Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Brennus
For MT'ing, I would say that a tank should not be able to dual wield. I think this for a few reasons. Firstly, In everygame I have played, when dual wielding , a tank loses the ability to migitate damage as well, this is in direct contribution of not having a sheild equipped, as does it make since, Agro control also should not be controlled through damage alone, I have seen many dual wield tanks using just damage to control agro, instead of using skills like taunt or something. Secondly, when dual wielding the damage increase will go up reguardless of what stance the warrior is in. Now, if you were in offensive stance and another warrior was in defensive - your dps would be higher but at what degree would it i have no clue. I think that dual wield is a good thing for warriors to have , but I would like to see VG possibly constrict it to just warriors when they are in offensive stances. And require 1 handers/sheild or 2 hander combos for defensive fighting.
|
It used to be that damage was basically the only thing keeping the MT tanking, so dual wield/2h was pretty common. Mostly because you could add procs for hate or get a weapon with one already on it. When WoW came out, then Dual wield and 2h tanking kinda went away for the highest end of the game, but still people do it when the encounters are easy.
Honestly if "realism" is a factor, its possible that you could block better with 2 swords than 1 and a shield. However, a lot of raid targets are a lot larger than you, and swordplay alone wouldnt save you. Sometimes it would take that giant magical shield to deflect their blows.