It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
I’ve played MM6 a couple of times now, but it has been a long time since the last time (a good 10 years). And my main stay each time has been Paladin, Druid, Cleric and Sorcerer.

I like it because I don’t see the benefit of the Knight or Archer, as you only get a few extra HP with the Knight over the Paladin and the Paladin you also have the extra spellcasting.

I like the Druid over the Archer for the same reason. The Archer has better physical stats, but that can be caught up down the road. But the Druid has more magic in having Body, Spirit and Mind as well. Where the Archer only has elemental magic.

With the Cleric and Sorcerer, explanations are not needed. Besides their normal spells, they are the only classes that can learn Light and Dark magic.

I feel it’s a very well balanced party and has always done me very well, as well as extremely fun to play. I am not into doing the challenge runs of “3 Paladins/Knights/Solo/etc” I like to have a good, balanced party when I play.

How about for everyone else?
avatar
Hobbun: I’ve played MM6 a couple of times now, but it has been a long time since the last time (a good 10 years). And my main stay each time has been Paladin, Druid, Cleric and Sorcerer.

I like it because I don’t see the benefit of the Knight or Archer, as you only get a few extra HP with the Knight over the Paladin and the Paladin you also have the extra spellcasting.

I like the Druid over the Archer for the same reason. The Archer has better physical stats, but that can be caught up down the road. But the Druid has more magic in having Body, Spirit and Mind as well. Where the Archer only has elemental magic.

With the Cleric and Sorcerer, explanations are not needed. Besides their normal spells, they are the only classes that can learn Light and Dark magic.

I feel it’s a very well balanced party and has always done me very well, as well as extremely fun to play. I am not into doing the challenge runs of “3 Paladins/Knights/Solo/etc” I like to have a good, balanced party when I play.

How about for everyone else?
In MM6, Druid rules, all others drool.
But Knight and Paladin are pretty equivalent. Life Share and the Knight will save many weaker players at crucial times.
avatar
Hobbun: I’ve played MM6 a couple of times now, but it has been a long time since the last time (a good 10 years). And my main stay each time has been Paladin, Druid, Cleric and Sorcerer.

I like it because I don’t see the benefit of the Knight or Archer, as you only get a few extra HP with the Knight over the Paladin and the Paladin you also have the extra spellcasting.

I like the Druid over the Archer for the same reason. The Archer has better physical stats, but that can be caught up down the road. But the Druid has more magic in having Body, Spirit and Mind as well. Where the Archer only has elemental magic.

With the Cleric and Sorcerer, explanations are not needed. Besides their normal spells, they are the only classes that can learn Light and Dark magic.

I feel it’s a very well balanced party and has always done me very well, as well as extremely fun to play. I am not into doing the challenge runs of “3 Paladins/Knights/Solo/etc” I like to have a good, balanced party when I play.

How about for everyone else?
avatar
macAilpin: In MM6, Druid rules, all others drool.
But Knight and Paladin are pretty equivalent. Life Share and the Knight will save many weaker players at crucial times.
I don't remember the specifics behind how Life Share works, but is Knight that much worth it over Paladin for one spell? Also, I like the Paladin better just for the better versatility. You can hit just as hard with the Paladin (melee/ranged), but you also can cast Mind, Spirit and Body spells, as well.
avatar
macAilpin: In MM6, Druid rules, all others drool.
But Knight and Paladin are pretty equivalent. Life Share and the Knight will save many weaker players at crucial times.
avatar
Hobbun: I don't remember the specifics behind how Life Share works, but is Knight that much worth it over Paladin for one spell? Also, I like the Paladin better just for the better versatility. You can hit just as hard with the Paladin (melee/ranged), but you also can cast Mind, Spirit and Body spells, as well.
I use the knight for repository of hit points in MM6. No matter how high the knight's damage, Magic hits every time and physical attacks often miss until accuracy gets ridiculously high. So, as a repository of hit points, I see the Knight as having the highest number. But, because Paladins can cure, they are interchangeable with knights.
avatar
macAilpin: In MM6, Druid rules, all others drool.
But Knight and Paladin are pretty equivalent. Life Share and the Knight will save many weaker players at crucial times.
avatar
Hobbun: I don't remember the specifics behind how Life Share works, but is Knight that much worth it over Paladin for one spell? Also, I like the Paladin better just for the better versatility. You can hit just as hard with the Paladin (melee/ranged), but you also can cast Mind, Spirit and Body spells, as well.
I just checked the classes before posting, and I'm glad I did.

The Knight gets 8 hp per level after 2nd promotion.
The Paladin gets 5 hp per level.
The Druid, Cleric, and Sorcerer all get 4 hp per level.

I was going to say I thought the Paladin was far enough beyond the others that he still serves fine as an HP pool for Shared Life, but he isn't really that much farther. I've always thought Shared Life from a Knight was somewhat wasteful, since the Knight tended to lose a lot more than the others gained (the hp is evenly split between all active members, and any hp per member over that character's max is just wasted).

I'd say the Paladin being able to cast Shared Life and Power Cure by himself, without needing the Cleric to do it, means the Paladin works just fine as an HP battery.
I went ahead and stayed with the Paladin. He's done weil for me and I've enjoyed him in prior play throughs.

My question is, do I want to dual wield with him eventually? I have gone sword and shield both times I've play the game.
avatar
Hobbun: I went ahead and stayed with the Paladin. He's done weil for me and I've enjoyed him in prior play throughs.

My question is, do I want to dual wield with him eventually? I have gone sword and shield both times I've play the game.
I'd say run the dual wield, but I'm rather partial toward more offense. You've got a paladin, a druid, and a cleric for healing, after all.