Legendary Part 1: Druids say "choose the player not the class"

Okay, so I saw a post pop up on WoW insider about the legendary weapon, based on a blog post written by a paladin.  First I want to say, yes it would be fine for paladins. Second, I want to say that it’s just as good for any other healing class. Even the paladin blogger agrees that the decision should be based on who in the guild deserves it the most, without taking class into consideration. However, it’s just not stated that well in the post because it’s buried under “but X class could use it better”

However,I’m not sure why the WoWinsider article is claiming that it’s a paladin weapon above other classes.  I won’t rank classes like that, and my conclusion has always been that every class is just as deserving. I won’t rank them. The act of ranking druids as being the worst to give the legendary to does a disservice to ALL the druids whose guilds decided that a druid was most deserving (Also, I’m not personally receiving one, but it’s going to one of the other druid healers in my new guild), and is really just not an okay thing to do – especially for an item where we haven’t even really seen the final stats & how it interacts with their healing abilities.

Okay, so you buy the “lets all just be equal and get along” argument, but why would a druid “deserve” the weapon if other classes say druids are the worst?

First, lets look at the proc:

Well, GC already said the proc should be good for druids, too.
The proc is probably better than you guys are assuming (even for druids). I’m not going to spoil it though. :)

If it buffs the healer instead of the target, then I don’t see why it would need to be limited to a single-target tank healer. If the shield would absorb magical damage as much as physical damage, then the heals could shield multiple targets (your melee damage that keeps dieing to all that dang AOE damage) for a decent amount of healing as a priest, shaman, or even druid. Even then, priests, shaman, and druids CAN be MT/OT healers without any real major problems.

The numbers that the paladin posted look big, but the shield proc mechanic isn’t likely to save your raid, regardless of which healer has it. You are just as likely to kill a boss regardless of which person in your raid has that weapon. In fact, you have to kill a lot of Ulduar bosses before you even get the weapon. So, it’s really not going to matter which person can “utilize” it the best, really. If the shield stacks over time, then any amount of healing will do a big shield on the tank.

Another argument comes down to comparing stats (ignoring the proc!).

Another claim is that druids would basically lose some spirit, crit, and int by picking up the legendary + an offhand compared to picking up The Lifebinder staff (and then WOWinsider says that the crit is bad, even though we’d get more crit from the staff). However, I’ve already given up all the regen stats on the Naxx weapons to pick up more spellpower. I care about spell power on my weapon more than I care about the other stats on my weapon slot. With spirit being even more devalued, I’ll happily give up spirit on my weapon slot to get more spell power. A lot of druids sacrifice those stats already for more spellpower on their weapon.  So, the stat argument really doesn’t hold up in my eyes. I wouldn’t have the staff in the first place, I’d have whatever 1-hander & off-hand gave me the highest spell power – unless for some reason I could find a staff with more spell power than my 1-hander + offhand item. So, in this case, the legendary would win for me. I can give up a little bit of base stats to have 56 more spell power? Yes please!

They also argue that crit isn’t a good stat for druids, which other druids have already proven wrong. Crit and haste are both good stats for druids. Any druid using the legindary mace will probably be doing more tank healing than raid healing, anyway, right? Nourish-spam with Nature’s Grace & Living seed procs (with supportive HOTs) is actually awesome for tank healing, which would be a playstyle very supportive of both crit and haste.

How much CAN you heal for in 15 seconds?

People across the board have really not taken into account how much a resto druid can heal a tank for in that 15 seconds. I see everyone continuously underestimating how much the shield would benefit a druid, especially if all the HOT ticks count towards the shield proc (which GC hinted it would do). Also, if you have enough haste, you can drop all your HOTs and nourish basically down to the 1 second GCD most of the time, without too much of a problem. So, you can (theoretically) get off 14 or 15 different casts of various spells during that 15 seconds.

In this case, you would want the extra haste you get off the Legendary weapon that is going to get your Nourish GCD as close to 1 second as possible, along with the crit that procs Nature’s Grace (for even more haste). We got a boost to nourish crit heals on single-targets with HoTs in 3.1, likely so that the mace’s proc would benefit us just as much – since we can work out really great tank healing builds. We can also use it for raid healing & putting smaller shields on a lot of the raid…

At the moment, I’m not going to fill in number of how much I could heal for in 15 seconds here. However, you could work it out yourself. How much can you heal for in 15 seconds? If you work out your numbers, you are welcome to send your results to: lissanna70 <at> gmail <dot> com

In fact, I’ll take numbers or supportive information from any healing class, and I’d be perfectly happy to keep posting that all healing classes should be weighted equal for who should get the mace. I’ll be writing part 2 of this post (where I actually work out the math on how much I can heal on my druid for in 15 seconds) sometime later this week or this weekend (I have to finish my finals before I can spend a few hours doing number crunching).

