the what if locks could tank thread

[nightfalls]

This doesn't make any sense. If there's a limited number of positions for tanks in a raid, yet you open up the role to more classes; aren't you setting up players for disapointment that they aren't going to get the opportunity to fill that new role? Tanking in LFD isn't going to get you raid geared fast, and nor does it bear any resemblance to, you know, tanking in a raid.

I think you are not making any sense whatsoever. First, who ever said being a tank meant you had to tank in a raid, and only in a raid? You can use tank specs for dungeons, soloing, leveling, achievements, old content runs, not-so-old content runs (say of previous current-expansion tiers), alt runs, even some PvP usage ("AND WAIT, THERE'S STILL MORE...").

And trust me, being a tank/healer will get you raid geared for DPS much, much faster than waiting in queue. That, or you'll have to kiss major ass to hope to get a queue buddy. Hardly a "compelling design." You seem to think that being a DPS means you only ever DPS in LFD, and being a tank means you must be the main tank of your guild - no sense.

It's not that the other 3 specs loose theirs, it's more that the new 4th would be so far out on it's own that it lacks belonging.

As put by various people, a remnant of the original "tank spec" idea is in the glyph, and you can ask people who use it whether they think the 4th spec would be "so far out on its own" - most people would disagree with you here.

DH has no resource use for reducing damage taken. That's the difference. It may not be a lot of new, but it might be because it's either that, or a lot of rebalancing existing stuff, which then does impact on the existing specs.

There is, it's Fury Ward. You only need to make it scale with SP (vengeance), and add an additional Fury dump that gives a more primary form of damage reduction.

It did, you may not be asking to replace swords with shields, but the point there is: What if players rolled those pures to avoid being asked, so neither of you ended up in that awkward situation?

1) You missed my original point completely. Some of the tones make me think that the "fear-mongering" crowd seem to think that making a tank spec would somehow mean that we'd have to replace all of the specs with tank specs and leave no DPS ability left (hence the "replace the all sword icons with shield icons") when this is not what anyone is intending whatsoever.

2) You're contradicting yourself. First argument is that nobody will use tank specs because "they aren't needed in raid" - but if they really aren't needed if you're not a MS tank, then why are we suddenly being "forced" to use tank specs?


As put, plenty of people are playing the DPS specs of a class with tank/healing capabilities and are doing fine. Plenty of priests are playing holy/discipline and are doing fine. Plenty of people just play tanks without off-specs and are doing fine. I can hear out some arguments about why adding in extra specs will make the class work, but only hearing "People will hate being 'made to tank'" is pretty ridiculous, considering the biggest likelihood is that they won't be made to do so at all.


[edit]

P.S. The majority of people I know who do in fact prefer pure DPS classes simply like to DPS and do not care for tanking or healing. They are not, however, afraid of being asked to tank or heal because their guild knows that they just prefer to DPS (amazing, they actually communicate what roles they like to play with their guild).

In this case, what would said people be losing if a spec is simply added without taking anything away?

[Jessicka]

No, despite the introduction of more and more tank classes the number of tanks seems always to regulate themselves on the low end. Any decent tank I know is just as happy dpsing. and just because you want to perform in a role doesn't mean you will get to do so. In any competetive endgame setting you earn your spot at the expense of others.

1) Not all tanks are happier DPSing. I've known a lot of players who -hate- DPSing and play Druids and Paladins specifically so they can have dual spec Healing/Tanking to avoid being asked. I don't like DPSing on my DK, and I don't have any desire to DPS or tank or my Paladin. Role evasion works both ways; and there a hell of a lot of Priests who run dual Healing specs for similar reasons.

2) In competative play, your RL will take the best class for the job. Some players are content to sit out 3 weeks of progression because they 'play the wrong class'; that's part of the deal in that environment and players there will put up with that kind of shit.

I must imagine those trade spams asking for tanks or the 30 minutes queues when I level a pure gimped dps class.

LFR tank queues are nearer an hour; and will even cause a healer with you to have to wait somewhat. It's quicker to queue as DPS, then just fail DPS or AFK in your tank spec for loot.

