Rogue Q & A – Answered


Samueltempus here, live from the Purple Parlor.  I wish you could see more of the city from this shot, but hey, I’m short.  Trust me though, the view is great.  The wait is over; the day has finally arrived, and Blizzard responded to the Rogue Q & A thread.  You can read the whole thing here, including my take on each point.  You might want to grab a drink though; despite the fact that I’ve removed the unneeded Community Team commentary, this post’s going to be long….

Rogue Q & A

Q. Where do rogues fit into the larger scope of things currently and where do you see them going from this point forward?

A: They’re a premier melee dps class — the personification of skulking and swashbuckling flair. It’s their primary and only role — they’re not going to turn into tanks or healers.

Rogues were once the best dps class hands-down, and a lot of the other classes were just there to buff rogues. Rogues were supposed to be selfish and not bring many buffs or utility of their own. We’re not really happy with that design any longer, and have pushed rogues to be a little more normal — great damage in the right conditions, but also some good utility and synergy as well.

Rogues have nearly always been strong in PvP, just because their shtick of coming out of stealth to stun and then unload on an opponent translates so well to everything from Arena to random world ganking.

I enjoy being a “Premier melee dps class.”  While not very insightful, this answer does a sufficient job of describing the Rogue class.  I like that they admit that they have moved away from Rogues being all DPS and no utility, and as long as we are topping the DPS with less raid buffs / utility than most classes, I’m sure that we’re all cool with that.

Q. What is it that makes them unique compared to all other classes?

A: Rogues have a complex resource system with the balance between energy and combo points, and rely on active abilities to respond to situations rather than passive effects. This leads to a very interesting tension between planning out what you’re going to do ahead of time and reacting to proc-based resource gains (energy/combo points from things like Combat Potency, Relentless Strikes, and Ruthlessness), and rationing your active timers and abilities to survive.

This response reminds me of saving my energy for a needed kick on a boss fight, or for stopping a heal in Arena.  Depending on the situation, using all available energy whenever possible is not the best idea in the world.   As long as you’re not topping off energy while engaged in a fight, you’re doing it right. Missing a kick because you’re out of energy from spamming Sinister Strike however, is not good Roguery.

It’s even ok to not use 5 combo points just because you have them.  A good example would be to sit on 5 combo points in a PvP situation to use a kidney shot as another interrupt, instead of using another finisher and having your target heal themselves instead.  If the rogues that stop by here get nothing else from this snippet, take this advice:  It is often wiser to use your energy and combo points to protect your group (PvE) or control an opponent (PvP) than it is to blow all of your energy.

Q. Do we feel the current combo point system is working out fine for rogues, not just for Subtlety, but for all three trees? Are there any plans to improve how combo points are awarded later down the road?

A: Yes, but there’s always room for improvement. Combo points are meaningful in all aspects of the game, and provide a necessary limiter on some of the rogue’s more powerful abilities. Too many combo points runs the risk of completely overwhelming your normal abilities and breaking the natural flow of the class, as Subtlety rogues who raid probably know all too well. I would expect that abilities that modify how combo points are acquired are something we’ll probably be careful with in the future.

Overall, we really like the way the combo point and finishing move system works. If anything, the risk is that we could push too many other classes towards this system, which makes it less unique for the rogue.

I love the nod to Honor Among Thieves in this reply.  No one who played HAT spec when it was bugged denied the fact that spamming 5 point Eviscerates was broken, at least they shouldn’t have denied it.

One thing I wanted to see in this response was a definite answer on if they are happy with combo points being chained to targets instead of the Rogue.  While I wouldn’t like to see the Rogue class be able to store 5 combo points indefinitely, there are a few potential changes to the system that might work:

  1. When you switch targets while holding combo points on a target, you keep them on that target for x seconds.  The amount of time the combo points stayed active on the first target would be the key to balancing this change.  Too little and it’s not as useful as it could be in PvE, too much, and it would be ridiculously overpowered in PvP.
  2. If you switch targets and generate combo points on a new target or your current target dies, you gain x energy for each combo point lost on your prior target.  I think that this would make a great talent if not a baseline ability.  It lessens the current penalty of losing all of your “investment” on a target, and unless the amount of regen is insane, it wouldn’t be game breaking in PvP.

