Discussions about the table itself, as in structure / color / style should be moved to Template talk:Classtableall

Past discussions archived to...


I miss one thing from this [DPS, AoE, Heal, Tank, CC, Pull, Buff, DBf, MA] ranking: the Cure(poison/disease/curse)/Dispell ability ranking. The classes have various abilities abut that. Some of them cant, some can 1 or 2, some from enemy (Purge), some from friendly (Cleanase), and some from both (Dispel Magic). I welcome a column for that.

Indeed, but I can't figure out to edit the table. I figured out how to add a column label, but not insert data labels into that column. I would grant 1 point for each type they could dispel, calling the column curing (Magic/Poison/Disease/Curse). Druids get 2, Priests get 3 (due to mass dispel being able to cleanse a whole group that just got frost nova'd or AoE-feared especially) Paladins get 3, Shamans get 2+1 (Cleanse Spirit). In addition I would also put a column offensive dispels. 2 for normal dispel, +2 for immunity dispel Priests get 4, Shamans get 2, Warriors get 2+2 (as they'd only be using this with a shield equipped, and the immunity dispel has a 5 minute cooldown), Mages get 1 (Will easily run them OOM if they spam it, say against a restoration druid, but the fact that they steal the buff makes it different) All other classes get 0 Miryuki (talk) 21:05, November 29, 2009 (UTC)
On a slightly related note, perhaps one for Survivability: Paladins get 4* (bubbles, plate, Lay on hands, hand of freedom, heals) and Mages get 2* (Invisibility). Asterisk means they have an immunity cooldown. Warriors get 2+2 (Arms Threat!, I was thinking -4+8), Rogues get 2+2 (Cloak of Shadows, Vanish, Cheat Death Talent, Evasion but all have cooldowns, plus numerous threat reduction, passive and active), DKs get 3+1 (Movement Impairs but its on a essential rune, Plate Armor, Vampiric Blood, Unbreakable Armor), Druids get 4 (Hots, Bear Form, Armor in tree form, shadowmeld for all alliance druids and stamina bonus for all horde druids), Hunters get 2+2 (Feign death not as useful in PVP but it will interrupt enemy spellcasting if it targets the hunter, deterrence, and disengage), Priests get 2+1 (Fade - best threat reduction in game and removes movement impairs in standard PVP shadow spec, Desperate Prayer and Dispersion, Pain Suppression, Power Infusion), Shamans get 3 (Ankh, Ghost Wolf, Earthbind, Mail armor), Warlocks get 2 (fear, pet shield, pet tank) Miryuki (talk) 21:05, November 29, 2009 (UTC)

Warlock DPS

Warlocks currently have a listed dps of 2+1 while paladins have a dps of 1^+2 meaning that a properly specced pally can equal the dps done by a properly specced warlock. For quick fights a destruction warlock can dish out loads of damage and for longer fights an affliction warlock can do as much or even more damage than a mage or rogue.With lifetap and dark pact they don't have to worry about going oom so they can sustain their dps for longer periods of time than other casters. Demonology warlocks can dish out quite a bit of damage too, but not enough as the other two specs. Lomingerie 18:44 July 4, 2007

Yes, I think the same. Either this table is simply outdated, or someone who wrote it is basing on what the classes SHOULD be, and never been on any lvl70 raid (where warlocks, most of the time, top the damage meters). --Konrad-kun 20:28, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Male Icon

OK, which ones are the male icons? thumbnails are so small you cannot make heads or tails of them. It was better with the ?? as the place holders. Paly 1 (talk) 22:49, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Rogue : Poisons and where to apply them ?

d I’ve recently started to raid with my guild in Karazhan. And all of a sudden I realized…hmm as a Rogue what kind of poison should I apply to my weapons when fighting the bosses here?. So I went online (Google) and tried to find a page where you can see what poisons the different bosses resist and witch they don’t…………..nada I found no single page explaining what to use where, not even old days MC info……so here is my question:

Does anyone know where i might find a list over what poisons the different bosses resist and what works?

(Adanoi 21:07, 29 June 2007 (UTC))

Well, fortunately, very few bosses are actually immune to poison. Generally, the mobs your gonna see immune to poison are elementals and mechanicals. So, in kara, this means Curator, his adds, and the trash before and after him. After that, I can't think of any poison-immune bosses until Void Reaver in TK. As far as which poisons to use, the best combination is deadly/instant. The DPS on Deadly poison will exceed that of Instant poison, but dual DP is a waste unless you're mutilate/envenom spec -- you'll end up with a 5-stack of DP so quick and be unable to add the additional DPS from the instant poison hitting. --tindelli 13:37, 01 October 2007

Quick Summaries

I added these recently, but they were mostly off the top of my head, so I would appreciate if people would review them and add any key bits I may have missed.

