Death knights must not exist (Ironic Thread)

[-Superman-]

Fixed this for you.

The Draenei are Eredar, so are the Man'Ari. So, feel free to fix that right back - Source

[Narwhalosh Whalescream]

Death Knights use auto attacks, all classes can use auto attack.
HO/\/\0G€NZ!ITAoonn|ssZZ
Class diversity please!

[Ciddy]

I was wondering this too, weren't the first Death Knights similar to warlocks?

Yes. Actually, the first Death Knights were Warlocks. When Doomhammer became Warchief, one of the first things he did was wipe out the Shadow Council (Gul'dan's group of warlocks). Gul'dan brought them back to life, but he put their spirits in the bodies of dead Stormwind soldiers. Basically, they were the spirits of slain Orc Warlocks, brought back to life in the bodies of human men. Teron Gorefiend was the first Death Knight.

Also, those Death Knights were very different from Arthas / Lich King and his Death Knights.

[Kotori125]

You always see the spells as you want to see them. Read again what did you wrote for the both coils. So im telling you that DH's Immolate burns nearby enemies 1-3 yards maximum and the Warlocks Immolate burns enemies within 8 yards. Im trying you to explain the differences of the warlocks and Demon Hunters.

So let me guess, if Mortal Coil was named, oh, Mortal fear, would it still be linked as a similarity? Because they have different mechanics: damage vs. fear. And the immolate explanation you gave is the same mechanically, functionally, purposefully, and does the exact same thing, just changing the ranges.

[Cerilis]

The Draenei are Eredar, so are the Man'Ari. So, feel free to fix that right back - Source

I didn't deny that.

[StrayFox]

Death Knights (Arthas' Death Knights anyway) Are a undead theme, they are like a necromancer and a warrior fused together. They may have SOME similarities to a Warlock, but Warlocks deal with demons not the undead.

There really isn't anything similar to those two. Now Warlock and Demon Hunter I'd say are very similar (The warlocks even have some Demon Hunter abilities) the only main difference being that one uses Mele combat.

[TheWindWalker]

You clearly have no idea about class themes or mechanics.

1.DK frost magic is based on Lich frost magic. I.E. Frost magic that is linked to the undead. The disease aspect comes from Death and Decay. Mage Frost magic is derived from the Water element, and is the offensive side of the water element. The restorative element is covered by Shaman.

2. DKs imbue weapons via a forge. Rogues imbue via Shadow magic. Shaman imbue via Elemental magic.

3. Death Coil heals the undead and damages the living. Mortal Coil is a fear spell. Not the same thing.

4. No they can't. Mages don't deal with disease or undeath. That is a DK theme that comes from Lichs and Necromancy.

5. No its not. Sacrificial Pact doesn't kill the demon. Sacrificial pact doesn't heal the Warlock.

6. And numerous classes can 1h with shield, 1h, use 2hs, etc. I'm not seeing the point with mentioning that.

7. Runic Power is taken from a primitive form of arcane magic that is common in Northrend. It comes from DKs wielding Runeblades in WC3.

8.Where's the raise dead Warlock and Mage spell?

9. Necromancy and Demonology are two very different schools of magic.

In short, Death Knights work because they filled the Undead or Necromancy theme. No other class shares that theme with Death Knights, so they have a place in the WoW class lineup.



Except those "similarities" you mentioned above pale in comparison to the similarities between Warlocks and Demon Hunters.

Thank you for your service. You've said most of what needs to be said and the OP is just being petty.

[Lovestar]

The problem is that Warlocks and Demon Hunters are like Necromancers and Death Knights — caster and martial versions of roughly the same school of practice.

You took pieces of every other class and found elements of it in DK, but there was no preexisting Necromancer (cut during WoW Alpha, in fact). If we had Necromancers already, DK probably would have been a harder sell.

Likewise, we have Warlocks already, making Demon Hunter a harder sell. Of course you could make it work — that's easy. The question is, would people rather see Warlock: The Melee Edition, or a totally new class unlike anything they've done before? Blizz errs on the side of brand-new, since it's more exciting.

[Slowpoke is a Gamer]

DeathKnights already existed in WC3. Demon hunters exist in TBC. Maybe someday. But, this will likely never happen without another BL expansion.

Demon Hunters existed in WC3 as well, they weren't created for TBC.


