Page 51 of 51 FirstFirst ...
41
49
50
51
  1. #1001
    Quote Originally Posted by Cle View Post
    Yeah but for some reason you also just said that illidari are warlocks.
    http://www.wowwiki.com/Illidari

    The Illidari is Illidan's faction, composed mainly of demons. The base definition of a Warlock class is someone who consorts with demons. So technically, anyone in that faction is going to be 'similar to Warlocks' just for being in that faction. That's what I'm getting at.

    If you're trying to make a case that Demon Hunters and Warlocks are different, you have to realize you're no longer debating 'Demon Hunters' as you know it, you're debating 'All of the Illidari and whatever they represent' as per the views of those who think DH are too similar to Locks. It's impossible to make any headway when you understand they will never accept your definition of 'Demon Hunter'.
    Last edited by Thimagryn; 2014-02-16 at 11:00 PM.

  2. #1002
    I dont care about factions, I just look at "demon hunter" of any iteration and their abilities and what is the general feel, and I cant help but think that they are not warlocks, and blizzard thinks likewise because they have co-existed since wc3 and have continued their separate lifes in WoW.

    Also the most annoying part of this debate is that opposers have extremely selective argumentation and everything they say can be converted into pro-demon hunter argument, mainly the fact that they are 100% ignoring that same "theme" can be basis for entirely different classes like paladins and priests. Also Demon hunter class certainly needs further iteration like Monk and Deathknight.

  3. #1003
    Elemental Lord Teriz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Beach City
    Posts
    8,778
    Quote Originally Posted by Cle View Post
    I dont care about factions, I just look at "demon hunter" of any iteration and their abilities and what is the general feel, and I cant help but think that they are not warlocks, and blizzard thinks likewise because they have co-existed since wc3 and have continued their separate lifes in WoW.

    Also the most annoying part of this debate is that opposers have extremely selective argumentation and everything they say can be converted into pro-demon hunter argument, mainly the fact that they are 100% ignoring that same "theme" can be basis for entirely different classes like paladins and priests. Also Demon hunter class certainly needs further iteration like Monk and Deathknight.
    Yeah, Priests and Paladins don't share the same theme.

    The Demon Hunter concept has received further iteration via the Warlock class.

    The Illidari are the most prominent Demon Hunters in WoW lore. That is why we base what we know about DHs on them, and their WC3 lore.

  4. #1004
    Quote Originally Posted by Cle View Post
    I dont care about factions, I just look at "demon hunter" of any iteration and their abilities and what is the general feel, and I cant help but think that they are not warlocks, and blizzard thinks likewise because they have co-existed since wc3 and have continued their separate lifes in WoW.
    And you're telling it to people who don't care what you think, that's the problem. It's literally like talking to brick walls. You'll never convince them they're not warlocks because they already believe they're the same thing. I'm not saying they're right or wrong, it's simply a matter that what you believe will never change what they believe Demon Hunters are. They won't listen.

  5. #1005
    Elemental Lord
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    8,016
    Quote Originally Posted by Cle View Post
    Actually, gameplay is superior to lore always.
    As far as the game goes. But...we aren't talking about the actual game. We're talking about adding a class, and giving it the theme, concepts, look and story of a Demon Hunter. We're talking about naming the resource the uses Fel Power" instead of "Steam". Of calling a CD Metamorphosis instead of Overboost.

    The gameplay is important...but in this case, we're talking about the class identity that goes with it. You can attach the gameplay to any class; it's plug and play that way. And because of that, as far as the actual class itself is concerned, gameplay is of next to no concern, Indeed, the only reason Meta itself is important is because of the look, the lore, the flavor that it gives the DH class.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jtree View Post
    Okay, point of order: how can you say DHs share a look, when they don't have proper gear because they are not yet their own class?
    Because we see DHs, both in game and out and have done ever since WC3 we can compare them. We have quite a few DH NPCs. We have quite a few pieces of art. We have toys in game that turn players into Demon Hunters.

    Quote Originally Posted by Thimagryn View Post
    On the contrary, I still believe the Demon Hunter as a completely viable class.
    And you'd be wrong.

    The point is that we are arguing two different class concepts with different people. When faced with people who are not wiling to accept a different definition, there really is no point in trying to convince those who are not willing to listen.
    There is no different definition. You are arguing that some demon hunters aren't demon hunters. That they aren't demon hunters because they are bad. And, by that reasoning, that good warlocks aren't warlocks because they aren't power mad. That members of the Crusade aren't paladins. And so on.

    So it comes to a simple conclusion, discuss based on their definition. A Demon Hunter class, based on all Demon Hunter examples in Warcraft, will not be made into a class. It's a fair assertion considering the Illidari represent a good chunk of that particular identity.
    Trouble for your pov is that the Illidari are Demon Hunters. They were trained by Night Elf Masters, went through the traditional training and rituals, followed the same path as any other DH, and did so for the same reasons as other DHs such as Loramus...to protect their people.

    Same training, same motivations, same rituals, same everything. They aren't corrupted, they aren't evil. They are, in fact, selfless. They are Demon Hunters. Trained as Demon Hunters by Demon Hunters, in the traditional Demon Hunter manner, working alongside Demons who have been freed from the Fel taint and the Legion.

    But they are "bad" NPCs so - for you - they don't count. They work with Demons. So they don't count. We see NElf DHs also work with Demons. But they don't count either. The only DHs who do count are those who meet your own personal criteria.

