Fury Legion Discussion

[Jaybee9084]

https://twitter.com/Celestalon/statu...42012992745472


PS: But it shows me that they originally wanted to go for SMF and backpedaled quickly at Blizzcon due to huge outcry from warrior community.

This is what im thinking as well. All the evidence points to SMF, but they've told us directly they're 2h. Something got mixed up along the way

[nativity]

This is what im thinking as well. All the evidence points to SMF, but they've told us directly they're 2h. Something got mixed up along the way

It might be the case that they are trying to avoid a potentially massive backlash from fury warriors which had been accumulating throughout WOD.. my guess purely ..

[Deleted]

They've been confirmed as 2h. I wouldn't read too far into it.

I know, they're now confirmed as 2h. I just found it interesting to see that, as that basically shows they were about to go SMF and effectively kill off TG for an Expansion.^^

- - - Updated - - -

It might be the case that they are trying to avoid a potentially massive backlash from fury warriors which had been accumulating throughout WOD.. my guess purely ..

Pretty sure, the whole 30% Damage Taken will suffice for a backlash, if they fail to take the "liability" part out of it.

[Gladio]

I can kinda see why Fury damage is tuned so poorly outside of Enrage currently. I'm currently sitting at 50% mastery and damage is pretty insane inside of Enrage. Would be nicer for damage to be smoothed out across non-enrage as well.

But they could always tune down our mastery and then balance us around 100% uptime. It would be easier for them and more fun for us. Poor RNG will always be negative but in our case it's devastating because outside of a 30s cd we have no control. Adding to that is the fact that we can't get the insane crit values other crit dependent classes can (MM & Feral who both reach their soft caps with ease at current gear levels).

This is what im thinking as well. All the evidence points to SMF, but they've told us directly they're 2h. Something got mixed up along the way

For me personally I was always fine with either SMF or TG (although TG definitely differentiates us from other DW classes). I'm more disappointed by the fact that all of our artifact weapons are swords. I REALLY don't want to transmog over the most powerful weapons we've ever received over the last 11 years of WoW but eventually always having some sort of sword will feel boring.

[Swaggah]

https://twitter.com/Celestalon/statu...42012992745472


PS: But it shows me that they originally wanted to go for SMF and backpedaled quickly at Blizzcon due to huge outcry from warrior community.

Couldn't find any info on it, but are holy paladins now using 2handers with offhand or did they revert that change because of the backlash from paladins?

[Jaybee9084]

Couldn't find any info on it, but are holy paladins now using 2handers with offhand or did they revert that change because of the backlash from paladins?

Believe it or not, that big fuck-off hammer they hold is a one-handed mace. Yeah, I know, it is fucking huge, and I don't understand it either. If you look at the paladin artifact preview, the character is holding the hammer in the main hand and the libram in the off. Looking at the artifact icons on WoWhead also confirms the hammer and libram each have their own icon.

[Dragoncurry]

That's a great fantasy, except in gameplay terms it doesn't work out like that. You aren't doing more damage than other players because you're enraged. You might during that specific moment, but overall you are not. That's where the disconnect occurs between fantasy and gameplay. See above.

Ok, I just PvP nowadays so that burst during enrage and getting the kill within that window is all that really matters to me over "overall damage", and thus this overall shit doesn't matter in my opinion.

As for DnD, the Brutal fighter or whatever archetype last I recall doesn't Ignore Pain. He basically Last Stands.

I don't like having things automated for me, so I disagree with Gladio. Thinking about it, giving Fury warriors a weaker last stand alleviates these issues really. If you're in a raid and there's a damage spike coming and you're gonna enrage, just enrage and last stand.

In PvP, just last stand if you're enraged, and it's dangerous. It may even be an actual last stand, so the flavor fits.

As for:

That's a key note: Disregarding incoming damage doesn't make it hurt more. Seriously, it doesn't even make sense.
Take two situations: A) You are calm and get cut. B) You are super angry, and get cut.

Which hurts more? Probably the first, because you don't have the spikes of adrenaline which come with high levels of anger.
Now which does more physical damage? Neither, because it's the same exact cut, and your emotional or mental response has nothing to do with the damage inflicted.

