Except, in this case, the DW DK tank was viable spec, as the OP never mentioned any problems with the tank in question.
DW tanks gain extra tanking stats, which help in taking less damage, over 2H weapons. If the OP had said that the DW DK tank kept losing agro or dieing in every encounter he was tanking for, then I would say that DW was the problem.
I know Arms is a viable raid spec. But, if the Master Looter thought all DPS should be Fury, since Arms was a PvP tree, and denied the Warrior a Polearm, then it's the same situation as what happened here.
We can even look at a 2-Handed Enhancement Shaman not being allowed to roll on the Betrayer (or any 2-Handed weapon), because Enhancement shamans are supposed to DW the raid might say, and deny the shaman any 2 Handed loot at all. The Shaman is specced and only interested in doing 2-Handed DPS, so why should he be forced to roll on Single handed weapons (NOTE: I might be wrong about 2-Handed weapons being worst then DW Shamans, and, if so, please picture this scenario as a DW Shaman being denied single handed weapon, instead).
@Hengist:If it was a guild run, I would base it on if the OP normally tanks vs. the DW DK tank. If we have DW DK tank on a regular basis, then the DK tank should get the item, since the guild will see more use of it from him then the tank who comes in to tank every now and again. Then again, if this was a guild run, there'd be no problems with the DK DW, since the guild would know he was DW and rolling on single handed weapons.
Plus, you're all forgeting that the ML actually allowed rolls to occur. It would have been one thing if they had discussed that before hand, but you let the guy roll, see he wins, then give it to someone else? Since from what the OP said the only rolls were the 2 DK's and him, just the fact that the ML allowed rolls then renegged on them is pretty messed up.
I mentioned it in the sense, that in the guild I would argue against giving 1h tanking weapon to DK, since I strongly believe its suboptimal, especially if there is a warrior tank present to receive loot (and in the guild I would know that Op's main spec is tank ofc). I'm one of the officers in my guild, and I just wouldn't like to see the weapon wasted, since it being put to good use will have some impact on the guild's progress, no matter how small.
Originally Posted by VerticalEvent
But in the PUG, I would give it to DK, since like you said, tehy did accept him in the first place. Its not fair to let guy DW tank the boss and then start to whine about him being a DW tank when it comes to loot distribution. The moment to accept (or not) him being DW tank was after the invitation, when everyone could see him having 2 tanking 1 handers equipped.
Doesn't have to mean anything, since people often roll just after seeing the item linked, before ML can specify who is allowed to roll and who is not.
Originally Posted by Voodan
A DK taking LL 'just in case it could be useful in the future' when you have someone there for whom it will be useful for sure would be quite silly in my eyes.
I completely agree with the ML's decision.
PuG with rolls, goes to highest roller, the person that wins the roll then decides if he/she feels like passing to someone who may need it more. Hence the roll system. Now if the highest roller has won something already that run, IMHO it should go to the next highest roller. BUT that needs to be spelled out before hand.
Your a Pickup with a guild run. Ask them how you fit into there loot system. And if something is a major upgrade for one of the guild members, IMHO again, let them have it or at least discuss it with them. Actions like that will get you invited back again, which is an awsome way to gear up one of your alts or to pick up off-spec pieces.
That is exactly how I got my Last Laugh on my warrior over a DK tank. GL/RL knew I had been helping out considerably and passing on gear left and right, when it dropped before anyone could say anything, he states its going to Norik. (Even the DK tank agreed.)
The DK wasn't item hogging for a future, unannounced patch note, but rather was actualling using two weapons to tank through out the encounter.
Originally Posted by Orz
Just to clarify some things:
I was there as Fury, and when the time came for Last Laugh rolls, nobody rolled for 10 seconds. At that time, I stated I wanted it for Off Spec, which is actually my Main Spec outside of that PUG (doesn't matter, but was just showing I would put it to use and not sell it). The Main tank and the Off Tank didn't roll for about another minute.
