Just like FFXI, make all Artifact armor wearable by all classes

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Deveryn

If anything's a bad joke, it's these threads constantly asking for what they can't or won't deliver. You can point to your favorite example, but it's always a lvl all job, where the other stuff has actual stats. That's enough for me to accept that it's outside the realm of possibility, but oh "that game did it and programming is a magic of infinite possibilities, so we must be able to have x" :rolleyes:

---

Can you clarify what you mean? I'm not sure I understand where stats come into play in regards to the glamour system.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ZephyrMenodora

Exactly what I've been saying. Love the person you responded to's "slippery slope" of letting people use some glamours, so must open the floodgates to EVERYTHING.

This game always had restrictions on glamours, and for various reasons.

Some gear is race-specific.
Some gear is gender-specific.
Some gear is job-specific.
Some gear is armor weight class specific.
Some gear is grand-company specific.

They made some concessions here and there but they can still draw the line where they want. And of course, people can still seek out the things they can't wear whenever and wherever they want and make threads like this *shrug*.

---

For the gender-specific gear, several were updated to allow for both genders by popular demand. The same could be done for racial gear if there's enough demand. But ultimately it makes sense for them to be restricted if there's no game model for all races or genders. That's a technical issue that can't be easily addressed by just altering a flag on the item.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ty_taurus

First of all, none of the boots I chose actually are covered by the bodywear, and the last two are especially prominent in those designs. If these pieces of equipment are going to be subjected to the same standard of "only one job can wear them because they're too heavily linked to job identity" then they also should be as definable as your standard white robe with red accents, or red pirate attire. If you were as confident as you sound on the job identity argument, you should feel confident in identifying these boots without needing to deflect. If you cannot identify which jobs the boots belong to, then I see no reason for them to have the restrictions you claim will ruin this vague sense of identity you're fighting for, because you apparently wouldn't even be able to identify them if someone actually wore them on the "wrong" job.

Also, as someone posted above, you can already make your WAR look like a BLM if you choose to. All you're doing is gatekeeping.

---

Yawn. Your argument remains weak and you didn't address my point at all. You picked purposely obscure pieces that while complete a look, are not the primary component of it. Try again with a Paladin's shining breastplate. A Summoner's Horn. A White Mages robe. A Dragoon's helm.

Be fair, and keep the outfits acutally together and not photos of icons from the inventory screen. What class is this?

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/96/84...9e87a303df.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ty_taurus

Vivi Hats that WARs can already wear:

Exhibit A
Exhibit B
Exhibit C
Exhibit D
Exhibit E

Should I keep going? There's more. All you're arguing for is gatekeeping certain pieces of gear to prevent players from dressing their character in ways they can already do. Maybe someone likes the details on one hat more than the other. Saying they aren't allowed to have that because you want to hold onto a self-affirmed sense of job identity is selfish.

---

As I said, you have enough options already. Keep some stuff job specific. Call it gatekeeping. lol The buzzword to end all buzzwords.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Payadopa

As I said, you have enough options already. Keep some stuff job specific. Call it gatekeeping. lol The buzzword to end all buzzwords.

---

Nope, unlock everything please. Theres some pieces from artifact gear that would go well with a couple of job glams c:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Deveryn

If anything's a bad joke, it's these threads constantly asking for what they can't or won't deliver. You can point to your favorite example, but it's always a lvl all job, where the other stuff has actual stats. That's enough for me to accept that it's outside the realm of possibility, but oh "that game did it and programming is a magic of infinite possibilities, so we must be able to have x" :rolleyes:

---

They actually can do it. They just don’t do it but do everything they can to contradict themselves with the «preserve job identity» while having clothing glams for Fending/Maiming and heavy armor glams for the others, not speaking of the usual goofy glams.

It’s right to make these threads, similar to housing, because it’s just bad design decisions and the solutions are not super complex either.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ZephyrMenodora

Yawn. Your argument remains weak and you didn't address my point at all. You picked purposely obscure pieces that while complete a look, are not the primary component of it. Try again with a Paladin's shining breastplate. A Summoner's Horn. A White Mages robe. A Dragoon's helm.

Be fair, and keep the outfits acutally together and not photos of icons from the inventory screen. What class is this?

