I was in a ADV group, it was high risk, the party was:
2Cleric(one was me)
1Paladin
1Warrior
1Ranger
1BeastLord
The paladin messed up and pulled2, and i as a cleric told the warrior to tank one. It worked all right, i used alot of mana but that will happen no matter what when you get a double pull.
But after that fight(while we were meding) My group got into a debate, Should the 2nd tank, tank the add? Or should one of the Clerics root it?
I don't like relying on Root, Clerics root is one of the worst i've seen, and if it breaks in the middle of a heal and i get attacked, it might not only cost my life but the life of the MT or the Whole group for that matter.
I just wanted to know your opinions, should the 2ndary tank, tank added mobs that are pulled? Or should you just root them apart?
·Theme
- Forums
- EverQuest
- General Discussion
- And I thought I knew how to play in a group.......
And I thought I knew how to play in a group.......Follow
seems like with that group, the best option might be to sick pet on the add, and all other try to take out first mob before pet dies. I know that really doesn't answer your question, but pallies are not too bad at root parking (assuming theres enough room to pull add away from group). Clerics in my opinion should never be on crowd control. Ranger or Pally should be on CC in your listed group.
Scholar
49 posts
I think it depends on the situation and the group makeup. In this case, I think that the best way would be to have the 2nd tank tank the 2nd mob. If it happened again, you could try root parking though, and see which one works better.... actually, something just occured to me... if you were doing a hard adventure, then aren't they immune to root?
Edited, Wed Feb 11 19:14:18 2004 by StefinFetchit
Since there were two clerics I think your solution was good. I however play a cleric (level 36) and would have root parked one if possible. (Instill really) What would you have done if there was a 3rd mob?
The idea of the bl tanking the add was a good idea as well.
When I set up in a group, I like to talk about what to do in case of adds before we get them. Again with two healers and two tanks I would have one on each mob.
The idea of the bl tanking the add was a good idea as well.
When I set up in a group, I like to talk about what to do in case of adds before we get them. Again with two healers and two tanks I would have one on each mob.
In your case I would have 2nd tank take the 2nd mob. With 2 clerics, one should be on primary and one on secondary tank anyway. Have the rest of group focus on the first mob to quickly get help to 2nd tank. One cleric a piece on the tanks. Should not be a problem.
On the other hand, the tank I play alot with likes to hit the 2nd mob once or twice and make sure he has agro and then go back to first mob, with everyone assisting. He loses HP faster, but allows clerics to focus on him and not worry about another mob running around the group. This breaks down if the mobs are stunning him alot. If so it can take a while.
On the other hand, the tank I play alot with likes to hit the 2nd mob once or twice and make sure he has agro and then go back to first mob, with everyone assisting. He loses HP faster, but allows clerics to focus on him and not worry about another mob running around the group. This breaks down if the mobs are stunning him alot. If so it can take a while.
That group has loads of options for dealing with an add (you could probabl;y deal with an overpull of four mobs). All reasonably valid not sure one way is better than any other. It doesn't really matter which way you choose as long as you are all comfortable.
I've had my pet on a few adds in a LDoN and easily kept it alive through my heals while helping to kill the main target, as the cleric focused on the tank. With your two clerics, even on hard mode, doing that should be okay. I am sure it depends on the average level though...this could change your tactics somewhat, it depends on how well your pet is buffed (if the pet's going to be off-tanking, see if you can get a Temperance or better on it, cough up the dough, it's better than dying).
Game on,
The Oneiromancer
Game on,
The Oneiromancer
As a magician I have to agree with those who say the pet should have been sent to keep the add busy until the group could get to it. Actually, a beastlord and his/her pet can hold off an add very well.
The key is to discuss how you'll handle adds before you start to hunt. I generally tell groups "if we get an add I'll sick my pet on it". Then I split my nukes between the add and the main mob (assuming we're not talking about a mob that can mow down my pet in 3 hits).
The key is to discuss how you'll handle adds before you start to hunt. I generally tell groups "if we get an add I'll sick my pet on it". Then I split my nukes between the add and the main mob (assuming we're not talking about a mob that can mow down my pet in 3 hits).
