How to Win Friends and Influence Priests

[DarkCrown]

I agree with almost everything Bolty has to say about healers in groups. But I do have a bit of an issue with not wanting other classes to heal.

I play a Druid, I'm level capped, and I've been there a while now. Most Druids at this point are Restoration specced, because they are usually called on to heal. My problem is that many parties will not let the Druid play as a Druid. The tanks don't want you playing off-tank, even though in many cases I have more hit points and armor than the pally they might be using in the role, and the Priests don't want you to heal since that's a 'waste of mana'. This leaves me standing at the back of the group, doing my measly 45-60 caster DPS and wondering how to explain things to people.

If there is a Priest and a Druid in the party, they should almost always split the healing duties. I often pair with a holy specced Priest, and when I'm along he's free to use mind control to great advantage, since he doesn't have to worry about the healing. He'll let me use the bear form when it's needed, and move himself into a healing role. This makes a great combo, one that along with a Mage, a Rogue and a Warrior was able to easily and quickly handle the BRD escort quest.

It's also quite viable to let the Druid do the initial healing, and then have him drop into bear form to deal with the ensuing aggro. This keeps the Priest alive and at full mana later in the fight, and gives him two tanks to help him out.

But when the Priest has told you 'Don't heal', and the main tank has told you 'Don't use forms', it's simply a complete waste of my abilities. And a pet peeve, as you can probably tell. :)

-DarkCrown

[acidjax]

What else do Priests look for in parties?  Well, along with a fantastic tank player, knowledgeable party members who understand that protecting the healer is key. 
[right][snapback]68648[/snapback][/right]

I definitely agree that agro management is a group effort. Mages help out by not overnuking when unnecessary and rogues use feint and vanish. Hunters can use feign death before they even get agro to lower their overall hate level in the fight. Rogues and hunters make excellent peelers to fed-ex the adds to the tank or get it off the priest. Priests try not to use PW:Shield during combat unless necessary to keep their hate levels lower.

I would suggest though in pickup groups that if a priest were to get agro, he might run with the mob into the LoS of the tank so that the tank would more easily notice.

[Tal]

Unfortunately, damage is the way to hold aggro right now.  Defensive Stance sacrifices damage output, and that means you're MUCH more reliant on skills to contain aggro, rather than sheer damage output.
[right][snapback]68716[/snapback][/right]

I, on behalf of other warriors who use defensive stance, call Bullcrap. It isn't the way to hold aggro right now. Yes, I have to use my skills wisely, yes I have to manage my rage properly.

Obviously, this is fine if your party wants to wait thirty seconds or so for you to get a Sunder or two on every mob in the pull, but that just takes too long.
[right][snapback]68716[/snapback][/right]

Oh give me a break. You don't have to land a sunder on every mob to get its attention. Demoralizing shout to grab the attention and then a sunder on each throughout the battle seems to do okay. Unless you have a bunch of DPS monkeys spamming AoE spells you won't need to worry overly about holding aggro on adds.

My party frequently has two mages.  A pull works like this: I use Charge, and use the rage generated for a quick Whirlwind, then a Dem-snare combo.  The mages charge in and spam IAE and/or Blizzard interspersed with Frost Novas and Blinks.  The mobs die, the Priest has about 80% MP left, the Mages have about 35% MP left.  I start a new pull, and the Shaman and I proceed to kill the mobs while the mages drink.  The mages get up after they're done drinking, nuke whatever's left, and rinse and repeat.[right][snapback]68716[/snapback][/right]

:blink: Never mind then.

I honestly think that using a heater and beater isn't productive.  Some swear by it, but it is MUCH easier to hold aggro with a standard 2H setup.  The way my group clears the instances might not be the "correct" way, but it's DAMN sure faster than the "correct" way.
[right][snapback]68716[/snapback][/right]

Thats good for you and your group. The neat thing about WoW is that there are so many ways for folks to play their characters. This is why I tend to get argumentative when somebody tells me that their is only one way of doing things. :)

YMMV

[playingtokrush]

The last I'd heard on the over-healing issue is that over-healing generates threat, but no more than if the heal had not been an over-heal. In other words, a heal causes the same amount of threat no matter how much health the target has. Of course, I don't know if this is how the game mechanics work, but this is my current opinion on how things work as of the last thread I've read on the subject.

