Will we EVER be able to glamour gear that we cannot wear???

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Felis

Snip

---

Considering we haven't been told much of anything by Square how the Glamour system works on a system-level, I have no doubts and I can make no assertions.
If, it were simple enough to simply toggle the glamour-ability of an item, which it might be, then you could easily not toggle this ability on the AF armors.
Or, as otherwise suggested, they can very clearly change the restricted classes on items from JOB/CLASS to Disciple of War/Magic, to all class. Adding an ever increasing list of same-model armors for certain classes would just contribute to bloat.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Blood-Aki

the only "argument" here is simply people crying that they cant wear job restricted armor. but want to.

---

Yeah, pretty much.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Blood-Aki

Which will never happen. which is why i said it takes common sense, to know that something like this will never happen.

---

And that's the part of your argument I don't understand. Basically you seem to just be saying "this rule exists so therefore it will never change" despite the fact that this is an MMO, in which rules and content are continually being updated and changed. We don't know whether this particular rule will ever change or not, but it certainly could. It's well within the range of the type of changes SE makes. In fact, the ability to glamour anything was a change they made. There was no glamour system when ARR launched. (I believe it was patch 2.2 that added it.) A future patch could well change how it works, particularly when it comes to details like what restrictions it has.

Now if we were discussing a completely different type of cosmetic system, then such an argument could make sense. For instance, the fact that they've already implemented a system of using one item's appearance to change another item means they're not likely to throw the whole system out to replace it with a system that leaves the items alone but lets us equip two of them at a time, one to our stat slots and one to our cosmetic slots. Some games use a system like that, and some of us might have preferred such a system here, but it's not the path SE took. Changing to it now isn't likely to happen, simply because it would disrupt too much of what they've already put in place.

The current discussion isn't like that example, though. We aren't talking about dropping the whole glamour system in favor of something completely different. We're talking about keeping glamours working basically like they do now, except tweaking one detail, that of which pieces we're allowed to glamour when. That kind of change, especially if it involves a lessening of restrictions, doesn't break anything that works now. Everything we have now would still work and still be relevant. There would simply be a few more options that would also work even though they don't now. That means the current system isn't an argument against it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Blood-Aki

So i do not think everyone understands how it works, or rather, they do NOT want it to work like that

---

And the distinction between those is important. The thread is about the fact that many people do not want it to work like that. We understand the system fine, but want a different system.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Blood-Aki

unless you are admitting this topic is more or less "i want it, damn lore. reasoning, logic"

---

Actually it's mostly about how the current version of the rule ignores lore, reasoning, and logic, and many of us would prefer a system that suits lore. reasoning, and logic better, as well as giving us greater flexibility. So it turned into discussing what sort of rule would be most logical, with some of us saying to preserve the restrictions when it comes to things like Artifact gear, but eliminate them elsewhere, and others saying to allow everything. You're arguing that keeping the rule as-is is the most logical, but so far, your only basis for claiming it's logical seems to be the fact that it's what's currently implemented in the game.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by winny

I hope not.
I think it's eally better to be able to know which job you are at looking at you instead of having to open the box to see your class.
I'm not doing RP at all, but i like the way it is now.

More general stuff, ok, but do not remove specific job gear.

---

Depends on what you consider job-specific. AF/tomestone gear should stay job-specific. Now if you want to glamour the white "of scouting" or something on to your DRG, I don't see why not.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Duelle

Depends on what you consider job-specific. AF/tomestone gear should stay job-specific. Now if you want to glamour the white "of scouting" or something on to your DRG, I don't see why not.

---

No kidding, the day I can glamour a Cashmere Skirt of Healing onto my Summoner, is the day I die happy. Cause honestly lets face it, there is no real logical explanation, outside of what the developers set up and can alter, that something as simply switching one piece of cloth for another, should be restricted.

AF/Lore Specific/GC Realted gear, sure I can understand.
But a damn skirt? Meh <_<

AF/GC gear doesn't need to be an exception. If you don't want to glamour a different AF onto another class, then nothing would be forcing you to do so.

