DK: is Rune Strike dependance Intended?

#0 - Jan. 3, 2009, 6:29 p.m.

We know DKs which are not holding a fast-hitting melee mob to rely on rune strike procs are gimped threat wise (this is getting worse next patch with a threat-buffed RS). A situation similar to pallies in BC, when they didn't have HotR or ShoR and a chunk of their threat came from getting hit with melee attacks.

Now, early on DKs were supposed to be the best caster tanks, however blizz abandoned the whole "niche" idea in favor of "bring the player, not the class" which in many ways was good move. Now, the problem is DKs and their reliance on Rune Strike for proper threat is that we're probably the WORST tanks when it comes to casters, not because of anti-magic defenses (which we have plenty of), but because of poor threat generation (losing aggro).

----

So, is this Intended?

Ghostcrawler

#3 - Jan. 3, 2009, 8:55 p.m.

Rune Strike is largely to make up for the fact that DK tanks are really penalized for failing to land attacks. For example if you open with a Plague Strike and get a miss or dodge, your rotation is thrown off and your threat will be lower.

It is dependent on a proc so that you have an incentive to hit other buttons and to make it less useful when doing dps. It is on next swing so that it doesn't tie up a GCD. It can't be avoided so that DKs who miss a Plague Strike and a Rune Strike aren't doubly screwed.