Positionals vs Damage over Time

[SeverianLyonesse]

I actually agree with the general sentiment of this thread.

As much as I like the idea of positionals, in practice on most jobs it just amounts to alternating rear/flanking positions, a kind of mindless sliding left and right. Which kind of dilutes the job fantasy when everyone is doing it.

That's not to say that they ought to be totally removed. I just think that they don't add much when every melee DPS job uses them in the same senseless, flavorless manner.

Better things to do with positionals:

1. Tailor them to the particular job fantasy.
a. NIN should only have rear positionals.
b. I feel like DRG should only have flanking positionals.
c. IMO SAM should actually have only *front* positionals (if we are talking pure flavor and ignoring stacking on the butt in practice).
d. MNK and maybe VPR make more sense to have alternating positionals given how dynamic they are; maybe MNK should have front/flanking (direct combat) and VPR should have rear/flanking (hunting prey).
e. RPR just shouldn't have positionals at all, I think. The job fantasy doesn't really inform any positional playstyle, and I think it feels kind of fitting for the "Void" class to be "devoid" of positionals.

(viewed another way, we see kind of a "theme" emerge: Striking (honor/martial jobs) hits straight on (front), Scouting (assassin/hunters) hits from behind (rear), and Maiming (poking sticks) does neither.)

(Alternatively, as polearm users, DRG and RPR could have bonuses for being between 5-10 yalms away instead of front/flanking/rear bonuses. Even though imo that might create some confusion as to why Scouting gets Aiming accessories.)

2. Design encounters around different melee positioning, so different jobs have to solve the encounter differently. They already kind of do this anyway, so it would just take a little more intentionality I think.