Letter from the Producer, IV (02/28/2011)

[Tomino]

Current jobs = new basic jobs doesn't work because the current ones have too much flexibility to be even considered "basic".
A simple warrior is a basic class while a Paladin is advanced because it has heals, but in FF14 Gladiators can heal, cast protect and even nuke.

Specialization would feel much better in my opinion. You're a Conjurer (versatile) but if you chose to specialize in "nuking" you get your BLM artifact armor, a huge boost in damage spells and some huge drawback to ever use a Cure.
If you are familiar with WoW, think about Druid resto spec and the Tree form.

[Elcura]

i am all for treating current job as basic jobs, 5 basic jobs sounds about right, and then branches out to different 'traditional classes'.
people that wants to play basic jobs til max rank would be those players that wants to level their swordsman to 99 without changing job to knight/crusader (RO)!

Depends on if they keep the cross class system. Cause there's nothing that says a basic job, like in XI, can't stand toe-to-toe with advanced jobs in terms of usefulness.

[solracht]

It depends on what basic and advanced is in XIV. If basic jobs are designed to simply be a means to attain the advanced ones, then you can bet they won't stand toe-to-toe with them.

[Elcura]

It depends on what basic and advanced is in XIV. If basic jobs are designed to simply be a means to attain the advanced ones, then you can bet they won't stand toe-to-toe with them.

It's all a matter of design and intent. It could go either way is what I'm saying, though I'd prefer that the original jobs still retained some usefulness.

[Elrina]

Haven't been paying attention to thread the whole time, and only skimmed the last couple pages, but it seems the quote from the interview about the two "potential" ways of restoring the class system are exactly the two that have been getting discussed prior to this (or at least, the two that I've discussed several times as being the most viable). Neither would require scrapping the current system, both would enable them to use what's there to move towards the traditional jobs, and both would enhance class definition.

Right now, it could go either way. They're trying to look at the long game, like they said, and they want to try to choose the option that will let them anticipate the unexpected things we start to do with the classes and react to them more efficiently.

We could get "advanced" classes, which require rank requirements from one or multiple current classes to unlock. This could work like XI, with a single class required at a static rank across classes. Or it could be different, more like Tactics, requiring a combination of multiple classes, 2-4, and might even have the rank requirements different for each one required (Paladin being Gladiator 40, Conjurer 30; Dragoon being Lancer 40, Gladiator 25; etc.). It could be like XI in that when the rank/level limit is increased, these are also, and they keep all classes relevant at every new max level. Or they could make it easier for them to balance and just double tier it, making the current classes relevant up through 50, but only the "advanced, more refined" classes go beyond that limit (or even start at that point?), rather than beginning at rank/level 1, so that you're continuing to progress rather than travel backwards (even if it's not 50 that they start, 30 or 40 as a static beginning point would work, a rough average of the class ranks required).

It could be specializations, like they said, in which case the current classes would always be relevant simply because they're the core class to begin with. Even if it's a "Paladin" specialization, it's still ultimately a tree of Gladiator. They can still focus more heavily on the specializations post-50, and possibly a fully spread out spec for Gladiator. Which is fine for Gladiator, but not all of the classes need it (think Archer or Lancer) since the traditional specialization would be simply enhancing what's already there rather than changing it to fit a specific mold, like Paladin would be.


Personally, I'm for the former. And the type of former I'm for (and have suggested amongst friends months ago) is multiple class requirements of varying ranks with either a static beginning point for all of them or simply the average of the class ranks required to obtain the advanced class (either would be fine imo, as long as they aren't starting over at "level 1", they're continuing to advance rather than start over). Screw keeping the current classes relevant. Some of them might deserve it, but it's not necessary for all of them and would make balancing, ultimately, more difficult post-50. Easier to introduce the new stuff, and then post-50 they're basically able to completely start over with how classes are balanced by focusing on the second tier (and even if they introduce third tier stuff, that requires second tier in class requirements, by treating it this way it could be balanced out with the second tier at the design level so that it's implementation can be balanced properly).

