YAWoWT: Why are priests like pets?

[ahurtt]

Originally posted by: Mareg
Should warrior ask money for protection ? - mmmmh, moneeeeeyyy.

No. Niether should ask for money. It is a symbiotic relationship. The warrior is a human shield for the priest. The priest is the reinforcement of that shield. If the priest fails to keep the warrior healed, both will die. If the warrior fails to keep mobs off the priest, both will die. To look at it from the perspective that one member needs the other is a fallacy. The members of the team all need each other. If I am running a group and people fail to realize that, and act all "I saved everybody's arse" and have non-team oriented attitudes, they will quickly find themselves looking for another group. Priest or no. Because these are the same kind of arrogant players who get groups wiped by going off and playing hot-shot.

 

[Smilin]

Originally posted by: torpid
I notice he left hunters off entirely. Most likely he's an "I don't party with hunters because they suck and I am god" type guy.

That statement to rogues is worthless. It should read... You are here to do damage but not get hit. Use feint regularly and don't expect me to heal you, because it will drain too much of my mana.

I don't play a hunter nor have I. I do think they get a bad rap though. Too many people have experiences with early-level hunters wiping a party with a stray pet. I think all hunters have done this but I also think they all have very quickly learned from it (they died too you know). The hunter's trap and the pet as a tank are badly under utilized. Hunters, like rogues, fall into the "take care of yourself" category though. We shouldn't need healing.

 

[torpid]

Originally posted by: Vortex22

Originally posted by: torpid
No, they are not. I'll take a priest of any spec over a druid of any spec. Perhaps you think this because you have no priests in your guild. Believe me, priests are significantly more capable healers than druids. Druids can get the job done, but that doesn't mean they can do it as well.

Muahaha... I'm in one of the larget guilds on my server, with 12 level 60 priests. We have one holy spec, all the rest shadow. Only the full holy priest can outheal me, and all the others openly admit this. Priests are better for healing soft targets because of PW:S, but a good druid is unmatched for MT healing. My rejuv ticks for 336 hp and I have 6600 mana and 3800 life self buffed (some of the priests have more mana, but I have innervate). Regrowth is the most mana efficient heal in the game, and its ~60% crit chance makes it even better. The best combo is druid + priest though, because we can stack HOTs, and druids make great priest bodyguards if the group runs into trouble.

What exactly does "outheal" mean? Maybe the problem is you are talking about some random number or figure and not talking about the overall usefulness of something as a healer. Yes, you can dole out more overall hit points healed than a shadow priest when healing the main tank in controlled situations. Big deal.

A druid has nothing like PW:S which is both an effective aggro management tool and also can prevent deaths in sticky situations. Even a shadow spec priest will likely (or should, anyway) have improved PW:S which means every 15 seconds you can shield. Nothing like fade either. Druids are very mana efficient, but they are not aggro efficient, in fact I'd say they are aggro DEficient.

 

[Vortex22]

Cat form cower = fade. Costs more mana and takes a little more time, but it works.
And when I say outheal I mean my ability to keep someone alive who is taking heavy damage. A priest is pretty much forced to spam flash heal while I can regrowth + rejuv and have the HOT buy enough time for a healing touch. PW:S works the first time, but if your tank is getting pounded by a big boss it is neither reliable nor mana efficient.. thats why I said priests are better for healing cloth wearers and druids main tanks. PW:S isn't an aggro management tool by the way... it generates significant aggro on the priest. Druids also have a talent just like priests that reduces healing aggro, although it is a smaller %. Then again, heal over time spells generate less aggro than burst heals in the first place.

 

[torpid]

Originally posted by: Vortex22
Cat form cower = fade. Costs more mana and takes a little more time, but it works.
And when I say outheal I mean my ability to keep someone alive who is taking heavy damage. A priest is pretty much forced to spam flash heal while I can regrowth + rejuv and have the HOT buy enough time for a healing touch. PW:S works the first time, but if your tank is getting pounded by a big boss it is neither reliable nor mana efficient.. thats why I said priests are better for healing cloth wearers and druids main tanks. PW:S isn't an aggro management tool by the way... it generates significant aggro on the priest. Druids also have a talent just like priests that reduces healing aggro, although it is a smaller %. Then again, heal over time spells generate less aggro than burst heals in the first place.

