Can We Get Rid Of The "Unique" Status On Gear?

[NolLacnala]

There isn't enough weekly tomes or inventory space for this

[Serilda]

I think they simply apply labels too liberally sometimes (see also: gender-locking hats just because they can). The unique flag makes sense on dungeon drops. It makes absolutely no sense on things like tome or PVP gear where you voluntarily want to buy extra copies, harming nobody, but cannot because the game wants people to have suboptimal materia for other jobs or carry around a bunch of mismatched gear pulled together from other sources. It's most silly with rings for obvious reasons.

[ErryK]

I don't see why this should be a thing.

[ovIm]

I dont mind the fact that lootable gear is unique (though, this can be cheesed by storing things with a retainer and then looting them again), but I dont understand why things you buy with tomestones need to be unique. Let us at least buy duplicates of those items (looking at you, tomestone rings)

[technole]

You can have "two" tombstone rings, you just have to upgrade one to 340. So get cracking on O2S already, heheheh.

Healers this tier it's better for damage to have a 330 tome and an upgraded tome 340 ring over the O1S 340 ring + 340 tome ring.

[BillyKaplan]

You can effectively get around this restriction already, so I don't see them removing it on their own (because this will make things too easy for us). With the exception of rings, and while it is a hassle, you can have as many copies of an item as you have retainers (not including the one you can keep in your inventory because you need an empty space otherwise you won't be able to take anything out).

[LineageRazor]

Probably the biggest defense for the Unique tag is for extremely exclusive gear, like Raid items. It's gotta sting to see a rare drop you need like the Genji Fending body get need-lotted by the other tank, who already has the piece, because he wants it to glamour one of his other tank jobs.

I honestly can't see the point of it on stuff like Tomestone gear, though. Seriously, SE should WANT players grinding out more Tomestones, since it's further incentive to keep playing the game even when you've met other goals.

[Niwashi]

On top end raid gear, I can kind of see a purpose for it. It's supposed to give other players a chance at the gear. (Even there, they could probably do without the UNIQUE tag, since they already have other ways of limiting people's rolls there anyway.)

But SE has overused the UNIQUE tag to a rather ridiculous extent. It's on tomestone gear where there's no competition for who gets the item. It's on low level dungeon drops that people can turn in for GC seals, so they're rolling on multiple copies of the item anyway. It doesn't make any sense there.

If they're going to keep it at all, at least restrict it to only where it makes sense. (Or better yet, just eliminate it entirely. Even where it's somewhat reasonable, it isn't necessary, and it exacerbates the problem with our glamour system.)

[Magic-Mal]

.

I would like it to be removed but in a way, moreso reworked. Remove it so you can possess a duplicate but you won't be able to prioritize yourself over others like in a raid. Have raid chest piece? Can't Need on it anymore. Can only Greed. That gives the others a chance to get it too.

[LineageRazor]

I would like it to be removed but in a way, moreso reworked. Remove it so you can possess a duplicate but you won't be able to prioritize yourself over others like in a raid. Have raid chest piece? Can't Need on it anymore. Can only Greed. That gives the others a chance to get it too.

Unfortunately, there's an easy way around this: Just store the item you want on a Retainer. The game no longer detects it in your inventory, and leaves you free to Need lot it. You can do this NOW, in fact - if you really want two raid bodies, there's nothing stopping you. No one does it, though, because there's little point since you can't carry them on you at the same time, and no one wants to have to zip to their retainer every time they want to change jobs. However, if you COULD carry around both pieces, folks most definitely WOULD store pieces on retainers in order to be able to double Need.

I suppose you could have the code check each players' retainers, as well, before distributing the right to Need lot, but I have no clue how difficult that would be to code, given that Retainer data is not stored locally and needs to be accessed on-demand.