My take on Samurai as a tank

[MagiusNecros]

As a tank it's gonna rely on parry. That much is certain.

[SendohJin]

If Samurai did become a tank, it should most definitely be like you said an OT type role like Warrior. Have a defensive stance and an attacking stance in some shape or form.

why do people say OT like it's such a real thing. many fights both tanks tank equally and PLD has defensive and attack stance too. all tanks SAM or not need to have MT and OT utility in a Full Party.

[Syhrwyb]

As a tank it's gonna rely on parry. That much is certain.

Didn't SE mention that parry is going to be reworked in 4.0?

[Velhart]

why do people say OT like it's such a real thing. many fights both tanks tank equally and PLD has defensive and attack stance too. all tanks SAM or not need to have MT and OT utility in a Full Party.

OT is a real thing. The OT has multiple roles in a fight. Either they need to grab the adds, perform a certain mechanic, or help switch with MT when they have too many stacks. WAR excels in this because they have a lot of utility to deal damage in their offensive stance compared to PLD. It isn't to say a WAR can't MT or a PLD can't OT, they are capable of those roles also, but when you are meeting strict DPS checks, you usually want the one who can bring a little more damage in the OT position. Again it is a each to their own thing. I believe Samurai should be given strong offensive measures similar to WAR.

Didn't SE mention that parry is going to be reworked in 4.0?

They said they were looking into changing how parry works by possibly 3.5 or when the expansion hits.

It would be neat if Samurai used parrying to a strong extent. Then again, WAR is suppose to be kind of like that also, but parrying stat building is pointless right now.

[FallenArisen0990]

If they are tanks, absolutely on heavy armor. Going to happen anyways since they would likely be thrown into the fending category of gear. If they are a DPS, then having light armor would be fine also. I question if they are DPS that if they would be thrown into Maiming gear with DRG, Striking with MNK, or get a whole new category like they did to NIN. At this point it would be worse to add a whole new gear set.

I am fine with heavy or light looking armor, as long as it helps represent the role well.

That's perfectly fine. I don't mind Samurai as a Tank or DPS. But some people are really hurt that not all SAMs in FF wear Heavy Armor. This is more or less the same outcry we had back then about tanks running around in bikinis and how it was ruining their "Immersion." Just cuz it's a RPG mechanic of applying numbers from an item for more or less of something doesn't change the fact that on screen, my character is in either little to no clothing and has the defense of the gods. FFX-2 debunks that because that game only had weps and accessories. Before anyone rules it out, It's still a FF game made by SE and still uses the Job "Samurai." Fan service or not tho, actual logic is not meant to be applied to games. We can even look at FFXII, no one in the entire party wears Heavy Armor on screen. Sure they can equip gear and stuff but at the end of the day, they are still running around in plain cloth.

[Derio]

I wonder. Whenever they add a popular class to dps it hurts queue times severely. So if they do add SAM as a dps like Yoshi invisioned then they would have to create popular requested healer and tank jobs to balance it out.

[MagiusNecros]

Didn't SE mention that parry is going to be reworked in 4.0?

They did. said changes might be put in place by 3.5 and likely to be delayed to 4.0 ergo the new expansion. Probably for Samurai. Who knows what that will mean for the DRK's out in the world.

why do people say OT like it's such a real thing. many fights both tanks tank equally and PLD has defensive and attack stance too. all tanks SAM or not need to have MT and OT utility in a Full Party.

Clearly one Tank is tanking the boss and the other is not. MT = Fighting the Boss OT = Fighting the boss he is not

I am glad you agree all Tanks require utilities under both roles. Because DRK could use a little help. PLD and WAR have great options like shields, heals and dmg up/down utilities but DRK is all about that dere Delirium and skills that increase their attack rate in the form of BW and damage DoTs.

Yes they have Reprisal but only when they are MT otherwise getting a parry proc is hard to come by.

[SendohJin]

It isn't to say a WAR can't MT or a PLD can't OT, they are capable of those roles also

that's my point.

but when you are meeting strict DPS checks, you usually want the one who can bring a little more damage in the OT position. Again it is a each to their own thing. I believe Samurai should be given strong offensive measures similar to WAR.

or they can do whatever they want with the new tank job and make changes to DRK so that DRK becomes comparable to WAR in those situations.

[FallenArisen0990]

They did. said changes might be put in place by 3.5 and likely to be delayed to 4.0 ergo the new expansion. Probably for Samurai. Who knows what that will mean for the DRK's out in the world.

I still say Parry should reduce the attack to 0 or count as an evade. Same for blocking... Dumb change they did in XI and made it carry over to XIV... -_-;

[Velhart]

that's my point.

I know that was your point. I was making my stance clear.

or they can do whatever they want with the new tank job and make changes to DRK so that DRK becomes comparable to WAR in those situations.

A DRK who knows what they are doing can easily do comparable damage and perform those functions fine. Very sure they would give Samurai flexibility also. It would make no sense if they did not.