Will Tinkers be a class in WoW?

[Rhamses]

By gods, not you too? Those are simply titles, I thought you had better common sense than that. Those are titles. They are all engineers with different titles. Or are you going to try to argue that Varian's class is not warrior, but 'High King'? Nothing at all in the game hints that those names are anything but simple titles.

You didn't answer my question: Where did Blizzard say that "engineers" are the only ones dealing with technology?

As to your question, we know that a Warrior is a fighter and a King is a ruler. A person can be a warrior and a King. That isn't the case here though, because calling an Artificer an Engineer doesn't make sense. An artificer deals with magic and technology, usually revolving around artifacts.

It appears more logical that in a world of 13 sentient races and several different branches of technology, the people of Azeroth would simply call their technology experts many different things. To say that they're all "engineers" and that anything that is not an engineer has "no place is WoW" is a very narrow view not backed by any evidence.

[Teriz]

its not melee range. 10 yards is short range, 20 is medium, and 30-40 is long range.

Relevance? The point is that DA Warlocks were built for melee combat, and they can withstand a great deal of punishment.

I have a high level mage. Trust me, they're not built for close or melee range combat at all.

[Yig]

No - I maintain that the Warlocks having being given that set forveer denies that look to a DH class. Why? Because its now the Warlocks.

This is absurd. You don't look like a demon hunter in that set, you look like a warlock covered in Illidan's dead body parts used as relics, garbed in the robes of a spell caster. How absurdly literalist can one be on this issue? Whatever it takes to make a warlock into a demon hunter I suppose, reason be damned.

A demon hunter's armor sets would look like fel/void/shadow magic rogue sets, as a Deathknight's armor is based on Lick/Vampiric/Frost scourge plate.

This is a demon hunter set inspired to give you the appearance of a demon hunter with an individual identity. An agile melee fighter augmented by magical means.


This is someone wearing dead body parts that in the most superficial sense looks like a giant a person with Illidans skull on his head. This is too absurd to even acknowledge. If this satisfies you, more power to you. Happy Halloween.


This was Illidan as a demon hunter. This is what a generic demon hunter is based on, not that dead skin mask.

Lone demon hunter specialist using void magic


Being a demon hunter is not walking around looking like a Nathrezim unless you have the most superficial interest in what a demon hunter class is in the first place.

Just as novice Deathknights start out in their novice armor, a Demon Hunter would begin in their traditional vestments, we would see their clandestine order and their rituals and trials.


Once you leave and set foot into the world, you take on your own looks. As the Demon Hunter and the Kaldorei share much in common with Japanese sensibilities, there would be a lot of asymmetrical armor.
Low level demon hunter armor.


This set was designed to specifically capture what a demon hunter would look like if they were a class with armor based around their class kit. You can all go dress up as Illidan all you want, but it seems mostly detractors and denigrators assume that's what a demon hunter is. Ignoring Illidan was nothing but a mold for an entirely different army unit in WC3's lore, which was nothing like him.

[Teriz]

So its just about appearance?

Don't Rogues take care of that with the Azzinoth blades and the blindfold?

http://wowroleplaygear.com/2011/05/12/demon-hunter/

[Ielenia]

Yes, because we all know that it takes a melee opponent so long to get from 10 yards to 5 yards.

You speak as if every melee DPS doesn't have some sort of gap-closing mechanics, like charge, roll, shadowstep, death grip...

[Teriz]

You speak as if every melee DPS doesn't have some sort of gap-closing mechanics, like charge, roll, shadowstep, death grip...

And it doesn't matter, because the DA Warlock has enough damage reduction and mitigation to stand toe-to-toe with melee.

[Ielenia]

You didn't answer my question: Where did Blizzard say that "engineers" are the only ones dealing with technology?

As to your question, we know that a Warrior is a fighter and a King is a ruler. A person can be a warrior and a King. That isn't the case here though, because calling an Artificer an Engineer doesn't make sense. An artificer deals with magic and technology, usually revolving around artifacts.

