Druid Changes - 1.8

[savaughn]

We're not certain whether subtlety and salvation actually stack.  Given recent experiences with Broodlord Lashlayer, we're leaning in the direction of them not stacking.
[right][snapback]90458[/snapback][/right]

Good point. I actually hadn't tested that.

Just curious.  What real world conditions do you believe will make the difference "far and away" superior?  I can see how you might argue that some conditions might put the mage slightly ahead again, but it's difficult to see how the mage will suddenly go all the way to the top.
[right][snapback]90458[/snapback][/right]

Well, in context I'm talking Mage vs. Druid, not Mage vs., say, Hunter or Rogue which is an entirely different conversation. There are a lot of little things that build up on top of each other here. I'll try and stay focused on the raiding instance as a frame of reference.

Probably the easiest place to go with this is available mana pool. Now, it's possible for a druid to get into the 6K range for mana. It's probably possible to hit 7k, although I've never seen it. A typical lvl 60 seems to be running with around 5.5k mana. A gnome mage skates across 7k in blues. What's more, against a raid level boss your mage can burn through a ruby, citrine, and jade and kick this up to an effective 10k point working mana pool. This is just looking strictly at class based stuff - everybody can toss down a blue pot or whatever, so I'm skipping those. Having 60% of the mana a mage brings to the table is a significant consideration when looking at exactly what you can and cannot throw during a fight.

Another consideration is +damage. Sure, AM only lists out at 192dps, but mine hit for 226. Longer spells get a much better multiplier out of +damage than shorter ones. To match the mage DPS you're talking about stacking Moonfire (instant - 43% modifier) with Wrath (2s base, 57% modifier). Frostbolt carries a better (3s base) 85% modifier.

This brings up the obvious issue of itemization. If you add +damage you're generally losing out on your mana pool, so clearly there's trade offs. That said, take a look at the itemization for Druids. Compare Cenarion to Arcanist. Arcanist has 194 int and every single set piece makes a mage a better nuker. Cenarion has 158 int and only 37 +damage total.

There's other stuff, of course. Like the fact that it's easier to get consistent DPS from longer casting spells than shorter ones because human reflexes and lag put a little gap in between each cast and the issue of Moonfire being a debuff in an environment where those are carefully horded. That kind of thing, but you see where I'm going with this. A balance Druid is going to be a good nuker, but not as good as a Mage for these encounters.

But then, I wouldn't expect a balance Druid to just stand there and nuke. I'd expect them to be flexible and fill in where it's needed. Nuke in Moonkin form, shift and heal if the cloth group he/she is paired with needs it, shift back, etc. I do not agree with the mindset that the flex classes are inferior to the focused classes in the end game. Let me give you an example. Lets say the raid feels it needs a little bit more healing. It could get a restoration druid or a priest to fill that role as a healing specialist. But if group X doesn't need that much healing, it just needs a bit more to cover the gap, a feral or balance druid might be the ideal. I think blizz intended the raids to add a feral druid to the rogue group and a balance druid to the caster DPS group and, while it's still speculation, that looks to me like it will be a good fit that complements skills rather than obsoleting them.

<edit: my AM does NOT hit for 246, it's 226 - bad fingers>