Which class should be next?

[Thimagryn]

And you forgot that Blizz have said in the past that a Hero Class in WoW is not the same as a Hero Class in WC3.

A Hero Class in wow is a class that they wanted to introduce via an already established story behind that character. That's it. So if they want to make Necro/Bard/Tinker a Hero class they can, they just have to create a story that makes them start at a level higher than lvl 1.

Yes, they can. They could add a Janitor class and make it a hero that starts higher than level 1 too. Based on what we know of Janitors in Warcraft, that isn't likely to happen either.

From what we've seen of a Hero class and how they differ from regular classes, their archetypes have been surrounding a seemingly normal class that has gone through some massive change to obtain supernatural powers beyond that of a mortal. That's the bar set for a Hero class. Should they decide to take a Necromancer, which in established lore we know as equivalent to Priests, Mages and Shamans, and turn them into a Hero class, they could very well do it. But why? The Necromancer isn't anything special. Same goes with Bards. They work perfectly as a regular class, as their archetype is already well established in the Warcraft universe. I'm not saying they won't or can't, but to be frank, for them to be a Hero class there'd better be a damned good reason why. And I'm not just talking lore reasoning, I'm talking about their overall archetype and design. These are still in the realm of Core classes in most RPGs.

Hero class is better saved for those special outlier classes that offer that extra umph, like a Dragonsworn that is a champion of the Aspects. That's the bar that is currently set, and I don't think it's likely that Blizzard will lower it just to boost any new class they add to a higher level. They were pretty clear with that when they added the Monk. Hero class is another name for Prestige class from DnD, and Necromancers aren't typically considered a prestige class, just an alternative core.

[Wildberry]

The difference here is that you're talking about 1 or 2 abilities versus several necromancer abilities and talents currently existing within the DK class. Additionally, while Warlocks did possess Metamorphosis, they could never be a melee/agility class that used Warglaives, but DKs can cast from range.

I'm assuming you're forgetting just how far the Dark Apotheosis glyph took Demonology Warlocks into Demon Hunter territory? I seem to remember you suggesting that Dark Apotheosis flat-out killed the chances of Demon Hunters coming to WoW. Really though, you're completely ignoring that a DK isn't going to be viable or optimal at range. Having a handful of ranged abilities isn't synonymous with being a ranged class. Hell, half of the reason Death Knights have those in the first place is to compensate for our God awful mobility.

Again, what abilities are you talking about? Bone spear? Teeth? Bone Wall?

You honestly believe that adding Bone Spear to a class that already has Bone Shield and Bone Storm would require a spec redesign?

I've largely focused on minions rather than Bones. I don't see why you're tunnel visioning on something I've yet to bring up. At this point, I'm just focused on a proper ranged class that summons the undead, interacts heavily with them, etc.

With regard to the spec redesign, I referenced it regarding Unholy specifically. Learn to read, please.

Death Coil? Death and Decay? Gargoyle? Outbreak? Blood Boil? Defile? Chains of Ice? Clawing Shadows? Corpse Explosion?

That's just in the UH tree, and that's not even all of them.

This is what I mean by intellectual dishonesty, Teriz. There's no way you genuinely believe this is a compelling argument. Really, there's no way that anyone with an IQ above room temperature believes that this is a compelling argument. It seems to me like you're just throwing whatever you possibly can out to support some half-baked point, without a care in the world for proper thought.

I mean, I'm not even going to get into Death and Decay's interaction with Scourge Strike, or bother delving into the fact that Defile replaces Death and Decay (Yet of course, just like in the minions discussion, you're trotting them out like separate coexisting abilities). Instead I just have to ask: Do you genuinely believe that Gargoyle and Corpse Explosion would be counted by any honest person as being proper ranged abilities? A cosmetic spell and a CD, really?

Also, Blood Boil is Blood only now, if I recall correctly, so no, it's not just the Unholy tree.

[Teriz]

I'm assuming you're forgetting just how far the Dark Apotheosis glyph took Demonology Warlocks into Demon Hunter territory? I seem to remember you suggesting that Dark Apotheosis flat-out killed the chances of Demon Hunters coming to WoW.

