Reliquary of Souls

[Mithos]

Probably because unless the tanking warrior wants to eat 12k ish soulscreams they have to stance dance as soon as soul screams CD is ready and keep doing so until the scream happens. Stance dancing doesn't trigger GCD but you will still lose some time to dancing due to latency/being human I'd imagine. The damage is far more spikey, a scream and a crush at the wrong time = possibly a splatted warrior. Also less damage on the tank means more raid healing, which will see you last that bit longer to kill him before it gets desperate (if at all).

[Mithos]

http://files.filefront.com/DR+vs+Reliqu ... einfo.html

video, its only 93 MB

[Splug]

Stance dancing doesn't trigger GCD but you will still lose some time to dancing due to latency/being human I'd imagine.

However, stance changes do trigger a cooldown on subsequent stance changes. Even if you abuse the /cast Defensive Stance macro (which will be broken if Blizzard ever puts 2.3.2 out), you're still looking at a maximum of one rage dump per ~1.5 seconds. Between the aura ticks generating crazy amounts of rage and the autoattack from Anger (even if it doesn't sneak a crush in), odds are fairly high a warrior will have some kind of rage build between the reset and the scream.

As for actual threat lost to spamming defensive stance, constantly dropping to 10 rage (ideal case - if you have tactical mastery, you can only drop down to 25 rage, meaning scream will hit for +2500ish) means that shield slam is a non-option during that time, and if you heroic strike you cannot devastate. If you take a rage spike from incoming damage, odds are you're going to have to throw that rage away before latency would allow you to use it... or EoA will do it for you. Once the defensive stance spam option is gone, warriors will suffer more directly: we have innate threat reduction when defensive stance is not active, so the 1.5 sec in battle stance will essentially become "dead time" as opposed to "mostly dead time."

It's doable, and will continue to be doable, but it's certainly non-ideal.

-Splug

[Mithos]

Yeah I'm not argueing against it, jwas just commenting the first time I tanked this it was pretty much decided that I would tank it every time due to spike less damage incoming. Even if I get to 2k mana and don't bother burning it so that I get a little bit extra back after the scream, its a necligable difference to the damage if i was at ~200 or so mana. We're pretty much a definite a better choice here. Would like to see more power burn encounters >_>.

[Oramac]

Yeah I'm not argueing against it, jwas just commenting the first time I tanked this it was pretty much decided that I would tank it every time due to spike less damage incoming. Even if I get to 2k mana and don't bother burning it so that I get a little bit extra back after the scream, its a necligable difference to the damage if i was at ~200 or so mana. We're pretty much a definite a better choice here. Would like to see more power burn encounters >_>.

just wondering as i've never seen a definite hard number on it. what exactly does soul scream hit you for? i've heard its .8 damage per mana, i've heard it's 1 to 1, and i've heard its the same as the rage burn. just looking for a hard number since you've obviously tanking it and [hopefully] have an idea what it hits for.

[Splug]

The rage burn is 100 damage per 1 rage. 90 damage per 1 rage in defensive stance. There is an additional ~3k direct hit, which is recorded independantly. I'm unsure of the exact mana numbers, beyond knowledge that it isn't 100:1.

-Splug

EDIT: I am bad and should not post after playing Fire Emblem and Rockband until 5 am before work. Power of ten error on numbers resolved.

[enbee]

The rage burn is 10 damage per 1 rage. 9 damage per 1 rage in defensive stance. There is an additional ~3k direct hit, which is recorded independantly. I'm unsure of the exact mana numbers, beyond knowledge that it isn't 10:1.

-Splug

a maximum of 900 damage from the burn? I don't think so..

[QuantumDelta]

Soul Scream: Lets out a soul scream, in a 10-yard frontal cone AoE, hitting up to 5 targets. Deals 2625-3375 shadow damage, in addition, burns 4375-5625 mana and burns 100 rage (every point of rage burned causes 100 damage).

[Joanadark]

it deals 0.5 Damage per 1 mana burned.

That's before Improved Righteous Fury, Spell Warding, and Ardent Defender modifiers are accounted for.

[Oramac]

it deals 0.5 Damage per 1 mana burned.

That's before Improved Righteous Fury, Spell Warding, and Ardent Defender modifiers are accounted for.

good to know. thank you.

[Splug]

Erm, yes. I zoned out and dropped a few zeros. I'll go back and fix my post, heh.

-Splug

[Cakes]

Erm, yes. I zoned out and dropped a few zeros. I'll go back and fix my post, heh.

-Splug

It's okay. Blizzard did the same thing with Kael trash v1.0. Battle mages hitting for 20k... WHOOPS, TOO MANY ZEROZ EL OH EL.

[Lore]

Erm, yes. I zoned out and dropped a few zeros. I'll go back and fix my post, heh.

-Splug

It's okay. Blizzard did the same thing with Kael trash v1.0. Battle mages hitting for 20k... WHOOPS, TOO MANY ZEROZ EL OH EL.

Thank you for that horrible memory.

[enbee]

At least you could cc them

I'd just keep build threat when its feared and then gtfo, taunt @ safe distance when lost, though 90% of my trash deaths in TK were due to those :<

[Cakes]

At least you could cc them

I'd just keep build threat when its feared and then gtfo, taunt @ safe distance when lost, though 90% of my trash deaths in TK were due to those :<

We just found that it was a short range attack (5 yards) , so we let our caster dps "tank" them. Worked really well, although a bit slow since melee and caster dps was split. Better than lolfrostattack gibbing tanks.