No, this makes no sense. It's not that you're getting cut the same, it's that you're getting cut harder because you're being reckless. If you ever fight someone, you'll know the difference. When you get pissed off and start swinging without watching your defense, you will take more damage than you would normally. It's not that I got hit when I was angrier vs when I was not. It's that when you enrage, you don't watch your defenses aka throwing caution to the winds.

Outside of the changes I suggested, I just don't see the disconnect. If there's a raid spike, I'm not going to stop. If my healer is gonna be CCed, I'm not gonna stop, I'm gonna save my parry for that. If I don't have shit up, I'm just gonna play defensively, has nothing to do with whether I am enraged or not. . You can stop, I suppose, I just don't see why.

And just because Mana exists in the game Universe does not mean that to be a Mage means to utilize Mana. Besides, Enhance is not classed as battlemage, they just said it's a battlemage feel.

All of your concerns imo are viable, but I just don't understand the disconnect. It's like you're forcing yourself to not play like a warrior bc of some mechanic. You can just play. They'll just heal you more, which is happening anyway cuz of your healthpools.

Warriors will never be unviable okay. You all need to relax. This isn't BC where DPS warriors were shunned for the whole damn expansion.

- - - Updated - - -

For me personally I was always fine with either SMF or TG (although TG definitely differentiates us from other DW classes). I'm more disappointed by the fact that all of our artifact weapons are swords. I REALLY don't want to transmog over the most powerful weapons we've ever received over the last 11 years of WoW but eventually always having some sort of sword will feel boring.

Again, giving warriors preferential treatment makes no sense. People sit down and go "can we give every class every variation of a artifact weapon with different lore" and the answer is no.

I love guns as a marksman, and Axes on my DK, and swords on my warrior, they only got 1 of those right. Like you just have to keep a perspective that if I want a sword, you can't tell me "just go arms" bc I don't like arms, I like Fury. Or Vice versa you know. It is what it is.

It's very unreasonable to ask that all of them are put in.

[Opeth69]

hopefully we will get a look at talents fairly soon, all i want for warriors is something unique to us that no one else has but thats actually fun/interesting and not the rngfest of execute or 30% damage taken or some other gimmick.

[Gladio]

Ok, I just PvP nowadays so that burst during enrage and getting the kill within that window is all that really matters to me over "overall damage", and thus this overall shit doesn't matter in my opinion.

Again, we will be balanced around a certain enrage uptime, since enrage is basically a maintenance buff like Slice and Dice you will be balanced around having a relatively high uptime. That means when you are enraged you are doing on par damage compared to other classes. You won't be dishing out insane damage, it will be just like now with extra HP and extra damage taken.

As for DnD, the Brutal fighter or whatever archetype last I recall doesn't Ignore Pain. He basically Last Stands.

I don't like having things automated for me, so I disagree with Gladio. Thinking about it, giving Fury warriors a weaker last stand alleviates these issues really. If you're in a raid and there's a damage spike coming and you're gonna enrage, just enrage and last stand.

In PvP, just last stand if you're enraged, and it's dangerous. It may even be an actual last stand, so the flavor fits.

Who is saying things need to be automated? If you last stand every time you enrage doesn't it become automated?

No, this makes no sense. It's not that you're getting cut the same, it's that you're getting cut harder because you're being reckless. If you ever fight someone, you'll know the difference. When you get pissed off and start swinging without watching your defense, you will take more damage than you would normally.

Apparently you don't understand the difference. There is a very big difference between being enraged and being reckless. In fact, we actually have them as 2 separate abilities! If I am enraged the only thing that has changed is my emotional state and the fact that I now have adrenaline rushing through me. In a fantasy setting this adrenaline makes you much stronger and causes you to ignore pain (kinda like reality).

Now, when I pop Recklessness I am throwing caution to the winds and THEN it makes sense that you have left yourself open. Even though recklessness and being enraged can be related, they are not the same.

It's not that I got hit when I was angrier vs when I was not. It's that when you enrage, you don't watch your defenses aka throwing caution to the winds.

