Roles for Samurai, Red Mage, Dancer

[Welsper59]

I played FFXI for 10 years. I do know what I'm talking about when I'm talking about that game. Did you play it? I see you didn't even know what trait I was talking about.

Then why wouldn't you know how the combat system functioned and why such a trait like that would exist, even for a DPS? I didn't know about it immediately because, as I answered right off the bat, I barely played SAM. That's like me asking you why you didn't know about Sneak Attack on NIN having a front position buffed effect. You still failed to justify anything on that trait proving "tank". Move on, just as I am.

Stats absolutely mattered for that kind of thing in that game. The Thief Artifact armor (And AF+1) has zero +enmity on it so my point still stands, the sets that gave Thief +enmity came WAY later. I specifically said it didn't make sense for SAM to have +enmity as a DPS job because they have no mechanics/abilities to shed or manipulate that like DRG does: " nor any reason to have +enmity, especially on a job that has no enmity reducing abilities like DRG had etc." I specifically mentioned DRG because of High Jump. I mained DRG in FFXI for near 2 years, I'm aware of it's abilities. It made sense to later add +enmity to Thief because the core moves of that job manipulated enmity to place it onto the tank. Samurai has no such skills.


Past FF games don't operate on a trinity system. There is technically no "tanks" in traditional JRPG Final Fantasy titles so the point is moot. You're arguments are pointless at this point because as I mentioned before, literally everything can be a DPS. You don't need to argue for it because of course it can be a DPS. The DPS role requires no extra stipulations aside from an ability to deal damage, that's it. So it's not a matter of "well it can be a dps too just as easily." because that's not the point, as anything can be a DPS, it's the default, the neutral, the base form.

The point is that is has many flags that make it a prime contendor as a Tank. I don't know how else to really break it down. Only that you're arguing for nothing because DPS is the default job archetype when it comes to these things.

My mistake on the DRG thing. Keep in mind though that, as I said, enmity reduction wasn't a common thing at all. DRG was pretty much the only one that had that. Also note that, as I said in an earlier post, SAM was not introduced until Zilart. The game had changed things by then. Zilart also introduced things like Dynamis, which is where the THF AF2 came from with the Enmity. Referencing original THF AF and comparing to gear that came out later for SAM when it released is... really reaching.

Realize that SAM was very powerful for good stretches of that game. They'd often steal agg from tanks if they went wild even without enmity+ gear. Subbing THF was a common practice outside of raid setups. Enmity in that game is not a strong argument for much, since they also used it as a punishment. It would explain why caster gear drops also had +enmity back then. It's the same risk vs reward system that explains why some gear have massive damage boosts, but huge hits to accuracy/def/stats. Hence, why I said that stats don't dictate much there to determine someones role. Some do, like DEF, but enmity is not exclusive to it. I mean crap man, THF had +shield and +parry on their AF pieces. Are they tanks!?

I'm arguing on the matter because your points have faults that work against you, but you don't seem to realize it. You can't pick and choose your arguments by ignoring factors that work against you. This is why I keep saying that it'll work for both sides equally, and I continuously state why that's the fact on the matter. Maybe I am talking to a wall on the matter, which isn't unusual when it comes to reasoning and inner workings.

[MomomiMomi]

Then why wouldn't you know how the combat system functioned and why such a trait like that would exist, even for a DPS? I didn't know about it immediately because, as I answered right off the bat, I barely played SAM. That's like me asking you why you didn't know about Sneak Attack on NIN having a front position buffed effect. You still failed to justify anything on that trait proving "tank". Move on, just as I am.

That would be a pretty silly question on your part, since I do know that sneak attack has a front position effect. Not only because, hey, I play with other ninjas, but I have a level 50 NIN myself.

And trying to say that it was only for WS is foolish, since auto-attacks made up about 40% of SAM's dps. It also doesn't explain why they made it work in the front. Why not the back?

[Welsper59]

That would be a pretty silly question on your part, since I do know that sneak attack has a front position effect. Not only because, hey, I play with other ninjas, but I have a level 50 NIN myself.

And trying to say that it was only for WS is foolish, since auto-attacks made up about 40% of SAM's dps. It also doesn't explain why they made it work in the front. Why not the back?

