4th spec would solve all class problems.

[Zaelsino]

"All" is pushing it. A fourth spec would be great though, yeah; it's just the sort of new feature they could do well leading with.

[Tuor]

Do note that WoW is probably set for a 12th class though. Cloth-wearers have 3 classes, leather-wearers have 3, mail-wearers only have 2, and plate-wearers have 3. What that class might be and what its "kit" is is anyone's guess.

If we look to lore, most likely a Ranger class were Alleria could fit, or a demon Hunter/warden class were both illidian and Maiev could fit.

About the topic i will comment just the 2 classes i play, and i will start with warriors, Bladlemaster?? How would that be or feel diferent then Arms? I would rather see SMF getting is own spec, and give Blademaster to Rogues, they already have stealth, so the Blademaster could fit them very well, and they don't have a 2h spec.

About Shamans, yes, a lot of people asking for 2h weapon viability, and most of those people are asking not for a spec but for a smal tunning to allow the usage of 2h weapons. As for tanking, i agree, if there is a 4th spec to come, it must be a tanking spec... Using a Shield obviously.

[Jtree]

About Shamans, yes, a lot of people asking for 2h weapon viability, and most of those people are asking not for a spec but for a smal tunning to allow the usage of 2h weapons. As for tanking, i agree, if there is a 4th spec to come, it must be a tanking spec... Using a Shield obviously.

Why use a shield? There aren't agility shields out there, and even if blizz does add more specs, I don't expect them to add a lot of new things to the loot tables. Certainly not for a single spec.

Personally, I'd love to see a Shaman dual-wield tank, that mechanically brings back the feel of Wrath-era DK Frost tanks. I've never enjoyed Blood tanking as much as I did the sturdy, damage-splashing Frost tank. A shaman tank could "harden himself with stone and ice" to reduce damage and increase health and threat. Add some damage mitigation tools, perhaps an omen of clarity type proc for heals or lightning attacks, and we're good.

[Teriz]

Coding was easy. Mechanical implementation was easy. There was precious little that had to be done about it.

Really? The mastery is completely different than its Cataclysm incarnation. Are you saying that its pretty easy to develop masteries?

And my argument was that there was hardly any need for design, there.

And my argument is that if adding this stuff isn't a big deal according to you, then what's the point of your original argument that adding a 4th spec is harder than adding a class?

You're wrong, because most of that was already built into the forms. I'm not saying that they didn't need to design a new synergy with many talents, but they had a very firm foundation to work from, and it pretty much came down to changing bear/cat to feral/guardian. Sure it was a lot of work. But nothing compared to what you're suggesting.

So it didn't require a lot of work, but it did require a lot of work, but I'm wrong because the foundation was there and didn't require a lot of work?

Okay.....

Shaman doesn't have a skeleton tank in there. All they have is the ability to wield shields and use Rockbiter. Sure; you could make a tank out of it pretty easily by adding a fourth spec that is pretty much an Enhancement copy designed for tanking, but the same cannot be said for other classes.

Actually the entire skeleton includes the following;

Rockbiter: Primary weapon imbue. Give it tanking stats.
Primal Strike: Not used after Stromstrike is learned. Make this a prominent ability in this spec.
Unleash Weapon/Fury: Keep it as it is currently.
Earthquake: Move it out of elemental and into this new spec. Ele Shaman use CL for AOE anyway.
Maelstrom Weapon: Make it unique to this spec. Ex: You trigger its procs from blocking, dodging, or parrying. Earthquake would benefit from this as well.
Elemental Shields: Wide open. You could have passives that enhance current shields, or make a unique one specialized for tanking.
Totems: Again wide open. Give this spec Elemental Harmony to allow the dropping of multiple totems of the same element, and some unique totems for tanking purposes.
Resurrection: A tank that can self-res? Yes please.
Shocks: Any shock could be utilized for this spec.
Earth Elemental: Should be heavily utilized in some fashion.
Ascendance: Tanking/DPS cooldown
Shields: (if sword and board style tank) Shield imbues? Shield abilities? Shield passives?
2H: (if 2H tank) Double weapon imbue? 2H abilities? 2H passives?
Shamanistic Rage: Already multi-spec.

Point is, the skeleton is already in place. Enhancement is the blueprint for melee shaman and the Earth elemental abilities are the blueprint for tanking. We have plenty of unused abilities just waiting to be used. All that's really left is implementation and establishing proper tanking CDs, and determining whether this spec would be 2h or use shields. In terms of CDs, Ascendance SR, and Earth Elemental are easy and already in place along with the level 15 talents. We would just need an additional defensive CD and we should be good to go. Big bad voodoo anyone?