Exactly, just because you're angry you don't get hit harder. What you're saying is that you leave your self open you may get hit in a more sensitive area but even then, just because you're less cautious doesn't mean a jab has the force as an uppercut.

Outside of the changes I suggested, I just don't see the disconnect. If there's a raid spike, I'm not going to stop. If my healer is gonna be CCed, I'm not gonna stop, I'm gonna save my parry for that. If I don't have shit up, I'm just gonna play defensively, has nothing to do with whether I am enraged or not. . You can stop, I suppose, I just don't see why.

1) If you don't stop you run the risk of dying to burst damage, if you die you don't do DPS.
2) So when you say play defensively you mean with caution right? Which goes against the fantasy of being a raging berserker doesn't it? If enrage makes you take an extra 30% damage and you're playing defensively, doesn't it make sense that you also won't pop enrage and risk taking extra damage? Which means you won't generate rage through BT and you will do poor damage when put on the defensive.

And just because Mana exists in the game Universe does not mean that to be a Mage means to utilize Mana. Besides, Enhance is not classed as battlemage, they just said it's a battlemage feel.

Mana was just an example. I was trying to say that if I say one thing but then the reality is different what I said doesn't matter. I then used that example to go into why Blizzard calling us raging berserkers but then punishing a raging berserker playstyle is contradictory and doesn't make sense.

All of your concerns imo are viable, but I just don't understand the disconnect. It's like you're forcing yourself to not play like a warrior bc of some mechanic. You can just play. They'll just heal you more, which is happening anyway cuz of your healthpools.

Warriors will never be unviable okay. You all need to relax. This isn't BC where DPS warriors were shunned for the whole damn expansion.

We all play warriors because we love them and we're all here discussing it because we love the class. However that doesn't change the fact that to play optimally this will affect things and it's not so simple as "just heal more" because in a lot of progression and PvP scenarios that just isn't a good solution.

I think you're misunderstanding, we're all very relaxed and other than a few outliers nobody is saying fury will be unviable. We're just saying that this change is 1) pointless and 2) doesn't address real issues with gameplay that people have brought up for a long time.

Again, giving warriors preferential treatment makes no sense. People sit down and go "can we give every class every variation of a artifact weapon with different lore" and the answer is no.

I love guns as a marksman, and Axes on my DK, and swords on my warrior, they only got 1 of those right. Like you just have to keep a perspective that if I want a sword, you can't tell me "just go arms" bc I don't like arms, I like Fury. Or Vice versa you know. It is what it is.

It's very unreasonable to ask that all of them are put in.

I honestly don't have any idea how you got that based off what I said. I literally didn't say any of those things.

All of the other classes have some variety of different weapon types within the class. Yes, some may not fit everyone's fantasy but there is variety. The only time there isn't variety is with warriors, we have 3 sword options and that's that. I understand that there are people who envision warriors in many different ways but all that means is that we should have some variety other than swords to satisfy a broader warrior playerbase.

[Dragoncurry]

Again, we will be balanced around a certain enrage uptime, since enrage is basically a maintenance buff like Slice and Dice you will be balanced around having a relatively high uptime. That means when you are enraged you are doing on par damage compared to other classes. You won't be dishing out insane damage, it will be just like now with extra HP and extra damage taken.

Yes, so at the end of the fight, my total damage won't be 10 mil over the other DPS, I understand. But you do insane damage during enrage window. Survival does more damage than my Warrior throughout the fight to a disc priest, but my warrior can push the Disc priest harder when he enrages and bursts and crits on his face.

Who is saying things need to be automated? If you last stand every time you enrage doesn't it become automated?

You can't last stand every time you enrage. There's a cooldown. But at least it requires you to think.

Apparently you don't understand the difference. There is a very big difference between being enraged and being reckless. In fact, we actually have them as 2 separate abilities! If I am enraged the only thing that has changed is my emotional state and the fact that I now have adrenaline rushing through me. In a fantasy setting this adrenaline makes you much stronger and causes you to ignore pain (kinda like reality).

Now, when I pop Recklessness I am throwing caution to the winds and THEN it makes sense that you have left yourself open. Even though recklessness and being enraged can be related, they are not the same.