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/96/84...9e87a303df.jpg

---

Let’s play your game, and note I’m not even trying much.

What’s the job here ?

https://i.imgur.com/KHyLq09.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/VI9gxss.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/7thTJ7C.jpg

You call others’ arguments «weak» while yours doesn’t even stand on its legs…
And there are many other pieces of gear aswell, Gaia’s hammer on the cash shop is another example, where’s your job identity there ?? There’s nothing «obscure» about it.

Just look at the latest 90 dungeon, they literally just swapped the OG sets between jobs, did a quick recolor and called it a day. Where’s your job identity again ? Ah right, only when it suits you while everyone is already running healers with heavy armors and tanks with Beach outfits. There would be 0 genuine issues with removing job gear restrictions for glamour purposes only.

Lots of bad faith from the nay sayers. Some honesty wouldn’t hurt.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SeiyaSoiya

It's not just in ffxi, it's a tradition in ff games since time immemorial

The moment you mastered a job by acquiring the required JP, you could wear the outfit of another job while using the abilities and actions of the job you mastered

---

I haven't read the entire thread, but wanted to touch on this.

I see people make claims like this surprisingly often, but I always wonder, which games allow this to happen? Only a few of them actually have job systems that you can change the jobs of the party members, and even then, I can't think of any of them that let you do this other than FFV and ONLY when you're the freelancer job.

Which games actually let you do this, if it's such a "since time immemorial" sort of thing? Not being snarky, I'd actually like to be informed on this.

Definitely not 1 and 2
I didn't play 3
4 each character had their own unique job
5 sort of (as explained above)
6 each character had their own unique job
didn't play 7 but I don't think it had a job system?
I don't remember a job system in 8
didn't play 9
10 didn't have a job and the only difference between each character was their weapon and where they started on the grid
didn't play 11
12 didn't originally have a job system and everyone could equip anything as long as you spent the LP on the grid, Zodiac added a job system but you were stuck with the two jobs you choose for each character
13 I hated too much to care about it and it's too late in the series to count as "time immemorial"
15 again too late in the series to count as "time immemorial" and... didn't have a job system.

Final Fantasy Tactics maybe? I didn't play enough of it to be able to know if this happens
FFTA and A2 definitely had a job system that did not do this

So how exactly is this a "time immemorial" thing?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by True-to-Caesar

snip

---

I... don't think this is quite the gotcha you think it is. In fact, it seems like you missed the point the person you replied to was making, considering that poster was arguing for the job identity of artifact gear and you're arguing for job identity of... job-less gear? If anything, your argument works for unlocking all non-artifact gear for glams for all jobs, which IMO they absolutely should, but leave artifact gear alone.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zebraoracle

I haven't read the entire thread, but wanted to touch on this.

I see people make claims like this surprisingly often, but I always wonder, which games allow this to happen? Only a few of them actually have job systems that you can change the jobs of the party members, and even then, I can't think of any of them that let you do this other than FFV and ONLY when you're the freelancer job.

Which games actually let you do this, if it's such a "since time immemorial" sort of thing? Not being snarky, I'd actually like to be informed on this.

Definitely not 1 and 2
I didn't play 3
4 each character had their own unique job
5 sort of (as explained above)
6 each character had their own unique job
didn't play 7 but I don't think it had a job system?
I don't remember a job system in 8
didn't play 9
10 didn't have a job and the only difference between each character was their weapon and where they started on the grid
didn't play 11
12 didn't originally have a job system and everyone could equip anything as long as you spent the LP on the grid, Zodiac added a job system but you were stuck with the two jobs you choose for each character
13 I hated too much to care about it and it's too late in the series to count as "time immemorial"
15 again too late in the series to count as "time immemorial" and... didn't have a job system.

Final Fantasy Tactics maybe? I didn't play enough of it to be able to know if this happens
FFTA and A2 definitely had a job system that did not do this

So how exactly is this a "time immemorial" thing?

