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

[Sorel]

Quests to unlock each job will become available once you have reached a certain rank in the corresponding class.
Rather than being advanced versions of classes, we would like players to think of jobs as specialized playing styles optimized for partying.

I think, having read this again, it might actually confirm they are locked to classes. Whilst it might be slightly badly worded, I think they're trying to say that they don't want people to consider these specific roles as superior to the current classes, leavng for example, conjurer to be left redundant in the place of Black mage even in solo situations. These aren't better, they're just alternatives options.

As for having a 'corresponding' class that unlocks the quest (notice it says class, not classes, why would a Thaumaturge not be able to take the quest to unlock Black mage, as well as conjurer? They're both magic casters)

I think it's all there, the wording is just so vague it's hard to pick out the facts.

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.

I think you may be reading too much into the pluralization ... or lack there of. The Japanese language doesn't use plurals at all. So pulling facts out of the presence or non-presence of pluralization in a statement translated from Japanese is somewhat shaky ground to base an argument on. One could do it, but I personally would not.

As for Akihiko Matsui's desire for Jobs not to be considered advanced classes, I believe he was just emphasizing the path they took in regards to what to do about Jobs. Remember the Development Team said a while back that they were contemplating two methods of introducing Jobs into FFXIV. This is Matsui just reiterating which method they are using, I think.

[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.

[Sephr]

I think you may be reading too much into the pluralization ... or lack there of. The Japanese language doesn't use plurals at all. So pulling facts out of the presence or non-presence of pluralization in a statement translated from Japanese is somewhat shaky ground to base an argument on. One could do it, but I personally would not.

As for Akihiko Matsui's desire for Jobs not to be considered advanced classes, I believe he was just emphasizing the path they took in regards to what to do about Jobs. Remember the Development Team said a while back that they were contemplating two methods of introducing Jobs into FFXIV. This is Matsui just reiterating which method they are using, I think.

I see! That's the kind of stuff I was interested in discussing. It'll be interesting to see how it relates to what's implemented, either way.

I do think the way he refers to the classes as corresponding to jobs is interesting still, but bearing what you've said in mind, perhaps it is that it simply requires a certain class (or classes) to unlock.

[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.

[Sorel]

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.

Maybe, as others have proposed, a single class have multiple Jobs that can be associated with it. In that case, Paladin isn't the next evolution of Gladiator, it's one of many choices (Paladin, Dark Knight, Warrior). Now in that light, those Jobs would still be advanced forms of Gladiator. And since Akihiko Matsui stated that Jobs should not be considered Advanced Classes ... what doe he want us to consider them as?

[Cairdeas]

Maybe, as others have proposed, a single class have multiple Jobs that can be associated with it. In that case, Paladin isn't the next evolution of Gladiator, it's one of many choices (Paladin, Dark Knight, Warrior). Now in that light, those Jobs would still be advanced forms of Gladiator. And since Akihiko Matsui stated that Jobs should not be considered Advanced Classes ... what doe he want us to consider them as?

I don't Mean that

Gladiator <-> Paladin
->RedMage

Etch. I know they will have more then one each.

But when Paladin only goes to Gladiator. It is an advanced class.

[Sephr]

I see the logic of what you are saying. I disagree that the balancing would be simpler with the restrictions than without, but I trust you see where I am coming from in my argument even if you do not agree it.

As for Samurai ... using "the each Class gets 2 Job specializations" rule, it would be very easy for the Development Team to add the "Tachi-User" Class, and then have it be able to access the Ninja and Samurai Jobs. That would be fairly clean and simple. No argument there. It would look like this.

Tachi-User:

1. Samurai
2. Ninja

There is still a little trouble with Red Mage, though. Let's say that Fencer (Fencing Blade-User) does get implemented as a Class. Using the 2 Job specialization rule, the Red Mage Job gets assigned to it and some other Job ... say Swashbuckler. So it would look like this.

Fencer:

1. Red Mage
2. Swashbuckler

Looks neat, except that this means the Red Mage Job cannot use Staves, Scepters, or Wands, because as a Job they have been restricted the the Fencer Class. It's doable, but is that what we want?

I can see what you mean yeah, it does somewhat pidgeon-hole you in what you can use. I guess all I could say to support this system in that sense is that the current system does pretty much confine you in the types of weapons you use per class so it's just an extension of that. You could sort of deal with red mage's situation by suggesting job-specific gear as helping deal with its magic stats, and also suggest that Red mage is based more on the red mage of ol' than the FFXI style one. So I guess it would be more about using fencing arts tailored to it (magic-based weapon skills?) and en- spells, as well as some debuffs and cures from the front line.

It's going to be interesting to see how it all turns out! I guess we're at two ends of the spectrum really, where the system our end proposes might be seen as too restrictive (even with the armoury's current spell-distribution and stat-allotment), whereas the other end's might be seen as being overly free (choices to excess, where the balancing of things like a WHM with a lance is a bit redundant)

But when Paladin only goes to Gladiator. It is an advanced class.

Not really, and I think that's the point they were trying to make. It's a branch of skills and acquired traits within the Gladiator (in this case) enabling it to perform the tanking role more effectively.

EDIT: Being an advanced class of gladiator implies it's superior to gladiator and I think that's what they were trying to get away from. By specialising, you gain one thing and lose another. So gladiator would be more versatile and better at soloing still.

[Nuru]

"I want to be a Tank, but I do not want to use a Sword and Shield."
- You Want to be a Paladin that can use any weapon and not just a sword and shield.

"I want to Tank while being an Archer"
- Although it seems abstract, You can have your bow equipped along with your Archer abilities. The Paladin Skills will help you play your role as a Tank.

"Kay thanks."

I believe this would sum up what is going on. Yes, the Archer Tank seems so ridiculous, but it is how free the Job/Class System would be if Cairdeas's suggestion is implemented.

[Sephr]

"I want to be a Tank, but I do not want to use a Sword and Shield."
- You Want to be a Paladin that can use any weapon and not just a sword and shield.

"I want to Tank while being an Archer"
- Although it seems abstract, You can have your bow equipped along with your Archer abilities. The Paladin Skills will help you play your role as a Tank.

"Kay thanks."

I believe this would sum up what is going on. Yes, the Archer Tank seems so ridiculous, but it is how free the Job/Class System would be if Cairdeas's suggestion is implemented.

How would that work with gear/stats though? Would archers be donning full mail sets and just taking hits? Seems like it kills the archetypes classic to FF that people were asking for. (I believe Yoshi even said something like "Jobs - That classic FF system - is returning" or sooomething)