Wardens are basically glorified door guards for valuable places or things, not a good general term for tanks, but Tank is. :P
If you are going to role-play in Ashes , Warden sounds much better then referring to someone as a Tank in a fantasy game. How does the word Tank even fit in a high fantasy world if actual tanks are not in the setting?
Roleplay in most cases refers to taking on a role that is lore friendly, right? If they make lore that supports tank as a name will you be happy?
So you're saying creating new lore in the world of Vera for put the name tank lore friendly...
No... I do not think that's going to work, just admit it dude... the name tank doesn't sound cool in a roleplay term.
Wardens are basically glorified door guards for valuable places or things, not a good general term for tanks, but Tank is. :P
If you are going to role-play in Ashes , Warden sounds much better then referring to someone as a Tank in a fantasy game. How does the word Tank even fit in a high fantasy world if actual tanks are not in the setting?
Roleplay in most cases refers to taking on a role that is lore friendly, right? If they make lore that supports tank as a name will you be happy?
You couldn't make a dumber reasoning could you? Like seriously, no. Tank is not a valid class name. That sounds so shit that all blown up tanks would roll in their scrapyards
Woah woah woah it was a simple question what's with all the angry crap yall are spewing?
We are literally arguing about a name in a fantasy game, you cant say it wont make sense until you see the lore of the game, which no one has yet.
Just because you personally do not like the name does not mean the writers of a novel need to change it, so why do you suddenly get that privilege now that it's a video game?
Woah woah woah it was a simple question what's with all the angry crap yall are spewing?
We are literally arguing about a name in a fantasy game, you cant say it wont make sense until you see the lore of the game, which no one has yet.
Just because you personally do not like the name does not mean the writers of a novel need to change it, so why do you suddenly get that privilege now that it's a video game?
Because your ansewers sounds conceited af
"Just because you personally do not like the name does not mean the writers of a novel need to change it, so why do you suddenly get that privilege now?"
We are in the forums to suggest what things can go better for the game, we are not here saying we have all the answers, nobody here is treating bad to the writers.
Woah woah woah it was a simple question what's with all the angry crap yall are spewing?
We are literally arguing about a name in a fantasy game, you cant say it wont make sense until you see the lore of the game, which no one has yet.
Just because you personally do not like the name does not mean the writers of a novel need to change it, so why do you suddenly get that privilege now that it's a video game?
Because your ansewers sounds conceited af
"Just because you personally do not like the name does not mean the writers of a novel need to change it, so why do you suddenly get that privilege now?"
We are in the forums to suggest what things can go better for the game, we are not here saying we have all the answers, nobody here is treating bad to the writers.
Then block me if you find my words so "conceited". Don't respond to questions and the other side of the argument, let's see how long you enjoy shouting into the void. All I did was give my take, and what seems to be the take of a few others in this thread. Perhaps you should have read it first before posting?
Woah woah woah it was a simple question what's with all the angry crap yall are spewing?
We are literally arguing about a name in a fantasy game, you cant say it wont make sense until you see the lore of the game, which no one has yet.
Just because you personally do not like the name does not mean the writers of a novel need to change it, so why do you suddenly get that privilege now that it's a video game?
Because your ansewers sounds conceited af
"Just because you personally do not like the name does not mean the writers of a novel need to change it, so why do you suddenly get that privilege now?"
We are in the forums to suggest what things can go better for the game, we are not here saying we have all the answers, nobody here is treating bad to the writers.
Then block me if you find my words so "conceited". Don't respond to questions and the other side of the argument, let's see how long you enjoy shouting into the void. All I did was give my take, and what seems to be the take of a few others in this thread. Perhaps you should have read it first before posting?
nobody needs to block you sweetie, we all here brings answer to you too but with no necessary need to be conceited, you're the only one here who looks a little nervous and mark the others like angry.
Woah woah woah it was a simple question what's with all the angry crap yall are spewing?
We are literally arguing about a name in a fantasy game, you cant say it wont make sense until you see the lore of the game, which no one has yet.
Just because you personally do not like the name does not mean the writers of a novel need to change it, so why do you suddenly get that privilege now that it's a video game?
Because your ansewers sounds conceited af
"Just because you personally do not like the name does not mean the writers of a novel need to change it, so why do you suddenly get that privilege now?"
