6.0 Red Mage speculation

[Archwizard]

- I'd love if Engagement became the default melee 200 potency finisher and Displacement had both its damage and target requirement components removed, thus becoming purely a movement based skill, to be used on demand at the end of the melee combo or if you'd actually had to leap some other time. It always feels a bit weird to tie in utility (movement) abilities with dps components.

While I understand the distaste for Displacement as a melee-capping skill and that it would be preferred to separate the backstep from the damage component, the flip-side to this ask is Engagement just being an oGCD melee skill for the sake of having one. 200 potency isn't that very strong by comparison to the others we have.

There are some utilitarian alternatives that have been proposed, however: having Displacement send you to the position of your last Corps-a-Corps; offloading their damage onto Corps-a-Corps and giving it charges; changing the purpose of Engagement into an AoE skill rather than just "worse Displacement"; and so on.

- I take that Enchanted Reprise is meant to fill in a movement-heavy moment? But even at a very low b/w mana cost, is it worth to cast a few times and inevitably delay your next melee phase? I almost never find a good situation to use that, to the point that I actually wish for a rework or something that would make it truly an on-the-run useful spell without compromising your melee phase timing.

It's a bit iffy in that regard. When it was announced, I think a lot of us were hoping that it would be a tool we could use to prevent overcapping Mana whenever we were forced to be at range, in addition to movement phases. Theoretically (and perhaps a touch ironically with regards to your post), it also fits the niche you were complaining about with using skills faster than mobs die, since we're meant to avoid the non-enchanted combo anyway. For the most part the cost is low enough that our melee is only pushed back an extra GCD on each use, assuming you can't manage to Swiftcast or slidecast your way to victory.

That being said, I might find it interesting if RDM was given some kind of Anatman-esque or Umbral Soul-style skill for generating Mana without a target, and we've already seen some suggestions for a Lightspeed- or Triplecast-style CD to sling spells on the go. There's some room to play around with and expand our arsenal.

[Raikai]

offloading their damage onto Corps-a-Corps and giving it charges;

That is actually a pretty cool idea! I'm not fond at all of utility skills (movement in this case) being part of a dps rotation because it simply pigeonholes the functionality. Especially when half of the time you probably don't want to leap back to where you used to be right away...

[Duelle]

1) It performs a powerful oGCD melee attack in-between melee steps

2) It channels the b/w mana gauge spent on enchanted melee combo steps into a secondary job gauge which is used to perform a powerful finisher melee attack at the end.

Late reply, but better later than never... >.>;

The problem I have with this is that you're cramming more things to the melee combo. What I'd aim for is adding more sword use during the build phase, because adding more to the spender phase screws RDM over even more in situations where targets died before you do the whole combo, the boss becomes untargetable and/or phase transitions. Also, the enchanted combo's GCD is too short to reliably allow weaving stuff between the weaponskills, giving RDM an issue similar to what MCH currently has where latency plays a huge role.

- I'd love if Engagement became the default melee 200 potency finisher and Displacement had both its damage and target requirement components removed, thus becoming purely a movement based skill, to be used on demand at the end of the melee combo or if you'd actually had to leap some other time. It always feels a bit weird to tie in utility (movement) abilities with dps components.

This is something I've always felt was off about the job, so I agree that Engagement should be separated from Displacement and have its potency increased so that it can join Fleche and Contre as buttons you push between GCDs.

As for Displacement, there's two ways to go about it. One would be to remove the damage component. The other would be to give RDM enough oGCDs to make use of Displacement a DPS loss, relegating it to being something you only use when you absolutely need to open distance. The former is much easier to implement than the latter.

- I wish the potency of the non-enchanted melee combo was raised, but not to the point of being the same of the jolt>etc rotation... Reason is, there would be a few opportunities to use that on trash targets that would die too fast for you to complete cast spells... It wouldn't really affect the main rotation at all, but offer an option in such cases. E.G. Heaven on High runs where things die way too fast, I feel kinda useless as a RDM.

