Do tanks actually take less damage?

[Legidias]

Id argue that bards take less damage than knights in a levelling group (given, say, everyone is in thurg gear) as they can pre-slow as targets come in and basically never lose aggro. One of the easiest ways to tank something I found was just to hit it with bard snare and just kite it for 0 damage. Works from lvl 20 or w/e all the way to 60, even in a tiny room in seb.

Knights have higher AC cap though and higher skills like parry, etc. IIRC

[Ennewi]

Originally Posted by Legidias [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Id argue that bards take less damage than knights in a levelling group (given, say, everyone is in thurg gear) as they can pre-slow as targets come in and basically never lose aggro. One of the easiest ways to tank something I found was just to hit it with bard snare and just kite it for 0 damage. Works from lvl 20 or w/e all the way to 60, even in a tiny room in seb.

Tried arguing this same point about shamans in an old thread. Outside of one or two endgame weapons, which are typically reserved for warriors, knights don't have a reliable means of slowing targets, so they joust or fear kite. Bards have more direct ways of avoiding/reducing damage with their songs to compensate for the tankiness they lack by default, slow being among the best.

[Stonewallx39]

Originally Posted by Ennewi [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Tried arguing this same point about shamans in an old thread. Outside of one or two endgame weapons, which are typically reserved for warriors, knights don't have a reliable means of slowing targets, so they joust or fear kite. Bards have more direct ways of avoiding/reducing damage with their songs to compensate for the tankiness they lack by default, slow being among the best.

A really interesting point, slow is godly powerful and that snare song just yoinks aggro whenever the bard wants it. Never being hit by an unslowed mob could make a huge difference in damage taken.

I think the counter argument is when a really good knight is working with a slower the slower can basically cast as soon as the mob is in camp. To your point the knight and slower would both really need to be on their game or there will be at least a couple rounds of unslowed melee. Definitely points to how a shaman/bard can be a totally viable tank in the right group makeup.

[Exard3k]

Originally Posted by Stonewallx39 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

To your point the knight and slower would both really need to be on their game or there will be at least a couple rounds of unslowed melee.

I never had any trouble keeping aggro with my paladin. I often was praised for that by chanters and shamans. As a tank, the slower can cast slow when mob is incoming and I take on aggro before the slower gets hit. Works all the time. Resists and thus recasts of slow are more difficult to handle and depend on reaction and distance tank <-> slower.

If you use your FoL and stuns after slower got hit, you're doing it wrong. Pro-active approach is advised to keep everything smooth and casters happy. Any chanter/shaman can rely on not getting hit/aggro on casting slow on inc mob when the tank is a paladin who knows their class and got some experience with slowers in party. Bard is more difficult because they generate more aggro over time with the songs, just be on your guard with a bard next to you.

I died once with my shaman because the WAR couldnt get aggro for like 25sec. This doesnt happen with PAL/SK.