And I assume you're forgetting that I was correct about that. Blizzard removed Dark Apotheosis and every trace of Demon Hunter abilities from the Warlock class which showed how correct I was.

Do you really think Blizzard is going to remove all of the necromancy abilities from the DK class? That's what its going to take for a Necromancer to enter the game as a class.

Really though, you're completely ignoring that a DK isn't going to be viable or optimal at range. Having a handful of ranged abilities isn't synonymous with being a ranged class. Hell, half of the reason Death Knights have those in the first place is to compensate for our God awful mobility.

And you're assuming that Blizzard isn't capable of simply making Unholy a ranged spec? I mean seriously, why would they add an entirely new class when they can just change the attack range of an existing spec? That's assuming of course that Blizzard even views a ranged Necromancer as a necessity. More than likely they have no problem with the melee Necromancer which the UH currently is. Heck, they added a melee Necromancer to Heroes of the Storm recently.

I've largely focused on minions rather than Bones. I don't see why you're tunnel visioning on something I've yet to bring up. At this point, I'm just focused on a proper ranged class that summons the undead, interacts heavily with them, etc.

So again, basically UH DK at caster range instead of melee with a few extra pet abilities....

This is what I mean by intellectual dishonesty, Teriz. There's no way you genuinely believe this is a compelling argument. Really, there's no way that anyone with an IQ above room temperature believes that this is a compelling argument. It seems to me like you're just throwing whatever you possibly can out to support some half-baked point, without a care in the world for proper thought.

I mean, I'm not even going to get into Death and Decay's interaction with Scourge Strike, or bother delving into the fact that Defile replaces Death and Decay (Yet of course, just like in the minions discussion, you're trotting them out like separate coexisting abilities). Instead I just have to ask: Do you genuinely believe that Gargoyle and Corpse Explosion would be counted by any honest person as being proper ranged abilities? A cosmetic spell and a CD, really?

Where did I say that UH DKs are a ranged spec? I said they have a lot of ranged abilities. Of course you're supposed to utilize your melee abilities alongside your ranged abilities. Interesting that you said nothing about Clawing Shadows. That talent replaces Scourge Strike with a ranged ability, and takes away your main gripe with Death and Decay.

[Deleted]

next class should be "project manager" it could have all these abilities (specs) what are with suggested classes in poll
project manager - tinker spec: makes up lots of useless stuff others have to deal with, if party member kills those devices they get short duration buff.
project manager - necromancer: brings up old stuff, like damages mobs twice as much but then heals them up again half the damage done
project manager - bard: disappears during encounter but brings back lots of flowers later with music (healing everybody full). while he is gone, rest of the party receives 20% stat buff and health regeneration.

[Deleted]

I remember Bard/Dancer being an interesting class in Ragnarök Online. And we don't have anything like that yet.

[Wildberry]

And I assume you're forgetting that I was correct about that. Blizzard removed Dark Apotheosis and every trace of Demon Hunter abilities from the Warlock class which showed how correct I was.

I'm happy to point out you're correct on that count, primarily because it completely invalidates your previous statement.

Do you really think Blizzard is going to remove all of the necromancy abilities from the DK class? That's what its going to take for a Necromancer to enter the game as a class.

Really, all of them? At this point, they could scrap two PvP talents, and utilize other undead, and have the class function differently mechanically. Regardless, there's never been any overlap before. Things like multiple classes summoning elementals? Unheard of. Two permanent pet ranged classes? Not enough room. etc.

And you're assuming that Blizzard isn't capable of simply making Unholy a ranged spec? I mean seriously, why would they add an entirely new class when they can just change the attack range of an existing spec? That's assuming of course that Blizzard even views a ranged Necromancer as a necessity. More than likely they have no problem with the melee Necromancer which the UH currently is. Heck, they added a melee Necromancer to Heroes of the Storm recently.