The main issue here is that, as I've mentioned before, the devs have shackled RDM to the mana bars and Dualcast. In order for non-enchanted weaponskills to be worthwhile they have to interact with at least one of those elements (either generate mana that offsets not casting Jolt+Verspell or making the next spell instant) or make up what what RDM is missing out on by not interacting with either. On top of that, you're dealing with the hard-coded rules on weaponskills where if you're above a certain amount of B/W mana, the weaponskill instantly consumes said mana. It's a very rigid system in that regard.

the flip-side to this is Engagement just being an oGCD melee skill for the sake of having one.

Considering how underrepresented the sword is in the bulk of RDM gameplay, having melee skills (even if oGCDs) that don't involve the mana bars isn't a bad thing. Yeah, it's an extra button to push, but it's a fair tradeoff, IMO.

having Displacement send you to the position of your last Corps-a-Corps

I'd like an example for this because I can't visualize it.

offloading their damage onto Corps-a-Corps and giving it charges

This puts a bit too much power on Corps, which I'm not comfortable with. Not to mention you're still encouraging squandering mobility tools between GCDs (though to be fair, gap closers aren't as big a deal as gap openers most of the time).

[Archwizard]

Considering how underrepresented the sword is in the bulk of RDM gameplay, having melee skills (even if oGCDs) that don't involve the mana bars isn't a bad thing.

I don't know how many ways to tell you that the "representation" you keep bringing up is a misguided push to rework us into a core melee job with some ranged spells. Which very few people want.

As RDM stands, if you want more melee skills, we need more Mana generation first. Otherwise Engagement is just gonna be something we may as well macro into our melee combo, or split an extra 50 potency among the E. Melee skills.

I'd like an example for this because I can't visualize it.

We already have Ley Lines and Between the Lines on a similar principle to what I mean. Hell, even DRG's Jump, just as a single action.

Whenever you use Corps-a-Corps, your starting position is recorded and you get a buff remembering it for 15-20 sec (possibly with a visual like a sigil on the floor or a shadow clone left behind, whathaveyou).
If you use Displacement during this window, instead of jumping 15y straight backwards, you instead jump to the exact spot you used Corps-a-Corps from. No more flipping out of the arena; if you used it in a safe spot or hold Displacement until your original spot is safe, you will be.
And of course you can still use Displacement as a backstep if you need it for that boost.

This puts a bit too much power on Corps, which I'm not comfortable with.

... What? What are you even talking about. We use Corps and the -ment abilities together already!

Corps is 140 potency to a single target every 40 sec. This would increase it to 340 (or accounting for the CD difference, around 370) potency every 40 sec. -- all of which is damage we already inflict now, just split over two oGCDs.
For comparison, Fleche is 440 potency on a single target every 25 sec, Contre Sixte is 400 per target every 35 sec, so it would still be the weakest oGCD we have. The only part of it with impact on our output would be the second charge.

Literally, what does it matter?

Not to mention you're still encouraging squandering mobility tools between GCDs (though to be fair, gap closers aren't as big a deal as gap openers most of the time).

So what you're saying is, no worse than what we have now, even if little better? No different than most of the vaunted melee jobs you wish RDM was part of...?

But if you prefer: The devs could easily write it so it's only "Enchanted" when you get 80/80 Mana to boost it by the extra 200 potency, so that its use as a gap-closer leading into your combo fundamentally doesn't change. You just have an extra charge to give it a grace period between uses and use it as a gap-closer when needed.

[Duelle]

I don't know how many ways to tell you that the "representation" you keep bringing up is a misguided push to rework us into a core melee job with some ranged spells. Which very few people want.

By representation I mean the core of the job is still spamming spells. When I start seeing more sword use beyond the melee combo, I can re-evaluate how one stands compared to the other.

Also, while my issues with the job's design are no secret to anyone here, I'm not talking about a redesign.

As RDM stands, if you want more melee skills, we need more Mana generation first.

If you increase mana generation, you're part of the way to making the spender phase superfluous because the current design and pace of mana generation tries to pass off enchanted sword swings as a big deal. If the goal is to keep the current design, I'd prefer to leave that part of the job alone and instead favor melee oGCDs that are not dependent on the mana bars.

Otherwise Engagement is just gonna be something we may as well macro into our melee combo, or split an extra 50 potency among the E. Melee skills.

