Sathrago wrote: » I know how to fix all the turmoil. Give me a few weeks and I'll get Chat GPT to rewrite The Hobbit books so that they use tank in reference to various characters (like people use ranger in this very same fantasy.) Since you could argue that the term "ranger" mostly became a fantasy term due to this book.
Arya_Yeshe wrote: » Tank name is bad, period... could itbe knight? paladin? guardian? could be something new
mcstackerson wrote: » How is this any different to names like summoner or fighter? Yes, those names have been used for classes in the past but isn't it a similar situation where a fighter is someone who fights and a summoner is someone who summoners?
CaptnChuck wrote: » Cripsus wrote: » Hello all, I believe this discussion may have come up before, but I really would like Steven and friends to reconsider the name “Tank”. Overall, they have done a good job at naming the other classes and subclasses, but they completely ruin the immersion of the game by using the class name “tank”. Tank was a code name given to military vehicles being created in 1915. It has been a slang term for classes and archetypes in many video games given to the role that is used to absorb/mitigate or “tank” damage. Having a class name as tank ruins the immersion. It’s like naming your cat “Cat”. It’s cute and puny, but is that what they really want for their game? What class do you play? Oh, I play a tank! Yea, but like what class? TANK!! *insert meme of a tank with a face on it... drooling* Really? Do you really think that every other name has been named well? Guess I'm the only one that sees the words shadow and sword being repeated a billion times across the class list.
Cripsus wrote: » Hello all, I believe this discussion may have come up before, but I really would like Steven and friends to reconsider the name “Tank”. Overall, they have done a good job at naming the other classes and subclasses, but they completely ruin the immersion of the game by using the class name “tank”. Tank was a code name given to military vehicles being created in 1915. It has been a slang term for classes and archetypes in many video games given to the role that is used to absorb/mitigate or “tank” damage. Having a class name as tank ruins the immersion. It’s like naming your cat “Cat”. It’s cute and puny, but is that what they really want for their game? What class do you play? Oh, I play a tank! Yea, but like what class? TANK!! *insert meme of a tank with a face on it... drooling*
BaSkA_9x2 wrote: » I also agree Tank is a bad name for the archetype, unless it has a cannon and is made of steel. I would prefer if it was Guardian, Warden, Protector or forgive me for I will sin: Warrior. It would be cool to make a poll about this imho!
Evyx wrote: » People in my opinion are far too quick to dismiss this argument. There is a problem with stating you have a trinity and there being HEALER, DPS and TANK roles. The issue is you literally have a class called tank. Most players who are brand new and have absolutely no idea how this game works in depth flat out will just see the name "Tank" and be like "Ohhhh okay so that is the tank I see I see " Then they see a summoner who has tank secondary and is a brood warden (who I presume is a valid tank capable of tanking content) and they are like "THIS ISN'T A TANK. HOW DARE YOU BRING THIS, YOU LITERALLY AREN'T A TANK LEAVEEE". Sadly I'd say that people wouldn't just do that but I've played long enough to know that the naming of particular things does trickle. Reputations are built sometimes off the dumbest things.
winner909098 wrote: » Sylvanar wrote: » I agree, though I would like to nominate two more classes: - Ranger - Fighter Class name should imply the role of the class and not be the role itself. I mean all the classes will have fighting capability and I doubt mage & other healers will have melee option. ranger is a d&d class, as is fighter
Sylvanar wrote: » I agree, though I would like to nominate two more classes: - Ranger - Fighter Class name should imply the role of the class and not be the role itself. I mean all the classes will have fighting capability and I doubt mage & other healers will have melee option.
Birthday wrote: » Why is this thread still alive? Don't you guys think it's very petty to be concerned about this? Let's look at it realistically. The only time when your class will actually be called Tank is pre-choosing secondary class. After that you become warden or guardian etc. So it's just in the early game.
Dygz wrote: » I am quite sure that people will refer to Necromancers as Necromancers. And Paladins as Paladins. And... if Tank is actually official at launch - lots of people will prefer to say Guardian, rather than Tank. Slang happens.
Dygz wrote: » Because, as usual, you have poor reading comprehension and failed to understand what I actually wrote. You choose to disagree just because you love to agrue.
Noaani wrote: » Dygz wrote: » I am quite sure that people will refer to Necromancers as Necromancers. And Paladins as Paladins. And... if Tank is actually official at launch - lots of people will prefer to say Guardian, rather than Tank. Slang happens. Why would Ashes be the opposite to all other games? In other games, a class called a Guardian just gets called "tank". In fact, all classes that can tank in other games are just called "tank".
SirChancelot wrote: » Noaani wrote: » Dygz wrote: » I am quite sure that people will refer to Necromancers as Necromancers. And Paladins as Paladins. And... if Tank is actually official at launch - lots of people will prefer to say Guardian, rather than Tank. Slang happens. Why would Ashes be the opposite to all other games? In other games, a class called a Guardian just gets called "tank". In fact, all classes that can tank in other games are just called "tank". You're right, players just say tank, healz, and DPS So if all classes that heal get called healz... Why does cleric get a name that's not it's role? While tank just gets tank.
Noaani wrote: » SirChancelot wrote: » Noaani wrote: » Dygz wrote: » I am quite sure that people will refer to Necromancers as Necromancers. And Paladins as Paladins. And... if Tank is actually official at launch - lots of people will prefer to say Guardian, rather than Tank. Slang happens. Why would Ashes be the opposite to all other games? In other games, a class called a Guardian just gets called "tank". In fact, all classes that can tank in other games are just called "tank". You're right, players just say tank, healz, and DPS So if all classes that heal get called healz... Why does cleric get a name that's not it's role? While tank just gets tank. My assumption is because bards will also be able to heal, and in some situations may be able to be the only/main healer in a group. Whereas a tank will be the only class able to tank.
SirChancelot wrote: » Noaani wrote: » SirChancelot wrote: » Noaani wrote: » Dygz wrote: » I am quite sure that people will refer to Necromancers as Necromancers. And Paladins as Paladins. And... if Tank is actually official at launch - lots of people will prefer to say Guardian, rather than Tank. Slang happens. Why would Ashes be the opposite to all other games? In other games, a class called a Guardian just gets called "tank". In fact, all classes that can tank in other games are just called "tank". You're right, players just say tank, healz, and DPS So if all classes that heal get called healz... Why does cleric get a name that's not it's role? While tank just gets tank. My assumption is because bards will also be able to heal, and in some situations may be able to be the only/main healer in a group. Whereas a tank will be the only class able to tank. Eh That may be true, and if it is then sure... But if bards can heal, as in fill The role of a healer and party content. Then I seriously hope other archetypes will be able to fill the role of tank if they take the tank secondary and build their character as one...