In the end, what really matters is rewarding a person in your guild that has been the most dedicated and long-term healer, who is likely to stay with your guild for a long time (which is why I wouldn’t even want the “responsibility” of getting one). Passing up someone who is personally deserving of the weapon, in favor of the “best class” to receive the weapon is just going to hurt a guild more than they benefit from the marginal differences between the healing specs.

Also, as soon as people decide to only give it to one of the healing specs at the exclusion of all others, the developers could decide to change the stats and totally mess up the min-maxers who decided it based on what they thought the stats were going to be. If you give it to the healer in your guild who deserves it the most, completely ignoring what class they are, then you can’t be disappointed if the stats change a little bit one way or the other over time.

UPDATE: Due to the plagiarism and identity theft claims against Ferarro’s blog posts, I’m disabling all links to that blog that were in this article, especially since all the relevant posts have already been deleted from that site.

29 Comments

  1. Posted April 29, 2009 at 2:43 am | Permalink

    I was assuming that the guy who wrote the post highlighting that blog either plays a paladin or was asked to stir up some drama.

    We’re giving ours to a druid :)

  2. Aelinna
    Posted April 29, 2009 at 4:10 am | Permalink

    Druid’s getting ours, the heal leader. Well deserved imho.

    The key argument really is whether the shield stacks, like Divine Aegis. I’d very much assume it does based on GC’s comment it’s good for druids too. That pretty much invalidates his “paladins drop da bomb” argument.

    AFAIK the IWIN hps method, ignoring overheal, is PoH anyway. 20k HL, meet 30k PoH.

    Besides have you seen his banner graphic? Puhleez.

  3. Posted April 29, 2009 at 4:13 am | Permalink

    my guild was kind enough to allow me to have it in an open forum discussion involving all the main spec healers and officers. i play a druid.

    also, wanted to note that i’ve been reading your blog for only a few weeks now (somebody turned me on to it before 3.1 went live) and i like your work. :D

  4. Posted April 29, 2009 at 9:03 am | Permalink

    Nice post, Lissanna. I’m still intending to write something on how to lose Val’anyr graciously. It seems that everyone writes posts and comments about how their guild gave them one. Our guild’s went to Matticus without a lot of debate, and I think being on the losing end of the legendary distribution is also worth writing about. Part of me was glad that the stats didn’t look ideal for druids. It helped with the sour grapes.

  5. Posted April 29, 2009 at 9:04 am | Permalink

    I’m not getting one. I just switched guilds. :)

  6. Posted April 29, 2009 at 9:44 am | Permalink

    Thank you!

    I can’t help but agree with you on all points here. I just wrote a similar post disagreeing with Ferarro as well.

    I’ll work out some numbers today and send them your way.

  7. Posted April 29, 2009 at 10:05 am | Permalink

    “In the end, what really matters is rewarding a person in your guild that has been the most dedicated and long-term healer.”

    @Averna: You’re right. I admit it. This is a Druid mace, completely. 100%. Best in slot and it sucks for Priests, Shamans and especially stupid Paladins. This could not be less of a Pally mace. GO RESTO DRUIDS!

  8. Posted April 29, 2009 at 10:09 am | Permalink

    Ferraro, we’re not saying that it’s better for druids than other classes. We’re saying that class shouldn’t matter, because dedication should be rewarded with it – not what class you chose to play 4 years ago. When you spend time explaining why it’s bad for one of the healing classes (even with disclaimers) you still end up with multiple posts on the WoW healing forums saying “look! someone said its only for paladins” and then we have to spend our time explaining why it wasn’t a bad decision to give it to anyone else…

  9. Posted April 29, 2009 at 10:21 am | Permalink

    *smiles* I know you weren’t saying that. I was just throwing hyperbole back for irony sake. But that was my point: I never said it was BAD for any class. And actually, direct quote from my post:

    “But because of the proc – depending on how it ends up working – it’ll likely be BiS for any healer, anyway.”

    It’s frustrating when people don’t read the entire article or skim through it, make assumptions, and then take it the wrong way. What you’re trying to do (saying that class shouldn’t matter, because dedication should be rewarded with it – not what class you chose to play 4 years ago) is exactly what I wrote half a dozen times. I even put it in bold, flashing text. =P

    Don’t read Wowinsider’s article (or horrible title). Read my post entirely, thoroughly, and completely. That’s all I ask from people. Not yelling and screaming and telling me I’m “wrong” and “stupid.” That’s all.

  10. Posted April 29, 2009 at 10:31 am | Permalink

    Ferarro, The act of doing X > Y is what distracted from your entire point. If you just deleted like the last sentence of your post, there would probably be a lot less controversy. It’s your ‘take home’ message at the very end of your post, along with how WoWinsider interpreted your post that’s the most problematic (combined with how the rest of the community started posting “legendary is for paladin” posts on the WoW forums). I don’t think I call anyone stupid in my post. :)

    You reinforced points that other people had been getting worked up about, and then got a lot of WoWinsider publicity on a Tuesday… so my form of damage control is really not meant as a personal attack against you. I’m sure you are a great person… Your post just comes across wrong because of the way you phrase things in a couple places. Here, I went back in my post and updated the first part to not be quite as harsh against you…

  11. Posted April 29, 2009 at 10:39 am | Permalink

    By last sentence I assume you mean, “As it stands right now, with the current stats and numbers, taking equal gear and equal skill into consideration, Val’anyr’s benefit goes: Paladin > Shaman > Priest > Druid.”

    But it’s true. Let’s pretend that on the Live version of the mace that it ends up being so amazing that any and all healers benefit from it the same. It’s BoAK proc is customizable and can be tailored to your class. Alright. So that takes the proc debate out of the discussion since it cancels itself out.

    What’s left? The stats. And Paladins benefit more from the stats than Druids do (NOT that Druids don’t benefit from the stats at all! – big difference). So if the proc is optimal for all healers, then the edge still goes to Paladins for the stat itemization (BUT IT’S STILL AN AMAZING MACE FOR ANY HEALING CLASS).

    They’re not mutually exclusive statements. That’s what’s frustrating.

  12. Posted April 29, 2009 at 10:42 am | Permalink

    Right, and the act of ranking classes like that pretty much means that all people listen to is the ranking part and ignore the rest of it. I know it’s frustrating you, but that’s just part of human nature. I understand you, I really do – but a lot of people don’t…

  13. Posted April 29, 2009 at 10:43 am | Permalink

    Oh, and I’m talking about the comments on Wowinsider and other sites, not your blog post. Don’t want you to think I’m bombing on you.

  14. Posted April 29, 2009 at 10:44 am | Permalink

    Yeah, I think you are learning an important lesson about why greater-than signs are evil, lol. It’s really just the way that wowinsider worded the article that was so problematic, I think. I wouldn’t have posted anything about it if I hadn’t seen that article get posted up…

  15. Posted April 29, 2009 at 10:53 am | Permalink

    I won’t run from the truth! Even if it kills me! *laughs* Paladins are a masochistic lot.

    Seriously though, I think a lot of it stems from the do-or-die nature of the game and people inflating everything out of proportion. Like if I wrote Druid healing > Shaman healing, everyone would scream at me for saying Shaman healing is bad. Even if title of the post was, “Which class has the best HoTs?”

    A lot of people just seem eager to grab a pitchfork and torch in this game.

    And for the record, I have an 80 resto Druid alt, so I’m far from biased. I’m also the GM of my guild and I’ve given the fragments to our Druid. 9 so far.

  16. Posted April 29, 2009 at 11:01 am | Permalink

    When it’s orange loot, everyone has to get all worked up about it. That’s just how loot works, even if we’ll never actually have the orange loot anyway…

  17. Posted April 29, 2009 at 11:06 am | Permalink

    Were you around for Thunderfury? I haven’t read your blog fully so I don’t know how long you’ve been playing. But oh man, oh man… that broke up guilds like no other. *shudder* At least with this Legendary we should all have 2-3 by next expansion, so it won’t be too dramatic.

  18. Posted April 29, 2009 at 11:20 am | Permalink

    I have been playing since about a week after WoW first came out (even though my blog is a more recent development). I raided hard-core in the pre-BC days. I know what you mean, lol.

