Fix paladin. Only Class in the entire game that cannot...

[Xenosan]

If not changes instead a hefty reward in 4.0 for the wait^^

[SyzzleSpark]

I'm not even sure why we're demanding buffs anymore with fewer 3.x patches ahead than behind, and everything likely getting a xpac-worthy boost in 4.0. PLD will just probably be getting a slightly larger boost and WAR a slightly smaller boost, if we're to take Yoshi at his word.

The only way we'll get anything sooner is if they dreadfully mis-design the coming raid tier such that PLD or some other job is unable to perform on an FCoB-DRG-esque level.

[Nivison]

So i was reading threw and it seems everyone is trying to make PLD do more damage which, in my honest opinion, seems to contradicts what a PLD is described to be. The ultimate tank.
As for play style its described to use a mix of Tp and Mp stuff yet doesnt really.
What i propose is first make its shield oath and sword oath drain mana or Tp depending on the stance, kinda like DRk, causing you to have to balance between the two. Interesting and would add some challenge to playing pld other than the constant same rotation spam.
Secondaly buff shield oaths DMG reduction and make it so abilities like shield bash and such are only available when your using shield oath, or make it so shield oath now also absorbs some of the damage delt to party members behide them. Another idea would be to make so only an area infront of PLD absorbs damage appling mitagation. For sword oath same idea, but dont know what to do for it, any ideas would be great.
(Ran out or room 1/2

[Nivison]

(Id also think it was great if the pose changes between stances I.E shield oath is shield up and blocking)
Secondly make it seem more akin to a PLD( or knight for Japanese version). Make it so cover now absorbs all dmg that the targer take but before mitigation. Allowing for a wider use.

Make it so he can now apply more debuffs allowing the party to do more dmg that way. This would come at the cost of dmg but it\\'d make the PLD feel more like a knight protecting their allies.

These changes would make the pld aquire a more seperated role from the tanks and may introduce interesting game play for them 2/2

[SessionZero]

If any tank is the debuff tank, it should be DRK. PLD makes a better support/off-healer, both in terms of balancing the tank roles and in reinforcing the class fantasy.

[zuzu-bq]

Wait, are you saying that paladin can sprint? I don't even know how does the sprint animation look like ._.

You saying a player wouldn't sprint just to see a cool animation?! Just look at DRK sprint, its really well made.
But if you want a pratical use, players without mount tend Sprint a lot during the first 3 to 6 hours of gameplay even if their jobs depend on TP to attack. Also yes, you should be sprinting on 50~60 dungeons as a PLD if your party can keep up. (Same applies to DRK)

If any tank is the debuff tank, it should be DRK.

*Stares at WAR Path and Eye*
Err...

[Jandor]

*Stares at WAR Path and Eye*
Err...

It currently isn't DRK, but it should be .

[Arg0n]

Tank classes are balanced quite well.

Warrior most offensiv tank -> then Darkknight -> then Paladin as most defensive Tank.

I like to play every Tank, doesn't matter if dailys, primals or alex. All 3 have their own gameplay, style and tankyness.
Pls don't always change the classes. Atm it's balanced extremly well !
If a paladin would do the same amount of damage as a warrior, it would be really unbalanced cause a warrior doesnt have that much defensive cooldowns.
I really don't see the problem. You want to do a lot of damage -> play Warrior. You want more tankyness but lack a bit of damage -> play paladin.

But it looks like you as a main paladin want to be tanky af and on place nr.1 in dps... that doesnt work out dude

[Reynhart]

But it looks like you as a main paladin want to be tanky af and on place nr.1 in dps... that doesnt work out dude

But anything a PLD can tank, a WAR can tank just as well.

[SessionZero]

*Stares at WAR Path and Eye*
Err...

>it should be DRK
>should be DRK
>should be
>should