I stated why already in that late edit earlier you saw. Risk vs Reward. I pointed out, at least to Shippuu, how prevalent that design philosophy was with that game. Is it worth the risk? Go for it... ooh bad timing, died to the breath attack. Or the better outcome, where you did more damage with your majority damage attack.

To say SAM did 40% of their damage from AA is severely overestimating. That'd be closer to true for MNK and other 2h weapon users (and THF maybe), but WS abilities in that game are practically everything about physical DPS. SAM frequented their abilities to quickly gain TP. Even if it were 40%, that's still ignoring the fact that a majority of your damage is coming from WS output thanks to potential to self-chain or do multiple types of SC's with others. Your argument is literally trying to say that because of that trait and how useful it is, the SAM should be standing in front of the mob at all times... you know, cuz getting one-shot by breath attacks wasn't a thing. You either did not play FFXI (much) or you played it poorly.

[MomomiMomi]

I stated why already in that late edit earlier you saw. Risk vs Reward. I pointed out, at least to Shippuu, how prevalent that design philosophy was with that game. Is it worth the risk? Go for it... ooh bad timing, died to the breath attack. Or the better outcome, where you did more damage with your majority damage attack.

To say SAM did 40% of their damage from AA is severely overestimating. That'd be closer to true for MNK and other 2h weapon users (and THF maybe), but WS abilities in that game are practically everything about physical DPS. SAM frequented their abilities to quickly gain TP. Even if it were 40%, that's still ignoring the fact that a majority of your damage is coming from WS output thanks to potential to self-chain or do multiple types of SC's with others. Your argument is literally trying to say that because of that trait and how useful it is, the SAM should be standing in front of the mob at all times... you know, cuz getting one-shot by breath attacks wasn't a thing. You either did not play FFXI (much) or you played it poorly.

Frontal attacks were nowhere near as prevalent on XI than they are here. Just about everything has them here. Not so on XI.

That would also make it the only job they gave a frontal attack risk to. Pretty much none of the other jobs had much risk. The only one was DRK.

[Welsper59]

It's not really reaching, you're the one who brought up THF AF in the first place saying it had +enmity on it (when it technically didn't.) All I was stating was that Samurai AF had +enmity on it's AF which was pretty much reserved to only tank jobs. THF received +enmity on their AF2 armor but they also had an entire job identity pretty much based on the whole sneak/trick attack which manipulated enmity.
It's important because the AF armor is meant to be the jobs iconic identifying armor and as such would be developed with the intent of complimenting the job's intended role. The Fact SAM AF had +enmity says a lot when the job had no other abilities to shed or manipulate enmity. There's really no denying it or trying to explain it in another way. DRG was released at the same time as SAM intended as a strong DPS, hence why it was given an ability to shed enmity in the event it ripped aggro. Ninja was given mitigation tools to counter the event that it grabbed aggro etc.

Even then, FFXI was a nightmarish example of any kind of balance. The devs for it were slow to fix any problems regarding balance. But it's whichever, to me the fact they had +enmity and other things indicates they planned it to be at least some form of tank-ish role. But we'll just have to agree to disagree on this one.



The faults you are pointing out though aren't working against me. They are simply able to be applied in the other direction. If they worked against me then they'd be making my arguments for a tank Samurai invalid but they aren't, they're just making it applicable to a DPS samurai as well. Like my Fell Cleave example from earlier. You stated that Samurai is known for Big hits, and I pointed out that tanks can do big hits too. That doesn't invalidate that a DPS SAM can do big hits, only that it can be applied to a Tank SAM as well.

Many things can be put on a DPS job because they are not as much of a restricted role, they have more flexibility than tanks and healers in what they can do as a result. Once again, the DPS role doesn't need arguments on why something should be a DPS because quite literally everything already can be a DPS. It's the assumed standard.

No one is saying it cannot be a DPS. But plenty of people are saying it cannot be a tank. That is why the tank side brings forth arguments defending it's reasoning for why it can or should be a tank. The DPS side doesn't need that.

I like you, you like to point out my own words to argue, which is proper. Some points are missed though, which isn't something I'm immune to obviously.

Regarding the THF AF, I brought that up because SAM was released at or around the same time as AF2 (Dynamis). Again, we're talking about a period where the game has undergone changes. I mean, my mention of THF having +shield and +parry stats on it's AF1 is evidence of one of many instances that proper stats aren't exact that games strengths, cuz as you know, those are tank stats.

