Tinkers In Our Future?

[Pua]

Maybe I misread your post? I thought you were saying that the game already caters to the fantasy via the engineering profession. I'm just saying that (more than likely) the reason this class keeps getting brought up is because people aren't getting the fantasy from the profession.

Mmm, crossed wires; I'll try to be a bit clearer.

I'm making two points here, that might be getting conflated and, thus, contributing to the confusion.

1) The clamour for the Tinker class is almost exclusively community driven.
2) The Tinker fantasy is largely taken care of by the Engineering profession.

The first point is the expression of players, while the second is the expression of developers. This is one of those occasions where the players and the developers potentially don't view something the same way, and the developers will always win when those two sets of desires clash. For example: Legion's class fantasy sold a particular fantasy for each spec, that was designated by the class designers. The community, who in many cases had a different vision, played almost no part in that design.

The community, as it often does, took what it got and either liked it or lumped it.

My view is that the developers likely feel like they're accounting for much of the Tinker class fantasy via the profession of Engineering. If players argue that such an approach isn't fulfilling that fantasy, then the developers are likely going to try and treat it via Engineering. This is assuming that they even agree that there's an issue in the first place, which is by no means guaranteed.

The conclusion I'm drawing is that the game doesn't need another class, the fantasy described is already catered for (strongly or weakly, depending on your view), and the in-game evidence seems to point in that direction.

Your mileage may vary.

[Ielenia]

Uh, its not a "rule of thumb" because all engineers from every race aren't equal

It is a "rule of thumb" considering those engineers were taught most likely by gnomes and goblins, since those consist to be the vast majority of engineer teachers around

Forsaken Monk from vanilla
Dranei Monk from TBC
Blood Elf Monk from TBC
Human monk from WotLk

That sort of proved that a wide variety of races could be monks.

No, it doesn't. We're still missing dwarves, gnomes, night elves, orcs, tauren and trolls. Remember: "if it doesn't exist in-game, it cannot exist at all". That's your argument.

Uh, the lack of any other races building mechs IS evidence.

Repeat after me, since you apparently have an issue with basic logic: "absence of evidence is not evidence of absence". Again, I'll remind you of the monk class, that, according to your argument, should have been restricted to four races only, instead of being available to all but two races (worgen and goblin).

Human City:
Goblin City:

Again, that doesn't prove anything, at all! At best it shows that humans and goblins have different architecture preferences.

Uh no, I'm arguing that Blizzard controls the lore,

Stop dodging the question. I'm not asking who controls the lore and what Blizzard can do with the lore. I asked your opinion if what is currently going on with the lore is that no matter how much a non-goblin, non-gnome engineer studies, no matter how gifted they are, they'll never reach the level of the average goblin/gnome engineer.

[Teriz]

It is a "rule of thumb" considering those engineers were taught most likely by gnomes and goblins, since those consist to be the vast majority of engineer teachers around

Which would make them inferior engineers compared to Gnomes and Goblins.

No, it doesn't. We're still missing dwarves, gnomes, night elves, orcs, tauren and trolls. Remember: "if it doesn't exist in-game, it cannot exist at all". That's your argument.

Except those examples showed that a wide variety of races can be Monks. They don't have to show every single race, they just needed to show enough races. In this case, each race was so different from each other that it facilitated just about every race being able to be monks.

We simply don't have that with other races and mech technology. If we had examples of other races building mechs and piloting mechs, then we could make make the same argument for multiple Tinker races.

Repeat after me, since you apparently have an issue with basic logic: "absence of evidence is not evidence of absence". Again, I'll remind you of the monk class, that, according to your argument, should have been restricted to four races only, instead of being available to all but two races (worgen and

The evidence is the lack of high technology present in the other WoW races. As for Monks, see above.

Again, that doesn't prove anything, at all! At best it shows that humans and goblins have different architecture preferences.

Goblins living in highly industrial cities and humans living in medieval castles is indicative of far more than an architectural preference. It's proved that Goblins are more technologically advanced than humans.

