Thread: Tinker Class

Page 45 of 63 FirstFirst ...
35
43
44
45
46
47
55
... LastLast
  1. #881
    The absorption thing is from an RPG sourcebook. That means it's in canon limbo, neither true nor false. The only demon hunter who ever absorbed anything in canon was Illidan, who absorbed the Skull of Gul'dan. Gul'dan was not a demon. He was a warlock.

    And demon hunters do use shadow magic. Alandien. Shadowfury.

    And demon hunters do use curses. Varedis. Illidari Highlord. Curse of Flames.

    And demon hunters do summon demons. Illidan. Summon Shadow Demons.

    And don't start telling me none of the above are "real" demon hunters.
    No. This are gameplay mechanics. Garrosh uses shadow damage, but he isn't a warlock or shadow priest.
    DKs using fire and holy in naxx? Yes, no problem,. Because game mechanics give this path to go.
    Monks using bleeds? Yes, in early SM/precata. Game mechanics!!! and too much ETC.
    Now, you are talking that demonhunters NPCs has adds (final boss of an expansion!!!), use some curses and use some shadow damage...

    Use logic plis.
    If Blizzard needs to put abilities to some NPCs, they don't create new, just change an already existing ones or use the same skills with different numbers.
    And in my opinion, I see a really good thing if they try to put curses from melee range (bleed/diseases/venoms for melee char!! it fits the thematic and has a link to warlocks that they use same type of energy), but again, that's my opinion. If they want to create a rogue 2.0, they can too.

  2. #882
    Quote Originally Posted by Hengwulf View Post
    They are clearly not demon hunting, the are working with demons instead, they serve the guy with a nickname Betrayer, but you claim that the distinction is player invented, because "they game still calls them demon hunters". How is that called then, picking one chosen detail, ignoring all the obvious rest, and basing your argument on it? Maybe I used the wrong figure of speech then, doesn't matter, you're wrong. Illidari demon hunters are not what a demon hunter class would be.

    Btw, I am not arguing if DHs use shadow magic or not, since I don't really know, but I am certainly arguing against using Illidan the Betrayer as an example of DH summoning demons or DH iconic look. Blindfold, tatoos, warglaives, yes, but horns, wings, hooves and summoning demons - that's what you get when you are the Betrayer.
    I could give two farts what random guy #360000 on the forums thinks a Demon Hunter ought to be. When I want to know what it is, I go to a canon source. And I provide links. Illidan is not a Demon Hunter, he's the Demon Hunter. All Demon Hunters everywhere owe their existence to him. Any conversation about Demon Hunters that leaves him out is an unserious one. And frankly I'm getting tired of seeing him trotted out when it suits the pro-Demon Hunter argument, then quickly shuffled back under the rug when any of his attributes don't mesh with the point they're trying to make.

  3. #883
    I could give two farts what random guy #360000 on the forums thinks a Demon Hunter ought to be. When I want to know what it is, I go to a canon source. And I provide links. Illidan is not a Demon Hunter, he's the Demon Hunter. All Demon Hunters everywhere owe their existence to him. Any conversation about Demon Hunters that leaves him out is an unserious one. And frankly I'm getting tired of seeing him trotted out when it suits the pro-Demon Hunter argument, then quickly shuffled back under the rug when any of his attributes don't mesh with the point they're trying to make.
    Nobody here is removing Illidan. But just use the DEMON HUNTER Illidan, because we are talking about Tinkerers (really?) and Demon Hunters.
    Use canon source, and you will see Demon Hunters without horns, hoofs and wings. But you can go to any Illidan source and find that he has hoofs, horns and wings. Difference between DH and Illidan? One is a class, the other one is a Blizz character that started like a mage, created the premise of a DH, evolved and was corrupted and then transformed into a Demon (yes, a Demon!!!), and at last, was killed and looted.

