Quote Originally Posted by Gwydion View Post
Could you possibly explain the inclusion of this item? If we have already established that Reward potency and recast are already capped by AF Body/Legs/Feet (and Job Points), why would you add this item? This item will likely never be used in any Beastmaster's Reward set, Keep in mind, if the item were changed to "Reward Recast -5 seconds", I think you would see greater utility. Spur augment is interesting, but Reward +30 is an eye-sore.

The other JSE capes just see so much more potent. How many different ways can you disrupt or underwhelm the play style of Beastmasters?

I was quite saddened when I initially saw the "Reward"+30 on this cape instead of the "Pet Lv. +1" that SMN/PUP both got, and further saddened due to the "Reward +30" being utterly worthless given the 50% potency cap... In order to receive any benefit from it, you would have to use non-ilvl Reward+ equipment only, since everything 109+ (that I am aware of at least) gives 20%-35% per piece. Reforged body+feet alone are actually over cap to begin with and augment w/ additional bonuses that can't be found elsewhere and should be used anyway.
I believe this should have been a Reward recast reduction, "Reward potency II +10", or something else entirely that is relatively uncommon (but useful) like "Stout Servant +2" or "Killer Effects +10", would all be actually useful instead of the current effective effect of "Reward+0".
(There is always the option to edit the item itself, especially with the news that they are adding a method to change the augment w/o losing ranks in the May update.)

As an extra dash of salt in the wound, the potential pet augments for acc/atk & m.acc/m.dmg are in the wrong slot -_-;; They should have been on dust (sharing augment slot w/ player acc/m.acc/etc) instead of being on thread (which shares space w/ player attribute bonuses.) This severely limits the potential on this cape since we are unable to get attribute+acc.stat+special.stat like other jobs, and is a confusing choice on the devs' part given how unintuitive it is that all acc/m.acc options are not grouped together.