[Treesh]

But when the Priest has told you 'Don't heal', and the main tank has told you 'Don't use forms', it's simply a complete waste of my abilities. And a pet peeve, as you can probably tell. :)

-DarkCrown
[right][snapback]68720[/snapback][/right]

I love having druids with me, on the rare occasions when I do. I don't tell them "don't heal", but most of the time since I don't mind being a heal bot, the druids don't have to heal so they don't, but I definitely don't tell them "stay the hell out of my domain."

And I just can't imagine someone telling a druid to not use forms. I'm so sorry you run into that. The druids I've been with have been so helpful simply because they are so versatile! One of the most fun I've had in a group was actually a random group with a druid and a mage (I was playing my priest and GG had his gnome warrior). We got a little sloppy and pulled two groups of critters at once, and then another one or two patrol groups came upon us at the same time. It was fantastic watching the druid be a bear when we needed an extra tank, a cat when we needed a little bit more DPS at the time and then shifting back to caster form and healing me when I was starting to get low on mana and was badly hurt since I wanted to save mana for healing the tank/off-tank so I wasn't healing myself (I still had desperate prayer to save my butt anyway). It was fantastic to watch a druid really get to work and show off his skills and his versatility (thanks Hippie!). Thankfully, that happened early in Aleri's career so I don't tell a druid what to do and what not to do; I trust in them to know what they're doing unless they prove otherwise. Since druids aren't flavors of the month, they don't get as many monkeys flocking to the class, not knowing how to play, and then ruining the rep of the class in general. There are still some of course, just like any class has it's utter twits. You can't avoid that. I just wish I could remember better that there is a secondary healer sometimes so I don't blow my desperate prayer unnecessarily.

[Olon97]

The Basilisk fight in Zul'Farrak is a bit tricky because on first glance, many players get the impression that the boss will continually summon minions unless he is quickly dispatched. The basilisks also annoy the AoE usual suspects with their high resistances. Their numbers are limited, however.

A reasonably leveled/geared tank can tank that pull starting in Zerker stance, using demo/ whirlwind / cleave to get a lead on healing aggro on as many basilisks as possible along with keeping sunders up on the named. If the rest of the group focuses fire on the basilisks first (with priority to any that break towards the healer) , the fight becomes quite managable. Similar tactics work on the Divino-part if the AoE players don't have the mana/endurance for the whole battle on the stairs.

I certainly don't want multiple healers overhealing or wasting mana, but I would rather have multiple seperate players use multiple small heals than one player use one large heal when it's an option - makes losing aggro to healing much less likey - see mongo's Neriad tales for the "how I learned to love healer rotations" account. ;)

[Professor Frink]

It's also quite viable to let the Druid do the initial healing, and then have him drop into bear form to deal with the ensuing aggro. This keeps the Priest alive and at full mana later in the fight, and gives him two tanks to help him out.
[right][snapback]68720[/snapback][/right]

Something like that was working well for me. I was in a party with another priest of somewhat lower level, and after a period of stepping on each other's toes, we settled into a routine where I renewed everything as the fight started, applied SW:Pain and my troll racial debuff as was safe, and sat back and wanded. The lesser priest lesser healed, and for small pulls that was it. If the fight went long, she'd run OOM and charge with her staff; I'd have full mana again due to the extended period of no casting, and be able to drop heals on whoever was taking the pounding. (unfortunately not always the tank due to our poor party discipline, but that's a side issue).

-- frink

[Thawwing Light]

Hmmm. I've read this thread, and I do tend to follow GG's style, at least in instances. Out of instances, I'm not in a party, so what I do doesn't matter all that much to people.

My build will eventually get Imp. Revenge and Conc. Blow. Unfortunately, I went to grab Tac. Mastery, Piercing Howl, and Anger Management first. So, no great seond taunt and great stuns. Such is life.

I'm going to see if I can't get into the habit of Sundering even more than I usually do... and it's good to know that the priest/warrior duo works well for you as well.

[MongoJerry]

My party frequently has two mages.  A pull works like this: I use Charge, and use the rage generated for a quick Whirlwind, then a Dem-snare combo.  The mages charge in and spam IAE and/or Blizzard interspersed with Frost Novas and Blinks.  The mobs die, the Priest has about 80% MP left, the Mages have about 35% MP left.  I start a new pull, and the Shaman and I proceed to kill the mobs while the mages drink.  The mages get up after they're done drinking, nuke whatever's left, and rinse and repeat.

I honestly think that using a heater and beater isn't productive.  Some swear by it, but it is MUCH easier to hold aggro with a standard 2H setup.  The way my group clears the instances might not be the "correct" way, but it's DAMN sure faster than the "correct" way.

