Role Skills a Mistake?

[Bebekurenai]

Why don't we just wait and see how it turns out when it's out in the first place?
All this speculation talk is a bit pointless when we have so little info. Saying it's a mistake at this point is really a bit over the top.

[Jpec07]

It's far too early to speculate on something we know almost nothing about.

Well no, because speculation is a lot of fun. XD

At this early juncture, we just need to be aware of the fact that any speculation is basically just a slightly educated guess.

Re OP: I don't think they'd get rid of something like Stoneskin for PLD. While it isn't "meta" for raiding, a lot of players take and use it (Ramuh HM becomes a lot easier for the healers if you spam Stoneskin on yourself after establishing a hate lead). If anything, if it disappears from the toolkit, I expect it will be replaced with a more attractive PLD-exclusive version (maybe instacast of the same, or part of the rotation under Shield Oath).

SE did a very good job in 3.0 of keeping the jobs intact (such that playing any level 50 content in level sync is largely the same as it was during 2.x). I imagine we'll see the same sort of transition from 3.55-4.0. Probably some QoL improvements, and maybe needing to change the nuance of how we use some of our skills, but stepping from 60 to 61 probably won't feel any different.

[Gravton]

Sorry, that's not the point i'm trying to make. I listed some examples to make the visuals easier.

The point i am trying to make is. Wouldn't it be easier for the Devs to just assign the skills they want each individual job to have, instead of throwing 3 jobs in multiple categories? Wouldn't that be easier to maintain going forward? I feel like the role specific categories will lead to problems down the road. If its easier to specify all the skills they want a WAR to have, why tie your hands by putting them in the tank category and then trying to figure out if you want PLD to have the same Cross skills as WAR?

Plus if we can bring this to the dev's attention now then they have time to change it IF they want. Also, 60% of the forum topics are on speculation. How is this topic any different than "the lady in red"?

[Shurrikhan]

The easiest solution I can imagine is that tanks and healers get Provoke and Cleric Stance automatically at levels 20 and 5, respectively, without consuming a cross-class slot, while these skills are still available according to their previous affinities as cross-class skills for anyone else.

Additionally, the 'job' tabs of the cross-class skills instead show all skills available, from any source class but sortable by class within that same screen, and have a "recommended" section at the top, perhaps with a brief explanation as to how that cross-class skill is useful to that given job. It defaults to the additional skills section for the job currently equipped if you merely click instead on the "Additional Skills" section header.

[Jpec07]

If there are abilities like Provoke and Cleric Stance that are flat-out mandatory for all character of a given role, it makes more sense to just have one ability to maintain that they all share rather than a different one for each job. It's a little more development effort up front, but takes up to (currently) 66% less work to maintain.

Think of it this way: each ability is a single data object. When you need to adjust an ability's performance, if each job had a separate version of the ability, they'd need to adjust it for each and every job that has them. If they're shared, that's just one adjustment. Take Foresight. Basically every tank has Foresight. If in removing the cross-class, they then added an equivalent for each job, that becomes three abilities they now need to maintain (the WAR version, the PLD version, and the DRK version). Addressing a bug in one job's ability's behavior will need to be duplicated to the other two that have duplicate code. If they share the ability, though, that is only one debug effort that needs to be done to cover all three jobs.

If in the new system a job is too strong or too weak, they can adjust sliders and make tweaks on other abilities (after all, if it's an ability that's shared between jobs, it's not likely to be the problem, as they can all access it).

[Shurrikhan]

Snip

Similarly though, it'd be "easier" not to differentiate healing CDs among healers or tank stances among tanks (e.g. all healers get Divine Seal, and all tanks simply get Defiance/Deliverance (now called "Attacker/Defender"). While, since we're already used to having just one of each, Cleric Stance and Provoke would probably be met with as much criticism and welcome if each was turned into a different skill and related mechanic per healer, the concept is really no different. To take what were previously mandatory cross-classes, basically base skills identical across multiple jobs, and diversify them by creating a version each per job would be "additional" effort, but of little difference from, say, making a new job; granted, in this case it'd be 4, rather significant, items of addition, rather than 27 (many of which can be copied and re-titled, if DRK and AST are anything to go by).

On which note, should each job simply include its own native version of a given skill, there's plentiful precedent to make them copies of each other differentiated only by art, name, and icon for closer aesthetics, wherein no future balance revisions nor cross-class leveling are required, but neither would a job or class necessarily feel "cheated" out of identity insofar as the skill itself goes.

Why don't we just wait and see how it turns out when it's out in the first place?