Hell, THF had +INT on it's original AF lol. INT for THF was only useful for its elemental WS abilities, and even then, it really wasn't a good stat to bother with since the WS didn't stack with SA/TA and SC'd really poorly. This is due to better WS abilities emerging like Dancing Edge or ones with better SC properties... even Viper Bite was better to use in those early level cases. Sorry for the tangent on detail lol.

But I agree with needing to agree to disagree on it.

Good catch on my poor word choice. You're right that it doesn't work against you, but it doesn't exactly prove one over the other, which I'm assuming seems to be the point. To be able to justify why one works over another.

I wouldn't really say "no one" on their thinking SAM must be tank, as there were some in this thread earlier ("righteousness of sword users = tank" bull**** that was brought up at some point), but I agree that most aren't of the "impossible" mind. Likewise with the folks that want it to be DPS, not tank.

I'd assume most of them are accepting that it's possible, but they think DPS is much better logically. To that, they're wrong too sorta lol. Practically every point on the matter is interchangeable, as you and I have noted. The only grounds that pro-DPS arguments have is XI, for two reasons. 1) It's a DPS, through and through. 2) Even if it was intended to be a tank there, that means they couldn't pull it off successfully (not a remark saying it can't be done, mind you). Are those points meaningful? Who knows, that sort of stuff is up to the devs.

Frontal attacks were nowhere near as prevalent on XI than they are here. Just about everything has them here. Not so on XI.

That would also make it the only job they gave a frontal attack risk to. Pretty much none of the other jobs had much risk. The only one was DRK.

You're right, they aren't as common as here. But you know what was different about it? They weren't telegraphed, and most abilities that mobs used were instant or near-instant... and VERY common to 1-shot non-tanks. You weren't going to avoid that Radiant Breath, Bad Breath, Heat Breath, Dark Spore, Silence Gas, Blank Gaze, etc. Just to clarify, there actually were a ton of frontal cone AoE in that game and many of them were very dangerous.

If you stood in the front of the mob all the time as a SAM for no group-beneficial reason, you were HATED in that group. Tanks found you annoying, healers REALLY hated you because you'd be 1-shot or they need to remove various debuffs that not only likely damaged you greatly, but hindered you to the point of being useless. So yeah, if you did that as a SAM, you were a bad player.

Edit: SAM is not the only job with risk factors as well. THF, for example, is the only job that technically would stay in front for longer than the SAM for the short time they would. TA+WS was a very common means to keep threat on the tank from powerful DPS doing their thing. This means THF does, in fact, go in front of the mob to do their thing. So... yeah, SAM is not the only one with mechanics or factors that involve going to the front.

... actually BRD would too sometimes. Depending what the tank specifically needed, compared to what the other jobs wanted. Forgot about BRD on that, and I used to main it too lol. Seriously, you should drop the trait argument. Come at me with something else... you're not gonna prove your point on this one, because it just doesn't apply to how the reality is. Now if the trait did something to mitigate damage full-time, I'd be right there with you on it, but that's not the case.

[MomomiMomi]

Edit: SAM is not the only job with risk factors as well. THF, for example, is the only job that technically would stay in front for longer than the SAM for the short time they would. TA+WS was a very common means to keep threat on the tank from powerful DPS doing their thing. This means THF does, in fact, go in front of the mob to do their thing. So... yeah, SAM is not the only one with mechanics or factors that involve going to the front.

... actually BRD would too sometimes. Depending what the tank specifically needed, compared to what the other jobs wanted. Forgot about BRD on that, and I used to main it too lol. Seriously, you should drop the trait argument. Come at me with something else... you're not gonna prove your point on this one, because it just doesn't apply to how the reality is. Now if the trait did something to mitigate damage full-time, I'd be right there with you on it, but that's not the case.

Those are pretty much the jobs with the least risk. THF's whole design is to mitigate risk for the party. And there was absolutely nothing risky about BRD other than pulling, and that was something completely outside the job's design.

Seriously, there was no job with any risks other than DRK. That's the only job that had any risk built into it. All the other dps jobs have methods of mitigating risk.

I also don't know how a dps job "through and through" has a defensive stance that gives it a 100% dodge, and an "evade and counter."