Quote Originally Posted by Yagrush View Post
This idea is directed towards fights like Ifrit and Titan, where two tanks aren't actually required. In Ifrit's case, the only reason the two tanks are viable is because one is just a stun bot, while on Titan he is just being a gimped DPS. This means that one of the tanks ends up being a burden, which is bad design.
Godsdammit. Say it with me now: WAR is not a DPS.

You see, PLD needs Sword Oath to be able to match WAR non-Defiance DPS. This is the reason for the existence of Sword Oath in the first place. Second, you've overestimated the difference between tank and DPS damage output -- it's 20-25%, not 70%. Compare WAR to DRG, and know that both have PGL and MRD abilities. The difference between the two is exactly 32 strength, then potency and ability considerations. End result is that DRG gets ~7-9% more damage from STR differences and another 10% or so out of greater potency on attacks, then the bonus off-GCD abilities. Additionally, WAR is already getting a buff to address some of the endgame struggles.

Quote Originally Posted by Yagrush View Post
Maybe if you're overgeared for the content. Also, if this were true, people wouldn't mind picking up a Warrior who isn't gonna tank into a Titan HM.. They aren't doing this.
You're seriously demanding that a tank be a full-fledged DPS. That won't ever happen, obviously. However, you also have to realize that people often aren't doing things because they're just as easily confused as you are about the game's mechanics. Parties of 4 tanks have handily downed Titan -- take this thread, for example.