RDM Scortch

[Jonnycbad]

RDM should ABC so no need for DoTs. Having to interrupt your flow to throw on a DoT is disruptive anyway.

[Archwizard]

Personally I would have liked to see Scorch be a third alternative finisher (so, instead of Verflare or Verholy) that you get for having black and white mana be equal when you use your melee combo. It would have a bit more potency than Verflare/Verholy, grant 11 of each colour mana (as opposed to 21 of one colour) and activate both Verstone and Verfire procs. It always seemed weird to me that the theme of the job is all about balance, and yet you're actually incentivised to be slightly imbalanced.

So, you want a reason to never cast Verholy/Verflare ever again.

Having to interrupt your flow to throw on a DoT is disruptive anyway.

Explain this statement, please. Fairly certain you've made it before in the other RDM thread, and it made no sense then either.

Are you just basing this purely in the vacuum of DoTs' impacts on other jobs like BLM, without regards to how it may function on a RDM with Dualcast?

All RDM skills are either shortcasts, longcasts or melee. If the cast is longer than 2 sec, congratulations, it's a longcast and functionally instant. Hell, this applies to our Raise of all things.
If a DoT is a spell, it's no more "disruptive" than any of the procs we already have (arguably less so since we can see it coming), and would be no different than giving us a super-Jolt with a cooldown of the same length. Heavens forbid we experiment with super-Jolts in our rotation, right Impact?
The only way it could be "disruptive" is if it costs Mana to apply the DoT and slows down the road to the melee combo -- assuming it isn't part of the melee combo.

The context of this thread is that it would literally just be a damage bonus on top of exactly what we already do with Verholy/flare. How would such an entirely passive addition be "disruptive"?

I don't care if we get a DoT either way, but I cannot stand the knee-jerk dismissal of any mechanic more complicated than "cast X every time it procs". RDM can stand just a bit more risk-reward.

[SaberMaxwell]

I don't care if we get a DoT either way, but I cannot stand the knee-jerk dismissal of any mechanic more complicated than "cast X every time it procs". RDM can stand just a bit more risk-reward.

Cast X when Y duration left is <5s is more complex?

It's also possible people kneejerk like that is because it feels like a kneejerk "Need complexity? Add a dot!" What complexity, since you brought complexity in, would adding a dot to scorch add? It'd just be potency+ on top of scorch.

[Archwizard]

Cast X when Y duration left is <5s is more complex?

Mildly, yes. I believe jobs should be iteratively expanded upon throughout the expansions and that a DoT is both a gateway for such expansion and an additional tuning knob.
Meanwhile, RDM has no timers whatsoever to maintain or burst within anyway, compared to BLM's Enochian and Thunder DoT, or SMN's multiple DoTs, Trances and Demi-summons.

It seems to me there are two disparate groups on this topic, one who are used to far more complex jobs and consider DoT maintenance on its own to be virtually nothing (of which you and I are part), and one of those who claim to play RDM in large part because even a single timer's maintenance is considered difficult or stressful.
Woah to us who play at level 80+ content and expect gameplay to have layers.

It's also possible people kneejerk like that is because it feels like a kneejerk "Need complexity? Add a dot!"

And I would love to believe that, if he didn't also say "RDM should ABC" and complain about "disruption", highlighting it's not about dislike of simple DoTs, but rather the fear of any obligation within the rotation to prevent him from casting whatever he wants.

What complexity, since you brought complexity in, would adding a dot to scorch add? It'd just be potency+ on top of scorch.

My point exactly. It wouldn't, so why the talk of "disruption"?

[SaberMaxwell]

Mildly, yes. I believe jobs should be iteratively expanded upon throughout the expansions and that a DoT is both a gateway for such expansion and an additional tuning knob.
Meanwhile, RDM has no timers whatsoever to maintain or burst within anyway, compared to BLM's Enochian and Thunder DoT, or SMN's multiple DoTs, Trances and Demi-summons.