But this thread does a good job of pissing all over a certain someone's "Tinker must be the next class because Demon Hunters have metamorphosis" argument.

[Shelly]

You bring up one good example, which is the mortal coil/death coil.

Mortal Coil WAS Death Coil prior to WotLK. They changed it when they introduced DKs because Death Coil was a signature spell of DK units in WC2.

The rest of your examples fall rather flat, the biggest similarity here would be metamorphosis except for the small problem that it's a signature ability. You can't really take it away or change it.

At this point it's really just been cemented that Demon Hunters are/were proto-warlocks. Which isn't to say that there's not a small chance Demon Hunters will suddenly show up sometime, but it's very doubtful at this point given that their single signature ability is that of another class.

[Teriz]

Demon Hunters existed in WC3 as well, they weren't created for TBC.


But this thread does a good job of pissing all over a certain someone's "Tinker must be the next class because Demon Hunters have metamorphosis" argument.

That's not the argument. The argument is that Tinkers must be the next class because they have a unique theme that no other class has. Demon Hunters won't be a class because they're the same theme as the Warlock class.

[Arberian]

That's not the argument. The argument is that Tinkers must be the next class because they have a unique theme that no other class has. Demon Hunters won't be a class because they're the same theme as the Warlock class.

Read here please and you still cant understand that they dont share the same theme and Demon Hunters are not the same class as Warlocks.
Click here: Some Reasons Why Demon Hunters and Warlocks doesnt Share the Same Theme

[Wildberry]

The Draenei are Eredar, so are the Man'Ari. So, feel free to fix that right back - Source

Then again, I am not a stickler to Lore

Can you stop talking about things you know nothing about? Please?

Illidan Spent more time Working against the Legion in WCIII than he did working for, and he pretty much went back to working against the Legion again shortly after.

Also

Saying Draenei are equal to Man'ari Eredar is kind of like saying Vrykul are like Humans, you can link them together, but there's a pretty big difference.

But you are right about one thing:

Then again, I am not a stickler to Lore

- - - Updated - - -

Likewise, we have Warlocks already, making Demon Hunter a harder sell. Of course you could make it work — that's easy. The question is, would people rather see Warlock: The Melee Edition, or a totally new class unlike anything they've done before? Blizz errs on the side of brand-new, since it's more exciting.

Monks are brand new, look at monk representation compared to DK representation

Oh, I would suggest you actually read a little bit into this subject as well, Warlock=/=Demon Hunter, in fact Paladins and priests are FAR closer than Warlocks and Demon Hunters.

[Meiluy]

That's not the argument. The argument is that Tinkers must be the next class because they have a unique theme that no other class has. Demon Hunters won't be a class because they're the same theme as the Warlock class.

Because THAT was the reason we got Deathknights and Monks, not that they fit the theme of the expansion... your argument is as terrible as ever. Unless we get a tech themed expansion, the likelihood of a Tinker class is exceptionally low. Since we know the burning legion is coming thanks to Wrathion, and they're NOT the focus of the next expansion, it's pretty safe to think they may be the focus of the following one. With that in mind, what class makes the most sense in the concept of fighting demons? Demon Hunters fit the criteria for a new class much better than a Tinker.

But we've had this argument before. You will ignore logic, falling back on the same comments that others have deconstructed before, ignoring any valid argument that doesn't support your focused belief.

[Lovestar]

Monks are brand new, look at monk representation compared to DK representation

Irrelevant and refutes nothing I said. Blizzard wants to offer players new and exciting things, not stuff they're perceive as a minor variation on a preexisting class.

Oh, I would suggest you actually read a little bit into this subject as well, Warlock=/=Demon Hunter, in fact Paladins and priests are FAR closer than Warlocks and Demon Hunters.

Irrelevant, I never said they were equal, I said they're Caster/Martial versions of the same general theme, similar to Necro & DK. Which, they are. Blizzard has to invest massive time and resources to create a new class, they want to create distinct stuff that adds as much as possible to the palette of options as players perceive it, since that's who they're selling their product to with something as xpac-marketing as a New Class™.

