From Wowpedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Removed Outdated Shadow Priest Information

I removed the line regarding shadow weaving being a contribution to raid-wide dps (namely warlocks) from the damage dealing section of Endgame Expectations. This is due to the change of the shadow weaving talent, which now only boosts the damage of the caster, and no longer benefits other members of the raid.

Edit: Also removed another outdated Shadow Weaving reference to raiding in the same section. Missed it last time. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Xaemoon (talk · contr) on 31 May 2009.

Your right - yet still... (Aulus)

It pays to have played a pally (i havn't)and i think your exactly right. Although the page (if you scroll down to holy talents) still claims the priest to be the best healing class in the game. Each class has each of its own benifits, my main point was priests wern't the ultimate healing class.

In reguards to shadow priests - I think its something we all agree on that they are extremely usefull. Guilds are really looking for not only holy priests but shadow priests as well. Instead of the page saying that many guilds feel they should be holy, it should read something opposite - stating that they are wanted. G0g

My brother has a Shadow Priest himself. From what I've heard from him about being a Shadow Priest, they can actually be pretty good healers; his group gets decent amounts of healing from Vampiric Embrace, and he's usually the main healer (he still has to drop Shadowform when someone needs a REAL healing effect :P). The only problem about being a Shadow Priest: major aggro (healing from VE and damage really stacks up threat). Felindre

Priest Page reflects outdated thinking about shadow priests

As a 70 shadow priest raiding Karazhan on a regular basis, I don't think the priest page is "all wrong". But it does need updating to get rid of remnants of "holyist" comments. While formerly discriminated against, the Shadow Priest has come into its own as a fully accepted dps class.

We wouldn't spend time talking about racist guilds that don't allow players of particular ethnic groups. Similarly, we shouldn't spend time talking about out-of-touch guilds that only allow priests to be holy. Comments to the effect that holy priests are always popular with pickup groups, while shadow priests are "just another dps class" may be reasonably appropriate. But any end-game raiding guild worth it's salt wants both holy and shadow priests.

=CaptC 16:30, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

I'm going to have to agree with this philosophy. The old thinking about the shadow tree being for leveling purposes only basically went away with the introduction of the Burning Crusade and the Vampiric Touch top-tier shadow talent. Shadow priests have an extremely vital and vibrant role in raids now, and most raiding guilds worth their salt actively seek out shadow priests to raid with them. While the health return from Vampiric Embrace is good, the biggest utility a shadow priest brings is to be a "mana battery" for the healers in long boss encounters through Vampiric Touch.

-- Teni 18:24, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

On Priest and Paladin Healing (in response to G0g)

I speak as a 70 Priest and 61 Paladin who were both at 60 for a long time prior to the expansion release. Both have been specced Holy in 5-man, PvP, and raiding situations. So no one gets the wrong idea, my conclusion in advance: They're both great.

I can't even begin to say how wrong the poster above me is about Holy Priests. The Priest class is without a doubt the most powerful overall healer in WoW. True, Paladins are superior at spamming single-target heals by a noticeable margin while things are going smoothly, but Priests can still do that just fine and then some. It's not the Priests' absolute dominion over one minor aspect of healing that makes them superb healers, it's their domination of the whole of the field of healing. Priests have reliable spike healing, steady healing, float healing, AoE healing (not to mention the only AoE heal that can effect a group other than their own! (Circle of Healing)), heal-over-time effects, aggro and AoE damage control with the mana-efficient Prayer of Mending, the super-efficient Lightwell, reliable mana regeneration with Shadowfiend, and many ways to salvage a situation that's going badly (Power Word: Shield, Flash Heal, Binding Heal, and Spirit of Redemption come to mind).

By contrast, the Paladin has unreliable spike healing (depends on crits going off), steady single-target healing, float healing, and in many cases he admittedly does the latter two better than the Priest due to his superb, if slightly unreliable, staying power. The only HoT he potentially gets is a racial on a 3 minute cooldown, his ways to salvage a bad situation can be powerful, but are very limited (Blessing of Protection on a 3-5 minute cooldown, and Divine Intervention, presuming there's someone else who can resurrect, on a 1 hour cooldown). In fact, he only gets three healing abilities total, all of which are single-target. So yes, he deserves to be very good with them, because that's all he's got in the way of direct healing.