Stop dodging the question. I'm not asking who controls the lore and what Blizzard can do with the lore. I asked your opinion if what is currently going on with the lore is that no matter how much a non-goblin, non-gnome engineer studies, no matter how gifted they are, they'll never reach the level of the average goblin/gnome engineer.

Based on the game lore, that would be a reasonable conclusion.

[Ielenia]

Which would make them inferior engineers compared to Gnomes and Goblins.

What!? No! It wouldn't! Geez, where the hell do you pull out such dumb assertions?!

Except those examples showed that a wide variety of races can be Monks.

No, it didn't. As per your own argument, it didn't. Again, as per your argument, if we do not see any representative of that class for a given race, then said given race cannot be part of that class' race list. Otherwise, hey, look at those human, dwarven and forsaken engineers! That means those races can be part of a tech class' race list.

We simply don't have that with other races and mech technology.

You do know that this line of yours completely negates your previous examples, considering that none of those even come close to the power of a real monk, right? Again, I'm just using your logic and your arguments here.

The evidence is the lack

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, you dimwit. Seriously, how many times do I have to repeat this until you understand it?

Goblins living in highly industrial cities and humans living in medieval castles is indicative of far more than an architectural preference.

No, it doesn't. It simply indicates what aesthetics said race find more pleasing.

Based on the game lore, that would be a reasonable conclusion.

So here we have it. Teriz admitting that he thinks all the races in the game, save for gnomes and goblins, are suffering of heavy mental retardation.

... Why do people tend to not only forsake any sense of basic logic and common sense when they're defending a tech class, but also actively fight against common sense and basic logic? I just simply can't understand

[Teriz]

Mmm, crossed wires; I'll try to be a bit clearer.

I'm making two points here, that might be getting conflated and, thus, contributing to the confusion.

1) The clamour for the Tinker class is almost exclusively community driven.
2) The Tinker fantasy is largely taken care of by the Engineering profession.

The first point is the expression of players, while the second is the expression of developers. This is one of those occasions where the players and the developers potentially don't view something the same way, and the developers will always win when those two sets of desires clash. For example: Legion's class fantasy sold a particular fantasy for each spec, that was designated by the class designers. The community, who in many cases had a different vision, played almost no part in that design.

The community, as it often does, took what it got and either liked it or lumped it.

My view is that the developers likely feel like they're accounting for much of the Tinker class fantasy via the profession of Engineering. If players argue that such an approach isn't fulfilling that fantasy, then the developers are likely going to try and treat it via Engineering. This is assuming that they even agree that there's an issue in the first place, which is by no means guaranteed.

The conclusion I'm drawing is that the game doesn't need another class, the fantasy described is already catered for (strongly or weakly, depending on your view), and the in-game evidence seems to point in that direction.

Your mileage may vary.

I disagree with some of that. I would argue that the developers have been stoking that player desire with concepts like Mekkatorque, Gazlowe, Blackfuse, and Noggenfogger all piloting awesome mech suits in the recent expansion. If they have no plans to allow players to partake in the experience of piloting a mech in progression content, then that's a pretty cruel tease.

I'll freely admit that I had no real idea where a Tinker class could go, but a mech based tinker class makes a whole lot of sense, and isn't covered by any other class and is barely touched on in the profession. We'll have to wait and see what's coming next, but I would be very surprised if Blizzard doesn't create a mech-based Tinker class, given what they've shown us so far.

[Ielenia]

I disagree with some of that. I would argue that the developers have been stoking that player desire with concepts like Mekkatorque, Gazlowe, Blackfuse, and Noggenfogger all piloting awesome mech suits in the recent expansion.

And yet, everything you claimed that a 'tinker class' should do (mech riding, fighting in mechs, healing with technology, dropping turrets, etc) keeps being added into the engineering profession, giving a lot of credit to @Aviemore's hypothesis. Even mechanized pets were given to Hunters.

