Quote Originally Posted by Anahlise_Auhn_Giinslai View Post
I view a protective barrier that needs to be broken, for a offensive gain, as a liability and a bad design, while I think that a defensive action should not have a liability connection to offense.
Just some few cents:

Personally, I wouldn't mind that (and it might even seem uniquely interesting) if we just had more means by which to manipulate whether it'd break (or, more directly put, whether we'd get its reward) and/or some real reason to use it even when it wouldn't necessarily break (such as for an anti-knockback or anti-debuff when used against lighter damage).

That doesn't have to come from anything specific to DRK, even. That could easily come from role-wide changes towards less passive mitigation and much more frequent and manipulable instances of active mitigation. That could come from fight design. That could come from mechanics specifically being skill-shots that you wouldn't normally intercept an additional count of (but against which TBN on the first prevents the vulnerability debuff). Etc., etc.