Will Tinkers be a class in WoW?

[Teriz]

It is not considered lore because he never showed up in any of the story campaigns of WC3 and its expansion.

Gazlowe did. Gazlowe is currently in HotS as a Goblin Tinker.

Also both the Gnome and Goblin faction leaders are Tinkers in WoW.

We've already been over this.

- - - Updated - - -

Okay, so explosive shot shoots arrows no matter what. And Scatter Shot is always rocks, no matter what. I guess that means Concussive Shot is a bunch of swirlies. And Multi-Shot is actually glaives.

I mean, the icon says so.

I was only talking about explosive show and certain other abilities. Not the entire Hunter ability set as a whole.

[Hatecore]

Gazlowe is a Tinker. He had a part in WC3's cannon lore.

*citation needed that he is a "tinker"


Funny cause he was called a engineer not a tinker

Quest: Seal the Tunnel, Warcraft III: The Frozen Throne. Blizzard Entertainment. Orgrimmar Tunnels, Durotar. Gazlowe.

Which has nothing to do with the profession gameplay wise.

Wrong blizzard chose to make engineer a Profession and not a class gameplay wise

Which again has nothing to do with the profession gameplay wise.

Again blizzard chose to make engineer a Profession and not a class gameplay wise

[Ielenia]

http://www.heroesnexus.com/heroes/5-gazlowe
http://classic.battle.net/war3/neutr...intinker.shtml

*citation still needed. That 'Xplodium Charge' looks suspiciously like a trap, to me.

[Hatecore]

Gazlowe did. Gazlowe is currently in HotS as a Goblin Tinker.

Also both the Gnome and Goblin faction leaders are Tinkers in WoW.

We've already been over this.

http://www.wowwiki.com/Gazlowe#cite_note-1

Character class Rogue (RPG); Engineer
Position: Trade Manager/Chief Engineer of Ratchet

http://www.wowwiki.com/Gelbin_Mekkatorque

http://www.wowwiki.com/Gelbin_Mekkatorque
Character class: Tinker

Position: High Tinker-in-Exile of Gnomeregan

The High Tinker is the highest political office in Gnomeregan, and of the Gnomeregan Exiles.


Gelbin is one of the most renowned inventors ever (his invention include the Mechanostrider mounts, the repair bot, and the [Gyromatic Micro-Adjustor])

http://www.wowwiki.com/Gyromatic_Micro-Adjustor

Gyromatic Micro-Adjustor is a tool used by engineers to make a variety of items.

Seems to be a large lack off evidence separating Tinkers from Engineers. In fact most off the evidence shows they are the same thing.

[Ielenia]

Gazlowe did. Gazlowe is currently in HotS as a Goblin Tinker.

Gazlowe showed up using a Goblin Sapper unit model. Does that mean he's actually a suicidal goblin?

Also both the Gnome and Goblin faction leaders are Tinkers in WoW.
We've already been over this.

Indeed. We've been over this: titles.

[Teriz]

*citation needed that he is a "tinker"

http://www.ign.com/wikis/heroes-of-t...oblin_Tinkerer
http://hots.wikia.com/wiki/Gazlowe,_Goblin_Tinker

Funny cause he was called a engineer not a tinker

Probably because that quest line was placed into the game before the Tinker hero was introduced.

Wrong blizzard chose to make engineer a Profession and not a class gameplay wise

Which is why none of the Tinker's abilities appear in the Engineering profession?

- - - Updated - - -

*citation still needed. That 'Xplodium Charge' looks suspiciously like a trap, to me.

You do know you have to step on the Hunter's traps to set them off right? Xplodium Charge simply goes off... since its a bomb and all.....

- - - Updated - - -

Gazlowe showed up using a Goblin Sapper unit model. Does that mean he's actually a suicidal goblin?

Does that mean that he's actually two Goblins?



It's called a place holder.

[Hatecore]

http://www.ign.com/wikis/heroes-of-t...oblin_Tinkerer
http://hots.wikia.com/wiki/Gazlowe,_Goblin_Tinker

Gazlowe the Goblin Tinkerer Right HOTS IS NOT Cannon to wow lore.

For wow http://www.wowwiki.com/Gazlowe

Probably because that quest line was placed into the game before the Tinker hero was introduced.

Tinker hero was a Aprils fools joke that people demand again NOT Cannon

Which is why none of the Tinker's abilities appear in the Engineering profession?

Bombs, rockets, lazors, death ray, sky golem all there other things are not for Game play and balance reasons

[Teriz]

Gazlowe the Goblin Tinkerer Right HOTS IS NOT Cannon to wow lore.

For wow http://www.wowwiki.com/Gazlowe

No, but Gazlowe as a Tinker is cannon to lore since Blizzard made him a Tinker in their game. Blizzard makes the rules, not Wowwiki.

Tinker hero was a Aprils fools joke that people demand again NOT Cannon

As soon as the players demanded the Tinker placed into WC3 it became cannon.

Bombs, rockets, lazors, death ray, sky golem all there other things are not for Game play and balance reasons

Which is like saying Vial of the Sands, Noggenfogger Elixir, Frenzyheart Brew, Super Simian Sphere, Magic Eater, Hook of the Master Angler and Orb of the Blackwhelp is the same as Druid shapeshifting, or that those items replace the Druid class.

[Talen]

Seems to be a large lack off evidence separating Tinkers from Engineers. In fact most off the evidence shows they are the same thing.

So what?

A Tinker class would not be an Engineer unless the player also took the profession. He would simply be someone proficient in the use of the tools and abilities of the Tinker class. Nothing more.

EJL

[Ielenia]

Highborne Mages.

What about them? They already existed in Night Elven lore since WoW vanilla.

Except while it is very possible to separate Oranges from Apples, it is very difficult to separate Apple from Apples.

Thank goodness we're talking Demon Hunters and Warlocks here, not fruits. [sarcasm off] It is the same thing. Paladins and Priests, Demon Hunters and Warlocks.

Here's the thing. You are wrong about this. You need to look at the entirety of the design space. Every single part of it.The only area where the DH has a chance to make its own identity separate from Warlocks is gameplay. And even there, there is overlap.

Here is the thing: you don't want Demon Hunters to see the light of day. Therefore you're not looking at the whole picture the way other people who want Demon Hunters are. You ignore things because you're not actively looking for them. Is there overlap? yes. But at the same time there are so much that can be done with DHs to keep them their own class, their own identity. But you don't see that because you are already convinced Demon Hunters cannot exist.

I can see you are having trouble recognising that Justice does not necessarily involve the law.
As I said, it isn't about the "Law". It's about Justice. Righting wrongs and exacting punishment.
As I said...you have a real problem separating Justice from Law. And yes....revenge and retribution would also be part of the Paladins theme

'Justice' does not exist without the law. Without law, there is only 'eye for an eye'. Only revenge.

- - - Updated - - -

Does that mean that he's actually two Goblins?

It's called a place holder.

A 'placeholder' that is never 'updated' is not a placeholder. That is his permanent sprite.
Here: Gazlowe.

[Taros]

I don't think there will be a Tinker class. I actually really wish they would make a Bard class though.

[Teriz]

A 'placeholder' that is never 'updated' is not a placeholder. That is his permanent sprite.
Here: Gazlowe.

The fact that the tinker hero was introduced very late in the life cycle of WC3, the fact that Gazlowe was shown as a Sapper, and the fact that Gazlowe is a Tinker in HotS pretty much proves my point.

[Talen]

What about them? They already existed in Night Elven lore since WoW vanilla.

And there are NElfs Warlocks as well.. What's your point?


Regardless... the problem is Blizzard will never add in a class with the same design space as an existing class.

It is the same thing. Paladins and Priests, Demon Hunters and Warlocks.

And yet...you are simply just parroiting the same mantra.


Demon Hunters and Warlocks have the same themes. The same concepts. The same lore. Tehy share abilities and looks. There is not one aspect of the design space that is not shred between the two.


Paladins and Priests? Different themes, different concepts. Different looks. They don't share abilities and even the overlap in lore and gameplay is minimal.


You are saying two classes which have different design spaces equate to two classes which have a heavy overlap, where the design space of each is shared with the other.


Paladins and Priests share lore in that some priests became Paladins and they both worship the Light. They share gameplay in that they both have a healing role and use the same school of magic.And the major areas of class theme? Class concepts? Visual identity? And so on? Different.

Here is the thing: you don't want Demon Hunters to see the light of day. Therefore you're not looking at the whole picture the way other people who want Demon Hunters are. You ignore things because you're not actively looking for them. Is there overlap? yes. But at the same time there are so much that can be done with DHs to keep them their own class, their own identity. But you don't see that because you are already convinced Demon Hunters cannot exist.

People have tried to show that Demon Hunters can develop their own identity. And I'd be the first to admit - it's possible


What they have spectaculary failed to do is have them get their own identity and still keep the design space that defines the DH we see in game, and have since WC3.


The latest attempt here by Thimagryn has him drop the looks, the lore, the name, the abilities, the theme, the concepts in order to bring in his "Slayer" concept.


Now...if I get rid of the abilities and backstory, if I call it by a different name and give it a different look, are you really going to tell me that the result is a Demon Hunter?


You want to show me I'm wrong? Then do what Blizzard will be doing and look at the entirety of the existing design space and following good design practise, develop something that will slot into the game as is.


Give the class its own identity, its own design space without getting rid of the old one.


THAT is impossible. Because its the design space which causes the problems and you can't get rid of that without removing it. Which means dropping canon and lore based aspects of the class.

'Justice' does not exist without the law. Without law, there is only 'eye for an eye'. Only revenge.

Nice quote. But what it means is that lawful justice won't exist. And justice without law is vengeance, revenge, retribution. Actually a case can even be made that Justice within the Law is still vengeance...just vengeance within rules, carried out by someone else, that the wronged are avenged by the courts, and the police.


As I said, you are getting mixed up with Law.


EJL

[Ielenia]

The fact that the tinker hero was introduced very late in the life cycle of WC3, the fact that Gazlowe was shown as a Sapper, and the fact that Gazlowe is a Tinker in HotS pretty much proves my point.

Doesn't prove your point. Gazlowe's sprite was never updated, even when the Tinker got added.

- - - Updated - - -

Regardless... the problem is Blizzard will never add in a class with the same design space as an existing class.

Priests and Paladins would like to have a word with you. I repeat this same 'mantra' because it's true.

[Thimagryn]

Does that mean that he's actually two Goblins?

There's actually 3 Goblins there.

[Joker of Muerte]

Good lord this topic is going to go on for longer than time itself.. i mean seriously every dang day i log on mmochampion i see this in the feed.

[Deleted]

In terms of the actual MMO class archetype an engineer could feasibly fill, Shaman have already taken it. This has been covered oh so many times before, but:

- temporary constructs that assist allies and harm foes (totems)
- ranged attacks (Lightning etc)
- temporary construct pets (Elementals)
- Damage or support roles (Resto vs DPS specs)

Whatever way you try and swing it, a tinker/engineer class would need to use some if not all of these traits to be more than just a mage in mail. You can see the blatant similarities between the engineer archetype and the WoW shaman just by looking at what other MMO's have dreamt up for their token engineer class. Just look at GW2, WAR, SWTOR and more. It's all temporary turrets and support buffs, combined with ranged damage.

Blizz aren't going to just reskin an existing class, when a profession like Engineering already exists in game to get the aesthetic flavour that this suggestion is basically all about. Also, OP could have benefited from checking if this topic had already been addressed before needlessly restarting it. Again.

[Tnfstc]

No, Cool idea but I think the answer to this would be more along the lines of an overhaul of professions so they do more than just get us small buffs and make us some armor. Engineer should be overhauled to have all of these abilities, kind of like a sub-class that as you grow in your engineering you can choose to use more and more technology instead of your current spells and abilities. Maybe i've been playing the ESO beta too much but I love how you have the three basic "specs" but in addition you also have armor and weapon abilities to learn as well as profession and guild related abilities. It adds more depth, if I just want to focus on my sword and shield than I can, if I want to be in better graces with the thieves guild I can and am rewarded with things that aren't just for show but actually change the way I play. NO profession in WoW does that, maybe a trinket but that doesn't change it more than a quest trinket changes it.

[Talen]

Priests and Paladins would like to have a word with you. I repeat this same 'mantra' because it's true.

Except their design spaces are very different. You're simply focussing on the few areas of overlap. You're ignoring major differences in theme, concepts, abilities, gameplay, looks and so on to make that statement.

Paladins embody the themes of Justice, Judgement, Vengeance, Retribution. Priests do not. They share a school of magic, a bit of lore tied into the paladin origins and the healing role. And nothing else. They share neither looks, nor theme, nor concepts, nor abilities.
Demon Hunters embody the concepts of Power from Demons, the theme of Demons, the use of Demon Magics and Abilities. All aspects shared by Warlocks...who also share looks and lore, abilities and gameplay. They differ in that one is melee and one is ranged.

You are trying to create a similarity where none exists.

EJL

[Yig]

Except their design spaces are very different. You're simply focussing on the few areas of overlap. You're ignoring major differences in theme, concepts, abilities, gameplay, looks and so on to make that statement.

God, the selective judgment and projection is remarkable.

Warlocks are scholars, magi who either wanted access to more power or decided to similarly to demon hunters to learn to fight fire with fire.

Talen is impossible to reason with, accusing others of being parrots while being nothing but a parrot. There are different paladins and different priests, and there are different warlocks and different demon hunters. There is not one over riding theme for each.

But you seem blind to the WC3 hero unit's role as the antihero martyr so bent on revenge and destroying his enemies they cut out their own eyes and sell their soul to do it.

I'm not sure if you want to play as Illidan, or if you just love arguing.