You could do what I do, which is stand in melee range and just use it on cooldown. I won't deny that splitting Engagement from Displacement would be a boon to me, as I wouldn't miss out on a gap opener when needed just because I like to stand in the front lines.

Whenever you use Corps-a-Corps, your starting position is recorded and you get a buff remembering it for 15-20 sec (possibly with a visual like a sigil on the floor or a shadow clone left behind, whathaveyou).
If you use Displacement during this window, instead of jumping 15y straight backwards, you instead jump to the exact spot you used Corps-a-Corps from. No more flipping out of the arena; if you used it in a safe spot or hold Displacement until your original spot is safe, you will be.

Okay, I understand that now. Getting rid of the meme of accidentally jumping off boss platforms would be an improvement, and it deals with an apparent flaw in Displacement (I'd still say needlessly having to jump around is stupid, but that's neither here nor there). I guess you could make Engagament its own ability (buff the damage or give it another effect) since at that point there'd be no reason for it to share a cooldown with anything.

Corps is 140 potency to a single target every 40 sec. This would increase it to 340 (or accounting for the CD difference, around 370) potency every 40 sec. -- all of which is damage we already inflict now, just split over two oGCDs.
...
Literally, what does it matter?

300+ potency on a gap closer leaves a bad taste in my mouth, even if it'd a DPS gain (assuming you make Corps 2 charges). It just makes the "that's a bit much for the utility it offers" alarms ring in my head.

So what you're saying is, no worse than what we have now, even if little better? No different than most of the vaunted melee jobs you wish RDM was part of...?

Corps and Displacement being oGCD fillers doesn't make them a good thing per se (for context, I had a problem with stuns and silences dealing damage during ARR and Heavensward because people were using those on cooldown instead of properly learning to stun and silence mobs, which is still biting us in the ass). Taking this back to an earlier point, assuming you add one or two oGCDs that involve sword use as better alternatives to Corps/Displacement, you basically push them out of the rotation outside of situations when everything is on cooldown (which, based on my own experiences, is not often) or when you actually need to open/close a gap. At that point you're playing into the priority system currently in place.

We already have one possible candidate in Engagement (assuming all you do is split its cooldown from Displacement and buff its damage). We'd just need another one, be it just plain damage, something that interacts with spells in some way, or something that interacts with procs (consuming Verfire/Verstone Ready to generate mana or upgrading the procs to more powerful spells that generate more mana or mana of both types). That said, two skills would be nice, but just one would make a notable difference.

[Archwizard]

If you increase mana generation, you're part of the way to making the spender phase superfluous

I fail to see how it would do that, in part because our Mana generation has already increased this last expansion thanks to Scorch and Enhanced Manafication, and based on the rest of our leveling experience, I expect that will continue to be the general upward trend for us in the future.

If the spender phase maintains its position as the capstone of our damage, then increased Mana generation doesn't necessarily diminish the phase itself, just makes it more frequent. Like if BLM somehow got a way to speed up Polyglot charges, for instance... or like any melee job's resource gauges.
All this depending on how they choose to go about increasing Mana generation of course (new spells that give above-average amounts of one type of Mana or some of each type, increasing Ver-proc rates, adding a small amount of Mana to each of our oGCDs, an Anatman-style skill or adding a small amount of Mana to Cure in-combat for downtime, etc), but if anything it would just reduce our necessary time spent slinging ranged attacks.

Your critique comes off as doomsaying more than logical concern.

You could do what I do, which is stand in melee range and just use it on cooldown.

Like I was saying, all you're essentially doing is mashing another free swing into the combo we already have (since its timer roughly lines up with it anyway and it's affected by Manafication). I'm not sure that tangibly makes a positive difference in terms of our gameplay, at least no more than tacking another capstone onto the end of our combo.
I'll grant you could say the same thing about any of our other oGCDs, but you don't need to be in the melee to use them on cooldown, they're not synchronized with our melee phase, and their actual role is to help fill the frequent gaps between our interchangeable dualcasts so we don't feel severe downtime; their asynchronous nature also gives them plenty of room for expansion, like shrinking their CDs without worrying about how they line up. By contrast, our melee phase hardly has any downtime to shrink.

