Why having a dedicated MT and dedicated OT is a TERRIBLE idea

[Kabooa]

Point. Missed.

You are literally changing the function of cover to make this argument.

It's redirecting attacks to the paladin. Not reducing damage. Not preventing damage. The function is changing the target.

[Lambdafish]

Shunt
Ability
120s Cooldown
Effect: Grant ally "Cover me!" for 10 seconds. While you are within 10y of the ally with "Cover Me!", all attacks targeting you instead target them.

That will be fun in duty finder... I don't see anyone abusing that at all. The reason that cover works and this doesn't is because it requires the other player to be in 100% communication for it to do anything other than kill them.

[Kabooa]

That will be fun in duty finder... I don't see anyone abusing that at all. The reason that cover works and this doesn't is because it requires the other player to be in 100% communication for it to do anything other than kill them.

Huh. How would you do it, then?

[Reynhart]

I don't recall Cover being limited to whether or not you are actively tanking an enemy.

I don't recall Cover being that useful if you're the one to take physical damage...

But what is its FUNCTION. the reason you use cover is to protect a single ally from damage. That's why you use it in every FF ever.

Again, no, it's not. What you describe is Protect, Blink, NulElem or Stoneskin, not Cover.

[Izsha]

You are literally changing the function of cover to make this argument.

It's redirecting attacks to the paladin. Not reducing damage. Not preventing damage. The function is changing the target.

No you are failing to understand the difference in an actions purpose and how it achieves that purpose. Giving (for example) war an action that significantly mitigates damage on a single target is not "giving war cover" which was the initial response. Its giving war a single target protection tool. The only way you give war cover is if you give war cover. It doesnt have to redirect damage to serve the purpose of protecting a single target from death to high damage. No one ever suggested war go jump in front of an alli and redirect damage. But the suggestion was to give war and drk a cover TYPE ability.

You are the one that us confusing the meanings of words in this case. Cover type ability isnt cover. Its having a tool to accomplish the same task (protecting a single target from extreme damage). The redirection is simply the way a pld would accomplish that task. Drk could do it with shields. War could do it with straight mitigation (as an example) and never touch the iconic idea of jumping in front of an ally as plds have been doing for decades.

[Reynhart]

No you are failing to understand the difference in an actions purpose and how it achieves that purpose.

And you're deliberately avoiding an important difference between those actions, that I already explained, precisely that addionnal effects are redirected with Cover and not with any other way of mitigating damage on someone else. The sad part is that this is essential on what makes Cover strategic, allowing to bypass some movements or tank swaps, which is an important concern when imagining a tank that isn't supposed to "main" tank.

[Kalise]

Would you care to provide an example of an ability that would redirect hits to the Dark Knight that would maintain parity with Cover and also be its own distinct version?

Diabolic Eye
120s CD
Grant another party member the buff "Gaze of the Abyss" absorbing all damage taken for 10s while you remain within 12y of them.

Once this effect expires, you gain the debuff "Grasp of the Abyss" dealing damage to you equal to the damage absorbed over 5s.

For example. If you simply wanted to retain the "Take damage/effects of someone else" thing.

Instead of taking the mechanic at a base value of "Reduce damage ally takes (Also prevent negative effects from applying to them)"

Also note: This doesn't necessarily have to be about using it on the MT... It could be a mechanic where a DPS/Healer gets targeted by something and you then go save them. Instead of just "Cover the MT to prevent needing to swap"

Yes. I don't disagree there, but claiming I'm "seeking exploits" is the most unfair assumption. The culture up until that point was taking an encounter and solving it. The method to solve it varied from group to group.

Then you probably should have provided some examples of non-exploit ways of "Creatively using skills"

When all I'm going on is you stating "I did this thing, which was then patched out because it was an exploit... But then I also did this other thing, which was an exploit and also got patched out..." it paints the picture of you actively looking to find exploits with these inequal kits.

Dark knight's invuln works for every single one that Paladin does. They even get a second use when Paladins likely won't. Just needs a little more effort from your healers. How do you figure Dark Knights getting left out here? Sounds like you could take Paladin or Dark Knight here, despite their cooldowns not having 1:1 parity.

Except what if it didn't work for this particular TB because it was designed specifically for Paladin's one?

What if it provided a healing debuff which meant that not only would DRK not be able to take it with LD but neither would WAR with Holm?

By your own words, you have stated that SE wants jobs to have around 24 skills. By having every job have the same core suite of skills, you vastly limit the amount of new tools that can come out that relate to tanking, because they must maintain parity. Sure, there might be new tools, but you're likely losing old ones too.

Well, it's not like we don't have plenty of room to cull skills.

