PLD Bonus Stats

I'm trying to figure out the best way of thinking when it comes to bonus stats. What I gathered from the UI in game it boils down to:

STR=Threat
DEX=mitigation
VIT=Health.

There are three ways to look at it that I was able to come up with. Play on the strength of paladin, mitigation, and become even more potent at reducing incoming damage. Or, make up for pld's weakness (compared to war) threat generation. I will mention I've not played war. That was just what I've gathered from posts on the forums both here and in beta. The last way is some hybrid of 2 or all 3 stats to spread out the bonus but not focus on any one trait.

Any and all input is appreciated.

VIT > STR > DEX. Vit is the absolute most important stat for Gla's as their HP pool is lower compared to a Marauder. Str comes in second for threat. Dex is a distant third for some additional Mit.

STR also affects how much damage you are able to block with your shield so it helps with mitigation too. As for the VIT I would say it is second most important with strength in first. Strength allows you to do more damage affecting your hate and it does the shield thing I said before while VIT only helps with health. Im not saying it's right but just what I think.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Saltheart

VIT > STR > DEX. Vit is the absolute most important stat for Gla's as their HP pool is lower compared to a Marauder. Str comes in second for threat. Dex is a distant third for some additional Mit.

---

Take this with a grain of salt. Unless we got endgame to actually "evaluate" the importance of the individual stats, this is a "suggestion" at best.

If survivability is gonna be the smallest problem, you can compeltely ignore VIT on your bonus stat allocation.
If it's gonna be an issue, than VIT is gonna be first choice (unless you got enough VIT through gear to make up for it, then mitigating stats are gonna be better again)

No matter what...without actual endgame tests there is no way of saying which stat is gonna be the most favourable to raise.

How exactly does DEX effect mitigation? Is it one of those things where it just does, or does DEX have anything to do with shield skill?

Correct me if I am wrong but does not Dex improve your chance to block as well as to parry?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TirionCrey

Snip

---

It's not just a suggestion, just spend some time and research abilities (didn't mean this as an offense, just meant research so I don't have to type them all out) that benefit more from a tank with more HP, having more HP doesn't just allow you to have a bigger HP pool, but it allows some healing abilities to heal more, stoneskin to absorb more etc. From a tanking standpoint the 30 points in VIT is much more beneficial not just for paladin but for warrior also.

Remember, this is talking about the 30 points, this isn't a in general what is better, strength of vit, but the 30 points, which is more beneficial putting them into vit (sorry, some people like to debate str vs vit now in 2.0 gear wise when that doesn't really matter with how gear is designed now).

Tirion is correct. Without the numbers everything is a suggestion based off theory. Personal preference will play a part as well.

Vitality gives the most return, strength second and dex isn't even close to being worth putting any points into. Strength is barely worth the points since it takes a large amount to hit the next percentage of mitigation. The 30 points in strength will not increase your dps any noticeable amount and same with threat. We have more than enough threat generation, especially once we get Shield Oath. There were several detailed charts that broke down all this in the phase 3 beta forums. Vitality gives 450 more hp, more hp regen, more stoneskin bonus etc. I for one think the bonus stats are silly to begin with, but that's another topic :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ghemyni

Tirion is correct. Without the numbers everything is a suggestion based off theory. Personal preference will play a part as well.

---

Assuming threat is not an issue which it shouldn't be, and if 30strength will make or break your threat, there is a bigger issue then that. The gain towards parry from 30 strength is minimal at best.

Here is the list of abilities that will help a paladin more then strength would putting your 30 points into VIT.

http://xivdb.com/?skill/90005/Enhanced-Vitality-III
http://xivdb.com/?skill/27/Cover
http://xivdb.com/?skill/140/Benediction
http://xivdb.com/?skill/129/Stoneskin
http://xivdb.com/?skill/189/Lustrate

I may of missed some, but truthfully the only thing putting the 30 points into strength as a paladin is benefiting and taking in the fact you are a tank and not a dps is

http://xivdb.com/?skill/34/Bloodbath

Without even throwing in the idea that having a bigger HP pool that can effectively help healers have a easier time healing and even allow other opportunities like healers being able to throw in some dps during healing with a big enough hp pool it sounds pretty reasonable to say VIT is the way to go.