Given how Survival's rework has been received, I highly doubt we'll see another rework like that. Demon Hunters have gone over flawlessly in comparison. But here's why: Because Blizzard philosophically disagrees with you. I seem to recall a number of posts of yours, where you advocate that Demonology Warlocks be pushed further into Demon Hunter territory to compensate for the fact that "Demon Hunters wouldn't work in WoW." Instead of acting on your advice, Blizzard did the complete opposite. They felt that Demon Hunter fantasy was too broad to be tacked on to an existing class, thus they trimmed Demonology back, and did the concept justice with it's own class.

I'm surprised, given the tangents about mail armor, Demon Hunter gear, etc. that you're still using phrases like "Blizzard most likely..." If there's anyone with their finger on the pulse of the company, it's certainly not you.

So again, basically UH DK at caster range instead of melee with a few extra pet abilities....

That's a wonderful little phrase there. It's the necromantic equivalent of "Tinkers are already covered by engineering," truthfully. You're ignoring some very large mechanical differences between the two.

Where did I say that UH DKs are a ranged spec? I said they have a lot of ranged abilities. Of course you're supposed to utilize your melee abilities alongside your ranged abilities.

They have some ranged abilities to augment their primarily melee toolkit.

Interesting that you said nothing about Clawing Shadows. That talent replaces Scourge Strike with a ranged ability, and takes away your main gripe with Death and Decay.

I'm sorry, I was too baffled by you counting Death and Decay and Defile separately, assuming they count in the first place, throwing Gargoyle out, pretending that Corpse Explosion is an actual ability, and thinking that Unholy still has Blood Boil.

Yes, it does take away my gripe with Death and Decay, unfortunately, that gripe is just replaced by another gripe regarding Festering Strike. There's no reason for a Death Knight to not be in melee range. Them having a handful of ranged abilities doesn't somehow invalidate the idea of a mechanically different, ranged necromantic class.

And again, you are completely ignoring the fact that Unholy is still trying to deliver on Runeblades, plagues, and raising the dead. It's impossible for the spec to deliver on all fronts in a compelling manner.

- - - Updated - - -

Well, here's the thing, though: being a summoner and spreader of plague and disease is what makes Unholy Unholy right now. The runeblade-wielding harbinger of death part is honestly more Frost's jam at the moment, which right now plays like an undead berserker, weaving magic into fast-paced, hard-hitting strikes, overwhelming its target with a flurry of immediate damage.

Interesting, so when I gripe about the lack of two-handed Frost, I'm told that Unholy is the runeblade-wielding harbinger of Death. When I bring up that Unholy's split between three themes, and isn't delivering on any, I'm told that they have two covered, and runeblade-wielding harbingers are a Frost thing.

UH is the only DK left with a permanent pet, its signature artifact ability is Apocalypse, which summons even more undead minions, it's main DPS cooldowns are Army of the Dead and Gargoyle, and it's the only spec with two rot mechanics in the form of Virulent Plague and Festering Wounds.

Well, I find it odd that you're considering FW a rot mechanic considering they're "popped" (ie, consumable debuffs, not DoTs). But, let me put it this way, as someone who's spent a considerable amount of time with either a DK main or DK alt at any given moment post-WotLK launch. Unholy started out with a handful of DoTs, a number of Debuffs, and some summons thanks to the good old expansive talent trees. While summoning was part of the class, it was fairly clear that the spec was focused more on magic mitigation, decay, and runeblades. When the Cataclysm Pre-Patch came out, we were stripped of most of our DoTs and Debuffs, and received a bit of pet interaction.

We stayed more on the Pet & Runeblade side of things until, arguably, ToT, at which point Festerblight took off, and made the class a little more disease oriented.

I'm sure you get the picture I'm painting here. Unholy has swung back and forth between pets, and diseases, but has yet to actually capitalize on both at once. Don't get me wrong, I like the way that current Unholy functions mechanically (Though it does need tuning changes, and a new fourth Gold Artifact Talent), but it's once again in the awkward position of being caught between a handful of themes and not really exploring any of them fully.

Given everything we've seen from the Scourge alone, the realms of plague and undeath are so broad that to properly utilize them both, it would require either a new class or a fourth DK spec. Demon Hunter could have potentially just been a Fourth Warlock spec by splitting pre-Legion Demonology into two parts, and filling out from there. That's not the route Blizzard took though, and truthfully the game is better off for it.