PW:S has been proven to be an aggro reducer many times over now. From tests done by many priests, it seems to generate as much threat as a heal that heals twice as much health. It is very mana inefficient, but it is very aggro efficient. Obviously it's going to generate more "up front" threat than a heal over time, but it generates much less threat than a burst heal for the same number of hit points.

Heal over time generates the same total threat, but it is dispersed over time. There is no discernible difference in threat if you cast a burst heal when your HOT would have ended. It is useful because it is a preventative heal and because it is instant (in priests) or quick (in druids). The druid small heal + HOT is the one area where the priest has nothing like it, and is certainly a great healing too. But the priest HOT is an instant cast and can easily be combined with a flash or regular heal, so it's not a total deal breaker.

 

[Schadenfroh]

Originally posted by: Smilin

Originally posted by: Schadenfroh
have a new macro now for it

/p Hello, This is a step by step guide on how to keep your Priest pet happy and safe.
/p 1. Mages: Please do your best to keep the curses off the group, priests cant do this. It is also your job to make sure your priest is kept watered. A thirsty priest is a poor healing pet.
/p 2. Warriors: Do use taunt when the monster leaves you and goes after the priest. The priest pet cannot keep you happy when it is dead due to it being so soft, furry, and cute to infernals.
/p 3. Rogues: Sorry, but you do not provide a purpose other than picking locks, so you need to heal yourself so the priest can save mana to heal the warrior. Please take up first aid.
/p 4. Warlocks: Keep healthstones on all players in case the priest pet runs out of mana. Also, keep the priest pet secure with a nice soulstorage.
/p 5. Shamans: When priest pet runs out of mana, take over healing and do try to keep yourself healed so the priest can focus on the warrior.
/p 6. Pally: When priest pet runs out of mana, take over healing and do try to keep yourself healed so the priest can focus on the warrior.
/p 7. Druid: 2 dogs can get into nasty fights when one trys to take the others turf, please leave the healing to the priest unless he runs out of mana.

Edit: removed unwarranted flame.

You may wish to reword:
/p 3. Rogues: Sorry, but you do not provide a purpose other than picking locks, so you need to heal yourself so the priest can save mana to heal the warrior. Please take up first aid.

I think it's pretty clear you'll offend any rogue in your party with such condescending remarks. The message of "I need you to fend for yourself" should be conveyed but you should definately say it another way.

In truth, your whole macro has a narcissistic air about it. If you used it I probably would pick a different priest for my party and the other members would thank me for it.

You learn to hate rogues when you play priests on PvP servers. Priests can also say whatever they want to some groups and they will still keep them, because in truth.... most server have a severe lack of priests and rejuv spec druids. If it were not true, i would not have to put people on my ignore list because they wont stop whispering me trying to get me to do instances with them. As a matter of fact some learn to hate all classes after a while playing one for a while, save mages for water reasons and the warriors for padding.

 

[naddicott]

Originally posted by: Schadenfroh

Originally posted by: Smilin
You may wish to reword:
/p 3. Rogues: Sorry, but you do not provide a purpose other than picking locks, so you need to heal yourself so the priest can save mana to heal the warrior. Please take up first aid.

I think it's pretty clear you'll offend any rogue in your party with such condescending remarks. The message of "I need you to fend for yourself" should be conveyed but you should definately say it another way.

In truth, your whole macro has a narcissistic air about it. If you used it I probably would pick a different priest for my party and the other members would thank me for it.

You learn to hate rogues when you play priests on PvP servers. Priests can also say whatever they want to some groups and they will still keep them, because in truth.... most server have a severe lack of priests and rejuv spec druids. If it were not true, i would not have to put people on my ignore list because they wont stop whispering me trying to get me to do instances with them. As a matter of fact some learn to hate all classes after a while playing one for a while, save mages for water reasons and the warriors for padding.

Picking a different priest soley on the original one being a little rude is often a pipe dream in my experience. Better to save the bad kharma for getting rid of incompetent priests (those who regularly shield after the pull or otherwise get heal aggro far too early). Maybe the priest scarcity is a PvP server thing...

