Tanks are fine (show your support so they don't change them)

[Junyroku]

The issue rigth now is about keeping aggro, tenacity is not bringing nothing, building enemity is meh, you build a decent enemity in a mob and in seconds all that combo pass to be garbage

[Claire_Pendragon]

But, see, you had to tack on an additional qualifier to make your case, which means that, as the Job currently stands, Summoner is not a Tank. Nor would it likely be made such even with additions to the abilities of Titan-Egi, but that's just my speculation based on the functions of its other combat pets.

I mean, Monk has a defensive stance and CAN certainly tank for a short time in a party under very extreme circumstances, but that doesn't necessarily qualify it to fill a dedicated Tank role in a party. Not with the way roles currently work in game.

You're not disproving his point. He thinks with the additions it could tank, and I say with some modifications it could tank, but to be balanced, the SMN would then have to deal considerably less dmg, so as not to be a DPS.
(Of course we could amp up dps, titan, and even heals, and make a SMN all roles in one, but thats not the argument being presented.)

As it stands, SMN is a DPS with minor tanking options, but not enough to actually tank all content.

And by your logic, a PLD, WAR, and DRK arent tanks, because they need their gear to survive tank busters. Not their own natural abilities, which arent their own, but something else, because aether that makes egi's is no different than the aether thats used to make shield oath, grit, etc.

[Kinkoz]

I never said SMN was a tank though. That was someone else. Could they become one with added stuff? Sure, but I wouldn't recommend it. I think a puppetmaster would be a better tank then SMN. I was just answering you if they could become one.

I never said you said that, either. Neither did I ask if they could become one, just whether or not they were, or could be considered, a Tank based on the fact that they have access to a tanking combat pet.

You're not disproving his point. He thinks with the additions it could tank, and I say with some modifications it could tank, but to be balanced, the SMN would then have to deal considerably less dmg, so as not to be a DPS.
(Of course we could amp up dps, titan, and even heals, and make a SMN all roles in one, but thats not the argument being presented.)

I think you're missing the point of all of this, especially since you've yet to address my statement regarding the strict trinity structuring of roles. It can't be that way because the game isn't designed in such a fashion, unlike games that have had "talent trees" and multiple ways to build a single class for different roles, like WoW.

And by your logic, a PLD, WAR, and DRK arent tanks, because they need their gear to survive tank busters. Not their own natural abilities, which arent their own, but something else, because aether that makes egi's is no different than the aether thats used to make shield oath, grit, etc.

I'm... Failing to see how you came to that conclusion without assuming a great number of things that I neither said nor implied. You sound like you're reaching at this point.

EDIT: And, based upon your current reply, you're DEFINITELY reaching for straws. You're completely misinterpreting not only my point about the trinity structure being a question instead of a flat, matter-of-fact statement, but pretty much everything else about what I'm saying.

If a Job's designed and programmed to be a DPS, then they're going to be a DPS, end of story. Only way this would change is if the dev team made queuing such where you COULD queue as a Tank on Summoner, just to give an example, provided that your Summoner was built around enabling Titan-Egi to Tank effectively while you, yourself, are providing DPS.

I DID also say that if your pet is tanking, then you're not the Tank, which is true. I didn't want to argue a single thing, I am arguing that if you're not the one directly managing and directing all the aggro to yourself, then you, on a fundamental level, are not the Tank of the party. You are a DPS or support role bringing along an AI-controlled companion that handles the tanking for your party.

I honestly have no idea why or how you're interpreting this from a lore standpoint rather than a functional, mechanical standpoint, which is the angle in which I've been arguing this whole entire time.

Every single time you reply, Claire, you keep going further and further off-base with your counterarguments as well as your assumptions that, quite frankly, it's starting to become incredibly disconcerting.

[Altgexx6]

I don't mind the changes that much, but please SE, give DRKs Scourge back.