Right now, Engagement exists not because the devs felt we needed another melee skill, but because they wanted to give us a consolation for occasionally being unable to Displacement. Without that competitive aspect, the only justification for Engagement in its current form to continue to take hotbar space is for a sliver of raw potency (Physical damage at that), which wouldn't be strong enough for another job to consider worth keeping. It's exactly the kind of "superfluous" melee skill you were just warning against.
Without some other utilitarian element, once we get to the point the devs need to start trading out skills for us, it's at the top of the list of skills to chop, not build off.

[Sylvain]

Someone posted this long ago with more details but I really liked the idea and thought it would fix some RDM issues.

The proposed spell was a sort of spell blade which was a melee cast which would consume and fire/earth proc for extra damage as well as a significant amount of mana (20 or something)

That spell was not meant to be part of the normal rotation but instead meant to burn mana if some were to be in excess before a burst window (like you're at 80/85 and in 15s it's Showtime with everything coming back)
Or as a small finisher if the boss left the fight in order to consume the procs that would go to waste.
Mind you the goal was to make it "just weak enough to not spam it over regular melee".

My personal wish (which won't happen) would be to reduce verwind/thunder to 1.8s recast. The reasoning behind this is that standing still doing nothing for 2.5s every 2 spells really kills the job to me. I really see the RDM as the really fast paced BLM, like rattling gun vs bazooka. And having that 2.5s of waiting after each instant makes the job feels slow. As I like to point. Think of how slow the melee combo would feel if the recharge was 2.5 instead of 1.5.

I would like to be incited to use verholy/flare in order. I don't understand why it's the only spell that you can go either way without impact on the rotation beside peanut potency loss

Obviously some sort of verwater/freeze as long as they're not dot

[Duelle]

I fail to see how it would do that, in part because our Mana generation has already increased this last expansion thanks to Scorch and Enhanced Manafication, and based on the rest of our leveling experience, I expect that will continue to be the general upward trend for us in the future.

You've alluded that the only way to make the sword more relevant is to increase how often the mana bars hit 80/80 to use the melee combo. The problem I have with this is that the melee combo by design is a finisher. If the "finisher" happens more often, it loses its significance from a mechanics standpoint and begins raising the question "why does this mechanic even exist? This might as well just be a regular ability". That's not mentioning that nerfs would be in order (this assumes you're not just increasing damage dealt across the board, as that would lead to power creep).

While Scorch helps, it isn't much in the grand scheme of things. It'd be a different story if Scorch generated something like 11, 13 or even 15 b/w mana per use.

If the spender phase maintains its position as the capstone of our damage, then increased Mana generation doesn't necessarily diminish the phase itself, just makes it more frequent. Like if BLM somehow got a way to speed up Polyglot charges, for instance... or like any melee job's resource gauges.

It's not as simple as just making something happen more often. For example, speeding up Polyglot would require nerfing Xenoglossy and Foul, as their current design relies on their restricted use via a timer. And that would in turn be detrimental because you're reducing the allure of the mechanic. Sort of like how, hypothetically, nerfing Fire/Blizard IV would make the Enochian mechanic seem superfluous because you're not gaining as much by going along with that mechanic.

Like I was saying, all you're essentially doing is mashing another free swing into the combo we already have

I don't see it that way, since I use it between Dualcasts if Fleche and Contre are on cooldown. It's the closest thing to the type of gameplay I wanted out of RDM since there's sword swings and spells used in tandem while standing in the front lines. As a redesign is not on the table, I'd like more of that because it's the next best thing.

I'm not sure that tangibly makes a positive difference in terms of our gameplay, at least no more than tacking another capstone onto the end of our combo.

Speaking for myself, the benefits are that it uses the sword, it's in melee range, doesn't involve me needlessly jumping around and is not restricted by the mana bars. Also, an ability that can be used at any time isn't comparable to combo extensions, since the latter are restricted by the mana bars (along with the problem with mobs becoming untargetable or dying early and how those screw you out of the mana refunds).