I have trouble understanding why the warlock class should be a haven to 12 year old with self-esteem issues. If you find it awkward to be asked to play an offspec you don't like and is traumatized by saying no as grownup person I say it's good practice for real life were being asked to do stuff you don't like is a commonplace occurence.

I think it's selfish of you to remove a choice they were given 8 years ago. Calling someone a "12 year old with self-esteem issues' is hardly an advert for your maturity, nor is it going to make anyone feel any better about telling you 'No'. You are why people want that choice.

I think you are not making any sense whatsoever. First, who ever said being a tank meant you had to tank in a raid, and only in a raid? You can use tank specs for dungeons, soloing, leveling, achievements, old content runs, not-so-old content runs (say of previous current-expansion tiers), alt runs, even some PvP usage ("AND WAIT, THERE'S STILL MORE...").

And trust me, being a tank/healer will get you raid geared for DPS much, much faster than waiting in queue. That, or you'll have to kiss major ass to hope to get a queue buddy. Hardly a "compelling design." You seem to think that being a DPS means you only ever DPS in LFD, and being a tank means you must be the main tank of your guild - no sense.

I've not had to kiss any asses to get queue buddies for a long time so it's hard for me to comment. But I'm not sure what you're saying - are you telling people to go in their under/ungeared OS to get it geared faster? Or are you advocating Needing on OS loot in place of others?

As put by various people, a remnant of the original "tank spec" idea is in the glyph, and you can ask people who use it whether they think the 4th spec would be "so far out on its own" - most people would disagree with you here.

Invoking majorities isn't an argument. It's up there with 'playing since vanilla' to validate a point and doesn't mean anything. If anything, the sign of a healthy democracy is actually protection of the minority. I simply don't feel like it has anything semblance of Warlock left in that stance, let alone Demonology about it to warrant being a part of our arsenal. That's not to say I don't think it could work; I think it would work far better however if it wasn't constrained by Demonology, or anything else Warlock. As others have also requested, it would also open up much more easily the notion of a melee DPS variant on it.

There is, it's Fury Ward. You only need to make it scale with SP (vengeance), and add an additional Fury dump that gives a more primary form of damage reduction.

Fury Ward is a short cooldown more akin to AMS, it's not really an active mitigation button.

1) You missed my original point completely. Some of the tones make me think that the "fear-mongering" crowd seem to think that making a tank spec would somehow mean that we'd have to replace all of the specs with tank specs and leave no DPS ability left (hence the "replace the all sword icons with shield icons") when this is not what anyone is intending whatsoever.

You talked about replacing a DPS spec. It doesn't matter what spec you replace, there are players who like that spec as it is as a DPS spec. Telling them to respec is likely in their eyes no different to asking them to reroll completely. We saw that when DK trees were changed, and it's right that GC does not want to repeat that.

2) You're contradicting yourself. First argument is that nobody will use tank specs because "they aren't needed in raid" - but if they really aren't needed if you're not a MS tank, then why are we suddenly being "forced" to use tank specs?

As put, plenty of people are playing the DPS specs of a class with tank/healing capabilities and are doing fine. Plenty of priests are playing holy/discipline and are doing fine. Plenty of people just play tanks without off-specs and are doing fine. I can hear out some arguments about why adding in extra specs will make the class work, but only hearing "People will hate being 'made to tank'" is pretty ridiculous, considering the biggest likelihood is that they won't be made to do so at all.

Because no guild is a perfectly stable environment; people will always come and go from the game and that includes players of niche roles. People get asked, even if only temporarily, but it happens and I don't know how this denial persists.

P.S. The majority of people I know who do in fact prefer pure DPS classes simply like to DPS and do not care for tanking or healing. They are not, however, afraid of being asked to tank or heal because their guild knows that they just prefer to DPS (amazing, they actually communicate what roles they like to play with their guild).

In this case, what would said people be losing if a spec is simply added without taking anything away?

Choice.

