[dev1033] Ideas for a Two-Tier Class System: Jobs on Top of Weapon Specializations

The problem with a lot of the other system proposed I've mentioned before. They try and limit progress from a certain point and close down the open-ness of both the Armoury System and the job system. Doing things like limiting Paladin to Gladiator.

When Paladin should be able to be a Lancer, Con, Thaum, or any other weapon class.

I can't support any system that says "You can only be a black mage if you level thaum" that doesn't make sense. The system that is implemented needs to be open and only the player should force limitations on themselves.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cairdeas

The problem with a lot of the other system proposed I've mentioned before. They try and limit progress from a certain point and close down the open-ness of both the Armoury System and the job system. Doing things like limiting Paladin to Gladiator.

When Paladin should be able to be a Lancer, Con, Thaum, or any other weapon class.

I can't support any system that says "You can only be a black mage if you level thaum" that doesn't make sense. The system that is implemented needs to be open and only the player should force limitations on themselves.

---

Were you replying to me? Because I don't see a problem with using others system mechanics and applying it to the title system.

If, for example, Dragoon has its own grid, you work on that grid which is superimposed to your basic weapon class, whatever it is. I don't care if someone somewhere said that only 2 advanced paths are possible for a given base weapon class. If that guy has good ideas just take what you like from it and leave the rest.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by northernsky

Were you replying to me? Because I don't see a problem with using others system mechanics and applying it to the title system.

If, for example, Dragoon has its own grid, you work on that grid which is superimposed to your basic weapon class, whatever it is. I don't care if someone somewhere said that only 2 advanced paths are possible for a given base weapon class. If that guy has good ideas just take what you like from it and leave the rest.

---

No I agree. But the moment I see someone say "Only these jobs can use these classes" I tend to block all their ideas out so I guess I'm trying to say, if anyone goes out to try and pull ideas from other sources it probably shouldn't be me.

Honestly I thought implementation was covered in OP. Its a ff:t-esque way of unlocking. You want to unlock dark knight you level the base weapon specializations to obtain certain spells and abilities. Once the title is unlocked you equip it as your ttitle starting at the lowest tier, still leveling your chosen weapon spec but at the same time the exp counts towards your title gaining tiers, when your title does advance to the next tier you do (this is just me, not sure if its in the OP) a type of class quest when the quest is over you advance to the next tier and will be able to chose your title bonuses using a sphere grid type system of progression that will allow you to customize your titles play style (paladin for instance being DD, tanking, buffing/healing...just an example). Now as for grouping and stat distribution you would group based on your weapon spec but gain small stat bonuses from your title based on your weapon spec. The combinations are very varied so please go back earlier in the thread to find examples.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cairdeas

The problem with a lot of the other system proposed I've mentioned before. They try and limit progress from a certain point and close down the open-ness of both the Armoury System and the job system. Doing things like limiting Paladin to Gladiator.

When Paladin should be able to be a Lancer, Con, Thaum, or any other weapon class.

I can't support any system that says "You can only be a black mage if you level thaum" that doesn't make sense. The system that is implemented needs to be open and only the player should force limitations on themselves.

---

Or in the case of FFXI, every other player in the game besides the player in question.

:rimshot:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Reiku

Refer to my previous post.

Example (Extreme simplification)

Gladiator Class
As you level up your gladiator stats are added.
Title = Dark Knight (Stat priorities for this class would be Strength and Dexterity)
1LV of Gladiator Rank increases your Strength +4pts, Dexterity +1pts, Vitality by 3pt.

Now say lets say...

As you level up your gladiator stats are added.
Title = Paladin (Stat priorities are Strength and Vitality)
1LV of Gladiator Rank increases your Strength +2pts, Dexterity +2pt, Vitality by 4pts.


Marauder Class
As you level up your marauder stats are added.
Title = Dark Knight (Stat priorities for this class would be Strength and Dexterity)
1LV of Marauder Rank increases your Strength +5pts, Dexterity +2pts, Vitality by 1pt.

Now say lets say...

As you level up your marauder stats are added.
Title = Paladin (Stat priorities are Strength and Vitality)
1LV of Marauder Rank increases your Strength +3pts, Dexterity +3pt, Vitality by 3pts.

So each title would dictate where your stats gained from increasing weapon rank would be allocated.


This of course would vary with each weapon class and title combo. As a Dark Knight Pugalist you'd get maybe slightly more DEX and less STR than you would if you went with Gladiator or Marauder. BUT if you did decide to go gladiator for sword play, you wouldn't get flooded with unecessary vitality as if you would if you were a Paladin (Where you'd want more Vitality).

Is this more clear?

---

Found it, but to expand on it I think the stat bonuses should be much much smaller when you first unlock your title and gain more points as you reach the next tier of your title. Drk only giving 1 point str 1 point vit per gld rank as a novice drk but as a master drk you get 5 str 4 vit 3 dex per rank you see?

Now, the only problem I see with any type of implementation is that it basically forces you to get some type of advanced job because of stat bonuses and ability bonuses. Whether or not this is a good thing should be left to the players. Really the only way I see it working like that though is to release more titles or to rename the current weapon specializations (from gladiator to sword user for example) only because people will cry that the job they leveled to 50 is now obsolete and besides I had a lot of friends in ff:xi that leveled their base job to 75 and I feel it would be unfair to people that didn't really like the advance jobs to begin with. I need more ideas on how to fix that. The easies solution would be to release more titles that aren't drk or pld and would play to the strengths the base weapon specialkzations already have,, perhaps we could call this class onion knight (or something else that sounds more hardcore xD) for DoW and red mage for DoM (just rough examples mind you). Those would be the two classes that are basically freely given so those who want to play their base class to max won't miss out on the stat bonuses given by the other advance jobs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Anathiel

Now, the only problem I see with any type of implementation is that it basically forces you to get some type of advanced job because of stat bonuses and ability bonuses. Whether or not this is a good thing should be left to the players. Really the only way I see it working like that though is to release more titles or to rename the current weapon specializations (from gladiator to sword user for example) only because people will cry that the job they leveled to 50 is now obsolete and besides I had a lot of friends in ff:xi that leveled their base job to 75 and I feel it would be unfair to people that didn't really like the advance jobs to begin with. I need more ideas on how to fix that. The easies solution would be to release more titles that aren't drk or pld and would play to the strengths the base weapon specialkzations already have,, perhaps we could call this class onion knight (or something else that sounds more hardcore xD) for DoW and red mage for DoM (just rough examples mind you). Those would be the two classes that are basically freely given so those who want to play their base class to max won't miss out on the stat bonuses given by the other advance jobs.

---

Like how FFXI forced you to get a subjob?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nuru

Like how FFXI forced you to get a subjob?

---

Yeah...good point, but the advance jobs that we're all talking about putting in, I think we would need a more comprehensive list with some good examples of the way the armory system could be used to augment them. Warrior, monk, thief, ranger, dark knight, paladin, ranger, dragoon, samurai, ninja, black mage, white mage, red mage, summoner, beast master.

You'll notice I put summoner and beast master last because I don't think they'll be implemented for quite some while. Now, we've put a lot of thought into drk, pld, rdm, and blm, but what about warrior and monk? To unlock them using the system we discussed earlier would mean they would have to unlock abilities correct? But which abilities could they use to unlock the classes and still be different to the abilities those jobs could unlock on their own is the question. Warrior is a mix of gladiator and marauder, which in my mind would be one of the hardest classes to implement because really what could you give them that marauder and gladiator don't already have? These are the hardball questions that need to be asked before we could really demand anything from the dev team asfar as answers go

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Anathiel

Found it, but to expand on it I think the stat bonuses should be much much smaller when you first unlock your title and gain more points as you reach the next tier of your title. Drk only giving 1 point str 1 point vit per gld rank as a novice drk but as a master drk you get 5 str 4 vit 3 dex per rank you see?

---

Yes I remember this post, thanks. So it's a nice way to allocate stats and there are some other posts on traits, abilities gained with the progression of the title.

The only question I had at the time with this post and it's still not clear to me is whether the poster wanted a) that those stats allocations are permanent for the base weapon class (i-e gaining 1 rank on GLA as a DRK would permanently add 4STR, 1DEX and 3VIT to your GLA, think of the esper bonus system in FFVI), or b)if the stats per rank of a basic weapon class are automatically reallocated when you switch title. In any case, what happens to the stats of your basic weapon class when you have no title equipped?

There are potential balance problems with either possibility. In case (a), permanently allocating stats would greatly alter the possibilities in a system where in theory you play only 1 character. Also, you need to stop everything you do so you don't waste levels with lower bonuses in stats? What about the current rank50?In case (b), several questions remain, i-e, say you can unlock titles at rank 30. But when you have it, can you equip a title on your rank 10 THM? If so, how will it affect your THM stats? Or do you have to wait to rank 30 to equip a title? This also takes its importance considering point (a)

You see, there are several good propositions but I don't think that they all have been optimized. I would like this proposition you cited, but I would prefer more customization by either allocating myself a reduced (compared to now) amount of stat points depending on the way I want to play, or to unlock bonuses in a grid system (HP+3%, STR+2, VIT+4, for example; a PLD grid would have higher occurrence of HP+, enmity+ and VIT+ slots compared to DRK which would have many ATT+ and STR+ slots to unlock so you would have to choose where you want to allocate your points).

This is an example to illustrate that even though many suggestions are in the thread, I think that there still are several possibilities.

That being said I realize that just because I personally am not fully satisfied with the current propositions on how to allocate abilities, traits and stats does not mean that the OP's suggestion is incomplete.