Also, having access to Plate proficiency is nice, but for healing purposes, cloth offers all the stats the Priest needs, and he has plenty of ways to deal with the low armour he has (Psychic Scream, Fade, Power Word: Shield, powerful survivability talents, etc.). That's not to say that Plate isn't nice, it is, but it's not the be-all end-all. Also, Plate healing gear is there exclusively for Paladins, and is therefore given the stats the Paladin needs, which are often different from the stats the Priest needs most. Cloth healing gear, by contrast, is itemised for the Priest, the only exclusively cloth-wearing healer, giving him the stats he needs most, some of which the Paladin would feel to be a bad use of itemisation points for him (Spirit comes to mind here).

In conclusion, both the Priest and Paladin are very capable healers, but they are very different classes. If you set as the basis for judgement their respective proficiency at the thing the Paladin is designed to do best (spamming single-target heals), yes, of course the Paladin will seem like a better healer. However, if you look at their overall capabilities, you'll see that they both bring a lot of wonderful things to a group (as do the other two healing-capable classes!), and that the Holy Priest does have far more versatility with his healing, not to mention very useful buffs, while the Holy Paladin adds other benefits, such as versatile auras and blessings to keep the party running efficiently, plate armour and an emergency taunt to go with it, wipe prevention, and the like. In less words, the Priest who is specced to heal is a pure healing class who does it superbly, while the Holy Paladin is a support class who can main heal quite well.

All that said, I happen to agree with you overall about Shadow Priests in that they deal very strong DPS, and the benefits they provide are quite helpful.



Can someone check whether this is actually true: The first section says shadow priest's damage scales well with gear. I'm not a shadow priest, so I don't know, but I'm pretty sure that the fact that it doesn't is a major annoyance to Shadow priests. - Cheers, Longitude, 26 August 2006

on Shadow damage

Shadow damage calculation is no different that other schools of damage on other classes. This means that the damage bonus you get from gear is calculated before talents are, which means they scale with the talents.

So far the statement, in reality a Shadow Priest's damage becomes less and less interesting compared to a Mage's once you get to somewhat serious gear level. At 500 +damage a Holy specced damage priest will effectively outdamage a Shadow priest. Simply because the main damage spell of a Shadow Priest (Mind Flay) takes so very little (43%) bonus from gear. Specific shadow damage gear that gives a larger bonus to just Shadow damage compensates this up to a point, but not endlessly.

The versatility and power of a well-played Shadow Priest in PvP is of course, not much affected by slightly weaker spells! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Frederik-Jan (talk · contr) on 30 August 2006.

Effects of shadow damage talents on spell damage gear

There are three talents that increase the damage of your shadow spells: Darkness, Shadow Weaving and Shadowform.

Shadow Weaving applies a debuff to your talent which increases its shadow damage taken by 15%, and Shadowform applies a buff to yourself which increases your shadow damage output by 15%. Theses two talents DO scale +dmg gear.

Darkness increases your shadow spell damage by 10%. This talent DOES NOT scale +dmg gear.

Passive talents are applied first, then +dmg gear is considered, then the effect of all buffs. I'm not sure if buffs are additive or if they compound to actually give the combination of Shadowform + Shadow Weaving together an effect of (1.15 * 1.15 = 1.3225) +32.35% on shadow damage. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Injekt26254 (talk · contr) on 15 October 2006.

Recent Image Edits

Is there any real reason to prefer a Horde priest versus an Alliance priest? It's not like there's favoritism here. --Hobinheim 11:34, 23 December 2006 (EST)

Put the Human Priest trainer back in, it was unbalanced with Alliance anyways, but no need to unbalance it with all Horde. --Zeal (talk - contr - web) 11:41, 23 December 2006 (EST)
And lo, we have both images :) -- Kirkburn (talk) 18:13, 23 December 2006 (EST)

what hord race makes the best priest

ok so my friend is telling me that undead priests are the best on the hord side and that troll priests (which is the one i have) are just retarted along with blood elf. so is he right? well i don't personally agree with him. so i would like it if you guys would give me your personal opinions. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Setsuna0251121 (talk · contr) on 21 April 2007.

    depends. in aspects of healing or shadow? for example the undead priest has an ability "devouring plague" which does just under the damage of a SW:P, thats a whole extra DoT for a shadow priest, but this dosen't help healing wise. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by G0g20972 (talk · contr) on 8 May 2007.

