Removal of the cross class system announced.

[Tactical]

Since stoneskin is a healer skill, Paladin might lose it. I hope overpower and unleash are added to the pool as skill options. I also hope that paladins native provoke is replaced with either a self heal or a viable aoe.

>needing OP
>needing Unleash

You have Flash, is that not good enough? That thing does a NUMBER on aggro. Besides, Overpower and Unleash would not be okay on a Paladin.

That'd mean that PLDs could DPS! And we all know that WAR is the only DPS Job classified as a tank.

[Ragology]

>needing OP
>needing Unleash

You have Flash, is that not good enough? That thing does a NUMBER on aggro. Besides, Overpower and Unleash would not be okay on a Paladin.

That'd mean that PLDs could DPS! And we all know that WAR is the only DPS Job classified as a tank.

mmm I've got no qualms with the threat generated by Flash.

I think I'd be able to use the blinding effect of paladins flash more strategically If I wasn't making things immune at the start of a pull. Also I'd like to contribute more to aoe damage. Things get better at higher levels when I can tag everything with goring blade and circle of scorn, but until then I feel like I'd be contributing more if I had Overpower or Unleash in AOE situations.

People say that they should make flash into a damaging move but I like being able to flash sleeping or bound mobs without freeing them from the negative status.

[Lambdafish]

You have Flash, is that not good enough? That thing does a NUMBER on aggro. Besides, Overpower and Unleash would not be okay on a Paladin.

That'd mean that PLDs could DPS! And we all know that WAR is the only DPS Job classified as a tank.

It isn't even the comparison to WAR that people have an issue with when it comes to DPS, its the comparison to DRK. A recent example is that I'm currently trying to clear Zurvan EX as a PLD, and the add phase is mind numbing. There are lots of adds and the objective is to AOE them down while avoiding mechanics, which is terrible for a PLD. I already have hate, and my objective is to stand around occassionally popping CoS when it is up, and flash when I feel i might need more hate (or if im truly that bored), and the only alternative is to resort to single targeting one of the large group of mobs. Compare that to DRK who gets abyssal drain, and salted earth (not including unleash which is a straight up better flash) and procs for blood price so they can keep AOEing without fear of running out of MP. So I would say no, flash is not good enough.

WAR is it's own beast, and there are plenty of other debates and grievances when it comes to the WAR meta, but DRK and PLD are in direct competition, and are supposed to fill the same spot.

Since stoneskin is a healer skill, Paladin might lose it. I hope overpower and unleash are added to the pool as skill options. I also hope that paladins native provoke is replaced with either a self heal or a viable aoe.

I really hope PLD gets something good out of this deal because it essentially carries the majority of the tank cross class pool. While WAR might lose one or two skills (and DRK loses none), PLD has the potential to lose 3 or 4 skills (as part of the base PLD toolkit), on top of the healing skills which diversify its gameplay.

[Shurrikhan]

Actually, I think the change will be bigger than that. Yoshi-P mentionned, as an "example", that it's useless to have severals tanks having a "-20% damage taken/1m30 CD/20s duration" skill.
So, maybe Rampart and Shadowskin will be removed from PLD and DRK skilltrees and put into the Tank skills. It opens up a new slot for PLD and DRK, but can also make Rampart available for WAR, who will need to be adjusted accordingly.

Even where two skills are clones of each other—and I'm not saying that's okay—I'd much rather have Shadowskin on my edgy DRK job than Rampart, and would rather not have it on my Paladin, merely in terms of name and appearance. Moreover, moving it to a broad "tank" skill does nothing for customization or button-bloat. It'd still be a required choice; you'd just no longer have aesthetic fitting for your particular job, nor the ability to increase or decrease its strength in order to better shape its proportionate value against your other job skills and would remove yet another axis of balancing, in turn forcing those other job skills to be even more like one another. That is not a good kind of "simplification".

Technically, they could decide to make a universal enmity combo too, and balance the potency gap between job-restricted skills.

Making a universal enmity combo does not save space. It replaces three more unique slots with 3 absolutely homogenized ones that force the remaining skills to then also be more homogenized. It tears apart each tank's previous rotational priorities, where they previously all varied immensely. I don't understand why you would think that would be, in any way, a good thing.

As a sidenote, what it could bring in the end is the total removal of classes, and thus, potentially removing the weapon restriction.
Think about it, if your job is determined by the Crystal you equip, why not allow a PLD to use a greatsword or a Ninja to use two sword with a real Dual Wield?

If something tends to remove, remove, remove, with seemingly no intent of adding something in its place... it usually adds nothing in its place.

And why would you want this? Why would you want a job with shield-dependent skills like Bulwark and Shelltron and "Shield" Lob and "Shield" Bash to take on a Greatsword? Do you really think SE would be willing to create new, fitting animations, let alone names or effects, for each of those modified skills, after they'd apparently just removed all variance among (near-) identical skills?

You have Flash, is that not good enough? That thing does a NUMBER on aggro. Besides, Overpower and Unleash would not be okay on a Paladin.

That'd mean that PLDs could DPS! And we all know that WAR is the only DPS Job classified as a tank.

