Tank Stance Redesign

[Acidblood]

Definitely an improvement (though ultimately, I'd like to see the removal of tank stances, at least from PLD and DRK, with mitigation being more active / interactive)

If stances are to exist though, a few things to add:
1. Removal of 'enmity' combo (or at least reworked to be frequently useful*), with 'extra enmity' from basic attacks** instead tied to stance... not sure how this would work prior to level 30, maybe being in 'DPS stance' removes the enmity modifier (as opposed to 'tank stance' adding it).
2. PLD Shield Oath also boosts Bulwark block rate to +80%, making block rate 100% while Bulwark is active.

* Would also be nice if each tank was a bit different in their combos (as opposed to them always having 3-part Enmity + 3-part DPS).
** By 'basic attacks' I mean Rage of Halone, Power Slash, Butchers Block, etc. … Flash, Shield Lob, Unleash, Unmend, Overpower, Tomahawk, etc. would always have 'increased enmity' regardless of stance.

[TabrisOmbrelame]

If I take an other game as exemple like Warcraft, back in the Lich King expansion... As far as I remember, Tank was forced to use Tank stance. The damage of bosses was too damn high to let a tank in Dps stance and further more it was a huge mistake to make it like this cause of specialized class.

Now if we look into Ff14, The mitigation that we gain through the Tank stance is huge. But the cost is terrible in term of damage loss.
I think of something like removing Dps stance, removing the damage loss in tank stance but lower the mitigation to maybe 10%? Of course it's only an Idea

[Bourne_Endeavor]

While I fancy the idea, unfortunately, Tank Stance will always be considered obsolete, unless the devs radically change the battle system. There simply isn't enough outgoing damage to warrant consistent mitigation; not helped by the fact lethal attacks are 100% predictable. No amount of incentivizing Tank Stance will make it relevant. It's frustrating to hear Yoshida lament how Warriors won't use Defiance or Healer DPS isn't expected. Make content where we care less about damage then and we'll actually focus less on it. Ultimate is a perfect example of this. Putting aside the difficulty, it's actually the sheer frequency of damage that forces Tank Stance in more situations than any other content. There is a risk going into DPS at inopportune moments. Bring that risk over on a smaller scale and people will use Tank Stance. But when Immunity through every major buster and have Vengeance up for other bigger hits. Well, what do I need Defiance for?

[Grimoire-M]

If you want to stop Tanks sitting in DPS stance as a main tank, you have to attack their aggro generation in DPS stance. Removing their aggro combo isn't the solution. You basically have to make their DPS stance give them permanent Diversion while its on plus add a Lucid Dreaming aggro dump when you swap, while removing Shirk and disabling Provoke/Ultimatum during it in order to kill circle shirking but restore its intended behavior. This would heavily discourage sitting in DPS stance for too long as a main tank (which would take a LOT of aggro combos and party effort to enable) and make it incredibly difficult to maintain hate against your party. Only a shadewalker NIN could realistically keep you ahead of the group for any period, likely only for burst windows. If you then add ways to get around this, such as making PLD's DPS penalty only apply to physical damage, making Dark Arts ignore the Grit penalty entirely, and applying Unchained for free during the Berserk window, then that would minimize the value of this ability.

The only tank this wouldn't work for is DRK currently, meaning they'd likely have to see Grit and Darkside reworked to be mutually exclusive like the other two tanks. Reducing Grit's damage penalty to 5% in the process would be a minor nerf but approximate this nicely, but the major issue would be all of the Darkside/Grit specific interactions that would have to be readdressed. All in all it would likely be a rework from the ground up at that point, which some DRKs are for, though I'd hope they could retain as much of the current kit as possible (aside from Blood imo).

I feel that the damage penalty in tank stance should be reduced, not removed. I'd also prefer it if Sword Oath was more than 'here's a bunch of auto attack potency'. Give PLD something to care about in sword oath, even if it's just a DPS version of Shield Swipe.