    But even then, even were we to accept that pov, that the Illidari and others don't count, we can still look at your group of DHs - Altruis and Feronas - compare their (and the web page and the other canon info we have) lore, theme, concepts, etc with Warlocks and they'd still be one and the same. There'd still be that very large degree of overlap.

    The base concept of both would still be "power through dark powers" for both.
    The spec themes of both would still be Demons.
    The lore of both would still encompass Sargeras, the BL, Demons.

    And so on.

    All of which brings us to the real problem.

    Blizzard isn't going to use a class slot on a class whose theme and concept already exists in game.
    Blizzard isn't going to add a class whose addition can only hurt other classes - even if you think "they'll get over it".
    Blizzard isn't going to add a class whose design carries so much baggage and expectation that the deisgners don't have a free hand in its creation.

    EJL
    Last edited by Talen; 2014-02-17 at 02:11 AM.

  6. #1006
    Quote Originally Posted by Talen View Post
    And you'd be wrong.


    There is no different definition. You are arguing that some demon hunters aren't demon hunters. That they aren't demon hunters because they are bad. And, by that reasoning, that good warlocks aren't warlocks because they aren't power mad. That members of the Crusade aren't paladins. And so on.
    I am arguing there is a difference between the Illidari and the Night Elf Demon Hunters of Warcraft 3. Just as there is a difference between Druids of the Flame, and the Druids of Warcraft 3. Do you understand this parallel in thought?

    When we are talking about classes, the Druids that we play are representative of Warcraft 3. They are not representative of Druids of the Flame. Do you agree?

    If you believe it all to be the same and that it all represents the same class, then you are submitting to the idea that Playable Druids should have the ability to use Fire magic because Druids of the Flame exist.

    Trouble for your pov is that the Illidari are Demon Hunters. They were trained by Night Elf Masters, went through the traditional training and rituals, followed the same path as any other DH, and did so for the same reasons as other DHs such as Loramus...to protect their people.
    I am not saying the Illidari Demon Hunters are not Demon Hunters. I am saying a playable class would not be based on them, just as the Druid class is not based on 'Druids of the Flame', who are in all context still Druids.

    A large part of our debate is confused based on lack of definition. It's much easier to apply this to Paladins and Death Knights, since it is clear that a Paladin that is corrupted by the Scourge become Death Knights. When a Druid becomes corrupted by Ragnaros, they are are not given another name despite a complete change in motivation, creed and altogether class identity. So what I ask is- is it logical sense to incorporate the Druids of the Flame in the same spectrum of all Druids, and accept the use of Fire magic?
    Last edited by Thimagryn; 2014-02-17 at 02:36 AM.

  7. #1007
    Elemental Lord
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    8,016
    Quote Originally Posted by Cle View Post
    I understand how they might seem very similar when reduced in bare minimum, but same thing can be said about paladins and priests.
    Simple repetition doe snot make this argument true.

    The points of similarity? Both heal. Both share a belief and so use holy magic. Some priests became Paladins 30 years ago.

    Everything else? Is different. In short, when you compare the design space of the Paladins and Priest, they are almost totally different.

    The fact that you view this as "very similar" speaks volumes. It tells me, for example, that you don't really know anything at all about game design. It hints you don't even know or understand what a class design space actually or what it covers. It suggests that you haven't even read any of the articles or tweest Blizzard has made detailing its design processes and priorities

    It suggests you just want to rubbish the concept of design space overlap and, like others, are simply shouting loudest about the near non-existent similarity between Paladins and Priests in the hope that players will draw the wrong conclusion about the very real, very large overlap between DHs and warlocks.

    Unfortunately, the people you would need to convince are Blizzard. They are the ones who need to work around it.

    Also warlocks and demon hunters have co-existed since WC3, blizzard thinks they are different so I have no reason to think about anything else.
    Blizzards one of those who has pointed to the issue with the design space overlap. And there is no reason it shouldn't think so. It is, after all, the entity whose decided the design direction that has converged the classes and made it impossible for the DH to exist as a separate class.

    Quote Originally Posted by Thimagryn View Post
    I am arguing there is a difference between the Illidari and the Night Elf Demon Hunters of Warcraft 3. Just as there is a difference between Druids of the Flame, and the Druids of Warcraft 3. Do you understand this parallel in thought?
    I understand it. But, at best, you are talking about the scale of difference that exists between specs. Not classes.


    When we are talking about classes, the Druids that we play are representative of Warcraft 3. They are not representative of Druids of the Flame. Do you disagree?

    I am not saying the Illidari Demon Hunters are not Demon Hunters. I am saying a playable class would not be based on them[
    A playable class would be based on them just as much as they are based on the actual existing lore. That they are bad guys hasn't stopped Blizzard referencing bad guys for inspiration before. They are part and parcel of the class lore of the DH class. Elves who made a selfless pact with Demons to protect their people and fight the Legion.

    They've been trained by DHs. They've gone through the rituals. They meet your "selfless" test. But you still don't count them

    And yet, you've stated that if we go by the Illidari, a faction of Demon Hunters who meet all the criteria, then we essentially have Warlocks. Even were your objection to have any point, the fact that the Illidari can be represented as a Warlocks class just about guarantees Blizzard won't make any distinction if/when adding DHs. If Warlocks can be Illidari, then Warlocks can be DHs. There is no room left for a "pure" DH of the kind you envisage because Blizzard isn't going to duplicate a class like that. I could see them duplicating the Paladin to create racially locked Blood knight and Sunwalkers. I could see them adding a Glyph or other tool to change a Paladins school to arcane to bring in BattleMages or Sentinels.

