DRK - Excessive "Conditional" Effects

[SyzzleSpark]

But would you accept standart benefit for well executed investment gameplay, and underpowered ones if badly executed ?

I'm not sure what hair you're trying to split here.

Sure I'd accept punishment for badly executed gameplay sure as I would have accepted losing Darkside for overextending myself back in 3.x.

What I ask of the abilities listed is that if the punishment is going to fit the crime, the reward should fit the investment. It currently doesn't. I didn't outline this in the OP though, because that was not its intended purpose; I really just wanted to point out a design flaw.

Now, if you're saying that we should accept the punishment of things like Living Dead and such based on the benefits they already confer, we're going to disagree there, because that's where it becomes a balance issue wherein the other tanks can do the same thing either more cheaply or without being in danger of punishment. That's not a proper risk-reward.

Risk-reward with respect to balance issues implies that you take a risk the other jobs do not, but if it pays off, you also get a reward that they do not get as well.

Otherwise its not "risk-reward", its merely "risk---"

[MauvaisOeil]

I'm not sure what hair you're trying to split here.

Sure I'd accept punishment for badly executed gameplay sure as I would have accepted losing Darkside for overextending myself back in 3.x.

What I ask of the abilities listed is that if the punishment is going to fit the crime, the reward should fit the investment. It currently doesn't. I didn't outline this in the OP though, because that was not its intended purpose; I really just wanted to point out a design flaw.

Now, if you're saying that we should accept the punishment of things like Living Dead and such based on the benefits they already confer, we're going to disagree there, because that's where it becomes a balance issue wherein the other tanks can do the same thing either more cheaply or without being in danger of punishment. That's not a proper risk-reward.

Risk-reward with respect to balance issues implies that you take a risk the other jobs do not, but if it pays off, you also get a reward that they do not get as well.

Otherwise its not "risk-reward", its merely "risk---"

I'm simply wondering : would you accept the DRK to be harder with results beeing in line with other, and not better because "harder" ?

You seems to have a harsh opinion about pretty everything, including the core balance of cost in the DRK toolkit, wondering "would balance suffice your expectations, and would you sacrifice the core of gameplay for that ?"

[SyzzleSpark]

I'm simply wondering : would you accept the DRK to be harder with results beeing in line with other, and not better because "harder" ?

You seems to have a harsh opinion about pretty everything, including the core balance of cost in the DRK toolkit, wondering "would balance suffice your expectations, and would you sacrifice the core of gameplay for that ?"

I think that if you have to work harder, with a greater risk of personal loss or failure, the payoff should be proportionately greater. Its really simple. Working harder to attain results equal to, or in some cases worse, than the other jobs in your role, to me, is not fun.

[Launched]

Otherwise its not "risk-reward", its merely "risk---"

DRK does have rewards/benefits to the skills in the OP.

TBN is available every 15s. That's more often than Sheltron, and Sheltron is only really great against tankbusters while TBN works well on everything: tankbusters, boss autos, and trash packs. A 10k+ shield (closer to 12k at i340) every 15s is a lot of mitigation and it doesn't even have diminishing returns when stacked with a % mitigation cooldown. Sheltron only works on a single hit so it's not amazing against autos and bad against trash. IB is the best mitigation of the 3, but it's also a guaranteed DPS loss because it requires tank stance unlike the other two and also uses a DPS resource that won't get refunded. So for the risk of a small DPS loss you get a great cooldown that's almost always available and works in pretty much every situation. Converting MP to Blood also stops DRK from being as boring as it could be by letting you use Bloodspiller/Quietus instead of another Dark Arts/Abyssal Drain.

Living Dead has a 2 minute shorter cooldown than Hallowed and only activates when you actually hit 1hp so you don't have to be as exact with the timing. In exchange, your healer has to do a little bit of work to keep you alive after. That shorter cooldown means you can use it in places a PLD couldn't use Hallowed, like all 3 Delta Attacks in Neo Exdeath. Then there's Holmgang, which has just over half the duration of the other two cooldowns and also roots you. If you're planning to use Holmgang on a specific mechanic then your healers need to heal the WAR too: Thrill isn't enough HP and you don't want to swap to tank stance for Equilibrium/IB. DRK isn't the only one that requires healing. Tanking isn't just about using your invincibility cooldown as a panic button.

Let's be serious, Sole Survivor isn't "a chance to get healed". It lasts 15s, it's off-gcd, and it doesn't cost anything. You use it on something that's at low HP and you're going to get that heal/MP. It's not Mercy Stroke, it doesn't require you to get the kill with a low potency skill. It's not an impressive skill, but when you have the chance to use it (in every single dungeon and plenty of bosses) it's going to work.

You're also making Dark Passenger sound a lot more complicated than it is. Got a lot of MP coming in from a big pull? Go ahead and use it. Forced to do a small pull with 2-4 enemies (like after the second boss of Skalla)? Use it. It's a boring off-gcd and should be deleted in my opinion, but it's not really complicated or risky.