Thoughts on the FFXI Job Adjustment Manifesto

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Raksha

An Ad Hominem is only a fallacy if it is being used INSTEAD OF an argument.

---

No, and here is an example. Lets say that I argue that the sky is red. Then someone says that you can look up at the sky and see that it is clearly blue, and I also have green hair. They could have argued a perfect argument, but they also used an ad hominem attack, particularly because it has nothing to do with my argument, and is only there to discredit or distract from an actual argument.

Making personal attacks and keeping them separated from an argument is pretty hard to do in any case, but even so, insulting others while arguing is generally bad form, and further, against the forum rules.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Raksha

So far I haven't seen SE give us ANYTHING we've wanted. It's not just that we haven't gotten everything we wanted.

---

You contradict yourself later.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Raksha

2HR spells will not make SCH useful in abyssea. Abyssea is a solved equation, and short of giving SCH procs or the ability go afk and still keep a tank alive, nothing will.

---

KI farm.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Raksha

Light/dark arts buff is something i'm actually excited about.

---

Didn't you say in the same comment that SE wasn't giving you anything that you wanted? You just said you are excited about the buff, which usually means that it is something you want.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Raksha

I understand you're upset that SCH has gotten so many responses. I partly agree. I would've preferred one decent post rather than four WTF?!? posts.

---

At this point I am not upset that Scholar has gotten so many responses. I am upset that many Scholars dismiss them as being nothing or being crappy posts.

Compared to certain other job notes, Scholar's posts are attentive, and straightforward. Scholar as a job may still have complaints, but, once again, saying that Scholars have been given nothing useful or aren't being listened to is not truthful.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Economizer

No, and here is an example. Lets say that I argue that the sky is red. Then someone says that you can look up at the sky and see that it is clearly blue, and I also have green hair. They could have argued a perfect argument, but they also used an ad hominem attack, particularly because it has nothing to do with my argument, and is only there to discredit or distract from an actual argument.

Making personal attacks and keeping them separated from an argument is pretty hard to do in any case, but even so, insulting others while arguing is generally bad form, and further, against the forum rules.

---

Here's the first paragraph of the wikipedia article:

Quote:

---

Ad hominem
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
"Personal attacks" redirects here. For the Wikipedia policy, see Wikipedia:No personal attacks.

An ad hominem (Latin: "to the man"), short for argumentum ad hominem, is an attempt to negate the truth of a claim by pointing out a negative characteristic or belief of the person advocating it.[1] The ad hominem is normally described as a logical fallacy,[2][3][4] but it is not always fallacious; in some instances, questions of personal conduct, character, motives, etc., are legitimate and relevant to the issue.[5]

---

I'll let it speak for itself.

Quote:

---

You contradict yourself later.

---

I'll get to this later.

Quote:

---

KI farm.

---

BLM will still be better. WAR will still be better. BLU will also probably still be better. If you meant that it will allow SCH to do something better than it could before, then I agree with you. But there's no reason to take a SCH to KI farm.

Quote:

---

Didn't you say in the same comment that SE wasn't giving you anything that you wanted? You just said you are excited about the buff, which usually means that it is something you want.

---

Now i'm going to have to argue semantics with you.

Saying that they didn't give us anything we've wanted is true. If you go through all of the SCH threads (In the english forum at least) you won't find anyone who asked for this buff. Saying that I am excited about it is also true, and is non-contradictory. Perhaps a better phrasing would be "They are only giving us stuff we didn't originally know that we wanted."

Quote:

---

At this point I am not upset that Scholar has gotten so many responses. I am upset that many Scholars dismiss them as being nothing or being crappy posts.

Compared to certain other job notes, Scholar's posts are attentive, and straightforward. Scholar as a job may still have complaints, but, once again, saying that Scholars have been given nothing useful or aren't being listened to is not truthful.

---

I don't know that I would call them crappy, but most of them weren't really worth the time to bother answering when there are much better things to focus on (like answering the other jobs' concerns). I'm of the opinion that SCH isn't in as terrible shape as most people seem to believe, and the "fix" is a relatively simple one (a 2nd cure spell that we can spam along with cure4).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Raksha

But there's no reason to take a SCH to KI farm.

---

I've seen all sorts of setups for KI farm in Abyssea. For a lowman KI farm of 1-2 people, Scholar is going to be further cemented in as one of the better jobs to do this with.

Considering this, next time you decide to farm chests in Abyssea, demand to go as a Scholar, if Scholar is the job you enjoy playing most.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Raksha

I'm of the opinion that SCH isn't in as terrible shape as most people seem to believe, and the "fix" is a relatively simple one (a 2nd cure spell that we can spam along with cure4).

---

Alternatively, SE could just say that Scholar is supposed to be a better nuker and other jobs are supposed to be better healers. The biggest issue at this point is the gap between perception and what each job is getting.

Thus if SE merely said something like "We currently have jobs balanced so that it is set up like this: Healing > Nuking -> White Mage > Red Mage > Scholar > Black Mage", it would solve the problem with half the work.

