Glorious Alpha Two Testers!
Phase I of Alpha Two testing will occur on weekends. Each weekend is scheduled to start on Fridays at 10 AM PT and end on Sundays at 10 PM PT. Find out more here.
Check out Alpha Two Announcements here to see the latest Alpha Two news and update notes.
Our quickest Alpha Two updates are in Discord. Testers with Alpha Two access can chat in Alpha Two channels by connecting your Discord and Intrepid accounts here.
Phase I of Alpha Two testing will occur on weekends. Each weekend is scheduled to start on Fridays at 10 AM PT and end on Sundays at 10 PM PT. Find out more here.
Check out Alpha Two Announcements here to see the latest Alpha Two news and update notes.
Our quickest Alpha Two updates are in Discord. Testers with Alpha Two access can chat in Alpha Two channels by connecting your Discord and Intrepid accounts here.
Comments
We don't know yet. So this whole argument is not only pointless, it is also premature.
(Edit: tank sounds fine to me)
I don't have sources but I heard somewhere that augments from secondary archetypes aren't intended to encroach on primary archetype roles (plus that's the vibe I get from comments like "If I am a Tank archetype and a Mage is my counter, I can take a Mage secondary and kind of bridge the divide slightly; and then move my identity that direction ever so slightly")
On the other hand from the wiki: "Although traditional roles are present, players should not feel branded by their primary archetypes"
So that's a bunch of words, as tester's we'll need to help find the balance between these.
(coz honestly, with 64 classes, I can imagine common use just referring to them by their primary archetype)
Now this thread ruined it for me completely, I cannot help but feel like I am a banana in a bowl of oranges
I definitely considered it, but I am not sure that I agree with Inixia that we should ALL be bananas:
(That layout does seem to align with Steven's comments here though)
Instead I think I should get to be an orange too:
Old -> New Name
Tank -> 'Defender'
I expect/hope this game will pull in new MMO fans, people who have never heard of the trinity and don't care to research it but just want to play an immersive MMO. If I was a first-time MMO player, and heard the word "tank" describing a character I would be just as likely to think it was someone with a very powerful ranged attack as to think of someone who was heavily armored.
Aside from not confusing people who play AoC as their first MMO, I think it would be much better from an RP perspective also. While it's nice to feel valuable for PVE, a "defender" has so many better connotations for thing like sieges and caravan protection, etc.
I'm not a fan of "Vanguard" (proposed earlier), it will confuse too many people. Ideally all people would know what the word means but there will be many pre-teen players and ESL that will just have no idea, I think "defender" communicates to most anyone.
I realize a "defender" can use two-handed weapon, but a bard can also wear a shield so I think that is an irrelevant argument. The name is based more on the archetype skills which all lean to a defensive type playstyle because it causes mobs/players to attack yourself.
My 2c (and first post, hello everyone!)
The archetype names clearly communicates what umbrella their respective classes fall under. All classes under the mage archetype will be your archetypical magic using spellslingers. All classes under the Rogue archetype will be your archetypical sneaky type.
The word "Rogue" doesn't have any meaning even remotely associated with being sneaky or stealthy, whereas a Tank is at least a vehicle that takes punishment and hits back.
And changing "Rogue" to something else would also cut out the number of times we see "rouge" instead.
I know tank isn't a traditional name but i don't see it as being different from names like fighter or summoner. Hell, even ranger is a little weird when you think about it.
Emmm the equivalent role
Well, the equivalent to the "tank" role in a ranger would be "Ranged DPS" or "Physical Ranged DPS" role.
Glad I could help.
The etymology of 'ranger' has to do with wandering the wilds e.g. 'ranging.' It doesn't have anything to do with ranged weaponry.
Yep!
This is the most obvious in LotR where Aragorn is a ranger - but it's Legolas who goes piew piew
I'm not sure what you are trying to get at here?
Ok.... I don't see your point. if a ranger is someone who does ranging, is it weird to call someone who does tanking a tank?
Should it instead be called a tanker?
Ahh, I was afraid you would not be able to understand the concept, given the premise of your initial post. Sorry for my bad english:
Healer = role
DPS = role
Tank = role
Cleric = class
Ranger = class
"Guardian" = class
If my english skills are not proficient enough for you to understand the concept, I'm sorry but I tried to be as basic as I could.
Yea, I don't think you got my point either.
Before I go farther, the tank isn't a class name, it's the name of an archetype which is more synonymous with a role. If you choose it to be your primary, you will receive your class name when you select your secondary. For example, if you choose tank as your primary and secondary, Guardian will be your class.
