ShadowKnight changes 1/22/09

[Tandy]

<p>Ok I posted a bit in other thread but this needs its own.</p><p>Currently now that the de-taunts are removed from Offensive stance...group taunt and death march are no longer castable in that stance.</p><p>This definetly needs to change. Deathmarch is utility for a DPS group...which is where we would be in an offensive stance...or if we are the 2nd tank in an xp group.</p><p>Group taunt has a disease debuff on it. I have no problems if that debuff is moved to another ability like one of the open AoE's but not being able to cast it is too much.</p><p>The stances having recast timers on them now is also a bit much.</p><p>The snap abilites arent usable but Grave Sacrament is. Seems a bit odd.</p><p>I SERIOUSLY prefered the de-aggro over this. I wish people woudl have stopped crying about them cause this is screwed up for SK's and Paladins I am sure.</p>

[Spe]

<p>Four fighter classes versus other two? I would prefer solution acceptable for the majority of the fighters, not just two classes.</p>

[Tandy]

<p><cite>Spetz@Runnyeye wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p>Four fighter classes versus other two? I would prefer solution acceptable for the majority of the fighters, not just two classes.</p></blockquote><p>I didnt think the de-taunts screwed over any fighters.  It just prevented tanking in offensive stance and might have messed with some duo/trio's who were doing solo content togther.</p>

[Spe]

<p><cite>Tandy wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p><cite>Spetz@Runnyeye wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p>Four fighter classes versus other two? I would prefer solution acceptable for the majority of the fighters, not just two classes.</p></blockquote><p>I didnt think the de-taunts screwed over any fighters.  It just prevented tanking in offensive stance and might have messed with some duo/trio's who were doing solo content togther.</p></blockquote><p>For warriors these detaunts makes any tanking in offensive impossible.</p><p>If I want to help to burn mobs in group instances - I have to let wizzy to tank =)</p>

[EvilAstroboy]

<p><cite>Spetz@Runnyeye wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p>Four fighter classes versus other two? I would prefer solution acceptable for the majority of the fighters, not just two classes.</p></blockquote><p>Go away troll.</p><p>This change is stupid. Death March is mainly a DPS utility, people stopped using it for aggro at level 70.And our debuff too, why not just remove the hate component from everyones taunts in offensive instead of locking out skills?</p><p>No Shadowknight will use this stance if it goes to live like this. In fact we probably wont use defensive either. Awesome job, this update simply removed 4 of my skills (the stances and the two buffs that got merged). Is this the vision for fighters that you envisioned? Stanceless?</p>

[Tandy]

<p><cite>Spetz@Runnyeye wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p><cite>Tandy wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p><cite>Spetz@Runnyeye wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p>Four fighter classes versus other two? I would prefer solution acceptable for the majority of the fighters, not just two classes.</p></blockquote><p>I didnt think the de-taunts screwed over any fighters.  It just prevented tanking in offensive stance and might have messed with some duo/trio's who were doing solo content togther.</p></blockquote><p>For warriors these detaunts makes any tanking in offensive impossible.</p><p>If I want to help to burn mobs in group instances - I have to let wizzy to tank =)</p></blockquote><p>Yeah you missed the memo....tanking in defensive is what we are supposed to do. Offensive is for DPS and NOT for tanking. So your comments arent applicable.</p>

[Antryg Mistrose]

<p><cite>Tandy wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p><cite>Spetz@Runnyeye wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p><cite>Tandy wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p><cite>Spetz@Runnyeye wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p>Four fighter classes versus other two? I would prefer solution acceptable for the majority of the fighters, not just two classes.</p></blockquote><p>I didnt think the de-taunts screwed over any fighters.  It just prevented tanking in offensive stance and might have messed with some duo/trio's who were doing solo content togther.</p></blockquote><p>For warriors these detaunts makes any tanking in offensive impossible.</p><p>If I want to help to burn mobs in group instances - I have to let wizzy to tank =)</p></blockquote><p>Yeah you missed the memo....tanking in defensive is what we are supposed to do. Offensive is for DPS and NOT for tanking. So your comments arent applicable.</p></blockquote><p>It just dropped the dps of crusaders in offensive stance - thats our (for paladin at least ONLY ) debuff to our spells resist type no longer castable.</p>