We are in the forums to suggest what things can go better for the game, we are not here saying we have all the answers, nobody here is treating bad to the writers.
Then block me if you find my words so "conceited". Don't respond to questions and the other side of the argument, let's see how long you enjoy shouting into the void. All I did was give my take, and what seems to be the take of a few others in this thread. Perhaps you should have read it first before posting?
nobody needs to block you sweetie, we all here brings answer to you too but with no necessary need to be conceited, you're the only one here who looks a little nervous and mark the others like angry.
Just wasting time here bud. Tank is fine as is, you have not given a good reason to change it.
Woah woah woah it was a simple question what's with all the angry crap yall are spewing?
We are literally arguing about a name in a fantasy game, you cant say it wont make sense until you see the lore of the game, which no one has yet.
Just because you personally do not like the name does not mean the writers of a novel need to change it, so why do you suddenly get that privilege now that it's a video game?
Because your ansewers sounds conceited af
"Just because you personally do not like the name does not mean the writers of a novel need to change it, so why do you suddenly get that privilege now?"
We are in the forums to suggest what things can go better for the game, we are not here saying we have all the answers, nobody here is treating bad to the writers.
Then block me if you find my words so "conceited". Don't respond to questions and the other side of the argument, let's see how long you enjoy shouting into the void. All I did was give my take, and what seems to be the take of a few others in this thread. Perhaps you should have read it first before posting?
nobody needs to block you sweetie, we all here brings answer to you too but with no necessary need to be conceited, you're the only one here who looks a little nervous and mark the others like angry.
Just wasting time here bud. Tank is fine as is, you have not given a good reason to change it.
Yes I did, tank doesn't sounds good in a roleplay term.
Woah woah woah it was a simple question what's with all the angry crap yall are spewing?
We are literally arguing about a name in a fantasy game, you cant say it wont make sense until you see the lore of the game, which no one has yet.
Just because you personally do not like the name does not mean the writers of a novel need to change it, so why do you suddenly get that privilege now that it's a video game?
Because your ansewers sounds conceited af
"Just because you personally do not like the name does not mean the writers of a novel need to change it, so why do you suddenly get that privilege now?"
We are in the forums to suggest what things can go better for the game, we are not here saying we have all the answers, nobody here is treating bad to the writers.
Then block me if you find my words so "conceited". Don't respond to questions and the other side of the argument, let's see how long you enjoy shouting into the void. All I did was give my take, and what seems to be the take of a few others in this thread. Perhaps you should have read it first before posting?
nobody needs to block you sweetie, we all here brings answer to you too but with no necessary need to be conceited, you're the only one here who looks a little nervous and mark the others like angry.
Just wasting time here bud. Tank is fine as is, you have not given a good reason to change it.
Yes I did, tank doesn't sounds good in a roleplay term.
And I asked if you would be ok with it if they actually had lore to explain why things were tanks. Oh look a perfectly reasonable line of discussion that you destroyed by insulting me.
So I assume your answer is no meaning you actually dont give a damn about the lore.
Woah woah woah it was a simple question what's with all the angry crap yall are spewing?
We are literally arguing about a name in a fantasy game, you cant say it wont make sense until you see the lore of the game, which no one has yet.
Just because you personally do not like the name does not mean the writers of a novel need to change it, so why do you suddenly get that privilege now that it's a video game?
Because your ansewers sounds conceited af
"Just because you personally do not like the name does not mean the writers of a novel need to change it, so why do you suddenly get that privilege now?"
We are in the forums to suggest what things can go better for the game, we are not here saying we have all the answers, nobody here is treating bad to the writers.
Then block me if you find my words so "conceited". Don't respond to questions and the other side of the argument, let's see how long you enjoy shouting into the void. All I did was give my take, and what seems to be the take of a few others in this thread. Perhaps you should have read it first before posting?
nobody needs to block you sweetie, we all here brings answer to you too but with no necessary need to be conceited, you're the only one here who looks a little nervous and mark the others like angry.
Just wasting time here bud. Tank is fine as is, you have not given a good reason to change it.
Yes I did, tank doesn't sounds good in a roleplay term.
And I asked if you would be ok with it if they actually had lore to explain why things were tanks. Oh look a perfectly reasonable line of discussion that you destroyed by insulting me.