[nightfalls]

Are you telling people to go in their under/ungeared OS to get it geared faster? Or are you advocating Needing on OS loot in place of others?

Both are exactly what I'm saying. By queuing as a healer instead of DPS to gear my DPS set, I am allowing other DPS to get in faster and taking a quicker queue myself. The DPS in my group have two options: wait in a long ass queue because I (and others) queued as DPS, then role against me (and others) for DPS loot, or wait in a shorter queue because I queued as a healer, and roll against me for DPS loot.

Fury Ward is a short cooldown more akin to AMS, it's not really an active mitigation button.

I remember that the main constraint on using it was more meant to be demonic fury generation than the cooldown. That and obviously it sucks now, with no scaling with damage taken.

Choice.

So adding options without taking old options away somehow equals "taking away choice"...

---------- Post added 2013-02-08 at 02:36 PM ----------

1) Not all tanks are happier DPSing. I've known a lot of players who -hate- DPSing and play Druids and Paladins specifically so they can have dual spec Healing/Tanking to avoid being asked. I don't like DPSing on my DK, and I don't have any desire to DPS or tank or my Paladin. Role evasion works both ways; and there a hell of a lot of Priests who run dual Healing specs for similar reasons.

So as you pointed out, it's possible to play classes with a DPS spec and avoid DPSing. It's possible to play classes with a heal spec and avoid healing. How, then, is it impossible to play a class with 3 DPS specs and 1 tank spec, and not get "forced" to tank?

[Jessicka]

Both are exactly what I'm saying. By queuing as a healer instead of DPS to gear my DPS set, I am allowing other DPS to get in faster and taking a quicker queue myself. The DPS in my group have two options: wait in a long ass queue because I (and others) queued as DPS, then role against me (and others) for DPS loot, or wait in a shorter queue because I queued as a healer, and roll against me for DPS loot.

That only works insofar as the player already has adequate OS gear for the content. Otherwise they're going to have to use their MS anyway and no one is gaining anything.

I remember that the main constraint on using it was more meant to be demonic fury generation than the cooldown. That and obviously it sucks now, with no scaling with damage taken.

I never found Fury to be the limiting factor. Maybe this was when the amount of Fury you had stored up was a factor in how much mitigation it provided?

So adding options without taking old options away somehow equals "taking away choice"...

Sure, removing the choice of playing a pure DPS class.

So as you pointed out, it's possible to play classes with a DPS spec and avoid DPSing. It's possible to play classes with a heal spec and avoid healing. How, then, is it impossible to play a class with 3 DPS specs and 1 tank spec, and not get "forced" to tank?

How do you think I found out those players didn't like DPSing?

[xskarma]

Monk tanks don't use any tanking stats, they use dps gear plain and simple. TBH the only difference would be like int gives you faster fury generation or some other such thing, or increases strength of your abilities that give mitigation, mastery buffs ur mitigation, and then maybe you want to reforge parry the way bear tanks reforge dodge. No leather gear has parry or dodge on it and no cloth gear would have to either.

They could easily add a tank spec to warlocks without changing gear one iota (and if you can't see that you aren't very smart). The question is entirely about whether they want to. Personally, I think it could be cool to see a Warlock tank; maybe they could even design some encounters around warlock tanking (Mannoroth's Fury would make them excellent for picking up mass groups of mobs that are spread out for example). You could incorporate the lock cds in the talents already as tank cds, give them a few other cds that come with the spec and some active on-use abilities involving some kind of dark energy source that is perhaps built from taking dmg or from dealing damage like warriors.

It could work VERY well if Blizzard wanted it to, and there is definitely an audience for doing it. The only thing is once you do it then where does it end, because shamans could be tanks pretty easily also and then maybe you have to bring back shockadins and make a ranged dps paladin spec, etc. One thing I wouldn't mind seeing make a come-back and maybe make them more powerful is support specs where your primary duty as a raider is to bring constant utility to a raid kind of like bards in Everquest. Shamans used to fill that role but now they are just a general dps and the usefulness of buffs in raid design has gone way down. But I guess that is to please the masses, if they did go back to it I would want them to make it an active role not just "okay u bring mana tide totem afk in the corner now." but like constantly applying buffs to raiders that maybe you channel or have to complete sequences for them to go off (similar to Twin Consorts constellation sequence type stuff); could make for very interesting gameplay. Now I'm off on a tangent.

