What Makes a Paladin? An Essay on Paladin Identity

[Freyyy]

Edit for your edit :

So, I suppose any target jumping of becoming untargettable for several seconds is not doing your rotation properly...but, hey, whatever, I'll change the wording of the skill so you can't play on words anymore.

When a boss is untargettable for more than 4sec, you should toggle Darkside off too in order to let your MP regen a little bit. That's just like using Maim. You reactivate Darkside when the boss is targettable again, just like you would first start with a Storm's Eye combo as a WAR (and thus, reapply Maim). It's the exact same thing. Dunno why you're still trying to argue about this, nitpicking like that.

[Reynhart]

Lol where did you see a Paladin use only his shield or his sword depending on the oath ? I don't understand your point here. In real life, the oaths would just translate in either you stand with your sword in front of you, for a more "fencing-oriented" stance, or with your shield in front of you, anticipating enemy attacks and preparing to block.

Except that, in real life, you don't stand with your sword in front of you when you have a shield. First, it protects you less, and second, it gives you less momentum when striking with your sword.

And, if you really want to be technical, I don't see my PLD changing body position when switching Oath. you want use to stop using the word Stance altogether ? Or we can stop comparing the game to "real life" since it's, you know, a game.

[Brannigan]

I think it's decently likely that Shield Oath, Sword Oath, and the monk stances were kind of unfinished going into ARR so they just made them all "good enough." It was always puzzling that paladin got two stances as job actions but they didn't really do anything except buff your damage/defense. Like you could delete Sword Oath from the game, distribute its potency to WSes on job change, and then put a bigger damage penalty on Shield Oath and the only thing that would change is paladins would save a GCD when switching. Alternatively, you could delete shield oath, adjust paladin's base mitigation/damage/enmity, and have Sword Oath remove those changes.

The whole stance/not a stance argument is kind of irrelevant to the idea that unless Sword/Shield oath actually change the way you press your buttons, one of them could be removed without changing paladin's gameplay at all.

[Reynhart]

Dunno why you're still trying to argue about this, nitpicking like that.

I'm the one nitpicking, sure...when all of this started because you're pretending that DRK in Darkside should not be compared to PLD in SwOath...

Like you could delete Sword Oath from the game, distribute its potency to WSes, and then put a bigger damage penalty on Shield Oath and the only thing that would change is paladins would save a GCD when switching.

At last, someone who talks about the real issue. Thank you sir.

[Freyyy]

Except that, in real life, you don't stand with your sword in front of you when you have a shield. First, it protects you less, and second, it gives you less momentum when striking with your sword.

And, if you really want to be technical, I don't see my PLD changing body position when switching Oath. you want use to stop using the word Stance altogether ? Or we can stop comparing the game to "real life" since it's, you know, a game.

I know that in real life you don't do that. It's just how you can eventually see the thing, since PLD loses tankiness when activating Sword Oath. Yeah PLD don't change body positions. You're just nitpicking here, I don't really know why I keep answering you. You seem to not understand that "stances" are a type of ability in video games and they are called like that for specific reasons that tie to the real life definition of what is a stance. Darkside doesn't fit in this category at all.

[Reynhart]

You seem to not understand that "stances" are a type of ability in video games and they are called like that for specific reasons that tie to the real life definition of what is a stance. Darkside doesn't fit in this category at all.

So, for the third time : Ok, I'll stop using the "stance" word if that's the real issue for you. Can we go back on track, now ?

All and all, it doesn't change the fact that every tank_skill_that_stays_on_without_any_duration_displayed offers something else when used in conjunction with other skills, except SwOath and ShOath.

I'm the one nitpicking, sure...when all of this started because you're pretending that DRK in Darkside should not be compared to PLD in SwOath...

[Freyyy]

So, for the third time : Ok, I'll stop using the "stance" word if that's the real issue for you. Can we go back on track, now ?

Yes we can go back on track. I was just pointing out a confusion most people have about Darkside, saying it's a DPS stance when it's clearly not. That's all.
I agree about the fact that PLD stances don't bring anything in terms of gameplay compared to the other jobs (Defiance/Deliverance bring Wrath/Abandon mechanics, Grit brings Souleater's lifesteal, Gritless brings Blood Weapon, SwO/ShO don't bring anything other than their passive buffs). But I think that it's unfortunately the way devs want PLD to work. All passive, very simple gameplay. And that's sad.

[Jpec07]

This was an awfully long post to say "I want PLD to have big numbers like WAR/DRK".

