Rejoice! Demon Hunter is already playable in-game, but not clear enough, apparently.

[Belisaurio]

They share nothing if you overlook everything DHs have in game. Summoned demons, warlock spell casting abilities, cloth (looking) armour....
Tell you what....give a Warlock dual wield and a balanced melee rotation and then try to point out a meaningful gameplay difference. And they are already at that point - leaving aside pure effectivenes, the major gameplay difference NOW is Warlocks don't have dual wield.

Ergo, you never played in WC3 DHs. You are saying that DH have the same gameplay that a caster, i.e. Lich/keeper of the grove/archmage/farseer. This Heroes were ranged-casters, and you say that are really close in gameplay (not in aesthetics) than DH? Not even close.
Stop giving personal assumptions. DemonHunters, in WC3 and in wow, are melee fighters, that dual-wield warglaives, have some tatoos, and blindfolds. They don't use caster-skills like ranged bolts, they need to run in front of the target and start smashing his face.

Did they have ranged spell? Yes. Case closed.

So DKs are ranged. Rogues are ranged. Warriors are ranged. All of them have some ranged abilities...
To be a ranged doesn't mean that you have 1 ranged-ability.

You seem to ignore the DH who we know DOES control Felhounds.

No, you are ignoring that the DH had no pet-skills, had not battle-pet to fight (he helped us and he didn't use anything pet-related in the final quest). You assume that this felhounds are his pets. But again, If you want to believe that they are his pets and DHs are a pet-battle based class, then it's your chose.

Simple answer. You don't give a DH standalone class at all. It isn't needed. It brings nothing to the game. There is a large crossover with an existing class. There is no major reason to implement it. And asking the same question I did you isn't really giving an answer. There is no viable option for a DH design that doesn't cause problems somewhere.

So, you don't know what type of class are DH and you are arguing that they bring nothing to the game. You are talking that is a large crossover with warlocks, and they only share the theme of his "possible" skills (demons) like Paladins and Priest have the same (holy). And for major reason, well, what class could fit in a "possible" burning legion expansion? What class is the most demanded in fan-webs? There are a lot of reasons, too many if you want my opinion. Of course this is not a fact about they are the next class. But a good start.

I don't associate DHs with fairies. I don't associate Warlocks with guns. I associate both with demons

I can associate physical with warriors and rogues too. Or holy with priests and paladins. Or magic with warlocks and mages. Or venom with hunters and rogues, and elements with mage and shaman, etc. So, what's the point of this association?

You can ALWAYS design what is effectively a new class and say its a Demon Hunter.
Why bother? Seriously - why? Noone seems to want to answer that. Why bother with a new class called demon hunter instead of the one players want?

What's this "class" that you are talking about that players want? I can say that there are more posts about DH than any other class (you can try in official forums too), so I assume that more people like DH, but just my point of view. Of course they can create a new class, would be awesome to have tinkerers, wardens, or whatever they implement. Or maybe, they doesn't give us any new class, and they go for races to be the next playable feature!!

[Talen]

Again, Strawman argument implying players only want the Warcraft 3 Demon Hunter.

Quite frankly - if you just want a class CALLED Demon Hunter, there isn't any point in adding one. None of the lore? None of the look or feel? None of the theme?

You may as well say the MM Hunter is a Demon Hunter.

EJL

[Jerakal]

If you really think blizzard would pass up the opportunity to add another class to the game, to give us another character to level, to give (insert figure here) of Illidan/Demon Hunter fans a reason to resubscribe/stay subscribed, to give us a perfectly lore appropriate new class for the return of the legion expansion that's right around the corner.

You, my friend, are delusional.

We will get a proper demon hunter class before you know it. Count on it.

[Teriz]

If you really think blizzard would pass up the opportunity to add another class to the game, to give us another character to level, to give (insert figure here) of Illidan/Demon Hunter fans a reason to resubscribe/stay subscribed, to give us a perfectly lore appropriate new class for the return of the legion expansion that's right around the corner.

You, my friend, are delusional.

We will get a proper demon hunter class before you know it. Count on it.

Why would they do that when they didn't do it during the Burning Crusade? Players kind of massacred the majority of Demon Hunters, along with Illidan himself.