I don't know about lvling, strength might be best while soloing, but I doubt during the leveling process that these points can really make the big of a difference, hell, they barely make a difference in end game.

This is also just going off of tool tips, some people say that even your natural Regen is higher with more HP and other cool little things that I can't remember at this time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eliseus

It's not just a suggestion, just spend some time and research abilities (didn't mean this as an offense, just meant research so I don't have to type them all out) that benefit more from a tank with more HP, having more HP doesn't just allow you to have a bigger HP pool, but it allows some healing abilities to heal more, stoneskin to absorb more etc. From a tanking standpoint the 30 points in VIT is much more beneficial not just for paladin but for warrior also.

Remember, this is talking about the 30 points, this isn't a in general what is better, strength of vit, but the 30 points, which is more beneficial putting them into vit (sorry, some people like to debate str vs vit now in 2.0 gear wise when that doesn't really matter with how gear is designed now).

---

Often times larger than necessary health pools just become MP dumps for healers. Health pools should never be looked at as the biggest is the best, for if that were the case the WAR would win hands down. Having sufficient health to absorb significant damage before requiring attention is the target. Now, what is sufficient health? That is really the question and one that cannot yet be answered for the factors are myriad.

Side note: Stoneskin is as of right now nearly useless as anything but a pre-pull buff. Cast time and MP cost are too high and efficacy too low to be of value during battle.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eliseus

Your side note is wrong, and that is actually one prime example of how much a larger HP pool could help more then not, it could potentially open doors to cast stoneskin instead of spamming heals, also, name me a time that a bigger health pool is worse instead of not, because with the 30 points into vit then 30 points into str, not only will you still do all the content NP, but you will have almost 500 more HP to fluff around that will look more desirable to people. If you also saw my last post, I even gave examples of where more HP is beneficial.

---

In what way am I wrong? The mana cost at level 50 is 3x's the cost of Cure (399 for Stoneskin, 133 for Cure) has a 3 second base cast time (50% more than Cure) and only shields at best 18% of PHYSICAL!!! damage. There is a decent write up of Stoneskins problems in the healer forums if you want to check it out.

I'll make up some fake numbers here since you're 50 and I'm not so idk what health pools are at that level. At 4000 HP Stoneskin will shield 720 HP (that is not much for 399 mana) but at 5000 HP we are sill only getting 900 HP of physical protection. That is not a huge jump in bonus protection for a theoretical 125 VIT. You also mentioned heals that are better when health is higher. I've looked over CNJ, WHM and SCH and see nothing of the sort. What are you talking about specifically? The SCH does get a shield of sorts, but is is based off its healed amount, not target HP.

Ultimately what that means is Stoneskin is not good for the tank during the fight since Cure heals all damage, not just physical, has a lower mana cost and is faster. It is also not going to be used on DPS since it has such a long cast time which prevents it from being used reactionary to immediate threats.

When would higher HP be a bad thing? When mitigation is sacrificed for it, as might be the case with STR. There is a balance that must be struck between mitigation and health and both suffer from diminishing returns. Having a huge health pool that gets drained quickly becomes, as I already said, an MP dump for healers since they will be required to spend more time casting heals on the tank. If these basic points have some how gotten past you, I fear for your ability to do this job effectively.

However, you might be absolutely correct in saying that VIT is more important than STR (for these 30 points; though if for these 30, than for any). The fact is we just don't know how effective STR is in block and parry mitigation. Perhaps it will be too insignificant to be worth investing too heavily in. My point is that all things must be considered and just blindly saying VIT is better because it gives you a bigger HP pool is foolish. Tanks must be able to balance enmity generation, mitigation and HP. Not one is more important than the other.

Enjoy!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LunarRei

Often times larger than necessary health pools just become MP dumps for healers. Health pools should never be looked at as the biggest is the best, for if that were the case the WAR would win hands down. Having sufficient health to absorb significant damage before requiring attention is the target. Now, what is sufficient health? That is really the question and one that cannot yet be answered for the factors are myriad.

Side note: Stoneskin is as of right now nearly useless as anything but a pre-pull buff. Cast time and MP cost are too high and efficacy too low to be of value during battle.