Could be done, but then: It would essentially be the exact same spec as Demonology, only tanking. Why would you do that? Also, I don't think Blizzard altered it because of what you say... There's something wrong when a pure class tanks as well as a tanking class, but deals as much damage as a pure.

Yeah, DA isn't like Demonology. Demonology is still primarily a caster spec. Dark Apotheosis is a Melee/ranged hybrid spec.

There's only something wrong with that if the developers don't balance it properly. They could have balanced Warlock tanking to make it work. However, doing that destroys Demonology as a DPS spec. They couldn't pull a feral because then they'd be right back in the feral situation again, so they just turned it into a glyph.

So now Warlocks are in the same position that Druids were in, except their second spec is locked into glyph.

All of this btw answers your earlier question of "who would want this?" If the response from the Warlock community during BETA is any indication, its a lot of people.

The fact that a class can do it doesn't mean that a class can do it well. A mage can fight in melee. Doesn't mean the mage should be able to do so as well as a warrior.

False equivalency.

A Mage fighting in Melee isn't the same as a DKs ability casting spells. All DKs cast spells. spells are a significant portion of their DPS. Melee combat is NO part of Mages DPS. So a Mage having a Melee specs makes little sense. A DK having a caster spec makes sense, because there are examples in WoW of ranged casters in heavy armor.

Doesn't make them melee combatants. It makes them casters that can take a hit and generate more threat.

Their main spell only has a 10 yard range, and the majority of their spells can't go beyond 25 yards, they also have craploads of threat, and have a paassive that stacks a 15% damage reduction stat on top of a plate armor equivalent. They're Melee combatants because they have to fight in Melee range, and they're designed to fight in melee range. This is why they can take a hit. The point is that a clothie warlock being as tough as a tank isn't some silly pipe dream, its pretty much already in the game.

And the Monk class was built with this conversion mechanic into it for that spec... You could do the same for other specs, but it will take time, effort, and results might not please you.

The point is that it can be done be sues there's a successful template on how to make it work.

The false equivalency is in the fact that you ask which is harder: Adding a new (but already existing) spec, or altering a class in order to allow it to keep up with the times while giving each spec more personality. It's like asking 'what is harder; building a house or building a bridge.' They're just not the same. But I answered the question regardless, so there's no use in trying to pass it off as if I didn't.

Yeah, asking if a bridge or a building is more difficult to build isn't a false equivalency either.

---------- Post added 2013-04-23 at 09:20 PM ----------

About the topic i will comment just the 2 classes i play, and i will start with warriors, Bladlemaster?? How would that be or feel diferent then Arms? I would rather see SMF getting is own spec, and give Blademaster to Rogues, they already have stealth, so the Blademaster could fit them very well, and they don't have a 2h spec.

It should feel quite a bit different than arms if properly implemented. First you have wind walk, which should allow a warrior to increase their movement speed while invisible. When they emerge out of Wind Walk, they should have a buff that makes their next attack a critical strike for a few seconds.

Next they should have mirror image, that allows the blaster to split into illusionary copies.

[Jackielope]

Yeah, my money is on the 12th class being the Tinker class. They could wear mail armor, their archetype is very broad, and they could easily be a hybrid class.

I do believe that we may see a 4th spec because MoP already introduced a race and a class. 4th spec and new character models in addition to expanded lore for each race already in the game could replace the need to add a new class and race for the next expansion. Also Druids proved that 4th specs are doable in the current WoW system, and a few classes in the game have skeletons of additional specs already within them.

This allows Blizzard to expand on the races and classes already in the game.

I'm not sure Blizz could do a Tinker class purely because Engineering is a profession. Likewise, an Alchemist wouldn't work because that's also a profession.

If we look to lore, most likely a Ranger class were Alleria could fit, or a demon Hunter/warden class were both illidian and Maiev could fit.

About the topic i will comment just the 2 classes i play, and i will start with warriors, Bladlemaster?? How would that be or feel diferent then Arms? I would rather see SMF getting is own spec, and give Blademaster to Rogues, they already have stealth, so the Blademaster could fit them very well, and they don't have a 2h spec.

About Shamans, yes, a lot of people asking for 2h weapon viability, and most of those people are asking not for a spec but for a smal tunning to allow the usage of 2h weapons. As for tanking, i agree, if there is a 4th spec to come, it must be a tanking spec... Using a Shield obviously.

I think a ranged weapon-based class or spec without a pet would be helpful and good for the game, so ranger would fit. Getting it to not overlap so much with the hunter or rogue could be quite difficult though. Making a whole new class might not work, but a new spec probably would.