Maybe this would be the ideal, maybe not. SE will eventually sort things out, considering that they are unquestionably listening. I predict there will be complaints no matter what SE does though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Economizer

Alternatively, SE could just say that Scholar is supposed to be a better nuker and other jobs are supposed to be better healers.

---

They could, but that idea cuts both ways. They could just as easily redefine whm and say that whm was never meant to be the only main healer. I'm not saying they will, but if they did - would you expect whms to just accept that without complaining?
But anyway, one thing to point out is the progression that they had sch at earlier levels. It's pretty obvious that there's been a substantial change in later levels in light arts spells from the previous trend. It's not that people here are arguing to change sch to something completely new, it's that people want the trend changed BACK to what it was, with respect to other classes. Hence the the charge of the class being "broken" has evidence to back it up - it's not just people whining.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Economizer

The biggest issue at this point is the gap between perception and what each job is getting.

---

This is an is/ought fallacy. What "is" (or rather what "will") doesn't justify what "ought to be". What each job is getting doesn't settle anything concerning this debate. It's what this job should be getting.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Economizer

SE will eventually sort things out, considering that they are unquestionably listening. I predict there will be complaints no matter what SE does though.

---

That's probably true, but making pejorative statements against complaining doesn't say anything meaningful. The whole point of this discussion is not whether there's complaining, it's if the complaints have merit. You side-step the whole debate entirely.

Forgive me for also quoting parts that are completely unnecessary, but I want to be very clear about what is being said, and not taking it out of context. I don't want to paint a picture about what is being said by others that is not true.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sigma_star

But anyway, one thing to point out is the progression that they had sch at earlier levels. It's pretty obvious that there's been a substantial change in later levels in light arts spells from the previous trend. It's not that people here are arguing to change sch to something completely new, it's that people want the trend changed BACK to what it was, with respect to other classes. Hence the the charge of the class being "broken" has evidence to back it up - it's not just people whining.

---

So, basically what you are saying, is that what you percieve Scholar to deserve vs. what you are getting are two different things, and the problem here is the gap between the two?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sigma_star

This is an is/ought fallacy. What "is" (or rather what "will") doesn't justify what "ought to be". What each job is getting doesn't settle anything concerning this debate. It's what this job should be getting.

---

For a fallacy, you sure appear to have eaten it up two seconds ago, and then in the same statement you make now.

Mainly because in this case, it is not a fallacy - the problem is solely based on what people are happy with - and Scholars aren't happy with the gap between the abilities they think they have "what is" and the abilities they think they deserve "what ought to be"

The issue is that Scholars don't think they are getting what they should be getting. It is a matter of fixing the gap between perception and reality. This is a very real and pressing issue that has to be dealt with in some way.

My ideal would be for SE to actually do something about it instead of just telling Scholars that they aren't meant to heal at all, but defining the job as "not a healer" would also solve the problem.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sigma_star

The whole point of this discussion is not whether there's complaining, it's if the complaints have merit. You side-step the whole debate entirely.

---

No, I don't. I am clearly saying that the complaint about SE not listening does not have merit. I am not saying that other, well-thought, and incredibly valid complaints are invalid, I am only saying that saying the SE is not listening is an argument without merit.

I have not yet seen anything that contradicts this, in fact, the longer I deal with this, the less I am convinced that I will ever see any evidence that SE is not listening to Scholars. It might take time, but between valid discussion about actual issues, and suggestions about how to improve the job, Scholar will have the gap between perception about what their job should be and what it is fixed, and more.

Quote:

---

I am clearly saying that the complaint about SE not listening does not have merit.

---

I both agree and disagree. Though regardless, their listening doesn't seem to do much. All Scholar has asked for since Lv.75 (however it may as well have been since Lv.55) is something new for Light Arts. I guess Libra/Animus could be counted as such, though they've shown no notice of complaints about either (I'll admit my adjustment for Animus would take long, but the very minimum people have asked for in regards to Libra is to increase its range - that shouldn't even take ten minutes to do). I'm willing to let Perpetuance cover Light Arts for now, but they still seem to cover heavily on Dark Arts rather than Light Arts on a job that should treat both equally. Hell, I've been piping the same tune since before these forums were up and I'm possibly one of the more vocal here, yet this update we get nothing more than new shiny two hour spells? That doesn't send out the greatest message, it's not so much an issue that they don't listen, rather they lack comprehension and make incredibly bad choices regarding updates, or at the very least it says they didn't listen until the last minute; which may not be a bad thing, but I'm still not going to be happy about it.
I'll admit the two hour spells aren't awful considering I'll get some use out of them (though I'd rather have had something I can use in any situation like most other jobs got), but they're not exactly the few dozen notches above Libra that I've been waiting for since Lv.80.