--Fandyllic 11:04 AM PDT 24 September 2005
I wordsmithed all the summaries for "improved" flavor and better grammar, while adding and removing a few minor tidbits in a few cases. Most of the information is substantively the same. Please feel free to iterate.
--Flick 19:04, 25 October 2006 (EDT)
(Note that fandyllic's comment is more than a year old, and that the summaries took a detour via a separate page :-))
Beautifully written. My only concern is that some of them became a bit wordy for a "quick" summary; after all, there's Choosing a class as well as the own pages for each class. I took some liberties with a scissors in a few of the longer ones.   --Mikk (T) 01:06, 27 October 2006 (EDT)
(yup, the summaries took a detour but were recently merged back in)
Good idea to pare it down and make it more concise: I brought out the machete to see about trimming the fat and removed most of the "opinion fluff" and made the tone a bit more consistent.
--Flick 14:45, 30 October 2006 (EST)

Warlock Tanking

Soul Linked + Master Demonologist warlocks can out tank pretty much anything but a protection warrior or feral druid (Horde side - don't know about Paladins). It's a very "niche" ability, but a reasonably equipped warlock (Tier 1) can hit 7k HP raid buffed without Flasks, and about 70% damage mitigation, which is similar to a prot warrior with about 8,000 AC. We use this for Nefarion stage 1: A warlock tanks the Drakonids using Hellfire to help pin them for the mages.

Going to upgrade warlock tanking to: "2+1"

[different person starting] Sorry, I have know idea how to do anything in WoWWiki other than type, I can't even start a new, what do you call it, section. But I think that hunters should definitely be 2 tanking, and warlocks should be 2+1. Voidwalkers and pets can tank almost as well as a shaman.

Hrms. I play one of those "reasonably equipped" warlocks, and I just don't agree with a flat 2+1. You have to take aggro keeping abilities into account and whatnot. Sure, give a warlock some time to hellfire with three healers pouring healing into him and he'll keep aggro for a bit but... uhm... he'll kind of run out of mana. I could POSSIBLY call it a 2^+1. (2 against special mobs). So I'm putting that in.   --Mikk (T) 16:28, 2 October 2006 (EDT)
Hm never mind. It's still a 1+1 and I'm not going to be the one to upgrade it.   --Mikk (T) 16:29, 2 October 2006 (EDT)
Well a warlock has to tank one of twin emperors... so put the ^ at warlock tanking

warlocks should have 2+1 at AOE, but.... meh.. TBC is coming... 3+1 --Nexxius

Pally healing

Why is paladin healing only 2+1 when my blue-geared healbot pally outheals fully epixed-out priests by more than a factor of two (assuming a sane, constant healing/second rate, going from full mana to dry.) I'd call it 2+2. Priests still get (4) for versatility even though paladins out-endure them.   --Mikk (T) 16:34, 2 October 2006 (EDT)

My personal opinion is that paladins, while offering a great amount of healing, lack the opportunities that Priests and Druids have. No HoT, no group heal, no fast, effective heal. Currently, hardly anyone cares, as it's more important to be able to cheaply spam some heal, however in times where gear was a lot worse and people played 5-mans, Paladins did not come close to the main healing classes. I think the healer column perfectly represents the situation. --bfx 10:30, 29 October 2006 (EST)
Yeah, valid point. This is to help people choose a class before they know much about them, and pallies really aren't healbots until they start stacking gobs of +heal equipment, which isn't really available until lvl55+.   --Mikk (T) 13:28, 29 October 2006 (EST)
Id have to agree that a pally 2+2 makes sense if you count gear. Sure running scarlet monastary a paladin isnt going to be amazing, but the fact is in end game raids a pally can meet or beat any other healer, and I AM a priest. Deadsniper 14:54, 28 December 2006 (EST)
Paladins outheal all other classes when the fight is Beacon-of-Light-Favored (Main Tank and Offtank taking most of the damage and raid taking negligible damage). They are sometimes just slightly above retribution paladins on other fights. They sometimes struggle in 5-mans where there is AoE. Without an AoE healer such as a druid or priest or occasionally a restoration shaman, certain 10 and 25man fights could not be done with just holy paladins (but any other redundant class potentially could, for instance a 10man Naxx Undying run could be composed of 2 priests, one holy one discipline. However, in raids that are actually challenging like TOGC10, you will need to have as much unique classes as possible.)

This needs to be updated Post-BC (7/20/2007) And please, nobody who is not a well geared 70 Paladin needs to add. +Healing gear has made Paladins the best single target healers in the game. I am in constant demand to heal in Raids. Paladins are now tanking any instance up to Gruls lair and where the social order accepts, beyond. We are still not DPS kings but we have enough to hold our own and be viable in grinding/5-mans.