RDM now has a 110s Manafication and Enchanted Reprise; these additions allow RDM to manage their burst windows to align better with the 60s Trick burst windows if used right (see the 120s Burst Rotation in the linked doc.) Not to mention Manafication and Embolden are both timers any RDM would want to line up no matter what, and careful mana management will see one to that goal. I consider that a good iterative expansion without needing to add a DoT, but even today lining up a double verfinisher very much lines up with a timer to burst within.

Timers to maintain, like dots, I could go either way with. My friend Dualgunner suggested Vermillion Shadow and Vermillion Radiance in the RDM Wishlist thread, stances that would empower spells of black/white respectively. They even suggested Aero 2 and Thunder 2, which would be accessible under their respective stance, and would apply a DoT.

It seems to me there are two disparate groups on this topic, one who are used to far more complex jobs and consider DoT maintenance on its own to be virtually nothing (of which you and I are part), and one of those who claim to play RDM in large part because even a single timer's maintenance is considered difficult or stressful.
Woah to us who play at level 80+ content and expect gameplay to have layers.

That's a fair enough assessment. I'll go into some detail in the next quote why I feel RDM not having a DoT adds to its identity, but I'll also state that whether it has one or not so long as it's a spellblade job I'll probably still play it.

And I would love to believe that, if he didn't also say "RDM should ABC" and complain about "disruption", highlighting it's not about dislike of simple DoTs, but rather the fear of any obligation within the rotation to prevent him from casting whatever he wants.

I disagree with the "disruption" comment, but I think I know what he means by ABC.

Right now, I think RDM's chief weakness is that if it's not casting, it's not damaging, which creates for RDM its own game of movement entirely separate from Black Mage's. This is a good weakness to have, it supplies an identity separate to its peers; it's also what allows RDM to have such high-powered flat potencies on its attacks, and part of why RDM can't expect to curebomb or raise slave people and come out with good damage.

A DoT being added means damage is being done even when not casting, which in its own way would change the dynamic of RDM as a job; this would be a powerful indirect buff to Vercure and Verraise as well, the two of which are vastly overestimated in current play. You could argue that likewise, E. Reprise has changed RDM's movement game, but RDM needs to pay into the bar in order to get its Scathe-like, which itself is a level of forethought and planning for the job and fight.

RDM is a simple job, yet so many are bad at it. Besides general community skill, why would this be? Because a lot of people underestimate just how under the ABC gun RDM really is.

My point exactly. It wouldn't, so why the talk of "disruption"?

Any gameplay element that's going to be significant to the job's rotation will be a disruption of some sort. I suppose I'm coming at it from the angle of "If the DoT wouldn't add anything to the rotation, why add a DoT?"

Going back to Verrad and Vershad, wanting the DoTs up is why you would cycle to and fro between the stances. Those DoTs would significantly change the rotation, and thus in my opinion add some level of depth. Putting DoT on Scorch because DoT seems much less inspired; it feels a lot like "Most jobs have DoTs, RDM should too."

[Archwizard]

Im really sorry, but why are Dots necessary? RDM has twincast. Dots more or less are Autoattack+ skills, that do add to overall dps but just do filler, consecutive damage over time. Since we can spam 2 spells in one GCD, or 1.1 GCD's it doesnt really seem to make sense that we need constant new auto attack like damage, to be RDM. I just dont see it being necessary in our kits over any other class or job in the whole game atm. The only depth we needed was an option for aoe finishing, and maybe a bit more complexity in aoe rotation. Some more utility, as some suggested "as upgrades to our identity and give more useful edge in raiding beyond prog" but a dot? We're part white mage and part black mage, we dont even follow Arcanist. And sure whm and blm have their few dots, but we dual cast, all the time, every time. But sure if its really that big of a deal, i just figured small aoe burst was the big area we were lacking in, not dot management, without a bane type mechanic, im sure cause it wasnt mentioned. We got a lot of single target. Another dot wont change that.

Alright, misconceptions here:

1) I never said DoTs were necessary. I said I don't care if we get one one way or the other, I just won't dismiss the suggestion or quit RDM if we did get one.
Besides, if not for DNC, where else would you even go. Even with a DoT, RDM would probably still be the most simplistic job available.

