Appearance armor slots - mistake?

[Anastasie]

<p><span style="color: #cc00ff;"><b>Ok - this seems to be backwards. Shouldn't that say lighter?</b> </span></p><p>"You'll only be able to equip items for appearance that your class could normally wear. So mages cannot equip plate. We did kick around this exact idea of forcing your appearance piece to match the type of the equipped piece, but it was pretty split in terms of people that were for/against it, so we left it open for now. If people want to run around in the cities displaying guild status clothing, it would be a pain if they had to unequip their armor to make it work. If your tank insists on tanking in a robe, just don't heal him. "</p><p>Rothgar EQ2 Dev Team</p><p>From test Update notes today:</p><ul><li><div>Upon reaching level 20, you'll be able to access new appearance item slots on the inventory window. </div></li><li>Equipping items in the appearance slots will change the way you look without affecting your stats. </li><li>Only items usable by your class, and <span style="color: #cc0000;"><b>heavier</b></span> than your currently equipped armor can be worn. </li><li>Some clothing items, such as city rewards will be wearable by everyone. </li></ul>

[Lyasa]

guessing it's working that way so plate tanks can't go around wearing  robes over their plate armor

[Terron]

"not lighter" would make more sense,

[Anastasie]

<p>Wow - that is quite limiting. At least they are not including status clothing in that. I wonder if the handcrafted vanity outfits will be wearable as well. They really need to give us more status clothing. We haven't had a new outfit since GL 40.</p>

[wiire]

Thats slightly odd and confusing, can anyone on test check this out and explain it to us? So if I'm a chain wearing defiler, I can't equip a pretty robe? So basically even if an item is 'usable by my class' I cant use it for appearance? I can ONLY wear chain?

[Spangles]

<p>What this actually means is that you could have a plate tank who decides, for some bizarre reason, that he wishes to use a chainmail vest instead of a breast plate but that for fluff reasons may want to look like a plate tank, he can.  He is allowed to wear chain as his main armour if he wishes, but with the fluff slot he can put in a plate piece because it is heavier, but he couldn't make it look like he was wearing leather or cloth.</p>

[wiire]

<p>Ok, I understand a big important plate tank needing to look 'right' or 'proper'</p><p>But a lil chain wearing healer can't wear pretty leather boots over her big uncomfortable looking chain boots? Why does it matter what the heck a healer looks like?</p>

[Finora]

<p>This is a horrific change. Most stupid actually. Why bother with appearance slots at all if you aren't going to let people pick what they want to wear.</p><p>I was also was very much looking forward to this as I could FINALLY have some armor that looked nice, and possibly not exactly like everyone else. Now you are saying that just because one of my characters wears chain, she won't be able to equip some leather item that looks better or fits my idea of the character better? How annoying.</p><p>Appearance slots are pure fluff, whatever is put in those slots has ZERO affect on anyone else's game play. It has less effect on people's game play than fluff illusions already in game. As such, it should have been left alone, allowing anyone to put anything they want in those slots that they could already wear. Putting restrictions on fluff is pointless. </p>

[zhiDarkivel]

I guess I can kinda see the logic behind this, but is it possible to at least get an equal to or heavier?  Does it literally have to be heavier, meaning when I'm wearing plate mail, I have to find a heavier piece of plate to put in the slot?And heavier would mean no one can wear the pretty dresses and costumes the tailors can make, since I don't think those are any heavier than regular robes.  I'd love to see a bit broader of a stroke with this restriction.  For example, if you are wearing chain or plate, you can only put chain or plate in the slots, and if you are wearing leather or cloth, you can only put leather or cloth in the slots (according to what your class can wear, of course.)  I'd like for my druid to be able to wear a dress if she likes, and surely it makes sense you could put a robe on over leather.

[wiire]

<cite>Filraen@Najena wrote:</cite><blockquote> I'd love to see a bit broader of a stroke with this restriction.  For example, if you are wearing chain or plate, you can only put chain or plate in the slots, and if you are wearing leather or cloth, you can only put leather or cloth in the slots (according to what your class can wear, of course.)  I'd like for my druid to be able to wear a dress if she likes, and surely it makes sense you could put a robe on over leather.</blockquote>Emm, so how come it doesnt make sense to wear a robe over chain? Where do you draw the limit? Your idea seems like pretty much that they have now.. and 90% of people seem to be voicing they dislike it.

[Rijacki]

"-and- heavier" - The way this is worded, it means that no one can use these slots unless the equip armor lighter than their max. - A guardian would need to wear chain in the normal slots to equip heavier plate in the appearance slots. If the guardian was wearing plate in the normal, he can't use anything in the appearance since nothing is heavier tthan plate. - A wizard would need to wear status or fluff clothes in the normal spot to be able to use the appearance slots at all since everything is heavier than cloth but a wizard can -only- wear cloth. I know that's not the intention (or I hope it isn't). It should, however, be phrased as "and no lighter than". That would allow a guardian to wear plate in normal and appearance and let the wizard wear his robe in normal and use other cloth items for appearance.

[zhiDarkivel]

<cite>Auroz@Lucan DLere wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Filraen@Najena wrote:</cite><blockquote> I'd love to see a bit broader of a stroke with this restriction.  For example, if you are wearing chain or plate, you can only put chain or plate in the slots, and if you are wearing leather or cloth, you can only put leather or cloth in the slots (according to what your class can wear, of course.)  I'd like for my druid to be able to wear a dress if she likes, and surely it makes sense you could put a robe on over leather.</blockquote>Emm, so how come it doesnt make sense to wear a robe over chain? Where do you draw the limit? Your idea seems like pretty much that they have now.. and 90% of people seem to be voicing they dislike it.</blockquote>I'm not saying I like it either.  Was just looking for a compromise spot.

[Zagbab_Dorfbasher]

First of all this change sucks, personaly I believe there should be no restrictions whatsoever.Secondly, do the devs even understand just how limiting this is??? This means that either everyone will run around in "social" clothing which does not seem to be affected by the restrictions, or everyone will run around in a few different type appropriate sets of matching armor that can be obtained rather easily, so they will at least match. For instance, and just as an example, every tank and plate healer will run around in Xegonite armor, every dark mage in the Barrister robe and every light mage in the white Velvet one. (That of course was a rediculously exagerated example, but still).Oh well, guess I have to pick out a chain set that I like..... and try to get rid of all the nice looking stuff I already bought......

[einar4]

<p> It is fairly silly implementation and from what I have been reading, most people will find it useless and just ignore it as a non-feature.   In that, it has little impact to the game, which basically makes it a waste of time.  It will be amusing to see it touted in the "Sneak Peak" little spin-busy-hype that will no doubt be displayed everywhere prior to the update.   </p><p> I guess adding this is better than having some other enjoyable part of the game nerfed into oblivion, but it is still a bit disingenuous of the team to set expectations for the players, then implement an arbitrary limitation which anyone with a sliver of common sense would know that most of the playerbase would dislike intensely.  </p><p> Now that, is PR at it's most egregious. </p>

[Libnok Daemon]

<p>Not only is this feature useless, it will introduce another headache. </p><p> If you create a macro to equip an item and if you leave the appearances tab in the foreground (even though the inventory window is closed) it equips in the appearance window not on the actual slot intended. </p>

[Lilj]

I have just been on test and I hope I can explain how it works.<span class="postbody">The actual weight (pound-wise) of the item doesn't mean anything. You can wear a piece of leather (2 pounds) and then put a leather piece in the fluff that is lighter (1.7 pounds), but I can't put on a piece of cloth armor.It is indeed the cloth, leather, chain and plate notations this goes on. So a chain wearing person will have to use chain armor as fluff, he can't use leather or cloth unless he changes his real equipmentIt seems some cloth armor don't go by this rule though, status cloth and the dresses/suits a tailor can make. I could wear a tailor made fluff dress over my leather armor. Unfortunately this doesn't help the Ceremonial armor of Marr from Bloodline chronicles. That armor set is cloth and can not be worn on top of leather, chain and plate.The system as it is now, makes you wear the fluff armor. You have to attune it and put it on. My guess is this is why there is a class restriction on the fluff armor.</span><span class="postbody"></span>

[saliorboy]

Everyone seems to be missing the most obvious reason for this. The devs looked at all the brawler posts and are leting us play dress up (in plate) to try and sneak into raids. <img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />

[Aurumn]

<cite>saliorboy wrote:</cite><blockquote>Everyone seems to be missing the most obvious reason for this. The devs looked at all the brawler posts and are leting us play dress up (in plate) to try and sneak into raids. <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY<img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />" width="15" height="15" /></blockquote><p>Thanks Sailorboy... I needed that chuckle. Now where do I get that set of purple plate for my ratonga bruiser? <img src="http://forums.station.sony.com/eq2/images/smilies/97ada74b88049a6d50a6ed40898a03d7.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" width="15" height="15" /></p><p>Seriously though... I think a statement of clarification is in order here. Some classes can wear more than one type of armor already (scouts for example). I think it would make much more sense if you can equip anything in your fluff spots that you *could* equip in your normal slots. </p><p>For example, an assassin equips their best chain adventuring gear but has a nifty set of sneaky-looking black leather that they want to wear in the fluff spots. It's a suit they <u>could</u> adventure in, but don't because the chain stats are better. Either is ok for their class so either should be ok for the fluff spots. </p>

