[Next Message in Time] |
[Previous Message in Time] |
[Next Message in Topic] |
[Previous Message in Topic]
Message ID: 2247
Date: Wed Dec 15 21:46:37 GMT 1999
Author: Danny Devorkin
Subject: Re: Specialization
>words,
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tekdruid [mailto:Tekdruid@...]
> Sent: Wednesday, December 15, 1999 3:25 PM
> To: 'eqenchanters@onelist.com'
> Subject: RE: [eqenchanters] Specialization
>
>
> From: Tekdruid <Tekdruid@...>
>
> Good Point. What you choose for specialization is dependant on your play
> style. It is RECOMMENDED that enchanters specialize in alteration, but if
> you
> think another would be more useful, then specialize in that. A
> specialize:Conjuration would be useful as well for an enchanter who is
> strict
> crowd control and doesn't buff/debuff as much. Specialize:Alteration is
> simply
> recommended mostly because most of the enchanters spells ARE Alteration.
>
> Tinik
> 19 Gnomish Enchanter
> Veeshan
>
> On Wednesday, December 15, 1999 2:22 PM, Farr, Robert
> [SMTP:Robert.Farr@...] wrote:
> > From: "Farr, Robert" <Robert.Farr@...>
> >
> > The way I did it was to let the cards fall where they may. In other
> Ione
> > trained a point in each and played the way I normally play. If my
> > specialization:Evocation had made it first, then obviously it was the
> > that was used most often, and should be the one that got the benefits ofAlteration,
> > specialization. As luck would have it, my playstyle emphasized
> > so that's what my specialty is in. That actually surprised me, given theALL
> > fact that the Mesmerize line of spells is Conjuration, and I use those
> very
> > heavily. Anyway, I guess what I'm trying to say is that specializing in
> > Alteration might be a good idea for Enchanters, but it may not be for
> > Enchanters.
> >
> > My 2cp...
> >
> > Qinie Isil'Goren
> > 27 Enchanter
> > Mith Marr
> >
>
> >