Well thanks for the replies, I thought it was like this, People need to stop thinking it will happen just because they like the idea
Well thanks for the replies, I thought it was like this, People need to stop thinking it will happen just because they like the idea
Well no. A Tinker and a Hunter cover completely different areas. The only area they converge is possible weaponry. Even that is dubious because the Tinker class could very well not use ranged weapons at all, and have built in ranged abilities.
In the case of Rangers and Hunters, there's no aspect of a Ranger that a Hunter couldn't potentially cover. The only difference between a Hunter and a Ranger is that one has a pet, and one occasionally doesn't. However, even in that regard, there's plenty of examples of Rangers being able to tame and control animals in RPGs.
In the case of Wardens, they are Rogues by and large. Mages got Blink, Rogues got Fan of Knives. Shadow Strike, and Spirit of Vengeance can easily become Rogue abilities in the future. We're already seeing Rogues begin to utilize Shadow magic in their melee abilities. Creating a Rogue-like class based around "bounty-hunting" seems a bit superfluous.
Paladins are holy knights. Huge archetype. Warriors are the Knights, Barbarians, Champions, etc. Again, huge archetype. Death Knights are the Unholy knights, the black knights, the Necro Warriors, etc. Their archetype is large because it serves as an opposite to the Paladin/Holy knight.Then we get to the Paladin, Warrior and Death Knight. We also have the issue that the Hunter COULD cover the Ranger...but not really the Bounty Hunter or Warden archetypes.
The Bounty Hunter archetype is the Hunter archetype. They're essentially the same thing. For example, a Bounty Hunter class works in SWTOR because there isn't a Hunter class. Warden isn't an archetype. Its the name Blizzard gave a hero unit in WC3.
Greg Street @Ghostcrawler 29 Aug
@Jerakal @jessicka_dg You can make the argument that adding new roles to existing classes is more work than a new class.Think there was another blue that just said straight up that it was too much work. You've got to consider 'bang for buck' as well, I think a new class would have more impact than new specs and if it comes at less work, then it answers itself.Greg Street @Ghostcrawler 29 Aug
@Jerakal @jessicka_dg With a new class, you have little baggage or other constraints. Sky's the limit.
Considering the loot holes, the remaining heroes left from WC3, the remaining archetypes that haven't been touched on by current classes, the remaining class type being full hybrid, Gnomes and Goblins being a bit out of place, and the abundance of technology in the game without a class to represent it, is plenty of evidence. A technology class fills all of those gaps.
- - - Updated - - -
Actually, everything Tinker came from WC3.
Along with Shredders, Siege tanks, mortar teams, gyro copters, etc.
No, he isn't. He's the most vocal supporter, but he isn't the first. I've been a supporter of the class since Wrath, wrote up a concept for the official forums hoping it would be Cata's new class.
With that said, Tinkers are not a fan invention. Everything Tinker came from Blizzard and the games they have made, including the one we're discussing. The elements are already there.
Hilarious.
I don't think there's any evidence or really good hints pointing to a Tinker class. I certainly hope they will implement it though.
EDIT: I would like a "profession based" class in general. Tinker would be the counterpart to Engineering obviously, but Alchemist for example would be nice too.
just a bad, silly and irrational idea made up from a part of the community, nothing more.
You understand what "evidence" means right? None of that proves tinker will be the next class. It only adds more possibility.
- - - Updated - - -
Didn't say it's a kiddy but the theme of it is a bit light-hearted and I said Blizzard will likely explore other tone next xpac.
I would say that the things I posted are helpful in forming a conclusion or a judgment. Wouldn't you agree?ev·i·dence (v-dns)
n.
1. A thing or things helpful in forming a conclusion or judgment: The broken window was evidence that a burglary had taken place. Scientists weigh the evidence for and against a hypothesis.
2. Something indicative; an outward sign: evidence of grief on a mourner's face.
For example, we have evidence that Blizzard has used WC3 hero units as inspiration for the expansion classes (Brewmaster and Death Knight). Thus, my conclusion would be that based on that evidence, Blizzard will continue that practice. Which WC3 hero is left to be an inspiration for a class?
The Goblin Tinker.
See how easy that was?
In that case, you are abandoning your core argument of a tinker being able to take on a Physical Ranged DPS role.
In the case of Rangers and Hunters, there's no aspect of a Ranger that a Hunter couldn't potentially cover
Petless Ranged DPS class. Like it or not, if Blizzard can create differences between Paladins, Warriors and DKs, they can do the same with Hunters and Rangers. Hunters use a Pet while Rangers do not is a big difference between Warriors and DKs, for example,
In that they share a couple of moves. However, Rogues don't have the Spirit of Vengeance, nor the Warden "policeman" theme, nr do they share the look. Your theory that Rogues COULD get SoV later doesn't negate the fact they don't have it now....and, like Meta...its the one move that should be pat of the class.In the case of Wardens, they are Rogues by and large.
And all three are plate wearing melee hybrids with a similar weapon set. You are opposing Wardens because they'll be a mail wearing class that uses physical ranged weaponry.Paladins are holy knights. Huge archetype. Warriors are the Knights, Barbarians, Champions, etc. Again, huge archetype. Death Knights are the Unholy knights, the black knights, the Necro Warriors, etc. Their archetype is large because it serves as an opposite to the Paladin/Holy knight.
The Hunter archetype is that of outdoorsman and survivalist. The Bounty Hunter theme doesn't really cross into that. Grizzly Adams doesn't have a lot of thematic crossover with Boba Fett. Its seen as the Ranged weapon specialist in game only because there is no other ranged combat class in game.The Bounty Hunter archetype is the Hunter archetype. They're essentially the same thing. For example, a Bounty Hunter class works in SWTOR because there isn't a Hunter class. Warden isn't an archetype. Its the name Blizzard gave a hero unit in WC3.
EJL
I think Tinker class would conflict with Engineering profession. They too can create all kinds of tinkering gadgets, both goblin and gnome engineers.
http://classic.battle.net/war3/neutr...intinker.shtml
http://classic.battle.net/war3/neutr...lchemist.shtml
I mean, I know goblins are already a race, but there's a goblin riding an ogre, too. It would be pretty cool if one of the specs got to constantly be inside a mechanical machine that you got to customize.