Page 38 of 47 FirstFirst ...
28
36
37
38
39
40
... LastLast
  1. #741
    The Unstoppable Force Jessicka's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Manchester
    Posts
    20,949
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    Yeah, anyone can come up with some crackpot way of getting a DH to work in the game. I don't think anyone said that a playable DH is impossible, it certainly isn't. I believe the argument has always been that they're already in the game in a sense. The problem is that Blizzard's interpretation of a playable DH (or some approximation to it) isn't satisfactory to a lot of people, who wanted a melee fighter that uses demonic magic. Unfortunately for them, that was never Blizzard's goal in the first place.
    Blizzard's original goals were also for more asymmetric balance (Shaman Horde only and Paladins Alliance only, different armours used by different numbers of classes/specs/roles - Holy Palas were meant to wear Mail for example). That they may have felt Rogues or Warriors "would suffice" to cover DHs and probably DKs and Monks too; it's quite clear that as time has gone on those classes have developed much stronger identities of their own which now exclude the RTS classes they once covered. That in turn has made room for Monks and DKs and I think DHs and other classes too.

  2. #742
    I like how this thread is about warlocks and DH and no one respond to this:

    Quote Originally Posted by rarhyx View Post
    want to jump again on the train warlocks = demon hunters.
    some say Locks are DH.

    DH -> hunting and killing demons with their(demon) power.
    Locks -> using demons and their magic for their own benefits.

    But if we see what changed every expac with the demononlogy tree it looks like locks got better in controlling demons.

    BC -> locks can control fel guards
    WotLK -> locks copying Illidans meta
    Cata -> no real change(?)
    MoP -> changed the duration of meta with demonic fury (before it was 30 sec iirc) + DA glyph

    need help at the wotlk and cata changes, I'm not a lock player so I don't really know what was changed, did they have melee attacks back then?

    and now we got the greenfire quest.
    the journal of Jubeka Shadowbreaker says:

    Day 36:

    Remarkable! My first attempt to summon a higher order member of the legion failed as spectacularly as planned. The shivarra broke free almost instantly after Kanrethad completed the ritual.

    I expected the frail human to be struck down while I banished the creature. Instead, in the instant that the shivarra's razor-sharp blades sliced through the air, Kanrethad's form shifted and the blades bounced as if striking stone.

    Unlike the typical form of metamorphosis, he did not complete the demonic transformation...

    so in other words Kanrethad used the DA form. but wait, there's more on the page!

    perhaps his research has been more successful than I expected.

    which could be a hint that demonology's meta in the next xpac will be the appearence of DA and making the glyph of DA baseline (it's awesome for solo playing)
    just change colors or size of the wing in both transformations and remove the melee attacks.

    and now it's different from DH's meta.

    but even if DH will not be the next class, this my prediction about walock changes for the next xpac
    Just adding that Demonolgy Locks are summoners.

    to those who say locks are DH because of http://www.wowhead.com/item=45780#created-by-spell

    you probably didn't see that they have also
    http://www.wowhead.com/item=42460 and
    http://www.wowhead.com/item=42465#created-by-spell

    notice how Imp swarm requires Demonology.
    Demo locks are more away from being DH than DK. DK are closer to shamans than a to DH.

    and to those who say locks are representing illidan to much and that makes them DH
    look at the very first DK:
    http://www.wowhead.com/npc=22871#abilities
    he looks like the warlock T5 PLUS HE EVEN HAS A WARLOCK ABILITY..
    DK WILL GET WARLOCK ABILITIES. UNHOLY WILL BE CHANGED TO CASTER SPEC

  3. #743
    and to those who say locks are representing illidan to much and that makes them DH
    look at the very first DK:
    http://www.wowhead.com/npc=22871#abilities
    he looks like the warlock T5 PLUS HE EVEN HAS A WARLOCK ABILITY..
    DK WILL GET WARLOCK ABILITIES. UNHOLY WILL BE CHANGED TO CASTER SPEC
    I agree with you, but Teron Gorefiend is an Old DK. Not the new DK modelled in WC3 DKs. They are really different.
    Teron was an Orc warlock controlling the corpse of a Human paladin.
    Dks in this days are a resurrected body's and trained to become part of scourge army. So it's logic to give to old DKs (wc1/2) some abilities similar to warlocks.

    Yeah, anyone can come up with some crackpot way of getting a DH to work in the game. I don't think anyone said that a playable DH is impossible, it certainly isn't. I believe the argument has always been that they're already in the game in a sense. The problem is that Blizzard's interpretation of a playable DH (or some approximation to it) isn't satisfactory to a lot of people, who wanted a melee fighter that uses demonic magic. Unfortunately for them, that was never Blizzard's goal in the first place.
    Just my opinion but I don't see any playable class that has any DH style.
    1-Warlocks have curses, are ranged casters and have a pet-battle system, and their glyph give you a big demon to smash people.
    2-Rogues are close, but they don't have any them related to DH, they aren't tanky and they don't use the same aesthetics or magic skills.
    3-Shamans enhancement are close to what DH could be. They are melee, are more tanky than rogues, use dw and are hybrids beteween physical and magical, but they lose all aesthetics and demon-related things. And of course, they are related to some races and no lore behind to be a demon-haters.
    4-Warriors are iron behemoths with weapons and shields in their backs. They are close to DH because they are melee (smashing things), but they lose all other things (too much armor maybe, weapons specialized, no magic at all, etc...).

    You can argue that we have a demon-user class that had one glyph to become like a demon, and DH had one skill that give some ranged+defensive power and they were demon-like creatures. If you take that like the only thing of what a DH is, then yes, we have a playable DH class in game.

    Edit:
    After reading and playing with warlock's glyph of Demon Hunting; I find that they play like a Dreadlord (Nathrezim in wow) fusioned with a random demon, and they look like a possible demon-form from DH.
    Maybe, If they want to create a demonology spec based on DH for warlocks, they should create a new "normal" form and give them a demon-form in a CD button, take out some Nathrezim abilities (sleep and carrion swarm! why?? they hate demons, they only want to hit them in their heads, not become them and throw the same things!!!) and give something between rogues/warlocks abilities. That should be awesome, if they can maintain the same aesthetics of a DH (tatoos+warloglaves/dw weapons), then they got me!!!!
    Last edited by Belisaurio; 2013-08-08 at 02:26 PM.

  4. #744
    I agree with you, but Teron Gorefiend is an Old DK. Not the new DK modelled in WC3 DKs. They are really different.
    Teron was an Orc warlock controlling the corpse of a Human paladin.
    Dks in this days are a resurrected body's and trained to become part of scourge army. So it's logic to give to old DKs (wc1/2) some abilities similar to warlocks.
    I know. IIRC we, Dk(the player) are third generation of DK's.
    who says if DH (if they will be introduced) are of the same generation as illidan?
    with wrathion taking action now it could be possible that he found a way to train DH, so more will actually pass the training instead of failing.
    that would for example be a reason for a range spec or even heal.

    edit:
    forgot to write in my earlier post:
    those who don't play a lock(like myself) and still say locks are dh
    -> download the ptr and create a lvl 90 lock. than say again they are dh.
    and I'll say it again: actually we can't use DA in a raid or dungeon.
    IF locks should really be DH with DA, THEN THERE WOULD BE NO 500% THRAET INCREASE

    Edit:
    After reading and playing with warlock's glyph of Demon Hunting; I find that they play like a Dreadlord (Nathrezim in wow) fusioned with a random demon, and they look like a possible demon-form from DH.
    Maybe, If they want to create a demonology spec based on DH for warlocks, they should create a new "normal" form and give them a demon-form in a CD button, take out some Nathrezim abilities (sleep and carrion swarm! why?? they hate demons, they only want to hit them in their heads, not become them and throw the same things!!!) and give something between rogues/warlocks abilities. That should be awesome, if they can maintain the same aesthetics of a DH (tatoos+warloglaves/dw weapons), then they got me!!!!
    agree.
    Last edited by rarhyx; 2013-08-08 at 02:55 PM.

  5. #745
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    Not that it matters, because a DH would also have non-fire spells in its arsenal as well.
    Was just pointing out what you forgot. If you want to argue class mechanics, try to list all of them.

    Again, a Demon Hunter DPS spec would have an entirely fire-based spell book either.
    Logical, but what would it be? Not nature, like the dominant school of shaman damage.

    Of course its not what you imagine. That doesn't change the fact that fire-based melee is a major portion of Enhancement Shaman's DPS. So its already in the game.
    As I said, around a third of a raiding shaman's damage. Give the DH spec a damage mix dominated by fire and physical damage, and they'll look quite different. For starters, I doubt a DH will use a cooldown to turn into an air elemental ascendant like enhancement does.

