Will the demon hunter class ever come about in WoW?

[Hellishreaper]

Are you going to tell me you missed the uproar on the forums when they announced the monk instead of the demon hunter? hell people have wanted demon hunters since classic and ask for it every expansion.

[delus]

The story lore in wow goes that Warlocks adapted the secrets of the demon hunters for their own use. They already took metamorphosis which is the pillar of what a demon hunter is supposed to be. They now have the glyph of demon hunting and an Illidan armor set in MOP. Adding a demon hunter class would be redundant because they've been gutted of all abilities and most of their flavor has been given to warlocks.

[Tauror]

The story lore in wow goes that Warlocks adapted the secrets of the demon hunters for their own use. They already took metamorphosis which is the pillar of what a demon hunter is supposed to be. They now have the glyph of demon hunting and an Illidan armor set in MOP. Adding a demon hunter class would be redundant because they've been gutted of all abilities and most of their flavor has been given to warlocks.

Was about to say this. The Demon Hunter is slowly becoming a sect of Warlock, with the Warlocks get more and more Demon Hunter-related gear and abilities.

Which it does kinda make sense, since Illidan was a mage, before all, that started fighting fel fire with fel fire. In other words, a warlock.

[Leviatharan]

Pros of the Demon Hunter:
- At least one of the top five most requested classes of all time, or top three now that Death Knights and Monks/Brewmasters are out of the picture.
- Replicable, non-generic and still recognizable.
- Class niche whose existence is supported by a very lore-heavy character: Illidan. This attribute is important, as EVERY class seen thus far has a lore figure at its head.

Cons of the Demon Hunter:
- Many unique attributes and abilities have been divided between the Demonology Warlock and Rogue, and Blizzard habitually bars replication of class mechanics other than de/buffs.
- The most iconic figure of the class is dead, and it's ambiguous if Blizzard intends to revive him as anything more than a shining moment of fanservice.
- In line with the previous, there are currently only two confirmed/living/unkillable Demon Hunters remaining in the game: Altruis the Sufferer and Feronas Sindweller.
- All Demon Hunters seen thus far have been Night Elves or Blood Elves, and the Blood Elf Demon Hunters are noted for their rarity, as only two survived training.
- There are no organizations of Demon Hunters, something every other class has alongside a major lore figure. This can be remedied, however, as seen with the Death Knight. (The 'Dark Embrace' was one ghost, not an organization.)
- It's a fourth Leather-wearing class, pulling it over the limit.
- Not enough information has been given on the class' abilities to distinguish three specs, and even if they were distinguishable from each other, good luck separating them from other classes.

---------- Post added 2012-06-08 at 06:17 PM ----------

Which it does kinda make sense, since Illidan was a mage, before all, that started fighting fel fire with fel fire. In other words, a warlock.

Sorcerer, not mage.

[gibbie99]

I could see it as an advanced class, ie get to level 80 or whatever and choose your AC, or maybe they would add a 4th spec to all classes. But yeah it's too similiar to lock and hunter abilities to create a brand new class.

[ijffdrie]

Sorcerer, not mage.

There's a difference in warcraft lore? I know the RPG had them as different classes (well, the first edition did, the 2nd had them both as arcanists), but outside of that, the rules seem to be that command of magic is a combination of talent and training. The balance between the two may differ, but the core mechanics are the same.

[Tauror]

Sorcerer, not mage.

Uh, that's basically the same in Warcraft mechanics. The same as a Sunwalker being a Paladin archtype or a Ranger being a Hunter, for example.

[Albert the fish]

There's a difference in warcraft lore? I know the RPG had them as different classes (well, the first edition did, the 2nd had them both as arcanists), but outside of that, the rules seem to be that command of magic is a combination of talent and training. The balance between the two may differ, but the core mechanics are the same.

there are differences in lore. in gameplay both are represented by the "Mage" class.
this happens all the time.it's why we won't see a farseer or witch doctor class anytime soon.
it's also why we won't see Demon Hunter, regardless of how much some people cling to the hope.

certain classes represent others in game. if you want to play a spellbreak, roll a belf warrior and refer to yourself as a spellbreaker. if you want to be a farseer, roll orc shaman and refer to yourself as a farseer.
the longer time goes on, the more and more Blizzard makes it clear that if you want to play a Demon Hunter, you roll a Warlock, spec Demo and call yourself a Demon Hunter.

the finishing touch will be when they allow Nelves to be Warlocks.

no sorry, even then the believers will gripe and maintain that Demon Hunters are right around the corner.

don't get me wrong, i'd be the first to roll a DH if they were made into a unique class, but everything that makes them Demon Hunters was suspiciously Warlocky from the start (using demon powers against demons? turning into a demon?!) and their powers have kept on and kept on bleeding into Warlock and to a limited form to Rogues since the game started. Demo ability to use Metamorphosis (it even uses the same name and the same basic figure for crying out loud) signaled the end of DH as a unique class in WoW. it was a sad day for those of us that wanted DH.
i got over it. a lot of people haven't.

[ijffdrie]

there are differences in lore. in gameplay both are represented by the "Mage" class.
this happens all the time.it's why we won't see a farseer or witch doctor class anytime soon.

No, I get that part. What I meant was whether there was specifically a difference between mages and sorcerers. Usually, the difference lies in sorcerers being naturally gifted, while mages have trained, but that doesn't really seem to be the case in the warcraft universe (what with the sorcerors in warcraft III coming from the centers of magical studies). Unlike, say, a blood mage, necromancer or warlock, a sorcerer doesn't appear to be a specific specialization either.

[Albert the fish]

No, I get that part. What I meant was whether there was specifically a difference between mages and sorcerers. Usually, the difference lies in sorcerers being naturally gifted, while mages have trained, but that doesn't really seem to be the case in the warcraft universe (what with the sorcerors in warcraft III coming from the centers of magical studies). Unlike, say, a blood mage, necromancer or warlock, a sorcerer doesn't appear to be a specific specialization either.

i don't remember what the differences were, but yes in lore there are differences between mages and sorcerers.