Page 4 of 7 FirstFirst ...
2
3
4
5
6
... LastLast
  1. #61
    Bloodsail Admiral DonQShot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Guimaraes
    Posts
    1,085
    Quote Originally Posted by Verain View Post
    Plenty of rogues are already demon hunters. They just rolled the closest fit class. Those guys don't really want to see some new class appear that they have to reroll to.
    nope, i think rogues who "are" demon hunters would reroll instantly for the pleasure of playing one from the beginning. That's the thing with these new players, they are in it just for the instant gratification and easy way through. If your not in this game to play a class and learn it, then don't bother playing at all.

  2. #62
    Epic! Skayth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Backwards Country
    Posts
    1,618
    Quote Originally Posted by Verain View Post
    Yes. It's almost assuredly plate. You could make an argument for mail perhaps, but not leather or cloth.
    Yes you can easily. Alot of plate doesnt look straight metal anymore. Hell, alot of cloth and leather now have alot of metal on it.

    Since you actually do this, pics or it didn't happen. I'm not aware of a plate-a-like set for rogues.
    cover of silence
    deadly gladiator's leather spaulders or if u want straight plate rockshard pauldrons
    deathmantle chestguard but for straight plate hauberk of karabor
    gloves of smoldering touch
    Id go with legguards of throusandfold blades for the color but for straight plate ruthless leather legguards
    boots of still breath

    There u go, a quick transmog plate look. Stop being bad and go look for yourself.


    With wow transmog, maybe not. But in WCIII, yes it does.
    actually, go look at maiev in wc3, she looks like shes in leather


    I don't think anyone argues that they would make an excellent hero class.
    Rogues have no lore for demon hunters though, which you are trying to argue


    Plenty of rogues are already demon hunters. They just rolled the closest fit class. Those guys don't really want to see some new class appear that they have to reroll to.
    yea yea, same with people who are rolling warlocks at this moment.
    Rogues are NOT demon hunters. You steal Illidan's blindfold and his warglaives to dance around in. congrats you can duel wield. Now lets see you use immolation, mana burn, and metamorph

    Rogues are not demon hunters. If you want to roleplay, then go role play on the servers, but as it is, rogues have nothing like demon hunter besides being able to duel wield and being able to steal some corpses stuff.

  3. #63
    Over 9000! Snowraven's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    European Union
    Posts
    9,344
    Demon hunters should be a warlock spec, rogues should get wardens. Fits better.

    The demon hunters have made a pact and used fel magic to battle the legion. Warlocks did something quite similar, just that they didn't pluck out their eyes, though it could be said some warlocks went and learned some of the secrets of demon hunters without removing their eyes, or just making the eyes of warlocks similar to those of death knights, only green.

    Furthermore, both demon hunters and warlocks are more or less outcasts of society. They aren't really accepted and live in shadow, hidden from plain view.
    Also demon hunters are a class based on magic first, their blades second. This would give warlocks their possible wanted tank spec.

    While on the rogues side, rogues aren't very magic oriented, sure they have their more or less magical tricks, but those are few and little in number. Wardens are the shadowy figures similar to rogues, they're still official parts of the military, yet some are more vicious and would stop at nothing from doing their duty. It would also give rogues their tank spec

  4. #64
    Quote Originally Posted by wolfen View Post
    Actually, they are Umbra Crescents,and i quote wowpedia: This is a circular blade favored by night elf Watchers. This type of weapon was most famously wielded by Maiev Shadowsong, but can be seen even today on night elves such as the Barrow Deeps Watchers on Mount Hyjal. It is likely the weapon you have recovered was magical before it was broken into so many fragments.
    They are a type of chakram called Umbra Crescent. Doesn't change that they're chakrams.

  5. #65
    Elemental Lord
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    8,023
    Quote Originally Posted by Thimagryn View Post
    Paladins are Paladins in WoW. Priests are Priests. If Paladins are simply 'Priests and clerics who donned plate' then they would have been a Priest spec. They aren't portrayed that way in the game in any fashion.
    You answered a point about character lore with an in game mechanic?

    Demon Hunters are not in game, and it's somewhat speculative, but based on established lore, they are different enough from Warlocks to warrant being their own class. The parallel to the Paladin is there.
    And then try to support your own argument using lore to support an in-game system?

    A Melee warlock is still a Warlock, any way you see it. A Brewmaster is still a Monk. An Arms Warrior is still a Warrior. Demon Hunters would have to become Warlocks for this change to happen.
    Suppose I call a Melee Warlock a Demon Hunter - in the same way I call a Tanking Monk a Brewmaster?