    But using a separate class slot simply to give the class a different name?

    But all of this leads to the questions....what do you see as different for the Illidari that makes you see them as not a DH? Is it because they work with , consort with cleansed Demons? Something we've seen NElf DHs do. Is it because you think they are corrupted or selfish?

    Or is it simply because they represent an extension to the DH lore and background that you don't want to see? That you want the NElf DHs and nothing else?

    A large part of our debate is confused based on lack of definition. It's much easier to apply this to Paladins and Death Knights, since it is clear that a Paladin that is corrupted by the Scourge become Death Knights. When a Druid becomes corrupted by Ragnaros, they are are not given another name despite a complete change in motivation, creed and altogether class identity.
    A priest who switches from Holy to Shadow or vice versa instantly converts to another faith and set of beliefs and motivations. A Shaman who switches from Enhancement to Elemental forgets how to Dual Wield. A Paladin who fights for the Crusade is seen as evil.

    EJL
    Last edited by Talen; 2014-02-17 at 02:46 AM.

  8. #1008
    Quote Originally Posted by Talen View Post
    I understand it. But, at best, you are talking about the scale of difference that exists between specs. Not classes.
    We can not begin to discuss my views on this subject until you are willing to understand it. I take by your dismissal of my argument that you are not willing to cooperate with this train of thought.

    What you say is true. Druids of the Flame are on the scale that they could be a new Spec, but all the same a Death Knight could be considered a new spec of the Paladin. Even in Warcraft 3, the original name of the Death Knight was the "Anti-Paladin", the only difference between these two parallels is in nomenclature.

    It begs the question - What is the difference between a Spec and a Class? I don't mean by definition, but by example. Why are Paladins and Death Knights different classes, yet Shaman and Shadow Hunter are not, even though they are separated in lore and by example of Warcraft 3. Is Priestess of the Moon considered a Druid spec?

    A playable class would be based on them just as much as they are based on the actual existing lore. That they are bad guys hasn't stopped Blizzard referencing bad guys for inspiration before. They are part and parcel of the class lore of the DH class. Elves who made a selfless pact with Demons to protect their people and fight the Legion.

    They've been trained by DHs. They've gone through the rituals. They meet your "selfless" test. But you still don't count them
    Where is the example of Selflessness? If anything, we are shown they are selfish. Even Leotheras' quotes embody this

    Leotheras the Blind yells: Kill! KILL!
    Leotheras the Blind yells: That's right! Yes!
    Leotheras the Blind yells: Who's the master now?
    Shadow of Leotheras yells: I have no equal.
    Shadow of Leotheras yells: Perish, mortal.
    Shadow of Leotheras yells: Yes, YES! Ahahah!

    Where is the Selflessness again?

    And yet, you've stated that if we go by the Illidari, a faction of Demon Hunters who meet all the criteria, then we essentially have Warlocks. Even were your objection to have any point, the fact that the Illidari can be represented as a Warlocks class just about guarantees Blizzard won't make any distinction if/when adding DHs. If Warlocks can be Illidari, then Warlocks can be DHs. There is no room left for a "pure" DH of the kind you envisage because Blizzard isn't going to duplicate a class like that. I could see them duplicating the Paladin to create racially locked Blood knight and Sunwalkers. I could see them adding a Glyph or other tool to change a Paladins school to arcane to bring in BattleMages or Sentinels.
    I have never made the case that the Illidari should become Playable. That is the point.

    I maintain a different vision of Demon Hunters, one that you will never understand because you are unwilling to listen.


    But all of this leads to the questions....what do you see as different for the Illidari that makes you see them as not a DH? Is it because they work with , consort with cleansed Demons? Something we've seen NElf DHs do. Is it because you think they are corrupted or selfish?
    The Illidari represent everything the Warlock class does, so it's obvious when you associate Demon Hunters to the Warlocks, there is clearly no room to co-exist, and it is clearly understandable that it could all be incorporated as a spec. They share the exact same ideals and themes and motivations. The difference comes in the fact that by associating the Illidari to the Demon Hunters as a whole, there is no room to grow the Demon Hunter into any other concept. You have already drowned out all other possibilities by adhering to the demonic theme. The inclusion of the Illidari as a core theme of Demon Hunter compounds any other possible identity.

    As an exercise to my argument, would you accept Demon Hunters who do not use Demonic Magic?


    A priest who switches from Holy to Shadow or vice versa instantly converts to another faith and set of beliefs and motivations. A Shaman who switches from Enhancement to Elemental forgets how to Dual Wield. A Paladin who fights for the Crusade is seen as evil.
    No, they follow the same faith. A Seer does not change their faith suddenly to mind control a mob, or deal damage with the Shadow. By lore standards, they are still Sun-worshippers through and through. Your assertion that they change their faith is not reflected in the lore, but is explained by your own observation of game mechanics.

    To be frank, the concept of escaping your faith temporarily contradicts the concept of having a faith in the first place. You can't just put your faith in the Holy Light on hold for a dungeon run.

    From an official stance, there is simply no explanation for any change in their beliefs when they change their Specs. It is simply an unproven assumption that they are converting their faiths in the process of spec-switching.
    Last edited by Thimagryn; 2014-02-17 at 03:56 AM.

  9. #1009
    Quote Originally Posted by Talen View Post
    Because we see DHs, both in game and out and have done ever since WC3 we can compare them. We have quite a few DH NPCs. We have quite a few pieces of art. We have toys in game that turn players into Demon Hunters.
    We have toys that turn toons into naga and monkeys' That doesn't mean they are. My paladin just got Blackflame Daggers. Doesn't mean he's a dual-wield class.

