No, they gave Tataru lore (with a fair bit of credibility) that she's been mining for awhile and she just ordered a new hammer and starts the whole fiasco. This gets explained over DOZENS of lines in the quest. I emphasize dozens because this is the type of information required for lore reasons for these random NPC's in the beginning of every instance.Quote:
Especially when we have proof that, people like Tataru, who knew nothing of mining, could just put on an outfit and go mining in Mor Dhona.
http://ffxiv.gamerescape.com/wiki/Picking_up_the_Sledge
There's 43 dungeons alone (33 Trials, 25 raids if you were curious [again OP and others in this thread are asking for EVERY instance]). So you're saying each NPC (That needs unique dialogue to create his presence in these menacing dungeons) Can explain all that in 1.5 "lines"? No........Quote:
At most, it would need, what, 50, maybe 60 lines? And even then,
I WOULD rather have the choice, the choice of LEVELING a crafter for the PERK.Quote:
Wouldn't you rather have the choice, than no choice at all?
It is not faulty reasoning OR coming up short as a failsafe. You just don't agree. That does not make it faulty nor coming up short. This entire thread is pure opinion from both sides. Conversely, I see it as sound reasoning and being a full fledged failsafe. (google define fail-safe: a system or plan that comes into operation in the event of something going wrong or that is there to prevent such an occurrence.) The system/plan is to level a crafter in the event of something going wrong (gear break).Quote:
Except it's only a failsafe if you level those jobs. If you never level them, then there is no failsafe. This is why that is such a faulty reasoning - suggesting that the failsafe exists for those who do not currently* have it, means it is coming up short as a failsafe.
And surprise the game does not FORCE them to do anything. They can repair from ANY of the various towns they are probably standing in at that exact moment. They CHOSE not to repair. As others have hyperboled in the thread, you can just keep taking this request further and further as a "failsafe''. I need access to my retainers in dungeon, as a failsafe. I need access to the Market Board in dungeon, as a failsafe. There is your only full proof failsafe. Every instance needs access to the MB/Retainer/Repair NPC/Vendor NPC (Can't forget those guys who have their entire inventory full [people posted the first week of patch about missing the Fenrir pup drop from PvP since their inventory was full). You called it a slippery slope fallacy, and well its a slippery slope but not a fallacy in this context. Their IS a failsafe, you think its insufficient so you want an ADDITIONAL failsafe. Your argument is that it hurts no one. Access to the MB in every dungeon hurts no one either. Access to your retainers in every dungeon doesn't hurt anyone either. Etc. Etc. It is a REAL slippery slope and not a fallacy.Quote:
in a game that says you can CHOOSE to do everything, should not be forcing you to do everything for basic quality of life changes.
1) The programming is almost a copy/pasta from melding. As you mention it also existed from 1.0 which means they DO have the code already (100% its backed up somewhere) they just have to find it.Quote:
Now, let's compare this to your suggestion, and see why it is a bad idea:
2) No trading needs to be done, why don't you understand this.
3) No gil exchange needs to be done, why don't you understand this.
4) Your marginalizing an already marginal issue.
1) NPC's already exist, yes but don't forget you have to give them unique lines, backstory and program the functions on to them and then make sure its not programming it onto their character model OUTSIDE of the instance either, heck this means making a duplicate NPC model and attaching the repair menu to it.Quote:
Let me give you a few examples of why I, personally, feel adding NPC's is easier.
2) No argument there, but the programming also exists for the other option.
3) Yes again, the programming exists for both options.
And as far as I'm concerned the exact opposite is true. The programming already exists for both, one just requires 0 ret con or lore re writes or additional models being loaded into dungeons.Quote:
As far as I am concerned, it is FAR EASIER to add NPC's and a line of dialogue, or just straight up copy-pasting NPC's from the dungeon's very entrance than it is to create a whole new system within the game to give you what you want.
They also don't get the benefit of your additional failsafe if they don't have enough gil on them when they queue in. TBH its probably equally likely for both scenarios.Quote:
Except they DON'T Get that benefit if the crafter isn't there,
OPTION which is not a payment. Simply disable that option. Its practically changing a 1 to a 0 in code in complexity.Quote:
What? Yes there is. The whole "Request Meld" system in the game involves having the OPTION of adding payment via the Meld interface, and true to form - some people expect "Tips" for their work. There are also people who do it for free, but it does not change that the Melding system (Whcih is our parallel in this case) inherantly has that feature built in, and it should be expected that the feature would be added to a Reapir rquest system as well.