And yes, Blademaster abilities were some inspiration for Arms. Bladestorm isn't in that tree for nothing. I wouldn't expect Wind Walk to become a rogue or warrior ability though unless it was renamed, since Wind Walk pretty much screams monk now. The different version of ability is also something rogues have had for a while now because of stealth openers.

Shaman shield tanking wouldn't work due to itemization. DW tanking though, that could go over quite well, but 2h tanking would still work too. One reason for DW tanking is different weapon imbues can mean different effects based on the encounter, though perhaps that would end up just being one of those things players look up online to get the most optimal choice per encounter, so it really wouldn't add much depth once people analyzed it. Having the choice of DW or 2h might still be interesting even if Rockbiter was the only option.

For the record, if shamans ever get a tanking spec, it really shouldn't be called Guardian. They already share one spec name with druids, let's not add another. At least, not completely. Maybe something like Earthguard for the name?

[Teriz]

I'm not sure Blizz could do a Tinker class purely because Engineering is a profession. Likewise, an Alchemist wouldn't work because that's also a profession.

Well a few things work in its favor despite its similarity to engineering;

1. It has a different name than the profession, so while thematically its similar, players shouldn't get confused. You could also call the class a Gyromancer.
2. None of the WC3 Tinker hero's abilities are in WoW currently.
3. It would be a great class to further Goblin and especially Gnome lore.
4. The class would help represent the steam punk side of WoW, which is frankly getting more and more prevalent in each expansion.
5. This class fills the mail armor and physical ranged hole in the current class balance. I.E. The petless spec that can use ranged weapons.

[Stir]

Really? The mastery is completely different than its Cataclysm incarnation. Are you saying that its pretty easy to develop masteries?

Game systems mechanically? Yeah; mastery is pretty easy to implement.

And my argument is that if adding this stuff isn't a big deal according to you, then what's the point of your original argument that adding a 4th spec is harder than adding a class?

The difference is that 'this stuff' by itself isn't so difficult... But fitting it to a framework that does not accommodate it is.

So it didn't require a lot of work, but it did require a lot of work, but I'm wrong because the foundation was there and didn't require a lot of work?

From a systems developer, it didn't require a lot of work. Systems developers don't write the code, don't work the UI, don't work on the engine, don't work on graphics design, modelling, texturing or animating.

Actually the entire skeleton includes the following;

Rockbiter: Primary weapon imbue. Give it tanking stats.

Rockbiter is an oh-shit button, and not intended to be more (at the moment). It could have once been meant to be able to develop further into a tanking tree, but Blizzard decided not to go that route with Enhancement.

Primal Strike: Not used after Stromstrike is learned. Make this a prominent ability in this spec.

Nothing to do with tanking.

Unleash Weapon/Fury: Keep it as it is currently.

Has nothing to do with tanking.

Earthquake: Move it out of elemental and into this new spec. Ele Shaman use CL for AOE anyway.

Has nothing to do with tanking.

Maelstrom Weapon: Make it unique to this spec. Ex: You trigger its procs from blocking, dodging, or parrying. Earthquake would benefit from this as well.

Has nothing to do with tanking.

Elemental Shields: Wide open. You could have passives that enhance current shields, or make a unique one specialized for tanking.

Has nothing to do with tanking. Lightning shield was solo/PvP intended. Water Shield's proc was PvP-intended with passive MP/5 buff and benefit on getting aggro.

Totems: Again wide open. Give this spec Elemental Harmony to allow the dropping of multiple totems of the same element, and some unique totems for tanking purposes.

Nothing to do with tanking.

Resurrection: A tank that can self-res? Yes please.

I agree; it'd be cool... But nothing to do with tanking.

Shocks: Any shock could be utilized for this spec.

True, but nothing to do with tanking.

Earth Elemental: Should be heavily utilized in some fashion.

Nothing to do with/CONFLICTING with tanking.

Ascendance: Tanking/DPS cooldown

Nothing to do with tanking.

Shields: (if sword and board style tank) Shield imbues? Shield abilities? Shield passives?

Shields can be used for tanking. Shield imbues (rockbiter: Shield) does not exist. Could be made to fix, but does not exist.

2H: (if 2H tank) Double weapon imbue? 2H abilities? 2H passives?

Nothing to do with tanking. DK and Guardian are weird for not using sword'n'board, but two-handed tanking is not the staple. Only one spec uses it. Not a good argument, but it in itself does not have anything to do with tanking.

Shamanistic Rage: Already multi-spec.

the ONLY thing that is staple to tanking because of the damage reduction. All non-tanking classes have similar cooldowns, however.

