Xeno believes paladin should NEVER be main tank

[Gameplayzero]

I don't know what is so hard for you to understand. Xeno is saying that if the PLD is in ShO it hurts the raid. If the PLD is OTing then they have higher SwO up-time. But, if the PLD is capable of MTing with the same SwO up-time, then that point does not matter. They have the same SwO up-time regardless of MTing or OTing?.

but if he is ok with paladin being in sword oath as main tank why would he just say "paladins should never be main tank"? As you said all the cons dont matter at that point. The guy asking Xeno asked in general why the paladin in the group wasn't main tanking. Not why paladins in shield oath shouldn't tank.

if I'm misinterpreting this super badly can someone tell me lol. I'm rather shocked by his statement than the evidence he provided in spite of what raid groups are currently doing.

[Violette]

I may come across as rude but I already knew all of what you said.

but if he is ok with paladin being in sword oath as main tank why would he just say "paladins should never be main tank"? As you said all the cons dont matter at that point. The guy asking Xeno asked in general why the paladin in the group wasn't main tanking. Not why paladins in shield oath shouldn't tank.

if I'm misinterpreting this super badly can someone tell me lol.

You're ignoring Brian's bringing up Xeno's clarifying statement.

After all, Layla Bell from Elysium said that Midas Savage would have been easier with a paladin mt as opposed to a drk (on A8S), yet no-one brings that up.

[Gameplayzero]

You're ignoring Brian's bringing up Xeno's clarifying statement.

After all, Layla Bell from Elysium said that Midas Savage would have been easier with a paladin mt as opposed to a drk (on A8S), yet no-one brings that up.

I edited the post in light of that. I'm not saying brian is wrong (because he isn't at all). But brian already said that if the paladin is stance dancing then the argument is irrelevant. That much I understand and why raids are currently the way they are (paladin mainly being MT).

Its a huge statement that, as brian has mentioned before, has been very widely known for a long time that Warriors MT damage is far better and safer when stance dancing. But I think Xeno meant in general as to why paladins shouldn't be the one in main tank slot.

[Violette]

I edited the post in light of that. I'm not saying brian is wrong (because he isn't at all). But brian already said that if the paladin is stance dancing then the argument is irrelevant. That much I understand and why raids are currently the way they are (paladin mainly being MT).

Its a huge statement that, as brian has mentioned before, has been very widely known for a long time that Warriors MT damage is far better and safer when stance dancing. But I think Xeno meant in general as to why paladins shouldn't be the one in main tank slot.

But he didn't say that. He said "Paladin's shouldn't MT" THEN clarified his initial statement with "everytime the PLD is in ShO they are hindering their group.".

There is nothing wrong with a paladin MT, only a MT who refuses to stance dance.

[Gameplayzero]

e.

I find it rather odd then that in his most recent vids he only goes double warrior or dark haha. The one video where he does have paladin he is relegated to being OT. I know Dark does is best for MT damage with slashing debuff but thats strange.

but my issue with his statement is that paladins or any main tank WONT be in tank stance for entire encounter. There was absolutely NO reason to bring up shield oath alone because no optimal paladin is going to be in shield oath if they dont have to and harm the group. Their paladin in that video has been tanking with them for awhile and has cleared content with them. There would be no issue with that paladin to stance dance since he does it on dark already and warrior.

the poster asked in that specific instance (or that video in general) why the paladin in question wasnt main tanking like every other paladin does.

but I won't beat a dead horse. If I'm wrong so be it. I just don't see why Zeno would mention something that you two said was a non-issue if the paladin was switching stance regardless.