Hah, we both ended up doing the same thing and even the same definition. However...Quote:
It is NOT a failsafe, because by the very definition of the word failsafe
That's not what pre-emptive means at all. Repairing above 100%, is pre-emptive. Leveling a crafter or carrying dark matter is not.Quote:
Rather, your system falls more accurately and more succinctly into the definition of a pre-emptive measure
For "intial" yes. That's less than 1/2 of ARR + HW's lifespan.Quote:
Even without these listed items, Crafted accessories are still the only way for non-tank classes to raise their Vitality without sacrificing a primary stat, so it still had its use for initial progression raiding.
The whole reason I'm mentioning this is because this applies to both scenarios. Everything you said for a crafter making millions applies to battle classes as well. No effort, no profit. This point you're trying to make literally cancels itself out.Quote:
A crafter requires an investment, but if you're willing to apply effort after the investment,
No, this thread has come up a few times in the past. But the scarcity of it shows general lack of care by the public. This topic has less followers than the "Give Roegadyn chest hair" club and a metric ton less than the "Give Miqo'te their booty back" club.Quote:
To argue Majority from either of us would be flawed.
That's exactly what 0% effectiveness means. Its broke to the point of unusability until someone fixes it, just like the stuff that we have to spend 5 quest chains on, or several patches worth to fix.Quote:
At 0%, it breaks in such a way that it becomes useless, but can be repaired. This can be something as simple as the straps being broken, to the armor having been cleaved in two and needs to be welded back together. In the end, it doesn't matter - what matters is, "I can't use this shield" because it can't be held to block anymore.
The fact that our armor is fully effective until 0% suggets to me that we at 0% are not reaching the same dilapidated state of the very stuff you suggest is being fixed in the world at large.
Repair NPCs in Dungeons
Printable View
-
03-24-2016, 12:27 AMZantitrach
-
03-24-2016, 01:07 AMEidolonYes. They added in lines that said she was good at it, without any real precedent for it. They just said "Oh by the way she can mine now" and gave her a quest series for it. How does that not come off as Retconning to you, but having an NPC say the same thing in a dungoun that was sent to help you to the entrance would?Quote:
Originally Posted by Zantitrach
Yes, actually. A very fast, single, succinct line from an NPC would be more than enough to define their purpose for being there. The issue seems to be that you're expecting them to have full quest chains. Characters in the world often have only 1-3 text bubbles containing 1-2 lines at most.Quote:
There's 43 dungeons alone (33 Trials, 25 raids if you were curious [again OP and others in this thread are asking for EVERY instance]). So you're saying each NPC (That needs unique dialogue to create his presence in these menacing dungeons) Can explain all that in 1.5 "lines"? No........
I'm not saying to flesh them out like the characters were in MSQ. I am saying that flavor text, or just re-using the models of the guards standing outside of the dungoun that gives them continuity, is equally effective and isn't nearly as much work as you're making it out to be.
which is a choice that is NOT TAKEN AWAY by the presence of an NPC in the dungoun. They add the NPC, you still have the choice to level so you can use it whenever, wherever, at a cheaper cost, going over 100%. You need to stop acting like this takes away from it - AT ALL.Quote:
I WOULD rather have the choice, the choice of LEVELING a crafter for the PERK.
No, it is very faulty. It assumes everyone has leveled the job, thus that the failsafe is available to all. It is a very poor failsafe, but a great pre-emptive measure (And I'll define this for you too:Quote:
It is not faulty reasoning OR coming up short as a failsafe. You just don't agree. That does not make it faulty nor coming up short. This entire thread is pure opinion from both sides. Conversely, I see it as sound reasoning and being a full fledged failsafe. (google define fail-safe: a system or plan that comes into operation in the event of something going wrong or that is there to prevent such an occurrence.) The system/plan is to level a crafter in the event of something going wrong (gear break).
a. Undertaken or intended to deter or prevent an anticipated, usually unpleasant situation or occurrence:
As you can see, the purpose of leveling your crafts is the perfect definition of a pre-emptive measure. It is done with the intent of preventing the anticipated occurance of being in a situation in which your gear breaks and you do not have a way to prevent it. It is not a failsafe, because it is not a neutral state that can occur in the case that the said 'fail state' DOES happen.