That would enable them to almost literally start over, without actually starting over. Keep the current system relevant for the first 50 "ranks", and form real "levels" post-50 that aren't divided. Introduce content now and later that is more relevant to the way the classes work in the first 50 ranks, keep them all universally balanced through 50, but let them work without any influence from the original design when they raise the level limits (which will happen sooner or later, and must be considered). And having leveled and continuing to level current classes isn't negated or made pointless, because it directly contributes to obtaining the new classes (make the rank required from the "core class" for the advanced classes 50), and they don't start over at 1, but rather at a median of the classes required so that you're progressing this new, more defined and focused class.

If you keep the current classes relevant, in my opinion, you diminish the "advanced" in advanced classes. They're no better, meaning they aren't advanced, they're just different. Introduce the Chemist class, requiring Alchemy + Botany. Introduce Paladin, using Conjurer + Gladiator. Ninja, requiring Pugilist, Gladiator and Thaumaturge. They should be special, combinations that define archetypes that give them advanced and special purpose (even if they have "specializations" in-class to perform separate roles, which don't have to be the same amount for each, they're restricted to one specific function at any given time).



tl;dr - Get rid of the damn hodgepodge and make whichever change to the class system have reason and purpose for why you're using a specific class.

[Hiroishime]

suddenly this subforum is interesting to read, for the first time i didnt skimmed anything.

[Elrina]

Same discussion is going on in the Collection of News from the Media thread. Could like, a mod post or temp lock this one or something to coordinate the discussion in one place from this point on? ; ;

[Sephiroth]

What would they do with archer? I can't see an advanced form of this class being needed in the same way a CON could become a WHM or BLM, or a GLA become a PLD or WAR. Does it even need renaming to ranger?

I do prefer the second option of making traditional names a sub class that you specialise in however as it makes more sense. I'd specialise my CON as BLM straight away. But again not every class has multiple options like that. Archer can specialise in shooting arrows and what? I suppose you could break it into short range and long range, but that's hardly interesting.

Also why does everyone assume GLA would become PLD? Warrior would make more sense.

[Selamis]

What would they do with archer? I can't see an advanced form of this class being needed in the same way a CON could become a WHM or BLM, or a GLA become a PLD or WAR. Does it even need renaming to ranger?

I do prefer the second option of making traditional names a sub class that you specialise in however as it makes more sense. I'd specialise my CON as BLM straight away. But again not every class has multiple options like that. Archer can specialise in shooting arrows and what? I suppose you could break it into short range and long range, but that's hardly interesting.

Also why does everyone assume GLA would become PLD? Warrior would make more sense.

Because marauder is more like a warrior than gladiator is?

[Sephiroth]

Because marauder is more like a warrior than gladiator is?

Is it? All the GLAs I know play it as either a tank or a DD, plus it uses swords and shields, both things you could say about WAR in XI. But maybe MRD has similarities too. It would make more sense to have a warrior in a Colosseum than a PLD in any case.

[Selamis]

Also why does everyone assume GLA would become PLD? Warrior would make more sense.

Because marauder is more like a warrior than gladiator is?

Is it? All the GLAs I know play it as either a tank or a DD, plus it uses swords and shields, both things you could say about WAR in XI. But maybe MRD has similarities too. It would make more sense to have a warrior in a Colosseum than a PLD in any case.

Which is exactly why people assume it would become Pld. Outside of WoW, Paladins typically aren't there for DD, they're there for hate control and defense. Not sure what sorta people played War on your server in XI, but the only time I ever saw a War with a sword was when it was used in offhand, and it was either a Ridill or Joyeuse. Years ago before we knew better, sure people leveled War with a sword, but most people stopped that to use axes or great axes once it became common knowledge that anything other than that was not as good. And maybe things changed now, have been retired since September, but I've never used a shield with my War, and I never saw anyone else on my server use one outside of like, the Dunes.

Gladiator has always seemed like it'd be the tank job since before beta started, just based off the armor that they (SE) displayed in the pic, showing a Gladiator in heavy chainmail with a full helmet, and sword/shield. Marauder seemed like a War based off it's picture and use of a great axe.

[Aratharn]

I do prefer the second option of making traditional names a sub class that you specialise in however as it makes more sense. I'd specialise my CON as BLM straight away. But again not every class has multiple options like that. Archer can specialise in shooting arrows and what? I suppose you could break it into short range and long range, but that's hardly interesting.

