EQ2 Character Selection . . . for the long haul

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

I'd sort of like to get a taste of several different professions//races
before settling down on one for the long haul. As a rule, about what level
would some of you more experienced folks and beta testers say that a
particular combo should be to get a "taste" of it?

I want to play one long enough to get that "taste", but there's no point
continuing on if far enough's enough, so to speak.

TIA

--
chainbreaker

If you need to email, then chainbreaker (naturally) at comcast dot
net--that's "net" not "com"--should do it.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

chainbreaker <noone@nowhere.com> wrote:
>I'd sort of like to get a taste of several different professions//races
>before settling down on one for the long haul. As a rule, about what level
>would some of you more experienced folks and beta testers say that a
>particular combo should be to get a "taste" of it?

level 15-20 should give you a fair idea of the play of your class for the
newbie and midgame. You don't get the good/evil class specialization until
level 20, so you kind of have to look at spell lists and guess beyond that.

Nobody knows how different the endgame will be. It's quite possible that,
like EQ1, most high-level classes play rather differently from the way they
did at mid-level. And even if they don't now, they may after a few
expansions.

>I want to play one long enough to get that "taste", but there's no point
>continuing on if far enough's enough, so to speak.

It's impossible to know what "enough" is if you're having fun. If you're
not, that's enough right there. I believe this is a good thing.

For some things, you'll probably know before you get off newbie isle. Maybe
you hate root/nuke, so being a mage isn't for you. For others, you may have
fun through level 35 and then get bored, or be annoyed with some game
mechanic that gets important around that level.

The important thing is you have fun WHILE experimenting. When it stops being
fun, try another character (or game). This could be years from now, or weeks.
--
Mark Rafn dagon@dagon.net <http://www.dagon.net/>

 

[Wolfie]

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

chainbreaker wrote:
> I'd sort of like to get a taste of several different
> professions//races before settling down on one for the long haul. As
> a rule, about what level would some of you more experienced folks and
> beta testers say that a particular combo should be to get a "taste"
> of it?

For classes, probably either mid-to-upper teens, at least.
In some cases - necro vs conjurer, for example - that
will need to be mid-to-upper 20's. EVERY priest (druid,
shaman, cleric) plays the same until 10, after all. Then
you start getting some flavor for the class itself. The
ultimate class (fury/warden for druids) don't start until
20. So you might know you dislike playing a druid
around 15 -- but you couldn't know you dislike playing
an offensive-oriented druid (fury) until after 20. Same
for the other classes, of course.

Races are easier - you should know whether you like a
particular race shortly after reaching your home area and
certainly by level 10. Other than the obvious -- short/tall,
good/evil, starting stats -- there's not a whole lot of game
differences between races.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

Mark Rafn wrote:
> chainbreaker <noone@nowhere.com> wrote:
>> I'd sort of like to get a taste of several different
>> professions//races before settling down on one for the long haul.
>> As a rule, about what level would some of you more experienced folks
>> and beta testers say that a particular combo should be to get a
>> "taste" of it?
>
> level 15-20 should give you a fair idea of the play of your class for
> the newbie and midgame. You don't get the good/evil class
> specialization until level 20, so you kind of have to look at spell
> lists and guess beyond that.
>

Hmm, OK, thanks for everybody's input.
--
chainbreaker

 

[Wolfie]

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

Mark Rafn wrote:

> Nobody knows how different the endgame will be. It's quite possible
> that, like EQ1, most high-level classes play rather differently from
> the way they did at mid-level. And even if they don't now, they may
> after a few expansions.

I agree. And, even more to the point *right now* IMO,
no one really knows how the middle game will go either.
EQ clerics didn't get CHeal until 39 -- and groups at
that point went from "well, a druid or shaman will do
because they have damage shields or slows" to "only
a cleric here" (a mistake in a lot of places, but still...)

There very well may be that type of "gotcha" in EQ2.
Until enough groups get out there and start actually
encountering the day to day grinds, we won't know.
And, like Kunark and Velious, we really won't know
how the game will develop in expansions either -- and
they could really change things in a hurry...

I will say that -- again, IMO from the low-levels -- the
developers *seem* to have caught a lot of the *known*
"gotchas" -- all priests can rez, healing seems to be a
non-issue with any priest, there aren't any "solo god"
classes, etc. But we won't know how well that *really*
works out until there are a lot of 40+ groups out there
*and* we've seen an expansion or two and can see
how the game progresses.