---

Your side note is wrong, and that is actually one prime example of how much a larger HP pool could help more then not, it could potentially open doors to cast stoneskin instead of spamming heals, also, name me a time that a bigger health pool is worse instead of not, because with the 30 points into vit then 30 points into str, not only will you still do all the content NP, but you will have almost 500 more HP to fluff around that will look more desirable to people. If you also saw my last post, I even gave examples of where more HP is beneficial.

Fact is people like to see big numbers, just like big HP pools, but more often, people like to try and get big numbers damage wise. Someone somewhere thinks 30strength is going to give that when in reality RNG could make your numbers exactly the same still with how minimal that extra 30 points is. 30 points in VIT is much more beneficial, and being a tank and all, benefits more towards tank like things.

Thank you everyone for your replies. I had went vit in p4 because it's been my experience that HP maters more to tanking low level dungeons in other MMOs. I wasn't aware of the effect on stoneskin though, and that is a nice surprise.

Did anyone else notice an increase in block rate in P4 as compared to P3? It may have just been my impression (or the fact I played different races in each) but it definitely seemed like I blocked significantly more in P4. If block rate was indeed altered in the background, that could change the discussion on stat allocation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LunarRei

Rambling

---

Look at my links. It isn't blindly, without even testing you should be able to conclude which is better (reading is hard), MP costs don't really matter much considering at least what people were saying, the infinite pool of MP they had, like you said though, you aren't 50, so you don't know this. Just because you aren't 50, don't just accuse people of "blindly" saying how things are at 50. Just because you don't like it, doesn't make it wrong.

Also the burden of proof lies upon you to present a situation where healers just dump MP trying to heal someone with that 30 extra vit, but you know, like you said, you not being 50, might be pretty hard.

You mention physical damage, if we are talking about spell damage, HP > all since you can't parry or block or dodge magic. Stoneskin isn't just physical damage. Can we get someone in here that at least reads what abilities do or 50 trying to argue strength being better then vit? Thank you for supporting my VIT argument though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eliseus

Look at my links. Also, it isn't blindly, without any kind of testing you should be able to conclude which is better, MP costs don't really matter much considering at least what people were saying, the infinite pool of MP they had, like you said though, you aren't 50, so you don't know this. Just because you aren't 50, don't just accuse people of "blindly" saying how things are at 50. Just because you don't like it, doesn't make it wrong.

Also the burden of proof lies upon you to present a situation where healers just dump MP trying to heal someone with that 30 extra vit, but you know, like you said, you not being 50, might be pretty hard.

---

No need to get elitist because you have a 50. You obviously missed some things on the way, but I won't hold that against you. Yes, people are saying MP isn't a big factor, yet, but they also confess to not knowing what the endgame is like. The reason I am criticizing your conclusion as blind is because you don't know how much mitigation is gained by way of STR. That means you are blind to the facts. As am I.

What you seem to be missing that I am not, however, is that there are general principles to tanking that you are clearly glossing over. Mitigation is one of the prime aspects of tanking, as well as health pool. If only health pool mattered then why not let THM tank as long as they have sufficient health? This is an obviously extreme example, but clearly illustrates my point.

All you have done is say that because you are 50 and I am not, you are correct. Such hubris will get your party killed, fellow tank. There is no burden for me to prove, it has been proven time and time again in all MMO's that utilize the holy trinity. Besides, I am not the one printing conjecture and asserting it as fact. I have tried to stay objective and have explained my position with numbers and actual spell descriptions. I also stated that you may be correct. It would appear your reading comprehension is on par with your tanking knowledge.

Edit: Checked out your links and the only ones that scale with HP are the WHM full heal and the 20% heal from SCH (ignoring stoneskin because it has already been explained). The WHM heal is on a 5 minute CD so if you are building your char based on that, you are screwed. The 20% from SCH is more interesting, but you have to be in Aetherflow which in on 1 min CD and should probably be saved for when it is needed, meaning it won't be prime heal. So, decent bonus, but not more important than mitigation.

From all sources except the XIV database, Stoneskin prevents only physical damage. Until it can be confirmed tomorrow, I'll go with what I know. Even if it does block elemental damage, Cure > Stoneskin in all cases after battle has started.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LunarRei

Sigh

---

I am not blind, and there has been many tests from p4 even of people saying how much strength does from their tests, sadly, a lot of it is still on the beta forums which is closed. I am also not blind because like I said, just reading the tooltips is good enough to suggest what to do with your 30 points.

