Artifact Armors!

[Rumpelstiltzkin]

He says it transforms, he does not say it folds.

Thank you so much! This made me so happy! Yay for "passive" spellcasting

[Kiote]

I think what we are seeing here in the incorporation of toggled stances.

Stance 1 - Bow Mode: Brd gains access to ranged skills

Stance 2 - Duel Wield: Brd gains access to buffs and melee attacks

[Gidonoidon_Sur]

More importantly. Is it:

Arcbard?
Barcher?

[gahoo]

I think there are two things going on here.

First, a lot of the "problems" (term used loosely) are, IMO, tied to retaining the class terminology post armory overhaul. "Gladiator", as a fancy translation of "sword user", was OK when the original classes and armory was the end of the discussion, but it doesn't really fit with the new system, where the original class decision is a more generic, solo-friendly, role. The "gladiator" is able to solo by virtue of absorbing a lot of damage (i.e. tank) while putting out decent damage vs. the more balanced attack/defense of the "pugilist" or the more nuke heavy but defense light "thaumaturge". Had the classes gotten renamed we wouldn't be in the mess we're in with Barchers (or Gladins or Punks or whatnot).

If we had:
Close Damage dealer -> Monk
Standard Damage dealer -> WAR
Mid-ranged Damage dealer -> DRG
Long-range Damage dealer -> BLM
Support -> Bard
Healer -> WHM
Tank -> PLD

nobody would blink at the "transition" to the new titles and roles. The problem is we have the defined original titles with what should be more generic roles - which is a disconnect.

I think Yoshida has done a terrific job turning FFXIV around, but the decision to retain the armoury system, and the 1:1 ratio of weapon to class and then the 1:1 ration of class to job, is inflexible, which is precisely what the original concept of the system was trying to avoid.

This problem of perception could also be dealt with by not having the 1:1 class:job ratio. But if the ratio persists, the original class names should have been made generic.

The second issue is seen easily from the above list I think - that Archer was not originally a support job - meaning people who selected archers did not want to play that role. If the party role for the archer is support, you've "forced" (as much as it can be forced, which it really isn't) archers to play a role they didn't want to play. This argument could also be made for some of the other classes, but it is more pronounced with an Archer/Bard line than a Gladiator/Paladin line.

Ideally, given where the game is and where the development is, what I would like to see is a full move away from 1:1 class:job ratio. That would probably be the least disruptive. Hit level 30 and you can unlock whatever extra "party-focused" job you want.

Even if some (or even many) of the skills of the job have prerequisites from a particular class, so be it. Assume that 50% of the Bard skills require some prerequisite from Archer alone - that's ok. That might essentially require some playing of archer to unlock all of the bard skills, but it doesn't put them on the same linear path.

Anyway. Enough rambling...

[AmyRae]

The second issue is seen easily from the above list I think - that Archer was not originally a support job - meaning people who selected archers did not want to play that role. If the party role for the archer is support, you've "forced" (as much as it can be forced, which it really isn't) archers to play a role they didn't want to play. This argument could also be made for some of the other classes, but it is more pronounced with an Archer/Bard line than a Gladiator/Paladin line.

Arguably, you could say some people have chosen the Archer class because it has renown for being a tremendously effective damage dealer, and a ranged one at that, and thus very desirable for parties. Being turned into a Bard may not necessarily satisfy a continuation of that role (but they do seem to be able to shoot arrows still, so I'm not yet convinced it's a diminishment of their damage-dealing capacity), but being the only support job in the game is certainly a continuation of a guaranteed seat in any party. If this was your motivation for playing an Archer, then your future relevance has just been secured for all time.

[Anon]

That harp bow monstrosity is really going to kill what little immersion I have. I can not stress what a mistake converting archer to bard is; as mentioned going from dd to support is a ridiculous transition. I know people have emotional attachment to the bard job but just give a mage haste-ga for now and leave bard to be released later when the time is right instead of force feeding us a half-baked idea now.

[AmyRae]

That harp bow monstrosity is really going to kill what little immersion I have. I can not stress what a mistake converting archer to bard is; as mentioned going from dd to support is a ridiculous transition. I know people have emotional attachment to the bard job but just give a mage haste-ga for now and leave bard to be released later when the time is right instead of force feeding us a half-baked idea.

I'm posting way too much here. Must stop soon.

I think Bards will continue to be fine damage dealers. You'll just be able to buff your party, too. I mean, the job sounds overpowered to me, not underwhelming. From where I'm sitting, the must-have jobs for any party are going to White Mages, Paladins, and Bards. You'll always have a seat at the table waiting for you. How is this bad?

As for the weapon, I have to tell you, it breaks my immersion not to have fantasy contraptions in a fantasy game. This is the sort of thing we need to see more of, not less.

[Physic]

That harp bow monstrosity is really going to kill what little immersion I have. I can not stress what a mistake converting archer to bard is; as mentioned going from dd to support is a ridiculous transition. I know people have emotional attachment to the bard job but just give a mage haste-ga for now and leave bard to be released later when the time is right instead of force feeding us a half-baked idea now.

well honestly i wouldnt be surprised if asrcher went support, but in a more archer like way, with debuffs and and control spells, rather than buffs, which is common to bard.

On one side i think its creative and potentially entertaining, on the other side, it is a really crazy transition in a number of ways.
there is no way in which support is a specialisation of archer. archer has about two support abilities, and they are debuffs, swinging the opposite way is quite a shift, not an evolution.

making a job require a new weapon type, thats going to do a lot of crazy things, this might be subverted by having the option to have the swiss army bow, or like 2 or 3 weapons in different slots.. but still pretty weird.

Stealing the job from a class more suited for bard, this is a major problem, it could be solved with a sentinel like musical class, that instrumentalist can get later, but if they were going to make the job later what would it be called?

It highlights even further how the job system alters the armory system. because if these jobs are worthwhile, they are better than jobs at certain playstyles. which means, your archer should in fact be gimp compared to whatever DD, or the new DD are not better at their roles. This means...
your archer is basically dead.
when they say the other jobs are mostly for soloing, they mean the ability to use a lot of other job skills. the barcher will most likely have the exact same damage potential as an archer, (maybe slightly different due to stat allocation IF the stat tables are different)
basically jobs are infact replacing classes. replacing, and limiting them to specifc roles.

but we all knew this. The whole solo thing is basically saying, yeah you can be jack of all trades when no ones around. Even though it is honestly questionable if that will even be accurate. lets be honest, with the huge mp drain of curing, in terms of soloing you are only getting so much bang for your buck. Is getting access to protect, cure and shock spikes really going to beat a generous increased in damage?

the most valuable cross class skills on pug now, are raging strike, invigorate, bloodbath, one keeps me alive, the rest are DD related, and i expect that pug will have its DD potential increased, so how useful is pugilist for soloing really? probably not at all.

[Griss]

Ya know, The first time i looked at a pickaxe in the game i wondered "How the heck is this thing suposed to be used to dig up any thing". then it did the cool little transformation deal and i said "well hell i guess that's how"

It will probably be the same for the bow harp... barp? borp? bowp? we need to come up with a nickname for this contraption.

Bayo perhaps you could poke some one at the main office to post some more of those really cool concept art pictures, or maby some screen shots of the finished stuff in game. Like johnny 5 once said, Need more input!

[Arcell]

Hate to say I told you so....oh wait, no i don't. Told you so :3

Childish taunting aside, I may very well go level Archer now. Transforming weapons are a really cool concept in my mind, definitely got my attention there.