Watcher's Response to Priests after QA

[SilentRose]

Healing priests: In the Q&A, I fielded a question about absorbs, and have seen feedback about a seeming contradiction between our stance on Demonology warlocks (“we don’t want all warlocks to feel obligated to play Demo, so we’re nerfing Demo”) and my comments about Disc (“you’re probably doing it wrong if you only have one priest in the raid and that priest isn’t Disc”). To be clear, we don’t think the current state of priest healer representation is a desirable one – I was describing the present reality, not stating our design goal. But the Discipline problem isn’t one that is solvable with simple numbers changes – we’d have to nerf Discipline to the point of complete uselessness in order to meaningfully affect their representation. The issue lies in their nature as an absorb-based healer, offering a unique benefit that neither Holy priest nor any other healer can provide, and often doing so at the expense of the fun of other healers (whose core gameplay lies in refilling health bars that now empty less, or not at all, due to absorbs). Absorbs are still interesting as a mechanic, and we’re not looking to prevent Disc from feeling unique, but the spec’s niche in multi-healer situations probably shouldn’t be mechanically blanketing allies with absorbs. In short: we acknowledge that there is a problem, but we don’t have a solution to discuss just yet.

This is what was posted in the "Live Q&A Saturday, June 13 w/ Ion Hazzikostas" thread earlier today and I would like to see everyone's responses with it. Would you like to see disc move away from absorbs, how do you see it changing or how would you change it to still be a unique playstyle?

For holy priests, they still seem set on saying that holy is a competitive spec. If disc was changed, would you feel that holy would be a viable spec and if so, what would be the advantages to bringing one. Would you change holy at all and if so, what would you change?

[Deleted]

I personally think that it was the t17 boni that brought us on a level with the other healers (if at all). Now losing that one and getting the t18 boni where the 2p seems okay for being 2p bonus and the 4p seems really bad, I feel holy priests are in a rather bad place. Two raid spots are reserved for disc + paladin anyways + then you can choose from other throughput healers (shaman, druid, monk, holy priest). Now, in my opinion shamans are really strong due to several group healing cooldowns like double spirit link, ascendance, tide and additionally monks and druids are getting crazy overpowered set boni. There is no reason to take a holy priest when you have the choice of taking any other healer.

Well, thats my opinion at least with holy priest being my first twink, having 8/10 mythic xp on that char, might not be an expert on that topic.

What changes I would love for holy priests?
1. PoH mechanic is outdated, make this level 100 clumped heal at least a viable alternative
2. Proper t18 4p set bonus
3. let mastery in some way scale with renew. Maybe so that you can choose to be a more direct or a more hot specialized healer.

[Senel]

Useless Class Trinket + Horrible 4pc, we all know what the result will be.

[Deleted]

Interesting really

I do believe holy is in an OK place, as I've posted elsewhere. I feel it is heavily reliant on the t17 4pc to be competetive and I believe that without that bonus or another source of serendipity that holy will fall behind significantly in both numbers and gameplay, having PoH and 'heal' gated by a buff that you can't generate effectively just feels awkward.

Regarding disc, I don't see it as such a huge challenge, they have made changes before to address things such as making PoH always grant DA etc.
I'd like to see disc using PW: S as a replacement flash heal rather than a replacement renew (comparing to holy), it should be the emergency heal not the filler spell.
It feels like disc is missing a button to press and it needs something to fill the void; that spell should be primarily a heal rather than an absorb. That used to be atonement which would still be ok with the less smart heal nature of the spell so long as the damage portion isn't increased (why not just heal for 200% of damage dealt, for example). Holy nova is another option but I think it has too many limitations to be a filler spell and otherwise not that exciting gameplay when it isn't limited by range / positioning etc.
I'd also like to see the absorbs from disc come from DA rather than PWS, making crit the primary stat. Perhaps scaling down mastery on absorbs to be equal with the amount it increases heals, as boring as that may be. Blowing excess mana on PoH to fish for DA procs was fun, imo. Same with 100% overhealing penances just to fish for DA shields, it wasn't mana efficient nor should it be.

