You can bring back one thing removed from tanks. What do you bring back?

[Rithy255]

Except, doesn't a single (no CD required) AoE attack have the same "instantly got aggro on everything" effect these days? Why needlessly have an extra Provoke CD, given that?

mainly for that one summoner who pulls aggro on a few mobs and stands in mars, who you try to run up to but they run away from you, so you end up having to waste time using your ranged attacks.

Tbf I think a AOE provoke role action is still a waste of space.

[DRKoftheAzure]

Except, doesn't a single (no CD required) AoE attack have the same "instantly got aggro on everything" effect these days? Why needlessly have an extra Provoke CD, given that?

Tbf I think a AOE provoke role action is still a waste of space.

Tank swaps, and aggro wars... mostly tank swaps though... and I mean more frequent tank swaps.

[Shurrikhan]

Tank swaps, and aggro wars... mostly tank swaps though... and I mean more frequent tank swaps.

So, taking up an extra button just to make unnecessary aggro-wars more annoying?

If there were anything deliberate that actually needed more than one Provoke per its current CD per tank... that would just be a reason to reduce the CD of Provoke, not to waste an extra button on the same purpose.

[ArianeEwah]

I would bring back dps stance - shape or form doesn't really matter to me.

Could be a slight dps buff, with a slight mitigation nerf, or a huge one which makes you as squishy as a dps - best example that comes to my mind is the essence/spirit of the irregular from Bozjan.

A big issue I see with the old tank/dps stance:
Tank stance was never really a gain for YOU, I would even question it being a gain for the party outside of ARR. In terms of suvivability and dps output the trade was pretty even, e.g. on PLD you lost 15% dps, but gained 20%, net loss/gain was pretty much zero!
Tho, pre-HW (3.2) the damage reduction was set to 20%, which was undoubtly a loss for the tank.
But the real problem arises once you take dps stance into account; it had no drawbacks; a pure net gain of at least 10% in dps. And why would YOU have to suffer, the tank! Tanks a few, you are the most important person in the party, dps and healers adjus-... ahem, anyway you get the picture. Additionally, 2/3 tanks had to spend a whole GCD to swap stances, so it was WAR pulling 99% of the time. In a DRK/PLD scenario, you better had a NIN shadowwalking you!

I suggest a small dps increase of ~10%, but it negates the tank mastery damage taken effect.
This means, you may gain 10% dps, but lose 20% mitigation, so you take 25% more damage. e.g. DRK gets the action Darkside with 15% dmg increase, but no MP regen ticks and 25% more dmg taken, WAR raw 5% dmg and 10% crit hit rate, but 20% less HP etc.

These stances could get restrictions, just as they cannot be used in Ultimates, maybe even Savage. They should be available to every normal raid tho (8 and 24 man), even dungeons. Tank busters a far and few in between and a good tank can make a big difference there. And the action being oGCDs would also make them convenient.

We could go pretty hardcore and add a stance comparable to the Bozjan irregular potion. Not available outside of solo duties or the overworld (like FATEs and such), as you will become as squishy a melee dps with some mits, but you might deal as much damage as a ranged dps; and enmity tools cannot be used during this stance.

Just some thoughts.

[Rithy255]

I would bring back dps stance - shape or form doesn't really matter to me.

I can see DPS/Tank stances working if.
1. The DPS gain isn't massive, The Dps gain in reality shouldn't be the deciding factor if you can clear or not.
2. The defensive value you have in DPS mode is equivalent of that of a Melee DPS, it would also need to be hard to gain aggro in a DPS stance compared to a Tanking stance (I don't think we need hard aggro management back), Maybe even lockout certain defensives, I can see OT keeping utility skills for other targets as that makes them more of a supportive DPS aswell. (Also if some level of aggro management was to be in game it needs to remain a solely tanking mech it shouldn't be down to other jobs).
3. In general Defensive stance would be Aimed at MT, while the OT would be aimed at being in Offensive stance, theirs likely a lot of opportunities where a MT can switch into DPS stance but that would need fight knowing the fight, Also there should be swaps and instances where the designated OT has to either become the MT, or share a buster in tanking stance.