So I assume your answer is no meaning you actually dont give a damn about the lore.
And I already told you that it doesn't going to sound good even if they going to try to make the name tank sounded good in the term of rolplay.
And I already told you that it doesn't going to sound good even if they going to try to make the name tank sounded good in the term of rolplay.
And I didn't insult you. lol
How do you know that without even seeing it yet? That's like saying a chinese dragon is not a dragon just because you come from a place that sees dragons as something else.
it's a matter of perspective, and maybe in this world tank is naturally used for adventurers that run headlong into battles and are really good at taking a hit. Who knows? We have to wait for them to release lore.
We'll rename it to Tank Top and anyone who specs double Tank Top becomes an Absolute Unit.
Hell yeah brother.
2
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
I consider a Tank to be someone in heavy plate that does some powerful damage in battle.
I don't need the vehicle reference for the concept to work.
We're going to be on Verra. That's the word that is used for the concept on that world, so...it's fine.
I consider a Tank to be someone in heavy plate that does some powerful damage in battle.
I don't need the vehicle reference for the concept to work.
We're going to be on Verra. That's the word that is used for the concept on that world, so...it's fine.
Knights are not tanks despite being in heavy plate and doing powerful damage in battle. So no, it wouldn't fit.
A tank is a gamer term, not a class name. No offense to anyone on the dev team, but a class name of Tank is a lazy name and unoriginal. You have 63 other classes and none of them have some gamer term used for naming them.
At least Tank Tank mains will be called Guardians, so it shows IS aren't doing Tank for Tank Tank.
0
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
edited June 2021
Not all Knights wear full plate but some might.
In Ashes, Knights are one of the Primary Tanks, so it does work.
A Tank is a Primary Archetype name on Verra. Regardless of whether it's lazy or unoriginal.
Sounds like you're saying Tank is a unique name among the 64 classes. Unique can be good.
I used to be on the "tank is a bad class name" team, but recently I've switched. I rather appreciate how blunt it is; If you want to tank, you need to play a Tank. That is the role they fulfill. Nothing else can Tank. You can't name them Knight because knights do other things than just tank damage. You can't name them Defender because anybody can play defense. You name them Tank because its the thing that's completely unique to them.
No, it's not the greatest roleplay term. If you want to roleplay your class and you're a tank, use the whole Archetype name, like Knight or Guardian. If you want to roleplay your class, and you don't have your secondary archetype yet, say something like "I'm a Knight in training".
You also can't do things like call Cleric "healer" or Bard "support". Clerics can (at least in A1) spec into things other than healing. Bards aren't the only class that supports. A Fighter/Cleric doesn't have to use healing augments and most classes will probably have support utility. However, a Fighter/Tank's available augments will almost certainly have to do with damage mitigation or threat generation, which are augments that help with tanking.
It's possible that we may be caught up too much by equating archetypes to classes, though they are heavily related to one another.
We do need to remember that the Archetypes are general patterns of behavior/personality for a given identity or in this case with a game: the prototype of the roles and their intended function. The class itself (choosing the 2 archetypes) is the final product and manifestation of the combined types.
But yeah the tank thing has kinda grown on me too when I realized this. Not the coolest name but it gets the job done. Most likely what will really matter is the final product after choosing the two archetypes. But this, I admit, is just me speculating. Because I highly doubt that ingame, the NPCs will be like, "Great holy tank Godsthesis, go there and pick 2 pounds of wet grass."
It's like pokemon mystery dungeon series when you pick your pokemon in the beginning, you answer a set of questions to determine your personality and then poof, the end result is a pokemon based on your choices.
It's possible that we may be caught up too much by equating archetypes to classes, though they are heavily related to one another.
We do need to remember that the Archetypes are general patterns of behavior/personality for a given identity or in this case with a game: the prototype of the roles and their intended function. The class itself (choosing the 2 archetypes) is the final product and manifestation of the combined types.
But yeah the tank thing has kinda grown on me too when I realized this. Not the coolest name but it gets the job done. Most likely what will really matter is the final product after choosing the two archetypes. But this, I admit, is just me speculating. Because I highly doubt that ingame, the NPCs will be like, "Great holy tank Godsthesis, go there and pick 2 pounds of wet grass."