    To make Demon Hunters a part of the Warlock class would be like taking the current Paladin and folding it into the Priest as a spec. It would be breaking Warlock identity to fit in a playable melee spec (that fits to what a Demon Hunter is), and it would be changing Demon Hunter lore to become a Warlock pecialization.
    What Demon Hunter or Warlock lore would it contradict? None.
    What gameplay element would forbid it? None.
    What identity of one class who wields demonic energy would be broken by associating it with another class who wields demonic energy? None.

    Quote Originally Posted by dokhidamo View Post
    Easy way to say it is just to look at their motives. Demon Hunters are more than just a petless melee warlock if you look into their lore beyond just "uses demonic energy."
    Petless?

    Never met Raytaf, Shahiar and Zaman?

    EJL
    Last edited by Talen; 2013-05-08 at 09:41 PM.

  6. #66
    Paladins have their own order. They are not priests. This is presented in lore. Sunwalkers are not Tauren Priests, Blood Knights are not Blood Elf Priests.

    Demon Hunters are their own order. They are not Warlock subclasses. The same can be said of Liches and Death Knights, they are similar and may have similar powers, but they are not the same class. Demon Hunters ritualistically gain their powers through self sacrifice. Warlocks actively study magic to learn and use their powers. There is a significant difference in lore.

    The main issue is derives from identity. A Specialization still derives from the core class. A Brewmaster is a specialization of Monk, and that makes sense. A Blademaster could be a specialization of Warrior, or a Warden could be a specilialization of a Rogue. Demon Hunters are not Warlocks specializing in demon hunting. If this comes to pass, then the Demon Hunter (Warlock spec) of WoW would not be the same as the Demon Hunters that we know in lore, they would be their own thing. It would be like renaming Frost DK spec to 'Lich', even though we know they are not Liches.
    Last edited by Thimagryn; 2013-05-08 at 10:30 PM.

  7. #67
    [QUOTE=wolfen;21062748]Yes you can easily. Alot of plate doesnt look straight metal anymore. Hell, alot of cloth and leather now have alot of metal on it.

    cover of silence
    deadly gladiator's leather spaulders or if u want straight plate rockshard pauldrons
    deathmantle chestguard but for straight plate hauberk of karabor
    gloves of smoldering touch
    Id go with legguards of throusandfold blades for the color but for straight plate ruthless leather legguards
    boots of still breath

    There u go, a quick transmog plate look. Stop being bad and go look for yourself.
    Lol, what a transmog. I wouldn't call not counting that garbage "bad", I guess beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

    That's not really a very solid plate transmog. If anything, these are the exceptions that prove the rule: rogues don't have a plate transmog. More relevantly, as I stated before, a few off pieces that look like plate doesn't prove anything. The Warden isn't carefully constructed from the discount bin of rogue transmog, she's just fucking wearing plate armor.


    actually, go look at maiev in wc3, she looks like shes in leather
    Can you link an image from that? I find these 100% compelling as plate:





    There's really no room for debate here. If the best argument is "a dedicated xmog hound can vaguely construct a look of plate armor, therefore any hero wearing plate can be reasonably construed to be a rogue", I don't think that needs me to defeat it, it's all [Sacrificial Dagger] on itself.

    Rogues have no lore for demon hunters though, which you are trying to argue
    Rogues have no lore. Which is yet another reason why anyone who wants to be a demon hunter rolled rogue already.

    yea yea, same with people who are rolling warlocks at this moment.
    I don't see that at all. Warlocks are almost all down with being warlocks. Shit man, night elves can't even be warlocks, and 100% of demon hunters before BC were night elves. But I don't even see blood elf locks running around shirtless trying to RP that shit.

    Rogues are NOT demon hunters.
    Not yet anyway :P

    The point I'm making is, if you want a demon hunter, and you created a WoW character, it was a rogue. If you weren't willing to compromise to play the WoW character you want, it was a rogue.

    You steal Illidan's blindfold and his warglaives to dance around in.
    So the rogue:
    Dual wields
    Has evasion
    Can use the warglaives that define the demon hunter
    Is a melee class
    Uses the blindfold that defines the demon hunter, and can even trangsmog to it.

    That's as compelling and close as you get.

    Now lets see you use immolation, mana burn, and metamorph
    Well, those would have to be in the tree. Mana burn would have to be modified to not actually be much mana.



    Rogues are not demon hunters. If you want to roleplay, then go role play on the servers,
    It's an MMORPG. I don't need to roll on an RP server to do that, and neither do the people who are already playing as demon hunters and ofc picked rogue.

    I'm not saying DH would be a bad class. But I am saying that if it was added as a spec, it would be to rogue. Nothing else makes sense.


    but as it is, rogues have nothing like demon hunter besides being able to duel wield and being able to steal some corpses stuff.
    Besides the visual and the combat, got it.

  8. #68
    Elemental Lord
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    8,023
    Quote Originally Posted by Thimagryn View Post
    Paladins have their own order. They are not priests.
    Some of the first paladins were priests and clerics who essentially put on plate and picked up a hammer. Turalyon, for example...the BIG Alliance hero of the day. Second only to Anduin Lothar himself.

    Priest.

    Demon Hunters are their own order.
    No. They don't.

    They are not Warlock subclasses.
    In your opinion.

    Demon Hunters ritualistically gain their powers through self sacrifice. Warlocks actively study magic to learn and use their powers. There is a significant difference in lore.
    Which is about as big as the difference between a Brewmaster Monk and a Windwalker Monk. Illidan was a caster who became a Demon Hunter. Tuarlyon was a priest who became a Paladin. BattleMages are Mages who don armor and pick up a sword to fight face to face.

    All these exist in game. But the reason you cannot see the Demon Hunter as someone who studies how to fight and use and manipulate demonic energies for use in melee is because you see the class as tied irrevocably to the concept that they can and do use and manipulkate demonic energies for use as a caster.

    Except - as these are warlocks - when they fight in melee.

    Not to mention, your information about Demon Hunters actually ahs little relevane to the argument, even if it turnsd out to be accurate and still in force given we have next to no information about themn whatsoever.

    What we do have are the following.

    Demon Hunters in game make use of Shadowbolt. Shadowfury. Banish. Metamorphosis. Curses. And a couple of other similar spells.
    Demon Hunters in game appear to wear cloth armour.
    Demon Hunters in game have been known to summon and control demons....specifically felhounds.
    Demon Hunters in game make use of sword class weaponry.

    So

    Warlocks make use of Shadowbolt. Shadowfury. Banish. Metamorphosis. Curses.
    Warlocks in game wear cloth armour.
    Warlocks summon and control demons.
    Warlocks make use of sword class weaponry.

    In lore, Illidan was a caster who became a Demon Hunter.
    In lore, he wasn't unique. Far from it.

    But you object to the idea of Demon Hunters being a sub spec of Warlocks because....Warlocks don't dual wield? Because in your view Warlcoks shouldn't have a spec that has them learning how to melee? That Warlocks can't have a BattleMage equivalent?

    Do you have any stronger arguments against? While I would agree that the class could be more fully developed as a fully fledged and unqiue class, so far the main argument as to why they can't be a warlock sub spec is "I don't see thm that way". Which granted, could be Blizzards pov as well. But until they actually do so, it seems a little premature to write anything off.

    EJL
    Last edited by Talen; 2013-05-08 at 10:36 PM.

  9. #69
    Dreadlord Findus707's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Norway, Trondheim
    Posts
    758
    i would vote Demon Hunters to be for Hunters, to allow them use melee weapons again, as i still got alot of lvl 70 weapons left in my bank on my hunter that i want to use yet again.

  10. #70
    Quote Originally Posted by Klavier Gavin View Post
    Can't say it would be that hard for Blizzard to change the lore around a little!
    No, but it'd be a bit difficult to justify those retcons or changes in direction.

    Quote Originally Posted by Talen View Post
    Paladins are priests and clerics who donned plate instead of mail.

    And Demon Hunters aren't in the game yet so this is a highly speculative statement. If a Mage can pick up a sword and devote his tiem to develop the skills necessary to become a BattleMage in gameworld, the same can be said for a Warlock type caster who develops towards the Demon Hunter. Some one who manipulates demonic energies in pursuit of a melee style approach. Blizzard doesn't need to develop the DH this way - but the truth is that it has given the Warlock a large number of DH style features and has linked the two classes to a great degree and there isn't anything in lore or ingame that would contradict that approach.
    Actually according to lore, both of these comparisons are incorrect.

    Paladins seem to work with the Light in a different way than priests and put it to different uses. Paladins seem to suffuse themselves with the light, while priests tend to have it flow through themselves. A paladin is like a reservoir while a priest is like a river. Both have water, but they contain that water in different ways. As well, paladins are primarily warriors and use the Light to smite their enemies, while priests use it primarily to heal others. Their respective training regimens and ceremonies are also quite different.

    In a similar fashion, demon hunters aren't just warlocks who've picked up a pair of warglaives. A warlock attempts to gain mastery over demonic magic. A demon hunter on the other hand assimilates that magic into his very being, becoming one with it. And again, like the difference between the uses of these magics, warlocks are scholarly, they didn't become a warlock to fight, they became a warlock to gain knowledge and power. A demon hunter becomes what he is because he wants to hunt and kill demons.