The class table needs to be updated, and considering the discussion here and my own years of being a paladin in various roles, it is perfectly reasonable to give paladins a healing rating of 2+2. Since many articles seem to be going on pre-TBC information, and that nobody here has expressed strong concerns about why paladins shouldnt be ranked 2+2 on the class table, I am updating it to reflect this discussion. Dantheman102100 23:32, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Ranged Weapons

Mage DPS

In the Class Table, there are four classes that are noted to be able to out-DPS Mages (with talents). Rogues are kings of DPS, sure (due to Feint and the benefit of Energy over Mana in a long fight), but is the consensus really that appropriately specced Hunters, Warlocks, and Warriors are all capable of dealing more damage than Mages? I should think that Mages should get a 4 or at the very least a 3+1 (Fire-specialized).
-- Dreamwolf, 2006-10-30 18:32 EST

Definitely not a 4. Warlocks, hunters and dps warriors do out-dps them in endgame raids. But fire mages outdps at least warlocks and probably also hunters in 5-mans where the burst and aoe dps makes a big difference. That'll make it 3 or 3+1 to me.   --Mikk (T) 03:05, 31 October 2006 (EST)
In non-raid content, mages are definitely a 3+1 if not 4 for single-target DPS (discounting AoE, which has a separate category), because mana limitations are not an issue. What it really comes down to is - what is the context of this table? Is it a raid-role table? 5-man content table? So many things change when going 5-man -> raid that it's pretty silly to lump it together and have these goofy, highly subjective numeric ratings. --Flick 14:15, 31 October 2006 (EST)
"Able to" does not mean "they always will". ;) --Tinkerer 14:17, 31 October 2006 (EST)

I'll call it: This is relevant for 5 man content. Fire specced mages are 4, so the table entry is 3+1. There. Solved :-)   --Mikk (T) 17:27, 31 October 2006 (EST)

I think these arguments are ultimately just people yelling and wanking off. There are so many factors involved in who does more DPS in a certain fight that there is no substantial evidence. I've been in guilds where the top DPSers were warlocks and guilds where the top DPSers were rogues, and it always varies, because of how hard the people are playing, gear, specs, mobs, the nature of each class' roles in an encounter, etc etc.

Any argument about "This class does more overall DPS than this class" should be hurled out the window. It's downright retarded. I didn't even take into account the current faction differences which places an enormous gap for the DPS of certain classes in an encounter. For example, you will rarely see Horde hunters and casters topping DPS charts for certain fights. But on Alliance, they are consistently on top because of JoW and BoW. You simply cannot just lump it up as "class x beats y in raids".--Grid 16:12, 10 November 2006 (EST)

how the #$^@#$%^ is supposed any class to outdps a skilled fire mage?? oh... whatever 3+1... but in TBC must be changed to (4) because *ALL* trees get substantial dmg and will be no matter for any mage to outdps any class with any build (Spell Power+Ignite=245% fire crit dmg/Spell Power+ice shards= 225% frost crit/ molten fury/ empowered talents,....,..,... )--Nexxius 12:00, 29 November 2006 (EST)

Sign your posts and stop being an asshat. --Grid 16:15, 28 November 2006 (EST)

asshat? for what? /:) ??? --Nexxius 12:00, 29 November 2006 (EST)

There we go. Now, please try to restate your previous post in a way that's understandable, because what I got out from it was only the first sentence. Which is false.

Head to Onyxia, Rag and BWL and tell me if fire mages are ZOMG RIPPING APART the DPS charts kthx. If anything you just proved my point. Declaring a "king of DPS" class is idiotic because the every single boss encounter in WoW is designed for a certain class to shine so everyone is required in a raid. There is no king of anything. It's a pitiful argument propogated by people who feel insecure over their digital identities in a make-believe game, and an unhealthy psychological projection of themselves onto their game character.

So in short: It's all a load of bull.--Grid 17:46, 29 November 2006 (EST)

i'm not saying that mages are the kings of dps, all i say is that mages deserve that "4" on class page because of their high DPS in all builds; you have right, every boss is designed for a certain class , but for example a fire mage can do some good dps in mc or bwl with some support from Curse of Elements (and Improved Scorch). I'm sorry if you don't understand "my english" but i'm not a fan of it :P . --Nexxius 13:22, 30 November 2006 (EST)

A fire mage could, but he would only excel in certain fights. Many fights in MC and BWL (Rag, Vael, Geddon, etc...) will render their Fire DPS useless, and as we all know, Blizz LOVES to create elemental based encounters -- usually against a major magical tree. And I can't see Arcane ever becoming a raid build. It's core talents lie in burst damage in exchange for more mana costs.

I think a mage is good at 3. Hunters should be a 2, and shamans should definately be higher because at this point they're faction exclusive. They're the only support we got.--Grid 20:06, 30 November 2006 (EST)

yes, you have right, another example could be Sapphiron wich is immune to frost,... until some new mechanics or improvements in the future expansions and patches should remain 3+1 --Nexxius 06:53, 1 December 2006 (EST)

Why on earth is there a quantified list of abstract abilities? List what each class can do and be done with it, stat freaks. Anyone who would actually find any value in such a list is the sort of person who doesn't know how the class in question works. So what you're doing is compounding prejudices held by noobs about the efficacy of specific classes. --Grendel 15:53, 15 March 2007 (GMT)

Only a ignorant person can say that mages deserve a 3 on DPS, don't forget about fire mages they can do as dps as rogues thats no doubt.... some ppl say mage has a problem of mana and rogues dont bcause that have energy instead mana, that's right but not right about DPS... DPS means "damage per second" not "damage all time per second" ... on active situation fire mages deal lots of damage per second... that's why fire mages deserves a 4... but if mages in general deserve a 3+1 then rogue deserve that too... --JD3K 12:25, 24 January 2008 (GMT)

