If they cared about melee Rdm they wouldn't ask for a JT that's not even useful for the jobs that do get it, much less Rdm.
If they cared about melee Rdm they wouldn't ask for a JT that's not even useful for the jobs that do get it, much less Rdm.
Last edited by Neisan_Quetz; 06-15-2011 at 10:04 AM.
All Red Mages are concerned about is that fact that it's a spit in the face to make a job trait that's called Fencer, and then proceed to not give it to us.
Heck, they gave it to Bards, for crying out loud. How much more insulting can you get?
ADD: Not saying that the Job Trait in and of itself isn't that impressive, and hopelessly fails at what it was designed to do (that is, give incentive for not Dual Wielding for one-handed weapons), and I would even argue that it should be buffed in that department. At least give it natively to the fencing job first, however.
I'd personally find it more useful than Shield Mastery, at any rate . . .
No, not all red mages are concerned about not getting a fairly useless job trait.
So because we already have 2 fairly useless job traits they should tack on one more in the hope it gets better down the road? Uh, no.
Last edited by Neisan_Quetz; 06-15-2011 at 01:26 PM.
RDM isn't a pure/solid fencer.
You'r just mislead by SE's naming policy.
The WAR isn't a razor. ;p
this is somewhat off topic but
http://wiki.ffxiclopedia.org/wiki/Rune_Chopper
plenty of stuff that could be changed for the better
Lego-DNC99 BST82 BRD69 PUP53 Other40+
Sparkel-BST99 DRG82 RDM75 PUP53 Other40+
Cooking100+6 Alchemy83+5 Other70 Gold52 Smith30
Waiting For Death With Open Arms.
No, what they need to do is either double the trait's potency, or make it work while Dual Wielding. There's no reason to want a trait you will never use, since any meleeing RDM that's not dual wielding is losing half (or more) of their enspell damage, and getting TP slower, thereby making them a terrible DD.
Then you can wish for it. You'd be better off asking for occult acumen, it'd help you DD better.
I don't think that the potency is to low nor should it made availabe for dual wielding.
The job trait is good the way it is right now. SE had in mind that those WARs (that also have a shield skill) should be rewarted for using a shield and take the role of a tank who not rely on shadows or pure damage. And depending on what weapon you use it's quiet interesting.
Knowing what the job trait is doing a WAR could come to the conclusion that you should use sword/shield with Sanguine Blade or any other sword ws. But Sanguine Blade would profit the most.
It'd probably be nice for almace RDMs.
RDM can get native Fencer the day they get native Vorpal Blade.
Fencer is basically a bribe to try to get certain jobs to use a shield (particularly in the blind hope that, somewhere, a WAR with a shield will get the idea that they can tank). RDMs already equip shields almost as often as PLDs, so I wouldn't hold my breath.
I'm actually a little surprised they didn't give it to THF.
Nothing in the above post is intended to disparage Square Enix or FINAL FANTASY XI, or to criticize Square Enix staff; such behavior would be a violation of the FINAL FANTASY XI User Agreement. Any such violations of the FINAL FANTASY XI User Agreement should be reported to Square Enix immediately, by using the "Report Post" icon in the bottom-left of forum posts.
No Moogles were harmed in the making in this post. Stars save the Sibyl!
I'm always amused when I'm reminded of Fencer's existence, because the only job that would get any practical use out of it doesn't get access to it.
© SQUARE ENIX FINAL FANTASY, SQUARE ENIX, and the SQUARE ENIX logo are registered trademarks of Square Enix Holdings Co., Ltd. Vana'diel , Tetra Master, PLAYONLINE, the PLAYONLINE logo, Rise of the Zilart, Chains of Promathia, Treasures of Aht Urhgan, and Wings of the Goddess are registered trademarks of Square Enix Co., Ltd. The rating icon is a registered trademark of the Entertainment Software Association. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. Online play requires internet connection. |