How a Shapeshifter Could Work in FFXIV

[Capriana]

I am happy for you and your creativity. Its nice to be this excited about something.

But please for the LOVE of GOD. No freaking shapeshifter in FFXIV. JUST NO! STOP!

I liked your bluemage, your dancer or whatever but god shapeshifter, JUST NO! ESPECIALLY AS A TANK. HATE MAGE TANKS. HATE is not even a strong word here.

[Kazrah]

I am happy for you and your creativity. Its nice to be this excited about something.

But please for the LOVE of GOD. No freaking shapeshifter in FFXIV. JUST NO! STOP!

I liked your bluemage, your dancer or whatever but god shapeshifter, JUST NO! ESPECIALLY AS A TANK. HATE MAGE TANKS. HATE is not even a strong word here.

Thanks for the compliments, but why so opposed to those two themes?

[TankHunter678]

Thanks for the compliments, but why so opposed to those two themes?

I hear shapeshifter and I think druid to be honest. Sorcery and the title of Sorcerer is more along the lines of Black Mage, White Mage, and Red Mage, and maybe dealing with voidsent rather then anything in the realm of shapeshifting like a druid in touch with nature and the inner beast.

As for mage tanks, in general its a conflict of themes. Mages are always known to be thin brittle robe wearers, the polar opposite of tanks which are known for being bulky tough armor wearers. Sorcerer especially invokes the robe wearing bookish type that is not physically fit for the rigors tanking requires.

[kikix12]

Mages are not always known for being brittle. Quite the opposite. There are many stories where they leave typical "tanks" in the dust. It's just that for some reason, most games ignore those stories.

Who makes use of barriers, knights or mages?! What's stronger, a very much destructible metal armor or a potentially indestructible magical barrier?!

Look at the prime RPG game, Dungeons and Dragons. Are mages squishy there themselves?! Yes. Except clerics which are almost as tanky as warriors, and even tankier than them when you factor in their healing. But what about mages?! They are squishy, but as levels go, they gain access to force kind of spells that are virtually indestructible (only other mages with only limited few spells can destroy force). Only a caster can stop a dragons breath from turning the party into a fried chicken substitute. That's why mages had to be held back by limited casts of their spells in 3.X and lower.

Look at Magi manga, where mages are surrounded by "Borg", a kind of forcefield, just because they are mages, making an adept tougher than your veteran warrior. The titular Magi are outright impossible to defeat for normal warriors.
Look at Harry Potter, a very liked story, where the casters throw barriers to stop attacks that should have killed any normal human.
And Gandalf fighting against Balrog (or Balrok?! well, one of these)? Could Gimli or Aragorn stop him even for a second? Fighting in a war on the front lines? Saruman and Sauron both were magical entities as well, and Sauron could not be defeated without destroying the one ring, which itself was completely indestructible outside of a very specific, single volcano right at the very middle of Saurons territory.


If you look at fiction, there are PLENTY examples of tough mages. Mages that cover their bodies with earth forming a tough, regenerating armor. Mages in bubbles of hardened water (and fun fact, at high enough pressure water is harder than any concrete, metal or even diamond). Mages in spheres of forcefields.

In non-game fiction, mages are most often shown as being able to withstand a lot more beating than non-mages. So your statement is entirely incorrect. There is absolutely zero conflict of themes.

[TankHunter678]

-snip-

In general Magic Knights, Paladins/Templar, etc are the ones depicted as the merging of the durable melee fighter and caster types. Lacking in the potential strength of both sides unless they specialize. Like Paladins do as anti-undead/demon wielding holy magic in addition to their blessed equipment for dealing with undead/demons.

Also a big flaw in the ones you bring up is that the setting needs to have no forms of anti-magic in order for the mages to surpass physical warrior types. Saruman for instance would be helpless against a warrior outfitted in anti-magic gear outside of trying to levitate objects to throw at the guy, if he lived through figuring that out.

Any setting where anti-magic is a regular and common thing, especially for policing mages? The mages are brittle and have to pick their fights carefully lest they get crushed by their more physical oriented enemies.

There is also the fact that when magic is in the setting mage superiority over physical opponents only really works as long as the physical opponent lacks enchantments. A fire mage trying to take on a warrior decked out in anti-fire gear is going to get crushed easily becaue that warrior can face tank a dragon's breath attack without need of a barrier. Which is also typically how dragons die in many fantasy stories.

[kikix12]

In general Magic Knights, Paladins/Templar, etc are the ones depicted as the merging of the durable melee fighter and caster types. Lacking in the potential strength of both sides unless they specialize. Like Paladins do as anti-undead/demon wielding holy magic in addition to their blessed equipment for dealing with undead/demons.