    What's a demon hunter? It's obviously a warlock!!

    edit:
    Some interesting points:
    Illidan transformation is attributed for 2 source (we don't know what source was the one that transformed Illidan):
    -Gift from Kil'jaeden (empowerment).
    -Absorb the remaining fel energies from skull of Gul'dan. (this is the winning one at this moment).
    This is WHY he has this. So, all DH should have horns, wings, hoofs, smoke and all this things? No!! only Illidan accomplished this transformation.
    Last edited by Belisaurio; 2013-09-12 at 06:50 PM.

  4. #884
    The Patient Hengwulf's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Warszawa, Poland
    Posts
    242
    Quote Originally Posted by Drilnos View Post
    I could give two farts what random guy #360000 on the forums thinks a Demon Hunter ought to be. When I want to know what it is, I go to a canon source. And I provide links. Illidan is not a Demon Hunter, he's the Demon Hunter. All Demon Hunters everywhere owe their existence to him. Any conversation about Demon Hunters that leaves him out is an unserious one. And frankly I'm getting tired of seeing him trotted out when it suits the pro-Demon Hunter argument, then quickly shuffled back under the rug when any of his attributes don't mesh with the point they're trying to make.
    Yes, and Arthas the Lich King is a great example of a paladin, because he used to be one. Are you even serious? You really can't understand that people use ILLIDAN THE DEMON HUNTER as role model for future possible DH class, and not ILLIDAN THE BETRAYER, and that those two are not the same?

  5. #885
    Arthas never used frost or blood magic. Player DKs are not Arthas, even if they trained under him. That is the crux or the argument. Arthas does not define player DKs so why should Illidan define players?

  6. #886
    Quote Originally Posted by Hengwulf View Post
    Yes, and Arthas the Lich King is a great example of a paladin, because he used to be one. Are you even serious? You really can't understand that people use ILLIDAN THE DEMON HUNTER as role model for future possible DH class, and not ILLIDAN THE BETRAYER, and that those two are not the same?
    Illidan got the Betrayer title about ten thousand years before he turned into a demon. Source. We saw the exact moment that he got it in the Well of Eternity 5 man back in Cata. He was always a character with questionable ethics. You act like he turned into something completely new when he gained his demon form, but he didn't change one bit. It only made his outside appearance match his inner one. I'd even venture to say, given what we found out in the warlock-specific quest chain in Black Temple, that he's been retconned into not having gone insane in TBC, but just changed his tactics for beating the Legion to turning demons against them by giving them an alternative magic source. Fel orcs, the draining of Magtheridon's blood. All "fighting fire with fire," same as always.

  7. #887
    Good analysis of Illidan. This still doesn't relate to playable demon hunters.

  8. #888
    The Patient Hengwulf's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Warszawa, Poland
    Posts
    242
    Quote Originally Posted by Drilnos View Post
    Illidan got the Betrayer title about ten thousand years before he turned into a demon. Source. We saw the exact moment that he got it in the Well of Eternity 5 man back in Cata. He was always a character with questionable ethics. You act like he turned into something completely new when he gained his demon form, but he didn't change one bit. It only made his outside appearance match his inner one. I'd even venture to say, given what we found out in the warlock-specific quest chain in Black Temple, that he's been retconned into not having gone insane in TBC, but just changed his tactics for beating the Legion to turning demons against them by giving them an alternative magic source. Fel orcs, the draining of Magtheridon's blood. All "fighting fire with fire," same as always.
    I actually didn't know about it. I stand corrected.

    Still, that doesn't change my point - while he remained Illidan, he was no longer a demon hunter, and we are talking about a possible Demon Hunter class, not Illidan class.

  9. #889
    I wouldn't say he isn't a demon hunter. He's just not a representation of any playable demon hunters.

  10. #890
    I wouldn't say he isn't a demon hunter. He's just not a representation of any playable demon hunters.
    I thing that the he still is a DH. Like Garrosh in the last phase is a warrior. But for X circumstances, they changed a little: Illidan with hoofs, horns, etc...; and Garrosh with some eyes here and there and purple "things" over his body (and over-musculated body).