There is no way you would use a Cleric to root park an add in this circumstance.
You are introducing a wholly unneeded risk.
As was mentioned Cleric root parking is a high risk tactic, when, not if, root breaks the Cleric has to deal with life threatening situation which is most likely going to make it impossible for him/her to heal anyone.
Sure you can get away with it if every thing is going nicely, but the whole point of planning out tactics is to have fall back plans to cope with the times when everything goes wrong.
If things are going poorly, (any number of problems can be the cause, a second add, a trap goes off with a nasty DoT, mutliple tanks somehow take some large hits, one of the adds is a healer, or healer is standing in the next room healing anyway, etc) then you really want your two clerics free to heal and nuke.
Yes nuke (or perhaps stun, situation dependant) because this line up does not have "coupe de grace" capability without the cleric nuke.
There is no doubt the best tactical choice in this circumstance is to offtank the add.
My preference would have been to have the Pally offtank, this is with the presumption that the Warrior was MA. If it was the other way round it makes not much difference.
Leave the warder on the main mob initially as this is keeping as much DPS as possible on the main target.
One of the Clerics, by prior agreement will switch to main healing the offtanker, this would be the cleric that was previously charged with being main nuker/stunner.
So now you have MA with all the DPS on the main mob with a cleric main healing - no risk here this is a standard setup. If the mob is giving any sort of trouble, healing, running whatever, all the tools are there to deal with it.
The Offtanker just has to hold aggro and stay alive, he/she has a dedicated cleric, so only in the absolute extreme is he/she in any real danger, if the mob is a healer the cleric can deal with it. There is very little that can go wrong here either.
If another add comes along, then the BL should send his warder in, now things do get a bit harder as the BL has to keep his warder alive, the warder has to hold aggro and the BL really needs to try to keep his/her DPS up on the main mob.
But still it is a controlled situation with risks minimised to dealable levels.
If you were using cleric root park, by this time things would very likely have reached critical, with a half dead cleric running around trying to control two mobs, tanks being forced to leave the melee to try to pull aggro off the cleric and very likely the other cleric is going Oom trying to heal everyone in the process.
I have done many groupings with two clerics, it actually quite a powerfull combination (I am told this is mostly so in the 40's where the cleric magic and undead nukes are relatively very powerful) and one that I enjoy, and it is most suited to just the sort of line up that you describe.
Trying to think why others in the group would have even raised the issue.... the only "loss" in the offtanking tactic is the reduction of DPS on the main mob. Frankly the loss of the Pally DPS would be unmeasurable (sorry Pallies), the loss of the Cleric nukes is significant (although a small price to pay for a controlled battlefield), however I can say from experience, that if all is going well and the Pally is tanking well (and the cleric didn't start out with low mana), the Cleric will still be able to drop a nuke on the main mob and kep the offtank healed anyway. The loss of DPS is minimal at worst. I cannot think of any good reason to try root parking.
Edited, Wed Feb 4 20:27:16 2004 by Iluien
You are introducing a wholly unneeded risk.
As was mentioned Cleric root parking is a high risk tactic, when, not if, root breaks the Cleric has to deal with life threatening situation which is most likely going to make it impossible for him/her to heal anyone.
Sure you can get away with it if every thing is going nicely, but the whole point of planning out tactics is to have fall back plans to cope with the times when everything goes wrong.
If things are going poorly, (any number of problems can be the cause, a second add, a trap goes off with a nasty DoT, mutliple tanks somehow take some large hits, one of the adds is a healer, or healer is standing in the next room healing anyway, etc) then you really want your two clerics free to heal and nuke.
Yes nuke (or perhaps stun, situation dependant) because this line up does not have "coupe de grace" capability without the cleric nuke.
There is no doubt the best tactical choice in this circumstance is to offtank the add.
My preference would have been to have the Pally offtank, this is with the presumption that the Warrior was MA. If it was the other way round it makes not much difference.
Leave the warder on the main mob initially as this is keeping as much DPS as possible on the main target.
One of the Clerics, by prior agreement will switch to main healing the offtanker, this would be the cleric that was previously charged with being main nuker/stunner.