---

Final Fantasy V, once you master that job all of its bonuses and abilities can be used by the base "Freelancer" job. Which allows also allows you to wear any armor

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Atelier-Bagur

Final Fantasy V, once you master that job all of its bonuses and abilities can be used by the base "Freelancer" job. Which allows also allows you to wear any armor

---

Which is exactly what I said. One game that has limitations to boot, to me, doesn't really qualify something as being "since time immemorial"? I dunno, seems like stretching a point to make an argument for something.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zebraoracle

I... don't think this is quite the gotcha you think it is. In fact, it seems like you missed the point the person you replied to was making, considering that poster was arguing for the job identity of artifact gear and you're arguing for job identity of... job-less gear? If anything, your argument works for unlocking all non-artifact gear for glams for all jobs, which IMO they absolutely should, but leave artifact gear alone.

---

What kind of cherry picking is this? Have all armor glam unlocked minus artifact gear? No, especially artifact gear, Ive already stated this multiple times but many of the artifact gear pieces can also go well with other jobs, just like every other gear piece in this game. You do realize the whole point for glam unlock is actually more in favor for people to fully customize their fantasy lore friendly glams more so than meme glams which are nothing but filled with modern, goofy gear pieces that already exist in this game?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Atelier-Bagur

What kind of cherry picking is this? Have all armor glam unlocked minus artifact gear? No, especially artifact gear, Ive already stated this multiple times but many of the artifact gear pieces can also go well with other jobs, just like every other gear piece in this game. You do realize the whole point for glam unlock is actually more in favor for people to fully customize their fantasy lore friendly glams more so than meme glams which are nothing but filled with modern, goofy gear pieces that already exist in this game?

---

I don't even know where I cherry picked, as you said. I have no issue whatsoever with any non-AF gear being available for whatever job to create whatever look, I personally view the AF gear as special, like the job's weapons, and I personally would prefer them to be left job restricted. If this irritates you so much, which it apparently does judging by how aggro you got over it, I'd suggest you take a step back from the forum for a minute.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zebraoracle

I don't even know where I cherry picked, as you said. I have no issue whatsoever with any non-AF gear being available for whatever job to create whatever look, I personally view the AF gear as special, like the job's weapons, and I personally would prefer them to be left job restricted. If this irritates you so much, which it apparently does judging by how aggro you got over it, I'd suggest you take a step back from the forum for a minute.

---

Im not irritated, I just dont necessarily agree with your stance because you allow almost everything....cept this one thing? Even though the whole argument is that unique class fantasy has already thrown out the window with a lot of in-game armors anyway. Your point makes no sense really.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Atelier-Bagur

Im not irritated, I just dont necessarily agree with your stance because you allow almost everything....cept this one thing? Even though the whole argument is that unique class fantasy has already thrown out the window with a lot of in-game armors anyway. Your point makes no sense really.

---

You do realize starting out with "You're cherrypicking" and "what kind of argument is this? it makes no sense!" makes you look aggressive, yes?

You could have just asked "Wait, why do you support removing the lock if job identity isn't an issue, but you keep the lock on the AF gear?"

And he just told you as much. It's not that complicated when you actually stop and read:

Quote:

---

I personally view the AF gear as special, like the job's weapons, and I personally would prefer them to be left job restricted

---

As in, the other gear has no meaning to the class or role, it doesn't HAVE to be locked.

AF gear, on the other hand, is there to specifically represent that class or role, and thus he prefers it locked.

It's not cherrypicking. He stated why on the post you just quoted. His point only doesn't make sense to you. Whether you agree with it or not though? That's entirely up to you, but that doesn't mean he's wrong. Just means you disagree, have different opinions on the matter and different outlooks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Atelier-Bagur

Im not irritated, I just dont necessarily agree with your stance because you allow almost everything....cept this one thing? Even though the whole argument is that unique class fantasy has already thrown out the window with a lot of in-game armors anyway. Your point makes no sense really.