You are right, mitigation is usually best, but we are talking about these 30 points, and you are presenting arguments that really don't exist in FFXIV anymore of what is better vit or str, because besides the 30points, there really isn't much room anymore to have different pieces of gear etc.

Don't take what I say out of context being 50 and try to use it to successfully argue your point of view.

Yep, I'm a bad tank, caught me, just as you feel, I hope no one has the luck of being in my party through the duty finder :(.

Usually defeat results in attacks towards other things, but whatever, if that makes you happy, I'm fine with that, as long as you don't pop a blood vessel or something.

Also, read my post still at end of page 1 before accusing me of not linking any spells or whatever. Apparently you finally read it, but completely missed the entire point. Oh well, guess you can't help everyone.

Have to agree with Eliseus. You can take 1.0 for example where a bigger HP pool is better than any other stats for tanks.

http://valk.dancing-mad.com/?page_id=227

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/...jY2tWVlE#gid=0

this is just some raw data I'm dumping I've been reading around reddit, if anyone has it seen it and would like to come to their own conclusions.

Here's the reddit where some conclusions are made based on various testing data.
http://www.reddit.com/r/ffxiv/commen...s_and_tanking/

I'm not going to put in my input really, for now I say VIT, and if they change something, or we find that the diminishing returns on other stats are increased and aren't that bad now, hold off on stat'ing for a bit, if you're 50 and played 1.0 and have a restat token, try it out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by zaviermhigo

http://valk.dancing-mad.com/?page_id=227

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/...jY2tWVlE#gid=0

this is just some raw data I'm dumping I've been reading around reddit, if anyone has it seen it and would like to come to their own conclusions.

Here's the reddit where some conclusions are made based on various testing data.
http://www.reddit.com/r/ffxiv/commen...s_and_tanking/

I'm not going to put in my input really, for now I say VIT, and if they change something, or we find that the diminishing returns on other stats are increased and aren't that bad now, hold off on stat'ing for a bit, if you're 50 and played 1.0 and have a restat token, try it out.

---

Well I was just about to post http://i.imgur.com/YNwUMd9.png but you went and found the rest of the charts I was trying to find lol. Need too much str to hit those tiers and dex is even worse. Vitality all the way! :)

Thank you for those links Zavier

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eliseus

I am not blind, and there has been many tests from p4 even of people saying how much strength does from their tests, sadly, a lot of it is still on the beta forums which is closed. I am also not blind because like I said, just reading the tooltips is good enough to suggest what to do with your 30 points.

---

This is precisely what I mean. The tooltips don't tell you that you get 8 HP per VIT. They don't tell you how much mitigation you get from STR. The parry and block ratings don't even tell you what they mean other than higher is better. Testing told us that 1 VIT = x HP and 1 STR = x Parry/Block rating. So, no, the tooltips didn't tell you anything. Testing did.

However, the amount of testing from 4 days of beta is not sufficient to determine stat weightings.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eliseus

Don't take what I say out of context being 50 and try to use it to successfully argue your point of view.

---

I would never!!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eliseus

like you said though, you aren't 50, so you don't know this
Just because you aren't 50
how things are at 50
you not being 50
Can we get someone in here that at least reads what abilities do or [sic] 50

---

;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nosiahk

Have to agree with Eliseus. You can take 1.0 for example where a bigger HP pool is better than any other stats for tanks.

---

This isn't Kansas anymore though, right? Can't we hope that they actually tried to fix broken systems?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by zaviermhigo

snip

---

I'll take a look. Data is good. My entire point is that one should not hastily draw conclusions and say HP is ALWAYS better. It's not. Too much health is pointless.

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Sorry, I was trying to save my reply space... and now I've ran out... ugh! Posting limits for noobs sucks...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vire

I don't understand what you are trying to do here Lunar except be difficult for no reason. All the math and testing points to Vit being better as well as common sense says it should be better. The burden of proof is on you if you disagree and I have not seen one thing come from any of your rambling to say otherwise. It doesn't matter one bit that you aren't 50 but that doesn't mean you aren't wrong either.

Do you seriously believe Str is a better stat right now? If so explain why.

