Would prefer to see it swapped with the divine toll line at the bottom, both have 1 point for spell and another for the modifier. Divine toll is something most rets would want where execution sentence leans into a very specific playstyle.
5 Likes
I get it but you can clearly see left is leaning more aoe situations with right side more single target.
I gey why they would put in middle so both sides could use it.
I played the season 2 build of exec, reckoning and seraphim and divine toll and it makes more sense in middle than an end of tree talent.
1 Like
It isn’t a middle of the road talent though is the issue, it should be hanging out with the single target things.
2 Likes
If it’s in the middle it can help lift our single target when we go to an aoe build.
For me it makes sense than having to choose exec sentence over some of the end of talent trees.
Yes but I’m saying it dictates a certain playstyle regardless, I don’t WANT to be forced to take it. There should be something more playstyle neutral there instead.
To emphasize, I would absolutely detest if every paladin build played ES. I dislike the spell. I want the 1 minute build to be there for people who like it but I do not want to ever be forced into ES unless I go the 1 min build.
3 Likes
Looking at the tree it looks like rather then single target vs aoe ret is split between one minute build and avenging wrath/crusade+sustained stuff on the left vs right sides respectively. Though I’m kinda working off the capstones because the tree is a bit of a mess. Just for example I’m not sure why the judgement talents on the far right are on the opposite side of the tree from divine toll which is what you will pick those for. I feel like in general they should try to gather the talents that effect certain abilities and move them together. I recall divine storm being on both sides of the tree for some reason.
2 Likes
What? Ret doesn’t have aoe. They have a single target rotation that replaces templar’s verdict with divine storm. Both sides are heavy single target. Oh and they heard you like consecration so they gave your blades of justice consecration so you can have consecration x 2.
Its hard to tell but it does look like they did put some work in to give ret aoe. There is now like 50 consc talents that may turn it into a power house, or not, but there are so many consc buffing talents I’m worried that rets will be running the divine storm increases consc damage by 50% for 8 seconds talent in single target from the sheer number of damage boosts. There are also a few weird ones like exorcism having that death and decay+scourge strike style cleave, and the new spender version of wake.
Dunno if it’ll give ret respectable aoe, but an attempt seems to be being made.
3 Likes
Yeah we’ll see. I don’t think it’ll be enough because the pure dps of consecration is a bit low, but they may tune it higher. Path of Ruin is an awful new trait. Not sure why anyone would take a trait to replace a 3 HP builder for one that does barely more damage in a lower cd but now costs 3 HP. Also, is templar’s verdict available for prot/holy now cause it’s not in the ret tree?
I’d wager templar’s verdict is one of the baseline ret spells. I do share the skeptisism on consecrate becoming good, but I saw a few too many talents that hit my “this could be broken” senses namely incandescence in the general tree which was a new talent that causes a holy explosion on proc chance based on holy power spent, and a ret talent that gives a second consecrate, which might also have its own explosions or not. If thats competitively tuned and combined with the like 70% extra consc damage and high avenger wrath uptime it might be a thing. Too early to tell of course but I’ve been eyeing these trees for silly builds and I can see what might be one around those talents.
I’m quite excited for the consecrate talents, its something actually new and makes cons not just a fire and forget, its something we actually interact with which is nice.
It’s still fire and forget. Sometimes it’s a different ability you fire to get a consecration, but it’s still fire and forget. Besides, it’s still not enough damage. Tuning hasn’t happened yet, but right now consecration does about 3.75% attack power per second, blizzard does just over 11%, rain of fire does just almost 19% per second, and starfall does over 22%. So a few +10%, +80%, etc won’t stack up enough to make this even noticable. They’ll have to change the baseline damage, much like how holy has a hidden aura (it’s call holy paladin, all specs have one) that more than doubles consecration base damage. And even with all that being said, you gotta invest something like 6 points to make this thing worthwhile?
I do think its a good path to go since the ability has been very bare bones for a long time, but if they want to lean heavily on it I really do hope they consider character tracking it like that one old glyph.
As for tuning yeah, the thing that i’m looking at is a talent that does “medium” damage under consecrates name which may end up far outscaling the actual spell itself. I’m just getting vibes that they are trying to turn it into an immolation aura/relentless winter type thing for ret.
Maybe that proc can be decent, but how often are you firing off 3 holy power. “Medium” damage will need to be quite high at the current proc rate to be decent. How often do you fire off a 3 HP spender? Once every 4.5 seconds or so? Take the amount of time it takes on average to fire off a 3 HP spender and multiply that by about 6.5 and that’s how often that will proc. So even if you could fire off 3 hp spender every 3 seconds you’re looking at maybe 1 proc per 18seconds, which is about 2 procs every 3 full duration consecrates. If it’s damage is 200% attack power (which is stronger than templar’s verdict) it will do roughly the same dps as consecration to 5 enemies, and consecration will do more beyond that. I hope they make it interesting for all the point investment it costs to do the consecration route.
At the very least, add some updated animations. Modify consecration or add a glyph that brings the animation up from the year 2004. We could have had this:
But no.