I extremely disagree with this.
I suppose it depends on what one considers "filler", but I consider Ruin 3 to be the filler in the Job, and you use it 1-2 times per minute, which is an extremely small amount of filler. This seems akin to saying that Fire IV and Flare are "filler" on BLM, or that RDM's melee combo and burst phase are filler. I don't feel like that's an at all fair assessment.
You stop casting "aspected Ruin" by 72 at the latest. Again, you don't call Blizzard III "aspected Blizzard I", do you?
I read comments like this and like this bit from Roe:
...and I have to say; this is what unrealistic expectations look like. Not to mention divorced from any prior incarnation of Summoner.
Until FF16 (which people are saying was unpopular and not well received), was there every any case of a Summoner taking on body parts of their Summons? The only think I can think of in that same ballpark is Terra's trance from FF6, but she was half-Esper, so that was just her body partly transitioning into her Esper form (or what she'd likely have been if she had been born full Esper instead of half Esper, half Human). This expectation makes no sense to me.
And likewise, on what way are Crimson Strike and Mountain Buster "aspected Ruin 3"? Topaz and Emerald Rite aren't in any way like Ruin 3, either. Ruby only is in the sense it has a cast time, too. Again, this is like saying all BLM spells and Jolt/Verfire/Verstone are just aspected Ruin 3, which just isn't fair and isn't a claim anyone would argue. I don't feel that's a realistic standard.
(Not to mention I'd really really HATE this: Summoners in Final Fantasy are not about augmenting their body parts with Eidolons. That sounds like what the bad guys in FF games would do, though; and sorta what the bad guys did in FF6 to a point with that whole drain the Summons for power thing. BLU already does that some, and that's fine, but nothing about "take on Eidolon body parts when you cast spells" says "Summoner", as no FF summoners I can think of ever have. Dominants are not Summoners in the normal sense...or at all, really, as they ARE the Eidolons, more or less.)
I don't outright disagree with this, but I also don't agree with it. There are always niches, and there's always something to add, upgrade, etc from a Job. Some Jobs have had reworks because they were just...well...a mess before. MCH and SMN before the rework were both real messes. Yes, some people loved them, but that doesn't change the fact they were not well designed and not aging well. Conversely, RDM has been pretty unchanged since it was introduced; ShB just added another spell to the end and a Ruin 2 movement tool, and EW added a party mit and...another spell on the end (and changed Acceleration to work better). The flow of the Job in general is unchanged, and the basic theory behind it is unchanged other than optimization for burst (since you can fit in more of it within your mana since 50/50 is all you need instead of 80/80 or whatever it was before), which...just also devalued Reprise, but it was already something you tried to avoid anyway. BLM has gotten QOL, but the Job itself, unless you're doing the insane Paradox "instant casts for weeks" craziness, still has the same general core and flow.
So there are a lot of Jobs that haven't been changed much, or that don't need changing.
They may - emphasis on may - in the future do some across the board reset, but I would wager that would come with something like a level squish (if they do one) rather than just "let's make BLM into SMN". Especially since, as people are fond of pointing out, Yoshi P likes BLM and likely wouldn't support it being "dumbed down". And I think on some level there's a recognition that it's good to have complex AND simple Jobs both.



Reply With Quote