[bufferunderrun]

And yet, everything you claimed that a 'tinker class' should do (mech riding, fighting in mechs, healing with technology, dropping turrets, etc) keeps being added into the engineering profession, giving a lot of credit to [mention=810738]Aviemore

's hypothesis. Even mechanized pets were given to Hunters.[/QUOTE]

i'm not a tinker lover but honestly blizzard had show that they are willing to remove all the necessary thing to implement a new class if needed, look at dh and how they changed warlock to fit it. They may be now implementing those thing into engineering but that don't mean they could immediately remove them if tinker is implemented.

Still imho tinker is not the kind of class blizzard could love.

[Pua]

I disagree with some of that. I would argue that the developers have been stoking that player desire with concepts like Mekkatorque, Gazlowe, Blackfuse, and Noggenfogger all piloting awesome mech suits in the recent expansion. If they have no plans to allow players to partake in the experience of piloting a mech in progression content, then that's a pretty cruel tease.

And that's fair. Viewing the same evidence as me, you're drawing a different conclusion; my only point is that mech-mounts already exist (though, not always from the Engineering profession), which largely scratches the itch you're describing in my view from a design point of view. But:

i'm not a tinker lover but honestly blizzard had show that they are willing to remove all the necessary thing to implement a new class if needed, look at dh and how they changed warlock to fit it.

This is absolutely true. There is now a precedent for a pretty spec-defining ability to be removed in order to make way for another class that the designers felt was appropriate (in this case, I'm talking about Metamorphosis). As a result, I wouldn't write off the chances of seeing a Tinker - I simply find it extremely unlikely.

When push comes to shove, demon hunters made sense in a Legion themed expansion and were an obvious fit when they arrived as far as storytelling goes. Again, we shouldn't forget that Blizzard will always put gameplay before storytelling, but it's very hard to see an expansion or story-related direction that would demand a Tinker class that isn't already catered for by some of the other things I've already mentioned.

With that all said, it's appropriate to bear in mind that Pandaria came somewhat out of left field.

Still imho tinker is not the kind of class blizzard could love.

In many ways, this is arguably the biggest question:

Does Blizzard believe the Tinker class could work, in accordance with community wishes and from a gameplay point of view?

That's what it'll boil down to, and the evidence is... No, probably not. They're extremely cautious with the fundamentals of the game now (tank/heal/DPS, kill/collect, currency/gear treadmill), and to meet the community expectation for the Tinker class they'd probably have to fundamentally alter how combat is supposed to work. There simply isn't any way they're going to do that at this stage of the game's life cycle.

Once more - I'd never, ever rule it out.

It just strikes me as extremely unlikely.

[Teriz]

What!? No! It wouldn't! Geez, where the hell do you pull out such dumb assertions?!

You just said that a human engineer is learning from Gnome and Goblin teachers who in turn are natural tech geniuses who are learning from no one. How in the world would that human engineer be an equal to the Gnome and Goblin?

Let me make it easy for you; In order for you to prove that human engineers are equal to Gnome and Goblin engineers, you need to provide examples of human tech that rivals Gnome and Goblin inventions and tech.

Good luck with that.

No, it didn't. As per your own argument, it didn't. Again, as per your argument, if we do not see any representative of that class for a given race, then said given race cannot be part of that class' race list. Otherwise, hey, look at those human, dwarven and forsaken engineers! That means those races can be part of a tech class' race list.

Again, we don't need to have every race pop up as a NPC monk. If a Draenei, Forsaken, Human, and Blood Elf can be a monk, why can't Tauren, Trolls, Orcs, Dwarves and other races? The only thing those races have in common is that they have two arms and two legs, which appears to be the only requirement to be a monk.

You do know that this line of yours completely negates your previous examples, considering that none of those even come close to the power of a real monk, right? Again, I'm just using your logic and your arguments here.

It doesn't negate my example at all. I seriously doubt that Gazlowe's shredder is going to be as powerful or deep as an entire class dedicated to mechs, but that doesn't change that Gazlowe's shredder is a proof of concept for said class (if it happens).

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, you dimwit. Seriously, how many times do I have to repeat this until you understand it?

Oooo now we're getting to name-calling.

