Yoshi, your reply to Q22 in the XVIII Live Letter was false and dishonest.

[Felis]

in short we want more varity for DoM classes. it should be possible to increase the varity without changing the whole glamour system.

[Penguinmayhem]

Isn't the real reason simply mechanical? It would just take way too much more programming to make glamours work the way people want them to because of how they interact with the gear system.

I certainly wouldn't mind being able to put my Alchemists' Boots onto some of my other outfits.

[Shneibel]

Ugh, you again. Yes it would be, if it had two sets armor. Witch robe for casters, and broken zombie armor or something for disciples of war. Now you have more reason to the event longer. You seem to like jumping down my throat for a lot of things lately.

that reply is a sarcasm. Sorry if you feel that way but it was not my intention, I just browser the forum and write reply in different thread

[polyphonica]

Isn't the real reason simply mechanical? It would just take way too much more programming to make glamours work the way people want them to because of how they interact with the gear system.

Yeah, I'd say that's probably it. When they first started designing the system, they set it up so that it'd align to the classes/jobs so that you'd generally have to keep the look of your class/job. Then they added pure-vanity glamours that bypassed this general pattern (and are clearly vanity, so wouldn't generally cause class confusion, since it's just 'no class'). And it may be that some items are classed in a funny way, but I think the "false and dishonest" thing is a bit overblown. It's almost certainly a question of "that's the way we programmed it". That's why they talked about "if there are specific items you'd like changed" or whatever -- because it's probably easier for them to change individual items than to change the whole system at this point.

[Cutie_McSnuggles]

in short we want more varity for DoM classes. it should be possible to increase the varity without changing the whole glamour system.

Adding more variety will help but that wont satisfy all of us. There are some glamour restrictions that honestly make no sense.

Why can't I as a WHM wear a dyable version of the battlemage set? Why can't a MNK DRG or NIN wear the dayable version of the Foestriker set? Why can only mages use the Coliseum shawl/loin cloth but all classes can use the Taffeta set? These things are extremely arbitrary and make no sense. Not to mention the amount of cloth/leather armor that would look perfectly fine on a mage that we are totally locked out of for no reason. For instance the Kirimu Coat would look awesome on a mage, but NUPE!

[Riepah]

For instance the Kirimu Coat would look awesome on a mage, but NUPE!

Kirimu Coat would look awesome on almost every class, I wish I could glamour it to my Ninja. I might even glamour it to my Scholar.
The truth of the matter is, removing the glamour restrictions while adding a "Don't show glamour on other players" checkbox would improve the game experience for EVERYONE. People who want their unique looks could attain them, people who want classes to look like what that class can wear would see them wearing what they're really wearing without glamour in the way, and even crafters would get to sell more prisms. Everyone wins.

[Nyalia]

Personally, I don't see how long robes are at all logical on the battlefield. Wouldn't they limit mobility and get caught on things? Plus, wouldn't metal or hard leather be more protective against enemy attacks and projectiles?
Armor for Mages in 2015, please!

I fought in a boffer LARP as a front-line combatant while wearing long robes for two years. It's really not that hard, and if the robes are designed right, not mobility-limiting at all. I also never got them caught on anything despite having huge sleeves. I fought both single sword and, later, sword and shield without issue. Of course, I wore a leather vest over the robes and leather bracers under the robes for those sweet, sweet armor points :P

Now, going up stairs, that was hard!

[KikoriL]

The double standards and grey areas with glamour are pretty silly.
You don't want mages in tank gear and tanks in mage gear? Understandable. What about tanks in bikinis? Healers in hard leather from gathering classes? Melee in wedding outfits? Mixed signals are still gonna get sent. You can't avoid it; the above idea of allowing someone to not see glamours the same way we can choose to not see titles under names would fix the issue until people are familiar enough with the game to not get confused by glamours.
Why should a tank be able to wear a helmet that looks like it's twenty pounds but not a tricorne with a feather? Why can a healer wear a unicorn horn but not a slightly thicker circlet? Why are my White Mage's leather boots wearable but not plain old leather moccasins? Is the metal plate on my Cobalt Vambraces really so heavy that my Monk can't wear it despite having on Gloam Bracers with a similar looking metal plate? Sollorets have LESS metal than jackboots, but are MORE restrictive. I can get not wanting the bulky stuff like body armor and leggings traded over, but let's be honest, everything else among headgear, gloves, boots, and jewelry are so subtle in comparison that both job and class restrictions shouldn't exist on them.

And I know a lot of people would love to rock the Bard specific hats on any given outfit.

[QiLymePye]

I believe that when they added the glamour system, they changed this game from what "they" want in certain class looks to what "we" want. I don't mind it, but its not fair for people using BLM and such that get less choices than everybody else. I also think that based on his comment about new players getting confused about roles, in light of adding this system he should rethink that. And like in my previous thread, lets get with some elemental weapon glamours please!!!

[Nestama]

It's quite clear here that I am dressed Glamoured to tank. New players will expect all level 50 WAR's to look like this.


I wear a boarskin subligar dyed to match my characters skin colour as well as a Lotus Pink Tricorne now. This image is outdated.