Removing Tank Stance Argument

[whiskeybravo]

In my opinion, Tanks should have a defence penalty when dps stance is on, we shouldn't put out almost same damage like a dps. SE should think about balancing dps cross every role not between tanks.

The problem with this is how much of a defensive penalty? What's the point of taking an OT with lower damage, and now presumably lower defense, over another DPS job? The suggestion doesn't really work unless you make it a less-than-meaningful amount, and all that's going to do is shift even more burden on healers to heal through it.

347 says 60%, and maybe that's good enough for an average, but I'd say it's closer to 80% damage potential of a DPS. A major issue SE will face is that they've already established this baseline and it's what players will expect going forward. For anyone that thinks "tanks should just tank" there are twice as many that can tank just fine and want to deal as much damage as they can in the process. We don't have to get into a debate about how to tank to realize there is a diverse range of playstyles and if anything changes too drastic one way or the other there will be controversy from the other side.

No, I don't agree tanks should have a defensive penalty for DPS stance. I do agree that if tanks output 100% damage of DPS we would indeed have problems because people would just take tanks to survive through everything. 80% is a favorable number that allows tanks to be contributing but also not overpowered. And your 3rd point, doesn't really make sense. Of course SE balances the damage of a DPS to other DPS, healers to other healers, and tanks to other tanks.

[Kabooa]

The problem with this is how much of a defensive penalty? What's the point of taking an OT with lower damage, and now presumably lower defense, over another DPS job?

By having bosses be dangerous enough that swapping isn't a recommendation, preferably without forced swaps like 800% vulnerabilities.