    "Look" means the visual, what we see. The iconic look of a DH is a bare-chested, blindfolded figure carrying warglaives, just as the basic image of a paladin is a plate-clad champion wielding a warhammer and a huge holy book.

    Said books have even appeared on several of paladin's most iconic armor sets. I'd expect DH tiers to often reflect that lean, bare look we know them for, with chest pieces of minimal design.


    Blizzard isn't going to add a class whose design carries so much baggage and expectation that the deisgners don't have a free hand in its creation.
    Are you suggesting Death Knights didn't have expectation and baggage?!


    The base concept of both would still be "power through dark powers" for both.
    The spec themes of both would still be Demons.
    The lore of both would still encompass Sargeras, the BL, Demons.
    Blizz already powered through these arguments in 2008.

    #1: When DKs were announced, there were forum complaints about the game not needing another "dark powers" class, since warlocks already covered that.
    #2: DKs got a Frost spec, even though Mages already had one. They worked out to be quite different.
    #3: Paladins already had intimate lore with Arthas and the Scourge. A DK class was not necessary to tell a story about a war against the Lich King.

    Further thoughts on all three points:
    #1: Monks have a wise, spiritual vibe about them. Shamans, priests, and paladins already had this identity in their respective cultures. Sharing hasn't hurt anyone.
    #2: Are you implying that DHs would have a Demonology spec?
    #3: Legion lore also runs through the racial history of Night Elves, Draenei, and Orcs, and ultimately shapes much of what has transpired in the whole franchise. Adding a DH class adds another avenue to explore some of that history, and could potentially fill in gaps in our knowledge about what happened between the Sundering and modern Azeroth history.


    Quote Originally Posted by Talen View Post
    Simple repetition doe snot make this argument true.

    The points of similarity? Both heal. Both share a belief and so use holy magic. Some priests became Paladins 30 years ago.

    Everything else? Is different. In short, when you compare the design space of the Paladins and Priest, they are almost totally different.
    Mechanically, of course they are different. Their armor and weapons and fighting styles are entirely different. A paladin is literally more hands-on than a priest.

    But in the history and institutions of Azeroth, the two classes are intertwined. From the Church of the Holy Light to the Argent Dawn and Argent Crusade, paladins and priests are frequently found side by side. Members of one discipline respect and follow leaders from the other, like Tirion Fordring and the Prophet Velen. Their methods vary, but their purpose is the same: heal the afflicted, protect the innocent, destroy evil, in the name of the Church/Naaru/Earthmother.

  10. #1010
    Elemental Lord Teriz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Beach City
    Posts
    8,778
    Quote Originally Posted by Jtree View Post
    Mechanically, of course they are different. Their armor and weapons and fighting styles are entirely different. A paladin is literally more hands-on than a priest.

    But in the history and institutions of Azeroth, the two classes are intertwined. From the Church of the Holy Light to the Argent Dawn and Argent Crusade, paladins and priests are frequently found side by side. Members of one discipline respect and follow leaders from the other, like Tirion Fordring and the Prophet Velen. Their methods vary, but their purpose is the same: heal the afflicted, protect the innocent, destroy evil, in the name of the Church/Naaru/Earthmother.
    However you're forgetting that Priests also wallow in the dark side. That is a huge difference from Paladins. Paladins don't use Shadow magic at all. Meanwhile, priests dedicate an entire spec to it.

  11. #1011
    Elemental Lord
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    8,016
    Quote Originally Posted by Thimagryn View Post
    all the same a Death Knight could be considered a new spec of the Paladin.

    While the Death Knight gameplay could be ported over....the Death Knight idenetity could not. The moves could be renamed, but not, for example, the theme or class concept.


    Blizzard could have attached the DK concept to Paladisn, or Warriors, by updating the class system to allow it, to make it work, to take advantage of a "same class mechanics but different class" type scenario. But it didn't. And it hasn't.


    And it doesn't even need to do that for DHs and Warlocks. Two classes with the same theme, the same lore, the same concepts and so on. Those aspects which combine to make upt he class identity are found in the design space of both classes.


    Now, if Blizzard adjusted the class system or brought in Advanced classes or whatever, then yes...the situation could change. I could very easily see Blizzard loosening the system to tie gameplay more to the class, and identity more to the spec allowing for (in your example) the Paladin based DK. But even then, such as system would really only be necessary when and if Blizzard decide to stop adding classes.


    And if there are only one or two classes left to add, why use it on a design space that it largely sees as already in play?


    Why are Paladins and Death Knights different classes, yet Shaman and Shadow Hunter are not, even though they are separated in lore and by example of Warcraft 3. Is Priestess of the Moon considered a Druid spec?
    Identity. Class concept. Theme. A Death Knight is built around the concept and theme of Undeath. Thats very different from the theme and concept of Paladidns.

    In essence...their design space is different. Overlaps in variosu aspects, but they are stuill different.

    That difference doesn't really exist when comparing DHs and Warlocks. The have the same basic class concept, are built around the same theme, have strong overlaps in lore and so on.

    Where is the example of Selflessness? If anything, we are shown they are selfish. Even Leotheras' quotes embody this
    You are using as an example a DH whose soul is housing a live Demon and who has been driven mad as a result? The selflessness comes from putting their own souls at risk so they can protect their people.