No, enraged and recklessness are the same thing. There is no such thing as a Enraged fighter that fights cautiously. Adrenaline rushing through you is not "the only difference". That is the fundamental fucking difference in fighting normally. I don't think any of you guys know what Enraged, berserkers look like. The Gallic berserkers frothing at the mouth, showing the whites of their eyes is an example.

Exactly, just because you're angry you don't get hit harder. What you're saying is that you leave your self open you may get hit in a more sensitive area but even then, just because you're less cautious doesn't mean a jab has the force as an uppercut.

Bro, a jab to your chin when you miss a guard or get countered > an uppercut to your guard, damagewise.

1) If you don't stop you run the risk of dying to burst damage, if you die you don't do DPS.
2) So when you say play defensively you mean with caution right? Which goes against the fantasy of being a raging berserker doesn't it? If enrage makes you take an extra 30% damage and you're playing defensively, doesn't it make sense that you also won't pop enrage and risk taking extra damage? Which means you won't generate rage through BT and you will do poor damage when put on the defensive.

Lol no, like you don't understand. I am aware that if you die, you don't do DPS and you run the risk of dying. I'm telling you that it won't happen. It's very simple. If Boss 2 has an explosion that kills every fury warrior who happens to be carrying over an enrage, Blizz will edit it so that doesn't happen as that specifically discriminates against a class for no reason. The most that will happen is that you will have to watch extra so that you're not in avoidable raid mechanics.

As for PvP, if your healer is being CCed, you play back, that has nothing to do with being a raging berserker or not. It's just PvP strategy. PvP is not at all flavor filled to that extent because you have shit like being perma CCed by Hunter/Druid as a warrior and feeling like a goddamn idiot for things that are stopping you that shouldn't stop a raging berserker like some weeds on the ground or a snake trap (why am I not trampling these things into the dirt?). Warriors going sword and board macro to defensive bc they were getting trained by a mage in BC/Wotlk/Cata is not flavor, but you just deal with it bc it's PvP strategy. Enrage making you take more damage is not adding or taking away from current flavor.

We all play warriors because we love them and we're all here discussing it because we love the class. However that doesn't change the fact that to play optimally this will affect things and it's not so simple as "just heal more" because in a lot of progression and PvP scenarios that just isn't a good solution.

Well for most warriors, it won't really apply, as the majority of players don't push progression on that kind of cutting edge level lol. I'm telling you, it ain't that serious. They aren't even set on the 30% number and will adjust it I guarantee you.

I honestly don't have any idea how you got that based off what I said. I literally didn't say any of those things.

All of the other classes have some variety of different weapon types within the class. Yes, some may not fit everyone's fantasy but there is variety. The only time there isn't variety is with warriors, we have 3 sword options and that's that. I understand that there are people who envision warriors in many different ways but all that means is that we should have some variety other than swords to satisfy a broader warrior playerbase.

Like it doesn't matter if Arms has an Axe, and I only play Fury dude. I'm still stuck with swords that I don't want. You're asking blizzard to offer variety with meaningful lore weapons (2 of each at least) to 3 specs, for ALL the classes. That's so unreasonable lol.

[Archimtiros]

Ok, I just PvP nowadays so that burst during enrage and getting the kill within that window is all that really matters to me over "overall damage", and thus this overall shit doesn't matter in my opinion.

Fair, but PvP has always been a bastard child in WoW. Still, you're going to have a problem "just playing", when needlessly proccing Enrage causes you to take 30% extra damage and thus 30% extra healing.

As for DnD, the Brutal fighter or whatever archetype last I recall doesn't Ignore Pain. He basically Last Stands.

Except we were talking about the Barbarian archetype, with battle rage, hence the "reckless berserker" fantasy.

I don't like having things automated for me, so I disagree with Gladio. Thinking about it, giving Fury warriors a weaker last stand alleviates these issues really. If you're in a raid and there's a damage spike coming and you're gonna enrage, just enrage and last stand.

Defensive Stance. That said, it's still a poor solution to a poor mechanic.