[Tandy]

<p>I am hoping this is just a mistake. Almost all my taunts are still useable aside from rescue and group taunt and deathmarch.</p><p>Totally would be able to tank an instance like this with good healer(s) with no problems which basically negates the whole update itself and your better off scrapping the whole plan.</p><p>Turn off the taunt portions of abilies in Offensive stance. Or go back to de-taunts and figue something else out for the few people who want to group solo content please.</p>

[Tandy]

<p><cite>Antryg Mistrose wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p>It just dropped the dps of crusaders in offensive stance - thats our (for paladin at least ONLY ) debuff to our spells resist type no longer castable.</p></blockquote><p>Same for shadowknights....both crusader types depend on their group taunt for their debuff to their primary dmg type.</p><p>Offensive just got a whole lot less Offensive-y.</p>

[EvilAstroboy]

<p>Offensive stance should stay as detaunts. Add a third stance for this trash update if warriors want it so much.</p>

[Illine]

<p><cite>Tandy wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p>Ok I posted a bit in other thread but this needs its own.</p><p>Currently now that the de-taunts are removed from Offensive stance...group taunt and death march are no longer castable in that stance.</p><p>This definetly needs to change. Deathmarch is utility for a DPS group...which is where we would be in an offensive stance...or if we are the 2nd tank in an xp group.</p><p>Group taunt has a disease debuff on it. I have no problems if that debuff is moved to another ability like one of the open AoE's but not being able to cast it is too much.</p><p>The stances having recast timers on them now is also a bit much.</p><p>The snap abilites arent usable but Grave Sacrament is. Seems a bit odd.</p><p>I SERIOUSLY prefered the de-aggro over this. I wish people woudl have stopped crying about them cause this is screwed up for SK's and Paladins I am sure.</p></blockquote><p>well if they lock taunting and defensive abilities while in off, it just sucks. i understand changing stances. I wasn't found of spell merging and now blocking spells ... just suxss. soon, they'll block all offensive abilities we have in defense to make sure all we do is taunt. they have 2 choices, whether changing ALL taunts into detaunts while in off stance or nullifying them. So while in off stance, if your taunt has also a debuff, you'll cast the debuff but no taunt or detaunt. the aggro component of DM would be off, sigil would be useless.</p><p>exemple one of my taunt interrupts my target, and I use it even when soloing, it really helps. I want to be able to do it. I also have a magical stoneskin or a mitig buff. I use them while in off stance. Ok I solo but I sometimes need some buffs to keep me alive. If I can't use all my defensive and agro tools when soloing or in small groups, what's the point?</p><p>would be like telling healers they can't dps when they heal ... cool it would make the game boring.</p>

[Tandy]

<p>Well I think the reason behind this was, and no offense to these people at all, but the duo's and trio's who wanted to hold aggro AND dps while doing overland solo content.</p><p>Now I have nothing against trying to work something out for those people...but it IS solo content. Please lets not balance stuff out around a few people doing solo mobs together cause they want to, when in fact every single class is capable of doing every single solo quest in the game I think.</p><p>The majority of players in my experience are in an instance, in a full group, doing content that way.  Balance for everyone, but at the end of the day you have to make sure that the 90% of your content works well (and while there is nice overland content, instance content is by and far more focued in TSO).</p><p>As is no SK is going to be using offensive stance as a DPS person in a group or raid with this.  Conversely those few people doing solo overland together are likely going to be happy with it. Of course maybe not, who knows this might screw everyone equally.</p>

[TheSpin]

<p>I think this is a major breakthrough for this whole tanking revamp.  I definately understand the importance of deathmarch as a dps utility, and the important of the mitigation debuff on the SK taunt, but I think it's even more important that those deaggros don't go in.</p><p>Most taunts have some kind of secondary effect, some classes have interupts, others have damage or debuffs added, including the new kick and aoe line.  I think the perfect solution would be to disable the hate portion of the taunts while in offensive stance, while allowing the secondary effect to still work.  Taunts without a secondary effect could either have one added, or basically do nothing in offensive.  Deathmarch is unique, and with it's fairly long recast time I'd say they should just leave it alone.  If not, add a detaunt into it while in offensive, but keep it castable.</p>

[Wytie]

<p>Postive feedback.</p><p>I like to use my nox debuff all the time plz along with Death March.</p><p>Thanks!</p>

[Skywarrior]

<p>I just logged into Test Copy and checked this out.  Deathmarch casts just fine in Def, Off, and no stance.  Not sure where the misinformation is coming from unless it's still in discussion phase somewhere.  It isn't implemented as of this post.</p>

[Maroger]

<p>Not only are the buffs reduced in power as a result of ther merger -- we also lose the buffs we would get in out 70;s -- the new stances EVEN AT MASTER I LEVEL in out 70 - DO NOT EQUAL the power of the buffs we would have gotten in our 70;s in short -- the BUFFS have been reduced in power meaning that we are losing DPS even in OFFENSIVE STANCE.</p><p>Haven't you done enought damage already, Aeralik - we shoud be allowed to Cast DEATH MARCH when we want -- not when you want. This is becoming unwarranted interference in players ability to enjoy the game THEIR WAY -- your way to enjoy the game is unimportant.</p>

[EvilAstroboy]

<p><cite>Skywarrior wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p>I just logged into Test Copy and checked this out.  Deathmarch casts just fine in Def, Off, and no stance.  Not sure where the misinformation is coming from unless it's still in discussion phase somewhere.  It isn't implemented as of this post.</p></blockquote><p>It was implemented but it was ninja fixed while the servers were still up. Myself and 3 other SKs on test all noticed it became available in offensive all at the same time. This was not misinformation because at the time of posting it was true, death march was not usable in offensive stance.</p><p>Chastisement is still unusable.</p><p>They need to sort this mess out, give SKs back the detaunts. If we want to tank or OT we will go defensive.</p>

[Skywarrior]

<p><cite>EvilAstroboy wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p>It was implemented but it was ninja fixed while the servers were still up. Myself and 3 other SKs on test all noticed it became available in offensive all at the same time.</p></blockquote><p>I agree there might have been a temporary issue but I can only relate my experience.  When I first logged in, this morning less than one hour ago, to check out this claim, my Deathmarch icon was greyed out (I was in O stance on login).  I selected a mob target and Deathmarch remained grey and I could not cast.  I hit the stance button to go to no stance and Deathmarch became available.  I then proceeded to use Deathmarch in both stances and in no stance, as I indicated. </p><p>The only thing I did to make it start working was leave O stance after login and then it worked in all stances.  So, there may be a bug related to the stances being changed recently but I really don't think there was a "ninja fix" because I don't think it was intentionally changed.  I know, it's hard to prove one way or the other since so much gets left out of notes anyway.  What is it they say, "it's difficult to impossible to prove a negative"?</p>

[EvilAstroboy]

<p>Its back to being locked, and switching between stances and no stance doesnt change it. Aerelik did say he was removing snap aggro in another post. Was probably a bug that it became useable again, not that it wasnt usable in the first place.</p><p>Id be happy if they just returned SKs stances to before this update, all the other tanks seem happy with this new offensive stance but id rather tank in defensive and not steal aggro in raids using offensive.</p>

[Seolta]

