The Support Role Defined

[RickWolford]

I was talking to someone on the forums about the support role, which recently, seems to require a definition to satisfy some RIFT players.
Anyway, he was saying that he personally thinks that the support role is completely useless in 5-mans and maybe 10-mans, and that TRION should figure out a way to make then useful in 5-man groups. He then said, he wishes the Archon auras had a duration longer then 5 minutes...
Now I agree with his statement about the support role being less useful in 5-mans comparable to 20-mans. However, i couldn't agree with him about the Archon auras having their durations increased.
Think about this though. If the Archon's goal is to buff the party offensively and defensively, it wouldn't be out of the question to make Archon's auras even a shorter durations!
DPS uses their source (and by "source" I mean Energy, Power, Charge and/or Mana) to deal Damage. HPS use their source for healing, and Tanks use it for damage and threat management. So supports like the Bard and Archon should use their source for Damage, Buffs, Debuffs, and even AoE-off-heals. This makes the support role use more mana to cast them more often, which would enforce the support role's job, but also gives it more buttons to push (but not much more, I know).
The only problem about that though is the Aura's aren't powerful enough to justify having a 30 second duration in 5-mans. This brings me to my solution about Support being useless in 5-mans. Make buffs like Motifs and Auras equally distribute (rounding down) their buffs to the party. Volcanic Bomb currently buffs damage by 5%. So lets say instead of buffing the group's damage by 5%, it says something more on the lines of this:
"Launches an explosive volcanic stone at the enemy, causing 92 to 96 Earth damage instantly and 82 Fire damage over 6 seconds. Allies within 35 meters of the Mage have their damage increased. This amount is equal to 100% but evenly distributed among all group or raid members. Each member can't benefit from more then 20%. This effect lasts for 10 seconds"

So if you have 5 group members, the 100% is distributed evenly so each member gets a 20% increase (100 ÷ 5 members = 20). If you have 10 group members, the 100% is distributed evenly so each member gets a 10% increase (100 ÷ 10 members = 10). And finally if you have 20 group members, the 100% is distributed evenly so each member gets a 5% increase (100 ÷ 20 members = 5). This also makes 4 man groups not gain a 25% increase in damage because the spells description says no one can benefit from more then 20%. Try applying this methodology to the Archon and Bard buffs (not all of them, especially the ones that are just as effective in 5-mans as they are in 20-mans, mainly some of the defensive ones)

So before you say its over powering, if your currently running 5-mans and substitute your support for a DPS, its because that DPS does more for the party then the support does (which makes sense in the current 5-man environment). But consider my quantitative theory on why this even allocation of buffs is a good idea.

Im going assign what may appear to be arbitrary numerical values to a 5-man group's "DPS-worth" based on their role, so my point can be explained more accurately. So assume the following: Say that a Tank can dish out (while effectively using threat management) and "DPS-worth" of 1 (these numerical values are not an accurate representation of DPS or DPS ratios).

Tank: 1

The healer in the group is more then likely not going to contribute to DPS at all, and if they do, then they are sacrificing HPS, which in fine if HPS can in-fact be sacrificed in the given situation. But for this explanation, and what I would consider accurate for about 90% of the time, healers deliver no DPS, giving them a "DPS-worth" of 0 for this theory
(Now I understand the Chloro does DPS. However I personally think the Chloro's HPS shouldn't be able to compare to that of a none DPSing healer. If you got 2 healers that dish out the same HPS, but one provides some DPS, why not go with the DPS healer? So for balance sake, I would make the Chloro's healing slightly lower, but not by much... If that's not already the case... but that's another discussion)

Tank: 1
Healer: 0

Then lets say DPS are usually pushing... 2.5 times more DPS then the Tank. That seems reasonable, and so they are given a "DPS-worth" of 2.5

Tank: 1
Healer: 0
Damage: 2.5
Damage: 2.5

So if you were to have 3 DPS in the party instead of 2, then you'd have a total "DPS-worth" for the party of 8.5... But if you replaced one of the DPS with a support role, the 2.5 "DPS-worth" lose needs to be made up for some how... If the Support role pumps out 1 "DPS-worth" himself, his buffs have to make up for the 1.5 "DPS-worth" that is lost. So the support, through improving Crit, Attack Power, Spell Power, Raw Damage, Armor Pen, and de-buffing enemies so that they lose Armor, Resistance, and they susceptibility to resisting damage of all kinds, can make up for this damage. If he increased every ones damage output by 25%, then the individual "DPS-worth" would be more like this...

Tank: 1 + 25% = 1.25
Healer: 0 + 25% = 0
Damage: 2.5 + 25% = 3.125
Damage: 2.5 + 25% = 3.125
Support: 1 + 25% = 1.25

...then the overall "DPS-worth" would be at 8.75, making the support role a must... However, lets face it, 25% (in this case) might be to high. I would even say that I still think that having 3 DPS should still output slightly more damage then 2 DPS and 1 support. I say this because support doesn't just increase the parties DPS, it also increases they HPS and survivability. Which in HK, is absolutely necessary. So defense can be just as valuable as offense.

So that's my take on what Bards and Archons. There are other support roles like the Justicar, Chloromancer, and Dominator (I still think Warlord should be a Tank/Support hybrid though... I mean Warriors are the only class that can only queue up for 2 roles... that's another discussion). For instance, if the Dominator's CCs allow the party to concentrate their DPS on a smaller group and the enemies damage output is reduced to increase survivability, along with silencing, stunning, and draining mana, then the Dominator has effectively done his job as a support role. The Chloro and Justicar just do Aoe-off-heals and that's simple enough....

The last thing I would like to address is multiple types of the same support or other supports in the party. Raids don't care about Archon builds that aren't 51 point Archon because auras dont stack with other auras, and Burning Purpose is extremely important. Raids also don't care about the Warlords Call to Battle and Call of Entrench because they don't stack with the Bards Motifs. The Warlords Aspects don't stack with the Archons auras either, and neither does the Beastmaster's Bonds, and Shaman's Courages... So I think a solution to this (if my previous idea was applied to buff's, making them more effective in 5-mans) is to either:

1) Make only a certain number of Auras and Motifs to be active at one time. So instead of all 5 auras and 5 Motifs being active, only 3 can be active at any given time. That means having 2 Archons in the party, along with a Warlord support wouldn't be a bad idea... ALSO, back in 1.5, I had a pre-level 50, 38 Archon/28 Pyro that dished out damn good DPS despite the fact I was Archon main, and also provided good support. Once I hit level 50 though, this was useless, because I didn't have access to Burning Purpose... But if only 3 auras can be up at one given moment, then having an Off-Archon would be a good idea, too provide the auras that the 51 point Archon can't keep up.

2) The second solution I would propose, would be to change the functionality of Warlord Calls and Aspects, Shaman Courages, and Beastmaster Bonds, so that the same goal is achieved, but by different means, so they dont stack with Archon and Bard buffs... Think about it, the Beastmasters Enraged Companion stacks with Motif of Bravery even though they effectively do the same thing, and that is to buff damage. So you can make these changes in other ways. One of the possible suggestions I would make, would be to change the Warlords Call to Battle so that it does stack with Motif of Bravery, but still effectively achieved the same goal... There aren't enough AoE de-buffs in RIFT, so why not make Call to Battle an AoE de-buff, so that all enemies in range take 5% more damage. That wouldn't stack with anything that I'm aware of (you might need to change the name of Call to Battle to something more appropriate though...). Make changes like this so the other buffs are still effective and aren't completely useless sense you have a Bard and Archon in the group...

Man I typed to much... sorry bout that.

[UnknownAspect]

I only read the first bit, but the problem with distributive buffs is that it provides incentive to keep groups small to maximize buffs. And also makes support buffs useless in 20mans.

Think about expert and raid rifts, they'll never want more than the minimum unless they are overgeared to compensate for the buff loss.

[RickWolford]

I only read the first bit, but the problem with distributive buffs is that it provides incentive to keep groups small to maximize buffs. And also makes support buffs useless in 20mans.

Think about expert and raid rifts, they'll never want more than the minimum unless they are overgeared to compensate for the buff loss.

Im not sure if the buff is so powerful though that it would be better to have a 5-man vs a 20-man. I'm sure the DPS in a 20-man with distributive buffs will still be better then a 5-man.

[Hotter]

WTB cliff notes.

[WriteThemWrong]

1) Make only a certain number of Auras and Motifs to be active at one time. So instead of all 5 auras and 5 Motifs being active, only 3 can be active at any given time.

That would make support entirely useless. Not just in 5 or 10-mans but in 20-man raids. The reason you have support is because their buffs and debuffs are more beneficial and an increase for the raid than if they were just dps. If you limit how support works now, which I think they could use a buff if anything, then they're impact is severely lowered.

[irieguin]

i would like to see the paladin soul tweaked to function as support. then warriors could play 3 roles in groups like everyone else

[Hotter]

i would like to see the paladin soul tweaked to function as support. then warriors could play 3 roles in groups like everyone else

It was warlord that offered more of the support utility than pally, iirc. I'm fine with the status quo of dps/tank choices for warriors. Keep the homogenization of classes to a minimum. But the landscape is always changing, so who knows.

[Maestro Kenteko]

The problem with support is not all about the actual mechanics, persay, but more their actual contribution to how the game plays in five man dungeons. Five mans for the most part are all about gathering things up and blowing them to pieces, something neither of the supports really do much about due to the nature of their debuffs. Likewise, the times that the debuffs do contribute, the problem is more the scale and speed gain in question then the actual debuff itself.

For example, let's assume a static aoe figure of 1.5k DPS. If we assume that most DPS can do around that mark, the only way a support is even remotely viable on trash is if they add 50% more damage to the given DPS (roughly) to compensate for the support themselves not having aoe of appreciable strength. Even if we assume that the that the support can produce 500-700 DPS, a 5% boost is not even going to remotely cut it.

Single target is a little bit of a different story due to the wonder of spotters/jeopardy/illuminate. The problem that then arises are the ease of access for both illuminate and spotters while still retaining full functionality of the main role, especially in the realm of warrior tanks and chloro/archon specs. Why bother with going full archon or bard when the biggest DPS gain is more likely present to some capacity in another spec?

The best way to make support more viable in five mans is to design a support more like a dominator meets an archon then any in between. For example, assume a dominator has the choice of a massive aoe attack speed debuff that ramps up the more damage is done but doesn't work on a raid boss. This would give incentive to use in trash (safer pulls) while at the same time would not be overpowering on a boss. Likewise, imagine if it was possible to give someone a buff similar to Static Discharge that momentarily raised their damage or gave them a damage proc: If the buff was appreciable then support would gain purpose on both trash and boss fights while rewarding good play. You can even combine both aforementioned mechanics and create a soul that debuffs the enemy while buffing others in turn who then augment the debuff by going about their business.

To clarify a little, I'll use an imaginary Warlord class for the example. Warlords would gain abilities called "Commands" which are short duration temp buffs that augment the target in different ways and give the Warlord Attack Points. As a set of examples, Kill Command (five hits of spotter's order equivalent), Protective Command (heals apply stacking resistance buff), and Evasive Command (Reactive heal that triggers on hit). Next, give the Warlord a set of abilities called "Tactics" which are Finishers that are PBAOE and give all victims two debuffs: One general debuff and one augmented by people with commands. With another set of examples, Deadly Tactics (% damage taken increase, Kill Commands do double damage), Hold Your Ground (% damage done decreased, all individuals with the Protective Command resistance buff gain a bigger bonus) and Stand Tall (any time the target deals damage, they get hurt in return, those with Evasive Command deal double damage).

Effectively speaking, the above example allows for varied gameplay and flexibility depending on the group and raid by extension. While it is inherently complex, it is also straight forward what you want to end up doing (keep Kill Command up on a handful of DPS, make sure Deadly Tactics are up, then cycle Protective/Elusive depending on the situation). Even this can vary depending on the situation, a high mob pull can instead have a distinct preference over Evasive Command and Stand Tall to maximize aoe killing. Most importantly, a raid can choose to add an additional Warlord to give each a different focus (One exclusively keeps Spotter's Order and Deadly Tactics pu, as well as many Kill Commands as possible, the other worries more about survivability and general mitigation/debuffs). As long as the numbers support the end result, this type of support would function positively and an amazing/well played one would be dramatically different then a poorly played one.

Really, the best examples of the above are the Enchanter and Bard classes from EQ 2. All four have their own special specialties, but each facilitates it in a different manner. Rift supporters really pale in comparison due to their inherent inability to contribute outside of specific situations, relatively.

[RickWolford]

That would make support entirely useless. Not just in 5 or 10-mans but in 20-man raids. The reason you have support is because their buffs and debuffs are more beneficial and an increase for the raid than if they were just dps. If you limit how support works now, which I think they could use a buff if anything, then they're impact is severely lowered.

Then you make the buffs more powerful

To clarify a little, I'll use an imaginary Warlord class for the example. Warlords would gain abilities called "Commands" which are short duration temp buffs that augment the target in different ways and give the Warlord Attack Points. As a set of examples, Kill Command (five hits of spotter's order equivalent), Protective Command (heals apply stacking resistance buff), and Evasive Command (Reactive heal that triggers on hit). Next, give the Warlord a set of abilities called "Tactics" which are Finishers that are PBAOE and give all victims two debuffs: One general debuff and one augmented by people with commands. With another set of examples, Deadly Tactics (% damage taken increase, Kill Commands do double damage), Hold Your Ground (% damage done decreased, all individuals with the Protective Command resistance buff gain a bigger bonus) and Stand Tall (any time the target deals damage, they get hurt in return, those with Evasive Command deal double damage).

Effectively speaking, the above example allows for varied gameplay and flexibility depending on the group and raid by extension. While it is inherently complex, it is also straight forward what you want to end up doing (keep Kill Command up on a handful of DPS, make sure Deadly Tactics are up, then cycle Protective/Elusive depending on the situation). Even this can vary depending on the situation, a high mob pull can instead have a distinct preference over Evasive Command and Stand Tall to maximize aoe killing. Most importantly, a raid can choose to add an additional Warlord to give each a different focus (One exclusively keeps Spotter's Order and Deadly Tactics pu, as well as many Kill Commands as possible, the other worries more about survivability and general mitigation/debuffs). As long as the numbers support the end result, this type of support would function positively and an amazing/well played one would be dramatically different then a poorly played one.

Really, the best examples of the above are the Enchanter and Bard classes from EQ 2. All four have their own special specialties, but each facilitates it in a different manner. Rift supporters really pale in comparison due to their inherent inability to contribute outside of specific situations, relatively.

I really like this idea. I didn't get far with my Coercer or Dirge in EQ2 (Guardian all the way).

[Proin Drakenzol]

Stopped reading at nerf chloro hps.

You've obviously never played chloro. Yeah, being able to do a little (like, very little when main tank healing) is nice, but it's also the primary source of our healing. So on fights where there's nothing to attack (parts of Alsbeth fight in RoS, worm fight in Upper CR, etc) chloros have a tough time. Also PvP, but that's another story.

If you wanted a healer that heals via dps you should've rolled mage to start, if you want a turret healer that isn't reliant/screwed by enemy actions or mechanics roll a cleric.

[edit]and there are also several cleric builds that heal through damage or the next best thing (like ~icars)

[Nightreaver]

I agree that the Support role needs some serious attention. DPS, Heal and Tank roles are needed for every group and raid encounter in the game, Support certainly is not. And yet we are expected to accept the Support role as being equivalent to the other three. Not even close.

I like the idea of buffs scaling based on the number of players they would affect. If our buffs could compensate for the forfeiture of a DPS role then it might be viable outside 20-man raids.

Other alternatives.
Offensive Support
Archon is defined by Trion as an "Offensive" role not as a "Support" role (check the tool tip).
Give Archon better DPS options to bring them in line with other Offensive roles. In a 20-man raid an Archon adds to the raid DPS through their Debuff rotation. In smaller groups Archons could drop these debuffs in favor of straight up DPS abilities.

Or follow the Cleric path with limited healing support.
An Archon is one of the best choices for Support in 20-man raids. Outside of 20-man raids, an Archon is the worst choice with the best choice for Support going to a class the claims it has no Support role; Clerics.

Outside of 20-man raids, support healing is given a much higher precedence then buffs. So bring Archons more in line with Justicars. Give Archons a BRez and an AOE Heal to match those of the Justicar. Just those two abilities alone would make Archons a worthy consideration in smaller groups. After all, if a Tank role can be given an AOE heal along with a Brez in an archetype that already has three other Brezs, then I certainly see no reason why an actual Support role shouldn't have those in the only other archetype with a Healer role.

[Proin Drakenzol]

Archon is defined by Trion as an "Offensive" role not as a "Support" role (check the tool tip).

Archons are support. Get the little purple flag and everything.

[Proin Drakenzol]

Stupid 5 min edit timer combined with super slow underway internet.

As for the "off healing" aspect... I'd give archon more bubbles to throw. We already have chloro for healing and with chloros not being able to heal each other through veils (which is stupid, if they're that worried about two chloro~s in pvp synthing each other just make it so that they can't benefit from synthesis) a bubble thrower would be cool.

And if you need off-healing in a 5-man a mage can chloro~ just like a Cleric can ~icar.

On an unrelated note: Chloricars would be horribly and hilariously broken if they were possible.

[Nightreaver]

Archons are support. Get the little purple flag and everything.

So it doesn't seem odd to anyone that the Archon Soul is defined by Trion as Offensive yet the Archon Role is defined as Support?

As for the "off healing" aspect... I'd give archon more bubbles to throw. We already have chloro for healing….

Clerics already have 3 Healing roles for heals, each one with a Brez more effective than Chloro and it didn't prevent them from giving a 4th Brez and another AOE Heal to their Tank role. But yes, point taken, if support healing were needed it would probably be better to switch to Chloro.

[Rhiss]

Archon is described as an offensive soul, which is somewhat misleading for sure and when you first start you do not get the purple flag. It flags DPS origibnally. When it changes to the purple flag I don't know, but I am assuming it does