Poll: Is a 4th Spec Possible?

Thread: 4th Spec Ideas

Page 3 of 8 FirstFirst
1
2
3
4
5
... LastLast
  1. #41
    Quote Originally Posted by Naiomie View Post
    Exactly what i was thinking. haha
    Popular ideas are going to get many threads.

  2. #42
    There are 2 specs in particular I'd like to see:

    Hunter - Predator. This spec would be the first "melee" hunter spec ever, but with a lot of diversity. Simply put, you are the beast here. You shoot the living crap of your target, and by filling up the "savagery" meter by focusing on it, you can enter "beast mode". This would work similiar to Metamorphosis, with a few exceptions. First of all, you are melee fighter now, and secondly, by meeting certain goals this change is permanent. While leveling, you refill your savagery by killing enemies, during raiding - by performing specific rotations or cooldown sets.

    Warrior - Fencer. The idea is that Warrior was for some time the no. 1 tank in WoW, and in some way, I liked it. So, while keeping other tanks just as viable as Warriors, it would be nice to give Warriors a second tanking spec. This one, like Brewmaster, would heavily depend on skills. Wielding just one one handed weapon, Fencer would have to reduce his damage taken by confusing the opponent, dodge, parry and riposte attacks in order to survive. Your Riposte skills would be avaiable for a fraction of second after a successfull dodge/parry, allowing you to use your reflexes to boost your survival. This would make a nice choice between selecting your Warrior tanking spec - either the bulky, stamina - based Protection, or the quick and agile Fencer.

  3. #43
    Well, a lot of these ideas are still kind of far out in terms of actual possibility. I mean, there really are only a few choices for each class, in terms of another spec.

    Teriz has some of the most practical ideas for specs.

    So I'm going to build off of others here and compile what I think are the best ones to fit the class.

    DK: 1) Rune Master, 2) Lich (Ranged)
    Druid: -
    Hunter: 1) Ranger (Ranged - No Pet), 2) Bard (Healing)
    Mage: 1) Time Spec (Healing), 2) Blood Mage (Ranged), 3) Battle Mage (Melee) 4) Necromancers (Ranged)
    Monk: 1) Chi-Ji (Ranged)
    Paladin: 1) Invokers (Ranged)
    Priest: 1) Inquisitor, 2) Balance the Shadow/Light (Another shadow spec)
    Rogue: 1) Stalker (Ranged)
    Shaman: 1) Warden (Tank)
    Warlock: 1) Demon Hunter (Melee), 2) Tank
    Warrior: 1) Blade Master (Melee), 2) Spell Breaker (Melee)

    Another Class is almost not needed to be honest. The only viable candidates are Tinkers and Witch Doctors. Everything else can be incorporated into the classes we already have and even used as Heroic Classes for later in WoW's life.

    Demon hunters
    Rangers
    Tinkers
    Dragons Sworn
    Invokers
    Battle Mages
    Necromancers
    Bards
    Witch doctors
    Spell Breakers
    Wardens
    Sea witches
    Keepers of the Grove
    Wizards
    Rune Masters

    So 12 Total Classes would be a nice balance. After that add specs (about 3 per expansion) till we have 4 more expansions, and after that who knows where we will be. But it would reduce the burden of thinking up new classes and instead incorporating the classes we already have.
    Last edited by Anprionsa; 2013-04-28 at 06:08 PM.

  4. #44
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    According to GC, adding specs for all the classes is the equivalent of adding one new class.

    https://mobile.twitter.com/Ghostcraw...23266185551872

    This needs to be posted in every 4th spec thread. Blizzard could essentially revitalize every older class with the same effort as making a new one.

    I know what I would do if I was in charge.
    That's cool to see that Blizzard has already quantified the work involved.

  5. #45
    Deleted
    Would necromancer as a mage or lock spec make more sens then as a DK?
    necromancer = Undead, so it has nothing to do with mage or lock's lore, but more DK

    BUT, if i first thought necro could be a 4th dk spec, im starting to think there are enought things to do with necro ( bone skills, acid/poison skills, skeletons, corrupted healing spec .... ) to do a whole new class with the necromancer

  6. #46
    Merely a Setback Teriz's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Soul of Azeroth
    Posts
    29,821
    Hunters could actually go both ways. Hunter tanking could involve a special type of aspect that allows them to tank by merging with souls with animals. It could be somewhat similar to Druid tanking, but have an added aspect of pet tanking to make it a bit different. Consider it almost like a more evolved form of Beast Master spec.

    Hunter healing could involve an aspect that turns your Hunter shots into healing abilities, and allows you to summon pets that assist you in healing and supporting your allies.

  7. #47
    Mechagnome Deadhank's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Behind the Clouds
    Posts
    611
    Hunter healing is something I'd like. It sounds a little fun and from what I remember some of the ranged classes from SWTOR have healing specs (as in using medical skills to mend allies).

    Melee hunter would be a pure Beastmaster, just like Rexxar. It'd go way out of the class main purpose tho... That's why I think a petless spec instead of Rexxar-like would be AWESOME. I just like to think Dual Wielding ranged weapons (guns and crossbows, or even a new type of weapon, like Pistol or a Arbalest, like that one from Zon'ozz - Horrifying Horn Arbalest) as a possibility for hunters, with a pet or not.

    Anyway, loving this thread so far, but I can't find new plausible ideas for Warriors... I don't think Blademaster is suiting, seeing that it's just a badass Arms Warrior and even that the idea is pretty cool, the ranged Warr is kinda messed up and hard to develop, just like Beastmaster Hunter.

    Keep it up!

  8. #48
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by koawinter View Post
    Well, a lot of these ideas are still kind of far out in terms of actual possibility. I mean, there really are only a few choices for each class, in terms of another spec.

    Teriz has some of the most practical ideas for specs.

    So I'm going to build off of others here and compile what I think are the best ones to fit the class.

    DK: 1) Rune Master, 2) Lich (Ranged)
    Druid: -
    Hunter: 1) Ranger (Ranged - No Pet), 2) Bard (Healing)
    Mage: 1) Time Spec (Healing), 2) Blood Mage (Ranged), 3) Battle Mage (Melee) 4) Necromancers (Ranged)
    Monk: 1) Chi-Ji (Ranged)
    Paladin: 1) Invokers (Ranged)
    Priest: 1) Inquisitor, 2) Balance the Shadow/Light (Another shadow spec)
    Rogue: 1) Stalker (Ranged)
    Shaman: 1) Warden (Tank)
    Warlock: 1) Demon Hunter (Melee), 2) Tank
    Warrior: 1) Blade Master (Melee), 2) Spell Breaker (Melee)
    although I agree with some of the ideas, I think trying to fit demon hunters, battlemages, bards, necromancers, spell breakers and wardens into another class when they are so full of potential is as painful and retarded as to try and fit a size 50 foot in a 30 sized shoe. stop being being simplistic and lazy everybody!

    Another Class is almost not needed to be honest. The only viable candidates are Tinkers and Witch Doctors. Everything else can be incorporated into the classes we already have and even used as Heroic Classes for later in WoW's life.
    why witch doctors btw?
    Demon hunters
    Rangers
    Tinkers
    Dragons Sworn
    Invokers
    Battle Mages
    Necromancers
    Bards
    Witch doctors
    Spell Breakers
    Wardens
    Sea witches
    Keepers of the Grove
    Wizards
    Rune Masters

    So 12 Total Classes would be a nice balance. After that add specs (about 3 per expansion) till we have 4 more expansions, and after that who knows where we will be. But it would reduce the burden of thinking up new classes and instead incorporating the classes we already have.
    lol, I think blizzard would take on that "burden" while enjoying an happy hour in a bar. They create classes for a living. actually, the lore is pretty much set up since WC1 2 and 3 so all they need now are the class mechanics. I have been doing that for the past year just for fun and I don't work in a gaming company.

    ---------- Post added 2013-04-28 at 08:58 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by sakk View Post
    necromancer = Undead, so it has nothing to do with mage or lock's lore, but more DK

    BUT, if i first thought necro could be a 4th dk spec, im starting to think there are enought things to do with necro ( bone skills, acid/poison skills, skeletons, corrupted healing spec .... ) to do a whole new class with the necromancer
    well if u are thinking what I am thinking then follow my sig hehe.

    ---------- Post added 2013-04-28 at 08:58 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by Uzi View Post
    What did you say?
    lol complete nonsense

    ---------- Post added 2013-04-28 at 09:09 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by UnifiedDivide View Post
    A Hunter melee spec? How is that a good idea for a Hunter? Hunter's are meant to be ranged. Making them melee is ridiculous. What kind of a Hunter gets right up in the face of the thing they are hunting? We have traps and slows and guns and bows and crossbows for a reason!

    Now, the healing idea is an idea I'd probably get behind. A Hunter would have to heal him/herself out in the wild so it makes sense they'd have some skill in healing.

    I don't mean to be rude or anything about it but, melee Hunters would be a huge nono for me.

    That said, you guys have some very interesting ideas Keep going!
    doesn't make sense to me. a hunter would have to heal itself in the wild? KAKAKAKA. And he does already! just enough for himself. trying to make a hunter into an effective field doctor capable of healing the grievest wounds with just bandages is ridiculous

    ---------- Post added 2013-04-28 at 09:12 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by Sonridor View Post
    Hunter healing is something I'd like. It sounds a little fun and from what I remember some of the ranged classes from SWTOR have healing specs (as in using medical skills to mend allies).

    Melee hunter would be a pure Beastmaster, just like Rexxar. It'd go way out of the class main purpose tho... That's why I think a petless spec instead of Rexxar-like would be AWESOME. I just like to think Dual Wielding ranged weapons (guns and crossbows, or even a new type of weapon, like Pistol or a Arbalest, like that one from Zon'ozz - Horrifying Horn Arbalest) as a possibility for hunters, with a pet or not.

    Anyway, loving this thread so far, but I can't find new plausible ideas for Warriors... I don't think Blademaster is suiting, seeing that it's just a badass Arms Warrior and even that the idea is pretty cool, the ranged Warr is kinda messed up and hard to develop, just like Beastmaster Hunter.

