Repair NPCs in Dungeons

[Eidolon]

Your opinion won't change mine. You don't think that the drawbacks of that change is a big deal, I do.

You're probably one of the few honest poster's I've seen, that instead of trying to create disingenuous "They don't care" or "They don't try to discuss it", literally just comes forward and says "I don't care what you think, I like it this way."

There is something admirable to be said for that.

And I respect this reasoning more than the faulty logic a lot of other posters are using to say "It goes against lore", "It'd be a lot of work", "I'd rather have this other option" and "Level crafting."

[WinterLuna]

You're probably one of the few honest poster's I've seen, that instead of trying to create disingenuous "They don't care" or "They don't try to discuss it", literally just comes forward and says "I don't care what you think, I like it this way."

This is exactly what everyone is already doing, our arguments are obviously because we like the current system and don't think it's necessary. Opinions about lore and crafting are the same, we like it this way, and like Fyce said, it won't change our opinion although we respect yours.

[Noxifer]

And reformatting the window to properly be scaled to account for the fact that there is no longer that option, and changing the fact that the payment option is no longer in there, and making sure that it checks that you have hte PROPER GRADE of a DIFFERENT ITEM, and making sure that it checks your current Repair %'s and makes sure to add it on properly. Seriously, it is so much more work than having an NPC that works EXACLTY HOW THEY ALREADY WORK.

Like has been said, the system existed in 1.x, so it probably wouldn't be that tricky to implement the coding in itself. I admit I didn't play 1.x, so I don't know if that system used Dark Matter or not. As for UI, they could very well use the request meld window. And it's been mentioned (and if it hasn't, it should have been) that if they implemented this system, they'd probably implement it over-all instead of just inside of instances. So the 'tip' window wouldn't need to be removed, but it would have to be greyed out during instances due to the 'no trading' rules.
As for checking you have the proper grade, the melding system already checks to make sure you have the proper grade (or a higher one) of Carbonized Matter. So... that's nothing new either.

Yes, the coding would probably take up a bit of time, but once the system is there, it's there. No need to edit each dungeon because it'd be an over-all system based on the core programming.
With NPCs, the coding exists, yes. But they would still need to take the time to open up each dungeon map, decide on the proper place to put an NPC, edit the map to add that additional object/event... and probably come up with individual flavour text for each one of them. Sure, they could have mute Menders like in the cities, but... it'd avoid a lot of the "WTF is this guy doing here? D:" reactions if there was flavour text to explain it. That's also a lot of work.

And yes, theoretically those sentries outside might be able to repair things... But equally theoretically, the NPC Menders use tools of their trade. Did the sentries remember to bring their portable forge? ;p

Between player to player transactions (even if no gil or items change hands -- the payment for this service inside dungeons would simply be to make the person with broken equipment less useless), there's no need for flavour text. If players want that, they'll add it themselves through the chat and through emotes.

[fantasticm]

As far as I'm concerned, when lore is used as a reason to deprive players of harmless convenience, lore may have a problem.

As another pointed out, Lore is maleable. Lazy writing being preventative is not a reason to me to not do something. All it is, is a cheap and lazy excuse.

You two should be working for Blizzard.

[Zantitrach]

Especially when we have proof that, people like Tataru, who knew nothing of mining, could just put on an outfit and go mining in Mor Dhona.

No, they gave Tataru lore (with a fair bit of credibility) that she's been mining for awhile and she just ordered a new hammer and starts the whole fiasco. This gets explained over DOZENS of lines in the quest. I emphasize dozens because this is the type of information required for lore reasons for these random NPC's in the beginning of every instance.

http://ffxiv.gamerescape.com/wiki/Picking_up_the_Sledge

At most, it would need, what, 50, maybe 60 lines? And even then,

There's 43 dungeons alone (33 Trials, 25 raids if you were curious [again OP and others in this thread are asking for EVERY instance]). So you're saying each NPC (That needs unique dialogue to create his presence in these menacing dungeons) Can explain all that in 1.5 "lines"? No........

Wouldn't you rather have the choice, than no choice at all?

I WOULD rather have the choice, the choice of LEVELING a crafter for the PERK.

Except it's only a failsafe if you level those jobs. If you never level them, then there is no failsafe. This is why that is such a faulty reasoning - suggesting that the failsafe exists for those who do not currently* have it, means it is coming up short as a failsafe.

It is not faulty reasoning OR coming up short as a failsafe. You just don't agree. That does not make it faulty nor coming up short. This entire thread is pure opinion from both sides. Conversely, I see it as sound reasoning and being a full fledged failsafe. (google define fail-safe: a system or plan that comes into operation in the event of something going wrong or that is there to prevent such an occurrence.) The system/plan is to level a crafter in the event of something going wrong (gear break).

in a game that says you can CHOOSE to do everything, should not be forcing you to do everything for basic quality of life changes.

And surprise the game does not FORCE them to do anything. They can repair from ANY of the various towns they are probably standing in at that exact moment. They CHOSE not to repair. As others have hyperboled in the thread, you can just keep taking this request further and further as a "failsafe''. I need access to my retainers in dungeon, as a failsafe. I need access to the Market Board in dungeon, as a failsafe. There is your only full proof failsafe. Every instance needs access to the MB/Retainer/Repair NPC/Vendor NPC (Can't forget those guys who have their entire inventory full [people posted the first week of patch about missing the Fenrir pup drop from PvP since their inventory was full). You called it a slippery slope fallacy, and well its a slippery slope but not a fallacy in this context. Their IS a failsafe, you think its insufficient so you want an ADDITIONAL failsafe. Your argument is that it hurts no one. Access to the MB in every dungeon hurts no one either. Access to your retainers in every dungeon doesn't hurt anyone either. Etc. Etc. It is a REAL slippery slope and not a fallacy.