It's like pokemon mystery dungeon series when you pick your pokemon in the beginning, you answer a set of questions to determine your personality and then poof, the end result is a pokemon based on your choices.
You hit the nail on the head, they can just say adventurer, your race, or your character name. It wouldn't make much sense for them to say your class or archetype name aside from summoners since everyone can wear any gear.
I like the suggestion to rename the archetype to Guardian and change the Tank/Tank class name.
This has been mentioned, but using one of the base MMO roles (Tank/Healer/DPS/Support) as an archetype feels wrong. It also seems inconsistent with the only healing primary archetype being called Cleric rather than Healer.
I'm not sure if they would ever consider adding another primary archetype in an expansion, but I think it would be good future-proofing to change the name now. A second tanking archetype would allow for someone to fill the Tank role without using the Tank archetype, which causes some confusion.
I've seen some suggestions for Defender, but I think that would cause confusion with the Attacker/Defender roles in sieges. Guardian or Protector seem better than Tank, but I don't think it's a big deal if they decide to stick with Tank.
Wardens are basically glorified door guards for valuable places or things, not a good general term for tanks, but Tank is. :P
If you are going to role-play in Ashes , Warden sounds much better then referring to someone as a Tank in a fantasy game. How does the word Tank even fit in a high fantasy world if actual tanks are not in the setting?
If tanks are not in the setting, what do we hold water for irrigating crops in?
Wardens are basically glorified door guards for valuable places or things, not a good general term for tanks, but Tank is. :P
If you are going to role-play in Ashes , Warden sounds much better then referring to someone as a Tank in a fantasy game. How does the word Tank even fit in a high fantasy world if actual tanks are not in the setting?
If tanks are not in the setting, what do we hold water for irrigating crops in?
Barrels, reservoirs, and jugs... but no tanks!
If I had more time, I would write a shorter post.
1
Options
ThexBlackxKnightMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
Wardens are basically glorified door guards for valuable places or things, not a good general term for tanks, but Tank is. :P
If you are going to role-play in Ashes , Warden sounds much better then referring to someone as a Tank in a fantasy game. How does the word Tank even fit in a high fantasy world if actual tanks are not in the setting?
Roleplay in most cases refers to taking on a role that is lore friendly, right? If they make lore that supports tank as a name will you be happy?
I wouldn't. It would just compound on the problem that the term tank doesn't sound like a fantasy term, but rather just gaming terminology.
It's as if they named an archetype "DPS". Having characters in your fantasy world using gaming terms disrupts the sense of immersion when there are many better names that a fantasy world would believably use to describe a "tank".
Wardens are basically glorified door guards for valuable places or things, not a good general term for tanks, but Tank is. :P
If you are going to role-play in Ashes , Warden sounds much better then referring to someone as a Tank in a fantasy game. How does the word Tank even fit in a high fantasy world if actual tanks are not in the setting?
If tanks are not in the setting, what do we hold water for irrigating crops in?
Barrels, reservoirs, and jugs... but no tanks!
Funnily enough a pond in a pasture to give cattle water is also referred to as a stock tank. If this is not common for others, this is commonly used out here in the countryside by farmers.
Wardens are basically glorified door guards for valuable places or things, not a good general term for tanks, but Tank is. :P
If you are going to role-play in Ashes , Warden sounds much better then referring to someone as a Tank in a fantasy game. How does the word Tank even fit in a high fantasy world if actual tanks are not in the setting?
If tanks are not in the setting, what do we hold water for irrigating crops in?
Barrels, reservoirs, and jugs... but no tanks!
Funnily enough a pond in a pasture to give cattle water is also referred to as a stock tank. If this is not common for others, this is commonly used out here in the countryside by farmers.
Ya, learn something new every day.
If you keep introducing more real-world examples of tanks this thread will never end. We are at 27 pages now.
Instead of knights having squires clean their armors, maybe they should just hire tank wipes...
If tanks are not in the setting, what do we hold water for irrigating crops in?
Fine, so we have a class name after a water storage container.
I mean, in the real world, we have military vehicle type that is named after a liquid storage container - as that is where tanks get their name (it was originally a code name for Landships - which is what tanks were originally called. The British referred to them in communications as tanks so that their rivals would think that the steel and metal workers they were no doubt tracking that were all heading to one area were likely there to make fuel and water tanks for battleships).
