a plate tank not as necessary. -Healers (non-plate already) could solo better. -Mages might be able to solo/group with a bit more survivability, but would sacrifice DPS by not using gear with the bonuses they need + a mage would still get intterrupted constantly if he was being beat on. I'd like to hear why this would be a bad idea...it would definitely be nice for armorers, and would add a ton more customizability and options for what all non-current plate classes can wear. Since most class enhancement stats/procs are on the armor made for your class, the benefits of going for something else would be limited in that sense. I understand that plate-wearers would be annoyed that other classes could now wear plate, however as long as it's kept to treasured/crafted there would be zero increase in competition for drops and all of the really good items would still only be available to the original classes. If they were to implement this, they'd need to put detriments on armor. For instance, plate might reduce mage skills by 20% or sneaking CA damage by 20%, etc. There would have to be some downside to it. Obviously, stats could play a big role as well. Sure... you might have more mit in plate as a wizard, but if your spells do 15%-20% less damage because there is no INT on the armor, etc. then you have a tough choice to make. As for fantasy archtypes... it's all BS. Name any archtype... and I'll give you a contradiction. Mage who uses a sword and dual wields - Gandalf Fighter who tanks with no armor - Conan Ranger who wears plate - Tanis in Dragonlance Monk who wears plate - just watch chinese kung fu flicks enough... you'll see it Let's face it... it's.... FANTASY... you should be able to do whatever you want... so long as you accept the consequences. If you want to tank in a robe, you'll have less mitigation. If you want cast spells in plate, the spells would do less damage. If you want to sneak in plate, there will be a chance it will break. __________________ _____________________________________ Life is pain Princess! Anyone who tells you differently, is selling something!

03-03-2008, 06:23 PM	#22
Regholdain Loremaster Join Date: Jan 2008 Posts: 56	OK, so here's an idea... Swipe the feat and skills system from D&D and make it so that every class has certain class defining abilities, combat bonuses, and skills, but leave it up to the player to decide best how to burn those limited upgrade choices. In that way, for example, you could have a player with a mage choose to be "proficient" in wearing plate armor, but in doing so sacrifice the next upgrade to a class-defining spell. Here's the thing: Scouts cannot sneak in plate armor, rendering sneak attacks usesless; the armor just makes too much noise for enemies to be unaware of their presence, no matter how sneaky they try to be. Metal armor restricts the ability of a caster to gather the forces of magic, causing there to be a chance his spells will fizzle / fail OUTRIGHT or worse yet, BACKFIRE, and will also incurr a penalty to focus because the mage has to concentrate harder while fighting the limitations of the armor to even make a spell work properly. Druids wearing plate could not shapechange and use their speed buffs, and their own divine attacks would be limited as their dieties would frown on them for using such an "unnatural" armor. Monks and bruisers wouldn't get the benefit of their natural avoidance, as they are unaccustomed to fighting in heavy metal armor. Indeed, they would also incurr penalties to damage because the armor would slow down their normally fluid movements. The problem is that there are architypes in every fantasy game. These all suppose a certain set of class skills, knoweldge, and abilities are learned by the character prior to his adventuring life - say at an academy, college, or from the military or local mage tower, monastary, or whatnot. This is why a guardian would start out as a guardian - he had some prior martial training and learned how to use swords, shields, and all armors effectively. He even learned how to enrage an opponent and keep his attention (hopefully) off his comrades. Taking the concept of the architypes into view, it is obvious why all classes do not wear plate and are not meant to. A mage, as he studied, did not have the time to learn how to fight wearing armor and wielding sword and shield. His studies in the arcane were so strenuous the most he could be educated on was how to protect himself with the simple tools he already used for his class - daggers, wands, rods, and staves. He was also taught to fight at a distance, to let the warriors close in for melee when at all possible. A monk or bruiser were taught the mysteries of mystical inner forces, and how to use those powers to toughen their bodies, hit as if their fists were metal weapons, and they were conditioned to fight in light armor to make use of their lightning reflexes and hurricane punches and kicks. This training is so rigorous and intense, they had no time to learn the intricacies of tactics when fighting in plate mail or chain. In fact, they were encouraged to let their inner strength give them a tougher hide, to avoid and roll with the hits as often as possible - flow like water, sting like bee. Druids worship nature and are taught to abhore metal armor (and in truth weapons, but, eh..) and so they avoid it as it is unnatural, manmade, and corrupted. The druid abhorance of metal armor is their choice based on religion. Clerics have a place on the field of battle, so they must learn to use martial armors and weapons just as the plate-toting warriors must. They have to be able to be field medics, and have to be there side-by-side when the warriors go down or take lethal blows. Their dieties encourage this strength in protection and warfare, and so they are encouraged to bare the armor of their kin, to be courageous as fighters and to honor them on the field of battle. Scouts are trained to scout, and must be stealthy and agile for purposes of reconnaisence (sp?) and the somewhat sneaky missions they are required to undertake. They are trained up to the use of chain, and how to move fluidly and stealthily in said armors, how to strike from the shadows and unseen. They could do this in lighter armors to be sure, but their training is so that they could survive the field of battle insomuch as they could return with their all-important information, or avoid capture and death at the hands of the law and the just. Simply put, they could not accomplish the stealth required for their missions if they were to bear clunky and heavy plate armors. I would guess that these themes would be some of the developers' premisses regarding the class architypes. Sure, there are examples in fantasy of other possibilities, as stated by another poster. But in the fantasy world of EQ2, this is how it works. It would be nice to see a system in which a player could customize his class in these areas somehow - like a berserker being able to truely fight like a roman spartan or a grecian berserker, or even like a barbaric wildman of the ancient germanic tribes. Sure, there would be trade-offs to this within the system, somehow, as there always is. Typically this becomes the sacrifice of dps or abilities in favor of other strengths and weaknesses. I am not so sure EQ2 could make this customizable a system work with the current architypes. For the most part, EQ2 has crossed some architype lines through the AA system. For example, rogues being able to tank sacrifices some dps or other useful abilities in their AA trees. Sorcerers and enchanters often have to choose between dps, utility, and resistability in order to define their characters' niche. Summoners have to choose what their favored pets are and whether to boost dps or utility spells, making them unique amongst others of their classes. Guardians can be towers of physical protection and hate gathering, or dps wild fighters. Some of the AA trees and the options available aren't that favorable because the class architype might be a difficult one to justify certain options. Many options are situational, and thus create a 'specialist' area that no one really wants because they'd rather play the class another direction. Regardles... should all classes be able to wear plate? No. It's not necessarily unbalancing. It just plain and simple doesn't make sense for the class architypes in the EQ2 setting.

03-03-2008, 06:45 PM	#23
firexcracker Lord Join Date: Apr 2007 Posts: 91	Saurakk@Guk wrote: Mages wearing plate? How would they be able to cast or access spell components....scouts sneaking plate? A fighter tanking in only a robe and cloth? Sorcerers in Diablo II could wear plate armor, if they had enough strength

03-04-2008, 05:33 AM	#24
Todra_B Loremaster Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Kithicor; Nebraska Posts: 119	Mage who uses a sword and dual wields - Gandalf I don't want to be picky, and knowing this is all fantasy, but Gandalf is not a comparison to player character mages. In Tolkien's mythology Gandalf was an assistant to deities. He, Sauron, and the Balrog in our game terms would be equal or greater than Avatars ("This foe is beyond any of you....Run!&quot. Yes, there were a few Elves in the first age of the sun that slew Balrogs but they had all come from Valinor and could not be compared to elves of the third age (except for Galadriel) or player characters in Norrath. Sorry for being a Tolkien Nerd!