    Keep it up!
    A priestess of the moon is a more fitting archer healer than the hunter imho. That's how I made it in my ranger concept anyway =)

    ---------- Post added 2013-04-28 at 09:15 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by UnifiedDivide View Post
    As much as I'm against a melee Hunter tree, I think if it was more of a shapeshifting tree, it would make more sense. Along the lines of literally becoming the tanking pet yourself. Just make it different from a Druid' Bear Form, I guess. Hell, steal the Beast Within effect and change it to be a tanking talent that makes you a hunter/pet merging, enabling you to tank like a beast, literally

    Healing is something I'd probably for, as I said. We have Spirit Beasts already that have a healing ability. Really, things just need expanding on.
    seeing how some people here present resent the shapeshifting skill that I incorporated in my demon hunter class and my tinker class for being too similar to the druid, I find it surprising you make it so terribly simple to bring an ANIMAL shapeshift into the hunter's gameplay. IMO, atank spec could work but with the beast as tank not a shapeshifiting hunter for crying out loud.

  9. #49
    Deleted
    Just give us tri spec.
    Its bad enough we cant enjoy all 3 specs of a class without endlessly boringly respecing into cookycutter specs.
    Just be done with it and let us spec into all 3

  10. #50
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by UnifiedDivide View Post
    How does it not make sense?

    A Hunter wouldn't use just bandages. They would be using salves and such too. I'm no class creator but I'm sure Blizzard could make one work. Just look at how different they went for Monk healing! You have to think outside the box

    But sure, maybe there isn't enough there to make a Hunter healing spec. It still makes more sense that a Hunter dual-wielding and getting right up in a bosses face. That's not what a Hunter is.[COLOR="red"]
    But those healing abilities are already in the hunters arsenal as self healing. Lets not get over our heads with that =).

    I'm not some people though. Demon Hunters and a Tinker class have nothing to do with what I'm saying about the actual Hunter class.

    And quite often the simple things work the best. Shapeshifting the Hunter is hardly a game breaker. It's not as big of a deal as you might think.
    A tank spec might work. The Hunter shapeshifting to do so was just a quick thought. I hardly put all my brain power behind it >_>
    You could just expand the pet bar and give it new options for tanking if that's all your after.
    So going a bit off-topic here, would you like a demon hunter and a tinker classes with druid like shapeshifts? demon hunters into demons and tinker into mechs?

    Back on topic, a hunter able to shapeshift would be a druid right? I'm still in favor of a pet tank rather. I have no idea how a melee hunter a la rexxar would be hard to implemet but I would like that...

    No need to get bent out of shape about it really.

  11. #51
    Mechagnome Deadhank's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Behind the Clouds
    Posts
    611
    I'm a big fan of Rexxar myself, but now that I thought about it, it's pretty dumb. I know, it's still a hunter and it's just a Beastmaster using melee weapons, but it's just not right... I'd love to play a beastmaster and just go full apeshit summoning a lot of differente pets and fighting WITH them, but it's not very HUNTERISH...

    I honestly think a Gunslinger-like spec (DW 1h pistols/arbalests - aka mini xbows) would be better fitting... I mean, a petless spec (or at least a spec that has 0 dependency on his pet) is something I support.
    "Ah... you have learned much... and learned well... an honorable battle.
    In the end, I stood by the warchief, because it was my duty, and I am glad that it was you who struck me down.
    May your strength... lead the horde... into a new era of prosperity..."

    -General Nazgrim

  12. #52
    Pandaren Monk Solzan Nemesis's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Where ever the Regent-Lord needs me to be
    Posts
    1,973
    Quote Originally Posted by sakk View Post
    necromancer = Undead, so it has nothing to do with mage or lock's lore, but more DK

    BUT, if i first thought necro could be a 4th dk spec, im starting to think there are enought things to do with necro ( bone skills, acid/poison skills, skeletons, corrupted healing spec .... ) to do a whole new class with the necromancer
    But that's the thing it kinda dose. Most Necromancer where magi ones. Its a Dark art in the fields of Arcane magic. The Krin Tor even keeps a book on it in there studies of Arcane magic. A mage is a necromancy spec is about the same as a priest with a shadow spec. As for Warlocks they are both dark magic users and it would be easy to fit Necromancy right in there. My problem with DKs is the part where there a plate class.

  13. #53
    Something about summoning a lot of demons at time for locks.

  14. #54
    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.

  15. #55
    Pandaren Monk Solzan Nemesis's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Where ever the Regent-Lord needs me to be
    Posts
    1,973
    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.

  16. #56
    Reforged Gone Wrong The Stormbringer's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Premium
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    ...location, location!
    Posts
    15,354
    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.

  17. #57
    Mechagnome MOEEEE's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Thunder Bluff
    Posts
    546
    The ideas are nice, but keep it too three if you ask me.

  18. #58
    Deleted
    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.

  19. #59
    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.

  20. #60
    Elemental Lord
    15+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    8,868
    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

Posting Permissions

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