    I have never made the case that the Illidari should become Playable. That is the point.
    The Illidrai are a faction akin to the Scarlet Crusade. That the cruisadehas palaidns and Priests doesn't stop them being playable. That the Crusades members have differnet motivatiosn and beliefs, doesn't stop them being see as part of the classes in question. A Crusade Paladin is still a Paladin even if his beliefs and movations no longer represent those of the player. Just as the motivations and belief so the Blood Knights or Sunwalkers don't represent those of the Silver Hand.

    What is so special about the Illidari that we can no longer see Demon Hunters affiliated with them as Demon Hunters? What makes them different from the Crusade Priests and Paladins?

    [quote]The Illidari represent everything the Warlock class does[/qute]

    The same is true for ALL Demon Hunters regardless of faction.

    They share the exact same ideals and themes and motivations.
    Still the same for all DHs.

    The inclusion of the Illidari as a core theme of Demon Hunter compounds any other possible identity.
    They are the same as any other Demon Hunter.

    As an exercise to my argument, would you accept Demon Hunters who do not use Demonic Magic?
    If they don't use Demon magic, then they aren't following the lore. Does that mean that they no lonegr made their pact? That they no longer use demonic energies? Get rid of the Demon and we have a dual wielding class that uses Shadow Magic. We call that a Rogue in WOW.

    Your assertion that they change their faith is not reflected in the lore, but is explained by your own observation of game mechanics.
    Yes...its a gameplay necessity. But Holy priests are opposed to the Shadow as part of their Faith. Yet its simply a spec change away for priests. One moment they are priest of the Light, the next a Priest of the Shadow. Its a gameplay necessity, but one that shows the scale of change possible between specs.

    But lets cut this short. Lets accept everything you've stated. every single thing.

    The Illidari are de facto warlocks.

    Why would Blizzard add a specific DH class?




    EJL

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Jtree View Post
    But in the history and institutions of Azeroth, the two classes are intertwined. From the Church of the Holy Light to the Argent Dawn and Argent Crusade, paladins and priests are frequently found side by side. Members of one discipline respect and follow leaders from the other, like Tirion Fordring and the Prophet Velen. Their methods vary, but their purpose is the same: heal the afflicted, protect the innocent, destroy evil, in the name of the Church/Naaru/Earthmother.
    By that argument, every human is a Warrior because they all follow Varian.

    EJL
    Last edited by Talen; 2014-02-17 at 06:47 AM.

  12. #1012
    Your honors, i move that this case be dismissed on the grounds that the witness has been tinkered with. In the pants.
    If you like my draw-rings. http://yig.deviantart.com/
    If you can't find them for some reason beyond that page. http://yig.deviantart.com/gallery/
    WOW screenshot and concept art gallery http://smg.photobucket.com/user/evilknick/library/WoW

  13. #1013
    Quote Originally Posted by Talen View Post
    While the Death Knight gameplay could be ported over....the Death Knight idenetity could not. The moves could be renamed, but not, for example, the theme or class concept.

    Identity. Class concept. Theme. A Death Knight is built around the concept and theme of Undeath. Thats very different from the theme and concept of Paladidns.
    Same can be argued with the differences between Druids and Druid of the Flame. You could decree that the Druids of the Flame are so different that they would not be using Mark of the Wild, Rejuvenation or any conventional Druid spell. Druids of the Flame forsake all use of Nature and taken up the use of Fire. This gives them new identity and theme. Does this not meet the criteria to become a new class?

    Shadow Priests do not use any Holy magic and do not follow any particular explained Faith. Could they not be a new class?

    In the end, what is the difference between Class and Spec if identity and theme are already different within specializations of a given class? And what is 'Class Concept' if not some vague term?

    That difference doesn't really exist when comparing DHs and Warlocks. The have the same basic class concept, are built around the same theme, have strong overlaps in lore and so on.
    The difference does not exist because you will not allow it to. You maintain Demon Hunters in the same light as Warlocks for actions such as summoning demons, actions represented only by the Illidari.


    You are using as an example a DH whose soul is housing a live Demon and who has been driven mad as a result? The selflessness comes from putting their own souls at risk so they can protect their people.
    If you are to use Leotheras and all of the Illidari to represent all Demon Hunters, why do you object to this example?

    No, they are not selfless. Again, you have provided no evidence of this. The Illidari Demon Hunters' people would be the Blood Elves, and they do not fight to protect them.

    I ask again, where is your example that the Illidari are selfless and motivated to protecting anyone. Even Akama says they traded in one cruel master for another. Where are there any examples of selflessness?

    If they don't use Demon magic, then they aren't following the lore. Does that mean that they no lonegr made their pact? That they no longer use demonic energies? Get rid of the Demon and we have a dual wielding class that uses Shadow Magic. We call that a Rogue in WOW.
    Yet you disregard all that lore when merging Demon Hunters in the Warlock class. So when you use Affliction, they no longer made their pact? They no longer turn into Demons? They removed their blindness and capability of Dual Wielding?

    By all means, your definition of 'Identity, Theme, Class Concept' could incorporate Warlocks straight into the Mage class as a Demonology Spec. A Spec does not need to use abilities of any other Spec as shown by the difference between Holy and Shadow Priests, what would be against a Mage having Warlock gameplay as a Spec?

    What it boils down to is that you have a very confused definition for Class and Specialization, to the point where terms are interchangeable given their relationship is similar enough. Yet when it comes to a clear definition between two classes, you can not clearly define any of it without the use of context-specific conjecture.

    This is why your entire view on what Classes and Specializations are is WRONG
    Last edited by Thimagryn; 2014-02-17 at 07:59 AM.

