[7.0] Legion Discipline Priest Guide and Discussion

[Morrighan]

I've asked this before but I'm still getting mixed answers so sorry for the repetition. Does Light's Wrath +(10%per atonement) scale additivly or multiplicity. As in, would a 10 person atonement hit for 800sp (700+100) or 1400.

[Totaltotemic]

I've asked this before but I'm still getting mixed answers so sorry for the repetition. Does Light's Wrath +(10%per atonement) scale additivly or multiplicity. As in, would a 10 person atonement hit for 800sp (700+100) or 1400.

The latter. Multiplicative. 700, 770, 840, etc.

[Morrighan]

Nice! Thanks for the quick answer.

[anon5123]

The latter. Multiplicative. 700, 770, 840, etc.

So it's +70% SP per Atonement? Neat.

[longxia]

I'm more interested in what RL's and healing officers from top guilds have to say. So far, it just seems like disc's are convincing themselves that there is a spot for them in mythic progression, at least for the good ones, but on the other hand there's a pretty hefty chunk of top raiders literally saying that disc is, and I quote, "pure garbage". I want to stay disc, and continue progressing to mythic raiding as one, but I don't see that happening without convincing everyone that the spec is actually superb.

The guild I just joined for Legion wouldnt offer me a place as Disc, and I only got in when I said I was happy to play Holy.

I doubt that officer knows anything about any kind of Priest but thats WoW, always some clothie telling people how to tank etc. Being good at politics and maintaining appearances is probably more important than actual playing skill in most guilds.

At least I can (hopefully) kick ass in Mythic+, maybe link some Mythic+ achievements in chat if people are being too annoying.

[PosPosPos]

Would what you are describing there count as "articulate their points properly" in your book?
Because that would explain your posting style of attacking everything and anyone blindly with ad hominems.

And just to clarify: A properly articulated point is one that is short, precise, and logically sound with proper foundation in facts if necessary.
It does not rely on the visibility and reputation of the one making it, nor on how well they can shout or snark.

Pretty sure being snarky but right is better than being passive aggressive but utterly and woefully wrong, as is your case. But feel free to quote my posts then make a totally unrelated point just to start an argument, like you do all the time.

[ResidenceAlto]

Pretty sure being snarky but right is better than being passive aggressive but utterly and woefully wrong, as is your case. But feel free to quote my posts then make a totally unrelated point just to start an argument, like you do all the time.

i've literally never seen anyone get ragebaited so hard - your post history is comical. go clean up ya lifeeee

[PosPosPos]

i've literally never seen anyone get ragebaited so hard - your post history is comical. go clean up ya lifeeee

It's quite sad and ironic when someone makes a throwaway account just to flame, because they are either banned or don't have the balls to do it on their mains.

[Noradin]

The latter. Multiplicative. 700, 770, 840, etc.

The formular is

b*(1+0.1*n)

with basis value (b) and number of atonements (n).

I would call that additive in this context since every atonement adds 10% of the basis value to the total (arithmetic progression) and would expect multiplicative to mean geometric progression.
When we talk about how some set of buffs act together on the same stat we call it additive if they are added up before being multiplicated to the base value and multipicative when each one is multiplied to the others, thus if we are to speak of the buffs to Light's Wrath as seperate then those act together in an additive way.

Otherwise we would expect

b*(1+0.1)^n

which would be great but unfortunately we won't get.

- - - Updated - - -

Pretty sure being snarky but right is better than being passive aggressive but utterly and woefully wrong, as is your case. But feel free to quote my posts then make a totally unrelated point just to start an argument, like you do all the time.

Source...?
For you being right, and for me being wrong, please, everyone can see the tone you usually use so no need to quote that.

[Yunzi]

The guild I just joined for Legion wouldnt offer me a place as Disc, and I only got in when I said I was happy to play Holy.

