Elitist Jerks
Register
Blogs
Forums


Go Back   Elitist Jerks » The Dung Heap » The Banhammer

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 04/28/09, 11:13 AM   #1
• bartolimu
palpably superior comprehension
 
bartolimu's Avatar
 
Undead Warlock
 
Mal'Ganis
Infraction for Durzil: 3. All discussion should be both polite and civil.

Post: DK Tanking Discussion
User: Durzil
Infraction: 3. All discussion should be both polite and civil.
Points: 1

Administrative Note:

Message to User:
If a post is so dumb it makes you mad, report it. Also, it's spelled "sense."
Original Post:
Originally Posted by czokalapik View Post
I'm not saying that this talent is bad, i'm just saying i don't need it, haven't need it eariler.
Besides, i want to rely on people, not talents, if there's spike of 2-3 large hits in a row only first will be reduced by WotN, such hits happen from my mistake or because of encounter mechanics, so i can't make any mistakes, and healers have to know the encounter to prevent such hits.
I know, for some this is strange, some say i don't know how to play, but as i said - i trust my healers, and that's why i build my talents based on my group strengths.

For now WotN will be only "hard modes talent" for me, and you don't have to agree with me, just don't tell me that WotN is "must have".

Besides - in 3.1 there is no perfect tanking or dps build, before patch dry blood and IT spammer owned in dps, now any build made with thought can be on top of damage meters. Same goes for tanks.
The 25 str and buff to a pet that you don't have out 95% of the time while tanking is not worth the trade off of loosing out on WotN, you can rely on people all you want but your hurting your raid by not taking WotN in this situation.

If you don't want to rely on talents then you should spec 0/0/0 doesn't make a lot of seance huh, either did your post.

Offline
 

Go Back   Elitist Jerks » The Dung Heap » The Banhammer

Thread Tools

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Infraction for Har: 3. All discussion should be both polite and civil. bartolimu The Banhammer 0 04/03/09 10:34 AM
Infraction for Purinna: 3. All discussion should be both polite and civil. bartolimu The Banhammer 0 02/25/09 1:41 PM
Infraction for mpschafer: 3. All discussion should be both polite and civil. Aldriana The Banhammer 0 02/11/09 1:52 PM
Infraction for bombdigie: 3. All discussion should be both polite and civil. constantius The Banhammer 0 02/06/09 4:55 PM
Infraction for Flamingcloud: 3. All discussion should be both polite and civil. Aldriana The Banhammer 0 02/02/09 7:42 PM