New Jobs off current Classes!

[EdwinLi]

That is simply not true. BRD is not a hybrid, it's a DPS. It doesn't tank or heal. It provides utility, but that is not unique to BRD; LNC and PGL provide debuffs and interrupts as well. BRD cannot somehow coexist with another job that spends 99% of its time doing the exact same thing and which is built the exact same way with the exact same equipment and exact same stats, not to mention the absurdity of "balancing" two jobs like this.

Your looking at things way too limited to what in side the box.

Yes Arcanist derive into Summoner for DD and Scholar for healer but that is because the base class is set up to go into these two roles.

Bard is placed as DD becuase in this game all classes are either placed as one of the three basic trinity role being DD, Tank, or Healer. A direct description of what purpose a Job has in a group isn't defined into the game directly because it only labels classes and Jobs as one of the three trinities. Bard is the Supply Unit because the Job is designed to supply the group with MP and TP if they run low during certain situations. It also uses a skill like Foe Requiem to help the Mage Jobs perform more damage on enemies. While it follows a DD role the skills provided to Bard through the Job soulstone is towards support skills while it depends on its Archer class skills for the DD.

Balancing Bard and Ranger isn't a issue because it comes down to the value of each Job. Bard is a must have for any group because of its ability to provide TP and MP when groups need them for heavy MP and TP consuming fights which makes them valued outside of their normal role of DD. Rangers will not be capable of such ability because it focus more on damage making it lack skills that would benefit the group outside of its normal role of DD.

but if this is what you believe is ideal for the game then I'm not going to try to change your mind. As of now we can only wait and see what SE will do with the 2nd Jobs of each class.

[jomoru]

Balancing Bard and Ranger isn't a issue because it comes down to the value of each Job. Bard is a must have for any group because of its ability to provide TP and MP when groups need them for heavy MP and TP consuming fights which makes them valued outside of their normal role of DD. Rangers will not be capable of such ability because it focus more on damage making it lack skills that would benefit the group outside of its normal role of DD.

but if this is what you believe is ideal for the game then I'm not going to try to change your mind. As of now we can only wait and see what SE will do with the 2nd Jobs of each class.

Your argument would seem to invalidate the existence of rangers. You either get bards who are balanced to not only provide acceptable dps but also utility or.. you get rangers who will not be vastly better at dps and don't provide the necissary utility

[EdwinLi]

Your argument would seem to invalidate the existence of rangers. You either get bards who are balanced to not only provide acceptable dps but also utility or.. you get rangers who will not be vastly better at dps and don't provide the necissary utility

Well it is the matter of answering the question of what do you need rather than what do you want.

Such as do you really need 2 bard for a group or just 1?

Do you need 2 differnet Archer Jobs in 1 group so you can keep the 2 silence and not lower LB gain?

Will the Fight be TP and/or MP consuming.

and so on.

It all about asking the question of what will a group need rather than what a group wants. Most group contents in this game seems to follow what a group wants being simply a DD, tank or healer which have made people more focused on what role they can provide rather than what the Job can provide outside the role they are given in the trinity.

As of now we are not even close to being certain what they will do with 2nd Jobs but they can make Ranger unique in its own way like how Bard unique quality is through helping their Group through songs.

[Gamemako]

Your argument would seem to invalidate the existence of rangers. You either get bards who are balanced to not only provide acceptable dps but also utility or.. you get rangers who will not be vastly better at dps and don't provide the necissary utility

This. ARR isn't a game with rubbish design like FF11 where you completely replace your ability set as you progress. Bard and Ranger would be basically identical except for BRD's now-and-then songs and Ranger's whatever-abilities. Ranger's abilities wouldn't even have a role, since ARC already has silence, bind, cone AoE, circle AoE, AoE DoT, ST DoT, and off-GCD spam. Additionally, keep in mind that BRD's "utility" is also damage. The only defensive ability in 2.0, RoD, is now purely offensive.

Do you need 2 differnet Archer Jobs in 1 group so you can keep the 2 silence and not lower LB gain?

The system was never intended to make interrupts that essential, and it won't be with the changes to debuff resistance. Moreover, if you're choosing two archers in the first place, then ARC is overpowered and needs to be nerfed.

List of ideal fight characteristics

So ARC should have the ideal counterpick to every fight -- just change your job and enter said content, because gear, skills, and stat distribution are all shared?

As of now we are not even close to being certain what they will do with 2nd Jobs but they can make Ranger unique in its own way like how Bard unique quality is through helping their Group through songs.

The only question is whether all classes will get a second job at all. ARR's design abhors redundancy. Ranger as DPS is necessarily nearly identical to Bard. We may not see anything from Archer at all, but if we do, it won't be a DPS.