  6. #746
    Elemental Lord
    15+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    8,868
    Quote Originally Posted by Thimagryn View Post
    That is the biggest hole in your argument. Your claims are irrelevant when considering CAN a Demon Hunter exist within WoW.

    Saying as my point was that I consider a ***WOW*** style DH to be unlikely to be added, I don't see how that claim is irrelevant.


    I've always stated that Blizzard could simply redesign the class to the pooint where i didn't annoy Warlocks.


    The problem is Blizzard isn't likely to do that either....because that would give people something other than a WoW style DH. Why design and build a new class....and then sabotage it by tying it into the existing lore of what would effectively be a totally different class?


    You know what a Paradox is?

    Yeah...except I've never linked the themes because fo the magic they use. That was your point. I've stated they fill different tropes and have different themes. Warlocks have the Demon theme and no matter how you cut it, a Demon Hunter class is going to have a very strong demon based identity, no matter how it is designed.


    Quote Originally Posted by Jtree View Post
    Completely skipped over the part where I said that, to create a new class, Blizzard will make well over 100 abilities and such. Even if DHs get those two spells, that will be less than 2% of the tool kit. Smaller if you want to count resources, as I would think they'd create something other than mana/demonic fury.

    In many ways, the lesser abilitites don't matter. It is the big, flashy abilitites the contrbute much to the look, feel and theme of a class. Players don't care about the fact that Paladins and Warriors both swing a sword and wear plate, but there is a reason Warriors don't grow wings.


    Your "2%" of the toolkit might be 90% of the flavor.


    Quote Originally Posted by Jokubas View Post
    The problem is, right now they're not. There is no Warlock spec that's melee, dual-wields, has no relation to pets whatsoever, and can be played by night elves, all four of which are the very foundation of the class.

    Which is solved by giving warlocks dual wield, accepting that DHs **DO** use pets and giving NElfs accesss to the spec.


    Quote Originally Posted by Belisaurio View Post
    I never saw a priest wining about paladins. Warlock is the "summoner" archetype in wow. They use demon-theme, but like I said, Paladins and Priest have more in common than DH and Warlock.

    That similarity being "They both use Holy Magic" and "They both heal". They do however have different armor types, have very different toolkits, play in very different ways, have different styles of combat and fill different themes.


    The DH and Warlocks share a toolkit, appear to use the same armor type and share a theme. The DH coudl be made to play in a very different way and does have a different style of combat.


    Yeah, since WC3 playing

    Then you should know better.


    I want to ask you why you say that DH are a ranged class?

    Whether you like it or not, DHs have had ranged capability ever since WC3.


    But the point is that no DH used a pet-based sustem.

    ...followed by....


    -Second DH/ plot: Loramus Thalipedes. A DH quest giver. He had 3 fel hunters near him.

    Again, like it or not this shows DHs using demon pets. A Warlock ability. You may not like it, the ability may be rare within DHs but it cannot be denied that it exists and is a capability open to DHs. It does not get wiped from the canon simply because you personally do not think DHs should have that ability.


    If you create a DH, you create all new forms/skills/physics from 0.

    Which choice is valid, likely and viable?.


    1: Design a DH from scratch so it bears no resemblence to the DH in game and doesn't annoy Warlocks. This doesn't annoy Warlock players but it does mean DH Players do NOT get the DH they have been agitating for.
    2: Design a DH based upon the DH in game, This requires you to accept a very large overlap in theme, capabilities, look and toolkit. It gives DH players the DH they want - but also annoys warlock players.


    I'm a shaman, and my main signature was Blood Lust since WC3. What happened to my main signature? They gave to pet and to mage class.

    For gameplay reasons. Is there any gameplay advantage that requires a DH to fix? No...then lets move on.


    The thematic is about what type of "things" they throw or use, the class type is their function.

    Yes..and that's why that them doesn't work. Paladins and priests do not have an identitity based on the type of mgic they throw. It's based upon what they are. What iamge crops into yor midn when you say "Paladins"...its that of the Righteous Warrior. For priests - its going to be "healer". It doesn't really matter what magic type they use not what role they fill or how they fill it.


    At the end of the day, however, the problem is that Demon Hunters bring nothign new to the game. They fill no niche that needs filling. By definition, they will have a strong Demonic theme, which is already occupied by Warlocks. Gameplaywise, there already are AGI based dual wielding melee classes and while you could certainly design one with a different style of play - Blizzard could add that style of play to whatever new class (or even to rogues as part of the revamp) they bring in.


    Add on the gameplay problems - as DHs stand and exist in game, they share a large part of their toolkit with Warlocks, and a smaller part with Rogues.


