1. I would be uncomfortable with a mage being the MT...

Posted at 8:05AM on Oct 14th 2007 by Minnow

2. @1 .. like at Maulgar? (Offtanking)

Posted at 8:12AM on Oct 14th 2007 by Svenn

3. Argh :P not that far into end game raiding yet

Posted at 8:17AM on Oct 14th 2007 by Minnow

4. Warlocks can tank magic users (Vek'lor, Leotheras, Illidan), do decent damage and heal ourselves. I'm happy.

I personally like the idea of different than usual tanks (Gurtogg Bloodboil, Essence of Suffering, High King Maulgar). It enforces the idea that the individual being important, which was the whole point of going from 40-mans to 25-mans.

Posted at 8:19AM on Oct 14th 2007 by Lanth

5. Ret Paladins are upset because they were told that Ret would become more Raid viable. If Blizzard had initially stated that Ret was going to be a PvP spec or something, this would be a non-issue.

Paladins, however, are a different case from other classes. No other class is restricted to Healing and Tanking, the two jobs that are famous for not being fun.

Paladins already have the lowest DPS. If they ever get a cance to do it, they don't want to hav to one it down even more.

Posted at 8:19AM on Oct 14th 2007 by dekulink

6. No, and this is why:

http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.html;jsessionid=AE33F14664974C70D3856BF5A2D9FF82?topicId=2288169220&postId;=22876834611&sid;=1#27

Posted at 8:21AM on Oct 14th 2007 by Sky_Paladin

7. Now lets be honest.

Paladins are healers, but they can also spec as "Off-tanks" when it comes to raiding. They are good at picking up adds, and controlling large amounts of mobs.

Druids are Off-tanks as well, better off-tanks then paladins, as they can also DPS (One of the main roles for a off-tank) But they can spec into healing, but they are not as raid focused as Paladins. They are sorta the middle-man between Shamans and Paladins when it comes to healing. HoTs have a place in raiding, but there versatility is limited to 1 or 2 druids, more would be overkill.

Posted at 8:34AM on Oct 14th 2007 by Mats

8. Until my pet can MT/OT, or I can mend-pet a warrior, no they shouldn't be allowed to do DPS.

Posted at 8:39AM on Oct 14th 2007 by Chris

9. @5

If you don't like healing OR tanking why would you roll a Paladin? If you want to *only* DPS may I suggest Hunter, Rogue or Warlock. If you roll a hybrid class you will be expected, at some point, to fulfill more than one of that hybrid class' roles in a raid.

Posted at 8:45AM on Oct 14th 2007 by Razhlok

10. This post is somewhat incorrect.

Yes, the paladins are in a uproar.
But the Retribution paladins DO NOT want more DPS, we whish more raid utility and threat reduction.

So far, Blizzard gave us more spiky DPS, made the raid utility we had avaiable to both Holy and Protection paladins and denied us the threat reduction we crave for. Everything our spec did NOT needed.

And the initial idea behind the Paladin class is not a hybrid Tank/healer. Look at the warrior-priest class from Warhammer. That's the true Paladin essence. Not this "armored ambulance" condition we are stuck on.

And to answer if all classes should tank, heal and DPS, my answer is this:
Pure DPS classes should not be able to tank or heal except under certain situations (Ex: Mage tank in Maulgar fight; Warlocks healing themselves with Drain Life);
As a hybrid you should be able to do what you like and perform well, ONLY ONE ROLE at a time, and never better that a "pure" tanking/healing/dps class (unless they suck at their role).

Example: If I am a healer, I can't tank or dps properly.
If I am dps'ing, I can not afford to heal someone, because my heals are ineffective.

Posted at 8:56AM on Oct 14th 2007 by Zev

11. This isn't LOTRO we have a PvP/PvE balance in WoW that is a huge issue for the developers. WoW has a very good balance at the moment, compared to other games almost any class can be active in PvP and PvE in some fashion (the rewards being useful and if all specs are useful is another issue)

If there was no PvP we could have shadowform as a mundane spell have robust trees or just simple things like a viable curse of weakness.

With the game also having PvP we have huge CC, Anti-CC, and debuff limits. Remember when people first cried about PvP trinkets? With no PvP you could just say 'undead are undead, and they are immune to fear/charm effects' perception is passive and the like.

Posted at 9:04AM on Oct 14th 2007 by hpavc

12. I dont think Paladins should even get an enhance to DPS they werent meantto do damage in the first place, if you want to do that roll a rogue or mage, therefore I dont see threat reduction as necessary they should not be able to do enough damage to be constantly pulling a mob off the tank, its not the paladin's job

Posted at 9:14AM on Oct 14th 2007 by Tom

13. @7

Now let's be honest. Paladins make pretty crappy off tanks. They make outstanding main tanks in most fights. They were designed that way. I prefer a tankadin in all 5 man instanecs, most of Kara, and about half of the 25-man raids. Maulgar is tough, Gruul is almost impossible, Mags is tough, and some of the harder hitting bosses are tough, but it's only because of spotty itemization and reliance on spell damage instead of stamina. A 15K smack from Gruul on 18 or 19 grows is pretty much it for a pally tank.

But on all other fights, pallies are better at holding multiple mobs, surviving multiple mobs, and doing pretty decent DPS to those mobs at the same time. That's not something warriors or bears can say. Our overall mitigation may be lower than a well-geared warrior, but I can front-load threat on a group of mobs faster than a warrior can, and my DPS can open up much sooner. I even have a long-range taunt that has saved my healer more times than I can count, and an AoE aggro generator that I can keep up essentially indefinitely with good heals so any adds have to come through me on the way to the squishies.