    Quote Originally Posted by wolfen View Post
    Thats actually a misinterpreted quote. It is true that About half the warlocks are in it for power, the other half are in it for revenge. Go reread council of the six daggers. Quite a few of them are there simply for power, and others simply know the horrors they face and wish to gain power to fight them.
    Having just reread that passage it reinforces my point. Warlocks aren't portrayed in the same way as demon hunters in terms of fighting these dark powers. Warlocks do so out of the need of self preservation. Demon hunters do it out of a desire to benefit the greater good. It's an inherently different view on wielding dark magics.

    Quote Originally Posted by Talen View Post
    Some of the first paladins were priests and clerics who essentially put on plate and picked up a hammer. Turalyon, for example...the BIG Alliance hero of the day. Second only to Anduin Lothar himself.

    Priest.
    And others were warriors who were taught the ways of the Light.

    By your logic that means they're also warriors.

    But here's the fun bit: They aren't warriors. They aren't priests. They're warrior-priests... AKA: Paladins. They have aspects of both, mixed up and twisted so that while the basis of the class is clear they are fundamentally different from either class that were mixed beforehand. The warrior stuff is different and the priest stuff is different.

    Quote Originally Posted by Talen View Post
    No. They don't.
    Yes, they are. No demon hunter would associate with a warlock unless they had a dire need to do so. Demon Hunters tend to view warlocks little better than demons.

    Quote Originally Posted by Talen View Post
    In your opinion.
    In lore. They both wield and gain fel magics in completely different ways.

    Quote Originally Posted by Talen View Post
    Not to mention, your information about Demon Hunters actually ahs little relevane to the argument, even if it turnsd out to be accurate and still in force given we have next to no information about themn whatsoever.
    His information on how they get their powers and what they use them for has EVERYTHING to do with this argument. If you want to say that a class which gains its powers in a significantly different way and uses those powers in a significantly different way should be a subclass because the only thing they share is that they wield fel magic is... shaky, at best. If this were the thought pattern of class developers we wouldn't have paladins and priests being two separate classes.
    Last edited by The Madgod; 2013-05-08 at 10:49 PM.

  11. #71
    I'm still surprised you argue that Paladins are Priests when WoW specifically divides the two classes from each other in the game, both in lore and mechanics. Paladins were priests, before Warcraft 2. They have since become their own order, and in WoW you play as a character in the Paladin order.

    Demon Hunters have their own order. "To become a demon hunter, a hero must find a demon hunter who is willing to lead them through a series of complex rituals." Warlocks do not go through this process, thus a Demon Hunter specialization would still be a Warlock.

    Since you believe Paladins and Priests are the same thing, further discussing parallels and differentiations of the two classes would be futile on my part. If you believe Warlocks can become Demon Hunters because of their similarities, then we simply have differing opinions on the subject.
    Last edited by Thimagryn; 2013-05-08 at 10:59 PM.

  12. #72
    Elemental Lord
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    8,023
    Quote Originally Posted by The Madgod View Post
    Paladins seem to work with the Light in a different way than priests and put it to different uses. Paladins seem to suffuse themselves with the light, while priests tend to have it flow through themselves. A paladin is like a reservoir while a priest is like a river. Both have water, but they contain that water in different ways. As well, paladins are primarily warriors and use the Light to smite their enemies, while priests use it primarily to heal others. Their respective training regimens and ceremonies are also quite different.
    And yet none of that negates the fact that priests can, will and have become Paladins.

    In a similar fashion, demon hunters aren't just warlocks who've picked up a pair of warglaives. A warlock attempts to gain mastery over demonic magic. A demon hunter on the other hand assimilates that magic into his very being, becoming one with it. And again, like the difference between the uses of these magics, warlocks are scholarly, they didn't become a warlock to fight, they became a warlock to gain knowledge and power. A demon hunter becomes what he is because he wants to hunt and kill demons.
    Which, being blunt, is meaningless as far as gameplay is concerned. Lore was brought up to support the idea of a dedicated Demon hunter as separate from the Warlock class.

    In lore...it is. In lore, there are also exceptions which shows that this distinction is neither universal nor absolute. In gameplay...the difference boils down to the fact Warlocks lack the dual wield and Evasion skills. If the next Xpac gives the class these skills?