  11. #891
    Quote Originally Posted by Thimagryn View Post
    I wouldn't say he isn't a demon hunter. He's just not a representation of any playable demon hunters.
    And again, that's not the point I was making. This isn't about what hypothetical player characters could and could not do, this is about what Demon Hunters do and do not do, in lore, and there is a post a page back stating with nary a trace of irony that Demon Hunters do not use shadow magic, do not cast curses and do not summon demons. These are all demonstrably false, with multiple counterexamples for each one. But instead of admitting that, we get a whole treatment on whether or not they were actual demon hunters or some imaginary class that a demon hunter who doesn't hunt demons falls into.

    When you change the criteria for what is and isn't a demon hunter according to your own arbitrary standards, then demon hunters don't have anything in common with warlocks. Unfortunately, we don't live in Fantasyland.

  12. #892
    Merely a Setback Teriz's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Soul of Azeroth
    Posts
    29,653
    Quote Originally Posted by Belisaurio View Post
    Nah, You did a concept time ago without any problem. Pay a professional to do his job and wait. Easy and without any problem.
    That concept also included the abilities now firmly in the hands of Warlocks, Rogues, and the deleted abilities from Priests.

    I also included an entire spec that wouldn't work, since Blizzard has completely removed mana-stealing abilities from the game.

    My concept could never work as an actual class in the actual game.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Thimagryn View Post
    You continually cite that Warlock Death Coil was not the same as Death Knight's version. By that same logic, Rogue Evasion and Warlock Immolation Aura are not the same as Demon Hunter's Evasion and Immolation. The only carry over would be Metamorphosis. But that could be completely excused by the fact that both recently added classes do not have their ultimates in the approrpriate specs. Brewmasters don't have Storm, Earth and Fire. DK's don't have Animate Dead at all.
    Does it matter if Brewmasters don't have SE&F? The Monk class has it. As for DK's, Animate Dead= Army of the Dead. For some reason, Blizzard can't use animate dead as an ability. Another major point you seem to miss is that other classes don't have either ability, so its nothing like the Warlock, Rogue, and DH situation.

    If you extend this to existing character classes, Paladins don't have Ressurection, Mages don't have Mass Teleport and Priestess doesn't have Starfall. It means that the concept can still carry over even if it doesn't use all 4 spells, and has similarly themed replacements instead.
    The Paladin ability was actually Mass Resurrection. No other class has Mass Teleport or Mass Resurrection.

    Priestesses don't have Starfall because the PotM wasn't a Priest. It was a unique NE unit that couldn't be defined by WoW's classes. That's why PotM's abilities were broken up between Hunters and Druids.

  13. #893
    It's all relevant to a Playable Demon Hunter class. Those conflicts arise when faced with the overarching problem people are wary of, that being "They're too similar to Warlocks".

    If you consider lore, all Death Knight NPCs are Death Knights. The lore allows a wide range to exist, from Teron Gorefiend to Baron Rivendare to the 4 Horsemen to Arthas. The DK player class is also a Death Knight in lore. Any discussion between Death Knights and conflicts with other player classes will exclusively be tied to the player class, regardless of what any other NPC can or can not do.

    The same exists here. When we talk about Demon Hunters and lore, we are talking about what is relevant to the potential Player class, not what any NPC represents. NPCs have absolutely no bearing on a player class, and if they use Shadow magic or summon Demons, that is indicative of that NPC.

    I understand your problems with this, since the whole idea of a Demon Hunter player class is nebulous. The criteria and lore can change to suit whatever needs to make it plausible, and that seems biased. That is the point. The very concept of the Demon Hunter class does not yet exist, and is not yet defined. It is by this very reason that it should not be put up to comparison with any existing WoW class, such as saying it's too similar to Warlocks or Rogues; or that they are limited because their abilities from Warcraft 3 have been given to other classes.