How would you make a Necromancer class that won't encroach upon UH's fantasy, which I'd argue is so clearly defined at the moment, without having to take the basic elements that define that?

Fairly easily. You trim a few of Unholy's summons back (Really just the artifact ones), give it a bit more emphasis on hard-hitting strikes, and keep most everything else as-is.

With regard to the Necromancer, there are a lot of options. Now that Unholy's been reigned in and brought back to its roots as a Death Knight, one would be free to do all sorts of things. Summoning ghosts and sacrificing them for damage boosts, summoning skeletons and sacrificing them for AoE (Corpse Explosion), or to construct other things (Bone Golems etc.). The plague-spreading cultists could be thematically merged with apothecaries a la Professor Putricide et al. to make an AoE-heavy DoT spec.

There are so many opportunities once you trim Unholy back. The realms of plague and undeath has been explored so much, thanks to the Scourge taking such a large role in Warcraft, that it would really be impossible for a single spec to deliver on all fronts.

Because the only thing that makes UH not-a-necromancer at this point is the fact that it's still a melee dps spec.

Currently it only has two debuffs, and lacks pet interaction as a core part of the class. If you were to give it more pet interaction, the diseases suffer, or vice versa.

All the other stuff you mention could be baked into UH just as easily as well, and IMO it would be simpler than making a new class to fill that role.

Yes, and you'd end up with a horribly bloated spec as a result. That's the problem here. Unholy does a few things, and it's caught in a predicament where it can't do all of them well while remaining playable and coherent. Push the needle in one direction and you leave at least one other void.

To me, it would further differentiate UH from Frost, and it would take its fantasy to a whole new level, something truly unique in the game that isn't just another version of a lock or a spriest.

Why do the two specs need further differentiation? The two are already some of the most different specs of the same role in the game. Death Knights have never really had the Rogue/Hunter problem where specs overlap too much. I think, at this point (especially given Frost's direction in Legion) that Unholy could easily be moved back to the realm of a hard-hitting melee class (With pets and DoTs tacked on) without stepping on Frost's toes mechanically or thematically.

Furthermore, let's clear a few things up:

Your argument is "Unholy is already a melee necromancer, just make it ranged." However, you also believe that "A real Necromancer Class would just be another version of a Lock or Spriest." If you honestly believe both of those things, how would it make any sense for you to advocate pushing Unholy into the realm of ranged DPS. If it's a proper Necromancer already, as you've stated, wouldn't making it ranged just make it "another version of a lock or a spriest?"

[Tandi]

Neither

Tinkers sound absolutely stupid.

Bards do not belong/fit in WoW

Necromancers we already have, sort of.

[Niffo]

I rather see a fourth spec for every class.

[Teriz]

I'm happy to point out you're correct on that count, primarily because it completely invalidates your previous statement.

Really, all of them? At this point, they could scrap two PvP talents, and utilize other undead, and have the class function differently mechanically. Regardless, there's never been any overlap before. Things like multiple classes summoning elementals? Unheard of. Two permanent pet ranged classes? Not enough room. etc.

There's a clear difference between Mages and Shaman, and there's a clear difference between Hunters and Warlocks. There's zero difference between a Necromancer and a DK. Blizzard even said that the Necromancer was used in the design of the Death Knight.

Given how Survival's rework has been received, I highly doubt we'll see another rework like that. Demon Hunters have gone over flawlessly in comparison. But here's why: Because Blizzard philosophically disagrees with you. I seem to recall a number of posts of yours, where you advocate that Demonology Warlocks be pushed further into Demon Hunter territory to compensate for the fact that "Demon Hunters wouldn't work in WoW." Instead of acting on your advice, Blizzard did the complete opposite. They felt that Demon Hunter fantasy was too broad to be tacked on to an existing class, thus they trimmed Demonology back, and did the concept justice with it's own class.

Again, the difference being that Warlocks weren't DHs, and were pushed into the DH's direction later in their life cycle, so an argument could be made by Blizzard to revert them back to what they were before that push began.