When you stop zerging instances, you'll find this tactic won't work. At level 58, you should be running lower Blackrock Spire and Scholomance in 5-man teams, or if you want a little easier time, you can run Blackrock Depths. But from our earlier discussions (when you were running the Scarlet Monastery at mid-to-high 40's), I imagine that you're just running Marauden and the Sunken Temple now. When you fight mobs of roughly your own level and boss mobs at levels higher than you, you'll find that many of the tactics you had used before stop working.

In particular, the 2H setup thing. Oh, man, when I see a warrior try that, I just shake my head and groan. But I'm a patient person, and since I will have already wasted a lot of time getting to the instance and waiting for the party, I figure I might as well get some amusement out of the situation. So, first I'll suggest to the warrior that maybe he or she should break out their shield. If the person says, "no," and goes on about how he or she can tank and hold aggro without a shield, I'll let them go ahead for a couple of pulls. I mean, you never know. Maybe this is the 1 in a 1000 warrior who has figured out a new technique, right? After the warrior inevitably dies twice (usually with party wipe), because the warrior lacks armor and blocking and takes more damage than can be healed in time, I'll bring up the idea of using a shield again. I've seen some warriors sheepishly switch to a shield and end up tanking decently well for the rest of the instance. However, I have had a couple of people who kept insisting that they can tank without a shield. At this point, depending on my mood, I either stay to watch them die a few more times for my amusement and then hearth out, or I'll hearth out immediately.

[Thawwing Light]

Unfortunately, damage is the way to hold aggro right now.  Defensive Stance sacrifices damage output, and that means you're MUCH more reliant on skills to contain aggro, rather than sheer damage output.

Obviously, this is fine if your party wants to wait thirty seconds or so for you to get a Sunder or two on every mob in the pull, but that just takes too long.

My party frequently has two mages.  A pull works like this: I use Charge, and use the rage generated for a quick Whirlwind, then a Dem-snare combo.  The mages charge in and spam IAE and/or Blizzard interspersed with Frost Novas and Blinks.  The mobs die, the Priest has about 80% MP left, the Mages have about 35% MP left.  I start a new pull, and the Shaman and I proceed to kill the mobs while the mages drink.  The mages get up after they're done drinking, nuke whatever's left, and rinse and repeat.

I honestly think that using a heater and beater isn't productive.  Some swear by it, but it is MUCH easier to hold aggro with a standard 2H setup.  The way my group clears the instances might not be the "correct" way, but it's DAMN sure faster than the "correct" way.
[right][snapback]68716[/snapback][/right]

Artega, you're probably sick of hearing me ask for a better way to hold group agro, and as you prescribe the same cure each time, you're wondering why I haven't taken it.

Well, I did try it. My current build is (effectively) Arms/Fury, and I swapped in a nice 2hander, Corpsemaker, to test this strategy. The verdict is such:

It's not bad, but it doesn't solve my problem, and it doesn't play any 'better' than my shield strategy. I kill faster, but I need significantly more healing, and pulling with charges gives my starting rage and a free hit at the cost of a safe pull. My damage output is nice, but it only speeds life up against weak monsters...

---

Ultimately, I think what you don't realise, or choose to ignore, is the fact Defensive stance is given a significant boost in hate generation (10% base I think) to compensate for its reduced damage. Until recently, I didn't notice how well this helped things, but after doing Razor Fen Kraul a few times with overzealous mages, I began to notice a pattern. I could hold agro on my main target in some of the instance's required multi pulls, but if the mages went ahead and AoE'd at the start of the fight, the monster would be pulled off me regardless of what strategy I was using...


Ultimately? The easiest way for a warrior to keep multiple target hate is for him to pull, use his AoE hate generation, and for the healers and nukers to hold off a few seconds. Defensive stance helps this because a) the Warrior is generating equally good hate while dying slower and B) (unconfirmed) Abilities generate more hate.

Maybe your method is working for you, Artega. It's not the only way.

[Bolty]

Power Word: Shield. I love this skill, and it's great that Priests can spam it on a warrior in its improved form. That doesn't mean they should.
[right][snapback]68689[/snapback][/right]

If you're partying with a Priest that is casting PW:S on a warrior, inform them of this. I never cast it on Warriors in groups because I know it stops the buildup of rage.