Let me help you out again;

Argument: Non-Goblin/Gnome races are technologically inferior to Gnomes and Goblins. Thus they would be unable to construct a pilotable mech.

Evidence 1: Forsaken Technology:


Evidence 2: Gnome technology:


Hope that helps.

No, it doesn't. It simply indicates what aesthetics said race find more pleasing.

Denial isn't just a river in Egypt.

So here we have it. Teriz admitting that he thinks all the races in the game, save for gnomes and goblins, are suffering of heavy mental retardation.

... Why do people tend to not only forsake any sense of basic logic and common sense when they're defending a tech class, but also actively fight against common sense and basic logic? I just simply can't understand

Says the poster who thinks non-Goblin and Gnome races don't build technological cities because they find them "ugly".....

[Ielenia]

You just said that a human engineer is learning from Gnome and Goblin teachers who in turn are natural tech geniuses who are learning from no one.

Excuse me? "Learning from no one"? Could your please quit making BS assertions that not only you have no way at all you can prove, but also have in-game examples that directly contradict your very statement, like these two engineer apprentices, Trixie Quickswitch and Nogg

Let me make it easy for you; In order for you to prove that human engineers are equal to Gnome and Goblin engineers, you need to provide examples of human tech that rivals Gnome and Goblin inventions and tech.

Fuck me. One more time because you refute to be honest in this discussion: it was never my argument that all human engineers are equal to gnome and goblin engineers. My argument is that individual engineers of any race can (keyword here that you keep ignoring) reach the level of expert goblin and gnome engineering.

Again, we don't need to have every race pop up as a NPC monk.

So we don't need to have every race pop up riding a mech? Thank you for finally conceding.

The only thing those races have in common is that they have two arms and two legs, which appears to be the only requirement to be a monk.

Well, all the playable races have two arms and hands with opposing thumbs, which appears to be the only requirements to be an engineer. Your own argument. And before you say that engineering requires more than that, so does the monk training. After all, two races are missing from the monk class' race lineup.

Oooo now we're getting to name-calling.

Let me help you out again;

Argument: Non-Goblin/Gnome races are technologically inferior to Gnomes and Goblins.

Counter-argument: irrelevant. Because it doesn't matter if one race doesn't tend to rely on technology like gnomes and goblins do, individuals of said race can still dedicate themselves to engineering and have the potential to become just as good as expert gnome and goblin engineers.

Denial isn't just a river in Egypt.

And projection is a skill you seem to have mastered.

Says the poster who thinks non-Goblin and Gnome races don't build technological cities because they find them "ugly".....

... How is that even an argument? Different people, especially different races and cultures, have different aesthetic likes and dislikes. That's a fact of life.
But, just to see you put your foot in your mouth again, big time, let's take a look at some glorious goblin settlements, shall we?
K3, in Storm Peaks, Northrend:


Gadgetzan, in Tanaris, Kalimdor:


Fuselight, in Badlands, Eastern Kingdoms:


So... it seems goblins aren't too keen on living in technological settlements, as well, eh? I'm waiting to see what excuses, rationalization and/or double-standards you're going to use to explain those.

... Why do people tend to not only forsake any sense of basic logic and common sense when they're defending a tech class, but also actively fight against common sense and basic logic? I just simply can't understand this.

[bufferunderrun]

And that's fair. Viewing the same evidence as me, you're drawing a different conclusion; my only point is that mech-mounts already exist (though, not always from the Engineering profession), which largely scratches the itch you're describing in my view from a design point of view. But:



This is absolutely true. There is now a precedent for a pretty spec-defining ability to be removed in order to make way for another class that the designers felt was appropriate (in this case, I'm talking about Metamorphosis). As a result, I wouldn't write off the chances of seeing a Tinker - I simply find it extremely unlikely.

When push comes to shove, demon hunters made sense in a Legion themed expansion and were an obvious fit when they arrived as far as storytelling goes. Again, we shouldn't forget that Blizzard will always put gameplay before storytelling, but it's very hard to see an expansion or story-related direction that would demand a Tinker class that isn't already catered for by some of the other things I've already mentioned.