Courtesy quote since you got caught in the spam filter and people might have missed your post.

[Chimera-Lothar]

I've tanked Heroic dungeons, and Raid Trash (when a tank was afk) on my Warlock.
I had a blast and would love it if it became a filled out 4th spec.

[Deleted]

First, what makes you think (aside from doomsday paranoia) that a tank spec will actually take away from the DPS specs? Especially if you got a 4th spec, and still kept your 3 existing DPS specs.

I didn't say it would take away from the dps specs, I said " - the tank spec deviating so far from the source that it doesn't have any right to be part of it.", if a warlock spec suddenly starts tanking it up in melee, it seems to have deviated from the ranged dps spec the warlock has always been pretty far, just as it would if mages started doing it.

That said, the two most often posed "solutions" to the none-existent problem that a lack of a tank spec apparently is, is either that it's not a 4th spec, at which point it's disadvantaging the spec it replaces, or a demon hunter 4th spec - which I think I find even more destructive than killing demo.

You can't tack something as "big" as the demon hunter archetype onto the existing warlock class without either
a) The DH no being DH-ery enough to do it justice, or
b) it being so different that it flat out doesn't fit in the Warlock class and can stand on it's own feet as a different class

On this point, you're just plain wrong. Having played tank specs and having heard of Xelnath's original idea, I notice that the spec was actually built for the tanking paradigm - that of generating resources with abilities, and then using the resources to mitigate damage.

The reason it did end up being either overpowered or underpowered simply was because there wasn't a dedicated spec on its own, with a talent and glyph system to support it at all. But that doesn't mean the basic paradigm isn't there.

Fairly sure Xelnath himself said the tank-spec thing was half baked and he didn't listen to some of the other members, especially the numbers guys. The warlock spec utilised none of the standard tank stats bar absorbing damage and flat damage reduction, that doesn't really fit within the tanking paradigm to me - generating and spending resources is a part of most dps specs as well as tanks.

The only way I can see a tank spec fitting into the tanking paradigm would be by it actually using some distinct tanking stats, which either has messy stat conversions or requires different gear. I also don't think it would work at range, it just causes nasty ramifications with encounter design.

When you're having to meet tank criteria, how much of a warlock is left?

Finally on a more personal level, I think some of the people who are arguing "this is what you signed up for" don't realize that for a new player, the amount of personal investment into one's first class can be pretty huge even if the player had no clue what he was signing up for on the character sheet.

I'm not saying your argument is invalid, but do think of that before just saying "This is what you signed up for, sucker! Enjoy your fresh 1-90 again."

I spent my first hours in WoW stabbing skeletons to death with my warlocks knife, I'm fully aware that people don't step into the game knowing everything about the class they pick, but not should it be balanced around that. You can't just pick any class and then complain at blizzard that it needs changing on that ground, the archetypes are pretty obvious in most cases - warlocks and mages are fairly well known casting archetypes, just as a warrior is an obvious melee class and a priest is, predictably, a healer. If people manage to get up to level 90 before figuring out their class can't tank, then they need to be the ones the admit the fault is on their end and if they want to tank, they may need to roll a tanking class. Otherwise we'd have melee hunters already, God knows they've been running around ingame longer than warlock tanks have.

[Jtree]

If by "distinct tanking stats" you mean dodge and parry, it doesn't have to be too complicated. Druids and monks don't have gear with those stats, yet they do alright. Functionally, I would think lock tanks would get mechanics akin to stagger and shuffle, along with on use dodge and/or absorb abilities.

And I think they'd still be warlocks despite standing in front of the boss getting bashed on. They'd still be slinging fel magics, and still have minions o utilize. That could be another unique hook, the pet-commanding tank, though hopefully sacrifice has a useable element to it for those who may prefer not to use a pet.

[Deleted]

If by "distinct tanking stats" you mean dodge and parry, it doesn't have to be too complicated. Druids and monks don't have gear with those stats, yet they do alright. Functionally, I would think lock tanks would get mechanics akin to stagger and shuffle, along with on use dodge and/or absorb abilities.

And I think they'd still be warlocks despite standing in front of the boss getting bashed on. They'd still be slinging fel magics, and still have minions o utilize. That could be another unique hook, the pet-commanding tank, though hopefully sacrifice has a useable element to it for those who may prefer not to use a pet.

I thought Dodge was Guardian's most sought-for stat, least that's what the Guardian guides say (My own druid is Balance and one very neglected and overlooked cow), not to mention that dodge is inherent in Agility gear. Int has no such inherent secondary stat.

The idea of a pet tank is interesting, but the troubles when you have to ask how much DPS should a tank do (for PvP balancing issues, which are a whole different story entirely). Would Demons do too much damage, essentially. Also, Demons give a situational ability that you lack 3/4 (or 4/5) most of the time: for a Tank, having as many abilities as possible accesible would be important, so Demons would have to require a good knowledge of each fight, perhaps moreso than for DPS. As for the Warlock feel.. I personally don't think it would feel warlocky, but, again, the idea of a dodging, staggering, fel using, dual wielding character is already in the lore: Demon Hunters. And yes, DHs can be amalgamated into Warlocks, but I feel doing that would really lose the flavour of a potential new class now th--- Wait, I'm sure I said this before.

[Brusalk]

I thought Dodge was Guardian's most sought-for stat, least that's what the Guardian guides say (My own druid is Balance and one very neglected and overlooked cow), not to mention that dodge is inherent in Agility gear. Int has no such inherent secondary stat.

The idea of a pet tank is interesting, but the troubles when you have to ask how much DPS should a tank do (for PvP balancing issues, which are a whole different story entirely). Would Demons do too much damage, essentially. Also, Demons give a situational ability that you lack 3/4 (or 4/5) most of the time: for a Tank, having as many abilities as possible accesible would be important, so Demons would have to require a good knowledge of each fight, perhaps moreso than for DPS. As for the Warlock feel.. I personally don't think it would feel warlocky, but, again, the idea of a dodging, staggering, fel using, dual wielding character is already in the lore: Demon Hunters. And yes, DHs can be amalgamated into Warlocks, but I feel doing that would really lose the flavour of a potential new class now th--- Wait, I'm sure I said this before.

Well Int gives crit chance, so that's not entirely true. And if you wanted to, you could make a mitigation mechanic that is based off of crit % or procs off crits or something similar.

Personally I see no reason why the tank needs to have the pet be tanking. Demonology makes sense to me for tanking primarily because you transform yourself into a demon and gain enhanced abilities and armor.

[Jtree]

Typing on my phone here, makes it a pain to make longer responses.

Queen, druid and monk tanks get dodge from agility, while plate tanks get parry from strength. I don't think it would be absurd for int to do something useful for locks. There's also the option of giving lock tanks a use for spirit gear (evasive spirit?)

Now, when I said "pet-commanding tank" I should have said "a tank who has a pet in tow". It's just not reasonable to try to use a pet to tank a raid boss. Those encounters are too involved, and a pet would either be useless or would cheese most mechanics. Rather, a lock tank would be different in that it has a pet to offer extra abilities for the encounter at hand.

If I were designing a lock tank, I would move away from demo's resources and abilities, to create a new feel. I'd theme it around directly tapping into the twisting nether, Apotheosis, to "ground" damage, while primarily dealing damage via life draining. Perhaps have increased dodge while channelling, and a chi or holy power type secondary resource for active mitigation damage absorbs. Demon Soul would be the shield wall for this spec, while its mastery would increase health gained from offensive spells, and/or avoidance.

If it were up to me.