So now you have MA with all the DPS on the main mob with a cleric main healing - no risk here this is a standard setup. If the mob is giving any sort of trouble, healing, running whatever, all the tools are there to deal with it.
The Offtanker just has to hold aggro and stay alive, he/she has a dedicated cleric, so only in the absolute extreme is he/she in any real danger, if the mob is a healer the cleric can deal with it. There is very little that can go wrong here either.
If another add comes along, then the BL should send his warder in, now things do get a bit harder as the BL has to keep his warder alive, the warder has to hold aggro and the BL really needs to try to keep his/her DPS up on the main mob.
But still it is a controlled situation with risks minimised to dealable levels.
If you were using cleric root park, by this time things would very likely have reached critical, with a half dead cleric running around trying to control two mobs, tanks being forced to leave the melee to try to pull aggro off the cleric and very likely the other cleric is going Oom trying to heal everyone in the process.
I have done many groupings with two clerics, it actually quite a powerfull combination (I am told this is mostly so in the 40's where the cleric magic and undead nukes are relatively very powerful) and one that I enjoy, and it is most suited to just the sort of line up that you describe.
Trying to think why others in the group would have even raised the issue.... the only "loss" in the offtanking tactic is the reduction of DPS on the main mob. Frankly the loss of the Pally DPS would be unmeasurable (sorry Pallies), the loss of the Cleric nukes is significant (although a small price to pay for a controlled battlefield), however I can say from experience, that if all is going well and the Pally is tanking well (and the cleric didn't start out with low mana), the Cleric will still be able to drop a nuke on the main mob and kep the offtank healed anyway. The loss of DPS is minimal at worst. I cannot think of any good reason to try root parking.
Edited, Wed Feb 4 20:27:16 2004 by Iluien
I think I would have tried a root with my clc in the above situation - even though I agree that it is an iffy proposition or just kept healing as MT and assists beat down the pull. I currently have a 41 chanter, 45 clc, and 46 pally with a ton of LDONs between them. Crowd control in your group starts with pull (both clcs and pally have soothe lines) but you will always have a chance of adds from pull or wanderers and you should have a strategy to deal with it (i.e. who is responsible). Having said that, I am convinced that once you get an add you should try to root it to keep it from agroing casters but that the group needs to focus on getting the pull down first and then both go on to the add. The second cleric is available to heal in the event that the MT or off tanker takes too much damage (if they get agro they can always root again and hopefully get the add out of the fight). 2 wounded mobs deal out double the damage of 1 unhit, so why should you take the extra damage of letting both hit twice as long? I would agree that sending the warder is next best choice. Final thought, while I agree with the post about 2 clcs being a great combo, I would have to disagree about the dps loss on pally being minor - pallys have undead and stun lines in addition to melee and hopefully spirit of nife as well. Although the undead nukes of pally do not compare to clcs at same level they are quite considerable and taking agro is not as disruptive to group for them than clc getting it. Also pallys have root and could cast it on add before going back to pull.
Edited, Thu Feb 5 11:17:58 2004 by rickea
Edited, Thu Feb 5 11:29:23 2004 by rickea
Edited, Thu Feb 5 11:17:58 2004 by rickea
Edited, Thu Feb 5 11:29:23 2004 by rickea
I have to agree. I seldom root with my cleric in group situations...especially in LDON adventures. The only time I root in group is to facilitate an escape, or if a caster in the group has a hostile mob pounding them and chasing them around the room, I will root to give them a chance to get away...once again as a form of lifesaving escape.
Clerics are not suited for crowd control, however. Because when that mob comes free it is probably gonna beat the crap out of the groups healer. As healer, the cardinal rule is to not get agro. We get it enough with our heals...do not need to give the mobs another reason to eat us.
And besides, mana is better spent on heals for the tanks who can deal the damage that has to be dealt to get rid of the mob, not jsut to delay the mob's attack.
Clerics are not suited for crowd control, however. Because when that mob comes free it is probably gonna beat the crap out of the groups healer. As healer, the cardinal rule is to not get agro. We get it enough with our heals...do not need to give the mobs another reason to eat us.
And besides, mana is better spent on heals for the tanks who can deal the damage that has to be dealt to get rid of the mob, not jsut to delay the mob's attack.
