I hope this clears up some of the Rogue>Ninja rage

[Rubeus_Carcer]

Thief will probably be a job soul crystal way later down the road, I'm not really worried. If you renamed rogue into thief, this wouldn't be possible so I see it as beneficial, personally.

[Exodus-E]

I just hope that someday (even post-expansion) we'll get a proper Thief job branching out from the Rogue class, regardless of whether there are too many DPS already or not...mostly for completionist's sake.

[Shougun]

The curse of Tanaka, it haunts us still. His might is untold, even the fiery cleanse of Dalamud cannot stop him!

XD. Wish we didn't have a Barcher either (class mechanics are not bad and people I know wouldn't want to lose that, but the class mechanics are no form a bard).



Edit: For those hoping for a Thief "job" later, from my understanding of the Rogue lore that won't happen. They said Rogue's were thieves that stopped stealing and just kept their sneakiness. So we technically already have Thieves, sans stealing.

[Buff_Archer]

A bit off topic but applicable to some of the replys- has it occurred to them yet to add a tank job that lancer could evolve to (like a Knight or something I don't know) similar to how Arcanists can go either Summoner (DPS) or Scholar (Healer)? They'd lose STR and gain VIT similar to the INT -> MND stat swap going from DPS to Healer with Arcanist-based jobs. You could make the argument that we don't want lancers to start their tanking career with level 30 dungeons (and yeah Brayflox + new tank = mixed results) but the same is true with Scholars being first time healers at lvl 30, and if there were a requirement to get Dragoon to 50 to unlock this job this would help mitigate the problem of an influx of underprepared tanks.

What does this have to do with Rogue/Ninja? Trust me when I say the lack of tanking classes relative to DPS ones will be felt hard when this comes out and EVERYBODY is trying to queue with it (lucky me, I saved PLD/WAR/WHM for last). While there are Dragoons who try to tank/OT when they shouldn't, giving the class a bad rap, a lot of the skills (stuns, some parry/DMG mitigation cross class skills, knowing importance of directional positioning of enemies, dodging in close quarter combat situations) are very relevant. And most Dragoons have had to assume the tank role at one point or another when the actual tank instabailed from DR, and while this wouldn't go well in higher level dungeons, it shows that it's at least viable.

[Shadow_Sama]

I wouldn't want them to add any new jobs to existing classes simply because of the fact that the new job will play like the old class. Give 5 or so new abilities. New classes should be introduced along with the new jobs, to avoid new jobs going stale quickly.

[Magis]

What is the point of the classes again?

Any time you ask that about, the answer is "it was in 1.0, deemed "too stressful" and left in half-assed". See elemental resistance, racial stats, crafting, etc.

[LineageRazor]

Here's the reason why I think that SE went with the Rogue>Thief route:

<Logic cut, due to logic being completely irrelevant to the argument.>

Yeah, you're not gonna get much traction in clearing up the rage this way. The people who are angry? For the most part, they already know all the stuff that you said. They understand SE's reasons for doing things the way that they did.

However, the bottom line is still this: Thief (not Rogue, THIEF) is still not in the game. SE can spout all the logic and reasoning that they want, but until it happens (and perhaps not even then), folks will not be satisfied. Also see: Red Mage.

I'm pretty confident that, in the fullness of time, Thief (not Rogue, THIEF) will be added to the game as a job. Perhaps branching off from Rogue, perhaps from another class. FFXIV is strongly devoted to providing fan service for Final Fantasy fans. As derivative as it is of other MMOs currently on the market, this fan service is the primary tool it has at its disposal for drawing in customers. Satisfying those fans will be a priority, and SE will eventually pony up the goods.

[Kaethra]

I think I can clear it up a bit more clearly:

All Thieves are Rogues. Not all Rogues are Thieves.

A thief has to have the skills of a rogue, stealth, acrobatics, and troubleshooting (lock picking, trap disarmament, and since we're talking about adventurers, an agile fighting style. But what makes a Rogue a Thief? Well he's thief.. he steals things. Not all rogues are into larcenous activities. So SE did what WotC did with D&D. They allow players to play a Rogue and define their own story and lore.

If you play a Rogue, you can still be a Thief. You can be a Swashbuckler, too. Or a Scout, or a myriad of other things. The choice is yours. Would you rather have less choice over your character over three letters? If so, why deny others who don't? That's what it really comes down to. Is three letters and choices in Role-play.

[Phyllo]

Snip

Unfortunately you're confident for nothing because they have confirmed a while ago that rogue is thief, 100% thief. they just named it rogue because thief would sound weird in a town (because rogue sounds better? Not even counting the pirates...).

The bottom line is that thief is coming for 2.4 and that it won't be a job but a base class with another name.

[Ehayte]

Didn't Yoshi say @ E3 that they also didn't want to use THF because he didn't feel that it was a meaningful job? Like, "Thief? What, he steals stuff? Well how is that going to help us kill this giant dragon! You need to hit it!"

I disagree completely, because Zidane was a total BA (Grand Lethal!?) and the mythos that FF has put around thieves is meaningful enough to me to not have any problem with the lore.

And so what if Ul'Dah doesn't want a THF guild - guess what? They are there, and you don't know shit about them, and they are going to steal your stupid jewels of your dumb heads. Because they are smarter than you, and better than you at arts and crafts and the guitar.