DKs have always been Necromancers. They were designed that way by Blizzard from the very beginning. You seem to want to ignore the fact that in order to bring DHs into the game, Blizzard removed ALL DH-Based abilities from the Warlock class. It's highly doubtful that Blizzard would remove all the Necro abilities from the DK.

I'm surprised, given the tangents about mail armor, Demon Hunter gear, etc. that you're still using phrases like "Blizzard most likely..." If there's anyone with their finger on the pulse of the company, it's certainly not you.

As I said, I was correct in my statements about the Demon Hunter; Their design space was small, in order to bring them into the game you would have to gut the Warlock class, they would be redundant gameplay wise, they would have to be elven only.

The only mistake I made was not believing that Blizzard would gut Warlocks and shoehorn in such a shallow class. So who knows? Maybe Blizzard WILL bring in Necromancers and damage the game even further.

That's a wonderful little phrase there. It's the necromantic equivalent of "Tinkers are already covered by engineering," truthfully. You're ignoring some very large mechanical differences between the two.

And the difference is that Engineering is a profession, not a competing class. Additionally, the Tinker concept in its rumored form is quite a bit different than anything else we have in the game currently.

A DK and a Necromancer would be competing for the same goals, meaning that not only would they cannibalize each other, but they would be mechanically and thematically redundant. A profession and a class have very different goals.

I'm sorry, I was too baffled by you counting Death and Decay and Defile separately, assuming they count in the first place, throwing Gargoyle out, pretending that Corpse Explosion is an actual ability, and thinking that Unholy still has Blood Boil.

Yes, it does take away my gripe with Death and Decay, unfortunately, that gripe is just replaced by another gripe regarding Festering Strike. There's no reason for a Death Knight to not be in melee range. Them having a handful of ranged abilities doesn't somehow invalidate the idea of a mechanically different, ranged necromantic class.

And again, you are completely ignoring the fact that Unholy is still trying to deliver on Runeblades, plagues, and raising the dead. It's impossible for the spec to deliver on all fronts in a compelling manner.

You do understand that Plague spreading is a major component of the Necromancer concept right?

In the end, it appears that your main gripe is that the WoW Necromancer is mainly melee instead of ranged. The problem with that argument is that Blizzard has introduced melee Necromancers into their games before, so a melee Necromancer isn't unheard of. Again, if Blizzard desires to create a ranged Necromancer, they're far more likely to simply make UH a ranged spec. By many accounts, they're going in that direction anyway.

[Ielenia]

I would, considering that the ability list and flavor of a Feral Druid and a Rogue are quite different from each other.

What's "flavor" to you? Gameplay? If so, then yeah, feral druids and rogues have a lot in common, having the same core mechanics.

So Hearthstone is lore now? When did that happen?

So you have no problems using Heroes of the Storm... but criticize me for pointing at Hearthstone? Won't the double-standards never end?

Yeah, Blizzard probably had to give DHs massive metamorphosis CDs because the Warlock class could transform into demons more often. I suppose Blizzard didn't want to confuse people by giving Demon Hunters a 3rd spec that would be essentially the Warlock's old Demonology spec.

Considering the "old Demonology spec" was already gone, what would have been the issue?

[Al Gorefiend]

I want to see something like a shaman tank class for dwarf and Tauren only.

I'm cool with whatever class as long as elves and human can't roll it.

[Teriz]

What's "flavor" to you? Gameplay? If so, then yeah, feral druids and rogues have a lot in common, having the same core mechanics.

Yes gameplay, and Ferals also have a lot not in common with Rogues.

So you have no problems using Heroes of the Storm... but criticize me for pointing at Hearthstone? Won't the double-standards never end?

Well no, since Blizzard has pulled abilities from HotS and placed them in WoW.

Considering the "old Demonology spec" was already gone, what would have been the issue?

People would have immediately claimed that the DH "stole" the Warlock spec, especially if new Demonology came out lackluster (as it appears to have).

[Ielenia]

Yes gameplay, and Ferals also have a lot not in common with Rogues.

"A lot"? Other than a 'coat of paint'... not really.

Well no, since Blizzard has pulled abilities from HotS and placed them in WoW.

Yes, double-standards, since HotS is a game non-canon to the Warcraft universe, just like Hearthstone is. And I pointed out to HS to show that Blizzard considers Tyrande a priest, just like you like to point at HotS to say "look at tinkers".

People would have immediately claimed that the DH "stole" the Warlock spec, especially if new Demonology came out lackluster (as it appears to have).

Considering the previous Demonology wasn't about you being 100% in demon form, and they gave different abilities to the DH spec, there wouldn't be much of an issue, right? I mean... rogues and feral druids, remember?

[Teriz]

"A lot"? Other than a 'coat of paint'... not really.

Yeah... You're welcome to your opinion on that one.

Yes, double-standards, since HotS is a game non-canon to the Warcraft universe, just like Hearthstone is. And I pointed out to HS to show that Blizzard considers Tyrande a priest, just like you like to point at HotS to say "look at tinkers".

I point out HotS because Blizzard is pulling abilities and concepts from there and importing them into WoW.

The point is that Tyrande has Druid and Hunter abilities, and Druids eventually got Starfall because Tyrande had Starfall. Thus it stands to reason that DHs should get some abilities from Illidan.

Considering the previous Demonology wasn't about you being 100% in demon form, and they gave different abilities to the DH spec, there wouldn't be much of an issue, right? I mean... rogues and feral druids, remember?

Actually it was. The goal of old Demonology was to be in Demon form as much as possible. Further, the old Demonology was actually quite close to how Illidan worked in Black Temple. Dark Apotheosis did this as well, though it was only a glyph.

Point is, that playstyle could have been available for Demon Hunters if Warlocks didn't have it first.

[Toogoodman]

None of these will ever happen, and heres an easy breakdown of why

1) Tinker - After WotLK they will literally NEVER add a class that uses a vehicle for damage (vehicle combat was poorly received by most of the community, hence why it never saw the light of day outside of quests again). The entire idea of a Tinker class is basically an engineer that uses mech suits to damage, how would gearing this character work? how would you interact in combat with this character? This will literally never happen, so i dont know why people jerk off to it so much.

2) Bard....- You're fucking kidding me right? This would be the single least played class of all time, not to mention xpacs are literally build around the lore of a new hero class, what would the xpac be that introduces a healing hippy on his ukulele? Also, don't ever expect them to introduce a class that's primary role is support (lul), support is already the least played shit in the game, no one wants to heal, let alone heal on a bard.

3) Necromancer - This is literally an Unholy DK, i know the argument of "DHs took meta from locks, so why cant necro's delete the entire UH DK spec". Probably because DKs are already a hero class, that was introduced in the Lich King expansion, so it made a shit ton of sense. Are we going to fight the void, and all of a sudden necromancers come to the rescue? man makes sense.

I could see some sort of variation of hunter that gets turned into a dark ranger, were they just go full archer/BM for hunters, while dark rangers are a cross between a hunter/rogue, they apply poisons and shadow magic to their arrows. They could use stealth, and be an actually mail wearing class, because we literally have 2. Thinking about it, this actually sounds really cool, and something that could fit the game pretty well.

Dark Ranger:
1) Uses poisons, runes, and shadow magic to buff the damage of arrows. Able to shoot blight and poison vials that explode on targets
2) Uses stealth like a rogue, not a camo like hunters, but a true stealth
3) Mail user who uses int for a shadow magic/blight spec, and agi for a poison/bleed spec
4) Would be open for all races, similar to DK, alliance Dark Rangers would be pissed off hunters who got risen by the forsaken, horde
would be individuals are happy hunters who were risen by the forsaken.
5) Could fit the void or WotLK 2 xpac idea, shadow spec fits void, risen by forsaken fits WotLK 2

[derpkitteh]

3) Necromancer - This is literally an Unholy DK, i know the argument of "DHs took meta from locks, so why cant necro's delete the entire UH DK spec". Probably because DKs are already a hero class, that was introduced in the Lich King expansion, so it made a shit ton of sense. Are we going to fight the void, and all of a sudden necromancers come to the rescue? man makes sense.

ok, remove priests because paladins do the same thing basically. remove warlocks since there's dh now, same thing basically right?

no. it's not the same thing as unholy dk. it's just not. they're two entirely separate classes that uses the same class of magic.

now, the timing in which they are introduced, i agree with you on that. it will be weird to fit them into a non-undead related expansion. but there's no reason that death knight interferes with them at all.

[Teriz]

None of these will ever happen, and heres an easy breakdown of why

1) Tinker - After WotLK they will literally NEVER add a class that uses a vehicle for damage (vehicle combat was poorly received by most of the community, hence why it never saw the light of day outside of quests again). The entire idea of a Tinker class is basically an engineer that uses mech suits to damage, how would gearing this character work? how would you interact in combat with this character? This will literally never happen, so i dont know why people jerk off to it so much.

Simple, you don't make it like your standard vehicle combat, you make it like a Druid form.

You "change forms" and that form is your character riding a mech. Gearing would be no different than Druids, except that while in the mech you can actually see your armor. Weapons would just be stat sticks, again, just like Druids.

[Toogoodman]

ok, remove priests because paladins do the same thing basically. remove warlocks since there's dh now, same thing basically right?

no. it's not the same thing as unholy dk. it's just not. they're two entirely separate classes that uses the same class of magic.

now, the timing in which they are introduced, i agree with you on that. it will be weird to fit them into a non-undead related expansion. but there's no reason that death knight interferes with them at all.

Even if that explanation is true, i just don't see them adding another tank, so that leaves us with a single spec for the class? Also, they wouldn't add a cloth tanking spec, that also makes no sense (even if they use "bones" to protect themselves). Also, priests and pallys are very different, just because they use the light to heal, their utility is very different. Unholy and necromancer have an almost identical meta, spread plague, raise undead allies to assist in combat. Personally, out of this list, i would believe necros to be the most logical addition (tinker and bard is lulz), but i dont see it. If they were to add another caster it would have to be something very unique, i could see them raping Spriests and warlocks to make some kind of void caster, but i think Dark Ranger would be a good addition (bow classes are pretty rare, since there is only 1).

[Ielenia]

I point out HotS because Blizzard is pulling abilities and concepts from there and importing them into WoW.

Pointing at HotS is the exact same thing as pointing at HS. Both are non-canon.

The point is that Tyrande has Druid and Hunter abilities, and Druids eventually got Starfall because Tyrande had Starfall. Thus it stands to reason that DHs should get some abilities from Illidan.

So what you're saying is that DHs can get abilities from other non-DH NPCs, since druids got an ability that came from a priest NPC?

Actually it was. The goal of old Demonology was to be in Demon form as much as possible.

"As much as possible" =/= "all the time". I'm talking about permanent, not "as much as possible".

[derpkitteh]

Even if that explanation is true, i just don't see them adding another tank, so that leaves us with a single spec for the class? Also, they wouldn't add a cloth tanking spec, that also makes no sense (even if they use "bones" to protect themselves). Also, priests and pallys are very different, just because they use the light to heal, their utility is very different. Unholy and necromancer have an almost identical meta, spread plague, raise undead allies to assist in combat. Personally, out of this list, i would believe necros to be the most logical addition (tinker and bard is lulz), but i dont see it. If they were to add another caster it would have to be something very unique, i could see them raping Spriests and warlocks to make some kind of void caster, but i think Dark Ranger would be a good addition (bow classes are pretty rare, since there is only 1).

necro could have two dps specs and a heal spec. call the heal spec unnatural preservation. or maybe just one dps spec, focusing on having a permanent army of skeletons following you, instead of unholy's temporary army of ghouls. maybe even fiddle with the lich lore a little and bring phylacteries into the mix.

dark ranger could be interesting though, but it'd have to be done right and restricted to only elves and humans, have sylvanas turn to raising night elves for their archery prowess for it, humans, some humans turn forsaken, blood elves.

night elves and humans could escape to the alliance in the starting zone. no reason for the alliance to turn them away, when they didn't turn away(or kill on sight) a fucking death knight, one of the most insidious threats the alliance ever faced.