Pally: More DPS would be good. What about a Warlock or Mage?
Me: I dunno man. I guess it depends on your style. Warlocks have longevity, so that'd take a bit of healing pressure off of you. But Mages generally have greater burst damage.
Pally: Yeah, but a Fire Mage is also easy to kill.
Me: You're the one that'd be healing. You don't think you could keep one up?
Pally: It's not that. It'd just be nice to have both DPS and longevity. You think a Mage would be a better fit than an SL/SL Warlock?
Me: For DPS, big time. SL/SL 'locks don't rely on Shadow Bolts, don't have Shadowburn, and rely on DoTs or their channeled Drain Life to do dmg. That's hardly bursting damage, which you'll definitely notice when you need it fast.
Pally: But the mage, I mean, once he burns everything, he's pretty much a paper weight.
Me: Yeah, but stick a Mage and your Warrior on one target, and that'll probably be one less to worry about right quick.
Pally: Unless it's a Pally healing. He can just bubble and heal our target through the damage. Ugh, I guess it comes down to whether I want to try and out-DPS the other team's heals or outlast them.
Me: A Warlock for out-lasting, for sure. Better long-term mana efficiency and the other healers get to blow their mana on removing DoTS all match long. And don't forget that 'locks can drain mana. Might come in handy. But if you want to try and DPS a target down asap and try to catch healers off guard, a Mage would work better me thinks.
Pally: Bah. Maybe I should just grab a Hunter.
Me: lol, well, they don't wear cloth. And they are getting buffed big time in 2.3.
Pally: That, and people in my battle group fall for feign death all the time.
Pally: And cloth for the lose come Ignore Armor.
Me: Cloth definitely for the lose.
Pally: So it's settled then. Pally, Warrior, and Hunter.
Me: Grats man.
So there you have it! When trying to choose between a Warlock and a Mage post Patch 2.3, go with the Hunter. We can now finally put this issue to rest. Thank you, Blizzard. So very much.