SECOND Job Stones for base classes of ARR?

[Vahlnir]

To be honest though, I also want a Ranger job. But I kinda want it to get a crossbow instead of a bow.

A crossbow job is something I could get behind.

[Bright-Flower]

Crossbow job could be fun.

I'm 100% against tying new jobs to existing classes though. Just keep adding new jobs standalone. If we get a 4th ranged physical job one day, crossbow could be a good fit. But no splitting ranger off of Archer.

[ChazNatlo]

Something that could be added in patches (summoner was added via patch for example and i am not sure, ninja maybe, too - dont remember). Though i think that Beastmaster is a very exciting job that many players would look forward to.

I know you dislike the "the devs said they wouldn't do it" argument but this is one I believe they shouldn't go back on. They've said in the past that they won't be adding new classes mid expansion like they did Rogue/Ninja because trying to squeeze that in was extremely stressful. And I don't want to subject that kind of crunch on the team (you'll note that I refered to what the devs said, then explained why I agree with them in this)

As for the classes/ new Job stones: I don't see the harm, but not because it's make creating a new job easier. Ultimately to make sure they can balance them, they'd basically make entirely new Jobs with some shared animations, much like how now the only skill in common between SMN and SCH is Resurrect. Even their Physic is supposed to be a different skill. They'd effectively need to create a whole new job, but they'd save a bit of time on animations.

I think this approach would wind up working best with the non melee jobs, since they have less dynamic character animations (though more dynamic effect animations frequently)

[Kes13a]

where do you propose all the extra space for the gear/stone is going to come from exactly for one thing.

second, they are not going to dual spec jobs. figured that had been pretty well covered previously.

[CaptainLagbeard]

Here's the thing, unless they make the second job the same role, they'd need to make new weapons for the new job anyways because of role specific stats like Tenacity and Piety, and largely a new set of skills outside the basic weaponskills and/or spells... The only way it would be easy and functional would be doing something stupid like taking Gladiator and making it become 2 different tanks.

If you wanted to turn it into some other role, like DPS, you'd need to take replace basically everything except the Weaponskill combos...

[SeverianLyonesse]

Here's the thing, unless they make the second job the same role, they'd need to make new weapons for the new job anyways because of role specific stats like Tenacity and Piety, and largely a new set of skills outside the basic weaponskills and/or spells... The only way it would be easy and functional would be doing something stupid like taking Gladiator and making it become 2 different tanks.

If you wanted to turn it into some other role, like DPS, you'd need to take replace basically everything except the Weaponskill combos...

This seems like a redundant point when the argument is primarily that dual jobs would save on modeling, rigging, and animations. Of course a second job would have a completely set of weapons, just like Scholar and Arcanist. But it would be easier to implement because they could just palette swap most of them.

Again, doesn't make me an advocate for it, as it really feels like late-cycle bonus content after all of the truly unique weapon ideas are expended. But this idea that they would use the same weapons, which I have seen pop up in several places, seems to be misunderstanding the concept and appeal.

[ForteNightshade]

As i said in one post above you: "the devs" said is no argument. Whats your personal argument on that?

A waste of time. Why try and shoehorn in classes/jobs together instead of simply creating an entirely new job which will achieve exactly the same result? Taking your own example, Beast Master has pretty much nothing whatsoever to do with Marauder or Warrior. Lumping the two together accomplishes absolutely nothing that simply releasing Beast Master as a new job doesn't already. Would Dark Knight have been better if it branched off Gladiator? Probably not seeing they wouldn't have their unique lore but piggyback off existing Gladiator stuff.

With all that being said. This whole discussion is rather pointless because what the devs said is an argument. They aren't ever going to implement branching classes like this. So it doesn't matter if some people want it. Several people want the job complexity seen in Heavensward to make a return. Discussing it doesn't really amount to much when Yoshida said outright they have no intention of going in that direction. Before you say "maybe they'll change their mind". They've been splitting up SCH/SMN more every expansion. Literally all the two jobs share nowadays is Resurrection and Physick. The dev team has been pretty consistent on decoupling as much as they possibly can from both jobs.

[kaynide]

Re: Ranger

I expect a crossbow job at some point; possibly even dual crossbows a la Diablo or Linkle.

But, on bows... it's not really an issue at all as many have said, WHM and BLM both use staff. It would be a non-issue. I mean, Guildwars 2 has 2 different types of bow. Guildlwars 1 had 5.

[RitsukoSonoda]

Separating bow classes at this point though sounds a bit tedious. Knives were actually a main hand weapon for gladiators until rogue/ninja was added. Then they had to go back and remove the knives from the GLA/PLD weapon list and replace them all with swords since they appeared throughout the leveling weapon list as both crafted items and duty drops.

[ChazNatlo]

Does the Bard use any Japanese style bows with the longer top spar? I wouldn't know, I don't Bard.