The Problem with Paladin

[Kyri]

(Posting as Kaetara Sagitta)

I read through all 21 pages of this thread, and I am honestly confounded at the sheer number of people who delivered the exact same argument regarding "Jobs are meant for party play.." without having read the equally countless other replies to that exact same argument stating "Classes can be used in party play..". Joining a party doesn't mean you have to switch to your class's corresponding job.

It doesn't matter if a PLD can be a better PLD with a BRD, because a GLA can be a better GLA with a BRD.

A better, mathematically equivalent equation would be: If GLA>PLD and BRD=BRD, then GLA+BRD > PLD+BRD.

To that end, since a GLA can tank just as well as a PLD while having better survivability, then a GLA tank can allow the BRD to stay as an ARC and focus on DD rather than buffs.

I also find myself quietly laughing at all the instances of people saying that PLD was designed to be a support tank. In what way, shape, or form does that notion even make a modicum of sense? Even the developers concept of PLD stated they were meant to be "the solid rock upon which the party's defense is founded" (paraphrased), not "the loose rock upon which the party can stand when all else fails".

Honestly I agree with all points made that PLD simply does not perform the job of tank as well as other jobs, or even classes, can. It desperately needs to be revised.

[Conradus]

(Posting as Kaetara Sagitta)
A better, mathematically equivalent equation would be: If GLA>PLD and BRD=BRD, then GLA+BRD > PLD+BRD.

Except that's not necessarily true, character classes/jobs not being real numbers. It ignores the way the abilities of the two character classes might interact. For example, Ballad is enormously helpful to PLD, but just doesn't mean that much to GLA. I'm not saying that it's not true, mind you, just that it's not something that can be assumed to be true without evidence.