Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

Starter classesFollow

#1 Jan 07 2006 at 7:50 PM Rating: Decent
What is a good starter class that is pretty easy to get into and doesn't require much armor? I'm currently in WoW and looking for an alternate MMO, is this game easy to get into and how would it compare to other MMOs such as FFXI and WoW?
#2 Jan 07 2006 at 8:11 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
***
1,166 posts
Quote:
What is a good starter class that is pretty easy to get into and doesn't require much armor?


Any, at the start, for all classes are more or less equal to about level 15 or so.

Quote:
I'm currently in WoW and looking for an alternate MMO, is this game easy to get into and how would it compare to other MMOs such as FFXI and WoW?


If you get into this game, WoW will become the part-time or alternate mmo, as there is so much more depth to this game.

...imo
____________________________
Over the last 15 months, we've traveled to every corner of the United States. I've now been in 57 states? I think one left to go.

Barack Obama

Laen - 105 Dru
Haam - 105 Sk
Laosha - 105 Shammy
Lutan - 105 Bard
#3 Jan 07 2006 at 8:12 PM Rating: Good
****
8,619 posts
I would say that thier are 4 main differences between WoW and EQ.

1. Graphics in most of the zones are not as good, nor is the player models of the quality of WoW.

2. The people who form the main body of the EQ community have been playing along time and are generally alot more Mature than in WoW, you will not find many teenagers and extremely few preteens unless on a parents account.

This mean acting the fool is generally frowned apon and the humour and grouping is more Adult in nature, most player use full words rather than text speak for the most part in normal conversations for example.

3. the leveling in EQ is much slower and the skills more highly developed, it is no understatement to say that leveling to the highest level is not to be rushed if you expect to have the skills required when you get there.

Those that ignore this end up on people "do not group with" lists. EQ is a highly complex game at high levels with each class preforming roles that require a certain amount of knowlage and skill on the players behalf rather than the inate skills of the charicter itself.

i found that in WoW there was no such huge need for player skill and people would rather do a mission the same way untill it worked rather than think encounters through.

At the very top end it requires close co-ordination of muliple groups to break the higest zones.

4. and the main difference EQ has a highly developped end game, most people are there already so it can be a struggle to catch up, but that End game is HUGE and i mean HUGE, WoW has no high end game, once you top out level wise there isn't much left to do.

In EQ it's only the beginning.
#4 Jan 07 2006 at 8:23 PM Rating: Good
*
157 posts
Mage is a good starter class and one to stay with its less gear dependent, all you need up to 50 is maybe a couple of ft items, summoned focus items and a cheap robe. oh and your spells and pet focus items of course Plus we Mages can solo well throughout all lvls.
#5 Jan 07 2006 at 8:27 PM Rating: Good
*
103 posts
Necro's are the easiest class to start with. They are more gear independant than most classes and capable of getting you towards the higher levels solo.
#6 Jan 07 2006 at 8:28 PM Rating: Good
*
157 posts
ooh pluss in general people will help you out with items or spells just dont spam people asking for stuff
#7 Jan 08 2006 at 12:50 AM Rating: Good
Rogues, monks and berserkers are probably the cheapest classes to build. They don't have spells and don't take hits unless they get careless, so you really don't have to buy any thing and you'd still be able to go to the tuffest parts of the game.

Rangers and Beastlords are probably the 2nd cheapest to make because their higher up spells are lower level spells from other classes and aren't nearly as much desired. They will need decent gear though, because every ranger and every beastlord tanks some times.

Clerics, enchanters and shaman are probably the third cheapest to make. Although they are hard core casters who eventually have to buy pricey spells, they ***** their class out like any other class wish they could.

Hard core casters like necromancers, wizards and mages are probably the 4th least costly to make. They have it nice soloing which can be very much more profitable then grouping, but they have to buy tons of horribly costly spells from other players.

Lastly, tanks. Paladins, Shadowknights and warriors are tanks. Tanks need the best gear possible for their levels, or they're ****** tanks. They can't solo, so they have to get all their platinum from grouping, which is awfull because you can't get a group in profitable zones because your gear isn't good enough to tank the profitable mobs. Most successfull tanks are either four years old or are alternate characters to very wealthy wizards, necros or shamans.

Don't pick a druid.
#8 Jan 08 2006 at 12:59 AM Rating: Good
Scholar
***
2,496 posts
Quote:
Don't pick a druid.


Why not? I started with a dru and I love it. They are a great class to learn with.
#9 Jan 08 2006 at 1:19 AM Rating: Good
**
811 posts
Quote:
Don't pick a druid.


Why not? I started in 2000 with a druid, unfortunately my ex changed my PW and I lost that account.

Came back a couple of years later and started another druid, she is 64 now, ok equipped for her level, she has been able to do a lot of soloing, made nice plat with ports, and selling of foraged items used in tradeskills. With a bit of skill this class can give a lot of satisfaction and allows you to both group and solo.

I also made a chanter(54 and she bores me silly), a warrior (45, expensive to dress, fun to play) a rogue (35 cheap-ish to keep and a LOT of fun) but above all I love my druid as she is so very versetile (sp?)

Edited, Sun Jan 8 01:26:34 2006 by Maktub
#10 Jan 08 2006 at 1:22 AM Rating: Good
*
157 posts
yea druids are another choice for starter class, they can forage and track both good for makeing pp or getting the gear they want pluss they can solo mobs just as good as any other caster..
#11 Jan 08 2006 at 1:38 AM Rating: Good
***
1,117 posts
Quote:
Rogues, monks and berserkers are probably the cheapest classes to build. They don't have spells and don't take hits unless they get careless, so you really don't have to buy any thing and you'd still be able to go to the tuffest parts of the game.