---

I've never said that STR is better, only that we don't know for sure and that pumping VIT by default is not necessarily a good idea. It is not common sense that higher HP is always better and I'll explain why below. Oh, and I really hate Stoneskin and will always vigorously fight against using it in its current form.

Think of it like this: is a THM with 10,000 HP a good tank? No way! Even with that many HP, their ability to mitigate damage is so weak that the healer will have to spam heals to keep them alive. If the received DPS is greater than the HPS output of the healer, then they will be outpaced and if the fight does not end quickly, the tank will die. If the DPS and HPS more closely match, then this can strain a healers MP which in long fights (possibly, hopefully, endgame) will lead to loss through attrition.

Conversely, if you have a PLD that mitigates ALL (w/ resistances) damage at 90% (what is cap in this game? 90% seemed like a sufficiently high number), but only had 500 HP, that would also be of little use. This would handcuff the healer as all of their investments and spell power would be wasted but would also make the PLD incapable of handling burst damage or successive hits for too long since the healer has to keep the PLD capped on HP for him to stay alive between CD's.

So what does that mean? Well, we start creeping more toward the middle with more reasonable HP numbers and high, but not excessive, defense ratings and resistances. It is when we hit this middle ground that each point starts to show its true value. We have these 30 points and materia to play with, so it is worth paying attention to when the diminishing returns start to bounce between HP and defense.

How much HP is enough to give the healer some breathing room and allow you to get through some burst while the healer might have to aoe heal instead of focus?
How much mitigation is enough to where each point of defense or block is better spent on the extra 8 HP?
What fights are you building for and what enemies are you going to face?

To me, and the people I protect, it is a much more important decision than just saying "meh, HP".

I guess my question to you all is, how much health does your GLA (were job crystals available to you legacy in p4? if so, what numbers were your PLD's pushing?) have at 50 and does 240 more make that big of a difference? From what I am seeing, maybe so. But I'll never take somebody's word for it. (Hint: that makes the question rhetorical.)

Elisius: the discussion is good and should be had every time SE adjusts stat weights. Never close your mind to the idea that there might be better options than the obvious.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LunarRei

Snip

---

You really didn't get me mocking you because you tried arguing things for end game without ever doing it at all (and essentially implying to everyone that you really have no idea what you are saying and you aren't 50 yet so that is why), I know technically no one has, but people were able to base a lot of opinions off of at least higher lvl mobs, which in case, you couldn't. I call straw man. :P

Have to keep editing my post since you just don't post new replies lol.

Anyways, the only time IIRC stating that HP is ALWAYS better is when it comes to mitigation vs spells since you can't parry/block/doge.

If you can find any other time, I will gladly admit fault and apologize since that would be foolish of me.

Also

Quote:

---

You are right, mitigation is usually best, but we are talking about these 30 points, and you are presenting arguments that really don't exist in FFXIV anymore of what is better vit or str, because besides the 30points, there really isn't much room anymore to have different pieces of gear etc.

---

before you look, just to make sure you do see that I did say this.

I don't understand what you are trying to do here Lunar except be difficult for no reason. All the math and testing points to Vit being better as well as common sense says it should be better. The burden of proof is on you if you disagree and I have not seen one thing come from any of your rambling to say otherwise. It doesn't matter one bit that you aren't 50 but that doesn't mean you aren't wrong either.

Do you seriously believe Str is a better stat right now? If so explain why.

Current theories suggest that Str and Dex are more important then Vit. Vit only raises HP, not actual defense. Might be more useful for War but really...you're going to get enough vit with gear. STR is currently the most important or one of the most important due to damage migration.

Edit- wow didnt see this becoming a all out war when I posted my reply. I still stand by it but I'm not getting sucked into it sorry >.> It was based off a few threads I saw on Beta, my own experience (I have 50 in everything so I can be ultra elitist too...yay), and forums elsewhere.