    How Warlocks and DHs are represented in lore is fairly meaningless. Lore shows casters can will and have become melee fighters so Warlocks could adopt to a melee based outlook. Would they be a traditional Warlock? No. But do you think (lorewise) a Swashbuckling Combat Rogue is also a secertive ninja assassin? Very different outlooks. Very different training regimens. Very different groups. But still the same class in game. Just like Blood Knights and Sunwalkers and paladins are the same class with very different orders, training and beliefs.

    So no. In lore a Demon Hunter would be a Demon Hunter, and not a Warlock.

    That, however, provides no justification for saying that the Warlock class cannot be used to represent - gameplay wise - the Demon Hunter class. Nor does it prevent Demon Hunters being presented as an order of what are effectively Warlocks in all but name who simply focussed their attention on melee combat - just as BattleMages do.

    The entire justification for the argument "Warlocks cannot represnet Demon Hunters" comes from one source. Players own preconceptions about hwo the class should be represented in game lore and in game play. And that justification, as far as Blizzard is concenred, is essentially meaningless.

    If Blizzard want to develop the class as a standalone, it will do so. If it wants to develop it as a Warlock sub-spec - there isn't anything that exists in lore that will contradict that stance. Not a thing. And in game? Theres a lot to support that stance.

    Yes, they are. No demon hunter would associate with a warlock unless they had a dire need to do so.
    Preconceived notions of how Demon Hunters act and should behave have no relevance. Nor do you seem to be able to grasp the concept that Demon Hunters can be based upon the Warlock as far as gameplay is concerned...and yet see themselves as completely different and separate in lore. Respeccing doesn't exist in life.

    In lore. They both wield and gain fel magics in completely different ways.
    Again, in your own preconcieved belief of what and how Demon Hunters (and Warlocks) act and behave. Meaningless.

    His information on how they get their powers and what they use them for has EVERYTHING to do with this argument. If you want to say that a class which gains its powers in a significantly different way and uses those powers in a significantly different way should be a subclass because the only thing they share is that they wield fel magic is... shaky, at best. If this were the thought pattern of class developers we wouldn't have paladins and priests being two separate classes.
    You don't know HOW a DH gains his abilities. Because such information has never been provided. Nor do you really know how a Warlock is trained. Yes, A Warlocks is seen as a caster and a DH as a meleer...except a Warlock does receive some training in swordplay while DHs in game have a lot of Warlock based spells.

    And yes, his information on how a DH gets his powers IS meaningless. Because it doesn't exist. Nor do we know what they use them for. Or why. There is little DH lore anymore.

    Quote Originally Posted by Thimagryn View Post
    I'm still surprised you argue that Paladins are Priests when WoW specifically divides the two classes from each other in the game, both in lore and mechanics. Paladins were priests, before Warcraft 2. They have since become their own order, and in WoW you play as a character in the Paladin order.
    The point you missed was that prists were fully able to don armour and pick up a weapon to become a melee class. We know Mages can effectively do the same for BattleMages.

    But you continually deny Warlocks have the same capability.

    To put it another way. You take a Warlock. Train him up in melee combat and swordplay. You put him into combat and wtch him. He'll slice and dice and he'll cast spells and set curses upon his foes. He'll use metamorphosis and harness the demonic energies his warlcok trainigngives him mastery of.

    Functionally? He's a Demon Hunter in every way.

    Demon Hunters have their own order. "To become a demon hunter, a hero must find a demon hunter who is willing to lead them through a series of complex rituals.
    Let me know when the RPG becomes canon again.

    Warlocks do not go through this process
    As far as you know. Warlockism isn't exactly a respected occupation in many areas of Azeroth. A would be warlock would likewise have to locate someone willing to train them. Or figure it out themsleevs. As would a Demon Hunter in your example.

    Since you believe Paladins and Priests are the same thing
    Putting words in my mouth isn't helping your case.

    If you believe Warlocks can become Demon Hunters because of their similarities, then we simply have differing opinions on the subject.
    Can you point out anything in the current game - not the RPG - which contradicts that stance?

    EJL
    Last edited by Talen; 2013-05-08 at 11:31 PM.

  13. #73
    Epic! Skayth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Backwards Country
    Posts
    1,618
    Quote Originally Posted by Verain View Post

    Lol, what a transmog. I wouldn't call not counting that garbage "bad", I guess beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

    That's not really a very solid plate transmog. If anything, these are the exceptions that prove the rule: rogues don't have a plate transmog. More relevantly, as I stated before, a few off pieces that look like plate doesn't prove anything. The Warden isn't carefully constructed from the discount bin of rogue transmog, she's just fucking wearing plate armor.
    1. Its a pretty solid look at plate armor for a rogue look alike. No matter if its color is off, I didnt bother actually looking. I simply proved my point.
    2. No, she isnt. Go replay wc3
    3. That is the wow armor they gave her.