[/I][/B]No, this makes no sense. It's not that you're getting cut the same, it's that you're getting cut harder because you're being reckless. If you ever fight someone, you'll know the difference. When you get pissed off and start swinging without watching your defense, you will take more damage than you would normally. It's not that I got hit when I was angrier vs when I was not. It's that when you enrage, you don't watch your defenses aka throwing caution to the winds.

I'm sorry, but that's ridiculous. If you're a completely untrained fighter, yeah, maybe. If you have any semblance of training, which the Fury Warrior supposedly has a lifetime of by the preview writeups own admission, this is a complete joke. When is the last time you saw a (successful) professional fighter "abandon all defenses" and "swing wildly" like a schoolyard idiot? Never. Yeah there's a reason for that.

And it still doesn't mean you would get hit "harder". The force of a blow doesn't come from you, it comes from your opponent, therefore you don't get hit harder just because you are angry about it. Again, we are trying to equate gameplay terms into real life terms which doesn't really work very well, but at best the only thing you could say is that the "reckless" attacker would get hit more, because of their lack of defenses, bu that still doesn't mean they get hit harder.

And just because Mana exists in the game Universe does not mean that to be a Mage means to utilize Mana. Besides, Enhance is not classed as battlemage, they just said it's a battlemage feel.

You completely misread or misunderstood the argument. Battlemage feel doesn't = the title of Battlemage, the writeup simply used it as a buzzword. However, a Mage absolutely utilizes mana in the Warcraft universe and there's no refuting that. Enh Shamans have the similar fantasy to a Battlemage, but they aren't actually Battlemages, because they aren't Mages. Simple.

All of your concerns imo are viable, but I just don't understand the disconnect. It's like you're forcing yourself to not play like a warrior bc of some mechanic. You can just play. They'll just heal you more, which is happening anyway cuz of your healthpools.

Warriors will never be unviable okay. You all need to relax. This isn't BC where DPS warriors were shunned for the whole damn expansion.

This is you're problem: Nobody in here is saying Warrior's won't be viable, in fact I said quite the opposite, of course they will be balanced accordingly. What we're saying it's a bad design decision for the game, and those are two extremely different arguments. However, there absolutely will be a lot of Warriors that will feel forced to play differently (or rather stop playing), because of the mechanic, knowing about the damage income.

[Gladio]

Yes, so at the end of the fight, my total damage won't be 10 mil over the other DPS, I understand. But you do insane damage during enrage window. Survival does more damage than my Warrior throughout the fight to a disc priest, but my warrior can push the Disc priest harder when he enrages and bursts and crits on his face.

Mechanically, enrage will stay the same as it is now in addition to having extra attack speed. Do you currently burst harder than other classes while enrage is up without CDs? No, your enraged damage will be equal or slightly greater than other classes normal DPS.

You can't last stand every time you enrage. There's a cooldown. But at least it requires you to think.

They aren't going to add anything to counter the increased damage taken because that is what the increased hp pool is supposed to do. The system they are creating requires no thought.

No, enraged and recklessness are the same thing. There is no such thing as a Enraged fighter that fights cautiously. Adrenaline rushing through you is not "the only difference". That is the fundamental fucking difference in fighting normally. I don't think any of you guys know what Enraged, berserkers look like. The Gallic berserkers frothing at the mouth, showing the whites of their eyes is an example.

They are literally not the same thing, just google the definition for enrage vs recklessness. Just look in our spellbook and they'll be listed differently.
Enrage - To make very angry
Recklessness - 1. marked by lack of proper caution, careless of consequences 2. irresponsible

Being enraged doesn't automatically make you reckless. We even have a perfect example of this in the game, a cooldown called Recklessness. If you follow the restrictions already laid out in WoW, we are enraged fighters that periodically enter a state of recklessness.

Bro, a jab to your chin when you miss a guard or get countered > an uppercut to your guard, damagewise.

Something that is guarded or blocked by definition doesn't do any damage so your example completely misses the point. You have to compare two hits that both land. Being reckless doesn't magically amplify the force of a blow, it just leaves you open to other blows that will do the same damage as if you weren't reckless.