Also if their plan was to keep Demon Hunters as a trump card all these years, why would they purposely release the Monk class (a hybrid, melee, leather, and agility class that fills up the DH niche), and purposely farm out Demon Hunter abilities and attributes to other classes?

[Jerakal]

Anyone with a few spare braincells knows that they were going to come back around to the legion eventually. After all, we hadn't killed Sargeras yet.

As for why they didn't release it during BC? Plenty of reasons. At that time they didn't want to add any new classes to the game. The game design model they had was very different compared to what it is now, since then they've released two new classes, it's more likely than ever that we'll see Demon Hunter.

And the fact that other classes have similar powers is hardly an argument against adding DH. Warlocks and DKs have a number of similar abilities, as do Monk and Rogue.

As for why they released the monk class? It was something people had been clamoring about on the forums for years. (KIND OF LIKE DEMON HUNTER) They finally had an excuse to do it when Mists of Pandaria came out. Boy I wonder what kind of class would be appropriate to add to the game for the next expansion. Especially considering THE LEGION IS RETURNING AND ALL THAT.

IF ONLY WE HAD A NUMBER OF HIGHLY TRAINED INDIVIDUALS WHOSE SOLE PURPOSE WAS THE ERADICATION OF DEMONS.

Ahem.

[Jessicka]

Why would they do that when they didn't do it during the Burning Crusade? Players kind of massacred the majority of Demon Hunters, along with Illidan himself.

Also if their plan was to keep Demon Hunters as a trump card all these years, why would they purposely release the Monk class (a hybrid, melee, leather, and agility class that fills up the DH niche), and purposely farm out Demon Hunter abilities and attributes to other classes?

Almost no one had finished classic when TBC launched and leveling an alt was just unthinkable because it took so long. They added Draenei and Blood Elves, and it gave them the opportunity there to give Horde Paladins and Alliance Shaman. Adding a new class at that point wouldn't really have worked. It worked in Wrath because of the XP nerf, introduction of Heirlooms and DKs starting at 55.

Furthermore, the lack of use of end game content meant balance wasn't the all important thing it is now. If you wanted to play your Warrior or Rogue as if they were a Demon Hunter, you could get away with it. As time went on and classes got new abilities, and became more defined by having a 'correct' spec, weapon choice etc due to increasing end-game participation and the growing importance of balance that came with it; the opportunity to do that got lost and your Warrior became a Warrior and Rogue a Rogue. The gaps between them where those guys who wanted to be a DK or Monk or Demon Hunter or whatever, were trimmed away. It's that that made room for DKs and Monks, and would make room for other classes which previously existed in those overlaps.

[Jerakal]

And let's be honest here. They added the monk without any regard for how badly it stepped on the toes of rogue and druid. They clearly have no qualms with releasing a new class that shits on the older ones.

[Talen]

You are saying that DH have the same gameplay that a caster, i.e. Lich/keeper of the grove/archmage/farseer. This Heroes were ranged-casters, and you say that are really close in gameplay (not in aesthetics) than DH? Not even close.

As far as this game is concerned...the main gameplay difference is Warlocks don't have Dual Wield. That's it. They can stand in melee, take damage, and cats spells and auto attack. They don't have dedicated melee physical attacks, they aren't truly effective in the role but the main gameplay difference is they don't have dual wield. Other than that they can stand in melee, attack physically with a handheld weapon and augment that with spells.

You want a Demon Hunter in game? Give a Warlock Dual Wield. You'll need a few more changes to make him effective in that role, but gameplay wise...is there any other significant difference?

Stop giving personal assumptions. DemonHunters, in WC3 and in wow, are melee fighters, that dual-wield warglaives, have some tatoos, and blindfolds. They don't use caster-skills like ranged bolts, they need to run in front of the target and start smashing his face.

Yeah. Go play WC3. Use Meta. Is the DH now capable of attacking from range? The answer is yes.

No, you are ignoring that the DH had no pet-skills, had not battle-pet to fight (he helped us and he didn't use anything pet-related in the final quest). You assume that this felhounds are his pets. But again, If you want to believe that they are his pets and DHs are a pet-battle based class, then it's your chose.