Actually, I prefer Troll Priests, though their Priest Racial (Hex of Weakness) is basically useless, their Berserking ability can be useful for self preservation: At half health it reduces casting time by 30%. When you're at half health pop PW:S, activate Berserking, and you can usually get a heal or two off before the shield's down. Razzik 01:30, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

I like Shadowguard. Sure, you don't get it until level 20, but even so.
User:QitelRemel/Sig 01:20, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
This is like the debate over whether Fire or Frost is the best overall Mage spec. It's a matter of opinion (and, it seems to me, your friend is maybe a little too opinionated).
  • Forsaken Priests are good because they have Will of the Forsaken, Cannibalize (don't have to use mana to restore health after a fight), and Shadow Resistance. THe Devouring Plague and Touch of Weakness spells are useful as well.
  • Troll Priests don't have to heal themselves quite as frequently due to Regeneration, and they get a bonus to damage against Beasts. Hex of Weakness reduces the damage the Troll Priest takes, and Shadowguard works a lot like Lightning Shield for Shamans.
  • Blood Elves have Mana Tap and Arcane Torrent (reduce the opponent's mana with Mana Tap, then silence nearby mobs and restore mana with Arcane Torrent), not to mention the passive Enchanting bonus and the +5 resistance to all types of magic. They share Touch of Weakness with the Forsaken, and they can use Consume Magic to remove a Priest buff on themselves in exchange for mana.

I say the race depends on whether you prefer DPS or healing, and in the end on which one you like better. Felindre

Removed comment from body of article

I just removed from the body of the article the following text:

*Note: Lately I have received more and more invites to places like Karazhan, being a shadow priest. I would recommend, if you would like to heal well without respeccing out of shadow completely, for a 0/18/43 talent spec. All of the talents for mana reduction and cast time on heals, crit and improved renew, with none of the damage loss in shadow - just a few things handy for PvP like increased range and crits will be lost. If you want to be available to fight in a raid and grant those warlocks your shadow damage bonuses (which make them happy regarding the damage charts) as well as supporting your healers and giving back mana - or being ready to main heal a 5 man with no problem, maybe a few pieces of gear swapped out, then this is the spec for you. Joining a raiding guild not necessary.

Subjective commentary like this probably doesn't belong in an article, especially as written (C'mon, referring to self?). Despite being primarily a holy priest (it's been over a year since I played shadow, having switched holy at the request of my raid quite some time ago!), however, I do agree that the shadow priest sections do need heavy revision in order to reflect what the original poster probably inteded to write. If I have the time and inclination later, I'll be bold and take the initiative to rewrite that section to hold less bias and emphasis the new respect and acceptance shadow builds have garnered in raiding. If anyone wants to take a stab before I do so, I welcome them! User:Cynra/Sig 16:11, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

I lied - I didn't do this later. It was nagging me so I sat down and rewrote the section. It's now split up between Healing and DPS, since the original section was heavily focused on asserting shadow priests' right to raid without really emphasizing how they can be beneficial. I've hopefully organized it a little better, removed a lot of the bias that was there, and made positive contributions to the article. I'll probably be returning to this in the near future to clean up some other areas that caught my attention; the blasted thing seems poorly written in some areas while full of unsubstantiated bias (and countered in the same statement by another editor!). I don't want to unnecessarily lengthen this article, but I was considering fleshing out the raiding section with specifics. An idea? User:Cynra/Sig 17:16, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

I was about to say something about how the wiki exaggerates the healing importance of priests, when I see that someone else beat me to it already. Being blunt, the wiki sounds like TBC never happened. At level 70, all healing classes are nearly equal in overall healing potential with situational differences, while shadow priests are strongly desired even when their damage scaling starts suffering at tier 6. Holy priests aren't the ultimate healers, and shadow priests aren't a side note. The wiki should reflect this so that people don't get the wrong idea about the class. Since 2.0, holy priests have been largely relegated to clean-up duty or shoved out of 25-man raiding entirely. This can cause a lot of frustration to someone who has the wrong idea of what a priest is supposed to do in endgame. I'm not saying that my opinion should be inserted, but that the exaggerations of Holy's importance should be removed. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Rbx347153 (talk · contr) on 11 December 2007.

wiki exaggerates holy, downplays shadow

I was about to say something about how the wiki exaggerates the healing importance of priests, when I see that someone else beat me to it already. Being blunt, the wiki sounds like TBC never happened. At level 70, all healing classes are nearly equal in overall healing potential with situational differences, while shadow priests are strongly desired even when their damage scaling starts suffering at tier 6. Holy priests aren't the ultimate healers, and shadow priests aren't a side note. The wiki should reflect this so that people don't get the wrong idea about the class. Since 2.0, holy priests have been largely relegated to clean-up duty or shoved out of 25-man raiding entirely. This can cause a lot of frustration to someone who has the wrong idea of what a priest is supposed to do in endgame. I'm not saying that my opinion should be inserted, but that the exaggerations of Holy's importance should be removed. Rbx3 19:01, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

however tt's unclear what is the idea of the priest YOU have --N'Nanz 19:12, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
Be bold and make a change! I'm considering adding a bit more of the negative (realistic) aspects of raiding as a priest; I added a lot of what I hoped was neutral information on Shadow priests since the article originally seemed to be working under the antedivulian impression that it isn't a viable raiding spec, but I haven't played a high-level Shadow priest in about two years (though I'm a-working on leveling my neophyte Shadow priest!). Actually, I was also concerned originally with how much Shadow [b]was[/b] being portrayed in some areas and in a very opinionated way that didn't see to embrace the neutrality that WoW Wiki advocates.
I currently raid as a hybrid healing priest (more Holy than Discipline) and I agree that we need to add some of the criticisms that the class and spec gets in competative raiding. It's a fact that most competative end-game raiding guilds prefer to stack paladins and shamans over priests due to their added utility, though this article seems to go back and forth in painting priests as the ultimate healing class - and, despite preferring priests as healers and having leveled multiple priests, I'm not that dedicated to my class to espouse that kind of drivel. The lack of priests isn't as common in casual-to-moderate raiding environments, so maybe I'll make mention of the tendency to have difficulties as a healing priest in competative raiding while the problem seems to decrease as your start examining more casual raids.
I hope to get some stuff posted either today or this weekend (in addition to cleaning up some other stuff that waffles back and forth and contradicts itself in the article). Cheers! User:Cynra/Sig 15:13, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
Edited as requested. A short summary of the problems with raiding as a healing priest has been added to the appropriate section. I tried to add some citations, but some of the posts that I'd prefer to reference I can't access right now (my list is at the house, bleh!), so I'll include those citations in a future update - especially the one concerning the fact that Spirit should be "fixed" sometime in the future, probably by the time WotLK comes out. I'd still like to go through and clean up a lot of the contradictions on priestly performance in raids as well as clean up the trees discussion (most of it focuses on the Shadow tree, followed by Discipline tree, and then sadly the impotent Holy tree). As always, feel free to edit, change, add, or remove pieces as appropriate. User:Cynra/Sig 16:32, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Baroque non-comittal statements

Under the Overview section, it stated, "While Holy Priests are not as effective in damage output, they are argued to be one of the best healing classes in the game, however, this is still debated." (Emphasis is mine).

This looks like two different editors using "unbiased" language to promote their biases.

Part of me wanted to impishly toss in a few more caveats to neuter this statement even more. ("While Holy Priests are not as effective in damage output, they are argued to be among some of the of the best healing classes in the game--apart from Holy Paladins, and Restoration Shamans and Druids who have been asserted by some players as better healers--however, this is still debated, though some don't contest this at all.")

