I wish Gunbreaker would be a DPS class.

[Bright-Flower]

If I can heal someone by throwing a card at them (Lady of Crowns) then I think that "but it doesn't make sense" is no longer an appropriate argument. "But magic"? Ok, well, but magic. That's why gunbreaker works.

I think it's a bit early to really say much anyway. We've only seen a handful of animations and have no idea what their toolkit is or what the lore of the job is. My GUESS is that the name gun breaker is because it's a style designed to counter Garlean guns and artillery and defend against them and counter them but until we get those quests we won't really know what the in lore explanation for it is.

[Melichoir]

snip snip about tanks and stuff

I think your reasoning is a bit of a stretch. Tanks are historically any armored vehicle that run on treads. Theyre not always mounted with 'cannons', nor are they always the 'highest destructive force' in combat. Even initially, tanks were more for crossing trenches and assisting in troop movement rather than being a firepower force. As a result, tanks actually vary in their capabilities when it comes to fire power.

At the end of day the argument you should be making isnt about firepower at all. A gun blade doesnt bring anything to tanking that a Sword and Shield, or an Axe, or a Greatsword couldnt bring, in terms of damage per say. They all hurt, but at varying degrees and in varying ways (just like actual tanks). Point of a tank isnt to be the biggest baddest most DPS-ing person on the battle field with the addition of having armor. Theyre supposed to fit a role of an armored unit that may provide support. Sometimes that is more along the lines of protecting allies (like a paladin does), and sometimes that more like being a menace (like a Warrior or DRK does). Im not sure what a gunblade will bring, tank wise, but that point is irrelevant. Its what their entire kit brings that makes a tank a tank, not the weapon they carry. So long as the GB class is armored and works in tandem with mitigation, it will fit the role of tank regardless of how it uses its weapon.

[EdwinLi]

---

Consdiering we see that Magic Bullets play a large role in Gunbreaker's abilities and the magitek inside their gunblade as well, I am assuming a lot of the tank skills will focus on using the Magic Bullets by shooting the bullet into the air so it breaks apart into magical energy that creates the magical barriers.

In my perspective it is basically like a magical Shotgun with different types of magical bullets for different tasks.

Explosive bullets for EXPLOSIONS to cause damage.

Barrier Bullets that breaks apart when shot out of the Gunblade to disperse Magical energy to create a barrier.

and etc....


I will not be surprised if they even have a Healing Magical Bullet they shoot into the air to disperse magical Healing energy once it breaks apart as their "self-heal" Tank skill.

As I said before, anything can be a tank or healer with the right imagination but how far are we willing to let that go for the sake of more Tanks and Healers is up to the majority.

With the Magicked Ammo and the way people are speculating on the job it somewhat sounds like the Gun Mage job from FFX-2.

From what I've seen it basically is but that is how Squall's Gunblade has always worked even before X-2 Gun Mage was introduced.

That is actually the original use for Gunblades in FF8 being "insert Magic Bullet for X effect"

[Burningskull]

With the Magicked Ammo and the way people are speculating on the job it somewhat sounds like the Gun Mage job from FFX-2.

[Deceptus]

I wished Samurai was a tank and DRK was a DPS.

Didn't happen. Live in reality.

[kikix12]

I think your reasoning is a bit of a stretch. Tanks are historically any armored vehicle that run on treads.

You would be right...if the term "tank" was first used for defensive character in games early on.

By the time MMO games were made, tank was a heavily armored fighting vehicle I spoke of. That's the meaning of the word "tank" that is the origin of the gaming term.

You see, history may be unchangeable, but it's neither linear nor unchanging. Whenever looking at the origin of something you need to go from "now" to the point it was used the first time for the purpose you're interested in.

And sorry, but even the lightest tanks nowadays have more firepower than majority of other land-based weapons. Exceptions are probably only heavy artillery that are...well...being almost as large as tanks they are purely weapons, no armor included.

Theyre supposed to fit a role of an armored unit that may provide support. Sometimes that is more along the lines of protecting allies (like a paladin does), and sometimes that more like being a menace (like a Warrior or DRK does).

I explained the origin of the term for the "aesthetic" reason why Gunblade fits a tank and you try to counter it with an argument about mechanics, completely ignoring lore. Congratulations. By your logic Warrior and Dark Knight are not tanks, they're DPS. Do you realize that?!

Warriors lore is ALL ABOUT them being that unstoppable, destructive force. Literally everything in the quests is about them being walking walls of destruction.

Dark Knights story line is all about being the stronger force that destroys the strong oppressors to protect the weak. The "one fighting against many". Both of these classes are fundamentally about protecting through DESTROYING opposition.

Their mechanics being less so is purely balance matter. But mechanically anything fits any role, so it's utterly pointless to discuss.

[Melichoir]

Thats kind of my point. The weapon is irrelevant ultimately as long as the class with its skills functions as a 'tank' type job (job that mitigates damage, typically holds threat in the holy trinity setup, and relies on some level of damage/utility). It doesnt matter what the weapon is at that point. You could make Machinest a tank if you got creative about it. You could easily make Dragoon a tank, or Ninja, or Monk. You could have a Caster like Summoner or BlackMage be tanks depending on how you handle skill and the like. It ultimately doesnt matter what the weapon is, but the kit.

Granted people associate certain weapons with tanks (typically sword and board as the go-to), but beyond that, anything goes.

snip snap

Oh christ crispies, what are you taking about? My criticism lied with how you tried to equate the tank to actual real life tanks and how it makes sense (talking about firepower and etc), where Im pointing out that youre analogy doesnt make sense in that line of thinking and even more so that that facet is irrelevant. The only real distinguishing thing from both real life and from a gameplay perspective is its an armored unit that usually works with other units and may or may not be the 'biggest' firepower on the field. It was a bad analogy you were making, and you shouldve relied more on the facet if the classes kit rather than what weapon theyre bringing cause that is more logically consistent even within your analogy and more relevant. It really shouldve been a simple "It doesnt matter what weapon is being brought, only what the kit is like."

[Averax]

Play a machinist and stand in melee. Wish granted.

[Bonbori]

...

...

Um not to meddle buuut I was under the impression that you were both on the same side of the debate? Why are you arguing? ^^

[miraidensetsu]

I hope that Gunbreaker can be a Tank and the new healer won't be a dancer, but Geomancer instead.