Restricting Weapon skills to original class.

[Sirtis]

The more I think about it, the more I can see two ways that they might consider altering the cross-class usage of weapon skills, if they decide to do anything at all.

1. Leave some weapon skills with the ability to cross-class, but make others, perhaps the better ones, class-specific.

2. Do not change the ability to cross-class weapon skills, but only allow a weapon skill to be used when the damage type of the weapon equipped matches the damage type of the weapon skill (see PUG weapons with slashing mentioned above).

I'm on the fence as to how I feel about it at this point. I could see either method done, or none at all. The second one seems like a logical move to me.

Congrats. #1 is how the current game is. I am sure you have seen them before. That Speed Surge and Life Surge you have as a lancer can not be used as a Pugilist. While they could be more restricted (as I can't think of any restricted PUG skills off the top of my head), they are/have worked on the idea of open class weapon skills, closed class abilities. You want them to enhance the current method, which is fine. The classes are being looked at in how they are to be defined nearly constantly from within and without.

[BlaiseLallaise]

Congrats. #1 is how the current game is. I am sure you have seen them before. That Speed Surge and Life Surge you have as a lancer can not be used as a Pugilist. While they could be more restricted (as I can't think of any restricted PUG skills off the top of my head), they are/have worked on the idea of open class weapon skills, closed class abilities. You want them to enhance the current method, which is fine. The classes are being looked at in how they are to be defined nearly constantly from within and without.

That's odd. I thought we were just talking about weapon skills here. What I meant in #1 is reducing the number of weapon skills that can be used cross-class. Using PUG as an example, allow Concussive Blow and Seismic Shock to be cross-classed, but keep Aura Pulse PUG only. Allow Jarring Strike to be cross-classed, but keep Haymaker PUG only.

[Crowley]

I think a lot of us like the "FF:Tactics" build system. Sure they need to define you main job more, but that's in the works.

[Roaran]

That's odd. I thought we were just talking about weapon skills here.

I'm curious, for anyone against this thread's topic; If incapacitation and damage type were not an issue, would you then be in favor of having most/all/new weapon skills be restricted in order for the developers to have a manageable list of animations/effects an so said animations/effects could then be improved?

[Lienn]

I'm curious, for anyone against this thread's topic; If incapacitation and damage type were not an issue, would you then be in favor of having most/all/new weapon skills be restricted in order for the developers to have a manageable list of animations/effects an so said animations/effects could then be improved?

i'm not. I support the idea of improved animation and exclusive animations when a class use its native WS, but i don't agree with restrictin g WS to its native class.

I believe, however, that this might happen with the new jobs. I believe new classes may be just like current ones, but new jobs (advanced jobs) will have most actions restricted to them.

[Augury]

I'm curious, for anyone against this thread's topic; If incapacitation and damage type were not an issue, would you then be in favor of having most/all/new weapon skills be restricted in order for the developers to have a manageable list of animations/effects an so said animations/effects could then be improved?

Well, that puts it more into the gray area for me. The issue I have is that if Job supply skill-sets, should their weapon skills only be limited to what is available for their active weapon? I keep finding reasons to say "no" to this, even though restrictions COULD be beneficial in this situation.

For example... Why shouldn't a Monk be able to use Marauder or Lancer skills in addition to Pugilist ones, when they have the potential to congeal so well? Why should a hunter be stuck to Glad or Arc when being able to use ranged Glad skills just sounds so much more fun in addition to Hunter skills?

From my point of view though, the DEVs want my money... Thus, I don't think it's plausible for them to hide behind the excuse of it being difficult to create accurate animations. SquEnix, has and CAN put more into this game's aesthetics other than the amount of vRAM it burns up or how "HiDef it can be". In-fact, they can and SHOULD do just the opposite- allow lower power, better detailed aesthetics which trades off the HD for charm and clever design

[Mr_Gyactus]

I'm curious, for anyone against this thread's topic; If incapacitation and damage type were not an issue, would you then be in favor of having most/all/new weapon skills be restricted in order for the developers to have a manageable list of animations/effects an so said animations/effects could then be improved?

If incapacitation was not an issue, probably I was never using cross-class skills. The damage is lower (without affinity), cooldown higher...
i.e. I use leg sweep with every class because I don't have a formal substitute, or I need more stun's skills in my rotation.

If I'm tanking as marauder, I need taunt and provoke. If I'm tanking as gladiator, do I need taunt?

I can use some skill from conj if I'm thau, but does it really worth? less damage, cooldown... and both have direct spells and DOT spells.

[Alise]

There would be no point to play multiple class if they remove the cross skill feature which is reason people play cross-classes now.

If crossing were actually the problem, then why CON/THM spell also look so plain/suck? So I agree that animation could improve as cross-class skill too! it is only up to them to work on it or lazy.

[Roaran]

If crossing were actually the problem, then why CON/THM spell also look so plain/suck?

I thought this was a good point, but if you look at the whole development situation concerning battle effects, Spells and WS are all included together. If you spend too much time on one, the other suffers. Or if you expand one too much, the other suffers as well.

So, just because spells suck, doesn't necessarily mean its an art problem, it is still a design problem.

Another point that could be made, if less time is spent on making effects & animations work for all the classes, more time would be available for spells. So both could improve by simply limiting weapon skills to their weapon.

****Also I think some people might be getting confused. This thread is only about limiting weapon skills, not all actions. Those not familiar with ffxi, a weapon skill would be considered any melee skill like Skull Sunder or Red Lotus Blade, or possibly even magic skills like Damnation and Radiance.

[MeowyWowie]

****Also I think some people might be getting confused. This thread is only about limiting weapon skills, not all actions. Those not familiar with ffxi, a weapon skill would be considered any melee skill like Skull Sunder or Red Lotus Blade, or possibly even magic skills like Damnation and Radiance.

I have to agree with this. I think some people are getting confused with the difference between Weapon Skills and Abilities/Magic. Even if they restrict WS's to their parent weapons the system is still very customizable. To me, it just makes sense that Weapon Skills should be just that, Weapon Skills. Abilities and Magic should remain unchanged.

In the end, I think the new job system they're working on will take care of all this. Though I'm assuming they they might restrict WS's, Abilities and Magic with it, something many will not be too happy about. For example: Changing to Paladin will only let you equip staffs, swords and daggers for weapons; healing and buffing spells for magic; and enmity generation, defense/magic defense buffs for abilities.

I personally would accept this system, but I'm sure many will not. We'll see what happens.