Ahhhh....you want to discount a Demon Hunter who has demon pets and USES them because you don't get to fight them. Really, it's a good thing for me we see the Demon Hunter with them actually in game. Now, if you can provide a canon source to suggest that he is unique.....but you can't. We just have your opinion that DHs can't use pets but there is nothing in lore to support that. Nothing to DHs can't summon demons may indeed be a part of their arsenal.

So, you don't know what type of class are DH and you are arguing that they bring nothing to the game. You are talking that is a large crossover with warlocks, and they only share the theme of his "possible" skills (demons) like Paladins and Priest have the same (holy).

You seem to be under the mistaken assumption that a similar school of magic indicates a similar theme or identity.

And for major reason, well, what class could fit in a "possible" burning legion expansion? What class is the most demanded in fan-webs? There are a lot of reasons, too many if you want my opinion. Of course this is not a fact about they are the next class. But a good start.

There are lots of classes that players want. But we are talking about Demon Hunters. Players want Demon Hunters. They also want Wardens. Tinkers. Timewalkers. Bards. Rangers. Blademasters. Necromancers. Dragonsworn. Templars. Runemasters and more. Blizzard will find plenty of players for whatever new class it brings in....that trait isn't unique to Demon Hunters.

Would they fit a BL Expansion? Sure. OTOH, a major emphasis on Warlocks would do the same job. You could base Tinkers on a study of the BL technologists. Look into their history with NElfs to give Wardens. Examine the Sundering and get Timewalkers. Demon Hunters, believe it or not, are not the only class that could fit into a BL Expansion. It's not a question of if a different class would fit it; it's a question of what story Blizzard woudl choose to tell.

As for "too many"...go ahead and provide some.

IF you redesign the class from the ground up - you don't end up with WoW style DHs a la Illidan. You end up with a totally different class such as the D3 style DH. A totally pointless exercise. If you don't, you end up with a class which has a large crossover with Warlocks.

What does the DH bring that is worth that? They don't have a unique niche. They don't have a unique look or feel or theme. Anything Blizzard could implement for them gameplaywise could be added to ANY class. The one plus point they have is that players wnat them...but that can be said for ANY class Blizzard can add.

So....go ahead. List some reason to show why Blizzard should go ahead and tick off the Warlock players. I know they can do it. That's never been a question. I want to know why they should. And simply stating there are too many reasons for you to list isn't really good enough.

What would DHs bring as a standalone class that would make their impact on Warlocks worth it?

What's this "class" that you are talking about that players want?

Quick question.....when you say you want a "Demon Hunter" class do you want

A: Illidan
or
B: The D3 style Demon Hunter.

B is pointless and A is a Warlock.

EJL

[Belisaurio]

As far as this game is concerned...the main gameplay difference is Warlocks don't have Dual Wield. That's it. They can stand in melee, take damage, and cats spells and auto attack. They don't have dedicated melee physical attacks, they aren't truly effective in the role but the main gameplay difference is they don't have dual wield. Other than that they can stand in melee, attack physically with a handheld weapon and augment that with spells.

You want a Demon Hunter in game? Give a Warlock Dual Wield. You'll need a few more changes to make him effective in that role, but gameplay wise...is there any other significant difference?

Have you played the Demon Hunter class in wow? No, because there aren't any class called demon hunters. So your point is that Demon Hunters in wow are warlocks in demonology spec. Well, this is just your opinion, but try to play WC3 or just do the quests in wow related to Demon Hunters plis.

Yeah. Go play WC3. Use Meta. Is the DH now capable of attacking from range? The answer is yes.

No. We have some DH in game already, and all of them need to run to your tank and start hitting them (melee). So no, we haven't got any Demon Hunter that, after being taunted, starts throwing ranged-attacks.

Ahhhh....you want to discount a Demon Hunter who has demon pets and USES them because you don't get to fight them. Really, it's a good thing for me we see the Demon Hunter with them actually in game. Now, if you can provide a canon source to suggest that he is unique.....but you can't. We just have your opinion that DHs can't use pets but there is nothing in lore to support that. Nothing to DHs can't summon demons may indeed be a part of their arsenal.

No, I'm counting him, and he never USE pets. He uses a melee atacks to tank the final chain-quest. He never use any pet, or any pet-system, or use any skill pet related. It's supported in lore, it's supported in WC3, it's supported in wow, so it's not my imagination. Stop talking about that we have one DH using pets, because we haven't anything like that in wow. Do the quest, then talk plis. You can record the quest if you want.