I can play that game as well and ask where Blizzard say that engineering is not the only skill that deals with creation and development of technology. In the whole of the game, we only see engineering as a tech-dealing skill in the form of the engineering profession. Yes, the profession available to players is a 'watered-down' form of the engineering skill available world-wide in Azeroth, but it's the only thing so far. All hints and clues point to engineering being the sole skill that deals with technology, with 'tinkers', 'technicians' and what-have-you being nothing more than titles.

As for 'branches', that excuse also doesn't fly. The two most opposing kinds of engineering, goblin and gnomish, can be learned by any engineer. So much so players don't need to relearn everything in engineer when they decide to switch specializations.

It should also be noted we're talking pure engineering here. Technology only.

- - - Updated - - -

And it doesn't matter, because the DA Warlock has enough damage reduction and mitigation to stand toe-to-toe with melee.

They'll still die almost as easily.

[Rhamses]

I can play that game as well and ask where Blizzard say that engineering is not the only skill that deals with creation and development of technology.

Simple; Because we have technicians, artificers, mechanics, inventors, gear masters, siegecrafters, demolitionist, sappers, tinkmasters, pilots, Mekgineers, machinists, and tinkers in World of Warcraft.

Next up: Grenadiers via the Iron Horde:



And I'm willing to bet the farm that that isn't going to be the only new tech-based unit introduced in WoD.

Thus, it falls upon you to show us why the term "engineering" supersedes the rest to the point where the rest are just "titles" and engineering is the term that binds them all.

In the whole of the game, we only see engineering as a tech-dealing skill in the form of the engineering profession. Yes, the profession available to players is a 'watered-down' form of the engineering skill available world-wide in Azeroth, but it's the only thing so far. All hints and clues point to engineering being the sole skill that deals with technology, with 'tinkers', 'technicians' and what-have-you being nothing more than titles.

Except that isn't true. In the game world we see other tech users all the time and none of them are called "engineers". Many of those tech users far exceed the limits of the engineering profession. You could say that the profession is a branch of technology in WoW, and that would be a good assessment, since technology in WoW runs laps around what's available in the profession by quite a large margin.

As for 'branches', that excuse also doesn't fly. The two most opposing kinds of engineering, goblin and gnomish, can be learned by any engineer. So much so players don't need to relearn everything in engineer when they decide to switch specializations.

But there are other branches of technology in WoW. There is Foresaken, Dwarven, Blood Elf, Draenei, Worgen, and Titan technology in the game world. We're about to enter an expansion where another branch of technology will be introduced from the Iron Horde.

We've seen that technology, we know it exists. That backs the argument that the term "engineer" only applies to a narrow strip of the total technology in WoW.


So please, answer the question; Where did Blizzard say that "engineers" are the only ones dealing with technology?

[Teriz]

They'll still die almost as easily.

Please point me to the other Spellcasters that have the equivalent of plate armor, and an ability, mastery, glyph, and talent that all reduces damage taken on top of said plate armor.

[Traveler Voltin]

tinkers wont happen.

[Ielenia]

Simple; Because we have technicians, artificers, mechanics, inventors, gear masters, siegecrafters, tinkmasters, pilots, Mekgineers, machinists, and tinkers in World of Warcraft.

Technicians, mechanics, inventors, gear masters, siegecrafters, tinkmasters, mekgineers and tinkers. All engineers. Pilots aren't engineers. They're just pilots. Shows how much you understand.

Thus, it falls upon you to show us why the term "engineering" supersedes the rest to the point where the rest are just "titles" and engineering is the term that binds them all.

Because there is no instance in WoW where an NPC says anything like "Engineering can't do that, but Tinker does."

Next up: Grenadiers via the Iron Horde:

Soldiers holding a big gun.

Except that isn't true. In the game world we see other tech users all the time and none of them are called "engineers". Many of those tech users far exceed the limits of the engineering profession. You could say that the profession is a branch of technology in WoW, and that would be a good assessment, since technology in WoW runs laps around what's available in the profession by quite a large margin.

It is true. Engineering is, so far, the only 'thing' in WoW that deals with technology because it's the only skill ever mentioned by NPCs. There is no 'branch' of technology that justifies something other than engineering. Even goblin and gnomish are simply sub-sections of engineering.

But there are other branches of technology in WoW. There is Foresaken, Dwarven, Blood Elf, Draenei, Worgen, and Titan technology in the game world. We're about to enter an expansion where another branch of technology will be introduced from the Iron Horde.