Anyone who sends repeated additional messages when the "/dnd" flag is set earns their /ignore. Warriors get random whispers, but much less frequently than priests, so I write a non copy-paste, polite reply every time I decline an instance invite from a complete stranger.

For something casual, I'll take a druid + shaman over a priest I don't know any day, just because I find I'm likely to get folks who are less jaded/cocky - i.e. more fun to spend an hour or two of my day with. Ultimately, as long as the healer isn't an perma-AFK neo-nazi, I'll suffer their quirks and take them along.

 

[Velk]

Originally posted by: torpid

PW:S has been proven to be an aggro reducer many times over now. From tests done by many priests, it seems to generate as much threat as a heal that heals twice as much health. It is very mana inefficient, but it is very aggro efficient. Obviously it's going to generate more "up front" threat than a heal over time, but it generates much less threat than a burst heal for the same number of hit points.

Can't comment on that.

Heal over time generates the same total threat, but it is dispersed over time. There is no discernible difference in threat if you cast a burst heal when your HOT would have ended. It is useful because it is a preventative heal and because it is instant (in priests) or quick (in druids). The druid small heal + HOT is the one area where the priest has nothing like it, and is certainly a great healing too. But the priest HOT is an instant cast and can easily be combined with a flash or regular heal, so it's not a total deal breaker.

This however, is completely incorrect. Heal over time spells produce aggro when they are cast and at no point after that. The aggro they produce is also significantly lower than a full heal of the same magnitude, with good reason.

My guild makes good use of this, in that a druid dropping two HOTs on a tank immediately before a pull gains zero aggro and starts the fight partway in with full mana.

If you are skeptical it's quite easy for you to test for yourself by doing the same thing.

 

[Velk]

Originally posted by: torpid
What exactly does "outheal" mean? Maybe the problem is you are talking about some random number or figure and not talking about the overall usefulness of something as a healer. Yes, you can dole out more overall hit points healed than a shadow priest when healing the main tank in controlled situations. Big deal.

In a number of encounters, that is the sole basis for healing comparisons. So yeah, it is a 'big deal' as you put it ;p

A druid has nothing like PW:S which is both an effective aggro management tool and also can prevent deaths in sticky situations. Even a shadow spec priest will likely (or should, anyway) have improved PW:S which means every 15 seconds you can shield. Nothing like fade either. Druids are very mana efficient, but they are not aggro efficient, in fact I'd say they are aggro DEficient.

This is true, however in a fight which has one very powerful mob, the tank is not going to lose aggro regardless. In fights of lesser mobs, the druid is more than capable of offtanking several mobs at once. A priest getting aggro is a disaster - a druid getting aggro is often convenient. It's different ways of achieving the same thing, and overall the balance is pretty good.

Really the only criteria on which druids fall down as the sole healer for instance groups is resurrect. That's why you see people say that you want two healers if one is a druid - not because their healing is lacking but because they can't res anyone if an accident happens.

 

[torpid]

Originally posted by: Velk

Heal over time generates the same total threat, but it is dispersed over time. There is no discernible difference in threat if you cast a burst heal when your HOT would have ended. It is useful because it is a preventative heal and because it is instant (in priests) or quick (in druids). The druid small heal + HOT is the one area where the priest has nothing like it, and is certainly a great healing too. But the priest HOT is an instant cast and can easily be combined with a flash or regular heal, so it's not a total deal breaker.

This however, is completely incorrect. Heal over time spells produce aggro when they are cast and at no point after that. The aggro they produce is also significantly lower than a full heal of the same magnitude, with good reason.

My guild makes good use of this, in that a druid dropping two HOTs on a tank immediately before a pull gains zero aggro and starts the fight partway in with full mana.

If you are skeptical it's quite easy for you to test for yourself by doing the same thing.

What you have described is different than what you are arguing against. It is easy to verify that the HOT generates threat on each pulse. Have your warrior pull multiple targets but only get the attention of one. Cast renew and see when the linked enemies come after you.

What you have described is the enemy not attacking people for pulsing buffs or debuffs that they had applied before battle. As far as I can tell, this makes perfect sense since they didn't see WHO cast it and there is really no way to know aside from enemy "cheating".

