Red Mages Needs a Bit More Complexity

[DestroidNGS]

Verstone and Verfire would benefit from more depth. Maybe adding a DoT effect to Verfire, or a small AoE explosion to Verstone - overall same potency. Thus, Verstone is good against tough targets surrounded by weaker ones, and Verfire is good against strong single targets. It adds a small decision point to the class.

Verflare and Verholy are underwhelming for capstone abilities. They are locked behind a melee combo that cannot always be used. They differ only as to which mana they will fill. Maybe add a small AoE to Verflare, or have it consume the duration of the Verfire DoT for added damage. For Verholy, have it pulse out a little heal.

From a visual standpoint, Verholy and Verflare are not as interesting as Flare, which is a lower level ability. They look COOL, but don't have the same audio/visual impact.

I like RDM, but I feel it could use more depth to allow players to push for interesting play.

[DestroidNGS]

Continued:

Acceleration. An entire ability that takes a proc from 50% to 100% seems like a waste. Compared to Sharpcast which can take a proc chance from 3% to 100%.

Add to Acceleration the benefit of allowing Verholy or Verflare to be used without first needing to perform the melee combo. Similar to True North in that it removes prerequisites from ability use, and adds a decision point to the ability. This would allow RDM to use their capstone ability in more situations.

[Galvuu]

Verflare and Verholy are awesome.
You do this 920 potency sword combo and get this free 550 finisher which is an explosion while you backflip away and go back to barraging them with spells while running around.
That's like saying Foul or Akh Morn aren't awesome. Big explosions are awesome, that's why I play casters to begin with x)

Also, don't take this wrong, but none of these changes really bring more complexity. Your whole rotation would be the same, you'd just accelerate a different spell (you'd accelerate Verholy/Verflare). In fact, that would make the job easier (and buff it), since now the tiny bit of mana gauge management you have (to make sure both are 80+ and slightly uneven) would be removed (you can just use accelerate to use a Verflare or Verholy). You really want to make RDM stronger and easier x)?

[PrismaticDaybreak]

Depth would be something like Verstone/fire: The next spell you cast of the opposing element deals 5% more damage. Even then that's not really much depth to add to it. Or something like, becoming unbalanced in mana reduces the damage of spells of the opposite element by 10%. There's really not a huge amount of depth that can be added to it without serious changes.

[Galvuu]

Depth would be something like Verstone/fire: The next spell you cast of the opposing element deals 5% more damage. Even then that's not really much depth to add to it. Or something like, becoming unbalanced in mana reduces the damage of spells of the opposite element by 10%. There's really not a huge amount of depth that can be added to it without serious changes.

This is actually a pretty good idea in a vacuum. The only sad part is that RDM already naturally alternates between the two types of spells like this to keep the mana mostly even.
Like you said, you'd need some bigger, more structural changes to add this complexity.

[Sylvina]

Actually what other classes need is a bit less complexity.

[Galvuu]

Actually what other classes need is a bit less complexity.

You should always have higher depth options for people that like that sorta stuff.
I played a lot of SCH/SMN/BLM/BRD in 3.x because I liked their priority rotation, decision making aspects (and the fact BLM was so punishing and rewarded knowledge). I just like this sort of thing.
It already irks me that the new BLM has less depth (less variations in the main rotation compared to 3.x).
RDM staying a straightforward, simple job is fine for people that like that sorta stuff.
Just don't take my fun away when there's simpler alternatives around xD

[Frowny]

Actually what other classes need is a bit less complexity.

Rather, balance should also take complexity into account: really easy means less personal damage. When something not as complex can do a hell of a lot more then everyone will want that... but some of us like little nuances.

[Zojha]

Rather, balance should also take complexity into account: really easy means less personal damage. When something not as complex can do a hell of a lot more then everyone will want that... but some of us like little nuances.

Mhm, it's an issue you cannot really solve.

If something else can achieve better results if you just "git gut", people will naturally want you to "git gut" instead of playing the easy thing. But if making use of class complexity isn't appropriately rewarding, it doesn't feel good to "git gut" at it either and there's little reason to play these classes. Doubly so when mechanics come into play and the already existing job complexity with intricate timings gets multiplied by invulnerability phases and the like - you'll just end up performing worse in spite of putting in more effort.

No matter what, you end up stepping on people's toes. So it's just a matter of whether you want effort to be rewarded or not.

[JunseiKei]

No thanks. The beauty of RDM is how simple it is. I absolutely love how the class has no DoT maintenance whatsoever and no overly complex string of buffs to do optimal DPS. Just like you ask for another to not take away the complexity of decision making of other classes, do not instill your favor of complexity.