Q. Vanish, as you know, is one of the class’s staple abilities that sets it apart from other classes. However, there are times when Vanish doesn’t execute quite as the rogue intends, especially when they vanish right in the middle of some kind of enemy channeling spell or when a class sends their pet after the rogue “mid-vanish.” Do we feel that, in its current rendition, Vanish is working properly in this respect? What variables should be considered when Rogues decide to utilize Vanish to avoid it being negated?

A: No, Vanish isn’t working properly and breaks when you breathe on the rogue funny. There are two problems with fixing it. One is that technically it’s just not easy. We would need to change the ways spells are resolved on the server side. Now that is something we can do, but the outcome would be taking a powerful ability and making it more powerful. We need to solve the frustration part of the ability, but not also greatly buff rogue survivability or damage potential when doing it. The solution we like the most is something like Vanish puts you in stealth for 1 second minimum no matter what else happens.

Finally, a real response on Vanish, not a “we can’t duplicate these results” answer.  I feel for them that to truly fix the issue they’d have to do a major revamp of the code, and that they believe that the needed change might be overpowered, but at least they’re willing to attempt to patch it.  If the 1 second minimum addition would mean that pets stop following me and that one spell, bullet, arrow or whatever didn’t immediately pull me out of stealth, I’d take it in a heartbeat.

Q. We’ve seen some changes made to both Mutilate and Overkill; how do we feel these abilities are faring currently and do we believe they require any additional adjustments?

A: Both abilities are largely where we want them — a poisoned enemy is still meaningful to the Mutilate rogue, and the modern Overkill keeps the feeling of being awesome while in or emerging from stealth, while being relatively more balanced than the prior incarnation. The changes seem to have had their intended effect of reducing rogue burst damage.

I have to agree with this.  We’ll have to see what the Resilience change does in 3.2, but Mutilate spec is very good, if not the best in PvE, and Mut/Prep is still deadly in PvP.  I’ve loved the Overkill change overall, especially in PvP.  It’s helped smooth out my DPS rotation in arenas instead of waiting forever between Mutilates after its prior incarnation ran out.

Q. There has been mention in previous developer responses on the forums about changes planned for Hunger for Blood. Players are interested to know what is in store for this ability in the foreseeable future.

A: The current design for Hunger for Blood is in place to boost rogue PvE damage without substantially boosting PvP damage. It’s not a terribly exciting talent in its current implementation, but it does the job. As such, we do have long-term plans to change it, but we think the current design works for now. Long-term we want it to be a more reactive ability — something you use depending on the situation but use often in a fight, and not just a passive damage buff that requires a lot of management. Long-term we’d also like to get it back into PvP.

I’m glad they agree it’s lackluster, because it is.  Don’t get me wrong, I’m sure there are plenty of classes that would throw 5 points (and we get it for 1 point!) into a talent for a flat 15% (18% if glyphed) damage increase.  It’s still a bland band-aid, and after a while, they’d get sick of it too.  Hopefully change will come in 3.3, but based on the number of Rogue changes compared to other classes per patch, I’m guessing that it won’t be revisited until the next expansion, as it would require a fairly large update of the Assassination tree.

Q. Rogues appreciated the original rendition of Shadow Dance and felt it to be incredibly unique. Do we have plans to implement the original functionality later down the road?

A: No. The repeated snare-breaks from chain-Vanish were way too good and basically made the rogue immune to snares and roots for the duration of Shadow Dance. It wasn’t intended to be Bladestorm.

The original Shadow Dance was overpowered, and I think this response was to be expected.  The change in 3.2 lowering the cooldown and duration make it more useful than it currently is, but without going back to it being game breaking.

Q. Players feel Subtlety captures the essence of a rogue with the majority of its abilities revolving around stealth and utility. How do we feel this specialization is performing currently and where do we see it in the future?

A: The damage is behind the other specs in PvE, and due to all the neat utility tools, Subtlety would immediately become the default spec in PvE if the damage were comparable. In the future we’d like to make it competitive, but it’s an interesting balancing act between too good and not good enough. It has a place in PvP, and should be more compelling in the post-3.2 world where survival talents will be more valuable.

Long-term, we’d love to see more of the utility talents from Subtlety core for the rogue class in general, or alternatively, we’d like to see more of the damage boosts from the other trees made passive so that rogues of all trees were choosing utility versus utility when making talent choices instead of utility versus damage.

