Suggestion - Paladin Identity and new stance?

[Shurrikhan]

In regards to the "pointless" Sword Oath:

1. The improved Sword Oath would be flagrantly overpowered. We're that not much behind WAR in terms of single-target OT dps, and ahead of DRK when its mana is strained.

2. The "improved" Sword Oath does not aid stance-dancing as MT, since its damage increase coincides with enmity and mitigation (and faint shield swipe proc) loss.

3. The auto-attack potency increase is already a huge bonus. With a 1.5s delay sword, that would mean another 2k potency per minute, or with a 2s delay sword and extra 1500 per minute, even in Shield Oath... Compare that with the at best 600 potency per minute buff to tanking dps via oGCD Shield Swipe and consider again if your suggestion is at all reasonable... (And you'd then be getting an extra 10% of that with your new Sword Oath...)

4. Sword Oath itself is far from pointless. For every combo, Sword Oath puts out approximately 160 potency for a 2.4s sword, or ~200 potency for a 1.9 second sword, ~250 for a 1.5s sword, etc. That's a good 23% to 36% of your RA combo... Over a single GB (22.5s, 1 dot clipped)
500+150+200+360+150+200+360+150+230 (2280) Sword Oath would be equal to 562.5 potency with a 2.0s weapon, or almost 25% of your weaponskill-based dps.

Include also your regular AA potency of 750 per 22.5s, Shield Swipe's up to 225 potency average over a theoretical 22.5 seconds, 225 average from Spirits Within, 225 from Circle of Scorn, and Sword Oath still composes 562.5 of 4,267 potency per 22.5 seconds, or 13.2% of your potency per GB window (with a 2.0s sword). That's a fair bit better than Deliverance, even with its Fell Cleave. And keep in mind the percentage would be higher if you weren't tanking (no Swipes, let alone a theoretical maxing thereof) --> 13.9% with a 2.0s sword.

So there you have it, with a mid-speed sword, Sword Oath is contributing around 13% of your dps. That's not exactly "pointless".

If you want a "more interesting" version of Sword Oath, it cannot be stacked upon another version that, while lackluster, is damn effective. I'll agree that Sword Oath is dull, though there is one thing I like about it: I can drop Shield before swapping to it. (That's it. That's literally the only thing I like about it.) Its time necessary to be a potency gain isn't necessarily that much longer than WAR's stance-dance CD (+/- which combo you're using, your oGCDs, and the fact that you'll do 3 or 6 moves (5 if desperate), never 4). If, say, you wanted to trade it out for... generating Crusade stacks where you can re-combo an ability (costs 1 stack for a 2nd-tier combo, 3 stacks for a finisher, and each unduplicated combo generates a stack)... that could be interesting, but you'd have to see how much of a potency increase that actually is and how fun it would be to use in actual gameplay, not just the idea of it.

[Yes, every oGCD contributes, theoretically, exactly the same potency in a GB window, just like they each contribute, theoretically (full health and perfect procs) 600 potency per minute. It's surprisingly nice and tidy in that way. oGCD Shield Swipe just added a third 10 potency/second oGCD to the mix.)
Note: with a 2.0s blade, Sword Oath provides 1500 per minute, about the same as your three oGCDs if you could only proc 2 Swipes per minute.)
Shield Swipe = 150 x 22.5/15 = 225. Spirits Within = 150 x 22.5/30 = 225. Circle of Scorn = 250 x 22.5/25 = 225.

tldr: Your suggestions would make likely make PLD a contending easy-mode DPS without solving much if any of its real issues. You should work out the math behind what you're asking a bit more.

---------------------------------------------------------------
As for the new stance (heal oath):

1. PLD's strength, the stat from which Clemency's 1200 potency is based, will still likely blow the Vit/Mind-based Cure out of any real use. All the more so when they could be dpsing for OP numbers instead of heal-casting for a mere 400 potency at a time.

2. If anything, PLD needs a higher barrier (percentage of damage dealt required to interrupt), into which defensive CDs could synergize, not just an RNG shield. Nor does this help really with MT healing, where Shield Oath was already technically helping. Given SE's rigidity of universal design (11 traits for every class), it's unlikely that its interruption can be solved by a trait, so it would have to be attached to an oath (where the one that makes the most sense would be Shield Oath), all oaths, or to Clemency itself (since non-WHM Stoneskin's been screwed since 3.0 anyways)...

