Shaman - May we tank 5 Mans, please?

#0 - Jan. 2, 2010, 9:23 a.m.

You know, come the next expansion it wouldn't be overly difficult to allow us to tank the easier content again, as was possible pre-BC. Given that our AoE is based on Magma/Fire totems it may be harder for us to AoE tank, but most Shaman are skilled players who could pull it off.

Assuming that the tanking talents and a 1 handed specialization were put into the Enhance Tree, we could handle agro on 4 mobs pretty well with Maelstrom Weapon, Chain Lightning, and the Chain Lighting glyph. Then there is Lightning Shield and Static Shock too.

Basically, all we really need here is Righteous Fury and a Stamina modifier, provided that Block/Dodge/Parry can either be itemized on Mail again or derived through a talent or set of talents.

Some people are vehemently against this concept and I really just can't come up with a logical idea as to why they would be. I mean, who cares what someone does with their Shaman or what options they have available to them? Paladins and Druids are 100% effective at all 3 rolls, so what would be so bad about Shaman being 100% DPS / 100% Healing / 75% Tanking? Seems like just a bunch of babies whining when I hear people say how terrible of an idea this is... boohoo?

Anyhow, I would dual spec healing and 5 man tanking for sure!

Nethaera

#38 - Jan. 4, 2010, 7:47 p.m.

This is a sticky sort of subject. There is a certain level of expectation that people have when it comes to tanking as we've all seen and experienced in game. If changes were made to allow shaman the ability to tank some things but not others, they could easily get labeled as "bad tanks" and no one would want to use them (or play them) at all in this capacity. While for some people, being a "temporary" tank in the lower end 5s might be intriguing, it may not be so for most people and might end up being a very little used spec for the class. It may even end up being more frustrating for some who find themselves wanting to get into the upper end dungeons and raids in this capacity only to find themselves coming up short.

So you could say, yes, we could find a way to make this work, but the ultimate question is, would it be worth doing so and what would be the end result? I don't want to crush your hopes but, at this point, this sort of change seems very unlikely and wouldn't have the sort of payoff that you would like to come out of it.