Warlock: Bane vs Aftermath

[Inconsiderable]

Hello.

As the subject said.. Bane or Aftermath? Aftermath will give a 10% chance to daze the target. Thats not really awesome - other classes have stun. I thought it could do nice with AEs, but I will have a 26% chance to stun anyway, the 10% chance to daze will not cut it.
And I cannot spam low lvl instant spells, destruction has nothing like SW:P Rank 1.
Bane on the other hand will lower the casting time on immolate and shadowbolt, both are used alot.

Is Aftermath important? Whats your experience?

Thanks :)

[Coldfire]

I think your question should be changed to something more like "I'm getting Bane, should I get Aftermath too?"

:P

[Jumai]

Aftermath is at an important talent tree breakpoint, taking it will lock you out of dark pact and lock you out of certain demonology/affliction combinations. That should be your main consideration.

I also understand it's bugged.

[KungFoo]

Jumai: I think you're thinking of Pyroclasm (% chance to stun on AOEs), which is both broken and requiring 20 points in Destruction. Aftermath is a tier 2 dest. talent, and thereby still leaves plenty of room for maxing another tree.

Bane > Aftermath, easily. It isn't so much that daze isn't useful (it's great in combination with fear) as that it never seems to go off when you want it to, and bane both gives you an increase in DPS (20% for shadowbolt; 33% for immolate if you were to spam it and avoid the DoT entirely, although for practical purposes you just get to nuke .5s faster) and an effectual decrease in interrupt chance, which is pretty kickass.

[Jumai]

yep, I was thinking of the wrong talent. Foot- > mouth.