FANDOM



/Archive1

Cleanup of the talk page?

I've deleted my own comments and am making a suggestion to clear most of the comments from this page for file size and due to them being in reference to a page format that has been changed significantly to the point that they no longer apply. The edit war statements are equally unnecessary as they are in reference to a long settled debate on abilities/traits. Feel free to clear this one out if you choose to delete the rest as well. Storme 11:51, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Edit war

After a complaint on the forums and a quick overview of the history page, this page is now protected because you can't discuss things like adults and would rather fight about it and war revisions. It's simple:

  • It qualifies in the job trait section if whilst activated in the merit section, it is present in your job trait list.
  • If qualifies in the job ability section if whilst activated in the merit section, it is present in your job ability list.
  • It does not qualify for either if it appears in neither.

Is it really that hard? If you people really think that these are present in the job trait list, perhaps you care to back it up with a screenshot? I wouldn't know, I don't have Dancer at 75. --CharitwoTalk 12:57, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

I have implemented my alternative. Tahngarthortalk-contribs 19:28, 24 October 2008 (UTC)


Question About The Links In The Article

Is it really necessary to have the Job Ability table include links? They link right back to the same page and it's not like people have to scroll down far to see the information. I recommend the links be removed until they are needed. Shaowstrike 03:00, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

I agree. If there are to be links in there (I'm all for having links for anything reasonable), the different categories of abilities should at least have its own page/sub-page so it isn't coming right back to the Dancer page again. --Gamesoul Master 09:08, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

DNC Tanking

looks like SE is trying to make DNC into a tank or maybe a support tank of sorts maybe we will see more people using DNC for merit parties when they cannot find a BRD. --Orivaan - Midgardsormr 19:33, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

So funny. One piece of gear with +2 enmity and a couple of merited job abillities and suddenly SE want to make it a tank. And for some reason that way maybe it can be a replacement for bards.... /sigh Rafage 09:26, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Dagger skill question

Moved from main page: "(Um... But I have DNC1/THF1, and dagger skill capped at 6. with no merits and zero gear. 2009/03/27)"

You're seeing the skill of the THF1, which does cap dagger at six. DNC1/--- would only have dagger 5. --Kasandaro 17:50, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Undid Edit

Adding all of a DNC's abilities to the Job Ability list is unnecessary, as they are all neatly listed lower on the page. The Job Ability List was fine listing just the categories that the different abilities fall under (the list saying just Sambas, rather then listing every single Samba they get). Give the sheer number of Job Abilities available to DNC and the above reason, the list became unnecessarily large. That edit has been undone. --Nahara 03:28, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

I agree that this edit seems unnecessary. Scholar and Corsair have similar issues and they are presented how this page used to be presented. The dances are the equivalent to rolls, spells or stategems, and the older is layout better presents the information in my opinion. --GAHOO t/ c 15:17, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
Well I redid the revamp. There is certainly no need for the info to be there 2x. It's not bad like this, although not sure it is better than it was before the revamp, but it is certainly better than the original redo. --GAHOO t/ c 15:30, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
Honestly, I still feel it looked fine the way it was before people started shoving all of their dances into the Job Ability list. I think that a uniform format for the DNC, SCH, and COR jobs needs to be implemented, and if SCH and COR are fine by listing simply "Stratagems" and "Phantom Roll" and "Quick Draw" in the Job Ability list while listing the specifics lower on the page, the DNC page should be allowed to be formatted the same. Otherwise, SCH and COR should have every Stratagem and every Phantom Roll and Quick Draw in their JA lists like DNC currently has with its dances. --Nahara 18:46, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
Whoever changed the page to make separate tables for the different abilities really screwed it up. I personally think it's so much more inconvenient now. With the one list we could at least see all the abilities in one place, now they're spread out throughout the whole page. Very annoying in my opinion. --Yamoto 07:39, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
It was changed for proper consistancy with layout of other jobs with similar abilities. The dances, steps, and flourishes have their own sub categories, similar to SCH strategems, and COR phantom rolls. This is the proper layout for all those jobs as the only things that should be in the job abilites list are what is visible in them in game menus. However, if you'd prefer to discuss a change in the design of all the job templates that work this way, please do. Until then, I believe that this is the best format that we should be using. More so, with all the flourishes listed under job abilities, it makes it far more difficult to determine which ones are type I or type II and can be used in rapid succession. Though I would like to find a better layout suggestion to get all the tables to fit onscreen for ease of viewing the material. Storme 02:42, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Ability List

What is it with people with 0-10 edits, coming in and screwing up the job abilities list? No, The DNC page does NOT have to be "like sch and cor". It's a Different Job. And see how people who actually play dancer (Yamoto, above, and myself) need the long list? The flourishes are about the only valid reason to "split things up", and that is easily handled by the subtable down below. Especially with Level Sync these days, its really important to have a consecutive list of what DNC can do, sorted just by job level. Having to go crossreference 6 different tables for that, is incredibly dumb.

Not to mention, the shortened list, is completely useless. Who cares if there's a "menu entry for flourishes I at level 20"? As a DNC I dont need to know that. I need to know what is actually IN THE MENU, at level 20!

I'll also point out that for COR, listing just the menu entry for phantom roll, is different. It is just ONE entry with an obvious full sub-table for all the rolls. All the other entries in the COR "job abilities" table, are things that actual do something. In contrast, none of the non-merited JA short table entries do anything, with the exception of Trance. Useless Table. --Theferret 18:20, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Editing the abilities table does not require you to replace the other text on the page with poorly edited copy that is difficult to follow and much better explained on other pages.--Anthoron T/ C 00:04, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
I recently did a very targetted edit, to change JUST the abilities table. That was trashed, by what I presume is a dummy account made by someone for the sole purpose of doing that edit, to hide their regular account. An account made on the same day the edit is made, and they do NOTHING else on the wiki? How pathetic, that someone would hide like that. So anyway, your opinion of the rest of the text, isnt relevant to the ability list. Besides which, I'm not the one who made the text a strange mixed around jumble that sounded more like a guide. So I'm glad you cleaned that up, at least. --Theferret 00:57, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

I personally checked with Charitwo when I had revamped the page for consistency of format with other similar jobs. I was told that my layout was the preferred way to outline the page. As the ruling of job page design currently stands, the job ability list should only show exactly what is shown in game when the job ability list is accessed. As a side note, I see the lower ability tables were changed to a better layout for viewing. Thanks to the re-editor that did so. Storme 04:04, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Heh, apparently I'm a dummy account? You don't need to be a regular editor on this particular wiki to see that the way you had it was ugly and unnecessary. Late response, but felt compelled to reply. --Adonzo 05:14, January 17, 2010 (UTC)

Artifact Equipment Tables

Since there doesn't seem to be a widely accepted layout for the Artifact Armor section, I took the DRG layout and changed it around a little bit for easier reading. I'd like people's opinions on this layout so that if it's acceptable, we can implement it as the standard across all 20 job pages. You can find the layout here. TinDragon (talk) 18:24, September 22, 2010 (UTC)

Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.