3. The sheer swap time and mana cost would eat too deeply into its benefits.

4. Even if you could then heal significantly, it likely wouldn't be worth the mitigation or dps benefits of the other two stances in almost any situation (esp. any situation Clemency couldn't already cover).

__________________________________________________

To keep from nit-picking without providing anything, here's some stuff I think might help / would like to see.

I. Easy fixes for the important shit (mostly enmity)

1. Increase Savage Blade enmity modifier from 3.0 to 3.75 (Spinning and Skull each use 3.5) -- Increases from 600 to 750 potency-worth of enmity.
2. Increase Rage of Halone potency from 260 to 280. Enmity modifier remains at 5.0. (Power and Butcher each use 5.5.) -- Increases from 1300 to 1400 potency-worth of enmity.
* Main point is to decrease the damage gap between RoH and RA for support (str down) reasons, rather than to push up burst threat significantly.
* We don't want to take threat from the MT just by debuffing. But because we're getting an extra 450-600 enmity per dps combo's midstep, this becomes a concern.
* Average and (nonCD) burst threat should probably fall within 15% of the other tanks. It's okay if their dynamics are a bit different.
**Your

*** Suggestion: apply the change to Savage Blade via trait at level 40. Make the current level 40 trait's change to Rage of Halone (increasing Str Down from 5% to 10%) default. Having RoH be worth cycling for debuffs will not break their meta at levels 26-40, but it's also fine for Flash to remain their strongest enmity provider until then.

OR (True parity (apart from the need to maintain and bonus of Maim / Darkside):
1. Increase Savage Blade enmity modifier from 3.0 to 3.5 (Spinning and Skull each use 3.5) -- Increases from 600 to 700 potency-worth of enmity.
2. Increase Rage of Halone potency from 260 to 280. Increase enmity modifier from 5.0 to 5.5 (Power and Butcher each use 5.5.) -- Increases from 1300 to 1540 potency-worth of enmity.
* This will have a 190-higher enmity output per RA+RoH combo. This can lead to stealing threat when debuffing.

OR (Smoothest solution, but does not solve stance dancing issues)
1. Shield Oath increase the threat modifiers of all weaponskills and abilities by .25.
(Riot Blade now 517.5 from 460. Rage of Halone now 1885 from 1820. Royal Authority now 765 from 680. Increases tri-combo threat by 545 (2180 base weaponskill potency to 2725 base enmity potency).
* Now easier to pull off Goring Blade openers. If not enough for this purpose, maybe try .33?
* Yet, does not provide so much enmity as to rip hate off the MT.
** Poorer side effect... makes RoH even less viable. Likely it would still need a potency boost.
** Again, no aid to Sword Oath tanking. Helps stance-dancing only in-so far as by dancing to Sword Oath for 25 seconds (GB to GB) every FoF or so.
*** Can possibly even have it reduce multiplicative modifier very slightly, and push the additive multiplier up more, but then we'd REALLY need that RoH potency up.

Now, let's actually compare adapted values to the 3 combos of another tank. Of course, this is just a gloss. Maintainable buffs assumed to be already up. I'll try to edit in tank-stance-buffed versions later. We will also assume all have the Slashing debuff provided them.

1)HS - Maim - SE - HS - SS - BB - HS - Maim - SP
150+190+270+150+700+1540+150+190+250 x 1.2 = 3590 x 1.2 = 4308
OR
2) HS - Maim-SE - HS - SS - BB - HS - SS - BB
150+190+270+150+700+1540+150+700+1540 x 1.2 = 6480

1) FB - RB - GB[DoT] - FB - SB - RoH - FB - SB - RA
150+230+220[280]+150+750+1400+150+750+340 = 4420 (currently 4020 [+400]). Now ahead on average threat.

2) FB - RB - GB[DoT]- FB - SB - RoH - FB - SB - RoH
150+230+220[280]+150+750+1400+150+750+1400 = 5480 (currently 4980 [+500]), still behind by 1000

[Let's compare BB and RoH spam rq, assuming that Maim will only fade on the last BB...]
HS-SS-BB-HS-SS-BS-HS-SS:BB
150+700+1540+150+700+1540+150+700+1155 x 1.2 = 6785

FB-SB-RoH-FB-SB-RoH-FB-SB-RoH
150+750+1400+150+750+1400+150+700+1400 = 6900 (currently 6600 [+300]). Can now win in a straight up (prolonged) average threat contest. FoF will still be beaten by Unleashed.

