Quote Originally Posted by Packetdancer View Post
By queuing into group content, I am implicitly agreeing to be a team player, and use the toolkit that SQEX has provided me to do my part to get everyone through the content we're now in. That includes things like "equipping your job stone", "turning on tank stance", "not just DPS'ing and refusing to heal anyone", and so on. Rescue is a part of that toolkit; I do not use it often, because its timing is "weird" at best, and can often just result in pulling someone to you after it is too late, and also people do not like it. But it is there to be be used, and in those few cases where I think it is merited, yes, I will use it.
I'm not specifically talking about rescue, I'm talking about just making you do something you don't want to because THEY think it's the right thing. It could be as simple as popping your buff everyone cooldown for you, or changing your target to the "right" one. Would you be OK with that?

Quote Originally Posted by Packetdancer View Post

Despite this, as I have said several times, if Rescue causes this much bitterness, then fine, take it out in the name of community harmony. But then give healers something in return. Something unique to healers, ideally. Preferably some way to potentially avoid needing to pay 2400 and slow-rez someone, which is what Rescue can be.
Kind of a separate argument really though. I think I have mentioned in other threads how healers probably need other things to do and their current rotations and responsibilities are garbo. Sure.. give them something else to do. I wouldn't call it "bitterness" though. I don't encounter it often enough to even really think about it much. But when you mention it to me, the negative occasions are far more numerous than the positives for me. I won't care if it's still in the game for the rest of my life, but since we're talking about it, I don't like several aspects of it.

Quote Originally Posted by Packetdancer View Post
(In contrast, what you may recall I strongly objected to in the glamour thread you reference was the idea that people who didn't like the glamour being changed—and potentially having screenshots of their character in gear that they didn't feel represented them—should be mollified by having it be that if someone turns off seeing anyone else's glamour it turns everyone into the default version of their race/gender when you first enter the character creator; that way, it wasn't their character. Which I get was intended to be the "see, everyone wins!" solution. However, those default characters, generally speaking, tend to be very fair-skinned. And glamour notwithstanding, I found—and still find—the suggestion that a game add a toggle to make dark-skinned characters functionally "disappear" to be one with some implications I'd define as "maybe a little problematic", whether or not those implications were the intention. I consider that a wildly different scenario than "someone moved my character for me" in a whole bunch of different ways. However, that is not really relevant to this thread.)
barring starting that entire conversation in another thread which can get wildly out of control I will avoid any counter statements. Just going to say that the idea that certain people were adamant about not removing their choices in one way but seem to ignore how choice is removed in this one was an interesting contrast to me.