Also, kind of unrelated but if such changes did come to disc priest then I'd like to see some of the old interactions back. They mentioned in the earlier Q+A that some things got removed that probably didn't need to be and I feel disc is probably the #1 victim. The amount of buffs / passives / interaction that was removed wasn't just a pruning it was complete annihilation of the spec, imo.

Rapture
Train of thought
Strength of soul
grace (the old mechanic)
inner focus


for sure, some of those were a fine choice to be removed considering the prune and the general direction. Losing rapture made sense with the new healing model. Inner focus felt clunky and outdated. But losing train of thought? that seems odd to me, spell book clutter? hmm, I don't think so, not when I see some of what was left in, it didn't take up a slot on the action bar. It's that kind of spell interaction which just adds a bit of depth to a spec. It's something that new players can essentially ignore and still gain benefit from and cutting edge players can game to min/max same with strength of soul, I see no reason why it needed removing.

[KaPe]

(...)
What changes I would love for holy priests?
1. PoH mechanic is outdated, make this level 100 clumped heal at least a viable alternative
(...)

Oh, but they (tried to) did that, what with Clarity of Purpose being a thing. Of course they also decided that removing group restriction needs to be balanced by a huge radius nerf, meaning it might still not hit everyone you'd want it to. Not to mention it competes with WoM, and with T17 bonus nearly doubling its strength, there's no contest. Sure, T18 will mean going back to 5 charges PoM, so it should make CoP "better", but we're also losing Serendipity generator, so...

I assume Spirit Shell is part of the problem. Sure, no one really uses it anymore, but (theoretically) it's reliant on PoH group based healing to work properly. Semi-smart aoe heals would make it too random and (even more) useless. It might be a Disc thing, and one that doesn't really matter in practice, but the design issue is there. Having one spec with group restricted PoH and being "smart" - probably not happening outside talents.

As for the OP question - they need to rework absorbs in general, not just Disc. The issue here is that people got really used to Disc being too unique for their own good, so the potential backlash always resulted in sudden buffs that break the balance. Instead of focusing on actual heals and different interractions between them (EAA + PoH was a start, there should have been more), it always comes back to bubble spamming.

I guess Holy will remain "viable", but there's always that quote mark around. As long as Disc is the only absorb focused healer in the game (and isn't crippled number wise), and Holy is not at the level of 5.0 Mistweavers, things will not really change. The main problem is with absorbs. If it ever gets solved, we can properly judge Holy's performance without thinking "but if he/she was Disc instead..."

'Course, instead of reworking them, they decided to add some weird trinkets to mess the balance even more.

[anon5123]

Honestly, Blizz should just scrap Disc and turn it into a Holy DPS spec.

Expansion after expansion, they struggle to balance it properly and it ends up either being shit, or horrifically overpowered.

-In BC it was crap in PvE, only brought maybe 1 to a raid for pain suppression, and power infusion on your top caster DPS.
-In WOTLK it was crap in PvE until ICC, and even then it was just mindless bubble-blanketing for all of the ticking AoE aura damage fights.
-In Cata it started off completely unviable, then got a buff and bubblespam was OP, then bubble got nerfed, but by 4.2 it ended up being the only viable heroic raid spec for healing priests, because Holy's regen had shit scaling while Disc's regen (Rapture) had amazing scaling.
-In MoP I have no idea because I only played during 5.4, but during 5.4 Disc was insanely OP.

And now in WoD, Disc continues to be OP with bubblespam.

Seriously Blizz, just rework Disc into a DPS spec. It's clear that you have no idea how to balance it properly.

[Senel]

Honestly, Blizz should just scrap Disc and turn it into a Holy DPS spec.

Easiest and most efficient solution. But people would complain a lot.

[Yunzi]

As far as absorbs having priority and "reducing the fun" of the other healing specs, that's misleading. It's better than another throughput healer healing your target before you have a chance to - at least with absorbs there's no sniping competition and lost throughput by means of overhealing for the slower healer. Disc synergizes with throughput healers much better than they synergize with each other.

