Plague/Scourge strike idea:
by Jayde | 11/08/2008 22:35:50 A lot of you that PvP with the DK have probably realized by now that our unholy runes are pretty scarce as is. The fact that plague/scourge strike remove hots is great, but the fact that all hots can simply be reapplied with minimal effort makes this feature less appealing. Against a healer that doesn't understand that these strikes only remove hots on the initial application, and our unholy runes are a relatively limited resource every 10 seconds, it can seem powerful. However, a healer who knows how this mechanic works, can simply be looking for the debuff to be applied and simply reapply hots as needed. In reality, that makes the hot-removing aspect of those strikes seem pretty bland against healers who know what they're doing. My suggestion, then, would be to slightly increase this functionality of those strikes as such: In addition to removing a disease on the initial strike, have blood plague give a chance to remove a hot, every time the disease ticks (Maybe 25% base chance per tick, with Epidemic or Virulence adding to the chance.... something early in the tree that's easily accessible to nearly all specs). It's not a mortal strike, and it's not a wound poison, but it's something. And it's certainly something better than we've currently got. Edit: The reason I'm throwing this out there is because I feel like our unholy runes are already too limited in pvp as is. The fact that plague strike is our hot remover just makes things worse. I feel compelled to use it as often as I can, leaving me with no unholy runes for other things. This change would keep some functionality of the hot removal while freeing up the stress of constantly reapplying plague/scourge strike for the hot removal effect, but not totally making the target immune to being healed via hots. Edit 2: In addition, this would also be yet another way that you could make pestilence attractive in PvP. And going further than that, this would actually make unholy blight feel very useful in PvP, especially against a team being healed by a resto druid (as it's supposed to afflict targets with blood plague as well). It certainly fits the theme, anyways. Let me know what you think. [ Post edited by Jayde ] aka Leiah /cast Slap to the Face http://jadefury.blogspot.com |
by Ghostcrawler | 11/08/2008 15:58:25 I don't want to position the death knight as a bear killer, or especially that the death knight is supposed to "fix" druids in PvP. But I like not having to constantly spam Plague Strike in case the hotter just re-hots after the hit. Edited for "the" spam. [ Post edited by Ghostcrawler ] |
| by Ghostcrawler | 15/08/2008 15:20:44 I believe it is actually in. What does your Blood Plague tooltip say? |
| by Ghostcrawler | 19/08/2008 10:44:37 Mine says "A disease dealing Shadow damage over time. Has a 50% chance to remove one heal over time effect whenever it does damage." |
| by Ghostcrawler | 19/08/2008 15:56:16 The Blood Plague change would be in addition the current hot removal of Plague / Scourge Strike. It did seem stange to spam Plague Strike just to keep a healer from reapplying the hot just after your hit. That is why we went with a random chance on Blood Plague -- it will probably remove a hot on its own, but if you really want to make sure, go ahead and use Plague Strike again. |
News
Spam
Hot: Latest blues on Class changes in patch 2.4
Most Viewed 
Recent Blizzard Announcements