---

If you're not irritated then okay, but boy howdy you came across pretty aggro and I was completely caught by surprise because I didn't think I said anything that warranted such a response. ANYWAYS

I understand what y'all are arguing for. My point is, like I said, I view the AF gear as a very small set of special gear that I personally like being job restricted because it literally carries the look and essence of a specific job. There being other options in the vast sea of options that "throw class fantasy out the window" doesn't suddenly make the AF pieces not carry job identity. In fact, I'm ALL FOR these other armor sets for people that want other sort of themes (ie I like going for a more traditional cleric look for my white mage glam, which the white mage AF gear does NOT bring, but I'm able to enact with the radiant healing chestpiece). I'm ALL FOR options for everyone, EXCEPT in this one very niche, specialized circumstance.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zebraoracle

I... don't think this is quite the gotcha you think it is. In fact, it seems like you missed the point the person you replied to was making, considering that poster was arguing for the job identity of artifact gear and you're arguing for job identity of... job-less gear? If anything, your argument works for unlocking all non-artifact gear for glams for all jobs, which IMO they absolutely should, but leave artifact gear alone.

---

It wasn't indeed, but the mindless upvote brigade for people who want no restrictions on gear showed up without any critical thinking whatsoever lol.

Fortunately the devs seem to appreciate the sanctity of Artifact gear, so I have little fear that fingers typing into the wind will change much here.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Midareyukki

You do realize starting out with "You're cherrypicking" and "what kind of argument is this? it makes no sense!" makes you look aggressive, yes?

You could have just asked "Wait, why do you support removing the lock if job identity isn't an issue, but you keep the lock on the AF gear?"

And he just told you as much. It's not that complicated when you actually stop and read:


As in, the other gear has no meaning to the class or role, it doesn't HAVE to be locked.

AF gear, on the other hand, is there to specifically represent that class or role, and thus he prefers it locked.

It's not cherrypicking. He stated why on the post you just quoted. His point only doesn't make sense to you. Whether you agree with it or not though? That's entirely up to you, but that doesn't mean he's wrong. Just means you disagree, have different opinions on the matter and different outlooks.

---

You do realize we're all talking in text and its never fully known the context and tone behind somebody's post without hearing it right? Its not my fault if you somehow mistake somebody's post into something else. Heck Ive even made a joke post about this sort of thing with another poster on another thread highlighting this issue.

Anyway Ive already read what was said but that still doesnt necessarily make his points good. AF indeed is based on the specific role but if we're trying to cement the argument for lifting glamour restriction we cant just decide to lock these specific sets away from it, since the whole basis of the debate is that many glamour pieces can work well with building your own specific job glamours. Its just being annoying at this point if they do it like that, and I know I'm not the only one who feels this is the case with some pieces in AF armors that could work well with other jobs. This argument is an all or nothing deal, so we're treating it as such. So yes, indeed he is cherry picking and in my opinion, I feel its the wrong mindset to have in a MMO where people always strive for allowing more options for people available.

This argument can be turned against Hroths like yourselves too. How do you feel when people start saying things like "Oh Hroths should have all these hairstyles.....except these ones because they're tied to that race somehow". Same thing here

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Atelier-Bagur

You do realize we're all talking in text and its never fully known the context and tone behind somebody's post without hearing it right? Its not my fault if you somehow mistake somebody's post into something else. Heck Ive even made a joke post about this sort of thing with another poster on another thread highlighting this issue.

Anyway Ive already read what was said but that still doesnt necessarily make his points good. AF indeed is based on the specific role but if we're trying to cement the argument for lifting glamour restriction we cant just decide to lock these specific sets away from it, since the whole basis of the debate is that many glamour pieces can work well with building your own specific job glamours. Its just being annoying at this point if they do it like that, and I know I'm not the only one who feels this is the case with some pieces in AF armors that could work well with other jobs. This argument is an all or nothing deal, so we're treating it as such. So yes, indeed he is cherry picking and in my opinion, I feel its the wrong mindset to have in a MMO where people always strive for allowing more options for people available.

This argument can be turned against Hroths like yourselves too. How do you feel when people start saying things like "Oh Hroths should have all these hairstyles.....except these ones because they're tied to that race somehow". Same thing here

---

...so uh... 2 things off the bat

1 - Why are you this salty that someone called you out that you're willing to pick on a completely different subject just to provoke them? ...are you serious? Literally what's the stick that's jammed up your behind, because I'd call a proctologist by this point... I refuse to engage in your silly comparison. Please grow up. Sure, that topic may be childish to you and all that, but you're right now acting even worse.

