Tank IDENTITY

[Shurrikhan]

That said, they still can have a little bit of it regardless since warriors, specificaly this one being the more berserker type sometimes have it here and there. But Lifesteal itself is a concept i find more grim in nature, and that's why you always see it on classes akin to dark knight in most other games.

However, warrior in lore already has this Beast inside of him so you can spin it around and find sense in drinking the blood of your enemy like a bloody animal, but i'd remove either thrill or equilibrium as a result, and replace it with more DMG Reduction like i said, anything that increases the warrior's size, anybody? feeling like being a fucking Titan?

I think that mostly comes down to comparative theme. If Warrior is supposed to be the superarmored, unmoveable titan... what is Paladin with its shield and heavy plate armor supposed to be?

Initially, the two jobs were set as opposites to one another:

Paladin was designed to be one who rises to the challenge, as a vanguard, whereas Warrior was just a beast unleashed who could be put to group use but would otherwise go things solo. The first was a guardian, the second a hardy brawler. The first was a first and last line of defense, the other a force of nature thrilling in the fight.

The result:

• Paladin's mitigation scaled primarily with content (was percentile), while Warrior's mitigation scaled primarily with its own stats (based on abilities and damage dealt).
• Paladin's eHP bonuses scaled multiplicatively with mitigation; Warrior's did not.
• Paladin offered further efficiency group healing funneled through it; Warrior did not unless specifically favoring defense.
• Warrior's HP would jump wildly, moving in either direction; Paladin's would change slowly, but, without outside influence, in only one direction.
• Paladin offered party-member support; Warrior supported only itself.
• Paladin was entirely preemptive; Warrior was primarily reactive.
• Paladin could heavily and choicefully sacrifice output for sustain (which could be cast on anyone); Warrior's offensive and defensive choices instead largely played around each other, thematically and mechanically favoring offense.

Now, not all of those points of opposition could actually work. For instance, pure stat scaling, even if properly balanced, would end up just a noticeable net disadvantage early in a tier but overpowered by its end. But overall those kinds of deliberate distinctions, or comparative identity, were pretty powerful.

And those comparative identities were a whole lot more thematically cohesive and comprehensive than just A get shields, B gets self-heals, C gets evasion, etc., etc. (to what may come out as identical niches and feel in practice).

:: I think we need to consider, for that and similar reasons, we need also to consider how a job fits alongside others when deciding how to anchor its themes mechanically. That's not to say only one job can claim ownership to this or that mechanics --far from it-- but if we're to set one as thematically the 'nigh undamageable bulwark' or whatnot, through whatever mechanics may fit, we should be sure we're applying that theme to the right 1 of n jobs in role.