A Bard Thought

[HyoMinPark]

True. There is no denying that savage groups would overall prefer to bring a player that is comfortable with playing in bard form; however, it would still give the player base a kind of wiggle room to play the class however they wish to play it and still make it viable. SE has already stated and it has been demonstrated that you don't HAVE to bring one specific class or another to clear savage content. I personally feel that it should not be necessary to change since bard is named bard and therefore their core identity is to provide supportive elements to their party at the cost of personal dps. Period. No ifs ands or buts. But I also understand that there are others that play the class and while they enjoy the play style, don't agree with the supportive elements because of how they are used to bow and arrow type classes in other games.

There has got to be a way for us to find a sort of equilibrium between the two play styles and while this idea may be rough around the edges, it seems to be something that would overall be easier to implement rather than adding a whole new class or massive reworking of our tool-kit.

:shrug:

I’m not advocating for BRD to not have support and be a Ranger. I just don’t agree with the idea of it having two stances because I have seen AST struggle with its two stances for 4 years. All because the developers seem to not want to make Nocturnal a viable option compared to SCH shields. I also don’t agree with the idea of pure support, because I don’t think this game is designed for the pure-support philosophy that “actual Bard” seems to usually entail.

I also see the issues that this game has had with balancing utility jobs with other non-utility jobs, as well as simply balancing within a particular role (see: melee DPS, casters); and I would hate to see BRD changed in such a way that it upsets the current balance between the physical ranged.

[Suniva]

Hrm, I see and understand your perspective. Pure support cannot really exist in the game, hence the whole support/hybrid bard was supposed to be. But when our "supportive" kit is nerfed to the ground compared to what we used to have and pure dps have "supportive" skills that are more viable than ours (looking at you monk and your mantra) it's just, disheartening? (I think it's the proper word).

It really feels as if they just don't know what to do with us. I've seen, and I'm sure you have too, many suggestions on how to fix bard. I really don't think we should HAVE to go the way of having to add another bow and arrow type class that is more of a selfish dps to satisfy the player base if they can just find a healthy way to bring balance to the two play styles on the ONE class. Maybe I dreaming xD

[Grimoire-M]

Honestly, why not have Foe Requiem return as a song-based cooldown? Let it augment the current song you're in (likely by generating Repertoire) and offer a raid boost while it's in effect. Let your song rotation charge it up (up to 3 charges, consumes each charge for 10/20/30s duration. 20s cooldown) and as long as you're properly rotating between Paeon/Minuet/Ballad and you're good to go. That way you reward players who not only want to support with a potentially powerful cooldown, but also give them incentive to align their support with other raid buffs.

[ty_taurus]

Snip...

I'm aware of those issues, which is why I brought that up both in the original post and again in my last post with an example of how easy it is for the system to fall apart. I didn't suggest it in the tone of "OMG guys let's just do this and BAM! Everyone wins!" It's something that, as someone who does design games (WAY more inexperienced than the Square team mind you, and I haven't designed anything with a class system despite how much I'd like to), I would bring up in basically a powwow. If I were a part of Square's team, that would be how I opened up a conversation. "What if we had a bard sect and a ranger sect?" That's not the answer, but the beginning of the path to it.

The only way you could properly balance it is have the bard sect using song actions that ultimately do exactly the same thing as ranger actions, just in a different way. Here's an even simpler example. Refulgent Arrow deals 340 Potency when under the effect of Straight Shot Ready. Bard Sect replaces it with Refulgent Song which applies a buff on a party member that deals a 340 potency attack (based on your stats) on the main target of their next Spell or Weaponskill. You can use this on yourself.

As for the issue of DPS via buffs, maybe we just need to system to start recognizing how much of your DPS is actually coming from other players.

An "actual Bard" doesn't just have to be a pure support from FFXI. Case-and-point: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KMf6NdM55ws
Why can't we have a job like that who uses DPS songs? The concept of using music to harm isn't that crazy, nor has it not been done before.

Lastly, I don't really care whether or not you have no desire to be Support. If I've beaten this dead horse already, I'll beat it again: There are players who want a support-heavy bard, which Current Bard denies them for no other reason than the fact that it's named Bard. If Bard was just named "Ranger" in the first place, it wouldn't be an issue because there would always be the opportunity to add a real Bard later down the line. The entire point of this thread was never to deny players like you who want a selfish DPS archer. It was to bring up ideas for how BOTH groups of players could have a job that fit the fantasy and play style they want without having to sacrifice anything. I don't want to just make Bard an all-support DPS and deny you your Archer fantasy, all I ask is that you do the same for those of us who love the Bard fantasy and want a musical job. Leaving off your comment with "I don't have any desire to be 100% support" to me comes across as "I don't really give a damn whether or not you get the job you want. I like bard as a not-bard."

[HyoMinPark]

I was going to type out a well-worded response to your counter, but I stopped when I got to this part.