I see no reason at all why if we have vehicles in the real world named after tanks, in game can't have a class that is decked out in metal armor also named after tanks.
It honestly isn't even that much of a stretch .
In the real world, the fantasy class "tank" gets it's name from the vehicle, and the vehicle gets its name from the liquid storage vessel. In game, the class gets it's name directly from the liquid storage vessel.
In the real world, the fantasy class "tank" gets it's name from the vehicle, and the vehicle gets its name from the liquid storage vessel. In game, the class gets it's name directly from the liquid storage vessel.
I *REALLY* don't see the issue.
That’s assuming they took the archetype name directly from the storage vessel. Which I would argue is an unlikely speculation.
I was always convinced “Tank” was just a placeholder.. Haha
I think that giving an archetype the same name as a role/play style is unnecessarily confusing.
It’s only for the first 25 levels so it’s not a dealbreaker, just kinda lame.
In the real world, the fantasy class "tank" gets it's name from the vehicle, and the vehicle gets its name from the liquid storage vessel. In game, the class gets it's name directly from the liquid storage vessel.
I *REALLY* don't see the issue.
That’s assuming they took the archetype name directly from the storage vessel. Which I would argue is an unlikely speculation.
Even if the developers didn't directly do this, the writers can write it in if they wish.
If the writers don't write it in, and don't provide any reason for the name, players are welcome to fill in the blanks until they do.
The above is that blank filled in for those that care.
Comments
So you're saying creating new lore in the world of Vera for put the name tank lore friendly...
No... I do not think that's going to work, just admit it dude... the name tank doesn't sound cool in a roleplay term.
You couldn't make a dumber reasoning could you? Like seriously, no. Tank is not a valid class name. That sounds so shit that all blown up tanks would roll in their scrapyards
We are literally arguing about a name in a fantasy game, you cant say it wont make sense until you see the lore of the game, which no one has yet.
Just because you personally do not like the name does not mean the writers of a novel need to change it, so why do you suddenly get that privilege now that it's a video game?
Because your ansewers sounds conceited af
"Just because you personally do not like the name does not mean the writers of a novel need to change it, so why do you suddenly get that privilege now?"
We are in the forums to suggest what things can go better for the game, we are not here saying we have all the answers, nobody here is treating bad to the writers.
Then block me if you find my words so "conceited". Don't respond to questions and the other side of the argument, let's see how long you enjoy shouting into the void. All I did was give my take, and what seems to be the take of a few others in this thread. Perhaps you should have read it first before posting?
nobody needs to block you sweetie, we all here brings answer to you too but with no necessary need to be conceited, you're the only one here who looks a little nervous and mark the others like angry.
Just wasting time here bud. Tank is fine as is, you have not given a good reason to change it.
Yes I did, tank doesn't sounds good in a roleplay term.
And I asked if you would be ok with it if they actually had lore to explain why things were tanks. Oh look a perfectly reasonable line of discussion that you destroyed by insulting me.
So I assume your answer is no meaning you actually dont give a damn about the lore.
And I already told you that it doesn't going to sound good even if they going to try to make the name tank sounded good in the term of rolplay.
And I didn't insult you. lol
How do you know that without even seeing it yet? That's like saying a chinese dragon is not a dragon just because you come from a place that sees dragons as something else.
it's a matter of perspective, and maybe in this world tank is naturally used for adventurers that run headlong into battles and are really good at taking a hit. Who knows? We have to wait for them to release lore.
We'll rename it to Tank Top and anyone who specs double Tank Top becomes an Absolute Unit.
Hell yeah brother.
I don't need the vehicle reference for the concept to work.
We're going to be on Verra. That's the word that is used for the concept on that world, so...it's fine.
Knights are not tanks despite being in heavy plate and doing powerful damage in battle. So no, it wouldn't fit.
A tank is a gamer term, not a class name. No offense to anyone on the dev team, but a class name of Tank is a lazy name and unoriginal. You have 63 other classes and none of them have some gamer term used for naming them.
At least Tank Tank mains will be called Guardians, so it shows IS aren't doing Tank for Tank Tank.
In Ashes, Knights are one of the Primary Tanks, so it does work.
