Roles for Samurai, Red Mage, Dancer

[silentwindfr]

the trouble with samurai as tank, and it was pointed countless time but ignored by some, is... it will be:
- a two hand sword class (like the dark knight)
- based on parry (like dark knight and warrior)
- mostly physical damage (like paladin and warrior)
- wearing heavy armor (like every tank)

the point is the samurai as tank is only a skin.... we already have a jobs with 2 hand sword as tank... and one based on parry. what the point to add one more jobs like this? i see more a magic melee tank that will bring novelty and new gameplay to the tank, more than samurai that some want simply because.... they want samurai as tank.

as tank it will bring nothing new to the jobs. when a tank based on a caster can be quite interesting and have a few way to be added. because dark knight is not really a caster tank, is more a bad hybrid with more a melee with a few ability draining him mp... don't make it a caster tank.

and just a particularity into the combo system is not enough for justify to add samurai as tank.

[Shippuu]

the trouble with samurai as tank, and it was pointed countless time but ignored by some, is...

Your arguments are often ignored or easily dismissed because more often then not they're either weak arguments or actual non-arguments. I'll easily debunk them once again:

- a two hand sword class (like the dark knight)

While both weapons use two hands, they are starkly different in how they appear and how they would be used. The only similarity is that they are both a form of sword. We have White Mage and Black Mage that both use two handed staves/canes. SCH and SMN both use books (though they are a shared base class). Even then, there is no magic rule that says two tanks cannot have similar weapons. Please provide a sourced comment where any developer for FFXIV has said there can never be any (slight) overlap in weapons by jobs in a same role. That's like saying they couldn't add Machinist because it uses a weapon that fires projectiles because Bard already has a weapon that fires projectiles.

This also doesn't rule out a possibility of a dual wielding Samurai concept, of which there is no dual wielding tank available to players.

- based on parry (like dark knight and warrior)

Nowhere is it said it must revolve around parry. It can have an active counter-attack system/skills without being based around parrying or using parry as a stat. Even then, multiple jobs have abilities that increase parry or proc other moves off of a dodge or parry. Just because one job uses it doesn't mean it's "locked out" from being used by another job.
Even if you argue that parrying is part of FF Samurai's identity (Which it isn't, but counter attacking is but can technically be a different mechanic.) It's no different to how people said Dark Knight must have an HP sacrifice mechanic and look how that turned out.

- mostly physical damage (like paladin and warrior)

Dark Knight is also mostly physical damage (Only a few of their moves do magical damage and most of magical ones their primary purpose is not damage). There are bosses/enemies in the game that become immune to, or reflect magical damage that need to be tanked, as a result tanks cannot be locked into doing primarily magical damage without changing mechanics of said bosses and removing that kind of mechanic from ever being used again which is highly unlikely (same concept applies to melee healers as well.)

- wearing heavy armor (like every tank)

How is this in any way an argument AGAINST Samurai being a tank? The fact tanks share a common armor type is intentional for a multitude of reasons and offers plenty of benefits. Future tanks will likely continue to share this armor type. It makes things easier on the devs and provides flexibility for tank players to play multiple tank jobs to keep them playing that role. Introducing tanks that do not wear fending gear would make tank players have to pick and choose which tanks to actively gear, reducing their flexibility and options which could drive them away from tanking which you don't want to do. This is the same reason Red Mage tank is unlikely unless they alter the identity of Red Mage to wear heavy armor.

the point is the samurai as tank is only a skin.... we already have a jobs with 2 hand sword as tank... and one based on parry. what the point to add one more jobs like this? i see more a magic melee tank that will bring novelty and new gameplay to the tank, more than samurai that some want simply because.... they want samurai as tank.

These same arguments can be made directly towards a DPS Samurai as well. We already have combo based DPS etc. We already have 2 handed DPS that does spike damage etc. etc. I've already debunked the magic damage tank above. 2 of the 3 tanks already have emphasis on magical aspects and using MP, so another physical orientated themed one would be fine.

as tank it will bring nothing new to the jobs. when a tank based on a caster can be quite interesting and have a few way to be added. because dark knight is not really a caster tank, is more a bad hybrid with more a melee with a few ability draining him mp... don't make it a caster tank.

Your lack of imagination and narrow view of what a Samurai is or could be is why you cannot possibly see it as anything but a dps. And I won't even start on how a caster tank just isn't feasible, even if it did physical damage with it's "spells".

So in summary, your arguments just don't cut it, as usual.

[Welsper59]

And I won't even start on how a caster tank just isn't feasible, even if it did physical damage with it's "spells".