2) Even with Dualcast we still cast one spell per GCD. It just means that the cast time of half our spells won't occupy the entire GCD, allowing us periods to cast oGCD skills without any time loss.
You seem a little confused about what a GCD is. The "Global Cooldown" that initiates on most of your skills once you cast a spell, to prevent you from casting multiple actions simultaneously? That's your GCD. It tends to finish just after we finish our shortcast spells, allowing us to cast our next immediately. After we unleash an instant spell (ie through Dualcast), we have a period of about 2 seconds where we cannot cast any more spells, due to the second GCD, but can use "off GCD" tools like Fleche.

3) DoTs aren't exactly like auto-attacks. They do scale with spell speed the same way auto-attacks would normally scale with other speed effects (though I think I've heard mention it doesn't work like that in XIV, I don't play melee so I can't say for sure), but the need to keep the DoT applied creates a significant difference.

Let's take an example like, say, Aero II. It deals 50 potency damage outright, then another 50 potency every tick for 18 seconds; with each tick at 3 seconds as a base, that comes out to 6 ticks, or 300 potency from the DoT plus 50 from the initial cast. Aero II in effect is a single GCD worth approximately 350 potency -- meaning if there are any GCDs you have of higher value, you'd use those over Aero II anyway.
However, this relies on two factors: One, that spell speed isn't high enough to meet any breakpoints necessary to increase the number of ticks per cast (additional scaling with spell speed means that the maximum damage potential of the skill can go up by a slightly higher amount than normal skills with gear), and two, that the DoT is refreshed such that it remains near-constantly active on the target and gets close to its maximum number of ticks per cast.
Meaning, a single cast of Aero II is only worth 350 potency if it's cast no more frequently than every 7-8ish GCDs. Unlike auto-attacking, however (which can be disrupted any time you and the boss gain distance from one another, meaning it's effectively a constant maintenance of distance rather than time), just like any other damage effect, once it's cast, the damage is already on the target, you just gotta wait.
Compare this to an effect such as, say, Contre Sixte, which is worth 350 potency every cast, but can only be cast at most every 35 sec.

It's a matter of perspective. DoTs are basically just cooldowns, just less braindead so you can't just macro them or stare at your hotbar.

4) Dualcast doesn't substitute auto-attacking, I don't even know where this train of logic is even coming from.
In fact, somewhat ironically due to Dualcast, the large periods of GCDs where we aren't animation locked by casting means we could theoretically auto-attack between casts, unlike a BLM... just that our Strength and attack speed are so pathetically low that it'd only amount to the damage of maybe one cast over the course of a fight and it's not worth it for us squishy casters to stand so close.

RDM now has a 110s Manafication and Enchanted Reprise; these additions allow RDM to manage their burst windows to align better with the 60s Trick burst windows if used right (see the 120s Burst Rotation in the linked doc.) Not to mention Manafication and Embolden are both timers any RDM would want to line up no matter what, and careful mana management will see one to that goal. I consider that a good iterative expansion without needing to add a DoT, but even today lining up a double verfinisher very much lines up with a timer to burst within."

And those are great for lining up burst windows with a bit of group coordination, but they don't require upkeep on the RDM's part; at worst you hold them a few seconds for everyone else, which is not something you could compare to keeping Enochian up or holding Deathflare till the very last second of your Trance window.

Any gameplay element that's going to be significant to the job's rotation will be a disruption of some sort. I suppose I'm coming at it from the angle of "If the DoT wouldn't add anything to the rotation, why add a DoT?"

And I absolutely agree. I don't agree with having Scorch gain a DoT for a DoT's sake because it doesn't add to the gameplay and is effectively just raw potency for Scorch -- if you'll reread my original post, I only acknowledged Patronas' sentiment about DoTs on Verholy and Verflare, which I can understand to reward and encourage alternating between the two, even if I can accept there are alternative methods to accomplish the same goal.
Thunder on BLM is interesting not because of its maintenance or damage, but because of the additional mechanic of Thundercloud (or that would be the case, anyway, if not for people just holding Thunder for UI phase regardless due to tight GCD timing on AF; a good idea in perhaps the wrong place). Likewise, I think concepts like VerRadiance and VerShadow are on the right track because they encourage new mechanics beyond raw maintenance and I can agree with their goals of increasing the skill ceiling, even if I may disagree with the specifics of their stated implementation.

