Suggestion: Myth lockout per class not per character, and Loot lockout.

[Narcissus]

per job means you are screwed if you're FC wants you to come on a job already capped.

like people said level an alt if you want per job.

What does this even mean. do you even think bro

[indira]

they should make you buy an item to enter make it a gil sink item breaks on entry.

Need lockout per ROLE instead so people understand fights better

thats bad too alot of people only have one class at lv50, nice way to demotivate people from even bothering when they could just do the coil. it will screw up FC's plans.

[Sylkis]

thats bad too alot of people only have one class at lv50, nice way to demotivate people from even bothering when they could just do the coil. it will screw up FC's plans.

Pay 300 myth to unlock the other 2 roles for the week. Sounds fair?

[Crankysorc]

I can't understand, for one I always have things to do because I really don't play much. I have other things that take up my time. Even if that was the case, I'd find something else to do. It really isn't a big deal, and life will go on.

I don't understand why anyone would sub to a game they don't play at least a few hours a week. It's great that you don't want to play the game anywhere near it's full extent and all, but there are many players who would like to actually make use of the ability to level multiple classes on a single character.

@indira- just go on the job that's capped already, then. It'd be the same as running things now after getting your tomes.
If it becomes a frequent problem, don't run things without your FC on that job.
How would giving people a reason to run content demotivate those with only one 50 and ruin FC plans?
There's enough gil sinks as is, we don't need gil spammers shouting they'll pay for your run entry items.

[Hanabira]

Need lockout per ROLE instead so people understand fights better

As someone heavily against class caps... this... isnt a half bad idea o.o