Instead, I'm just going to edit it to make it more readable and retain a non-committal tone. ("While Holy Priests are not as effective in damage output, they are formidable healers.") Arcmonkey 20:32, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Good edit imo. :) -- Zealvurte, 21:29, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Discipline description reworked

I found the Discipline Description a bit obsolete, so I did some rework. I have no full confidence on my English so I copied a good description from here Domp (talk) 12:21, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Worgen Priest

Can somebody maybe help to explain how a Worgen priests fits into all of this? hey are fierce half-human half-werewolf type creatures hailing from a dark world, thoroughly evil, delighting in torturing and devouring intelligent creatures doesn't really sound like priest material... who do they worship, etc? --Grynd (talk) 22:27, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

True, however the Worgen that are going to be playable were once humans who are,more often than not, followers of the Light and simply because they are no Worgen does not mean they would give up their faith, so I'd assume they get their powers from the holy light and I can't help but remember the quote on Chancellor Velora's card "The Light rewards faith, not form." which is why they are still able to use the Light. but that's just my assumption lolKantoisamo (talk) 11:02, April 18, 2010 (UTC)

Updates to VE and VT

Updated and clarified information on VT to describe how it causes the Replenishment effect, rather than mana based on damaged done; updated information on VE to reflect changes in patch 3.3. Xolodilnik (talk) 09:10, December 16, 2009 (UTC)

Gnome, Troll, Forsaken and Worgen Priests

I notion that all of this content should be moved to/combined with the content on the "Priest Races page". This would be a much more suitable place for it. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Rotgar (talk · contr).

I apologize, I meant Forsaken, Troll, Tauren and Gnome priests, obviously. ---Rotgar (talk) 03:43, June 18, 2010 (UTC)

WTB rewrite

I changed the talents section to be more applicable etc, but I have to wonder if all that blue text at the bottom is really needed? Wouldn't it be better to integrate that information into the article now that the changes are mostly live? Some of the sections also seem like they provide information that could be combined into one (like tactics and end game expectations). Are those sections there because of some "master template" or style guide for classes? Zilana (talk) 15:04, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

I agree with you and I like the changes you done and agree with them, if you could head to the Tree sections and consolidate that info, I have changed the Tree Talent for Discipline and Holy, but I can't elaborate on the text, since my knowledge of English grammar is limited. Luxcura (talk) 23:36, 27 October 2010 (UTC)
I have raised the issue on Portal talk:Main. Zilana (talk) 11:39, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

Witch doctors priests?

The warcraft III unit and canonical portrayal of witch doctors seems to be a lot closer to the in-game shaman class. They use totems and invoke non-divine spirits. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ijffdrie (talk · contr). 23:16, 11 April 2012

"Due to this, priests are one of the most highly sought after classes for any group."

This was added in 2009. Is it still, specifically and universally true? In all types of play, for PvE and PvP? The statement has been on the page for as long as I've been editing, and it seems to me quite a thing to state. No such statement is offered on any other class page. Important, powerful? Yes. But more sought after than most other classes? -- Taohinton (talk)

No. I've removed it. Thanks for bringing this up. -- DarkTZeratul (talk) 22:28, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

Flavor quote

I'd like to suggest a new flavor quote that better represents priests duality in their mastery over light and shadow. The new priest legendary ring has an excellent bit of flavor text, to this end:

I think the second sentence-- "They are the masters of the Light and embracers of the Void - for light cannot exist without darkness, and darkness without light."-- would be excellent. -- davesignal

I believe that the above is a better representation, too, especially with the expanded lore in Legion. The current flavor quote emphasizes the Holy aspect of priests while essentially leaving out the aspects of Discipline and Shadow. -- Alayea (talk / contrib) 20:13, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
While I agree, I would wait until patch 7.2.5 is live and this ring is in the game before updating the page. Just in case it changes between now and then. -- DarkTZeratul (talk) 21:47, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
I'd have to say nay. The quote is good, but only shows 2 of the many powers the priests of Azeroth call on. Many priests do draw on the Light and the Void, but just as many draw on the loa (trolls), Elune (night elves), the celestials (pandaren), and An'she (tauren). Duesten's quote seems more vague as to the source of a priest's power, which I think is better. -- User:Malcior (User talk:Malcior) 7:01 PM, 16 May 2017.
Regardless of the source of a priest's faith, their power is still ultimately derived from either the Light or the Void. -- DarkTZeratul (talk) 23:42, 16 May 2017 (UTC)