Roles for Samurai, Red Mage, Dancer

[Welsper59]

It's not really reaching, you're the one who brought up THF AF in the first place saying it had +enmity on it (when it technically didn't.) All I was stating was that Samurai AF had +enmity on it's AF which was pretty much reserved to only tank jobs. THF received +enmity on their AF2 armor but they also had an entire job identity pretty much based on the whole sneak/trick attack which manipulated enmity.
It's important because the AF armor is meant to be the jobs iconic identifying armor and as such would be developed with the intent of complimenting the job's intended role. The Fact SAM AF had +enmity says a lot when the job had no other abilities to shed or manipulate enmity. There's really no denying it or trying to explain it in another way. DRG was released at the same time as SAM intended as a strong DPS, hence why it was given an ability to shed enmity in the event it ripped aggro. Ninja was given mitigation tools to counter the event that it grabbed aggro etc.

Even then, FFXI was a nightmarish example of any kind of balance. The devs for it were slow to fix any problems regarding balance. But it's whichever, to me the fact they had +enmity and other things indicates they planned it to be at least some form of tank-ish role. But we'll just have to agree to disagree on this one.



The faults you are pointing out though aren't working against me. They are simply able to be applied in the other direction. If they worked against me then they'd be making my arguments for a tank Samurai invalid but they aren't, they're just making it applicable to a DPS samurai as well. Like my Fell Cleave example from earlier. You stated that Samurai is known for Big hits, and I pointed out that tanks can do big hits too. That doesn't invalidate that a DPS SAM can do big hits, only that it can be applied to a Tank SAM as well.

Many things can be put on a DPS job because they are not as much of a restricted role, they have more flexibility than tanks and healers in what they can do as a result. Once again, the DPS role doesn't need arguments on why something should be a DPS because quite literally everything already can be a DPS. It's the assumed standard.

No one is saying it cannot be a DPS. But plenty of people are saying it cannot be a tank. That is why the tank side brings forth arguments defending it's reasoning for why it can or should be a tank. The DPS side doesn't need that.

I like you, you like to point out my own words to argue, which is proper. Some points are missed though, which isn't something I'm immune to obviously.

Regarding the THF AF, I brought that up because SAM was released at or around the same time as AF2 (Dynamis). Again, we're talking about a period where the game has undergone changes. I mean, my mention of THF having +shield and +parry stats on it's AF1 is evidence of one of many instances that proper stats aren't exact that games strengths, cuz as you know, those are tank stats.

Hell, THF had +INT on it's original AF lol. INT for THF was only useful for its elemental WS abilities, and even then, it really wasn't a good stat to bother with since the WS didn't stack with SA/TA and SC'd really poorly. This is due to better WS abilities emerging like Dancing Edge or ones with better SC properties... even Viper Bite was better to use in those early level cases. Sorry for the tangent on detail lol.

But I agree with needing to agree to disagree on it.

Good catch on my poor word choice. You're right that it doesn't work against you, but it doesn't exactly prove one over the other, which I'm assuming seems to be the point. To be able to justify why one works over another.

I wouldn't really say "no one" on their thinking SAM must be tank, as there were some in this thread earlier ("righteousness of sword users = tank" bull**** that was brought up at some point), but I agree that most aren't of the "impossible" mind. Likewise with the folks that want it to be DPS, not tank.

I'd assume most of them are accepting that it's possible, but they think DPS is much better logically. To that, they're wrong too sorta lol. Practically every point on the matter is interchangeable, as you and I have noted. The only grounds that pro-DPS arguments have is XI, for two reasons. 1) It's a DPS, through and through. 2) Even if it was intended to be a tank there, that means they couldn't pull it off successfully (not a remark saying it can't be done, mind you). Are those points meaningful? Who knows, that sort of stuff is up to the devs.

Frontal attacks were nowhere near as prevalent on XI than they are here. Just about everything has them here. Not so on XI.

That would also make it the only job they gave a frontal attack risk to. Pretty much none of the other jobs had much risk. The only one was DRK.

You're right, they aren't as common as here. But you know what was different about it? They weren't telegraphed, and most abilities that mobs used were instant or near-instant... and VERY common to 1-shot non-tanks. You weren't going to avoid that Radiant Breath, Bad Breath, Heat Breath, Dark Spore, Silence Gas, Blank Gaze, etc. Just to clarify, there actually were a ton of frontal cone AoE in that game and many of them were very dangerous.

If you stood in the front of the mob all the time as a SAM for no group-beneficial reason, you were HATED in that group. Tanks found you annoying, healers REALLY hated you because you'd be 1-shot or they need to remove various debuffs that not only likely damaged you greatly, but hindered you to the point of being useless. So yeah, if you did that as a SAM, you were a bad player.

Edit: SAM is not the only job with risk factors as well. THF, for example, is the only job that technically would stay in front for longer than the SAM for the short time they would. TA+WS was a very common means to keep threat on the tank from powerful DPS doing their thing. This means THF does, in fact, go in front of the mob to do their thing. So... yeah, SAM is not the only one with mechanics or factors that involve going to the front.

... actually BRD would too sometimes. Depending what the tank specifically needed, compared to what the other jobs wanted. Forgot about BRD on that, and I used to main it too lol. Seriously, you should drop the trait argument. Come at me with something else... you're not gonna prove your point on this one, because it just doesn't apply to how the reality is. Now if the trait did something to mitigate damage full-time, I'd be right there with you on it, but that's not the case.