A bunch of people on Ko4life always say not to go a hybrid build (balance between attack/support) for mages.
I'm normally statted 160 int 160 mp 101 hp 51 str on my light mage, level 73. I've got 3k base hp, 650 ac, and I blade tank priests with scorp shield + lycaon for 480, nub rogues for 600. I have an elysium +8 and a single imir +2, other finger is ROM for the moment.
I went MP build for a few days, to see how it was or if I was being an idiot for doing my half-tank build. 160 int 212 mp, same gear, bladed the same tank priest with scorp shield + lycaon for 50ish more damage at the cost of 777 base hp and 1 ac. Stun cloud (level 70 ranged skill) and novas hit quite a bit harder, but most everything else was meh improvement.
If I take my imir off, I blade about 100 damage less. So if I wanted to do more damage, I'd buy a second imir +2, theoretically blading 550 as a minimum to anyone not using a talia. I'd still be hp build, blading 550s-650s or more to most people. I dunno about you, but for me that's damn plenty of damage, and gaining another 50-70 damage by going MP build isn't worth the hefty hp loss.
So why does it apparently have to be full mp build or tank build, and not a happy medium? The biggest argument I've heard is that "50 more blade dmg is for every blade, and 777 hp is taken away in one hit".
Sure, that's true if all you do is 1v1. Roll with a party healer and that 777 hp will come back every time a full heal is dropped. Roll without that 777 hp and you'll be dead a hit sooner, and speaking from experience it's pretty damn hard to blade for 50 more damage for usual when you're dead. And I'm level 73. Even if I didn't put any more points into hp, that number would still go up as I level, meaning hopefully around 900 hp more at level 80.
I guess my big question is this: Is the rumor that a mage should only be full attack or full tank build the truth, or is it just archaic bullshit that is no longer true?