Inevitable Job Simplifications?

[Renathras]

Good points. Simply put, we are pigeon-holed into 3 roles and SE has backed themselves into a corner. This is why we wind up seeing limited jobs like BLU. That's how they can allow these jobs to exist, but not allowing them to do any current content.

Warden was an example of what LOTRO would consider a fairly complicated job. I'd love to see something similar in FFXIV, but it would have to set into one of the three roles and would probably lose all its flavor.

Agreed. BLU is able to do so much because it breaks with the otherwise rigid system FFXIV uses. But because it does so, it isn't allowed to compete in current content because...I guess people clearing content is bad or something.

This trend of ... reworking old jobs (deleting them and giving another job their name and soul crystal, in SMN's case) ... is really troubling.

I disagree with your post on the whole, but specifically the words above, I agree with.

I feel like at this point they should be adding these as new Jobs, not reworking/replacing existing Jobs. If a Job sucks, then let it continue to suck. If the Devs thought Old SMN was in a corner, they could just give them a new animation for Miasma and Egi Assault and then call it a day. Make no additional changes to the rotation in future expansions, just an occasional graphic upgrade to a spell. Then people can't complain the Job was changed, and if it sucks...well, then it just sucks and they want it to suck, so...let it suck. They can't complain it's not being changed, since they are on the record not wanting it reworked. They can't complain the Devs are just being lazy or vindictive since we know they would complain if the Devs seriously looked at and changed the Job. So the Job could exist as a more or less time capsule with some pretty window dressing. And that would be fine. The people that would love it would continue to love it. After all, if people loved ShB SMN, they can't well complain that it isn't changed since they already LOVE IT as it was.

I think if people want some Jobs to be terrible and unfun to play, because they somehow find that fun, that's fine, and they should absolutely be allowed to keep that. I don't think they should force it on everyone else/change other Jobs to be like that, but it's fine if some Jobs are like BLM and suck. Some few people will find them fun, everyone else will avoid them like the plague, and everyone can be vaguely happy together.

I honestly have no idea why this isn't allowed - or is allowed for BLM and nothing else.

New SMN is way better than Old SMN. It could have just been a new Job. It's not like FF lore doesn't have more than one name for the Summoner archetype. Evoker or Caller (probably Evoker) would have worked fine. Have it share the Class Arcanist and be done with it. Would some people complain about that being weird? Sure. But who cares?

As for these, they're not arguing the points and are just rampant ad hominem attempts to avoid the actual discussion going on. As such, I won't be giving them anything other than a HB text so they will stop distracting and attempting to derail the thread. If those of you quoted wish to continue derailing the thread, that's on you. If those of you who are liking their posts which have no substance, no point to the discussion, and are just derailing attempts want to continue liking their posts because they're somehow your paragons...you have questionable taste, but that's on you, too. I won't continue giving it any kind of top billing, and may honestly just ignore them as what they are - harassment and derailing attempts.

...

I see your posts.
I read your posts.
I reply to your posts - often point by point, often quoting your own words.

Saying people are bad at reading comprehension doesn't work well when they're using your own statements.

As for what is good faith - good faith means a person is making an honest attempt. (That means the "or no" doesn't count, even if that is what's happening). If I seem to be misunderstanding what you're saying, it might be worth you asking questions to see why I'm not understanding something, or restating it. I would like to know, as you asked me the question, what have I misrepresented of your position? What have I misunderstood of it?

As for mine, you've consistently ignored my posts (as you admit) and even flaunted that you were doing so. But you've also misrepresented them as favoring "braindead" (when I've clearly said I don't see SMN as "braindead"), and you seem to misunderstand when I talk about things being fun or not or discussing specific terms.

You like to be so pedantic about words and meaning and now is discarding it as if I said nothing. It's there, I said it, I didn't say just bad things about this new SMN like you claimed it. Deal with it.

Stop.
With.
The.
Attempted.
Gotcha.
Ad.
Hominem.
Fallacy.

As I noted, you're being antagonistic, and if you weren't aware, ad hominem (what you're doing right now - attacking/addressing me directly, not my argument) is a logical fallacy. "attack on the person" or "addressing the person" rather than their argument. It's an attempt to sidestep arguments that are difficult to overcome.

If I was going to be PEDANTIC, I'd note I said:

What did I say in that quote that is wrong?

...

You've resisted saying good things about it? Also true.

...and point out that you saying, in only one post in the entire thread, while also saying "but it still sucks" that the graphics were pretty could be considered "resisting" saying good things about it and only doing so grudgingly. So if I was going to be pedantic, I'd point out my statement was still true.

Also, it's not "discarding it as if (you) said nothing". It's pointing out you've said exactly ONE good thing, couched in a compound statement of negativity, and that I did not "gloss over" or "discard" it, I didn't consider it you being positive when you were couching it in "and it still sucks".

You said one thing that MAY not have been bad, and seemed to do so grudgingly.

And now you're engaging in rampant ad hominem because you don't want to actually deal with arguments which you can't overcome, so you'd rather attack the person saying them.

Meanwhile, do you know what you've done?

You that aren't reading all my posts if you say that. I already said that, but clearly you just gloss over what want to read and discard the rest.

...because I said this in my prior post, and you clearly just glossed over it and discarded the rest.

Deal with it.