I would like to see Classes treated as proper, separate "Jobs"

[Lambdafish]

Yes lets not just stop there; Jobs are a massive waste of resources and players only really play the 'best' ones anyway so from now on there should only be healer, tank and dps so no one can be excluded! Yay for everyone! /endsarcasm.

"Right. So, if we did something like add mode A and mode B for dragoon, eventually people on the internet would examine them and choose which one was stronger. Then, when we created new content, the content would have to be based on whatever was strongest. There would be a lot of discussion about the job states like "that job is too strong" or "that job is too weak" and people would always choose what they felt was best. That's not to say a skill system like that would be negative, but the armoury system itself already allows you to play all of the different jobs. Since we already have that system in place, I'm not expecting that we'll make branches for jobs for the time being."
- Yoshi P's official stance on skill trees, January 2016

https://www.bluegartr.com/threads/12...tions-requests

Don't be buttmad that you don't get your way ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

My personal opinion is that the job system in itself IS the skill tree system, we get the choice of which playstyle we want to play and would rather they put the resources towards a new job than a skill-tree system, the SCH/SMN problem is enough of a reason to go away from it.

[Zari]

I dont understand why they deemed smn/sch a failure, imean unless you consider a dps-healer and a support-dps that have similar skills a failure. But what do i know i just like scholar, XD.

It was more about balancing and other issues like attribute points coming off of the fact that they share a base class.

[Jynx]

No the class system even as it is restricts the designers. Classes are a relic that need to be torn from the game not expanded upon.

[MagiusNecros]

I dont understand why they deemed smn/sch a failure, imean unless you consider a dps-healer and a support-dps that have similar skills a failure. But what do i know i just like scholar, XD.

It's more SCH is a dynamic class that has lots of abilities from a healing and a damage dealing perspective. Whereas SMN is a complete joke. And many of their grievances comes from balancing content because of the Fairy. They basically created a monster and have no clue how to balance content around it.

If anything I'd consider SCH a success and SMN a failure.

No the class system even as it is restricts the designers. Classes are a relic that need to be torn from the game not expanded upon.

I think the dev team needs to play an actual game of DnD and understand the basis of a character's basic attributes and then take a look at classes and understand that tying a base class to a single weapon type and simple stat system for the sake of being simple is where everything went wrong.

If the creators are restricted by something they created themselves what does that say about them? And if these systems were created by staff from1.0 why didn't they keep those bums on staff and collaborate together to improve the existing system a long ass time ago?

[Terin]

If Classes are treated as separate Jobs, though, that's something totally different than the issues that Yoshi-P mentions. The problem he mentions, is two versions of the same job filling the same role. Instead, you would be presented something more like everyone having a DPS role, as well as a Healer or Tank form.

The only place it becomes confusing is with Arcanist, Summoner, and Scholar. Not sure how to handle that.

Also, I'm all about nostalgia. At the same time, FFXIV (or at least ARR) has managed to build a fascinating world and deep, interest story unique unto itself. The core Classes might not be "classic Final Fantasy Jobs", but I think their original incarnations were interesting enough to warrant a place beside classic Jobs. Classes are only "outdated" because they aren't relevant right now. Giving them unique roles, and perhaps even Artifact Armor, would give them a place in the game.

[Alahra]

instead refine the Armoury System (give classes to the Heavensward Jobs and separate SCH from ACN and give it a new base class), as it's becoming so convoluted now, it's losing consistency

I really wish they would do this. It drives me nuts that Machinist doesn't have a Musketeer base class (there's a guild for it in Limsa Lominsa!), and why Dark Knight didn't branch off of Ravager (from FFTA) is beyond me. Astrologian is a bit harder to decouple into a class and job, but I'm sure they could have done something.

I like the structure of base classes leading into jobs, both because I actually enjoy being low level for new classes (leveling is my favorite thing to do, so starting at level 30 means I get less content—but I also understand it's not everyone's cup of tea) and also because it tickles my nostalgia bone. The idea of "advanced" classes in Final Fantasy has been around since FF1, which had the class change trial. Fighter going into Knight/Paladin in FF1 is fairly analogous to Gladiator going into Paladin in FFXIV, and I want to see more of that, not less.

In terms of SCH/SMN, I've always felt that thematically, SCH branches off of the ACN questline far better than SMN does, but SMN branches off of ACN's abilities better, so which one should be given primacy is tough. But one of them probably should at this point.

But these are such fundamental changes, I don't see it getting done, as it requires a lot of reworking. Would a level 50 DRK need to go back and do 1-30 quests, for instance? Would they renname all of the base SCH abilities? Especially in the case of the latter, they might be tempted to redesign the class from the ground up, which could end up alienating a lot of current SCHs.

[Eloah]

It was more about balancing and other issues like attribute points coming off of the fact that they share a base class.

Certain skill balances I get, but attribute points arent an issue really, since they dont do much. Honestly they are just a fake attempt at customization.

If anything I'd consider SCH a success and SMN a failure.

While Scholar might be more of a success than Summoner, Summoner is far from a failure. Does it have flaws yes, but the only reason it's deemed a "failure" by the player base is because everyone wanted a "traditional" Summoner, which doesn't exist. (Please no debate talk). By that same logic, if XIVs is a failure in design but a success in execution, than XIs was a success in design and a failure in execution.

[MaeIsMean]

No the class system even as it is restricts the designers. Classes are a relic that need to be torn from the game not expanded upon.

