No, it doesn't. Let's just be completely clear. Paladin doesn't do remotely enough DPS in Sword Oath.
Unless you think that WAR out-DPSing Bards is bad (sure, I could see why you might think that despite BRD's utility since BRD is a DPS class), in which case you could nerf Fell cleave to 300 potency, remove the 5% DPS bonus from Deliverance, and prevent the use of Blood Price entirely when out of Grit. Then I suppose Sword Oath would be fine because that's how too low it is right now (~15-20%), but it would also piss off a lot of people so I think that's not likely to happen.
As tired as people might be about these threads, I honestly don't have a problem with them flooding the forum because there still hasn't been any change or public acknowledgment that the current situation is a major problem. I do have a problem with the theory of healer DPS being a suitable substitute for tank DPS even if it were true that Paladin in Shield Oath is a superior tank (it is not) or provided superior support skills (it does not. As MT it has virtually zero utility other than Veil) since tank and healer DPS are very different in terms of when they're optimal to squeeze out and tank DPS is much more reliable than healer unless you meld accuracy and have a Bard for RoD. Plus you have AST that is less optimized for DPSing than SCH and healers that just don't feel comfortable DPSing in general.
Even if it were not false that Paladin is the most defensive tank and depending on healer DPS didn't have issues, it still doesn't justify the gap in the OT stance when none of that applies.
