tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3434954756598017230.post6153650959534223821..comments2023-09-29T09:18:05.510+01:00Comments on Misery - a shadow priest blog: My place in the (5-man) worldMerlothttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12268596977879215079noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3434954756598017230.post-30661297456741078152008-10-20T20:12:00.000+01:002008-10-20T20:12:00.000+01:00All of these changes would have been Great with th...All of these changes would have been Great with the little change priests saw in the 3.0 patch (shoulda been named Echoes of QQ).Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3434954756598017230.post-39785942568612677022008-04-24T20:52:00.000+01:002008-04-24T20:52:00.000+01:00I like the idea of expanding the shackle applicabi...I like the idea of expanding the shackle applicability to demons... not a huge deal would just open up our utility in netherstorm instances and elsewhere.<BR/><BR/>MC definitely needs a fix.... but I'm not sure what is best. Here's the dilemma as I see it. Other forms of CC such as sap and sheep are much more reliable, which is a big factor in loss of favor towards shadow priests in 5-man PUGs. Still, from one point of view MC is a superior CC; sap and sheep only serve to take the target out of action, whereas MC gets you a new ally. So, one might argue, MC should be worse than sheep or sap in some fashion. And it certainly is. In my experience in heroics, if you want to set up for a full wipe, try MC. Better no CC than MC in most cases. One improvement could be that with MC you remain free to do other things, as you suggsted, but I would rather have MC become more reliable, for example, there is one resistance check upon cast rather than at every 'tick'. This would make it a more useful spell in BGs as well.Phil Ullrichhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17951006638649001059noreply@blogger.com