Sword Oath Idea

[Synestra]

anyone who has played WKC2 knows about the skill "Twin Blades". Probably a bad example since that game was mediocre but still kinda fun. In this stance the player would drop the shield and "clone" the sword they are currently holding and all attack animations are now altered a dual blade style of fighting. It looked really cool and help give the sword and board class a bit of variety.



Full Video of it in action here

I hope they do something like this for the PLD in the near future.

I would lie if i said i wouldnt like to see this, always loved DW classes and this would be awesome as fuck! Maybe SE will do this in future as i really dont see they can keep adding too many new jobs due balance reasons, maybe this is could be potential off-spec for PLD's(tbh DRK should have been PLD's DPS off-spec instead being a totally new job).

[Noxifer]

TLDR awesome idea, but should be an option for all the tanks. Giving it to just one would make that one crazy-overpowered.

You say that, but given the aesthetics of dual-wielding on a PLD already... now imagine dual-wielded Greataxes and Claymores... Additionally, it is only at an aesthetic at core.

Um... I don't think Syzygian was responding to the "temporary dual wield" idea, but rather to the whole "make dps stance switch vitality and strength, like cleric stance does with mind and int".

(To further draw from cleric stance, there could be a penalty to defence, similar to the penalty to healing while in cleric stance -- especially since tanks would be able to go "stance-less" to avoid defence penalty. But it might also require adjusting the whole damage penalty on tank stance, since the difference of going from tank stance to dps stance would be not only +20/25% (WAR has higher damage penalty in tank stance than PLD & DRK) but also the increased boost of switching VIT/STR. I dunno. It might include removing the damage penalty AND lower over-all damage instead. Which would kind of defeat the purpose ^^; )

[Archaell]

I like the idea of dual wield swords it could add uniqueness to the class depending on how its handled. I like it, but i also don't the sight of a dual wielding paladin doesn't seem right.

Paladin really does not seem like dual wielding type - gladiator maybe, but paladin nope.

Imho, putting shield on your back while in sword oath would be great even without the additional sword in hand. Of course block would have to be removed (or moved to rear - that would be interesting.) Imagine all the possibilities, like punch in the face instead of shield bash ^^. My personal vision of interesting paladin is stance dancing. Using only sword in sword oath and only shield in shield oath, while providing some kind of mid ground without oaths on.

[Argyle_Darkheart]

The main problem with this idea is that in order to optimize Sword Oath, you would need to stack VIT, which would minimize your damage in Shield Oath.

Tanks don't have two distinct modes (healing and attacking) like healers do; tanks are always attacking.

[Violette]

Um... I don't think Syzygian was responding to the "temporary dual wield" idea, but rather to the whole "make dps stance switch vitality and strength, like cleric stance does with mind and int".

(To further draw from cleric stance, there could be a penalty to defence, similar to the penalty to healing while in cleric stance -- especially since tanks would be able to go "stance-less" to avoid defence penalty. But it might also require adjusting the whole damage penalty on tank stance, since the difference of going from tank stance to dps stance would be not only +20/25% (WAR has higher damage penalty in tank stance than PLD & DRK) but also the increased boost of switching VIT/STR. I dunno. It might include removing the damage penalty AND lower over-all damage instead. Which would kind of defeat the purpose ^^; )

As a Dark Knight I am 1000% ok with dual wielding Deathbringers.

[Archaell]

Tanks don't have two distinct modes (healing and attacking) like healers do; tanks are always attacking.

Maybe that's the whole problem. Paladin is supposed to be defensive tank, yet tanks are always attacking. If the war has "dps" utility, the paladin should have been designed to get "no-dps" utility, like building up initial enmity and then using skills to modify it, instead of doing dmg. Of course that way the damage would be even worse, and so it would be required to provide party wide dps buffs to compensate for it. Something like debuff that increases damage while being the wall, yet giving paladin enmity of other party members generated by such ability.

[Argyle_Darkheart]

Maybe that's the whole problem. Paladin is supposed to be defensive tank, yet tanks are always attacking.

Maybe, but I don't see SE changing their tune in regards to that any time soon.

[Causality]

I wish Sword Oath made us glow faintlyt. WAR and DRK get cool glowy stances. I wanna be radiant :/

Warriors don't glow in stance.... We glow when we have our combo buff on us. I'll trade you though. Glow effect for Buff that makes me Manderville in the middle of a giant trash pull.

[dspguy]

I think many of PLD's oath woes would be solved if they allowed stance dancing w/o the MP cost. Or maybe at a bare minimum, don't put it on the GCD.