Thief/Ninja looks to be Inbound

[ziddyt]

Except for the part where it's already been proven.

[Exstal]

Except for the part where it's already been proven.

Where?

If you can prove that there is a way to make 1 class into two of the type job role without basically making a new class, you will win.

SCH and SMN don't play the same because they don't do the same thing. One heals. One damages.

[ziddyt]

I think the burden of proof is on you to prove that you know more than the devs do, enough to dictate what they can and cannot do with their game.
Yoshi specifically said they could easily make class skills perform differently for different jobs, giving Dark Knight as an example if it were to branch off of Gladiator (which he also denied would definitely be the case).
Even without that, how can you be so dense that you realize they can make a job utilize entirely different skills from one another without acknowledging they don't have to be different roles. If square can make Scholar a job that focuses mainly on its job abilities, why can't they give Ranger job skills and traits that allow them to focus on those rather than Archer skills. Who's to say that Ranger skills couldn't completely replace half or more of the base Archer rotation?

[Kitru]

Regardless of what a SCH's role is, it is irrelevant to the fact that two jobs based on the same class can have vastly different skills.

Except that it's entirely appropriate to bring up role when discussing second jobs for a class. If SCH was a DPS role, it would play virtually identically to SMN because the two share so many abilities. The only reason that SCH plays differently than SMN is because SCH is a healer and SMN is a DPS. The only major difference in their personal attack options is that SMN has Fester (if SCH were DPS, it would actually have a DPS pet, so the role difference plays an even bigger part if you bring up pets), and the reason that SCH is so different is because it has more than just 1 heal, by necessity.

The same would be true of any new DPS job built off of ARC (or, in fact, any second job that has an identical role to an existing job for its class such as another tank for GLA or healer for CNJ) because jobs only bring 5 abilities whereas classes bring 17-18 abilities and 11 traits. Any theoretical second job for ARC would play so similarly to a BRD that it's pointless to create it, not to mention the balance concerns that would be required (BRD DPS would have to be decreased so that the new job isn't useless which means increasing their support capabilities which means adjusting content and composition to allow for the greater impact of "support").

[Kitru]

If square can make Scholar a job that focuses mainly on its job abilities, why can't they give Ranger job skills and traits that allow them to focus on those rather than Archer skills. Who's to say that Ranger skills couldn't completely replace half or more of the base Archer rotation?

Those are completely separate concerns. SCH abilities are not replacing existing capacities that ACN has; they're providing the missing functionality that ACN requires to become a healer. For RNG to be justifiably built off of ARC, it would need 5 abilities that completely alter how BRD (re: ARC) does DPS without making it completely broken, which is going to be hard as hell given that the BRD rotation is a whopping 4 abilities with a crapton of off-GCDs.

[Exstal]

I think the burden of proof is on you to prove that you know more than the devs do, enough to dictate what they can and cannot do with their game.

I've never said that they couldn't. It's inefficient to do such a thing when you can just make an entirely new class.

Yoshi specifically said they could easily make class skills perform differently for different jobs, giving Dark Knight as an example if it were to branch off of Gladiator (which he also denied would definitely be the case).
Even without that, how can you be so dense that you realize they can make a job utilize entirely different skills from one another without acknowledging they don't have to be different roles. If square can make Scholar a job that focuses mainly on its job abilities, why can't they give Ranger job skills and traits that allow them to focus on those rather than Archer skills. Who's to say that Ranger skills couldn't completely replace half or more of the base Archer rotation?

The example for Dark Knight was that they could remove the emnity modifiers to change Gladiator from a tank role into a DPS role. See that there is a role change there. Look at what you would need to do to make Ranger out of Bard.
What is a class? What you play all the time.
What is a Job? A specialization of the class to further gameplay change

More specifically, what is a Bard without Songs? An Archer. So to create Ranger you'll be playing Bard without the Songs..which is comically Ranger.
So they change base Archer "rotation". Add base new skills, which means more coding, more animation creation on top of different weapon creation (or same like SCH/SMN). Why do all this work for an already existing class when you can make something else from the ground up? It seems foolish to expend all this time and already created class, risk ruining something about that class rather than create a new one.

[Pizzaparty7]

I say they should add like fifteen new dps jobs to suit every flavor from every ff game ever. Then all of them can sit in queue for DF while the tanks keep smiling.

[Deathscythe343]

I say they should add like fifteen new dps jobs to suit every flavor from every ff game ever. Then all of them can sit in queue for DF while the tanks keep smiling.

Not likely to happen given that SE would also want the total number of classes to be balanced, not only in a general combat sense, but also balanced when it comes to the tank, healer, dps trinity.

[Kret]

How I think the jobs will roll out

Class musketeer
Jobs: Ranger/Corsair

Class: assassin,scout,rogue?
Jobs: Thief/Ninja

So far none of the classes are names FF is incredibly familiar with like the classic WHM BLM etc line up so I don't think it would make much sense to have thief or non be a class and the other be a job... Either way I just hope NIN isn't a tank -.-

[Kirinichibon]

Whichever role ninja fills, half of the community is going to be severely annoyed. A new tank would go a very long way in this game. If there was one role that would be great as FOTM for the game as a whole, it would be Tank. Ninja was very popular in FFXI as a tank. My vote is for Thief base with Ninja(tank)/Assassin(DPS) jobs. IMO it makes the most sense.

But I won't complain about it either way. I'd still be excited about a new class/job.