There are lots of classes that players want. But we are talking about Demon Hunters. Players want Demon Hunters. They also want Wardens. Tinkers. Timewalkers. Bards. Rangers. Blademasters. Necromancers. Dragonsworn. Templars. Runemasters and more. Blizzard will find plenty of players for whatever new class it brings in....that trait isn't unique to Demon Hunters.
Would they fit a BL Expansion? Sure. OTOH, a major emphasis on Warlocks would do the same job. You could base Tinkers on a study of the BL technologists. Look into their history with NElfs to give Wardens. Examine the Sundering and get Timewalkers. Demon Hunters, believe it or not, are not the only class that could fit into a BL Expansion. It's not a question of if a different class would fit it; it's a question of what story Blizzard woudl choose to tell.
As for "too many"...go ahead and provide some.
IF you redesign the class from the ground up - you don't end up with WoW style DHs a la Illidan. You end up with a totally different class such as the D3 style DH. A totally pointless exercise. If you don't, you end up with a class which has a large crossover with Warlocks.
What does the DH bring that is worth that? They don't have a unique niche. They don't have a unique look or feel or theme. Anything Blizzard could implement for them gameplaywise could be added to ANY class. The one plus point they have is that players wnat them...but that can be said for ANY class Blizzard can add.
So....go ahead. List some reason to show why Blizzard should go ahead and tick off the Warlock players. I know they can do it. That's never been a question. I want to know why they should. And simply stating there are too many reasons for you to list isn't really good enough.
What would DHs bring as a standalone class that would make their impact on Warlocks worth it?

Can't believe... Ok I can argue some points:
-It's the most commented class in all fan-forums (I read 4 fan-webs and the official EU forum).
-It's the class that has better theme for a BL expansion.
-They can fit some missing points, like melee-demonic themed champion.
-One of the most loved characters in wow was the first DH. Some devs. talked about the possibility to ressurect/return in some way this character.
-Has more hints that others "possible" classes in game (various quests, various hints in some texts, various factions that talked about them, etc...).
-Has a clear aesthetics (tattoos+blindfold+dw). And this things are UNIQUE (this covers lot of your points).

Sorry if this is not the case, but it seems that you are trolling me. Maybe it's just my point of view, but you said that they were rangeds because they had a ranged skill, but warriors have some ranged abilities and it's clear that they are a melee class, or you are talking that one DHs-NPC use some pets, but I clearly said before that he never used any pet.

[nightfalls]

And let's be honest here. They added the monk without any regard for how badly it stepped on the toes of rogue and druid. They clearly have no qualms with releasing a new class that shits on the older ones.

I think they might have realized their mistake when they now have to totally rebalance rogues and resto druids due to massive population losses there, maybe. Or maybe not? (It's blizzard, after all).

[rarhyx]

to the people who say Dh won't come because they are to similar to locks:
imagine we wouldn't have priest(or paladin) but have paladin(or priest).
and the playerbase would speculate or suggest priest/paladin, would you say yes or no to priest/paladin?

[Skayth]

I think they might have realized their mistake when they now have to totally rebalance rogues and resto druids due to massive population losses there, maybe. Or maybe not? (It's blizzard, after all).

monks are the least played class right now. so... not really needing to do repops. Druids are one of the most played classes (4 specs.. do 4 different things... just need a 5th with range weapons to be even more amazing?) They actually do need a population hit, along with pallys and dks, which blizz were hoping for.

but rogues are the 2nd lowest class, but werent when they were in the spot light (dw tier) Locks are still in the same spot as last expansion... just now with an entirely new class to buffer their descent back to least played class, along with rogues =D

But adding a dh class... will take population from both rogues and warlocks, no doubt (me), but would also take the population of the big three as well, if they are the new hero class.

[Jessicka]

I think they might have realized their mistake when they now have to totally rebalance rogues and resto druids due to massive population losses there, maybe. Or maybe not? (It's blizzard, after all).

I don't think they do. Rogues fill the 'Ninja' martial artist archetype, those looking to be a martial artist character would have gravitated there already; but since it didn't really fit the Kung Fu fist-fighter, then it's no surprise that Monks filled that archetype better and people shifted. As long as there are distinct differences between playstyle I don't think Blizzard are overly concerned with population balance just so long as it can't be attributed to a specific lack of power.

People like Paladins because they like to be the 'Good Guy'. The anti-hero Rogue or Warlock are always going to be naturally less popular. Aesthetics probably have a bigger role in a lot of players' character choice than you might think, since outside of hardcore raiding circles, balance and increments of 'betterness' become rather less important.

[Talen]

Have you played the Demon Hunter class in wow? No, because there aren't any class called demon hunters. So your point is that Demon Hunters in wow are warlocks in demonology spec. Well, this is just your opinion, but try to play WC3 or just do the quests in wow related to Demon Hunters plis.

Leaving aside in game effectiveness and the dual wield capability....what's the difference between Demonology Warlocks and the WoW/WC3 style DH? Not much. If you give Demonology Warlocks Dual Wield then you actually DO have DHs in game. Sure...it'd be nice if they were effective at melee but leaving that aside, the difference is minimal.

Warlocks do not have dual wield.

No. We have some DH in game already, and all of them need to run to your tank and start hitting them (melee). So no, we haven't got any Demon Hunter that, after being taunted, starts throwing ranged-attacks.

Nice qualifier.....perhaps though, you should start by checking out the capabilities of all DHs starting with those in WC3 before you start making blanket statements. DHs ***DO*** have ranged attacks available to them and I'm not sure why you want to try and deny this.

No, I'm counting him, and he never USE pets.

He's a Demon Hunter and he's surrounded by pets which obey him and follow and which he uses and has named. But they are, for him, pure decoration. Sure.

It's supported in lore, it's supported in WC3, it's supported in wow, so it's not my imagination.

There is NOTHING in lore to support the assertion DHs cannot use or summon demons. Plus, we have this example to counter that assertion.

-It's the most commented class in all fan-forums (I read 4 fan-webs and the official EU forum).

So what? Other classes have their fans as well.

-It's the class that has better theme for a BL expansion.

The BL provides an obvious story for DHs, true...but the BL can provide story for other classes as well.

-They can fit some missing points, like melee-demonic themed champion.

Already largely filled by the Warlock. And if melee was important, the Warlock can fill that.

-One of the most loved characters in wow was the first DH. Some devs. talked about the possibility to ressurect/return in some way this character.

Which says nothing about a DH class...especially since the last hint we had about Illidan placed him as a Warlock.

-Has a clear aesthetics (tattoos+blindfold+dw). And this things are UNIQUE (this covers lot of your points).

Someone hasn't seen the Challenge mode Warlock armor. It has the tattoos. It has the horns.

Seriously, all Warlocks are really missing is the DW capability. In terms of look, theme, toolkit...they basically have everything that makes a DH a DH. They have the signature moves. They have the cloth armor. They have the tattoos and horns. They have metamorphosis. They have the look and theme. They can even wield swords. Give them dual wield and they essentially have everything...anything else is just added value.

Sorry if this is not the case, but it seems that you are trolling me. Maybe it's just my point of view, but you said that they were ranged

No, I said they had ranged capability. And have done so since WC3, right through TBC into the present day.

you are talking that one DHs-NPC use some pets, but I clearly said before that he never used any pet.

The very fact he has Felhounds is enough to prove the point I make.

EJL

[Skayth]

We've already seen how popularity alone can ruin a game. Just because people want it doesn't make it a good idea.

No... No i havent. why dont you tell me. I think the Peak of Popularity was WotLK, and it was a perfect expansion. Note, I am from the beginning of vanilla.

I'm inclined to say Warlocks fit that theme equally. And they already exist.

Your both right. Warlocks would fit the theme... but so do demon hunters. Since we already have Warlocks, that leaves demon hunters the best fit =3

This is not a theme, nor does it fill ANY points that the game needs. (Support, debuff, buff, tank, heal)

We have no support classes in game. Buffs and Debuffs come to all classes. Demon Hunter can tank. If they really want to, they can make Demon Hunters heal. No lore against it. Just like brewmasters ^.~

Which I STILL consider a horrible course of action. And considering he is coming back, I see two possible courses of action.
A) He starts over, free of any demonic corruption, and is therefore no longer the iconic Demon Hunter we know.
B) He is a villain, and does not influence our class choice in any way.

A) Yes he is. A demon hunter is a demon hunter, no matter the amount of corruption. + WoE illidan says Hi.
B) They said redemption story, not Villian. If anything, The Hunter (maiev) will become, the Hunted(Illidan). Role reversal... Yet again. Wha BAM! And maiev is bad now, btw.

There are no hints that Demon Hunters are coming. As a matter of fact, considering how few Demon Hunters are left after the assault on Black Temple, I'd go so far as to say there's hints in game that there will NOT be a Demon Hunter class.

The Dark Embrace says hi
Sindweller says hi
Loramus says hi
Altrius says hi

-Tattoos will be hidden by armor.
-There is a single Blindfold in game.
-There are at least 4 specs in game that can dual wield. They are not unique.
Aesthetics will change at every turn, they can not be unique because the classes will be sharing armor, therefore aesthetics are not an argument in your favor.

-Tattoos would be the armor, not hidden (until later tiers)
-yes. there is. NEs also have a blindfold as a face. So I put a blind fold on your blind folds, because you liked blind folds, and we gave more blind folds of different colors out, because you like them so much.
-8 actually (9 if you want to include Single minded fury and titans grip as separate). So what? They can easily make dhs use 2hs as well. Nothing in lore against it. It says warBLADES, not glaives... so whooptyfkndoo? another dwn class. who cares.

Actually...aesthetics can be only for dhs. If they get all their "Demon Hunter" look tier in the starting zone, where none of the other classes can get, and then all the rest of the tiers looks less like that.

There is nothing unique about the Demon Hunter class idea. It brings nothing to the table.

Actually, there is.
Melee-demonically infused class revolving around 2 of the specs min. Say demonic magic is warlocks, slap yourself with priests and paladins.

[Belisaurio]

We've already seen how popularity alone can ruin a game. Just because people want it doesn't make it a good idea.

I don't care. Say that to Blizzard. It's a point to look, not a mandatory term. I'm with you. What people want and what people need are different concepts, but the point already exists.

I'm inclined to say Warlocks fit that theme equally. And they already exist.

Yep, that's your opinion. You can argue that a BL expansion shouldn't have any class, because the one that can be themed with the plot is already in game. That's another point. Put them in the lists of things that "demonhunters can't exist in wow". For me, and for other people (see other posts), a new BL expansion with DH class would be really awesome and fits really well (same with Tinkerers, Pirates, etc... combined with their possible themed-expansion).

This is not a theme, nor does it fill ANY points that the game needs. (Support, debuff, buff, tank, heal)

Like DKs and Monks. We had already tanks, healers and melee dps. The theme about them is really different, but I don't see any problem in a demonic-user that fights demons with melee-type skills.

Which I STILL consider a horrible course of action. And considering he is coming back, I see two possible courses of action.
A) He starts over, free of any demonic corruption, and is therefore no longer the iconic Demon Hunter we know.
B) He is a villain, and does not influence our class choice in any way.

You should play DKs then. Or maybe they are like Illidan (uncorrupted one)l that had only the pact and use some powerful demon-steroids. I don't see any problem creating new lore for them, and I'm not a professional writer.

There are no hints that Demon Hunters are coming. As a matter of fact, considering how few Demon Hunters are left after the assault on Black Temple, I'd go so far as to say there's hints in game that there will NOT be a Demon Hunter class.

Pandaren's joke that they want to be DHs, grey texts about how to be a DH, new quests and ending quests that talks that there are more DHs, vannity items talking about a new faction of DHs, new rare that was a DH and now is tormented (achievement for killing him). Yeah, maybe they are not strong hints, but better than any other class before. Or maybe just funny things for Dh-fans. We don't know.

-Tattoos will be hidden by armor.
-There is a single Blindfold in game.
-There are at least 4 specs in game that can dual wield. They are not unique.
Aesthetics will change at every turn, they can not be unique because the classes will be sharing armor, therefore aesthetics are not an argument in your favor.

Well, we don't know what type of character could it be the DH class. You can't say that armors will hide their tattos, because at first view, DH are shirtless, that's something that devs. needs to solve in the case that they want to implement DH, same with blindfold. About dw, I only see another ranged-physical class to be the next "unique" look to go. And I like that, but I don't see any point that say that DH can't be in wow because they are DW. Look at Dks and Monks, they have the same type of weapons like other classes, and they are "new" classes. So it's not a point for "impossible to have DH" in wow.

[Talen]

Melee-demonically infused class revolving around 2 of the specs min. Say demonic magic is warlocks, slap yourself with priests and paladins.

Plate wearing meleeing Holy Warrior and a heavy emphasis on combat vs Cloth wearing spell caster with a strong focus on healing.

Cloth wearing demonic empowered individual who summons demons, use demon magic, employs curses and can shift into demon form and tends to fight at range vs Cloth wearing demonic empowered individual who summons demons, use demon magic, employs curses and can shift into demon form and tends to fight in melee.

Which one of these has the greatest difference?

Demon Hunters bring nothing to the game that either doesn't already exist or cannot be applied to another new class. As it is, the big difference between them and Warlocks right now lies in their effectiveness at melee combat. A difference that can be readily addressed.

Could Blizzard bring in a standalone class? Sure.

But I'll ask again...given the crossover with Warlocks, given the huge crossover in theme, look and toolkit, given the likely reaction of Warlocks to having another class tread on their turf, given the plethora of other options available to Blizzard - why would Blizzard bring in a standalone DH class?

I'd love it if they brought in a DH class. But the chances that they will annoy Warlocks by giving their theme, their niche to another class is...to put it mildly....remote. There is no one "killer" reason for that...but when you out them all together what you have is a Warlock class that already has the look, feel, theme, toolkit and design convergence for the DH in game.

Blizzard doesn't need to design a standalone class because the DH is effectively already in the game already.

EJL

[Skayth]

Plate wearing meleeing Holy Warrior and a heavy emphasis on combat vs Cloth wearing spell caster with a strong focus on healing.

Cloth wearing demonic empowered individual who summons demons, use demon magic, employs curses and can shift into demon form and tends to fight at range vs Cloth wearing demonic empowered individual who summons demons, use demon magic, employs curses and can shift into demon form and tends to fight in melee.

Which one of these has the greatest difference?

Demon Hunters bring nothing to the game that either doesn't already exist or cannot be applied to another new class. As it is, the big difference between them and Warlocks right now lies in their effectiveness at melee combat. A difference that can be readily addressed.

Could Blizzard bring in a standalone class? Sure.

But I'll ask again...given the crossover with Warlocks, given the huge crossover in theme, look and toolkit, given the likely reaction of Warlocks to having another class tread on their turf, given the plethora of other options available to Blizzard - why would Blizzard bring in a standalone DH class?

I'd love it if they brought in a DH class. But the chances that they will annoy Warlocks by giving their theme, their niche to another class is...to put it mildly....remote.

EJL

Who says demon hunters do not use plate? or mail? I am serious.. who? Rpg book? Oh right, uncanon. -.- nothing in lore that says they cannot wear heavy armor.

A demon hunter has a heavy emphasis on combat. Melee Combat. They are not range.

Really? Annoy warlocks? I am a warlock. I am annoyed they did not make me a damn tank in the damn revamp. Nor would I want warlocks to be a melee dps. that is not their thing. Can they be a tank? yes. A magic powered tank is something amazing to think of. But is that alot of the dh? god no. People are simply wrapped up in the fact that locks have meta. thats it. A meta that was given lore away from the demon hunters meta.

The reality is, they can easily make a dh class, just like any other class, and have it tread on none of the grounds of a warlock. People with a little imagination can see that.

[nightfalls]

Really? Annoy warlocks? I am a warlock. I am annoyed they did not make me a damn tank in the damn revamp. Nor would I want warlocks to be a melee dps. that is not their thing.

I also see no requirement that a tank have to have a corresponding melee spec. Just because healers typically stand at range, and if they do DPS use ranged attacks, doesn't mean they need a ranged DPS spec. Fact: More healers have melee specs than range specs.

[Skayth]

I also see no requirement that a tank have to have a corresponding melee spec. Just because healers typically stand at range, and if they do DPS use ranged attacks, doesn't mean they need a ranged DPS spec. Fact: More healers have melee specs than range specs.

Which was the point i was showing, 2 range specs (lock) and a tank spec in that specific quote. Dhs, though, are in tuned for two melee specs, if they go off whats ingame and wc3, one being tank and the other dps.