Here’s an honest answer.  Subtlety does have more tricks than the other specs, and I agree that most of us would be using Sub if it were comparable damage to Combat and Assassination.  This is pretty common for most DPS classes.  If your spec is either easier to play, or has significantly more utility than the other two trees, it’s going to be the lowest DPS.

It’s also good to know that in the future they plan on making more things passive / core abilities.  Of the five fully leveled toons I play, my Rogue is the only one that doesn’t have more than one page of abilities for each tree.  Am I saying that Rogues are weak for not having as many abilities as other classes?  No, I’m simply pointing out that making more abilities passive or core would bring us more in line with other classes.

Q. For both groups and raids, utility such as raid buffs and debuffs offer great benefits for improving your party-member’s effectiveness in most PvE encounters. While rogues do have abilities such as Expose Armor, Blind, and Sap, do we have plans for added utility later on?

A: Yes, the question is where we add them and how we do it without unbalancing the tightrope between the specs we walk in both PvE and PvP, and giving them too much access to their PvE damage potential in PvP. We think Tricks of the Trade is a fun utility ability that lets the rogue feel smart when it’s used most optimally. We want to make sure rogues have enough group raid buffs (currently they have Expose Armor, Mind-numbing Poison, Master Poisoner, Wound Poison, and Savage Combat), but rogue damage is sufficient now that they are pretty attractive members of the team.

Rogues aren’t necessarily hurting for raid spots, and as long as we can stay on top of the damage meters, I think this response is appropriate.  Premier damage dealer; that’s our job, and we do it well. We don’t have to bring too much else to the table as long as we’re effective at that job.  I’m trying to think hard where the MS debuff from Wound Poison is used extensively in PvE.  I don’t know that I would have used it in a response that seems to be talking about PvE utility.  Also, almost all of the other raid buffs that were used as an example are easily brought by another class.

Q. The majority of a rogue’s damage seems to stem mostly from white damage; we’ve seen devs in the past mention revamping this to avoid it being the main source of damage. Also, with changes made recently to abilities such as Mutilate and Slice and Dice, players would like to know how exactly we plan to change this aspect for rogues.

A: Rogue ability usage is still a very meaningful part of their damage, and rogues who use their abilities and timers skillfully perform much better than those who do not. As such, there aren’t really plans to change this significantly, as it’s an interesting distinction between the rogue and more ability-driven classes such as the death knight. Putting more damage into their abilities also increases the damage on an already bursty class.

This wasn’t the response I, and I assume many of us, were hoping for.  For a Combat Rogue, around 65% of our Damage in PvE comes from white hits and poison procs (mainly from white hits).  This is similar to the design of the current Hunger for Blood.  It works just fine, but it’s boring.  It seems wrong that usually only one out of four of your top damage dealing abilities is an active ability.

Playing devil’s advocate, it’s our combat system that causes the issue. Fixing it might require a class overhaul, and right now, I’m pretty happy with the class, so it can wait.

Q. Cool-downs are another topic that has been discussed consistently within the rogue community. Rogues understand that they are strong and efficient when they have cool-downs readily available, however on the same token, they feel a bit constrained by the limitation to their class because of various cool-downs. In a dungeon/raid encounter, they feel that they are unable to provide significant damage contributions even when attempting to manage their cool-downs to the best of their ability. How do we currently feel about cool-downs for their damage-dealing abilities?

A: In dungeons they’re absolutely right — one of the disadvantages of scaling so well in a raid scenario is that you need to start at a lower baseline. They’re better than they used to be for dungeons due to a mostly reliable Sap, but they’re still not great compared to a caster or melee hybrid. In a raid they’re great, and the problem exists between the chair and the keyboard if they’re not contributing damage effectively in that scenario.

GC had an interesting answer here that I didn’t follow the first time I saw it.  I’ll talk about his answer here in a second, but first, how would I talk about this topic?  I think that Combat is in a good place for cooldowns.  Blade Flurry, Adrenaline Rush and Killing spree are all powerful with relatively short cooldowns.  Assassination lags behind though.  Cold Blood will give a guaranteed Crit, but with Crit as high as it is this day, it looses a lot of its luster in PvE.  Assassination would benefit from a second cooldown (possibly a revamped Hunger for Blood), and a more useful Cold Blood (again in PvE).