Except not even. So long as the job had a clearly-defined identity, I wouldn't even mind if we took a DPS loss. I just think PLD is in a very sad state in terms of knowing what we are supposed to be and what our player fantasy is supposed to be, and that it has been since 2.0. SE hasn't done much of anything to rectify the situation, because for some reason they don't seem to realize how redundant and uninteresting "the defensive defender" is as an identity.

OP have you considered moving to Balmung?

Once, when I started playing FFXIV. I do RP, but I've been burned by big RP servers before, so prefer to just RP among friends (much lower pressure in terms of character conceptualization and plot freedom). Getting back on topic, though.

{ ... A really good counter-post to why Oathkeeper matters ... }

My biggest problem with this is that, while there is some flavor to the job that can be found while reading the optional text, this is never, ever shown to us. We're told about it, but we never see it. If they showed us Sultansworn who were losing heart about the sword? It'd be fantastic. If they showed us Sultansworn acting on their corruption, where we could step up and out-Paladin them? Equally fantastic. But we don't get any of that. We're told why this sword is important, but we never, ever see it.

Great points otherwise, though.

...At this point, it's topics like this that make people think PLDs are a bunch of babies...

How very condescending of you. Go read the essay (again). I don't care about performance so much as how it feels to play a Paladin, and how the job basically feels generic and directionless right now. I'd love to see combos that result in mitigation for the raid, or creative ways that Paladins can participate more effectively in a support role. Because right now, the Paladin toolkit for survival is self-centered, and very inadequate when it comes to being a semi-support job. We currently have less group mitigation than anyone, and while our big cooldowns may be bigger than the other tanks', it doesn't make sense for a Paladin to be so bad at protecting other people. I've had several instances where I, as the Paladin, despite my best efforts, am the last player standing. That doesn't feel very good at all, and doesn't fit what little fantasy SE had established for us.

Don't get me wrong, Paladins aren't "broken" or anything right now (well, maybe slightly, but that's not my point). They function, and can tank a dungeon with relative ease. But they don't feel very fun to play to me (and a bunch of other people), and that's my point.

I don't know why you are cross classing Protect, Cure, and Raise, though. If you think those skills are part of maximizing PLD play, well, I don't need to say much.

This is exactly the problem. These cross-class skills that Paladins get are the only ones that are unique to Paladins as tanks, and they are effectively useless. The things that Paladins have to set themselves apart are either generally not worth using, or aren't worth having on your bars in the first place. You'll note that I didn't put Cure, Raise, or Protect in my original post, specifically for exactly that reason. Paladins don't have any reason at all to take those skills, when they very easily should.

I agree about the fact that PLD stances don't bring anything in terms of gameplay compared to the other jobs (Defiance/Deliverance bring Wrath/Abandon mechanics, Grit brings Souleater's lifesteal, Gritless brings Blood Weapon, SwO/ShO don't bring anything other than their passive buffs). But I think that it's unfortunately the way devs want PLD to work. All passive, very simple gameplay. And that's sad.

Semantically, I think most people who reference the Darkside "stance" are talking about taking Grit off; it's just easier to reference Darkside-no-Grit (DnG) as "Darkside" and Darkside-with-Grit (DwG) as "Grit". At least that's what I've always understood in that regard. But that's all semantics when really, everyone's saying the same thing: DnG an DwG both have more of an impact on DRK gameplay than SwO and ShO do on PLD gameplay.

And yes, I do believe the devs may think that's adequate. But what this essay is about is begging them to realize that it's not even remotely adequate.

[Rexus]

Read the entire OP, really enjoyed it. I have to agree that the PLD story leaves something to be desired, but sadly I don't think we'll ever see changes to it. I also have to agree that I don't really "feel" like a PLD when I play the job, more just a swordsman with strong defensive buffs. I'd like to see PLD expand upon its holy/divine skills and have more skills that intervene/protect allies.

In regards to the whole "it's a stance/no it's not" stuff, it boils down to this:
Defiance/Deliverance and Grit/Dark side either let WAR/DRK use new skills, or alter other skills. Shield/Sword Oath does neither.

[Kosmos992k]

In regards to the whole "it's a stance/no it's not" stuff, it boils down to this:
Defiance/Deliverance and Grit/Dark side either let WAR/DRK use new skills, or alter other skills. Shield/Sword Oath does neither.

Sword Oath is not a stance. There is literally no point in not using it *ever* unless you are needing Shield Oath. And by Ever, I mean as soon as you login, switch into it, and never turn it off until you need shield oath. As it stands, Sword Oath should be a trait, not an stance/ability.