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

[zaviermhigo]

rdm+lnc = double paper. Rdm being less paper than a lnc. Lnc's should do more damage for the amount they get hit.

[ZephyrAM]

III & V limited most jobs to a particular weapon type.
X-2 limited all jobs to a particular weapon type.
Most FFs locked characters to specific weapon types.

The common element of the job system is not the tactics style mix-and-match, but the ability to change from one job to another without losing progress in other jobs.

The only numbered FF's that had an actual job system were: I, III, V, X-2.

Other games only touched upon elements of classes without every actually making any of the player characters into those said classes. While X-2 could, admittedly, be only a debatable part of the numbered series, that still leaves III as the last FF to restrict jobs to no cross-skills.

That was a heck of a long time ago.

Except for those mentioned above, FF Tactics practically 'is' the traditional Job system. They pulled the system out of the series and made a side-series of games based entirely around it.

Weapon locking is a minor aspect of the Job system, it only happens as a side effect of what they're creating. The only reason it's come up as more important in XIV is because of the Armory system, which is another off shot.

So, for the last 20 years, the Job system has been about mixing different jobs to form one character, every time it's been used. In those FF's since III where the Job system wasn't directly used, only IV and VI didn't allow heavy character customization; every game since has let you basically 'cross-class' your characters into whatever you want them to be.

The common element across them all may not be mix-and-match, but it is used in a good 75% of the games to date, which should say something.

[Lerris]

The only numbered FF's that had an actual job system were: I, III, V, X-2.

Other games only touched upon elements of classes without every actually making any of the player characters into those said classes. While X-2 could, admittedly, be only a debatable part of the numbered series, that still leaves III as the last FF to restrict jobs to no cross-skills.

That was a heck of a long time ago.

Except for those mentioned above, FF Tactics practically 'is' the traditional Job system. They pulled the system out of the series and made a side-series of games based entirely around it.

Weapon locking is a minor aspect of the Job system, it only happens as a side effect of what they're creating. The only reason it's come up as more important in XIV is because of the Armory system, which is another off shot.

So, for the last 20 years, the Job system has been about mixing different jobs to form one character, every time it's been used. In those FF's since III where the Job system wasn't directly used, only IV and VI didn't allow heavy character customization; every game since has let you basically 'cross-class' your characters into whatever you want them to be.

The common element across them all may not be mix-and-match, but it is used in a good 75% of the games to date, which should say something.

FF I did not have a job system. Characters could not switch classes freely.

Ignoring FFX-2 also implies ignoring the Tactics series.

My point, through this thread, is that the argument must be made on the merits of the proposed system, not on the precedent set by other games in the series.

[ZephyrAM]

Then the argument at the moment is currently invalid. We don't 'know' anything about the proposed system... only that it's a Job system to work alongside the Armory system. We can't say what is good or bad for something that has no basis.

Which is exactly why this whole thread has been about what we 'want' to see: freedom of character development.

There's no point in worrying about how to balance such a system, that's what the Devs are around for, and what it is their job to do. They won't create something they don't believe they have any chance of balancing, or which doesn't begin at least remotely balanced, no matter how much we argue for it. Yet if we don't argue for it, there's less chance that they'll implement anything even remotely similar... no matter how much it may have been used in Final Fantasy games to date.

The FF team is not the same as it used to be, and the newer installments to the series reflect that clearly; we can't expect anything from the past from them.

If we want it, we must make it clear.

[Lerris]

Then the argument at the moment is currently invalid. We don't 'know' anything about the proposed system... only that it's a Job system to work alongside the Armory system. We can't say what is good or bad for something that has no basis.

Let me rephrase...
Cairdeas proposes that jobs not be restricted to a single class.
His arguments in favor of such a move should be focused on the merits of his proposal, not on the precedent set within the series. Precedent is not useful in this case because for every example there is a counterexample.

I like the idea of freedom. It makes for a more interesting game. But, it also increases the complexity and may make balancing the game difficult. And while I was initially fully in favor of Cairdeas' thoughts, when he started using examples of previous games, my own experience with the series has shown that the more enjoyable installments had less freedom in character development. My issue with his arguments, then, is that they have turned me against the idea which he is arguing for.

What it comes down to for me, now, is that whichever path SE takes, either can be done well, or done badly. I want to see it done well.

[Sorel]

I like the idea of freedom. It makes for a more interesting game. But, it also increases the complexity and may make balancing the game difficult. And while I was initially fully in favor of Cairdeas' thoughts, when he started using examples of previous games, my own experience with the series has shown that the more enjoyable installments had less freedom in character development. My issue with his arguments, then, is that they have turned me against the idea which he is arguing for.

I believe I myself have offered logical and forward-looking arguments that show that restricting one Class to a single Job (or two or three) creates more balance problems than not restricting them. Cairdeas may be playing the role of Passionate Historian in this debate. I'm playing the Actuary.

If my arguments have not been sound, please let me know.

[PSxpert2011]

So now they want to add "Jobs" (as an option, I hope), add auto-attack (also as an option, I hope) and abolish the Physical leveling system (which will eliminate the ability to distribute your stat points??)

Distributing my stat point and costomizing my class to use any abilitiy I desire is going to be taken away??

If I don't convert to the job system, then what??

It makes me an outcast?

I'm fine with the outcast job =P

[Lerris]

So now they want to add "Jobs" (as an option, I hope), add auto-attack (also as an option, I hope) and abolish the Physical leveling system (which will eliminate the ability to distribute your stat points??)

Distributing my stat point and costomizing my class to use any abilitiy I desire is going to be taken away??

If I don't convert to the job system, then what??

It makes me an outcast?

I'm fine with the outcast job =P

No, none of the existing customization will be taken away.
If you don't equip a job, you keep the existing class-ability mix and match.
If you equip a job, some ( but not all ) cross-class abilities will not be permitted.

Instead of assigning stat points based on physical level, you assign them based on class rank. You still have the option of assigning them.

[BruceyBruceyBangBang]

So now they want to add "Jobs" (as an option, I hope)

Yes, for party set ups and proficiency to go up against more rough battles and to give uniqueness to certain roles.

add auto-attack (also as an option, I hope)

Not an option, I'm afraid. Stamina will be eliminated and it will switch over to auto-attack.

and abolish the Physical leveling system (which will eliminate the ability to distribute your stat points??)

Yes and no. The formulas will be reworked and simplified resulting in a lighter, but more potent distribution of attributes. Of course, this is only an assumption, but it's a safe one. Two things are known though. You'd be able to distribute based on your class rank (basically combining physical with rank) and attributes will be reworked, but to simplify them, as they say, should result in them being more potent and the pool shrinking. Even though that last part isn't in their words, it's safe to say that is what is in store.

[PSxpert2011]

Thanks for the reply guys.