Next expansion, please make PLD optimal MT and WAR optimal OT

[Satarn]

I don't want WAR to be optimal MT and PLD to be optimal OT any more. That needs to stop.

Why? Because you say so?

WAR: big berserkers who throw caution to the wind and focus more on damage

...who according to lore draw their strength from their will to protect their allies. So they throw themselves into danger and their reckless, destructive presence draws enemies' attention. Meanwhile the paladins support their partner...

Using a shield to protect your allies

...and helping ease the hardest blows with their protective magics, such as Intervention.

My "fantasy" against your "fantasy".

I understand liking a job for it's playstyle and aesthetic, while maybe not being happy with it's usual OT/MT assignment. Don't act however like your preference should dictate how the game is designed because, like it or not, there are people who have a different preference. As many people noted before, the way this game works, optimally both tanks should share their responsibilities and swap frequently to best utilize their cooldowns. Don't worry - playing a PLD does not make you a support bot, you should still be tanking.

One more thing: people should really get out of their heads this notion that highest damage tank = off tank. This isn't how FFXIV works.

[Saeno]

I disagree. All tanks should be able to pull bosses as effectively as other tanks. All tanks should be ok with not pulling. All tanks should be able to hold the boss for longer periods of time but they SHOULD run out of CD's eventually, forcing tank swaps for the sake of CD uptime.

[zuzu-bq]

As long WAR is the only tank with free stance swap, this ain't happening.

Oh wait, they're also better on full Defiance vs full Shield Oath. Totally not a broken job at all guys.

[Booden]

I want to make it clear that I want all three tanks to be viable at both roles, but I don't want WAR to be optimal MT and PLD to be optimal OT any more. That needs to stop.

Except all three tanks already are great at both ot and mt jobs, just that you want the WAR to pull because it's optimal.

What's optimal in ffxiv is not having a dedicated mt/ot, it's having a dedicated puller (WAR in this case) and having tank switches to rotate the defensive cooldowns (more importantly, rotate the invincibilities). Both tanks have to ot and mt efficiently.

If it really bothers you that much you can also glam away the pld shield to make it invisible, that's what I do.

[Aniya_Estlihn]

MT/OT is a dead concept, both thanks share the burden and a team should make use of their CDs, Provoke and Shirk accordingly. The only differentiation there is now is that WAR is the "pulling" tank, which doesn't mean they are MT, just that they pull the boss because of their superior lead during their opener.

[Reynhart]

I'm sorry, but I think you have it backwards. You're right that PLD feels like a protector, but you don't realize that the one person who really needs protection is, in fact, the MT.
If you're the MT, Intervention and Cover are not really that useful.

Problem is, the MT/OT is not something that should be enforced, because any setup should be as viable. What could be done is having different ways of staying alive, but SE had a hard time pulling it, so all tanks focus on reducing damage.

[Jukebox12]

I'm sorry, but I think you have it backwards. You're right that PLD feels like a protector, but you don't realize that the one person who really needs protection is, in fact, the MT.
If you're the MT, Intervention and Cover are not really that useful.

Problem is, the MT/OT is not something that should be enforced, because any setup should be as viable. What could be done is having different ways of staying alive, but SE had a hard time pulling it, so all tanks focus on reducing damage.

Can I hug you

[RLofOBFL]

I mean ideally PLD should MT but WAR should pull. Passive block is a p cool innate ability that does seem to go to waste a lot of times.

They way they have it now, WAR absolutely MUST pull and both PLD and WAR get damage buffs if theyre MT(Shield Swipe/Vengeance), DRK is the odd one out that receives no bonus damage MTing, as well as being suboptimal at pulling.

This tier I don't actually end up MT except during Kefka swaps, though o6 dual autos are nice buffer so its unnecessary, and I am starting to voke after the opener on Phantom Train. Guardian is a bit more complex though.

[bounddreamer]

Let's not tell this guy how much time my co-tank and I stay out of "tank stance" while we're at it...

Get rid of the obsolete terms "MT" and "OT." In savage content we are co tanking almost every single fight.

If it's not savage, eh, doesn't matter. I've been the pulling tank in every different permutation of two tanks, and I've been the one who stays in dps stance based on what the other tank does or says.

If we are in O8N and you put shield oath on I'll silently judge you but I'll still shift to Deliverance. Live out your fantasy, nothing is stopping you.

[Mithron]

FF1 NES: Top party member slot had highest chance of taking damage, therefore you would put your tankiest members here. That meant the Fighter, which job changed into Knight later, and often used sword/shields as their best weapons throughout the game. Excalibur was one of the best weapons for them, which was a sword, and they used a shield. Easy to see that Paladin in XIV fits this fantasy and is what I want.
FF3: Knight job again returns as the best "tank." Even comes with cover. Although dual wielding swords was optimal, it's easy to see Paladin fits this fantasy.
FF4: Dark Knight and Paladin were the "tanks" and Paladin came with cover. Sword and shield.
FF5: Knight job was a thing, used swords, but obviously the job system allowed for a lot of different setups. Still, early game, Knight was a beefy tank (and damage dealer).

I'd explain more of my opinion but post limit.