Xeno believes paladin should NEVER be main tank

[Brian_]

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.

He's also saying that another point in favor of WAR is their enmity generation because BB is part of their standard rotation and RoH is ideally not a part of PLD's. But there are ways around this. The first is to have the WAR open the fight before swapping to your PLD. The second is a NIN. Context is also important. A lot of fights this tier have forced DPS down-time via mechanics or add-phases which allow tanks to enjoy some alone time with the boss. They also have forced tank swaps which allow your WAR co-tank to rebuild some of the enmity lead.

[Kingkie]

edit: sorry I also meant to assume paladin is only staying in shield oath when needed and is constantly stance dancing. I know warrior does more MT damage than paladin, but I'm asking if Zeno is right in completely condoning paladin main tanking.

Honestly it depends on your group and mostly your healer.
Note: this is during alex savage.
Paladin is the class with the most defensive cooldowns, but all those cooldowns are not needed if the healer is comfortable with the fight. Most hc group ran drk/war or double war, simply because those jobs do more dps than a paladin.
So if the tank insists in playing paladin, it's better raid dps wise as a OT.

[Violette]

Opinions:
Xeno's spitting out "knowledge" that has been known since warrior was changed back around 2.1.
As Brian said, nothing new/exciting/important to be seen here.

[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.

[Brian_]

Because he is obviously assuming that the PLD needs to use ShO hence the line "every time they are in shield oath they are hindering their group."

He is not assuming that the PLD doesn't need to use ShO or would have the same SwO up-time while MTing.

[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.

[Gameplayzero]

Because he is obviously assuming that the PLD needs to use ShO hence the line "every time they are in shield oath they are hindering their group."

He is not assuming that the PLD doesn't need to use ShO or would have the same SwO up-time while MTing.

true. No encounter in this raid tier is going to allow you to stay in dps stance the entire fight I'm pretty sure. But as you've said, if it's a very short amount of time being in tank stance then the issue is mute. All the issues of being in ShO known are negligible. Especially with the dps checks being toned down and paladins now more than Gordias being brought out to main tank.

he mentioned the obvious as to why they shouldn't main tank yet anything but more often than not paladins are always main tanks when paired with warriors.

[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.

[CookieMonsta]

https://youtu.be/B7j6MJzd-4A

I would say Xeno is very correct. It comes down to simple math, the WAR/DRK loses relatively little DPS when in the MT role vs their OT potential, however, the PLD loses an insane amount of DPS when forced to MT. The fact comes down to the PLD pretty much needs to be in Shield to MT effectively because of the required emnity modifier to maintain hate, the lack of fluid stance switch also hinders the ability fine grain the dance like DRK/WAR.
The reason the PLD is in this awkward position is because the DRK/WAR have sufficient mitigation to go through most fights rendering the additional mitigation afforded by the PLD to be relatively worthless.

Until they start designing fights again where the extra mitigation and strong Physical blocking can make the difference on clearability, PLD is more valuable in OT.

Anecdotally, my group used the PLD in mostly OT capacity in A3S + A4S and the extra DPS the PLD can churn out in Sword is impressive and actually completely outweighed the amount our WAR loses when in MT.