    Can you link an image from that? I find these 100% compelling as plate:
    http://www.wowpedia.org/File:Maiev3.jpg
    http://www.wowpedia.org/images/archi...%21MaievFT.jpg
    that is her armor from wc3. THAT is leather with a cloak


    Rogues have no lore. Which is yet another reason why anyone who wants to be a demon hunter rolled rogue already.
    For rogues, the only code is the contract, and their honor is purchased in gold. Free from the constraints of a conscience, these mercenaries rely on brutal and efficient tactics. Lethal assassins and masters of stealth, they will approach their marks from behind, piercing a vital organ and vanishing into the shadows before the victim hits the ground. Rogues can dip their weapons in paralyzing toxins that render foes unable to defend themselves. These silent stalkers wear leather armor so they can move unencumbered, ensuring that they land the first strike.
    With the rogue’s poisons and speed, the first strike is often the last step before the killing blow.
    ~blizzard

    Doesnt sound very demon hunter-y


    I don't see that at all. Warlocks are almost all down with being warlocks. Shit man, night elves can't even be warlocks, and 100% of demon hunters before BC were night elves. But I don't even see blood elf locks running around shirtless trying to RP that shit.
    You really want to do this? really? RP? Please, go reread wowpedia's demon hunter overview, for the uncanon RPG. And you tell me where your fel magic is. Demon hunters rarely use Shadow Magic.

    Not yet anyway :P

    The point I'm making is, if you want a demon hunter, and you created a WoW character, it was a rogue. If you weren't willing to compromise to play the WoW character you want, it was a rogue.
    or a warrior

    So the rogue:
    Dual wields
    Has evasion
    Can use the warglaives that define the demon hunter
    Is a melee class
    Uses the blindfold that defines the demon hunter, and can even trangsmog to it.
    Damn... so does that make monks demon hunters too? baddy. Evasion is passive for demon hunters.

    Well, those would have to be in the tree. Mana burn would have to be modified to not actually be much mana.
    so you are going to randomly start using fel magic, take 3 abilities of a warlock, and bring back mana burn from priests... good luck with that one. But hey what ever your stubborn dreams say, good luck.


    It's an MMORPG. I don't need to roll on an RP server to do that, and neither do the people who are already playing as demon hunters and ofc picked rogue.

    I'm not saying DH would be a bad class. But I am saying that if it was added as a spec, it would be to rogue. Nothing else makes sense.
    Makes more sense, if 4th spec, to warlock, not rogues, plus it would be easier, just simply add duel wield and give night elfs the option to be locks... since they allowed back the highbourne.

    For me though, i think it would be easier to make demon hunter as a hero class.


    Besides the visual and the combat, got it.
    Monks have more visuals and combat than you. Congrats.

  14. #74
    Quote Originally Posted by Talen View Post
    And yet none of that negates the fact that priests can, will and have become Paladins.
    A mage can become a warlock or a necromancer if he chooses to envelop himself in one of those dark taboos. That doesn't mean that warlocks and mages are the same.

    Quote Originally Posted by Talen View Post
    Which, being blunt, is meaningless as far as gameplay is concerned. Lore was brought up to support the idea of a dedicated Demon hunter as separate from the Warlock class.

    In lore...it is. In lore, there are also exceptions which shows that this distinction is neither universal nor absolute. In gameplay...the difference boils down to the fact Warlocks lack the dual wield and Evasion skills. If the next Xpac gives the class these skills?
    Gameplay is inspired by lore. If it weren't, then we'd see the paladin as a subclass for both priests and warriors.

    Quote Originally Posted by Talen View Post
    In lore a Demon Hunter would be a Demon Hunter, and not a Warlock.

    That, however, provides no justification for saying that the Warlock class cannot be used to represent the Demon Hunter class. Nor does it prevent Demon Hunters being presented as an order of what are effectively Warlocks in all but name who simply focussed their attention on melee combat - just as BattleMages do.
    It was justification for the difference in paladins and priests. Why doesn't it work for demon hunters and warlocks, who are much more different than paladins and priests?

    Quote Originally Posted by Talen View Post
    If Blizzard want to develop the class as a standalone, it will do so. If it wants to develop it as a Warlock sub-spec - there isn't anything that exists in lore that will contradict that stance. Not a thing. And in game? Theres a lot to support that stance.
    Except the knowledge that we have concerning how demon hunters work and why they do so and how warlocks function and why they do what they do.