    If you look at the two added classes as any example, Death Knights and Monks have no relatable NPCs that they were based off of. Their lore is entirely based on their own, separate from every existing NPC that came before them. There is no reason for Illidan or any other Demon Hunter NPC to indicate of how a Player class would be represented in the game. The class must represent its own identity, and if the issue comes into conflict with any other idea such as being too similar to Warlocks, it is plausible to change or accomodate that conflict. That is why there is plausibility to exist.

  14. #894
    Merely a Setback Teriz's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Soul of Azeroth
    Posts
    29,653
    Quote Originally Posted by Thimagryn View Post
    It's all relevant to a Playable Demon Hunter class. Those conflicts arise when faced with the overarching problem people are wary of, that being "They're too similar to Warlocks".

    If you consider lore, all Death Knight NPCs are Death Knights. The lore allows a wide range to exist, from Teron Gorefiend to Baron Rivendare to the 4 Horsemen to Arthas. The DK player class is also a Death Knight in lore. Any discussion between Death Knights and conflicts with other player classes will exclusively be tied to the player class, regardless of what any other NPC can or can not do.

    The same exists here. When we talk about Demon Hunters and lore, we are talking about what is relevant to the potential Player class, not what any NPC represents. NPCs have absolutely no bearing on a player class, and if they use Shadow magic or summon Demons, that is indicative of that NPC.

    I understand your problems with this, since the whole idea of a Demon Hunter player class is nebulous. The criteria and lore can change to suit whatever needs to make it plausible, and that seems biased. That is the point. The very concept of the Demon Hunter class does not yet exist, and is not yet defined. It is by this very reason that it should not be put up to comparison with any existing WoW class, such as saying it's too similar to Warlocks or Rogues; or that they are limited because their abilities from Warcraft 3 have been given to other classes.

    If you look at the two added classes as any example, Death Knights and Monks have no relatable NPCs that they were based off of. Their lore is entirely based on their own, separate from every existing NPC that came before them. There is no reason for Illidan or any other Demon Hunter NPC to indicate of how a Player class would be represented in the game. The class must represent its own identity, and if the issue comes into conflict with any other idea such as being too similar to Warlocks, it is plausible to change or accomodate that conflict. That is why there is plausibility to exist.

    Again with the lore....

    Let's keep it simple; Before the introduction of DKs and Monks, all of their corresponding WC3 abilities were open. None existed in other classes. There was Death Coil with Warlocks, but it wasn't the same spell.

    With Demon Hunters, EVERY SINGLE ABILITY is absorbed by existing classes, and those abilities are major abilities in their respective classes. So you can't just switch them around, or replace them, or remove them.

    That is a huge road block to their ability to become a WoW class.

  15. #895
    That concept also included the abilities now firmly in the hands of Warlocks, Rogues, and the deleted abilities from Priests.
    I also included an entire spec that wouldn't work, since Blizzard has completely removed mana-stealing abilities from the game.
    My concept could never work as an actual class in the actual game.
    Create another one. I've done more complicated things with registered marks between products, that concepts were more hard than this one, because if you overlap a little, someone will send you a postcard (with a judge's sign in it).
    But talking about a class that you can do whatever you want, in your own game with your own lore? Nah, no hard, just some work.

    The Paladin ability was actually Mass Resurrection. No other class has Mass Teleport or Mass Resurrection.
    Priestesses don't have Starfall because the PotM wasn't a Priest. It was a unique NE unit that couldn't be defined by WoW's classes. That's why PotM's abilities were broken up between Hunters and Druids.
    Yes, and no.
    Paladins had mass resurrection, and was the unique form to resurrect a unite (the /inmortal mode from DKs were not permanent). In wow, you can only mass resurrect with a guild perk, and in a low rate, with other resurrecting-skills. This skills were given to other classes. And that's good. The only bad thing is that Paladins can't resurrect in combat, and was one of his main rolls in WC3 (knights+healers...hate that comp, expensive but you couldn't kill them mid game!)
    About Starfall, yes, Priests Night Elfs had "Starfall", but because of "homogenization" of classes (nobody remember that because all allied priest were dwards...that free fear!!!), they removed that skill.

