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)
10-30-2011 @ 5:22PM
Feldring said...
From a purely gameplay standpoint, no, there's nothing to be worried about with monks. From the standpoint of having always desired to play a paladin as a righteous protector and holy warrior who wears heavy armor and wields a weapon with skill for a reason, I have to admit to being quite jealous indeed that we're still relegated to standing in the back and looking shiny.
Doesn't it fit the concept of a paladin more to be in the thick of things? Praying and laying on hands and BEING a beacon of light, but also striking fear into the hearts of our enemies? I've always acknowledged it would be difficult to pull off a melee healing model -- even a rather hybridized version as a paladin's would most likely be -- but Blizzard now seems to think it's possible but not worth trying out for an existing class.
What do others feel about this from a concept standpoint?
Reply
10-30-2011 @ 6:09PM
Texicles said...
I completely agree with you, and have said for a long time now, that Holy Paladins should be some kind of melee healer, wading into battle, hammer and tome akimbo, ruinating baddies' faces and simultaneously fixing friends' booboos.
Unfortunately, for those of us who have always wanted paladins as true melee healers, 7 years of "tradition" stand in the way of that dream. At this point, the people who like playing holy for what it is significantly outnumber the people who wish things were different.
10-31-2011 @ 12:45AM
lawlingU said...
yeah they could apply it to an existing class. But for those of us who love playing said class, it would kill the game for us. Thats why they don't do it