    Quote Originally Posted by Talen View Post
    Preconceived notions of how Demon Hunters act and should behave have no relevance. Nor do you seem to be able to grasp the concept that Demon Hunters can be based upon the Warlock as far as gameplay is concerned...and yet see themselves as completely different and separate in lore. Respeccing doesn't exist in life.
    Quote Originally Posted by Talen View Post
    Again, in your own preconcieved belief of what and how Demon Hunters (and Warlocks) act and behave. Meaningless.
    Eeeeexcept that the reasons why demon hunters do what they do is quite well known and warlocks have time and time again been portrayed as something quite opposite of demon hunters.

    So no, hardly meaningless. Your denial of such is, however.

    Quote Originally Posted by Talen View Post
    You don't know HOW a DH gains his abilities. Because such information has never been provided. Nor do you really know how a Warlock is trained. Yes, A Warlocks is seen as a caster and a DH as a meleer...except a Warlock does receive some training in swordplay while DHs in game have a lot of Warlock based spells.
    Quote Originally Posted by wowpedia
    Later, a group of night elves, inspired by Illidan's example, made a pact to turn the Burning Legion's powers against it, fighting destruction with destruction. Obviously they could not gain their powers in the same way Illidan did, but they discovered other means. In the millennia since, other night elves, and a few creatures of other races, have made the same pact, binding demonic essence in their bodies and using it to destroy the Legion's minions.
    ^ Information on how they gain their abilities (also WHY they gain their abilities and what they use it for).

    As well there's information on their ritualistic self-blinding and replacing their ruined eyes with magical ones and their purpose. Plus, we do know how a warlock is trained. They DON'T blind themselves nor do they make a pact. Warlocks

    Quote Originally Posted by Talen View Post
    And yes, his information on how a DH gets his powers IS meaningless. Because it doesn't exist. Nor do we know what they use them for. Or why. There is little DH lore anymore.
    EJL
    See my quote above.

    As well as the War of the Ancients Trilogy, a canon book series. Goes into a good bit of detail on what happened with Illidan and how he got his characteristic demon hunter shtuff. Combine that with the quote and you've got a solid bit of information.

    Plus again we know what demon hunters use their powers for. It's been known since Warcraft III. Ignorance of the lore is not a plausible reason to deny it.

    You can make all the arguments you want, deny all the lore you want, but here's the skinny: It is common knowledge that demon hunters get their power through a dark pact and imbue themselves with fel magic to better hunt demons. It is a morally questionable but ultimately selfless thing to do. It is also common knowledge that warlocks become warlocks because of a desire for greater power, an inherently selfish thing to do, and turn to fel magics to sate that lust.

    By saying that one can be a subclass of another you are inherently saying that they are linked. Because classes are made with lore in mind and lore as a basis, you are suggesting that two classes with completely opposite motivations be made roughly one and the same.

    The only evidence you have? A denial of the opposition (despite your lack of backing up what you're saying with evidence) and some shared generic powers (which is a null point because we already have separate classes that have a similar relationship). That doesn't fly.
    Last edited by The Madgod; 2013-05-08 at 11:47 PM.

  15. #75
    There's no philosophy of what you should act like behind DH or Warlock or if there's one then not everyone has to follow it. Being DH or Warlock are just the types of power you have obtained. Illidan didn't give a fuck about what DH is supposed to do and that made him not a DH? No. You go through the ritual to become DH and then you choose your own path.

  16. #76
    Quote Originally Posted by Wildmoon View Post
    There's no philosophy of what you should act like behind DH or Warlock or if there's one then not everyone has to follow it. Being DH or Warlock are just the types of power you have obtained. Illidan didn't give a fuck about what DH is supposed to do and that made him not a DH? No. You go through the ritual to become DH and then you choose your own path.
    Considering that there are recognizable patterns and common traits among demon hunters and warlocks, I'd say you're wrong. Demon hunters ultimately made a selfless decision: taint themselves to better hunt a threat to all mortals. Warlocks have the common trait of desiring further personal power.

  17. #77
    Mages have a Frost spec
    Mages can equip swords
    Some Mages have turned to the dark arts, taking up necromancy

    Is this compelling evidence that Death Knights could be a Mage spec?

    If lore and class identity were not an important matter, then I'm sure I could make a compelling case for Death Knights to be a Mage Spec, because gameplay mechanics could be created to support any scenario if it really mattered.

    Identity is the core reason here. It's not an excuse as to why Warlocks can't become Demon Hunters. I'm not arguing against this mechanically or in lore. The issue comes from muddling the identity of the Demon Hunter by attaching it to a core class that does not fully represent what the concept of a Demon Hunter really is.