Simply put, because unless it concerns balance among jobs or the overall meta of upper-end play, significant adjustments after implementation are almost nil in this game. While it's unlikely the forums will have an impact on incoming designs, that chance is even less after initial implementation.

[Reynhart]

The easiest solution I can imagine is that tanks and healers get Provoke and Cleric Stance automatically at levels 20 and 5, respectively, without consuming a cross-class slot, while these skills are still available according to their previous affinities as cross-class skills for anyone else.

That's one thing we don't know yet. Will there be "slots" ? Speculating on the recent interviews, it doesn't really feel that way.

I think they will make a "backbone" for each role, like a Rampart-like for tanks, a raise for Healers, etc...they could even put the whole "enmity combo" if they want, since they basically are the same at their core. Once it's done, they can tweaks the skills for each job with traits or stance buffs.

Besides, how many different names will they manage to find for a raising spell before it sounds ridiculous ?

[Lambdafish]

Why don't we just wait and see how it turns out when it's out in the first place?
All this speculation talk is a bit pointless when we have so little info. Saying it's a mistake at this point is really a bit over the top.

Pretty sure everyone in this thread is aware that it is pointless, however we can still talk about and wonder and worry about the information we have so far. It won't amount to anything (other than the devs looking at what our thoughts are), but thats what community forums are for.

Besides, how many different names will they manage to find for a raising spell before it sounds ridiculous ?

But.... we still have to get through Life and Curaise D: (You are right, one raise is fine)

[Gravton]

Think of it this way: each ability is a single data object. When you need to adjust an ability's performance, if each job had a separate version of the ability, they'd need to adjust it for each and every job that has them. If they're shared, that's just one adjustment. Take Foresight. Basically every tank has Foresight. If in removing the cross-class, they then added an equivalent for each job, that becomes three abilities they now need to maintain (the WAR version, the PLD version, and the DRK version). Addressing a bug in one job's ability's behavior will need to be duplicated to the other two that have duplicate code. If they share the ability, though, that is only one debug effort that needs to be done to cover all three jobs.

I can understand that, but lets use Foresight as the example (this can be any skill but I'll just use Foresight). What if in the future they decide Foresight is to "overpowered" on PLD but works as intended for WAR and DRK. Foresight has been added to the tank pool and adjusting it to balance with Pld might underpower it for DRK and WAR. If each of the tanks had abilities asigned to it individually they could balance or remove it from Pld and the other two tanks wouldn't be affected. Just like when Thunder was removed because it was to OP on SMN but WHM could have really kept the dps boost.

[Shurrikhan]

That's one thing we don't know yet. Will there be "slots" ? Speculating on the recent interviews, it doesn't really feel that way.

I think they will make a "backbone" for each role, like a Rampart-like for tanks, a raise for Healers, etc...they could even put the whole "enmity combo" if they want, since they basically are the same at their core. Once it's done, they can tweaks the skills for each job with traits or stance buffs.

Besides, how many different names will they manage to find for a raising spell before it sounds ridiculous ?

But consider how many threads have been basically devoted just to the "small" differences between Rage of Halone, Power Slash, and Butcher's Block. Though they may all function as enmity combos, there are enough distinctions that the purpose and prioritization of said combo differs for each tank after achieving a sufficient enmity margin. Give them all the same, and you've got a PLD without mitigation weaponskills, or a WAR and DRK with two each, an even weaker Power Slash (now "Enmity Combo part 3"), etc.

My own preference would be to have the skills differ not only in name and art, but in actual effect. Warrior and Dark Knight could each acquire their own version of Provoke at level 20, which would then be added to their role skill list; any one of the three is free, and additional of them can taken at cost of cross-class slots. Warrior, for instance, could gain Challenge, generating massive AoE temporary enmity around himself and his target, while Dark Knight could gain Command, which provides little enmity directly but forces the target to attack him for up to 6 seconds (according to his Command buff, which can be dropped).

Healers similarly could have distinct versions of their Raising ability. To start with an extreme example, Ascend could be changed to a resume-able channel (when not Swiftcasted), which appears to pull the incapacitated party member upward, puppeting him, as if through gravitational forces above around the target, allowing it to fight earlier, but with less protection than Resurrection or Raise. Raise, alternatively, could be charged spell that grants percentile HP, MP, and TP to a fallen party member upon reaching a particular minimum amount (the hidden amounts granted beneath this minimum fade over time at an accelerating rate). This would normally take a scaled 8 seconds worth of casting, and can be overcharged to 10 to provide higher HP, MP, and TP upon resurrection. Resurrection remains the plain cast, but with less time required to make up for its being more likely cancelled. Just some spit-ball ideas.