Disc should become more of an absorb healer, not less of one. Disc has only one absorb spell in it's entire base toolkit, with a second as a talent choice. Absorb healers are proactive, needing to anticipate incoming damage to a far greater degree than mostly reactive throughput healers. It takes a very different mindset to play disc.

Expanding the absorb toolkit will give Bliz the latitude to change PWS, enable disc priests to have more casting choices during a fight, and make the spec much easier to balance.

If transforming the spec into a "pure absorb healer" makes them unviable in solo-healing situations where throughput is necessary, the spec can be split into two modes - throughput and absorb. Throughput mode would be similar to how they are now - mostly mediocre throughput spells and one good absorb.

[Chulai]

Easiest and most efficient solution. But people would complain a lot.

People would complain a lot, but without an entire class rework to better manage the effect of absorbs - Discs are where they have always been; unbalanced and problematic in the healing scene.

I was reading at some point (that I wish I could find reference too, but can't at the moment) that one of the leading reason people quote as to why they leave the game is that because of "too many class changes" etc. I have only played Disc for BRF, but have healed across a number of Tiers now, with Disc always being the center of some fundamental healing style/class/numbers crisis. With other healers praying something will be done to reduce the overwhelming impact of absorbs, and Disc's crossing their fingers that everything won't be ripped out from underneath them - its exhausting.

Each developer discussion just brings dread for me - I thought it would end when I rolled Disc (because even as Watcher said, if you are going to have a Priest, its going to be Disc) but it hasn't. I am sure it would bring a lot of complaints from the community, but the very nature of absorbs makes them over-powered and vastly more desirable in any kind of group healing environment. It leaves other healers disheartened, Holy Priests in the dust and the general healing style and community constantly out of balance.

[KaPe]

It still amuses me that they thought adding yet another absorb to Disc arsenal was a good idea. CoW might not be as obvious as constant PW:S spam, but in some cases it can be even worse at "stealing" hps from others and it pretty much "breaks" certain boss mechanics. I guess they thought that "fixing" DA, Atonement and breaking Holy Nova was enough and things will work themselves out. Sure enough, they did - except not in the way they were supposed to.

Unless there's some brilliant absorb rework happening behind the scenes, Disc will have to be gutted at some point and rebuilt from scratch. Otherwise, it will keep bouncing between underpowered mess that can't do anything, and overpowered monster that sucks the fun from other healers. There is no other spec in the game that has unique dpsing/healing/tanking method that's superior to anything. I guess Blood DKs come close (Brewmaster too, in a way, but it's getting a huge nerf), but it's balanced by other factors. But when you have Blizzard themselves stating you "need" Disc...

[Low Hanging Fruit]

I feel the problem is more the double dip and not the single side of absorbs.

You heal some while putting an absorb on. It should be 2 separate mechanics imo. Makes it to win / win right now. If you want to put an absorb up then do it, but you don't get healing. If you need to heal then don't use an absorb use a pure heal. I think for one it would bring choice into the equation. Second bring down the pure throughput to par.

[Deleted]

I've always thought that absorbs should make up a smaller part of discs toolkit, around 15-30% of healing done should be absorbs, in line with what you'd see from DA when stacking crit when mastery doesn't increase absorbs and that discs overall throughput should be 5-10% behind 'throughput' healers. That would be a more realistic choice. Go holy when you need the raw throughput, bring disc for the shield utility.
There have been moments where disc has been just the right amount behind holy in throughput that it has offered somewhat of a choice. And holy NEEDS to be competitive with druids / monks throughput. As it stands shamans are also competing for that throughput yet they bring a world more utility, essentially resto shaman IS a holy priest plus double spirit link, an easier to use raid CD and stronger personal throughput CDs.

There's a lot of work to be done but there's still a lot that could be improved via bandaids

[Moonstream]

As a holy priest, I just dread when a disc enters the group. Because unless that disc is a window licking mouth breather, I don't have a chance at being competitive and end up trying to snipe any heal I can instead of, you know, having to heal. Pretty sure other healers feel the same or similar emotions. *the disc didn't show up! tonight we dine like kings!*

I'd personally like them to just remake disc into a dps spec, but I'm sure something like that would never happen.