Priest Tanking

Currently, a Priest has 0+1 to tanking. I don't think that is a good reflection. Considering Shadowform and Inner Fire, damage mitigation is at least on par with a rogue (1+1). Also, threat-wise there is no problem for a Shadow Priest with Mind Blast and Vampiric Embrace. I'd definitely put him as high as a rogue; 0+2. --bfx 03:57, 1 November 2006 (EST)

I'd give you that damage mitigation from armor is on par with a rogue. But a rogue dodges and parries a heck of a lot more than a priest.   --Mikk (T) 08:55, 1 November 2006 (EST)
I've already counted that in. A priest with Inner Fire has roughly as much armor as a rogue. Shadowform pushes that 15 % further. I think they are pretty much on par.
I still disagree, for two reasons. A rogue dodges+parries more than that and has no problem keeping dps up when getting beat -- on the contrary, with the right spec they actually go _higher_ (riposte). And also no mana to run out of.   --Mikk (T) 17:51, 1 November 2006 (EST)
Unfortunately, I'm not perfectly informed about how much damage mitigation can be achieved through parry + dodge. Though I don't think it is that much higher than a Shadow Priest's mitigation (who can even have Improved Inner Fire). With Martyrdom, a Priest rarely has trouble keeping DPS up. Furthermore, Mind Flay's DPS is only reduced slightly, whereas beating reduces DPM. Considering mana, against an average mob, mana is not an issue. Rogue's threat is reduced by 30 % if I'm not mistaken, whereas Priest's threat is above 100 % (through Mind Blast). I've often played as a Shadow Priest off-tank, and it seemed to work much better than a rogue tanking. :) --bfx 06:50, 2 November 2006 (EST)
On a related note, I think that 1+1 is too high for a warlock. I think the warlock should be 0+1 same as the priest. And mages 0, period.   --Mikk (T) 17:54, 1 November 2006 (EST)
I'm with you. The warlock should have 0 as base, as well as the mage. However, as it is the situation with the priest, I'd give a Soul Link warlock with VW or FH +2, as additional 30 % damage "mitigation" (actually it's just transferred) plus either another 10 % or 60 spell resistances is a lot. --bfx 06:50, 2 November 2006 (EST)
Warlocks deserve at least a base of 1, capable in this role, because with no talents they still have a voidwalker that may suck at tanking and need lots of heals but can do it, as opposed to a class like a mage that just can't tank without speccing for it. --Jameth 08:59, 2 December 2006 (EST)

Warlock get their 1+1 point in tank because of the voidwalker, not because of themselves. Tanking capabilities are not measured with how much damage you can take only, but also how much aggro can you generate and on that mages and priests are worthless. Even alone demonology locks can tank much better than mages and priests, because they can have up to 45% armor mitication (with Damage split with the pet) and can generate alot of aggro with Searing pain. Aludolf 14:10, 17 April 2007 (EDT)

Paladin Stub

I'm planning on deleting the sentence claiming that 'paladins generally have the highest DPS potential using the Warladin build'. Sounds fishy and anything claiming to be highest DPS potential across the board is POV.--Grid 12:47, 13 December 2006 (EST)

If by saying a Warladin you mean a Protection paladin then that statement is very true. A protection paladin will easily out damage anyone in your group. ANYONE. My prot pally is only level 56 and is decently equipped. I am always tops for damage by at least 100 to 200K damage.
Now the proof is this.
  • Ret aura 20 damage every time i'm hit
  • Holy shield: 86 every time i block
  • Blessing of sanctuary 35 damage every time i block
  • Thorium Shield Spike: 30 damage every time i block
that's 151 damage every time i block and my block chance while holy shield is up (which is constantly) is nearly 85%. so combine that with ret aura, the fact im dropping consecration constantly which is 384 damage to everyone in the vicinity over 8 seconds and our damage goes through the roof. There's a reason we hold aggro better than any other tanking class and it's our AOE damage capabilities. If you dont believe us roll yourself a paladin. They dont start becoming great tanks until about 40 FYI.
--Ironwolf9876 00:09, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
True enough, but you'll have a main tank role to maintain Holy Shield damage, Ret aura damage and so on and so forth. This is a grub, consisting to be a succesfull DPS-er, you have to fulfill that role in at any time and place. Of course if by DPS pallie you mean retri build - it's rather different story, but, myself, i cannot say more about it. --User:Surdan
As of TBC, paladin's still have somewhat mediocre dps. The +2 on the dps scale is mostly for paladin's abilities such as Improved Sanctity Aura and Improved Seal of the Crusader which causes significantly more damage on the target from all those attacking. In other words, paladins by themselves have rather lackluster dps; what makes them shine in dps roles is their abilities to dramaticly increase party members damage. I think the 1+2 at the moment is the best way to describe paladin's dps scale. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Dantheman102100 (talkcontr).