Lastly, I don't really care whether or not you have no desire to be Support. . . The entire point of this thread was never to deny players like you who want a selfish DPS archer. . . and deny you your Archer fantasy,

Clearly you didn’t read anything I said. I said that I don’t want to be a 100% support job that stands around and does nothing but buff other players because that is not a playstyle I enjoy. Nor is it a playstyle that will ever work in this game. I never said anything about wanting to be a selfish DPS Archer—I’ve been in multiple threads advocating for some support to return to BRD. Please actually read what I type before responding with things like this, because it defeats any sort of constructive things you may have had to say in my eyes.

I like the hybrid aspect of BRD as it has had in this iteration of the game. 4.x was very “support-heavy”—the most “support-heavy” this job has ever seen in FFXIV with BV, Foe’s, and the passive Crit contributing nearly 1,000 DPS to the raid, if not more, in optimized settings. It also offered healing buffs (Minne), damage mitigation (Troubadour), and resource management (Refresh/Tactician). 4.x BRD was highly adored by a variety of players, and there were rarely any conversations being held on this forum platform demanding for it to have more utility than what it had outside of “5.0 BRD suggestions” where they would suggest the level 70 to 80 skills that built upon its existing support.

I have never played the job to be a glorified Archer with a Harp.



As for your suggestion of different stances—I have already outlined the issues with this. I’m not going to reiterate them. I will say that when you mention “you can use this on yourself” with regards to the Refulgent song, that takes away from being a party support job because now you can just buff yourself. The developers would likely also tax the job’s damage based on that alone—just like it’s likely they would hit its damage if BV buffed us, which I’ve never thought that it should.

Your idea for the songs defeat the purpose of us supporting our party if we can just opt to buff ourself.

[ty_taurus]

I was going to type out a well-worded response to your counter, but I stopped when I got to this part.



Clearly you didn’t read anything I said. I said that I don’t want to be a 100% support job that stands around and does nothing but buff other players because that is not a playstyle I enjoy. Nor is it a playstyle that will ever work in this game. I never said anything about wanting to be a selfish DPS Archer—I’ve been in multiple threads advocating for some support to return to BRD. Please actually read what I type before responding with things like this, because it defeats any sort of constructive things you may have had to say in my eyes.

I like the hybrid aspect of BRD as it has had in this iteration of the game. 4.x was very “support-heavy”—the most “support-heavy” this job has ever seen in FFXIV with BV, Foe’s, and the passive Crit contributing nearly 1,000 DPS to the raid, if not more, in optimized settings. It also offered healing buffs (Minne), damage mitigation (Troubadour), and resource management (Refresh/Tactician). 4.x BRD was highly adored by a variety of players, and there were rarely any conversations being held on this forum platform demanding for it to have more utility than what it had outside of “5.0 BRD suggestions” where they would suggest the level 70 to 80 skills that built upon its existing support.

I have never played the job to be a glorified Archer with a Harp.



As for your suggestion of different stances—I have already outlined the issues with this. I’m not going to reiterate them. I will say that when you mention “you can use this on yourself” with regards to the Refulgent song, that takes away from being a party support job because now you can just buff yourself. The developers would likely also tax the job’s damage based on that alone—just like it’s likely they would hit its damage if BV buffed us, which I’ve never thought that it should.

Your idea for the songs defeat the purpose of us supporting our party if we can just opt to buff ourself.

Yes, I did read what you had to say.

The whole reason I typed that last paragraph is because your solution is essentially to just keep bard as an Archer with a hint of music. Bard has always been at least 90% Archer, 10% Bard. That isn't what the fans of the Bard fantasy have wanted. Not since 2.0, not in 3.0, not in 4.0, and not now in 5.0. Sure, 4.0 was tolerated because it showed change and slightly more impact with musical abilities, but "tolerate" does not equate to "happy with."

And this is why I responded the way I did. It feels like writing off the changes as just making a hybrid that's an archer who kinda-sorta sings when they feel like it just you saying that you don't really care about the players who want a legitimate, full-on battle-musician. It wasn't an attack on you, nor did I really believe your goal was to paint that picture, but your words did.

How realistic is it that we'll get a legitimate solution to this? You're right in claiming that it's unlikely. That doesn't matter though. Things will never change if we don't talk about them. The worst outcome of these suggestions is that nothing happens. The best possible outcome from this and many other threads about Bard is that it catches the attention of the grapevine that can ultimately help communicate what it is players want. Thats why I don't like your remedy. It's not a remedy, it's a compromise. I don't want compromise. It sounds selfish, but that's kinda the point of talking about what we want and don't want in a game like this. I don't demand this change right here, right now. I just want the attention to the topic. More eyes and more voices have a greater chance of conveying what is is that we want: A job that's an Archer AND a job that's a Bard. They don't have to be the same job. It's possible they can be.

Is this the solution that will yield the best results? Probably not, like I've said several times as well. And for the sake of the argument, the reason I included that you can use it on yourself was that so you're not gimped in Bard Sect during solo content.

If you asked me what change I'd want to see, I would've gone with Option B of my original post: Transform Bard into a full-on foil to Dancer where the only use of the bow comes from your Heavy Shot, Straight Shot, and maybe DoTs. Literally everything else would be a song and they'd have a completely new play style to match this. Then add in the Ranger job who uses Crossbows and plays like current Bard does, perhaps even completely stealing actions like Refulgent Arrow, Apex Arrow, and the like. Essentially, the new Ranger would just be old Bard and Bard would basically be an all new Class instead of Ranger being the new Class.

[Suniva]

The only way you could properly balance it is have the bard sect using song actions that ultimately do exactly the same thing as ranger actions, just in a different way. Here's an even simpler example. Refulgent Arrow deals 340 Potency when under the effect of Straight Shot Ready. Bard Sect replaces it with Refulgent Song which applies a buff on a party member that deals a 340 potency attack (based on your stats) on the main target of their next Spell or Weaponskill. You can use this on yourself.

Ehh?! No bueno senor. I don't agree with this idea. As Hyomin stated, not only does it defeat the general purpose of a bard buffing their party if it can be used on yourself, but you would also have to time the usage of that ability with the dps you want to use it on, which adds more complexity to the class which is something SE was trying to step away from. While I am all for a discussion in regards to having different "stances" as it were, I don't think we have to make any significant changes to the tool kit already available to bards. The only change that I would like to overall see is that while in, let's call it bard form for now, that our songs include an "inspiration" to the party in form of a buff at the cost of personal dps while ranger form stays as bard is currently designed at the present, which is more focused on providing dps and their "songs" procing the repertoire they need to sustain that.

Keeping the changes to the minimum would be the best way to see those changes come to pass I feel.

[ty_taurus]

Ehh?! No bueno senor. I don't agree with this idea. While I am all for a discussion in regards to having different "stances" as it were, I don't think we have to make any significant changes to the tool kit already available to bards. The only change that I would like to overall see is that while in, let's call it bard form for now, that our songs include an "inspiration" to the party in form of a buff at the cost of personal dps while ranger form stays as bard is currently designed at the present, which is more focused on providing dps and their "songs" procing the repertoire they need to sustain that.

That will never work either. All it takes is for Bard Form's support to increase rDPS by even as little as 100 and suddenly no one will ever tolerate any Bard playing in Ranger Form. The same is true in reverse. The Support has an overall decrease in rDPS by as little as 100? Now every Bard that chooses Bard Form will get kicked from statics.

The only way a form system will work is if the rDPS of the group is 100% identical for both forms OR one of the forms is worse, but brings something required for Statics if another job can't bring that. The later just creates a world no one wants: Some aspect of DPS support is required in all forms of content making Bard form Bard or Dancer mandatory, and all Bard players are forced to flex between both styles, not just choose the one that fits for you. Basically, you would want Bard form Bard and Ranger Form Bard to be Selene and Eos.

[ForteNightshade]

Lastly, I don't really care whether or not you have no desire to be Support. If I've beaten this dead horse already, I'll beat it again: There are players who want a support-heavy bard, which Current Bard denies them for no other reason than the fact that it's named Bard. If Bard was just named "Ranger" in the first place, it wouldn't be an issue because there would always be the opportunity to add a real Bard later down the line. The entire point of this thread was never to deny players like you who want a selfish DPS archer. It was to bring up ideas for how BOTH groups of players could have a job that fit the fantasy and play style they want without having to sacrifice anything. I don't want to just make Bard an all-support DPS and deny you your Archer fantasy, all I ask is that you do the same for those of us who love the Bard fantasy and want a musical job. Leaving off your comment with "I don't have any desire to be 100% support" to me comes across as "I don't really give a damn whether or not you get the job you want. I like bard as a not-bard."

I will be blunt. This will never, ever happen. The closest FFXIV will ever see to a support heavy Bard is the Stormblood iteration. There is precisely zero chance they opt for something comparable to FFXI due to it becoming a balancing nightmare. If this was even a consideration it would have happened sometime in the last six years. Your suggestions boil down to the same reason we don't have unique substats or whatnot on our gear. Players will theorycraft what is mathematically superior and any deviation will be rendered pointless. If your hypothetical Ranger deals more rDPS than the now support focused Bard. Every PF you join will expect you to play "Ranger Sect". There's a reason Noct AST isn't nearly as popular as Diurnal.

[HyoMinPark]

Basically, you would want Bard form Bard and Ranger Form Bard to be Selene and Eos.

You’re using Selene and Eos as comparisons—but what happened in 5.0? Selene and Eos are fairy glamours now: they couldn’t balance the two fairies against one another, so now they both do the exact same thing. Doesn’t this defeat the purpose of what you’re advocating?