View Poll Results: Is a 4th Spec Possible?

Voters
225. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    160 71.11%
  • No

    65 28.89%

Thread: 4th Spec Ideas

Page 4 of 8 FirstFirst ...
2
3
4
5
6
... LastLast
  1. #61
    Yes, but if it happened I'd probably want to see some of the current specs re-worked a bit. My idea would probably be something like this:

    Death Knight: All current specs retained as they are, new spec added using Intellect plate, Caster DPS using the runeblade as a ranged focus instead of a melee weapon. I'm picturing something like a crackling jade lightning or the Lich King's attack during transitions for a main attack.
    Druid: Already has 4 specs.
    Hunter: New spec added as a tanking spec, using the pet to supplement defensively. (Pet attacks would form the basis for active mitigation). Could fight with bow or with spear/polearm/dual wield, I could see it working either way. Would prefer melee, but see argument for ranged for sake of consistency across specs.
    Mage: All current specs retained. New spec: Healing spec, with focus on time effects (healing spells that heal a baseline amount, plus a percentage of recently taken damage.
    Monk: All current specs retained, new caster DPS spec added, uses new Stance of the <Adjective> Crane, thematically based off of Chi-Ji.
    Paladin: All current specs retained, save that holy paladin absorbs are reworked to function similarly to disc priest absorbs (see below). Caster DPS spec added using Intellect plate.
    Priest: Holy spec loses dps boosting capabilities. New caster DPS spec added focusing on holy damage, unable to use shadow spells. Discipline shields re-worked to only absorb a percentage of incoming damage, but heals are strengthened to strike a balance between prevention and healing.
    Rogue: Assassination and Subtlety retained as are, save that Subtlety is slightly reworked to ensure non-dagger weapons are always at least as good as dagger weapons. Combat re-worked to be a tanking spec. New DPS spec added to be ranged combat, with less capability for control, using ranged weapons.
    Shaman: Current specs retained. New spec added as tanking spec. Pretty straightforward functionality here.... probably implement a new shield of some sort (Rock Shield) to work as one form of active mitigation, totems would probably serve as major defensives.
    Warlock: Demon Hunter spec. I don't really see Demon Hunter working as a full class, but a melee-focused Warlock using demonic power to protect and empower could work relatively easy.
    Warrior: I love the idea of a support spec, but without reworking all raids and dungeons to be tuned around the idea of using a spec role, I don't see it working. Honestly, this is the hardest for me, because I don't see any warrior concept that permits healing, they've got the DPS covered already (2H, DW both 1H and 2H) and I don't see room for a plate range physical dps. Part of me would love to see a second tanking spec that's more offensive, but if it works well that would pretty well eliminate the need for the current prot spec. For lack of a better idea, I'd probably split Fury into two specs, one for Titan's Grip and one for Single-Minded Fury, and add a bit more diversity to the two to make them feel more unique... but I'm not sure I like that solution.

  2. #62
    Pandaren Monk Solzan Nemesis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Where ever the Regent-Lord needs me to be
    Posts
    1,955
    My ideas.

    Warrior: Guardian, two handed tanking spec.
    Paladin: Crusade, one handed and shield dps spec.
    Death Knight: Shadow, two handed dps (old Blood spec). Frost is back to just being a dual wild spec.
    Hunter: Ranger, a petless hunter dps spec. Beast Mastery is now a melee Hunter spec. (like Rexxar)
    Shaman: Geomancy, one handed and shield tank spec.
    Rogue: Tinker, tech base dps spec. Will use range weapons, robot pets, turrets, and gadgets.
    Monk: Runemaster, caster dps spec with runes. Will use Red Crane stance also.
    Druid: All read has four specs.
    Priest: Divan Archery, range dps spec based on Priestesses of the Moon and Sea Witches. (probably change the name so guns can fit in)
    Mage: Battle Magic, battlemage melee dps spec.
    Warlock: Necromancy, range dps spec that trades demons and fire spells for undead and frost spells.

