1H + barehanded vs 2 x 1H

[Olon97]

What I was trying to alude to was that the modifiers on the two weapons might be more important than the total amount of damage output.  If I were tempted to dual wield rather than use a 1h + shield, it would be to utilize modifiers on the offhand weapon that upped my stats, like agility or defense sufficient to replace the lost armor.  The topic of getting and holding aggro is being discussed in Bolty's priest post as well, and it seems that it is crucial for the party to work together to get the tank engaged before spamming all their high damage distractions.

The only case I can think of where dual wielding weapons for stats rather than for damage considerations would make sense (from a min/max perspective) would be for a hunter who primarily uses their ranged weapon. The more agility the better. Native weapon procs are often too weak to figure into the picture, poison and enchants I don't know what's optimal but they might tip the balance.

While a coordinated party certainly helps tons, a tanking warrior is able to make the largest contriubtion if he gets aggro under control by applying high threat skills as quickly as possible. That comes down to available rage, which comes down to initial, dependable, non-streaky damage (as well as getting hit). Quick warrior aggro lock means safer healing as well as faster and heavier DPS from the rest of the party (leading to less damage taken and less downtime). The trick is for each group to get a feel for the dynamics and unload just as much as the particular tank's aggro holding capacities permits (assuming the mobs are a significant threat to the non-tanks of course).