  18. #78
    Quote Originally Posted by The Madgod View Post
    Considering that there are recognizable patterns and common traits among demon hunters and warlocks, I'd say you're wrong. Demon hunters ultimately made a selfless decision: taint themselves to better hunt a threat to all mortals. Warlocks have the common trait of desiring further personal power.
    Illidan made a selfless pact or not is arguable. Some DHs really sacrificed themself but somes use their sacrifice to justify their greed for power. Your warlock's common trait is also just how society view them. Not all of Warlocks are like that. It's like saying all Priests are kind, selfless. Benedictus. You ar the one who are wrong here. Being a class doesn't define who you are.

  19. #79
    Epic! Skayth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Backwards Country
    Posts
    1,618
    Quote Originally Posted by The Madgod View Post
    Considering that there are recognizable patterns and common traits among demon hunters and warlocks, I'd say you're wrong. Demon hunters ultimately made a selfless decision: taint themselves to better hunt a threat to all mortals. Warlocks have the common trait of desiring further personal power.
    Completely agree, but you also falter to know the most known demon hunter, Illidan. Not all his decisions were selfless, and he hungered for greater power. Not saying he is like Altruis the Sufferer or Loramus Thalipedis, who owned two felhunters but later gave his life to save the blasted lands from a dread lord. But there are a few that followed his exact example and eventually paid the ultimate price.

  20. #80
    Quote Originally Posted by Thimagryn View Post
    Mages have a Frost spec
    Mages can equip swords
    Some Mages have turned to the dark arts, taking up necromancy

    Is this compelling evidence that Death Knights could be a Mage spec?

    If lore and class identity were not an important matter, then I'm sure I could make a compelling case for Death Knights to be a Mage Spec, because gameplay mechanics could be created to support any scenario if it really mattered.

    Identity is the core reason here. It's not an excuse as to why Warlocks can't become Demon Hunters. I'm not arguing against this mechanically or in lore. The issue comes from muddling the identity of the Demon Hunter by attaching it to a core class that does not fully represent what the concept of a Demon Hunter really is.
    Exactly!

    A character can become any class they want, even if they were previously another class that has little to do with that new class, provided the excuse for such is well-made... but that has nothing to do with combining classes or making one the subclass of another. Demon hunters and warlocks are similar. This is fact. They both wield fel magic. However they have different means of gaining and wielding these powers as well as different general intentions. Warlocks don't fully represent demon hunters, nor do demon hunters fully represent warlocks. There are enough differences between them that they are not the same class.

    Quote Originally Posted by Wildmoon View Post
    Illidan made a selfless pact or not is arguable. Some DHs really sacrificed themself but somes use their sacrifice to justify their greed for power. Your warlock's common trait is also just how society view them. Not all of Warlocks are like that. It's like saying all Priests are kind, selfless. Benedictus. You ar the one who are wrong here. Being a class doesn't define who you are.
    Illidan never really made a pact. He was "rewarded" with his power for swearing to serve Sargeras and helping him out in some way (I forget how, exactly). Ultimately though, demon hunters do corrupt themselves to better fight demons, which is self-sacrifice for the greater good. Their work is to see demon-kind fall.

    As well, warlocks are mages who sought more power and turned to the fel arts for such. That is a fact. That doesn't mean they have to be bad guys. It just means that they ultimately desired power. They are viewed as bad guys by society because they broke the taboo of magi and turned to fel magic, not because they sought more power.

    If you don't believe me, check the first paragraph of the wowpedia article on warlocks:

    Quote Originally Posted by wowpedia
    Warlocks are former arcanists, or in the case of the orcs, former shamans, who, in pursuit of ever-greater sources of power, have cast off their studies of the arcane or nature magics to delve deeper into the darker, fel-based magic of shadow.
    Last but not least, Benedictus was still a priest and still adhered to one of its general archetypes, namely the archetype of a shadow priest. It's the antithesis of a Light-wielding priest, but it's still a priest archetype. Nothing incorrect about my statements so far, mate.

    Quote Originally Posted by wolfen View Post
    Completely agree, but you also falter to know the most known demon hunter, Illidan. Not all his decisions were selfless, and he hungered for greater power. Not saying he is like Altruis the Sufferer or Loramus Thalipedis, who owned two felhunters but later gave his life to save the blasted lands from a dread lord. But there are a few that followed his exact example and eventually paid the ultimate price.
    Illidan was hungry for power, true. However his ultimate intentions were to ensure that the Legion would never be able to take Azeroth, which is the commonality of demon hunters; to deny the Legion Azeroth and its denizens.
    Last edited by The Madgod; 2013-05-09 at 12:12 AM.

Posting Permissions

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