11-15-2006, 12:03 AM
Since I haven't had time or ability to closely monitor upcoming changes to the game via TBC, I might not be able to grasp the point of this post, but it seems the OP isn't really stating anything new.
From what I understand, the new Paladin "taunt" decreases the aggro other party members have, rather than increase the aggro the Paladin has, which I don't really see as any different functionally other than the fact that something will already be beating on a non-tank before the Paladin gets the opportunity to use their "taunt" (unless the taunt functions differently from Taunt; that is, it adds a static amount of aggro, which would reduce Paladin tanks to Tauntadins), and it's my understanding that anything that isn't a tank that's getting mauled by a mob in a raid setting is going to be dead well before the Paladin has time to react.
Barring that, itemization doesn't favor Paladin tanks; their tier sets and non-set tier gear generally have Spellpower and MP5 stats, and have lower STA in favor of INT, SPI, and they lack Defense entirely. I haven't had time to sift through the chaff in the WoW forums to find out how exactly Defense Rating, Resilience Rating, Critical Rating, and all the other new terminology relate to the present stats of Defense and Critical Strike, nor do I have time to check for updates to Paladin talents and skills, but I don't think Paladins could ever be realistically good tanks without a good amount of +DEF and an obscene amount MP5, since Mana isn't as effective as Rage for extended fights.
Now, the OP says that a 41-point Protection Paladin will generally be chosen over a DPS Warrior for tanking situations; isn't that pretty logical to assume? Granted, a 31-point Protection Paladin might not be chosen over a DPS Warrior for a tanking position in the current game, and maybe that's what the OP is trying to get across - that Paladins will actually be capable and maybe even preferred for tanking in TBC over DPS Warriors. But isn't that how it should be to begin with?
I'm assuming the OP means "So if you are a DPS Warrior wanting to tank" in this instance, since I don't see how a Prot Paladin would be chosen over a Prot Warrior in most situations, given that Rage is better than Mana for tanking. Obviously, there will probably be some encounters in the new instances (and maybe some old ones will be redesigned) so that a Paladin will need to step up to the plate, and possibly/probably the same for Bears. Frankly, I'd enjoy that; I've always thought it was pretty moronic to have three classes capable of tanking, yet only use one of the three extensively for end-game tanking.
From what I understand, the new Paladin "taunt" decreases the aggro other party members have, rather than increase the aggro the Paladin has, which I don't really see as any different functionally other than the fact that something will already be beating on a non-tank before the Paladin gets the opportunity to use their "taunt" (unless the taunt functions differently from Taunt; that is, it adds a static amount of aggro, which would reduce Paladin tanks to Tauntadins), and it's my understanding that anything that isn't a tank that's getting mauled by a mob in a raid setting is going to be dead well before the Paladin has time to react.
Barring that, itemization doesn't favor Paladin tanks; their tier sets and non-set tier gear generally have Spellpower and MP5 stats, and have lower STA in favor of INT, SPI, and they lack Defense entirely. I haven't had time to sift through the chaff in the WoW forums to find out how exactly Defense Rating, Resilience Rating, Critical Rating, and all the other new terminology relate to the present stats of Defense and Critical Strike, nor do I have time to check for updates to Paladin talents and skills, but I don't think Paladins could ever be realistically good tanks without a good amount of +DEF and an obscene amount MP5, since Mana isn't as effective as Rage for extended fights.
Now, the OP says that a 41-point Protection Paladin will generally be chosen over a DPS Warrior for tanking situations; isn't that pretty logical to assume? Granted, a 31-point Protection Paladin might not be chosen over a DPS Warrior for a tanking position in the current game, and maybe that's what the OP is trying to get across - that Paladins will actually be capable and maybe even preferred for tanking in TBC over DPS Warriors. But isn't that how it should be to begin with?
Quote:So if you are a Warrior wanting to tank you may need to be in one of the guilds that everyone wants to join rather than the guilds that pick up the leftover players the top guilds dont want
I'm assuming the OP means "So if you are a DPS Warrior wanting to tank" in this instance, since I don't see how a Prot Paladin would be chosen over a Prot Warrior in most situations, given that Rage is better than Mana for tanking. Obviously, there will probably be some encounters in the new instances (and maybe some old ones will be redesigned) so that a Paladin will need to step up to the plate, and possibly/probably the same for Bears. Frankly, I'd enjoy that; I've always thought it was pretty moronic to have three classes capable of tanking, yet only use one of the three extensively for end-game tanking.
ArrayPaladins were not meant to sit in the back of the raid staring at health bars all day, spamming heals and listening to eight different classes whine about buffs.[/quote]
The original Heavy Metal Cowâ¢. USDA inspected, FDA approved.
The original Heavy Metal Cowâ¢. USDA inspected, FDA approved.