Please do not lock Jobs to the Weapon Class that unlocks them.

This was one of the first things I noticed in this game that really ticks me off.

I was a little dissapointed to read the 1 job per class response from the developers, but I'm optimistic that they will alter this in the future to allow access to at least 3 or 4.

For mages I was hoping that we would see say 3 extensions within the "job specialization tree" to enhance Damage, Buffing/Debuffing and Healing for example. Instead it looks as though at the moment we are just going to get: GLA >> PLD, MRD >> WAR etc (especially as they have said that they want to return to the more "traditional" Final Fantasy job names) with limited questable abilities.

Ah well, I guess we won't know until they put it into effect :(

Well...

I leveled up by THM and CON so I'm good on that front. Though they're both less than R30 so...

...and I bring up R30 because that's supposedly what the first dungeon's rank will be so it makes sense that the job quest would start at R30. Or maybe I'm just fantasizing again and they're going to be at R50. In which case I hope they make grinding fun.

Jobs are supposed to be party role specializations for the classes. So yes, pretty much all of the classes will become obsolete in parties with the jobs around.

Going one-to-one with classes and jobs actually isn't an awful idea. This way they can keep introducing new classes (and weapons/fighting styles) and have each one with a job for it.

So since we've only got 2 mages for the whm/blm jobs, where does red mage go? Fencer. In some FF games (FFTA/FFTA2/probably more) Red Mages use Rapiers as their main weapons. What other job would there be for Fencer really? Turning a strictly melee class into the proper jack of all trades melee/magic hybrid.

There are dozens upon dozens of Final Fantasy class/job types they could include. With it being one-to-one they will just have to keep adding more classes which means more jobs too.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Arcell

Jobs are supposed to be party role specializations for the classes. So yes, pretty much all of the classes will become obsolete in parties with the jobs around.

Going one-to-one with classes and jobs actually isn't an awful idea. This way they can keep introducing new classes (and weapons/fighting styles) and have each one with a job for it.

So since we've only got 2 mages for the whm/blm jobs, where does red mage go? Fencer. In some FF games (FFTA/FFTA2/probably more) Red Mages use Rapiers as their main weapons. What other job would there be for Fencer really? Turning a strictly melee class into the proper jack of all trades melee/magic hybrid.

There are dozens upon dozens of Final Fantasy class/job types they could include. With it being one-to-one they will just have to keep adding more classes which means more jobs too.

---

Blue Mage, Summoner? They're gonna have a hard time finding some weapons for those jobs' classes :X

I really don't think we'll see Summoner. The Primals just aren't subservient enough, they're doing their own thing. Without spoiling anything specific, there's no way they'd ever listen to us.

As far as Blue Mage goes, they've been known to use Sabers mostly so just add in a class that uses them with Blue Mage as the job.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Arcell

I really don't think we'll see Summoner. The Primals just aren't subservient enough, they're doing their own thing. Without spoiling anything specific, there's no way they'd ever listen to us.

As far as Blue Mage goes, they've been known to use Sabers mostly so just add in a class that uses them with Blue Mage as the job.

---

But GLAs use curved swords, which usually are a lolBLU's weapon of choice.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Corrderio

But GLAs use curved swords, which usually are a lolBLU's weapon of choice.

---

Well they could always change that. Currently they only use one, the Aeolian Scimitar. They also use Daggers so that would mean Thief will never exist either, of course unless they change it. Either allow more than one job per class or take certain weapons away from Gladiator as it's the only class that uses a variety of similar weapons.

I don't like the idea of a one-to-one class/job ratio. What purpose would there be in even having classes if they each had their own job? In my mind, it would completely undermine the purpose for the existence of the armory system.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BlaiseLallaise

I don't like the idea of a one-to-one class/job ratio. What purpose would there be in even having classes if they each had their own job? In my mind, it would completely undermine the purpose for the existence of the armory system.

---

jobs wont be a requirement, remember, they SPECIALIZE you, and perhaps you wont always want that specialization

also, 1:1 to start, is a start, literaly, they can always add more in later once the basework is done and implemented

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Corrderio

But GLAs use curved swords, which usually are a lolBLU's weapon of choice.

---

FFV - Knives, Sword, Rod
FFVI - Strago- Daggers, Rods, Flails
Gau - unarmed
FFVIII - Quistis - Whip
FFIX - Quina - Fork
FFX - Kimahri - Lance
FFX-2 - Gun
FFXI - scimitars
Tactics Advance and A2 - Sabers

Once again, I protest the use of examples from previous games as archetypes. All previous examples can tell us in this series is to expect something at least a little different from what we've seen before.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheVedis

also, 1:1 to start, is a start, literaly, they can always add more in later once the basework is done and implemented

---

In order to make 1-to-1 AND locking out cross-class abilities on Jobs work, the Development Team will have to move or remove over 33 (I counted) Armory Class abilities. After all that work is done, I don't see how they can change the ratio, because they balanced it based on one Job using only one set of Armory Class abilities.

Once they say two Jobs can use a set of Armory Class abilities, they'll have to re-rebalance the abilities again. Not only that, they will have to make it so that there is two for every Armory Class. And that's when we run into problems with overlapping and not enough Jobs to go around.

What two Jobs will Lancer be allowed to play in a party?? What About Archer??

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sorel

In order to make 1-to-1 AND locking out cross-class abilities on Jobs work, the Development Team will have to move or remove over 33 (I counted) Armory Class abilities. After all that work is done, I don't see how they can change the ratio, because they balanced it based on one Job using only one set of Armory Class abilities.

Once they say two Jobs can use a set of Armory Class abilities, they'll have to re-rebalance the abilities again. Not only that, they will have to make it so that there is two for every Armory Class. And that's when we run into problems with overlapping and not enough Jobs to go around.

What two Jobs will Lancer be allowed to play in a party?? What About Archer??

---

It's not difficult to restrict a class ability to a certain job or set of jobs. For example, Bloodbath currently requires "Disciples of War and Magic." How would it then be a problem to say it is only available to job Warrior versus also being available to Dark Knight? Restricting classes and restricting jobs do not have to be intertwined.

And who is to say that the number of jobs available to a class has to be the same for each class? Each discipline does not have the same number of classes, so why would each class need the same number of jobs? Maybe a Gladiator can be Paladin, Warrior, or Dark Knight, but a Lancer can only be Dragoon or Warrior. It is not blasphemy to do this.

Dev's i think every angle has been over analyzed about this new JOB system. Some are right but most forgot how to read and comprehend.


DEATH TO THE THREAD >>> and boot to the head!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BlaiseLallaise

It's not difficult to restrict a class ability to a certain job or set of jobs. For example, Bloodbath currently requires "Disciples of War and Magic." How would it then be a problem to say it is only available to job Warrior versus also being available to Dark Knight? Restricting classes and restricting jobs do not have to be intertwined.

And who is to say that the number of jobs available to a class has to be the same for each class? Each discipline does not have the same number of classes, so why would each class need the same number of jobs? Maybe a Gladiator can be Paladin, Warrior, or Dark Knight, but a Lancer can only be Dragoon or Warrior. It is not blasphemy to do this.

---

QUOTE And who is to say that the number of jobs available to a class has to be the same for each class?

Amswer. The Dev team did. Their only releasing ONE JOB per ONE Class.

Well all this QQing over losing job abilities or not having the right class leveled is silly imo. I am a Lancer main R40 (haven't really committed to playing lately since LA Noire came out <3) but I plan on rerolling my character (after giving my gil to a friend to hold; old money in a new world = $$$) so I can experience the new gameplay aspects from the ground up. I want to be able to feel like I am playing a new game instead of having to bitch and moan about more grinding. Oh, and even though I do reroll I will still be a Lancer/Dragoon, and I will probably pick the same looking character lol...am I the only one who is going to do this?

I might make a new character to experience the game fresh, but definitely not rerolling again. Once was enough for me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OMEGA_HACK

Well all this QQing over losing job abilities or not having the right class leveled is silly imo. I am a Lancer main R40 (haven't really committed to playing lately since LA Noire came out <3) but I plan on rerolling my character (after giving my gil to a friend to hold; old money in a new world = $$$) so I can experience the new gameplay aspects from the ground up. I want to be able to feel like I am playing a new game instead of having to bitch and moan about more grinding. Oh, and even though I do reroll I will still be a Lancer/Dragoon, and I will probably pick the same looking character lol...am I the only one who is going to do this?

---

Did it in Nov 2010 update did it again had a 37pugelvaan and a 44pughume and now am back to elvaan same class Pug lol. Last time i reroll i got myself 19 and just waiting for the update,

1 job per class?

OH, right right... I forgot, we are working hard to keep FFXIV a dying game here... sorry about the question.


Like honestly?! jeez... a concept is made which now provides a content-scalable solution, that new jobs can be released per class, and a concept which could have made it so there is something like a "job 1, job 2, and job3 (hybrid)" branch per class. Ex. Conjurer -> WHM, BLM, RDM (in this order).

I don't understand what dev's are doing for FFXIV, like... this game already turned out to be a dying failure because they thought they would make some super revolutionary overly-complicated idea for everything, and they didnt end up even finishing anything properly.... I understand the game is getting better now but my statement still stands.

Dev1: "Hey guys, I know our races from FFXI were so awesome and successful, so I thought that for FFXIV we should rename them for no apparent reason, and kinda alter how they look!"

Dev2: "WOAH AWESOME IDEA! Let's totally do that for all of the successful trademark jobs/classes (SINCE THEY SHOULD BE THE SAME DAMN THING), and I bet people will think it's cool and upbeat.

Dev1: "Wow, look at your creative mind flow, I was thinking we should replace chill looking armor which everyone loved with garbage stone, bronze, and iron-age armor as well, since who doesnt love wearing something that looks like a potato sack with holes cut out for the head, arms and legs in it, and who doesn't enjoy feeling strong while wearing bronze armor"

Dev2: "Wow... this game is gonna FLY off the shelves!"



...


I rant because I care. Bottom-line.

I just wish FFXIV could capitalize on things that have already worked so well in FFXI and bring them into a whole new world.

<insert f word + sigh here>

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hellsoul-Sama

1 job per class?

OH, right right... I forgot, we are working hard to keep FFXIV a dying game here... sorry about the question.


Like honestly?! jeez... a concept is made which now provides a content-scalable solution, that new jobs can be released per class, and a concept which could have made it so there is something like a "job 1, job 2, and job3 (hybrid)" branch per class. Ex. Conjurer -> WHM, BLM, RDM (in this order).

I don't understand what dev's are doing for FFXIV, like... this game already turned out to be a dying failure because they thought they would make some super revolutionary overly-complicated idea for everything, and they didnt end up even finishing anything properly.... I understand the game is getting better now but my statement still stands.

Dev1: "Hey guys, I know our races from FFXI were so awesome and successful, so I thought that for FFXIV we should rename them for no apparent reason, and kinda alter how they look!"

Dev2: "WOAH AWESOME IDEA! Let's totally do that for all of the successful trademark jobs/classes (SINCE THEY SHOULD BE THE SAME DAMN THING), and I bet people will think it's cool and upbeat.

Dev1: "Wow, look at your creative mind flow, I was thinking we should replace chill looking armor which everyone loved with garbage stone, bronze, and iron-age armor as well, since who doesnt love wearing something that looks like a potato sack with holes cut out for the head, arms and legs in it, and who doesn't enjoy feeling strong while wearing bronze armor"

Dev2: "Wow... this game is gonna FLY off the shelves!"



...


I rant because I care. Bottom-line.

I just wish FFXIV could capitalize on things that have already worked so well in FFXI and bring them into a whole new world.

<insert f word + sigh here>

---

uhhhh honestly most starter FFXI gear was not much better. in fact, it was probably worse. good stuff didnt pop till around 50 (except the monk sam ni gi set was cool) and even that was only ehh. Now while i definitely agree, way too many potato sacks, (especially for the women) FFXI is not the place to compare it. They honestly shouldnt have used FFXI races, its makes people think the game is going to be FFXI-2, the fact that it wasnt angered people.

Anyhow i do agree that one class per job, especially with the roles they will probably give them, and the roles they will leave out sounds like a bad idea.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Xeno

Thaumaturge=White Mage

---

By Menphina, I hope not. I'm a Conjurer aspiring to be a White Mage. I've barely touched Thaumaturge (or, as my old LS used to call it, Thermal Turd). >.<

I chose CON believing it to be more the path of the healer based on the desc on the official game site:

Quote:

---

Attuned to the essence of all things around them, the conjurers' intimacy with all forms of being enables them to shift between both offensive and defensive magic as needed.

---

Wheras THM sounded like a pure damage-dealing caster:

Quote:

---

Thaumaturges are unparalleled in their powers of destruction, eclipsing even the Desciples of War.

---

I really hope the dev team keeps this in mind when assigning jobs to classes.

so what DD classes are going to win in ex-change for being a job?

i suspect that while in job mode u wont be able to have cross-class skills? only class+new jobs skills /traits

so classes are for grinding , and jobs for party play.....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BlaiseLallaise

It's not difficult to restrict a class ability to a certain job or set of jobs. For example, Bloodbath currently requires "Disciples of War and Magic." How would it then be a problem to say it is only available to job Warrior versus also being available to Dark Knight? Restricting classes and restricting jobs do not have to be intertwined.

---

True, that is possible. If the Development Team do what is described above, it would look like this.

Bloodbath
Optimal Rank: 6
Requires: Disciples of War or Magic
Permits: Warrior or Dark Knight

This not what I would consider the ideal solution, but it would work for this facet of the problem.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BlaiseLallaise

And who is to say that the number of jobs available to a class has to be the same for each class? Each discipline does not have the same number of classes, so why would each class need the same number of jobs? Maybe a Gladiator can be Paladin, Warrior, or Dark Knight, but a Lancer can only be Dragoon or Warrior. It is not blasphemy to do this.

---

Well, we'd have to put aside what Bayohne said the Dev Team stated. But let's do that for the sake of argument.

Using the example above, if Gladiator can be 3 Jobs (Paladin, Warrior, Dark Knight), but Lancer can only be 2 Jobs (Dragoon, Warrior) ... that makes Gladiators more versatile in parties than Lancers. Which makes them more useful. Which makes them more in demand by party leaders. Lancers in turn would become less useful because Gladiators can do one of their Jobs already (Warrior).

To balance that, the Development Team would have to make the Lancer's remaining Job (Dragoon) 2/3rds more powerful than Warrior, Paladin and Dark Knight ... to offset the lack of access to a third Job and the overlap of a second Job with Gladiator. Otherwise Lancer well become a solo Class and Dragoon a solo Job, because party leaders would invite Gladiators over Lancers every time.

This is why arbitrary Class-Job restrictions are literally counterproductive to maintaining balance. They create more balancing work for the Dev Team than they save ... both in the present and down the road when new Jobs or Classes are added.

If the Lancer above at least had access to the Paladin or Dark Knight Job he could compete for party invites on a level playing field with Gladiator. A party leader would know that if he loses the party's only Gladiator, he can fall back on the party's Lancer. He may or may not be equally effective, but at least he can fill the slot ... at least he has a chance. Without access, the Lancer can't possibly fill the slot and has no chance. None. And neither would the party. It would have to disband.

All that aside, personally, I think that Lancers and their abilities of debuffing and draining would make excellent Dark Knights. But with 1-to-1 Job restrictions we will never find out. Just a thought.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bayohne

Spoke to the dev. team to try and wrangle some more details regarding the upcoming job system. The current thinking is to have one job for one class. So for example, if you are a gladiator, the job you could unlock would be paladin, etc. Right now, we can't give any further details about the possibility of having multiple jobs per class.

To try and stave off the coming flood of "So if gladiator becomes paladin, then what will xyz class unlock?" You'll have to stay tuned for more details in the future!

---

All this says to me is that each class unlocks one job. Not that each class can only use one job.

Maybe I lack comprehension or maybe it's purposely ambiguous but I think you guys are reading too much into it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bayohne

The current thinking is to have one job for one class.

---

The word "for" is too imprecise. Does "for" mean "unlock" or does it mean "available to"?? The implications of each are very different.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bayohne

So for example, if you are a gladiator, the job you could unlock would be paladin, etc.

---

This sentence seems to indicate the the word "for" in the previous sentence meant "unlock".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bayohne

Right now, we can't give any further details about the possibility of having multiple jobs per class.

---

Again, "having" is too imprecise a word. Does "having" mean "unlocking" or does it mean "playing as"??

Simply put, Bayohne's post requires clarification that only the Community and/or Development Team can provide. Until then, this topic is still very debatable.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sorel

True, that is possible. If the Development Team do what is described above, it would look like this.

Bloodbath
Optimal Rank: 6
Requires: Disciples of War or Magic
Permits: Warrior or Dark Knight

This not what I would consider the ideal solution, but it would work for this facet of the problem.



Well, we'd have to put aside what Bayohne said the Dev Team stated. But let's do that for the sake of argument.

Using the example above, if Gladiator can be 3 Jobs (Paladin, Warrior, Dark Knight), but Lancer can only be 2 Jobs (Dragoon, Warrior) ... that makes Gladiators more versatile in parties than Lancers. Which makes them more useful. Which makes them more in demand by party leaders. Lancers in turn would become less useful because Gladiators can do one of their Jobs already (Warrior).

To balance that, the Development Team would have to make the Lancer's remaining Job (Dragoon) 2/3rds more powerful than Warrior, Paladin and Dark Knight ... to offset the lack of access to a third Job and the overlap of a second Job with Gladiator. Otherwise Lancer well become a solo Class and Dragoon a solo Job, because party leaders would invite Gladiators over Lancers every time.

This is why arbitrary Class-Job restrictions are literally counterproductive to maintaining balance. They create more balancing work for the Dev Team than they save ... both in the present and down the road when new Jobs or Classes are added.

If the Lancer above at least had access to the Paladin or Dark Knight Job he could compete for party invites on a level playing field with Gladiator. A party leader would know that if he loses the party's only Gladiator, he can fall back on the party's Lancer. He may or may not be equally effective, but at least he can fill the slot ... at least he has a chance. Without access, the Lancer can't possibly fill the slot and has no chance. None. And neither would the party. It would have to disband.

All that aside, personally, I think that Lancers and their abilities of debuffing and draining would make excellent Dark Knights. But with 1-to-1 Job restrictions we will never find out. Just a thought.

---

gladiator having 3 jobs available doesnt really matter as long as he can only play one job at once. doesnt matter if a sword user can do 3 roles, what matters is the roles, in ffxi sword user would have been pld rdm thf warrior dancer etc,

now if glad is the only tank role, which is possible, then glad is powerful, soo hmmm i wonder how many roles they are going to choose, it really looks kind of wonky when you think about it, having only 7 roles, and tieing 1 to each class, no class really fits the standard roles, except glad being tank.

in FFXI thf and dancer used Daggers , warrior used axes =/

sword users = pld , blu , and rdm (while solo or /nin)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sorel

The word "for" is too imprecise. Does "for" mean "unlock" or does it mean "available to"?? The implications of each are very different.



This sentence seems to indicate the the word "for" in the previous sentence meant "unlock".



Again, "having" is too imprecise a word. Does "having" mean "unlocking" or does it mean "playing as"??

Simply put, Bayohne's post requires clarification that only the Community and/or Development Team can provide. Until then, this topic is still very debatable.

---

Exactly.

Bayohne's post didn't do much for this thread IMO :(

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Warlyx

in FFXI thf and dancer used Daggers , warrior used axes =/

sword users = pld , blu , and rdm (while solo or /nin)

---

warrior and thf also had sword access, weaponskills, etc. but really the point is, One discipline having access to 3 roles and another having two isnt really that important.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Physic

warrior and thf also had sword access, weaponskills, etc. but really the point is, One discipline having access to 3 roles and another having two isnt really that important.

---

I understand your point ... but I disagree, respectfully. :)

Entire game dynamics can be altered on these details. I'm sure the FFXI Development Team didn't think it "that important" that they gave Utsusemi (the most effective tanking ability) and Dual-Wield (a powerful DD ability) to a single Job (Ninja) ... helping make it the most powerful and versatile Job in that game.

I would like this Dev Team to avoid that particular mistake in FFXIV.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sorel

I understand your point ... but I disagree, respectfully. :)

Entire game dynamics can be altered on these details. I'm sure the FFXI Development Team didn't think it "that important" that they gave Utsusemi (the most effective tanking ability) and Dual-Wield (a powerful DD ability) to a single Job (Ninja) ... helping make it the most powerful and versatile Job in that game.

I would like this Dev Team to avoid that particular mistake in FFXIV.

---

So you want everyone to have it? Dual-wield should be only that need it the rest give them something less. Matter what happen there alway going to be that one powerful DD and powerful tank and that one awesome mage.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zenaku

So you want everyone to have it? Dual-wield should be only that need it the rest give them something less. Matter what happen there alway going to be that one powerful DD and powerful tank and that one awesome mage.

---

The problem is that it should not be on the same job/class because it makes all other classes/jobs of that role less useful.

Ninjas could tank, had Dual Wield so could deal a good amount of damage, and had good utility spells as well...they were so versatile that as long as you had NIN you really didn't need much else but a healer and buffer/debuffer.

That problem should be avoided in FFXIV.

One way to do this is to give jobs the same role but for different situations. For example, Dragoons would be damage dealers that are more effective vs. Dragon-type monsters and deal piercing damage (Piercing as in it ignores some defense but does less total damage as a trade-off) while a Monk would also be a damage dealer, but instead of being more effective vs. a certain type of monster, they deal more damage vs. targets with average-or-less defense than a Dragoon. So while a Monk is better for targets that aren't dragons and that have low/average defenses, you would want a Dragoon in your party for Dragon slaying and for killing high-armor targets.

The tricky part is with debuffers though, since putting a debuffer with a Monk in your party could potentially remove the advantage a Dragoon has over the Monk with the defense piercing.

Hopefully they're thinking about this :X There is a lot of stuff they could do with the different types of damage to further diversify classes and jobs that really isn't seen yet.

This thread is too long. I m not sure if anybody can answer me this question :
Is any dev mention job rank? I wonder if we need to rank them up too?. If anybody could quote the dev post, it would be pleasure.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alise

This thread is too long. I m not sure if anybody can answer me this question :
Is any dev mention job rank? I wonder if we need to rank them up too?. If anybody could quote the dev post, it would be pleasure.

---

I forget where it was quoted exactly, but Bayohne I think mentioned that you do not need to rank your job up and that it would be the same rank as whatever class you equip it to.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SuzakuCMX

The problem is that it should not be on the same job/class because it makes all other classes/jobs of that role less useful.

Ninjas could tank, had Dual Wield so could deal a good amount of damage, and had good utility spells as well...they were so versatile that as long as you had NIN you really didn't need much else but a healer and buffer/debuffer.

That problem should be avoided in FFXIV.

---

Agreed. The problem with Ninja was more the fact that it could avoid damage entirely. Dual wield was just weird design in XI, and was made that much more powerful once multi-hit weapons entered the game.

Quote:

---

One way to do this is to give jobs the same role but for different situations. For example, Dragoons would be damage dealers that are more effective vs. Dragon-type monsters and deal piercing damage (Piercing as in it ignores some defense but does less total damage as a trade-off) while a Monk would also be a damage dealer, but instead of being more effective vs. a certain type of monster, they deal more damage vs. targets with average-or-less defense than a Dragoon. So while a Monk is better for targets that aren't dragons and that have low/average defenses, you would want a Dragoon in your party for Dragon slaying and for killing high-armor targets.

The tricky part is with debuffers though, since putting a debuffer with a Monk in your party could potentially remove the advantage a Dragoon has over the Monk with the defense piercing.

---

I know where you're coming from, but this makes damage dealing overly complicated. It shouldn't be so situational, since it devalues player choices and has your job/role chosen for you by the situation. I'm more for just having the damage dealers deal around the same amount of damage, being interchangeable in a party set-up while having their own utility to bring in.

People need to, at the very least, look at it from the perspective of "What weapons should a job be able to use" rather than "what class should advance to which job".

I don't know why SE doesnt just give us free range of all weapons though. And, in this fashion, let any class unlock any job.

Let it sort itself out.

I mean, really.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vesperia

People need to, at the very least, look at it from the perspective of "What weapons should a job be able to use" rather than "what class should advance to which job".

I don't know why SE doesnt just give us free range of all weapons though. And, in this fashion, let any class unlock any job.

Let it sort itself out.

I mean, really.

---

There's a lot of overlap between jobs and weapons though, plus it's not like there is an absolute precedent for weapons :X A lot of the class weapons changed over the games...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SuzakuCMX

There's a lot of overlap between jobs and weapons though, plus it's not like there is an absolute precedent for weapons :X A lot of the class weapons changed over the games...

---

Exactly, so they should just let us have free reign of the weapons. And if a weapon sucks for a specific job... that's natural selection.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vesperia

Exactly, so they should just let us have free reign of the weapons. And if a weapon sucks for a specific job... that's natural selection.

---

I agree but it's probably not going to happen regardless.

"Too much like FFXI" or perhaps "CLASSES MATTER TOO MUCH."

Beginning to feel that the armory system is too limiting when combined with the job system, but we'll see what SE does...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SuzakuCMX

I agree but it's probably not going to happen regardless.

"Too much like FFXI" or perhaps "CLASSES MATTER TOO MUCH."

Beginning to feel that the armory system is too limiting when combined with the job system, but we'll see what SE does...

---

I don't see how anyone could complain how such a system would be too much like FFXI.

In FFXI, jobs had a few choices of weapons, but not all.