Root parking is not a good thing. In a group like the one you had, it could easily be the death of a cleric. In that group, the beast's pet should off-tank the add until the group gets done with the first. Healing 2 different tanks tanking 2 mobs not efficient for cleric's mana.
Just my 2 cp
Just my 2 cp
The pally or the ranger could have easily root parked the add in the event that the pet couldn't handle the situation. Any pally or ranger who has soloed for any lengthy period of time should be a master at the fine art of root parking. If the pally was using 2HS the ranger probably would have been a better choice in performing this function (in order to prevent interrupting the swing timer), however if the pally was using 1HS+Bash either character could have rooted the add. A Flash of Light or Stun is all that would be necessary to re-establish aggro.
I agree 100% that this probably should have been clarified before the adventure started. Having the clerics perform this function outside of an absolute emergency is just taking an unnecessary risk.
I agree 100% that this probably should have been clarified before the adventure started. Having the clerics perform this function outside of an absolute emergency is just taking an unnecessary risk.
In most cases, LDoN fights last so short that I would have gone with the split tank method, especially since you had 2 clerics. Without proper crowd control, it would be too time consuming to try to root park while foghting another mob. Hell, I would have tanked an add myself (as cleric) but most people are a bit leery of this.
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
Did everyone survive the fight? Yes? Then you did the right thing =D
Hmmmm.... Is it just me or is the main problem being overlooked here? IMHO if you survived, you did just fine. That's point number one.
What is missing, however, seems to be several things. First, these things should all be settled beforehand. One of my fail-proof indications of the strength of a group is how well the group sets up guidelines AHEAD of the combat. Designation of who loots, what happens with uber drops, who pulls, who is the main tank, add tank, main healer, crowd controller, and on and on. If it's done beforehand I can guarantee you that the group will pull smoothly and kill efficently. You will also have occasions where a pull goes wrong or mobs pop on top of you or some idiot trains you in the middle of a battle. You will then find out who evacs, who CALLS the evac, and what the team is supposed to do while waiting for the evac to cast.....or not. If not, you will find out how nice it is to have clerics in the group.
How nice it is to be in a group where these things are all set in advance and while you still get the adrenalin rush and the heightened blood pressure, the end result is that the group survives, kills the mobs or smoothly evacs. Nothing is better than chuckling about these after the mobs are dead and ML is gathering the loot.
After a few of these, I have become somewhat of a curmudgeon about groups. I ask a few "innocent" questions about the group and if I don't like the answers, I find something else to do. I know it's cowardly, but I have tried to educate some of these groups and found it to be a totally useless endeavor. If the group members are over level 30 and still don't know what needs to be done when forming a group, they are lost causes. Go find something else to do where you won't be killed by someone you will probably never see again anyway.
By the way, a group with two clerics sets alarm bells off in my mind, anyway. If you have one good cleric, that's enough. If they are not good clerics, six is not enough. This is not a really hard rule, but unless you just couldn't find enough other classes to fill the group, there is not a reason to have two clerics. If you do have two, however, you really need to work together and set roles. One needs to be main healer, the other needs to keep the buffs up, and they both need to spend a lot of time communicating. Communication is the primary mark of a good cleric anyway.
One last comment if I haven't lost you already. When a group chides a cleric for lack of, or inefficient crowd control, it is definitely time TO GET A NEW GROUP. Sorry about that, but this games works best when each class does the things that they excel in. (my high school english teacher is whirling in her grave) Anyway, if there is fault in your experience, I fail to see how any should be attached to you, except in your choice of fellow group members.... I hope I'm not being too critical, but I commend you for listening to the criticism and trying to gain a better understanding of the situation. You will do just fine in this game.
What is missing, however, seems to be several things. First, these things should all be settled beforehand. One of my fail-proof indications of the strength of a group is how well the group sets up guidelines AHEAD of the combat. Designation of who loots, what happens with uber drops, who pulls, who is the main tank, add tank, main healer, crowd controller, and on and on. If it's done beforehand I can guarantee you that the group will pull smoothly and kill efficently. You will also have occasions where a pull goes wrong or mobs pop on top of you or some idiot trains you in the middle of a battle. You will then find out who evacs, who CALLS the evac, and what the team is supposed to do while waiting for the evac to cast.....or not. If not, you will find out how nice it is to have clerics in the group.