[KERSTYNN]

<cite>Aurumn@Unrest wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>saliorboy wrote:</cite><blockquote>Everyone seems to be missing the most obvious reason for this. The devs looked at all the brawler posts and are leting us play dress up (in plate) to try and sneak into raids. <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY<img src=" width="15" height="15" />" width="15" height="15"></blockquote><p>Thanks Sailorboy... I needed that chuckle. Now where do I get that set of purple plate for my ratonga bruiser? <img src="http://forums.station.sony.com/eq2/images/smilies/97ada74b88049a6d50a6ed40898a03d7.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" width="15" height="15" /></p><p>Seriously though... I think a statement of clarification is in order here. Some classes can wear more than one type of armor already (scouts for example). I think it would make much more sense if you can equip anything in your fluff spots that you *could* equip in your normal slots. </p><p>For example, an assassin equips their best chain adventuring gear but has a nifty set of sneaky-looking black leather that they want to wear in the fluff spots. It's a suit they <u>could</u> adventure in, but don't because the chain stats are better. Either is ok for their class so either should be ok for the fluff spots. </p></blockquote>Aurumn, this is the <i>way</i> it should implemented, dead on... Can't belive the devs are borking this one too....so many good ideas, so many poor implementations....I am losing hope.....<img src="http://forums.station.sony.com/eq2/images/smilies/c30b4198e0907b23b8246bdd52aa1c3c.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" width="15" height="15" />

[LordDarthKhan]

<cite>KERSTYNN wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Aurumn@Unrest wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>saliorboy wrote:</cite><blockquote>Everyone seems to be missing the most obvious reason for this. The devs looked at all the brawler posts and are leting us play dress up (in plate) to try and sneak into raids. <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY<img mce_tsrc=" width="15" height="15" />" width="15" height="15"></blockquote><p>Thanks Sailorboy... I needed that chuckle. Now where do I get that set of purple plate for my ratonga bruiser? <img src="http://forums.station.sony.com/eq2/images/smilies/97ada74b88049a6d50a6ed40898a03d7.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" width="15" height="15" /></p><p>Seriously though... I think a statement of clarification is in order here. Some classes can wear more than one type of armor already (scouts for example). I think it would make much more sense if you can equip anything in your fluff spots that you *could* equip in your normal slots. </p><p>For example, an assassin equips their best chain adventuring gear but has a nifty set of sneaky-looking black leather that they want to wear in the fluff spots. It's a suit they <u>could</u> adventure in, but don't because the chain stats are better. Either is ok for their class so either should be ok for the fluff spots. </p></blockquote>Aurumn, this is the <i>way</i> it should implemented, dead on... Can't belive the devs are borking this one too....so many good ideas, so many poor implementations....I am losing hope.....<img src="http://forums.station.sony.com/eq2/images/smilies/c30b4198e0907b23b8246bdd52aa1c3c.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" width="15" height="15" /></blockquote>That was exactly what I was going to do with my assassin. use chain but looks like leather. Never understood why scouts had to wear chain... they are supposed to be sneaky, how sneaky you can be  in a chainmail ??? bah.

[wiire]

<cite>Aurumn@Unrest wrote:</cite> <blockquote><p>Seriously though... I think a statement of clarification is in order here. Some classes can wear more than one type of armor already (scouts for example). I think it would make much more sense if you can equip anything in your fluff spots that you *could* equip in your normal slots. </p><p>For example, an assassin equips their best chain adventuring gear but has a nifty set of sneaky-looking black leather that they want to wear in the fluff spots. It's a suit they <u>could</u> adventure in, but don't because the chain stats are better. Either is ok for their class so either should be ok for the fluff spots.</p></blockquote><p>Thats what I don't understand.. I'm a chain class, but for a few levels I actually wore a robe to adventure in because it had better stats than my old chain (and FT when I needed it) So I CAN wear cloth instead of chain..</p><p>so why the heck can't I choose to LOOK like I'm wearing cloth, since though my class is a 'chain' class, I CAN wear cloth >.<</p>

[Siclone]

<cite>saliorboy wrote:</cite><blockquote>Everyone seems to be missing the most obvious reason for this. The devs looked at all the brawler posts and are leting us play dress up (in plate) to try and sneak into raids. <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY<img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />" /></blockquote>oh god now you brawlers are sneaking in your whines on the few non brawler whine threads there are anyway...Nice update, Thank you SOE for keeping the integrity of your game and not bowing to those who want to destroy the feel of the whole game, by letting tanks where robes and wiz plate ect..

[Despak]

<cite>Siclone wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>saliorboy wrote:</cite><blockquote>Everyone seems to be missing the most obvious reason for this. The devs looked at all the brawler posts and are leting us play dress up (in plate) to try and sneak into raids. <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY<img src=" width="15" height="15" />"></blockquote>oh god now you brawlers are sneaking in your whines on the few non brawler whine threads there are anyway...Nice update, Thank you SOE for keeping the integrity of your game and not bowing to those who want to destroy the feel of the whole game, by letting tanks where robes and wiz plate ect..</blockquote><p>If the implementation is as stated, then no-one will be able to wear anything in the fluff slots beyond status items unless, of course, Tanks raid in Chain, Scouts raid in cloth or leather etc.  Casters are just bent over and lubed with the KY.</p><p>You think that is a good change? </p>

[Sekhau]

<p>Perhaps the Devs should have implemented a PvP vs. PvE clause in the coding. </p><p>I mean, for PvP servers I understand why the "heavier" clause is implemented. I wouldn't want to attack a Cloth wearer, only to discover that they're actually wearing Plate.</p><p> For PvE however, the appearance of our avatars doesn't matter in the slightest to the mobs we're fighting.  If a Plate Wearer wants to for example, Tank while wearing a Robe over their Plate, then why not?</p><p>As long as my Illy can wear Cloth in the Visible Slots, while wearing Cloth in his Statistic Slots, I'm fine. </p>

[EtoilePirate]

<cite>LordDarthKhan wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>KERSTYNN wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Aurumn@Unrest wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite></cite><p>Seriously though... I think a statement of clarification is in order here. Some classes can wear more than one type of armor already (scouts for example). I think it would make much more sense if you can equip anything in your fluff spots that you *could* equip in your normal slots. </p><p>For example, an assassin equips their best chain adventuring gear but has a nifty set of sneaky-looking black leather that they want to wear in the fluff spots. It's a suit they <u>could</u> adventure in, but don't because the chain stats are better. Either is ok for their class so either should be ok for the fluff spots. </p></blockquote>Aurumn, this is the <i>way</i> it should implemented, dead on... Can't belive the devs are borking this one too....so many good ideas, so many poor implementations....I am losing hope.....<img src="http://forums.station.sony.com/eq2/images/smilies/c30b4198e0907b23b8246bdd52aa1c3c.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" width="15" height="15" /></blockquote>That was exactly what I was going to do with my assassin. use chain but looks like leather. Never understood why scouts had to wear chain... they are supposed to be sneaky, how sneaky you can be  in a chainmail ??? bah.</blockquote>Heh, apparently the stereotype holds and assassins ARE concerned with style...My assassin has some old leather pieces I like the look of, I'd been equipping them in "appearance" for the last couple of days to make an interesting look.  (Leather shoulders, keeping the appearance of the Kithicor armor set tunic... looked cool.)  I'd much rather keep the hard-won armor equipped for stats and the pretty found/crafted other things for appearance but I guess that's not to be.  Better go back to getting all the pieces for my armor set, then.  At least I don't have the pink boots anymore...

[Zarafein]

<cite>Siclone wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>saliorboy wrote:</cite><blockquote>Everyone seems to be missing the most obvious reason for this. The devs looked at all the brawler posts and are leting us play dress up (in plate) to try and sneak into raids. <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY<img src=" width="15" height="15" />"></blockquote>oh god now you brawlers are sneaking in your whines on the few non brawler whine threads there are anyway...Nice update, Thank you SOE for keeping the integrity of your game and not bowing to those who want to destroy the feel of the whole game, by letting tanks where robes and wiz plate ect..</blockquote>Yeah great, instead of robes,chain or leather(not to mention combinations of all 4..) on a tank you will see them half naked in a formal dress.. way to go!<img src="http://forums.station.sony.com/eq2/images/smilies/2786c5c8e1a8be796fb2f726cca5a0fe.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" width="15" height="15" />

[Catria]

<p>I posted this idea in another thread but I will add my two cents' worth here too:</p><p> Give us the appearance "fluff" spots without restriction.  Give us a toggle to choose whether we want to see other's "fluff" appearance or not.  This makes those of us who want to play dressup happy and the ones that only want to see regular armor are appeased as well.  </p>

[Lilj]

<cite>Sekhau wrote:</cite><blockquote><p>Perhaps the Devs should have implemented a PvP vs. PvE clause in the coding. </p><p>I mean, for PvP servers I understand why the "heavier" clause is implemented. I wouldn't want to attack a Cloth wearer, only to discover that they're actually wearing Plate.</p><p> For PvE however, the appearance of our avatars doesn't matter in the slightest to the mobs we're fighting.  If a Plate Wearer wants to for example, Tank while wearing a Robe over their Plate, then why not?</p><p>As long as my Illy can wear Cloth in the Visible Slots, while wearing Cloth in his Statistic Slots, I'm fine. </p></blockquote>The funny thing is, if you visited the PvP boards and heard what the PvPers said there you would know that most PvP'ers worth their salt don't use the looks of their prey to anything. They look at the preys buffs to see what it is.And as far as I know there is such a clause already. Most CA's and spells work differently on the PvP servers compared to the PvE servers <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />And for the /fluff command, yeah why not? Then we can decide if we want to see other persons fluff or not. I could live with that suggestion, if it meant I could pretty much wear what I wanted (I could also live with stuff that was class-restricted).