<p><strong><span style="font-size: x-small;">IMO merge the Disease debuff from Decree line into the Cleave Flesh line. You could adjust the Cleave Flesh recast, delay and dmg amount as necessary...</span></strong></p><p><strong><span style="font-size: x-small;">We ABSOLUTELY must be able to use our disease debuff in Offensive and Defensive stances. It is our primary debuff and is a central key to our ability to land most of our spells.</span></strong></p><p><strong><span style="font-size: x-small;">ALSO...we must be able to use Deathmarch in Offensive AND Defensive stance...it is a DPS/Utility/Flexibility spell and pretty much our best one at that. The aggro component was a nice (if unintended) side effect and was incredibly useful for aggro control, but if we will REALLY be able to manage in Def stance with just our taunts/rescue/AA's then just pull the aggro component or if that's technically impossible just add an equivalent de-taunt to it.</span></strong></p><p><strong><span style="font-size: x-small;">A huge part of the value of Deathmarch is the short duration control immunity. If we lose this in *either* stance it will be a very bad blow to SK functionality.</span></strong></p><p><span style="font-size: x-small;"><strong>If you want us to "play your way" with the stances then fine, but don't take away extremely useful utility tools that we've had forever and have come to be a central part of our class.</strong> </span></p>

[AziBam]

<p><cite>TheSpin wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p>I think this is a major breakthrough for this whole tanking revamp.  I definately understand the importance of deathmarch as a dps utility, and the important of the mitigation debuff on the SK taunt, but I think it's even more important that those deaggros don't go in.</p><p><span style="font-size: small;"><strong>Most taunts have some kind of secondary effect, some classes have interupts, others have damage or debuffs added, including the new kick and aoe line.  I think the perfect solution would be to disable the hate portion of the taunts while in offensive stance, while allowing the secondary effect to still work.</strong>  </span>Taunts without a secondary effect could either have one added, or basically do nothing in offensive.  Deathmarch is unique, and with it's fairly long recast time I'd say they should just leave it alone.  If not, add a detaunt into it while in offensive, but keep it castable.</p></blockquote><p>Yep!  Tanks would be hard pressed to hold aggro in a full group with no taunt capacity and only their dps to help them.  On the other hand, in a duo/trio they could make it work.  Every single one of my SK threat abilities has secondary effects of one sort or another.  Most of them damage components including the single target taunt.  Leave the damage, stun, debuff, interrupts, etc. on the fighters threat abilities but remove the threat component when in offensive.  I'd be happy with that and I think it would accomplish the intended goal of DEF stance for any real tanking and OFF stance for dps.</p>

[Kaarim]

<p>Shadowknight level 76 Taunt and Disease Debuff ability Chastisement issue.With the new change to having offensive stance prevent taunts from working...this is also preventing The disease mitigation debuff component. This is an issue to me since I am a raider and debuffs are essential. Can someone please make it so that in offensive stance it prevents any "Increase Threat" but doesn't lose the second part to the combat art? I believe Offensive stance is to increase DPS..if this is a penalty of being in Offensive then it seems to be more of a nerf lowering DPS since Shadowknights do Disease Damage. Please look into this and make it so that in offensive it either prevents the threat componant or complete remove the component when you switch stances or a fine tuned alternative.</p><p><span><p>Also please looking into the Paladins AoE taunt as well since theirs have Divine Mitigation debuff tied to the taunt.</p><p>I'm not sure if warriors have this issue as well but will like this to be looked at more closely and tweaked better..the ideas are awesome and I'm all up for em' just needs some reworking.</p><p>Thanks.</p></span></p>

[Wytie]

<p>They obviously cant keep it like this, so just keep /feedback in test and give them better suggestions.</p><p>Because its currently an epic fail atm.</p>

[Kaarim]

<p><span >Death march isn't working in offesive stance either...please look into this.</span></p>

[Elanjar]

<p><cite>Tandy wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p><cite>Spetz@Runnyeye wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p><cite>Tandy wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p><cite>Spetz@Runnyeye wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p>Four fighter classes versus other two? I would prefer solution acceptable for the majority of the fighters, not just two classes.</p></blockquote><p>I didnt think the de-taunts screwed over any fighters. It just prevented tanking in offensive stance and might have messed with some duo/trio's who were doing solo content togther.</p></blockquote><p>For warriors these detaunts makes any tanking in offensive impossible.</p><p>If I want to help to burn mobs in group instances - I have to let wizzy to tank =)</p></blockquote><p>Yeah you missed the memo....tanking in defensive is what we are supposed to do. Offensive is for DPS and NOT for tanking. So your comments arent applicable.</p></blockquote><p>Your "vision" of tanking is not the same as everyone elses. I think I can find more people that agree fighters should never detaunt. EVER. (possible exception for brawlers) Than find people who agree with your mindset. You've been spouting in these threads like you know everything about every tank. Get off your throne.</p><p>The changes now, with the exception of the 5 second recast on stances is more in line with how it should be. Agro should be equal/balanced in both stances with survivability vs dps being the seperating differences. If you widen the survivability gap then players would have to choose defensive when its called for cause offensive would not suffice.</p>

