Also on AOL
- Autos
- Technology
- Lifestyle
- Gaming
- Finance
- Entertainment on AOL
- Lifestyle on AOL
- Sports on AOL
- Travel on AOL
- More on AOL
Featured Galleries
Joystiq
© 2013 AOL Inc. All rights Reserved. Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Trademarks | AOL A-Z HELP | About Our Ads

Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
1-30-2011 @ 4:57PM
Kole said...
"No gear in forms If you spend a lot of time admiring your character, this spec's not for you."
This is the same CRAP excuse used for Trees when they lost their form. If you want to see your damn armor DON'T play a freaking shape shifter class!!!!!!
Reply
1-30-2011 @ 5:54PM
Kurash said...
"If you want to see your damn armor DON'T play a freaking shape shifter class!!!!!!"
That's exactly what he said in the quote that you yourself reposted. Though he said it in a more reasonable way.
1-30-2011 @ 6:07PM
Kole said...
That was not directed at the author, it was directed at the people who think it is a viable excuse for removing tree form. If the "buffs" from tree form were the problem, then remove the buffs! Make them a GCD spell. Why not remove chicken form if that was the case...no one has EVER given a good reason for removing the shape shifting element from healers.
But you know...you're right. I apologize for stating my opinion and for re-iterating a point given by the author.
WTB delete post button.
1-30-2011 @ 7:40PM
Ronin said...
Relax, Kole. It's really not necessary to be so aggressive, especially on a point that A. wasn't even part of the article, and B. won't get you anywhere. So you're mad they took away Tree as a shape-shift. We get that. Go yell at Blizz for it-- not at those who may or may not agree with you, here.