Quote Originally Posted by Rithy255 View Post
Clunky is the excuse people make up when they don't like how a job plays. Clunky basically means "wah wah I can't play it optimally without picking it up in one second"

BLM doesn't feel clunky to me, old DOT PLD didn't feel clunky ect.

The only thing "clunky" I can think of is the delay in boss attacks.
I mean, yeah that's the obvious definition. But even still, when someone says X is clunky, they don't usually want it to mean "I don't like how it plays", but rather something more like "it's contradictory to the rest of the jobs design; it encourages unorthodox play" or something along those lines. My biggest problem is that they don't go over why something is clunky in their view, instead just saying "clunky" without elaborating.

Old Anatman is something I'd point to as "clunky", especially the initial version in ShB that was oGCD since you could use it in the opener to squeeze in an extra GL stack just as the boss was pulled before starting the fight proper. The reason it was clunky in my view was because you had to be able to track server ticks (something that the UI just doesn't natively do outside asking one of the healers pop a regen beforehand) in the hopes that you could get a stack just in time to not screw up your opener. Further, it was obviously not the intended opener to use Anatman since it messed with the flow of an opener just for one GL stack.

Despite that however, I'm sure there were others that liked the idea of old Anatman and would've been disappointed at losing it when Anatman became a GCD. They'd be few in number, but even still, a "clunky" mechanic that was more or less optional was removed when it could've just been a mark of someone trying to get the absolute most out of their job.

In the end, I'd rather have a little "clunk" if it meant giving every job a unique feel and some optional optimizations.