05-27-2007, 10:44 PM
Quote:Warriors should have the edge on most encounters, but all encounters should be tankable by a druid or a paladin, period. Otherwise they are not viable alternatives to warriors, which the devs claimed they should be.
There's absolutely no reason why the MT spot should always be taken by just one class. No other class in the game gets special treatment on that front, so why on earth should warriors?
Why not?
The "MT spot" as we define it, the tank that the boss is targeting most of the time, is only one role to be played in the fight. Almost all of the time, it's one of multiple tank roles being played in the fight. Why shouldn't a warrior be the best at it - since non-warriors are the best at other tank jobs? Yes the warrior gets special treatment for being the boss-target-tank, but druids get advantages on secondary threat generation, multiple target tanking, and periodic deaggro situations. Paladins...need a bit of tweaking, but their area-effect and secondary threat generation is still healthy. Paladin issues primarily rest in itemization; until recently, their tier sets were horrifically itemized crap. I can't imagine that a full-t5 paladin couldn't tank at least reasonably well.
Two prot warriors is basically the max for any encounter in SSC/TK, to fulfill the "get-beat-on-by-main-boss" requirement of the fight. For all the rest of the tanking, a warrior would struggle or be outright incapable of pulling it off. When you want something for the boss to target, a warrior is the best choice. For everything else, go druid, and in some cases paladin.
Suppose that the job of boss-target-tank is diversified across all tanking classes, as you wish. What do you give warriors in return?