PLD 4.0

[Jpec07]

AoE would be very nice. Honestly, in gameplay, it's the one glaring weak point that I can really feel in PLD versus other tanks. Just about every other job out there (with the exception of maybe MNK?) has at least the ability to do some pretty solid burst AoE damage, while sustainable AoE is a of a niche. PLD's block mechanic is built for situations where they'd be taking a lot of hits - it's where their mitigation model really shines. And yet, the PLD enmity mechanics and gameplay mechanics give PLD the weakest AoE in the game, with its only damaging move being locked to a lengthy cooldown. Paladin is built for AoE tanking mitigation, but single target enmity generation. It's kind of backwards.

I'd like to see some way for PLD to do more AoE damage. We have a couple of DoTs (CoS and GB); why not make it so Flash spreads and/or extends/refreshes them? Have Flash pass around the Goring Blade DoT to up to two additional enemies, and have it extend the duration of the CoS DoT on all affected targets by 2GCD/6 seconds.

I also hope that they aren't adding more skills/abilities in 4.0, and instead take the traits route to alter how various abilities behave and interact.

Itemization
Never put parry on a PLD item again, especially PLD JSE/relic. Parry and block roll against each other, and PLD already has a built in 20+% "random" mitigation tool in its shield.

I'd rather they adjust the combat table to make the two rolls independent, so that it is possible to both block and parry an incoming hit (call it a critical block or something). That, and parry needs to be made more useful anyway. Even if they just moved the parry roll ahead of the Crit roll, it would suddenly become desirable for PLD again.

[Brian_]

I'd rather they adjust the combat table to make the two rolls independent, so that it is possible to both block and parry an incoming hit (call it a critical block or something).

This is completely wrong.

The main problem with how parry and block work is that they are independent rolls.

And, allowing parry and block to occur on the same hit completely misses the point. Damage reduction amount does not matter that much. Damage reduction consistency is what matters.

The point is people DO NOT WANT RNG MITIGATION. People want to know how much damage they're going to take and when they are going to take it.

The least they could do to improve parry for PLDs is to combine the hit tables for parry and block. That way, you will have a much higher chance of reducing incoming damage. Rather than have an independent 25% chance to block roll followed by a 20% chance to parry roll, you would have a flat 45% chance to mitigation an incoming hit. With Bulwark and Awareness active, you would have a 100% chance to mitigate an incoming hit. That's what people want. Consistent mitigation.

[Ultimatecalibur]

The point is people DO NOT WANT RNG MITIGATION. People want to know how much damage they're going to take and when they are going to take it.

Only because current boss fight design is based around single hit spike damage every X seconds/minutes rather than constant, growing or even rhythmic damage patterns.

Taking 20% less damage from 1 in every 4 attacks is meaningless when only one attack is important. Parry and Block would be closer to fine if fights were not so reliant on Tank Busters in order to threaten tanks.

[Brian_]

Only because current boss fight design is based around single hit spike damage every X seconds/minutes rather than constant, growing or even rhythmic damage patterns.

Taking 20% less damage from 1 in every 4 attacks is meaningless when only one attack is important. Parry and Block would be closer to fine if fights were not so reliant on Tank Busters in order to threaten tanks.

So you're suggesting that if we switched to a meta where general tank damage was much higher that people would suddenly prefer inconsistent and spike prone damage intake?

You're wrong and ignorant. We've seen that meta in other MMOs and the test of science and basic reason and logic has resulted in what I said.

Spike damage = bad.
Inconsistent damage intake = bad.

So RNG "blesses" you and you get a string of blocks and parries. Your healers adjust to that degree of damage intake. Then RNG flips on you and you get a string of hits with a couple crits mixed in. Your healers fail to account for the sudden spike in your damage intake and you die. When healing, you cannot adjust your GCD usage based on your tank MAYBE blocking or parrying.

As block and parry currently exist, they're useful in a very specific situation. When tanks are taking a lot of quick and small hits, parry and block are really good. But, that comes back to the idea of consistency. When you take a lot of quick and small hits, parry and block provide a much more consistent decrease in damage intake.

[Ultimatecalibur]

So you're suggesting that if we switched to a meta where general tank damage was much higher that people would suddenly prefer inconsistent and spike prone damage intake?

No, that was not what I was suggesting. I was suggesting that getting away from single hit Spike + mostly ignorable regular damage pattern would make non-spike RNG based proc defenses (i.e. parry/block and not Dodge/Perfect Resist) more viable. If you can't rely on RNG defensive procs to reliably decrease average damage intake they are worth less than effects that do reliably decrease average damage intake.

You're wrong and ignorant. We've seen that meta in other MMOs and the test of science and basic reason and logic has resulted in what I said.

And you are one of the thousands who hear and repeat things without actually understanding what is actually going on.

Spike damage = bad.
Inconsistent damage intake = bad.

Yes, random unpredictable Spikes in damage are bad (which is what makes Evasion tanking non-viable), but "inconsistent damage intake" is not a bad thing. Problems occur because far to often inconsistent damage intake is too varied to be effectively reacted to.

