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

[Sephr]

I think it'll be like this, I'm going to use Conjurer and White Mage as an example:

- You rank up Conjurer to R30 (for instance) and you unlock a quest that allows you to get the specialization White Mage. You do the quest, get the reward, and equip the specialization. This specialization will still keep you as a conjurer specialized as a white mage, all this means is that you will still be R30. However what this will do is limit certain aspects while highlighting other aspects of the class that will help with content much more difficult without specilization.

- The specialization will highlight magic potency for example that will allow you to heal better. For Paladins it can highlight Defense for instance amongst other things. And so on and so forth for other jobs. The specialization will also allow you to obtain "abilities that are quested for" that is why I concluded that you wont unlock an "advanced class" and rank it up from 1 again...that and because they said don't think of them as advanced classes.

- I think this is a great idea because it'll allow for a lot of versatility in solo and light party play as they put it, and heavy party play or "more challenging and more rewarding" party play. This tells me things like Behests and leves will pretty much go untouched or will be tweaked a little to accommodate but they will remain as accessible as they are today however future party content aimed at heavy party play will require role specializations that will need you to have that extra umph in magic potency to heal better or that extra umph in defense to rank better. I think if they can separate the two and it seems like they will, they can give people the best of both worlds.

I was less trying to put my ideas for what I'd like across, and more trying to analyse what was actually written in the blueprint. It would be neat that you could put them across all classes (although would be much more complex to balance assuming each job got their own active skills), but it just doesn't appear to be worded that way.

They mention 'corresponding' classes to the jobs, aka. the class that it is linked with.

Furthermore what I was trying to say about advanced classes is that I think we've misinterpreted it. Them saying they dont want people to think of them as advanced classes has been misread as 'They're totally seperate from classes', whereas I think they were trying to say 'Whilst they are extensions of the current classes, we don't want people to see them as superior to the classes in-game, merely a side-step for different use.'

EDIT: The arguement that a paladin would suck with a polearm or whatever is redundant because we don't actually have skill levels in weapons outside of the class level. This means if they DID spread specialisations across classes, they'd probably be equally proficient in all weapons.