Point is, the skeleton is already in place. Enhancement is the blueprint for melee shaman and the Earth elemental abilities are the blueprint for tanking. We have plenty of unused abilities just waiting to be used. All that's really left is implementation and establishing proper tanking CDs, and determining whether this spec would be 2h or use shields. In terms of CDs, Ascendance SR, and Earth Elemental are easy and already in place along with the level 15 talents. We would just need an additional defensive CD and we should be good to go. Big bad voodoo anyone?

No; it is NOT in place. If could be adapted to include tanking, and Enhancement is the easiest to go with (despite difficulties such as conversion and Maelstrom not being a core Shaman mechanic). But a tanking skeleton does not exist within the Shaman class.

Yeah, DA isn't like Demonology. Demonology is still primarily a caster spec. Dark Apotheosis is a Melee/ranged hybrid spec.

Melee: Uses melee weapons. WEAPONS. You clobber things. DA is still a caster that can take a beating. It's a close combat caster, but no less a caster.

There's only something wrong with that if the developers don't balance it properly. They could have balanced Warlock tanking to make it work. However, doing that destroys Demonology as a DPS spec. They couldn't pull a feral because then they'd be right back in the feral situation again, so they just turned it into a glyph.

Exactly. Which is why they didn't go that route. Remember the death knight outcry when Blood became the tanking spec?

So now Warlocks are in the same position that Druids were in, except their second spec is locked into glyph.

No... Their second spec is an oh-shit button like Rockbiter Unleash. Actually, they don't have a second spec. It was speculative in beta, but never on live. It hasn't happened. It wasn't THERE. Nothing got taken away.

All of this btw answers your earlier question of "who would want this?" If the response from the Warlock community during BETA is any indication, its a lot of people.

Beta is a testing phase. Nothing more. DA didn't work as intended; people start to use it for actually tanking stuff, and Blizzard didn't want a tanking warlock. End of.

False equivalency.

How so? A warrior is a melee class. A mage can swing a weapon, but lacks any special weapon attack abilities. Therefore, a mage will never be a competent melee combatant.

A Mage fighting in Melee isn't the same as a DKs ability casting spells. All DKs cast spells. spells are a significant portion of their DPS. Melee combat is NO part of Mages DPS. So a Mage having a Melee specs makes little sense. A DK having a caster spec makes sense, because there are examples in WoW of ranged casters in heavy armor.

Death Knight 'spells' act like hybrid strikes. Only AotD has a casting time, and Death Knights need to build specific resources to cast the spells. Usually, this is in the form of DC/RS/FS, using Runic Power, which is generated by using melee strikes that are fuelled by runes. Basically: You need to be in your opponent's face hitting them in order to build up resource to 'cast spells' at them. The 'spells' are actually just strikes that use spell-LIKE mechanics. But those mechanics stop at hit/expertise/armour (for DC). Mages, warlocks and such, however, have an entirely different playstyle. Cast times, mana pools, no auto-swings, no expertise, hightened hit ceiling (which was internally lowered for DK 'spells' simply because they are spells designed to act like strikes).
You could, again, go the Enhancement route, which is the ONLY melee spellcaster (though Mistweaver comes close because of qi points fuelling healing spells, and Jab generating qi points, but Jab is too low a damage component to actually allow for a melee spellcaster principle in this respect). And they way they went is by adding a non-core mechanic in Maelstrom: And RNG 'buff' that grants casting time reduction, and is generated by melee attacks and strikes.

Their main spell only has a 10 yard range, and the majority of their spells can't go beyond 25 yards, they also have craploads of threat, and have a paassive that stacks a 15% damage reduction stat on top of a plate armor equivalent. They're Melee combatants because they have to fight in Melee range, and they're designed to fight in melee range. This is why they can take a hit. The point is that a clothie warlock being as tough as a tank isn't some silly pipe dream, its pretty much already in the game.

Close combat caster. It's still not a melee unit. When Balance got mana returns for melee hits, they were still full casters even though they could tank (with a lot of work, true).
It's not about 'being as tough as a tank.'

The point is that it can be done be sues there's a successful template on how to make it work.

Yes, well; unless you want to erase all other templates and replace them with monks (Holy Monk, Plate Monk, Duel-Wield Monk, Demon Monk and so forth), you're still not getting it.
The fact that there is a template that does this doesn't make it functional. By the way: They pretty much used the Druid's shapeshift template for that: Altering a stance alters not only abilities available, but also the type of resource used for those abilities.
Could they do that for another class? Sure. But why would they?

Yeah, asking if a bridge or a building is more difficult to build isn't a false equivalency either.

Because they're the same thing, right? Civil Engineering is absolutely the same as Architecture.

Please stop thinking you understand stuff because you can look at its surface. You sound like an intelligent person... Put that brain of yours to use and do some research. Please. Humour me.

Edit: By the way, I will not be responding to this thread any longer. I'm going on a two-week holiday, you see. Have fun in the mean time!

[Teriz]

Game systems mechanically? Yeah; mastery is pretty easy to implement.

Good. Then it should be relatively easy to create new masteries for each new spec.

The difference is that 'this stuff' by itself isn't so difficult... But fitting it to a framework that does not accommodate it is.

Except the framework is there. It simply needs to be expanded upon.

Rockbiter is an oh-shit button, and not intended to be more (at the moment). It could have once been meant to be able to develop further into a tanking tree, but Blizzard decided not to go that route with Enhancement.

Rockbiter is damage mitigation. It reduces damage and increases threat. It is a classic tanking utility on a class that doesn't tank.

Nothing to do with tanking.

Unleashed Weapon Rockbiter is a taunt. The Unleashed Fury talent reduces damage by an additional 40% for 5 seconds. Those are tanking abilities.

Has nothing to do with tanking.
Has nothing to do with tanking.
Has nothing to do with tanking.

Primal Strike adds an additional melee button. Malestrom Weapon utilizes melee attacks or attacks against you to make spells instant cast. Both of those work for tanking, and there would be no game issue with having a tanking spec share Malestrom Weapon with Enhance.

Has nothing to do with tanking. Lightning shield was solo/PvP intended.

Wrong. Lightning Shield is another damage mitigation tool, because it damages attackers who are attacking the Shaman.

Nothing to do with/CONFLICTING with tanking.

Actually a taunting pet doesn't conflict with tanking. See Monks and Xuen. Xuen taunts targets if you are under the tank spec.

Nothing to do with tanking.

Really? You think a tank couldn't use Healing Tide Totem and Stone Bulwark Totem?

Shields can be used for tanking. Shield imbues (rockbiter: Shield) does not exist. Could be made to fix, but does not exist.
Nothing to do with tanking. DK and Guardian are weird for not using sword'n'board, but two-handed tanking is not the staple. Only one spec uses it. Not a good argument, but it in itself does not have anything to do with tanking.

Monks also use two handed weapons while tanking. The majority of tanks in WoW do not use sword and board.

No; it is NOT in place. If could be adapted to include tanking, and Enhancement is the easiest to go with (despite difficulties such as conversion and Maelstrom not being a core Shaman mechanic). But a tanking skeleton does not exist within the Shaman class.

I've already shown how it is in place.

Melee: Uses melee weapons. WEAPONS. You clobber things. DA is still a caster that can take a beating. It's a close combat caster, but no less a caster.

Like I said a melee/ranged hybrid. However, it fights in melee range. Melee isn't based on weaponry, its based on the range you're fighting in.

Exactly. Which is why they didn't go that route. Remember the death knight outcry when Blood became the tanking spec?

The point is that Demonology is exactly where feral was in the last expansion. The question now is what does Blizzard do with Dark Apotheosis since it is so popular with Warlocks? It would seem that the only logical conclusion is to give Warlocks a fourth spec like they did for Druids. Now if you do that for Locks, you have to do it for Shaman too. Since you did it for Shaman and Locks, you had better do it for the rest of the classes in the game.

Or you could just get rid of Dark Apotheosis and piss off tons of Warlocks.

No... Their second spec is an oh-shit button like Rockbiter Unleash. Actually, they don't have a second spec. It was speculative in beta, but never on live. It hasn't happened. It wasn't THERE. Nothing got taken away.

Its not an oh-shit button. Its a stance. An oh-shit button is something like Shield Wall or Shamanistic Rage; Cooldowns that last no more than 30 seconds and have long cooldowns.

An oh-shit button is not something that can last indefinitely and dumps ridiculous amounts of threat and damage onto a target.

Beta is a testing phase. Nothing more. DA didn't work as intended; people start to use it for actually tanking stuff, and Blizzard didn't want a tanking warlock.

Nothing more? People are playing as DA Warlocks. It actually exists in game and people love playing as it. People are using it to tank stuff. If Blizzard's intention was to not have people tank with DA Warlocks, or have them play as DA locks, they failed miserably.

How so? A warrior is a melee class. A mage can swing a weapon, but lacks any special weapon attack abilities. Therefore, a mage will never be a competent melee combatant.

You compared Mage swinging a melee weapon to a DK casting a spell as if they are equal. That is a false equivalency since Mage melee isn't a viable portion of their gameplay, while DK spell casting is a viable portion of their gameplay.