Now, let's compare this to your suggestion, and see why it is a bad idea:

1) The programming is almost a copy/pasta from melding. As you mention it also existed from 1.0 which means they DO have the code already (100% its backed up somewhere) they just have to find it.
2) No trading needs to be done, why don't you understand this.
3) No gil exchange needs to be done, why don't you understand this.
4) Your marginalizing an already marginal issue.

Let me give you a few examples of why I, personally, feel adding NPC's is easier.

1) NPC's already exist, yes but don't forget you have to give them unique lines, backstory and program the functions on to them and then make sure its not programming it onto their character model OUTSIDE of the instance either, heck this means making a duplicate NPC model and attaching the repair menu to it.
2) No argument there, but the programming also exists for the other option.
3) Yes again, the programming exists for both options.

As far as I am concerned, it is FAR EASIER to add NPC's and a line of dialogue, or just straight up copy-pasting NPC's from the dungeon's very entrance than it is to create a whole new system within the game to give you what you want.

And as far as I'm concerned the exact opposite is true. The programming already exists for both, one just requires 0 ret con or lore re writes or additional models being loaded into dungeons.

Except they DON'T Get that benefit if the crafter isn't there,

They also don't get the benefit of your additional failsafe if they don't have enough gil on them when they queue in. TBH its probably equally likely for both scenarios.

What? Yes there is. The whole "Request Meld" system in the game involves having the OPTION of adding payment via the Meld interface, and true to form - some people expect "Tips" for their work. There are also people who do it for free, but it does not change that the Melding system (Whcih is our parallel in this case) inherantly has that feature built in, and it should be expected that the feature would be added to a Reapir rquest system as well.

OPTION which is not a payment. Simply disable that option. Its practically changing a 1 to a 0 in code in complexity.

It is NOT a failsafe, because by the very definition of the word failsafe

Hah, we both ended up doing the same thing and even the same definition. However...

Rather, your system falls more accurately and more succinctly into the definition of a pre-emptive measure

That's not what pre-emptive means at all. Repairing above 100%, is pre-emptive. Leveling a crafter or carrying dark matter is not.

Even without these listed items, Crafted accessories are still the only way for non-tank classes to raise their Vitality without sacrificing a primary stat, so it still had its use for initial progression raiding.

For "intial" yes. That's less than 1/2 of ARR + HW's lifespan.

A crafter requires an investment, but if you're willing to apply effort after the investment,

The whole reason I'm mentioning this is because this applies to both scenarios. Everything you said for a crafter making millions applies to battle classes as well. No effort, no profit. This point you're trying to make literally cancels itself out.

To argue Majority from either of us would be flawed.

No, this thread has come up a few times in the past. But the scarcity of it shows general lack of care by the public. This topic has less followers than the "Give Roegadyn chest hair" club and a metric ton less than the "Give Miqo'te their booty back" club.

At 0%, it breaks in such a way that it becomes useless, but can be repaired. This can be something as simple as the straps being broken, to the armor having been cleaved in two and needs to be welded back together. In the end, it doesn't matter - what matters is, "I can't use this shield" because it can't be held to block anymore.

The fact that our armor is fully effective until 0% suggets to me that we at 0% are not reaching the same dilapidated state of the very stuff you suggest is being fixed in the world at large.

That's exactly what 0% effectiveness means. Its broke to the point of unusability until someone fixes it, just like the stuff that we have to spend 5 quest chains on, or several patches worth to fix.

[Iagainsti]

20 More Pages!!!!!

[FeliAiko]

Adding NPCs would be easier and convenient... doesn't mean it should actually be done, because it would also be silly and unnecessary. The most I'd like to see SE do is give players the ability to repair other players gear, like with materia melding.

[Andrea]

I would like the food buff permanent now because I sometimes forget to eat.

Please SE add in the next patch that my character automatically eats when entering an instance.

[MugenMugetsu]

I'm not even going to bother reading this entire thread. I think the responses to the OP have gone way overboard. It was a simple request. Have a NPC at the start of the dungeon, in a safe zone, who can repair our gear. Sounds like a legitimate request if you ask me and I would welcome having a repair NPC at the start of the dungeon. Yes, it's largely unneeded. Yes, we should be responsible and check our durability before queuing, however the fact of the matter is that no one is perfect, and mistakes happen. As a small QoL improvement to the game having a repair NPC at the start of the dungeon would be great. I support the OP's request. Too bad it seems that the vast majority of people in this thread are vehemently against anything other than everyone leveling all of the crafting jobs so they can repair their own gear and want to make a huge deal out of a very small, simple, request.

[FeliAiko]

Snip.

From what I gleaned in this thread, the OP got valid responses as to why it wasn't a good idea yet his responses amounted to stuff like "I don't like crafting" or "it should be easy to just code it in", "they can just change the lore to however they want", which shows a refusal to respect the systems and options that the game provides but would rather have SE switch everything up just to facilitate his niche needs.