    Leaves room for a Demon Hunter Hero Class.
    Last edited by Solzan Nemesis; 2013-04-29 at 08:02 PM.

  3. #63
    I want there to be a fourth spec for everyone, if I'm perfectly honest. I don't see why there shouldn't be, and I think it would be a lot of fun if they managed to make them all feel unique and interesting. There's plenty of interesting ideas out there, and I'm sure they could make it work.

    Avatar by Ely
    My deviantART

  4. #64
    Mechagnome Thulyn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Somewhere in Norway.
    Posts
    532
    The ideas are nice, but keep it too three if you ask me.

  5. #65
    Stood in the Fire RyokuchaMidori's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    France
    Posts
    382
    Mage : Magician, David copperfield style

    Rogue : Thief, specializes in pick pocket.

    Hunter : See-Hunter, specializes in hunting under water. Can tame fish.

    Warrior : Tactician, a new design, works purely with voice acting.

    DearthKnight : Ghoul, specializes in eating brains.

    Priest : Theologian, same design as Tactitian, gives advices on moral and piety.

    Warlock : Evil Theologian, can duel a Theologian in a disputatio, gives bad advices on moral and piety.

    Monk : Squire, because we need squires for the White Knights.

    Shaman : Meteorologist, specializes in understanding the weather.

    Paladin : White Knight, specializes in Jousting. Requires a Squire.
    "Skill, as the world of warcraft goes, is only in question between equals in pvp power, while the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must."

    Thucydides : " The Melian dialogue".

  6. #66
    Why does everyone want a 4th spec for every class? Do that, and only one or two would be any decent. And extra tanks and healers? That would be hell to balance, and then they would be made to play more or less the same, leading to mass QQ.

    I can only think of a few that can kind of make sense and fill a niche.

    Priest and Paladin: Holy caster spec.

  7. #67
    Quote Originally Posted by Eschatonin View Post
    Why does everyone want a 4th spec for every class? Do that, and only one or two would be any decent. And extra tanks and healers? That would be hell to balance, and then they would be made to play more or less the same, leading to mass QQ.

    I can only think of a few that can kind of make sense and fill a niche.

    Priest and Paladin: Holy caster spec.
    Its adds variety without requiring much more work to balance than a dedicated class and with a LOT less work involved for the art department. It can add flexibility to existing specs and refresh the existing classes. The Druid shows it is possible. The downside is that it can blur the lines between different classes and may cause confusion with the story. A Tauren Paladin isn't going to care one whit about a Paladin quest involving the Light.

    As things stand - I think it has a high likelihood of actually coming to passs though. There is a lot to recommend it. The alternative is to revamp the specs even more into a role based system so you have a different spec for tanking or DPS, but not two DPS specs.

    As things stand, there is fairly easy/obvious list of classs that can be patched onto existing classes.

    Death Knight : - Lich, Necromancer, Runemaster
    Druid: Already has 4 specs.
    Hunter: Ranger, Demon Hunter, Shadow hunter, D3 Demon Hunter, Sniper
    Mage: Chronomancer, BattleMage
    Monk: Initiate opf the Crane
    Paladin: Shockadin/BattleMage, Cleric, Spellbreaker, Knight, Spellsword
    Priest: Holy DPS, Monk
    Rogue: Demon Hunter, Ranger
    Shaman: Tinker, Eart/Air/Fire/Water specialisations
    Warlock: Demon Hunter,
    Warrior: Spellbreaker, Knight, Sniper

    Yes, some ideas appear more than once; it'd depend on how you implemented those ideas.

    There are other options to refresh the class.

    If you take a Holy priest and give him Shadowform and Shadow spell as baseline - you wouldn't have any real need for a Shadow spec. You could get Priests into one class with a stance mechanic. Paladins? Padldins could merge Ret and Prot into one spec fairly easily I think. You'd have a tank with a DPS mode, and you'd need something akin to Seal of Blood to lower the classes inherent survivability. Smae for warriors. And so on.

    Or switch the spec system to a Job type mechanic. Core spec define armor, philosoohy, story potential and resourec mechnaic...but the actual role and class woudl depend on yuor spec.

    As I said, its easy to see the attraction to it. Whetehr or not they woudl be decent depedns on how well Blizzrad actually manages the integration. They've done it badly at times and they've done it very well at others.

    EJL

  8. #68
    So over and over "druid: already has 4th spec" yeah, we do, we got half a spec we've already had for years. If every other class wants brand new specs they better at least overhaul what druids got.

  9. #69
    Actually ele shaman is fire and enh is air.

    ---------- Post added 2013-05-01 at 09:56 AM ----------

    Also just voting yes so i can express my views on shaman tanking.

  10. #70
    Quote Originally Posted by Kojo View Post
    So over and over "druid: already has 4th spec" yeah, we do, we got half a spec we've already had for years. If every other class wants brand new specs they better at least overhaul what druids got.
    Druids get four specs in MoP where all others have three, and were the only class besides the initial DK concept that could do two roles in one spec beforehand. Not getting a new spec in the next expansions wouldn't be screwing over druids, it would be giving other classes what druids already have.

  11. #71
    Deathknight - a ranged dps is the only real thing here
    Druid - already has
    Rogue - pirate. Dual wield a 1 hander and a 1h gun
    Warrior - Gladiator - dual wield parry tank. priests are the classic healer so have 2 heal specs, warriors are the class tank so should have 2 tank specs.
    mage - Chronomancer - Preventitive healer, more like disc than other healers.
    Monk - Skyseer - ranged dps.
    Hunter - Savagery - melee or 1h gun dual wield - petless
    Warlock - Permanent demon form tank, maybe race specific - like fel orcs and the elves from MGT that kind of thing. Converts most spells into instant melee attacks that deal magical damage.
    paladin -inquisitor - shockadin nuff said. maybe half heal half damage like a smite priest.
    priest - holy/arcane ranged damage with a bow or crossbow.

  12. #72
    The hardest part of this would be finding new specs that fill a new role for the class, but still feel like that class.

    For example, tying a demon hunter spec to a rogue or warlock would be too radical imo. It wouldn't feel like a new spec for that class, but just a new class welded awkwardly onto it.

  13. #73
    By adding too many role options to every class, then there soon ceases to be any reason to choose aside from cosmetics and style.
    The entire point of classes is to be distinctive, to have strengths and weakness, where you actually have to choose.

    Adding extra options for under-represented roles like tanks does nothing to solve any number issues there, because it has been done already.
    Two new classes, with two new tanks and same old issues keep rearing their ugly head.
    The reason is simple, a community problem.
    DPS still pulling with no consideration for letting a tank do their job, for expecting a healer to heal through otherwise avoidable damage rather than trying to take less.

  14. #74
    Bloodsail Admiral DonQShot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Guimaraes
    Posts
    1,085
    Quote Originally Posted by Florena View Post
    The hardest part of this would be finding new specs that fill a new role for the class, but still feel like that class.

    For example, tying a demon hunter spec to a rogue or warlock would be too radical imo. It wouldn't feel like a new spec for that class, but just a new class welded awkwardly onto it.
    and thats only one of the many things why this will never work. Trying to force a demon hunter or necromancer(just 2 of the most obvious ones) into a spec is not the right way to go, and Blizzard knows this so I'm safe in the knowledge that they don't give a crap to most of the proposed 4th spec ideas =)

  15. #75
    Stood in the Fire therealbowser's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    World 8
    Posts
    495
    Warrior - A DPS spec that focuses on sustained damage and utility (not burst damage) and uses a sword and shield, looking back to the footmen and knights of older Warcraft. The tank stats on the shield would be adjusted in some way to be moderately beneficial to this spec, and possibly enough that tank gear on this spec would be acceptable (but not as good) as DPS gear, making this also a great offspec for protection warriors.

