It seem MT and ST might become more differ now?

[aleph_null]

depends on if the fight requires stuns. PLD still has Shield Bash so that will at least guarantee it the MT spot in those fights.

I hate it when people assume pld should be doing stuns just because they have gcd stun skill. It's a dps loss because it's on gcd, unlike brutal swing or low blow, or heck, even drg's leg sweep. It may break your combos depending on when you need to stun. It freaking costs 120 TP, on one of the jobs that have the biggest issues with TP drainage. Nah, unless it's an emergency or when you're learning new content pld shouldn't be the one stunning stuffs.

[Thela]

I hate it when people assume pld should be doing stuns just because they have gcd stun skill. It's a dps loss because it's on gcd, unlike brutal swing or low blow, or heck, even drg's leg sweep. It may break your combos depending on when you need to stun. It freaking costs 120 TP, on one of the jobs that have the biggest issues with TP drainage. Nah, unless it's an emergency or when you're learning new content pld shouldn't be the one stunning stuffs.

Doesn't matter anyway, as long as they keep off GCD stuns with damage on them, DPS will use them in their rotations making everything immune to stuns when you actually need to stun them.

[aleph_null]

Doesn't matter anyway, as long as they keep off GCD stuns with damage on them, DPS will use them in their rotations making everything immune to stuns when you actually need to stun them.

My point was that in contents where failing to stun something would result in a wipe or serious damage, stun priorities should go war/drk > dps > pld. But everyone seems to assume pld should have the highest priority when it comes to stunning targets.

[jazzcatte]

It does worry me a bit cause it seems like warrior probably still has it's guaranteed spot

I think that Warrior's spot is less guaranteed. We're losing path (which was an excellent debuff for mitigation in progression), and it seems like ninja/samurai will also maintain slashing debuff as part of their normal rotations (whereas in 3.x ninja lost dps for doing so, so having a warrior was a dps increase for both tanks AND the ninja). That means that warrior is effectively a tank that brings zero raid utility, and we all saw how well classes with no raid utility do in the meta during this expansion. If content is punishing enough to require or reward raidwide mitigation, DRK/PLD could end up being a preferable composition.

It's also possible that we'll be looking at fight design that doesn't rely on raidwide mitigation, in which case warrior's higher personal DPS will probably be in demand again. It's far too early to tell what the meta will look like.

[Ultimatecalibur]

Doesn't matter anyway, as long as they keep off GCD stuns with damage on them, DPS will use them in their rotations making everything immune to stuns when you actually need to stun them.

Those are being removed. Looks like most interrupts will just inflict the status effect with out dealing damage.

My point was that in contents where failing to stun something would result in a wipe or serious damage, stun priorities should go war/drk > dps > pld. But everyone seems to assume pld should have the highest priority when it comes to stunning targets.

It is more for Stun duration. A Paladin can stun lock a target for 10s (6s, 3s, 1s), White Mage 7s (4s, 2s, 1s) when everyone else is stunning for only 5s, 4s or even 3s.

[Thela]

My point was that in contents where failing to stun something would result in a wipe or serious damage, stun priorities should go war/drk > dps > pld. But everyone seems to assume pld should have the highest priority when it comes to stunning targets.

Yeah i know what you meant as far as i know war is losing their off-gcd stun btw.

Those are being removed. Looks like most interrupts will just inflict the status effect with out dealing damage.

Good news, never made sense to me why they would make interrupting abilities do damage forcing their usage in rotations. Wasn't only stuns but also silences.