Idea: Split Archer into Bard and Ranger

[Duelle]

This wouldn't really impact Ranger though. Because Ranger would use DEX just like BRD. Ranger would also be full DPS, so it would just compete for the same spot BRD competes for now.

What Riceisnice is aiming at is that all the OP suggestion does is sort of hide the problem without actually resolving it. BRD would still be saddled with WM and the awkward gameplay.

[Sessurea]

not happening. NEXT!

[AskaRay]

They would've done this already if they were gonna do it at all, it's more obvious a choice than "arcanist > Summoner/Scholar" so I'm pretty sure they didn't split archer on purpose.

[RiceisNice]

...

Because if we were to go with this implementation, Ranger would still have all of bard skills minus songs (except swiftsong, that would be on ranger) and level 52-60 abilities. This includes traits and passives like river of blood. While it's adding new skills, the base foundation of the class still remains, and 5 skills does not dramatically change how they play; you're severely underestimating how much of the job is tied to their class abilities.

The only other class that has branching jobs is summoner/scholar, and that comes with a complete change in role and still comes with balancing problems (they cant buff SMN without buffing SCH)

[LordPhantomhive]

I think if brd's abilities like straighter shot and bloodletter proc'd more, or could be forced more like mch the casting wouldn't be so bothersome. Mch has the luxury or loading/ reload for combo damage and no casting. Also has an auto attack depending on turret. Brd needs something to ease the pain of that castbar.

[Noelzzz]

Ranger would still have all of bard skills minus songs (except swiftsong, that would be on ranger) and level 52-60 abilities

Ranger will have all archers skills not bards, do you really think that 10 jobs skill can't change how you play a class? About traits, yoshi-p in an interview said that at some point will introduce a skill tree system

[DestinovaTrueblade]

Why do people see branching jobs as a bad thing? I'm pretty sure for jobs with the same role it can works actually pretty well, just see them as if were another spec. How can people say that branching jobs will play the same? Do you know that going on we will get only jobs skills? if you play this game with a decent knowledge of the job you know how much a class can change with just 5 jobs skills. For me Ranger and Thief must be in this game, they are iconic jobs and will add variety. I dont understand why, instead of trying to get a better game, people answer with "no"

I don't claim to be a game designer or anything, but a bloated roster of specs/classes/jobs =\= better game because the longer that roster, the harder it is to balance the game without homogenizing the spcs/classes/jobs.
So it's better to be selective on what is actually added to the game and IMO Rogues and Archer already represented Ranger and Thief adequetly, I'd rather see something currently absent like Samurai or Red Mage.

[Dererk]

Why do people see branching jobs as a bad thing? I'm pretty sure for jobs with the same role it can works actually pretty well, just see them as if were another spec. How can people say that branching jobs will play the same? Do you know that going on we will get only jobs skills? if you play this game with a decent knowledge of the job you know how much a class can change with just 5 jobs skills. For me Ranger and Thief must be in this game, they are iconic jobs and will add variety. I dont understand why, instead of trying to get a better game, people answer with "no"

Why do 2 dps jobs need to brach off 1 class? And yes brd is a dps but it has support capability's. But it's still a dps the brd in my static is good real good. Maybe if they made a support role a real one could see this happening but then you can't buff one with out buffing the other and SE has made that clear multiple times as well as adding a real support role to the set up in party's. (you know duty finder limitations ya its true.)

Also I find it funny with MCH people said they wanted a magic gunner well they got a gunner with a cast bar lol.

I don't understand where you're coming from. You're comparing Ranger to BRD, and saying we won't need it because casters will have to compete with the spot? All DPS are competing against all similar DPS for those slots already? How would this mess up the meta? Ninja didn't mess up the meta when it was introduced because of TP generation/taking a melee DPS slot.

Ninja also brings a slashing resistance down de buff to the party and monk dragon kick adds a intelligence and a blunt resistance down debuff. And with DRK and delirium that gives an intelligence down debuff but since it doesn't add a blunt down dragon kick overwrites delirium. And if you have a DRK and PLD tank set up for end game ninja would be more useful than mnk in these set ups.

[Noelzzz]

Rogues and Archer already represented Ranger and Thief adequetly, I'd rather see something currently absent like Samurai or Red Mage.

Represent Ranger and Thief, yes, you can't play Rogue and Archer in endgame anyway. I agree with you with the priority to add something currently absent though, but that doesn't they could "fix" it someday.

[rappa]

Wanderer's Minuet isn't going anywhere

I stopped to read here. I could use "git gud", "learn 2 play", "go to smn op" but i'll try to post something relevant.

WM brings more dps. i prefer lose my mobility and earn 30% damage than move like a headless chicken or my ass is on fire.

Bard now is useful in good hands and a disaster in "smashing button" players. Our cast time is 1'40 and 1'50. It's unusual any aoe i can't cast and avoid after the execution. If i can't cast i will have bloodletter, sidewinder, flaming arrow, any oGCD to buff me or last resort, "feint".

I will rant if "feint" has castime.