With that all said, it's appropriate to bear in mind that Pandaria came somewhat out of left field.



In many ways, this is arguably the biggest question:

Does Blizzard believe the Tinker class could work, in accordance with community wishes and from a gameplay point of view?

That's what it'll boil down to, and the evidence is... No, probably not. They're extremely cautious with the fundamentals of the game now (tank/heal/DPS, kill/collect, currency/gear treadmill), and to meet the community expectation for the Tinker class they'd probably have to fundamentally alter how combat is supposed to work. There simply isn't any way they're going to do that at this stage of the game's life cycle.

Once more - I'd never, ever rule it out.

It just strikes me as extremely unlikely.

new classes have always been themed around the xpack those come out, DK from wotlk, Monk from pandaria, DH from legion ; what kind of xpack theme could fit a tinker class? An xpack themed around machinery? pretty unlikely

I doubt blizzard give us a new class next xpack and i doubt they even give us new races, but if next xpack is themed around the void then the chance of a tinker will be 0

[Teriz]

Excuse me? "Learning from no one"? Could your please quit making BS assertions that not only you have no way at all you can prove, but also have in-game examples that directly contradict your very statement, like these two engineer apprentices, Trixie Quickswitch and Nogg

And who do you think are Trixie and Nogg's teachers?

Yeah, they're Goblins and Gnomes.

Fuck me. One more time because you refute to be honest in this discussion: it was never my argument that all human engineers are equal to gnome and goblin engineers. My argument is that individual engineers of any race can (keyword here that you keep ignoring) reach the level of expert goblin and gnome engineering.

In order for other races to be able to build pilotable mechs, they would have to be on the technological level of Gnomes and Goblins. It's baffling that you don't seem to understand this.

So we don't need to have every race pop up riding a mech? Thank you for finally conceding.

No, but we would need an example beyond Gnomes and Goblins, since both of those races have been portrayed as having extremely advanced mechanical technology.

Well, all the playable races have two arms and hands with opposing thumbs, which appears to be the only requirements to be an engineer. Your own argument. And before you say that engineering requires more than that, so does the monk training. After all, two races are missing from the monk class' race lineup.

No, the other requirement would be genius-level intellect ala Blackfuse and Mekkatorque.

As for Monks, see the previous post. Why would Draenei or Blood Elves be able to become Monks but Night Elves and Dwarves not be able to? That makes little sense.

Counter-argument: irrelevant. Because it doesn't matter if one race doesn't tend to rely on technology like gnomes and goblins do, individuals of said race can still dedicate themselves to engineering and have the potential to become just as good as expert gnome and goblin engineers.

An Orc engineer can dedicate himself to his craft until the end of his days. In the end, he's still only going to be able to build a better catapult, thanks to the medieval setting of the game, and the technological barriers inherent in his race. Only Goblins and Gnomes have shown a high level of advanced mechanical technology, with Draenei showcasing an advanced level of Magical Technology.

So... it seems goblins aren't too keen on living in technological settlements, as well, eh? I'm waiting to see what excuses, rationalization and/or double-standards you're going to use to explain those.

In small settlements, probably not. However, one of your examples, Gadgetzhan, is rumored to be expanded in the next expansion to be similar to what we saw in the Gadgetzhan Hearthstone expansion. If that rumor is true, this is how it grew;




And this is how it came to look like (under Goblin control):



Pretty much a 1920's styled urban center.

- - - Updated - - -

new classes have always been themed around the xpack those come out, DK from wotlk, Monk from pandaria, DH from legion ; what kind of xpack theme could fit a tinker class? An xpack themed around machinery? pretty unlikely

Well the rumor is that the next expansion revolves around the Naga and Azshara with the south seas being heavily contested. There's a lot of Goblin holdings in that area (Kezan/Undermine, Gadgetzhan, Rachet, and Booty Bay), so that's how you begin to draw in Tinker lore, since Goblins would obviously utilize their technology to fight back against the Naga. In order to justify the Gnome Tinkers, there could be a raid or patch that deals with (FINALLY) retaking Gnomeregan.