I do feel that Tanks would have to get something added to their aggro combos to make them more useful again too. I'd say bring back the debuff combos, but don't make them mutually exclusive.Either use the same debuff across all of them, or add two debuffs per tank, all of which are present on the third hits. So DRK gets Addle + Damage Down, PLD gets Feint + Damage Down, and WAR gets Addle + Feint, all of which when combined give you all three of the former tank debuffs from HW/ARR, no matter which pair you bring.

[Bourne_Endeavor]

If you want to stop Tanks sitting in DPS stance as a main tank, you have to attack their aggro generation in DPS stance. Removing their aggro combo isn't the solution. You basically have to make their DPS stance give them permanent Diversion while its on plus add a Lucid Dreaming aggro dump when you swap, while removing Shirk and disabling Provoke/Ultimatum during it in order to kill circle shirking but restore its intended behavior. This would heavily discourage sitting in DPS stance for too long as a main tank (which would take a LOT of aggro combos and party effort to enable) and make it incredibly difficult to maintain hate against your party. Only a shadewalker NIN could realistically keep you ahead of the group for any period, likely only for burst windows. If you then add ways to get around this, such as making PLD's DPS penalty only apply to physical damage, making Dark Arts ignore the Grit penalty entirely, and applying Unchained for free during the Berserk window, then that would minimize the value of this ability

This is an excellent way to assure people quit tanking outright. Forcing people into your intended way of doing something never works. Look at how Pagos turned out. If the devs want us utilizing Tank Stance, they need to incentivize it, thus we elect to turn it on to our own benefit, not because the game nerfed DPS stance into the ground. A further issue with simply forcing Tank Stance is it robs tanks of optimization. Once we have a fight mapped out, there simply isn't any reason for all that extra mitigation. Hence why tanks focus on their DPS. It provides them a goal worth striving towards. Take that away and now we're doing less than healers while sitting around, waiting for a buster to go out so I have a reason to give a damn about the fight. I cannot describe how incredibly boring such gameplay would be.

I do agree enmity needs an overhaul as it's become a complete joke, however unless the content actually does more damage, thereby making constant DPS stance an actual risk. Any attempts to force tanks into Tank Stance will simply result in boring gameplay. I mean, speaking only for myself, half the reason I do room wide pulls in dungeons is because I actually feel like a tank due to the incoming damage. If I pulled the way the devs intended, I'd be bored out of my mind.

[TabrisOmbrelame]

If you want to stop Tanks sitting in DPS stance as a main tank, you have to attack their aggro generation in DPS stance. Removing their aggro combo isn't the solution. You basically have to make their DPS stance give them permanent Diversion while its on plus add a Lucid Dreaming aggro dump when you swap, while removing Shirk and disabling Provoke/Ultimatum during it in order to kill circle shirking but restore its intended behavior. This would heavily discourage sitting in DPS stance for too long as a main tank (which would take a LOT of aggro combos and party effort to enable) and make it incredibly difficult to maintain hate against your party. Only a shadewalker NIN could realistically keep you ahead of the group for any period, likely only for burst windows. If you then add ways to get around this, such as making PLD's DPS penalty only apply to physical damage, making Dark Arts ignore the Grit penalty entirely, and applying Unchained for free during the Berserk window, then that would minimize the value of this ability.

Your idea, with some other system, could be good, but can't be used either.

Some boss, like Lakshmi Extreme, will target the 2nd on aggro even if it's not a tank. If some kind of lethal damage is dealt, the Dps will surely die because of this.

[Grimoire-M]

Your idea, with some other system, could be good, but can't be used either.

Some boss, like Lakshmi Extreme, will target the 2nd on aggro even if it's not a tank. If some kind of lethal damage is dealt, the Dps will surely die because of this.

You can easily have the cleave mechanic check which tank has the most aggro and target the other one accordingly. Class-exclusive targetting already exists, as well as aggro based. SE can easily combine the two to create the situation they want.

Hell, Ravana already does this. In normal mode AND extreme. It's not exactly hard for them to code.