Lol no, like you don't understand. I am aware that if you die, you don't do DPS and you run the risk of dying. I'm telling you that it won't happen. It's very simple. If Boss 2 has an explosion that kills every fury warrior who happens to be carrying over an enrage, Blizz will edit it so that doesn't happen as that specifically discriminates against a class for no reason. The most that will happen is that you will have to watch extra so that you're not in avoidable raid mechanics.

If Blizzard edits it to the point that it doesn't matter, then what is the point of having it? Also, if you haven't read the other class previews I suggest you do so, none of them have increased damage taken as a baseline fantasy. Shadow priests go insane and don't take extra damage, wouldn't insanity be a good reason to take increased damage? It's even worse than being reckless.

As for PvP, if your healer is being CCed, you play back, that has nothing to do with being a raging berserker or not. It's just PvP strategy. PvP is not at all flavor filled to that extent ....

So gameplay is more important than flavor which is what I've been saying this entire time?

Well for most warriors, it won't really apply, as the majority of players don't push progression on that kind of cutting edge level lol. I'm telling you, it ain't that serious. They aren't even set on the 30% number and will adjust it I guarantee you.

Yes they'll adjust it but if it doesn't matter to most warriors then why is it there? What's the point of adding something supposedly for flavor when it doesn't matter to most of the people playing that class?

The point is that there is no point wasting time and resources on something you admit people won't care about or won't notice. Instead they should work on building the gameplay of the class and fixing the issues that are currently there like RNG hampering our rotation. Once they have that core fixed then they should come up with a fantasy that fits that gameplay.

Like it doesn't matter if Arms has an Axe, and I only play Fury dude. I'm still stuck with swords that I don't want. You're asking blizzard to offer variety with meaningful lore weapons (2 of each at least) to 3 specs, for ALL the classes. That's so unreasonable lol.

First off, you're arguing points that I didn't even make, when did I say that ALL the classes need to have anything? Second, all the other classes actually do already have at least 1 of their 3 artifacts a different weapon type from the other. I'm just talking about warriors.

Last, it doesn't matter to you.Warriors have 3 different sword artifact weapons. The lore for our weapons was literally created out of thin air. If they were created from thin air why couldn't one of them be an axe or a mace? Sure that wouldn't satisfy everyone but it would provide more variety for warriors and for players who play more than one spec.

[Archimtiros]

Bro, a jab to your chin when you miss a guard or get countered > an uppercut to your guard, damagewise.

Except those are not the same hit doing more damage, those are two different hits.

Dude your arguments suck.

[Maltore]

Nobody in here is saying Warrior's won't be viable, in fact I said quite the opposite, of course they will be balanced accordingly. What we're saying it's a bad design decision for the game, and those are two extremely different arguments. However, there absolutely will be a lot of Warriors that will feel forced to play differently (or rather stop playing), because of the mechanic, knowing about the damage income.

This is really the bottom line argument against the damage taken debuff.

I can't image anyone looking to roll at new class/spec that sees this 'flavor' and thinks to themselves, "Oh, awesome! I take more damage while Enraged. That's so cool!", while at the same time knowing that there's no real benefit to it (i.e. Blizzard isn't going to put Fury at the top of the charts to offset the extra damage that needs to be healed...). No, they're more likely to say, "Oh, huh? I take more damage? Why would I want that? Let's take a look at some of these other classes/specs..."

This flavor simply tastes bad! Class flavor should have fun gameplay (e.g. Heroic Leap) or cool visuals (e.g. Titan's Grip). A flat-out damage taken debuff is not fun and certainly isn't cool to look at.

[Dragoncurry]

Except those are not the same hit doing more damage, those are two different hits.

Dude your arguments suck.

His original argument, which I assume you did not read was that a jab is not as strong as an uppercut. I replied with the above. Thoughts now that it's been clarified?

Also an uppercut into your guard means your arms are up, not that you blocked it. They still both land. Man...

Anyways, the 30% really doesn't matter. It will be fully adjusted so you see no difference.

[maraxusofk]

It makes a difference to your raid healers who will need to spend more mana. If it makes no difference why would a mythic raid want to take a war who does the same amount of dmg as everyone else just to spend more mana?