  14. #1014
    Quote Originally Posted by Thimagryn View Post
    This is why your entire view on what Classes and Specializations are is WRONG

    I am by no means unbiased and my interpretations in this matter are for the majority radical and undefendable and highly mired in wild speculation, and I suspect my gratitude is likely not welcomed, but Thimagryn's logic is refreshing. Their demonstration of how subjective this issue remains while in the face of a barrage of impenetrable walls of unreasonable denial may not change any minds, but their dedication and stamina in the face of this makes for invaluable educational examples of the labyrinthine contextual hair splitting at play here while offering continual demonstrations of the dangers inherent in the software glitches of the human mind. I am reminded of a biologically impossible love child of AronRa and Sam Harris.

    /Kirk out
    If you like my draw-rings. http://yig.deviantart.com/
    If you can't find them for some reason beyond that page. http://yig.deviantart.com/gallery/
    WOW screenshot and concept art gallery http://smg.photobucket.com/user/evilknick/library/WoW

  15. #1015
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    However you're forgetting that Priests also wallow in the dark side. That is a huge difference from Paladins. Paladins don't use Shadow magic at all. Meanwhile, priests dedicate an entire spec to it.
    Didn't forget that at all. Didn't want to wander into these weeds unnecessarily, but since you're going there, I'll follow.

    There isn't a lot of lore I've ever seen about priests' use of Shadow magic. The official site says this:

    Originally Posted by Blizzard Entertainment
    As light cannot exist without darkness, and darkness without light, some priests tap into shadow to better understand their own abilities, as well as the abilities of those who threaten them.
    This is how I imagine it:

    When a Paladin chooses to go on the offensive, he takes up a large weapon and smashes his opponents in a violent, righteous physical assault. Priests, when they need to attack evil, reach into the shadows beyond the Light, turning the darkness hidden there against their enemies. Spells like Mind Sear and Mind Flay directly assault the mind, while Vampiric Touch and Embrace eat away at the life force of their enemy. The spiritual healers become spiritual devourers, destroying their enemy from within.


    Quote Originally Posted by Talen View Post
    By that argument, every human is a Warrior because they all follow Varian.
    You've got it exactly backwards. By my argument, all humans are not warriors, even though they follow Varian Wrynn, just like all members of the Argent Crusade are not Paladins, even though a Paladin leads it. The Crusade even had a warlock master summoner, until he got himself killed.

    However, all playable humans in WoW are citizens of the Kingdom of Stormwind. Not because Varian is the template for all humans, but because that is what is written in game. There are lots of other humans out there who are not of Stormwind.

  16. #1016
    Pit Lord Skorpionss's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Bucharest, Romania
    Posts
    2,287
    Quote Originally Posted by Ginantonicus View Post
    Dosen't that just prove why Demon Hunters can't be a class. In order to be a playable class don't DH have to be the same abilities?
    It doesn't necessarily mean that each demon gives them different abilities... it could be reworked to be types of demons big burly demons give you tanking abilities, thus creating the tanking spec(doomguards, pit lords and such), other demons, such as nathrezim could give you physical strength and agility enabling you to use melee dps abilities,thus creating the melee dps spec... and demons that mainly cast spells give you better magical abilities thus giving you the 3rd spec of spell dps...
    This could be nicely shown in the starting zone via questing... at the start of the questing zone, after getting familiar with the non-spec exclusive skills, you get a quest to slay a demon, and depending what demon you kill you are locked in that spec until the starting zone is completed.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    Considering that he wasn't a Melee swinging bad ass until he got the glaives, I would disagree. The glaives are a major part of his identity as a Demon Hunter, and were incredibly powerful weapons in their own right. It could also be argued that Illidan's attunement to demonic energy allowed him to draw more power from a demonic weapon than a non-Warlock would be capable of.

    Either way, the premise of your argument is wrong. Even Illidan killed and sacrificed demons to gain power as a Demon Hunter.



    The problem isn't that DHs are Rogues, the problem is that DHs could be easily considered shadowy assassins like Rogues, because of their similar design space. Granted, it's not as huge an overlap as it is with warlocks, but it's there regardless.
    I think you should consult a dictionary for the meaning of the words kill and sacrifice... Sacrifice means you give something up for the sake of something else... Demon hunters don't sacrifice anything when they kill the demons... warlocks sacrifice their pets, they lose a pet to obtain their power...

  17. #1017
    Elemental Lord
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    8,016
    [QUOTE=Thimagryn;25407246]Same can be argued with the differences between Druids and Druid of the Flame. You could decree that the Druids of the Flame are so different that they would not be using Mark of the Wild, Rejuvenation or any conventional Druid spell. Druids of the Flame forsake all use of Nature and taken up the use of Fire. This gives them new identity and theme. Does this not meet the criteria to become a new class?[]/quote]

    Potentially. Trouble, is, the design space for DotF would overlap with Druids....but at the same time, the design space for that apsect is still fairly open. With limited information and interaction, with limited history and lore, the opportunity to develop a new class, or attach it to a different class is there. It's also the case that the existing design space of the druid could be utilised and expanded to take in the DotF concept.

    So - yes...you could decree that DotF had a sufficiently different identity that a new class was warranted. Or you could say the identity was different enough to justify a new spec and develop it that way.

    The difference does not exist because you will not allow it to. You maintain Demon Hunters in the same light as Warlocks for actions such as summoning demons, actions represented only by the Illidari.
    And Loramus.And we can also note that those Illidari Demons were cleansed and therefore not typical.