[Maleric]

This has been a problem with disc for a long time, and they haven't yet found a workable design alternative to PW:S spam. They decided to try PoH as an alternate to PW:S in Cataclysm, that didn't work, and then they tried Smite in MoP, and that didn't work either. And then they talked about Holy Nova in WoD beta, but that was a bad idea to begin with because of the positional requirements, and it didn't go anywhere either.

So it looks like the latest blue post on this is just the developers acknowledging (again) a problem that's been there for awhile. Unless they start talking about solutions, it probably won't amount to anything.

[Thirteen]

That would be a more realistic choice. Go holy when you need the raw throughput, bring disc for the shield utility.

I disagree with this. If disc has even a sliver of utility more than holy, holy will always be choice #2. Obviously this goes both ways, but disc has historically had better utility so I chose that as an example. Say what you want - holy doesn't compete with druids, shaman or mistweavers. First and foremost it competes with disc. And if disc and only disc offers <quality A>, and there's no <quality B> unique to holy, you have no incentive to play holy. If you have a spec that fills a unique role, you can't stick it on a class with another spec of the same role. Affliction warlocks have a similar problem with their lack of AoE damage. No matter how good its ST damage is, both the other specs have significantly better AoE damage. Now imagine if every fight was an AoE/add fight - you'd never take an affliction warlock.

With DPS classes sure you can say "go fire for AoE and arcane for ST". There are dozens of DPS classes and not one has its own unique niche that isn't shared with others. With healers, you're dealing with 6 specs spread across 5 classes. There's not much room to give any spec its unique niche without making it mandatory. You can either remove the niches altogether, or make them more available. When only one healer has absorbs, regardless of what % of healing they do, that gives them an edge over other healers, and it's especially noticeable in priests.

[Levelfive]

As far as absorbs having priority and "reducing the fun" of the other healing specs, that's misleading. It's better than another throughput healer healing your target before you have a chance to - at least with absorbs there's no sniping competition and lost throughput by means of overhealing for the slower healer. Disc synergizes with throughput healers much better than they synergize with each other.

Disc should become more of an absorb healer, not less of one. Disc has only one absorb spell in it's entire base toolkit, with a second as a talent choice. Absorb healers are proactive, needing to anticipate incoming damage to a far greater degree than mostly reactive throughput healers. It takes a very different mindset to play disc.

Expanding the absorb toolkit will give Bliz the latitude to change PWS, enable disc priests to have more casting choices during a fight, and make the spec much easier to balance.

If transforming the spec into a "pure absorb healer" makes them unviable in solo-healing situations where throughput is necessary, the spec can be split into two modes - throughput and absorb. Throughput mode would be similar to how they are now - mostly mediocre throughput spells and one good absorb.

I think that's exactly the direction they tried to go, though, that the design goal was specifically to let us mitigate almost like a support healer (Barrier, Sup, Spirit Shell, CoW, DA [with a buffed Inner Focus], PW:S) but to make the refilling of bars difficult to punitive (the removal of Binding Heal, Renew, Train of Thought and [old] Grace, very expensive PoH; Holy Nova, Atonement, and the t90s in their current state, and AA being essentially a chakra stance that takes 5 stacks to access, etc.,)--of course, then they over buffed PW:S and Grace and made PW:S super cheap and spammable so that even with the inevitable nerfs it's the best thing to cast. What could go wrong? And even with the pruning, we still have a bunch of spells I feel bad to merely awkward casting at all (Heal, Smite, Holy Nova, PoM). I'm ready for the Holy dps option, which solves the problem of disc, and absorbs, and the spec, and the need for the spec in raids, at the expense of holy priests in particular, all at once, but that seems very unlikely.

[The Stormbringer]

As someone who used to play Disc a lot, I do NOT like the idea of them getting rid of/replacing/nerfing absorbs to the point where they're just flavor. Disc priests ARE unique, that's kind of the point. I would think that a better solution would be to offer some very minimal absorb options to some other healers, or alternatively have another healing spec based around absorbs with an upcoming class.

My two cents on the matter.