[Kendricke]

<cite>Auroz@Lucan DLere wrote:</cite><blockquote><p>But a lil chain wearing healer can't wear pretty leather boots over her big uncomfortable looking chain boots? </p></blockquote>Sure you can.  Just put on leather or cloth boots in the first place - or find some really light chain boots. 

[Finora]

<cite>Kendricke wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Auroz@Lucan DLere wrote:</cite><blockquote><p>But a lil chain wearing healer can't wear pretty leather boots over her big uncomfortable looking chain boots? </p></blockquote>Sure you can.  Just put on leather or cloth boots in the first place - or find some really light chain boots.  </blockquote>Shouldn't have to do that for fluff. And to the person who said it was so you wouldn't see mages in plate and tanks in robes, this change doesn't do ANYTHING to change the fact that they can do that (via status bought items), it only means that there is a limited selection for everyone, which is all and all a very bad thing IMO.

[Branna]

Nevermind this post, apparently I'm dumb enough to be an mmo designer, and I completely read the patch notes wrong <img src="/smilies/69934afc394145350659cd7add244ca9.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />

[Cayden]

<cite>Branna wrote:</cite><blockquote>Not sure if I missed a reply on this, but I think a lot of people (and especially the DEVS!) are missing a big point here... Sure, tanks can't wear a robe over their plate armor (if this goes through as stated), but apparently mages can wear ANYTHING IN THE GAME. Gonna see a lot of wizzies running around in full plate and the like, cause yeah, that makes sense.This idea, if not a typo or miscommunication of some sort, is possibly the worst update to the game ever. </blockquote>No, mages will still be limited to cloth only.

[Lightstrider]

<p>This does feel like poor implementation of what at its core was a good idea.  I am happy, however, that it seems that tailor-produced clothing can be equipped in the fluff slots, as that may make such clothing more in demand and help my tailor's bank account <img src="http://forums.station.sony.com/eq2/images/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" width="15" height="15" />.</p><p>Question, though:  does the fluff armor add to weight?  I would assume so.</p>

[Laiyo]

Player control of their character's appearance is an important feature of these games that generates a great deal of interest. Even simple things like armor dye generate numerous forum threads. Looking over other MMORPG forums shows, that more control over their character's appearance is an important issue (at least to forum visiting players) for the players.Restrictions on the fluff armor spots are bad.  Especially if it is implemented half-heartedly. Given that a plate wearing character can wear "her frostfell's finest" over her plate armor shows that a) the implementation of the restriction is unnecessary b) the restriction is inconsistently applied and c) obfuscating the character's armor may not be the reason for the restriction.  Fluff has no effect on the actual game play mechanics. The appearance tab should affect just that *appearance* it should not have any affect (even addition of weight) on anything else. It is a fluff piece and should not penalize the player in anyway for using it. The addition of these types of slots is a wonderful addition for players interested in building the appearance of their character in line with their character concept. For players not interested in such things, it doesn't hinder their game play in anyway.Remove any and all restrictions. Let the appearance tab actually be the place where players, that desire to do so, can play with the appearance of their character.

[Cusashorn]

<p>They really should clarify that to say "Lighter than or equal to"</p><p>Most monk gi's in the game all weigh the same. It wouldn't be fair if I can't equip an item that weighs the same.</p><p>*EDIT* Yeah. Just checked. Every monk gi in the game weighs 2.0 pounds. It wouldn't be cool if we can't wear items that weigh the exact same.</p>

[Gaige]

<cite>Cusashorn wrote:</cite><blockquote><p>They really should clarify that to say "Lighter than or equal to"</p><p>Most monk gi's in the game all weigh the same. It wouldn't be fair if I can't equip an item that weighs the same.</p><p>*EDIT* Yeah. Just checked. Every monk gi in the game weighs 2.0 pounds. It wouldn't be cool if we can't wear items that weigh the exact same.</p></blockquote><p>The restrictions have nothing to do with item weight, they have to do with item class: cloth, leather, chain, plate.</p><p>If you have leather equipped to adventure in as a monk, you can only equip leather items in your appearance tab, not cloth.</p><p>If a plate tank has a chain bp equipped to adventure in, he can equip chain for appearance, or plate (the heavier armor type).</p><p>So you're clearly confused.</p>

[Nayurayne]

Actually I agree that it should be rephrased to heavier or equal to. Right now it makes it sound like if you're wearing leather you can only wear chain or plate (if class allows) and not leather because leather isn't "heavier".

[ZerkerDwarf]

<cite>Laiyo wrote:</cite><blockquote>Player control of their character's appearance is an important feature of these games that generates a great deal of interest. Even simple things like armor dye generate numerous forum threads. Looking over other MMORPG forums shows, that more control over their character's appearance is an important issue (at least to forum visiting players) for the players.Restrictions on the fluff armor spots are bad.  Especially if it is implemented half-heartedly. Given that a plate wearing character can wear "her frostfell's finest" over her plate armor shows that a) the implementation of the restriction is unnecessary b) the restriction is inconsistently applied and c) obfuscating the character's armor may not be the reason for the restriction.  Fluff has no effect on the actual game play mechanics. The appearance tab should affect just that *appearance* it should not have any affect (even addition of weight) on anything else. It is a fluff piece and should not penalize the player in anyway for using it. The addition of these types of slots is a wonderful addition for players interested in building the appearance of their character in line with their character concept. For players not interested in such things, it doesn't hinder their game play in anyway.Remove any and all restrictions. Let the appearance tab actually be the place where players, that desire to do so, can play with the appearance of their character.</blockquote><p>That's it! <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></p><p>I would vote for total freedom of optics, since it does not affect the game mechanics a bit, at least on PvE. Maybe on PvP it could be used to 'cheat' opponents... but an opportunity that can be used by everybody is not a cheat any longer. It would work both ways: melee folks could look like mages, mages could look like plate tanks and so on.</p><p>Why not allowing everybody to wear everything as fluff? Even plate armour for mages. Cloth for tanks without the necessity to wear less than plate primarily. Wouldn't it be quite nice to see 'battlemages' out there in plate armour or 2hander wielding tanks with a robe?</p><p>Mages were the loosers if there was a restriction "UP TO your armour class". They could fluff with cloth only, whereas higher armour classes could wear more armour types. Nevertheless I want to be able to fluff my berserker with some leather pieces... so for the sake of a same right for everybody I vote for total freedom instead of the current rules that somehow force you to stick with your archetype's armour.</p>

[Ashlian]

<cite>ZerkerDwarf wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Laiyo wrote:</cite><blockquote>Player control of their character's appearance is an important feature of these games that generates a great deal of interest. Even simple things like armor dye generate numerous forum threads. Looking over other MMORPG forums shows, that more control over their character's appearance is an important issue (at least to forum visiting players) for the players.Restrictions on the fluff armor spots are bad.  Especially if it is implemented half-heartedly. Given that a plate wearing character can wear "her frostfell's finest" over her plate armor shows that a) the implementation of the restriction is unnecessary b) the restriction is inconsistently applied and c) obfuscating the character's armor may not be the reason for the restriction.  Fluff has no effect on the actual game play mechanics. The appearance tab should affect just that *appearance* it should not have any affect (even addition of weight) on anything else. It is a fluff piece and should not penalize the player in anyway for using it. The addition of these types of slots is a wonderful addition for players interested in building the appearance of their character in line with their character concept. For players not interested in such things, it doesn't hinder their game play in anyway.Remove any and all restrictions. Let the appearance tab actually be the place where players, that desire to do so, can play with the appearance of their character.</blockquote><p>That's it! <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY<img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />" width="15" height="15" /></p><p>I would vote for total freedom of optics, since it does not affect the game mechanics a bit, at least on PvE. Maybe on PvP it could be used to 'cheat' opponents... but an opportunity that can be used by everybody is not a cheat any longer. It would work both ways: melee folks could look like mages, mages could look like plate tanks and so on.</p><p>Why not allowing everybody to wear everything as fluff? Even plate armour for mages. Cloth for tanks without the necessity to wear less than plate primarily. Wouldn't it be quite nice to see 'battlemages' out there in plate armour or 2hander wielding tanks with a robe?</p><p>Mages were the loosers if there was a restriction "UP TO your armour class". They could fluff with cloth only, whereas higher armour classes could wear more armour types. Nevertheless I want to be able to fluff my berserker with some leather pieces... so for the sake of a same right for everybody I vote for total freedom instead of the current rules that somehow force you to stick with your archetype's armour.</p></blockquote><p>While I don't necessarily agree that a mage should wear plate, I think that it's perfectly acceptable to let a tank wear leather or chain or even cloth. Berserkers in the real world even had a tradition of wearing nothing BUT blue paint, though I think we might not want to go QUITE that far! But to force me to wear cloth if I want a cloth look when my character is capable of wearing cloth is nitpicky in the extreme and pretty idiotic. Are we saying that my character would be incapable of finding magical cloth clothing with the stats of leather clothing? Obviously, in a magical world, such would be available. Just assume that we have that available to us and let us LOOK LIKE WE WANT TO LOOK FOR HEAVEN'S SAKE! I HAVE NEVER BEEN ABLE TO LOOK REMOTELY LIKE I HAVE WISHED SINCE THIS GAME CAME OUT! </p><p>I can tell you that since I heard about this change at Fan Faire, I was turning cartwheels and jumping for joy, but hearing about these restrictions, I just want to cry or throw up my hands in disgust at a great idea implemented unbelievably poorly to least please the people who wanted it the most, the people most concerned with appearance for appearance sake alone. The people most concerned with the stupid stats and the unique appearance of armor will not be affected in the least, so let those of us who are not concerned with absolute accuracy live in our little FANTASY world where CLOTH AND LEATHER armor can be strong as STEEL! Thank you!!!</p>

