Please don't defile BST

[Kalise]

Oh and to add to the Gunblade imagery. Yes the ones from VIII are the traditional design, but that's not an actual gunblade, it's actually just a glorified sword with a vibrator.

No, the ones from Gunbreaker are functioning like the ones from VIII.

As mentioned by Yoshida himself. As, they, to him, the lead designer for the game, are the "True Gunblade"

Your the one who's confusing meanings and trying to ascribe nuances that are directly counter to what the lead designer of the game has personally stated.

Yes, there are technically multiple variants of "Gunblade" but in reality, for the Final Fantasy universe, "Gunblade" tends to refer to VIII's weapon, even though they're technically not a gun. Since, in this instance Gunblade is not merely a portmantaeu of Gun and Blade to reference an object that is both a gun and a blade, but the name of a weapon type, which is called Gunblade. Much like how a Handcannon is not a hand and a cannon. Or a Handgun not being a hand and a gun.

Which is why Yoshida states that the Garlean weapons aren't actually Gunblades, because they're merely guns with bayonets not Gunblades.

In real life, there exists no Gunblades, only gun and sword/dagger hybrid weapons. There has never existed a weapon that used an explosive trigger from a bullet or shell to send a shock down the length of a blade to inflict more damage (Mostly, because that's literally not how physics works. In real life, such a thing would only serve to create a massive amount of painful handshock for the wielder while doing nothing to the target whom is only in contact with the blade for a fraction of a second and thus won't have any shock transferred to them even if you did manage to trigger it at the perfect moment)

True and iconic can mean the same thing when given context. In this case, that's what's being argued. True = Iconic. Since, it means its true to the source that popularized it, the iconic source. Again, I'll use the Scholar example, if they released Scholar as Red Mage as we know it but still called it Scholar and wrote a bunch of lore about how these "Scholars" were naturally gifted and born able to wield magicks (Like Padjal) this would not be a true Scholar as it is not being true to its iconic source, which is that of a studious role that goes so far as to eschew weapons in favour of tomes/grimoires that contain powerful incantations and magicks.

So, again, just because SMN can "Summon" Egi/Carbuncles doesn't make them a Summoner any more than SCH is a Summoner because they "Summon" fairies. Summoner, much like how Gunblade refers to the specific weapon in VIII, is often used in reference to those jobs in Final Fantasy games that summon the powerful eidolons that make up many of the titles strongest spells (Leaving out the potential gearing set ups that let people hit for the 9999 damage cap with less powerful spells)

[SaitoHikari]

If there's one thing I noticed, it's that talk of Blue Mage basically died pretty much immediately after the first two weeks. It's like it never even existed outside of these DPS forums. There aren't any BLU action farming parties anymore.

I think this experiment by SE was a complete failure.

[Eloah]

stuff

I just can't anymore. Your other post made me think you got it, so I'll leave it at that. Honestly, I don't know why I even care. Maybe the content drought is hitting me harder than I thought.

I'm gonna start calling Shiva, Ifrit, and Ramuh Trues now, since it means the same thing.

[Kalise]

I'm gonna start calling Shiva, Ifrit, and Ramuh Trues now, since it means the same thing.

So, apparently Iconic is now a direct synonym for Eikon in your mind...

What's up with all the people who keep scrutinizing word usage not understanding the concept of CONTEXT

It's like, basic language, especially in English, that context determines the meanings of words... Yet, people are too busy looking at one specific definition in their dictionary to bother actually trying to understand the complexities of how words are actually used.

Ironic, you'd think a Scholar main might have read a book or two in their lives...

If there's one thing I noticed, it's that talk of Blue Mage basically died pretty much immediately after the first two weeks. It's like it never even existed outside of these DPS forums. There aren't any BLU action farming parties anymore.

I think this experiment by SE was a complete failure.

Just wait until ShB when they update the class and it gets a whole new buzz of excitement.

For another 2 weeks.

Then it dies until the next update, potentially in 6.0...

#LimitedJobs

[Eloah]

So, apparently Iconic is now a direct synonym for Eikon in your mind...

I'm sure you are aware that iconic is the adjective form of icon, and Eikon, though the spelling is more archaic, is a proper noun form of icon.