[Teriz]

Because THAT was the reason we got Deathknights and Monks, not that they fit the theme of the expansion... your argument is as terrible as ever. Unless we get a tech themed expansion, the likelihood of a Tinker class is exceptionally low. Since we know the burning legion is coming thanks to Wrathion, and they're NOT the focus of the next expansion, it's pretty safe to think they may be the focus of the following one. With that in mind, what class makes the most sense in the concept of fighting demons? Demon Hunters fit the criteria for a new class much better than a Tinker.

Classes being unique from each other is the MAIN reason for their inclusion. Based on the existing 11 classes, Blizzard wants each class to be as different from each other as possible. A Demon Hunter class does not support that model. Blizzard has said this themselves. Tinkers do support that model, because no other class utilizes the mechanical theme.

We also have the WC3 concept, Goblin and Gnome tech, technology based bosses, and the upcoming Iron Horde to expand this theme.

Which class makes the most sense in concept of fighting Demons? How about every class in the game, since they've all successfully fought demons at one point or another in the game. However if you mean which class fits a legion theme, that would be the existing Warlock class. We don't need two demonic themed classes that essentially do the same thing and share abilities.

But we've had this argument before. You will ignore logic, falling back on the same comments that others have deconstructed before, ignoring any valid argument that doesn't support your focused belief.

I'm still waiting for you or anyone else to provide a decent reason for a DH class to be in this game, and a reason they need an entirely separate class instead of simply being a Warlock spec. However, to even get to that point, we have to ignore the very clear links between both concepts that Blizzard has established.

In the end, the ones ignoring logic are people like yourself.

[Meiluy]

Classes being unique from each other is the MAIN reason for their inclusion. Based on the existing 11 classes, Blizzard wants each class to be as different from each other as possible. A Demon Hunter class does not support that model. Blizzard has said this themselves. Tinkers do support that model, because no other class utilizes the mechanical theme.

Blizzard wants all the classes to be as different as possible? Then why all of the class homogenization? Besides, you are assuming they can't make a Demon Hunter play different than the established classes currently.

We also have the WC3 concept, Goblin and Gnome tech, technology based bosses, and the upcoming Iron Horde to expand this theme.

The Iron Horde having technology it normally wouldn't have does not equate to a tech themed expansion. We've had tech based bosses for numerous expansions, with no sign that they were related to a Tinker class at all.

Which class makes the most sense in concept of fighting Demons? How about every class in the game, since they've all successfully fought demons at one point or another in the game. However if you mean which class fits a legion theme, that would be the existing Warlock class. We don't need two demonic themed classes that essentially do the same thing and share abilities.

Just because every class has fought demons, doesn't mean every class is SPECIALIZED in hunting demons (you know, kind of what Demon Hunter implies). Warlocks haven't really shown a better ability to kill demons as much as the ability to control some. If we don't need to demonic themed classes, do we need two Light themed classes (Priest and Paladin), or two Nature themed classes (Druid and Shaman), multiple elemental caster classes (Mage, Warlock, Shaman again), or even classes that share spec names (Holy Paladins and Priests, Restoration Shamans and Druids).

As for classes that share abilities, you assume Blizzard can't design new abilities (they do it every expansion) or modify existing ones to bring the proper one back to it's original owner (Death Coil, for example). This is nothing new.

I'm still waiting for you or anyone else to provide a decent reason for a DH class to be in this game, and a reason they need an entirely separate class instead of simply being a Warlock spec. However, to even get to that point, we have to ignore the very clear links between both concepts that Blizzard has established.

And I'm still waiting for you to provide a decent reason for the Tinker class to be in the game when it is clearly represented through Engineering (the profession). As far as the concepts that Blizzard has established, we have a number of classes that were present in the RTS games that haven't made it in yet. We have an available slot in place for a class that starts wearing leather and upgrades to mail at level 40 (fine for either DH or Tink). We have been told, both in real life and in game, that the threat of the Burning Legion is looming, and we will need strong heroes to fight them. Of the two in discussion, which makes more sense for fighting demons? How about the class trained to fight demons, the one that a number of people have been asking for since WoW was announced, one that was shown on the original box art (kind of makes you think they've been planned for quite a while, eh?)

In the end, the ones ignoring logic are people like yourself.

You know, when you count the people on both side of the argument, you tend to find a lot more people who think that DH is more likely than Tink. Doesn't that make you question whether your logic is sound?

[Teriz]

Blizzard wants all the classes to be as different as possible? Then why all of the class homogenization? Besides, you are assuming they can't make a Demon Hunter play different than the established classes currently.

There's homogenization because there has to be class balance. For example, Paladins can't be the only class that has shields, because that would be op. So almost every class has a shield/bubble ability now. Warlocks can't be the only class that has fear because its such a strong mechanic, so a lot of classes have a fear or horrify mechanic. Shaman had one of the most powerful raid abilities in the game. Because of that, almost every raid had to have a shaman in it. Blizzard decided to give Mages and Hunters a similar mechanic.

Again, similarity for balance purposes is not the same as similarity because a group of fans want to play as Illidan.

The Iron Horde having technology it normally wouldn't have does not equate to a tech themed expansion. We've had tech based bosses for numerous expansions, with no sign that they were related to a Tinker class at all.

You haven't been paying attention. Introducing a technology class into a game where there is almost no technology makes little sense. People would sit back and wonder why there is a class with robots when the game world is still operating in medieval times. What Blizzard has been doing has been slowly adding technology into the game world and into the lore. So in Vanilla we were introduced to the irradiated Gnome capital that was filled with robots and mechs. In WotLK we had airships flying over Northrend, and a steamship taking us to its ports. We also explored the mystery of Titan technology. In Cataclysm we were introduced to Kezan where Goblins drove around in cars and had highways. In MoP we ventured to Pandaria on either a Horde or Alliance airship, fought a variety of titan-based constructs, and completed the expansion fighting giant robotic scorpions and a Goblin in a giant robot suit.

Now in WoD we face a technologically advanced Iron Horde from the past, who are infused with technology that Garrosh used at the end of Siege.

So if Blizzard introduces a technology class as the new WoW class, no one would be shocked, because they're playing a game loaded with technology throughout the game world.

Just because every class has fought demons, doesn't mean every class is SPECIALIZED in hunting demons (you know, kind of what Demon Hunter implies). Warlocks haven't really shown a better ability to kill demons as much as the ability to control some. If we don't need to demonic themed classes, do we need two Light themed classes (Priest and Paladin), or two Nature themed classes (Druid and Shaman), multiple elemental caster classes (Mage, Warlock, Shaman again), or even classes that share spec names (Holy Paladins and Priests, Restoration Shamans and Druids).

Hunters have this ability;

http://www.wowhead.com/spell=19878

Would this make them SPECIALIZED to hunt demons?

As for classes that share abilities, you assume Blizzard can't design new abilities (they do it every expansion) or modify existing ones to bring the proper one back to it's original owner (Death Coil, for example). This is nothing new.

Death Coil wasn't the same ability as the DK version of Death Coil. So yes, it would be something new, because Blizzard has never done what you described. In fact, Blizzard's class inclusions have demonstrated a concentrated effort to have the concept be as free of overlap as possible.

And I'm still waiting for you to provide a decent reason for the Tinker class to be in the game when it is clearly represented through Engineering (the profession).

Actually its not. None of the WC3 hero abilities exist in the profession. None of the tech-based bosses we've fought have any resemblance to the Engineering profession, and of course professions don't perform the same job as classes. In short, the Engineering profession doesn't represent the type of technology we're seeing in the game world. Its like toy maker assuming they're doing the same job as military contractor.

You know, when you count the people on both side of the argument, you tend to find a lot more people who think that DH is more likely than Tink. Doesn't that make you question whether your logic is sound?

A majority of people arguing on the wrong side of an argument doesn't make that wrong argument right.

[Nayelie]

I always joked that Death Knights are plate-wearing warlocks...

[Traveler Voltin]

Can you stop talking about things you know nothing about? Please?

Illidan Spent more time Working against the Legion in WCIII than he did working for, and he pretty much went back to working against the Legion again shortly after.

Also

Saying Draenei are equal to Man'ari Eredar is kind of like saying Vrykul are like Humans, you can link them together, but there's a pretty big difference.

But you are right about one thing:


- - - Updated - - -



Monks are brand new, look at monk representation compared to DK representation

Oh, I would suggest you actually read a little bit into this subject as well, Warlock=/=Demon Hunter, in fact Paladins and priests are FAR closer than Warlocks and Demon Hunters.

werent the G1(generation one) paladins just priests in plate? didnt play WCII so i am not really sure.
there is like 3 generations death knights and 2 generations of paladins.