Beyond that, there are possible mechanics that can be weaved in between dualcasts if you insert melee oGCD skills. I mentioned one possible example earlier with a melee skill that deals damage and upgrades the next Verstone/Verfire to a bigger spell. I've also toyed with the idea of turning Fleche and Contre into contextual abilities that change depending on your distance to the target mob (Fleche turning into a melee skill when within 3y of the mob, remaining its usual self when beyond 3y from the mob, with melee Fleche possibly dealing less damage but having some other mechanical benefit).

It's exactly the kind of "superfluous" melee skill you were just warning against.

You're equating oGCD fillers with reducing the impact of a finisher by making it happen more often (which, as I've said, would also require additional changes and adjustments). They're not the same thing as both affect gameplay in different ways.

As I said, my aim in asking for these things is that I get a facsimile of what I wanted out of RDM while avoiding having to do a redesign of the job (which would basically put off anyone that is looking for a caster without the SMN spinning plates or BLM timers).

Without some other utilitarian element, once we get to the point the devs need to start trading out skills for us, it's at the top of the list of skills to chop, not build off.

We'll have to wait and see on that one. I don't see Engagement going away without the devs doing something about Displacement first. And altering Displacement means you're fiddling with a part of the "hop in and out" thing the devs have saddled RDM with, which may or may not necessitate other changes.

[ADVSS]

Someone posted this long ago with more details but I really liked the idea and thought it would fix some RDM issues.

The proposed spell was a sort of spell blade which was a melee cast which would consume and fire/earth proc for extra damage as well as a significant amount of mana (20 or something)

That spell was not meant to be part of the normal rotation but instead meant to burn mana if some were to be in excess before a burst window (like you're at 80/85 and in 15s it's Showtime with everything coming back)
Or as a small finisher if the boss left the fight in order to consume the procs that would go to waste.
Mind you the goal was to make it "just weak enough to not spam it over regular melee".

Isnt this engagement?

I don't see it that way, since I use it between Dualcasts if Fleche and Contre are on cooldown. It's the closest thing to the type of gameplay I wanted out of RDM since there's sword swings and spells used in tandem while standing in the front lines. As a redesign is not on the table, I'd like more of that because it's the next best thing.
Speaking for myself, the benefits are that it uses the sword, it's in melee range, doesn't involve me needlessly jumping around and is not restricted by the mana bars. Also, an ability that can be used at any time isn't comparable to combo extensions, since the latter are restricted by the mana bars (along with the problem with mobs becoming untargetable or dying early and how those screw you out of the mana refunds).

As I said, my aim in asking for these things is that I get a facsimile of what I wanted out of RDM while avoiding having to do a redesign of the job (which would basically put off anyone that is looking for a caster without the SMN spinning plates or BLM timers).
We'll have to wait and see on that one. I don't see Engagement going away without the devs doing something about Displacement first. And altering Displacement means you're fiddling with a part of the "hop in and out" thing the devs have saddled RDM with, which may or may not necessitate other changes.

I am and have been pretty sure the job you're looking for is Mystic Knight, and has been. No need for a rework of RDM, just push for Mystic Knight

[Archwizard]

You've alluded that the only way to make the sword more relevant is to increase how often the mana bars hit 80/80 to use the melee combo. The problem I have with this is that the melee combo by design is a finisher. If the "finisher" happens more often, it loses its significance from a mechanics standpoint and begins raising the question "why does this mechanic even exist? This might as well just be a regular ability". That's not mentioning that nerfs would be in order (this assumes you're not just increasing damage dealt across the board, as that would lead to power creep).

While Scorch helps, it isn't much in the grand scheme of things. It'd be a different story if Scorch generated something like 11, 13 or even 15 b/w mana per use.
It's not as simple as just making something happen more often. For example, speeding up Polyglot would require nerfing Xenoglossy and Foul, as their current design relies on their restricted use via a timer. And that would in turn be detrimental because you're reducing the allure of the mechanic. Sort of like how, hypothetically, nerfing Fire/Blizard IV would make the Enochian mechanic seem superfluous because you're not gaining as much by going along with that mechanic.

... Except this is all under the assumption of the same balance of power that we have now, and without assuming room for increasing raw potencies within the rotation.