A 'new branch of technology that will begin and end in the same expansion, therefore meaningless. And all of those you mentioned, save for Titan? All engineering. Why? Because if you know one, you can make any if you know the aforementioned race's 'aesthetics'. Titan falls into futuristic, therefore uncomprehensible technology.

So please, answer the question; Where did Blizzard say that "engineers" are the only ones dealing with technology?

When they made no NPC say "engineering can't do this, but tinker/technician/mechanics/machinists can".

- - - Updated - - -

Please point me to the other Spellcasters that have the equivalent of plate armor, and an ability, mastery, glyph, and talent that all reduces damage taken on top of said plate armor.

Balance Druids.

[Drilnos]

When they made no NPC say "engineering can't do this, but tinker/technician/mechanics/machinists can".

I'm curious how you know this, because I know for damn sure that you didn't go looking for counterexamples in any database or wiki or even in the game.

[Teriz]

tinkers wont happen.

I have yet to see a good reason why they won't.

- - - Updated - - -

Simple; Because we have technicians, artificers, mechanics, inventors, gear masters, siegecrafters, demolitionist, sappers, tinkmasters, pilots, Mekgineers, machinists, and tinkers in World of Warcraft.

Good post. Too bad you're wasting it on Ielenia.

[Rhamses]

Technicians, mechanics, inventors, gear masters, siegecrafters, tinkmasters, mekgineers and tinkers. All engineers. Pilots aren't engineers. They're just pilots. Shows how much you understand.

And what about Artificers, Demolitionists, Sappers, and Machinists?

Also what are you basing this on?

Because there is no instance in WoW where an NPC says anything like "Engineering can't do that, but Tinker does."

Nor does the NPC say the reverse. So I'm not seeing your point there.

Soldiers holding a big gun.

A tech-user holding piece of technology.

It is true. Engineering is, so far, the only 'thing' in WoW that deals with technology because it's the only skill ever mentioned by NPCs.

Well that's not true;

Sir/Ma'am>, we need tons of moolah to pay the Trade Prince and get off Kezan! Well, tons of it is just waiting for the taking down there in the Kaja'mine!

These are the last known deposits of kaja'mite anywhere. This is the raw stuff that made us the genius tinkerers and alchemists we are today. If that's not worth a bazillion macaroons, I don't know what is!

Take some of my kablooey bombs and blowup the deposits. Then, pick up the chunks.

Just watch out for the rebellious trolls!

http://www.wowhead.com/quest=14124

And that was said by a Goblin.

A 'new branch of technology that will begin and end in the same expansion, therefore meaningless. And all of those you mentioned, save for Titan? All engineering. Why? Because if you know one, you can make any if you know the aforementioned race's 'aesthetics'. Titan falls into futuristic, therefore uncomprehensible technology.

Well that's not true either. The roots of the Iron Horde are firmly in MoP, and more than likely continue after WoD since Blizzard wants future expansions to tie more closely together. As for Titan technology, it may be incomprehensible, but it still exists, and there are groups within WoW who are actively trying to harness its power.

In the end, your argument is kind of silly. Even in the real world we don't call everyone who works with technology "engineers". There's scientists, doctors, mechanics, developers, Lab techs, etc.

When they made no NPC say "engineering can't do this, but tinker/technician/mechanics/machinists can".

Sigh... That doesn't make sense, much less answer the question.

[Talen]

Except we're not taking away.

Meta doesn't matter to you. You are trying to redevelop the class concept to get away fromt he demon theme and concepts. The class lore that has been developed anywhere else other than WC3 is - to you - meaningless. And, for you, Illidan post-skull is not a Demon Hunter anymore.

You take away meta. You take away the Demon lore lore and theme. You take away Illidan. Why? Because those are all aspects you find don't belong to Demon Hunters. They don't represent the "true" WC3 spirit of the class.

But the problem here is - we already have Rogues. We already have monks. You? You want a DH but you'be suggested getting rid of everything that makes it a DH to get around the various issues that have been raised.

We're not taking anything away from the DH, Metamorphosis would still exist as Dark Embrace.

No. It wouldn't. There would be no Metamorphosis for a standalone DH. There would not even be a Meta under a different name. Warlocks have it. And there is no reason for Blizzard to take that away from them. None at all. It doesn't matter that DHs had it fiurst. It just matters that Warlocks have it now.

What is wrong with an melee Agi class who augments his attack with demonic magic as one spec of class?

Nothing - so long as that base class are Warlocks. otherwise, you don't get the Demon theme. That's what it means to have an overlap in the design space. One class gets it, the other doesn't.

And why can't we change what the DH is?

Because it has been developed.The DK got expanded, but what was in Wc3 is still there. Because change is "retcon". You can grow it - but growing it means what is there now is still there.

Sure - Blizzard could drop the elements of the design space you don't agree with, but that's retconning the class.

If you don't want to retcon the DH as it exists now, then you have to deal with the overlap. That's a big reason why the Tinker is so attractive. There is no meaningful overlap and it provides a good opportunity to update several aspects of the game world.

The point is not what I want, it's what is possible.

And within the existing constraints of the DH design space...not much. The DH has baggage and limitations created by its existing presence in game, by its existing lore, by player expectations.

A DH isn't worth while adding because the class concept and theme are already in use. The DH isn't worth adding because the lore and stories that it can be used to tell or enhance can told or enhanced via Warlocks. A DH isn't worth adding because a standalone class could never meet what players actually expect from the class - because abilities such as Metamorphosis could never be given to it. And those same expectations also limit what Blizzard can do to redeisgn or rework the class. It simply isn't worthwhile upsetting players over this.

That's because you're blind and ignorant to the lore, which shows us how the Illidari are a corrupt faction that needs to be rid from the world. That's the whole point of the Burning Crusade expansion and why we're even in Outland in the first place.

The lore tells us that they are the bad guys and our enemies. It does not tell us they are not Demon Hunters.

Loramus, Sindweller and Altruis are examples of Demon Hunters who existed before that time. Even Sindweller exists in name as a Warcraft 3 DH hero for multiplayer.

Altruis was an Illidari who worked withIllidan and his demons before he left Illidans service.
Feronas is a Demon Hunter who has a soft spot for Illidan post-skull.
Loramus is a Demon Hunter who worked with Demons.

These are your examples of DHs. Not one meets your criteria.

Vigilantism. Catching the bad guys and making them pay for the crimes they committed. Street Justice, if you will. Eye for an eye

Eye for en Eye.
Vengeance.
Retribution.
Justice.
The Law.

Perhaps you will see where I am going with this?

Warlocks and Rogues? Motivated by personal power and greed. Demon Hunters are motivated by vengeance, for the sake of protecting the weak.

A lot of themes there that you are trying to sort out into one. Demons. Vengeance. Justice. Dark Justice. Protecting the Weak. And all you have at the end is one big muddle.

Sorry to say...justice/vengeance/retribution is the paladins balliwick. It's why I didn't think you were serious with it.

Seriously - you are trying to tie a Paladins theme into DHs? Because you wanted to get around the overlap created by their existing theme of Demons?

But no....you aren't after Lawful Justice. No....you want a class built around a different flavor of the theme. DHs - they go after the bad guys, but they're cooler than Paladins.

Player Rogues are hired killers, as described by Blizzard on their own website.

They are also described as spies and swashbucklers. The Assassin spec is not representative of the class so not every Rogue is a hired killer.

They can already take that form using Demon Form.

Not unless they are a Warlock. Meta is off the table.

Demon Hunters are already asked for despite Warlocks having Metamorphosis and Dark Apotheosis. You won't satisfy anyone with a Warlock 4th spec.

And warlocks have been asking for the full DH treatement ever since they got meta. As with everything, you won't satisfy everyone but you'll likely satisfy enough.

Ninjas do it. Batman does it. It's not magic at all, it's simply a representation of moving so fast you can't catch them with your own eyes. Rogues are masters of deception, they use tricks to distract and manipulate their opponents.

That isn't how its done. The descriptions of the spells indicate magic.

Okay, so lets say it is Ninja magic. Since Rogues have Ninja Magic, we can't have a Demon Hunter class?

Not by itself. No. But given the existence of two lightly armored, AGi based, dual wielding meleers who make wide use of Shadow magic it's difficult to see both existing since they are effectively the same class with a different story. It'd be possible to develop a theme and class concept around that setup. But - there'd be no demon connection. No demon magic. No metamorphosis. You'd be a Ninja....a rogue who is as much a master of stealth and shadow magic as he is of the assassins trade.

You know - Naruto.

[quote]Design Space which can be filled with non-DH concepts, just as the Monk Class does not inhabit any Brewmaster themes in their other specs.

Demon Hunters wouldn't even have overlap with Warlocks, considering they would be fighting using Demonic power to augment melee combat, with an overall theme for Vengeance and Dark (Vigilante) Justice.

You have them using Demonic Power. That requires lore involvoing Demons. That involves Demon magic. That involves the Burning legion.

It's a little difficult to keep the Demon Magic while trying to pretend that aspect doesn't exist.

Then we have you trying to coopt the Paladins theme of justice in an attempt to not coopt the Warlocks theme of Demons. And the very fact you are trying shows that you DO understand the problem. That the overlap here is a problem just as Blizzard said it was.

You simply aren't.

I'm open to plenty of possibilities. But your ideas don't work.

You have tried to replace the overlap - but you can't because the overlap is what defies the DH class.
You've stated here and elsewhere the elements that a DH doens't need to be a DH. Illidan. Demons. Meta. They've all been sacrificed by you at one point or another.
You've tried to develop another theme and class concept. By taking those which already belong to other existing classes.
You've tired to create analogies between the overlap problem here and with Paladins/Priests and Tinkers/Engineers to show the overlap doesn't matter...but analogies only work when the comparisons used are valid.

And at the end, we are still left with the same problem. The DH class concept has a design space - as do all classes - that encompasses looks, themes, concepts, abilities, gameplay, lore, and more. It's a very good design space. It has a very nice iconic class. It is unfortunate that everything about it bar gameplay also forms part of the Warlock class design space.

And neither you, nor I , nor Teriz (and I consider his effort as a Gold), nor anyone else has managed to show Blizzard wrong, to show that there is design space available for it.

EJL

[Ielenia]

And what about Artificers, Demolitionists, Sappers, and Machinists?

Artificers are crafters. They're almost synonyms. Demolitionists and sappers aren't engineers or anything. They're just folks that know how to use explosives. Machinists... cut materials.

Nor does the NPC say the reverse. So I'm not seeing your point there.

They don't say the reverse because 'tinker' isnt a real thing. So there's no point in saying.

A tech-user holding piece of technology.

Uh, you're aware that every single character, NPC and Player alike, are 'tech users', in World of Warcraft? Heck, I could wield a grenade launcher.

Well that's not true;
http://www.wowhead.com/quest=14124
And that was said by a Goblin.

Just like Draenei priests are called Anchorites? As per the words a Horde npc.

Well that's not true either. The roots of the Iron Horde are firmly in MoP, and more than likely continue after WoD since Blizzard wants future expansions to tie more closely together. As for Titan technology, it may be incomprehensible, but it still exists, and there are groups within WoW who are actively trying to harness its power.

The 'roots' of the Iron Horde's technology is goblin engineering. And it'll end in WoD because the Iron Horde won't be touched again after it's over. And comprehending Titan technology is akin to giving the latest Iphone to Naopoleon Bonaparte and ask his people to understand it. That's how leaps and bounds Titan tech is from Azeroth's current tech level.

Sigh... That doesn't make sense, much less answer the question.

Of course it does. It means there is nothing else that deals with technology other than engineering.

[Yig]

So its just about appearance?

Don't Rogues take care of that with the Azzinoth blades and the blindfold?

http://wowroleplaygear.com/2011/05/12/demon-hunter/

Fuck, the circle just keeps going and going and going and going.

You know, they would about 90 something percent if you could fucking mog some glaives in this game. But you can't. You're left a Deathknight without his Runeblade.

But no Teriz, it's not "just about" anything.

But it's certainly heavily based on appearance as every class is to an extent, this among those few most of all, along with the DK as a prime example and the Paladin. The DK is always a guy in giant black/evil looking bones and skulls and plate, a black knight, with a rune blade. Understand? A demon hunter is an agile lithe fleet footed fighter whose class kit includes a blind fold, ritualistic tattoos, and classically warglaives. Warglaives, while numerous in the game files, are off limits to players but for the legendary, which are only viable around level 70. They cannot be mogged. There should be dozens and dozens of demon hunter themed armor sets built on these foundations, use your imagination, you have one, stop chaining it to your rigid presumptions. Along with distinct look and feel of watching a demon hunter in action, which you obviously never understand how to break down into it's most generic essence without specific spell names and mechanics, there is the personality type of a demon hunter antihero adventurer, who has nothing to do with Illidan or his powers or his personality. They are individuals who again, choose to give up their lives and social acceptance and status in society risking even their very souls to protect Kaldorei civilization for "ages". Here's what's very important about them, their fighting style is based on a flamboyant and arrogant display, flaunting their abilities with poses and unnecessary flourishes. They are Maori, they are intimidating to you and they are showing off, as the vikings of old, they welcome death. And so they do things brashly and they do them with panache. They are trying to show they do not fear death in a competition between each other almost, and this is an archetype I think you completely do not pick up on that demon hunters are a part of. They literally sit and dare you to kill them.


You play games with technicalities, you will never understand this while a Death Knight Class is a perfect example. A demonic melee fighter paired with heavily distinct visual iconography and fighting style, which looks like dancing. A whirling dervish exploding into violence, assuming garrish and flamboyant mocking poses, daring you to face them in their nakedness, the Celtic warriors, nude and covered in woad, their hair spiked and dyed in bright garish colors, Norse berserkers, naked in bear furs, amanita flecking the corners of their mouths, they are the wood elven war dancer and the dwarf slayer of Warcraft. You think their similarities are just coincidence with Warhammer, seriously?

The Dwarf Slayer

A shamed and dishonored dwarf who takes the oath of the slayer, to die in battle to the most dangerous foe they can find to regain their honor in memory. They take on ritual tattoos of great meaning and intimidation, they slather their garishly dyed hair in bear lard with flamboyant lofty mohawks and spikes, they fight all but naked, relying on their massive blades and nothing else with suicidal abandon. Daring you to kill them.


The War Dancer

Wardancers are the elven equivalent of berserkers—they have no armor, move fluidly, weave 'dances of death' around their opponents, and are immune to psychological effects such as fear and terror. In Wood Elf folklore, Wardancers are treated with the utmost respect in direct contrast to the maligned demon hunter. Wardancer Kindreds are known for dancing at great feasts and banquets. They go so far in their flamboyant fighting style, with garish lofty attention calling hairstyles covered in ritual paint, to actually play a drum on their hip in battle while dancing from foe to foe, their intricate technique flowing from one strike to the next in an elegant blur, the music driving them on into a blood frenzy, their arrogance and flamboyant bravado on par with the Demon Hunter, who is always on the front lines, always demanding foes to be faced, fighting with intentionally garish style with pure concentrated rage driving them ever forward to the next foe.



These archetypes court death as one would court a maid for bedding or marriage. They have chosen to risk their lives and seek out their inevitable death while taking as many of the enemy as they can with them. They welcome death, if you can dare to show them the way. You ignore all of this because of technicalities, your ambition is stunted. Get lost in your procural list of myopic standards, keep on trumpeting Illidan Stormrage as the quintessential demon hunter. Every demon hunter role playing group disagrees with you, opting to use the WC3 hero unit and their bio as a basis for their exploration of this class. It's no coincidence the vast majority of contrarians and detractors openly loathe the class, openly mock and belittle the class for being shallow or the "rule of cool", they argue against the class based on ulterior motives like their own pet class to advertise or simply have no idea what a demon hunter is, confusing them with Diablo 3 and hunters. And no, to say that semantic issue is worth considering as a reason to keep them out of the game to avoid confusion is pedantic.

What we have here is a rogue fury warrior hybrid debuff class dripping unique visual iconography and theme and style.

They are FAR from just about appearance, although it's a backbone of their identity. Their suicidal and garish fighting style, the enigmatic dark antihero, why would they ever dare choose such a path? Their many unique signatures are rife for expansion and exploration. And Blizzard has intentionally left them shrouded in enigma. Will you now claim they must always have this enigma or it cheapens them?