Death Knight 'spells' act like hybrid strikes. Only AotD has a casting time, and Death Knights need to build specific resources to cast the spells. Usually, this is in the form of DC/RS/FS, using Runic Power, which is generated by using melee strikes that are fuelled by runes. Basically: You need to be in your opponent's face hitting them in order to build up resource to 'cast spells' at them. The 'spells' are actually just strikes that use spell-LIKE mechanics. But those mechanics stop at hit/expertise/armour (for DC). Mages, warlocks and such, however, have an entirely different playstyle. Cast times, mana pools, no auto-swings, no expertise, hightened hit ceiling (which was internally lowered for DK 'spells' simply because they are spells designed to act like strikes).

Um, Warlocks and Mages have plenty of spells that don't require mana or cast times. Are those "hybrid spells" too?

A magic spell is simply a ranged attack that uses magic. Icy Touch is a magic spell. It doesn't matter what resource it uses, or cast time. Stop with the nonsense please.

Yes, well; unless you want to erase all other templates and replace them with monks (Holy Monk, Plate Monk, Duel-Wield Monk, Demon Monk and so forth), you're still not getting it.
The fact that there is a template that does this doesn't make it functional. By the way: They pretty much used the Druid's shapeshift template for that: Altering a stance alters not only abilities available, but also the type of resource used for those abilities.
Could they do that for another class? Sure. But why would they?

I'm not getting it because your argument changes from post to post. Also a template is the same thing as a framework, something you said doesn't exist for any of these classes. What is your argument again?

Because they're the same thing, right? Civil Engineering is absolutely the same as Architecture.

LoL! Yeah, enjoy your vacation bud.

[ItachiZaku]

No. If you want 4 specs, go to Rift (I <3 Rift).

[Tuor]

Why use a shield? There aren't agility shields out there, and even if blizz does add more specs, I don't expect them to add a lot of new things to the loot tables. Certainly not for a single spec.

Neither do i, there are already strenght shields in the game, Shamans get around 1 AP per strenght point, solution?? Well its quite simple, give them a ability to get 2AP per strenght point, just like all other strenght classes.

Personally, I'd love to see a Shaman dual-wield tank, that mechanically brings back the feel of Wrath-era DK Frost tanks.

Frost tanking back in wrath wasn't viable back then for bosses were you needed to keep switching targets, 2H DK's always got more threat then DW ones.

It should feel quite a bit different than arms if properly implemented. First you have wind walk, which should allow a warrior to increase their movement speed while invisible. When they emerge out of Wind Walk, they should have a buff that makes their next attack a critical strike for a few seconds.

Next they should have mirror image, that allows the blaster to split into illusionary copies.

The problem is that its just a copy of 2 already existing abilities, one from Rogues and another one from Mages... I hated when warriors got totems... Being my main a warriors i hate to see this copy past concept, .

Shaman shield tanking wouldn't work due to itemization. DW tanking though, that could go over quite well, but 2h tanking would still work too. One reason for DW tanking is different weapon imbues can mean different effects based on the encounter, though perhaps that would end up just being one of those things players look up online to get the most optimal choice per encounter, so it really wouldn't add much depth once people analyzed it. Having the choice of DW or 2h might still be interesting even if Rockbiter was the only option.

Lets get this real, Shamans need a shield for tanking because they don't enought armor, besides only 2 classes use shields in the game, and shamans can equip them aswell, making this a total of 3 classes rolling for shields. They could easely make rockbitter to work with shields, so a tanking shaman would be using flametong on MH and rockbitter on shield. And they could add a little more damage reduction to rockbitter to compensate mail lower armor.

[Jtree]

Neither do i, there are already strenght shields in the game, Shamans get around 1 AP per strenght point, solution?? Well its quite simple, give them a ability to get 2AP per strenght point, just like all other strenght classes.

They could certainly do that, but my belief is that Blizzard's efforts over the last two expansions to streamline stats won't allow that. Agility has been rendered worthless for plate classes, and the Wrath experiment with Spirit for mages and warlocks was reverted in Cata. Also, IIRC, shamans were a strength class back in BC, and had all their gear and abilities converted to rely on Agi (and attack power, a stat that has since been streamlined out of existence) in patch 3.0.

That's also why I recommend dual-wielding, as the only currently existing 2-hand Agi weapons a monk can wield are staves (unless there are maces in the T15 loot table I don't know about).

Lets get this real, Shamans need a shield for tanking because they don't enought armor, besides only 2 classes use shields in the game, and shamans can equip them aswell, making this a total of 3 classes rolling for shields. They could easely make rockbitter to work with shields, so a tanking shaman would be using flametong on MH and rockbitter on shield. And they could add a little more damage reduction to rockbitter to compensate mail lower armor.

Monks do okay without a shield. There's no reason to think Blizz can't give shamans something else creative to compensate. I wouldn't expect them to use Lightning Shield or Water Shield anyway. Make a new buff, perhaps Stone Shield, as a variation Defensive Stance/Bear Form/Righteous Fury/Blood Presence/Stance of the Sturdy Ox. Increases armor, stamina, threat, damage reduction, etc.

Heh. I guess that means I am expecting them to use a "shield".

Frost tanking back in wrath wasn't viable back then for bosses were you needed to keep switching targets, 2H DK's always got more threat then DW ones.

Well, I can't speak to tiers 7 or 8, but I never felt any issues with multi-target threat in T9 and 10. Frost was generally considered to be up there with paladins for AoE threat. And, as I said, it was sturdy too.

[Deleted]

1) Will a 4th spec solve the problems? NO, imo. It wil probably add more imbalance, but i really don't care. The game is already unbalanced, can't really be, and so what? One patch your class is op, next it's broken, and finally it's above average, till it starts again in the next extension.

I really prefer new features, and new exiting gameplay, instead of a statu quo, because of players afraid of news spec.

SO, for me, it is definitivly what WOW NEEDS , in order to add real content , real gameplay, for everybody.
Since Mop beta, the warlock tank spec, and the 4th druid spec, i'm pretty convinced the 4th spec is a future feature, and if it's not the case, i really hope the devs will think about it.

2) other question in this tread:

Can the demon hunter be a brand new class with rich lore and unique gameplay? YES, totally.

The fact that the warlock tank spec is more or less called demon hunter doesn"t mean the classe can't exist.

Indeed, a Burning legion ( and so demons) based extension + a second class using bow and arrow, + some new gameplay is really needed. Furthermore, none of the 2 new classes added a distance dps spec.

I mean, how can we say there is no real lore behind this? Legion attacks, people want to fight against them, some former demon hunter of illidan come to help and teach them.

And i really think a second bow/gun/croosbow class is required/ would be enjoyed .



3) SO WHAT COULD THE DEVS ADD?

A 4th spec for each class, except druid, already having the 4.
A new heroic class : demon hunter ( starting level 78 or 83 ; because the total failure of the monk class ( and i play monk) shows people having a 90 character won't have enought willpower to test the gameplay of a class, and pexing 95 level of it, without garantee they like it)

ALL the specs i'm gonna suggest need one change on the distance weapon:
- bow and guns remains unchanged: 2 handed distance weapons
- crossbow is now one handed weapon
- new weapon type: pistols , one handed weapon

THIS will allow news ambidextery specs, and some gameplay/animations players really want to see

4 ) THE SPECS I PROPOSE

Warlock : demonoTANK - tanking spec, almost already implemented. The tanking demon form should be a little different from the dps one ( new demon skin should not be a problem in a burning legion extension ) and some passive ability could convert haste in parry and crit in dodge; then make a drain-life or soul link with demon based mastery, and voila, your spec 90% warlock want .

Priest: HOLYNUKER : - a dps holynuker spec is some sort of fantasm priests have/ try to have since vanilla. Add a holy dot, rethink holy nova for aoe, make 2 or 3 news spells and procs and you have a second dps spec for priest

Mage: BATTLEMAGE - a melee dps spec, with ambidextery ( 2 caster weapons, with of course a scaling of the skills counting of the double caster weapon), and a rotation including fire, arcane and frost skills in melee, and some combinaisons of symbols to realise


Rogue: DPS distance spec - ranged spec with 2 crossbow/pistols ( ambi ), based on bleeding and poisoning effects ( dot spec), and of course combo point and finishers

Monk: Melee magic/pet spec - a melee dps spec based on fire/lightning skills and combinaisons of summoning of Xuen/yulon/Chiji/Niuzao ( who are more or less , atm, totally absent of monk gameplay although there are the center of pandaria lore)

Shaman : 2 options i could see :
- a new healing spec, based on dps-to-heal aka fistweaver/atonement, but really heavily based on this, and nature spells ( put a seed of a tree around here, put a nature dot there to aoe-hot heal, have a nuke spell to heal a "beconed" people ) this would be the miror of the RIFT chloromancer spec, which is one of the best heal gameplay ive ever played.
- or a tank spec, heavily based on earth armor and earth spells

Hunter : ranged ambidextery spec - ranged spec with 2 pistols/crossbow, and quick ambidextery attacks, based on dot ( bleeding?), or pet sacrifice ( some sort of sanginary hunter spec a little crazy )

Warrior: ranged 2-handed spec - ranged dps spec, with bow or gun, based on nets, grenades, explosions, something a little " commando", a little heavy, with of corse rage builder and rage dumper

Paladin : caster dps spec - a real caster holy spec, using intel stuff, and different holy power buider and dumper to create a good rotation

DK : necromancer caster spec - a real pet and ranged based spec, using intel stuff, based on abomination, skeletons, wyrms, and ranged spells, with a new bar of power you can build, and then use to " food" your pets ( your ranged spells make you win souls, and this souls are used to summon temporary pets, or make big attacks on wyrm/abomination... )


Note: this 2 specs would make more usefull plate intel stuff

5 ) demon hunter class

lore: with the return of burning legion, former soldiers and mages on azeroth want to have a real training to fight them ( which would explain there already are level 78/83 ).

Stuff: mail agility

Gameplay: - inspired on diablo, 2 ressources ( anger, discipline, or call it as you want), you HAVE to maintain balanced, with different skills that consumme and make gain different numbers of anger and discipline .

Spec : - 2 ranged ambidextery spec : 2 crossbow/pistols, 1 physical spec, one more based on death spells and magical arrow
- 1 ambidextery melee dps spec
- 1 tank spec ( with 2H agility weapon )


and that's it, it's more or less my wish list for the next ( or 2 next ) expansion(s).
I have to admit i've been wanting this 4th spec for so long^^

[willowe]

It's be horrid to balance 11 new specs. Think about it.

[Teriz]

The problem is that its just a copy of 2 already existing abilities, one from Rogues and another one from Mages... I hated when warriors got totems... Being my main a warriors i hate to see this copy past concept, .

It all depends on Implementation. For starters, all Rogue specs have stealth. In this case, only the BM spec would have stealth. Also Wind Walk would increase movement speed while stealthed. With Rogues, the movement speed is decreased. I'm not sure if Rogues can deliver a critical strike when they exit stealth. If not, that would be another ability that is different than Rogue stealth.

In terms of Mirror Image, it would be different because its melee and not ranged. It would be used for confusion and disorientation.

---------- Post added 2013-04-24 at 07:42 PM ----------

It's be horrid to balance 11 new specs. Think about it.

They're currently balancing 34 and they're doing just fine.

And it wouldn't be 11 new specs. It would be 10.

[willowe]

They're currently balancing 34 and they're doing just fine.

And it wouldn't be 11 new specs. It would be 10.

Yes, most of them are at least 4 years old and have been balanced slowly over their life-times. Adding 10 or so new specs would be like adding 3-4 new classes, they already "break" balance with every new class added for the first 4-6 mos of those classes' life, adding 3 1/3 new classes would hurt more than it helped, unless they beta/ptr'ed it for a year or more.

[SherbertLand]

People requesting new classes to be added to the game is not a class issue.

[Teriz]

Yes, most of them are at least 4 years old and have been balanced slowly over their life-times. Adding 10 or so new specs would be like adding 3-4 new classes, they already "break" balance with every new class added for the first 4-6 mos of those classes' life, adding 3 1/3 new classes would hurt more than it helped, unless they beta/ptr'ed it for a year or more.

Yeah that's false. The current classes are updated every expansion. Heck, the new talent system pretty much reset all the classes, because almost none of them play like they played in the previous expansion. This is especially true of Warlocks and Druids who both received pretty significant class changes.

Irregardless of whatever Blizzard decides to do, balance is "broken" every time they release another expansion. Adding more specs to the game won't change that much.

[Lochton]

I voted no as well.

This would give too many lost hours on balancing the new specs (Even if you say it's broken, it would be more broken then). As Blizzard says it so well, more tank specs doesn't mean more tanks. I would rather have them center around a 3rd specc offer, so an addition to Dual spec. And really, we had a long discussion on the forum about lack of identity. Don't wish too many to be the same as other speccs (Tanks = Tanks / unless other, completely new style)

[Teriz]

I voted no as well.

This would give too many lost hours on balancing the new specs (Even if you say it's broken, it would be more broken then). As Blizzard says it so well, more tank specs doesn't mean more tanks. I would rather have them center around a 3rd specc offer, so an addition to Dual spec. And really, we had a long discussion on the forum about lack of identity. Don't wish too many to be the same as other speccs (Tanks = Tanks / unless other, completely new style)

10 specs were added or revamped in MoP, along with a completely new class. So, adding 10 new specs for the next expansion shouldn't be a big deal.

[Theupsman]

All of them are incredibly unrealistic. Most sound more like a job position than a class: Chieftan? Warden? Keeper of the Grove? Where's the application? Hunters want a melee spec...? So roll a melee class, hunters are a ranged class. By these standards mages should also get a melee class. What...Battle mages you say? They're actually called enhancement shamans. My main is a DK, if I wanted a caster/ranged that could summon things are stun things, or freeze things in place- oh I dunno...I could roll any of all the other ranged classes WoW has to offer. WoW is so unbalanced because of all the crap all these classes can do. We don't need more to add to the problem.

Here's what I feel what you're saying. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=48-tcRiBNj4