Monk 45, Ranger 50, Ranger 50, Cleric 50, Me 39 at the time. The only
variable was the level 50 Necro vs. the level 50 Wizard... and the level 50
wizard has a very strong reputation as being a very strong player (although
also an Item Farmer and Kill Stealer also... 8P ).

To further clarify, the reason that we died was we had the spawns for all
three camps split up perfectly with the Necro. When the necro left, it took
up a lot longer to kill the lord and a wizzie spawned at the end of our
battle and started to Ice Comet us... starting with taking out the wizard
(there goes evac :P) followed by the cleric, the rangers and then me... The
monk ran, FD'ed and zoned with a quarter bubble left. In addition, we could
not re-break the spawn once we complete corpse recovery and the lord and his
guards had respawned. With the necro we broke the room by simply waltzing
in, charming, mezzing and then we slapped the lord around like he was a
wimpy dervish cutthroat or something... With the wizard we simply couldn't
split them up or handle them as a group.

The necro was infinately more productive then the wizard in this group
camping the Lord/Hand/Magi... and yes, I will attest that a Necro's ability
to effect undead and us being in lower guk may have had a lot to do with
it...

>
> Well that's a poor example. Two different players can
> be very differing in ability to play the game. (Being
> level 50 does not mean you have any clue at all about
> EQ is one of my main problems with the game...witness
> any 50 warriors out there still wearing serp bracers,
> exe hoods, etc.) So the necro could have been a very
> good player and the wizard a very poor player. Also
> you'd need to tell me more about the groups involved.
> If there was no tank then the necro might have been a
> necessity for his pet. If you had a good tank and
> healer and the spawn was broken the wizard should have
> been just fine. Yeah yeah i'm rambling on I know I
> know... :)
>