    What is the point of adding a standalone DH class that adds nothing to the game, isn't needed for any role and whose capabilities already belong to existing classes?

    It's not impossible Blizzard would do it, but I don't see the point of it. Nor do I see Blizzard simply ignoring the Crossover with Warlocks. There is no need or benefit for them to ignore it.


    EJL

  7. #747
    That similarity being "They both use Holy Magic" and "They both heal". They do however have different armor types, have very different toolkits, play in very different ways, have different styles of combat and fill different themes.

    The DH and Warlocks share a toolkit, appear to use the same armor type and share a theme. The DH coudl be made to play in a very different way and does have a different style of combat.
    Are you reading? Maybe I'm really bad writing and thinking in English (sorry, it's not my language).
    DH and warlocks don't share anything outside demon-looking form in one ability (and they are different, one used to be ranged/steroid, and the other one is to transform your caster in a ranged dreadlord character).
    And why you say that DH have the same type of armor? They use tatoos and blindfold!!! I never saw any warlock using this things before!!!

    Whether you like it or not, DHs have had ranged capability ever since WC3.
    Nop. In wc3 they fought were melees. In wow, they are fighting in melee combat. So no, I never saw a spellcaster-DH. Maybe you are confused about DH in Diablo 3 and DH in warcraft. Look in wowpedia or wow wiki, or just play some skirmishes in WC3 and take NE army to know what DH is.

    Again, like it or not this shows DHs using demon pets. A Warlock ability. You may not like it, the ability may be rare within DHs but it cannot be denied that it exists and is a capability open to DHs. It does not get wiped from the canon simply because you personally do not think DHs should have that ability.
    Sorry if this is not the case, but it seems that you are trolling me. So, there is 0 DH that have a pet-based system in their kit, and only 2 (illidan and leotheras) that are bosses and have 1 add-mechanics, and you are assuming that they use pets? There isn't any lore related that explain anything about some DH that had demon slaves to help them killing things, but you are 100% sure that they can use? It's really hard to understand that, I can't say anything, maybe if you have a link or something that explains what you have in mind, we could understand this theory.

    Which choice is valid, likely and viable?.
    1: Design a DH from scratch so it bears no resemblence to the DH in game and doesn't annoy Warlocks. This doesn't annoy Warlock players but it does mean DH Players do NOT get the DH they have been agitating for.
    2: Design a DH based upon the DH in game, This requires you to accept a very large overlap in theme, capabilities, look and toolkit. It gives DH players the DH they want - but also annoys warlock players.
    I can ask the same: You are creating a new expansion; you lost some player-base and need to create a really awesome features to create a good expectation. One of them is a new class (we don't know, but it's a possibility because this threat is about that), so, in case that you chose DH to be the new feature, you just re-edit some skills already ingame (only skills related to NPCs and Boss mechanics that are DH, because there isn't any class already ingame with a good skill kit for DH), or you just create new forms, new visual effects, new rotations for a DH class?
    Like monks or DKs, you create using some previous aesthetics (WC3 pandaren brewmaster and WC3 Death knight) and create all their new rotations, resources, visual effects, pets, etc... That's the most obvious chose.

    Yes..and that's why that them doesn't work. Paladins and priests do not have an identitity based on the type of mgic they throw. It's based upon what they are. What iamge crops into yor midn when you say "Paladins"...its that of the Righteous Warrior. For priests - its going to be "healer". It doesn't really matter what magic type they use not what role they fill or how they fill it.
    And this is a good point for me. So when you are talking about warlocks, you have DH in your mind?
    DemonHunter: http://wowpedia.org/File:Samwise_Demon_Hunter.jpg In game: http://wowpedia.org/File:FeronasSindweller.jpg
    Warlock: http://wowpedia.org/File:Gul%27dan_HoW.jpg In game: http://wowpedia.org/File:Zuluhed.jpg

    Add on the gameplay problems - as DHs stand and exist in game, they share a large part of their toolkit with Warlocks, and a smaller part with Rogues.
    What is the point of adding a standalone DH class that adds nothing to the game, isn't needed for any role and whose capabilities already belong to existing classes?
    It's not impossible Blizzard would do it, but I don't see the point of it. Nor do I see Blizzard simply ignoring the Crossover with Warlocks. There is no need or benefit for them to ignore it.
    I don't see any problem. We have some gaps like (i.e.) a mail-melee user+int user= they can do something like enhancement 2.0 in DH aesthetics.
    Last edited by Belisaurio; 2013-08-08 at 05:56 PM.