While I agree about the points regarding SAM being a tank, I wanted to point out that caster tanking is absolutely a feasible thing. Mage tanking is almost as long of a tradition in RPGs (the general genre) as normal sword and board types. The most common form of mitigation for them is magic shields or barriers. If you ever played original Starcraft or Broodwars, think Archons in that example. A specific boss fight in the TBC expansion of WoW had the Mage class have to tank a boss as well, using the bosses shield against them. Sometimes magic manipulation itself becomes their mitigation, as is the case of Rune Fencer in FFXI. Though they use a 2h weapon in that game, the concept of runes to ward harm isn't exactly exclusive to people who would wield sluggish weaponry lol.

[Shippuu]

While I agree about the points regarding SAM being a tank, I wanted to point out that caster tanking is absolutely a feasible thing. Mage tanking is almost as long of a tradition in RPGs (the general genre) as normal sword and board types. The most common form of mitigation for them is magic shields or barriers. If you ever played original Starcraft or Broodwars, think Archons in that example. A specific boss fight in the TBC expansion of WoW had the Mage class have to tank a boss as well, using the bosses shield against them. Sometimes magic manipulation itself becomes their mitigation, as is the case of Rune Fencer in FFXI. Though they use a 2h weapon in that game, the concept of runes to ward harm isn't exactly exclusive to people who would wield sluggish weaponry lol.

What you're describing isn't a caster tank though. You're describing magical themed tanks which isn't the same. We have magical themed tanks such as Paladin and Dark Knight. Paladin's have flash, they have clemency which is a hard-cast heal, and Divine Veil which creates a magical barrier around their allies. Even Cover has a somewhat magical connotation. Dark Knight has even more, from Dark Arts itself being a buff, to Dark Passenger shooting a wave of dark energy, even their Power Slash which isn't magic damage has the appearance of a magical spell as they blast a ball of dark magic from their hands.

So a tank can definitely be a kind of mage. But one cannot work so well (In this game specifically) as a caster. At least not without making some significant exceptions to how it casts spells. There's just no way it can be feasibly done unless you do the following:

-The caster tank cannot be interrupted in their spellcasting.
-They can move while casting magic with no reduction to their mobility.
OR
-Their cast times are incredibly short (think BRD/MCH level, about the same as the GCD).

We have already seen the problems when it comes to Paladin's Clemency. They already had to significantly reduce the cast time, and even now it's challenging to find windows you can squeeze out a cast without being interrupted or having to move. Tanks in this game sometimes have to move often, and a caster that has to move often significantly drops in efficiency. Tanks also often have to tank a lot of enemies at once, especially with dungeon speed runs calling for huge pulls. More enemies = more chances to be interrupted. So this is why a caster tank needs to have these kinds of exceptions made to their casting to make it work.

At that point though, are you really playing a caster anymore however? You're fighting in melee range, and basically just waiting for your attacks to go off. Tanks often have to grab enmity quickly and react fast to pick up adds or enemies who might have gotten pulled away. If the majority of your moves have a cast bar it's counter-productive to things like snap-aggro, we saw this in 2.0 Warrior's Overpower which had a long windup before going off, in 2.1 it was changed to the fairly instant version of Overpower we have now because it was easy to miss with such a slow AoE enmity tool.

There's other things to consider too like armor types, will it wear mage robes? Or Tank gear? Is it a good idea to have a tank compete with gear with dps? (Generally not so good of an idea). If it wears tank gear do they need to add magic stats to tank gear? That's more work. How will it handle mechanics in fights where enemies are immune to magic damage such as in the Void Ark if all it does is magic damage? Or fights where magic is reflected? Why would people want a tank that takes extra damage from a boss?

So in the end, it's not so cut and dry. There are many things that need to be considered and while a concept might sound cool initially when you start to look at it from a realistic and developmental viewpoint it can easily fall apart. This doesn't mean that a casting tank isn't possible, but it's a lot harder to develop and in the end it could likely never be a full blown caster but rather a melee job that has a handful of casted spells not unlike Dark Knight thematically or Paladin mechanically.

[Welsper59]

What you're describing isn't a caster tank though. You're describing magical themed tanks which isn't the same. We have magical themed tanks such as Paladin and Dark Knight. Paladin's have flash, they have clemency which is a hard-cast heal, and Divine Veil which creates a magical barrier around their allies. Even Cover has a somewhat magical connotation. Dark Knight has even more, from Dark Arts itself being a buff, to Dark Passenger shooting a wave of dark energy, even their Power Slash which isn't magic damage has the appearance of a magical spell as they blast a ball of dark magic from their hands.

So a tank can definitely be a kind of mage. But one cannot work so well (In this game specifically) as a caster. At least not without making some significant exceptions to how it casts spells. There's just no way it can be feasibly done unless you do the following:

-The caster tank cannot be interrupted in their spellcasting.
-They can move while casting magic with no reduction to their mobility.
OR
-Their cast times are incredibly short (think BRD/MCH level, about the same as the GCD).

We have already seen the problems when it comes to Paladin's Clemency. They already had to significantly reduce the cast time, and even now it's challenging to find windows you can squeeze out a cast without being interrupted or having to move. Tanks in this game sometimes have to move often, and a caster that has to move often significantly drops in efficiency. Tanks also often have to tank a lot of enemies at once, especially with dungeon speed runs calling for huge pulls. More enemies = more chances to be interrupted. So this is why a caster tank needs to have these kinds of exceptions made to their casting to make it work.

At that point though, are you really playing a caster anymore however? You're fighting in melee range, and basically just waiting for your attacks to go off. Tanks often have to grab enmity quickly and react fast to pick up adds or enemies who might have gotten pulled away. If the majority of your moves have a cast bar it's counter-productive to things like snap-aggro, we saw this in 2.0 Warrior's Overpower which had a long windup before going off, in 2.1 it was changed to the fairly instant version of Overpower we have now because it was easy to miss with such a slow AoE enmity tool.

There's other things to consider too like armor types, will it wear mage robes? Or Tank gear? Is it a good idea to have a tank compete with gear with dps? (Generally not so good of an idea). If it wears tank gear do they need to add magic stats to tank gear? That's more work. How will it handle mechanics in fights where enemies are immune to magic damage such as in the Void Ark if all it does is magic damage? Or fights where magic is reflected? Why would people want a tank that takes extra damage from a boss?

So in the end, it's not so cut and dry. There are many things that need to be considered and while a concept might sound cool initially when you start to look at it from a realistic and developmental viewpoint it can easily fall apart. This doesn't mean that a casting tank isn't possible, but it's a lot harder to develop and in the end it could likely never be a full blown caster but rather a melee job that has a handful of casted spells not unlike Dark Knight thematically or Paladin mechanically.

Well "caster" isn't really a role, it's just a term used to identify the type of class/job/whatever (i.e. a broad group identity). Generally speaking, casters are magic users, be it they are primarily instant use spells (similar to melee skills/abilities), have cast time, or channeled. If SMN, for example, were entirely composed of instant cast spells, you'd still lop them in with the group identified as "caster". They're casting spells, even if they are instant. It's pretty rare for anyone to not use that to reference a magic user in general. For the role of tanking, instant cast with some either channeled or cast time spells/abilities thrown about.

In terms of the idea of distance, that much is fairly irrelevant. Think about times you solo, need to move in close (e.g. WHM Holy), or even use as a means to increase DPS (like SMN were technically moved to do during the 2.0 era, since books as weapons added a noticeable increase). You're in melee proximity for those cases. What you might be thinking of is a ranged tank, in this case. Those are of magic use or physical, as was the case of 2.0 BRDs kiting FATE bosses around, since the point is to simply play in a way that keeps distance between you and the target(s). Outside of kiting or fighting ranged-only mobs, they don't really exist for obvious OP status reasons lol.

Again, the term caster is simply a title or identity, it's not a reflection of mandatory play. Instant cast spells, spells with cast time, spells that are channeled, etc. are all part of the identity of "caster". That is, a character that utilizes magic as their primary. Technically, if PLD in this game could cure groups reliably, they'd be considered a caster too if they choose to focus on healing lol. Since they're more melee oriented though, they're simply a melee or tank that can cast spells. Even the term "melee" is simply a description to identify the primary means of doing their job. Casters can melee too, but you rightfully wouldn't label them as such.

[Shippuu]

Well "caster" isn't really a role, it's just a term used to identify the type of class/job/whatever (i.e. a broad group identity). Generally speaking, casters are magic users, be it they are primarily instant use spells (similar to melee skills/abilities), have cast time, or channeled. If SMN, for example, were entirely composed of instant cast spells, you'd still lop them in with the group identified as "caster". They're casting spells, even if they are instant. It's pretty rare for anyone to not use that to reference a magic user in general. For the role of tanking, instant cast with some either channeled or cast time spells/abilities thrown about.

By this definition we have 2 caster tanks already then. So if redundancy is a valid argument against something like Samurai via their weapon choice, then this would also apply to future mage tanks being redundant when we have Paladin and Dark Knight, who both cast magic spells in an instant cast fashion.

In my opinion, Casters are casters because they have cast bars, whether it's a channel or fill guage. Yes instant cast spells are still "cast" but now it's just arguing semantics.

In terms of the idea of distance, that much is fairly irrelevant. Think about times you solo, need to move in close (e.g. WHM Holy), or even use as a means to increase DPS (like SMN were technically moved to do during the 2.0 era, since books as weapons added a noticeable increase). You're in melee proximity for those cases. What you might be thinking of is a ranged tank, in this case. Those are of magic use or physical, as was the case of 2.0 BRDs kiting FATE bosses around, since the point is to simply play in a way that keeps distance between you and the target(s). Outside of kiting or fighting ranged-only mobs, they don't really exist for obvious OP status reasons lol.

