Quote Originally Posted by Shurrikhan View Post
I'd actually be totally fine with that if the added risk of taking DPS wasn't due to RNG, poor telegraphs, or the like. Just as I'd like to see scenarios by which taking a single tank could be viable, I'd like to see the occasional excess-tanks composition as a cheese strat so long as it comes at cost and does not therefore become dominant. Using tanks to absorb unmitigateable risk sucks, because it just comes down to statistical risk management. Using them to make manageable an fight that would otherwise be too difficult at a party's current skill level (where below the balance point), though? I've got no issues with that. It just makes me wish further that tanks could have broader impact (like, more skills being interceptable, etc.), so that there was more interaction involved in those varying comps.
I could do threads upon threads just discussing ideas and design schemata.

Keeping it within this scope though, there's two primary scenarios where I'd go along with saying more damage is fine.

A) The Toggles come back with greater stat shifts. Every 1% damage increase it grants should be met with a 2-3% damage taken increase. A damage penalty for the 'tank' stance wouldn't be necessary here since the 'DPS stance' brings an appropriate drop in durability.

While I would prefer 'stances' exclude and enable actions, it's a good enough compromise when moving into your offensive mode is a significant and dangerous option. Tanks currently have something like a base EHP ratio of 250% more than everyone else. Gaining 15% damage and reducing to 125-150% of that is a suitable drop.

B) Retributive skill design. The tank getting hit by the boss deals more damage through enabling powerful counter attack options.

The two are not exclusive with each other, but from a tank fantasy, getting hit and slinging it back in turn with a bit more gusto is more appealing than adding more potency to basic actions.