[Archimtiros]

His original argument, which I assume you did not read was that a jab is not as strong as an uppercut. I replied with the above. Thoughts now that it's been clarified?

Also an uppercut into your guard means your arms are up, not that you blocked it. They still both land. Man...

Anyways, the 30% really doesn't matter. It will be fully adjusted so you see no difference.

No, to be honest I got lost in the wall of text between you two quoting each other over and over again. Hard to expect anyone to read over those in their entirety, though strictly speaking I'd say he is right; a jab does not carry the same amount of force as a proper uppercut.

My post was a continuation of my previous in which I opposed your assertion that being enraged somehow makes you get hit harder, it doesn't. It might mean you get hit more, because you aren't playing defensively, which may translate into more damage, but it doesn't mean that the individual hits themselves are somehow worse, because they carry the same amount of force regardless.

The 30% does matter, and we've enumerated why multiple times. Still, the argument was never one of viability (I guess you glossed over that part of my post), it is of whether or not the mechanic is good for the game, and it is not.

[Gladio]

His original argument, which I assume you did not read was that a jab is not as strong as an uppercut. I replied with the above. Thoughts now that it's been clarified?

Also an uppercut into your guard means your arms are up, not that you blocked it. They still both land. Man...

Anyways, the 30% really doesn't matter. It will be fully adjusted so you see no difference.

No, my original argument was that being reckless doesn't make a weaker blow magically hit harder and therefore hit equally as strong as a harder hitting blow. Regardless comparing two different types of hits isn't a good example so that's my bad.

With that said, being angry or not angry has no affect on the force of the blow. As Archi explained, the force of the blow comes from an external source. So how hard that source hits depends on who is doing the hitting, not on who is getting hit.

And again, if you see no difference why is it being added? If you see no difference what flavor is it adding? The answer is there is no reason for it to be added and there is no flavor in it's addition. It is pointless.

It makes a difference to your raid healers who will need to spend more mana. If it makes no difference why would a mythic raid want to take a war who does the same amount of dmg as everyone else just to spend more mana?

Exactly exactly exactly!

[Archimtiros]

This is really the bottom line argument against the damage taken debuff.

I can't image anyone looking to roll at new class/spec that sees this 'flavor' and thinks to themselves, "Oh, awesome! I take more damage while Enraged. That's so cool!", while at the same time knowing that there's now real benefit to it (i.e. Blizzard isn't going to put Fury at the top of the charts to offset the extra damage that needs to be healed...). No, they're more likely to say, "Oh, huh? I take more damage? Why would I want that? Let's take a look at some of these other classes/specs..."

This flavor simply tastes bad! Class flavor should have fun gameplay (e.g. Heroic Leap) or cool visuals (e.g. Titan's Grip). A flat-out damage taken debuff is not fun and certainly isn't cool to look at.

Can't agree more.

On the one hand, most player aren't going to realize that they have more health and take more damage. We all know most players don't read quest text, much less every tooltip in the game. Therefore the "flavor" is lost on them, because they aren't aware of it.

On the other hand, the players that are aware of it, are constantly rationalizing the thought in their head. "I'm going to take 435k damage, I take 30% more because I'm Enraged, I can take 20% less if I use Defensive Stance, I heal 5% every 4s with Bloodthirst... who's on first?" That's not flavor, that's nuisance.

It's needlessly complicated, it forces your healers to devote more time/mana to get you back to the same percentage health, and it forces players to make bad gameplay decisions. It simply has no benefit.

[Murlocbait]

On the one hand, most player aren't going to realize that they have more health and take more damage. We all know most players don't read quest text, much less every tooltip in the game. Therefore the "flavor" is lost on them, because they aren't aware of it.

They won't read it, but they will read raid chat and battleground chat telling them "Dude, why are you furry? You take more damage. Fucking spec Arms nub!" And after seeing that enough times, all they'll know/believe/think is that fury takes more damage, therefore fury is bad. A lot of people will never go to icy veins or read a guide on here, or read their tooltips. They'll play by instinct and what friends/guildies/randos tell them - and the popular opinion will be "Fury takes 30% more damage."