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

[Sephr]

I stand corrected! I forgot about that part of the Producer's Letter.

As to "freedom for the sake of freedom", I guess I'd word it more as "freedom for the sake of fun".

Sure perhaps, only two or three classes are "good" with a particular job. What are the options?
1) Allow each job only one weapon/class -- works for some jobs, but not all of them. Sure, Dragoon with an Axe isn't high in the lore, but Dragoon with a sword is. Not to mention the major issue with WAR..
2) Allow each job only a select set of weapon/classes -- I suggested this, and it was pointed out that would likely be interpreted as implicit endorsement that all such job / class combos are "equally good", thus putting pressure on SE to balance them all.
3) Allow each job to be paired with any weapon/class -- Allows some combos that people consider to be against FF lore, and many combinations are weak ; leaves it up to the players to determine which combos work and in what situations

P.S. Sorry if it seemed when I said "Fin" that the case was closed ... I was just trying to be cute in wrapping up my post >_>'

Sounds great and all, but it's totally forgetting what the purpose of jobs are. They're adding them to create more defined roles in parties for dungeon content etc. The base classes are there for experimentation and you can be a 'divine lancer' all you want with them.

[Kurokikaze]

How long can you guys keep up the mental gymnastics? It's pretty clear from the Q/A that there will be certain abilities/skills that will not be cross-classed. Also, Jobs will be Class Specific because they are a "Specialization".

^ the above is clear and its up to you to accept it and quit your whining. It's annoying.

[Amineri]

Sounds great and all, but it's totally forgetting what the purpose of jobs are. They're adding them to create more defined roles in parties for dungeon content etc. The base classes are there for experimentation and you can be a 'divine lancer' all you want with them.

That is a fair comment. Agree that the stated purpose of jobs is to create more defined roles in parties for dungeon content, etc.

However, the concepts of "job = defined role" and "job not locked to class" are not mutually exclusive, I don't think. I suppose in large part it depends upon how jobs are implemented. Having said that, there was also mention that the CLASSES are also being reworked to be better defined, and how that ties in with jobs ... who can tell?

I think the example that has been bandied about the most is "healer" role : almost certainly White Mage. Now, unless SE removes Sacrifice from THM or Cure from CON, both classes have healing spells already. So, maybe White Mage allows for reduced casting time / reduced MP cost / reduced enmity generation for heal-type spells, while eliminating access to damage spells. So, White Mage is a defined role. However, playing as a WHM / CON or WHM / THM would be equally viable in that role, no? And very possibly Arcanist, if it is opened up later?

This example and others tend to point to opening up jobs to more than a single weaponclass, which then leads to the discussion between points 2 and 3 above.

Final point: a job having a defined 'role' does not necessarily mean that there is only ONE way to play that role. As Matsui-san stated:

our objective is to implement a battle system that rewards player effort and innovation in such areas as equipment, hunting grounds, and party structure

[Amineri]

How long can you guys keep up the mental gymnastics? It's pretty clear from the Q/A that there will be certain abilities/skills that will not be cross-classed. Also, Jobs will be Class Specific because they are a "Specialization".

^ the above is clear and its up to you to accept it and quit your whining. It's annoying.

I enjoy my mental gymnatics :'( ... as long as I don't hurt anyone, nor are rude, how does it impact anyone?

Seriously though, I didn't see anything in the Q/A that Jobs were Specializations. Can you provide the quote?

[Kurokikaze]

It was in the producer letter AND the battle blueprint. Again mental gymnastics because you trick your mind into omitting that information.

Sure you're not hurting anyone physically, but what you guys don't understand is that you're hurting the debate. Instead of trying to come up with ways to take into account the changes that are already deep into development you guys try to make them change whats already on the way.

Accept the changes and focus your feedback on adding onto it. Not removing said changes.

[Sorel]

One of the problems with direct one-to-one, two-to-one, or X-to-Y restrictions is that the raw numbers make it a mess.

(using the ":=" nomenclature for assignment)

You can't have Job := Role because there are only 4 basic Roles in a party (Healer, Damager, Tank, Support), and there are at least 6 basic Jobs in Final Fantasy (White Mage, Black Mage, Red Mage, Warrior, Thief, Monk).

You could add Paladin, Dark Knight, Dragoon, and remove the generic Warrior Job. That would give us 8 Jobs total. Then you can *attempt* to assign 2 Jobs to each Role.

Damager := Black Mage, Dark Knight
Tank := Paladin, Monk
Healer := White Mage, ??Red Mage??
Support := Thief, ??Dragoon??

See the problem. It's hard to use Jobs to help define Roles when half the Jobs themselves don't neatly fit into Roles, or a Job can fit into 2 or 3 Roles easily (like Red Mage).

Now there is nothing to say that Jobs and Roles should be balanced on assignment. I'm pretty sure I'm currently arguing against that.

But on the other hand, not balancing the Roles evenly between the Jobs would lead to ultra-versatile Jobs that can handle multiple Roles (like Red Mage). Those Jobs would be in higher demand, more valuable, and thus more powerful than the Jobs "specialized" in a single Role (like Paladin).

Something to think about, I guess.

[Kurokikaze]

Everything you just said they managed to do in XI using the same 4 basic roles. Your argument is not valid.

[Sorel]

Everything you just said they managed to do in XI using the same 4 basic roles. Your argument is not valid.

I politely disagree. It is a very valid argument, precisely because of what happened in FFXI.

In FFXI, Red Mage and Ninja became the MUST HAVE Jobs in parties because they could fulfill multiple Roles. It was part of the reason they were unbalanced. Red Mage could fulfill 2 Roles (Healer, Support). Ninja could fulfill 2 Roles (Tank, Damager).

This is definitely something that we should be aware of and, if possible, try not to repeat.

[Cairdeas]

As I keep saying, a dragoon wielding an axe isn't a dragoon in the traditional FF sense of the word, and that's what they're shooting for.

Kain which is the "Definition" of Traditional Dragoon most people use. Used Axes.

[Reika]

One of the problems with direct one-to-one, two-to-one, or X-to-Y restrictions is that the raw numbers make it a mess.

(using the ":=" nomenclature for assignment)

You can't have Job := Role because there are only 4 basic Roles in a party (Healer, Damager, Tank, Support), and there are at least 6 basic Jobs in Final Fantasy (White Mage, Black Mage, Red Mage, Warrior, Thief, Monk).

You could add Paladin, Dark Knight, Dragoon, and remove the generic Warrior Job. That would give us 8 Jobs total. Then you can *attempt* to assign 2 Jobs to each Role.

Damager := Black Mage, Dark Knight
Tank := Paladin, Monk
Healer := White Mage, ??Red Mage??
Support := Thief, ??Dragoon??

See the problem. It's hard to use Jobs to help define Roles when half the Jobs themselves don't neatly fit into Roles, or a Job can fit into 2 or 3 Roles easily (like Red Mage).

Now there is nothing to say that Jobs and Roles should be balanced on assignment. I'm pretty sure I'm currently arguing against that.

But on the other hand, not balancing the Roles evenly between the Jobs would lead to ultra-versatile Jobs that can handle multiple Roles (like Red Mage). Those Jobs would be in higher demand, more valuable, and thus more powerful than the Jobs "specialized" in a single Role (like Paladin).

Something to think about, I guess.

Crazyness! Dark Knights are tanks too

and they should keep the generic warrior job.