Blood DK tanks Dual Weilding?

Death Knight
1 2 3 6 Next
So, I've seen a few threads of people complaining about receiving a fang crescent axe.

My question is this. Why can't, or why don't, Blood DKs want to dual wield? DKs have the ability, so what is wrong with Blood tanks dual wielding?
nonononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononopnononono0pnonopnonononononono.

no.

You're losing DPS for no reason.

no.
So, I've seen a few threads of people complaining about receiving a fang crescent axe.

My question is this. Why can't, or why don't, Blood DKs want to dual wield? DKs have the ability, so what is wrong with Blood tanks dual wielding?


short answer everything

long answer theres no benefit to dual wielding (like if your geared out the !@# and doing heroics) but its not as optimal as 2 handed
because the important abilities scale with weapon damage. it isnt now and never will be viable
10/29/2012 05:59 PMPosted by Evisolace
because the important abilities scale with weapon damage. it isnt now and never will be viable
wrong use of the word viable once again

viable = feasible. which means it can be done. you are capable of dual wielding as a blood and meeting with success. however you are making it more difficult for your group in doing so.

the word you are looking for is optimal

dual wielding as a blood dk for the purpose of tanking is not optimal because there is no noticeable benefit for doing so and in turn are gimping your damage output since all of your strike abilities are based off of weapon damage.
U don't have and will never have Threat of Thassarian which allows all strikes to hit with your off hand weapon so has stated above you are gimping yourself and your group by trying DW tanking

If you get DW,( never happen ), I want Frost Tanking back :D
DW and 2H works for Frost, Blizzard did it.
They could also make DW and 2H work equally for Blood, but they won't do it. I assume this is by choice. It's simple, just add some 2H and DW passive talents, like Frost: Problem solved.

Last I heard they actually prefer Blood being a 2H tank spec. So here we are.
It's not that "simple" and overall just would lead to extra clutter. They'd have to constantly change scaling for damage and so on because of how things interact. On top of that to even support it they would have to add more tanking 1 handers with actual avoidance to even make it reasonable. Tanks would actually be making it even harder on themselves to need 2 weapons looted instead of just a 2 hander. We are not monks that were designed with multiple weapon modifiers in their mechanics and to think this should be the same for every other class? No.

Look at frost dk. They wanted to make it more optimal for both 2 handed and Dual Wield and instead had to work around their abilities priority between masterfrost and Hastefrost. Blood doesn't even really have that capability for scaling changes and neither does unholy. You will have to settle on that Blood is a 2 handed user. It's easier to equip (just one weapon) and also is less punished by hit & expertise for white damage.

edited to add on about tanking 1 handers.

If you haven't noticed 1 handers with avoidance can be counted on like 2-3 tops for this expansion so far and NONE of them are from raids. So to be dual wield you are actually hurting yourself further to even use the one from Elegon twice. At least with the 2 hander you get more base stats on top of it also not being optimal with mastery.
wrong use of the word viable once again

viable = feasible. which means it can be done. you are capable of dual wielding as a blood and meeting with success. however you are making it more difficult for your group in doing so.

the word you are looking for is optimal


Viable: Capable of working successfully

successful: Having a favorable outcome

How we are using the phrase "not viable" - not capable of working with a favorable outcome. I don't believe we are misusing the word here.

And yes DW blood tanks is not viable as there is no benefit but there are losses (hence not a favourable outcome)
Ok, just so I understand.

A lot of the Blood DK's abilities are based off of how much a single weapon strike does, so by using a one handed weapon, you do less damage per strike than if you used a two handed weapon, so your abilities do less. Is this correct?

Excuse my ignorance, I am essentially completely new to WoW. I played for a couple months back before WotLK released, quit, and recently a friend gave me a SoR. So, I'm new, and just trying to figure things out. I asked because I had wanted to dual wield, as it looks bad !@# IMO, but saw that everyone on here said Blood DK's can't/shouldn't do it.
wrong use of the word viable once again

viable = feasible. which means it can be done. you are capable of dual wielding as a blood and meeting with success. however you are making it more difficult for your group in doing so.

the word you are looking for is optimal


Viable: Capable of working successfully

successful: Having a favorable outcome

How we are using the phrase "not viable" - not capable of working with a favorable outcome. I don't believe we are misusing the word here.