[TaleraRis]

<cite>ZerkerDwarf wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite></cite>I vote for total freedom instead of the current rules that somehow force you to stick with your archetype's armour.</blockquote>I'm a scout. Depending on the benefit, my archetype's armor could be a nice chain piece or a good quality leather piece. If I wear some chain boots because they benefit me in my equipment slot, why should I not be able to wear some leather boots that I think look nice in my appearance slot? I'm a ranger. Our traditional "look" in many minds is leather.

[Erithe]

<p>To restrict someone wearing leather to only Fluff in leather is ridiculous.  At the very least, people should be able to fluff what their class can wear + status items.  </p><p>Personally, I'm in favor of not restricting the armor at all and seeing what happens.  If all hell breaks loose, then nerf it in a month or three.  But I'll bet you'll find it's not necessary and no one gives a care.  On the RP servers, people will be so happy they likely won't complain at all for months.  <img src="/smilies/69934afc394145350659cd7add244ca9.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />  Well, maybe not, but the Devs will find they've grown in popularity.  LoL</p><p>I don't see the point of fluff if it's not just that.  Fun stuff that has no purpose but to please the heart and mind of the player.  </p><p>of course, if you look at other games or read the blogs at MMORPG.com, you'll find the most anticipated new games have endless customization options.  Would really suck to fall behind one of those when they're released b/c for some odd reason, EQ2 players don't deserve to be individual and unique.</p><p>Just saying ...</p>

[Sapphirius]

<p>Okies, huns. If you want to state your opinions somewhere where it will really matter, a dev has already stated they are reading <a rel="nofollow" href="http://forums.station.sony.com/eq2/posts/list.m?start=300&topic_id=379858�" target="_blank">this thread</a> and even said why they made this change to the fluff armor appearances. Rothgar has asked us for our opinions on the matter with no promises to actually change anything. If you want to make your voice heard, post <a rel="nofollow" href="http://forums.station.sony.com/eq2/posts/list.m?start=300&topic_id=379858�" target="_blank">here</a> in response.</p>

[ke'la]

<cite>Cayden@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Branna wrote:</cite><blockquote>Not sure if I missed a reply on this, but I think a lot of people (and especially the DEVS!) are missing a big point here... Sure, tanks can't wear a robe over their plate armor (if this goes through as stated), but apparently mages can wear ANYTHING IN THE GAME. Gonna see a lot of wizzies running around in full plate and the like, cause yeah, that makes sense.This idea, if not a typo or miscommunication of some sort, is possibly the worst update to the game ever. </blockquote>No, mages will still be limited to cloth only.</blockquote><p>YES, Mages can only ware cloth, HOWEVER there is stuff that LOOKS like plate, but is consitered CLOTH meaning a Platewarer CAN NOT ware it as fluff but a MAGE can, if you don't beleave me look below(and this is on live and that is equiped in my MAGE's normal slots.</p><p><img src="http://i109.photobucket.com/albums/n65/kela_012/MageInPlate.jpg" alt="" width="210" height="613" border="0" /></p>

[AlawnGnome]

This is the worst thing they could have done to the appearance slots.  What were they thinking?  There is no reason at all to restrict it more than what you could normally wear.  And if it would be unfair to PVP players who cares.  They have the ability to make different rules for PVP and PVE.  The shouldn't put in stupid restrictions on PVE just because of PVP.  Let PVP players have the restriction and let the PVE players wear what they want.  Or just put in an option to not see other people's fluff armor. 

[retro_guy]

<cite>Sioned@Befallen wrote:</cite><blockquote><p><span style="color: #cc00ff;"><b>Ok - this seems to be backwards. Shouldn't that say lighter?</b> </span></p><p>"You'll only be able to equip items for appearance that your class could normally wear. So mages cannot equip plate. We did kick around this exact idea of forcing your appearance piece to match the type of the equipped piece, but it was pretty split in terms of people that were for/against it, so we left it open for now. If people want to run around in the cities displaying guild status clothing, it would be a pain if they had to unequip their armor to make it work. If your tank insists on tanking in a robe, just don't heal him. "</p><p>Rothgar EQ2 Dev Team</p><p>From test Update notes today:</p><ul><li><div>Upon reaching level 20, you'll be able to access new appearance item slots on the inventory window. </div></li><li>Equipping items in the appearance slots will change the way you look without affecting your stats. </li><li>Only items usable by your class, and <span style="color: #cc0000;"><b>heavier</b></span> than your currently equipped armor can be worn. </li><li>Some clothing items, such as city rewards will be wearable by everyone. </li></ul></blockquote>The way I read that, mages cannot equip anything in their appearance slots, as thay cannot wear anything other than cloth in their standard slots.It doesn't make any sense the way it's stated now, shouldn't it be "The same or heavier if your class allows you to wear the item"?That way mages will be able to equip robes, leather wearers can equip leather, chain wears can quip chain and plate can equip plate.Currently mages cannot use the slot, in fact the way it's written noone can use the slot, I mean what is heavier than plate??

[Winter]

<p><span style="font-size: medium;color: #ff99ff;">Personally, the best option I think would be as follows:</span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;color: #ff99ff;">1. PvP servers - must be class appropriate armor. Plate to plate, cloth to cloth, leather to leather. People have to make quick judgements based upon appearance. How many people will really sit there to go 'wow... is that guardian wearing a robe really wearing the Fabled Robe of Sir Ganksalot?'... I think it would take away from the PvP element.</span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;color: #ff99ff;">2. PvE servers - I personally see no harm in allowing anybody to wear anything on the PvE servers. Although it would kill me to be on a raid and have the wizard say 'no, hey, I need that Plate of Uberduberness for my appearance slot', I personally see no harm in a plate caster or a cloth tank. I think it allows for a roleplay element not allowed before. What I think would be the BEST option, however, is to allow class appropriate armor as in the PvP servers, but allow tailor made dresses and suits to be worn over the armor. I, for one, like my character to look super girly - I can hardly wait to get my hands on a TRUE pinky pink dress for her. However, they only feel good for roleplay right now because, as soon as you leave town, you better switch back out lest you want to get hurt in combat. Besides, I think it would be good for the business of tailors this way too - talk about an increased feel of importance tradeskill-wise.</span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;color: #ff99ff;">Let's face it - Norrath is a world of magic, wonder, and adventure. If it causes no harm, why not allow people to express and experience it the way they wish? But that's just my point of view on it. <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> No matter the final implementation, I think this addition is incredible.</span></p>

[Nembutal]

This would suck for me too... I have seen 2 pieces of gear I really want for my troubadour for fluff... and both of them were leather. (one fabled and 1 legendary unfortunately so not going to be easy)  Ironically 1 looked like chain/plate combo... and the other looked like plate... but it was leather.I liked the idea of disabling it on PvP servers better.... I could care less if my tank is fighting a god wearing his easter dress.... if that's what floats his boat... let him do it.The way the game currently is as far as art goes... where you have cloth, leather, and chain that looks like plate... well... why restrict us?  You can't restrict your own artists to follow your vision (people you pay)... why do it to your customers (people that pay you)?I mean I don't take offense that they made some cloth, leather, and chain look like plate.... and I don't think it makes them less of an artist... BUT... if you can dress up a mage to look like  a tank (in either regular mode or appearence fluff mode) ... why can't I dress up a tank to look like a mage (in the new appearence fluff mode... I can do it in regular mode anyway)OR... just put a flag in our settings to disable fluff slot gear... so if you are on PVP you can turn it off if you want.. or if you are on a regular server and get sick of the candy cane monk in the screenshots above you can turn it off.  Don't give me the excuse that the toon should be viewed as the player wished people to view it because I think SOGA OGRES SUCK... and yet I have no way of forcing people to view me as ME in old world models.  I don't think this case is anything different.