    Paladin
    - A holy damage spec. Not necessarily ranged, but focused on holy damage and spellpower gear, and dealing holy damage over physical. This would make a very viable offspec for holy paladins and an interesting spec for paladins to play in general.

    Death Knights
    - DPS blood spec.

    Hunter - Melee spec. This would get a new skillset, and replace utility shots with ranged throwing attacks (concussive shot, etc).

    Shaman - Tank spec. Earth themed and would focus on damage absorption shields. The strength from tanking shields would be adjusted to not be a complete loss for them.

    Monk - Chi'ji spec focused on magical damage, possibly even ranged damage. It would use spellpower gear and mana and use a new stance. This would be an interesting new spec, complete the circle, and provide mistweaver monks with a viable offspec that shares gear. Perhaps a 'lorewalker' spec?

    Druid - Already has one.

    Rogue - I am thinking a ranged damage spec, and I want to take this time to suggest a new weapon type that potential future classes and hunters would use as well -- dual wielded one handed ranged weapons. Pistols, one handed cross bows, and potentially throwing weapons as well. Alternatively, they could make shuriken toss a spec in general and work that way, adjusting abilities to be used at range, and in turn reducing their mobility and/or defenses somewhat to make up for the new talents in ranged damage.

    Mage - Your guess is as good as mine. Frostfire spec, or time manipulating damage specs seem ideal. A healing spec, however, wouldn't be my first choice. I heard someone suggest a time manipulating spec that indirectly healed and worked as one -- I guess that could work, maybe. We could also have battlemages that focus on physical damage, but that seems a little over the top and silly.

    Priest - Holy damage spec.

    Warlocks - Metamorphosis tanking spec. (Not a 'demon hunter' spec, as that's almost certainly going to be the new hero class.)

    My two cents.

    ---------- Post added 2013-05-01 at 09:43 AM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by DonQShot View Post
    and thats only one of the many things why this will never work. Trying to force a demon hunter or necromancer(just 2 of the most obvious ones) into a spec is not the right way to go, and Blizzard knows this so I'm safe in the knowledge that they don't give a crap to most of the proposed 4th spec ideas =)
    Actually, besides the mage class, I've found new specs that suit every class. Though I am sure people will critique the rogue and hunter changes, I still think they are a great fit.
    Last edited by therealbowser; 2013-05-01 at 02:48 PM.

  16. #76
    I love the Rogue ideas ITT, except for the field medic idea, don't want a healing spec tbh. If given a choice between a ranger type spec and a "swashbuckler" sword and buckler themed tank spec, I would take the ranger spec in an instant, though I think a tanking spec for rogues would make sense.

    Quote Originally Posted by darkwarrior42 View Post
    Rogue: Assassination and Subtlety retained as are, save that Subtlety is slightly reworked to ensure non-dagger weapons are always at least as good as dagger weapons. Combat re-worked to be a tanking spec. New DPS spec added to be ranged combat, with less capability for control, using ranged weapons.
    This sounds absolutely perfect!

    One other point: I hear it come up now and then that rogues would make sense as Demon Hunters. What relationships do rogues have to DHs other than DHs dual weild glaives? Honest question. I don't see how they fit personally.

  17. #77
    I don't think every class needs 4 specs. Heck, I don't think hunters need more than 2, to be honest - a pet themed and a weapon themed spec - survival is kinda... meh as implemented.

    That being said, I could totally get behind the re-working of the DK to be akin to Druid.
    Blood for Tanking, Frost for Melee DPS, Unholy for Ranged DPS and Necromancy for Healing - let Unholy and Necromancy use Int plate. (Unholy would be reworked significantly to grant more ranged spells with a 'fist-weaving' (or Seal of Insight, might be better analogy) type of mana recovery mechanic.)

    Shaman have needed an earth aspect since Beta. Just makes sense - could even have different options - typical sword and board, or go fully totemic with Tauren poles. Just make it happen.