The Off Tank was NOT spec'd for DW tanking. He was spec'd for 2-handed tanking. He had abilities that increased 2-handed weapon damage and passed on the 1-handed talents in Frost.
the Off Tank was, however, actually using 2x 1-handers. But, I think he was only doing this in order to get more defense for that one fight, not because he actually played like that. Had he actually been a true DW tank, obviously he would have talented his abilities for it.
And yes, the Off Tank was dying. He died every attempt, including the the one that actually saw KT's death. I don't know enough about DK tanking mechanics specifically to determine if that was a result of DW or not, as somebody mentioned was a possibility.
The loot system was never explained, I didn't bother to ask. However, I don't really care what the loot system is. There is always room for the ML to step in. If you're a warrior and the Tier token drops, and you already have Tier 8 helm, the loot system says you can still roll on it for main spec ... but an ML can say "wait a minute, you already have an upgrade, you're trying to steal that for an offspec ... let the Shaman with the blue helm take it instead." This is why Master Looters have a responsibility to their guild and even in pugs.
No, I never stated that I was rolling on tanking gear as priority over DPS gear. It just happened that Last Laugh dropped, so I put in a bid on it for Off Spec since I didn't believe any real tank in that particular raid would actually want it. And then the situation developed from there.
I should also mention that it had already been established prior to KT that I was usually a Main Tank and Fury was my true offspec. I ended up getting the dodge trinket off of Saph because nobody else wanted it (yes, I know it's mainly a druid tanking trink, but we had no druids and I was the only person int he raid that expressed an interest in it right before it was almost sharded. I probably won't ever use it, but I like the options of miscellaneous gear for unique encounters). No, I don't think Last Laugh would ever be miscellaneous gear for a specific encounter for Death Knight, personally.
Well, the majority of us agree with the ML's decision. I fully agree with steph on the issue. I'm not a DK so I can't speak for the guy who won the roll, but as i said the guy can easily go 2-h, get jawbone or whichever BIS 2-h is and call it a day. Where as Orz would have to farm 25 man KT repeatedly to get BIS pre-ulduar for warrior tanks. That's my opinion though and I am not saying the ML was right for his/her decision just stating my opinion. This is why I don't like pugs because loot rules go out the window, better to just find a progressed guild who downs 25 man KT every week and does some sort of loot counciling. Since it's a bit more fair to everyone imo as long as you have people who got gear logged in your computer or a notebook. Also, the trinket shouldn't even be an issue since nobody wanted it. Maybe the DK was dying due to lack of gear as well. It would probably help if you linked his armory too.
I won't link his armory because I don't think there's a need to identify him.
Suffice to say, he was in half blues (only 26k hp) and a Frost hybrid spec, 23 / 33 / 15.
Another clarification: He was the second OT. He was obviously DPSing and tossed on gear just for OTing the KT adds. The 1st OT was a warrior that had Last Laugh already.
Had I bothered to inspect him prior to initiating KT, I would have expressed that I should be an OT instead, since I'm far more geared and experienced and it would have made things easier. I never bothered to look him over since the raid leader said he was good to go and I felt an obligation to DPS as nobody was interrupting KT as much as I was and I was also one of the top DPSers. Looking back, I really should have looked this guy over and brought up the subject of his gear and opposing spec for that encounter and made the OT go back to DPSing. I didn't, however.
That would have made this a whole lot easier. But, that wasn't the case.
DWing rarely has an impact on survivability of the tank except for in general 2 x 1-h weapons will have less stam than some of the higher end 2-h weapons and parry haste. However, most raid bosses don't get parry haste so that would not be an issue. It was probably the rest of his gear and/or spec.
Based on your clarification Orz, I actually change my opinion on the situation. If the DK tank just went DW for that one fight, that could only be a defensive stats choice imo. If thats the case, LL does not benefit a DK in such a way so if his main spec was not DW tank then I would say priority goes to an off-spec (yes I know prot is your main but for the purposes of the raid it was your off-spec) prot warrior than to a strange side-grade for the DK.
