3.1 PLD changes look good

[Reynhart]

If you arent on the bleeding edge then the small difference in tanks dont matter because you'll have more than enough DPS.

Jobs should be equally viable especially on the bleeding edge. Again, no one cares than PLD can do Expert dungeons fine...

If they dont design any content around PLD being the better tank because of it's physical mitigation superiority next raid cycle then ill call SE on intentionally leaving PLDs out but for right now you guys are all premature with your criticism.

And again, again, designing content for one particular tank is a bad idea. If the next cycle is purely physical, then DRK will be thrown out of the loop, it won't be better on the overall balance.

[Ralvenom]

And again, again, designing content for one particular tank is a bad idea. If the next cycle is purely physical, then DRK will be thrown out of the loop, it won't be better on the overall balance.

What they need to do is develop the next cycle to have several different types of encounter design. Physical, magical, pure damage check, crazy (but not too crazy) mechanics -- maybe even mix up types, depending on fight phase. That way, you can have all 3 tanks be equally viable.

[Havenchild]

What they need to do is develop the next cycle to have several different types of encounter design. Physical, magical, pure damage check, crazy (but not too crazy) mechanics -- maybe even mix up types, depending on fight phase. That way, you can have all 3 tanks be equally viable.

To be quite honest, the content being Physical or Magical, has little meaning. Toolkit wise, DRK is stable enough that it can survive an encounter that has majority physical damage (A2). However WAR also offers the ability to be a main tank. Which means that in actuality the DRK + WAR meta is too strong for PLD to compete against. For a PLD to even barge into this at current, a raid turn would have to be so explosively physical that both DRK and WAR would have a struggle keeping up which almost seems impossible.

If they want to help PLD, I agree that first they should switch one of the cross classes. PLD could definitely do without MRD or CNJ and subbing in say, Lancer would be a really nice change both with TP support and a new offense CD, and a semi swap for Foresight, with Keen Flurry. Stoneskin by itself isn't a strong enough skill in light of 3.0. This change would simply boost there physical damage but this gears towards homogenizing the three tanks which ideally is something we don't want.

Which leaves the outside example of what a PLD can do differently that neither of the other tanks can do. I think that SE should focus on their defense. It seems to be the basis of the class already so they should expand on it. Either make magic damage blockable (should be re-evaluated) with a shield only or buff Shield Oath.

An example of this would be Shield Oath can either be kicked up to 40% reduction in damage (brings to the table more Healer DPS)or offer a potential rebound effect (something that stacks when a PLD receives damage in Shield Oath) and after a certain amount of consecutive hits, a debuff (named maybe Disarmed) is applied that increases damage received (similar to Trick Attack). You can't gain stacks when the debuff is applied. Granted this is only an idea, but I think they should encourage the defensive capabilities of the one tank that specializes in it. Sword Oath could also be changed to affect all of its skills instead of just auto attacks but this again goes more in line with homogenizing the stance swapping from other tanks. I think only focusing on the PLDs personal DPS, is a stop gap solution to what it can't bring to the table in that environment.

[Seku]

And again, again, designing content for one particular tank is a bad idea. If the next cycle is purely physical, then DRK will be thrown out of the loop, it won't be better on the overall balance.

I don't think DRK will be thrown out of the loop if the next cycle is purely physical unless Shieldtron is required. I see them using their cool downs roughly the same way as PLD.

But I get your main point.