Could do Musketeer/Ranger out of Archer... use of Guns/Bows/Crossbows.

I'm sure they'll figure something out.

[Elcura]

Personally, I'm for the former. And the type of former I'm for (and have suggested amongst friends months ago) is multiple class requirements of varying ranks with either a static beginning point for all of them or simply the average of the class ranks required to obtain the advanced class (either would be fine imo, as long as they aren't starting over at "level 1", they're continuing to advance rather than start over). Screw keeping the current classes relevant. Some of them might deserve it, but it's not necessary for all of them and would make balancing, ultimately, more difficult post-50. Easier to introduce the new stuff, and then post-50 they're basically able to completely start over with how classes are balanced by focusing on the second tier (and even if they introduce third tier stuff, that requires second tier in class requirements, by treating it this way it could be balanced out with the second tier at the design level so that it's implementation can be balanced properly).

That would enable them to almost literally start over, without actually starting over. Keep the current system relevant for the first 50 "ranks", and form real "levels" post-50 that aren't divided. Introduce content now and later that is more relevant to the way the classes work in the first 50 ranks, keep them all universally balanced through 50, but let them work without any influence from the original design when they raise the level limits (which will happen sooner or later, and must be considered). And having leveled and continuing to level current classes isn't negated or made pointless, because it directly contributes to obtaining the new classes (make the rank required from the "core class" for the advanced classes 50), and they don't start over at 1, but rather at a median of the classes required so that you're progressing this new, more defined and focused class.

If you keep the current classes relevant, in my opinion, you diminish the "advanced" in advanced classes. They're no better, meaning they aren't advanced, they're just different. Introduce the Chemist class, requiring Alchemy + Botany. Introduce Paladin, using Conjurer + Gladiator. Ninja, requiring Pugilist, Gladiator and Thaumaturge. They should be special, combinations that define archetypes that give them advanced and special purpose (even if they have "specializations" in-class to perform separate roles, which don't have to be the same amount for each, they're restricted to one specific function at any given time).

"You know that class you like? Sorry, but after a while it's obsolete. Go choose another job that you don't like as much."

[Kyroc]

Archer could specialise into Bow's or Crossbows maybe

[Grey Jorildyn]

I feel like the classes should be dividing into specialized classes at a much lower level, and do something more D&D 4.0-esque.

Like Gladiator can turn into dualwield class or tank class. Archer into Marksman/Hunter, etc. But like at level 20 or 30, not 50.

[Hyan]

Archer can specialise in shooting arrows and what? I suppose you could break it into short range and long range, but that's hardly interesting.

"Corsair"? Or just guns in general. Musketeer is already there.

[Sephiroth]

Which is exactly why people assume it would become Pld. Outside of WoW, Paladins typically aren't there for DD, they're there for hate control and defense. Not sure what sorta people played War on your server in XI, but the only time I ever saw a War with a sword was when it was used in offhand, and it was either a Ridill or Joyeuse. Years ago before we knew better, sure people leveled War with a sword, but most people stopped that to use axes or great axes once it became common knowledge that anything other than that was not as good. And maybe things changed now, have been retired since September, but I've never used a shield with my War, and I never saw anyone else on my server use one outside of like, the Dunes.

Gladiator has always seemed like it'd be the tank job since before beta started, just based off the armor that they (SE) displayed in the pic, showing a Gladiator in heavy chainmail with a full helmet, and sword/shield. Marauder seemed like a War based off it's picture and use of a great axe.

It's a long time since I played XI so you're probably right. I've never seen GLA as similar to PLD tho, I mean PLD in XI just didn't have the versatility of being a tank or a DD in the same way WAR did. GLA doesn't have any of the magic spells that PLD came with either. I don't really care what SE do with the classes as long as it makes sense and makes them more fun to play.

[Tomino]

There's still one major bundary they have to deal with.
The whole premise of FF14 was " weapon = class " so I hope they start from that.

What I myself could picture is:
Overall weapon type = basic class. ie 1handed blades = Gladiator.
Specific weapon type = advanced class. ie Broadsword = Paladin, Scimitar = Blue Mage, Fleuret = Red Mage.