[Sapphirius]

<p>OK, to clear the misconceptions up.</p><p><b>First -</b> This was <i><b><u><span style="color: #ffff00;">NOT</span></u></b></i> changed because of PvP server concerns. Anyone who knows <i>anything</i> about PvP also knows that you don't look at someone's appearance to determine their class. You look at their buffs.</p><p>(I don't think that I can stress the above message enough.)</p><p><b>Second -</b> It's says what you can wear <i>and</i> heavier. Yes, it would have been worded <i>way </i>better than it was. It's current phrasing is confusing.</p><p>This means that it's<i> inclusive</i> of the weight of armor you are currently wearing. So if you have a tank wearing plate, he can equip plate in that slot. In order for him to look like he is wearing a chain breastplate, he'd have to equip a chain breastplate in his normal chest slot because chain is <i>lighter</i> than plate.</p><p><b>Third -</b> This change was made because of what devs viewed as the "shaft factor." Basically, they made it this way to be "<i>fair"</i> to mages because all mages <i>can</i> wear is cloth, and a plate wearer can wear anything. You can read Rothgar's statement <a href="http://forums.station.sony.com/eq2/posts/list.m?start=300&topic_id=379858�" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">here</a> regarding the shaft factor.</p><p>ONCE AGAIN, I stress that this change was <i><b><u><span style="color: #ffff00;">NOT</span></u></b></i> made for PvP reasons. It was made because the devs felt (incorrectly so) that this would make it<i> "fair"</i> for everyone. Rothgar has asked for our opinions on changing it back with no promises to change it back in <a href="http://forums.station.sony.com/eq2/posts/list.m?start=300&topic_id=379858�" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">this thread</a>. As this is the thread that the devs have stated they are reading, it may behoove you to post your comments either for or against the restrictions there.</p><p>BTW, I agree and I <i>hate</i> the restrictions.</p>

[Vydar]

It doesn't make sense to me....The tank wearing the cloth seems to be worse than the opposite.If, say, on the PvP server, you see a cloth class and jump it... to find out its mitigation is much higher than you thought because its a tank?This is much worse than say... a cloth wearer wearing a plate set, to jump it and find out, zomg, he's much easier to kill than I thought!I'm not sure how a balance could be found this way.  I personally think anyone should be able to wear any gear in their fluff slot.  this means all those nice status plate pieces?  Only tanks/clerics can wear them. 

[PaganSaint]

<cite>Sioned@Befallen wrote:</cite><blockquote><p><span style="color: #cc00ff;"><b>Ok - this seems to be backwards. Shouldn't that say lighter?</b> </span></p><p>"You'll only be able to equip items for appearance that your class could normally wear. So mages cannot equip plate. We did kick around this exact idea of forcing your appearance piece to match the type of the equipped piece, but it was pretty split in terms of people that were for/against it, so we left it open for now. If people want to run around in the cities displaying guild status clothing, it would be a pain if they had to unequip their armor to make it work. If your tank insists on tanking in a robe, just don't heal him. "</p><p>Rothgar EQ2 Dev Team</p><p>From test Update notes today:</p><ul><li><div>Upon reaching level 20, you'll be able to access new appearance item slots on the inventory window. </div></li><li>Equipping items in the appearance slots will change the way you look without affecting your stats. </li><li>Only items usable by your class, and <span style="color: #cc0000;"><b>heavier</b></span> than your currently equipped armor can be worn. </li><li>Some clothing items, such as city rewards will be wearable by everyone. </li></ul></blockquote><ul><li>Only items usable by your class, and <span style="color: #cc0000;"><b>heavier</b></span> than your currently equipped armor can be worn. </li></ul>Ok lets word this so everyone understands.Mages can naturally equip Cloth Only. <b>In their appearance slots they can equip Leather, Chain and Plate in addition to Cloth.</b>Brawlers and Druids can naturally equip Cloth and Leather only. <b>In their appearance slots they can equip Chain and Plate in addition to Cloth and Leather.</b>Shamans and Scouts can naturally equip Cloth, Leather, and Chain only. <b>In their appearance slots they can equip Plate in addition to Cloth, Leather and Chain.</b>Clerics, Crusaders and Warriors can equip Cloth, Leather, Chain, and Plate.<b> In their appearance slots they can equip Cloth, Leather, Chain, and Plate.</b>-------------------------------------------As for PvP, now you have to look at people's buffs, weapons, shields and if they are casting or meleeing/ranging to see what classes they are. Oh no! You have to almost think to figure it out!

[Amphibia]

<cite>Winter wrote:</cite><blockquote><p><span style="font-size: medium;color: #ff99ff;">Personally, the best option I think would be as follows:</span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;color: #ff99ff;">1. PvP servers - must be class appropriate armor. Plate to plate, cloth to cloth, leather to leather. People have to make quick judgements based upon appearance. How many people will really sit there to go 'wow... is that guardian wearing a robe really wearing the Fabled Robe of Sir Ganksalot?'... I think it would take away from the PvP element.</span></p></blockquote>Question for you, Winwin.... do you play on a PvP server yourself? PS: Thanks Sapph <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" width="15" height="15" />

[retro_guy]

<cite>PaganSaint wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Sioned@Befallen wrote:</cite><blockquote><p><span style="color: #cc00ff;"><b>Ok - this seems to be backwards. Shouldn't that say lighter?</b> </span></p><p>"You'll only be able to equip items for appearance that your class could normally wear. So mages cannot equip plate. We did kick around this exact idea of forcing your appearance piece to match the type of the equipped piece, but it was pretty split in terms of people that were for/against it, so we left it open for now. If people want to run around in the cities displaying guild status clothing, it would be a pain if they had to unequip their armor to make it work. If your tank insists on tanking in a robe, just don't heal him. "</p><p>Rothgar EQ2 Dev Team</p><p>From test Update notes today:</p><ul><li><div>Upon reaching level 20, you'll be able to access new appearance item slots on the inventory window. </div></li><li>Equipping items in the appearance slots will change the way you look without affecting your stats. </li><li><span style="font-size: large;">Only items usable by your class</span>, and <span style="color: #cc0000;"><b>heavier</b></span> than your currently equipped armor can be worn. </li><li>Some clothing items, such as city rewards will be wearable by everyone. </li></ul></blockquote><ul><li>Only items usable by your class, and <span style="color: #cc0000;"><b>heavier</b></span> than your currently equipped armor can be worn. </li></ul>Ok lets word this so everyone understands.Mages can naturally equip Cloth Only. <b>In their appearance slots they can equip Leather, Chain and Plate in addition to Cloth.</b>Brawlers and Druids can naturally equip Cloth and Leather only. <b>In their appearance slots they can equip Chain and Plate in addition to Cloth and Leather.</b>Shamans and Scouts can naturally equip Cloth, Leather, and Chain only. <b>In their appearance slots they can equip Plate in addition to Cloth, Leather and Chain.</b>Clerics, Crusaders and Warriors can equip Cloth, Leather, Chain, and Plate.<b> In their appearance slots they can equip Cloth, Leather, Chain, and Plate.</b>-------------------------------------------As for PvP, now you have to look at people's buffs, weapons, shields and if they are casting or meleeing/ranging to see what classes they are. Oh no! You have to almost think to figure it out!</blockquote>"Only items usable by your class" can be equipped (this is the key phrase), so since mages can only use cloth, as they cannot equip leather, chain or plate. But I can see how you could read it the other way.So:Mages can naturally equip Cloth Only. <b>In their appearance slots they can equip Cloth.</b>Brawlers and Druids can naturally equip Cloth and Leather only. <b>In their appearance slots they can equip Cloth (if wearing cloth) and Leather.</b>Shamans and Scouts can naturally equip Cloth, Leather, and Chain only. <b>In their appearance slots they can equip Cloth (if wearing cloth) in addition to Leather and Chain.</b>Clerics, Crusaders and Warriors can equip Cloth, Leather, Chain, and Plate.<b> In their appearance slots they can equip Cloth (if wearing cloth), Leather, Chain, and Plate.That seems to make far more sense that cloth wearers being able to wear heavy armour (plate??), which completely goes against the current game mechanics.</b>

[Gaige]

<cite>PaganSaint wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Sioned@Befallen wrote:</cite><ul><li>Only items usable by your class, and <span style="color: #cc0000;"><b>heavier</b></span> than your currently equipped armor can be worn. </li></ul>Ok lets word this so everyone understands.Mages can naturally equip Cloth Only. <b>In their appearance slots they can equip Leather, Chain and Plate in addition to Cloth.</b>Brawlers and Druids can naturally equip Cloth and Leather only. <b>In their appearance slots they can equip Chain and Plate in addition to Cloth and Leather.</b>Shamans and Scouts can naturally equip Cloth, Leather, and Chain only. <b>In their appearance slots they can equip Plate in addition to Cloth, Leather and Chain.</b>Clerics, Crusaders and Warriors can equip Cloth, Leather, Chain, and Plate.<b> In their appearance slots they can equip Cloth, Leather, Chain, and Plate.</b>-------------------------------------------As for PvP, now you have to look at people's buffs, weapons, shields and if they are casting or meleeing/ranging to see what classes they are. Oh no! You have to almost think to figure it out!</blockquote><p>That's wrong.</p><p>It goes by what you have equipped in your adventure slot and the normal equipment rules.</p><p>So a mage can equip only cloth in both adventure/appearance.</p><p>A scout can equip chain in his adventure/appearance slots or if he has leather equipped in an adventure slot he can equip leather or chain (the heavier armor) in his appearance slots.</p><p>You can't equip something in appearance that you class can't normally wear (so no mages in anything other than cloth) and you can't equip anything lighter than you have equipped to adventure in, although if you are capable of wearing plate and are adventuring in chain you can choose from either chain or plate for your appearance.</p><p>Confusing I know, but that's how it works.</p>

[Tarlok]

You fail to see the downside of this restriction.  What if I like how the blood iron chain set looks and want my zerker to have that "look".  By these restrictions I would have to actually equip chain and hence [Removed for Content] my stats if I want to have the look I want.  Yes I want my plate stats, but I want my zerker to look like he is wearing chain so he looks more like what I view the iconic d&d barbarian/frenzied beserker to be.  The fluff armor slots are a waste of code now.

