Shadowbringers RDM Wishlist

[Archwizard]

You can look at it like an "I couldn't hit what I really wanted" button or a "bandaid that solves nothing," I see it as an increase to the decisionmaking that Displacement gives the job. That's why it's perplexing to me, given all of these thoughts I need to take into account regarding a singular ability of Red Mage's, that you want it gone (or mitigated) and yet advocate for Red Mage to get a DoT because it's much needed "depth of gameplay." I don't need to think about a DoT like I need to think about Displacement.

As I've repeatedly said, I don't care if we get a DoT as long as we get something to shake up gameplay, I just won't mind if we get one; most of the "defending" I do for the stance of a DoT isn't pure advocation out of any sense we "need" one, it's addressing the knee-jerk dismissal of DoTs in general for such trumped-up charges as "it would disrupt the flow of the rotation" and "they replace auto-attacks" (lol?) and "they're boring", none of which necessarily are/need be true.

[CorbinDallas]

I didn't say I couldn't do it, I said I didn't enjoy the stress of strict timers, so I switched jobs. People are allowed to not enjoy things, and to switch jobs if they do so; it's a fairly common response to not enjoying things. Don't damn me if I do, thanks.

You would have a point if this was BLM discussion and I was saying that was an aspect of BLM that needed to change. This isn't. This is a RDM discussion where I'm adding credence to opinions about not making the job more like BLM.
Your "git gud" attitude is unnecessary, irrelevant, and just flat-out rude, so please ride your high horse out of here.

You brought up BLM saying it had something that needed changing, to which I wholly disagree. My jaded "git gud" attitude is completely the fault of players like you, who even though they don't like a job, suggest to "fix" a problem with it which frankly isn't there. Enochian and Thunder 3 don't need to be changed.

I don't like a multitude of jobs, so I just don't play them. I also don't put forward opinions or suggestions on how to fix them because I frankly don't have enough experience with them, which is evidently the case with you and BLM. Use the job as a comparison all you like, but don't claim to know things you don't.

[Shurrikhan]

You brought up BLM saying it had something that needed changing, to which I wholly disagree. My jaded "git gud" attitude is completely the fault of players like you, who even though they don't like a job, suggest to "fix" a problem with it which frankly isn't there. Enochian and Thunder 3 don't need to be changed.

I don't like a multitude of jobs, so I just don't play them. I also don't put forward opinions or suggestions on how to fix them because I frankly don't have enough experience with them, which is evidently the case with you and BLM. Use the job as a comparison all you like, but don't claim to know things you don't.

I'd normally agree with you, especially as twice now I've seen my favorite jobs effectively squashed by pandering changes like you describe, but there are some changes that can benefit players not already enjoying the job as much as they would like without negatively affecting those who already love it. These are, unfortunately, rarely the kind the devs go with, but the possibilities do exist.

What I want to protect on my jobs are the constraints and decisions that contribute enjoyable difficulty. But I do have to wonder, would BLM be any less fun or challenging if, say, Enochian worked in as a trait instead of an ability, or at least offered an MP-less quickcast when it expires? One's efficiency-based design, but can easily be brought in such a way that you'd at most lose a bit of burst potency in incredibly short (e.g. sub-15-second) fights but lose zero reason to pursue the actions necessary to maintain Enochian as it is (i.e. no change in gameplay). The other's a more gimmicky QoL bonus, but can as much be a fun manipulable for skilled players as a safety line for the unskilled. Probably neither of those spontaneous spitballs would suit, but there is almost always some design that would -- a benefit without requiring compromise. It just scares me when one who doesn't play the job much puts these forward as complete, both-sided solutions when they, almost by definition, could not know what they've missed (though I suppose one could say the same of a veteran's sense of weighing the attractiveness of a job, though that subject is far more subjective than the mechanics of a given job).

It's irrelevant in either case, though. This is a RDM thread. The BLM stuff Arch mentioned was solely for context in discussing how and why he wouldn't want RDM to be more BLM-like.

[Archwizard]

You brought up BLM saying it had something that needed changing, to which I wholly disagree.

I never said they needed changing. I never even implied they needed changing. I don't believe they need changing in any manner you're implying, and even if I did I would be discussing it in a BLM thread, not a RDM thread.

I simply said they're not mechanics for RDM.

End of discussion.

[CorbinDallas]

I never said they needed changing. I never even implied they needed changing. I don't believe they need changing in any manner you're implying, and even if I did I would be discussing it in a BLM thread, not a RDM thread.

I simply said they're not mechanics for RDM.

End of discussion.

You literally said so in the last post I quoted, which you've conveniently edited. Don't lie.

[Archwizard]

You literally said so in the last post I quoted, which you've conveniently edited. Don't lie.

Luckily you've quoted that bit then, haven't you? And I can clearly read nothing of the sort from the section you quoted.

"I didn't enjoy the gameplay loop, so I switched" =/= "The gameplay loop is broken and needs to change."

You, sir, are reading into things so you can toss your elitism around. "Fixing" BLM wasn't even the subject of discussion, I brought BLM up to compare the two.

[CorbinDallas]

Luckily you've quoted that bit then, haven't you? And I can clearly read nothing of the sort from the section you quoted.

You, sir, are reading into things so you can toss your elitism around. "Fixing" BLM wasn't even the subject of discussion, I brought BLM up to compare the two.

You would have a point if this was BLM discussion and I was saying that was an aspect of BLM that needed to change.

There you go.

[Archwizard]

There you go.

"You would have a point if [...] I was saying that was an aspect of BLM that needed to change."

The "and" was a pretty key point. Your reading comprehension is the problem here.

[Nezia]

Welp, at first I was pretty "Meh, nothing really new..." when they announced the RDM changes, but now I see that it's pretty possible that Reprise ends up adding some very needed depth in the gameplay. Sure, I doubt it'll be rocket science but I guess it's nice to have some complexity added to the class, even if minor.

[Zyneste]

Welp, at first I was pretty "Meh, nothing really new..." when they announced the RDM changes, but now I see that it's pretty possible that Reprise ends up adding some very needed depth in the gameplay. Sure, I doubt it'll be rocket science but I guess it's nice to have some complexity added to the class, even if minor.

As an aside, Enhanced Moulinet might be our pre-76 budget reprise for mana dumping. 5* yalm ranged attack for 200 potency on a 1.5 second recast costing just 20B/W mana. Out of the box it's better than riposte in the mana per potency department. Realized it the other day.

Ench. Riposte: 140 PPS (210/1.5 secs) 2.33 Potency Per mana. 3 Yalm Range.

Ench. Moulinet: 133.3 PPS (200/1.5 secs) 3.33 Potency Per Mana. 5* Yalm Range.

Ench. Reprise: 136 PPS (300/2.2 seconds) 6.82 Potency Per Mana. 25 Yalm Range.

* - 6 yalm range but only hits within a 5 yalm range.