Priest Debuff

I think with the addition of Misery, priests probably deserve a 3 for debuff if specced for it. Adding 20% shadow damage, 5% all other spell damage and a 50% snare is pretty impressive debuffing. Also with sw pain and vampiric touch. Is alot of debuffs. Deadsniper 14:54, 28 December 2006 (EST)

I agree, speccing into the updated shadow tree gives those two amazing raid boosting debuffs. Casters, especially warlocks benefit greatly from a shadow priest's debuffs.--Stiverton 02:16, 30 December 2006 (EST)

Rogue Main Assist

I might drop them from 4 to 3, or at least comment by it. Becuase there are quite a few encounters where you dont want the primary assist to be in melee. Either because its harder to see the next thing coming up with oversized badguys like mc, or if its becuase of constant chance of CC untargeting for him (Jindo the Hexar). --14:57, 28 December 2006 (EST)

I would agree for a different reason. Once a rogue is in stealth, you cannot target them from a distance, and cannot see what they are targeting. -Dreadlock 18:18, 18 January 2007 (EST)
Frankly, I'd question putting them that high at all. I can understand Hunters, who have their mark to specifically lead players to the target. But a rogue doesn't have anything like that. I mean, Vendetta may work that way, but it hasn't from everything I've heard. I'd give them a 1 or 2, myself... -ShadowDragoonFTW 14:47, 19 October 2010 (EST)

Priest DPS

With the new sets coming out from TBC, as well as several priests reporting highest dps numbers in Naxxramas raids Speakeasy picture of dps meters on a naxx raid.

By no means is he the only example, however, examples such as this should push the priest to a base 2, with a +2 modifier based upon spec, or a base 1, with a +3 modifier based upon spec. (the later I strongly suggest, as it represents the class the best, you wouldn't take a healer priest to dps, but they can do small amounts of it. (representing a 1). With some priests reporting top dps, logically, the rating should be increased to a possible 4, as 'top', in my language at least, means 'best'.

My vote: 1+3

Seconded, 2.06 Caster DPS Comparison has some interesting dps cycles listed in more detail with different builds: as you can see any viable mage dps(on a single target) is actually lower except for arcane blast spamming which is absurdly mana inefficient.

My Vote: 1+3 also. --Klai 13:01, 24 January 2007 (EST)

With the movement into late T6/Sunwell content[on PTR, anyway] it's come to light in a large way that Priests have a very harsh 'maximum DPS'. 1600DPS, is thrown around as the maximum possible DPS by a SPriest, given that this is roughly 25% lower than Ret Paladins, Enhancement Shaman and Feral Druids [and in certain circumstances, Prot Warriors]:

I vote for priests to be bumped to a maximum score of 3. Either 2+1 or 1+2. Klimpen 19:38, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Warrior/MT pulling

Hunter is listed as the best puller; however, there is hardly any situation where I would have the hunter, or any long-range DPS pull. Yes, the Hunter can feign death, but this is not reliable as feign death can be resisted.

In most PvE groups, be it an instance group, an instance raid, or just world grouping, the MT is the better puller as getting initial agro against either a single mob or a group of mobs is better for the group than a more damaging initial attack. This is ESPECIALLY true on boss fights where the MT often must accumulate a large amount of threat right off the bat to prevent healers from getting agro, and to allow DPS classes to function at their best potential. MT pulling is not just a convenience, it is the most reliable way to pull without error.

In closing, hunters not only do not make the 'best' pullers, for the purposes of reliably surviving as a group, they should not pull. Period.

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Zeteginara (talkcontr).

Ah, but you are forgeting atleast two ablities: at level 70, hunters have access to misdirection which is the best pulling ablitiy in the game, as the hunter can pull directly to anyone. But what at lower levels? That's where you have the unter build up a lot of threat by using aim shot/distracting shot... and then taunt the target off of the hunter. Then the hunter can FD to make sure you have everything, and no one should be able to pull aggro off of you.--Stfrn 21:59, 9 March 2007 (EST)
I was not aware of Misdirection, so I retract my statement. But earlier levels, having the hunter build up a lot of agro and then taunting is NOT reliable at all. Taunt doesn't create agro it just gives the warrior a 6 second window where the mob is attacking him.... so he can build rage and some form of agro ability. If the hunter does enough damage, and gets enough agro, then it can be very hard for a Warrior to pull that off in 6 seconds, much less get the 2-3 other mobs that are also likely there.
And as I've said, FD can be resisted, so that's not reliable.
But I interpret these tables to be accurate for the top level of the class, and with Misdirection, I think that the 4 the hunters get is well deserved. --Zeteginera 09:09, 12 March 2007 (EST)
Tuanting does indead give the tank 100% of the aggro. They then have a few seconds where they don't need more aggro to hold the mob, but if the hunter feigns then the tank won't have any problem staying far ahead of everyone else. It is risky as taunt can be resisted, but is highly successfull.--Stfrn 23:46, 12 March 2007 (EDT)

First off, before lvl 30 the MT should be pulling because the hunter has no reason to. However, your forgetting one very important factor about hunters with feign. First off, feign is not nearly as unreliable as you claim, and if you spec imp feign the resist chance is very low. Plus, and most importantly, a skilled hunter will run far ahead to pull, and if they overpull a second group they can run half-way back and feign,resetting the entire pull. Second, a hunter has a LOT easier time using freezing trap or other traps if he/she pulls the mob. In my guild, which has a lot of pre-BC and current raiding experience, we have lways used a hunter to pull for the simple reason that they can reset a pull whenever its needed. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ghozst (talkcontr).