[retro_guy]

The obvious answer to this is to make the fluff slots work exactly like the Soga models - client side only. The let us equip anything in the fluff slots, no matter if we can wear it not.That way we get to see our characters exactly as we want while the rest of the world gets to see them the way SONY want.I personally don't like this option, as I hate the SOGA models, and would prefer to be able to control how other see my character, but if we can't do it with SOGA, is there any point trying to do it with the fluff models?

[Amphibia]

<cite>retro_guy wrote:</cite><blockquote>The obvious answer to this is to make the fluff slots work exactly like the Soga models - client side only. The let us equip anything in the fluff slots, no matter if we can wear it not.That way we get to see our characters exactly as we want while the rest of the world gets to see them the way SONY want.I personally don't like this option, as I hate the SOGA models, and would prefer to be able to control how other see my character, but if we can't do it with SOGA, is there any point trying to do it with the fluff models?</blockquote>They've already said no to that. <a rel="nofollow" href="http://forums.station.sony.com/eq2/posts/list.m?start=285&topic_id=379858�" target="_blank">http://forums.station.sony.com/eq2/...379858</a>Good thing too, do you ask me. Because I think that as a player, part of the fun in a game like this is to have some control over how your own character appears to others.

[Captain Apple Darkberry]

<cite>Winter wrote:</cite><blockquote><p><span style="font-size: medium;color: #ff99ff;">Personally, the best option I think would be as follows:</span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;color: #ff99ff;">1. PvP servers - must be class appropriate armor. Plate to plate, cloth to cloth, leather to leather. People have to make quick judgements based upon appearance. How many people will really sit there to go 'wow... is that guardian wearing a robe really wearing the Fabled Robe of Sir Ganksalot?'... I think it would take away from the PvP element.</span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;color: #ff99ff;">2. PvE servers - I personally see no harm in allowing anybody to wear anything on the PvE servers. Although it would kill me to be on a raid and have the wizard say 'no, hey, I need that Plate of Uberduberness for my appearance slot', I personally see no harm in a plate caster or a cloth tank. I think it allows for a roleplay element not allowed before. What I think would be the BEST option, however, is to allow class appropriate armor as in the PvP servers, but allow tailor made dresses and suits to be worn over the armor. I, for one, like my character to look super girly - I can hardly wait to get my hands on a TRUE pinky pink dress for her. However, they only feel good for roleplay right now because, as soon as you leave town, you better switch back out lest you want to get hurt in combat. Besides, I think it would be good for the business of tailors this way too - talk about an increased feel of importance tradeskill-wise.</span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;color: #ff99ff;">Let's face it - Norrath is a world of magic, wonder, and adventure. If it causes no harm, why not allow people to express and experience it the way they wish? But that's just my point of view on it. <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY<img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />" /> No matter the final implementation, I think this addition is incredible.</span></p></blockquote><span style="color: #ff3300;">Personally I think the best option would be for no restrictions on either PvP or PvE...</span>

[Sapphirius]

<cite>PaganSaint wrote:</cite><blockquote><ul><li>Only items usable by your class, and <span style="color: #cc0000;"><b>heavier</b></span> than your currently equipped armor can be worn. </li></ul>Ok lets word this so everyone understands.Mages can naturally equip Cloth Only. <b>In their appearance slots they can equip Leather, Chain and Plate in addition to Cloth.</b>Brawlers and Druids can naturally equip Cloth and Leather only. <b>In their appearance slots they can equip Chain and Plate in addition to Cloth and Leather.</b>Shamans and Scouts can naturally equip Cloth, Leather, and Chain only. <b>In their appearance slots they can equip Plate in addition to Cloth, Leather and Chain.</b>Clerics, Crusaders and Warriors can equip Cloth, Leather, Chain, and Plate.<b> In their appearance slots they can equip Cloth, Leather, Chain, and Plate.</b>-------------------------------------------As for PvP, now you have to look at people's buffs, weapons, shields and if they are casting or meleeing/ranging to see what classes they are. Oh no! You have to almost think to figure it out!</blockquote><chokes laughing> After the DF thread and the dual wield comment, I find this funny. Really I do.

[Telden]

<cite>ke'la wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite></cite><p>YES, Mages can only ware cloth, HOWEVER there is stuff that LOOKS like plate, but is consitered CLOTH meaning a Platewarer CAN NOT ware it as fluff but a MAGE can, if you don't beleave me look below(and this is on live and that is equiped in my MAGE's normal slots.</p><p><img src="http://i109.photobucket.com/albums/n65/kela_012/MageInPlate.jpg" border="0" alt="" width="210" height="613" /></p></blockquote>Where did you get that mage plate?

[dubbs]

Restricting it to only be able to wear equal to or heavier armor for appearance is as dumb as saying you can now only display illusions that are taller than your current heigth.

[Wy]

<cite>Spangles wrote:</cite><blockquote><p>What this actually means is that you could have a plate tank who decides, for some bizarre reason, that he wishes to use a chainmail vest instead of a breast plate but that for fluff reasons may want to look like a plate tank, he can.  He is allowed to wear chain as his main armour if he wishes, but with the fluff slot he can put in a plate piece because it is heavier, but he couldn't make it look like he was wearing leather or cloth.</p></blockquote> Sounds pretty biased against the heavies to me.

[Cocytus]

My most recent post in the 36th page of the <a href="http://forums.station.sony.com/eq2/posts/list.m?start=525&topic_id=379858" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">other</a> thread points out how the current restrictions are actually extremely biased to heavier classes, and I really don't think it's fair. They need to set the restrictions back to what they were...THe thread is full of people wanting the same, or more.

[Winter]

<cite>Niryan@Nagafen wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Winter wrote:</cite><blockquote><p><span style="font-size: medium;color: #ff99ff;">Personally, the best option I think would be as follows:</span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;color: #ff99ff;">1. PvP servers - must be class appropriate armor. Plate to plate, cloth to cloth, leather to leather. People have to make quick judgements based upon appearance. How many people will really sit there to go 'wow... is that guardian wearing a robe really wearing the Fabled Robe of Sir Ganksalot?'... I think it would take away from the PvP element.</span></p></blockquote>Question for you, Winwin.... do you play on a PvP server yourself? PS: Thanks Sapph <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" width="15" height="15" /></blockquote><span style="font-size: medium;color: #ff99ff;">I will admit that normally I do not play on PvP. I do have a little character I play on PvP from time to time though. I know appearance isn't normally the way to go... my only fear is people not being able to tell how 'uber' somebody is in their class. Most of the fabled armors, etc, have quite a distinct appearance. Granted, I will be the first to admit that I haven't played mid to high level pvp, I've mostly just dabbled in it - so if I said or say anything unaware of certain things, I apologize. <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY<img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />" width="15" height="15" /></span>

[hizashi]

<p>I for one would prefer to not see mages and druids running around in plate armor, and I welcome the system as planned.</p><p>Its basically an improvement on armor dyes, except you also get to pick the graphical models (not just color). It also adds the element of finding the best looking armor (per your opinion) for your archetype.</p><p> Just wanted to throw a positive in the mix.</p>

[Larogi]

<cite>hizashi wrote:</cite><blockquote><p>I for one would prefer to not see mages and druids running around in plate armor, and I welcome the system as planned.</p><p>Its basically an improvement on armor dyes, except you also get to pick the graphical models (not just color). It also adds the element of finding the best looking armor (per your opinion) for your archetype.</p><p> Just wanted to throw a positive in the mix.</p></blockquote><p><span style="color: #3333ff;">I believe the one class that is having problems with this is the Ranger/Assassin class. They can wear chain armor, but they look better in leather and should probably be wearing leather. I know I would rather be seen wearing leather for either my ranger or assasin and have the positive affects of chain armor. Maybe this class just needs to be looked at for there armor.</span></p><p><span style="color: #3333ff;">I know I do not want to see any plate wearer running around in a robe. I actually had one wear one in a group in Nek Castle and as a healer mentioned many times that she needs to buy plate armor and the response was, "I am roleplaying". Well to say the least, I let her die and concentrated my healing to another fighter within the group. </span></p><p><span style="color: #3333ff;">The whole aspect for this change was to find the armor for your class that you want to look like, but not lose the great stats of the rainbow looking armor you may be currently wearing. If everyone would look at it from that perspective alone, this is a great change. Quite trying to morph this into a wish list of possiblities.</span></p><p><span style="color: #3333ff;">Just my 2cp.</span></p>

