Break the Trinity System Please

[AldoVonAlexandros]

What? You can do stuff breaking the trinity system, I remember doing primals with 1 tank and 7 sch xD, u can always do stuff with diferent kind and f parties xD

[Alurwen]

Many people are waiting for true support type jobs, could work them into 8 man stuff easily but may be difficult for 4 man dungeons. In lotro the small party size was only 3 players so working in a burglar (support mostly) was really difficult and no one wanted to take a burg for 3 mans. I hope SE figures out how to incorporate red mages :3

[myahele]

The trinity system is fine as is. I'd just like it if healers will have more support abilities

[Toodles]

^what... no.

It's simply a modality. It approaches DPS differently.

It wouldn't be a requirement any more than any other Job, especially if they implement more than one.

Some fights would favor it's utilization but that's the same as "it's better to have only 1 Melee in this fight or a mix of Physical/Magical damage"... we have that currently.

Only the most hardcore of raiders who say "no X Job, it does 1% less DPS in our comp" would make it so, but that's normal (MNK>DRG, etc.) & already exists in ARR.

They could balance DPS-Support just fine as seen with BRD.

They wouldn't have to entice people to play it either, the people who want to will just like today... people who like tanking tank, people who don't... Don't.

There's such a thing as balancing roles/Jobs to be viable but not OP/UP, it's entirely possible to do with DPS-Support hybrids.

[Delily]

^what... no.

It's simply a modality. It approaches DPS differently.

It wouldn't be a requirement any more than any other Job, especially if they implement more than one.

Some fights would favor it's utilization but that's the same as "it's better to have only 1 Melee in this fight or a mix of Physical/Magical damage"... we have that currently.

Only the most hardcore of raiders who say "no X Job, it does 1% less DPS in our comp" would make it so, but that's normal (MNK>DRG, etc.) & already exists in ARR.

Theycould balance DPS-Support just fine as seen with BRD.

They wouldn't have to entice people to play it either, the people who want to will just like today... people who like tanking tank, people who don't... Don't.

There's such a thing as balancing roles/Jobs to be viable but not OP/UP, it's entirely possible to do with DPS-Support hybrids.

So, now, instead of asking for pure support roles, you're suggesting that Square create a new hybrid/DPS role that can either do full damage or boost the party's damage. In other words, you've gone full circle and are, in essence, asking that the bard's buff spells be stronger.

However, let's put this to the test. You create this Bard+ class and it registers as DPS. This means for the duty finder, the class is irrelevant. If a party gets one and the person decides to play his support role, that means everyone else will be doing more damage, so the run will go a little faster. Otherwise, it has no bearing on the game. This means that for leveling and some early endgame gearing purposes, the class isn't needed, since the designers cannot guarantee the class is present. In more organized raids, should the class's support spells actually be more beneficial, any good raiding FC will require that person play in support mode. So this means the class's abilities will only be useful in raiding. This is close to what the bard is.

Or the designers could go out, and add the support role in. Now, everyone's duty finder queue times suddenly increase. It's now 1 tank, 1 healer, 2 damage, and 1 support for light, and 2 tanks, 2 healers, 4 dmg, and 1-2 support for full. This of course translates into raids, where the support role is now needed. You've gimped everyone else for the sole purpose of having a support class. Meanwhile, the more organized FC will investigate ways to optimize setups so that the support person can be supplanted with a better damage class, because hey, more damage means a faster clear. Sure, that means the support person would be playing 100% damage, which renders the support aspect useless.

I realize you don't like the trinity, but as I said, the tank/healer/damage role is the most basic group setup in a theme park raiding MMO you can get. Square's setup o spreading CC and support around the classes (like Blizzard has done) is most efficient design. It guarantees you can fire off a CD during a burn phase, but it also ensures you can complete an encounter without the CD.

[NyarukoW]

Might as well ask people to break the wheel. Reinventing the wheel, whatever you call it, is still the wheel. Even tracked vehicles are in essence using wheels inside the tracks, and requires a lot more maintenance. Short of flying or sailing where wheels don't apply, I am not sure the bull-headed endeavor to reinvent the wheel will achieve much.

The attempt to replace the trinity with some odd version of the trinity is still the trinity. Actually at theoretical level, you got offense, defense and support, and all characters are some combinations of those. Because at the end of the day, you either do damage to the opponent or you take damage from the opponent, or you assist in either endevour. Healers are just a specialized subset of support favoring defense, i.e. taking hits. The aggro system is just a tool to let a single tank be whole offensive live, without it you'd need a lot more tanks to tank all the mobs. You can tweaks things, but you can not possibly break the trinity system, unless it is a completely different type of game we are playing.

[Toodles]

"In other words, you've gone full circle and are, in essence, asking that the bard's buff spells be stronger."

Never once did I say make Bard's buff spells stronger.

[Delily]

"In other words, you've gone full circle and are, in essence, asking that the bard's buff spells be stronger."

Never once did I say make Bard's buff spells stronger.

You started by asking for a full support role. Then you asked for a support/dmg that queues as dmg and can reduce its damage to buff the group or play at full dmg. Which is what a bard does. So no, you never explicitly asked for buffs to the bard's spells. You have asked for bard++, at which point the question is one of deciding if a new dmg/support class is needed, or if the existing class needs to be improved.

[Toodles]

^yeah, a Bard does that.

Where is this idea of Bard++ coming from if I didn't suggest buffs to Bards which you admit now.

Buffs to Bards aren't even implied in my posting.

Your whole premise of Bard++ & me suggesting it is so ridiculous.

I also love how it's 2 +'s now... rofl.

[Dwill]

^yeah, a Bard does that.

Where is this idea of Bard++ coming from if I didn't suggest buffs to Bards which you admit now.

Buffs to Bards aren't even implied in my posting.

Your whole premise of Bard++ & me suggesting it is so ridiculous.

I also love how it's 2 +'s now... rofl.

It's not hard to understand. You want a DPS Hybrid that buffs the party but as it seems for you, Bard isn't doing it to a good enough level therefore, buffs to Bard would be implied in your ideology even if you didn't mention them per say. If bards would be buffed, then you'd have a class that according to you, would be a true DPS/Support hybrid.

Then again, your whole ideology doesn't take into account past MMO history on how Supports (Bard and Red Mage FFXI), Hybrid (Bards in FFXIV and Archon in Rift) are always going to be staple to a raid group if they are strong enough and you thinking that only the 1% will drop people for said classes is an utopic thought.