Confusion: Archer to Bard? Where is the Ranger Job?

[Lavani]

Because a bard is a support class in final fantasy. They should have added bard AFTER the RNG job.

[Isaveron]

Because a bard is a support class in final fantasy. They should have added bard AFTER the RNG job.

Bard should have been its own class, like the original plan was. Then they could have made its job dancer, or something else.

[PrettyPrincess]

what is the difference between an archer and ranger?

[Scherwiz]

what is the difference between an archer and ranger?

You dont know?!



It's the hat.

In all seriousness though, they don't really play the same imo, but that could just be me.

[Mairuzu]

You dont know?!



It's the hat.

In all seriousness though, they don't really play the same imo, but that could just be me.

The pot leaf hat. I miss it

[Anonymoose]

what is the difference between an archer and ranger?

In the lore, the differences are a lot like the real world, honestly. The fact that Rangers in Final Fantasy have generally used Bows, that's not the identity of the job by any means at all. The notion that there's a necessary link is a fallacy brought on by previous experience. However, Rangers have also been known to wield:

• Boomerangs (Final Fantasy II, XI)
• Daggers (Final Fantasy V, XI, A2)
• Bouncyballs (Final Fantasy X)
• Crossbows (Final Fantasy XI)
• Guns (Final Fantasy XI)

The abilities, however, have the common theme of nature. This is because a Ranger isn't necessarily a "User of ranged attacks" as much as it is "Ranges over the terrain and is a master of everything on it." Think less FFXI ranger (though it did have Widescan...) and think more mountain ranger. Or Aragorn. Or any other use of Ranger outside of Final Fantasy.

Many do fight from a distance and have abilities like Aim, but the nature theme extends to tracking animals, calling on their abilities, etc. Also, Rangers are more reliant on doing DAMAGE via ranged attacks where as ARCHERS are more reliant on tactical damage dealing, as in attacks that, while they do a bit of damage, more importantly do things like control enmity, inflict status effects, bind the enemy, etc.

Ironically enough, one of the Rangers from FFV was dressed in a bard outfit.

Either way, Ranger uses a LOT more than bows, and Archer has always been a status inflicting class. Giving it Bard makes 10x more sense than anybody has given it credit for so far.

Seriously; naysayers on this topic, I invite you to disprove any of this and state a counter-argument more productive than, "I don't want to do any support! I JUST WANT: BANG BANG BANG!"

[PrettyPrincess]

In the lore, the differences are a lot like the real world, honestly. The fact that Rangers in Final Fantasy have generally used Bows, that's not the identity of the job by any means at all. The notion that there's a necessary link is a fallacy brought on by previous experience. However, Rangers have also been known to wield:

• Boomerangs (Final Fantasy II, XI)
• Daggers (Final Fantasy V, XI, A2)
• Bouncyballs (Final Fantasy X)
• Crossbows (Final Fantasy XI)
• Guns (Final Fantasy XI)

The abilities, however, have the common theme of nature. Many do fight from a distance and have abilities like Aim, but the nature theme extends to tracking animals, calling on their abilities, etc. Also, Rangers are more reliant on doing DAMAGE via ranged attacks where as ARCHERS are more reliant on tactical damage dealing, as in attacks that, while they do a bit of damage, more importantly do things like control enmity, inflict status effects, bind the enemy, etc.

Ironically enough, one of the Rangers from FFV was dressed in a bard outfit.

Either way, Ranger uses a LOT more than bows, and Archer has always been a status inflicting class. Giving it Bard makes 10x more sense than anybody has given it credit for so far.

Seriously; naysayers on this topic, I invite you to disprove any of this and state a counter-argument more productive than, "I don't want to do any support! I JUST WANT: BANG BANG BANG!"