I'm curious about how the warriors you group with keep agro on multiple targets. Do they use AoEs such as Demoralizing Shout and (if they took talents for it) Piercing Howl?
[right][snapback]68689[/snapback][/right]

Any and every group aggro technique should be used. On top of that, Warriors should try to rotate their targets to gain more aggro. Ideally, by the time the healer has to pop off their first heal, the tank has smacked around all the mobs a bit. This is hard to do.

The other thing I want to ask is your thoughts on backup tanks and backup healers. I know you've given bits of your opinion in regards to them thus far (mainly, that backup tanks existing to save the priest is a useful role, and that a secondary healer can screw things up with overhealing), but I'm curious what you think of secondary tanks as regards to them being more useful for holding agro on a large number of targets, or less useful because they require you to alternate heals between two targets. I'm also curious what you feel about a backup healer, be it a druid, a shaman, or even another priest (likely shadow) for when things go wrong and more healing than you can provide is required.
[right][snapback]68689[/snapback][/right]

There's nothing wrong with backup healers. Things Will Go Wrong™, and also for boss fights, it's supremely handy to have another healer around to save the day when the primary runs out of mana. But for most fights, you only need one healer, and if you're playing with a holy/disc priest, you're not having them along for their offense. :)

As for tanks, secondary tanks are just dandy if they can hold aggro. While a party of four Warriors and a Priest would not be all that effective, having a Paladin accompany a Warrior along in an instance makes life *easy*.

-Bolty

[Boutros]

Unfortunately, damage is the way to hold aggro right now.  Defensive Stance sacrifices damage output, and that means you're MUCH more reliant on skills to contain aggro, rather than sheer damage output.

Obviously, this is fine if your party wants to wait thirty seconds or so for you to get a Sunder or two on every mob in the pull, but that just takes too long.

My party frequently has two mages.  A pull works like this: I use Charge, and use the rage generated for a quick Whirlwind, then a Dem-snare combo.  The mages charge in and spam IAE and/or Blizzard interspersed with Frost Novas and Blinks.  The mobs die, the Priest has about 80% MP left, the Mages have about 35% MP left.  I start a new pull, and the Shaman and I proceed to kill the mobs while the mages drink.  The mages get up after they're done drinking, nuke whatever's left, and rinse and repeat.

I honestly think that using a heater and beater isn't productive.  Some swear by it, but it is MUCH easier to hold aggro with a standard 2H setup.  The way my group clears the instances might not be the "correct" way, but it's DAMN sure faster than the "correct" way.
[right][snapback]68716[/snapback][/right]

When a warrior is taking almost all the group's damage and only dealing a small fraction of the groups damage it makes a ton of sense to maximize mitigation via defensive stance and shield in exchange for reduced damage output. And I for one can't understand how battle stance makes for better tanking.

When I duo with my brother's shaman I usually go with 2hander and battle stance, and he holds aggro the whole time, not even using earthshock or rockbiter. But when I go defensive with sword and shield I can out aggro him with no difficulty at all.

I'm not saying that defensive stance is the best in every situation and that it should always be kept to. Stance switching for overpowers, whirlwinds, intercepts and charges are very important, but in general defensive stance is the win for aggro and saving your healers mana.

But that's just for my mundane kill once monster at a time strategy. I can't really comment on your AOE style of play, suffice it to say I've never been in a group with 2 mages, I consider myself lucky if my groups have either a priest or a mage to complement the usual 2 shamans and a rogue or 2 rogues and a shaman.

Edit: paragraphed for readability.

[Bolty]

My problem is that many parties will not let the Druid play as a Druid. The tanks don't want you playing off-tank, even though in many cases I have more hit points and armor than the pally they might be using in the role, and the Priests don't want you to heal since that's a 'waste of mana'. This leaves me standing at the back of the group, doing my measly 45-60 caster DPS and wondering how to explain things to people.
[right][snapback]68720[/snapback][/right]

I know little of Druids. I assumed they had a little firepower in the casting department and would be of more use with their mana that way. I usually expect to see Druids in bear or cat form if I'm doing the healing.

If there is a Priest and a Druid in the party, they should almost always split the healing duties. I often pair with a holy specced Priest, and when I'm along he's free to use mind control to great advantage, since he doesn't have to worry about the healing. He'll let me use the bear form when it's needed, and move himself  into a healing role. This makes a great combo, one that along with a Mage, a Rogue and a Warrior was able to easily and quickly handle the BRD escort quest.
[right][snapback]68720[/snapback][/right]

The problem with this is that a Holy spec'ed Priest is very focused on healing. It's what they're made for, it's what they're good at. Having one with you *should* mean that you get to have the night off for healing duties and can concentrate on dishing out damage. Mind Control is such an iffy spell for Priests; I only use it when I'm in a non-threatening situation, like if the group is fighting mobs that are all 5 levels lower than us and not much of a problem. If you take healing away from the holy Priest, what they have left is...Shadow Word: Pain and Smite. And that ain't much.

It's also quite viable to let the Druid do the initial healing, and then have him drop into bear form to deal with the ensuing aggro. This keeps the Priest alive and at full mana later in the fight, and gives him two tanks to help him out.
[right][snapback]68720[/snapback][/right]

This I agree with quite a bit - a Druid can help keep aggro off a Priest this way.

But when the Priest has told you 'Don't heal', and the main tank has told you 'Don't use forms', it's simply a complete waste of my abilities. And a pet peeve, as you can probably tell. :)
[right][snapback]68720[/snapback][/right]

Now, my question: why would a tank tell you not to use forms? If a Priest has the healing covered, wouldn't they appreciate the extra damage you provide? Keeping you around purely for healing makes for a SLOW group, since you're down to just 3 offensive slots...

-Bolty

[MongoJerry]

If you're partying with a Priest that is casting PW:S on a warrior, inform them of this.  I never cast it on Warriors in groups because I know it stops the buildup of rage.

Actually, that's a myth. PW:S doesn't affect rage generation positively or negatively.

There's nothing wrong with backup healers.  Things Will Go Wrong™, and also for boss fights, it's supremely handy to have another healer around to save the day when the primary runs out of mana.  But for most fights, you only need one healer, and if you're playing with a holy/disc priest, you're not having them along for their offense.

I usually tell shamans that if a fight gets rough, I'll expect them to take care of healing themselves and I'll handle the other guys. I'll throw the occational renew on a shaman and if others aren't in dire need of healing, I'll occationally throw a flash heal on a shaman. But to me, a shaman is mostly one less person I have to heal during a fight.

A pull works like this: I use Charge, and use the rage generated for a quick Whirlwind, then a Dem-snare combo.

Ugh, I forgot to mention this. I hate charge pulls in higher level instances, for many reasons, but not limited to:

1. Mob groups tend to be more tightly packed together, so a charging warrior will frequently end up pulling extra mob groups.

2. Higher level instances have more patroling mobs, so you want to pull mobs to where patrols won't add during the fight. Having the warrior charge forward means that fights happen right where the mobs are and right where patrols will walk by. The alternative is that the warrior can charge forward and then walk backward to the party, but then that's several seconds where the mobs are pounding on the tank without them getting pounded on. (Or, that's where the priest heals the tank and pulls all the aggro and gets pounded on).

3. Mobs in higher level instances often have special abilities like knockback and fear. If you fight the mobs where they are, that means you have a lot better chance of being knocked into more adds.

Just use Inner Rage or whatever thing you have to do to build up a little initial rage and shoot pull the mob group to the party. It's so much simpler and less likely to wipe a party that chooses to fight mobs of its level.

[MongoJerry]

Keeping you around purely for healing makes for a SLOW group, since you're down to just 3 offensive slots...

Actually, two offensive slots, since neither the priest nor the warrior is dealing much damage, either.

[Artega]

When you stop zerging instances, you'll find this tactic won't work.
[right][snapback]68746[/snapback][/right]

When my healer and my shaman reach level 58 with me, maybe we'll stop "zerging" instances. Unfortunately, they rarely have time to play, excepting Saturdays, which means they're Lv.52 while the others are Lv.56 or higher.

I HAVE done BRD tanking with a 2H, and it went just fine.

Ugh, I forgot to mention this. I hate charge pulls in higher level instances, for many reasons, but not limited to:

And you're assuming the Warrior doesn't have a brain, and is unable to think on his feet. If it's a blatantly messy pull, I have someone else pull for me (typically the Shaman or the Priest will pull with Silence or Shackle, depending on the mobs in question), and I charge as they get closer.

Just because I don't use a board doesn't mean I don't think.

[Kevin]

As it stands now a Paladin has three means of holding (haha) aggro. Seal of Fury, consecration and dps. Seal of fury works fairly well as long as I get the first hit in and stay on the upside of the Aggro mound. If a mage or priest overpulls aggro it is very, very difficult for me to get it back. Consecration is a AoE DoT that works fairly well, again, so long as no one overpulls aggro. It also has the effect of breaking sheep, sap, and mez. Granted this isn't as much of an issue if you fight the main mob out of range of the CC'd mobs. DPS on a paladin is a joke so unless I'm partied with lowbies, I won't pull aggro that way. So if you have a paladin as main tank, and things go wrong™, there is very little I can do but go OOM healing and smacking things with Seal of Fury and finally as a last resort hit divine intervention.

