Well, sure, but you could shield them anyway. My point was more that the MT of a fight, generally speaking, is more likely to be doing everything they can to generate threat and/or survive and less likely to have a few seconds of downtime to improve the survivability of someone other than theirself than an OT would.
I mean, in the scenario you note, the holy pally is presumably shielding the MT and so the MT is shielding the OT. Personally, as RL, I'd rather have the MT shield themselves so they can control it themselves, and have the holy pally shield the OT rather than setting up a daisy chain.
Of course, the only other survivability talent you could put the points into is Divinity, which, IMO, is pretty meh. I could certainly see taking DG/DS anyway for focusing on survivability for lack of better options, and details of encounter design will be the real lynchpin of the decision making process so its entirely possible that your scenario will prove the better choice most of the time.
Still, wouldn't it seem odd for the MT to put talent points into an ability that helps the survivability of other folks in the raid, but not the MT? Sure, paladins seem to get that kind of thing all the time, but it still seem bass-ackwards to me. DS is an obvious exception, but the amount of damage it saves is SO huge and is often usable in situations where the MT isn't directly tanking the boss anyway, so it works out.
Well, sure, but you could shield them anyway. My point was more that the MT of a fight, generally speaking, is more likely to be doing everything they can to generate threat and/or survive and less likely to have a few seconds of downtime to improve the survivability of someone other than theirself than an OT would.
I mean, in the scenario you note, the holy pally is presumably shielding the MT and so the MT is shielding the OT. Personally, as RL, I'd rather have the MT shield themselves so they can control it themselves, and have the holy pally shield the OT rather than setting up a daisy chain.
The issue with not having the Holy Pally SS the MT is that the MT's spellpower and therefore SS pales in comparison to what a Holy Pally has. It really wouldn't be hard to set up the chain if it was needed.
As a tank, I'd rather have a more powerful SS on me even if it's out of my control because it's a given the Holy pally will SS the one who should be taking the most damage. When there are times the Holy pally isn't targeting me, then I'll pop one on myself and once I'm back to taking the damage let it drop or put it on someone else.
The issue with not having the Holy Pally SS the MT is that the MT's spellpower and therefore SS pales in comparison to what a Holy Pally has. It really wouldn't be hard to set up the chain if it was needed.
As a tank, I'd rather have a more powerful SS on me even if it's out of my control because it's a given the Holy pally will SS the one who should be taking the most damage. When there are times the Holy pally isn't targeting me, then I'll pop one on myself and once I'm back to taking the damage let it drop or put it on someone else.
In my experience it is most beneficial if the Holy Pala shields the MT, and the MT shields himself, too. As of 3.1, both shields can proc at the same time... and the OT is most of the time fine without a shield (or shields himself too, if he is pala). Would this change with 3.2?
Sacred Shield: This buff will no longer have any effect if the target is another player engaged in a duel. In addition, the heal from this buff will no longer cause the paladin to stand, and it is no longer possible for two paladins to both have the spell active on one target.
From the 3.2 Patch notes.
No more stacking 4 SS on the a tank.
But you're gaining, effectively, a free half-strength Exo any time you taunt something that's not attacking you ("free" in terms of both mana and time).
You're proposing a situation where...
the damage done by the new HoR is not enough to subsequently hold threat, but...
the damage done by Exorcism would have been, and...
there's nothing you can do to build more threat on the mob within 3 seconds despite having an additional GCD available.
I'll grant that it's possible, sure, but I can't imagine it happening very often at all.
EDIT:
What's your rotation then? You can fill up all your GCDs with Judge/HS/Cons/ShR/HotR, and I don't see why you'd want to drop any of these for Exorcism, save the one exception I mentioned above.
I think the point, which some of the other posts below are getting at, is there are numerous real situations in which instant-cast exo has proven a very useful tanking spell. This week in Ulduar (both 10 and 25) I tried to track a few fights in which it was very useful:
- Freya, during the waves as well as all the trash pulls
- mimiron during phase 3, HoR+1/2 exo would do for the attack bots, but it saved a wipe on an unfortunate bomb bot spawn
- Ignis, as mentioned below
- Razorscale during the tunneller spawns during the air phases
- another unfortunate situation with that first add pull in the antechamber
As the saying goes, s--t happens. And exo has been great for when it does. I wish they would offer us something like the art of war talent that would permit you to instant cast, or make improved exo trainable with 51 points in prot. But its not looking good ...
With the upcoming increase to block value pally mitigation seems to be a much better route to take than avoidance(not that it hasn't always). My questions is with talents and spells like Imp righteous fury, BoS and shield of the templar providing 12% damage reduction. In terms of physical damage mitigation is it added to my Armor DR or figured in after my armor DR... the difference being a 10,000 hit x .30 = 3,000 x .88 = 2640 then shield block value takes off its chunk leaving with a smaller mitigated hit or are they factored together 10000 x .18 = 1800 then block value would be able to absorb the entire attack... Clearly the reason I ask is if it is in fact a combined DR then raising my shield block value high enough as a pally could provide a 50-80% chance with redoubt to completely ignore the attack entirely. I've read all sorts of forums but none of them talk about the relation of talent and spell DR to Armor DR...
Also in response to all the qualms below about the future loss of Exo, all I can really say is seriously? I've tanked just fine in the past without and I'll tank just fine in the future without it... really in a spell rotation from a threat standpoint using Exo was nice because it was an instant cast but using it mean that one of our main threat spells wasn't being used when it was off CD... sure it was nice to have the distance attack but again, it was a new trick and I'd trade it for a passive cheat death life saving talent any day... There is no other tanking talent in game that's going to beat the new ardent defender. Oh i died... Just kidding Im alive and well and Loh has put me back to full health a taunt a consecrate and a shield slam and you're back on top... not to mention with a taunt macro for righteous defense we effectively have two taunts, I don't think you'll miss Exo at all
To your first point, I don't think block has ever been a better route than avoidance in WotlK. Even with the doubling of block value it is mediocre at best. You should probably consider using more avoidance gear if you aren't already.
To your question, the armor mitigation and the talent mitigation are calculated seperately, as in your first example.
I don't think either of these points are relevant to a 3.2 protection discussion though.
Has anyone confirmed whather the DoT ticks from seal of vengeance are working correctly on the PTR? They've been changed to use melee mechanics, literally. Whenever the DoT ticks it has a chance to be dodged or parried, or so it seems. It's very odd, but considering the newly buffed SoV it could be a way to make us scale better with expertise.
Still, a DoT that can be dodged or parried is very... unique
Well there is the possibility that that note meant the DoT application could be dodged/parried. Have you seen DoT ticks dodged/parried yet? I will try to test it some on the PTR today.
EDIT, in about 20 mins of testing, a DoT tick never got parried or dodged, but the applications of the DoT's did. That may not be 100% conclusive yet, but it seems to indicate it only affects the application.
Also in response to all the qualms below about the future loss of Exo, all I can really say is seriously? I've tanked just fine in the past without and I'll tank just fine in the future without it... really in a spell rotation from a threat standpoint using Exo was nice because it was an instant cast but using it mean that one of our main threat spells wasn't being used when it was off CD... sure it was nice to have the distance attack but again, it was a new trick and I'd trade it for a passive cheat death life saving talent any day... There is no other tanking talent in game that's going to beat the new ardent defender. Oh i died... Just kidding Im alive and well and Loh has put me back to full health a taunt a consecrate and a shield slam and you're back on top... not to mention with a taunt macro for righteous defense we effectively have two taunts, I don't think you'll miss Exo at all
I am aware of the fact that Exo as instant cast is a recent (3.0) addition to the arsenal. All the buffs to exo were specificly meant for ulduar - according the Ghostcrawler posts I've been reading. The additional buff enabling it to hit the living and the (un)dead was specifically intended for ulduar - again, according to GC posts on the subject. But what is currently happening on the PTR is ret/pvp concerns trumping prot/PVE concerns. I, for one, would like very much to hold onto it in an instant-cast form, even if it had some Art of War type proc mechanic.
Again, according to GC posts, the AD buff comes from a recognition of the fact that paladins do not have the oh-s*&t CDs that other tanking classes have to deal with burst damage. Given the recent history, its also subtly telling us we will need them in the near (3.2) future. I do not see how this was ever framed as some kind of trade, and I'm not sure why one would claim it were so, except perhaps as a non sequitur.
No. reckoning does get a boost from our lovely new Corruption friend, but it does not boost it enough to be desireable. It is still our lowest threat producing talent. the information and charts can be found in Thecks posts over on Maintankadin
With the upcoming increase to block value pally mitigation seems to be a much better route to take than avoidance(not that it hasn't always). My questions is with talents and spells like Imp righteous fury, BoS and shield of the templar providing 12% damage reduction. In terms of physical damage mitigation is it added to my Armor DR or figured in after my armor DR... the difference being a 10,000 hit x .30 = 3,000 x .88 = 2640 then shield block value takes off its chunk leaving with a smaller mitigated hit or are they factored together 10000 x .18 = 1800 then block value would be able to absorb the entire attack... Clearly the reason I ask is if it is in fact a combined DR then raising my shield block value high enough as a pally could provide a 50-80% chance with redoubt to completely ignore the attack entirely. I've read all sorts of forums but none of them talk about the relation of talent and spell DR to Armor DR...
All percentage based DR (armour, talents, divine protection, etc) is multiplicative, all flat-numbers (PW:S, block, etc) is additive, and applied after percentage based DR. So neither of your examples is strictly correct, because BoSanc, SotT and imp RF are multiplied together to give 0.94*0.97*0.97 = 0.884446, or 11.5554% DR. This is then multiplied with your armour-based DR to get your total physical DR. Once that's applied to the base hit, then you subtract block / shield modifiers. So if your physical DR is 80% and the base hit is 80,000, then the final hit will be 16,000, minus your block value (if you block) and the values of any PW:S or SS on you.
In Ulduar, block is inferior to avoidance in every relevant scenario. This will almost certainly be true post-3.2 as well, although I haven't paid any attention to the boss testing on the PTR, so I can't comment on how useful it will be in CC. The only time in WotLK that block has been attractive compared to avoidance was on Sarth+3 add tanking duty, where you could full-block the unenraged fire elementals for a lot of the fight.
A latent appliance fetishist is someone who refuses to admit to his or herself that sexual gratification can only be achieved through the use of machines.
- L. Ron Hoover
Perhaps a sign of things to come? Protection does use mainly holy damage and does have more on-demand attacks than retribution does, could this be the up-and-coming dps (or at least pvp) spec of choice?
The main effect of the block buff is that block value will be at least moderately competitive as a tanking stat. It's not a real fix for the block situation, but it's not meant to be. It's a band-aid to make things less bad until they can fully address the issues with blocking (which I don't expect them to do before the next xpac and the 4.0 revision).
My comrades are my weapons, and I am their shield.
Perhaps a sign of things to come? Protection does use mainly holy damage and does have more on-demand attacks than retribution does, could this be the up-and-coming dps (or at least pvp) spec of choice?
Nope, at least not for PvE. However, it is a likely the best Battlegrounds spec with the Cheat Death talent + survival talents, but I doubt it will be better than Ret for Arena dps.
Millions of words are written annually purporting to tell how to beat the races, whereas the best possible advice on the subject is found in the three monosyllables: 'Do not try.'
I think we can all agree these changes are totally in the right direction for paladins being more accepted as tanks. (I think most players that visit this forum have convinced people no problem, but I think the general population still needs some convincing.
On Ardent Defender: "Hell...It's about tiiime." AD has always been one of those talents that while you might not be reluctant to take, in the back of your mind you think "it looks better than actually is". The leapfrogging I think puts a great deal of tanks (and healers) at ease. Though I still think that this buff (while it's a great buff) is going to be an interesting execution. I haven't been on PTR so maybe someone can provide more information.
With a 2 minute CD on an ability with no icon, I can see this as sometimes causing confusion, or just simply becoming the victim of another "RNG" mishap. Mainly I talk about those situations with a boss wailing on you and heals being spammed that maybe, instead of hitting your binding for DP (that your finger has been on top of a majority of the fight) you hope for your AD to kick in. Now that's all well and good when it works the first time. But I'd like to be able to see a "ARDENT DEFENDER" buff appear much like Cheat Death (and I hope it does). Though still, now without a timer to see (I imagine a mod will have to be created or something) I think it's problematic to know when maybe it will be up again unless you or someone else is keeping a timer.
Basically what I'm getting at, someone had mentioned earlier that it becomes no-brains tanking. An ability that is beyond your control can be both a blessing and a curse. I compare it to cheat death, because it's a similar ability. I wouldn't say it's all that crucial for a PVP talent for a DPS class to be that important to keep track of. If anything it's a nice buff in a situation where you think could go south.
But for tanks in PVE I don't think the same kind of ability will translate. Now I certainly like this bonus, but that's all I see it as, a RNG bonus that can sometimes help you, but can't be relied on, by player activated abilities like DP, PS, GS. etc. I think the leapfrogging is the better side of the change, albeit this isn't a bad one.
But maybe that's just what they are going for, a non gcd conscious ability. Time will tell!
I tested AD on the PTR, and whenever the "GS type of thing" procs, you will get a debuff with 2 minutes on it, saying AD just saved your ass
I think the point, which some of the other posts below are getting at, is there are numerous real situations in which instant-cast exo has proven a very useful tanking spell. This week in Ulduar (both 10 and 25) I tried to track a few fights in which it was very useful:
- Freya, during the waves as well as all the trash pulls
- mimiron during phase 3, HoR+1/2 exo would do for the attack bots, but it saved a wipe on an unfortunate bomb bot spawn
- Ignis, as mentioned below
- Razorscale during the tunneller spawns during the air phases
- another unfortunate situation with that first add pull in the antechamber
But there's a difference between "I used Exo in this fight" and "I needed instant-cast Exo in this fight and nothing else would have substituted." For example, I can certainly see using Exo to pick up adds on Ignis, but I don't think anyone who's seen the fight would believe that instant-cast Exo is even remotely necessary for that task. Similarly, I have a hard time believing that you really needed Exo for Razorscale; you get so much advance warning of add spawns there that it's pretty easy to lock down multiple groups at once through cons/HotR/AS, which still leaves RD/HoR available to wrangle any that get loose.
I can't speak to every situation you might have encountered, but I suspect you're using Exo frequently in situations where something else would do the job just as well. Nothing wrong with that, of course: if it's there, use it. But you can't say on that basis alone that instant-cast Exo is necessary.
My comrades are my weapons, and I am their shield.
But there's a difference between "I used Exo in this fight" and "I needed instant-cast Exo in this fight and nothing else would have substituted."
^ Pretty much this. Many of us tanked Sarth+3 fire eles / whelps without exo, and I'd still probably say that's the most challenging add-pickup scenario in WotLK so far. Exo's certainly nice, but I wouldn't say it's anywhere near necessary.
Regarding a prot DPS spec, it's certainly tempting, but the loss of white / seal damage is simply too high. On paper it certainly looks appealing, especially when you're seeing your HotR and ShoR hit harder than CS / DS. In terms of sustained damage though, a one-hander just isn't powerful enough. There are also, of course, very significant mana concerns with no JotW.
A latent appliance fetishist is someone who refuses to admit to his or herself that sexual gratification can only be achieved through the use of machines.
- L. Ron Hoover
Regarding a prot DPS spec, it's certainly tempting, but the loss of white / seal damage is simply too high. On paper it certainly looks appealing, especially when you're seeing your HotR and ShoR hit harder than CS / DS. In terms of sustained damage though, a one-hander just isn't powerful enough. There are also, of course, very significant mana concerns with no JotW.
Without proper int buffs, mana would be an issue. However, once those buffs are in place Divine Plea can compensate. HotR and SoR are quite cheap compared to CS and DS, but for damage sometimes Avanger's Shield could be used, and that one eats more mana than Conc.. Thankfully it's on a 30 second CD.
Still, anything but a Ret spec will indeed lower the DPS because to get the attacks from Holy or Prot you'd be sacrificing many of the best Ret talents. It may be fun, but it won't be able to do nearly as much damage sadly.
Edit to add another point: I just noticed that the last point in Reckoning says getting hit by any melee attack -or- blocking an attack has a 10% chance to trigger the extra swings... Perhaps I'll stick with my block set after all if there are places it could prove better. I can see this being especially useful for when I'm in add tank like Emalon.
Last edited by Jackinthegreen : 07/22/09 at 8:34 PM.
Edit to add another point: I just noticed that the last point in Reckoning says getting hit by any melee attack -or- blocking an attack has a 10% chance to trigger the extra swings... Perhaps I'll stick with my block set after all if there are places it could prove better. I can see this being especially useful for when I'm in add tank like Emalon.
Frankly, even in max HP gear I find myself killing adds just from Consecrate/HotR damage. Wearing block gear to trigger reckoning which would up your DPS would just be more annoying - because for each add killed you have to pick up an additional one. I usually just consecrate once, establish threat on each new mob with a ShoR and just hit holy shield and wait for the overload.
Last time I solo tanked 10man I couldn't do this and killed all four adds three times during the boss fight - which entailed stopping TPS on the boss momentarily to pick up each new add.
In short, block sets would be good for reckoning for the reason you stated, but Emalon is a bad example.
Without proper int buffs, mana would be an issue. However, once those buffs are in place Divine Plea can compensate. HotR and SoR are quite cheap compared to CS and DS, but for damage sometimes Avanger's Shield could be used, and that one eats more mana than Conc.. Thankfully it's on a 30 second CD.
Standard 969 isn't sustainable with only DP, so a 969 which replaced the holy shield with AS / Exo would certainly be problematic. 2/2 SA might be enough to cover the difference on some fights, but otherwise you're simply forced to drop consecrate, and therefore a big chunk of damage.
A latent appliance fetishist is someone who refuses to admit to his or herself that sexual gratification can only be achieved through the use of machines.
- L. Ron Hoover
The main use I could see for a PvE Protribution build would be for fights where you have to switch off between dps and light tanking. But in that case I'm not sure you really get all that much of a dps improvement over a standard prot build.
Another option along those lines would be to collect enough Ret PvP/arena gear to get 5.6% crit reduction through resilience and then use that for those fights where you switch between light OT'ing and dps -- but you'd probably use a Ret spec for that. (We had a dps warrior who did that in TBC to tank on some of the larger trash pulls, but I don't recall that we ever had him do it on a boss.)
My comrades are my weapons, and I am their shield.
I don't think prot dps builds are going to prove viable, though I admit I thought the same thing about prot-based healing builds and I was certainly wrong about that.
Properly glyphing seems like it would be tricky. Since mana starvation is going to be a huge issue, I'd think the glyph of consecration would be front and center. While that would screw up a 969 rotation, shifting over to a button-mashing ret-like rotation (the cooldowns are actually pretty similar) might be required. Unless against an undead opponent, it feels like Exorcism would be difficult to work in w/o AoW procs, so that would probably be the glyph to dump.
The main use I could see for a PvE Protribution build would be for fights where you have to switch off between dps and light tanking. But in that case I'm not sure you really get all that much of a dps improvement over a standard prot build.
Another option along those lines would be to collect enough Ret PvP/arena gear to get 5.6% crit reduction through resilience and then use that for those fights where you switch between light OT'ing and dps -- but you'd probably use a Ret spec for that. (We had a dps warrior who did that in TBC to tank on some of the larger trash pulls, but I don't recall that we ever had him do it on a boss.)
I believe what prot/ret builds are trying to do is create a DPS spec with more surviveability and burst damage, not a tank spec with more dps.
The spec is a blast in battelgrounds - probably the best battelgrounds spec due to the unexpected burst damage and high surviveability.
The proponents of the build argue that you should be doing competitive PVE dps so long as you're in Ret gear, but I find it hard to believe...if you have awesome Ret gear, and want to do DPS, why not spec Ret? Sure there is more surviveability in this spec, but in most PVE situations DPS surviveability is "don't stand in the fire" - something that mages in cloth gear seem to understand and survive just fine, so there's no reason a Ret pally can't stay alive with no surviveability talents...
Card carrying member of the Inapropriately in Love with Hilary Duff Society.
"Yeah, well, if we could all get what we want I would be eating dinner out of Hilary Duff's skull right now" - Salabesh
I don't think prot dps builds are going to prove viable, though I admit I thought the same thing about prot-based healing builds and I was certainly wrong about that.
Properly glyphing seems like it would be tricky. Since mana starvation is going to be a huge issue, I'd think the glyph of consecration would be front and center. While that would screw up a 969 rotation, shifting over to a button-mashing ret-like rotation (the cooldowns are actually pretty similar) might be required. Unless against an undead opponent, it feels like Exorcism would be difficult to work in w/o AoW procs, so that would probably be the glyph to dump.
If you have all the nice mana-friendly raid buffs, the posters at the above link said you could glyph straight damage - AS, Exo, Judgement. However, if you need mana, you would drop one of the damage glyphs (most people said Judgement) for SoB or, in 3.2, dropping the Exo glyph for Shield of Righteousness. I did some _very_ limited DPS testing on live on a combat dummy with a druid to heal the SoB damage, and it was a ~100 dps loss to run as prot. I was also severely mana-limited, but didn't get a chance to test how well it did with Glyph of SoB or ShoR. I would think losing Exorcism in the rotation would pretty much take the viability completely out of a prot DPS spec come 3.2.
To the above poster, I think the point of a PvE prot DPS build for the folks over at Wowhead seemed to be more along the lines of, "It's fun and it's different from Ret." The survivability is great and all, but I get the feeling that someone was just bored with the everyday Ret spec and wanted to try something different.
07/16/09, 11:23 PM
Similar Threads