[Claire_Pendragon]

I think you're missing the point of all of this, especially since you've yet to address my statement regarding the strict trinity structuring of roles. It can't be that way because the game isn't designed in such a fashion, unlike games that have had "talent trees" and multiple ways to build a single class for different roles, like WoW.

Only if you intend to have SMN be able to switch between tank and DPS, would your question about the trinity/talents matter.
Im not suggesting SMN be a tank, and DPS. (Much less a Tank)
Im addressing the original poster in which I was explaining how it would be possible to have a ranged tank.
Which if you decided to split away from that, that's your choice, not mine.

I'm... Failing to see how you came to that conclusion without assuming a great number of things that I neither said nor implied. You sound like you're reaching at this point.

You said if a Pet is tanking, then you're not the tank.
You wanted to argue if a job that isnt directly taking the hits, shoudlnt be considered a tank, even if they fill the role perfectly.

The only way this argument has any validation, is if you're not talking about the role in which a player is filling, but the lore behind a job, and nitpicking at details from the in game lore.

So if I press a button,f or my pet to take an action, it is somehow different from pressing a button and my character takes an action.
(Both of which arent actually me.)

So if we're going to nitpick to the degree in which you are wanting to, then I can say that a group going through savage, will fail if their tanks didnt wear armor, and that if the character is unable to tank it w/o outside help, then they cant be considered a tank. (aka, a Ranged Tank, cant ever be considered a tank, if their pet is taking the hits, instead of the controller of the pet.)

The rest of us are talking about game mechanics, and the functions each role needs to accomplish.
If a Pet class was reworked to CD for all Tank busters, Invincible through insta kills, hold hate, usually able to spam AoE hate, single target burst hate, provoke/tank swap, dodge AoEs, position the boss, swap into a higher DPS state when OTing, all while not out performing any other job, then it is possible for a pet class to tank, and if their is a pet class tanking, that player could also be "ranged" in the form of their personal dmg.

[NocturniaUzuki]

I don't care about my actual damage output as a tank. I just wish they hadn't butchered tanks pre-70, gameplay-wise. DRK felt so rewarding to play well in 3.X. Now, it's just frustrating to do anything but stay in Grit all the time. I can still stance dance, but it's frustrating to do and my cooldowns don't aligned properly for it. They completely destroyed Blood Price in exchange for its Lv70 functionality. Well that's great and all if you're Lv70, but if you're either a) a new player trying out DRK or b) want to do any sub-70 content, then DRK suddenly feels like you're playing half a class.

Ultimately, what experienced players want when they say "We want our damage back" or "Revert tank changes" is the ability to actually be able to DPS if they play well. It's supposed to be a reward for high-level play, not just a freebie. So I don't think they should just hand tanks DPS potential on a silver platter. But just like healers can do a lot of damage if they play their cards right, tanks should be able to do the same. Pre-Stormblood, tanks were able to do that - at all levels. Now, playing tank, especially pre-70, just feels wrong.

[Claire_Pendragon]

I don't care about my actual damage output as a tank. I just wish they hadn't butchered tanks pre-70, gameplay-wise. DRK felt so rewarding to play well in 3.X. Now, it's just frustrating to do anything but stay in Grit all the time. I can still stance dance, but it's frustrating to do and my cooldowns don't aligned properly for it. They completely destroyed Blood Price in exchange for its Lv70 functionality. Well that's great and all if you're Lv70, but if you're either a) a new player trying out DRK or b) want to do any sub-70 content, then DRK suddenly feels like you're playing half a class.

Ultimately, what experienced players want when they say "We want our damage back" or "Revert tank changes" is the ability to actually be able to DPS if they play well. It's supposed to be a reward for high-level play, not just a freebie. So I don't think they should just hand tanks DPS potential on a silver platter. But just like healers can do a lot of damage if they play their cards right, tanks should be able to do the same. Pre-Stormblood, tanks were able to do that - at all levels. Now, playing tank, especially pre-70, just feels wrong.

Personally I just dislike the VIT/STR change, idc about dmg, nor having higher dmg for risk.

my main issue is SOLELY that Reprisal, and its procs, low blow, and its procs, and dark passenger are no longer what they were.

While being able to frontload some dmg on a monster in solo is a great feature of these in 3.x, I would accept the loss in dmg, if they at least kept the procs, and added enmity potency on them, as if they still did dmg.
I find it fun to weave low blow on my primary target for stun, reprisal my 2nd target, then low blow the 2nd when reprisal wears off, reprisal the 3rd target, then low blow the 3rd target, in order to maximize my mitigation, but with the procs gone, and reprisals durations and effectiveness lower, this is no longer possible.

I also would put reprisal/lowblow on mobs I wanted a bit more threat on, but wasnt quite going to combo.

Dark passenger is a DPS loss, and not really that good for mitigation either. (But that is pretty much the ONLY thing its good for, but just not at that cost)
So its been removed from my bar, until they fix it.

While I can semi enjoy Plunge, Salted Earth, and Carve-n-spit, They have minor issues I dont find as fun about them.
Animation lock on Plunge, the requirement of DA, slowing down the moment I would carve-n-spit on single target. (fine in AoE) and Salted Earth being less "fun" to use on controller/keybord, w/o the use of a mouse. (Not terrible, as I use a macro, but not as fun when it feels clunky this way)

I would pretty much accept all the other changes though, even if they arent amazing. Just wish the job was fun again.
I would accept being the worst in mitigation and DPS, if the job was fun.

[Pori_Dessu]

Played around with DRK at 70 a little bit more on my friend's character, and got two things out of it:
- DRK does feel very incomplete pre 70. TBN is pretty much what makes the job "enjoyable" now.
- Holding enmity in single targets (Did Susano EX with him and some other peeps from his FC) is not a problem. Holding Enmity in multiple enemies is harder, and you literally have to spam Abyssal Drain after every Syphon Strike/Souleater (While in Grit).
From those things, I reached a conclusion: Why can't they give us more mitigation tools like TBN? Not in terms of power, but the fact that is up so often, you use it all the time, and that is what "Active Mitigation" is like in a game like this. Other than that, unless you're doing some "very hard" content, you just pop the other CDs every minute or so when you see a tankbuster (Or know it's coming), this combined with the fact that you only have 1 enmity combo and one effective AoE for enmity just feels "repetitive and passive" (Words from my friend). This is my problem with tanks as of now. Before SB, those of us that didn't enjoy this repetitive play style could at least optimize our DPS, working on our rotations and resource management, which gave us something to do outside of popping CDs every now and then and repeating the same 1-2-3 combo over and over.
The solution to the current situation could be: Making more variation for enmity generation, with interesting choices between them (Both SAM and RDM are good examples of how to make interesting choices when using combos and skills, one being more complex and mechanically intensive, the other being more simple and mechanically easier), and more active mitigation tools like TBN (Weaker tools that you use more often, and once again, with more important choices).

[Rhysati]

Not really. No reprisal procs, low blow procs, scourge, shadow skin, dark dance, delirium. There's no debuffs or oGCD abilities. That's a a lot to lose. Also, why did PLD get to keep all their shit? DoTs, shield procs, etc.

Well that's an easy question to answer. Because PLD were bottom of the barrel throughout HW and DRK was the top of the list. So DRK got nerfed to bring them down to earth. They might have clipped the wings a bit too much though.

[Dauntess]

Ultimately, what experienced players want when they say "We want our damage back" or "Revert tank changes" is the ability to actually be able to DPS if they play well. It's supposed to be a reward for high-level play, not just a freebie. So I don't think they should just hand tanks DPS potential on a silver platter. But just like healers can do a lot of damage if they play their cards right, tanks should be able to do the same. Pre-Stormblood, tanks were able to do that - at all levels. Now, playing tank, especially pre-70, just feels wrong.

Nailed it This is exactly my issues with the changes.