  19. Posted April 29, 2009 at 11:56 am | Permalink

    I saw the post over at WoW Insider, and I just completed reading Ferraro’s post.

    Ferarro, reading your post…I get your veiwpoint, I do. Just like an attorney defending her client, you are zealously defending your classes right to the weapon. However, in doing so, you looked at it just from your client’s perspective, making it a fairly narrow minded, and seemingly one-sided approach. You did the math for your class only, and instead of saying “here is how it would benefit other classes” and then comparing the cold hard numbers between classes and difinitively showing how those numbers work out in favor of a paladin, you spent the majority of your argument just saying why it was good for paladins, and not as good for other classes with no real substantiating support! (That is just incomplete and inconclusive argument formulation ;))

    I read through all your comments here and on your site, and really I don’t feel you have much of a right to get as defensive as you have been. You put forth your argument for your client, and now you are being ripped on cross examination =) It was bound to happen when you provided such a one sided approach and definitive stance to your opinion. You put forth your evidence and now it’s time for opposing counsel to provide their defense…and by default, they too will be zealously defending *their* client (classes), which ultimately means proving that you are wrong, or at least less right. It’s not personal, per se, it’s just everyone else now putting forth their two cents.

    I understand that you did make a statement saying that it should go to your guild’s most dedicated, deserving healer, but that really was lost in all of the other pro-paladin points of argument that you were stating.

    I am looking forward to Lissana’s numerical response to yours. I suspect that she will show that a druid can also put up some amazing numbers as well with the weapon proc. Think about all the raid damage going around in Ulduar…think about how many targets a druid can heal in 15 seconds in a fight like Hodir, XT or Ignis where there is constant raid damage.

    In the end…kudos for having the courage for coming out and giving your stance in an official capacity, but you should have been ready for lots of the backlash you are now seeing :)

  20. Posted April 29, 2009 at 12:06 pm | Permalink

    From what I wrote on another blog:

    “My analysis of the proc is based on what I saw back in March, which heavily favors the Paladin. Is this different on Live? I have no idea. You have no idea. I hope so, though. But for now, I’m backing up the proc argument with first-hand results I’ve seen with my eyes.

    In March:
    Me – I saw it better for Paladins.
    You – You weren’t there.

    Now:
    You – You’re guessing/hoping it’ll be equal for us all.
    Me – I’m hoping for the same, but I can’t ignore first-hand data.

    “Also, the difference between putting small shields over the raid versus big shields on the tank is, as you say, equally important – furthering the argument for canceling out the proc from the debate. So, for the 7th time, all that leaves are the stats, which benefits Paladins more. I don’t know how many times I can reiterate my point here.

    “Just because the mace is BETTER for Paladins doesn’t mean it’s bad for Druids. Stop arguing over that. Unless another version comes out with Spirit and Mp5 on it, you can’t win. The difference in the mace’s benefit between a Paladin and Druid will likely be very, very small – Probably unnoticeable. But even a 1% edge is a 1% edge, and that is where my I drew my article from.”

    TL;DR – Even assuming the proc ends up being equally powerful for all healing classes across the board (which I hope), the stats benefit Paladins more than Druids, Shamans and Priest, whether marginally or otherwise. You can’t “rip that apart.” It’s concrete and even begrudgingly agreed upon in the healing community.

    And again, I’m not defending my class’s rights. As the GM I even gave the fragments to our guild’s Druid. Our Shaman is next.

  21. Posted April 29, 2009 at 12:28 pm | Permalink

    Re-iterating what you’ve already said repeatedly does not solidify your argument, it is still the same inconclusive, half finished argument that it was in your original post. All it does is show that you are fairly un-moving and closeminded in your opinions and in your stance.

    I am not going to get into the back and forth, run into a brick wall, that you did with Averna, because as she proved, and you yourself proved in your response to me, it’s a fairly pointless endeavor.

    I am open minded about the mace, I even made a post about it’s distribution on my blog some time ago. All I am doing is trying to make you understand *why* people are having this kind of reaction to your flat out statements (one of which was even made in your reply to me) that this is hands down best in the hands of a paladin. It is just as fair for everyone to disagree with you as it is for you to make such a bold statement.

    Regardless of HOW you meant your post to be read, it is clearly being read differently.

  22. Posted April 29, 2009 at 12:33 pm | Permalink

    That brick wall is logic.

