Krile's Attire 12$ yet cannot dye the outfit.

Worst thing about the outfit is that it is missing one item o.o/

According to this site: https://www.garlandtools.org/db/#npc/1012813 she is wearing the Lord's Drawers (Black) underneath, wich must be a mistake since they are gender locked for males. The correct panty would be Lady's Knickers (Black), but they are sold seperately on the mog station, so you have to pay extra to get the full outfit! :O

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dan4077

This just seems ridiculous to have to point out at all but. Why do we pay 12$ yet we cannot even dye anything but the hair? I just find this outrageous that I buy an outfit that I cannot dye. So you will barely be able to mix and match and it just seemed like a huge waste. I mean there is not even a higher priced one you can dye. Would love it if you guys could make it able to be dyed. I seriously get confused on what it is with square and not making a ton of outfits that cannot be dyed in an mmo game where costomization is a HUGE part of the game.

---

You know if you hover over the items in the listing you can see if it's dyeable or not. You did know that right?

Think the OP is angry. At least they are venting out their frustration but there are punching bags or stress balls for that, doing that on the forums serves no purpose. I wanted a dyeable light dress of Minfilla's but ah well... You'll live.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tint

Worst thing about the outfit is that it is missing one item o.o/

According to this site: https://www.garlandtools.org/db/#npc/1012813 she is wearing the Lord's Drawers (Black) underneath, wich must be a mistake since they are gender locked for males. The correct panty would be Lady's Knickers (Black), but they are sold seperately on the mog station, so you have to pay extra to get the full outfit! :O

---

I've come across a few other NPCs with strange things like that - female characters using male versions of gear, or sometimes "antiquated" relic gear with a dye applied to it.

I'm not sure if it's to do with the NPC or with how Garland detects it.

It's odd in any case.

(I wouldn't consider it a "missing piece" of the costume though, because you can't see it and could wear any number of items that give the same effect.)

OP, people are agreeing with you that it's silly. But were explaining that the devs are pretty set on their reasons for not making NPC gear dyable. And also that it's silly to have expected it to be dyable when you purchased it, when it's not the case for other NPC sets, it's not advertised as dyable and not all gear is dyable and there is a way of checking if something is dyable.

I was interested in buying it and the newer Minfilia one too, but checked they were dyable first and because of this, I decided against it. I think this was brought up because you were outraged it was not dyable after purchasing it, when nothing is there to set that expectation.

However, not liking the responses you got you've acted like a child name-calling people who were agreeing with your point, and you don't like them for disagreeing with your expectations or maybe just did not get what you were trying to articulate? (If people misunderstand, maybe they misread, or you didn't articulate your point very well, hence some benefit of the doubt is due, surely?)

If you resort to name-calling so easily then you can't expect people to take you seriously. Especially given that when people resort to insulting others is an admission that you've lost your argument.