G-give it Back T---T; !! (Scholar Edition)

[Renathras]

What does this have to do with what I said?

That if one should change, it should be SGE, not SCH. It should be "If you want that, go play SCH" not "If you want that, go play SGE". SGE should do something else.

...

Collectively, this is a really weak argument.

When leveling solo, you deal damage. It's why no one (or nearly no one) ever asks that healers (and tanks) have all their damage buttons REMOVED. Though it should be noted even back then, there were players that did this. In some old school MMOs like EQ or FF11, it was most efficient to level by being in a party killing enemy spawns in an area ("camps"), and the healers would often ONLY heal, same as they did in dungeons and raids. This was due to MP use (more downtime resting/drinking/etc if they used attack spells) and agro management in those games where you REALLY didn't want your party's healer to go down; the DPS could always be raised if they got agro and the party survived the encounter, but the healer could not unless you had a spare.

We're not talking about soloing or leveling, which you can do with Glarespam without issue. We're talking about having DPS-lite damage rotations (all the way up to full on DPSer level rotations, though that's a bit more rare), not Holy Priest in WoW having Shadow Word: Pain (Dia) and Smite (Glare) back when I leveled and played one in BC and Wrath and Cata. (And Smite being so prohibitive, you almost never used it anyway; people sub-speced into Disc for Wand Mastery for additional autoattack damage until getting to level 40 and picking up Shadow if they wanted to solo level faster.)

As for tanks: No.

Tank's generate agro, which is done through dealing damage or healing. You'd have to implement an entirely new game system of damage-less-agro-generation, at which point, what's the point? Unlike "healers are for healing", "tanks are for agro ONLY" requires rebuilding the game to be less intuitive and more complex to achieve the same result. And I don't mean encounter designs, I mean damage calculations, enrage tuning, and an entirely new agro system where you have to make abilities and program in agro values for them, and do this for every Tank ability. That's a lot of work to "prove a point" vs doing exactly zero work now. Conversely, healers having simple DPS rotations does not. It functions entirely within the normal game systems (MP costs, cast times, damage calculation, and agro generation values) with no additional action, work, programming, or etc.

...and I say this as someone that liked FFXIV's take on Sentinel; it's an interesting idea but requires a lot of changes to the back end to implement and make it work. (Also note that unlike WHM with Glarespam, a Sentinel would NOT be able to clear the MSQ solo instances - take things like the Zenos fight where you have to DPS down the nail things/clones/whatever it was - you can't do that with only Counter).

Not to mention, as you note, literally no one's asking for that, while people ARE asking for healers to have simple DPS kits. Not everyone is, but enough are to justify having at least one healer (*cough*4 Healers Model*cough*) function that way. So NO ONE is asking for Tanks that work like that, much less the entire role, meaning there's no reason to do or consider doing all this work for something literally no one seems to want. Conversely, there ARE healer players that DO "just wanna heal", which justifies some consideration to that.

Note as always - 4 Healers Model - this doesn't preclude a or some Healer Jobs having more involved DPS kits. It just means not all of them should.

.

TL;DR:

I get this is one of your favorite go-to counter-arguments, but it's a REALLY bad one.

[Aravell]

That if one should change, it should be SGE, not SCH. It should be "If you want that, go play SCH" not "If you want that, go play SGE". SGE should do something else.

Your stance is all over the place now. You always said things should be preserved for people who love them, it's the very premise of your "one healer must stay the same" argument, but here you're saying they should change SCH into something that appeals to the people SGE appeals to right now and also change SGE into something that appeals to SCH players of old? I don't get your point. SGE already fulfills what these people want, they can go play that instead of trying to ruin a system that people enjoy.

You always say that people who want SMN to change should go play BLM, how is this different?

[ty_taurus]

I get this is one of your favorite go-to counter-arguments, but it's a REALLY bad one.

We stan a snarky king.