[Deleted]

Well Int gives crit chance, so that's not entirely true. And if you wanted to, you could make a mitigation mechanic that is based off of crit % or procs off crits or something similar.

Ah, my bad. Note to self: Research is needed more than radioactive superspiders. Wasn't Crit-based mitigation what warriors had in Catacylsm or have currently? Or, at least a crit-esque mechanic tied to the mastery stat. I'd argue that crit might "feel" a bit RNG-y (look at how Fire Mages are discussing their spec being too dependant on RNG in the Mage forums) for a tanking spec but it's an interesting idea, if even crit-based resources rather than true mitigation.

Jtree, I gotta say, I'm sorry. I've read so many of these that I think I'm getting a bit cynical. Frankly, I thought you were going for a Demon Hunter, Illidan in 3 esque look. The idea is interesting in itself (bare in mind, I'm playing Devil's Advocate against myself right now). Not too sure about a casting tank, since silences would be fatal (which one could argue is the point, but I digress). The issue of range is also there too (TOR admitted they couldn't balance a ranged Tank class) but easily solved by something like DA's limitations. Other tanking specs gain life at regular intervals, DKs rely on runes and Paladins rely on HoP, so perhaps resource-based life gain being a focus instead of Drain Life? The aesthetic idea, using the Nether to ground damage rather than turning into a demon seems FAR more palatable to the Warlock aesthetic (IMO). I digress.

The potential is there, I'll admit, but I'm not sure if it is needed at this time. Maybe, if WoW changes in the far future. Also, one further thing that I don't think has been addressed is how Warlocks would be viewed. Remember DKs during Wrath in the levelling process? The DK problem (iirc, coming from my memories of Wrath levelling) was that they started at a high level with little to no prior experience in tanking (or even melee) required, and were given a whole plethora of abilities (and, admittedly, a confusing dual-role spec tree style) and were seen to have more trouble learning the class mechanics than any other class of equal level (who would have had 55 more levels and many many more hours under their belt than DKs). If Warlocks got a tanking spec tomorrow, I worry if a similar event will happen. On an even more meta level: We're getting a big lore-filled storyling just for us and shiny new fire animations to go with our shiny new resources and class overhaul that we got only a few months ago. If Warlocks are announced to be the first class to have a brand new spec added just for them, and a new role in what can be considered a seller's market.... To quote Batman in a bad film "It just raises too many questions."

[nightfalls]

I thought Dodge was Guardian's most sought-for stat, least that's what the Guardian guides say (My own druid is Balance and one very neglected and overlooked cow), not to mention that dodge is inherent in Agility gear. Int has no such inherent secondary stat.

If I remember in most cases (there's a few fights you want dodge), you want hit/expertise, then critical strike.

[epicchaos]

Turns out warlocks can tank (lfr at least). As for the discussion of the intended blizzard mechanics... who gives a crap. Play the game how you want to play it, within limits of the ToS of course.

[checking facts]

Turns out warlocks can tank (lfr at least). As for the discussion of the intended blizzard mechanics... who gives a crap. Play the game how you want to play it, within limits of the ToS of course.

I think I just found my favorite video on youtube

[Deleted]

1) Not all tanks are happier DPSing.

Yes as I said good ones, people who tank as mains for a normal raiding guilds. If you raid 10 man at least one of your tanks must be able dps decently.

I've known a lot of players who -hate- DPSing and play Druids and Paladins specifically so they can have dual spec Healing/Tanking to avoid being asked. I don't like DPSing on my DK, and I don't have any desire to DPS or tank or my Paladin. Role evasion works both ways; and there a hell of a lot of Priests who run dual Healing specs for similar reasons.

Yes? Virtually the entire playerbase only care to perform in one role, this has nothing to do with whether they are pure or hybrid. This is why your point is senseless. Who expect a a restodruid to be able or interested in tanking knowing nothing else about him? I would never even consider asking such a person to replace a tank, unless I knew he had that inclination or gear.

2) In competative play, your RL will take the best class for the job. Some players are content to sit out 3 weeks of progression because they 'play the wrong class'; that's part of the deal in that environment and players there will put up with that kind of shit.

