Paladin DPS

Lol vartenaal I guess I need to take some refresher courses. But I was casting a blind/divine stun combo every 30 secs, after the initial spam of agro, because unless I am really competeing for agro this is enough. And really it was probably like every 15 secs. I was just trying to convey that I was not spamming every spell possible as this would ruin dps but at the same time I was acting like I would on a mob I was trying to hold agro on.

And that second parse was more just to give an idea of tanking dps in as realistic of a setup as I could come up with. Unlike the first where the two tanks had the exact same weapon and stance and no spells were cast.
 
Last edited:
What about reverting the change to guarding blade, but changing it back to 2 hander only? It would make sense with the Paladins 'lolDPS' role, and make them unique, just like warriors are snowflakes with the ability to dual wield.
 
Mythryn said:
What about reverting the change to guarding blade, but changing it back to 2 hander only? It would make sense with the Paladins 'lolDPS' role, and make them unique, just like warriors are snowflakes with the ability to dual wield.
Click to expand...

I actually really like this idea for two reasons.
1. it adds a unique feeling to the paladin when put next to the SK/war
2. it means paladins can aux tank with their 2handers and not worry about if an add comes or if the main tank drops and they have to take over.

Quite frankly I have given aux tanking with a 2 hander a try but the problem is if the warrior drops or an unexpected add comes it is bad to be stuck there without a shield as I can easily die in the first few seconds before I manage to swap out my two hander, swap in my shield and one hander, switch back to defensive stance. If /s 4 were back to 2hander only all a paladin would have to do is hit their stance if they had their 2 hander in already. Of course to make up for losing the great benefits of a shield(hp, ac, block skill) /s 4 would have to be put back closer to what it was before and I don't know if thats what devs want to do.
 
I wouldn't support that change, nor do I think it would help.

S4 w/ a shield on increased my parry % from 10 (in s3) to 21% on average (this was before power, not duration was reduced). Any time I tank, I would instantly swap my shield in and receive a bigger benefit. S4 would then effectively be a useless stance.

Furthermore, the whole point is your potential dps on raids. This would generally be when you arn't tanking, and in s2 which is more dps than s4 is.

7-8% increase in melee dps I don't feel is significant enough. Maybe you do good dps compared to sk's. You also have 25% tomes completed which is causing you to make up for a lot of lost ground. I am 8% tomes ahead of jenks in tomes and his dps can certainly supersede mine.

Things plain and simply start favoring sks at the high end. They start to get high cha, they also start to get charms that increase their chance to crit spells. They get big high delay 2hers which allow them to more easily slip spells in between swings. They can more easily max their attack, when paladin thaz gear generally allowed pallies to do it easier.

Miffy said:
Quite frankly I have given aux tanking with a 2 hander a try but the problem is if the warrior drops or an unexpected add comes it is bad to be stuck there without a shield as I can easily die in the first few seconds before I manage to swap out my two hander
Click to expand...

Yalls conversation actually gives me an idea:
Instead of making s4 only usable w/ a 2her, s5 (if made better) could also be made to be 2her only. Thus making it even more of a tradeoff for the paladin to switch into their dps role.

So in total, s5 could:
-Decrease your tanking abilities to some degree
-Require a 2her, so paladins not only have the added difficulty of maintaining a good 2her
-Require a 2her, so when using the stance you would be a loss of ac/tanking ability due to lack of shield/ac on 1her.
-Require a 2her, so that you are at a few seconds loss when trying to become a better tank (time spent switching out 2her out for 1her/shield).

A combination of those, or maybe even all of them would force the paladin to give up a lot in order to significantly increase their dps. It would also make it grossly inefficient for the stance to be used in grouping situations, and only really on raids or situations where the paladin is not tanking. Although, keep in mind just making the stance 2her only would generally be more detrimental than losing "tanking abilities to some degree." This is because if the pally gets agro, he can always change his stance as soon as he gets agro and effectively mitigate or totally dodge any loss in tanking ability by being quick to change to a better tanking stance. However, being stuck with both changing stances and changing weapons will take more time and cause a greater loss when having to transition.
 
Last edited:
The Idea certainly has merit, as your right a paladin would have to pick and choose what role he wanted to preform and couldn't easyly switch between them on a moments notice.

So prehaps:
+10% DPS in general Melee
Decrease stamina drain of /s 5
Increase effectiveness of /s 5
Make /s 5 2her only
Add a small negative tanking mod (parry?) to /s 5 to off set increased DPS from it.
Slight decrease in stamina drain of /s 4 (1 minute or tanking? instead of the current 30ish secs)

It would suddenly give much more of a reason for all those higher tier 2hers. Lets face it, even if the 2hers currently are giving better DPS then 1hers, the lose of Shields keeps most knights with thier 1h + shield over 2her so the items become a bit of a waste.

Now the one issue I forsee with increaseing DPS on a paladin, especialy combined with /s 5 increase in DPS is aggro. Most paladins out thier are packing +10 Aggression, and don't buy negative aggression AAs/Tomes.

So might want to add a bit of negative aggression mode to the new /s 5 or else I could see a bit of aggro issues happening. This would further make this new stance less and less appealing for tanking as holding aggro in it would be harder.

So all paladins Raid or Group would have to deside. Tanking (IE: Shield +1her /s 3 or /s 4) Or DPSing (IE: 2her /s 2 or /s 5)

Of course I still would love to see /s 7 better :)
 
Regarding stances, I'll say that I never use /s 5 on raids because the added haste from /s 2 seems to be just as good (or very close, while preserving my stamina). I am always saving my stamina now in case I have to suddenly tank something in which /s 4 is necessary in the "oh shit" situations... in which it only lasts a short while.

As far as /s 7 goes, it's useless. It drains way too much stamina, and it rarely even procs at all when I want it to. The situations where it's needed are so extremely rare.. because it's easy enough to grab AE aggro without having to use /s 7.

I remember years ago I had suggested a better use for Flame of Light line of spells. I think that it would be nice to add a couple higher level versions of it so it's not just a worthless spell rotting in my spellbook. Even at level 51, when I got the spell, it was such low damage that I never used it. I also had suggested a possible upgrade to the Divine Might spell. Possibly something that is a proc which does damage slightly more than rbow, and would increase melee damage by 5%, or perhaps a slight overhaste of some sort.
 
The other problem with /s 5 on raids is that it doesnt stack with enchanter curse like /s 2. But yeah the stamina drain is the big turn off these days.
 
Adding str/dex/ac to paladin HoT's at the expense of a higher mana cost would be a pretty easy fix to paladin's dps situation. Clerics could possibly have the same HoT changes made as well.

Another way to boost paladin DPS a bit would be by raising the paladin riposte cap while lowering the parry cap by the same amount which actually would tie in nicely with the ae tank role.

On a side note a direct group heal spell added for paladin would nice since paladin and cleric HoT's don't stack, but also since shaman's don't have any group heal spells and heal over time spells alone aren't always enough to keep a group alive from AE damage.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom