Steve Irwin died the same way he lived. With animals in his heart.
Yep, of course, it is, according to Teriz design philosophy (just like every suggestions he makes on MMO-C), a better solution to let 8 specs compete for one caster mace in T14.
Let me break it down
elemental shaman
resto shaman
shadow priest
disci priest
holy priest
holy paladin
resto druid
balance druid
For this specs, the BiS weapon of this tier is the sha-touched mace of the Empress. Great design.
IF they actually do agility swords, it means they exclude us, hence giving swords to enh would mean "it will give us more" for certain. If they dont make swords, shamans are definately the reason. Sooo we will get more choices, assuming they do make swords and it will give us the same opions in that case as well.
scratch the "not" in your sentence and you're actually making sense.
Every troll in zg worships the primal gods, more pecisely hakkar. So even a hakkari warrior, headhunter, assasin or whatever could be seen as religious, and therefor have his weapon choices justified as one and the same, ignoring classes.Did you disregard every other part of my post that had answers to all of that?
First, 'religious' classes, of which a Warriors is not, all follow an individual race's feelings and aesthetics on that 'religion'
...
Warriors are a generalization. They are represented in every race, and no race really gives the ideal of a Warrior more than any other-- everyone has their weapon-swinging badasses.
Religious classes worship deities and gods, not weapon types. There is no such thing as offending a shamans' ancestors or elemental spirits by weilding a sword. A priest cannot weild swords, but a paladin, who just as well gains power from the light, can. How do you explain that?
Swords can be weilded by "evil" classes like dks, warlocks and rogues, but also by just paladins and monks or "neutral" mages and warriors. They cannot be weilded by neither shadow nor holy priests. So where exactly does a divine power actually distinguish between weapon types?
The only reason why they could still justify keeping swords away from shamans would be caster weapon balance, which could be easily avoided by keeping them enhance only.
Last edited by Omanley; 2013-02-05 at 06:44 PM.
Originally Posted by Angoth
If Blizzard does care about aesthetics and lore, they would'nt make offset pieces based on the tier sets that can be equipped by another classes. One another fact, that i don't understand why tier sets have class restrictions...First, 'religious' classes, of which a Warriors is not, all follow an individual race's feelings and aesthetics on that 'religion'
Shaman == Orc (see: Ghost Wolf form)
Druid == Night Elf
Priest == Human/Dwarf
Paladin == Human/Dwarf
Monk == Pandaren
Warriors are a generalization. They are represented in every race, and no race really gives the ideal of a Warrior more than any other-- everyone has their weapon-swinging badasses.
I think the biggest limitation with giving Shamans swords is actually that it would mean caster Shamans would have access to caster swords as well, which would be unfair to other casters.
It is when Blizzard gives blacksmiths the ability to craft 1 slow agility weapon and it is a sword . . . they gave Rogues axes so why is it a big deal to give just Enhancement Swords if people don't think swords are shaman like they can just not use swords or you know xmog it to a axe or a mace (5.2).
Last edited by Zaizo; 2013-02-06 at 04:03 AM.
You continue to miss my point.
Of course they worshipped in ZG. It was a temple city. I'm talking about player classes.
It's not about the worship of a weapon, it's about tendencies in the 'sect' represented by the player class and the traditions thereof.
The Shaman class in WoW, regardless of race chosen, represents the Orc Shaman sec (See: Bloodlust, Feral Spirit, Ghost Wolf, Far Sight, Chain Lightning, etc). Orcs, traditionally, use axes. Therefore, regardless of shamanistic tendencies in other races, Shaman in WoW prefer Axes, Fists and Clubs (the more primal, brutish weapons) as a throwback to the Orc Shaman aesthetics.
I'm not arguing for or against, but this is a valid explanation for why Shaman can't use swords. It's a matter of tradition and class identity.
This isn't even a valid complaint, since the only raid Agi sword since T11 (exclusive) has been a trash drop.
Consider it, if anything, a compliment, that your class has that sort of identity. Your class has history, aesthetic, and lore. Consider now Rogues, Warriors and Hunters that, due to their more general nature, have very little class identity (barring stealth, the wielding of weapons, and pets). There is no race or sect that particularly screams any one of those more than the other and has a developed enough aesthetic to base the class around.
Shaman can't use swords because it offers identity.
Steve Irwin died the same way he lived. With animals in his heart.
I don't think they should be able to. Maybe if there weren't any monks.
As sorrior pointed out, 2h maces/axes used to be enh specific. It is neither hard to implement nor is there any problem with it being the only spec specific proficiency in the game.
They gave axes to rogues so that they could make axes that didn't felt as a waste of itemisation space. Giving swords to shamans will accomplish something similar for agi swords, so it does serve more than cosmetic purposes (which include rogues/monks as well tbh, since it means more new moggable sword skins).The ONLY reason they gave axes to rogues was to improve itemization and weapon variety. There's no such issue right now, so there's no extant reason to add swords to Shaman, other than some Shaman thinking swords look cool.
If it didn't, people would just ask for the ability to mog into swords, rather than the ability to weild them.
For casters, yes. For agi 1h users, no. Both rogues and monks can use everything enh can use, plus swords. If rogues hadn't axes still, and monks being unable to weild maces, then it would serve a purpose. The only purpose it serves now is to exclude enh from equal weapon options among loot rivals.The weapon proficiency system serves a purpose.
So lore reasons actually are not about lore, but players? Makes perfect sense.I'm talking about player classes.
Wow shamans are nothing more than a potpourri of spiritual WC3 units, such as shamans, witch doctors, shadow hunters, spirit walkers and far seers. Talk about lore.
100% of lore is npc based, hence including zg trolls.
So there aren't actually lore reasons at all.
There is no "sect". Player classes are 100% made up of of players. Us. And we are obviously not all agreeing on those supposed tendencies. It's about blizzard implementing it or not, that is all. And for what unjustifiable reason they dont do it, doesn't matter either.It's not about the worship of a weapon, it's about tendencies in the 'sect' represented by the player class and the traditions thereof.
Totems (Witch doctor wards), Spiritlink (Spiritwalker), Ethereal Form => Astral Shift (Spiritwalker), Healing Wave (Shadow Hunter), Serpent Ward = Searing Totem (Shadow Hunter), Hex (Shadow Hunter), Reincarnation (Tauren chieftain)The Shaman class in WoW, regardless of race chosen, represents the Orc Shaman
Also... Spiritwalk, Spiritwalker's Grace
none of these are orcish...
In lots of areas in wow, lore has lost its meaning. Rogues arent general, they are very specific in using stealthy weapons, which axes and maces are not. And daggers and staves are just as senseless for warriors btw. There is nothing complimenting being left out on something.Consider it, if anything, a compliment, that your class has that sort of identity. Your class has history, aesthetic, and lore.
Last edited by Omanley; 2013-02-06 at 06:26 PM.
Originally Posted by Angoth
Moaning that the only crafted agi weapon is a sword, what about 1h healer weapon, it's an axe, only paladins and SHAMANS can use it, literally just stop moaning, nothing is always going to be perfect for everyone, just get over it and go do some hcs till you get a fist/axe/mace or whatever, they're only 463 blues ffs