I certainly wasn't arguing for any kind of a ranged tank because that's an even more absurd idea than a tank that primarily has cast bars for their attacks.

Again, the term caster is simply a title or identity, it's not a reflection of mandatory play. Instant cast spells, spells with cast time, spells that are channeled, etc. are all part of the identity of "caster". That is, a character that utilizes magic as their primary. Technically, if PLD in this game could cure groups reliably, they'd be considered a caster too if they choose to focus on healing lol. Since they're more melee oriented though, they're simply a melee or tank that can cast spells. Even the term "melee" is simply a description to identify the primary means of doing their job. Casters can melee too, but you rightfully wouldn't label them as such.

That's one definition sure, but it can also be applied as a gameplay mechanic and not an identity, that's how words work they can have multiple definitions. And in the viewpoint of games development particularly for MMO's, a Caster is someone who casts spells usually via cast bars. You don't call Death Knights in WoW casters even though they cast plenty of spells, but you'd call Mages casters, Warlocks casters, etc. etc. You're really just arguing semantics here.

[Welsper59]

By this definition we have 2 caster tanks already then. So if redundancy is a valid argument against something like Samurai via their weapon choice, then this would also apply to future mage tanks being redundant when we have Paladin and Dark Knight, who both cast magic spells in an instant cast fashion.

In my opinion, Casters are casters because they have cast bars, whether it's a channel or fill guage. Yes instant cast spells are still "cast" but now it's just arguing semantics.




I certainly wasn't arguing for any kind of a ranged tank because that's an even more absurd idea than a tank that primarily has cast bars for their attacks.



That's one definition sure, but it can also be applied as a gameplay mechanic and not an identity, that's how words work they can have multiple definitions. And in the viewpoint of games development particularly for MMO's, a Caster is someone who casts spells usually via cast bars. You don't call Death Knights in WoW casters even though they cast plenty of spells, but you'd call Mages casters, Warlocks casters, etc. etc. You're really just arguing semantics here.

Well, DK's do focus on using their melee-range weapons to deal most of whatever damage they do, so they are classified as melee. It's not so much semantics as it is deductive reasoning/logic. DKs use their melee weapons to deal most of the damage, be it Shadow or Frost, so they must be in melee range. Purely physical classes like Warrior also has to use melee range weapons to deal most/all damage, which we classify as melee. Both rely primarily on their physical close-ranged combat skills and damage to do their roles. Thus, DK is melee by default and not caster.

Since WoW is brought up, I guess the primary example one can give on the matter is Paladin and Druid there. Do you consider Holy (healing) spec to be a caster? If so, do you consider Protection or Retribution to be casters? They do use spells afterall. I'm going to assume "no". If we're going on the cast time/bars bit, then what does that make Resto Druids? Their primary means of healing is instant cast HoT spells, where it was pretty rare to see them actually use a cast bar throughout various expansion pack periods of the game before. They obvious had some spells with cast bars, and it would only be there for a couple, but it was hardly a heavy occurrence. I'd argue it's not much different than how often you'd see a cast bar on PLD here. I'm going to again assume something, in that you'd consider those Resto Druids as "casters", despite it commonly not casting spells involving cast bars.

Thus we get to my point on that matter, and what I honestly believe is a universal objective acceptance of what we consider a "caster". They are classes/jobs that are magic users where magic spells (in general) are their primary function, and thus we are able to separate physical combat oriented cases like XIV's PLD from it, despite it have magic spells available. This is akin to the differing of Protection and Retribution specs from Holy in WoW. Heavy cast bar requirements being present for most/all spell casts for the term to apply becomes very subjective, as is the case with my mentioning of Resto Druids.

And just to note, I left out "primarily magic users" at the beginning of my reply you quoted, so while we do have 2 magic using tanks, that's not how they function to primarily do their role. I did mention the "primary" bit at the end, in my defense. The tanks we have now focus on their physical combat skills to do their roles, rather than actual magic like you'd see from a BLM or SMN. Keep in mind that the term "caster" is never officially bound, and simply applied by common understanding. So you're not technically wrong to view it that way, but there is an underlying understanding about it. I laid out as much of an objective definition for the community as I could think of, but from there, the details are where it becomes subjective. I get where you're coming from on the idea of cast bars, since that's what magic users are often tied with (lore wise due to incantations and chants), but then we have to look at examples that break the mold, again referring to Resto Druid.

Edit: Just to add another clarification, I agree that the redundancy argument is pointless to say SAM can't be a tank. Over saturation of many elements that make up an MMORPG game are centered around redundant themes lol. Source: 13yrs of various MMORPG play, which include 12yrs of WoW and around 8 staggered yrs of XI.