And yes DW blood tanks is not viable as there is no benefit but there are losses (hence not a favourable outcome)

this kills your entire argument
it is possible to dw tank and down content however it comes at the cost of your own dps.
that has been the only proven argument not to do it.
avoidance loss or gain? trivial
healing gained? trivial
damage taken? trivial although an argument could be made that the dps you lose for dwing is making the fight last longer than it should thus you take more hits.

to make a point i could go into a heroic dungeon or raid right now and tank with 2 one handers equipped and clear it without a problem. therefore dw is viable for said content. it is suboptimal however and i would fair better with a 2 hander.

you are using the word viable wrong.
AMG YA BRING BACK 2H ENHANCE BLIZZ

wait wrong nostalgia thread
I agree that it's not viable at the given moment. But stating that it will NEVER be viable seems a bit ridiculous. As much as this game changes from expansion to expansion... Or even patch to patch, saying that anything will "never" happen is a very big assumption.
While never is a big word to throw around, they have said that they intend blood to be a 2h spec, and don't have any plans to ever incorporate DW into the spec as an intended playstyle.
10/30/2012 11:18 AMPosted by Odisper
I agree that it's not viable at the given moment. But stating that it will NEVER be viable seems a bit ridiculous. As much as this game changes from expansion to expansion... Or even patch to patch, saying that anything will "never" happen is a very big assumption.


I'm pretty sure when Ghostcrawler basically implies "never" that he has more authority about that than say you...
Why can't, or why don't, Blood DKs want to dual wield? DKs have the ability, so what is wrong with Blood tanks dual wielding?

DK's can tank while Dual Wielding. Death Strike's abilities are based on damage in, not damage out.
10/30/2012 12:31 PMPosted by Babelon
Why can't, or why don't, Blood DKs want to dual wield? DKs have the ability, so what is wrong with Blood tanks dual wielding?

DK's can tank while Dual Wielding. Death Strike's abilities are based on damage in, not damage out.


The heal and shielding is based on damage in but the damage of the death strike is only based on mainhand so overall your damage/dps is less as dual wield and over time implies the fights are longer and thus you take MORE damage by dual wielding instead of using a 2 hander regardless of if the weapons have avoidance or not.
VIABLE

this kills your entire argument
it is possible to dw tank and down content however it comes at the cost of your own dps.
that has been the only proven argument not to do it.
avoidance loss or gain? trivial
healing gained? trivial
damage taken? trivial although an argument could be made that the dps you lose for dwing is making the fight last longer than it should thus you take more hits.

to make a point i could go into a heroic dungeon or raid right now and tank with 2 one handers equipped and clear it without a problem. therefore dw is viable for said content. it is suboptimal however and i would fair better with a 2 hander.

you are using the word viable wrong.


imma go bandage heal feng while my guild carries me through it and call it viable because the boss died, i won't do much healing but that just means it's suboptimal because i still did some healing, guild still cleared the content just wasn't very high numbers.

losing a good 30% - 40% damage from dual wielding isn't just suboptimal (don't say hes a tank it doesn't matter, tanks are currently pulling some of the higher numbers ~100k-130k) it's downright asking to be carried by your team.

successfully doesn't only mean just scraping through something either. If i were to use successfully for someone in real life it probably means they have a really high paying job, someone with a low paying job who can only just afford to live i wouldn't call successful. This is what my version of the word viable was based on.

this kills your entire argument
it is possible to dw tank and down content however it comes at the cost of your own dps.
that has been the only proven argument not to do it.
avoidance loss or gain? trivial
healing gained? trivial
damage taken? trivial although an argument could be made that the dps you lose for dwing is making the fight last longer than it should thus you take more hits.

to make a point i could go into a heroic dungeon or raid right now and tank with 2 one handers equipped and clear it without a problem. therefore dw is viable for said content. it is suboptimal however and i would fair better with a 2 hander.

you are using the word viable wrong.


imma go bandage heal feng while my guild carries me through it and call it viable because the boss died, i won't do much healing but that just means it's suboptimal because i still did some healing, guild still cleared the content just wasn't very high numbers.

losing a good 30% - 40% damage from dual wielding isn't just suboptimal (don't say hes a tank it doesn't matter, tanks are currently pulling some of the higher numbers ~100k-130k) it's downright asking to be carried by your team.

successfully doesn't only mean just scraping through something either. If i were to use successfully for someone in real life it probably means they have a really high paying job, someone with a low paying job who can only just afford to live i wouldn't call successful. This is what my version of the word viable was based on.

it doesnt matter what you may deem succesful it doesnt change the definition of the word

comparing dw tanking to bandage healing feng is beyond retarded and hardly comparable. you should be ashamed of yourself for even mentioning it.

even if the damage difference ranges from 30-40% (btw im sure you are pulling these numbers out of your !@#) from your supposed numbers that tanks should be pulling even if we were to lose said damage it would still be good enough to meet dps checks. on most fights atm

Join the Conversation

Return to Forum