"Wayne Sheppard" <mrwayne@...> wrote:

> I have dueled Shamans and Clerics of equal level without spells.
> I lost 5 out of 7 duels. They were stronger, had more hit points
> and had about equal armor if not superior due to superior strength.
> I had higher dex and agility which seemed to matter, but not enough
> to make me win. I imagine I could beat most druids in pure melee
> due to far better ac, but a glowing crook staff would rapidly even
> things out as we have no equivalent melee weapon below the 30+
> levels. That staff rocks! Too bad we have a max skill of 1 in 2HS
> and 2HB.

Well, the main problem is that your duels took place at lvl 16. Before level 20, many of the classes look exactly the same melee wise. Sorry, but a duel at lvl 16 is not an accurate judge of the abilities between 2 classes. Before level 16 the combat is equipment based, the glowing wooden crook (found on a level 24 or 25 lockjaw) is slightly above the level of the person you're fighting. Level 16 is very young in a character's career. To be honest, I would say that only aound level 25, when a character has had a decent chance to equip themselves and they have most of the skills that their class will get do you get truly defining battles between classes. Once you get dual wield, you will smoke a cleric in melee hands down.

> I have only dueled a ranger in ranged combat only. No contest he
> smoked me taking only 2 bubbles of health. Of course he did use a
> bow which we cannot use. Main problem was we were 16th at the time
> and he could camo and I could not. He knew when he was in range, I
> did not. He knew which way to run to get in range, I did not. I am
> sure I could beat either if we used only spells.

Ranged combat only between a bow wielding class and a non bow wielding class seems to me like it's always going to be pretty one-sided.

--
Miriana Windryder
Priestess of Tunare
Innoruuk Server

------------------------------------------------------------
Got Toast? http://www.etoast.com