Roles for Samurai, Red Mage, Dancer

[Shippuu]

SAM was not introduced until Zilart. The game had changed things by then. Zilart also introduced things like Dynamis, which is where the THF AF2 came from with the Enmity. Referencing original THF AF and comparing to gear that came out later for SAM when it released is... really reaching.

It's not really reaching, you're the one who brought up THF AF in the first place saying it had +enmity on it (when it technically didn't.) All I was stating was that Samurai AF had +enmity on it's AF which was pretty much reserved to only tank jobs. THF received +enmity on their AF2 armor but they also had an entire job identity pretty much based on the whole sneak/trick attack which manipulated enmity.
It's important because the AF armor is meant to be the jobs iconic identifying armor and as such would be developed with the intent of complimenting the job's intended role. The Fact SAM AF had +enmity says a lot when the job had no other abilities to shed or manipulate enmity. There's really no denying it or trying to explain it in another way. DRG was released at the same time as SAM intended as a strong DPS, hence why it was given an ability to shed enmity in the event it ripped aggro. Ninja was given mitigation tools to counter the event that it grabbed aggro etc.

Even then, FFXI was a nightmarish example of any kind of balance. The devs for it were slow to fix any problems regarding balance. But it's whichever, to me the fact they had +enmity and other things indicates they planned it to be at least some form of tank-ish role. But we'll just have to agree to disagree on this one.

I'm arguing on the matter because your points have faults that work against you, but you don't seem to realize it. You can't pick and choose your arguments by ignoring factors that work against you. This is why I keep saying that it'll work for both sides equally, and I continuously state why that's the fact on the matter. Maybe I am talking to a wall on the matter, which isn't unusual when it comes to reasoning and inner workings.

The faults you are pointing out though aren't working against me. They are simply able to be applied in the other direction. If they worked against me then they'd be making my arguments for a tank Samurai invalid but they aren't, they're just making it applicable to a DPS samurai as well. Like my Fell Cleave example from earlier. You stated that Samurai is known for Big hits, and I pointed out that tanks can do big hits too. That doesn't invalidate that a DPS SAM can do big hits, only that it can be applied to a Tank SAM as well.

Many things can be put on a DPS job because they are not as much of a restricted role, they have more flexibility than tanks and healers in what they can do as a result. Once again, the DPS role doesn't need arguments on why something should be a DPS because quite literally everything already can be a DPS. It's the assumed standard.

No one is saying it cannot be a DPS. But plenty of people are saying it cannot be a tank. That is why the tank side brings forth arguments defending it's reasoning for why it can or should be a tank. The DPS side doesn't need that.