  23. Posted April 29, 2009 at 12:38 pm | Permalink

    And I never said this mace is best in the hands of a Paladin in my reply. I said Paladins benefit the most from the mace. There’s a big difference, and it’s one a lot of people (like you) keep misunderstanding. Who it ends up being “best in the hands of” will largely depend on the final version of the proc on Live servers. Chances are, it’ll be equal for all healers.

  24. Posted April 29, 2009 at 2:09 pm | Permalink

    Actually, before 3.1, resto druids wouldn’t have worked as well with the proc. However, the 3.1 changes (and the further devaluation of spirit in both 3.1 and the proposed innervate change that GC announced) makes the stats more druid-friendly, as well as making druids better single-target tank healers than we were before 3.1. That’s the part that is missing.

    Before 3.1, paladin’s healing style & gearing may have favored the weapon. After 3.1, druid mechanics changed to make them more paladin-like in their healing under certain circumstances, so the stat evaluation I don’t even necessarily agree with anymore. As I said, all I personally value in my weapon slots is how much spell power I get, and I pretty much ignore all the other stats in that particular slot (I have a spirit/mana trinket instead of 2 spell power trinkets, so that’s where I make my gearing trade-off). What stats matter to what player is going to vary more than anyone is acknowledging.

    Also, if the “leaked” stats so heavily favor paladins, then I think the devs should put like 10 spirit and 5 mana/5 to muddy up the waters enough that all the arguments just break apart for any class. They avoided putting regen stats on the weapon so that you couldn’t say “oh it has X regen stat, it’s obviously for X class”, however by saying that no regen stats favors a paladin just seems contradictory to what the devs are trying to do with it.

    Since we’re basically still giving the weapon to people based on loyalty, attendance, and personal guild factors, the whole point of saying it’s “better” for one versus another is really just pointless in the end. I just don’t want it to end up becoming a case where the newer guilds 4 months from now exclude people based on a blog post.

    A good chain-healing shaman or AOE priest, or disc priest doing single-target healing, or druid doing single-target healing (OR raid healing), or a paladin doing tank healing are all going to find really interesting ways they can make the mace work for them. That’s what I really look forward to seeing – the creativity that people use to make the weapon work for them.

  25. Kyrsyii
    Posted April 29, 2009 at 2:58 pm | Permalink

    If you really want to kill the proc argument for sheer amount of healing done, look at a full hot set (with wildgrowth), swiftmend, and Tranquility. You could probably pull that off in 15 seconds.

    As for stats. . . What does any good player do? A good player optimizes his/her gear set OVERALL. That means any good player will shift gems and enchants in order to compensate for any lack of stats on an item. Having played both a priest and a druid for end game healing, I would love to have that mace on either one of my characters. Haste and crit are fantastic for both of those classes.

    You could also play devil’s advocate and say that because of rather impressive disrepancies between T8 sets, the mace is better off going to a different healing class to compensate for paladins having better or differently itemized gear. Paladin T8 has 66 more haste rating than a priest, and MORE THAN DOUBLE the rating a druid has on gear. Druids only have 4 more crit rating than paladins on gear while paladins are ahead of priests by 50 freaking crit rating. This doesn’t count the 11% base to Holy Light, without looking at Infusion of light procs. Priests can only get 5% with talents, while other talents, such as Divine Aegis, Inspiration, Surge of Light, and Holy Concentration all proc off of crits. Druids recently had their regrowth crit chance cut in half (to be shared by nourish), and in order for either of those spells to be effective at all, they need to crit. The ONLY crit-procs that a paladin has, are Illumination and Infusion of Light (which creates another 20% crit for Holy Light or makes Flash of Light instant!). So, if you really wanted to play devil’s advocate, you could argue that the mace really should go to a different healer in order to compensate for more poorly itemized gear (sorry, I played paladin, priest, and druid healers. . . no shaman, so I’m not sure what their story is.).

    So what’s the real message? Simple. Give it to the best and most reliable healer who wants it. That healer has probably already seen how they want to use it to its fullest capabilities. And that will determine its effectiveness to the raid — not by which class it is gifted to, but the person sitting behind the computer.

  26. Posted May 2, 2009 at 7:22 am | Permalink

    Ferraro do you really draw that much a distinction between “best in the hands of a paladin” and “paladins benefit the most from it”?

    Say a guild whose 3 top healers are equally deserving, equally atending, equally dedicated, and equally senior in the guild. A Paladin, a Druid, and a Shaman.