If damage is too consistent it becomes boring to deal with.
If damage is too inconsistent then it either ends up being impossible to deal with or forces players to focus on the worst case scenario which ends up making it boring also.

So RNG "blesses" you and you get a string of blocks and parries. Your healers adjust to that degree of damage intake. Then RNG flips on you and you get a string of hits with a couple crits mixed in. Your healers fail to account for the sudden spike in your damage intake and you die. When healing, you cannot adjust your GCD usage based on your tank MAYBE blocking or parrying.

Depends on how big the damage variance is. Having to react to 150% more damage than expected (getting a x2 damage crit when you were expecting a 80% damage parry/block) is a different monster than reacting to 87.5% more damage than expected (getting a x1.5 crit when expecting an 80% parry/block).

As long as the variance is large enough that it needs to be paid attention to, but still small enough that it can be reacted to Inconsistent Damage is fine and a good thing to have as it keeps Healers focused and interested in the fight.

As block and parry currently exist, they're useful in a very specific situation. When tanks are taking a lot of quick and small hits, parry and block are really good. But, that comes back to the idea of consistency. When you take a lot of quick and small hits, parry and block provide a much more consistent decrease in damage intake.

It is not just quick small hits. The hits can be slower or harder as long as there are enough hits for there to be enough procs to influence the average amount of damage taken a significant amount.

More hits = more chances to proc = closer damage taken is to the average. This is the Law of Large Numbers.

[Brian_]

snip.

The average amount of damage taken is something someone mentions when they don't understand what's going on.

In relation to tank damage intake, the only thing that matters is the interaction it has with healers.

Making yourself harder to heal in order to keep your healers focused and interested in the fight is not what you should be doing as a tank and it certainly doesn't work in this game. Boring is good. You want to make their job boring. Healers in this game always have something to do with their free GCDs.

Healers will plan how to use their GCDs. Like I already said, they cannot plan their GCDs around something that might happen. They plan for the worst of what can happen. Having higher or lower average damage taken does not matter if it doesn't change how a healer heals you. Occasionally mitigating 20-30% of a physical attack's damage does not change how a healer heals you.

You know what no healer has ever said in FFXIV? "Wow, he clearly just blocked that. Now I can just cancel this heal and go back to cleric stance."

[Reynhart]

The main problem with how parry and block work is that they are independent rolls.

Except they're not. For PLD Parry roll is only triggered by a failed Block roll.
If they really were, you could have a succesful Block and a succesful Parry at the same time, for an additionnal mitigation.

As for RNG mitigation, yes, you're right. That's why I think it could be interesting to make Sheltron a GCD (With a lower MP return, of course). Reliable Block, at the cost of some damage and enmity.

And give back Shield Swipe on GCD, but as a conal AoE.

[Shurrikhan]

Except they're not. For PLD Parry roll is only triggered by a failed Block roll.

I think she meant independent as in exclusive? You can get one, not the other. But neither would one be gated behind the other?

That said, and I'd have to go link-diving to check, but I was pretty sure all mitigation types shared the same table, along with crit, which is why removing crit taken chance rescaled not only hit chance but also block, dodge, and parry, to enlarged sizes?

With a buckler at the end of ARR in i125 I was getting close to a one-third block chance. My parry chance, however, was barely affected when swapping to a tower shield (several merged dungeons with each set). I don't see how this could be the case if my parries were gated behind block.

I'm still not entirely sure, coding-wise, why an auto-crit prevents auto-parry, though.

[Reynhart]

I don't see how this could be the case if my parries were gated behind block.

There is a sure way to see if parry is really gated behind block.
Test wether or not you can parry with Sheltron up.

We already know that Hit and Crit takes priority, since you can be missed or take a critical hit above Sheltron.

[Shurrikhan]

There is a sure way to see if parry is really gated behind block.
Test whether or not you can parry with Sheltron up.

We already know that Hit and Crit takes priority, since you can be missed or take a critical hit above Sheltron.

Given that it guarantees the block though, I don't see how this would be a fair test. For a parry to occur during a guaranteed block, they couldn't even be of the same table, because the block would subsume all parry chance (along with potentially hit, crit, and dodge); block would have to be gated by parry.

I'd imagine that if there's any sequencing of the defensive CDs, it would basically be to make sure a lesser mitigation tool isn't used over a greater one, right? Wouldn't the assumed order then be dodge > block (assuming kite/tower shield, or buckler after a tier or two, given parry's fixed state) > parry? The test then would be whether you can dodge during Shelltron. I've personally tried to test it, but I can't be sure whether Shelltron was actually yet armed/activated when the dodge occurs with the buff visible.

That said, I've forgotten if miss/dodge chance are one and the same, even with Featherfoot up. Do enemies have a intrinsic miss chance / accuracy rating? Or is all that simply your dodge chance? All I can be sure of is its level dependency.

Edit: to be clear, by the last sentence do you mean that as in atop Shelltron (blocking a crit), or not allowing Shelltron?