[Bright-Flower]

I'd prefer from a personal preference standpoint to have the tank stance be something you almost always want up in a boss fight and dps stance being something for soloing, off tanking or during certain dps checks when there's nothing to actually tank, etc.

Unfortunately so much of FF XIV's endgame meta seems built around dps because of strict enrage timers and only needing a bare minimum of healing and defensive mitigation. The only real way to force tanks into tank stance would be to A. retune enimty generation so that you wont' get enough to stay ahead of dps without tank stance or B. increase output of damage from bosses so that being in dps stance will lead to you getting your teeth kicked in.

[Liam_Harper]

I agree tank stance definitely needs a rework. The 25% dps loss is absolutely massive in a game where dps is everything. The fact we meld Direct Hit over Tenacity which is a 4-5% mitigation loss and a 1% dps gain says a lot about how much more important damage is.
I'm not sure about changes designed around "forcing us into tank stance". If you make it mandatory at certain points, it's no longer a choice. It's just something you predictably do at set intervals or situations. Tank busters already have this issue of predictability without adding more.
I don't agree with attacking our emnity or making us paper in dps either. Remember the changes should be fun to play, rather than attacking or punishing pieces of our toolkit.

Personally I'd like to see both stances become viable playstyles, that define the player. For example, a tank stance player could be a brick wall that healers would actually be happy to have in their party and a dps stance player would be the edge needed to beat a strict enrage, but both would be an asset to the group. Both stances could have abilities to master, the tank could choose to specialize in dealing damage or in being unkillable and focus towards that goal.

I don't think dps stance really needs to be more than a 5-10% increase personally. We'd use it. The dps stance could also have far better burst while tank stance is more sustained.

[PangTong]

I agree tank stance definitely needs a rework. The 25% dps loss is absolutely massive in a game where dps is everything. The fact we meld Direct Hit over Tenacity which is a 4-5% mitigation loss and a 1% dps gain says a lot about how much more important damage is.
I'm not sure about changes designed around "forcing us into tank stance". If you make it mandatory at certain points, it's no longer a choice. It's just something you predictably do at set intervals or situations. Tank busters already have this issue of predictability without adding more.
I don't agree with attacking our emnity or making us paper in dps either. Remember the changes should be fun to play, rather than attacking or punishing pieces of our toolkit.

Personally I'd like to see both stances become viable playstyles, that define the player. For example, a tank stance player could be a brick wall that healers would actually be happy to have in their party and a dps stance player would be the edge needed to beat a strict enrage, but both would be an asset to the group. Both stances could have abilities to master, the tank could choose to specialize in dealing damage or in being unkillable and focus towards that goal.

If we're talking about it as a "stance" that's either on or off then there's simply no way to create a state where you can simply be in one or the other all the time and they're equally viable. One will be determined as having the potential for more damage (whether in raid dps or otherwise) and therefore the only one worth using. To give a defensive ability value in this game that's all about damage, it either needs to have almost no negative impact on damage (like cooldowns) or it needs to be absolutely necessary for clearing content. And there is nothing wrong with having it be required. Complaining that tanks have to go into tank stance, is like complaining that healers sometimes have to use GCDs on healing the party when they could be doing damage.

It seems ridiculous to me that there is even an argument about whether tanks should be required to do tank things. Of course they should! They're tanks! I get the whole aspect of wanting to optimize for DPS, but that doesn't mean the game should go in a direction where actual active tanking becomes less and less important so everyone can just be a pseudo-DPS job and not worry about it. If DPS is so superdy-duper important for tanks that they desperately do not want to do anything tank-like, that ought to change! Cut back DPS requirements, or make tanks a smaller proportion of raid DPS if need be, just do something to save tanking as a distinct role.

I don't see anything wrong with forcing tanks into tank stance at least sometimes. Making it enmity based doesn't mean it's completely predictable either, as enmity will vary depending on the group. Having to balance damage output with tank responsibilities sounds like a perfectly fine concept for a tanking role to me. If the game ends up in a state where tanking is just a side effect of certain jobs doing their DPS rotation, that's a complete failure to design a tank role.