How nice it is to be in a group where these things are all set in advance and while you still get the adrenalin rush and the heightened blood pressure, the end result is that the group survives, kills the mobs or smoothly evacs. Nothing is better than chuckling about these after the mobs are dead and ML is gathering the loot.
After a few of these, I have become somewhat of a curmudgeon about groups. I ask a few "innocent" questions about the group and if I don't like the answers, I find something else to do. I know it's cowardly, but I have tried to educate some of these groups and found it to be a totally useless endeavor. If the group members are over level 30 and still don't know what needs to be done when forming a group, they are lost causes. Go find something else to do where you won't be killed by someone you will probably never see again anyway.
By the way, a group with two clerics sets alarm bells off in my mind, anyway. If you have one good cleric, that's enough. If they are not good clerics, six is not enough. This is not a really hard rule, but unless you just couldn't find enough other classes to fill the group, there is not a reason to have two clerics. If you do have two, however, you really need to work together and set roles. One needs to be main healer, the other needs to keep the buffs up, and they both need to spend a lot of time communicating. Communication is the primary mark of a good cleric anyway.
One last comment if I haven't lost you already. When a group chides a cleric for lack of, or inefficient crowd control, it is definitely time TO GET A NEW GROUP. Sorry about that, but this games works best when each class does the things that they excel in. (my high school english teacher is whirling in her grave) Anyway, if there is fault in your experience, I fail to see how any should be attached to you, except in your choice of fellow group members.... I hope I'm not being too critical, but I commend you for listening to the criticism and trying to gain a better understanding of the situation. You will do just fine in this game.
Hehe, I was just imagining the seething rage of any cleric being told that the group needed a second cleric for healing.
I've been in many two cleric groups, always simply because thats who was around when the group is being formed.
At first I was dubious about stackability, to my surprise clerics (who are not primadonas) seem to stack very well indeed.
I've been in many two cleric groups, always simply because thats who was around when the group is being formed.
At first I was dubious about stackability, to my surprise clerics (who are not primadonas) seem to stack very well indeed.
I can't say that I've ever done a hard adventure, so I don't know what for sure is different about it, but I KNOW that ranger park works just fine with one or even 2 adds, as long as you have the room. Any ranger worth his chainmail will know how to take the aggro of the adds (including using snare, an integral part of the park), pulling it OUT OF MELEE RANGE (the reason you need the room, which can be a problem with LDoN, unless he pulls them to a room that's already been cleared, which is what I do), and root. Return to the main fight. When the first mob is dead, reroot the third add and let the MT take aggro on the 2nd while you jolt it a couple times. Ranger root lasts right about 3 mins (at lvl 57 at least, don't remember when it was much shorter then that though) and snare lasts 15 mins. 15 MINUTES. That's why ranger's get so upset when they accidentally snare themselves (it can get confusing since buffing mana isn't to be "wasted" on the ranger in many groups so he's left to buff/spot heal himself). That's just from the point of view of a ranger though. If I had my necro in that group, I would've just soloed the add with pet and dots and dropped a dot or 2 on the MT's mob. Pet classes rock for that stuff.
Ranger should be on crowd control. Snare, lead mob to an empty corner of the room, root.
However, with 2 clerics, 2 tanks, maybe just easier to slow both mobs and tank them both, espeically if the ranger in group isn't doing his CC job. After all, you get 2 clerics and 2 tanks so you can tank 2 mobs right? Otherwise having 2 cleric and 2 tanks in the same group is very strange.
However, with 2 clerics, 2 tanks, maybe just easier to slow both mobs and tank them both, espeically if the ranger in group isn't doing his CC job. After all, you get 2 clerics and 2 tanks so you can tank 2 mobs right? Otherwise having 2 cleric and 2 tanks in the same group is very strange.
Recent Visitors: 233
All times are in CST
Morbys, Anonymous Guests (232)
- Forums
- EverQuest
- General Discussion
- And I thought I knew how to play in a group.......
© 2024 Fanbyte LLC