This still clashes with the idea of GLA being already able to cure itself, but opens for some nice fittings:

2Handed blades = Marauder. Scythe = DRK, G.Katana = SAM
Ranged weapons = Archer. Longbow = Ranger, Gun = Corsair
2H Staves = Conjurer. Wood Staves = BLM, Ornate Staves = SMN
and so on and so forth

[Elrina]

"You know that class you like? Sorry, but after a while it's obsolete. Go choose another job that you don't like as much."

I realize that some people might seem to be enjoying the Sword-user, Axe-user, Bow-user classes that had their names translated with a bit of flavor text. Sure, a few of them have a little foundation that could be used to further advance them, but there are only so many options here. The current classes are a problem as they are, and that's why restoring the traditional jobs in some way is even on the table. From Yoshida's fifth letter, today:

In particular, the lack of class uniqueness seems to be prevalent in all regions. As this relates closely to core elements such as battle strategy, party composition, and attributes, we will be giving it top priority. It is going to entail a huge overhaul, including balancing the distribution of actions across classes, but we'll be looking to see what we can do, and then doing it!

By restoring the traditional jobs (which seems inevitable at this point, to me, just a matter of which route they choose), they're making an enormous declarative statement that the current system doesn't work as it is.

The point is identity, not continuing the complete homogenization. It's going to be done with specializations, whether it's inside the current classes or via an Advanced class system of some sort, no matter which they choose it's to focus class roles while still enabling the ability to change between them at will. No matter what is done, it's to further define your role and give your class a specific point in being, even if it can specialize in different roles at different times.

Even if they keep the current classes relevant, they won't be the same as they are now anyway, because they would have to be focused into more specific roles as well in order to be balanced against the traditional jobs being added in. For some that wouldn't be a horrible thing, I can see the concept of a Gladiator class surviving. But Conjurer vs WHM and BLM? Pugilist vs MNK and THF?

It might end up being specializations simply to avoid this entire issue, because then Pugilist and Conjurer disappear into their respective specializations anyway, and classes that deserve their own specializations when stacked against their traditional counterparts can be given them.

I feel like the classes should be dividing into specialized classes at a much lower level, and do something more D&D 4.0-esque.

Like Gladiator can turn into dualwield class or tank class. Archer into Marksman/Hunter, etc. But like at level 20 or 30, not 50.

I agree it should be done earlier, I mentioned 50 earlier because I was half asleep and was thinking of progress currently made being kept. The core of my thoughts is still in what I posted, I think, but I wasn't all there. Like, I don't expect the cross-class ability system to survive the way it works now by the end of this, since it's built around the old design perspective of a weapon-user that shares abilities between classes to "make your own class", as I believe they phrased it once or twice early on. And specializations might be the better way to take it, simply because it would avoid a lot of the pitfalls around the different ways "advanced classes/jobs" could be implemented, while making sure the current classes stay relevant simply because they're the core of what is to come.

Like I said, it seems to me like they've already decided to restore the traditional jobs, it's just a matter of which choice they make in how to do so. So all the classes will remain balanced amongst each other, specializations would let them phase out classes that have no defined purpose of their own in favor of traditional FF class concepts while maintaining a spec for those that do.



Oh, and Hyan, Musketeer may "already be there" in an earlier design sense, but that doesn't mean that with all these changes that it would be kept. It would make much more sense, imo, to specialize Archer the way it was already suggested, bow/crossbow/guns, Archer/Ranger/Musketeer specs respectively, or something like that.

[Elcura]

Stuff

No matter how much you write, I will always be against making classes obsolete. It's just fucking stupid. Keep all the classes relevant and design better goddamn classes. Because when you make stuff obsolete, you're killing options. You're killing possibilities and just limiting design when it doesn't need to be limited.

PUG isn't MNK or THF, so why can't you have all progressing at the same time? Why can't PUG be designed to be specialized later on alongside MNK or THF? Why can't CON do that with WHM and BLM? I don't care if CON is a requirement to unlock WHM and BLM (makes sense), but to make the class irrelevant after 30-50 levels is bullshit.