Quote Originally Posted by LilimoLimomo View Post
we shouldn't be adding RNG to classes, we should be adding opportunities for failure into rotations in the form of risk/reward mechanics. Maybe those will have RNG, but maybe they won't. I'd hazard there are a lot of different ways to do that.
I do get it, and I do feel like that's a nice idea.

However, this does not cause any mess because BLM is already a very niche job, being one of the hardest hitting and one of the most mechanically demanding (as in "you need to plan the fight much more than say bards or machinists since you can't move most of the time"). Thunder III does account for 10% of the overall total DPS, so good procs are rewarded, but the BLM merely syncs with the rest of the party, it doesn't have a CD that boosts its damage for the next 10s. That's why it's no issue. Otherwise, BLMs would rather have two procs during this burst than three outside of it.
If they were to have such a CD, obnoxious high-end players (not all of them are) would complain that the game is too RNG-heavy, and that's why they don't get rank 1 or whatever.

I've read countless discussions on people that want Crit and DH flattened into raw damage to mitigate the effects of RNG, for that very reason. And even abolishing parsers would not help : it's the same as DNC and old MCH really, when procs are part of a rotation, you're not happy when you get procs, you're bitter when you don't. Because there's no good or bad RNG, there's only good or bad minset. I'm all out for more RNG, I had much more fun with MCH back then, despite being really unlucky in general, but most people would simply not appreciate it, sadly.

Edit : I didn't see Saraide post at the time of writing this, but that's exactly what I meant : it's a mindset. And that's no personal attack, some people like RNG, some don't. I have issue with the ones that complains about the RNG effects on parses tho.