A Tank is a Primary Archetype name on Verra. Regardless of whether it's lazy or unoriginal.
Sounds like you're saying Tank is a unique name among the 64 classes. Unique can be good.
No, it's not the greatest roleplay term. If you want to roleplay your class and you're a tank, use the whole Archetype name, like Knight or Guardian. If you want to roleplay your class, and you don't have your secondary archetype yet, say something like "I'm a Knight in training".
You also can't do things like call Cleric "healer" or Bard "support". Clerics can (at least in A1) spec into things other than healing. Bards aren't the only class that supports. A Fighter/Cleric doesn't have to use healing augments and most classes will probably have support utility. However, a Fighter/Tank's available augments will almost certainly have to do with damage mitigation or threat generation, which are augments that help with tanking.
It's possible that we may be caught up too much by equating archetypes to classes, though they are heavily related to one another.
We do need to remember that the Archetypes are general patterns of behavior/personality for a given identity or in this case with a game: the prototype of the roles and their intended function. The class itself (choosing the 2 archetypes) is the final product and manifestation of the combined types.
But yeah the tank thing has kinda grown on me too when I realized this. Not the coolest name but it gets the job done. Most likely what will really matter is the final product after choosing the two archetypes. But this, I admit, is just me speculating. Because I highly doubt that ingame, the NPCs will be like, "Great holy tank Godsthesis, go there and pick 2 pounds of wet grass."
It's like pokemon mystery dungeon series when you pick your pokemon in the beginning, you answer a set of questions to determine your personality and then poof, the end result is a pokemon based on your choices.
You hit the nail on the head, they can just say adventurer, your race, or your character name. It wouldn't make much sense for them to say your class or archetype name aside from summoners since everyone can wear any gear.
This has been mentioned, but using one of the base MMO roles (Tank/Healer/DPS/Support) as an archetype feels wrong. It also seems inconsistent with the only healing primary archetype being called Cleric rather than Healer.
I'm not sure if they would ever consider adding another primary archetype in an expansion, but I think it would be good future-proofing to change the name now. A second tanking archetype would allow for someone to fill the Tank role without using the Tank archetype, which causes some confusion.
I've seen some suggestions for Defender, but I think that would cause confusion with the Attacker/Defender roles in sieges. Guardian or Protector seem better than Tank, but I don't think it's a big deal if they decide to stick with Tank.
If tanks are not in the setting, what do we hold water for irrigating crops in?
Barrels, reservoirs, and jugs... but no tanks!
If I had more time, I would write a shorter post.
Fine, so we have a class name after a water storage container.
It's as if they named an archetype "DPS". Having characters in your fantasy world using gaming terms disrupts the sense of immersion when there are many better names that a fantasy world would believably use to describe a "tank".
Funnily enough a pond in a pasture to give cattle water is also referred to as a stock tank. If this is not common for others, this is commonly used out here in the countryside by farmers.
Ya, learn something new every day.
If you keep introducing more real-world examples of tanks this thread will never end. We are at 27 pages now.
Instead of knights having squires clean their armors, maybe they should just hire tank wipes...
If I had more time, I would write a shorter post.
I mean, in the real world, we have military vehicle type that is named after a liquid storage container - as that is where tanks get their name (it was originally a code name for Landships - which is what tanks were originally called. The British referred to them in communications as tanks so that their rivals would think that the steel and metal workers they were no doubt tracking that were all heading to one area were likely there to make fuel and water tanks for battleships).
I see no reason at all why if we have vehicles in the real world named after tanks, in game can't have a class that is decked out in metal armor also named after tanks.
It honestly isn't even that much of a stretch .
In the real world, the fantasy class "tank" gets it's name from the vehicle, and the vehicle gets its name from the liquid storage vessel. In game, the class gets it's name directly from the liquid storage vessel.
I *REALLY* don't see the issue.
That’s assuming they took the archetype name directly from the storage vessel. Which I would argue is an unlikely speculation.
I was always convinced “Tank” was just a placeholder.. Haha
I think that giving an archetype the same name as a role/play style is unnecessarily confusing.
It’s only for the first 25 levels so it’s not a dealbreaker, just kinda lame.
If the writers don't write it in, and don't provide any reason for the name, players are welcome to fill in the blanks until they do.
The above is that blank filled in for those that care.