Quote Originally Posted by Xerius View Post
Using this logic the other half of the responses are 'yes.'

So, uh... yes!
And people saying "no" are only half of this discussion as well.

Quote Originally Posted by Xerius View Post
It's a matter of how the job is played not DPS. A lot of people are upset that they're favorite job is all of the sudden played completely differently. Many people aren't disappointed by BRDs lack of DPS but are disappointed by how it feels to play the job now. Of course some people love WM, but many people don't and that's why I think it's only logical that a split occurs so people that loved the job before can play in a style similar to their favorite and people that love WM can still play BRD in it's current state.
Even if you were to take away WM from bard, they need something else to fill in the damage discrepancy. WM increases their overall dps as much as every otehr job getting increased dps from their new abilities. That is, their relative dps compared to other classes has not increased by using WM; their overall dps is balanced around using WM.

If you fit in ranger as a role that does exactly what WM does and foregoing regen songs, it's not competing with bard for a DPS slot, but rather the spell casters which comes with it's own problems; TP is not sustainable like MP and you have the spell damage aspect. The current party compositon setup between DPS is that you want two melee, 1 "support dps" and one caster. "Support dps" would be BRD or MCH because of their regen abilties which comes with naturally less damage output compared to those of a caster.

And now even if we were to go with this, it doesn't change the fact who (BRD or RNG) gets WM. WM the way it is, does not work well with archer's skills. The traits don't work properly with proc rates, and the animations on the archer skills. It's not so much as fixing the problem rather than moving it somewhere else.