I doubt that officer knows anything about any kind of Priest but thats WoW, always some clothie telling people how to tank etc. Being good at politics and maintaining appearances is probably more important than actual playing skill in most guilds.

At least I can (hopefully) kick ass in Mythic+, maybe link some Mythic+ achievements in chat if people are being too annoying.

The big problem is going to be the overwhelming use of HPS to determine healer quality. It seems as if Blizzard is looking to balance disc at 80-90% of the HPS of the average healer spec. Disc is highly likely to be tuned to be the lowest HPS spec of any healer, since it's DPS is highest. Outside of the top mythic progression guilds in the world, VERY few raid leaders take into account either utility or DPS when evaluating the value of a healer to the raid. They look at the HPS meter and that's it.

In other words, Discs are screwed. Sure, we can try to explain the value of healer DPS - the better our argument the more likely the raid leader will be offended by it - after all the existence of the argument presumes that the raid leader isn't evaluating healers correctly.

The highly likely outcome of all of this is that Discs will have a reputation for being "bad healers" based on relative lack of HPS, and that reputation will spread and gain strength at a higher rate than the truth.

[fallenangel-succ]

Honestly, if your raider leader can't see the value of adding an extra raid member that does comparable damage to a tank / low DPS, then you don't want to be in that raid.

[artame]

can someone make a BiS list for legion emerald nightmare/ nighthold raid ? @Totaltotemic @Pearl @PosPos

will DD trinkets procc atonement ? like PoF in hfc ?

[PosPosPos]

Source...?
For you being right, and for me being wrong, please, everyone can see the tone you usually use so no need to quote that.

So if I state that the earth is round, and take a very condescending tone, I am automatically wrong because I hurt your feelings, according to you.

Also, I will let you know of the day when moaning, griping and doomsaying about disc being bad based on some of the worst disc play and performance qualifies to be called "articulating their points properly".

- - - Updated - - -

can someone make a BiS list for legion emerald nightmare/ nighthold raid ? @Totaltotemic @Pearl @PosPos

will DD trinkets procc atonement ? like PoF in hfc ?

I didn't get to beta much, busy season for my work so I won't be able to make a bis list.

Damage trinkets do proc atonement though, like seethe, PoF etc. The unmitigated and unmodified damage of anything, active or passive, coming from the disc priest contributes to atonement.

Only modifier that is subject to exception is invulnerabilities, so if the boss becomes invulnerable you can't proc atonement.

[Noradin]

So if I state that the earth is round, and take a very condescending tone, I am automatically wrong because I hurt your feelings, according to you.

You deflecting and are putting words in my mouth, so you can make a personal attack against me and disctract from the fact that you have nothing of substance to say against what I said. As expected of you.

[PosPosPos]

You deflecting and are putting words in my mouth, so you can make a personal attack against me and disctract from the fact that you have nothing of substance to say against what I said. As expected of you.

Deflecting what?

You were the one who quoted me first, off this post:

So who should you take seriously then? The good players, or the mediocre naysayers?

What I said was true - that mediocre naysayers should be summarily ignored when it came to deciding whether disc was viable or not.

But of course, you went completely off topic again and made the subject about my tone and how I hurt your fragile soul, because you were doing precisely what I said you were only capable of - quoting people out of context to start fights.

It's hardly a personal attack, if I am criticizing your actions rather than your character and personality. Better google the term up, thanks.

[Noradin]

What I said was true - that mediocre naysayers should be summarily ignored when it came to deciding whether disc was viable or not.

But of course, you went completely off topic again and made the subject about my tone and how I hurt your fragile soul, because you were doing precisely what I said you were only capable of - quoting people out of context to start fights.

It's hardly a personal attack, if I am criticizing your actions rather than your character and personality. Better google the term up, thanks.

You where the one who choose to interpret it as an attack to your stance and posting style when all I pointed out was that as this is a forum with anonymous posters we should base our decisions on who can put their points down in a legible way, and make logical arguments based on facts. And yes, I prefer posters who do not feel the need to attack other randomly without first thinking about their posts. And yes, you were the one who made it personal.

