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

[Sorel]

Edit: Also, how come no one's commented on the brief reanalysis of what we've been told I did earlier (other than the guys that agreed)? It's all very well arguing over which system is better, but do you not think what was *actually written* was somewhat conclusive?

If you you give me a link I'll look it over for you, but I don't honestly recall the post you are referring to.

[Sephr]

If you you give me a link I'll look it over for you, but I don't honestly recall the post you are referring to.

Yeah fair enough, thread's moving pretty quick.

http://forum.square-enix.com/ffxiv/t...l=1#post141275

(not sure if that'll work or not! It's #396 anyway)

Just was trying to really establish what the point they were trying to get across in that text was, being as I think it might've been misunderstood. They say something like "We don't want people to think of them as advanced classes" as opposed to outright saying something like "These are seperate from classes". It's more about the perception they don't want people to get from the fact that they'll be stronger than their base class at certain things. That's what I take from it anyway.

[Cairdeas]

Yeah fair enough, thread's moving pretty quick.

http://forum.square-enix.com/ffxiv/t...l=1#post141275

(not sure if that'll work or not! It's #396 anyway)

Just was trying to really establish what the point they were trying to get across in that text was, being as I think it might've been misunderstood. They say something like "We don't want people to think of them as advanced classes" as opposed to outright saying something like "These are seperate from classes". It's more about the perception they don't want people to get from the fact that they'll be stronger than their base class at certain things. That's what I take from it anyway.

Most of us understand what it means.

Jobs are Playstyles/Roles not Classes.

IE.

A Thief is a Subverter. They attack from behind dealing excessive damage, steal items, and strip enmity and other effects from monsters.

That Role isn't lended directly to any weapon though. Any weapon right now can perform that role if they want. But if the job system pidgeonholes you into a weapon then you no longer are designing your character about how you want to perform your role (Pick up an axe, equip subversion skills, become a subverter) Your are saying "I'm a subverter and all my other choices are set for me." Which is boring.

I'd rather we see it as more like an evolution of the Subjob system. Your subjob in FFXI helped modify your main job to perform certain roles.

A Warrior/Thief was a Subverter. They dealt massive spike damage, stripped monsters of the def/str/etc with weapon skills, etc.

So to do the same thing in FFXIV we should be able to take Marauder which is our main identifier. Attach any Job to it as our modifier to adjust that job to perform the role we want.

Marauder / Thief then becomes the same as a Warrior/Thief from FFXI. You can recreate your character easily if that is your choice.

A Gladiator / Red Mage is a hybrid melee fighter that forces elemental stats into his weapons for extended damage dealing, but can assist others with heals and minor buffs.

A Lancer / White Mage is a holy fighter that uses holy spells and his lance to deal damage and single target cure spells to assist his party when necessary. (Reflecting on a Dragoon/White Mage from XI, or Holy Dragoon from past FF Games.)

This would give players more freedom to design their characters but still fill a specific role which is all the job system was supposed to do.

Once you have the Role set the weapon is modified to reflect that. It doesn't matter if you have a wand, staff, axe, or sword equipped. A White Mage will always be a Holy Magic and Healing Magic user.

A Thief will always be a Subverter.
A Warrior will always be a pure front line damage dealer.
A Dragoon will always be someone who uses Jumps to manage hate and assist in dealing damage.

A jobs weapon doesn't matter because it can do its role with any weapon. It just needs to be able to do its role.

[Sephr]

Most of us understand what it means.

(How? Do you have more information than everyone else?)

Jobs are Playstyles/Roles not Classes.

Still trying to establish your opinion as fact, and rally the troops behind you? Part of this mighty 'agenda'? I didn't say roles weren't playstyles. What I said was, by analysing what's actually been said in the text (talking about the class that corresponds to the job role being used to unlock it, corresponding meaning, being linked to), it would appear that classes are tied to specific roles.

Don't get me wrong, your idea sounds lovely (although fails to take stats into account really, and also fails to account for the fact that we're getting job-specific gear, meaning that a Black mage is going to be getting a black mage robe. But yeah he could totally be a lancer.) but it just doesn't seem like what they were trying to put across in the text.

You also pretty much seem to be working on the assumption that you're not speculating, that your idea has enough gravity to be right, and that pretty means you can gloss over the points I raised and ignore them?

[Cairdeas]

Still trying to establish your opinion as fact, and rally the troops behind you? Part of this mighty 'agenda'? I didn't say roles weren't playstyles. What I said was, by analysing what's actually been said in the text (talking about the class that corresponds to the job role being used to unlock it, corresponding meaning, being linked to), it would appear that classes are tied to specific roles.

Don't get me wrong, your idea sounds lovely (although fails to take stats into account really, and also fails to account for the fact that we're getting job-specific gear, meaning that a Black mage is going to be getting a black mage robe. But yeah he could totally be a lancer.) but it just doesn't seem like what they were trying to put across in the text.

You also pretty much seem to be working on the assumption that you're not speculating, that your idea has enough gravity to be right, and that pretty means you can gloss over the points I raised and ignore them?

I'm not saying how the game is going to work I'm saying how I WANT it to work. There is a difference and i think thats what people keep confusing.

We know jobs are playstyle/roles its in the writeup from Matsui. They are not Classes, Advanced Classes, or some other extention.

Though to be honest the only reason to specify explicitly "Jobs are not advanced classes" points to that they shouldn't be considered locked to a weapon. If they were locked to a weapon you could just consider them an advanced class.

[Sorel]

Though to be honest the only reason to specify explicitly "Jobs are not advanced classes" points to that they shouldn't be considered locked to a weapon. If they were locked to a weapon you could just consider them an advanced class.

That doesn't necessarily follow. It could very well be the case. But the conclusion in that sentence doesn't have enough facts to support it outright.

Just saying.

[Cairdeas]

That doesn't necessarily follow. It could very well be the case. But the conclusion in that sentence doesn't have enough facts to support it outright.

Just saying.

Well Lets just break it down.

If Paladin can only ever equip swords as their weapon, why should you do anything but say its an Advanced Class of Gladiator. Why would they Explicitly tell us not to consider them Advanced Classes unless there was nothing tying them to the class that unlocks them except that that class unlocks them?

If this is the Case though and a Single Job is locked to a Single Class. Its nothing more then the RO Multi Tiered Class System with different nomenclature. And thats something I do not want.