Now some would say that this is working as intended™ but I believe it isn't. Blizzard has stated that in their class vision for the paladin that they wanted a group who had a paladin as MT to not feel gimped. This is certainly not the case as it stands in the game now.

Lets look at the other hybrid class in the game, the Druid. The druid in bear form has a taunt ability but not as many skills for holding aggro as a warrior. The difference is that druid heals do cause aggro, especially if done on the person that has drawn aggro off the druid tank. However, I can go /OOM healing folk when things go bad without drawing aggro off anything. You saw this first hand in the fight before the boss of Gnomeregan. I fully healed Aleri twice and healed you for half life once without drawing any more mobs that what were already pounding on me. This would seem out of whack to me in what Blizzard intends for the the heal to threat ratio.
[right][snapback]68715[/snapback][/right]

I agree that paladin could use some other aggro gabbing tool, but I can see way too many exploits if it is a heal. I understand the frustation too, but a pally heal generating as much aggro as a priest or druid just looks too exploitable to me.

Remember a Druid can't really tank in caster form and it takes considerable amounts of mana to form shift. That limits how frequently a druid could use a heal as a taunt form while tanking. If you are tanking anything and shift out and cast a heal, you will take enough damage to need another major source of heal on yourself. At least that has been my experience. Also keep in mind that a bear druid can't use pots (and I don't think it could use a soulstone either) so it loses that out and really won't want to be shifting as an aggro hold. At least it's been a pretty bad idea for me when I've tried to shift and heal while tanking.

The paladin should not be as good a tank as the warrior. It should be right around what a shaman or druid could do. I agree there are issues with the paly in this regards. Shaman can pull and hold aggro easier than either of the two (earth shock and rock biter), but they can't take as much beating. But if you give pally heals the aggro gen of a priest or druid it just feels like they will tank better than a warrior and have more party benefits with the buffs and auras they can do.

It's just a tricky area.

[Tal]

I'm not asking for the aggro generating level of a priest or druid. I'm just asking for it to generate MORE threat than it does at present. I shouldn't be able to heal to heal the priest twice to full and the warrior to half health without generating some interest from a mob. :)

[LordJaeden]

Ugh, I forgot to mention this.  I hate charge pulls in higher level instances...[right][snapback]68756[/snapback][/right]

A good Hunter can do amazing things for a group. http://www.nuklearpower.com/hunter.php has some great strategies for how a Hunter should pull. I've been the primary healer in BRS and Stratholme and this method of pulling makes life easy.

Another thing is a good tank makes a Priests life soooo much easier. I find that if I party with a tank that knows how to hold aggro I enjoy the instance much more.

[DarkCrown]

Mind Control is such an iffy spell for Priests; I only use it when I'm in a non-threatening situation, like if the group is fighting mobs that are all 5 levels lower than us and not much of a problem.

I've seen Mind Control used all through Black Rock Mountain. It's one of the standard techniques of almost any raid I've been on. In a five man group it's a powerful way to control certain situations, as long as the group is ready to deal with the possible failure of the spell. It's a killer priest spell, and I'd suggest you play around with it more.

If you take healing away from the holy Priest, what they have left is...Shadow Word: Pain and Smite.  And that ain't much.

I'm not suggesting that a druid partied with a priest 'take away' the priest's role as healer. That's the same problem I described in the first post, only in reverse. I'm saying that if the druid is not forced into a particular role he allows other players to better use their abilities. The priest can do a better job of healing with backup, as long as the two healers work together.

Now, my question: why would a tank tell you not to use forms?  If a Priest has the healing covered, wouldn't they appreciate the extra damage you provide?  Keeping you around purely for healing makes for a SLOW group, since you're down to just 3 offensive slots...

The problem as I've encountered it is that most players want to fit each member of the party into just a few possible roles. There's a tank, there's a healer, and there are characters who supply DPS. Many players are uncomfortable with party members that don't fit neatly into one of these slots. And so they force the druid into a particular role, and that role is almost always healer. Very few players think that a druid is capable of tanking, and even fewer are ready for a character that moves fluidly from off-tank to healer as the situation demands.

-DarkCrown