Consider: how might you want the dynamics of PLD vs. WAR to work. If each opened with Storm/Goring, then PLD may gain on Riot, lose briefly on Goring, take back on next DoT tick, hold on Savage/Skull, lose on Butcher (unless a DoT crits), and will gain again on Savage(RA)/Maim(Storm) or will remain behind until next RoH, where, if WAR must reapply a Storm, PLD will remain ahead, but if WAR can BB WAR will hold for one more combo. If WAR Maims, then PLD likely takes via DoTs even if reapplying . If WAR BBs w/o Maim up, PLD will likely take, and will absolutely take next combo.

*ramble, ramble, ramble, got bored. Hiding block.*

II. Side-issue ideas (still easy fixes):

- Casts are too slow, and flash drags behind my otherwise 2.4 GCD
--> Skill Speed now affects PLD casts.

- Shelltron wasted on a 400 dmg AA, wtf
-> Shelltron will now block a minimum potency of X over the next 1.5 seconds after deployment before fading. (Very low value that may still be taken out by strong AAs before an actual ability (what you intended to block), but is not so likely to be consumed by a single weak attack now. --> Can still be wasted on bigger AAs

- Shelltron totally favors tower shields
Cooldown now scales with shield type. (20s for bucklers, 25s kites, 30s tower shields.) --> not technically fair (should be 17, 24, 30), but one step at a time, especially since Swipe favors bucklers already. If Swipe was further buffed, this would have to be removed for our 'shield balance'.

- Guy died before Clemency could hit
1. Clemency now does 67% of its healing and drains mana as a channel, ticking every .5 seconds (modified by Speed). All healing done is duplicated by 50% at the end of the cast (or upon cancellation if more than 3 ticks in). Any overhealing that was done by Clemency's channel is stored as a Clemency buff and doubled at the end. Finishing the cast will consume 33% of Clemency's mana cost. The rest in consumed by the channel.
2. We need a way to swiftcast. --> stacking system given by Oaths that can be blown on quick-casts? Outright make Clemency an instant cast? (It already blows our mana)
3. We need a way to instant shield long enough to keep people alive for the cast. --> Pair it with a modification of something else? Change Shelltron to Aegis Boon, give it a minimum absorption based on shield block strength, and allow it to also target and cover for allies with 16 yalms; now you can at least save them from physical hits...

- Clemency keeps getting interrupted.
1. Shield Oath increases the (% of health) damage required to interrupt you. Apart from that, just make sure you're mitigating that shit to keep it under threshold.
2. Tempered Will now prevent casting interrupts. Hope you didn't need it for anything else.
3. Bulwark will now prevent casting interrupts.
4. Change Divine Veil into something cool and useful. Maybe it will synergize here.

- Clemency costs a bit too much mana.
1. Be in a party that needs ballad; that's probably the only time you'd use it anyways.
2. Okay, for real... reduce Clemency mana cost.
3. Increase Riot Blade mana returns.

- Divine Veil feels clunky and a bit too situational.
1. Do Savage / join a group with barely failing healers / yadayada
2. Remove heal requirement.
3. Once the heal is received your icon changes to show that it is activated, but you still have control over when to release it rather than the buff going out automatically.
4. Reduce the cooldown. Adjust Thrill of Battle and Reprise to compensate. ToB can now somehow provide raid max health increase and Reprise can now be used without first parrying and parries against Reprise-ed enemies can trigger Revengeance, allowing you to use the ability again at 100 potency and refresh the duration by 8-12 seconds.
5. Change the ability -> Now consumes a mitigation CD to spread it across the party. (Kind of like an alternate Cover, in a way...)
6. Scrap the ability -> Give us Inspire. Imagine possibilities.

- Cover lacks control.
1. Cover can now be cancelled from either side. The link may be reestablished as long as the buff has duration left. Breaking the link costs 2 seconds' duration. (Fewer self-inflicted deaths via Cover, possibly a bit OP)
2. Cover now splits damage according to the range between tanks beyond 7 yalms, to a minimum of 30% damage taken at 14 yalms. (Decreases by 10% per yalm) (Range increased to 14 yalms) (OP)

- Cover has other ways of shooting you in the foot.
1. Both the buffer and buffed in a Cover pair use the higher Defense and Magic Defense of the two for all transferred damage. (Just in case MT is better geared than you.)
2. Damage to be transferred by Cover is first mitigated by the target's buffs before being mitigated by your own, and is mitigated on the target side by the greater of your (m)Defense ratings. (OP)

- Mmm, I still want more bonuses in my Cover.
1. Any blocks, parries, or dodges done by your Cover target will now apply procs for the both of you.
2. (1 step further) Any block, parries, or dodges done by the Covering PLD or his target will apply procs for both.
3. Hits done to the Cover target whose damage is transferred to the PLD will still proc all effects (dodges, blocks, parries, Blood Price) on the Cover target before transferring. (Not certain if this is the case already. If not, make it so. This one's great for DRK MT, PLD OT in trash.)
4. ...already mentioned the 14-yalm Cover.

- I can't get enough of this Cover. I need more Cover.
1. Something Oath-related chips away at the cooldowns for Cover and certain other associated abilities. Each Oath might have something like this or another way of doing something similar.

- I want Shield Swipe as OT.
1. Then stack for split cleaves with Shelltron.
2. See Shelltron changed out for Aegis Boon above. Can now block for others, proccing your Shield Swipe.


Bigger Picture:

- PLD MT dps still lags behind WAR and DRK.
1. Make Shield Swipe work like Low Blow. Adjust its proc chance with shield type (40% with towers, 34% with kites, 28% with bucklers). There are prettier solutions and more creative things that can be done with this, but that's the simplest MT dps up, likely resulting in twice the potency per minute on rapid-hitting single target fights, more on AoEs.
2. See changes to SB and RoH or Shield Oath enmity. Increase RoH potency from 260 to 280.
3. Take the middle road between 3.0 and 3.1 Shield Swipe--treat Shield Swipe and Shield Bash like Empy Arrow (Shield moves use a separate GCD). Increase animation time for kite shields slightly (clip .75s or so into next GCD) and tower shields noticeably (clip 1.25s) while bucklers function like oGCDs. Allow use without a block, but blocks refresh CD. Scale TP cost, potency, and pacify duration across shield types.
4. Shield Oath does not diminish the potency of Shield Bash or Shield Swipe.
4. Increase RoH Strength Down duration to 22 or 24 seconds. This should keep you from having to spam it for safety, when it can actually affect something of value. Delirium should likely get the same treatment; since both are technically inferior to Storm's Path, they should both at least have a slightly longer duration, especially since neither awards nor can handle Skill Speed as well as WAR can.


- PLDs still have lowish AoE threat.
1. Flash potency reduced by 33% but now auto-crits to make use of Crit stat.
2. The 'null damage' of Flash now scales with offensive cooldowns (Fight or Flight).

- PLDs still have shit AoE, and most things that matter can't be blinded.
1. Attach cleave component to Sword Oath?
2. Revise Flash and how debuffs in general work, such that there's nothing that's entirely immune to Blind? (Revision of how hits/misses, accuracy, and parry/block/dodge work. Ideally, things that are blinded will be less accurate but won't necessarily miss all that much more on their own, but are instead more easily blocked/parried/dodged. The block/parry side of this can allow for more counterattack damage against blinded enemies, which works nicely for PLD Swipe and DRK LB/Reprise.)
3. Attach a small damaging component to Flash (such as a brief DoT)?
4. Attacking victims of Circle of Scorn now deals their DoT damage as a critical AoE around them.
5. etc. etc.

[Ralvenom]

4. Even if you could then heal significantly, it likely wouldn't be worth the mitigation or dps benefits of the other two stances in almost any situation (esp. any situation Clemency couldn't already cover).

THANK YOU! DEAR GOD...

[Kosmos992k]

In regards to the "pointless" Sword Oath:

1. The improved Sword Oath would be flagrantly overpowered. We're that not much behind WAR in terms of single-target OT dps, and ahead of DRK when its mana is strained.

Thanks for doing the math here, I haven't been able to play as much as I would like (very long story relating to my wife and her health and her inability to play currently - so I am waiting for her) and so haven't progressed MSQ through to the end, so it's difficult to really do the math when you don't have as good a perspective on the new skills as someone who has done that and played end-game for comparison with WAR/DRK.

So, thank you for the theory-crafting/math regarding Sword Oath. I agree from what you've said that stacking the abilities would be overpowered. However, if I may, let me explain my thought process on Sword Oath. As it stands, I simply see no reason for it to be a separate stance. I can think of no reason at all why it should not be turned on unless you are using Shield Oath, because there is no penalty to using it, so there's not really a choice to be made. You're not trading any defensive ability or power for the additional attack power. So why have it as a stance at all, why not just make it a trait, so it's always there, and have that trait disabled when Shield Oath is used.

But I like the idea of there being an attack stance and a defense stance, so I would prefer a Sword Oath that boosted our DPS at the expense of some of our defense. Whether the boost comes through a potency modification to Auto Attack, or by a direct % modification on all damage dealt doesn't matter to me. Having a true attack stance makes it an actual decision with regard to whether you want to use Sword Oath or not.

So, despite my lack of mathematical exploration of the impact of the initial suggestion, I'd still like to see change to Sword Oath to make it more of a give and take, like Shield Oath is.

If you want a "more interesting" version of Sword Oath, it cannot be stacked upon another version that, while lackluster, is damn effective.

Agreed, I should have removed that stacking, I hadn't considered the combined impact of both with the detail and accuracy that you have.

If, say, you wanted to trade it out for... generating Crusade stacks

I don't want to do stack management on PLD, that already exists on WAR, and to be honest I wasn't intending for PLD to be close to WAR in DPS because the point of the idea was to give Paladin something that the other two tanks lack, just as each of them has something that we lack. Had the role of the shield not been diminished so much without a compensating gain for PLD, I doubt I would have made the suggestion, except to bemoan the pointlessness of Cure, Raise, and Protect. If Sword Oath were overhauled, I'd prefer it to be something of a mirror to Shield Oath. Such that the greater focus on Sword means a lower focus on defense and therefore gain in DPS is offset by a reduction in defense or mitigation, much like Shield oath boosts our passive defense at the expense of our DPS.

Note: with a 2.0s blade, Sword Oath provides 1500 per minute, about the same as your three oGCDs if you could only proc 2 Swipes per minute.)

Doesn't the reduced auto attack on the weapon offset the reduced delay? I was under the impression that if you had a 2.0s sword, that the also reduced autoattack (compared to the same ilvl weapon with a longer delay) offset the benefit of the delay?

Your suggestions would make likely make PLD a contending easy-mode DPS without solving much if any of its real issues.

That, clearly, was not the intention here.

As for the new stance (heal oath):

1. PLD's strength, the stat from which Clemency's 1200 potency is based, will still likely blow the Vit/Mind-based Cure out of any real use. All the more so when they could be dpsing for OP numbers instead of heal-casting for a mere 400 potency at a time.

Yes, I see that from an end-game point of view, but for any PLD working up from Gladiator, Clemency is not relevant, and cure is, and we have it from very early in the game; so I'd like to see it made a bit more useful to us. Also, I think that the MP cost and longer cast time of Clemency could work with a more viable Cure for PLD to use giving the Paladin a more efficient, but less powerful healing spell in addition to the more powerful, and MP consuming Clemency.

2. If anything, PLD needs a higher barrier (percentage of damage dealt required to interrupt), into which defensive CDs could synergize, not just an RNG shield. Nor does this help really with MT healing, where Shield Oath was already technically helping. Given SE's rigidity of universal design (11 traits for every class), it's unlikely that its interruption can be solved by a trait, so it would have to be attached to an oath (where the one that makes the most sense would be Shield Oath), all oaths, or to Clemency itself (since non-WHM Stoneskin's been screwed since 3.0 anyways)...

If you add a third Oath, the lower chance of interruption can be built into the Oath, along with allowing battlefield Raise while in that Oath. I am going back to a third Oath because I think that each of the Oaths should have a coherent purpose. Sword Oath's purpose is increasing damage, Shield Oath increases defense, and the healing Oath would increase our healing capability. It gives us an additional 'mode' of play, especially when we are in the OT role.

3. The sheer swap time and mana cost would eat too deeply into its benefits.

That might be true if a player was bouncing in and out of the Oaths. I was thinking more in terms of making tactical decisions about which Oath to use, rather than switching back and forth in order to obtain the specific beneficial effect you want at that time. So as MT you'd obviously pick Shield Oath (some will suggest Sword Oath I am sure), as OT you'd go Sword Oath, but if there was a problem with the healing, you'd switch to the healing stance, and stay there until the situation improves before switching back. Swapping back and forth would eat too many GCDs and you'd likely not have time to recover MP, as you suggest.

4. Even if you could then heal significantly, it likely wouldn't be worth the mitigation or dps benefits of the other two stances in almost any situation (esp. any situation Clemency couldn't already cover).

