To me here's the problem: Post 50; to go to most dungeon locations - it's
impossible without both a Cleric and Enchanter. How many times have you had
a group together in say Sebilis - and didn't go deeper because you didn't
have the right classes?

IMHO - this is a terrible flaw of EQ and needs to be rectified. Improving
Crowd Control capabilities of Bards helped; and improving healing for
Shamans and Clerics could be another. Perhaps there are other better ways
that don't involved "nerfing" clerics indirectly...

Slyde
-----Original Message-----
From: Kenneth E. Bachman [mailto:kbachman@...]
Sent: Saturday, January 20, 2001 5:14 AM
To: eqbards@egroups.com
Subject: Re: [eqbards] OT Complete heal (was Numbers on Bards)

I really wouldn't want to see Shamans and, especially, Druids get better
healing. The thrust of a lot of
these letters seems to be that a single Druid or a single Shaman should have
enough healing to stand in
for a Cleric, with maybe some downtime tradeoff. I really can't agree with
that. If that were the case,
what would be the point of a Cleric? What most people don't bother noticing
is that any combination of
two of the other healing classes is already quite sufficient (with the
exception of rez).
Shaman/Druid/Paladin, put any two in a party and you're pretty much good to
go. There's a ton of Druids
out there, the problem is that most of them don't want to or don't know how
to heal. That won't get fixed
by giving them more healing.

Kenross Cantoforjado, 56 songs, Innoruuk