The simple answer is, it's an extra free scourge strike once every 30 seconds instead of once every minute. Making a rough estimation, lets say you had a SS hit for 21k.
21000/30(seconds) = 700 dps
As opposed to untalented, every 1 minute
21000/60(seconds) = 350 dps.
So it scales with your gear, but at a decent gear level it will be a few hundred dps difference.
Thanks a lot for the answer, sounds much better than I thought. Anti-Magic zone scales with AP, but I'm not sure if it "scales" in relation to incoming raid damage. I have yet to see, if it helps in an encounter more than extra 350 dps.
I couldn't find any mention of putting Rune Strike in DPS macros, so I'm assuming the answer is no, but would like confirmation. With the change to Rune Strike, is it a waste of runic power to use it as DPS? Thanks.
-> found answer elsewhere. Rune Strike is also on GCD, so answer is probably no.
I have a few questions that I would like opinions on regarding Necrotic Strike. It's PvP-centric however so ignore if you have no care.
1. This scenario is a person is at 30% HP but has an NS stack on them worth 20% of their max HP. Would this be equivalent to somebody at 10% HP with no NS stack on them? This is assuming that the stack does not fall off and it had to be healed or the player with the stacks on them would die. Does anybody agree that this would be accurate?
2. Also, if you were told by somebody that NS was a 100% mortal strike how would your respond to them (constructively speaking)? As in, how would you explain the differences between an NS absorb and a 50% MS?
3. If you were able to get off six attacks in a row during a 10 second CC of,lets say, Scourge Strike. And the string was worth an average of 10k per strike. The player being hit by these strikes had 60k HP. They are now dead at 0HP.
Now, lets say the same players decided to change things up and instead used Necrotic Strike and each strike was worth 2000 damage with an 8k absorb. This leaves the player with 48k HP but they have 48k worth of NS on them.
Which situation would you prefer as a healer?
4. Last question. If somebody said that they would prefer direct damage over an absorb because they could heal the direct damage but they could not heal the absorb despite them being worth the same value, how do you respond?
The numbers are not accurate and are used to make the scenarios and questions easier. I already have my own answers but I was wondering how many people would response similar to myself and how many would respond differently. I am curious because of the sheer amount of people that seem to not understand the mechanics of how NS works.
As far as number 2 goes, it's the same difference between a Power Word: Shield and, say, Icebound Fortitude. PW:S is, after all, 100% damage reduction... until the cap, just as NS is 100% healing reduction until its cap. IBF and MS, on the other hand, reduce damage/healing by a smaller percent, but continue to do so based off a specific period of time, as opposed to a specific amount of damage/healing taken. Now, yes, NS is arguably stronger than PW:S, just as IBF is definitely stronger than MS, but that's simply an issue of specific numbers. Mechanically, it's the same idea.
Although I'm not quite understanding what you're asking about number 4, one can use a PW:S comparison to respond to it as well. One can damage the health of a direct heal, but not the absorb of a shield. Of course, you can damage the shield just as you can heal the NS one, so I'm not 100% sure what you mean, but whatever issue people have with one, it exists for the other!
All of that isn't to say NS might not be too strong. Perhaps you shouldn't be able to stack it up, or maybe the coefficient needs to be nerfed. I, honestly, have no clue, but even if it is too potent at the moment, to claim it's akin to a 100% MS is just horrible logic. It's very, very similar to PW:S... you simply can't stack PW:S, while you can NS, which is likely the largest problem, if there is any, aside from the specific numbers.
Question 4 a is question about perception and not about stats/numbers. It would appear some people would prefer to see an HP bar go down when damage is incoming and then the HP bar go up when they use a heal. The absorb seems to throw people off and in the end I've talked with a few who are very upset with the NS absorb mechanic. I know this is not a forum that deals with perception and instead deals with hard numbers and facts but I find this topic interesting and worthy of posting anyway. I could be completely wrong though and end up with a ban in the morning too.
These players see their heals do nothing and do not make an immediate impact on the HP bar. Because of this they believe it's a 100% MS rather than see the stack as missing HP that needs missing HP.
I believe people are getting rather upset over the ability due to it causing a late death. They see a player at 20% HP and they blow their CD's to heal them up and instead of the player going to 50% like they expect they see the HP bar stay right where it was or even go lower. What they don't get is if those NS stacks were not there then a direct damage ability like ScS would have been used and the person would have been dead anyway. But due to the healers believing they have a chance at healing the person and not being able to do anything with it they become agitated with the mechanic.
Not to mention if they don't pay attention to NS stacks they can easily get behind. So if they don't treat NS like it's missing HP then it causes issues. I'm of the opinion if there was a mod that showed missing HP for an NS stack most healers who used it would suddenly stop having a ton of issues dealing with getting behind on NS stacks (or they would scream for the DK to be CC'd/peeled so the stack can fall off). Never mind the fact that the DK can be peeled and los'd until the stack falls off wasting most of the rune cost associated with the stack.
I do agree that NS needs tuning. I also agree that the stacks should be limited as there needs to be a cap. This not only prevents exploitation in certain situations where NS becomes incredibly powerful but also increases a DK's skill cap. They will have to recognize when to use NS and when to use ScS. However, this has no relevance ion regards to my questions as the absorb seemed to be the primary concern of the persons I spoke with and the reasons behind their issues with NS which appears to be a somewhat common mis-understanding of the mechanic. They are more upset with the ability absorbing their heals than how much it actually absorbs compared to the direct damage alternative (ScS).
I'll just make a new post since you edited your response after I was done with my own...and it's to late to re-write
They are rhetorical because the answer appears rather obvious to me, hence the setup. But when presented to other people I have had issues with their acceptance. Hence me asking how people would respond to others who do not seem to "get it" via numbers/scenarios that make more sense than what I am providing them. I was also wanting to double check to make sure that I am not completely off my rocker too. I am getting old and it is 3:30 AM where I live.
I have but a simple question. Does the healing from deathstrike have a cap? I know that it at minimum heals you for 7% of your total health and heals you based on the damage you received in the 5 secs before you used it. If I was to be hit by lets say a raid bosses soft enrage like in throne of the four winds. Lets say it hits me for 90k, will I be healed for that exact amount or will I be healed for part of it?
Yeah, about the only limit on DS's healing is the amount of damage you can survive- ie, your health combined with however much OTHER healing you recieve- you can potentially get more out of it if you have a healer healing you as you're taking ludicrous damage. Also note that absorbed damage does NOT count towards it, only damage taken after all mitigations.