You posed a leading question designed to ridicule another poster, when I gave an answer you didn't like (and probably didn't think off, since it gave the other person a way to quitely leave the field to you) you made a personal attack in return:

Verbosity has no relationship to substance whatsoever, unlike how you seem to make it out to be. If I posted a thousand page verbal diarrhea, it's still verbal diarrhea.

Why not just say "yes", since and post the facts, because you obviously do have those.


And how would you even know who the mediocre naysayers are? Are those just those who disagree with you? And are those who agree with whatever you say automatically the good players? Don't you think that kind of arguing is beneath you? Why give those in the wrong that kind of opening by just claiming they are irrelevant because you are the better player when there is no proof in this thread to be had about that fact? Why not just make an logical argument and give the facts it is based on? Why the need to make it personal?

[PosPosPos]

You where the one who choose to interpret it as an attack to your stance and posting style when all I pointed out was that as this is a forum with anonymous posters we should base our decisions on who can put their points down in a legible way, and make logical arguments based on facts.

I merely pointed out you mistake verbosity and substance. That's a valid and justified rebuttal to your stance.

And yes, I prefer posters who do not feel the need to attack other randomly without first thinking about their posts. And yes, you were the one who made it personal.

Where? You were the one who first brought up my tone, as if it had any relation to my rebuttal of your point.

1) You posed a leading question designed to ridicule another poster, when I gave an answer you didn't like (and probably didn't think off, since it gave the other person a way to quitely leave the field to you) 2) you made a personal attack in return:

1) That's your own prejudice talking. Certainly, I didn't mean to ridicule Helelos, but merely pushed him to come up with the answer himself - and he did already, he came up with it all by himself when he replied to the first post I made quoting him. You were the one maliciously twisting the words of others.

2) Pointing out that you conflate verbosity and substance isn't a personal attack, however, you bringing up my "tone" to try and discredit my points, when it had absolutely no relation at all, is a personal attack.

Why not just say "yes", since and post the facts, because you obviously do have those.

The fact that you decided to derail the thread by insisting on bringing up my tone when it had no bearing on the conversation, speaks for itself. That and insisting that because you were offended, as usual, means my statement must be wrong.

And how would you even know who the mediocre naysayers are?

Notice how I didn't name any of them - because I was speaking in general. You, of course, are already assuming I am referring to specific people. Why? Because that is all you do. Assume, twist and misappropriate the words and intentions of others.

Are those just those who disagree with you?And are those who agree with whatever you say automatically the good players? Don't you think that kind of arguing is beneath you? Why give those in the wrong that kind of opening by just claiming they are irrelevant because you are the better player when there is no proof in this thread to be had about that fact? Why not just make an logical argument and give the facts it is based on? Why the need to make it personal?

Since you are so mad about my making leading questions(I did, but it was to get the target poster to think for themselves, but not to ridicule), so why are you being hypocritical in this case and asking those yourself? Except, you know, to attack my character instead of addressing why you think that naysayers who insist disc is bad, post bad logs of disc play to try and justify their statements, should be anything but ignored.

P.S. I know, because they post their logs showing that they were playing horribly. You do know how logs work, right?

[Djriff]

That's enough you two, if you continue to derail and attack each other i'll start handing out infractions. Post about the topic and not each other.

[Anastacy]

Honestly, if your raider leader can't see the value of adding an extra raid member that does comparable damage to a tank / low DPS, then you don't want to be in that raid.

Honestly, I'd question harder why the raid leader isn't replacing the "low DPS" that's comparable to a Disc...

[PosPosPos]

Honestly, I'd question harder why the raid leader isn't replacing the "low DPS" that's comparable to a Disc...

That part was pretty bad as an example, but the point still stands as to why to not even consider having someone who does tank damage and comparable output to other healer specs.