[Troubor]

<cite>Abelard@Oasis wrote, and I reply in <span style="color: #cc0000;">red within what I quoted</span>:</cite><blockquote><cite>hizashi wrote:</cite><blockquote><p>I for one would prefer to not see mages and druids running around in plate armor, and I welcome the system as planned.</p><p>Its basically an improvement on armor dyes, except you also get to pick the graphical models (not just color). It also adds the element of finding the best looking armor (per your opinion) for your archetype.</p><p> Just wanted to throw a positive in the mix.</p></blockquote><p><span style="color: #3333ff;">I believe the one class that is having problems with this is the Ranger/Assassin class. <span style="color: #cc0000;">(Actually, I know a lot of people of all character classes annoyed by this)</span>  They can wear chain armor, but they look better in leather and should probably be wearing leather.  <span style="color: #cc0000;">(This I will generally agree with)</span> I know I would rather be seen wearing leather for either my ranger or assasin and have the positive affects of chain armor. Maybe this class just needs to be looked at for there armor.  </span><span style="color: #cc0000;">(I would disagree that it's ranger/assassin only though.  How about a bard...why would a travelling performer pick chain?  An acrobat might want no armor at all for instance.  A musician may be happy with chain on his legs and chest, but want his arms free so he can play an instrument, and so forth)</span></p><p><span style="color: #3333ff;">I know I do not want to see any plate wearer running around in a robe.  <span style="color: #cc0000;">(If it's fluff armor, and not their actual stat armor, why does it matter?)</span> I actually had one wear one in a group in Nek Castle and as a healer mentioned many times that she needs to buy plate armor and the response was, "I am roleplaying".  <span style="color: #cc0000;">(If fluff armor didn't have the limitations that are currently on Test, that person could wear their robes in the appearance tab, but wear plate in the normal equipment.  It lets them RP they are wearing robes, but wear plate for game stat purposes.  Best of both worlds.)</span> Well to say the least, I let her die and concentrated my healing to another fighter within the group. </span><span style="color: #cc0000;">(If that person could have worn robes as fluff, plate for game stats, you wouldn't have to let her die)</span></p><p><span style="color: #3333ff;">The whole aspect for this change was to find the armor for your class that you want to look like, but not lose the great stats of the rainbow looking armor you may be currently wearing.  <span style="color: #cc0000;">(And you know this how?  I'm not on Test, so I won't claim to know the reason behind it.  But even if you are, have the developers came forward and specfically said "Okay, this is WHY we're doing an appearance tab and fluff armor".  If they have, then please quote them or at least say who said that)</span> If everyone would look at it from that perspective alone, this is a great change.  <span style="color: #cc0000;">(It's a change with great potential.  But if a plate wearer is stuck with only items heavier then what they can currently wear, then it's almost impossible for them to even FIND anything to wear as fluff.  Without looking at each item for exact weight, one piece of plate pretty much weighs the same as another.  If it was equal to or greater, then there is still IMO a bit too much of a limitation, but at least one has some choices.  And YES I know they say some clothing is exempt, status items being given as an example.  Well, way it reads now, it's almost status items or nothing)</span> Quite trying to morph this into a wish list of possiblities.  </span><span style="color: #cc0000;">(I'm not.  I'm suggesting choice is good.  If you wish to twist that into some wish list or pipe dream, so be it.)</span></p><p><span style="color: #3333ff;">Just my 2cp.</span></p></blockquote>

[Vydar]

If there were any good ways to make nice appearance armor, this would be ok.Name something tailors can make that isn't ugly?  Or exactly the same as every other tailor item only a different ugly color?  And... what city items can we buy to put in our "fluff" slots?  If all we can wear is more armor of our own tier that is lootable or craftable, since we can't wear stuff outside our class armor... [Removed for Content] is the point of this?I have never judged what class someone is by what they wear.  I'm not sure what the goal is here.  It looked like we were going to get a cool, nice change... now we're not.  This is pointless. 

[madha]

<p>MAges in plate would ruin the game for me you guys have played the game for years now only being able to use the robe that is best for you now you can find a pretty cloth set to use, and there are a bunch out there.  FLip side tanks in robes is just stupid.  </p><p>The options you have are only limited to what you have been able to ware forever how is that a limit? YOu guys want to see mages running around in the mirror city armor casting fusion on mobs? im sorry that takes away from the whole visual aspect of the game.  Just deal with the cloth/cloth chain/chain plate/plate leather/leather restrictions like you have been forever.</p><p>If you want your character in plat roll a tank not realy hard since all the solo content. heck even name it close to yoru other toons name so u will get confused, then in your own little world you can think your mage is in plate.  Honestly i dont know why anyone would think plate would ever be a option for mages to even have the appreance of having equipt.</p><p>I am for the change peole need the restrictions that they have add forever left inplace. since the dawn of RPG i dont thinnk mages have ever used plate, and if a tank wants to cover up his obber gear with a robe i think he shall be trotled with a wipe until he be dead. </p>

[Hazeroth]

If I remember right.Vanguard armor is considered Heavier "Heavy" Armor even if the the AC is approximately the same.Ie, Regular Plate might weigh 3.5, but Vanguard armor usually weighs in at 4.0.Since Vanguard is "Heavier" a Tank can wear the Shiny T5 Vanguard Plate over their normal armor. (or T5 Fabled vanguard).I need to start looking at all the armor and compare weights from one cloth armor to another, one may weigh .5 and another weigh 1.0. Same for the other armor types.You should be able to go cloth to cloth as long as the one is heavier then another. Now people will be looking at armor weight, where in the past people just over look it.

[Troubor]