Assuming that the "+1" on Paladin as puller in fact means "+1 if protection specced" - I'd say this is a way too low value. A tanking Paladin's Avenger's Shield is by far the best pulling skill in the game, excluding pulls where a Rogue's Sap is required, and varrants a higher value. In addition, I would think that even non-specced, a Paladin would get atleast a "1^" for Exorcism - instant pulls of undeads and demons, front-loading a huge amount of aggro either for the Paladin to hold the mob or for the MT to gain through taunt (especially with Righteous Fury). Suggesting Paladins are upgraded to atleast 1^+2 or maybe even +3. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ehtirno (talkcontr).

I am here to mention a level 70 Hunter spell called Misdirection. Described as, "Threat caused by your next 3 attacks is redirected to the target raid member. Caster and target can only be affected by one Misdirection spell at a time. Effect lasts 30 sec." Cast this on your MT and lay into the enemies with your strongest attacks or you most threat producing attack with your tank taking all the threat produced. Cool down is two minutes so it should pop back up when you need it. Jhay 14:22, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

I disagree with Warriors being marked as "Best of the best" for tanking, this is simply not the case. Maybe this was the case on the Horde side before BC, but certainly not now. Warriors seem to be simply lacking the aggro generation of AoE Prot Paladins and Feral Druids (esp. in Sethekk Halls). I have run countless times with Warriors in dungeons (Heroic and Normal mode) as well as in raids, and they simply cannot hold aggro like a Paladin or a Feral Druid, and I have paid for it too many times in repair bills from wipes from mobs who got aggro'd off of the Warrior tank. Maybe all of the Warriors I have run with are noobs, but I think this should be re-evaluated as practical experience does not bear out this accolade of "Best of the best", it simply is not the case. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by John81575 (talkcontr).

2 Tables

Don't know if this goes right, pretty new to wiki but if somthing goes wrong please correct me. Over to the idea, Reading through the talk page and seeing quite some discussion either uppgrading ones tank heal CC ability or not, quite good arguments there but most of them goes from 5man to raids, Would there not be a posibiliti to make 2 tables, 1 for 5man/pre end game and 1 for raids/endgame

Some Suggested Revisions, Especially Regarding the Mage

First of all, Warlocks properly spec'd potentially have the same burst DPS as a Mage as well as a potential for great sustained DPS if properly spec'd. I suggest upgrading them to at least 3+1, if not 4.

Secondly, I don't care if a Paladin doesn't have HoTs- they are still every bit as capable of main healing as a Priest or Druid is, if not better. They should be rated at least 2+2, if not 3+1, for healing.

Also, reconsider upgrade a Mage's pulling ability. With Ice Lance, Mages have an instant cast, low damage spell with reasonable range (30 yds untalented, 36 yds talented.) Why should Mages not be at least 2+1 for pulling?+

In addition, a Mage's Improved Scorch debuff is MUCH more desired now that Warlocks have Incinerate. I would suggest increasing a Mage's debuffing rating from 0+1 to 0+2 or so.--Wenry the mage 18:37, 9 March 2007 (EST)

/agree with all three. As said in previous posts Warlocks have crazy DPS now, they outdo mages for single target burst and DPS.
A ret pally would be a 2 in healing, but a holy pally with proper gear could be a 4 in healing.... the fact that they don't get HOTS is overshadowed but the fact that their healing spells don't generate agro in PvE, and in PvP they have crazy survivability compared to a priest or a resto druid.
Paladin healing gets a nerf in next patch. I think that without emergency healing and mass healing, the Paladin really shouldn't be listed as on par with the Priest, especially considering the fact that a Paladin really has to put a lot of talents/gear into healing for it to work.

Your also forgeting that paladins have divine intervintion seal of fury an many many more seals and buffs that can save the group time after time . Paladins rep is slowly rising while priests rep is slowing down and eventually it will come to a halt.

I am paladin on the twisted netherlands horde: Srbluman

But then again, KoenPater, that's a sign of how strong paladin healing currently is. I've heard reports of guilds turning away priest healers in favor of paladins. Infact shadow priests are prefered in many situations. But as you mentioned that is being changed in the next patch.--Stfrn 00:40, 14 April 2007 (EDT)

Mages? Should be 3+1 or 2+2 for pulling because of sheep and ice block. Sheep pulling is one of the most versatile ways to start a pull, though it only works on humanoids and beasts. Ice Block drops all agro and cannot be resisted unlike a hunter's feign death. --Zeteginara 09:14, 12 March 2007 (EST)
  • Shrug* Palies heals as good as shamies and lack of hots are indeed a huge problem. Equally equiped palies and shamies can't heal as good as druids and priests, all of them speced for healing. Palies and Shamies lack on instant "save the tank" abilities that priests (with shield) and druids (with swiftmend) have. Aludolf 14:04, 17 April 2007 (EDT)
Shamans can spec for nature's swiftness for exactly this reason. In addition Earth Shield my be the best hot in the game as it is a smart heal.Reskar