Rangers and Beastlords are probably the 2nd cheapest to make because their higher up spells are lower level spells from other classes and aren't nearly as much desired. They will need decent gear though, because every ranger and every beastlord tanks some times.

Clerics, enchanters and shaman are probably the third cheapest to make. Although they are hard core casters who eventually have to buy pricey spells, they ***** their class out like any other class wish they could.

Hard core casters like necromancers, wizards and mages are probably the 4th least costly to make. They have it nice soloing which can be very much more profitable then grouping, but they have to buy tons of horribly costly spells from other players.

Lastly, tanks. Paladins, Shadowknights and warriors are tanks. Tanks need the best gear possible for their levels, or they're sh*tty tanks. They can't solo, so they have to get all their platinum from grouping, which is awfull because you can't get a group in profitable zones because your gear isn't good enough to tank the profitable mobs. Most successfull tanks are either four years old or are alternate characters to very wealthy wizards, necros or shamans.

Don't pick a druid.

Just cause a class is the "cheapest" does not make it the best starter class. Paladins, for example, are great starter classes. On the reverse, monks can be very difficult to learn some of their skills, especially proper pulling (though they are probably the easiest class to learn pulling with).
#12 Jan 08 2006 at 1:51 AM Rating: Good
Tarv I disagree about the graphics.
I play both and while WoW graphics are "better" they are to cartoony for me. I personally love the EQ graphics besides great graphics cause lag >_>

I agree on the rest of your points though and would like to add a few of my own.

EQ is not a soloing game really ya classes can solo from 1-70 but it takes a very long time to do so(for starting players).

EQ is not a PVP game(ya you can PvP in it.........but not like WOW.....which btw is not as good as d2 for pvp >_>)

Just thought I would get those out


Oh and Melee classes are FAR more expensive than caster classes(epecially a zerker......a zerker is pure gear if you have crappy gear then you have a crappy zerker =/)...Spells cost nothing when compared to melee gear......


Right so to answer your question


Play what ever you think you will like.........in fact start like 4 classes and play them up to like 15-20 and see which you like...........then go with it.








Edited, Sun Jan 8 01:57:08 2006 by elorianBLAH
#13 Jan 08 2006 at 5:10 AM Rating: Good
****
8,619 posts
Quote:
Tarv I disagree about the graphics.
I play both and while WoW graphics are "better" they are to cartoony for me. I personally love the EQ graphics besides great graphics cause lag >_>
Yes they are cartoony, thats why i never bought WoW. but just because you don't like cartoony doesn't mean the graphics aren't better.

And strangely (i'm not computer literate never mind a programmer) i get far less lag on WoW than i do on EQ, anyone explain that?

you're right as ever on the other point El, well made.

*Edit because it read like i was disagreeing with El which fundamentally i don't.

Edited, Sun Jan 8 05:16:28 2006 by tarv
#14 Jan 08 2006 at 7:52 AM Rating: Excellent
***
1,251 posts
apart from the fact, that thats her the umpteenth thread with the topic "what classes noobs should pick" here just a few comments.

@Rossd, Necro as starters are easy? I don't think so. the necros versatility make him rather difficult to excel. and a new player shouldn't really solo that much...else he has to pick it up at mebbe lvl 50. and who wants to group with a 50 noob...

I agree though that Necros are somewhat less gear dependant and can solo well.

I second mage, ranger, pallie. :)

but, ye can start with any class. ask fer feedback from fellow players (just tell 'em yer a noob). if ye ask nicely, ye usually get lots of advice (things they have learned when playing their mains)

have fun :)
____________________________
Still a noob. :-P
Characters on Drinal, Povar, EMarr, Firiona Vie.
#15 Jan 08 2006 at 8:26 AM Rating: Good
**
515 posts
Characters are pretty much mostly melee until level 20 or so. Spells at that level are not very powerful. However, to get the best introduction to the game you do want a character that has magic. The only class I would not recommend would be Bard, since the Bard is totally different. All of this assumes you plan to play a while, get comfortable with the game, and then create a new character later to be your 'main' character once you have a better idea of what you want to do.

So, I would leave out, for a learning character, pure melee like Warriors, Rogues, Berserkers.

I personally think there is nothing wrong with a Druid as a first character, but freely admit Norrath has plenty of them, lol. Any priest class, Druid, Cleric, Shaman, would do. Or their hybids, Ranger, Paladin, Beastlord. If you tend to the evil side, Necro or their hybird, Shadow Knight, would be good starters. Just don't expect your magic to be important at first. Enchanter would be ok, but it's a bit more complex once you level up. However, if illusions and mind control thrill you, that's the traditional class to play. If you think you really want to be a pet master, or to pull objects out of thin air, Mage is the way to go.

The newest tutorial will take you to level 10 plus. By that time you may already have an idea of what new character you wish to create. Have fun!

Edited, Sun Jan 8 08:31:13 2006 by Fallonn
#16 Jan 08 2006 at 4:53 PM Rating: Decent
***
3,212 posts
I think the cleric is one of the easiest classes to play in EQ.
Easy to learn, almost always get groups when you go looking.
That said it can be the most demanding class, as the entire group depends on your skill. Try a cleric but its not for everyone.
OTOH I started a mage, played to the 20's when i ran into research and dropped it.
Started Jonwin as a Paladin, stayed with him untill I started Courtin the cleric.
So I can reccomend Paladin. But, today at this time and date I would say a beastlord is your best starting class.
The only drawback to a beastlord is that 3 of the 5 BL races have faction problems in most of the old world zones.


#17 Jan 08 2006 at 6:10 PM Rating: Decent
*
157 posts
You dont need to research till like 50 now there is a tower in oot i think that sells rarer spells up to 50 but they are probably sold in pok to
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 231 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (231)