Reality is, those 30 points are not insanely important. Put them in Str or Vit, but it wont matter too much. Not to sound hippy but it both helps with tanking, your role. I still stand by the Str but I'll have to see the changes in release myself. Reason is for migration AND for a small boost in weapon damage, something a paladin needs to think about, because sadly we're not warriors and cannot do their damage. Only time I would go out of my way to stack vit would be if a monster hit to the point where I need the HP to survive a special move or ability that I wont risk my shield with...or simply goes outside my shields block (as I remember some enemy bosses could do that in 1.0). Although quite honestly in that case I'd just go on my mrd anyway >.>

2/3 to VIT 1/3 to STR! ...at least that's what I started doing already <_<

@Eliseus: I get your points and they are all valid. But in all honesty. Without endgame experience, parsing etc. there is no way of knowing what stat is gonna be the most efficient for endgame. I agree that a bigger HP pool is overall beneficial. But let's say an endgame boss hits you for 1k of DMG a hit, passive damage mitigation will be overtaking 450HP over the long haul of a fight easily regardless of the skills that benefit from HP pool. But as I said, even that should be taken with a grain of salt...cause w/o actual endgame experience/parsing, there is no way of knowing for sure.

PS: All I can say from my PoV is though...STR is prolly gonna be least interesting stat for stat allocation (unless you are able to hit the next tier of block percentage putting in a few points)

I'm curious as to why no one's considered VIT = STR? Based on what I've read on these three pages, it seems to me that keeping VIT and STR equal would provide the balance of having a sufficient enough HP pool to survive burst damage from spells that can't be dodged/parried/blocked, while at the same time allowing for a GLD/PLD to generate enough threat from abilities, damage output, and HP pool.

I mean, I could be totally wrong in my understanding of the game mechanics, but, this is just my two cents. And let me make this clear, I'm not going to respond to troll posts and attacks for having an opinion. That kind of BS is for WoW and Blizz's Forums. Not SE and FFXIV.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sabyn

I'm curious as to why no one's considered VIT = STR? Based on what I've read on these three pages, it seems to me that keeping VIT and STR equal would provide the balance of having a sufficient enough HP pool to survive burst damage from spells that can't be dodged/parried/blocked, while at the same time allowing for a GLD/PLD to generate enough threat from abilities, damage output, and HP pool.

I mean, I could be totally wrong in my understanding of the game mechanics, but, this is just my two cents. And let me make this clear, I'm not going to respond to troll posts and attacks for having an opinion. That kind of BS is for WoW and Blizz's Forums. Not SE and FFXIV.

---

On the previous page there are some charts linked. When you look at them, you'll see the huge amounts of str, like 40something, to reach one tier and then 70 something to reach the next. 15 points of str will be a waste with these amounts. Now if it wasn't tiers like 21% 22% etc and gave an increase per point like 21.1% 21.2% etc, then str might be more of an option. For now, Vitality is your biggest bang per point.

Put all your points into vitality on GLA/PLD for stat allocation for now.

to be honest i thin vit is third mainly because all ur gear u get for PLD gives VIT & STR so if you gear you're self right u can spend 15 points on dex 10 on str and 5 on vit, but as TirionCrey said, no endgame can't be tested. Plus the gear we have now is great but in a few months is going to look like level 1 armour with all this new stuff coming.

Ahh, the old healthpool vs mitigation chestnut. I dislike specs based around huge health pools and nothing else, but in endgame scenarios that's sadly usually the best option. I sort of agree with Lunar regarding needing to see the actual figures of STR/DEX mitigation, but from what i've seen testers find (like 40+ strength needed to boost block mitigation 1%? And needing similar Dex to gain 1% parry/block) I'm inclined to believe that Str and Dex arent providing enough mitigation per point to be noticeable.

The question that DOES need to be asked though - compare a 30 STR paladin to a 30 VIT. Ignoring the block amount... will his damage be noticeably higher? How much of this damage increase will translate into threat too? One thing we don't know at endgame -yet- is DPS requirements for fights and how much threat well-geared DPSers pump out. I doubt 30 strength will make a difference, but if actually holding aggro becomes a bigger issue for tanks, Str might still have value.

So few data we have here, and please don't apply the WoW model. The GCD is 2.5 seconds here, not 1.5. We don't even know if the parry/block/dodge will scale anything like WoW. The problem my healer says the most is not having enough time to do stuff rather than mana issues. I stack pure VIT now. I have a full colleague party on Skype to play with. The healer tells me, He never goes OOM, it's a faceroll to heal. Combined with the fact that bosses hit like a girl right now, I don't see any downside of stacking VIT. Maybe later into the game, when my healer starts saying, "xxxx dude why are you taking so much damage?", THAT'S when I feel it would be the right time to start getting mitigation. Coz the fact is, how strong the tank is, or how tanky the tanks is, is NOT judged by the tank. It is judged by the healer. He knows exactly when it's easier to heal.