Y'know. That thing that happens every expansion. The one where healers are up to Rank IV+ of their DoTs and attack spells, all tanks/melee have an AoE combo, and all DPS gain new abilities for their main rotations that uh, checking my notes here, don't regularly cost potency from elsewhere in the kit unless the job ends up jumping ahead of all other DPS and warrants direct nerfs?
Because the devs come up with a small pool of "free potency" to add to every job that gets split across all of their advancements. For us in ShB, it was the value of using Scorch once every 40 sec over another GCD, the damage value of reducing the CDs of Manafication and Contre Sixte, and the potency increase to Displacement; the only things it "cost" us were some small mechanical adjustments that were probably gonna happen anyway, and it was still a net buff.
You call it "power creep", we call it "literally a selling point of the expansions and the point of this thread".

If your concern is that the damage of our combo will be reduced relative to everything else, unless the only advancements the devs choose to add are either another finisher a la Scorch or traits that buff the damage of our combo directly, that's literally going to happen anyway. So long as the bump from the combo remains potent enough to use over our primary rotation, however, it will still retain a position of value in our kits.

Like I said: Doomsaying.

I don't see it that way, since I use it between Dualcasts if Fleche and Contre are on cooldown.

... and you're trying to argue about "power creep" when you're not even optimizing just for the sake of your aesthetic?

Speaking for myself, the benefits are that it uses the sword, it's in melee range, doesn't involve me needlessly jumping around and is not restricted by the mana bars.

Again, my qualifier was "a positive difference in terms of gameplay". Using the sword is aesthetic but not a gameplay difference (Enchanted Reprise does too), restriction to melee is a disadvantage rather than a tangible benefit, and despite not being tied to mana bars it's still implicitly linked to our melee combo by its timer and Manafication. The only positive gameplay effect you listed hinges on it being an alternative to Displacement, which simply feeds my point that it would have no place if Displacement was unlinked from our damage or could be controlled on its own.

Beyond that, there are possible mechanics that can be weaved in between dualcasts if you insert melee oGCD skills. I mentioned one possible example earlier with a melee skill that deals damage and upgrades the next Verstone/Verfire to a bigger spell.

Sure, but you're not addressing the question of why it's relevant that the skill be restricted to melee range in the first place, besides satisfying your aesthetic tastes and making a melee skill for its own sake. "Upgrades your next Verstone/Verfire" seems like the kind of thing you'd want useful at any range where you're hurling Verstone/Verfire (particularly since you wouldn't want to interrupt your melee combo to use them), and such a restriction would be arbitrary.
Displacement and Engagement have reasons built in - Displacement makes a gap when the combo is done, Engagement uses the cooldown when Displacing would be dangerous.

I've also toyed with the idea of turning Fleche and Contre into contextual abilities that change depending on your distance to the target mob (Fleche turning into a melee skill when within 3y of the mob, remaining its usual self when beyond 3y from the mob, with melee Fleche possibly dealing less damage but having some other mechanical benefit).

Oh goody, pseudo-positionals for us that we don't have some True North equivalent for.

See the problem here is, either:
1) The difference between using them in melee versus using them at range is so negligible as to be purely cosmetic for the sake of satisfying the minor subset of people who want RDM to play like a melee job, or
2) The difference between using them in melee versus using them at range actually has a noteworthy damage value that will encourage players to remain at the most beneficial distance at all times and avoid using them when they will be weak.

Now in your case, you mention melee Fleche has less damage and another mechanical benefit, but unless that benefit comes out to a net damage increase in some tangible way -- a buff, a DoT, whatever, bearing in mind it already has a short cooldown so those would essentially be used on cooldown anyway -- it will be avoided under most circumstances, and in fact will probably do exactly the opposite of what you've been pushing for by encouraging people to spend less time in melee so as not to accidentally trade damage. At best it would encourage holding the skill when forced to remain in closed quarters with the boss (or alternately, when pushed to stand some distance from the boss for a given mechanic), provided that it doesn't amount to a sum damage loss, and would incentivize using Displacement; at its absolute worst it would be considered yet another penalty for being in restrictive spaces, just like Engagement.