Possible future hero classes.

[Teriz]

And this is a shining example of what arrogant, spoiled children say when arguing in a discussion. Not to mention asserting as facts stupid things they have no way to even show evidence for.

"Blizzard designed WoW to work against Bard fantasy tropes"... implying Blizzard developers, when developing WoW in the early 2000's, were discussing among themselves: "Any ideas how to design a fantasy MMO game that makes the introduction of a Bard player class impossible?"... Stupidity of this level is so sig-worthy...

Where did I say it was intentional?

For whatever reason, Blizzard developers never created lore around a Bard, never created any heroes around a Bard concept, and eventually moved the game system to lock out their particular style of play (buff/support).

Those are the facts. Take them or leave them.

[Directionalk9]

Well actually, this is what they pulled it from:

http://classic.battle.net/war3/neutr...ewmaster.shtml
http://wow.gamepedia.com/History_of_...en_in_Warcraft

The concept of the Pandaren and Pandaria certainly didn't come from nowhere. Before MoP, it had over a decade of history in the Warcraft universe. Mostly rooted in WC3, but also scattered in WoW lore.

With the Bard, we got nothing.

- - - Updated - - -



Yes, because they designed WoW (from lore to the trinity system) to work against well-established Bard tropes.

You're more wrong than anything he literally said its from a WC3 unit and Chen Stormstout. That fucking Hearthglen Forester you guys have been talking about is on par with what what WC3 had to offer for the creation of MoP.

Argument DONE SON!

[Darktbs]

Well actually, this is what they pulled it from:

http://classic.battle.net/war3/neutr...ewmaster.shtml
http://wow.gamepedia.com/History_of_...en_in_Warcraft

The concept of the Pandaren and Pandaria certainly didn't come from nowhere. Before MoP, it had over a decade of history in the Warcraft universe. Mostly rooted in WC3, but also scattered in WoW lore.

With the Bard, we got nothing.

- - - Updated - - -



Yes, because they designed WoW (from lore to the trinity system) to work against well-established Bard tropes.

Are you Kidding? Over a decade of history in the warcraft universe?That was a decade of jokes, joking with, "they exist" "they do not".
Mop was a expansion made from one character and a couple of Creeps that look nothing like a Pandaren, no one knew what pandaria looked like or had any hints or any races that live there.

If they can make a Expansion from Chen and Pandaria, one Pandaren and a name they can make something for Bards, considering that, guess what, it is already proven that they exist in wow.

[Teriz]

You're more wrong than anything he literally said its from a WC3 unit and Chen Stormstout. That fucking Hearthglen Forester you guys have been talking about is on par with what what WC3 had to offer for the creation of MoP.

Argument DONE SON!

The Pandaren Brewmaster had quite a few things working for it that Forrensten doesn't have:

1. It was from a race never seen before in Warcraft. So we now had a race of characters from a far off land. Where's Forrensten from? What's his story? Not that it matters, he's dead anyway.
2. The Brewmaster had all original abilities to build off of. In fact the entire kit eventually made its way to the Monk class. Forrensten has a hodgepodge of Warrior and Hunter abilities.
3. Chen Stormstout was a hero character that emerged from that Pandaren Brewmaster concept. Again, Forrensten is a minor boss in Stratholme (I think). Definitely not a hero character.

The notion that Hearthsinger Forrensten is on par with the Pandaren Brewmaster/Chen Stormstout is laughable at best.

[Ielenia]

Where did I say it was intentional?

You said it here:

Yes, because they designed WoW (from lore to the trinity system) to work against well-established Bard tropes.

There is no other way to interpret your words in that quote other than imply intent.

For whatever reason, Blizzard developers never created lore around a Bard,

You do know they never created any lore around monks... until Mists of Pandaria came along, right? Of course you do, you just don't let facts get in the way of your narrative.

never created any heroes around a Bard concept,

You do know they never created any heroes around a monk concept... until Mists of Pandaria came along, right? Of course you do, you just don't let facts get in the way of your narrative.

and eventually moved the game system to lock out their particular style of play (buff/support).