Honestly, the most confusing thing to me as a new player was understanding classes vs jobs and which jobs belonged to which classes. Still hard for me to remember to use the word "Jobs" when speaking of them, and find myself inverting them quite often.

[RiceisNice]

They are not and nor should they add specs or skill trees etc... People would find which specs or trees that worked best and are the most optimize, and people without said skills or specs would be insta kicked from parties and the GMs wouldn't do anything about it, because of the playstyle clause they have already stated is the TOS. Most games that had skill trees have done away with them, because of cookie cutter specs.

We already have this in the form of different jobs. You have jobs that fill the same role but so do different. There will always be an optimal set up (you'd be a damned fool to not have a scholar warrior in a progression group), but it's not as bad as you'd make it out to be. But because of what I said, I dont nessescarily think we need each jobs to have a branching talent tree or the like, but more jobs that add diversity to the gameplay.

I dont understand why they deemed smn/sch a failure, imean unless you consider a dps-healer and a support-dps that have similar skills a failure. But what do i know i just like scholar, XD.

Balancing the two jobs (specifically, summoner's dps) is a nightmare without affecting the other. Consider how a SCH primarily deals dps in a group; its in a near identical manner as SMN. During hte days of 2.x, SMN dps was arguably in need of some tuning, but scholar didn't (in consideration of it being a healer).

Now take that problem, but instead carry it over to something like an Archer branching to bard/ranger. They're both going to be drawing from the same 1-50 skills and traits. You'd have your hands tied trying to nerf/buff ranger's dps without also affecting bard's, and that's not even getting into diversifying gameplay. It's also because they don't start gaining job skills until level 30, much of the foundation is already established; Take a marauder > warrior/bersererker, a berserker is still going to do the same rotations as a warrior with 8 or so skills sprinkled on top of it. Unless it retroactively changes the skills and traits (that in itself is a very huge revamp of what we currently have) in relation to your job crystal, branching jobs simply isn't going to work and is a huge restriction on an otherwise expansive concept.

I really wish they would do this. It drives me nuts that Machinist doesn't have a Musketeer base class (there's a guild for it in Limsa Lominsa!), and why Dark Knight didn't branch off of Ravager (from FFTA) is beyond me. Astrologian is a bit harder to decouple into a class and job, but I'm sure they could have done something.

Let's be honest though, in the end it really adds nothing to the design of jobs in the long run except for lore (which is typically not a good restriction, see PvP). Machinist would have to be redone from 1-30 in regards to skill to make sense for musketeer (because honestly, the aethertransmitter, a defining feature of MCH is justifying all the abilities we use from level 1 and onward). Not that I'd have a problem with it, but skipping classes has worked out and honestly, the job crystals as of now are very archaic, pointless, and causing design problems in the instances that try to utilize it (SMN/SCH for example).

But these are such fundamental changes, I don't see it getting done, as it requires a lot of reworking. Would a level 50 DRK need to go back and do 1-30 quests, for instance? Would they renname all of the base SCH abilities? Especially in the case of the latter, they might be tempted to redesign the class from the ground up, which could end up alienating a lot of current SCHs.

Fundamental changes can work provided it makes sense, fits the fantasy, and adds more to the identity of the job rather than taking away from it. Take WoW's hunter for example, going into Cataclysm they removed mana bars for them entirely and gave them something akin to TP. Instead of doing skills to dump mana until you hit 0, you'd focus jump to empty out your resource (which takes 2-3 shots, compared to 40+ previously, which is incredibly motonoious) and instead alternate between focus dumping and using a focus regen skill that has a cast time (you have to stay stationary). It didn't change the core foundation of hunter's gameplay of using weaponskills and optimizing their resource use, but made it much more faster paced and rewarded good play. Compared to say, straight up getting rid of all the disease abilities from SCH, ruin becomes broil, and physic becomes aldo. You take away their DoTs and baked in scholar theme'd abilities in place of it;s standing spells, but now you're just a WHM but with shields and lower healing potencies. Or Wanderer's Minuet. Honestly speaking, "it's a lot of work" should never be an excuse to not implement something, espesically when we're looking at an expansion.

[Dualgunner]

Fundamental changes can work provided it makes sense, fits the fantasy, and adds more to the identity of the job rather than taking away from it. Take WoW's hunter for example, going into Cataclysm they removed mana bars for them entirely and gave them something akin to TP. Instead of doing skills to dump mana until you hit 0, you'd focus jump to empty out your resource (which takes 2-3 shots, compared to 40+ previously, which is incredibly motonoious) and instead alternate between focus dumping and using a focus regen skill that has a cast time (you have to stay stationary). It didn't change the core foundation of hunter's gameplay of using weaponskills and optimizing their resource use, but made it much more faster paced and rewarded good play. Compared to say, straight up getting rid of all the disease abilities from SCH, ruin becomes broil, and physic becomes aldo. You take away their DoTs and baked in scholar theme'd abilities in place of it;s standing spells, but now you're just a WHM but with shields and lower healing potencies. Or Wanderer's Minuet. Honestly speaking, "it's a lot of work" should never be an excuse to not implement something, espesically when we're looking at an expansion.

Had a thought the other day for Dragoon to change out its MP bar with a Blood of the Dragon bar. Same essential mechanic as BotD, only your bar (much more visible than a small buff icon) represents how much BotD time is left.