Tank as a Role not an Archetype

Hey I've been recently checking into the game and I found it extremely irritating from a semantic level that is a huge pet peeve of mine. Wherein the Knight archetype is called Tank, while Knight is reserved for a Tank/Fighter class name. I think this makes no sense. The purpose of a role in an RPG system is on the back end of the game systems, a tank does not exist in fantasy medieval settings, it s a meta term.

The correct name of the Archetype Tank should be Knight, because that's what it is. You don't call the rogue stealth, the cleric healer, the mage magic DPS, or the bard support. That's not how this works in an RPG system. What a character DOES is not what a character IS.

So my suggestions would be to change Tank to Knight. And then for the Knight/Fighter hybrid you call it names such as: Warlord, General, Sentinel, even Weapons Master.

And if you did weapons master which is taken by fighter/fighter, rename that one to Berserker, Barbarian, Warlord, etc.

Thank you for your time.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Ludullu

Tank is tank

MprisM

It may be, but it's incorrect. Effectively whats happening by using the name Tank is that they are breaking the 4th wall.

Ludullu

MprisM wrote: »

It may be, but it's incorrect.

Who exactly determines that? Is there an omnipotent arbiter of terms and nomenclatures? Cause I feel like they fail to keep several other games in check, so I see no reason for them to suddenly control this one.

Archetypes are archetypes, because they represent their roles. If anything, the other archetype names are inferior to the Tank's one, cause they are too damn vague and do not explain what the archetype does. Healer SHOULD be a healer. Ranger a ranged dps. Mage a magic dps. Etc etc.

One once they know their roles, they can then decide what they wanna specialize in, by choosing a class. If you wanna be a knight - you're free to be one.

MprisM

It's incorrect because of how the other archetypes are named. The arbiter is common sense, if we cannot agree on the basics we might as well become savages.

So yes, I'm fine with changing all of the other archetype names to fit in with Tank. It doesn't matter to me, I just want consistency and logic, because as it stands it's complete nonsense. It's either proof of incompetence, thinking the audience are too stupid to understand what the archetype is, or it is an intentional 4th wall break joke, I'm not interested in being on any of these timelines. So either they are dumb, they think we're dumb, or they think they are funny.

One of these things is not like the others, and to be honest, it's not debatable. You can debate it if you want, or try to, but I'm not going to. Because I know what reality is, and if people want to debate it go ahead and do so, I'll watch from afar like someone looking out their car window while passing by an insane asylum, and I'll keep on driving and never look back.

I have no reason to engage with insanity or sycophants. I pointed out common sense. So if people are gonna argue about reality, I'm out, I want nothing to do with it and I'm not going to spend my time on it any further. See ya.

Ludullu

MprisM wrote: »

Because I know what reality is

Tank is tank

Noaani

MprisM wrote: »

One of these things is not like the others, and to be honest, it's not debatable.

Sure it is.

We all know how the name "tank" came to be associated with the piece of war equipment we have now (the UK in WW1 invented the Landship, but code named the entire process as "tanks" so that the Germans couldn't easily figure out what they were up to, especially since a lot of the materials and expertise for making Landships was also needed for making water tanks). What we do not know is if there is or is not a similar thing that happened on Verra or Sanctus.

Since the armor a tank may be expected to wear would also involve similar materials and expertise to someone making metal water tanks, it is reasonable to assume that something similar may have happened in the past.

The fact that it happened in the real world means there is every reason to think it could happen in Verra/Sanctus.

Andi

Ludullu, he’s right. "Tank" is wrong for all the reasons he listed.

Not that it'd change anything, though.

Azherae

Andi wrote: »

Ludullu, he’s right. "Tank" is wrong for all the reasons he listed.

Not that it'd change anything, though.

Even if so, there isn't a term that is 'right' either, unless Ashes is giving up on the variety of Tanking styles they mentioned offering.

Basically I think 'Evasion Knight' sounds dumber overall than having to call Heavy armored/Mitigation style 'Mailmen' just "Tank".

Since Ashes says 'All weapons are ok', 'All gear is ok', 'You don't actually need to take the shield', and 'you don't actually have to take every skill, you just get at least one resource that you all use in one way or another'...

Tank is slightly better even if it's not particularly cool to have as the Archetype base name. Nearly every other term will genuinely make some player out there go 'But I'm not a--' and refuse to seriously play the Archetype.

Especially since the implication so far in Ashes is that Tanks will actually need to use the specifics of their build for the Tanking part, not just 'press the aggro button and avoid dying/sponging up too much Healer MP'.

Also, I hate Tank as an Archetype name, it's just 'probably' the 'only one that fits this game'.

Saabynator

MprisM wrote: »

Hey I've been recently checking into the game and I found it extremely irritating from a semantic level that is a huge pet peeve of mine. Wherein the Knight archetype is called Tank, while Knight is reserved for a Tank/Fighter class name. I think this makes no sense. The purpose of a role in an RPG system is on the back end of the game systems, a tank does not exist in fantasy medieval settings, it s a meta term.

The correct name of the Archetype Tank should be Knight, because that's what it is. You don't call the rogue stealth, the cleric healer, the mage magic DPS, or the bard support. That's not how this works in an RPG system. What a character DOES is not what a character IS.

So my suggestions would be to change Tank to Knight. And then for the Knight/Fighter hybrid you call it names such as: Warlord, General, Sentinel, even Weapons Master.

And if you did weapons master which is taken by fighter/fighter, rename that one to Berserker, Barbarian, Warlord, etc.

Thank you for your time.

Wouldnt that be a ton of new class names? What if a bard specced into bow, or twohanded sword, would they get ned names too then? The name right now, changes with the 2end class choice. So tank is only tank, until they get a 2end class. Then they become something else.

Phoenix77

Ur correct but Steven has a weird obsession with this name. Most ppl find it incorrect,many discussions have been made on this topic but Steven doesn’t change his mind.

daveywavey

Phoenix77 wrote: »

Ur correct but Steven has a weird obsession with this name. Most ppl find it incorrect,many discussions have been made on this topic but Steven doesn’t change his mind.

And some of us like it and don't want it changed!

Can't please everybody.

Azherae

daveywavey wrote: »

Phoenix77 wrote: »

Ur correct but Steven has a weird obsession with this name. Most ppl find it incorrect,many discussions have been made on this topic but Steven doesn’t change his mind.

And some of us like it and don't want it changed!

Can't please everybody.

As we all know, 'this name is not for everyone'.

Nerror

Hehe, we've had many threads about this over the years @MprisM , including a long one with 44 pages.

I wasn't a big fan of "Tank" at first, but I think it's just like anything else that undergoes changes or breaks from the norms; it just takes a little time getting used to. Now I don't care. I am not sure Intrepid would gain much, if anything, by changing the name at this point.

As soon as players hit lvl 25, they won't be tanks anymore. Nor will they be mages or clerics or rogues, etc.

daveywavey

Azherae wrote: »

daveywavey wrote: »

Phoenix77 wrote: »

Ur correct but Steven has a weird obsession with this name. Most ppl find it incorrect,many discussions have been made on this topic but Steven doesn’t change his mind.

And some of us like it and don't want it changed!

Can't please everybody.

As we all know, 'this name is not for everyone'.

Hahaha, if you don't like the archetype name "Tank", then maybe this game isn't for you!

Aszkalon

" I'll tank your Mom!! lol "

" What's up ? Not being able to "tank" how the Game is gonna be ? "

" I see the Game is "tanking" while People still care. How is it ever gonna be great ? "

" Oh Man. If i would have known the Game would "tank" so much, i would have never bought all Cosmetic Packs since 2018 and other kind of packs. "

I wrote everything i could think of, so that Others won't have to.

Volgaris

I got thrown in the drunk tank last night.

The tank is drunk and can't hold threat!

The tracks on this tank are bad

The fish tank is broken.

Okay my tank is empty someone else go.

Dygz

Mage is Mage
Fighter is Fighter
Tank is Tank

Child Item