5 reasons why you may see a Ranger or Tinker class in WoW

[Deleted]

I see what you did there, but that seems like something very few people would have gotten from what you said, since no one knows what "Titan project" is gonna be about, and Titan constructs are already in World of Warcraft and is a big part of this particular discussion i fail to see how i am suppose to guess that you are very vaguely referring to a game that we know nothing about.

*whispers* because I assumed you were aware of the double meaning of "Titan" *wink*

[Teriz]

Based on your beliefs from your last forum Post. 5 reasons why we wont see DH. This thread shoulda been called 5 reasons we wont see Tinkers Ranger or Alchemists.

You cant differentiate a class who is driven by a profession and simply say, OH tinkering and engineering are different.

As you said with warlocks and demon hunters.... to similar, warlocks have kit abilities demon hunters have so it wouldnt be rational.
So with your own train of thought that rangers and surely excluded because their kit will be exactly that of a hunter.

I pretty much said the exact thing in OP of the thread and within the first 20 responses. Thanks for refreshing my memory.

Alchemist falls flat also as it is a class who is driven by a profession.

Why cant the orc warrior who took herb and alchemy be an "alchemist" archytype? Does he not know how to throw vials of the potions and elixers he brews? That would make him an "alchemist" class.

Who is advocating for an Alchemist class?

Has Geblin Mechatorque never thought of building a giant tank to tank or a robot? Geblin is the "HIGH TINKER" and he fights in melee range, what makes him so different from the warrior he is... maybe he uses the cloth hat from Gnomer? Or other on use trinkets?

Actually (as has been stated by others) Mekkatorque invented Mechano Strider mounts, fought in tanks, and utilized quite a bit of technology when he battled. Let me know when warriors get the ability to summon laser beams from the sky.

---------- Post added 2013-01-27 at 11:55 PM ----------

/sigh You did 5 reasons why dhs wont be in game, and even in the thread you showed your bias-ness to ranger/tinkers, and loe and behold, this thread shows. Tinkers= Engineers. Rangers=Hunters.

There are many other classes that could simply be added to the game better than these two. These two are already taken by a profession and by a class. Sure, some gimmicks to tinkers are not in the engineer's profession, but most of it is already there. Hunters have everything that a ranger wants (besides dark ranger). You cannot make another class with everything that another class has.

Personally, I want sea witches, then have naga join either horde or alliance. That will give you another "ranger" class, with lightning and tornadoes mixed in. But hey, we can all be biased, much.

Well a major difference between a Tinker class and an engineering profession would be that the class would have abilities that scale as you level. You won't be stuck with a level 12 ability attached to an item that you can't use after your first day leveling.

Which is why a class and profession are two very different things.

[checking facts]

ranger is not gonna happen, because blizz always goes out of their way to show us that rangers and sentinels are hunters.

tinker could happen, but if I were a dev I'd not make it happen. here's why:

1 - it doesn't make sense for a tinker not to be an engineer;
2 - it would be bad to force tinkers to take engineering involuntarily;
3 - whatever the tinker does could be incorporated into engineering, so you could have a rogue tinker, a tinker warrior, a technomage, et cetera.

I'd say this: instead of a tinker class, blizz should work more on making professions show in gameplay. if engineers could take out a mecha and shoot fire lazors instead of fireballs or hitting people with shredder saws instead of axes, people would stop asking for tinkers.

[Drilnos]

ranger is not gonna happen, because blizz always goes out of their way to show us that rangers and sentinels are hunters.

tinker could happen, but if I were a dev I'd not make it happen. here's why:

1 - it doesn't make sense for a tinker not to be an engineer;
2 - it would be bad to force tinkers to take engineering involuntarily;
3 - whatever the tinker does could be incorporated into engineering, so you could have a rogue tinker, a tinker warrior, a technomage, et cetera.

I'd say this: instead of a tinker class, blizz should work more on making professions show in gameplay. if engineers could take out a mecha and shoot fire lazors instead of fireballs or hitting people with shredder saws instead of axes, people would stop asking for tinkers.

Is a mage who picks up blacksmithing a warrior mage? No. Is a rogue who knows how to enchant things a conjuror? Again, no. Does it make sense to have a warrior who doesn't act as a blacksmith? Sure. A mage who doesn't know how to enchant? Absolutely. Engineering gadgets are mass produced. They have end users. Tinkering gadgets are tailored to the individual tinker. A tinker doesn't have to worry about whether something he makes will make sense to anyone else. He doesn't have to come up with instruction manuals or factor in the average arm lengths or number of fingers of potential users, or assume that some people might not immediately know the purpose of the little red button on the bottom of the gun. A common engineer would find it nearly impossible to reverse engineer, or even safely use, a tinker's equipment. A tinker would need an engineer's skill set to produce something simple and generic enough for the masses to use.

[Teriz]

ranger is not gonna happen, because blizz always goes out of their way to show us that rangers and sentinels are hunters.

tinker could happen, but if I were a dev I'd not make it happen. here's why:

1 - it doesn't make sense for a tinker not to be an engineer;
2 - it would be bad to force tinkers to take engineering involuntarily;
3 - whatever the tinker does could be incorporated into engineering, so you could have a rogue tinker, a tinker warrior, a technomage, et cetera.

I'd say this: instead of a tinker class, blizz should work more on making professions show in gameplay. if engineers could take out a mecha and shoot fire lazors instead of fireballs or hitting people with shredder saws instead of axes, people would stop asking for tinkers.

If you were a dev, I'd recommend you play Torchlight 2 and the Engineering class and realize how awesome a Tinker class in WoW would be.

But to your reasons;

1. It makes sense. Think of an engineer like a mechanic who fixes things. Think of a tinker as a hero that uses technology as a weapon. Sort of like Iron Man.
2. A Tinker could take any profession they want. I see Shaman taking engineering, and warriors taking up tailoring. Ever see a warrior knit a dress?
3. You'll never see active skills, passive abilities, and cooldowns as a craft.

I'll do a write up of a Tinker class soon. Hopefully that convinces some people that it wouldn't be like the Engineering profession.

[McNeil]

Both ranger and tinker look like really promising classes. I'd like a new non-magic ranged DPS already, instead of only having a hunter for this.

[Moon-Man]

Ranger will never happen. Because Ranger are Hunters, with one exception...No Pets.

If you wanna play as a ranger, dismiss your pet...

[Teriz]

Ranger will never happen. Because Ranger are Hunters, with one exception...No Pets.

If you wanna play as a ranger, dismiss your pet...

http://www.mmo-champion.com/threads/...ss-idea-(Long)

I want to be that kind of Ranger.

[Moon-Man]

http://www.mmo-champion.com/threads/...ss-idea-(Long)

I want to be that kind of Ranger.

Looks like a Necromanger, or Rangomancer. Lol, (Ranger + Necromancer).

Would look cool

[Guldur]

It will be a mail class IMO, and I agree with most of what you said, very nice speculation thread, super interesting read. Thumbs up