2 - If you can acknowledge that this is text, then I reiterate:

Quote:

---

You do realize starting out with "You're cherrypicking" and "what kind of argument is this? it makes no sense!" makes you look aggressive, yes?
You could have just asked "Wait, why do you support removing the lock if job identity isn't an issue, but you keep the lock on the AF gear?"

---

You cannot now pikachu-face people and be like "I wasn't irritated", when it's coming across as you being irritated. Make up your mind and take your own advice, please.
I'm simply telling you "Hey, this is why people are thinking you're irritated, consider another avenue". But no, you decide to be so salty and bring up that topic...

Look at yourself for a minute here. No one was against you. I certainly wasn't, I was just saying "Ok, calm down, the point is this thing he said, and this is what he meant. Also if you don't realize you're coming across as agitated, then here is where you're getting people to think you are". You are proving to me that no, you are very much irritated. One can tell from how needlessly caustic you're being.

As for the actual topic...

No one ever said his points had to be good. You disagree? Well, say you disagree. And so far you have stated it, rather plainly. But you're the one throwing accusations and not letting people speak. If you're going to disagree, at least be rational about it and try to understand where they're coming from. Without being caustic. Yes?

I'll just see myself out before I make a Roegadyn turn Hellsguard for saying his writing is coming across as aggressive again...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Midareyukki

I'll just see myself out before I make a Roegadyn turn Hellsguard for saying his writing is coming across as aggressive again...

---

And what makes you the moral arbitor jumping in a 1 vs 3? Let me guess, your cute discord group you guys got going? Lmao. Better see yourself off.

Roe doesn't come across as aggressive one bit, especially considering he's trying to explain his position against multiple naysayers that are not even trying to argue beyond 'lawl na, SE will never do this'.

Let's derail this topic as well, like you guys usually do. Whatever.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Midareyukki

...so uh... 2 things off the bat

1 - Why are you this salty that someone called you out that you're willing to pick on a completely different subject just to provoke them? ...are you serious? Literally what's the stick that's jammed up your behind, because I'd call a proctologist by this point... I refuse to engage in your silly comparison. Please grow up. Sure, that topic may be childish to you and all that, but you're right now acting even worse.

2 - If you can acknowledge that this is text, then I reiterate:


You cannot now pikachu-face people and be like "I wasn't irritated", when it's coming across as you being irritated. Make up your mind and take your own advice, please.
I'm simply telling you "Hey, this is why people are thinking you're irritated, consider another avenue". But no, you decide to be so salty and bring up that topic...

Look at yourself for a minute here. No one was against you. I certainly wasn't, I was just saying "Ok, calm down, the point is this thing he said, and this is what he meant. Also if you don't realize you're coming across as agitated, then here is where you're getting people to think you are". You are proving to me that no, you are very much irritated. One can tell from how needlessly caustic you're being.

As for the actual topic...

No one ever said his points had to be good. You disagree? Well, say you disagree. And so far you have stated it, rather plainly. But you're the one throwing accusations and not letting people speak. If you're going to disagree, at least be rational about it and try to understand where they're coming from. Without being caustic. Yes?

---

I give up at this point. You clearly have missed everything Ive said and only care to focus on how one says things rather than actually discussing the topic.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hoehenflug

And what makes you the moral arbitor jumping in a 1 vs 3? Let me guess, your cute discord group you guys got going? Lmao. Better see yourself off.

---

Me and my massive high horse are eating rather well, thanks.

This is for everyone...

https://youtu.be/AJAwOlEz5ws

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Atelier-Bagur

You do realize we're all talking in text and its never fully known the context and tone behind somebody's post without hearing it right? Its not my fault if you somehow mistake somebody's post into something else. Heck Ive even made a joke post about this sort of thing with another poster on another thread highlighting this issue.

Anyway Ive already read what was said but that still doesnt necessarily make his points good. AF indeed is based on the specific role but if we're trying to cement the argument for lifting glamour restriction we cant just decide to lock these specific sets away from it, since the whole basis of the debate is that many glamour pieces can work well with building your own specific job glamours. Its just being annoying at this point if they do it like that, and I know I'm not the only one who feels this is the case with some pieces in AF armors that could work well with other jobs. This argument is an all or nothing deal, so we're treating it as such. So yes, indeed he is cherry picking and in my opinion, I feel its the wrong mindset to have in a MMO where people always strive for allowing more options for people available.