Back to Mr. Street’s response, I don’t see a lot of Rogues that understand the class complaining about their damage in Raids.  Assassination seems to lag a little behind combat for 5 mans (only cooldown related part of the answer), but with either spec, proper use of Fan of Knives and top single target DPS will make you a valuable member of your group every time.

Q. Cloak of Shadows is an incredible ability; it helps rogues avoid most incoming spell damage and effects. However, how do we feel this ability stacks up versus classes that possess both melee and spell damaging abilities? Do we still feel the 90% avoidance is sufficient to aid Rogues in PvP encounters against spell casters and hybrids?

A: It’s meant as a tool that’s part of a toolkit, not an I-win button. It’s sufficient, and extending it to 100% would make rogues largely immune to interesting PvE effects they shouldn’t be (e.g. Mimiron’s Shock Blast).

Given the PvE implications, I can’t really disagree with this answer.  However, in PvP, that 10% seems larger than it says it is.  I’m tired of being feared while cloaked, among other things.  It’s not so much an I-win button as it is a defense tactic.  In arena, when the “10%” happens, it can change the outcome of a match, and seems to go against the process of removing RNG from PvP.

Building on GC’s analogy, Cloak is slightly defective tool that occasionally fails.  The only problem is that it’s the only active tool we have that can keep a rogue alive against a caster at range.

Q. Rogues feel they take an extensive amount of damage against various classes and have very limited abilities with long cool-downs to help combat this, so they rely heavily on their avoidance abilities in PvP situations and have little to fall back on to survive. How do we feel rogue survivability is currently and are there any plans to supplement this?

A: Rogues are probably too survivable when they can apply all of their crowd control to a single target and much too squishy when they can’t. Moving some of the survivability from active abilities to passive ones without losing the interesting flavor of the class is an ongoing challenge, and we’d like to do it in ways like the Feint change rather than simply adding in “takes 20% less damage” to a random talent.

The current rogue design could be described as fragile, but rarely takes damage, since it’s possible to apply so much crowd control. Chaining crowd control and countering crowd control is a huge part of PvP that’s fun for a lot of players and we don’t want to remove that. On the other hand, we often run into problems with the rogue where we can’t diminish or change the DR on crowd control because then the rogue just takes damage and dies. An alternative model is a slightly more tanky rogue than can survive more damage (perhaps only when cooldowns are up or something), but can’t keep someone locked down so long. Also note that this would improve the rogue level-up experience as well. It’s effective and occasionally fun but can get pretty slow and tedious to have to approach every opponent from within stealth. Sometimes you just want to stab a relatively non-challenging mob to death and move on.

I touched on this about a month ago as I was reading through the player comments on the Q & A thread.  It’s good to see that the devs agree that we’re too hard to kill when we’re on the offense with stuns and cooldowns, but also realize that we’re super squishy outside of that scenario.  The person who is completely locked down by a Rogue and dies has a right to feel abused, but on the other hand, if we lose control of the situation, we’re often dead.  To be honest, it seems like more of an issue when you’re not being healed, but it is still an issue nonetheless.  It will be interesting to see what changes, if any, there are in store for the Rogue class to address the stun vs. survivability issue in future patches.

Q. So, over the past years, rogues have utilized macros for swapping in/out weapons with different poisons to aid them in different situations, but sometimes it can become slightly cumbersome to swap between weapons to gain added utility where needed. Do we feel this is a suitable approach in aiding rogues in this respect? Are there any plans to change this later down the road to make it easier for rogues to swap poisons mid-fight?

A: We agree it’s clunky to swap weapons and that’s because we don’t want it to be a major feature of the game. We could see making it a major feature, something much more like the weapon swapping of Diablo II. Currently you swap weapons more for macro-ing a shield for Spell Reflect. A rogue swapping poisons feels a little more interesting than that, but it’s pretty much the only example we could think of. Until we can make weapon swapping feel less clunky for more classes we aren’t going to push it as an important feature.

I’m not a fan of weapon swapping macros myself, but they do have uses.  Given the small number of abilities that rogues have in their book, and the restrictions placed on some of them (think: requires daggers), it’s not hard to see why Rogues in particular would use macros to have access to a wider variety of abilities.  If it’s never introduced as a major feature of the game, redesigning some talents to be used with all our weaponry would be nice.  Thanks to fan of knives, we already know that they can scale abilities to weapon type.

Q. Lots of rogues are fans of the “Combat-Daggers” setup. Do we feel this is a viable option in PvE versus other traditional setups?

