Removing Tank Stance Argument

[Seraphor]

Why does MT/OT have to be about damage output?

How about this:
Main-tanks: Get a trait at 30 that decreases damage and increases defence, and a cooldown/ability that disables this.
Off-tanks: Get a cooldown/ability at 30 (or starts with it for Gunbreaker) that increases their defence and decreases their damage.
(nuance can differentiate between main tanks or off tanks further, e.g. perhaps MT1 has a 60s cooldown that boosts DPS, while MT2 has a toggle-able ability that merely nullifies the dps penalty of the trait)

This would result in two different ways of tanking, one that is basically tank by default, but requires action to leave tank stance, and one that’s more dps/mitigation-support by default and requires action to become a tank.

For example, If Paladin is a Main tank, then Shield Oath would be a trait at level 30, and Sword Oath would be an ability.
Darkside being traited and Grit as an ability would make DRK an off tank.
Then I think WAR would be better suited as a main tank, with Defiance as a trait and Deliverance as an ability. (otherwise, unlimited Fell Cleave)
Which would leave GUN as an off tank.

This wouldn’t necessarily mean that main tanks need to main tank, meta could still evolve towards optimal dps, (unless the default aggro for a main tank makes it difficult to off tank, like a PLD before getting sword oath) but it would add some variety to the way tanks play.
For example, DRK/PLD could result in DRK bursting with Grit for aggro, and PLD using Sword Oath on cooldown and shirking every now and then. So MT and OT would be swapped.
Or, maybe WAR/DRK would have WAR main tanking, because its burst with Berserk has the greatest aggro gen, and then it can still burst with Deliverance for its Fell Cleaves, and DRK simply DPSes without touching Grit, using TBN on the WAR. This would be MT and OT in their proper places.
So MT and OT would be more about playstyle, than actual role in a fight, which would still be flexible.

[Summer_Iris]

Tldr: In my mind tank stances are currently a homogenous skill (executed in different ways) that conflates the enmity generation, defensive capabilities and dps balancing aspects of being a tank. If we took them away I think there would be more opportunities for creating unique tanking experiences by giving each tank tools to handle each thing in their own way.

Longer response:

I think the tank stance debate speaks to a number of different aspects of what it means to be a tank in FFXIV and the problem, in my mind, is it tries to solve too many things at once:

1) Damage balance and capabilities
2) Enmity management
3) Defensive capabilities

It then tries to create different ways of delivering this catch-all mechanic, which has the consequence of making things bland.

1) Damage balance and capabilities -

At the moment the only way of completing various encounters in the game is to deplete an enemy's HP pool. The only way of doing so is dps. Therefore, unless encounters either change the formula for success and / or completely removed the ability of tank and healer classes to do dps then there will always be a desire to maximise dps from all participants to ensure success i.e. the so-called dps meta isn't going anywhere.

The concern that tanks and / healers shouldn't encroach on DPS territory is sensible, but a tank stance doesn't need to do this. Just make it so that on a like for like basis on damage dealing skills tanks (and healer) dps is lower e.g. over three gcds if a dps on average deals 1000 damage, tanks and healers could be adjusted so that they only do 750.

This could be done via average potency reductions, fewer personal dps buffs, fewer DMG dealing ogcds or a combo.

Having done this I don't see any good reason for tank damage to be further compromised by a tank stance even where you have a 2 tank composition.

Instead the focus should be on differentiating and balancing how the different tanks deal damage. Stances could be one feature of delivering this like it is for Brd or BLM or Smn etc

[Summer_Iris]

2) Enmity management -

One of the primary roles form the tank is to hold aggro and switch aggro. This is very rudimentary at the moment and you just need more than anyone else and then a way of switching that or catching up in certain circumstances. Tank stance is just bland way of adding enmity to existing skills.

As others have mentioned the same outcome could easily.be achieved through a separate cool down that would be far more flexible. Also as enmity and DMG are interlinked, as a main tank you would probably be actively encouraged to pop it just before a burst / high DMG rotation. This way you could align enmity and DMG contribution aspects of tanking.

More broadly enmity management could be made far more interesting and be made more central to what a tank does compared to other roles. Whilst some may not like it (and it can trivialise enmity in some regards) I find the way provoke and shirk work is a far more engaging take on building and maintaining enmity than the pre-SB days. It encourages cooperation. More of this wouldn't be a bad thing.

As with damage dealing above, this could be an area where tanks could be given niches or different ways of managing / contributing towards enmity management whilst tanking or off-tanking. It would require some tweaks to how enmity works though.

[Summer_Iris]

Defensive capabilities
There is a thematic aspect to the tank stances too i.e. I'm in tank mode now or I'm in power mode. But that hasn't been the case for a while and seems silly when you've already picked the job that is by its nature a tank or that fact that they're just turn on or off buttons.

Tank stances from a defensive standpoint are a resource intensive skill with quite significant opportunity costs and marginal benefits. Also the differences between the tanks related to this skill are uninteresting and primarily executional.

I don't think there is anything wrong with having a defensive skills tied to resources (TBN, shelltron, IB). I just think it would be better to replacing the tank stance with more unique, defensive skills.
For example, you could still activate a skill that grants defensive bonuses but it runs out and you use skills and your rotation to maintain it (like dragoon) or, like storms eye, a skill could trigger a defensive buff that you could choose to maintain or play with your rotation to have it on when you need it etc