And please don't insult my intelligence, I haven't insulted yours. The reason people are scrutinizing the proper term is because of the imagery it conjures up. For instance, when people say Relic, meaning the weapons. Relic has become an overarching term, like jacuzzi or band-aid. But if people wanna refer to a specific weapon they'll say Zodiac, or Anima, or Eureka. But on the other hand what about jobs that have similar names, but different iterations. Conjuerers have been in FF games before but none of them act like the one found in FFXIV. Same with Astrologian and Gladiator. And what about Paladin? In Japanese they are just called Knights but not in English. But Knight is a job found in other FF games as well. So which one is the "true" version. None of them are, but some are more iconic. That's the concern. You are not wrong by any means, but to say true is inaccurate and can be a bit misleading.

Think of it this way. Vivi from XI was designed as an iconic BLM, not a true BLM. But Lulu is just as much a BLM as him but not an iconic BLM; she is iconic for another reason though, lol.

[Madisonlee]

So, again, just because SMN can "Summon" Egi/Carbuncles doesn't make them a Summoner any more than SCH is a Summoner because they "Summon" fairies.

Exactly. Like I said earlier, "Summoner" in the context of FF means something very, very specific.

True and iconic mean vastly different things and at the end of the day you and a lot of other people keep pointing to the design of the Egis as the main issue, which is fine. So please stop trying to point the finger at the DoTs. Everyone is in agreement that between summonings a SMN casts "filler" spells, how are DoTs any different.

Wait a second. For 7 pages are you telling me you were arguing against me about the DoTs???? Dude, the DoTs are fine, they don't bother me in the slightest. Like was said previously, SMN usually casted white or black magic in between summoning, but if SE wants to change that to DoTs for XIV's iteration, that's perfectly fine! It qualifies as one of the slight shake ups to new class iterations we were discussing before and makes the jobs feel fresh and new. MY point was MAKE THE EGI'S/DEMI'S COOL AND MAKE THEM MATTER! Cast DoTs in between all you want! I never said to scrap the whole class Jesus lol.

When I talked about being a DoT mage negatively, it was simply because right now, aside from Demi-Bahamut, SMN is missing its CORE of summoning primals! It's ADDITION/SHAKEUP of DoTs is fine to me! Just give me the CORE as well!

Sorry if I am confusing you, do I make sense now?

. Also, you know what happened when we got something that resembled more "traditional" summoning, people bitched that they couldn't see over the huge summon.

I'm curious how you would of reacted if BLU was implimented with the quest idea, instead of it's more traditional method.

They found a happy medium in XI, I remember a few people complaining about the Avatars being too big, but they were in the minority. XIV's Bahamut indeed looks quite large to me; didn't they fix that by letting you make him mini? The size isn't what matters to me, it's the design of the Egis that bothers me.

BLU's acquisition of magic has been VASTLY different in each implementation. In IX, we literally EAT the enemy to learn the magic LOL. That would have been interesting in this game. . .hahaha. For BLU, the CORE of BLU isn't how they explain or acquire the spells, nor the weapon; the core of BLU is being able to use monster spells, period, so your suggestion would not have bothered me.

[Dyvid]

None of which were DoT mages that summoned a Popoto, Spicy Popoto, or some weird Green Goblin thing. But instead summoned actual Eidolons (While then using standard White and Black magic when summons weren't needed)
.

Last time I checked Rydia could cast Poison and Virus. Summoners could cast Chocobo, Golem, Cait Sith, Goblin, and yes even Fairy. Tear it all away and you get a simple truth, Summoner calls forth monster to aid them in battle. How they do it has varied from game to game.

You can use the same argument that Yoshida himself used and claim that these are "True Summoners" just like how Squall/Seifer use the "True Gunblade" because theirs is the most iconic.

Yoshi-P approved of FFXIV SMN so does that make them "True Summoners?" No because there is no true Job, because the father of Final Fantasy, Hironobu Sakaguchi, made it a point to make each game different from the last and just retain iconic features.

Anyway, this is a dead horse at this point because everyone has different idea on how every job is suppose to be and its different from what it actually is in FFXIV.

[Madisonlee]

Last time I checked Rydia could cast Poison and Virus. Summoners could cast Chocobo, Golem, Cait Sith, Goblin, and yes even Fairy. Tear it all away and you get a simple truth, Summoner calls forth monster to aid them in battle. How they do it has varied from game to game.

Yoshi-P approved of FFXIV SMN so does that make them "True Summoners?" No because there is no true Job, because the father of Final Fantasy, Hironobu Sakaguchi, made it a point to make each game different from the last and just retain iconic features.

On your poison and virus comment: Wait, were you just arguing about how the DoTs are fine like Eloah was? I think we all need to be clearer with each other haha because I have no issue with the DoTs, they just poorly implemented the Summons and thus SMN doesn't retain its "Iconic Features" to me.

[Kalise]

I'm sure you are aware that iconic is the adjective form of icon, and Eikon, though the spelling is more archaic, is a proper noun form of icon.

And I'm sure you're aware than in the context of Final Fantasy, specifically, XIV, Eikon specifically refers to the ancient Allag name for beings that we have yet to find out much about. Then the word was adopted by the Garleans to be used to denote the meaning of "False God" and used to reference Primals (Which are different to what Allagans were calling Eikons).

Of course, this requires use of contextual inference, a skill you've proven to not have.

What next, facetiously calling potatoes fruit because in the French language they're known as pomme de terre which literally translates into "Apple of the Earth" and so potatoes = apples omegalul!?

And please don't insult my intelligence, I haven't insulted yours.

Then go buy an English 101 book and read up on context before insinuating things about word choices and being facetious in light of your apparent difficulty in understanding simple concepts like words having different or slightly altered meanings depending on how they're used.

The reason people are scrutinizing the proper term is because of the imagery it conjures up.

"People" aren't.

YOU are.

No-one else in this entire thread has had an issue with terminology used, only you.

Wherein you like to repeat "There is no TRUE Summoner" ad infinitum. Whenever anyone compares XIV's Summoner and declares it not a "True Summoner".

True Summoner, as in, one that is accurate and in accordance to the fact that of previous iterations and depictions of Summoners, a vast majority of them summoned powerful entities that had potent effects and many Summoners relied upon these summons for a majority of their offensive capability.

I cannot recall a single iteration of a Summoner outside of XIV where their summons were felt as though they were a secondary aspect of the job. Even in XI when people fell back onto their sub-job skills, suggests that for the Summoner job itself, it was very much focused on the Summon hence why sub-job skills were utilized outside of them rather than more Summoner skills that weren't summons.

So, unless it can be proven that there is significant basis for a Summoner job to have functionality like SMN in XIV where their summons are Egi's (Also, functionally no different to pre-job when you're just an Arcanist with Carbuncles) and take what often feels like a secondary role within the job as well as not even taking a form that is even close to resembling the Primal/Eidolon/Avatar (Whatever you want to call it based on which particular game you're referencing), it's quite possible to say that XIV's Summoner is NOT a True Summoner, as it is incongruous to all prior forms of the job, to which we even have very iconic characters that embody the job outside of iterations of the game where characters had flexibility in what jobs they could use that could be used as a reference guide for creating the job (Much like how Gunbreaker is being created around Squall/Seifer)

But on the other hand what about jobs that have similar names, but different iterations. Conjuerers have been in FF games before but none of them act like the one found in FFXIV. Same with Astrologian and Gladiator. And what about Paladin? In Japanese they are just called Knights but not in English. But Knight is a job found in other FF games as well.

In the case of other jobs within XIV, many of them are based on multiple jobs found within the Final Fantasy series, taking inspiration from multiple sources but each having distinct aspects that you can tie back to their respective roots. Such as Astrologian taking parts of Astrologians and Time Mages.

With Summoner this is not the case. Summoner and Arcanist are aberrations of design, neither having any relevance to any of the previous iterations of the jobs. Arcanist in Tactics A2 and Bravely Default being a class that is focused around Dark spells such as Drain, Gravity, Dark as well as unique dark spells (Like Corpse, Exterminate, Twilight etc)

While in XIV both are relegated to being this weird wannabe BLM that uses a few Black Magic spells (Like Bio) and has a pretty weak minion to slap things for a small portion of their overall damage output without any other job influencing their design that at least I can tell (Possibly Scholar because they use a book?). Even SMN's job gauge has nothing at all to do with summoning at least until we got Demi-Bahamut.

[Dyvid]

On your poison and virus comment: Wait, were you just arguing about how the DoTs are fine like Eloah was? I think we all need to be clearer with each other haha because I have no issue with the DoTs, they just poorly implemented the Summons and thus SMN doesn't retain its "Iconic Features" to me.

K, but it's hard to tell what you mean if you don't just say it. You said earlier you don't play FFXIV, just visit every couple of years to see what change. Well 4.0 has brought a lot of huge changes to Egi more weight and usefulness in combat, and pets in general account for about 30% of SMN damage. They now buff and debuff to increase the damage potential of the party. I"m not sure why you don't play FFXIV, but I doubt it's simple because Egi doesn't look cosmetically good. Personally i would rather have a job that plays good and is fun rather than something that looks good and is garbage to play.