[Tandy]

<p><cite>Elanjar@Nagafen wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p><cite>Tandy wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p><cite>Spetz@Runnyeye wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p><cite>Tandy wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p><cite>Spetz@Runnyeye wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p>Four fighter classes versus other two? I would prefer solution acceptable for the majority of the fighters, not just two classes.</p></blockquote><p>I didnt think the de-taunts screwed over any fighters. It just prevented tanking in offensive stance and might have messed with some duo/trio's who were doing solo content togther.</p></blockquote><p>For warriors these detaunts makes any tanking in offensive impossible.</p><p>If I want to help to burn mobs in group instances - I have to let wizzy to tank =)</p></blockquote><p>Yeah you missed the memo....tanking in defensive is what we are supposed to do. Offensive is for DPS and NOT for tanking. So your comments arent applicable.</p></blockquote><p>Your "vision" of tanking is not the same as everyone elses. I think I can find more people that agree fighters should never detaunt. EVER. (possible exception for brawlers) Than find people who agree with your mindset. You've been spouting in these threads like you know everything about every tank. Get off your throne.</p><p>The changes now, with the exception of the 5 second recast on stances is more in line with how it should be. Agro should be equal/balanced in both stances with survivability vs dps being the seperating differences. If you widen the survivability gap then players would have to choose defensive when its called for cause offensive would not suffice.</p></blockquote><p>Dont forget...when I posted what I said...death march wasnt useable...our debuff wasnt useable either. Those things are all changed now or will be changed soon.  So my orginal gripe is almost fixed...the only thing I hate is the 5 sec thing now too.</p><p>I have said over and over I only know what I tested first hand. Only dealing with SK's and only what I have seen personally and have information to back it up. No throne here just annoyed with people spreading false information. So if your gonna be nasty to me, at least get the facts straight about WHY to be nasty.</p>

[Aeralik]

<p>As mentioned in another thread, this change was removed due to some of these conflicts.  It should appear with the next test update which will then just stop threat effects from applying instead of not allowing you to cast them at all.</p>

[Zabjade]

<p><span style="color: #00cc00;">One thing I do miss is my Skelly Dumbfire pet. The rest seems ok for me, byt my SK is only in the 50's</span></p>

[Zimrathon]

<p>I've read countless posts regarding this both on eq2players and EQ2Flames and the most obvious solution to me has been said many times in them. Why not simply remove or reduce the threat aspect of anything whilst in offensive stance. But still enable us to pick up aggro should we need to step in, 5 seconds is long enough for a full wipe whilst we fumble about changign stance to try to gain crowd control.</p>

[Kurindor_Mythecnea]

<p><span style="color: #ffff00;">5 second recast for stance swap is uncalled for. peeryed.</span></p>

[Mentalep]

<p><cite>Aeralik wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p>As mentioned in another thread, this change was removed due to some of these conflicts.  It should appear with the next test update which will then just stop threat effects from applying instead of not allowing you to cast them at all.</p></blockquote><p>Any chance of letting positionals work in offensive stance, even if straight taunts don't?  Currently, if I'm in a group but not tanking, and the main tank dies or gets feared or whatever, my first<strong> </strong>priority is grabbing aggro, not switching stances.  It's awkward and annoying to have to drop offensive stance before I can pick up the mobs.</p>

[Phank]