It is not a choice to forget to do something, and this is where your arguement falls apart. Someone who forgets, is not saying "Hey, I'm just gonna forget about it." Think of it more like going to your car, and going "Oh ****, I forgot my keys!" I did not CHOOSE to forget my keys and have to go back to get them. I forgot, as is human nature, on things that come naturally that we become accustomed to.Quote:
And surprise the game does not FORCE them to do anything. They can repair from ANY of the various towns they are probably standing in at that exact moment. They CHOSE not to repair. As others have hyperboled in the thread, you can just keep taking this request further and further as a "failsafe''. I need access to my retainers in dungeon, as a failsafe. I need access to the Market Board in dungeon, as a failsafe. There is your only full proof failsafe. Every instance needs access to the MB/Retainer/Repair NPC/Vendor NPC (Can't forget those guys who have their entire inventory full [people posted the first week of patch about missing the Fenrir pup drop from PvP since their inventory was full). You called it a slippery slope fallacy, and well its a slippery slope but not a fallacy in this context. Their IS a failsafe, you think its insufficient so you want an ADDITIONAL failsafe. Your argument is that it hurts no one. Access to the MB in every dungeon hurts no one either. Access to your retainers in every dungeon doesn't hurt anyone either. Etc. Etc. It is a REAL slippery slope and not a fallacy.
Your entire arguement is a slippery slope in this paragraph. "We shouldn't add it because people will ask for more!" is completely absurd. There is nothing you need a MarketBoard for, a Vendor NPC (Food is optional, gear is on-hand, and crafting mats shouldn't be mid-dungoun or else it'll wind up like Diadem.)
Yes. you are right. Access to the MB in the dungoun doesn't hurt anyone. But what in the heck would be the point of putting it in? This is a major reason why a Slippery Sloap arguement doesn't work. Because the 'logical' (used that word loosely) conclusion that More will come of asking for something, doesn't work.
Why would someone ask for a MB in a dungoun? To do their crafting? They can't change to their crafts in dungouns, so that won't be a problem. To buy a piece of gear? Well, members who are able to enter into the dungoun meet the minimum ilevel requirement, thus they do not require any additional gear. Compare this to a member who's gear breaks middungou, that person NEEDS repairs.
Need vs. Wants is a very real subject, but using it as the foundation of a slippery slope is just... bad.
Slippery Slope:
The Slippery Slope is a fallacy in which a person asserts that some event must inevitably follow from another without any argument for the inevitability of the event in question.
Understand why this is a bad, fallacious arguement. And instead, focus on the issue at hand.
1) I do not think the programming is going to be a straight copy-pasta for the differences of melding a single piece of gear at percentage chances vs. repairing a gear with varying degrees of percentages and various potential grades of materia. No, the system does not, currently, in FFXIV exist, and to say "It'd be easy" without any way to substantiate it is completely personal opinion. Accept that it would take more work, however, than something that IS Available in the game.Quote:
1) The programming is almost a copy/pasta from melding. As you mention it also existed from 1.0 which means they DO have the code already (100% its backed up somewhere) they just have to find it.
2) No trading needs to be done, why don't you understand this.
3) No gil exchange needs to be done, why don't you understand this.
4) Your marginalizing an already marginal issue.
2-3) Again, the model of the idea is following behind the model of Materia Melding. If Square puts in a Request system for Repair, it is likely to have a system that enables someone to include a 'tip' for the work. It is an exchange between players, is what oyu need to understand. This means that it could be used in a way to move gil. Why do you not understand this?
4) No, I'm creating a very real scenario in which the failsafe that you suggest fails in its most basic function. Players are not garunteed to level a Crafting craft to 60, but they ARE garunteed to level a Combat class to 60 if they're in a level 60 dungoun. Do you understand that 100% of the time, a character will have a combat class at 60 if they are in a 60 dungoun, but not 100% of the time the player WILL NOT Have a crafting class at level 50/60?
1) Actually, you don't have to go so far. That is like suggesting that all the NPC's at the entrance to the dungouns needed specific backstory to them. They are a member of the Adders/Flames/Maelstrome. This is their backstory. Having a single line of flavor text is not difficult. The issue is, you are going to such an extreme to prove the point, that you're forgetting that at times - less is more. The continuity of the character from outside being the one at the entrance of the dungoun in itself is already world building. Having a single line of flavor text that mentions their discomfort / amazement with the area and looking forward to your success further adds to the characters. But I do not need a story of how their mother was actually Bahamut and their father was Shiva.Quote:
1) NPC's already exist, yes but don't forget you have to give them unique lines, backstory and program the functions on to them and then make sure its not programming it onto their character model OUTSIDE of the instance either, heck this means making a duplicate NPC model and attaching the repair menu to it.
2) No argument there, but the programming also exists for the other option.
3) Yes again, the programming exists for both options.
2)You have no proof that the programming exists 'for both options', only that the programming exists for melding.
3) You have no proof that the programming exists 'for both options', only that the programming exists for melding.
Neither require a retcon of lore. However, only one is proven to exist. Until we have some degree of proof that a system that existed only in 1.0 still exists in the code of 2.0, then we have to work by the assumption it would be more work to implement the system in than a system that already exists and is actively used in the game.Quote:
And as far as I'm concerned the exact opposite is true. The programming already exists for both, one just requires 0 ret con or lore re writes or additional models being loaded into dungeons.
[qupte] They also don't get the benefit of your additional failsafe if they don't have enough gil on them when they queue in. TBH its probably equally likely for both scenarios. [/quote]
Man that'd be like... the worst possible situation, but I can't deny it'd happen to someone, sooner or later. However, I do believe we can agree that - the majority of players have enough gil to repair their gear. It is just a matter that sometimes, these players enter without remembering to fix thier gear.
For those who don't have the gil to repair, I am not sure how to help those without the gil to repair. I know some people get by on 40k gil. I couldn't imagine it personally.
And reformatting the window to properly be scaled to account for the fact that there is no longer that option, and changing the fact that the payment option is no longer in there, and making sure that it checks that you have hte PROPER GRADE of a DIFFERENT ITEM, and making sure that it checks your current Repair %'s and makes sure to add it on properly. Seriously, it is so much more work than having an NPC that works EXACLTY HOW THEY ALREADY WORK.Quote:
OPTION which is not a payment. Simply disable that option. Its practically changing a 1 to a 0 in code in complexity.
No, repairing before hte dungoun is a pre-emptive measure.Quote:
Hah, we both ended up doing the same thing and even the same definition. However...
That's not what pre-emptive means at all. Repairing above 100%, is pre-emptive. Leveling a crafter or carrying dark matter is not.
Leveling crafters is a pre-emptive measure.
However, adding an NPC, is a failsafe. It ensures that, should both those systems fail, there is a 'zero-state' that protects the player.
Currently, there is no failsafe in the system. If you do not have your crafts leveled, and your gear breaks, you're kinda screwed for the stats. You might still be able to clear, but it will be at the cost of extra effort and strain on 3 other people in the party.
More like close to 1/2 or 3/4th. Crafted gear for BiS remains relevent for the entire content patch. It likewise could ALWAYS be used to bring your uncapped classes up to snuff for raid, something I have had to do more than once.Quote:
For "intial" yes. That's less than 1/2 of ARR + HW's lifespan.
Not necessarily. A crafter can make millions on their own, with enough effort. A battle crafter who wnats to sell runs will have to work with 6 other people, and is reliant on others. A battle crafter can go and farm things slowly, over time, and yes - it can earn gil. But the amount of gil a battle crafter will earn will likely not compare to someone who produces items for profit.Quote:
The whole reason I'm mentioning this is because this applies to both scenarios. Everything you said for a crafter making millions applies to battle classes as well. No effort, no profit. This point you're trying to make literally cancels itself out.
Let's think of it this way. It's like comparing someone who runs a mom and pop shop to the CEO of J.C. Penny's.
This is my first time seeing it, sadly. But I do think it's a good idea. It's very possible for ideas not to be mentioned frequnetly by virtue of the fact that it doesn't come up as an issue until you, personally, experience it. That is likely the position the OP spoke from, as well. "I'm tired of having to abandon dungouns." They clearly struggled with it.Quote:
No, this thread has come up a few times in the past. But the scarcity of it shows general lack of care by the public. This topic has less followers than the "Give Roegadyn chest hair" club and a metric ton less than the "Give Miqo'te their booty back" club.
First of all, the quest chain to make the relic was literally creating a brand new relic. That is a poor example. We used the broken, COMPLETELY USELESS, pieces of the original relic moreso as a blueprint, but everything was built around that. It was not the simple repair of the weapon - but rather, it was creating a whole new item from it.Quote:
That's exactly what 0% effectiveness means. Its broke to the point of unusability until someone fixes it, just like the stuff that we have to spend 5 quest chains on, or several patches worth to fix.
Something being unusable does not mean that it is completely useless, though. If the shield breaks, but can be repaired, it still has a value - compare that to a shield that has broken, and been eroded by YEARS of not being used, to the point that it litearlly doesn't even resemble its previous form. The Dark Matter can't fix that. But the one that could be reasonably repaired, makes sense.
There have been a number of characters that 'teleport out when X situation is met" or likewise "Teleports in when Y situation is met." for example, void ark spawning Cthulu-tentacle-oh-god-why. Characters spawn for Fates that you can interact and talk with, whcih would be easy to enable/disable for the pull.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fyce
Hell, you're gonna try to argue immersion?
We have bikin-clad cat girls running around with more defense than the rest of the mildly armored party. We have a world where it's considered 'realistic' for a Dragoon to literally travel via jumps (Dear god I died laughing when I first saw Eistinien enter/exit his cutscenes. It was hilarious.) We have literal magic.
But a character being in a zone, who by all rights SHOULD be there, as he is the SAME NPC that showed you the way from outside the dungoun, is somehow a streatch of the imagination?
We can be summoned to a giant mother crystal in some land we don't know, and float around like fairy princesses (God I hated that cutscene on a personal level), but some explorer who dabbles in repairs somehow sets you off?
You want to say that it's more realistic for there to be a glowing "Shortcut" that takes us to the last boss room we beat, but find it so unrealistic for someone who was waiting for us to wish for our well being?
Heck. If I want to keep in continuity with the shortcuts, let's just add a giant piece of floating crystal. We'll call it the "Mother Crystal", and when you interact with it, it says "It pulses with a warm light." and then pops open the repair window. It fits with the same level of absurdity of everything else, but to try and argue "Muh immersion" for an NPC who COULD in theory be at the start...
Also, I'll add - I still hold a strong belief to just dungouns. I think it could be done for raids, too, but I don't feel it is NEEDED for raids, because for the most part - raids (and when I say raids, I refer to Alexander and Coil) are not long enough to risk the breaking of armor. And when they do risk the breaking of armor (Assuming you reach 10% in the course of the fights), your more likely to have Vote Abandonens than anything else. But going into broken armor is very possible without wanting to vote abandon for a duty. -
03-24-2016, 01:13 AMFelisAsk the devs to bring back the feature to repair other players gearQuote:
Originally Posted by Adire
Problem solved without repair NPCs -
03-24-2016, 01:16 AMEidolonProblem not solved because none of your party members had any of their crafts leveled.Quote:
Originally Posted by Felis
Problem not solved because the player didn't bring Dark Matter because they usually use the NPC's in the field.
This is simply trying to add something to crafters and is trying to detract for the subject at hand. -
03-24-2016, 01:24 AMIagainsti
20 More Pages!!!!!
-
03-24-2016, 02:34 AMKosmos992kWait, my brain hurts from reading this mass of illogical nonsense. Apparently it's just too damned difficult for you to remember to repair your gear before logging out or upon logging back in because of...life. And yet you *utterly* dismiss the amount of work required just to implement backstories for all these NPCs you want showing up in the most dangerous places in the real with a gear repair kit in hand.Quote:
Originally Posted by Adire
So, remembering a simple thing like "repair before log out, repair upon login" is apparently such a big thing that it justifies creating new NPCs, adjusting lore, creating unique backstories, and characters, and then creating their repair booth in each dungeon or Trial? Really? I mean...really?
Seriously, I just don't know what to say. It's simply ridiculous.
P.S. I wonder how these mythical menders resist tempering...
Repair before running anything, at one of the scores of menders available in the open world...problem solved.Quote:
Originally Posted by Eidolon
-
03-24-2016, 02:41 AMFeliAiko
Adding NPCs would be easier and convenient... doesn't mean it should actually be done, because it would also be silly and unnecessary. The most I'd like to see SE do is give players the ability to repair other players gear, like with materia melding.
-
03-24-2016, 02:43 AMAndrea
I would like the food buff permanent now because I sometimes forget to eat.
Please SE add in the next patch that my character automatically eats when entering an instance. -
03-24-2016, 02:46 AMMugenMugetsu
I'm not even going to bother reading this entire thread. I think the responses to the OP have gone way overboard. It was a simple request. Have a NPC at the start of the dungeon, in a safe zone, who can repair our gear. Sounds like a legitimate request if you ask me and I would welcome having a repair NPC at the start of the dungeon. Yes, it's largely unneeded. Yes, we should be responsible and check our durability before queuing, however the fact of the matter is that no one is perfect, and mistakes happen. As a small QoL improvement to the game having a repair NPC at the start of the dungeon would be great. I support the OP's request. Too bad it seems that the vast majority of people in this thread are vehemently against anything other than everyone leveling all of the crafting jobs so they can repair their own gear and want to make a huge deal out of a very small, simple, request.
-
03-24-2016, 02:53 AMVoltyblast
I would say that, I rather have the possibility to teleport in and out of the dungeon so that I can repair to a NPC mender - ah wait scratch that, someone will most likely start pointing out how this feature can be open to abuse and say how this would ruin everything yadda yadda, you know the drill.
Move along I guess. Oh, but I do support the OP idea. Can't hurt.