Now back to what we are talking about.
My point is we have other archetypes that are named similarly like fighter and summoner. Fighters fight and summoners summon which I don't think are much different from a tank being named after tanking. Even ranger is named after the activity of ranging which another user pointed out.
No, I think it's totally reasonable. Though I think "Taunter" has a certain ring to it. My point was just clarifying that the name 'ranger' has nothing to do with a role of being ranged - which it so often jammed into.
We're all allowed our sensitivities, after all.
Stirring Intensifies
He was always the best character!
I want a Jerk Archetype. Whatever the combination it allows for play with only one hand.
Why?
Because "I am a Tank" is not a sentence that a character in a fantasy setting would utter. The class names should use terminology that befits the world the characters live in. It's okay to use Tank when talking about class roles, since those are meta conversations happening outside of the game world, but using them for class/archetype roles breaks the 4th wall and the immersion said 4th wall is meant to hold. It's also not consistent with other archetypes, a Cleric is a Cleric, not a "Healer" (and even then, a "Healer" would be a more fitting term than "Tank").
Bikeshedding
There is probably a dozen names that could be used here, some are taken by one of the 64 classes in the class chart, but there are still good names that befit the archetype that are free, like "Defender" or "Champion".
So a bikeshedding about the name will inevitably follow this discussion, and I think it's important to note that the community's inability to agree on what the term should be does not make the argument what the term should not be void.
I've witnessed a lot of bikeshedding arguments, with many hours poured into what the right choice should be and why. Ultimately picking a new name here that does not have the same problems that "Tank" has, will stop the bikeshed. Players don't have strong opinions about renaming "Cleric" to "Priest", and they won't have strong opinions about renaming "Defender" to "Guardian", or "Champon", or any other fitting term, as long as the chosen term is, indeed, fitting. "Tank" is not such a term.
[Edit] Other discussions where it comes up (and when):
Reddit 6 days ago
Reddit November 2020
Forums September 2020
Forums September 2020 (different thread)
Forums August 2020
Forums July 2020 (loose fit)
Forums August 2018
Forums August 2017
Reddit May 2017
[Edit Jan 18] re: Tank is not a class because you pick a secondary archetype that forms your class.
After scrubbing through Forums, Reddit, and Discord I only found this as the official response regarding renaming the Tank:
This is from January 2020, which to the best of my investigative ability is prior to level 25 requirement for secondary archetype was mentioned in an interview (July 2020) and subsequently added to the wiki (November 2020). Good folks at Discord say this was known to be somewhere in the level 20-30 range for a couple years now, but so far I can't find any sources for that.
Regardless, as things stand today, picking Tank as primary archetype, you are literally called Tank in game (whether the label is "class" or "archetype" is immaterial) from level 1 to 24.
For the record, do you disagree because you think it's fine if the archetype name does not fit the setting, or do you disagree because you think the term fits the setting, or some other reason?
What a stupid answer.
Everybody is entitled to give feedback.
I was around when Jedi Wizard was the name of one of the advanced classes of Swtor. People gave feedback. You know how it went down.
Even in fantasy settings that have literal tanks (like Warhammer Fantasy) it's still not a valid personal descriptor.
- What's your role in military young lad?
- I am a tank.
- ...you mean you are a tank operator?
- No, I'm literally a tank.
If you can find an example where someone in any fantasy setting says "I am a tank", meaning what we all understand this to mean (as opposed to "a large liquid container"), feel free to share. I'll be waiting. Until then, please refrain from alluding that I speak from authority rather than common sense.
That said. Keep these threads coming.
This is my personal feedback, shared to help the game thrive in its niche.
It's as fitting as calling Mages in classic WoW water dispensers.
Apples and oranges baby rage. Star wars has a very established lore. This game is in pre-alpha and originates from a pathfinder game where the term tank is quite often used.
Otherwise, the 1st-person in-character role would be something along the lines of "Vanguard" or "Vanguardsman" - but that's typically not just one or two people; It's a role of an entire group that charges first into the fighting, in a military-sized battle. If there were 8 total people somewhere about to enter battle IRL/out-of-character, you wouldn't classify 1 or 2 people as your army's vanguard. 8 people aren't an army!
That would be fine if all archetypes were named after their roles, but with a loose exception for Summoner, no other archetype is named after its role, not even the main healer.
There is plenty of good names to pick from, so that's a moot point.