I have currently put my 30 points into VIT. I'd say it is the safer option, especially for Paladin where +450HP (assuming 1 VIT = 15HP still - didn't pay it much attention, I will admit) - with a great deal of damage reduction that 450HP goes a lot further than it would appear (talking about effective HP). This is also true if it comes to taking high magic damage, because you can't block/parry/evade that and having more gives a bigger buffer to fall back.

On that, if Stoneskin does only affect physical damage, like Lunar seems to think (I cannot verify either side so I won't state any as fact), having an extra layer of (physical) damage mitigation actually seems to make Stoneskin more worthwhile against mobs with a lot of magic damage (Primals come to mind); take a 3k nasty magic attack from a 4500HP pool, you still have a 810HP Stoneskin to take some physical follow up hits.

It is possible that, upon knowing any boundaries for next tier block/parry rates, having a few points in STR or DEX might be beneficial in the long term, but under the current knowledge I still favour VIT over the other 2. I would probably go STR after VIT, just because it does boost damage along with mitigation (and I prefer to take less damage). I would put into DEX if, and only if, it boosts my rate up a tier and only so far as to take me up that tier.

I can see that the choice of stat allocation will change as the game develops, as new gear is obtained and as the calculations are tested and refined. For example, those 3 DEX you put in to take you up a tier may become useless when you have some gear which does that without those 3 points being there (basically, those 3 points are doing nothing). At that point, you would want to swap them for something else.

The general conclusion for me is that increasing STR and DEX, with regards to damage mitigated and proc rates only, depends entirely on whether it will have a long term benefit or not (i.e. over a % tier). VIT, on the other hand, will always have a benefit - each point is +15HP (or whatever value it is), and that is immediately transparent to you. Thus, the safer option until more testing comes and you can see what the effect of raising STR or DEX will have.

I side with Lunar here. VIT is an essential stat that cannot be ignored, but given how few abilities scale from max HP I don’t believe it to be the end-all-be-all many seem to think. STR is just as important to Paladins because it shores up our weakness of low damage = low threat, and boosts our mitigation which is the central theme of our form of tanking. While a good Paladin may be able to hold threat with easy regularity it doesn’t change the fact that more enmity is a good thing for when things go wrong, or even just a little bit sideways. A straight VIT PLD might lose threat when a BLM gets a string of crits or some adds spawn at an inopportune time, but a WAR or STR PLD would be able to manage these situations far better. Come End Game there will be times when your skill is tested and battles don’t go as planned, where your tidy rotations and strategies get thrown out the window and you need to go into damage control. Will a few hundred extra HP really help you there?

Over the course of a battle with any given enemy, who knows how much 26% parry chance and 44.44% block value will stack up to 20% pc and 40.44% bv** in overall mitigation, or how big a difference the requisite change to HP any variance in stat allocation would grant? Yes, it takes a large chunk of STR to reach a new tier, but each tier grants a % bonus, and I think 1% mitigation to every attack you block will add up to far more survivability than an extra 100 HP will.
**source: http://valk.dancing-mad.com/?page_id=227

I'm just going to throw into VIT and reallocate if needed. I got 7k seals from on and off FATE grinding, so 10k isn't bad. Keep up the research though! :D

I think 30 vit won't hurt honestly. It wouldn't diminish my ability to maintain threat and does give me some breathing room if I make some mistakes.

My suggestion is to look at the effect that the stats have as you gain in level. Low level materia is easy to come by. Draw your own conclusions as you level and then wait to allocate stats.

As to what's been said before, I would say that VIT would win out in theoretical benefits but there's really no way to draw conclusions yet, so I'm taking my own advice and waiting until it actually matters.

100% vitality. With our already insane mitigation makes our HP pool scale very very well. Also higher HP = stronger stoneskin. The little amount of damage/threat someone would gain from going 100% strength is so piss poor when compared to a DPS class out put. There would be only a handful of times that any points into strength would result in you having aggro over them.

dex in beta forums was calculated to be crap but i am not sure if they changed it since then.

just my 2 cents.