Felibar wrote:... if you want rational GM replies and discussion, stop being so confrontational about it (disclaimer at char create, etc). They already have more on their plate than you or I could imagine.
Felibar's got a point here, scibby. While I agree with your base point, that there are heavily armored classes that can basically solo things on their own or with a bot well enough that they really don't
need anyone else, the way you
express that point comes across as though you're trying to beat it into peoples' heads. Look at your last two posts; they're consecutive, one a bump and another attempt at browbeating,
within ten minutes of one another. Relax a bit. Make your points calmly, and give people time to consider them.
... us melee dps need that AC mitigation. How else are we expected to stand in and take flurry after flurry etc while you squishies get to set back and fling magic?
This is true as well. AC, as it stands, is absolutely necessary for tank classes to survive and function in a raid environment. I wouldn't want to suggest lowering AC for them in the slightest; it would outright ruin the game totally.
That said, you gotta keep in mind that squishies only get to "sit back and fling magic" IF there's a wall of HP and AC and aggro generation sitting between them and the mob. Most enemies past T1 or T4 trash ignore root spells, so tanks and pets are basically the only way to keep an enemy out of melee range, and that's assuming the mobs can't simply summon you to them (which just about everything starting with Chardok can do). You might envy the ranged DPS classes for their ability to sit outside of the bulk of the damage and lob in nukes & arrows, but keep in mind that they cannot do that without you.
The reverse, however, is not true; in most fights, tank classes
can survive and win without DPS - it just means taking longer. Scibby completely overblew the point about rangers, but they are a prime example; rangers
can tank (if sufficiently well-geared and geared intelligently), BUT they can also deal damage from range that's widely considered some of the best in the game that's not put out by a wizard or necro. On top of this, they have a selection of buffs and combat spells and disciplines, and can dual-wield in melee; their weapon selection is second only to that of a warrior in that regard. A ranger is basically an entire raid group in one package, limited only by the fact that, while they can do just about everything, they
can't do everything
at once and they're not the best at anything (with the possible exception of AFKbox DPS. /autofire FTW). SKs have a similar general profile, only their spells are more necromancer-like instead of druid/shaman-like and they have somewhat less ranged damage potential, but the advantage of wearing plate instead of chain.
Is it any wonder, then, than SKs and Rangers are among the most popular classes on this server, particularly for main toons? Is it also any wonder that people do not often play cloth classes as a main, preferring instead to consider a plate tank class as their main and play the clothie as box DPS?
Basically, in the majority of fights, the existence of ranged DPS classes is
a convenience for the tankers and melee DPS. The existence of tankers is
a necessity for most ranged DPS (with possibly the sole exception of rangers, who can freely switch from a ranged DPS role to a melee hybrid role with minimal difficulty). If you're interested in balancing the fact, you can either lessen the ranged DPS's reliance upon tankers by giving them built-in capable tanks (pets), or you can increase the reliance that tankers have for ranged DPS by reducing their damage output.
Since nobody wants to see the latter, the only reasonable solution is to provide the former. Unless of course, there's something I'm not considering.
