Class Lines: Divided and BlurredFollow

Yther wrote:

OK, so we all know this is what the classes can wear, as far as their armor goes.

BUT

Just because a cleric or bard wears plate, does that make them a tank?
Just because a Beastlord and Ranger can cast spells does that make them casters?

What do you consider the "True Class Roles"?

I believe the definition of a class's role is much more than just "they use discs and spells" or "they wear plate".

Take Hybrids for example:

When the game first started, a hybrid was seen as *generally* a 50/50 warrior/caster. We had:
Paladin = warrior/cleric
Shadowknight = warrior/necro
Ranger = warrior/druid
Bard = warrior/chanter (again, generally speaking)
Beastlord = warrior/shaman (introduced in Luclin)

This line of thinking was reinforced by the fact that these Hybrid's spell lines were taken DIRECTLY from their parent caster class (the bard is ALWAYS an exception to this), and it usually took around 15+ more levels for a hybrid class to be able to use the same spell the parent class could (Spirit of Wolf was originally unusable by Rangers until level 39). This of course, was acceptable, because we hadn't yet had the time to develop each class yet.

Fast forward to today, and the definition of a "hybrid" is more broad. And the ratio is more like 75/25. It's true all of these classes are still hybrids. But aren't they so much more than just a warrior/cleric or warrior/druid anymore? They all have unique spells and abilities that now set them apart from their respective "parent" classes. They are no longer DIRECTLY linked and/or limited by what the parent class can/cannot do. True, there are similarities. But there are just as many differences now. Nowadays, I see the only hybrids as being Beastlords and Rangers, because they are primarily melee classes, and they use their spells pretty equally in the areas of dps and utility.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Here's how I feel the classes get divided:
TANKS = Warrior, Paladin, Shadowknight, Ranger
HEALERS = Cleric, Shaman, Druid
MELEE DPS = Rogue, Zerker, Monk, Ranger, Beastlord, Bard
CASTER DPS = Necro, Wizard, Mage
UTILITY = Chanter, Bard, Monk, Beastlord, Ranger

As you can see, I feel some classes fit into a couple categories. And the order I listed them is the order I feel they are best in their respective categories.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
So where do you see the class lines? Are they divided or blurred?

Rather than pigeon-holing them, you'd have better luck making one of those graphs where you put "Tank", "DPS", "Utility" and "Healing" into the corners and then plot everyone as dots.

Or else little bar charts like on the back of the Transformers figures when I was a kid

Paladin 
Tank:    XXXXXXXXX 
Healer:  XXXXX 
Utility: XX 
DPS:     XXXX 
 
Cleric 
Tank:    XXXX 
Healer:  XXXXXXXXXX 
Utility: XXXX 
DPS:     XXX

I just made those ratings up without much thought. Don't yell at me

For that matter, even the roles are blurry. You separate caster DPS from melee DPS whereas, to me, they're one and the same. Both are just a means to making the mob fall over quicker. On the other hand, we both just said "utility" but that covers everything from slows to hp buffs to lulls to teleports to mana regen to stuns to invisibility to haste to summoning arrows. You'd be better off (in my opinion) to break "utility" into AC/HP Buffs, Combat Utility (debuffs, short term buffs, stuns, etc) & OOC Utility (mana regen, invis, speed buffs, etc). Maybe someone else would break them down differently.

As a ranger, I can't tank anything worthwhile (i.e. beyond light blue), and I am regularly outtanked by real tanks (plate classes) with half my AA count and two thirds my AC.

Rangers as a class are in a much better situation now than just a few expansions ago - just don't think of us as tanks please. We're happy to snap aggro off the finger-wagglers, and pretty good at it too, but as to being at the receiving end of some frenzied monstrosity with weapons longer than my grandmother's [DELETED], well, there are certain people at the back of the class who are much better at that sort of thing *snickers*

I respectfully disagree, though it is certainly very gear and AA dependent. Personally I love to tank, and I wind up as MT in most exp groups I'm in (including T5 and Korafax instances). However, you do need to skew your build to AC, tanking heroics, and have solid AAs to do this as a ranger, but if you can you'll be a good tank from an aggro perspective.