Again, you are talking about GAMING. I said clearly that game developers tend to do it like this (but not always). But in other kind of fiction, be it novels, be it manga, american comic books (Dr. Strange is a good example here), movies...this is far from that. The question is why are game developers doing it this way?! Because they are copy-cats. When first Idle games came out and proved to be successful, everyone and their mother started developing Idle games. Same with MMO's. Developers look at what was successful and reskin it. Simple as that.

Also a big flaw in the ones you bring up is that the setting needs to have no forms of anti-magic in order for the mages to surpass physical warrior types. Saruman for instance would be helpless against a warrior outfitted in anti-magic gear outside of trying to levitate objects to throw at the guy, if he lived through figuring that out.

You know that this is an absolute joke of an argument, right?! Tell me, what is anti-magic?! It's magic...So yeah, you need a mage to defeat a mage. How does that put the fighters in any better light?! And besides, I've almost never met a story that even used anti-magic freely. Though there were those examples. And you know what?! Those mages whose magic was beaten still did sometimes come on top. It's very obvious in the likes of Fairy Tail where about half of the mages are combat specialists and dragon slayers in particular are shown as superior melee fight combatants. But even in Harry Potter, there were anti-magic spells if I recall. And there still were mages that lost despite knowing them, cause the other side could use it too or just managed to outwit them.

Ironically, "anti-magic" gear is also magical. And funnily enough, let's use Dungeons and Dragons as example again. You could make that gear using perpetual anti-magic field around a piece of armor. And how that ends?! A lucky Mordenkainen's Disjunction and that gear is nothing more than scrap metal. Because anti-magic is not almighty and doesn't fully affect certain spells. It doesn't affect already-cast force either, so that force barrier?! Yes. If it was there before the anti-magic field was cast, it will still be there and will still prevent the anti-magic warrior from doing a thing. I use D&D as an example heavily because it is what many RPG's were inspired by for a long time, and now, many RPG's are inspired by those RPG's. The "glass cannon" mage is theoretically born from that as well (as I said, when you take away their spells, mages ARE as tough as glass...meaning not at all). But the developers completely ignored the many defensive capabilities that mages had in a pen and paper setting of D&D.

Oh, also, there is no anti-magic in Final Fantasy. Remember what we are even talking about here.

Any setting where anti-magic is a regular and common thing, especially for policing mages? The mages are brittle and have to pick their fights carefully lest they get crushed by their more physical oriented enemies.

Any setting where anti-magic is not a regular and common thing?! The non-mages are brittle and have to be careful who they pick a fight with. See what I did there?! You can make whatever setting you please. What's the problem of making a setting where in the presence of a mage all non-mages are turned into weaklings unable to lift a cup full of water?! Nothing. What's the problem of making a setting where MAGES lose their magic in presence of a non-mage?! Nothing (I recall an anime where a certain person lacking magic in a magical world was also fully immune to all magic as a result). But how does that affect the theme conflict?! Not at all. Because no matter what setting you do, there will be many others that will make the exact opposite, and their fiction is no less valuable than yours.

There is also the fact that when magic is in the setting mage superiority over physical opponents only really works as long as the physical opponent lacks enchantments. A fire mage trying to take on a warrior decked out in anti-fire gear is going to get crushed easily becaue that warrior can face tank a dragon's breath attack without need of a barrier. Which is also typically how dragons die in many fantasy stories.

What are you talking about?! Anti-fire gear IS an anti-fire barrier, effectively. And that warrior needs a mage/cleric/priest/whatever to cast it/enchant the gear. Effectively, mages can pass their defensive attributes to others, but physical guys cannot. MAGES are the source of those defenses, those enchantments, so it is MAGES defenses. What exactly stops the mages from doing the enchanment on their own garbs?! For example an enchantment that pushes away any metal that approaches?!

You are trying to give validity to your claims by making very specific situations, but you are forgetting that those very specific situations are not what we are talking about here. We are talking about mages viability as tanks. Are there examples of tanking mages?! Countless ones. There's nothing that can change that.

I know we are talking about magic and fiction all that, but let's look at real life for a bit here. You have two guys fighting in a swimming pool. One have a sword and another have technology as a magic-substitute. A nice, directional sound generator that creates a lot of loud noises. While the guy with a sword is going to be hard-pressed to do much with it due to the pressure of water making his attacks suck, the directional sound generator will turn his brain into mush. Take the fight outside, and that sound generator, commonly called "a speaker", will at best be a pain in the ass that can blow his eardrums, at worst a source of very pleasant music. It will have zero effect on his sword and his ability to attack with it though, and the "mage" will be dead, no questions asked. Now, arm the mage with a Faraday cage connected to a high voltage, and it's another story. The sword-master will die by trying to attack him out of water, but the mage will be killed by his own weapon if he'll get IN water. This change of potential based on the environment is the crucial point here. In pen and paper, you can adapt to the situation and that allows the concept to balance itself. In books, comics and the like the maker makes fixed constraints, so the adaptability is entirely based on what he wants to make. In a digital game?! Once it's set, it cannot be changed. That's why it is important to balance things thoroughly. Just so you know, there were examples of "battle mages" that did not suck at either magic or fighting in final fantasy past. Some were born from the customization of Final Fantasy Tactics, others were innate to specific classes (blue mage in tactics is pretty defensively viable if you ask me). In Final Fantasy VII everyone could be a decent mage and decent fighter, even though some were better for one or the other. In Final Fantasy VIII, the boundary was almost non-existent.


And how is it in Final Fantasy XIV?! The "theme" is just three roles. Tanks, healers and DPS. All tanks are tanky, all healers are somewhat resistant but have increased survivability thanks to self-healing ability and all DPS are somewhat resistant either magically or physically, but only Red Mage have significantly increases sustainability due to self-healing. Yes. A "mage" is the tankiest of DPS, just because he can spam a heal to make up for being hit...There is nothing, absolutely nothing, that stops a mage-tank. Heck. The nature of MMO's makes bosses, even magical bosses, one heck of a tough nut to crack, so you have "tanky mages" since day one of V1.0. Just not playable. The setting very much allows designated tank mages.

[TankHunter678]

-snip-

And if we look at FFXIV all casters are squishy unless they are hybridized with knights, like Paladin and Dark Knight who both have very limited magical capabilities and wear heavy armor. If we look at other FF games all dedicated casters are squishy, and even in the customizable versions all casters are squishy or speccing a character out to be a caster makes them more squishy unless hybridized to give up a sizable chunk on the caster side. Even in dungeons and dragons for a caster type to be durable they have to give up a lot on the caster side to do it.

And the ones shown to have any decent magic barriers main story wise in FFXIV are white mages, and just look at what happened to Y'shtola when some extra force was applied. Her shield was ripped in half and she was sent to the hospital for the 4.0 main story. Gameplay wise just look at how often WHM, AST, and SCH shields get punctured.

And by technicality dark knight is the "mage" tank. Its also considered the worst tank in the game outside of boss fights against enemies that use magic at max level.

I wish square would just remove that 1000 character limit already.

[Kazrah]

I hear shapeshifter and I think druid to be honest. Sorcery and the title of Sorcerer is more along the lines of Black Mage, White Mage, and Red Mage, and maybe dealing with voidsent rather then anything in the realm of shapeshifting like a druid in touch with nature and the inner beast.

As for mage tanks, in general its a conflict of themes. Mages are always known to be thin brittle robe wearers, the polar opposite of tanks which are known for being bulky tough armor wearers. Sorcerer especially invokes the robe wearing bookish type that is not physically fit for the rigors tanking requires.

Funny, because when I think of a Druid, I think of the Celtic druids that served as one of the main influences behind White Mages as well as some of their sacrificial rituals that may have inspired some elements of Black Mage in FFXIV. Now when I think of a Sorcerer, I think of this painting. One of the many detrimental things WoW has done in terms of history and culture is skew the meaning of the word "druid", and your statement serves as a remarkable example of that. Your comment on Sorcerers, on the other hand, is a bit more understandable since Sorcery covers a wide variety of abilities (including transformation).

As for the "conflict of themes" bit, much like the reference to druid, is yet another perception drawn from a stereotype, and if the druid you refer to is in fact the druid of WoW (a spellcaster that could be a tank), that only makes it worse.

It's a good idea, but you could take ideas from WoW Druid for this as well.

Actually, I was trying REALLY hard not to because not everything has to be like WoW.

I wish square would just remove that 1000 character limit already.

My original post was 26,363 characters. How do you think I feel?

[TankHunter678]

-snip-

The WoW druid bear tank never felt like a true tank to me, then again most of my experience with them was chasing after them as they mulched through everything faster then I could keep up like a steamroller of death only slowed down by bosses due to them having more HP then typical mobs. Also them relying on pure bulk and evasion granted by their armor to survive. They just happened to be the most tanky thing Night Elves had back in WC3 due to said sheer HP bulk.

[Kazrah]

The WoW druid bear tank never felt like a true tank to me, then again most of my experience with them was chasing after them as they mulched through everything faster then I could keep up like a steamroller of death only slowed down by bosses due to them having more HP then typical mobs. Also them relying on pure bulk and evasion granted by their armor to survive. They just happened to be the most tanky thing Night Elves had back in WC3 due to said sheer HP bulk.

By that logic, WAR isn't a true tank--wait a minute....I see what you did there....

At the end of the day though, you still have to ask yourself "is it holding mobs like a tank, taking hits like tank, and griping and moaning at the DPS like a tank?"--okay, maybe not that last one as much, but if it's doing the other two, then it's still a tank regardless of whatever armor it's rocking.

And gameplay-wise their shields being punctured...now, this is hilarious. Go ahead, play a tank. Go to a boss and say "hey, I'm a tank, so you can't scratch me!"...And die five seconds later. OF COURSE the shields are being punctured.

RIP Haurchefant.....