Blanket statements about "no DoTs though, because I don't want any timers" just arbitrarily limit design potential.

[Singularity]

So, you want a reason to never cast Verholy/Verflare ever again.

Yes, that is the point. Care should be taken with the potency values to ensure it doesn't become correct to waste a load of mana overcapping just to get access to Scorch mind.

[Mansion]

Yes, that is the point. Care should be taken with the potency values to ensure it doesn't become correct to waste a load of mana overcapping just to get access to Scorch mind.

Being even on mana is quite rare. We are actually building ressources not to be even to get the free proc after the finisher.
The only even situation I can think of is 100/100 on mana, and usually means there was a mana loss (and thus a DPS loss).
Introducing your finisher would require some kind of ability that cuts through one pool of mana so you can actually control the amounts you want to generate, and let's face it, adding small mental calculation (how much X spell do I need to reach X amount of mana?) would have people roar with rage (see Ridorana). While I like the idea of a rotation a bit more "complex" than reaching more than 80/80, I understand it could easily turn into a hassle.

[PatronasCharm]

Being even on mana is quite rare. We are actually building ressources not to be even to get the free proc after the finisher.
The only even situation I can think of is 100/100 on mana, and usually means there was a mana loss (and thus a DPS loss).
Introducing your finisher would require some kind of ability that cuts through one pool of mana so you can actually control the amounts you want to generate, and let's face it, adding small mental calculation (how much X spell do I need to reach X amount of mana?) would have people roar with rage (see Ridorana). While I like the idea of a rotation a bit more "complex" than reaching more than 80/80, I understand it could easily turn into a hassle.

Yeah true, it is super rare to get an even balance unless you save up to 100/100. Thus why we get a "Verfire / Verstone" ready if White is lower then you use Verholy, or vise-versa which I know is the initial design. I do agree too if we'd have to begin making mental calculations, "oh crap, okay, I should have casted Verthunder instead of Aero! Crap lol." The way it currently plays is pretty perfect.

So as far a DoT goes, again I believe it should be a mechanic behind our rotation, thus why I felt, without jeopardizing our rotation, tacking it on to Scorch. Heck, Scorch to me is what being burned? Flare burns, Holy burns, thus why I felt Scorch adding that DoT could have worked, even if the Potency is reduced by 200, and a DoT of idk, 50? That way we're still doing our basic rotations to maintain that DoT on the enemy. Because to be frank, I don't use my Combo unless its a hard enemy or a Boss fight, so keeping a DoT on that boss, would encourage to fill meter as quickly as possible and combo as much as possible.

The DoT, would have to be long, and mild, because I forget how long it takes me to get 80/80 without Manafestation, or by using Enchanted Reprise it increases DoT duration, that's -10/10 with a tacked on damage.

Again, this entire thing just came from my speculation over Scorch, didn't know what it did until I found it online. I doubt they'll do any overhaul right now, with the expansion being just around the corner and all.

I am eager to engage with 5.0 RDM and see how much smoother it is without all the button bloating.

But looking into the future, which is 2 years out, maybe we'll see Verwater / Verblizzard / Verfreeze or Verflood, even an interesting DoT added to a new combo finisher.

Thanks for the all the replies and discussions, yall

=)

[Archwizard]

Yes, that is the point. Care should be taken with the potency values to ensure it doesn't become correct to waste a load of mana overcapping just to get access to Scorch mind.

Bearing in mind for a moment that the skill you suggest also includes both Verquick procs and comes away with 33% higher effective Mana gain than either existing Verfinisher, mitigating any lost Mana from slight overcap:

Making an ability that's far and away better than two other existing abilities competing for the same job means creating excess button bloat -- we'll be dragging two dead weights behind us, all for the sake of removing one of the few elements of spontaneity and reactivity we have from the job.

Hard pass.