Paladins Replaceing Warriors?

[imported_Edward The Less]

Can a Paladin replace a Warrior as far as the Allaince goes?

Could all the Alliance races loose the Warrior class and just be left with Paladins for tanking?

 

[imported_Kalibek]

Not even close

They do not have snap aggro, they do not have the aggro generating abilities that warriors have. They don't have sustained threat generation (mana decreases, rage is infinite) and they do not have the damage reduction as warriors do (defensive stance).

Most importantly, they don't have the gear, especially when compared to warriors end game. Sure paladins can get high armor and a decent amount of stamina, but warriors can push 420+ defense with 25% block, 15-20% dodge/parry as well as 7k hp.

In 40 man raids, especially BWL and AQ, you will see that paladins are heal bots, and their biggest contribution are their blessings. But when you see fights like the Twin Emperors, which is 15 minutes in length, on average, you will see that they simply do not hold a candle to the abilities of a warrior.

Druids on the other hand have the ability to tank nearly as well as warriors. Their strengths are highest armor (15-16k), very high hp (7k+) and decent threat generation. However, their biggest weakness is the inability to handle fear, crits, and lack of parry.

 

[NeroRathe]

110% Behind Kalibek on this one....

....I cant imagine trying to run a 40 man raid with Pally's instead of Warriors. I hate saying that the Pally's are pretty much aura, heal, and buffadin's, but that's pretty much what they are.

The loss of Defensive Stance would put undue pressure on the other healer classes, as would the constant worry about mana, rage fills the bill much better.

While I agree as well about druids, I tend to approach this from a raiding perspective, and I'm used to running with mostly Resto Druids, the thought of them going to bear form to tank is nearly laughable. However, I damn well know they are capable of doing it in 5 man instances, and with their gear can do a damn good job of it, but the bottom line, is when it comes to taking a beating, and holding aggro for a sustained fight, nobody can do it like a warrior can do it.

 

[imported_Kalibek]

On a freak razorgore accident, three warriors fell through the world and the others got conflagged. One huge cleave crit later, only one warrior was up (mt) and a druid went bear form and tanked with him the rest of the fight.

But on fights like Nefarian, it would be impossible for a druid to tank because of the druid call (turns them into cat form).

 

[NeroRathe]

Again, I agree....in any raid situation, to me, it's warrior, druid, and then pally when I think of tanking, as a druid who is geared for it, can do a great job, close, but not quite as good as a warrior. Pally's do have their spots though, but I suspect that it's less than 20% of fights where I'd see them in the roll of a tank.

I dont want to call 'em the equal of a EQ2 Cleric, but they are there to heal, bless, and buff...if someone is relying on them to tank in a raid, then that raid is not destined for success.

 

[imported_Kalibek]

For regular tanking they are fine, but in situations where fear/class call is involved, they are outmatched by warriors. Not to mention a warrior can get 15-20% parry along with 20-25% dodge and 25-30% block rating with 220 block value. The amount of mitigation and avoidance a warrior can achieve heavily outweighs that of a druid, not to mention the ability to break fear every 30 seconds (more if they are undead)