Quote Originally Posted by Kitru View Post
You do realize that, to do this, you'd have to reduce the duration to 12 seconds, right? I would much rather have a longer duration with a penalty at the end of it than a crazy low duration like that.
Why would you care for the duration if it was the same effect?

Quote Originally Posted by Kitru View Post
-snip-
I love that you enjoy arguing so much, you'll make a wall of text arguing with the overall point you agree with. I in a few of my posts said pacification was bad for tanks. So no it does not apply just to Berserk as you seem to want to imply. I did state on a DD it'd make more sense, which I'll stand by, but have never stated pacification was ever a good thing. It'd be equally as bad if not worse on healers.

You might not agree with my examples given of why pacify is bad on Warrior (our only example of this effect taking place), yet you in the end say the exact same thing as I do. I'll even quote it for you:
Quote Originally Posted by Kitru View Post
Anything that prevents players from acting is generally not good game design since the entire point of the game is to play it rather than watch it.
This is in essence what I've been saying the whole time. I probably haven't articulated it well, but overall when I am pacified I am not playing my Warrior. This is why I keep bringing up our token cross class abilities that make things "manageable". I'm not sure how it is "flavor" for Warrior to not be a Warrior when pacified. Inability to play my class effectively because of an ability doesn't make me happy as a player. All these things are opinion though, like your opinion of players inability to act being bad game design. It is all opinion, that is why I brought up specific examples (unintentional aggroes, random events, learning content) as to why as a tank it is bad to have pacify. Inability to act. Thank you for articulating it better then I was. I don't find it necessary to argue with you here.