We really should be able to glamour other jobs' sets

[Siddiax]

Would have been nice if the "new" Garo outfits had no restrictions as well. I'd imagine that lots of people would use the Ranged DPS sets on other jobs.

[PoisonBerries]

Huge agree. I love experimenting with glamour and there'd be so much more creative freedom if they got rid of this restriction. I actually leveled multiple jobs just to have more glamour options in general. And seeing that NPCs get to bypass the restrictions while PCs can't miffs me.



I would have loved to use these boots for my WAR glamour, but alas, only Striking and Casting roles get to wear them, even though they're armored. Had to make do with the Warg Fending boots to get a similar look, though they don't have the high heels, which would have been perfect for me.

I hope they remove the role/job restrictions. AF gear makes sense but everything else should be unrestricted once it goes in the glamour dresser.

[Jirah]

All I freaking want is equal amount of weapon glams, give me a shiva gunblade!

[Xirean]

All I freaking want is equal amount of weapon glams, give me a shiva gunblade!

This right here bothers me more than the topic of the thread I think. The fact that new jobs are added and they don't have all the previous weapons retroactively added is very disappointing. I can understand (while still disagreeing) with relics, but not even primals?

[Siddiax]

Huge agree. I love experimenting with glamour and there'd be so much more creative freedom if they got rid of this restriction. I actually leveled multiple jobs just to have more glamour options in general. And seeing that NPCs get to bypass the restrictions while PCs can't miffs me.



I would have loved to use these boots for my WAR glamour, but alas, only Striking and Casting roles get to wear them, even though they're armored. Had to make do with the Warg Fending boots to get a similar look, though they don't have the high heels, which would have been perfect for me.

I hope they remove the role/job restrictions. AF gear makes sense but everything else should be unrestricted once it goes in the glamour dresser.

Yep, the Bonewicca and Warg sets are some of the best examples of why we need cross-role glamours. I'd love to be able to swap pieces, as some roles have much cooler helmets or boots than others.

[ty_taurus]

I'm also not entirely sure why there's a separation of Maiming and Striking as well as Scouting and Aiming. I know DRG can wear certain heavy armor sets from ARR, but the only real distinction between physical DPS is whether they use Strength or Dexterity. It would also cut down a lot of total items to merge each pair and make each piece appear more frequently in dungeon loot. We also don't actually get more than 4 different sets of gear aesthetically anyway. Every time we get new gear, Fending and Maiming are usually the same, Striking and Scouting are usually the same, Casting and Healing is usually the same but one is black and the other is white, and Aiming is on its own. Sometimes these change, but it's typically just 4 new outfits we see.

[Siddiax]

I'm also not entirely sure why there's a separation of Maiming and Striking as well as Scouting and Aiming. I know DRG can wear certain heavy armor sets from ARR, but the only real distinction between physical DPS is whether they use Strength or Dexterity. It would also cut down a lot of total items to merge each pair and make each piece appear more frequently in dungeon loot. We also don't actually get more than 4 different sets of gear aesthetically anyway. Every time we get new gear, Fending and Maiming are usually the same, Striking and Scouting are usually the same, Casting and Healing is usually the same but one is black and the other is white, and Aiming is on its own. Sometimes these change, but it's typically just 4 new outfits we see.

I can see it from a gameplay perspective - Square just don't want too many jobs using the same armor type as actual gear. From glamour perspective though... it's absolutely illogical. It's true that there's mostly 4 outfits per set, though they've stopped following the "rules" they established (Maiming/Fending and Casting/Healing being similar) It's like they roll a dice and just pick 2 jobs that will share an appearance, which supports the fact that glamour restrictions are pointless.

[ty_taurus]

I can see it from a gameplay perspective - Square just don't want too many jobs using the same armor type as actual gear. From glamour perspective though... it's absolutely illogical. It's true that there's mostly 4 outfits per set, though they've stopped following the "rules" they established (Maiming/Fending and Casting/Healing being similar) It's like they roll a dice and just pick 2 jobs that will share an appearance, which supports the fact that glamour restrictions are pointless.

"Alright, which sucker is getting shafted with sharing the caster/healer set this time?"

[Siddiax]

"Alright, which sucker is getting shafted with sharing the caster/healer set this time?"

How about that time when they decided to make Striking and Healing share the same look (Edengate) It looks absolutely ridiculous. Almost as much as Scouting getting a Casting robe... oh wait...

[Link941]

I think Yoshi P said something a while back about why clothing is restricted to classes. He didn't want classes looking nothing like what their job is iirc. Which I kinda get but if that is the reason then why don't they just restrict specific armors like relic sets to their job and have everything else unrestricted? Like there are tons of pieces of individual clothing that if I showed you them you would have no way of knowing what class they belong to but are still restricted to specific jobs.