Cross-Class Glamour?

I want my summoner to wear a cool armor. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lego3400

Not really, but it's been the classic fantasy argument since before video games.

---

Doesn't seem to be the case in most fantasy settings, though. Fantasy fiction is rife with armour-wearing magic wielders. Paladins, templars, dark knights, battle mages, mage hunters, wraiths, elven warriors, the Black Riders from Lord of the Rings, Witchers, the Dragonborn in Skyrim... the list goes on.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Riepah

Why do people care about "silhouettes" of jobs? We can glamour snowman heads and bikinis, there's already no "Tanks look like X, Healers look like Y" anymore. The weapon is already the only giveaway you can be sure of, I say let everyone glamour everything - the weapon will still tell you their job if you have to be able to tell visually. In PvP, you see their class written over their head anyway, and in group content you see their class symbol. Really doesn't matter what they wear.

And for those people who're hell-bent on having everyone looking as much as their class as possible, all we need is a checkbox in the options that shows or hides other people's cross-class glamour, done.

---

This is literal win for everyone.

I would honestly rather see more male only gear. Females have more glamour options than males....I want bunny ears!!!

If you have some old 1.0 stuff lying around, you can wear chainmail and plate as caster anyway, because those old pieces are glamourable but not class restricted in any way. One of my FC leaders does that on one of his characters :3

Aside from the AF sets...I really don't see a point in the restriction.

I know it's been mentioned before, but I think this would make a lot of people go back and level their untouched jobs (assuming there is the requirement that you have to be able to actually equip the item on the correct job prior to glamouring). Shoooot, I know I'd go back in a heartbeat and finally finish that MNK and WAR I've been putting off for years.


I know it's joked about quite often, but glamour IS a big part of end-game at this point :P This would give people an excuse to go back and level up in old dungeons, or to start farming old content for that piece of gear they never had a use for, but now suddenly do.



Sorry, I kind of repeated myself there D: Too early! Gonna leave it for now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Synrin

I wouldn't go as far as letting for example paladins look like black mages, but I wouldn't mind casters sharing robes. So DoW/DoM separation would be on point. But then again, a lot of robes are already available to all (from a caster point of view), it might just be the colour that isn't the same. And for example the esoterics gear should not be shared as it was designed for each class individually. To be honest, I am fine with the system as it is. /shrug

---

...Right. Because there are absolutely no robes or cowls available to paladins as is. Most pre-50 'mage gear' are All Classes, meaning tanks (and DoW) can already glamour those on. And by separating into DoW/DoM, you're still giving tanks a greater share of glamour, since tanks can equip DoW gear (and thus glamour it), but DoW can't equip/glamour tank gear. And of course DoM get the short end of the stick once more. Yes, neither tank nor DoW can equip DoM things, but like I said, most DoM gear pre-50 is All Classes (aside from specific and dungeon gear). So both tanks and physical dps classes can look like mages. It's just mages that can't look like physical dps or tanks, and physical dps can't look like tanks.

I agree, however, that job-specific gear (i.e. AF1/jobquest, AF1b/myth and AF2/eso) should not be glamourable by other classes/jobs. But outside of that, what's the point of restricting it? The commonly used argument (even by SE) that 'tanks looking like mages' would 'confuse new players' is... pointless, since it can already be done (albeit not high-level or dungeon mage gear). And despite this, I don't see many threads by 'confused new players' demanding that pre-50 robes should be changed to 'DoM' instead of 'all classes'.



I do agree with the stipulation 'level a class/job to be able to glamour on its gear', and think it's reasonable, but I also think that could be more difficult to implement than to simply relax the restrictions (apart from weapon glamours).

I'm all for it. I'd love to be able to glamour whatever I wanted! I often play around with the dressing room and see what I could combine if it was allowed. :D. I've seen bikini wearing playboy bunny tanks and reindeer healers, plus the odd person who tries to look naked, why can't I glamour some bard stuff onto my blm?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zojha

If you have some old 1.0 stuff lying around, you can wear chainmail and plate as caster anyway, because those old pieces are glamourable but not class restricted in any way. One of my FC leaders does that on one of his characters :3

Aside from the AF sets...I really don't see a point in the restriction.

---

Yep. Here is my AST:
http://i858.photobucket.com/albums/a...mark%20IV.jpeg
I get people asking me all the time where I got plate armor that casters could wear.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DiscordiaEris

Yep. Here is my AST:
http://i858.photobucket.com/albums/a...mark%20IV.jpeg
I get people asking me all the time where I got plate armor that casters could wear.

---

The one regret of mine is I had tossed out a bunch of dated gear at the launch of ARR. I really have no idea as I tend to keep a ton of random armor. :(