As for where I disagree that they're listening. I can sum it up in two words; Modus Veritas.
Sure they plan to decrease its recast - though once again that shouldn't take more than ten minutes so I'm perplexed about the wait - but that doesn't mean jack shit. Modus Veritas hasn't landed on anything in a good while and I'm willing to bet that adjusting it has been one of the biggest suggestions this forum has brought forward, yet they've turned around and said it's working as expected. Before it was just a mild annoyance I'd tag on each post, but now it's just infuriating. I'd gladly turn around and say they are listening wholeheartedly if Camate (or whoever) relayed the message that it isn't working back to the devs, and that reducing the recast to zero seconds on an ability with a 0% success rate is the dumbest idea to circumvent an exploit that they not only should have seen coming but should have simply fixed by removing the stacking effect that has zero benefit to the job or ability itself outside the damn exploit. But so far I've had little luck on that.

I do hope they are still listening, since not a lot of people are happy with this update and it wouldn't hurt them to know it. While we're not going to change anything regarding this update, but it would be nice if the constant bitching got us the overhaul we've been waiting for since Lv.80 in the next minor update (September I assume), confirmation that Scholar is at least getting real attention soon would be nice. If not, I guess they could always post that video of Embrava that was missing when they did the last one. Neither would hurt though I'd prefer the former, but I guess I should wait for this update to be over first.

I'd love to believe that not only is SE listening, but that they actually making positive progress with sch's development at some unspecified point in the future. But raise 3 just has me shaking my head. I guess I should be happy that I can raise like nobody's business, I'm sure I'll find lots of use for that.

I don't even like healing on sch, merton should be a fun toy and despite almost every addition to light arts other than perpetuance being virtually or completely useless it doesn't bother me that badly.

But then maybe my perspective is skewed, remember when sch got all those lowbie buffs added natively like stoneskin? Despite "winning the update" I consider that mostly fluff to.

Okay, I change my mind: SE is listening, but either they're not listening enough, or they're just ignoring what we say. They understand that we are asking for something "unique" and useful, but they aren't listening to the details. They don't really understand what it is that we are unhappy with. If they did, they would do something about Modus Veritas. At the very least, I would like a way to increase the accuracy of the job ability. I wouldn't mind having to sub /blm and using elemental seal or something. Leaving it completely up to chance is just a terrible and counter-intuitive idea.

Everything Economizer is saying is exactly the reason for why I am unhappy with the update. It's not that I don't welcome the changes; it's that by giving us these (at first glance) overpowered abilities, we almost lose the right to complain about the many things that SE has failed to address.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Economizer

So, basically what you are saying, is that what you percieve Scholar to deserve vs. what you are getting are two different things, and the problem here is the gap between the two?

---

Of course. There would be no need to say anything otherwise.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Economizer

For a fallacy, you sure appear to have eaten it up two seconds ago, and then in the same statement you make now.

Mainly because in this case, it is not a fallacy - the problem is solely based on what people are happy with - and Scholars aren't happy with the gap between the abilities they think they have "what is" and the abilities they think they deserve "what ought to be"

The issue is that Scholars don't think they are getting what they should be getting. It is a matter of fixing the gap between perception and reality. This is a very real and pressing issue that has to be dealt with in some way.

My ideal would be for SE to actually do something about it instead of just telling Scholars that they aren't meant to heal at all, but defining the job as "not a healer" would also solve the problem.

---

Yes, this gap as you call it is what's stirring the debate. You again have an is/ought here because you seem to be saying that because we don't like what "is", we somehow are intrinsically wrong. That doesn't work. That logic would never allow debate of any sort otherwise.
If SE would say what you're suggesting, that wouldn't change anything. It would just explicitly state what they've been implicitly saying in practice for the most part. But again, that's not what this debate is about. Sch should be a healing class - they are at earlier levels, and they should continue to be at later levels. That's the stance we're taking and what we're trying to argue. To try to assume to the contrary is missing the whole debate. If you want to say that sch shouldn't be a healing class, you have to say why, and back it up with your arguments.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Economizer

No, I don't. I am clearly saying that the complaint about SE not listening does not have merit. I am not saying that other, well-thought, and incredibly valid complaints are invalid, I am only saying that saying the SE is not listening is an argument without merit.

I have not yet seen anything that contradicts this, in fact, the longer I deal with this, the less I am convinced that I will ever see any evidence that SE is not listening to Scholars. It might take time, but between valid discussion about actual issues, and suggestions about how to improve the job, Scholar will have the gap between perception about what their job should be and what it is fixed, and more.

---

Maybe I misunderstood you - I thought you were slamming complaining in general. Complaining about SE not listening wasn't how I read that. If I was wrong, then I stand corrected.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ank

But then maybe my perspective is skewed, remember when sch got all those lowbie buffs added natively like stoneskin? Despite "winning the update" I consider that mostly fluff to.

---

The way I interpreted that change was to fix SCH as a subjob rather than SCH as a main job. The only thing SCH practically got out of that update is Shock Spikes since we could only sub it using /blm (which is rarely used)