You do know that Bards don't necessarily need to be a "support" class, right? Of course you do, you just don't let facts get in the way of your narrative.

[Directionalk9]

The Pandaren Brewmaster had quite a few things working for it that Forrensten doesn't have:

1. It was from a race never seen before in Warcraft. So we now had a race of characters from a far off land. Where's Forrensten from? What's his story? Not that it matters, he's dead anyway.
2. The Brewmaster had all original abilities to build off of. In fact the entire kit eventually made its way to the Monk class. Forrensten has a hodgepodge of Warrior and Hunter abilities.
3. Chen Stormstout was a hero character that emerged from that Pandaren Brewmaster concept. Again, Forrensten is a minor boss in Stratholme (I think). Definitely not a hero character.

The notion that Hearthsinger Forrensten is on par with the Pandaren Brewmaster/Chen Stormstout is laughable at best.

These aren't rubber bands, you stretchin, you stretchin too damn much.

Four abilities and a line that says "I'm from somewhere else" is the entire basis for an entire expansion.

You've proven how many times that there is room for Bards and Necros. Start paying attention boy, why you saying "no," when you proving that "yes," is possible.

You ain't no double helix, straighten yourself up.

[Teriz]

Are you Kidding? Over a decade of history in the warcraft universe?That was a decade of jokes, joking with, "they exist" "they do not".
Mop was a expansion made from one character and a couple of Creeps that look nothing like a Pandaren, no one knew what pandaria looked like or had any hints or any races that live there.

If they can make a Expansion from Chen and Pandaria, one Pandaren and a name they can make something for Bards, considering that, guess what, it is already proven that they exist in wow.

You do understand that Chen Stormstout, Pandaria, Pandaren, and the Brewmaster is far more material than a tribute character with a modified priest ability right?

[Thimagryn]

Tomayto tomahto on the use of the word "Dropping," neither of us want to go down the rabbit-hole of limited races = lower appeal...I guess I kinda do.

It's more than just semantics. It's all in how they want to design the class, and how fan expectations will be guided by the marketting behind the design.

Let's look at the Death Knight. If we look at Warcraft 2 and 3 as the primary sources of lore, then Human, Forsaken and Orc would be the races exclusive for this class. What we got in WoW was a vastly different approach in design, allowing all available races to be a Death Knight and shattering previous racial expectations.

Why? The gameplay was broad enough to incorporate all races into it, and the lore made all races fit the theme of the class. This choice was bolstered by the storytelling for Wrath, mainly to show the grand reach of the Lich King and his affect on all races. We don't look back at Warcraft 2 and 3 and say 'Death Knights should only be Human, Orc or Undead!' because Wrath did a great job of showing us your race of choice being turned. The class we were presented with set the standard for any racial expectations.

Now let's look at the Druids, who are limited to 4 races. We have examples of Blood Elves (Botanist boss in Botanica) and Humans (pre-Worgen Gilnean Harvest Witches) who can use Druidism, so why aren't they playable? Well 2 reasons for this - A: it sticks closer to the core fantasy of being exclusive to certain races, and B: the lower race choice allows for racial customization of certain abilities (All forms).

Since I don't have much investment in the Tinker, I have no preconceptions of what races it should be. I can see this class fitting either being a broad generalist like Engineering shows, or being exclusive to keep the fantasy specific to the small, inventive races. I don't see anything being dropped here because my expectations for any Tinker races falls in line with how the class would be presented to us. Both ways are fine, but the latter offers far more potential customization and a clearer identity of the class when you limit the races to a select few.

But if there were other options and you are set on Goblin/Gnome, all you have to do is not play the other races, and create it as a Goblin/Gnome.

It would be a different design. For one, if they had Mech Forms or Turrets, they would all have to use generic versions rather than potential race-specific ones. I know Druids and Shamans had forms and totems with racial customization too, but much of that was added over time. Same reason why Blizzard has mentioned Demon Hunters potentially expanding races in the future but not in Legion. The art takes resources to work in these customization perks.