I have no problem admitting that the leak seems to have the Tinker class jammed into it.

I doubt blizzard give us a new class next xpack and i doubt they even give us new races, but if next xpack is themed around the void then the chance of a tinker will be 0

True. It all depends on what Blizzard wants to do. I definitely think it will be new races or a new class though. Blizzard supposedly felt that part of the reason WoD wasn't well-received was because there weren't any new classes or races present (despite the model upgrades).

[Ielenia]

And who do you think are Trixie and Nogg's teachers?
Yeah, they're Goblins and Gnomes.

The point is: you were proven wrong once again. Goblins and gnomes do need to be taught, just like everyone else.

In order for other races

I'm talking about individuals. Get it through your thick skull.

No, but we would need an example beyond Gnomes and Goblins, since both of those races have been portrayed as having extremely advanced mechanical technology.

And we have engineers of other races. Case closed.

No, the other requirement would be genius-level intellect ala Blackfuse and Mekkatorque.

You mean, to become a tech class one must be dumb enough to think it's a good idea to dump toxic, radioactive gas into an entire populated city, to save said city? In a more serious note, no. Just like you don't need to have a genius-level skill with magic like Khadgar to be a mage.

Why would Draenei or Blood Elves be able to become Monks but Night Elves and Dwarves not be able to?

You tell me. Why can Gnomes and orcs be monks, but not goblins and worgen?

An Orc engineer can dedicate himself to his craft until the end of his days. In the end, he's still only going to be able to build a better catapult, thanks to the medieval setting of the game, and the technological barriers inherent in his race.

You do realize that the races in this game don't live in complete, total isolation from one-another, right? Especially those who: a) belong to the same faction, and b) happen to live within someone else's city, which just so happen to be the gnomes' and goblins' case, coincidentally enough.

In small settlements, probably not. However, one of your examples, Gadgetzhan, is rumored to be expanded in the next expansion to be similar to what we saw in the Gadgetzhan Hearthstone expansion. If that rumor is true, this is how it grew;

Still huts of stone and wood with a little bit of low technology. It's all I see.

[Friendlyimmolation]

So we have a guy using arguments that hilariously backfire on him, and then trying to use hearthstone to enforce his point.

[-Joker-]

You do realize that the races in this game don't live in complete, total isolation from one-another, right? Especially those who: a) belong to the same faction, and b) happen to live within someone else's city, which just so happen to be the gnomes' and goblins' case, coincidentally enough.

Yet Gnomes still cannot be Shaman or Paladin, since living with the Dwarves, in their city, seems to be a qualifying factor. Then again, that's a debate for another thread entirely. Personally, they should just unlock all Race/Class/Faction options. Darkmoon Faire is proof that sometimes two races who hate each other can get along just fine as the feelings of the race are not shared by the individual.

[MrExcelion]

This is always popular but if they do come out with them, I'd expect they go with a more badass name

[LordOtaku666]

I'd rather they didn't; at least until they can fix the classes we have now. I know "Balance" will never happen, but fixing what we have now should be priority when it comes to classes.

[MasterHamster]

Considering that we actually got DHs, while we have Feral, Rogues and WW Monks, nah, the next class will be another energy-based leather class.

[Teriz]

And we have engineers of other races. Case closed.

Who aren't on the same level of engineering as Goblins and Gnomes, thus they can't build piloted mechs like Goblins and Gnomes.

Case closed indeed.

[Ielenia]

Yet Gnomes still cannot be Shaman or Paladin, since living with the Dwarves, in their city, seems to be a qualifying factor.

Shamanism, unlike engineering, is not just something one sits down, studies, trains, and boom, shaman. To be a shaman, I believe you must be accepted by the elements, since the 'job' of a shaman is to be a mediator between the elements.

- - - Updated - - -

Who aren't on the same level of engineering as Goblins and Gnomes, thus they can't build piloted mechs like Goblins and Gnomes.

What you just wrote is pure conjecture without any basis in the lore at all. Could you please stick to facts and stop using baseless conjecture?