    Let's keep it simple; Before the introduction of DKs and Monks, all of their corresponding WC3 abilities were open. None existed in other classes. There was Death Coil with Warlocks, but it wasn't the same spell.
    With Demon Hunters, EVERY SINGLE ABILITY is absorbed by existing classes, and those abilities are major abilities in their respective classes. So you can't just switch them around, or replace them, or remove them.
    That is a huge road block to their ability to become a WoW class.
    Yes you are right. Impossible to create a demon hunter with the same feeling? No. I find a lot of things to be improved, expanded, whatever... but hey, If you can't take some minutes and do a brainstorming of new skills after reading some info about DH, it's normal that you can't see a future for that class.
    Last edited by Belisaurio; 2013-09-12 at 08:36 PM.

  16. #896
    The Patient Hengwulf's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Warszawa, Poland
    Posts
    242
    Quote Originally Posted by Drilnos View Post
    And again, that's not the point I was making. This isn't about what hypothetical player characters could and could not do, this is about what Demon Hunters do and do not do, in lore, and there is a post a page back stating with nary a trace of irony that Demon Hunters do not use shadow magic, do not cast curses and do not summon demons. These are all demonstrably false, with multiple counterexamples for each one. But instead of admitting that, we get a whole treatment on whether or not they were actual demon hunters or some imaginary class that a demon hunter who doesn't hunt demons falls into.

    When you change the criteria for what is and isn't a demon hunter according to your own arbitrary standards, then demon hunters don't have anything in common with warlocks. Unfortunately, we don't live in Fantasyland.
    If you're trying to pass nonstandard abilities used by nonstandard characters as a norm, you can't really expect to get any meaningful results. I don't think that trying to focus on what all available Dhs have in common, instead of some singular cases of abilities used by exceptional characters is applying arbitrary standards. Player class DH is supposed to capture the essence of what DH is, not everything every DH ever could do.

  17. #897
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    Again with the lore....

    Let's keep it simple; Before the introduction of DKs and Monks, all of their corresponding WC3 abilities were open. None existed in other classes. There was Death Coil with Warlocks, but it wasn't the same spell.
    By saying it wasn't the same spell, what basis do you have to say that any of the spells incorporated into WoW are the Demon Hunters?

    Warlock's Death Coil was taken from Warcraft 3 in name, icon and general effect. If you can find reason to say it was not the same spell due to mechanics, then we have no problem waiving the use of Metamorphosis and Immolation Aura (which isn't Immolation anyways). The Warcraft 3 versions are not the same mechanic, because Warcraft 3 Metamorphosis granted splash damage, increased health regeneration, and was a cooldown ability that lasted a set time instead of draining a resource. Evasion does not work the same way either, since it was a passive ability. Mana Burn has since been removed from Priests.

    It's down to one ability, and that is Metamorphosis, and as I've explained through Death Knight and Monk examples, even ultimate spells can be absent without affecting the creation or outcome of a new WoW class.
    Last edited by Thimagryn; 2013-09-12 at 08:39 PM.

  18. #898
    Merely a Setback Teriz's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Soul of Azeroth
    Posts
    29,653
    Quote Originally Posted by Thimagryn View Post
    By saying it wasn't the same spell, what basis do you have to say that any of the spells incorporated into WoW are the Demon Hunters?
    Because Demon Hunters in WoW had the Rogue version of Evasion, and Warlocks got Immolation aura and Metamorphosis from Illidan.

