npc_death Posted January 18, 2009 Report Share Posted January 18, 2009 Got a character whose RP could go either way. I'm not a very good PKer, but I'm moderately knowledgeable about the game's workings. Which class would be more effective/survivable and why? It's a good align, by the way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest emp_newb Posted January 18, 2009 Report Share Posted January 18, 2009 Ranger is more survivable and viable. Rangers do not rely on lagging skills, and have camo, camp, and herb. Human warrior will get you more recognition, but you are at a severe disadvantage. Unreliable lag, poorer weapon selection given your strength. The only real bonus is magic affect increase, and 0 base exp penalty. So if you want survivable, I would suggest ranger. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
killalou Posted January 18, 2009 Report Share Posted January 18, 2009 Werebeast ranger Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
a-guitarist Posted January 18, 2009 Report Share Posted January 18, 2009 I'd say ranger can survive. You've always got a mount with your displacer beasts, and food is everywhere you can kill something. No one can find you if you don't want to be, and you can pick three different paths for maximum replayability. Further, good to see you around again. Not sure if you left, but it still stands; good to see you. a-g Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HBwillie Posted January 18, 2009 Report Share Posted January 18, 2009 good human warrior. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crypticant Posted January 19, 2009 Report Share Posted January 19, 2009 Neutral Hamster Evangelist Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mudder Posted January 20, 2009 Report Share Posted January 20, 2009 Ranger. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EyeSeeU Posted January 20, 2009 Report Share Posted January 20, 2009 Neutral Hamster Evangelist For the win! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WagesofSin Posted January 20, 2009 Report Share Posted January 20, 2009 Ranger, definitely. For the same reasons as above. Human warrior? He'll be outclassed by everything save a gnome warrior. Warriors are difficult as hell since you need to have high hp, high hit/dam, and ability to get awesome gear. A human warrior, and especially a good aligned one, will have trouble with all of these. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EyeSeeU Posted January 20, 2009 Report Share Posted January 20, 2009 I'm going to beg to differ about the human warrior being outclassed by everything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iusedtobesomebody Posted January 20, 2009 Report Share Posted January 20, 2009 Neutral Hamster Evangelist Their "Nuts to Dust" spell is totally overpowered. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WagesofSin Posted January 20, 2009 Report Share Posted January 20, 2009 Well, maybe outclassed by everything is a bit much. Definitely outclassed by any of the giant races, but then that is a problem with average sized melees. Still, I'd rather be a dwarf, elf/drow, slith, avian, or even halfer warrior than a human one. Human average stats provide absolutely no compensation compared to what the other races get. Take an avian for instance. Alright so you get less con and strength, but at least it is made up for with great dex, autoflight, and better int/wis so you can more easily single prac yourself to get more HP. As a dwarf: better strength, awesome con, magic resist. A human doesnt have any glaring weaknesses, but that is the only advantage. Theres a saying: If it's good for everything, then it's probably good for nothing. Those "stat spikes" that the other races get allow you to stack your EQ to maximize your output. Add to this that none of the non-human races have any real RP restrictions. You can take that roleplay concept you had for a human and just apply it onto a non-human. This is due in part that FL doesn't have any RP guidelines for those races, but oh well we can't do anything there... At least that's my opinion... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
npc_death Posted January 21, 2009 Author Report Share Posted January 21, 2009 Humans seem to be getting a pretty bad rap. If a person weren't going Qrace, is there any reason at all to play a human? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ali_gmud Posted January 21, 2009 Report Share Posted January 21, 2009 all I play is humans humans are mint, sure they got no perks, but no real weaknesses really either I guess they arnt really all that big so they do get bashed around alot by giants or anything bigger - doesn't stop me from playing them though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WagesofSin Posted January 22, 2009 Report Share Posted January 22, 2009 If you pick a human, you're going to have to put in more effort in everything, be it training, gearing, or Pking. Less health, less mana, less of everything and almost no advantages.One could argue that they have no exp penalty, but that is a joke nowadays. Most competent players can get to 50 in no time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Celerity Posted January 22, 2009 Report Share Posted January 22, 2009 Humans are only nice in that you don't have to harvest consumables as much... Of course a human of any class can be good, if the player plays them right. However, that same player would do even better with a different standard race for all (nearly--monk?) classes... About the only thing a human trumps is the half-elf... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
npc_death Posted January 22, 2009 Author Report Share Posted January 22, 2009 is there an underlying implication that humans and half-elves might need tweaking? One Half-Elf change that would be nice is player-controlled customizable stats. That way the player can control how much the character takes after the Elven father or Human mother or vice versa. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mya Posted January 23, 2009 Report Share Posted January 23, 2009 Human Battlemages are very good. = 900HP base mage Paladins are also good. As a dwarf: better strength' date=' awesome con, magic resist.[/quote'] Dwarf get 21 STR, the same a human warrior. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mudder Posted January 23, 2009 Report Share Posted January 23, 2009 Human Battlemages are very good. = 900HP base mage Avians get more hp than humans, regardless of the con difference. Not to mention more mana. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iusedtobesomebody Posted January 24, 2009 Report Share Posted January 24, 2009 Wow, no one bit on my "Nuts to Dust" joke. Quit growing up, people! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarriorCleric Posted January 24, 2009 Report Share Posted January 24, 2009 Why do you want us to bite your nuts? WC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iusedtobesomebody Posted January 24, 2009 Report Share Posted January 24, 2009 Seriously, don't you have 124876928468475645 posts to quote or something? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.