MOAR SENSE I LOVE IT

[Scherwiz]

In the lore, the differences are a lot like the real world, honestly. The fact that Rangers in Final Fantasy have generally used Bows, that's not the identity of the job by any means at all. The notion that there's a necessary link is a fallacy brought on by previous experience. However, Rangers have also been known to wield:

• Boomerangs (Final Fantasy II, XI)
• Daggers (Final Fantasy V, XI, A2)
• Bouncyballs (Final Fantasy X)
• Crossbows (Final Fantasy XI)
• Guns (Final Fantasy XI)

The abilities, however, have the common theme of nature. This is because a Ranger isn't necessarily a "User of ranged attacks" as much as it is "Ranges over the terrain and is a master of everything on it." Think less FFXI ranger (though it did have Widescan...) and think more mountain ranger. Or Aragorn. Or any other use of Ranger outside of Final Fantasy.

Many do fight from a distance and have abilities like Aim, but the nature theme extends to tracking animals, calling on their abilities, etc. Also, Rangers are more reliant on doing DAMAGE via ranged attacks where as ARCHERS are more reliant on tactical damage dealing, as in attacks that, while they do a bit of damage, more importantly do things like control enmity, inflict status effects, bind the enemy, etc.

Ironically enough, one of the Rangers from FFV was dressed in a bard outfit.

Either way, Ranger uses a LOT more than bows, and Archer has always been a status inflicting class. Giving it Bard makes 10x more sense than anybody has given it credit for so far.

Seriously; naysayers on this topic, I invite you to disprove any of this and state a counter-argument more productive than, "I don't want to do any support! I JUST WANT: BANG BANG BANG!"

Yes, thank you, that was much more than I was willing to type. Also, they do not have to disprove anything, it boils down to what some people want from a job, like the LNC's campaigning against Wyverns for example. While you or I may not care that the job is BRD, others want a ranged damage dealer, and I feel the remedy to this lies within the Archer class itself if they can rebalance it correcly.

[Anonymoose]

Yes, thank you, that was much more than I was willing to type. Also, they do not have to disprove anything, it boils down to what some people want from a job, like the LNC's campaigning against Wyverns for example. While you or I may not care that the job is BRD, others want a ranged damage dealer, and I feel the remedy to this lies within the Archer class itself if they can rebalance it correcly.

It's a shame that Ranged DPS is anachronistic compared to new-school (post-broadband) MMO design; I won't drone on about it again for everyone's sake, but a few pages ago I went on a spree about why classes that ONLY do damage while being safe, or ONLY do buffing without any survivability can't exist in a Class-to-Job system, or in modern MMOs as a whole, really.

Those who are disappointed about Barcher will probably keep getting disappointed unless they come to understand the modern directions in responsibility balance in MMOs. They'll be disappointed when Musketeer turns into something like Corsair, they'll be disappointed when Ranger is finally announced and it's like, an extension of Beastmaster or something.

Either that, or I'LL be disappointed when they cave and add a pure ranged DD class where, like Archers do now, they just bump the DPS as high as possible and stand safely away from the mob, taking no damage and only accepting the responsibility of "don't take hate" - just alternating between going absolutely apeshit with WS and then standing around doing f**k all while their enmity lowers. Eugh.

[Scherwiz]

It's a shame that Ranged DPS is anachronistic compared to new-school (post-broadband) MMO design; I won't drone on about it again for everyone's sake, but a few pages ago I went on a spree about why classes that ONLY do damage while being safe, or ONLY do buffing without any survivability can't exist in a Class-to-Job system, or in modern MMOs as a whole, really.

Those who are disappointed about Barcher will probably keep getting disappointed unless they come to understand the modern directions in responsibility balance in MMOs. They'll be disappointed when Musketeer turns into something like Corsair, they'll be disappointed when Ranger is finally announced and it's like, an extension of Beastmaster or something.

Either that, or I'LL be disappointed when they cave and add a pure ranged DD class where, like Archers do now, they just bump the DPS as high as possible and stand safely away from the mob, taking no damage and only accepting the responsibility of "don't take hate" - just alternating between going absolutely apeshit with WS and then standing around doing f**k all while their enmity lowers. Eugh.

I think it is ok that you(?) may not want another ranged DD in this game, however, you are not the only person playing, and I think we can both agree that since the creation of these forums there has been nothing except asking for players feedback and trying to gauge community reaction to one thing or another. IF players want a ranged damage dealer, which archer in its currently "nerfed" state is not, then they should be allowed to ask for it even if now is not the time to add it or whatever other argument and bias others may have against it.