I'd like it if the options were as open as physically possible.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by YeaniNah

yeah like yours is not ... im an electricien ill fix the outlet with an cooking knife. ... OMG how come im dead ...duh
or better. Hey im a builder but i can use any tool to do what i want so hey i'll use a carrot peeler to hammer a nail to the wall ....

---

The amount of stupid in this post is astounding.

I'd love less restrictions on what Job can glamour what, but I also think gear set tied to a specific job - like the AF1, Myth, Red Scrip, and AF2 sets for example - should remain exclusive to that job.

However I think there is a compromise in the form of craftable "replica gear". These "replica sets" would lack certain elements - like fewer spikes on the DRG set replicas, the books on the SCH AF2 replica set, or the scissors and other 'tools of the trade' on WVR replica set - but allow any job or class to wear them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by YeaniNah

why he said she got no logic . when the post dont talk about outfit but gear . And he say in real life he use real life as comparaison .... so if we use a weapon as real life that a tool ..you see many wear normal outfit doing other job but you dont see anyone doing a specifique job using a tool from another type of job ....


saying im stupid when i relate to what he meant that he can do that in real life

---

Since you insist on attempting to equate real life to a fantasy game wear you can fight as a PLD against a dragon while wearing your bra/panties, let me give you an example of my own personal real life that shows just how stupid this argument is:

In my professional life I have been trained in the following:

Infantry
Emergency Medical Technician
Explosives Expert
Engineering

Equipping my rifle did not suddenly make me forget how to treat a broken leg, nor how to disarm that bomb. My uniform actually had very little to do with retaining the skills I had been trained in. As such, bringing up weapons, or tools in your post, is a stupid argument. One which holds no amount of water, in any way shape or form.

So, yes, the amount of stupid in that post was astounding. And that goes for anyone who even attempts that argument.

The argument of "well that class can't wear that" makes even less sense when you consider that, according to game lore, glamouring an item isn't even wearing it-- you're just projecting the image of that item over the armor that you ARE wearing. So there's even less reason as to why you can't project the image of any piece of clothing you want.

*Still waiting for bunny ears*

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Blood-Aki

There is NOTHING to bring to this conversation other then denial. Nor was i being "rude" i simply stated why it can't be done, and i kept getting responses like yours (but less jumping to conclusions) Your assumption is also wrong, It's the same reason why female characters do not have male animations, it's an indentitiy issue. and square wants to keep that.

And i was already "done" with this, but i have to keep correcting mistakes like this. but i'll leave you and all else to this now.

---

You mad bru?

...yes, please, it would be nice to have more options when it comes to glamour. When it comes to customising our character's looks, if certain creation parts (COUGH Au Ra horns to name the most recent/obvious COUGH) are thoroughly lacking in that regard.

Indeed, lore and common sense and logic were all thrown out the window by the devs themselves - even ignoring NPCs, even if I tried I couldn't keep count of how many half naked dragoons and bridesmaid warriors and such I see in pretty much every DF run. Or even in PF or just running back and forth in the cities. Don't even mention the outfits that are somehow suddenly for a different job, just because it's got a new dye.

Indeed, when it's just the looks of a piece of armor or clothing, whether or not the character could actually wear it should be of no importance at all. But if it's something some would like to keep: why not make it so that if the character actually unlocked the appropriate job and attained the appropriate level, they can use the stuff for glamour? They have the training/skill, so why not? A different weapon in hand somehow voids that, or what?

There are so many options here, and honestly we don't have any of that - instead, we have a half-assed, arbitrary restriction system, the application of which is basically a coin-toss. If at least it was consistent, I for one could be more understanding, but as it is, it just needs to go away.

I like the restrictions as they are. You can't wear it? Can't glam it.

That's my opinion on the subject. Now making glamor system less complicated? I'm good with making it easier to use.

No thanks. Classes should have unique looks.

I will be okay with this if it happens as long as job-specific gear stays job specific, though.