Quote Originally Posted by Renathras View Post
So if it's even 10%, that turns out to be pretty prevalent.

In short, the threshold for "prevalent" is still relatively small.
By what warrant? You're using this as an excuse to limit what options for engagement are available to any and all players, not just that maybe-up-to-10% thereof, so what makes this theoretical risk worth that cost?

Putting aside the conflation between broader community issues and just what part would be impacted by differences in gameplay/combat design... Keeping jobs simple tends to make it all the clearer whether someone is performing well or poorly, because the elements that differentiate a player are just those that are obvious and thereby visible, and thereby more easily tracked.

"Poor play" is relative, after all, to either ability to meet normal visible thresholds or to maintain visible routines of generally preferable action (using one's skills, not standing in bad); gameplay's effect on how likely one is to be called out for it comes down only to tuning (a separate issue unless specifically asking for nerfs) and the how easy it is to eyeball whether one is playing at least halfway decently. And the current simplicity gives us quite nearly the most transparency ("ability for others to know with high reliability, even with just minimal/peripheral effort, that/when you're screwing up") we've ever had.

A small increase to depth available to healers in their downtime does not increase the 'risk' of being 'found out' for being bad -- quite the opposite.

But more importantly, even if that risk were increased instead, why should that potential 'risk' to a subsection of a subsection of players happening upon a rare circumstance... outweigh any and all potential benefits of that added ceiling?