Rogue CC value in table

Since Improved Sap is now part of Sap, how about changing rogues to "3^" under crowd control?--Scrotch 03:17, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Paladin Tanking rating

Paladind currently have a listed as of 3^+1 while Druids have a Tanking of 3+1. I am planning to change Paladins part to 3+1 since I have not found yet a boss that I can not tank at least as as well as a equally equiped Druid. Also one of the reasons is that Druids can never became immune to crushing blows (and that's why they have so big amount health and armor) while Paladins can. Also Blizzard has stated i.e. [1] that all three tanking classes are "equal" to Blizzard what comes to tanking capabilities. --Ittai 09:27, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Paladin can block, druid cannot - any questions? --Surdan

Use of baseline 4's

Personally, no class should have a baseline rating of 4. 4 is the highest score, and saying that a class has that base, is equivalent to saying that it cannot be improved upon via talents. Which is untrue.

In addition, I feel that all three tanking classes are 'about the same', for actually tanking bosses. While each has its own strengths and weaknesses, there's no one class which is best for everything. Klimpen 19:38, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Neutrality of class summaries

I have just changed to druid class summary to be significantly more neutral. I don't think it's appropriate for this page to move into the realms of opinion on whether a particular hybrid class can or cannot hold their own against other classes - this is something which is constantly evolving, and it appears to me that Blizzard are keen to make hybrids approximately equivalent to dedicated classes, in similar levels of gear. Whilst there's almost certainly always going to be some imbalance, I don't think it's healthy or constructive to make bold statements that one particular class "cannot" equal another. There's also a statement recently added to the paladin section saying "... DPS of Retribution Paladins is nowhere near, say, a rogue's, ..." - that doesn't strike me as being particularly neutral either, but I'm not the right person to work on that, not knowing that class and spec particularly well. --Murph (talkcontr) 23:43, 10 April 2008 (UTC)


I'm sorry to sound like I'm bitching, but i honestly can't see why mages have been given 4 for AOE, whilst warlocks have 2+1. Warlocks should be 3+1, because with seed of corruption and shadowfury we can definetly match, if not outdo a mages AOE (it's not like mages can't do loads of other things anyway) We also have rain of fire and hellfire. BTw I don't actually hate mages, they rule and I have a mage of my own, but my main is a warlock.

I'm indecisive. Probably the strongest argument for an upgrade is Seed of Corruption, which can wreak havoc with the sheer damage it inflicts. However, the Warlock's other AoEs are not that convincing. Rain of Fire's damage is negligible, Hellfire backfires. Both need to be channeled and can be interrupted easily (by damage, stuns and interrupts). Their talent improvements Aftermath and Pyroclasm aren't particularly reliable either. Shadowfury, on the other hand, nicely supplements the Warlock's AoE arsenal.
The Mage's Arcane Explosion does good damage, cannot be interrupted by damage/interrupts, and is a quite easily usable spell; however, it requires the Mage to be in the middle of the battle. There are a lot of spells (Blast Wave, Dragon's Breath, Cone of Cold, Blizzard, Frost Nova) which, especially when paired with talents, provide both decent damage and a huge amount of utility (Stun, Snare, Freeze). Only Flamestrike's contribution is marginal.
For me, the Mage is slightly superior to the Warlock in terms of AoE, hence I vote for keeping the Warlock's rating below the Mage's. However, I'd change the Mage to 3+1, since a lot of AoE capability comes from talents. --bfx (talk) 18:45, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
I play both classes, and I think they are roughly equal in terms of AoE, if with different strengths. frost/fire Mages (esp frost) definitely bring more control which is valuable, but my experience is that warlocks can outdps mages in AoE encounters with same level gear. So I'd say it's a tie, which is best will depend on the encounter. Also paladins should not be a 1. That's bs. They don't do the same damage, but aside from a second mage/warlock, the next class I want working with me on AoE is a pally. Druids and hunters have some AoE skills, but I'd take a prot pally over them any time. prot-paladin + lock/mage + blessing of salvation == mob-b-gone. mes (talk) 19:36, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Shaman AOE: While we're on the subject. Shaman are given a 1+1 which I think is a bit low. The class has 3 AOE attacks, Fire Nova Totem, Magma Totem and Chain Lightning. The damage output of Fire Nova Totem is 692 with 1.5 global cooldown before the player can take another action. That comes out to 461 DPS per target compared to 392 DPS per target for Arcane Explosion. Furthermore, using a Fire Nova or Magma Totem along with Stoneclaw Totem will cause the fire totems to avoid being interrupted. Also, the totems generate threat for themselves but not for the caster so these totems can safely be used in situations where threat is a significant factor. A mage might hesitate to cast Arcane Explosion against a group of elites in an instance, but the Shaman would be relatively safe to use Fire Nova Totem in the same situation. Because of these things, I think the Shaman AOE should be raised to at least 2+1.

