Prot DPS talent anyone?

[promithius]

I played about a little with gladiator stance and its mega fun, but warriors arent very flashy compared to us pallys. So how about a similar thing for prot?

Seal of the Crusader (or something along those lines)
x% damage increase, forgoe defensive benefits + loose damage redux from SoTR
AS procs as a x% chance from melee swings, multistikes increase chance by x% per hit. AS would probably need a 'can only interrupt/silence each target once per x seconds' condition adding.
SoTR as main finisher
Bastion of Glory becomes Bastion of Vengance - increases damage of holy wrath by x% per stack
Hammer/Cons for AoE, perhaps DS or a new finisher?

Just something I've been thinking a little about in the pre-exp lull, throw your ideas in for shits and gigs.

[celinamuna]

Please no.
This will make balancing even worse.

[Vintersol]

Please no.
This will make balancing even worse.

BS. They would have give the gladiator thing to paladins instead of warriors, to give them a second dps option. Warriors always had 3 options for that. But that's blizzurd.... idiots as fuck.

[slondon]

BS. They would have give the gladiator thing to paladins instead of warriors, to give them a second dps option. Warriors always had 3 options for that. But that's blizzurd.... idiots as fuck.

I think your mistake is expecting each and every class to have the same type and number of choices. It would make for a very boring game if every class had the same spec options (imo).

[Condemner]

BS. They would have give the gladiator thing to paladins instead of warriors, to give them a second dps option. Warriors always had 3 options for that. But that's blizzurd.... idiots as fuck.

Lol, just... lol.... In that case I want Druids to have a third dps spec because mages have that too........

OT: If you think it's already megafun, why make it more as paladins?

[Vintersol]

I think your mistake is expecting each and every class to have the same type and number of choices. It would make for a very boring game if every class had the same spec options (imo).

Why the same? Shield + 1h fits the paladin theme very well and since we are the class with only one dps spec besides priests, they could have more diversity instead of giving another class a 4th option.

[slondon]

Why the same? Shield + 1h fits the paladin theme very well and since we are the class with only one dps spec besides priests, they could have more diversity instead of giving another class a 4th option.

While I agree that from a lore perspective it MAY fit better for paladins, lore comes after gameplay. How would you implement it? I very much doubt blizzard want to give classes a separate spec unless as a last resort (in the case of druids, to deal with the balance issues of Bear/Cat). As a seal? that would be a major headache seeing as they have gone with seals being changeable in combat and designed around doing so.

Stances for warriors are a better option to test this kind of thing (admittedly that is what one of the designers said, gladiator stance is an experimentation). They have moved towards stances rarely being changed in combat. So for an experimentation, it would make sense to go with the option that causes less headaches.

Who knows, if it works out and gains popularity, they make the effort to get around the difficulties of giving paladins a similar option.

[KonkeroaR]

I personally feel that if Pallys were to get a 2nd DPS spec, it should be an offshoot of Holy.

A caster spec that buffs denounce and holy shock further, with the addition of another couple abilities to solidify an ability rotation/priority.

[Gungnir]

I personally feel that if Pallys were to get a 2nd DPS spec, it should be an offshoot of Holy.

A caster spec that buffs denounce and holy shock further, with the addition of another couple abilities to solidify an ability rotation/priority.

If Shockadin came back in full glory, I'd play the shit out of it.

[Sar-]

Why the same? Shield + 1h fits the paladin theme very well and since we are the class with only one dps spec besides priests, they could have more diversity instead of giving another class a 4th option.

Monks say hello

[Vintersol]

How would you implement it?

As an equivalent of Righteous Fury ?

[Jackielope]

As an equivalent of Righteous Fury ?

Basically this. They can create a stance kind of thing (call it Righteous Vengeance or something) exactly like Gladiator Stance where it can't be changed into or out of in combat and it's mutually exclusive with Righteous Fury. Thus it gets rid of all swapping possibilities that bearcat had which made it practically a must in WotLK if there was ever time not actively tanking.

In our case it'd need to buff SotR to do more damage than Harsh Words, plus other tweaks, but the kit is generally there.

[nsgid]

while we're on this thread, how do you guys think prot leveling would be? What are the pros-cons of leveling as prot and ret?

[Jackielope]

while we're on this thread, how do you guys think prot leveling would be? What are the pros-cons of leveling as prot and ret?

I leveled entirely as prot during WotLK from 1 to 70, then split between holy and prot 70-80. Leveling as prot is still going to be very doable especially when it comes to pulling certain mob packs or taking down some tougher creatures like elites that would likely kill Ret or Holy first.

[SamuraiJakkass86]

BS. They would have give the gladiator thing to paladins instead of warriors, to give them a second dps option. Warriors always had 3 options for that. But that's blizzurd.... idiots as fuck.

Paladins have always had 3 fully functional and working specs. Warriors on the other hand, have always been a different situation.