<p>This most recent change basically breaks the Shadowknight class.  Not being able to disease debuff a mob, nor use Deathmarch (the SK's signature ability) in Offensive stance goes against everything we have known about the class for several years.  Not only that, it goes against the nature of these changes!  You want the SK to be able to DPS and have utility while in Offensive mode (i.e. not steal aggro from the MT) yet to take away their MAIN UTILITY is unacceptable.</p><p>Furthermore, the timers on the stances are asinine.  Again, you are taking something that wasn't broken and breaking it.  You are taking a playstyle that has been in place since inception and making every fighter relearn their trade.  In a deepening recession, this is not the best tactic to hold onto thinning revenue.</p><p>In fact, this is a major reason for us to quit the game and save our money rather than throw it away in disgust at these unacceptable changes.</p>

[Phank]

<p>This furthers the question, what about Malevolent Tormenting - our AA that adds an additional hate gain to Deathmarch? Seems like this AA is only viable in Defensive stance now.  So perhaps this should be rolled into our Defensive stance AA.  It seems like SOE like the idea of consolidation, and it would make sense for a Shadows Crusader AA to be usable in any stance or non-stance.  Give us a DM AA that increases the duration by 2 secs per rank or something worthwhile, rather than an AA that only works in one stance.</p>

[Junaru]

<p><cite>Phank wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p>This most recent change basically breaks the Shadowknight class.  Not being able to disease debuff a mob, nor use Deathmarch (the SK's signature ability) in Offensive stance goes against everything we have known about the class for several years.  Not only that, it goes against the nature of these changes!  You want the SK to be able to DPS and have utility while in Offensive mode (i.e. not steal aggro from the MT) yet to take away their MAIN UTILITY is unacceptable.</p></blockquote><p>Why keep bring it up after it's been said by a Dev many time that it's been changed just not on test yet. Drop it you can use DM now in o-stance.</p>

[Phank]

<p><cite>Junaru wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p>Why keep bring it up after it's been said by a Dev many time that it's been changed just not on test yet. Drop it you can use DM now in o-stance.</p></blockquote><p>Uh, I posted in a reactionary fashion before reading the Dev reply to the bug.  Also I didn't see the other thread regarding stance timers.  My bad.</p><p>However, I still think that Hate need to remain on DM regardless of stance.  Otherwise what is the point of spending 5 points into Malevolent Tormenting?  We won't need increased Hate in Defensive stance EVER!  But those points might be spent wisely in Malevolent Tormenting for Offtanking in Offensive stance.  If the MT goes down, these points will increase the snap ability while the timers refresh on the stance change from Off > Defensive.</p><p>Either way, this brings up another concern.  So no... I'm not going to drop it.</p>

[Noaani]

<p><cite>Mentalepsy wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p><cite>Aeralik wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p>As mentioned in another thread, this change was removed due to some of these conflicts.  It should appear with the next test update which will then just stop threat effects from applying instead of not allowing you to cast them at all.</p></blockquote><p>Any chance of letting positionals work in offensive stance, even if straight taunts don't?  Currently, if I'm in a group but not tanking, and the main tank dies or gets feared or whatever, my first<strong> </strong>priority is grabbing aggro, not switching stances.  It's awkward and annoying to have to drop offensive stance before I can pick up the mobs.</p></blockquote><p>You could make a macro for this.</p><p>May need to use /commands to get it to work propperly, but a macro that casts (cancels) your off stance then casts a rescue ability will work fine. It will take the same casting time as simply casting the rescue, since cancelling the stance has no casting time.</p>

[Pitt Hammerfi]

<p>5s cast time on stance swap is re-tarded</p><p>I've lost count how many times as an Off Tank, i've been in offensive doing my DPS and the main tank has died - i've had to grab the mob with my snap aggro skills and quickly switch to defensive.</p><p>That was my job as a SK, the ability to maneuver around the raid staying high on the hate list and the dps. Jumping in here and there by soaking up the MT's dmg and stepping in to grab mobs if things went wrong.</p><p>From the sounds of it youve totally changed my style of gameplay.</p>

[Azarphan]