They fight with weapons ridiculous for any but someone willing to specialize in their use for absurd lengths of dedication, but once mastered, those weapons are a wall of armor as well as a wall of death you must penetrate or avoid at your own peril.

Free will enters into this just as a deathknight, any claiming a demon hunter has nothing to do but go hunt demons reveals their limited vision. They are specialists interested in exploring this world and it's many ruins and ancient evils just as much as any free willed warlock is more interested than just learning to summon demons in their personal chambers making sacrifices on altars and studying grimoires. Every hero unit in Warcraft 3 makes sense as lone wandering questing adventurer. Let's put that to rest.

Once you are off leveling up in the world after having endured and survived the rituals of this path, just as any other class you begin following your wanderlust or your bloodlust or your pilgrimage or your duty or to find the death you trained to be worthy of. Chaos boils in your veins. A great doom is approaching and the world is not ready for it, in the mean time there is still the stubborn contamination of one hundred centuries to keep maintained surrounding Hyjals sacred groves in pockets of the obscene and the unspeakable.

[Rhamses]

Artificers are crafters. They're almost synonyms. Demolitionists and sappers aren't engineers or anything. They're just folks that know how to use explosives.

Weren't you just on here talking about how Tinkers were the same as the Engineering profession because they threw bombs?

Machinists... cut materials.

In WoW they drive vehicles and use advanced weapons.

They don't say the reverse because 'tinker' isnt a real thing. So there's no point in saying.

There's a Tinker boss, Tinkers are mentioned by Goblins, the faction leader of both the Goblins and Gnomes are Tinkers.

The 'roots' of the Iron Horde's technology is goblin engineering. And it'll end in WoD because the Iron Horde won't be touched again after it's over.

Another false statement. The Iron Star is not a Goblin technology. It was invented by Blackfuse, and smuggled back into the past. The Iron Staris exclusively Iron Horde tech now.

And comprehending Titan technology is akin to giving the latest Iphone to Naopoleon Bonaparte and ask his people to understand it. That's how leaps and bounds Titan tech is from Azeroth's current tech level.

Yet there's people in Azeroth who are actively attempting to translate it. Of course all of this is silly, because Blizzard could simply make it decipherable, since they completely control the game world.


Anyway, I'm done with this. You're not answering questions, making senseless arguments, and you're being purposely obtuse. I'll let you have the last word.

[Ielenia]

Weren't you just on here talking about how Tinkers were the same as the Engineering profession because they threw bombs?

'Bombs' were simply the example used. And I never argued about 'throwing bombs'. I argued building them.

In WoW they drive vehicles and use advanced weapons.

Care to provide an example or two, then?

There's a Tinker boss (which boss?), Tinkers are mentioned by Goblins (So are Anchorites), the faction leader of both the Goblins and Gnomes are Tinkers (I don't play horde, but Mekkatorque really looks more like a warrior than anything else).

Another false statement. The Iron Star is not a Goblin technology. It was invented by Blackfuse, and smuggled back into the past. The Iron Star is exclusively Iron Horde tech now.

What.
Forgive me, but while I was raiding Siege of Orgrimmar I came upon Helix Blackfuse, and he looks quite the goblin to me, y'know? He's a goblin engineer, he uses goblin engineering.

Anyway, I'm done with this. You're not answering questions, making senseless arguments, and you're being purposely obtuse. I'll let you have the last word.

I am answering your questions. You're just ignoring the answers.

[Teriz]

Care to provide an example or two, then?

Forsaken Machinist;

http://www.wowhead.com/npc=36292

Who drive these;

http://www.wowhead.com/npc=36283

There's also Kor'Kron Machinist during Siege.

http://www.wowhead.com/npc=73806#screenshots

Here's a few Tinkers (Tinkerers) for you as well;

http://www.wowhead.com/search?q=Tinkerer

- - - Updated - - -

Fuck, the circle just keeps going and going and going and going.

In the end, the Warlock covers the Demon Hunter's design space very well.

What you guys want is like someone wanting a Shadow Hunter class because Shaman can't throw a bladed weapon or use a bow.