What's the reasoning for melee jobs to have three different sets of gear?

[Duskane]

Drg has more Vit to be more bulkier thats why it gets armor similar to tank mostly

Ninja is Dex
I feel Samurai should have been too but that's only since i see more games use Katanas under Dex than str

[Lersayil]

I don't really care about this stat or roll wise...

But do we really want to sacrifice the small remaining armor model variety we still have?

They already cheap out often and give NIN and DRG a striking or fending recolor. Do we really wanna get rid of them permanently?

[ForteNightshade]

Have you seen the AF gear? Neither one of those sets are heavy armor.

Also have to bear in mind that (at least according to Yoshi-P) the inspiration for Samurai for FFXIV was the Edo period, post-military samurai that served less as an armored soldier and more as a diplomat and local security that also served as the same inspiration behind the Jedi in Star Wars.

Now realistically, I'd argue it would make more sense to make Ninja instead wear Aiming armor instead of trying to combine them with other melee.

... the Shadowbringer Samurai set is literally body armor. It's not too dissimilar to the new PvP that just released. I'd say that's close enough.

And while yes, that may have been the inspiration for Samurai. The whole aesthetic argument loses merit when Dancer gear—outside their AF set—looks nothing like what a Dancer would wear.

[Vidu]

... the Shadowbringer Samurai set is literally body armor. It's not too dissimilar to the new PvP that just released. I'd say that's close enough.

And while yes, that may have been the inspiration for Samurai. The whole aesthetic argument loses merit when Dancer gear—outside their AF set—looks nothing like what a Dancer would wear.

I'm not sure how it does lose merit because of "dancer"-gear, considering that
...outside of the AF-set its not "dancer"-gear but "physical ranged"-gear, meaning that you can have a set thats more tailored to maschinist or bard, giving only one of 3 jobs a really fitting piece of gear
...most of the current gear a dancer can wear was designed and released before dancer was a job, meaning it was designed without dancer in mind
...not even the AF-set is something every dancer would wear - considering that there are many different dancing styles and they outright said they didnt want this "dancing is sexy bellydance and nothing else" image (to bad they didnt actually stick with that when designing the AF-set). Anything that allows for free movement is something a dancer can (and probably would) wear, they're not limited to a bellydancer outfit.

Considering your original argument: What would be won by removing one of those sets and making samurai share with dragoon? At least in terms of design, which seems to be your problem with the dancer-gear: Nothing. We'd just lose one set.
Also: Just because something insipired a concept doesnt mean that everything has to follow said concept afterwards.

[Bright-Flower]

I kind of wish they'd just lift glamour restrictions in general, barring weapons and artifact sets of course.

[ForteNightshade]

I'm not sure how it does lose merit because of "dancer"-gear, considering that
...outside of the AF-set its not "dancer"-gear but "physical ranged"-gear, meaning that you can have a set thats more tailored to maschinist or bard, giving only one of 3 jobs a really fitting piece of gear
...most of the current gear a dancer can wear was designed and released before dancer was a job, meaning it was designed without dancer in mind
...not even the AF-set is something every dancer would wear - considering that there are many different dancing styles and they outright said they didnt want this "dancing is sexy bellydance and nothing else" image (to bad they didnt actually stick with that when designing the AF-set). Anything that allows for free movement is something a dancer can (and probably would) wear, they're not limited to a bellydancer outfit.

Considering your original argument: What would be won by removing one of those sets and making samurai share with dragoon? At least in terms of design, which seems to be your problem with the dancer-gear: Nothing. We'd just lose one set.
Also: Just because something insipired a concept doesnt mean that everything has to follow said concept afterwards.

Bard spent considerably amounts of time looking like a cowboy because it better suited Machinist. They only more recently moved away from that hence why I stated it wouldn't matter much if Dragoon and Samurai shared a set. I have no idea why you brought up old gear when I was referencing 5.0 and beyond. Likewise, my original argument had less to do with the aesthetic and more gameplay related. What would we gain? The ability to gear the remaining two melee up faster. By adding Maiming as its own set, you now have both it and Samurai gearing up. And the shift to Striking slots Ninja alongside Monk. Right now, Dragoon and Ninja only benefit themselves left side. Thus, if you main either, you're less able to bounce jobs at a comparable ilvl than a Range or Caster.

Finally, I never said the jobs have to maintain their original inspired aesthetic. In fact, my entire argument went against that. I have to wonder if you mis-quoted me or meant to refer to someone because I didn't insinuate a lot of what you're arguing here.

[MikkoAkure]

Without a remapping of all gear from the last half of ARR all the way to current as well as changing DEF and VIT on SAM only gear, I doubt we would ever see SAM merged into maiming outfits. We would lose scouting sets, some of which have different appearances from striking, and it would also make it so that dragoons and ninja have to compete with another class for gear drops in dungeons.

[JunseiKei]

People talking about what armor looks like when most of us are going to glamour over it anyway. Anything you would like, you'd keep to glamour with eventually.

For the different stats, like DRG has more HP than MNK, NIN, SAM, I'd rather they raised the base stats according to job stone, or had a hidden stat multiplier related to the job stone, to give the varying values that exist now. People that play Monster Hunter know a similar system if you've ever taken a look at motion values per weapon. It's a great system that really allows each weapon(job for XIV) to be different without having to tailor armor specifically to them.

Those fearing that they'd lose variety in gear looks, I think it'd help more in the long run. Right now they have to design fending, maiming, striking, aiming, scouting, casting and healing (7) and we see past models being reused anyway. If it got slimmed down to fending, striking, aiming, healing and casting (5), it might promote more varied armor due to needing to create less overall armor every new dungeon, raid, savage, tomestone, PvP, crafted and whatever else I missed.

However, I don't see SE every changing this anytime soon, if ever.

[Shurrikhan]

The reason: aesthetics > fairness.

Ranged get 3 jobs' coverage. Casters get 3 jobs' coverage. Healers get 3 jobs' coverage. Tanks get 4 jobs' coverage.

Melee get 1-2 because despite having multiple appearances tied to a single item in the case of gender, such apparently cannot apply to jobs and there is of course no possible way we could have attached Samurai to the Maiming aesthetic or Dancer to the scouting aesthetic, let alone actually flesh out those currently unique armor classes in the face of "too many melee!" (by which we mean 8 melee vs. 12 ranged but prefer to categorize it instead as 4 melee, 3 ranged and 3 casters despite there being more armor classes in those 4 "melee" than across all 6 of those non-melee, so that we can continue to increase ranged's breadth of choices per armor class while pigeon-holing melee).

[Anienai]

stuff

I love your avatar.