A: Not really. It was always a very simplistic spec that only used one finisher and limped along with no combo point income. The “rotation” for this spec, if you can call it that, was Backstab x 5, Slice and Dice, repeat. In sexy Naxx gear with a cool energy-boost set bonus it became Backstab x 5, Slice and Dice, Backstab x 3, Rupture, repeat. It was clunky to play, had massive ramp time (say 30 seconds) and positioning issues, and you couldn’t ever use your combo points or energy on anything but damage or it all fell apart. It might have been effective, but we didn’t think it was very fun and we don’t really want to promote it.

To be clear, it’s always a tough call when players find a creative way to use combinations of gear and talent specs like this. Sometimes we want to reward the players for being creative. Other times they are just taking the design in a direction we’re not crazy about. There are no hard and fast rules to when “unintended” equals “bad” or not.

I don’t know that I expected such an extensive response to this question, but, I agree with it.  Combat is intended to be a heavy weapon spec, and therefore, isn’t designed to be used with daggers.  I can’t blame the devs for not wanting to retool everything in the combat tree to make daggers viable.

Just look at the names of the trees.  Assassination and Subtlety fit well with sneaking around, and that would require small concealed weaponry.  Combat feels like it would fit in the middle of a large battle, where Daggers wouldn’t seem to be nearly as effective.

Q. With the advent of one-handed axes coming into play as another plausible choice of weapons for rogues, why did we decide to add this feature this far into the game? What are the benefits of having one-handed axes versus the traditional weaponry available to rogues?

A: We were in a world where we continued having to drop one-handed maces all the time, because swords couldn’t be used by shamans, axes by rogues, or fists by death knights. We wanted to have more variety in the type of one-handers we dropped. We discussed it quite a bit, and included the world designers and keepers of the lore in those discussions. Ultimately, we settled on axes for rogues. Rogues are supposed to be the masters of melee weaponry and there’s extensive support in classical literature for brigand/swashbuckler/lightly armored warrior types using axes (pen and paper RPGs, pirates, Native Americans with tomahawks, gladiators). If a rogue would pick up a broken bottle to use as a weapon (the infamous Barman Shanker) it seems likely they’d use a good axe. As a result, shamans and death knights should see more axes in the game overall. (Though remember, the 3.2 patch largely focused on the new Isle of Conquest BG, so we don’t have a ton of new raid bosses to itemize. That will change in 3.3.)

I think its great that Rogues will be able to use more weaponry next patch and that it makes it more likely that I’ll be able to upgrade my damage.  I don’t know how I feel about how it will look to be wielding them, but it’s a relatively easy way for them to solve a loot table issue.  To be honest about looks though, it probably won’t look any worse than the MH Fist / OH Sword I used to use.  That looked rather goofy.

I still think that the main weapon issue with Rogues, is that two of our trees are designed around using Daggers, and much of the lore suggests using Daggers. However, other melee classes aren’t generally interested in using them, so we don’t see them as often in the loot tables.

Q. Rogues have definitely embraced the lore behind them, including the Ravenholdt quest-line. Do we plan on expanding into this anytime soon? Players feel this specific lore really defined rogues early on in the game and would like a continuation of that.

A: The problem with class-specific quests is that you’re cutting off 90% (give or take depending on class popularity) of players from seeing the content. Put another way, you can offer 100 class-specific quests per class, or 1000 quests that almost everyone can see. We don’t have any announcements of new content in that quest line at this time.

I was excited when I was in Southshore working on that particular questline, and I tend to agree with the question in that I wanted more.  I understand the resources that it would take, but I think most people who didn’t reroll their class because of it being the most powerful ____ at the time would enjoy the extra lore.

Q. Are there any other lore-based quests that we will be providing not just for rogues but for classes in general, later down the road? Players feel these provide their respective class with a unique touch and allows for a more immersive feel to their gameplay.

A: As I said above, class quests are expensive from a content-development standpoint. That said, we recognize why they are so popular and can be so memorable. We made a lot of death knight-specific content for Wrath of the Lich King, and it may very well be the best zone of quests in the game. With content like this we don’t operate on a yes or no level, but off of a wish list. We would love to add more class-specific quests, but there’s a ton of other things we want to do with World of Warcraft as well.