Point of the rant: Anybody who says "Pallies are healers, you want to tank play a warrior" has no clue what they are talking about.

Posted at 9:17AM on Oct 14th 2007 by Heilig

14. Okay, this article is somewhat inflammatory, because it pre-supposes that "the idea behind paladins is tanking and healing"... which wasn't at all the case. Repeatedly, Blizzard has been clear since the game first came out that, like other hybrids, a paladin should be able to fill multiple roles: in fact, at Blizzcon, they specifically stated those roles as "Tank, DPS, or Heal"... like druids (with burning crusade, after their long and similar ordeal) can Tank, melee DPS, range DPS, or heal, or shamans can melee DPS, range DPS, or heal.

Like any hybrid, the talent trees and gear choices make one specialize. A paladin can't "Tank, DPS, and Heal" as the title supposes, but "Tank, DPS, or Heal", based on spec and gear.

The retribution tree, early on, was very powerful. It suffered. When BC came out, it was briefly powerful again, but because it's burst damage oriented, the outcry for PvP was strong, and it got nerfed... then became further nerfed as people got to 70 and got resilience (because ret pally abilities are so crit-centric).

A retribution pally is not a good tank, nor a good healer. They've specced and made gear choices to be capable of DPS... and can actually put out solid DPS when properly geared and played... but the outcry is because when they DO get a chance to raid, they're so severely threat-capped (they have the most threat per point of damage dealt of any class, by a good %), they spend their time at the bottom of the DPS charts, because they spend so much time NOT attacking, to stay under the tank's threat.

So their PvP ability dimishes greatly once lvl 70 and resilience gear is common (which they don't have, by the way, their gear is the one set without resilience, so they become more fragile in PvP at 70)... their raid ability to DPS is hamstrung by threat... so they're forced into either healing or tanking roles.

Blizzard told them the goal with 2.3 was to fix the PvE raid ability, then gave them buffs to help in PvP (which they didn't ask for).

They want raid ability... either threat reduction so their DPS isn't bottom of the chart (they don't want top-of-chart, they want not-always-bottom), or utility only they can bring (their one piece of utility, +3% crit to everyone, got put earlier in their tree, so non-ret-specs can now easily get to it)... and they want better itemization, their gear needed so many stats to be useful that they lost resilience. Ironically, the two things they most wanted got given to the two specs not-quite-as-bad-off as them... fury warriors got more threat reduction in their talent tree, and enhancement shamans got better itemization choices by the "AP becomes spell damage" buff in their tree.

I have a 70 mage and a 70 warrior tank, and played an endgame holy priest pre-BC, but it's not hard to understand why they're upset... many have played ret since the original beta, and it's been a pretty frustrating roller coaster for them. Telling them to reroll after three years of playing a sometimes viable spec isn't very fair, Blizzard really does need to make it a viable choice for those that choose to specialize in that way.

Posted at 9:20AM on Oct 14th 2007 by HankD

15. Excellent post, #14, and well thought out. I was actually of the impression that a Paladin was supposed to be a Defensive Hybrid, but having done some digging on my own and unearthing those quotes you pointed to, i =t turns out I was the mistaken one. Obviously Paladins are not currently living up to what they should be.

The answer is not to nerf Druids. I know that has been Blizzards response in the past, viz. Priests being relegated to the sidelines as single-target healers around March/April, so Paladins were given a nerf to peg them back a little bit. This is the incorrect tack to take. I have personally never played a Paladin as Retribution, because I enjoy healing in Battlegrounds and play a Mage as well for seeing the big numbers stack up. However, my hammer-swinging brothers need some love - not necessarily a buff, just some more balance and raid viability. Hell, It's About Time.

Posted at 9:38AM on Oct 14th 2007 by BenMS

16. @14 I doubt that the majority of Paladins have been playing since beta, there is simply no way in hell that's true.

DPS paladins shouldn't raid.

Posted at 9:40AM on Oct 14th 2007 by Jack Spicer

17. Wow, this was waaaay below WoWInsider's usual standards. This was quite clearly a "QQ Retnoobs" post, nothing else.

The only thing that needs to be said is this - as long as a retribution talent tree exists, it needs to be viable. If it is not meant to be viable, the tree should not exist at all, and should be remade into a talent tree that supports the two other roles a pally can fulfill. I don't think -anyone- can honestly say that having one whole talent tree that's basically not meant to be used would be good game design, regardless how they feel about ret paladins specifically?

Posted at 9:49AM on Oct 14th 2007 by Nati

18. I don't mind if Pallies get to "tank, dps and heal", nor Druids.

WHAT I MIND is when they can Tank better than Warriors and Heal better than Priests. I rolled a Priest so I could be the primary healer, not be upstaged by a hybrid. Our guild's MT Warrior left and rolled a Shammy. * sigh *

Posted at 9:49AM on Oct 14th 2007 by seamus

19. If Pallies can Heal, Tank & DPS... then Shammies need plate and tanking tallents!

Posted at 9:57AM on Oct 14th 2007 by Rob

20. I think the larger issue here is more players are getting fed up the rigidity of the raid spec mechanic in WoW.

Pre TBC, when you hit level cap, you didn't have many options in the game except to raid. Now at level 70, you have more end game content thats has nothing to do with raiding (which as someone who has very little interest in raids - makes me happy).

I think people are getting more fed up having their classes pigeon holed into certain roles and want to see more flexibility in raid encounters. Maybe its not the class that needs fixing - its raiding that needs to be re thought.

Posted at 10:10AM on Oct 14th 2007 by Saandstorm