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.
Tank -> Stoic
Kookaburra
Member, Alpha Two
Hello,
This is my first post here on the forum and I know it's already a much discussed topic, but I wanted to selfishly add my own opinion, of which I'm almost certain is not going to be a novel idea, given the long history of this discussion.
In considering what name would best be substituted for the archetype presently named "Tank", which we know to be more of a class role than an actual class fantasy or identity, the conclusion I came to was Stoic.
Defined as: "a person who can endure pain or hardship without showing their feelings or complaining."
Now, don't get me wrong, I'm aware that tank players themselves will be the first to tell you when they think you've done something wrong, and, in that sense, the fact of being a non-complainer is not exactly apt to this description. However, I think as a whole, the usage of this word to describe an archetype that endures the brutal strikes and overwhelming ire of enemies, at the cost of their own vitality, in order to protect their party or raid from utter annihilation, does seem quite Stoic to me.
As this word's usage as a noun is already established, I believe that applying it to a new terminology such as the naming of a class archetype is quite a reasonable path to tread, and that the name could be recognizable and distinct within a short period of adoption.
For visual reference this is what it would look like among the current roster of archetypes.
If you have tolerated reading this far, then you are a true Stoic and I salute your bravery and fortitude.
This is my first post here on the forum and I know it's already a much discussed topic, but I wanted to selfishly add my own opinion, of which I'm almost certain is not going to be a novel idea, given the long history of this discussion.
In considering what name would best be substituted for the archetype presently named "Tank", which we know to be more of a class role than an actual class fantasy or identity, the conclusion I came to was Stoic.
Defined as: "a person who can endure pain or hardship without showing their feelings or complaining."
Now, don't get me wrong, I'm aware that tank players themselves will be the first to tell you when they think you've done something wrong, and, in that sense, the fact of being a non-complainer is not exactly apt to this description. However, I think as a whole, the usage of this word to describe an archetype that endures the brutal strikes and overwhelming ire of enemies, at the cost of their own vitality, in order to protect their party or raid from utter annihilation, does seem quite Stoic to me.
As this word's usage as a noun is already established, I believe that applying it to a new terminology such as the naming of a class archetype is quite a reasonable path to tread, and that the name could be recognizable and distinct within a short period of adoption.
For visual reference this is what it would look like among the current roster of archetypes.
If you have tolerated reading this far, then you are a true Stoic and I salute your bravery and fortitude.
0
Comments
Yes, you're right! And I won't be entirely fussed if it does remain under that name, and all indications are that it probably and most likely shall. However, I am of the following that tend to believe that a bit more imagination could have been used when devising the name for it. This I believe is what has lead many others, and now myself, to suggest an alternative name.
That's just my take though, and I accept that you do not take issue with it and are content for it to remain unchanged. Knowing that, I'm glad enough for us to remain in disagreement on the matter.
Thanks.
i prefer Vanguard