    Immolation Aura;
    http://www.wowhead.com/search?q=Aura...olation#spells


    Warlock's Death Coil was taken from Warcraft 3 in name, icon and general effect. If you can find reason to say it was not the same spell due to mechanics, then we have no problem waiving the use of Metamorphosis and Immolation Aura (which isn't Immolation anyways). The Warcraft 3 versions are not the same mechanic, because Warcraft 3 Metamorphosis granted splash damage, increased health regeneration, and was a cooldown ability that lasted a set time instead of draining a resource. Evasion does not work the same way either, since it was a passive ability. Mana Burn has since been removed from Priests.

    Warlock version of DC;

    Causes the enemy target to run in horror for 3 sec and causes X Shadow damage. The caster gains 300% of the damage caused in health. 2 minute CD
    DK version of DC WC3/WoW

    Fire a blast of unholy energy, causing X Shadow damage to an enemy target or healing X damage on a friendly Undead target.
    It didn't have the same effect at all.

    It's down to one ability, and that is Metamorphosis, and as I've explained through Death Knight and Monk examples, even ultimate spells can be absent without affecting the creation or outcome of a new WoW class.

    What? Immolation Aura, Mana Burn, and Evasion suddenly don't matter anymore? They're all gone. A Demon Hunter class can't use them because Blizzard purposely split them into other classes.

    Why would they do that? Think about that for a moment. Why would Blizzard purposely divide the Demon Hunter's core abilities, and then give Warlocks and Rogues large amounts of DH thematics? Do you honestly believe they did that to one day introduce a Demon Hunter class?

  19. #899
    And why does a Demon Hunter class need those spells? They don't. They can carry their own weight without any of those spells, because people would be familiar with the class identity regardless of what abilities they would or would not have.

    If abilities defined a class, Rogue would not exist in WoW, because there were no Rogues or Rogue abilities in Warcraft 3. Unless you are saying Rogues are Demon Hunters, Blademasters and Wardens.

  20. #900
    What? Immolation Aura, Mana Burn, and Evasion suddenly don't matter anymore? They're all gone. A Demon Hunter class can't use them because Blizzard purposely split them into other classes.
    Why would they do that? Think about that for a moment. Why would Blizzard purposely divide the Demon Hunter's core abilities, and then give Warlocks and Rogues large amounts of DH thematics? Do you honestly believe they did that to one day introduce a Demon Hunter class?
    Think about that. They are storming a lot of ideas every expansion. In BC, there were other races over the table to fit the expansion, in wrath there were other classes, and of course all other expansions too.
    Why they take the same name from a skill of a DK and give them to warlocks? Because this skill fits their theme.
    Why evasion was in rogues kit? Because this skill fits their theme.
    Why starfall was racial-skill from Night Elfs Priest? Because this skill fits their theme. And then it was removed; and why Druids has it now? Because this skill fits their theme.
    Why Metamorfosis is in Warlocks kit? Because this skill fits their theme.

    And like all this type of projects, sometime you give something to other classes because it fits really well, but sometimes you need to remove that skill because the main class have more points to acquire his own skills (starfall is the black sheep from the list). But after that, this isn't because they predicted that Demon Hunter will never be a class in wow, because that's not true. The only bad lluck that this class had, was being melee that looked to be agile (rogues), had a demon theme (Warlocks) and had Hunter (for people that see hunter like a DH) in his name. And that gives a high probability that a game with a lot of years in his back, to take his own skills and give them to other classes.
    Other "possible classes" had the same problems:
    -Warden (magician-rogue style character).
    -Dark ranger (DK/Necromancer-Hunter style character).
    -DH (Warlock-Rogue style character)-The main one that we are talking.

    Other "possible classes" had the other problems like being a profession themed:
    -Tinkerer: Engineering profession. (theme)
    -Goblin alchemist: Alchemist (theme)

    And all the other Hero unites are just races:
    -Pit Lord.
    -Naga witch.
    etc...

Posting Permissions

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