Again, it seems that the devs agree that class specific content would be enjoyed, but would rather focus on the other things they’d like to add to the game.  I agree that the Death knight specific content is the best, and I’m not asking for that level of complexity, but a quest or two for the other classes that haven’t seen a ton of lore in a while would be nice.

Overall, I was generally pleased with the Q & A.  I get a sense of the direction the devs would like to go with the class without them making promises they can’t keep.  There’s a few topics they didn’t cover that I would have liked to see, but since we’re approaching five thousand words, I’ll save that for another post.

– Sam

9 Responses to Rogue Q & A – Answered

  1. Javaed says:

    Overall, I thought it was a pretty good Q&A session. I was a little surprised to see that they’ve narrowed down the problems with Vanish enough to have estimated the cost of fixing it. The responses to the class-specific quests questions does leave me a bit sad, I’ve always wanted more Priest specific quest lines.

  2. shibumi says:

    very interesting. tend to agree with your comments, but am far from a ‘5 fullly leveled’ player. ony 2 fully leveled – rogue and hunter.

    I’m enjoying my rogue times, thanks to you, and look forward to 3.2 (hopefully better as a patch than it is as beer).


  3. Stonedrake says:

    I’m unhappy with the Q&A because I feel like the “working as intended” attitude fails to address anything that matters to me about the class. Oh well. :/

  4. samueltempus says:

    What specifically did you not like? It seemed to me that for the first time they admitted that Vanish wasn’t working properly and want to fix it.

    – Sam

  5. Rochmoninoff says:

    The Q&A matched my expectations – I ready EJ and I know Bliz thinks “rogues are fine”. Heck, I think rogues are fine!

    The real meaty issue I wanted to see discussed was the sub tree in general.
    Is it not a problem that the 51-point sub talent is not a part of any cookie-cutter build?
    Is it not a problem that there are abilities that require a dagger and a key ability (hemo) that needs a heavy hitting non-dagger?
    Is it not a problem that the tree is overwhelmed by a single OP talent (HaT) to such a degree that no synergy is allowed in the tree at all?

    I was really hoping for “look, we know that the sub tree is busted and needs a total reengineering, but you’ve got 3 good PVE specs and a good PVP spec so be happy – we’ll reengineer sub in the next [promised time phase]”

  6. Rochmoninoff says:

    Oh yeah, re: Vanish.
    this is NOT the first official blue on that topic.
    I recall seeing nearly the exact same response in MMO-Champion’s blues tracker several months ago.

    The difference is that this time there was a solutions suggested: (1 sec force stealth)
    And there was an admission that since rogues are fine, fixing vanish would make us a wee bit OP. (this aspect was denied in the past)

  7. samueltempus says:


    I’ll totally agree with you that subtlety needs some work. It would be nice to see it reworked. Fixing Sub would probably require some reworking of the other trees, and given that our class is in a better place than most, I can understand that being on the back burner for a while.

    We have two chart topping DPS trees with the third tree having a viable (though admittedly lower DPS) alternative. That’s pretty standard from a “pure dps” perspective. Mut / Prep is still amazing in PvP, and PvP specs from the other two trees are still viable to use. If anything, we’re the class that for the most part Blizzard knows what to do with, while many other classes (Paladins come to mind) get massive changes nearly every patch.

    As far as Vanish goes, I could have been more clear in my analysis. It’s true that this isn’t the first official blue comment on the topic, however, it is one where they admit that despite the fact that they can’t always duplicate the situation, they are working on a potential fix. The potential fix being a response we haven’t seen before.

    – Sam

  8. Stonedrake says:

    My problem isn’t with Vanish (heck, I’ve only ran into the vanish bug once or twice, and never let it bother me much).

    What bothers me is we’re still just DPS. Where it seems every other “pure” DPS class has brought something to the table, our extra utility seems tied up in skills and abilities that Blizz doesn’t want us to ever remember we have (Pick Locks/Pockets, Find/Remove Traps).

    I think someone else said this before: if we’re working as intended, I’m not sure I like how we’re intended to be working. I dunno. I’m just not best pleased.

  9. samueltempus says:


    I see where you’re going, and can understand your point, but I wouldn’t want to take a DPS nerf to gain more utility, especially knowing that it would likely copy another buff someone else already provides.

    Pure, unadulterated DPS. If that’s all we’re brining to the table, at least it’s fun to watch the numbers fly.

    – Sam

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: