Posted by Caecus on November 18, 2000 at 20:15:40:
Generally, the idea of a "perma-group" always appealed to me. Two, or three people that can roleplay and interact outside their own group, as a legal group of people within the same travelling party all the time, would be cool. However, it just ain't so. There's a couple of permagroups going around, and what they mostly consist of is an anti paladin and another combat character, sometimes a transmuter at hero. The problem is with permagroups is that they do not contribute to the game, and in fact detract from the game from other players who play the game to have fun in other ways, other than facing the same stupid permagroup any day, any time. More or less, the three-person permagroups were pretty obvious - and what they'd consist of is either two combat characters and a transmuter or a summoner, transmuter and a combat character, most often a warrior, but sometimes an assassin or a thief. So people dropped down to two characters, more frequently. This seemed to be more of the norm, playing two characters against a group - while lessened, they could still take down a great number of people because their actions could be synchronized through phone, or more commonly, ICQ. Don't do it, people. It ruins the game for others, in a big way. Worst of all, you could lose 60 hours of work just because you permagrouped it.