Is that from the player's perspective or the party? perhaps we are viewing a healing stance from different points of view? I'm thinking of a healing stance as a party support role, not a personal healing role.

o keep from nit-picking without providing anything, here's some stuff I think might help / would like to see.
**snip**

A lot of that sounds good.

Rewinding back to the start, and echoing some of what others have said. I don't want to make PLD an imitation WAR or DRK, so we don't need to be trying to match WARs DPS for example, no stack management. Make sure that each tank has something that they, specifically, are good at, that set's them apart from the others.

PLD being a mitigation tank and therefore making mitigation our 'thing' is somewhat flawed in this game since every big encounter has to be balanced around the mitigation capability of all 3 tanks. It PLD had mitigation considerably better than the others, we'd always be the MT option, no matter what, which is clearly something to be avoided. All 3 should be viable as MT. So you can't lean on mitigation. On the other hand our Cross class stuff provides something special - healing ability from CNJ, so why not make use of that to carve out something that we can do that no one else does?

So, create a healing stance, rework Sword Oath into an actual stance rather than a passive DPS increase on an autoattack, and don't mess with Shield Oath. Looking at those cross class skills, Protect is the same for everyone, as is StoneSkin, so we can't do much to those. Cure is extremely weak for PLD and Raise is completely unusable, so a healing stance needs to fix those two skills to make them usable, and useful enough to merit use. By all means give the Healing stance an aspect that reduces the interrupts.

But, don't make our healing ability so powerful that some might be tempted to bring PLD along as a second healer rather than an actual healer. That's a difficult balance to strike, and perhaps the best way to do that is to either. Perhaps a way to enforce that is to take a leaf from the book of the NPC Sylphie who heals by using her own life force; so each Cure we cast while in the healing stance consumes both MP and HP in equal numbers to balance things and prevent a PLD from sitting in healing stance all the time to act as a second healer.

Thank you again for working out the math for Sword Oath, as well as your perspective on PLD.

[Reynhart]

So, create a healing stance, rework Sword Oath into an actual stance rather than a passive DPS increase on an autoattack, and don't mess with Shield Oath.

For me, we don't need Sword Oath. We can do far enough DPS without any oath for anytime we're soloing.
And in party situation, a Tank stance and a Healing stance will give us far enough to do, and we still have the option of deactivating our stances.

[Kosmos992k]

For me, we don't need Sword Oath. We can do far enough DPS without any oath for anytime we're soloing.
And in party situation, a Tank stance and a Healing stance will give us far enough to do, and we still have the option of deactivating our stances.

That would work, I just feel that the current Sword Oath is not so much a stance as a default state, it should not require stance switching to gain the effect.

[Shurrikhan]

snip

Sorry for being so late to reply, Kosmos. I lost it among the different threads I was going through, and this one's filling out so quickly (largely mine and Reynhart's doing...). Part of my criticism, as you would probably expect, was due to my own frustrations at certain 'ships having long since sailed' in regards to role homogeneity, but I assure you there is a logic to it as well (or at least so I convince myself); we only have what possibilities the state of the game, and its undermechanics, allow. I'm sure once you math things out, you could find a decent balance for what you want, I just do have to caution you again to do so. There's nothing like a good idea gone sour because it lacked the fine details. Your Healing Stance should be able to basically include trait-like ability enhancements (the only way any job can ever get an enhanced version of a non-job ability, sadly), enough to make them usable. I'd merely caution you from 1) removing the dps oath and 2) removing some manner of decent heal access to the other oaths (e.g. Clemency). As per the math I showed you, Sword Oath is a sizable dps component, and PLD/GLD would need a major revision to its potency to hold its own if Sword Oath was removed. In my signature (PLD fix) I've included the 8 adjustments I personally find most important for PLD, but it takes after the 'Knight' motif more than the 'Paladin' one, leaving heals usable but not really focus-able/specializable (no stance for Cure, instead just mediocre all the time, but at least not crap). Its aimed more at reducing frustrations and increasing general enjoyability than any additional tactical engagement, but I do think it at least retains identity. I haven't fixed Raise because I thought that'd be a bit much. The math is basically done.

Oh, but if GLD's potencies were increased to make up for no Sword Oath, what would you then want to do with that Oath to make it "give and take" still? If no-Oath does competitive dps, we can't really have an extra-dps-ish oath atop that. On the other hand, we already have a damage-sacrificing Oath, such that a +healing for -dmg would overlap a fair bit.