 

[torpid]

Originally posted by: Velk

Originally posted by: torpid
What exactly does "outheal" mean? Maybe the problem is you are talking about some random number or figure and not talking about the overall usefulness of something as a healer. Yes, you can dole out more overall hit points healed than a shadow priest when healing the main tank in controlled situations. Big deal.

In a number of encounters, that is the sole basis for healing comparisons. So yeah, it is a 'big deal' as you put it ;p

No, it is not. The priest generally will easily make up for this in equipment differences, unless the druid is 100% spec'd as a healer with all cloth Int equipment. The main advantage of the druid as a healer is innervate, which is why they are generally welcome as secondary or support healers (because you don't want them trying to have to heal AND innervate everyone).

A druid has nothing like PW:S which is both an effective aggro management tool and also can prevent deaths in sticky situations. Even a shadow spec priest will likely (or should, anyway) have improved PW:S which means every 15 seconds you can shield. Nothing like fade either. Druids are very mana efficient, but they are not aggro efficient, in fact I'd say they are aggro DEficient.

This is true, however in a fight which has one very powerful mob, the tank is not going to lose aggro regardless. In fights of lesser mobs, the druid is more than capable of offtanking several mobs at once. A priest getting aggro is a disaster - a druid getting aggro is often convenient. It's different ways of achieving the same thing, and overall the balance is pretty good.

Really the only criteria on which druids fall down as the sole healer for instance groups is resurrect. That's why you see people say that you want two healers if one is a druid - not because their healing is lacking but because they can't res anyone if an accident happens.

In fights of lesser mobs, if the druid gets aggro, it's a disaster. I don't know what enemies you are referring to, but from pretty much sunken temple on up, the druid no longer functions as a viable tank, and certainly not as a viable off tank for more than one enemy. Yes, if they get aggro, they will survive longer than a priest if we assume both are standing there taking the hits. Pretty terrible situation to base your healer on. I guess that makes paladins the best healers then, since they are quite mana efficient and can off tank whenever they feel like it.

Regardless, the druid's 3000-4000 armor is paltry compared to a good warrior or even paladin. Furthermore, the druid who goes into bear form can't heal himself or anyone else. Maybe I'm mistaken but the druid can't cast cower on everyone in the area without going right up to them in cat form. The priest's fade is an instant spell.

The people who say druids fall down as healers are the people doing high level instance runs like MC where the druid is almost always a support healer and the priest is almost always the main healer, where basically the only viable healing spell is flash heal; or people doing mass encounters where the druid can't control his aggro effectively enough.

 

[Vortex22]

In fights of lesser mobs, if the druid gets aggro, it's a disaster. I don't know what enemies you are referring to, but from pretty much sunken temple on up, the druid no longer functions as a viable tank, and certainly not as a viable off tank for more than one enemy. Yes, if they get aggro, they will survive longer than a priest if we assume both are standing there taking the hits. Pretty terrible situation to base your healer on. I guess that makes paladins the best healers then, since they are quite mana efficient and can off tank whenever they feel like it.

I just main tanked DM north and west a few minutes ago with my druid. (8000 armor)
I also solo healed a 10 man strat baron run last night with no deaths.
I am a main healer in MC/Onyxia and my innervate often goes on myself if the sole holy priest has already gotten one from another druid. In the huge raid instance battles, getting aggro from healing isn't as much of a problem as it is in smaller instances where you are the single healer.

 

[torpid]

Originally posted by: Vortex22

In fights of lesser mobs, if the druid gets aggro, it's a disaster. I don't know what enemies you are referring to, but from pretty much sunken temple on up, the druid no longer functions as a viable tank, and certainly not as a viable off tank for more than one enemy. Yes, if they get aggro, they will survive longer than a priest if we assume both are standing there taking the hits. Pretty terrible situation to base your healer on. I guess that makes paladins the best healers then, since they are quite mana efficient and can off tank whenever they feel like it.

I just main tanked DM north and west a few minutes ago with my druid. (8000 armor)
I also solo healed a 10 man strat baron run last night with no deaths.
I am a main healer in MC/Onyxia and my innervate often goes on myself if the sole holy priest has already gotten one from another druid. In the huge raid instance battles, getting aggro from healing isn't as much of a problem as it is in smaller instances where you are the single healer.

More power to you. I wouldn't have you do any of those, nor would anyone I know and play with regularly.