What with vestigial Enmity combos (3 skills), situational skills, random extra defensive CD's (Raw Intuition/Thrill of Battle/Bulwark/Dark Mind) oh and lets not forget, the 10 Role Actions we have where only 3 are actively "Necessary" for general play (Rampart, Provoke, Shirk) the others can be culled or altered without much change to the overall Tank playstyle (This isn't to say they're useless, just that they're not as vitally important to playing a Tank as the aforementioned 3 skills)

If one tank can't silence, the Melee or Ranged can do it. If they can't stun, the melee can do it. If they can't X - Someone else can do it. It would take active work to create a party composition that cannot deal with a mechanic spread like this, because as stated earlier in this thread, Tank exclusive responsibilities in this game are -minimal-.

Or... Get this...

We could give all tanks access to unique skills that then become Tank exclusive responsibilities!

While also having DPS have their own DPS exclusive responsibilities!

Instead of designing more things like Slashing debuff where it's a case of bring WAR if you don't have a NIN/SAM to provide it...

Let all roles have some exclusive responsibilities. Done in a way where you don't also make them exclusive to a particular job either.

[Kabooa]

Diabolic Eye
120s CD
Grant another party member the buff "Gaze of the Abyss" absorbing all damage taken for 10s while you remain within 12y of them.

Once this effect expires, you gain the debuff "Grasp of the Abyss" dealing damage to you equal to the damage absorbed over 5s.

For example. If you simply wanted to retain the "Take damage/effects of someone else" thing.

Instead of taking the mechanic at a base value of "Reduce damage ally takes (Also prevent negative effects from applying to them)"

Also note: This doesn't necessarily have to be about using it on the MT... It could be a mechanic where a DPS/Healer gets targeted by something and you then go save them. Instead of just "Cover the MT to prevent needing to swap"

Then you probably should have provided some examples of non-exploit ways of "Creatively using skills"

When all I'm going on is you stating "I did this thing, which was then patched out because it was an exploit... But then I also did this other thing, which was an exploit and also got patched out..." it paints the picture of you actively looking to find exploits with these inequal kits.

What if it provided a healing debuff which meant that not only would DRK not be able to take it with LD but neither would WAR with Holm?

Let all roles have some exclusive responsibilities. Done in a way where you don't also make them exclusive to a particular job either.

Oo, I like that one. I don't really think it maintains parity however. Using Omega 12 for an example, Cover works here because you use it after the Debuff applies to the guy about to be blasted. This ability doesn't, because the guy's still going to take -full- damage enhanced by said debuff. Like, 200k. Taking 40k a second, 120k a tick or similar results kind of makes this ability less worthwhile than just doing the mechanic properly. Needs work. But I like it.

I only gave you one example of a thing that got patched out. The second example wasn't. But I understand it wasn't clear. I'm assuming you're mostly reading about this stuff and never actually got to do it. Which is a shame - BC Raiding set the standard for a lot of stuff, in and out of WoW.

If it's designed specifically for hallowed ground it's going to happen at most twice in an encounter. Just let the Dark Knight eat the deaths. Not the best solution, but it's doable. Dark Knight ain't gonna like the solution but they can still clear it.

Oh sure, you can remove stuff and add stuff. But you're still adding less unique tools by maintaining parity across the board instead of doing separate ones for each job.

Sure, I'd be all about that. That's a great first step. Dividing up the responsibilities of an encounter I'm all for it. Maybe tanks won't feel like discount melee then.

[whiskeybravo]

I don't recall Cover being that useful if you're the one to take physical damage...

I meant that you are not limited to using Cover only as an OT. It doesn't happen often, but in the event you are main tanking you can still cover a healer or DPS from taking lethal damage if needed. Cover usage is not limited to being in the OT position.

It's redirecting attacks to the paladin. Not reducing damage. Not preventing damage. The function is changing the target.

Cover does in fact reduce damage. By a lot, if you want it to.

And you're deliberately avoiding an important difference between those actions, that I already explained, precisely that addionnal effects are redirected with Cover and not with any other way of mitigating damage on someone else. The sad part is that this is essential on what makes Cover strategic, allowing to bypass some movements or tank swaps, which is an important concern when imagining a tank that isn't supposed to "main" tank.

Again, you are only describing the fleshing out of a particular ability. Cover is a tool to mitigate damage dealt to a single party member. As a function of it's design, it redirects that damage. Sometimes this redirect function is useful, other times you are only using it to mitigate the damage.

But I can't help tie this in to the bigger picture. Clearly, this is the type of ability that you and Lyth would seem to support. It's wholly unique in it's function among support abilities, and it's also deeply ingrained in the PLD archetype. To take Cover away from PLD would be to take away it's shield. Fair enough. But don't then say that there is too much homogenization already and that's why they've failed to achieve "balance". If you want or need this unique function, then you can only get a PLD to fill it. Good night, Dark Prince.

[Kabooa]

Cover does in fact reduce damage. By a lot, if you want it to.

Sure, but that doesn't change the function.

The function is that it redirects the attack. The trait itself is called "Enhanced Cover", as in it is augmenting the base Action, Cover. Anything else in supplement to Cover, such as Shelltron, Rampart, or what have you, isn't the function of Cover itself.