<cite>madhatr wrote, I reply within the post in <span style="color: #cc0000;">red</span>:</cite><blockquote><p>MAges in plate would ruin the game for me you guys have played the game for years now only being able to use the robe that is best for you now you can find a pretty cloth set to use, and there are a bunch out there.  FLip side tanks in robes is just stupid.  <span style="color: #cc0000;">(A)  Then you have the choice as a mage to not wear plate in a fluff slot, or if a tank to not wear robes in a fluff spot.  B)  If they insist on making it "Only" your armor type, then at least make it equal or greater in weight.  Greater in weight still makes it very limited.  What if someone has an old suit of armor they saved that looks great.  They are a tank, so it's plate.  Want to wear it as fluff armor.  But it weighs the same as their current fluff armor.  What then?  They aren't breaking anything you stated, yet they can't wear this old suit of armor they saved due to how this looks to be done)</span></p><p>The options you have are only limited to what you have been able to ware forever how is that a limit? YOu guys want to see mages running around in the mirror city armor casting fusion on mobs? im sorry that takes away from the whole visual aspect of the game.  Just deal with the cloth/cloth chain/chain plate/plate leather/leather restrictions like you have been forever.  <span style="color: #cc0000;">(No, I want more choice options.  Forgive me, if I'd like to see a ranger able to pick green leather since it looks better, and in character concept if not gameplay actually works better looks wise.  Or a bard maybe pick a suit of cloth, since as a travelling entertainer they might not want to wear chain for RP purposes.  (yes, god forbid I mention roleplay in a roleplaying game...).  You just deal with people wanting more choices, you almost word this like you think YOUR preference is the only one that matters.  Sorry, but this isn't the case.  :p  )</span></p><p>If you want your character in plat roll a tank not realy hard since all the solo content. heck even name it close to yoru other toons name so u will get confused, then in your own little world you can think your mage is in plate.  Honestly i dont know why anyone would think plate would ever be a option for mages to even have the appreance of having equipt.  <span style="color: #cc0000;">(Actually, I know of someone who has a mage character, and a plate tank.  She plays they are the SAME person, just when she's needed as a mage, she dons the robes.  When needed as a plate tank, she's in armor.  Unusual, sure.  But someone is doing this.  Why can't this person for RP purposes put on some plate because she forgot to "swap" when her necro is called for, not her berserker, then RP that he spells seem less effective or some such (there's that nasty use of "rp/roleplay" again..and yes, I mention that as an aside, but I do wonder if the developers sometimes forget people RP in this game too..).  I have a character who has the ugly pink plate pants from SoS, the ones with no resist but a decent amount of flowing thought.  He gets teased by people he roleplays with for having them, I didn't plan on having him wear all cloth, but was going to put on a baggy set of cloth pants to "hide" them in hopes in RP he isn't teased.  Now unless a set of pants from some status merchant works, he's lost that option.  He'd still be obviously a plate tank, he'd just be hiding his leggings due to being ugly.  Is this ALLOWED by you?  :p</span></p><p><span style="color: #cc0000;">Again, even if they do want it how YOU want it if I understand correctly, and it's what others seem to be saying so for now assume I do, the armor has to be heavier.  That makes it difficult at best again.  A plate wearer in all vanguard pretty much has no choice unless they start intentionally having looted or crafted heavier then normal items patched into game.  Is this what you want?  :p  )</span></p><p>I am for the change peole need the restrictions that they have add forever left inplace. since the dawn of RPG i dont thinnk mages have ever used plate, and if a tank wants to cover up his obber gear with a robe i think he shall be trotled with a wipe until he be dead.   <span style="color: #cc0000;">(Since the dawn of RPG.  Go look up older editions of D&D for starters.  Many multi-class mage/fighters could use at least chain if not plate, at least if it was a specific kind.  Some official rule expansion may have even added in use of plate as long as it was a specific type, and 1st edition AD&D I think at least an elf could get away with any armor as a multi-class mage/fighter period.  Been way too long, but since he said "dawn of RPG", well 1st edition AD&D isn't the "dawn" of the genre per-se, but it's getting there.  Many game systems that weren't class specific had characters in whatever armor they wanted able to cast spells of an arcane nature fine, or with some limitation.  The Elder Scrolls series has classes, defined by what skills you specalize in, yet their mages can cast spells in plate, just with a penality based on the armor skill that fits the type of armor worn.  A pure mage in that game series could swap to armor that is obviously plate or vanguard in EQ2 terms yet cast their spells.  In case you don't know what the Elder Scrolls series is, go look up "Morrowind" or "Oblivion" for starters.  And before anyone says "none of those are EQ/EQ2", remember he said since the "Dawn of RPG".  He left it open to mention other roleplaying games.  <img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />  </span></p><p><span style="color: #cc0000;">As an aside, I'd not be TOO upset if they decided to be narrowminded and possibly (I said possibly.  :p ) bend to the PvP crowd by making it "plate only for plate wearers, chain for chain, etc".  BUT, at least drop this "heavier" restriction, or else...what can people really wear?  Myself, I was going to do the following, I'll list my characters with a generic description:</span></p><p><span style="color: #cc0000;">a)  70th level tank..doesn't have his fabled class leggings nor legendary, so was going to put a pair of plate in the fluff slot that didn't clash as badly with the fabled class gear he does have and is wearing.  Now, he apparently doesn't have that choice, I'm sure plate weighs the same or less.</span></p><p><span style="color: #cc0000;">b)  62nd level tank..mentioned him above, was going to wear cloth pants, other spots keep his stat gear for appearances, for pure RP reasons.  He'd still obviously be a tank, not a fighter in a robe.  Now unless some city merchart garb will work, he's lost that option.</span></p><p><span style="color: #cc0000;">Rest off hand I wasn't going to change appearance currently.  I guess if I can't do 'b", I'll live..but not being able to do "a", swap one piece of heavy for another for appearance purposes is truly absurd.</span></p><p><span style="color: #cc0000;">Guess my picks didn't seem all that radical.  Now as I understand it, I can't do either if I wish to maintain my stats.  For me at least, the use of fluff armor means nothing.  And I know others who were going to do similar things, kept, looted or bought one armor piece with lesser stats but that came closer to matching the rest of their suit.  Guess they are screwed for picking something the same weight if they have done so, so this isn't just me speaking, just using myself as an example.)</span></p></blockquote>

[Armawk]

<cite>Troubor wrote:</cite><blockquote><blockquote><p><span style="color: #cc0000;">As an aside, I'd not be TOO upset if they decided to be narrowminded and possibly (I said possibly.  :p ) bend to the PvP crowd by making it "plate only for plate wearers, chain for chain, etc".  BUT, at least drop this "heavier" restriction, or else...what can people really wear?  Myself, I was going to do the following, I'll list my characters with a generic description:</span></p><p><span style="color: #cc0000;">a)  70th level tank..doesn't have his fabled class leggings nor legendary, so was going to put a pair of plate in the fluff slot that didn't clash as badly with the fabled class gear he does have and is wearing.  Now, he apparently doesn't have that choice, I'm sure plate weighs the same or less.</span></p></blockquote></blockquote><p>Your entire argument is based on you misreading the rule, and ignoring the dozens of explanations of it.</p><p>Of course a plate tank can wear plate in the fluff slots. You can wear the same or heavier classed armour.</p>

[Troubor]

<cite>shaunfletcher wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Troubor wrote:</cite><blockquote><blockquote><p><span style="color: #cc0000;">As an aside, I'd not be TOO upset if they decided to be narrowminded and possibly (I said possibly.  :p ) bend to the PvP crowd by making it "plate only for plate wearers, chain for chain, etc".  BUT, at least drop this "heavier" restriction, or else...what can people really wear?  Myself, I was going to do the following, I'll list my characters with a generic description:</span></p><p><span style="color: #cc0000;">a)  70th level tank..doesn't have his fabled class leggings nor legendary, so was going to put a pair of plate in the fluff slot that didn't clash as badly with the fabled class gear he does have and is wearing.  Now, he apparently doesn't have that choice, I'm sure plate weighs the same or less.</span></p></blockquote></blockquote><p>Your entire argument is based on you misreading the rule, and ignoring the dozens of explanations of it.</p><p>Of course a plate tank can wear plate in the fluff slots. You can wear the same or heavier classed armour.</p></blockquote><p>Major edit, found one of the explinations I "ignored":</p><p>Since this is the case, then fine.  But, I was going by this post:</p><p><a rel="nofollow" href="http://forums.station.sony.com/eq2/posts/list.m?topic_id=379847" target="_blank">http://forums.station.sony.com/eq2/...topic_id=379847</a></p><p>To quote:</p><p>"Only items usable by your class, and heavier than your currently equipped armor can be worn".</p><p>How else would one read that.  They IMO said one thing but meant another.  If they wanted to convey "Same weight or heavier", then they could have said exactly that. </p><p>This still doesn't address a ranger wishing to wear green leather, a bard wishing to wear cloth so he fits the look of more of a performer a bit better, or other such items due to what I read as a misunderstood "shaft factor" by the developers, but I guess at least someone can wear any armor within their own classes common usage.  So no, my whole arguement wasn't based on that.  Please read my comments about the person I know who plays both a berserker and a nerco who are the same person, the comments I made with regards to the one fellow saying "Dawn of RPG" and so forth.</p>

[Captain Apple Darkberry]

<cite>hizashi wrote:</cite><blockquote><p>I for one would prefer to not see mages and druids running around in plate armor, and I welcome the system as planned.</p><p>Its basically an improvement on armor dyes, except you also get to pick the graphical models (not just color). It also adds the element of finding the best looking armor (per your opinion) for your archetype.</p><p> Just wanted to throw a positive in the mix.</p></blockquote><span style="color: #ff3300;"><looks at the scoreboard at halftime>Pro non-restricted Fluff Slots:  500Pro restricted Fluff Slots: 1Seriously, unless all of the status/faction armors and leather looking chain armors are taken from the game, then there is no reason to restrict the slots due to "certain classes having less options" or "Peeps on PvP need to be able to determine class visually".  As the ability to do what the restriction is there to stop is still present.As a Captain of the Seafurys, I could be wearing full PvP gear (well not really as I suck at PvP) and yet be wearing the basic Seafury faction armor which has the same graphic as Level 1 Rawhide Leather Armor that you could purchase from a vendor.  A SK, a Wizzy/Warlock, Inquisi, anyone at all could do the same...So much for "restricted slots" allowing people to determine a class in PvP...   ...so now that that "factor" has been shown false, PLEASE FREE UP THE FLUFF SLOTS!!!</span>

[Uumuuanu]

<p>Great, another thing that makes NO sense.</p><p>So lets see, I can dress up my warlock in my guardians gear, woots for warlocks in plate.  But I can't dress up my guardian in well, anything other then he already wears?  Wow, nice move someone.  Why don't we just allow warlocks to really wear plate because there isn't any good way for the average tank to hold aggro against them.</p><p>Oh yeah and lets see, that means that I can dress up my bruiser in guardian gear so he finally feels like the real tank he is supposed to be, although he can't tank worth crap because my guardian wearing over 100lbs of plate is still more agile then my bruiser wearing a couple of pounds of leather.  </p><p>Oh and while we are at it, lets have all of the healers dress up in plate so we have no clue what they really are without right clicking and inspecting every one of them.</p><p>WOW genius.  Wait, thats the answer, WoW, they want it to be like WoW, maybe we should all go play WoW?  But then again EQ2 is trying to dress up in WoW's clothing, or so it would seem.</p>

[Armawk]

<cite>Uumuuanu wrote:</cite><blockquote><p>Great, another thing that makes NO sense.</p><p>So lets see, I can dress up my warlock in my guardians gear, woots for warlocks in plate.  But I can't dress up my guardian in well, anything other then he already wears?  </p></blockquote><p>No because you have to be able to wear it AND it cant be lighter than the gear in the real slot.</p><p>Basically no character wearing their usual weight class of item will be able to equip anything other than that same class in that slot. Thats the upshot of this rule.</p>