Enchantment Spam

This suggestion essentially developed from the assumptions that A) dervishes are supposed to be melee AoE and B) are supposed to do so by spamming enchantments.

Currently, dervishes are subpar scythe users, and they are subpar enchantment spammers (and the enchantments themselves suck). This was my attempt at remedying that. Basically, I was trying to give dervishes back what they were originally intended to do.

To be fair, the interview does indicate that Anet has no clue what it's professions are actually good at.

I don't think you have much of a problem with the Dervish class.... maybe a small one. But you really have a problem with Warrior and Assassin being able to use the Scythe well. Warrior won't be able to use many of the enchantments due to energy issues, and the Assassin relys on high Critical Strikes and Scythe Mastery both to do damage. Dervish can split attributes easier than Warrior and Assassin and still use the scythe well, and also use their enchantments.

I admit that the Dervish has some concerns, but I don't think it has to do with their ability to use enchantments. And I don't think the MAJOR concern is a problem with the Dervish, but with an overpowered option from other classes. Ranger already got hurt some with the last skill change, but not completely. Perhaps more changes like this can help do what you want.

My problem is that there's basically no reason to play a dervish. I don't really care how that gets fixed, so long as it does (well, without making them overpowered, at least).

Here is your reason:

Is this your first MMO? Did you ever play Everquest? A 40 man raid included one and only one rogue (sometimes two in case the first one DC'd or had to leave). They were included just for traps, because traps were an incredibly fun idea that greatly improved how much players enjoyed the game and rogues were the only class that could deal with traps. Everything else a rogue did, could be done better, more efficiently, and safer than a rogue.

This is the kind of role that emerges when a particular class is forced into the game. Is this what you want from parties: "Just bring [insert necessary skill] and don't suck." Do you want to be the ranger with winter or the 1 hp BiP necro, because those are the niche roles that emerge when trying to force a class into a necessary role.

It's better than nothing.

That's a better situation than the current dervish is in anyway. At least the rogue had a niche use. Compared to the grand total of 0 uses the dervish currently has.

Dervishes are currently accepted into just about every HM group doing zaishen quests and bounties, as melee damage dealers. Often alongside or in place of warriors - and they get accepted more than Assassins.

What was your problem again, hmm?

You fail to see the biting sarcasm. No one liked rogues and no one would bring a rogue unless they were absolutely forced to bring one. The game developers made a situation where rogues were absolutely mandatory. This did not help rogues get into groups, this did not improve their class, this did not help 'diversity', this did not improve the game, this did not make the game any more enjoyable. In a lot of raids rogues were told to stay out of everything, literally just afk until we need you for something.

But would dervs be any better off if they had a role where they are told to just stay over there and not get in the way of anything? They already do, its called orders. Small niche rolls make the game worse, not better.

Orders isn't a reason to use a dervish, because Necromancers can do it too.

Also, you seem to think that incorporating dervishes into the game requires them to be forced into it. It doesn't. It just requires there to be a reason to use them.

Here's an example. Let's say that MSDB sins had 40 AoE dps with no limit on number of targets. And then lets say scythe warriors and scythe sins had 60dps, but only to 3 targets.

Strictly speaking, the MSDB sin is hitting more targets, but the scythe users are doing more damage to the targets they do hit. Each has it's advantages.

Now, every scythe user besides the dervish has other alternatives to justify their being in the party. But, what if the dervish had 65 dps to three targets? Or 50 dps to 4 targets? There'd be a real reason to use them.

Of course, this scenario has already been suggested in various forms, but it's one example of how dervishes could be "fixed" without having to do what you're implying would have to happen. In other words, your doomsday scenario is by no means the inevitable result of fixing dervishes.

Where are these groups, and how can I find them?

On second thought, maybe not. Are these PUGs, or guild/alliance groups? Random PUGs doing the harder areas of the game that would take a dervish over a warrior or assassin are the kinds of PUGs who think that HB is great. In other words, the ones that suck.

Also, ease of being able to get into groups is beside the point. It's about whether or not there's actually any reason to use a derv. And there really isn't.

Example: ER healers. They can outheal a pure heal monk and outprot a pure prot monk at the same time. Most PUGs don't realize this, however, and prefer monks for that role. Does that make the ER healer any less overpowered? No, it doesn't, just as the dervish's ability to get into a PUG doesn't affect how underpowered it is.

By your logic, nobody, and I mean NOBODY should play their Necro as a minion master. Heroes do a MUCH better job of using skills like Death Nova, Jagged Bones, Feast for the Dead, etc. while a human will be slow to cast due to targeting and not know WHEN to cast most of the time. But playing an MM on a Necro is a way to play, and people do so. It is less effective than other options available, but it doesn't stop anyone. Dervish is fine. Assassin and Warrior MAY be able to do better with a scythe, but not necesarily better with enchantments. Doesn't make a Dervish worthless, it MAY make them worth less.

If you aren't using PUGs because they suck, then there shouldn't be a problem anyway. If your guild/alliance/friends won't let you use a Dervish then you need to find new people to play with. If it is yourself that won't let you use a Derv, then that is something you should talk to you psychologist about.

As you noted, an ER E/Mo can outperform a Monk for some things. Does that mean people won't let a Monk play? Does that mean people shouldn't use a Monk? Does that mean the Monk needs to be buffed?

