How would an optional, official parser be toxic?

[TaiyoShikasu]

Also during a S hunt someone asked if they were number one and the person said no, Stating that I was number one.

Ya'll heard of parsing in Pagos, now get ready for some next level parsing of less than high end content.

Next up, parsing leveling roulette.

[Arrius]

Next up, parsing leveling roulette.

Oh, when they manage to add Roulettes to the Duty Recorder function, I so will make use of it in Expert. For evaluation reasons, of course.

[TaranTatsuuchi]

Ya'll heard of parsing in Pagos, now get ready for some next level parsing of less than high end content.

Next up, parsing leveling roulette.

Pretty sure people already do that...

[TaiyoShikasu]

If I can get a WHM in Aetherochemical Research Facility that doesn't use Holy during large pulls, you won't be able to explain to DPS why AOE abilities on a million mobs is a good thing.

Pretty sure people already do that...

And the absurdity of it makes my toes curl.

[Shurrikhan]

Pretty sure people already do that...

You say that like it's a bad thing...

The hope is that one learns their job, minus the 70 ability's integration into their rotation and priorities, by the time they hit 70. Why should a learning tool be excluded, then, from the vast majority of that learning process.

Because it makes no sense to exclude people in match-made leveling roulettes? True, true, it doesn't. Hmm. One might even figure that's... not a parser's use except in such tightly tuned fights as where developing poor (enrage-insufficient) in-context muscle memory would cause further stress for the party later on or when trialing members for explicitly exclusive statics?