  8. #748
    Quote Originally Posted by Talen View Post
    In many ways, the lesser abilitites don't matter. It is the big, flashy abilitites the contrbute much to the look, feel and theme of a class. Players don't care about the fact that Paladins and Warriors both swing a sword and wear plate, but there is a reason Warriors don't grow wings.


    Your "2%" of the toolkit might be 90% of the flavor.
    If it's 90% of the DH flavor, it lifts it well above warlocks and would thus differentiate the two a lot more.


    Which is solved by giving warlocks dual wield, accepting that DHs **DO** use pets and giving NElfs accesss to the spec.
    I can't help but think that that is an even bigger design challenge for Blizzard. They had the chance to add Agi cloth when they introduced monks, and they didn't. To make a cloth class a melee DPS, it will take a lot of the stat conversions they seem to be shying away from. Not to mention creating an entire specs worth of new and altered abilities.

    Whether you like it or not, DHs have had ranged capability ever since WC3.
    All magic-wielding melee in WoW has some ranged spells, so this isn't really an issue. It could, in fact, make for an interesting play choice. IMO, there is room in the game for a class or spec that has a melee/ranged toggle. IIRC, boomkins were doing that for a bit early in MoP, though it was due to odd stat, talent, and buff interactions.


    Again, like it or not this shows DHs using demon pets. A Warlock ability. You may not like it, the ability may be rare within DHs but it cannot be denied that it exists and is a capability open to DHs. It does not get wiped from the canon simply because you personally do not think DHs should have that ability.
    Weeeeeell...there is that one quest in Hellfire Peninsula where you have to dig through a goblin mine owner's pet felhunter's poop to get the goblin's shredder keys back. I don't recall him being a lock at all. Felhunters are the most animalistic of demons, perhaps they are trainable by anyone willing.


    1: Design a DH from scratch so it bears no resemblence to the DH in game and doesn't annoy Warlocks. This doesn't annoy Warlock players but it does mean DH Players do NOT get the DH they have been agitating for.
    2: Design a DH based upon the DH in game, This requires you to accept a very large overlap in theme, capabilities, look and toolkit. It gives DH players the DH they want - but also annoys warlock players.
    1. Dual wielding, fire and shadow and arcane powered, blind, demon-morphing, hero class. Lots of room to define all those in a fresh way.

    2. Everything Blizzard does annoys someone. That doesn't stop them from doing it.


    Now, I've already described giving a DH an entire Immolation spec, pulling it well away from the one lone spell of similar name that locks have. Metamorphosis for the DH could be as far different. For an Immo spec, it could turn into a fire demon - looking and functioning nothing like the lock spell. A tanking DH could have a "void" meta as their shieldwall counterpart, with an appearance more akin to a voidwalker.

    Another option could be to turn meta into a stance/form, more like a warrior or druid, conferring different benefits for different parts of a fight.

    My point is, there's a lot of open room to develop a DH class, functionally and thematically.

  9. #749
    Quote Originally Posted by Gereorth666 View Post
    Guys guys.. So.. Guys! Follow me on this.. ! .. You know hunters, guys, right? TRACKING! Hunters, tracking.. Demon Tracking.. Hunters Demon Tracking.. Tracking, hunting.. Demon Hunting.. Hunter, demon hunting..

    I THINK I'M UNTO SOMETHING!
    yeah this could be S******!



    ont: Its not the same thing. Demon Ranger will come as its own class when its ready.

  10. #750
    Quote Originally Posted by NSrm View Post
    ont: Its not the same thing. Demon Ranger will come as its own class when its ready.
    +1
    I support this.

    Or call it Demon Breaker/Slayer.
    Tank/Melee/Physical Range/Heal Specs.

  11. #751
    Again going to reiterate one of my post regarding lore and all that bullcrap:

    For the most part, Demon Hunters are completely wiped out. There were already very few to begin with, most of that "very few" were trained by and/or serving under Illidan and Co. You killed them all and you killed Illidan himself (whether he gets rezzed later or not, point is, there's been no new trainer for a while).

    So to bring them back as playable characters (unlike Monks who have been in game for a while, or Death Knights when Arthas was raising tons of them), you're going to need some reason for their resurgence, and that's going to basically allow you to make them whatever you feel like making them.

  12. #752
    Merely a Setback Teriz's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Soul of Azeroth
    Posts
    29,811
    Quote Originally Posted by voidspark View Post
    Again going to reiterate one of my post regarding lore and all that bullcrap:

    For the most part, Demon Hunters are completely wiped out. There were already very few to begin with, most of that "very few" were trained by and/or serving under Illidan and Co. You killed them all and you killed Illidan himself (whether he gets rezzed later or not, point is, there's been no new trainer for a while).

    So to bring them back as playable characters (unlike Monks who have been in game for a while, or Death Knights when Arthas was raising tons of them), you're going to need some reason for their resurgence, and that's going to basically allow you to make them whatever you feel like making them.
    And that begs the question; Why bother making them at all if they don't retain the flavor of the WC3 unit?

  13. #753
    Quote Originally Posted by voidspark View Post
    unlike Monks who have been in game for a while
    actually monks started to get trained after pandaria appeared. before that monks only existed in pandaria and some at the scarlet crusade(but those are very different than the player class) IIRC

  14. #754
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    And that begs the question; Why bother making them at all if they don't retain the flavor of the WC3 unit?
    Because this is WoW, not Warcraft 3?

  15. #755
    For the most part, Demon Hunters are completely wiped out. There were already very few to begin with, most of that "very few" were trained by and/or serving under Illidan and Co. You killed them all and you killed Illidan himself (whether he gets rezzed later or not, point is, there's been no new trainer for a while).
    So to bring them back as playable characters (unlike Monks who have been in game for a while, or Death Knights when Arthas was raising tons of them), you're going to need some reason for their resurgence, and that's going to basically allow you to make them whatever you feel like making them.
    We helped 1 in blasted lands, we helped another one in Felwood and he said that they were more, some people are speculating that the new expansion could be a Burning legion themed, and there are some items calling DH to the four wings (manual of demon hunter too!!!), and we know that there are some NPCs already in game that they want to become a DH,.
    After all, I see a really easy lore-return from DHs band/faction/whatever.

  16. #756
    Merely a Setback Teriz's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Soul of Azeroth
    Posts
    29,811
    Quote Originally Posted by Thimagryn View Post
    Because this is WoW, not Warcraft 3?
    But isn't that what the people want? The WC3 version of the Demon Hunter?


  17. #757
    Not really. People want a Demon Hunter that has more than 4 abilities.

  18. #758
    Merely a Setback Teriz's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Soul of Azeroth
    Posts
    29,811
    Quote Originally Posted by Thimagryn View Post
    Not really. People want a Demon Hunter that has more than 4 abilities.
    Sure, but people want those four abilities expanded upon, along with the look and flavor of the WC3 hero.

  19. #759
    [QUOTE]But isn't that what the people want? The WC3 version of the Demon Hunter?[/QUOTE

    Not sure. I want DH, but better expanded than ones in WC3. Like DKs in WC3, they were really boring characters (hero rush/support), but they created a new type of mechanics/skills/themes to fit better and be awesome. I want that.
    But the first impression that I have about player-base is that they want to play Illidan (in his last days, with horns and wings and all of that) and not DH class .

  20. #760
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    Sure, but people want those four abilities expanded upon, along with the look and flavor of the WC3 hero.
    Yet once you do that, it's no longer the WC3 hero, it becomes something new.

    This becomes the crux of the conversation, because arguments have been created to prevent this idea from blossoming. Anything demon-related is criticized as being too similar to Warlocks. Anything non-demon related is attacked for alienating Demon Hunter identity. In the end, those arguments are only relevant if we were talking about the Warcraft 3 unit becoming a class.

    But that's not what people are asking for. People want a playable Demon Hunter in WoW. That means 3 specs, 100+ abilities, their own gameplay mechanics and playstyle, and their own lore. This is something the Warcraft 3 Demon Hunter simply can not be regarded as. It's an identity that has not been fully realized yet.

    Just take a look at WoW Death Knights. They are the same as Warcraft 3 Death Knights for having unholy spells and abilities. They aren't the same for using Frost and Blood magic, and using Runic Power. Yet overall, the WoW class maintains a consistent identity between the two games. The identity is not formed out of spell names or Warcraft 3 mechanics, it is formed out of capturing the essence and ideals of a Death Knight and expanding on them.

    The Demon Hunter must be respected in this regard. It's why I believe you focus too heavily on Warcraft 3's spells and mechanics too heavily in your arguments, when the true identity of a Demon Hunter lies well beyond that.
    Last edited by Thimagryn; 2013-08-08 at 07:59 PM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •