A Simple Argument for the Tinker Class

[Rhamses]

Tinkers overlapping with Druids?

Yep, now I've heard everything....

- - - Updated - - -

One thing that really bugs me about this "mech" idea: it basically makes gear useless. I mean, it's not protecting you, since you're in your mech, and your mech would be doing the damage, not your weapon. At least Druids can use the "excuse" that the magic within their gear boost their shapeshifted forms' attributes.

Nah, the bodies of the pilots are still exposed, so the armor would protect you in that regard.

[Deleted]

Engineering has nothing To do with it. It as to fit an expansion theme, and that is the trouble.

Only one i could see fitting the theme is an underground expansion.

I know that if they do such a class based on Gazlowe from heroes i'm going to enjoy it. But just like the ritualist in GW1, it can be very OP.

[bloodmoth13]

Grenade throwing
slow fall
speed boosts
bandage gun healing
turret placing
rocket pack flying
double jump
mech suit they can use to fight stuff
teleportation
location swapping
loot grabbing
bullet firing from your head
able to place explosive pets, and dummies to direct attention

i would call that all things that make a class :P
oh guess what, all of those are from engineering
but yeah enginner/=/tinkerer, but it would def make it feel akward is tinkerers were not forced to be engineers..

go pick a fight with someone only using those, good luck!

both can exist side by side, all those 'perks' are on top of whatever any other spec does so... whats the problem?

[Ielenia]

And like I said, people tend to not ride their pets.

Not sure where you EVER seen that in series or movies or video games. I can't think of any example where a character had a pet big enough to ride on... and didn't ride on it.

You said that mages had no form of magical transportation. Opening up portals and Teleporting from one point to another is a form of transportation.

Please, man. Don't be daft. It makes talking to you very cringe-y when you act this dumb. You know exactly what I meant.

Except it's not Druid territory. Druid territory is shape shifting into animals and creatures of the wild, and being jacks of all trades. Giving a tech class a a few travel modes isn't going encroach on any of that.

Yes, it would. That mechanic (having unique forms for air, land and water travel) is unique to the druid. Giving such a thing to a different class, even with a different "coat of paint", cheapens the uniqueness of the druid class' mechanics.

If the goal is to make this class popular, I don't see the problem.

Double-standards, ahoy!

[Teriz]

Please, man. Don't be daft. It makes talking to you very cringe-y when you act this dumb. You know exactly what I meant.

I'm the one being daft? You said this;

Mages cannot travel using magic.

Teleportation is a form of travel.

Yes, it would. That mechanic (having unique forms for air, land and water travel) is unique to the druid. Giving such a thing to a different class, even with a different "coat of paint", cheapens the uniqueness of the druid class' mechanics.

Except it wouldn't be multiple forms. It would be one form for multiple purposes.

Further, the Druid class doesn't revolve around those perks. It revolves around the class' ability to shape shift into multiple forms to perform multiple class roles. Those multiple travel forms are simply icing on top of the cake.

Again, I highly doubt any Druid player would care if another class got a unique flight form or travel form. They don't care that Paladins, Shaman and Monks have them now.

[Ielenia]

I'm the one being daft? You said this;

Teleportation is a form of travel.

Again, stop playing stupid. You know full well the kind of transportation we were talking about. But if you really are that stupid, if you really are that dumb, I'll spell it out for you: 'travel', in that sense, was used to mean 'journey'. Y'know, it's not just going from point A to point B, it's about the journey between two points.

Again, I highly doubt any Druid player would care if another class got a unique flight form or travel form. They don't care that Paladins, Shaman and Monks have them now.

First: have you asked them? Or are you just guessing? Second: those are mounts! Those, unlike the druid stuff, go into the Mount panel. And worse yet: those are just land mounts! And the Monk's "mount" has horrible speed both flying and on the ground. On the ground it doesn't go any faster than your normal run speed! And you want to give the tech class a type of mount that doesn't exist in the game, which is one that traverses ALL terrain? At best, they'll give tech classes a mount that goes land and air only.

[Thimagryn]

Not sure where you EVER seen that in series or movies or video games. I can't think of any example where a character had a pet big enough to ride on... and didn't ride on it.

Rexxar and Misha?

[Teriz]

Engineering has nothing To do with it. It as to fit an expansion theme, and that is the trouble.

Only one i could see fitting the theme is an underground expansion.

I know that if they do such a class based on Gazlowe from heroes i'm going to enjoy it. But just like the ritualist in GW1, it can be very OP.

Kezan and Undermine are supposed to be continent-size places, so an expansion could take place in and around that location. Like I said in another thread, a possible expansion story could be villains finding an artifact or weapon of some type deep within Undermine, and the Alliance and Horde have to work together to stop him. Those villains could be Mogul Razdunk and the Venture Co. or someone new. That Blingtron mystery could be interwoven into that, as well as the Gnomes (finally) retaking Gnomeregan.

It appears that Blizzard really wants to give Gnomes and Goblins some more lore, and an expansion that focuses on them, so we'll see soon enough. I know some Gnome players definitely feel left out.

- - - Updated - - -

Again, stop playing stupid. You know full well the kind of transportation we were talking about. But if you really are that stupid, if you really are that dumb, I'll spell it out for you: 'travel', in that sense, was used to mean 'journey'. Y'know, it's not just going from point A to point B, it's about the journey between two points.

I'll spell it out for you; You're wrong. Mages CAN travel using magic.

First: have you asked them? Or are you just guessing? Second: those are mounts! Those, unlike the druid stuff, go into the Mount panel. And worse yet: those are just land mounts! And the Monk's "mount" has horrible speed both flying and on the ground. On the ground it doesn't go any faster than your normal run speed! And you want to give the tech class a type of mount that doesn't exist in the game, which is one that traverses ALL terrain? At best, they'll give tech classes a mount that goes land and air only.

I have yet to hear any Druid complain about Ghostwolf, Zen Flight, or Paladins getting an exclusive mount. Ghostwolf is especially a huge point because originally it was little different than the Druid travel form. You couldn't use GW indoors, and it wasn't much slower than Druid travel form. Also it was a wolf, and it looked better than the awful cheetah graphic that Druids had for years.

But anyway, feel free to have the last word on this one. The idea that a mech-based class would take away from druids is nonsense.

[Ielenia]

Rexxar and Misha?

Rexxar tames and mounts a big roc bird during WoD.

- - - Updated - - -

I'll spell it out for you; You're wrong. Mages CAN travel using magic.

Ok. It's confirmed: you're purposely being obtuse and stupid. For what reason, I do not know. Actually, I do know, but spelling it out for someone like you is likely to give me an infraction.

I have yet to hear any Druid complain about Ghostwolf, Zen Flight, or Paladins getting an exclusive mount. Ghostwolf is especially a huge point because originally it was little different than the Druid travel form. You couldn't use GW indoors, and it wasn't much slower than Druid travel form. Also it was a wolf, and it looked better than the awful cheetah graphic that Druids had for years.

Keyword: mount. As far as I know you could always use Ghost Wolf indoors. And again: I'm not sure why you're bringing Zen Flight to this, since it's a very slow mode of transportation that no sane person would find it better to travel around on than using a normal mount. Added bonus: you cannot use Zen Flight, at all, on the Broken Isles. Not even as a land """"mount"""". Back to Ghost Wolf: it's not a travel form. It's just a speed boost that can be used anytime, much slower than even the slower mount there is. And, again, no class has a form, or even a "mount" that deals with all terrain.

[Snuffleupagus]

Tinker is a bad idea, and you should feel bad.

INFRACTION

[-Joker-]

Gameplay is the only real reason for any difference. I'm fine with the definition of Engineers overlapping with that of a Tech class. A profession and a class isn't the same thing, even if they are able to carry out similar functions.

Being a blacksmith doesn't automatically make someone a sword smith. Being a sword smith does not make someone a master of the sword. While Eng and Tinkering may share similarities, they are still as different as twins. Just because they appear alike doesn't mean they are.

[Traveler Voltin]

Grenade throwing
slow fall
speed boosts
bandage gun healing
turret placing
rocket pack flying
double jump
mech suit they can use to fight stuff
teleportation
location swapping
loot grabbing
bullet firing from your head
able to place explosive pets, and dummies to direct attention

i would call that all things that make a class :P
oh guess what, all of those are from engineering
but yeah enginner/=/tinkerer, but it would def make it feel akward is tinkerers were not forced to be engineers..

tinkers would not prevent engineers from making.

Guns for hunters(and possibly tinkers)
Goggles
Mounts
Pets
Toys
gliders
blingtron,
and anything else i am missing.

it would only stop engineers from crafting rockets and shield. which are already useless anyway.

there are only 2 classes i believe have no chance at being introduced, Necromancers and bards.

[Rhamses]

Tinker is a bad idea, and you should feel bad.

Why is it a bad idea?

[FelPlague]

tinkers would not prevent engineers from making.

Guns for hunters(and possibly tinkers)
Goggles
Mounts
Pets
Toys
gliders
blingtron,
and anything else i am missing.

it would only stop engineers from crafting rockets and shield. which are already useless anyway.

there are only 2 classes i believe have no chance at being introduced, Necromancers and bards.

idk if you noticed but all those things i listed above are engineering items... there is even stealth items and buffs, aswell as many other things

[Traveler Voltin]

Engineers can make more than weapons.

[Thimagryn]

Being a blacksmith doesn't automatically make someone a sword smith. Being a sword smith does not make someone a master of the sword. While Eng and Tinkering may share similarities, they are still as different as twins. Just because they appear alike doesn't mean they are.

I don't think I've ever been in disagreement of that. I've been arguing that they are different this entire time.

- - - Updated - - -

I can't think of any example where a character had a pet big enough to ride on... and didn't ride on it.

Rexxar tames and mounts a big roc bird during WoD.

You said you couldn't think of an example of a character who didn't ride on their pet that was big enough to be ridden. Misha is big enough to be ridden and is never used as a mount. The Roc is literally <Rexxar's Mount>, it's not his pet (though it'd be awesome if he could use it in combat).

[Rhamses]

idk if you noticed but all those things i listed above are engineering items... there is even stealth items and buffs, aswell as many other things

And none of that matters really. Blizzard doesn't care about overlap if they're bringing in a new class. As was shown when they brought in Demon Hunters; If something exists in game that clashes too much with their new class concept, they'll just dismantle the existing thing. If Blizzard is capable of dismantling parts of a class to bring in Demon Hunters, I'm not seeing how its out of the realm of possibility that they'll dismantle part of a profession.

[Ielenia]

You said you couldn't think of an example of a character who didn't ride on their pet that was big enough to be ridden. Misha is big enough to be ridden and is never used as a mount. The Roc is literally <Rexxar's Mount>, it's not his pet (though it'd be awesome if he could use it in combat).

I suppose I should point out that when I say 'pet', I'm not talking about solely the gameplay definition of 'pet', but actually as a companion. That roc was tamed by Rexxar, and is his pet.

[Requimortem]

No more classes. Demon Hunters have already proven that Blizzard will butcher something (most likely Engineering) to make it work. I already had my class ruined, I don't want my profession ruined as well.

[Teriz]

No more classes. Demon Hunters have already proven that Blizzard will butcher something (most likely Engineering) to make it work. I already had my class ruined, I don't want my profession ruined as well.

You need to explain exactly how Engineering would be "ruined". Some would argue that Warlocks were "improved" after the inclusion of Demon Hunters.

If anything, the removal of the worthless engineering weapons and the addition of more money making items would actually go a long way towards improving the profession for a lot of people.