    Likewise with Warlocks - I agree with the sentiment 'just give them the damn tanking spec already and stop muddying up the waters with glyphs.'

    I could get behind the Shockadin idea - though I'm less enthusiastic about it than others, but more uses for spell plate is better.

    Monks, again, given the four aspects, should probably utilize Crane. Not that I see Crane as particularly 'ranged' and I hazard to guess that Blizzard didn't either, and hence why it wasn't used as such - but giving monks a second dps spec wouldn't be outside the realm of possibilities.

    Outside of that, I don't really think any other class really needs a 4th spec. Not everything has to be in balance (not, balanced against each other, but balanced in terms of specs) else every class would have four specs - tank, heals, ranged and melee dps. And that'd be a radical departure from not only Lore but Blizzards desire to keep things unique.

  18. #78
    Stood in the Fire therealbowser's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    World 8
    Posts
    495
    Quote Originally Posted by Theodoxus View Post
    I don't think every class needs 4 specs. Heck, I don't think hunters need more than 2, to be honest - a pet themed and a weapon themed spec - survival is kinda... meh as implemented.

    That being said, I could totally get behind the re-working of the DK to be akin to Druid.
    Blood for Tanking, Frost for Melee DPS, Unholy for Ranged DPS and Necromancy for Healing - let Unholy and Necromancy use Int plate. (Unholy would be reworked significantly to grant more ranged spells with a 'fist-weaving' (or Seal of Insight, might be better analogy) type of mana recovery mechanic.)

    Shaman have needed an earth aspect since Beta. Just makes sense - could even have different options - typical sword and board, or go fully totemic with Tauren poles. Just make it happen.

    Likewise with Warlocks - I agree with the sentiment 'just give them the damn tanking spec already and stop muddying up the waters with glyphs.'

    I could get behind the Shockadin idea - though I'm less enthusiastic about it than others, but more uses for spell plate is better.

    Monks, again, given the four aspects, should probably utilize Crane. Not that I see Crane as particularly 'ranged' and I hazard to guess that Blizzard didn't either, and hence why it wasn't used as such - but giving monks a second dps spec wouldn't be outside the realm of possibilities.

    Outside of that, I don't really think any other class really needs a 4th spec. Not everything has to be in balance (not, balanced against each other, but balanced in terms of specs) else every class would have four specs - tank, heals, ranged and melee dps. And that'd be a radical departure from not only Lore but Blizzards desire to keep things unique.
    Maybe but there's more to this than simply providing additional specs, but viable offspecs for casters (and tanks, in protection's case) and providing things that existed in lore to finally appear ingame (again, using warrior protection as an example).

    Potentially, not every spec needs a fourth, but it could work and it probably wouldn't hurt. A 4th spec idea would be great for an expansion where Blizzard did not want to add a new race or hero class.

  19. #79
    Elemental Lord Teriz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Beach City
    Posts
    8,665
    Quote Originally Posted by therealbowser View Post
    Maybe but there's more to this than simply providing additional specs, but viable offspecs for casters (and tanks, in protection's case) and providing things that existed in lore to finally appear ingame (again, using warrior protection as an example).

    Potentially, not every spec needs a fourth, but it could work and it probably wouldn't hurt. A 4th spec idea would be great for an expansion where Blizzard did not want to add a new race or hero class.
    That is exactly where we are now. With the additions of Monks and Pandarens, the re-modeling of the original races, and Druids already having a 4th spec, now seems to be the perfect time to introduce 4th specs for all classes.

  20. #80
    Stood in the Fire therealbowser's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    World 8
    Posts
    495
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    That is exactly where we are now. With the additions of Monks and Pandarens, the re-modeling of the original races, and Druids already having a 4th spec, now seems to be the perfect time to introduce 4th specs for all classes.
    The next expansion will almost certainly feature Demon Hunter hero class. But frankly, I'd be happy to have 4th specs now anyways. It's up to Blizzard really.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •