I agree, this is a terrible idea... rogues do not need bulwark. There is much that needs to be done to fix the scouts overall, but this.. is not the answer by any means.
Kindasorta not really how it works in practice. The threat from the line isn't particularly helpful for a few reasons. The encounter taunt: 1. It's an encounter taunt instead of an AE taunt. While fighters do have an encounter taunt, nearly every fighter has some unlocked standard AE method of significant threat generation. This is not that. 2. It doesn't generate enough threat to be considered effective. IT doesn't hurt, I guess, but it's extremely ineffective. What would make it effective for aggro generation: Add 1-2 threat positions to it. Increase the threat by like 10x (yes, seriously). The threat proc when hit: 1. It's a 55% hit chance, so only roughly every other hit. 2. It doesn't proc when you avoid, which disincentivizes higher avoidance. Rogues in defensive have relatively high avoidance, relative to plate tanks, and even more so if they're using a shield. To my great aggravation, devs have long since foregone rogue-shields (which are known as Round Shields) and just lumped them up in with bucklers, but this isn't the place for that rant. 3. It doesn't proc for enough hate when it does proc. What would make it effective for aggro generation: Make the proc also work on avoids, not unlike En Garde did before they made En Garde exclusively just a dumb boring straight damage proc (it changes to a straight damage proc at 120). Probably give it 5-10x the threat generated too. Things that are missing that a tank line for rogues would be needed to bring them in line: would also need a 100% avoid of some kind. Predators have something like this, although it's kind of bad because it stifles and dazes you. Also a stoneskin that lasts a couple of hits wouldn't necessarily hurt. Probably one extra snap aggro would be good too (brigands have one snap: shenanigans and swashbucklers have one: Sleight of Hand, but need more than just the one). And Bulwark, of course.
Uhhh, yea sure ok. But I have no use for any of it and do not care to have it changed. I am a scout not a tank and if I wanted to tank I would play my Zerker. I really do not have any desire to play a tank. When I raided my Zerker it just got to be too much to have to tank the same heroics 6 times a week to get everyone's updates since most raid teams only have a couple of tanks and not everyone can be on at the same time outside of raid schedule. Again: Don't change or do anything to scouts that has anything related to Tanking. Mmkk Thx.
This was also specific to rogues, not scouts broadly. If you have no use for it then it doesn't apply to you. I was simply discussing the kind of stuff that would be needed to make this kind of thing viable. If you're not interested in entertaining the idea, then you don't have to post about it. Or, if you had something specific to say like "this would be bad because it has x negative effect" that'd be something else. I'm not really invested in the idea, because while I generally like the idea of a rogue "tank" type (think like a duelist), there are a million other things that are bigger priorities to me and I feel like the amount of work it would take to make this viable wouldn't be particularly worth the time (when that time is better spent say curbing the stat inflation problem), and would also run the risk of throwing off balance in a way that could negatively impact other tanks. I would also generally see it as a bad idea to pursue for the aforementioned reasons. What I was doing was simply describing the base level of stuff that would be needed to make the idea viable (which is kind of another way of saying this is not really viable for the game at the moment).
