3.2 lore tome gear

[Remus]

Why would they repeat primal gear again in the same expansion?

It would still be classed as different gear because its new primals.

[Alahra]

Why would they repeat primal gear again in the same expansion?

There's at least a train of logic for it, anyway.

If they include Bismarck and Ravana, that would mean 4 or 5 sets (4 if they don't include King Mog since he wasn't "technically" a primal, and 5 if they do). It's possible they split things up because they didn't want to do 7 unique sets originally (to cover all 7 ARR Primal battles).

I don't think it's very likely (especially since the SMN Esoterics gear is arguably Bismarck-themed already if you compare it to the Expanse Grimoire), but I see it as at least theoretically possible that they might go that route.

[Youkulm]

I'm glad at least some of you have hope haha. I do not.

[Ashelia_Ferron]

Does it even matter? People are going to complain either way... In 3.0 the complaint was "I can't play every job" and "inventory is limited". Now the complaint is "There isn't enough gearsets". We have always gotten around 4-5 sets except for Job Specific Gear, that's just the way the game works. I think there is enough gearsets between tome gear, alex gear, the crafted stuff, and probably a new dungeon set as well. Theres still a glamour system you can use to change the look of the gear if you want. If everything SE does makes you that angry, then vote with your wallet.

You're missing the point.

No one here is complaining that the sets are by role (which, BTW, there are 7 sets). They're complaining that SE is being lazy that only 4 primals are represented and are thus shared appearance wise (ex: both Casters and Healers are based on Shiva).

[AeraLure]

No reason I can think of that they skipped on some further primal designs than simply resources/time spread too thin for what they could do, which is disappointing.

[Synrin]

I came here hoping for more pictures.

[Slappah]

We really need a ramuh set

I mean who wouldn't want just a giant beard that goes to the floor as a armor set amirite?

[Felis]

Why is it only 4 sets when there is more than enough primals for every job.

Tank
Healer
Caster
Ranged
DRG
MNK
NIN

7 sets, but 4 models

Perhaps they are holding primals back for future eikonic sets. So we may get a later titan, ramuh, bismarck, ravana set.

Then it would be again 7 sets, but 4 models
Each set its own model would be optimal

[Khalithar]

At the very least tanks should have gotten Titan, Ifrit suits mnk in my opinion but doesn't really work for tanks.

[Cidel]

but when they say we're getting primal gear, WHY were so many primals ignored?

I believe you answered your own question in the same thought before this:

I know carbon copy gear is something they always do.

But to comment on it, I'm actually quite surprised that everyone is, well, surprised. As amusing as it was to see people speculate all the 2.0 primals (and some even hoped for HW primals) being represented by one job/one role, why would the devs stop using palette-swaps when they've been doing it for everything outside of artifact gear? You could probably count on one hand how many healer/caster sets are legitimately different outside of colors (Valerian, Eve/Daystar, Ironworks, Satasha/Cashmere sets and the animal-motiff PvP sets, off the top of my head), and the Arachne set doesn't count, they're the same model except the healers got curtains from the waist down.

You don't get disappointed when you don't get your hopes up (when it comes to new gear sets).

As for why DRG got a set all to themselves; I dunno, don't they normally share a set appearance with other jobs? I'm fairly sure I've seen them share with MNK once or twice, their Crystal Tower set looked like BRD's, and I even think they had some very similar sets to tanks (minus accents) once or twice. Not defending them though, honestly I usually pick up a "SE's aesthetic golden child" vibe from them a lot, what with the super-detailed AFs and basically being the poster job for the new expansion among other things.