Originally Posted by Blizzard Entertainment
I feel like most of you have been on the forums long enough to know the difference, but here goes:
Example One: "I think Mortal Strike would feel better with a 9 sec cooldown."
Example Two: "I find myself with not enough Rage as Fury."
Example Three: "I find the rotation confusing. I'm not sure which button to push."
Example Four: "Rend was a fun button. I miss it."
Example Five: "I came up with a new warrior ability. It's called Staple. Staple requires 40 Rage and roots a target. You then get 100% crit chance against the Stapled target. I imagine it would have an icon that looks like a big staple. The glyph of Staple would staple the target to the warrior so you would drag them around with you."
Five is fun, but less useful to us overall. If it's fun for you, go for it. Maybe it will spur some interesting discussion as players try to explore what design problems (if any) you're trying to address with your brainstorming. The risk is that you grow attached to the idea of Staple and essentially refuse to like any warrior change unless you see Staple implemented. Ultimately, it's just a less efficient way to have a discussion than figuring out what the root problem is you are trying to solve anyway. But I understand sometimes it isn't easy to get your finger on the pulse of what is bothering you. I've been doing game design a long time, and it still vexes me sometimes.