Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="overgeeked" data-source="post: 9171027" data-attributes="member: 86653">The in-combat roles are fairly well established across games.Tank. DPS. Healer.Variations on how you tank, dps, and heal are great, but the roles are largely unchanging. Melee vs ranged DPS. Magical vs physical DPS. Etc. Concepts like battlefield control are not new, but they're not well implemented in most games. At least not as stand-alone roles. Control is usually a secondary concern or spread across the other roles, like buffs/debuffs.It's incredibly important to me that the roles stay in their lane, mechanically. I don't mind something like a tank than can deal a bit of damage, but a tank that's dealing as much damage or more damage than the dps is bad design. In an S + A-F ranking system, the given role should be the only S-tier pick. Any secondary stuff a class has should be B-C tier at absolute best. For example, a tank that can deal decent damage. Their tanking should be S tier and their damage should be no better than B-C tier.I vastly prefer keeping the pillars in separate silos so PCs can be built around multiple roles. One combat role (tank, dps, heals). One exploration role (whatever they'd be). And one social role (whatever they'd be). Rather than muddying the waters by mixing non-combat roles into a character's combat role, see thief or rogue as the "skills" character. That has no real meaning in combat.</blockquote>