This Thing You Call Aggro.

[Drasca]

haven't been any other warriors to engage targets... ;)
[right][snapback]78684[/snapback][/right]

:w00t: Must be wild to play with you then. I've done bits of UBRS with just one warrior. Not pretty at all. 2 warrior minimum.

Imagine this: When you're knocked back, by guards, the beast, or dragonkin, the second warrior immediately picks up the slack. Instead of the enemy mobs going wild on your party, they're held in check. Of course, it takes some coordination and understanding secondary tank doesn't taunt off each primary, but it works beautifully.

I don't even think I want to engage General drakk with just one warrior. I have vague memories of doing so before... and the group wiping. Not pretty.

Note that there's a when warrior bow pulls, then CC intercepts, intitial aggro from the entire group is to the warrior, secondary mob aggro is to the CC option. However, saps take exception. Saps have no aggro by themselves, so only healing and other non damage skills aggros them.

I want the healers away from the CC not to stop aggro, but to get distance so they won't be whacked when the CC pops, intentionally or not (charm is guaranteed to intermittently pop... sheeps can be refreshed). If intentionally, hopefully the sunder or other skill will stick, but that's not guaranteed. I don't want to see a Mortal strike finishing the priest when they can just mosey a few yards in the other direction while someone else engages it.

Not to mention cleaves and other physical aoe attacks... Oof.

CC options to reduce the pull to one mob anyway so I can play around in Battle/Zerk stance and have a grand old time  Crowd Control 

Hehe exactly, and you trust your CC'ers to CC, and not interfere. Then smack everything else around.

Its worst when charmed targets are hit. Charmed target hit, succubus (who has the aggro), succubus dies, Charm option gone, healer is likely next on the aggro list. Paaaaain.

Then again, you can run around un zerk/battle stance and whack everything else