Based on what I've seen in playtesting and the obsessive amount of character building I've been doing here are my observations. They are by no means exhaustive, as practically any build works well and I think the likelihood of a preferred build emerging is low, which reduces the value of a 'role' in the traditional sense:
Fighters will likely have two main modes: prof-driven and crit-driven. Playtesting has shown that both are viable, but have really different approaches:
Fighters will likely have two main modes: prof-driven and crit-driven. Playtesting has shown that both are viable, but have really different approaches:
- Prof-driven fighters will have excellent sustained damage but limited or no burst potential. They are excellent candidates for high armor, defensive skill loadouts, and lots of HP. These guys will be your 'tanks', such as they exist in Alliance, and are at their best when supported by a healer. These are the characters that anchor your battle line. Alternately, a prof-driven fighter with an offensive skill loadout makes for a really powerful archery build.
- Crit-driven fighters, on the other hand, have fantastic burst potential, but limited sustained damage potential. They pair well with offensive skill loadouts and light armor, and are at their best when they can find a battlefield weakness to exploit or a particular target to go after. Defensively-oriented crit-driven fighters are a bit of an oddity. They have ridiculous survival skills, but don't really fill a niche that I can think of. They might do well on the end of a battle line.
- There are other niche fighter builds that some players may choose to go for, but probably not commonly, such as blacksmith builds focusing on skill loadouts and quick refit times, or such.
- Unlike fighters, the choice of building via BS or BA is not quite as clearly delineated. Backstab is a more sustainable purchase and Back Attack a more bursty one, but neither lends itself more obviously to a particular style of play nor to a particular skill loadout, and I suspect the choice will primarily be one of how actively the player wants to manage their resources.
- More likely I think the choice to make will be whether or not to include alchemy, traps, and magic into a rogue build, which, and how much of each. A build focusing exclusively on combat skills with only minimal magic/crafting might make an excellent assassin/gunner, while a heavier investment into these skills makes a character that is more likely to have a skill for any situation and probably makes for a better skirmisher, when separated from their support. I have it on excellent authority that they also make fantastic cooks.
- Scouts using a synchronous build (equal points in rogue and fighter skills) will benefit from heavy investment in Profs and Backstabs; the effect of cost scaling means a scout pays the same cost for x profs and x stabs as a fighter or rogue pays for 2x profs or 2x stabs, effectively negating that part of the hybrid cost penalty. Because of this, synchronous builds will probably favor defensive fighter skills much the same way prof-driven fighters do, though they may branch into the offensive rogue skills. They will do really well on the end of a battle line, where there may be some opportunity to wrap/pincer the opposition.
- An asynchronous build, on the other hand, where the build favors either fighter or rogue over the other, will still benefit from a synchronous base (x profs and stabs), but the excess points devoted to the preferred style are best left in the form of critical or back attacks and their associated skills. This build heavily resembles its parent fighter or rogue build, but gains flexibility at the cost of raw power. I'm not sure what niche this build fills, though it may be preferred for those who like fighter or rogue but don't want to be bound by the class constraints.
- Due to the prohibitive cost scouts are not likely to be significant alchemists or casters, but may find trapping to be affordable in certain builds.