    In short....most Demon Hunters we see appear to have little or no trouble working with Demons. Just as Hunters have no trouble working with Beast.

    You seem to have this preconceived idea that a Dmeon Hunter can never ever under any circusmatnces work with or ally with demons.

    Let's assume that is true. In that case, Demon Hunters can never be a player class...because they're have to work with Warlocks.

    So...yes.Demon Hunters fight Demons. They sacrifice and risk their soul to protect their people. But where is it said that this can't involve using Demons? It can;'t be from the game because we do see Demon Hunters doing just that. It's not from WC3, and its not from the web page. It's not from any of the instances of DH NPCs. It's not from the novels or manga or comics.

    Where did you get this idea that Demon Hunters will never, ever work with Demons?

    No, they are not selfless. Again, you have provided no evidence of this. The Illidari Demon Hunters' people would be the Blood Elves, and they do not fight to protect them.
    What makes you think that they aren't fighting to protect their people? To help them survive? Why do you think they fight?

    Yet you disregard all that lore when merging Demon Hunters in the Warlock class. So when you use Affliction, they no longer made their pact? They no longer turn into Demons? They removed their blindness and capability of Dual Wielding?
    Yes...and when an Arms warrior switches to a Fury, he switches from being a trained soldier to a barbarian warrior. Each spec has it own identity and spec lore. It isn't just a switch in role or combat style but it comes with extras. The Fury warrior is a representation of a Barbarian warriors, not a traiend soldier. The Shadow Priest is not a devotee of the light. The Beastmaster vwho switches specs forgets how to call some of his own companions. The Enhancement Shaman forgets how to use the second axe he carries.

    A DH Warlock who switches to Affiliction would be the same. He'd switch from having the lore and abilities of a DH to the Lore of an Aff Warlock. In both cases, he'd have the lore and abilities of the base class as well.

    By all means, your definition of 'Identity, Theme, Class Concept' could incorporate Warlocks straight into the Mage class as a Demonology Spec.
    Warlocks could have been developed as a mage based pet class. Sicne then, thehy've been developed to have their own identity. It's very possible that had DHs been brought in in Vanilla, the same could have happened.

    It didn't.

    Which is where we are now. With the design space of Demon Hunters occupied by existing classes and with no room for the class to develop its own unique identity. other than melee viability, what could a DH class do that a Warlock class cannot? Why should Warlock players have to share their theme and concepts with another class? What benefit does it bring to the game to have a DH class when so much of what it is, what it does, is already done by other classes?

    EJL

  18. #1018
    a warlock is just the caster version of a demon hunter and to put a demon hunter CLASS in the game would just overlap. you have a dk, which is a shadowy darker melee class. adding ANOTHER melee class would be really really lame in terms of gameplay. we need a ranged thing. if anything, branch off of the warlock with a glyph idea and then apply the same structures to other classes to create a more diverse experience. creating a new classe is work, but editing one via glyphs is different. its already established and you can go slowly instead of building ground up

  19. #1019
    Quote Originally Posted by Talen View Post
    Potentially. Trouble, is, the design space for DotF would overlap with Druids....but at the same time, the design space for that apsect is still fairly open. With limited information and interaction, with limited history and lore, the opportunity to develop a new class, or attach it to a different class is there. It's also the case that the existing design space of the druid could be utilised and expanded to take in the DotF concept.

    So - yes...you could decree that DotF had a sufficiently different identity that a new class was warranted. Or you could say the identity was different enough to justify a new spec and develop it that way.
    Design space concerns aside, it's the gray area that worries me when considering the definition of spec extends to becoming classes, and there is no definitive to limit one becoming the other. It confuses communication, because one class could be considered a spec by the next person based on observation of gameplay.

    Design space aside, is the Priestess of the Moon a class itself? Is it a Druid for Starfall and Moonfire, Priest for namesake or Hunter for using Bows? If it is a Spec, then does this mean they can use Nature/Shadow/Beasts? These are inherrent problems if classifying based on observation.

    And Loramus.And we can also note that those Illidari Demons were cleansed and therefore not typical.

    In short....most Demon Hunters we see appear to have little or no trouble working with Demons. Just as Hunters have no trouble working with Beast.

    You seem to have this preconceived idea that a Dmeon Hunter can never ever under any circusmatnces work with or ally with demons.

    Let's assume that is true. In that case, Demon Hunters can never be a player class...because they're have to work with Warlocks.
    My problem doesn't stem with them being unable to work with demons, rather it is the concern that you and Teriz maintain they are the same as Warlocks for allying with Demons. Working with Warlocks is something every class does, but it does not make them inherent allies of Demons. Likewise, this is should be reflected for the Demon Hunter, who would not be a demon summoning class.

    You are making a case that they should not be their own class because they are too similar to Warlocks, yet you are not allowing room for an identity distinct from Warlocks. What you eliminate is an option for Demon Hunters to represent a greater theme (Runemastery, Vengeance, Anti-Magic) and instead solely focus on their use of Fel magic as a pure Demonic theme.

    If by your example we took Druids, we know they are Nature themed first and foremost, with Beasts being a subcomponent of Nature. Beasts would overlap with Hunters, but it is not important because overall their theme is of Nature. So why can't we have a Demon Hunter who at its core is themed on Runemastery, with use of Demonic magic considered as a subcomponent of Runemastery?

    Why is it not possible for Demon Hunters to inhabit a new overarching theme, with 'Demonic magic' merely representing one aspect of that theme?

    What makes you think that they aren't fighting to protect their people? To help them survive? Why do you think they fight?
    For a player class, that is what I want. Warlocks don't represent this kind of creed, their class concept shows that they are power hungry and fight for the purpose of growing that power. They aren't fighting to protect. Not every player class fights to protect. Some fight for personal gain, and that is what the Warlock class represents. When you say 'there could be Warlocks who fight to protect' that is not representative of the overall Class Concept, it is the exception. Just as a Paladin doing unjustly things is not representative of the overall class identity.

    Demon Hunters fighting to protect should be part of their class identity. It would help differentiate them as a class from Warlocks, and from a lore standpoint it makes sense considering what is indicated in Warcraft 3.

    Yes...and when an Arms warrior switches to a Fury, he switches from being a trained soldier to a barbarian warrior. Each spec has it own identity and spec lore. It isn't just a switch in role or combat style but it comes with extras. The Fury warrior is a representation of a Barbarian warriors, not a traiend soldier. The Shadow Priest is not a devotee of the light. The Beastmaster vwho switches specs forgets how to call some of his own companions. The Enhancement Shaman forgets how to use the second axe he carries.
    Which is all headcanon. Again, you have absolutely no evidence this happens because it doesn't. An explanation for this is the definition of Class and Specialization.

    Class is a term used for any archetype of character in Warcraft. Priests, Priestess of the Moon, Witchdoctor, Shaman, Shadow Hunter are all different classes. Some specific people may be multi-classed, but it must be backed and indicated by lore or specific in-game reference. One example would be characters like Chen Stormstout, who is both a Brewmaster and a Monk.

    Specializations are subthemes within a Class. Specialization exists in gameplay definition only, and does not reflect Lore or official canon. Specializations can represent any theme within a class, and alter the overall Class Identity, but they are 100% self contained and do not affect other classes.

    Shadow Spec, for example, has no relationship to the overall 'Healer' theme of Priests, and brings in an entirely different theme of dark, Shadow Magic to the table. Yet despite their mastery over Shadow Magic, it does not represent any other classes such as Warlocks. Rogues or Death Knights. Same applies to Hunters who have Beastmastery, which adds a heavy Beast-based theme to the bow-using Hunter class. It is self-contained, so it does not bring in characters like Rexxar into the Hunter class simply by association of mastering Beasts.

    This is why the Warlock/Demon Hunter argument is flawed. Demon Hunters are a different class, and no matter what Warlock spec gets that is similar to Demon Hunters, they are always going to be self contained and will not incorporate another autonomous class.

    With the design space of Demon Hunters occupied by existing classes and with no room for the class to develop its own unique identity. other than melee viability, what could a DH class do that a Warlock class cannot? Why should Warlock players have to share their theme and concepts with another class? What benefit does it bring to the game to have a DH class when so much of what it is, what it does, is already done by other classes?
    The answer is simple and obvious - Design a class concept that does not occupy space with existing classes from the ground up, using the Warcraft 3 Demon Hunter's themes purely as reference points and familiarity. The end result will not be a pure reflection of all Demon Hunters in the traditional sense, they will be a New class with a New identity that is familiarized by retaining a Demon Hunter's core ideals.

    The Monk was very much designed in this way. It was not taking the Brewmaster and expanding it. It is a New Class with a New identity that was flavoured with the Warcraft 3 Brewmaster, sharing abilities and core ideals. Windwalker and Mistweaver do not reflect the identity of any Monk class that ever existed within Warcraft's canon, such as Scarlet Monastery or Auchenai Crypts monks.

    The Death Knight was very much designed this way. From ground up, it is a Spellcaster Melee hero with 3 tank specs (originally). The overall theme is Undeath, though he has specs that do not reflect this theme at all, such as Frost and Blood. Overall his identity is that of a dark Warrior who can cast spells. He is flavoured with abilities themed on the original Death Knights, with mechanics such as spreading diseases and spawning Gargoyles/Ghouls to reinforce that identity.

    The Demon Hunter can be designed this way. From ground up, it is a Spellcaster Melee Hybrid who uses Mail armor and incorporates a heavy (example) Runemastery theme. They are based on using Arcane Runes to augment their weapons with magical powers, or augment their bodies. Spectral Sight allows them to see magic in its primal form so they can better channel it using their Runes. They have Blademastery and Spellbreaker specs using Runic Augmentation to channel power for use in physical combat, or to redirect spells back at their enemies. The final spec is flavoured by the Demon Hunter, who would channel Fel Magic specifically through the runes, using it to engulf themselves in flames or change their physical form into a Demon. The source of this demonic power drawn from a relic or cursed weapon they find, leading them to train under the old Demon Hunters who teach you how to tap into its power safely. The Warcraft 3 Demon Hunter is represented completely in mechanics and lore within this class as one spec.

    The end result is a Blind, Tattooed warrior who fights using Runes to augment their weapons with power, and techniques to redirect magic back at opponents (fighting Fire with Fire). One spec of this class would fully represent the classic Demon Hunter (possibly as a Tank spec), while two other specs represent Caster and Melee gameplay that supplements an overall 'Runemaster' style. They are tied to the original Demon Hunter class by use of Cursed Weaponry containing Fel magic (from which they can use Immolation/Metamorphosis), are being trained by the original Demon Hunters, and follow a creed to use this power to protect. This class is not malicious, has no direct relationship with Demons, and is themed on Runemastery. Add Warglaives for flavour as necessary.
    Last edited by Thimagryn; 2014-02-18 at 01:04 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
  •