I'm totally fine with either approach. I think opening up to more races lends to more popularity, since I think the class would be held back by Gnomes and Goblins being 'ugly' race choices. However, I recognize that if they DO keep it broad like Engineering, we aren't likely to see any racial customization at all and they would all be using one or two types of tech. Being a Draenei Engineer doesn't let you use Draenei Tech, you're stuck with making the same stuff that every other Engineer does. Same with Monks lacking racial customization and using the same animations and spell effects (style of kegs, style of ox/dragon statues) as everyone else. There isn't enough time and resources to spend on making custom assets for every race right out of the gate.

Also how would Pocket Factory work within the WoW combat system?

Same way Army of the Dead works without requiring Corpses. Just have them spawn from nowhere, like Hunter Stampede. Works for the Tinker in DOTA.

[Teriz]

You said it here:

There is no other way to interpret your words in that quote other than imply intent.

Intent to give their game a certain tone. It doesn't mean that they designed it that way to intentionally lock out how a Bard class plays, it simply turned out that way.

Of course the non-existence of Bard lore doesn't help matters.

You do know they never created any lore around monks... until Mists of Pandaria came along, right? Of course you do, you just don't let facts get in the way of your narrative.

Monks were attachable to Chen Stormstout and Pandaria.

By all means, tell us which WC3 Hero can be attached to Bards?

[Thimagryn]

You do understand that Chen Stormstout, Pandaria, Pandaren, and the Brewmaster is far more material than a tribute character with a modified priest ability right?

Considering the Bard was also an April Fools Joke, like the Tinker and the Pandarens, they all have equal amount of material to be substantiated as playable.

Hell, they even made the 2-player Ogre concept work in Heroes of the Storm.

- - - Updated - - -

By all means, tell us which WC3 Hero can be attached to Bards?

Hellscream's eyes are upon you. WC2 Era Grom Hellscream can still return with the doors left open from WoD.

[Ielenia]

Intent to give their game a certain tone. It doesn't mean that they designed it that way to intentionally lock out how a Bard class plays, it simply turned out that way.

No, what you wrote explicitly says that the developers designed WoW the way it is with the intention to block the Bard class from ever becoming reality.

Monks were attachable to Chen Stormstout and Pandaria.

Which had zero lore until MoP came along, which means monks had zero lore until MoP, which makes your reply a non-answer.

By all means, tell us which WC3 Hero can be attached to Bards?

First you need to prove, beyond reasonable doubt, that attaching a WC3 Hero is a must-have requirement. And you can only get that from an explicit Blizzard quote.

[Teriz]

Considering the Bard was also an April Fools Joke, like the Tinker and the Pandarens, they all have equal amount of material to be substantiated as playable.

Hell, they even made the 2-player Ogre concept work in Heroes of the Storm.

The Tinker and Pandaren had heroes that came out of those jokes. They were also expanded upon in WoW. The Bard never was on either level.

Hellscream's eyes are upon you.

What?

[Thimagryn]

What?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XgteUAI4tZo

The Tinker and Pandaren had heroes that came out of those jokes. They were also expanded upon in WoW. The Bard never was on either level.

WoW brought the Bard joke. Aren't they adding a new Deathmetal Band to Darkmoon Faire? I'd say that's expanding the concept too.

All the Bard needs is a strong concept to rally behind, much like how the Tinker has been a joke until we saw Gelbin in his Mech Suit. If they can make a Tinker look cool, they could do that to a Bard too. Just need to not be a Bard. Gelbin didn't need tank treads and a giant hammer sticking out of his suit to show us Tinkers can be a thing.

[AceofH]

So long as it's not more melee. Too many melee as is

[Teriz]

No, what you wrote explicitly says that the developers designed WoW the way it is with the intention to block the Bard class from ever becoming reality.

Yeah, I didn't say that, try again.

Which had zero lore until MoP came along, which means monks had zero lore until MoP, which makes your reply a non-answer.

Which is irrelevant since Chen Stormstout, the Brewmaster hero, and Pandaria gave them lore.

First you need to prove, beyond reasonable doubt, that attaching a WC3 Hero is a must-have requirement. And you can only get that from an explicit Blizzard quote.

You're the one comparing the Bard to the Monk, not me. If the Bard is equal to the Monk concept, then it should have all the advantages that the Monk concept had before implementation.

[Directionalk9]

For the record that's how I saw the Pocket Factory ability working. But Teriz has stated numerous times that abilities have to work differently than other class's abilities.
Most of Gazlowe's HoTS abilities and even the WC3 Tinker unit abilities are in the game under new names.

Rock It Turret, is just Searing Totem, a clunkier Searing Totem. As after you put it down, you have to target and then tell it to attack.

Cluster Rockets is Volley, but instead of arrows its mini missles. You could change it and have each rocket do some splash damage.

Robo-Goblin (wc3) is just fortifying brew mixed with that old Feral Druid ability King of the Jungle (is that still in game?)

Salvager is just Totemic Recall, altered slightly by the fact that your turret has to die, not a copy but definitely very similar

Deth Lazor seems a bit OP for WoW combat mechanics, but could be altered to be more like DH eye beam. (again I'm fine with stuff like that)

Xplodium Charge is a hunters explosive trap, if tinkers have it, there's a lot more you could do with it, but as it stands its not different

Grav-o-Bomb seems unique, funny i had a tinker ability that was a gravity beacon, but it was more of a short term CC spell in my mind

and finally different mechs for different specs is just druids, different forms for different specs, its literally just a visual change.

[Ielenia]

Which is irrelevant since Chen Stormstout, the Brewmaster hero, and Pandaria gave them lore.

Again, before Mists of Pandaria, it had zero lore. What you're claiming in the quote there? Happened after the fact, during Mists of Pandaria.

You're the one comparing the Bard to the Monk, not me. If the Bard is equal to the Monk concept, then it should have all the advantages that the Monk concept had before implementation.

You make the weirdest, most nonsensical correlations, you know that? I'm just pointing out that Blizzard would have no problems whatsoever to implement a bard class, both in gameplay and lore.

[Thimagryn]

For the record that's how I saw the Pocket Factory ability working. But Teriz has stated numerous times that abilities have to work differently than other class's abilities.
Most of Gazlowe's HoTS abilities and even the WC3 Tinker unit abilities are in the game under new names.

Rock It Turret, is just Searing Totem, a clunkier Searing Totem. As after you put it down, you have to target and then tell it to attack.

Cluster Rockets is Volley, but instead of arrows its mini missles. You could change it and have each rocket do some splash damage.

Robo-Goblin (wc3) is just fortifying brew mixed with that old Feral Druid ability King of the Jungle (is that still in game?)

Salvager is just Totemic Recall, altered slightly by the fact that your turret has to die, not a copy but definitely very similar

Deth Lazor seems a bit OP for WoW combat mechanics, but could be altered to be more like DH eye beam. (again I'm fine with stuff like that)

Xplodium Charge is a hunters explosive trap, if tinkers have it, there's a lot more you could do with it, but as it stands its not different

Grav-o-Bomb seems unique, funny i had a tinker ability that was a gravity beacon, but it was more of a short term CC spell in my mind

and finally different mechs for different specs is just druids, different forms for different specs, its literally just a visual change.

If you break it down, you can do that to the Death Knight or the Demon Hunter too and make comparisons to stuff that already exists in game. We have spells, we have summons, we have transformations, we have escapes. What is there mechanically that isn't in the game?

It's all about the flavour. So to say we have Turrets because there's a totem that does the same thing is not exactly true, since we don't have them as Turrets. I mean look at how many people want a necromancer class despite the fact that a Warlock and Death Knight pretty much have that all covered; AND it's not even bringing in a new theme into the mix. It's about playing a very specific class fantasy.

[Teriz]

WoW brought the Bard joke. Aren't they adding a new Deathmetal Band to Darkmoon Faire? I'd say that's expanding the concept too.

All the Bard needs is a strong concept to rally behind, much like how the Tinker has been a joke until we saw Gelbin in his Mech Suit. If they can make a Tinker look cool, they could do that to a Bard too. Just need to not be a Bard. Gelbin didn't need tank treads and a giant hammer sticking out of his suit to show us Tinkers can be a thing.

Well keep in mind, I'm not saying there's zero chance for a Bard to ever make it into WoW as a class, I'm saying it has a FAR lower chance than some other concepts floating around.

If we look at the previous expansion classes, they had main three things in common:

1. Has ties to WC3
2. Fit an expansion theme
3. Had a corresponding hero character

So it stands to reason that the most likely class inclusions would have similar attributes. Let's look at the main concepts brought up here:


Tinker:
1. Has ties to WC3? Yes. Tinker hero
2. Fit an expansion theme? Possibly, probably the strongest argument against the concept.
3. Had a corresponding hero character? Gelbin Mekkatorque, Gazlowe Rachet (possible)
Notes: Has examples on both factions, massive unused class theme

Dark Ranger:
1. Has ties to WC3? Yes. Dark Ranger hero
2. Fit an expansion theme? Yes, due to Sylvannas becoming Warchief, and her actions against the Gilneans.
3. Had a corresponding hero character? Sylvannas Windrunner, Nathanos Blightcaller (possible)
Notes: About the only thing working against this class is justifying spreading the concept beyond the forsaken. HotS abilities could provide some interesting new interpretations of the DR kit.

Necromancer:
1. Has ties to WC3? Yes. Necromancer unit.
2. Fit an expansion theme? Yes, if return to Northrend ever comes up.
3. Had a corresponding hero character? Kel'Thuzad
Notes: Heavy overlap with Death Knights. Redundant class theme. Dark Ranger are probably a preferable alternative.


Bard:

1. Has no ties to any WC lore.
2. No likely expansion theme fits the class (mainly due to lack of WC lore)
3. No corresponding hero character
Notes: The only Bard with abilities in the game is a tribute character with modified Priest abilities.

Out of those, I would say the front runners are the Dark Ranger and the Tinker. The other two have some pretty extreme drawbacks.

- - - Updated - - -

Again, before Mists of Pandaria, it had zero lore. What you're claiming in the quote there? Happened after the fact, during Mists of Pandaria.

Which is irrelevant because the Monk could be attached to a WC3 hero. The Bard cannot, that is the problem with the Bard concept (among others).

You make the weirdest, most nonsensical correlations, you know that? I'm just pointing out that Blizzard would have no problems whatsoever to implement a bard class, both in gameplay and lore.

What lore would they pull from exactly? There's pretty much zero history of Bards in Warcraft outside of a tribute character with a modified priest spell, and a NPC in the Rogue class hall. If you suddenly begin dumping Bard lore into the game it would seem bizarre and out of place. I also really don't see what kind of gameplay they could create for such a class that wouldn't seem redundant via the Priest class. I'm not saying it's impossible, but to say there would be "no problems" is nonsense.

[Directionalk9]

If you break it down, you can do that to the Death Knight or the Demon Hunter too and make comparisons to stuff that already exists in game. We have spells, we have summons, we have transformations, we have escapes. What is there mechanically that isn't in the game?

It's all about the flavour. So to say we have Turrets because there's a totem that does the same thing is not exactly true, since we don't have them as Turrets. I mean look at how many people want a necromancer class despite the fact that a Warlock and Death Knight pretty much have that all covered; AND it's not even bringing in a new theme into the mix. It's about playing a very specific class fantasy.

That's my point entirely. It proves that necros and bards and whatever else you wanna throw in the game can work. All abilities are repeats, there is overlap all over the place, and 4 classes already share 2 themes.