[Deleted]

I disagree with this. If disc has even a sliver of utility more than holy, holy will always be choice #2. Obviously this goes both ways, but disc has historically had better utility so I chose that as an example. Say what you want - holy doesn't compete with druids, shaman or mistweavers. First and foremost it competes with disc. And if disc and only disc offers <quality A>, and there's no <quality B> unique to holy, you have no incentive to play holy. If you have a spec that fills a unique role, you can't stick it on a class with another spec of the same role. Affliction warlocks have a similar problem with their lack of AoE damage. No matter how good its ST damage is, both the other specs have significantly better AoE damage. Now imagine if every fight was an AoE/add fight - you'd never take an affliction warlock.

With DPS classes sure you can say "go fire for AoE and arcane for ST". There are dozens of DPS classes and not one has its own unique niche that isn't shared with others. With healers, you're dealing with 6 specs spread across 5 classes. There's not much room to give any spec its unique niche without making it mandatory. You can either remove the niches altogether, or make them more available. When only one healer has absorbs, regardless of what % of healing they do, that gives them an edge over other healers, and it's especially noticeable in priests.

I do see your point but there would be a point where the numbers outweigh the utility. Imagine if disc was doing 10k hps whilst holy was doing 100k, an exaggeration but you get the idea I hope.
At the moment I think holy is competitive with trees and mistweavers but I think resto shamans bring extra utility that make them more valuable. Obviously if you're the ONLY priest then it's still not competitive vs disc. But in a guild that has say; 2 healing priests, tree, paladin, mistweaver and you want to 4 heal. Holy priest is just as competitive as the tree or mistweaver, imo.
Next tier? No chance, losing the set bonus makes holy bottom of the pile.

[Thirteen]

Obviously if you're the ONLY priest then it's still not competitive vs disc. But in a guild that has say; 2 healing priests, tree, paladin, mistweaver and you want to 4 heal. Holy priest is just as competitive as the tree or mistweaver, imo.

Well, that's really the problem that I personally have with this whole thing. If you have one priest, he shouldn't automatically have to default to either disc or holy, and then be the only person of that spec. If you have 5 healers and they're all priests, it's gonna be disc and 4 holy priests, but if you have one, it's gonna be disc. No other class has this, not even DPS specs. You don't tell your hunters "Okay, you go marksmanship, and the rest of you go survival". Bit of a double standard here, I know, since DPS classes just play the "best" spec they have, which is the same with holy vs. disc (as disc is the "best" spec), but it's an entirely feasible scenario to have 6 balanced healers, and somewhat less feasible to have ~20 balanced DPS specs.

[Deleted]

Well, that's really the problem that I personally have with this whole thing. If you have one priest, he shouldn't automatically have to default to either disc or holy, and then be the only person of that spec. If you have 5 healers and they're all priests, it's gonna be disc and 4 holy priests, but if you have one, it's gonna be disc. No other class has this, not even DPS specs. You don't tell your hunters "Okay, you go marksmanship, and the rest of you go survival". Bit of a double standard here, I know, since DPS classes just play the "best" spec they have, which is the same with holy vs. disc (as disc is the "best" spec), but it's an entirely feasible scenario to have 6 balanced healers, and somewhat less feasible to have ~20 balanced DPS specs.

Quite true but I do believe that disc and holy can be balanced whilst disc retains absorbs (still toned down). In the current healing model of t17, imagine if rank1 holy priest on blackhand mythic was 70k and rank1 disc was 55k. Just random numbers, might need to be closer or further apart but that's when the choice starts emerging. Shields offer unique utility but how much throughput can you justify losing? If you're simply wiping to overwhelming damage then it may be worth asking that disc priest to go holy to pick up the slack, or indeed bench the priest entirely for a tree or w/e your best option might be.
Again, the numbers are just picked out of a hat but I do believe that there's a tuning point that would force you to choose between the utility and healing, and utility wouldn't always win.

The problem right now is there's no choice, no sacrifice. You gain utility AND throughput by having a disc priest. Where's the choice in that? What incentive is there to bring a holy priest without a disc priest?