<p>I have to jump on the band wagon with Pitty.  5 seconds is an eternity when you have to snap aggro and settle a mob like Switchmaster when the MT hits the dirt.  This <span style="font-weight: bold;"><span style="font-style: italic;">really really</span></span> needs to go (looky, I even bold italicized this cause its just that important.)  </p><p>Glad we did away with the spell disabling thing from all aspects of game play this was a bad idea.  Not sure how a seasoned fighter would magically draw a blank because he is standing differently that's just crazyness.</p>

[Mentalep]

<p><cite>Noaani wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p><cite>Mentalepsy wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p><cite>Aeralik wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p>As mentioned in another thread, this change was removed due to some of these conflicts.  It should appear with the next test update which will then just stop threat effects from applying instead of not allowing you to cast them at all.</p></blockquote><p>Any chance of letting positionals work in offensive stance, even if straight taunts don't?  Currently, if I'm in a group but not tanking, and the main tank dies or gets feared or whatever, my first<strong> </strong>priority is grabbing aggro, not switching stances.  It's awkward and annoying to have to drop offensive stance before I can pick up the mobs.</p></blockquote><p>You could make a macro for this.</p><p>May need to use /commands to get it to work propperly, but a macro that casts (cancels) your off stance then casts a rescue ability will work fine. It will take the same casting time as simply casting the rescue, since cancelling the stance has no casting time.</p></blockquote><p>Thanks for the suggestion.  Is there a command I can use to specifically cancel a particular buff as if I had right-clicked it on my maintenance bar, or will I have to add another button to my hotbar (one with just Rescue, one with a macro that casts offensive stance first)?  If the latter, I would probably be better off just moving Rescue over next to my stance buttons (where Hold the Aggression used to be).</p>

[Wytie]

<p>Hoesntly they can leave the 5 sec delay, if I must switch and taunt sooner our taunts will still work during the 5sec cool down before you can go defensive, because you can cancle offensive at anytime you just have to wait a few to recast defensive after cancling offensive which still sucks but is still fine as long as taunts will still work in no stance.</p><p>Id rather have this than lose the secondary abilitys of taunts by simply not being able to cast them in offensive, they need some kind of cool down to prevent hot swap abuse and defy the whole system.</p>

[Elanjar]

<p><cite>Tandy wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p><cite>Elanjar@Nagafen wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p><cite>Tandy wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p><cite>Spetz@Runnyeye wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p><cite>Tandy wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p><cite>Spetz@Runnyeye wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p>...</p></blockquote><p>...</p></blockquote>...</blockquote><p>Yeah you missed the memo....<strong>tanking in defensive is what we are supposed to do. Offensive is for DPS and NOT for tanking. So your comments arent applicable.</strong></p></blockquote><p>Your "vision" of tanking is not the same as everyone elses. I think I can find more people that agree fighters should never detaunt. EVER. (possible exception for brawlers) Than find people who agree with your mindset. You've been spouting in these threads like you know everything about every tank. Get off your throne.</p><p>The changes now, with the exception of the 5 second recast on stances is more in line with how it should be. Agro should be equal/balanced in both stances with survivability vs dps being the seperating differences. If you widen the survivability gap then players would have to choose defensive when its called for cause offensive would not suffice.</p></blockquote><p>Dont forget...when I posted what I said...death march wasnt useable...our debuff wasnt useable either. Those things are all changed now or will be changed soon. So my orginal gripe is almost fixed...the only thing I hate is the 5 sec thing now too.</p><p>I have said over and over I only know what I tested first hand. Only dealing with SK's and only what I have seen personally and have information to back it up. No throne here just annoyed with people spreading false information. So if your gonna be nasty to me, at least get the facts straight about WHY to be nasty.</p></blockquote><p>My apologies sir. I had an anger flash there. I really just get sick of people saying that as a tank i should only be in defensive. Personally I think thats just stoopid. A tank should be able to tank offensively (the best defense is a good offense) in zones where the added avoidance and mit from DEF is uneccessary, or tank in defensive when he/she does need great survivability. Agro should be = in both.</p>