Please do not lock Jobs to the Weapon Class that unlocks them.

[Speeral]

Correct me if I am wrong but the current system already allows for a mish mash or everything and you can be a pug with fists and still tank or gimp heal if you wanted to? I don't understand why create an open system to an open system. The reason SE is adding the job/role/specialization system is to give us the player a direction of what we want to do in a party setting, because with the current system people cannot already figure it out.

We asked for the game to be open and allow freedom . . . . the game comes out

players complain there is no focus and said give us roles, because we cannot decide it for ourselves.. . . .

now that is exactly what yoshi and SE are doing and now people are saying no I want the freedom back?

I understand from what yoshi said and I am going to quote him

A number of plans made at the beginning of the year will soon be ripe for release. Among these are the shiny new job system (a proper system, mind you, not just renamed classes)

http://forum.square-enix.com/ffxiv/threads/11012

Just in case someone cries foul. This is an entire new system meant to pull from what is currently there. This means or at least I understand it and from what matsui said in his piece changes are coming that will tie us the player to the class we are going to be playing

By major revisions, not only do we mean the tweaking of effects and potency of existing actions - we will work from the ground up to redesign and reassign actions based on clearly identified class roles.

http://forum.square-enix.com/ffxiv/t...form-Blueprint


so it seems to me with the battle system there will be rigidities built into place forcing the player into roles, classes, and jobs. All of which at all times are not always interchangeable.

So Cairderas I don't think what you are asking for is going to happen. From my reading and understanding it seems we will be locked in some ways based on skills and weapon would be my guess.

[Cairdeas]

Correct me if I am wrong but the current system already allows for a mish mash or everything and you can be a pug with fists and still tank or gimp heal if you wanted to? I don't understand why create an open system to an open system. The reason SE is adding the job/role/specialization system is to give us the player a direction of what we want to do in a party setting, because with the current system people cannot already figure it out.

We asked for the game to be open and allow freedom . . . . the game comes out

players complain there is no focus and said give us roles, because we cannot decide it for ourselves.. . . .

now that is exactly what yoshi and SE are doing and now people are saying no I want the freedom back?

I understand from what yoshi said and I am going to quote him

A number of plans made at the beginning of the year will soon be ripe for release. Among these are the shiny new job system (a proper system, mind you, not just renamed classes)

http://forum.square-enix.com/ffxiv/threads/11012

Just in case someone cries foul. This is an entire new system meant to pull from what is currently there. This means or at least I understand it and from what matsui said in his piece changes are coming that will tie us the player to the class we are going to be playing

By major revisions, not only do we mean the tweaking of effects and potency of existing actions - we will work from the ground up to redesign and reassign actions based on clearly identified class roles.

http://forum.square-enix.com/ffxiv/t...form-Blueprint


so it seems to me with the battle system there will be rigidities built into place forcing the player into roles, classes, and jobs. All of which at all times are not always interchangeable.

So Cairderas I don't think what you are asking for is going to happen. From my reading and understanding it seems we will be locked in some ways based on skills and weapon would be my guess.

From how I understand it though all job does is define the actions you get from the job itself and what skills from outside of those you can equip as well.

IE a White mage can not equip Black magic.

This defines a Role. "White Mage" is a healer they only have access to the Actions of a healer.

If this is the case this doesn't mean they have to be limited to the weapons of conjurer because Conjurer itself doesn't define or have the role of Healer, it can perform it but that isn't its purpose. It also would be unfair of White Mage not being able to be equipped to Thaumaturge, another Caster class. Or to Enforcer (When it comes out) a Hammer Wielding class that as Hammers are White Mages "Traditional" weapon, not their only, just their traditional.


Same for Red Mage. it is unfair for a Redmage to only be Conjurer because thats the best fit for its weapon class based on the skills conjurer teaches you when Red Mage's traditional weapon is a Fencing Foil (Fencer) But if Fencer is implemented and Redmage is locked to Fencer only then Red Mage loses the ability to cast AOE spells.

[Speeral]

From how I understand it though all job does is define the actions you get from the job itself and what skills from outside of those you can equip as well.

IE a White mage can not equip Black magic.

This defines a Role. "White Mage" is a healer they only have access to the Actions of a healer.

If this is the case this doesn't mean they have to be limited to the weapons of conjurer because Conjurer itself doesn't define or have the role of Healer, it can perform it but that isn't its purpose. It also would be unfair of White Mage not being able to be equipped to Thaumaturge, another Caster class. Or to Enforcer (When it comes out) a Hammer Wielding class that as Hammers are White Mages "Traditional" weapon, not their only, just their traditional.


Same for Red Mage. it is unfair for a Redmage to only be Conjurer because thats the best fit for its weapon class based on the skills conjurer teaches you when Red Mage's traditional weapon is a Fencing Foil (Fencer) But if Fencer is implemented and Redmage is locked to Fencer only then Red Mage loses the ability to cast AOE spells.

I don't think personally its a fairness issue here its about balance and creating a bit or rigidity into a fluid system. The game as it is has no defined role but weapon based classes. So if you want to use an axe you're a marauder no ands ifs or buts . . .

so if a "job" is open based on one class, then realistically according to my understanding of the proposed system I will be tied to that weapon based on the job and class. Now if they are taking a bit from XI and allowing jobs to have access to other weapons and adding proficiency affinity based on a scale to how relevant or capable the job is to the weapon then I can see your ideas working.

Case in point Monk or blm and whm.

In xi monk, blm, whm could in their own right interchange weapons I.e. monk used baghknaks, polearm, fists, and a club but was proficient in fist type weapons and were most effective then for their role.

BLM had access to scythe but didn't have the stats and proficiency behind it to allow it to be a viable use, but mainly used for aesthetics.

If that's the case then fine I agree that would be a nice addition. but having a paladin with a bow even in xi was kinda dumb imho. As long as it makes sense and there are avenue for customization then I don't mind seeing how it will turn out.

I personally for parties would like to see some restrictions in a few ways but that is a different thought for a different conversation.

[Cairdeas]

I don't think personally its a fairness issue here its about balance and creating a bit or rigidity into a fluid system. The game as it is has no defined role but weapon based classes. So if you want to use an axe you're a marauder no ands ifs or buts . . .

so if a "job" is open based on one class, then realistically according to my understanding of the proposed system I will be tied to that weapon based on the job and class. Now if they are taking a bit from XI and allowing jobs to have access to other weapons and adding proficiency affinity based on a scale to how relevant or capable the job is to the weapon then I can see your ideas working.

Case in point Monk or blm and whm.

In xi monk, blm, whm could in their own right interchange weapons I.e. monk used baghknaks, polearm, fists, and a club but was proficient in fist type weapons and were most effective then for their role.

BLM had access to scythe but didn't have the stats and proficiency behind it to allow it to be a viable use, but mainly used for aesthetics.

If that's the case then fine I agree that would be a nice addition. but having a paladin with a bow even in xi was kinda dumb imho. As long as it makes sense and there are avenue for customization then I don't mind seeing how it will turn out.

I personally for parties would like to see some restrictions in a few ways but that is a different thought for a different conversation.

In a Party those restrictions should be done by the Party Leader through Party Consensus. If a player shows up out of spec for the Role they are hired on for, then you kick them.