The way I see it, the primary purpose of a pet should be to act as a
defensive barrier between the mob and the caster. In other words, the pet
keeps stuff off of the caster so the caster's spell don't get interrupted.
This does not necessarily mean the pet is inflicting a lot of damage. The
primary source of damage that the mob gets hit for should come from the
caster's spells, not the pet. If the mob starts to attack the caster, the
pet should a built in Taunt skill to draw the mob off the caster.

I just started up a newbie magician the other day so my opinion is subject
to change 180 degrees as I play him more:-)

Galtin of E'ci

PS There was a recent post on the official EQ site from a 50 warrior who had
dueled a 50 necro. The only thing the necro did was sic his pet on the
warrior. He didn't cast any spells. The necro pet won:-). Abashi's
response was that the warrior didn't have the right equipment for a 50
warrior (warrior was in crafted) and that he must not have used a good
strategy against the pet. I was always under the impression that there
wasn't much strategy to playing a warrior. Hit AutoAttack and start pushing
the bash/slam/kick/taunt buttons. Despite what Abashi said, IMO a pet
should never beat or even come close to beating an equal level melee class.

PPS Is this the list record for longest OT thread?

> > Heh bards aren't melee classes they don't even have double attack and
> until
> > you get a yekeshas or two you can't do much.
> >
> > Naeeldar
>
> That's my point. Necros aren't melee classes either, and are
> supposed to be less of a melee class than bards. Therefore it
> doesn't make sense that they have the ability to do more melee
> damage than bards.
>