1. Prot warriors have never, until Gladiator Stance - had a viable DPS option
2. Arms and Fury have NEVER in the history of the game been equal with each other. One of them is always fully functional while the other is lying in its own grave (currently this is Arms, but back in BC/Wrath - Fury was a shitty spec.

[Camaris]

For Cataclysm and Mists of Pandaria, Prot was actually the better DPS spec than Ret until about level 70. Ret didn't actually pull ahead until level 81 when the spec got Mastery and Inquisition. I'm not sure how the scaling will work out in WoD yet, but I'm sure I'll level ANOTHER paladin at some point and find out. This fairly extensive history of Prot out-DPSing Ret even at fairly advanced levels ability-wise convinces me that converting Prot to a DPS spec is very, very doable.

In fact... probably all that would be needed is to tie the sword and board DPS stance to RF as previously suggested to keep the paladin from going from defensive to offensive, then convert Shield of the Righteous so that instead of applying damage reduction based on Mastery to the paladin on use, it provides a Holy damage buff instead. Basically Inquisition. Bam, Prot can't soak nearly the level of damage and I'd be willing to bet that given the damage done by Avenger's Shield, Holy Wrath, and Consecrate, the damage gap between the S&B DPS spec and Ret would come pretty close together, necessitating only tweaks to the scaling of the Inquisition-like buff in terms of duration and magnitude via Mastery.

[Jackielope]

Paladins have always had 3 fully functional and working specs. Warriors on the other hand, have always been a different situation.

1. Prot warriors have never, until Gladiator Stance - had a viable DPS option
2. Arms and Fury have NEVER in the history of the game been equal with each other. One of them is always fully functional while the other is lying in its own grave (currently this is Arms, but back in BC/Wrath - Fury was a shitty spec.

Actually, back in Wrath Fury was king for PVE because Arms was the PVP spec and buffing it to do competitive PVE damage would have meant making it overpowered in PVP. That's the exact same reason why Frost Mages were bad in PVE: Their PVP game was already quite strong so "balancing" damage in PVE would have unbalanced PVP stuff.

Thyr does have a typo with warriors having 3 options though, if the context is for DPS. While certain tanks with certain setups could get rather crazy DPS on raid bosses it wasn't until the boss was on farm and healers could handle a tank's lower survivability by going with more DPS gearing that it happened. I recall seeing logs where both prot paladins and prot warriors could get 17k DPS against certain ICC bosses.

[PizzaSHARK]

Why the same? Shield + 1h fits the paladin theme very well and since we are the class with only one dps spec besides priests, they could have more diversity instead of giving another class a 4th option.

Play a different class if it bothers you so much. There's absolutely nothing stopping you from having one of each, you even get a free boost to 90 whenever you want it.

- - - Updated - - -

Actually, back in Wrath Fury was king for PVE because Arms was the PVP spec and buffing it to do competitive PVE damage would have meant making it overpowered in PVP. That's the exact same reason why Frost Mages were bad in PVE: Their PVP game was already quite strong so "balancing" damage in PVE would have unbalanced PVP stuff.

Thyr does have a typo with warriors having 3 options though, if the context is for DPS. While certain tanks with certain setups could get rather crazy DPS on raid bosses it wasn't until the boss was on farm and healers could handle a tank's lower survivability by going with more DPS gearing that it happened. I recall seeing logs where both prot paladins and prot warriors could get 17k DPS against certain ICC bosses.

DPS tanking was a thing back in ICC era. Basically tank spec wearing DPS gear. It really wasn't unusual for tanks to do considerably more DPS than the three DPS combined in your average heroic dungeon run, especially if they were geared.

Fun as hell.

[Vintersol]

Play a different class if it bothers you so much. There's absolutely nothing stopping you from having one of each, you even get a free boost to 90 whenever you want it.

It doesn't bother me not having this talent. It simply looks not logical to me giving warriors something that fits the paladin theme very well as another dps option, because they had already more then paladins, priests (and monks). Instead, we get empowered seals of crap. It's not the question what i want to play, it's simply criticism against blizzards design philosophy.

[PizzaSHARK]

How does it not fit the warrior theme every bit as much as the paladin theme? Both classes use one-handers and both classes use shields. Both even use their shields in the same goddamned way, pallies got their little version of Shield Slam way after warriors got the actual Shield Slam skill. Pallies used to have a Shield Block-like skill, too.

Warriors are tied to their shields just as much as pallies are. What're you on about?

Pallies have one DPS spec, one tanking spec, and one healing spec. Warriors had 2 DPS specs and a tanking spec, and now they kind of have three DPS specs and a tanking spec. They still can't heal.

Maybe they should've added a Field Medic stance for Warriors so they could heal! Fucking Blizzard and not giving Warriors the attention they deserve! What about Warriors that want to heal? So fucking inconsiderate of them!