What I'd want is tanks to actually play differently inside DPS stances, through certain skills maybe costing less, certain defensive buttons would switch over to offensive buttons, something like a OT DRK getting haste buff ect.

The Idea certainly is interesting to me to say the least, I don't think we will ever see it, as whatever's easier to design, is usually the default option for FF14, I don't even think tank stances would be that complicated in low level content as most new players can default into Defensive stance in dungeons ect. (I know this was different, offensive stances were more expected in ARR, HW, SB but again I think those stances were very flawed as it let tanks properly tank even if they took lots of damage, inside of offensive stances).

I'm sure theirs flaws in the design to be fair, I think the current system would be fine, if tanks had more of a rotation, more interesting tools and mitigations actually felt more important and diverse. My main issue is just how bland tanking is currently, not to say I don't think the current system of tanking can work, It just feels like tanks and healers get the lazy easy solution and get ignored for the most part, because the games focused on DPSing mostly, so it seems the best approach is to make mitigation, healing ect. Free with little drawbacks, for the most part I barely feel like a tank I just feel like a boring DPS now who barely needs to manage any defensives.

[HyperiusUltima]

Except, doesn't a single (no CD required) AoE attack have the same "instantly got aggro on everything" effect these days? Why needlessly have an extra Provoke CD, given that?

More or less for the people in the back who forget that AoE exists. They’re few and far between, but oh brother.

Otherwise, keep it in the trash can. If anything, we need more Interject usage when we barely have anything to Interject nowadays as is. Not even raids solves this issue.

[ArianeEwah]

I can see DPS/Tank stances working if.
1. [...]
2. [...]

It all depends on duty and definition.
1. If we're talking about normal raids (doesn't matter whether 8 or 24 man), there is no deciding factor anyway. If we're talking savage, week 1 hits like a truck, and after the stat squish, impact from gear increase has gone down since. It should make a difference, but only if you and your healers are skilled enough.
2. Yes and no, but not entirely. I mean, take the examples from my previous post: Either a rather "soft" dps stance, which increases dps by ~10%, but you take 25% more damage (/lose the 20% mit from trait) and you are on a level with support dps like BRD and DNC in aDPS; or the hardcore path, with a wooping 30-45% dps increase to catch to melee dps, but at least +100% dmg taken and 30% less HP. Personally, for normal duties I prefer the first version, the 2nd only outside of duties if you wanna go really bonkers. (not that we would see any of that either way, just "what if")

What I'd want is tanks to actually play differently inside DPS stances, through certain skills maybe costing less, certain defensive buttons would switch over to offensive buttons, something like a OT DRK getting haste buff ect.
...I just feel like a boring DPS now who barely needs to manage any defensives.

Agreed! Certainly, depending on stance design, it could be something like in WoW, e.g. iirc PLD could either go dps, tank or heal, and tho its theme remained pretty much the same, their actions and rotations varied greatly. FFXIV PLD old dps stance was called sword oath, so it would make sense that every shield-based action would be changed into sword-based ones. While WAR stances rarely different in their rotation, their effects certainly did (Inner Beast mit+heal vs Fell Cleave higher dmg output). DRK outside of Grit used Blood weapon for speed, Grit DRK was slow with higher MP return on Sython.

I am just getting so bored especially during normal raids when there is usually just 1 dude tanking, the other 1-2 are just... there, and use aoe mit from time to time or wait for a (shared) tank buster every full moon. It's just as you said, tank rotation aint that exciting to be a 2nd or 3rd rate support dps.

(Same for healers, too!)

[Derio]

HW version of abyssal drain on DRK

[DRKoftheAzure]

So, taking up an extra button just to make unnecessary aggro-wars more annoying?

If there were anything deliberate that actually needed more than one Provoke per its current CD per tank... that would just be a reason to reduce the CD of Provoke, not to waste an extra button on the same purpose.

To be fair, Shirk already does this by just existing and most people NEVER USE IT, because Provoke exists and tank stance exists, yet those are deemed necessary compared to Shirk.

[Absurdity]

HW version of abyssal drain on DRK

I'll just take HW DrK in general...hell, I'd take Dark Arts spam back at this point, never bothered me that much anyway.