And a tank in casters' robes isn't? O.o
2 is along the lines of what I'm thinking. Make any gear under level 45 glamourable (only) by any class. I'll take 3 (lots more level 1 'all classes' gear) in a pinch.The conundrum: Players want more varied options for glamour. In specific, many would like to look like a completely different role than the one they are currently fulfilling.
The current implementation: Players can only glamour a piece of gear if their currently selected class/job can equip it. Level restrictions, other roles, grand company gear, etc. provide additional restrictions.
Possible Solutions
2. Implement some way to perform solution one without actually allowing players to wear gear that is not assigned to their class. The feasibility of this solution is suspect, as it defies the current system of determining whether or not you can glamour something and would require more memory to be assigned to the data for every piece of equipment.
3. Implement more pure glamour gear that provides the more varied options people are asking for. ie. a set of plate armor, more magey mage robes, etc. This is a compromise solution that can be performed without altering the current systems underlying equipment.
If the system we have isn't changed, change the 'all classes (but meant for mages)' gear to 'DoM only'. In response to your 'worst case scenario' number 1... I HAVE had issues of tanks and melee wearing mage gear because it's "what they had". So it already happens...
As a tank, I show up in end-game armor glamored to look like the Sentinel set from the Darkhold (which I ran many times to get the full set). It has the look I want as a tank. But you know, when I heal, I feel uncomfortable being in dungeons wearing just my yukata and skirt... if I could, I'd totally at least put on a chain haubark. Just because I've changed what I'm doing in the dungeon doesn't mean the monsters hit any gentler!
I'd prefer they remove the cloth options from tanks. Instead of loosening the system up I'd prefer it to be locked down more and consistency achieved. I don't like seeing tanks in cloth. I don't like seeing mages in armor. Glamor is not a good enough reason for that imo.
Have you check the stats on that glamour. I'm pretty sure it wasn't mage stuff. It was just that, glamour equipment. There are some exceptions that allow you to get a certain looks crossing magic/war barrier, but that doesn't mean they haven't kept their word on the restriction (which makes perfect sense to me, though I understand is not OK with others.)
Some exceptions like these ones are nice because it allows people who do want the looks of other disciplines to somewhat get it while still not completely breaking the visual essence of the classes. Common robes, hoods are generic and widely used things. NPCs have them all over the world, so they aren't really a nice representation to magic classes even though they have those stats. Things like Vanya and Cashmere are what you will probably never see released to other disciplines.
look at the stats, it is not mage gear (not a single int and not a single mind). It is Halloween gear.
Hmm
Like this post if you want class requirements on gear to be away and favored classes on gear to come back.
favored classes mean that every class can wear it, but only the favored classes get 100% of the stats.
Last edited by Felis; 12-05-2014 at 12:41 AM.
Nope. I hope Yoshida stays steadfast with this one. Man, if you want to look like a mage, just level up BLM. There are so many ways around this issue that I can't believe people are still crying about it.
I actually quite enjoy the idea that I have a general idea of your class by your appearance. There is indeed a reason for keeping this even somewhat consistent, mages running around in plate armor and warriors in evenstar isn't really worth the loss of that concept.
You can still run around in your swimsuit, just not mage robes. I think that's fair.
Actually, tanks can run around in mage robes as well (most are "all classes"). Just not all of them. Mages, however, can't run around in a cotton tabard.Nope. I hope Yoshida stays steadfast with this one. Man, if you want to look like a mage, just level up BLM. There are so many ways around this issue that I can't believe people are still crying about it.
I actually quite enjoy the idea that I have a general idea of your class by your appearance. There is indeed a reason for keeping this even somewhat consistent, mages running around in plate armor and warriors in evenstar isn't really worth the loss of that concept.
You can still run around in your swimsuit, just not mage robes. I think that's fair.
Insanity is a gradual process, don't rush it - Ford Prefect
I actually agree with this more than anything in the thread. Though I would like to see more battle ready mage armor. More like the Daystar set but with a better looking chest peice. Mages don't need to be heavily armored, but they need more than bathrobes imo.I'd prefer they remove the cloth options from tanks. Instead of loosening the system up I'd prefer it to be locked down more and consistency achieved. I don't like seeing tanks in cloth. I don't like seeing mages in armor. Glamor is not a good enough reason for that imo.
A big reason for this is a lot of them are items from 1.0 which. Most tabards in 1.0 for example were properly tagged, but the original image of XIV the cowl and robes were very heavily rewarded in guild leves and was originally part of the 'Favor' system. A lot of ARR exclusive items or redesigns are properly tagged. Mages with dated gear can run around in heavy armor for example.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
Cookie Policy
This website uses cookies. If you do not wish us to set cookies on your device, please do not use the website. Please read the Square Enix cookies policy for more information. Your use of the website is also subject to the terms in the Square Enix website terms of use and privacy policy and by using the website you are accepting those terms. The Square Enix terms of use, privacy policy and cookies policy can also be found through links at the bottom of the page.