Posted by LeviathelVery productive responses to Zarotustr's question. Nice.Are you reading the same post I'm reading? The whole post reeks of general ignorance. Want me to clarify?03/12/2013 12:13 PMPosted by ZarotustrDK's are not healers, however. Who cares if their absorbs stay different?So, we should take away a death knight's ability to self mitigate just because you want to see paladins do less healing? They don't matter because they aren't healers, according to you. Oh, and what about a monk's only real tank cooldown, Life Cocoon? Should that be nerfed as well? Or perhaps a shaman's self-applied absorb, that should be nerfed as well, correct? All in the name to make IH less effective.DA "double standard" is only relevant if something unfair happens, otherwise it is called "being different".A double standard is a double standard, no matter how you look at it. Whether it's advantageous or otherwise, it's still a double standard. The idea that you want to nerf healing across the board to bring paladins in line, in your mind, but leaving Death Knights in the dust because their only form of mitigation is their self heals and absorb, not to mention other classes like Disc priests, is a huge double standard. It just is.If my car is white and yours is blue, it is not a double standard, it's just different. This has nothing to do with anything whatsoever, and honestly, it's two completely different ideas pulled from the Nether. Honestly, I'm not sure I follow exactly where you came up with this.
and others, thanks for insightful comments. Nice try.
Calling me ignorant, huh? I must say I misjudged the average IQ on these forums. Or maybe it's a straw man trick, who knows.
To clarify, no one is suggesting to touch the DK shields. I suggested to modify how healer absorbs work. I will say it again, DK's are not healers. The point of the thread is the balance and competition between the 6 different healer classes. DK's are not able to heal anyone else with their absorbs.
On the paladin and priest absorbs vs DK's absorbs, how is it a moral question now? This is not a double standard. A double standard implies unfairness. If, on the other hand, the way HEALER absorbs work was changed and instead they received a compensation to balance their healing, you cannot call it double standard. I may be asking too much, but there is a difference, however subtle, between a double standard (derogatory) and a different application of a method or a different way things work.
"A double standard, thus, can be described as a sort of biased, morally unfair suspension (toward a certain group) of the principle that all are equal in their freedoms. Such double standards are seen as unjustified because they violate a basic maxim of modern legal jurisprudence: that all parties should stand equal before the law. Double standards also violate the principle of justice known as impartiality, which is based on the assumption that the same standards should be applied to all people, without regard to subjective bias or favoritism based on social class, rank, ethnicity, gender, religion, sexual orientation, age or other distinctions. "