Rough Concept Rune Fencer

[Leobein]

ok I'm still drawing a blank here for the most part. What tank has stacking debuffs that you can use in combinations? Or that you can expend those debuffs for a huge enmity gain? I don't tank very much but what job uses the debuffs like I have described in my concept? WAR builds up wrath and does fell cleave or cyclone or that one aoe (not dependand on a debuffs), PLD i'm pretty clueless about because I find the job to be pretty boring, Dark is mostly special because it uses some magic and has more draining abilities to maintain it's mana. What tank utilizes it's debuffs as I've described?

[Shurrikhan]

ok I'm still drawing a blank here for the most part. What tank has stacking debuffs that you can use in combinations? Or that you can expend those debuffs for a huge enmity gain? I don't tank very much but what job uses the debuffs like I have described in my concept? WAR builds up wrath and does fell cleave or cyclone or that one aoe (not dependand on a debuffs), PLD i'm pretty clueless about because I find the job to be pretty boring, Dark is mostly special because it uses some magic and has more draining abilities to maintain it's mana. What tank utilizes it's debuffs as I've described?

I do not mean to attack your mechanic. I'm just wondering where the effective difference is, what the players would actually feel, that you want to build.

Though, if you want the short of it, a consumption mechanic does very little different from standard play except to provide ramp-up, unless multiple options (in its source combos) are actually usable. Consider: you use a combo finisher 1-3 times on a target, and then you consume their resource for enmity (+ an effect, which would be indifferent from something embedded in the combos itself except for its timing, which has no control advantage if it is not difficult to maintain and no combos which would have short-term or time-sensitive benefits). How does that meaningfully differ from simply having access to a high-enmity combo and even a vulnerability passive activating a combo finisher, except that while a high-enmity combo secures threat in 2-3 GCDs, this would take 3-9 + an ability?

Consider what it's actually doing for you and whether that gameplay, not the mechanic itself, would be unique and enjoyable.

Now, the system itself is actually really, really neat on paper, but you have to consider also: When would Gelus actually be useful? With 3 other party members or more, could Flabra ever outperform Tenebrae? If not, your gameplay is essentially just Tenebrae while stuck in Tellus for sufficient enmity until (if ever) you have enough enmity of Runic Cypher alone to swap to Lux.

It's a combination of factors, for instance, that makes the Warrior IR-Zerk phase feel urgent and impactful -- FC damage, Onslaught damage, the effective proximity between the two, what RI does given job gauge generation, the duration of RI as overlaps with Berserk as to allow either 130 (2 Onslaught, 1 Upheal + FCs) or 125 (max FCs) Rage spending over the duration, Onslaught CD as to be ready and syncable, the need to bank without overcapping in advance, etc., etc. Similarly, Dark Knight feels different primarily through its APM and because of how much is sacrificed to use an enmity combo, the relative and situational value of mana, the stance dependence of BW and BP in order to maximize that mana, this constant state of (however shallow) mana-gambling, etc.

What I meant to ask was, what are you going for here? What are supposed to be the exciting, not just functional, moments that let it feel different?

[Leobein]

Oh I never felt you were attacking me Shurikhan, it's more or less that I'm not fully comprehending what you're saying before and it's frustrating me. Words can be funny like that lol.
What I would want for Rune Fencer is to have highly useful abilities that make use of the runes on you and/or the enemy to powerful effects and utility, I haven't necissarily thought up all the potential abilities that could make use of the expendature of these runes, but again this is why this is a rough concept kind of a point to start with and refine as you get input and constructive criticisms and ideas from your other players

I guess what I would aim for is while PLD is the reliably defensive tank, WAR the high HP and high dps tank, and DRK the edgy magic using tank, Rune be the tank with higher utility than the others.

[Shurrikhan]

What I would want for Rune Fencer is to have highly useful abilities that make use of the runes on you and/or the enemy to powerful effects and utility.

I guess what I would aim for is while PLD is the reliably defensive tank, WAR the high HP and high dps tank, and DRK the edgy magic using tank, Rune be the tank with higher utility than the others.

Oh, it sounds like it's a good direction, for sure.

Just going to warn again, though, be careful of looking for a niche in capability, as they tend to be oversold. Paladin has less defensive maximal potential, for instance, than Warrior, and possibly even Dark Knight unless given massive tankbusters at reliable 20-30s intervals to maximize Shelltron. Dark Knight has scarcely higher anti-magic potential, and its using magic is only really felt via Dark Arts and having a ranged AoE, etc., etc. Reliable but rotationally driven (effectively, short-cooldown and pre-decisive) utility would be functionally and stylistically new, however, which I really like here.

I look forward to seeing how the idea fleshes out with time.

[Leobein]

yeah in many ways it feels like SE has to play of game of balancing a lot lol