There's probably a good reason Flash was never originally designed to be an AoE filler. Originally, Gladiator had physical AoEs, same as Marauder, and these remained, distinct, even after the removal of most cross-class skills in 1.18. (Flash was merely a ranged enmity nuke, cross-classable.)

Would it really be so wrong for Gladiator to take up a physical, TP-based AoE, such as Circle Slash or Brandish, whether be that be with some unique component?

[Tactical]

mmm I've got no qualms with the threat generated by Flash.

I think I'd be able to use the blinding effect of paladins flash more strategically If I wasn't making things immune at the start of a pull. Also I'd like to contribute more to aoe damage. Things get better at higher levels when I can tag everything with goring blade and circle of scorn, but until then I feel like I'd be contributing more if I had Overpower or Unleash in AOE situations.

People say that they should make flash into a damaging move but I like being able to flash sleeping or bound mobs without freeing them from the negative status.

Hum... a Flash that makes things less likely to dodge your attacks (so you don't miss Rage of Halone) would be nice, but yeah, Blinding enemies tends to be way less effective. (SE why you no remove vulnerability on this ;_

There's probably a good reason Flash was never originally designed to be an AoE filler. Originally, Gladiator had physical AoEs, same as Marauder, and these remained, distinct, even after the removal of most cross-class skills in 1.18. (Flash was merely a ranged enmity nuke, cross-classable.)

Would it really be so wrong for Gladiator to take up a physical, TP-based AoE, such as Circle Slash or Brandish, whether be that be with some unique component?

In my nonexistent defense, that last part was a bit of a shitpost, but yeah, Gladiator having something worthwhile, in terms of crowd control, would be nice.

Maybe for every target Flash hits, chance for Circle of Scorn's CD reduces by 10 seconds/ends CD? Nah, sounds pretty bust. But where my Rive @ from the Axe-wielding Training Partner

[Reynhart]

Even where two skills are clones of each other—and I'm not saying that's okay—I'd much rather have Shadowskin on my edgy DRK job than Rampart, and would rather not have it on my Paladin, merely in terms of name and appearance.

The name doesn't really matter in the end. As for the animation, you could have a different one depending on the job. Like doing Fracture with a Sword is different than with an Axe.

Moreover, moving it to a broad "tank" skill does nothing for customization or button-bloat. It'd still be a required choice;

Considering there's no real customization with the cross-class, it wouldn't worsen the situation. The most important part, for me, is that I don't think you'll have to chose the role skills. You'll just have all of them available. But keep in mind that if tank skills are always available, you can still have traits to modify them. Maybe WAR will have the basic "Rampart-like" but PLD and DRK will keep the improved version.

Making a universal enmity combo does not save space. It replaces three more unique slots with 3 absolutely homogenized ones that force the remaining skills to then also be more homogenized.

Stormblood will not reduce the number of skills we have at our disposal, anyway. They already said that moving skills to the role-pool will give room for more personal skills.

It tears apart each tank's previous rotational priorities, where they previously all varied immensely.

Level 70 will already change our rotation, it's not a big deal.

I don't understand why you would think that would be, in any way, a good thing.

IIRC, I never said this was "good". For me, not designing an expanded class/job system is where the system started declining.

But eh, it worked that way from the start "Ok we have a deep but flawed system, how do we fix it ? Adressing the flaw is boring, let's make the system as bland as possible, it can't come bite us in the future, right ?"

[Shurrikhan]

IIRC, I never said this was "good". For me, not designing an expanded class/job system is where the system started declining.

But eh, it worked that way from the start "Ok we have a deep but flawed, how do we fix it ? Adressing the flaw is boring, let's make the system as bland as possible, it can't come bite us in the future, right ?"

My apologies for mis-extrapolating there.

And yes, painfully true.

Stormblood will not reduce the number of skills we have at our disposal, anyway. They already said that moving skills to the role-pool will give room for more personal skills.

My only point here is that they said either that—and my memory isn't perfect here—that our total skill-count or the general skill requirements (skill floor and ceiling) would be the same in SB as in HW. And as long as these role skills are free, rather than having to sacrifice a native skill to be taken, then that movement has absolutely no effect on button-bloat. Whether you need to level Paladin to 22 for Provoke, or get it automatically, you still have it and 4 other obligatory "cross-class"/"role-based" skills on your bar in addition to all your native skills. There is zero effect on the total skill-count by just changing that label. You still have exactly 32 skills (+ whatever net addition, if any, comes with SB).

Level 70 will already change our rotation, it's not a big deal.

Better to still have some differences... Further homogenization, at this point, should be all the scarier, not just inundating to the point of apathy.

[Reynhart]

My apologies for mis-extrapolating there.

No hard feeling

My only point here is that they said either that—and my memory isn't perfect here—that our total skill-count or the general skill requirements (skill floor and ceiling) would be the same in SB as in HW.

When questionned about that during the Q/A session at Fanfest, I think Yoshida meant that the skills needed for our rotations will not change. It doesn't automatically means that we won't have more situationnal skills on top of that. For example, as a DRG, you have access to Foresight, Featherfoot and Mantra, or even Ring of Thorns and Doomspike...Some of those skills are still useful, but you don't need to take them into account when practicing an optimal rotation.