That being said if, in fact, the DK was consistently a DW tank it should have really gone to him. If he was dying so much, you guys could have replaced him. Since you chose to keep him around, if it was his main spec (regardless of the banter about its viability) he should have had his fair roll at it.
From what I interpreted this as. Both people were rolling for os in the raid.
The DK with the 531 def was not spec'd properly for his gear. It would be like me spec'ing for swords then using a mace.
I would have done the same thing as ML because you would have gained more utility from it immediately.
The DK may or may not have had a 2nd 1h, so we really don't know and it could have been on his wish list of *if I get titanguard or stoneguard etc then I can dual wield tank*.
@Tarigar: He was probably geared for the fight, if he was using Sigil of Unfaltering Knight, that gives about 10 Defense when casting Icy Touch
As well, the DK was DW for the fight with KT, which means the Last Laugh would of been an upgrade to whatever he was using during that fight. He would of found an immediate use of it, as well.
Even if he's specced for 2H weapons, was he tanking with a 2-Handed weapon or DW the whole night? I think that's the biggest question that needs to be answered. Specs can easily be changed or forgotten to be updated - gear is harder. If an Arms warrior is Sword Mastery specced, and BoH drops, does that mean he can not roll on it?
@Voodan - if it went to Off Spec roll, then the DK roll would of been valid (his "Main Spec" would be a 2-Handed Tank, and his OffSpec a DW tank) and would of out rolled the OP.
EDIT: As well, that's the definition of immediate use? In most cases, people don't equip new gear gained from an instance until after the run, simply because, before gemming and enchanting it, your old gear is probably still better. That DK, who has the gear to DW tank could of went and and respecced for DW Specilization (maybe he just picked up the Sen'jin axe, right before he got a raid invite) and would of just as useful for him as it was for OP, except, that it's harder to find a tanking position for raids then for dps spots.
I'm sorry, but this comment bothered me.
Originally Posted by rmd83
So, I went over the thread, and wrote down the names who seem to think that the item should of went to the DK or went to the Warrior (and kept names off of anyone who seemed in between).
So, as we can see more people seem to think the DK should of gotten the item at the end of the run, then the warrior.
the 2nd post is why people hate dkp. You cannot always go absolutely by the numbers and eliminate common sense. Common sense won in this case, not some dumb roll system. Would have ML'ed to you too.
I wasn't stating that he wasn't def capped I do understand the sigil. I was highlighting which dk I was referring to since he said there was 2. He stated that the DK with 531 def was dual wielding but 2h spec. So it would be like me showing up sword spec wearing the BoH. Not respec'ing afterwards.
Originally Posted by VerticalEvent
Also yes he could have picked up the sen'jin axe if he had the tokens. It is all hypothetical and a warrior could have equipped it right there thrown on a weapon chain etc. But I do have a bias as I have never seen any dk dw tanks in the past 3 months (as well as me being a warrior) as most dk's in my guild would say it isn't as beneficial to them as wearing a 2h.
So i still stand by my decision that I would have given it to the warrior. Some people like to have *an item* as a showcase piece but never really use it.
I have done the same with the Stave Illhoof dropped. It was going to get d/ed and I wanted to flaunt it to a druid friend who was farming for it.
I didn't say the majority thought the warrior should have gotten the weapon, I said the majority felt that dk's at this time cannot effectively dual wield..
If I'm masterlooter, any 1H tank gets priority over a death knight on 1H weapons. There are specific situations where you want 1H tank weapons (As I understand it, The unholy/blood build that DKs use for 3D sarth capitalizes on using the 2% magic damage reduction rune on two 1H weapons) but in general a Death knight with a 1H is just a hair above a mage asking for King's Defender for his shat spec.
Definitely should have gone to you. Plus, the DK seems like a douche :/