Druids and MA column

A druid in tree of life form will not make a good MA, but a druid in cat form basically mirrors the rogue in MA role. Combo points make it a bad plan to switch targets, DPS role in general. So basically druids are a 0 (tree) - 4 (cat) MA score. -WoWWiki-Dga (talk) 01:54, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

Paladin DPS

This chart is very outdated concerning Paladin DPS. For DPS they currently have 1^+2 and Shamans and Warriors have 2+1. With the current fixes to Paladin game mechanics, blue posts, and what I have seen on the test server is that Paladin DPS is comparable now to Shaman and Warriors. So I would like to change it to 2+1. Paly 1 (talk) 23:03, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Class Balancing no longer exists. Moved here for archival purposes. — Morder 21:31, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

Hotkeys for classes

Nice and easy.

In the class box at the top why not add hotkeys for each class/spec?

By that i mean is give a basic idear of what the keys that class and spec whold be using all the time whold be. So players who are rolling an alt can plan ahead about where they what to place each spell/abilty so they dont need to relearn there KB at level 80 to do the most damage ect. Redhot - keys which are spamed more or less Hot - keys with CD of under 3 mins and are used when ever off CD Normal - things only used once a boss battle Cold - used once a raid Ice - Spells never used or only for fun Should be deleted - Spells that make you thiwhy are they in the game. I play a resto shamie so there hot keys whold be..

Redhot - LWH, WH, CH, RT, ES. Hot - ES, WS, NS, Normal - Totems, Hero/Bloodlust Cold - Self Res Ice - Attacking spellsnk Shold be Deleted - (that totem which lets you keep an eye in once place and be in a diffent place, i forgot its name)

That only a small ammount of spells that a resto shamie has to paly with.

But that easy for me to list a few like that, but for a new player thinking about healing whold not know what earthshild is. Like i sayed, its somthing small but very usefull.

I wish some one whold make one for pallys so i know where i shold pop what :p I not asking for people to pop there keybindings up here, since we all play a diffent way. But all the resto shamies whold call the same keys redhot, hot ect. Maybe the names need a bit of playing with but that somthing we can play about with in the long term.

If you like (and dont mind helping me work out how to make the page) i will pop a page up to give an idear of what the resto shamies hot keys page might look like. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Richwarf (talkcontr).


opps i removed all the text...

Sorry clicked the wrong key... i was coping the page text to my notepad to try to learn a bit more about the coding of this page...

I restored the page back to ask it was, i hope i did that the right way. If not i sorry. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by richwarf (talkcontr).

Class vs Role

I had to giggle at this table. And the more I think about it, the sillier it appears. It's attached to the "Class vs Race" table as if it had something to do with that table other than the first column. It consists of entirely subjective values; there are at least a few columns with no "4" (best in show) listed, calling it "must talent into this".

In light of the dungeon finder, I think this table should be simplified to: Tank, Heal, DPS. A description at the top of the table saying "particular talent tree specializations make each of these classes more effective at particular roles; see those class descriptions for details." IE, this table attempts to portray entirely too many nuances for this particular article. Ideally, I would limit the role rating to "can/cannot fill this role". Anything more than this risks ePeen measurements. For instance, the above AoE section. But more, simply because *everything* is situational, specialization-dependent. "Variables preclude a fixed answer."

If people insist on having an epeen role rating on the wiki, then perhaps it belongs on the pages for the individual classes, where it can be discussed in more depth.

I'll give this a bit to see if it generates controversy, then I will make the Dungeon Finder-centric change if nobody objects reasonably. ... and if I remember. --Eirik Ratcatcher (talk) 20:51, August 3, 2010 (UTC)

I Like this change, and since no one seems to have said anything about it, I think I'll go ahead and try. Won't commit nothing unless I manage to create the table though, I'm not the best at wiki editing. Cadinsor (talk) 17:20, August 19, 2010 (UTC)

The whole table of specialty roles as it exists now is ridiculous, somehow the DK has a heal of 1, which is only a self heal, but Warlock has a heal of 0, DK Pull is 0+1 but has one of the best pulling mechanisms out there (Death Grip) plus a high threat ranged AOE (Death and Decay), saying any one tanking class is better than another is also silly, don't Warriors have to talent into their tanking? then should they not be 3+1 like the other tanks? Same with Priests vs other healers. Hunter's are 3+1 on DPS, so they're not the best before talenting but afterward are a 4? uhm OK, the whole MA column is a complete joke. Definitely agreed that the Dungeon Finder roles method is much better than the way it currently is. Eht (talk) 16:08, August 27, 2010 (UTC)
Since it's been quite a while, and nobody has objected, I think I'll go ahead and make the change. I agree completely with this. And, if nothing else, the changes can be reverted if need be, correct? ShadowDragoonFTW 19 October 2010

Best Classes for Solo/Group PVE & PVP

Which classes are best for Solo PVE, Group PVE, Solo PVP, and Group PVP?

I've set up a table with ratings for each of these four categories, but I have no idea how to rate each class. If you have any opinions on this, do me a favor and rate each class.

Thanks in advance. LokiCoder (talk) 17:50, March 29, 2013 (UTC)

Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.