The Vow of Piety and Dwayna's Touch nerfs effectively derailed the only "niche" role the dervish had. Is there any team out there looking for an orders dervish? I would KILL if someone asked for one, anywhere, for anything. People take dervishes in groups now when they don't think an area is difficult enough to warrant a superior class. There's no point in bringing one when an assassin, a warrior, a rit, a ranger, or a paragon can do their job better (assuming the dervish is meant to be a frontliner of some sort). You're right, a niche role won't provide much as far as diversity or improving the class, but God damn it'd be something.

That goes against everything you've ever said in these dervish threads. You've always said scythe damage isn't a reason to use derv because warriors/sins do it better. Well orders shouldn't be done on a necro, because dervs do it better.

But forcing them into the game seems to be about the only reason that you would accept, especially since "they are fun." doesn't seem to cut it.

Everywhere in the game, and particularly Zaishen missions. I imagine you must be saying something along the lines of "flarespam dervish lfg" if you're having trouble getting into skilled groups as a Dervish.

Just because you run ahead and aggro the entire map does not mean the group you played in sucks.

We're well aware that you're horrendously bad at playing Dervish, and that rather than learning to play, you'd rather whine to ArenaNet. Would you like ArenaNet to step in and hold your hand as you play, too?

That's interesting, because I don't recall ever having been in a group with you. So how on earth would you know whether or not I'm good at playing the dervish?

Or could it be that you're simply trying to discredit my argument by trotting out a strawman?

Let's play a little game called "Prove me wrong". Prove to me that there's a real reason to bring along a dervish and I'll shut up.

You're the one challenging the status quo, therefore the burden of proof is YOURS. My experiences with the dervish have been nothing like what you've described, so do indulge us.

Constant Deep Wound and "Save Yourselves!" Spam. Don't know about any non-dervish build that can spam both as much as a dervish.
Maybe also order, don't know how strong a necro one is since Masochism was "nerfed".

The reason for this is the same reason to play any class, the only reason to play any class.

They are fun to play.

They are fun to play

They are fun to play

THEY ARE FUN TO PLAY

EDIT: If you aren't having fun now, then Anet changing dervishes is ultimately not going to affect that. Sure there will be a week or so of novelty as you try new things out, but it won't last. Most importantly if you are not having fun in this game, you should go find something (not necessarily a video game) to do that you will enjoy.

See, that would be a meaningful argument if warriors and sins weren't just as fun. In fact, one could argue that they're more fun, because any fun you could have with a dervish you could have with them, and they have way more options than just the scythe.

Fun is subjective, and any profession can be fun. That doesn't mean there doesn't need to be a change. Heck, you could use that argument to say that nothing in the game should ever be changed. You could say that SF is fine because it's fun, that Ursan was fine because it was fun, that Rits being crappy not too long ago was fine because they were fun, that the current OP PvP build of the month is fine because it's fun (for the people abusing it, at least), etc.

Status quo? The status quo is that the dervish sucks. This has been known for a long time. Hang around the campfire for 5 minutes.

But regardless, I'll indulge you:

Offense? Outclassed by warriors and assassins (see enduring scythe and critscythe).

Defense? Same.

Utility? Same.

Enchantment spam? Same (plus it sucks).

Orders dervishes were nerfed also.

You call that a reason to bring a dervish along? You seem to be confusing "not redundant" with "good". Sure, I can argue that I have a use with that build (it's actually my favorite), but there are problems. Specifically, that the DW only gives me a one-time spike advantage per foe. If the enemy lasts long enough for a scythe warrior to get off a few attack skills, he quickly beats me. All while having better armor and energy management.

The fact that dervishes have to use such extreme gimmick builds like that (where they don't even have anything unique, but just one thing that this guy doesn't have and one the other guy doesn't have) just to avoid being completely redundant actually proves my point.

"Dervish sucks" is an opinion and nothing more, at least until you can (A) come up with a formal definition of "sucks" which everyone can agree with and (B) show that the dervish clearly meets this description. You haven't done that (it's worth noting I don't think something sucks just because "the campfire says so"). The status quo is not a subjective opinion but an indisputable fact - in this case, that Mysticism in its current functionality does not make enchantments cost 6% less energy per rank the way you suggest it should. You want to change the status quo and are thus challenging it. Others want to keep the status quo and are thus defending it.

This being the case, it's your responsibility to prove that it should be changed. The burden of proof means if it ain't broke don't fix it, i.e. until it can be soundly established that something IS broken, deference is given to maintaining the status quo (mysticism's current functionality).

You merely insisting that "dervish sucks" isn't compelling proof, especially for me since I've played the dervish since its inception. I've outtanked and outkilled my share of warriors/sins, and I've often accomplished that only after outright ABUSING my enchantment spam abilities. Critscythes run in terror from my best caster builds, but any dervish with Vow of Silence would laugh and decimate. Need a second opinion? Ask my guildies - if their successes with the dervish aren't like mine, they're even better.

So you can keep claiming a dervish sucks at all these things, but the more you keep repeating it without offering any plausible explanation, the less and less I'll believe it. Likewise I'm not expecting to convince you with my success stories, but that's fine because I don't have to. If it's a stalemate of opinions, then as a rule the status quo always wins.

Dervish is fine the way it is, just need to learn how to use skills properly because I believe you are looking at PvX for skill sets those will not help. I have been in pugs(yes pugs) with dervishes doing great or when im a dervish in HM. A dervish will always outlast a war and sin even in 1v1 they will rape war and sin. In be for someone gets angry for saying 1v1, its a game get over yourself's.