Only top end raiding guilds have the luxury to replace players based on class, for a guessismate 99.9999% of all people who plays wow playing skill is more important for competitive play then their class.

LFR tank queues are nearer an hour; and will even cause a healer with you to have to wait somewhat. It's quicker to queue as DPS, then just fail DPS or AFK in your tank spec for loot.

There will always be inbalances between the roles. My point is that if every class had an offspec you have the choice of respeccing for fast queues or sit in them to perform in your preferered role, everyone get what they want, and giving people the option to choose loot based on spec in LFR shouldn't be hard. and is another issue.

I think it's selfish of you to remove a choice they were given 8 years ago.

I don't think the word "choice" means what you think it means. Currently the warlock class has none, Who is selfish again?

Calling someone a "12 year old with self-esteem issues' is hardly an advert for your maturity, nor is it going to make anyone feel any better about telling you 'No'. You are why people want that choice.

It's merely there to bring home how nonsensical your fear is. Saying "i don't want to tank" is really not hard. Certainly a childish reason for denying others the opportunity.

Because no guild is a perfectly stable environment; people will always come and go from the game and that includes players of niche roles. People get asked, even if only temporarily, but it happens and I don't know how this denial persists.

Jessica, If the guild needs a dps with tank offspec and your spot is on the line. You are exactly the same situation if you say no as if your class is unable to tank. You will be replaced regardless.
If you want to be consistent you should campaign for the removal of all tanks with dps offspecs, that is the only way you can avoid the "pressure".

Then again in my experience this pressure is virtually nonexistent in the first place. No sane raidleader would pick a player to regulary tank who isn't comfortable with it. It can only end in misery, poor progress and wasted gear.

[Frizzlewits]

i said it before and i will say it again.

NO i do not want that my lock is able to tank.

[Brusalk]

i said it before and i will say it again.

NO i do not want that my lock is able to tank.

Why? If it doesn't replace any of the existing specs what possible reason is there that you don't want the personal choice to tank? You don't want to be forced to tank by your guild? That argument is preposterous. No guild I've ever seen or been in besides very, very serious and high-ranked guilds forces players to play a specific role outside of their main one, unless the player is inclined to.

I just don't see how opening up the option for people who enjoy warlock lore/class who also would like tanking as a warlock is a bad thing.

[nightfalls]

Why? If it doesn't replace any of the existing specs what possible reason is there that you don't want the personal choice to tank? You don't want to be forced to tank by your guild? That argument is preposterous. No guild I've ever seen or been in besides very, very serious and high-ranked guilds forces players to play a specific role outside of their main one, unless the player is inclined to.

I just don't see how opening up the option for people who enjoy warlock lore/class who also would like tanking as a warlock is a bad thing.

Not only that, but even in the very serious and high-ranked guilds, it's typically better to play a main alt that is the same role, because it's more conducive to class-stacking.

That and generally a player has to prove himself to be exceptional at both roles, to the point where a leader can confidently say he will be an equal to the guild's (very serious and high-ranked) main-spec healers/tanks/DPS.

[Jessicka]

Not only that, but even in the very serious and high-ranked guilds, it's typically better to play a main alt that is the same role, because it's more conducive to class-stacking.

That and generally a player has to prove himself to be exceptional at both roles, to the point where a leader can confidently say he will be an equal to the guild's (very serious and high-ranked) main-spec healers/tanks/DPS.

I can't see how you can possibly deny it when I've seen it happen.
- I have asked that question.
- I have seen applications to my former guild that said "I want to join because I want to do X but the guild I am in keep asking me to do Y".
- I have seen players leave guilds I've been in because they were sick of being asked to do X when they wanted to do Y (and that includes rerolling mains for a new role).

I don't know what metric you use to measure force, but "Do it or we don't raid tonight" is quite some duress. Having had the choice to pick a class where that situation wont come up and taking it away is wrong, as someone put in that position to make that choice on those grounds clearly did not end up there lightly.