    By your logic of “paladins benefit the most from it” it’s going to the Paladin. If the paladin benefits the most from it, then the best place for the raid to place it is in the hands of the paladin. Your statements may be ‘different’ ideas but they fall into the same chain of events: the mace ending up in a Paladin’s hands over another class.

    So either stop trying to defend your viewpoint and stick to your guns or re-evaluate your position. You can’t have it both ways.

  27. Posted May 2, 2009 at 2:14 pm | Permalink

    The reason for it seeming like I’m trying to “have it both ways” is to clarify the gray areas of the mace. Val’anyr is, without a doubt, a Paladin mace. I’ve never moved from that opinion. I argue this point over several other blogs (most notably nerfthisdruid.com). However, many people see the words “this is a Paladin mace” and read it as “this is only a Paladin mace and no other class should get it!”, which is not what I intended to say at all. To make things worse, Wowinsider’s post to my article and it’s title really spun things out of control. So I’ve had to reiterate and reiterate and RE-reiterate the differences between the two statements over and over again, because – as you can see from the comments on my blog – many people never read my post in it’s entirety. They say things about how stupid I am for thinking Shamans want +Spirit and then I have to directly quote the parts of my post where I say Shamans don’t want +Spirit. It’s frustrating.

    So while at no point do I renege on my original statement that Paladins benefit from this weapon the most (one of my last paragraphs ends with “Val’anyr’s benefit goes: Paladin > Shaman > D.Priest > H.Priest > Druid”), other, more important elements come into play when deciding who should get the mace besides simple class mechanics and statistics, such as player dedication, skill, attendance, and overall priority. It’s hardly cut and dry.

    As you can imagine, going through all of those subjects and scenarios can end up being a tad long-winded. But it’s never me trying to have it both ways. It’s simply breaking things down to the stubbornly illiterate.

  28. Odinthebull
    Posted May 4, 2009 at 6:28 pm | Permalink

    Bornakk
    We have received many questions about how the proc works on Val’anyr, the Hammer of the Ancient Kings. While we originally intended for this effect to be a mystery, we realize that guilds now know what the tooltip on the proc says without necessarily knowing the details on how it works. This leads to situations where a healer may not know if assembling the hammer is worth it for them (hint: it is), and perhaps even worse, a misinformed leader may not think you deserve the hammer (hint: you do).

    Players also wonder if the proc makes the item deserving of its legendary status given that the stat allocation is normal for items of its item level (Hint: it does).

    The effect reads “Your healing spells have a chance to cause Blessing of Ancient Kings for 15 seconds allowing your heals to shield the target absorbing damage equal to 15% of the amount healed.”

    The way this works is that when the proc happens (which is a 10% chance whenever a hot or direct spell heals, with a 45 sec internal cooldown) you gain a buff (the Blessing) on yourself. Now all of your heals for the next 15 sec cause an 8 sec damage shield. The shield stacks with itself. It includes healing done by subsequent ticks of existing hots on the target. Note that the spell has to actually heal, so hots ticking on a fully-healed target cannot cause the proc. However the shield is based on the size of the heal itself, not the amount healed – i.e. 100% overhealing will not proc the Blessing on the healer, but the shield itself includes overhealing once the Blessing is active. The shield can grow to a maximum size of 20,000 damage absorbed.

    Example 1: A paladin casts Holy Light for 10K on the tank, which partially heals her. The Blessing procs, so the paladin’s Holy Light immediately causes a shield on the tank which will now absorb 1500 damage. The tank dodges the next two hits, so no damage is absorbed. The paladin then casts another heal for 8K, but only heals the tank for 600 before she is at full health. The shield is now at 2700 damage absorbed (1500 1200) for 8 sec.

    Example 2: A druid casts Rejuv on the tank, healing her. The Blessing procs on the druid on the second tick. A shield is applied to the tank which absorbs 15% of the amount healed by that tick and each remaining tick of the Rejuv. If the druid also gets Lifebloom and Regrowth on the tank while the Blessing is up, then those ticks also contribute to the shield. If the shield goes down because the 8 sec duration expires or it absorbs that much damage, it can go up again as long as the Blessing lasts, which is 15 sec.

  29. Posted May 4, 2009 at 6:38 pm | Permalink

    I’m working on part 2 of this post right now. Should have it up some time tomorrow (which is part of the reason why today’s post was shorter than usual).