This argument can be turned against Hroths like yourselves too. How do you feel when people start saying things like "Oh Hroths should have all these hairstyles.....except these ones because they're tied to that race somehow". Same thing here

---

I mean, I'm all for racial specific hair and other cosmetic options that add more customization to add uniqueness to each race, as long as the available options, hair for this example, give a decent amount of options.

This is just my preference, man. If you disagree that's fine, we can disagree with each other and have our own preferences. I don't see why this ABSOLUTEY HAS to be an all or nothing subject. My reasoning makes sense to me, and if it doesn't to you then oh well, I think we'll both survive.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hoehenflug

And what makes you the moral arbitor jumping in a 1 vs 3? Let me guess, your cute discord group you guys got going? Lmao. Better see yourself off.

Roe doesn't come across as aggressive one bit, especially considering he's trying to explain his position against multiple naysayers that are not even trying to argue beyond 'lawl na, SE will never do this'.

Let's derail this topic as well, like you guys usually do. Whatever.

---

You mean the discord that's pretty open for people to join so we can have fun outside of the board and not be limited by the stupid message limit? Lol this isn't the gotcha you think it is, man. It's not some "super secret club". But go off, I guess, accusing people of derailing the thread when you're doing it yourself.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hoehenflug

And what makes you the moral arbitor jumping in a 1 vs 3? Let me guess, your cute discord group you guys got going? Lmao. Better see yourself off.

Roe doesn't come across as aggressive one bit, especially considering he's trying to explain his position against multiple naysayers that are not even trying to argue beyond 'lawl na, SE will never do this'.

Let's derail this topic as well, like you guys usually do. Whatever.

---

Well, some of us didn't stop at "lawl na SE will never do this." We are contemplating the reasons WHY SE made this the policy, and why they will never do this.

But, the "gimme" crowd can't stop and see other people's points of view, including that of the devs in why they made these exclusive to begin with. So, they deduce the entire discussion so they can dismiss arguments and points they disagree with without having to display an ounce of reasoning or thought like you just did here.

Whatever man. I couldn't care less about y'alls highschool drama in every single topic.

So scarrrry. Booooooo.

https://img2.finalfantasyxiv.com/acc...3f71f97991.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ZephyrMenodora

But, the "gimme" crowd can't stop and see other people's points of view

---

I'm not sure this is a point you can actually make, given that the argument you're making is also a "gimme", but one revolving around "gimme immersion/strict job fantasy at the cost of player expression"

This is something that falls into "If you don't like it, don't do it"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LordMcMutton

I'm not sure this is a point you can actually make, given that the argument you're making is also a "gimme", but one revolving around "gimme immersion/strict job fantasy at the cost of player expression"

This is something that falls into "If you don't like it, don't do it"

---

I'm not asking for anything - I like the game as it is now and support the Devs on the work they already completed and decisions they already made on this topic. I'm not asking the Devs to do work for my request, and I'm not looking to take something away from others to cater to my whims and demands - exclusivity on a small number of artifact armor sets.

I also completely understand the request, I just disagree. I can also empathize, something the other side appears unable to do - given I often wanted to glam a Paladin-only crown on my other tanks. I still think exclusive artifact gear trumps my or anyone's desire to glam anything and everything they want to whatever piece of gear they want.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ZephyrMenodora

Well, some of us didn't stop at "lawl na SE will never do this." We are contemplating the reasons WHY SE made this the policy, and why they will never do this.

But, the "gimme" crowd can't stop and see other people's points of view, including that of the devs in why they made these exclusive to begin with. So, they deduce the entire discussion so they can dismiss arguments and points they disagree with without having to display an ounce of reasoning or thought like you just did here.

---

If you're going to bash people for their debate tactics, I recommend not claiming to know what SE will do with their game. Speculation is all fine and dandy, but they very well may go the way of XI and eventually unlock all items for glamour. We simply don't know.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Skivvy

If you're going to bash people for their debate tactics, I recommend not claiming to know what SE will do with their game. Speculation is all fine and dandy, but they very well may go the way of XI and eventually unlock all items for glamour. We simply don't know.

---

Someone already stated that Yoshi P answered this question and said this won't change. I don't know why you don't believe him other than wishful thinking and "it could happen." It's also been almost a decade of these being locked...so...it's safe to assume it's not changing between the two.

Also, I never said I knew what SE would do - so maybe you confused me with someone else. I almost never speak in absolutes. That said, given Yoshi P spoke on the topic and nothing has changed, it's safe to assume nothing will until he states otherwise.

When you have no arguments left, attack the individual to belittle their reasoning, a pathetic attempt to make it void and shut the debate because you have nothing to argue against it besides a selfish reason.

Like hunted animals, very predictable.

« muh job fantasy, SE will never betray us fools! »

Meanwhile in Square Enix’s cash shop

https://i.imgur.com/W0ZMxIX.jpg

Like, facts right in front of you and still in denial. It’s actually impressive to see people who can’t even admit their argument is contradicted by everything your SE does.

I wonder what’s next.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by True-to-Caesar

When you have no arguments left, attack the individual to belittle their reasoning, a pathetic attempt to make it void and shut the debate because you have nothing to argue against it besides a selfish reason.

Like hunted animals, very predictable.

« muh job fantasy, SE will never betray us fools! »

Meanwhile in Square Enix’s cash shop

https://i.imgur.com/W0ZMxIX.jpg

Like, facts right in front of you and still in denial. It’s actually impressive to see people who can’t even admit their argument is contradicted by everything your SE does.

I wonder what’s next.

---

You found yet another argument that has nothing to do with the decision by the devs to keep artifact armor exclusive. It’s almost impressive how you can barge in with anything but the topic and talk like you had an epiphany.

In case it’s hard to understand, which I guess it is for some, this isn’t about forcing jobs to only dress in iconic armors. We already know there are tons of glamours that let people dress however. It’s about keeping some small amount of gear unique to the job it was created for.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ZephyrMenodora

You found yet another argument that has nothing to do with the decision by the devs to keep artifact armor exclusive. It’s almost impressive how you can barge in with anything but the topic and talk like you had an epiphany.

In case it’s hard to understand, which I guess it is for some, this isn’t about forcing jobs to only dress in iconic armors. We already know there are tons of glamours that let people dress however. It’s about keeping some small amount of gear unique to the job it was created for.

---

But do you understand WHY they don’t remove glamour restrictions ? Not only iconic sets but by category (fending, striking etc.).

« Job identity », I ask yet again, where is it now ?

I wouldn’t mind much if they still keep iconic gear as they are (yet you can find gear sets that are very close to job artefact sets, so even that isn’t set in stone), but bloody hell free up the rest. Everything they do contradicts this stance on so called job identity.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by True-to-Caesar

But do you understand WHY they don’t remove glamour restrictions ? Not only iconic sets but by category (fending, striking etc.).

«*Job identity*», I ask yet again, where is it now ?

---

Yes, but you clearly don’t. Lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by True-to-Caesar

When you have no arguments left, attack the individual to belittle their reasoning, a pathetic attempt to make it void and shut the debate because you have nothing to argue against it besides a selfish reason.

Like hunted animals, very predictable.

« muh job fantasy, SE will never betray us fools! »

Meanwhile in Square Enix’s cash shop

https://i.imgur.com/W0ZMxIX.jpg

Like, facts right in front of you and still in denial. It’s actually impressive to see people who can’t even admit their argument is contradicted by everything your SE does.

I wonder what’s next.

---

What facts and what denial? If you had any of the other jobs wielding that, then you'd have an argument. It's not outside the realm of possibility for any of those jobs to wield something that looks like that.

Gaia's story isn't over yet and they're reminding us of that. ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by True-to-Caesar

But do you understand WHY they don’t remove glamour restrictions ? Not only iconic sets but by category (fending, striking etc.).

---

It's all just speculatory, but as I've said in previous threads (because this forum keeps staging the same ten conversations over and over) – starting from the assumption "they must have a reason for keeping everything locked even though the current system doesn't preserve class identity" and I think the most logical scenario is that they want to keep some things class-locked, and either:

A: They do have the power to unlock absolutely everything by turning off the "can you equip this?" check, but don't have the power to selectively keep some things locked down in that case. So if they want to keep artifact gear sacred, then everything else has to be locked down with it.

B: The glamour system (which did not exist at release, but was bolted on later) really is hard-wired to the equip system and cannot be unlocked. The only way to ever unlock things is through all-class replicas.

It's clearly not as simple as them being fine with everything except artifact gear, because they still release things like the PVP sets that are level 1 glamour and still role-locked. And while they do sometimes recycle role-locked sets to new roles, they don't do it for everything, and the more "role identified" they look, the less likely they are to be shuffled.

I do wonder whether it's one person consistently making decisions or if they have had a string of people in the role, each making their own choice about how lenient or strict to be about it.

And then you have glamour gear, which is its own thing again. Do they make it "level 1 all classes" because they're happy about people wearing battle-inappropriate gear into battle, or because they expect it to be used in casual gear situations, and locking it to a specific class wouldn't make sense for (say) only letting you wear your bikini on the beach if you've unlocked dancer class, or something convoluted like that. So it logically has to be level 1, and the no-fine-tuning glamour system means they can't stop you from wearing it elsewhere.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Iscah

B: The glamour system (which did not exist at release, but was bolted on later) really is hard-wired to the equip system and cannot be unlocked. The only way to ever unlock things is through all-class replicas.

---

I find myself repeating this a lot in these threads. Someone else inevitably refers to how they attempted to copy WoW's transmog, but that failed.

Some people seem to think the solution is to make gear all class. That would just make a mess of things. One need look no further than ARR and the gear that exists down there. Many have seen people wearing gear with incorrect stats. It would also cause a problem with looting as you would likely have people needing on gear they can't even use for combat.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by True-to-Caesar

When you have no arguments left, attack the individual to belittle their reasoning, a pathetic attempt to make it void and shut the debate because you have nothing to argue against it besides a selfish reason.

Like hunted animals, very predictable.

« muh job fantasy, SE will never betray us fools! »

Meanwhile in Square Enix’s cash shop

https://i.imgur.com/W0ZMxIX.jpg

Like, facts right in front of you and still in denial. It’s actually impressive to see people who can’t even admit their argument is contradicted by everything your SE does.

I wonder what’s next.

---

When you have no arguments left, make up an imaginary argument in your head and argue against it.

I don't think anyone's denying that non-AF gear doesn't really carry job identity? I feel like you're making up an argument against someone who doesn't exist with this. The entire point is that AF gear DOES carry that job identity, and saying "BUT ALL THIS OTHER GEAR DOESN'T HAVE IT" is irrelevant because *all that other gear isn't AF gear*, which is what this thread is about.

I'm all for it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Deveryn

I find myself repeating this a lot in these threads. Someone else inevitably refers to how they attempted to copy WoW's transmog, but that failed.

Some people seem to think the solution is to make gear all class. That would just make a mess of things. One need look no further than ARR and the gear that exists down there. Many have seen people wearing gear with incorrect stats. It would also cause a problem with looting as you would likely have people needing on gear they can't even use for combat.

---

All-class gear is simply referring to the replicas that get added as a level one glam piece. I don't think I've seen anyone, across all these threads, suggest that the gear itself become functional stat-gear for all classes. We're talking glams.

With XI, all the gear becomes usable as glamour only once you can equip it normally. So as mentioned earlier, in order to use a level 90 PLD body piece as glamour for any job, you have to have your PLD at level 90 first. The gear itself isn't changing. It still retains the stats and role restrictions if you want to equip it as gear, but it's now usuable as a glam piece.

For a visual, this is my THF in XI:
https://i.imgur.com/Dbm2pNx.png

The squares show the gear that I actually have equipped for stats on my THF, which are all pieces that are for that job (e.g. the pillager's cullotes which are being shown), but I'm sporting a WHM glam. The list of items to the right shows all the items my THF can equip for stats/actual gear in white, while the grey items are for other jobs. However, if I wanted to, I could glam any of those grey pieces since I have all the jobs they are for leveled to the appropriate levels.

Now, can that system actually be coded into XIV? Who knows. But you seemed to be arguing against a point that no one asked for, so figured some clarification might help.