Demon hunter vs tinker/ alchemist class

[Yig]

Renaming Death Coil to Mortal Coil already incited a Warlock shitstorm over it. But it made sense, since the ability belonged to the Death Knight hero in WC3 to begin with, and it was never a demonic ability. You DON'T WANT a bigger shitstorm with taking the Warlocks' Metamorphosis however. And this time, Meta actually suits the warlocks well, instead of the Death Coil debacle.

As it is currently with the state of the game, DHs offer little of unique value to the game. What do you want? Another dual-wielding agility class? As if we don't have enough of those already. Another shadow-demon motif spell caster? Warlocks already occupy that niche in spades.

So what niche is left at all? Do we go with niches that are filled but aren't as filled as other niches? How novel can you get in this game? What makes something valuable in this context?

You're left with this discussion always going back into the same circles and the replies, ignoring the fact Blizzard will either never make demon hunters or they will create a reason to make them that is adequately fun and new in their opinion. We're left with disputing all you like about how nothing can do that without making them into something they aren't I guess.

Nothing new to this game will bring more than anything else but what we already have when you get down to it at the most basic level. In that foundational context, we never needed or got any value out of Deathknights and we never needed or got value out of monks. We already have melee classes, all they did was put variables on preexisting roles using distinct atmosphere and flavor. Now you're left with marking your arbitrary sense of value for those variables which make a flavor worthy of value.

In the way a Deathknight or a Brewmaster or a Demonhunter all would and could bring a lot of atmospheric value, a tinker would be pretty damn incredible to see in action. It would be a weird melee ranged hybrid I guess, nothing new there but the ratio of melee to ranged, but the charm would be in watching incredible whimsical animations, lock on missile effects and sound FX, mechanical fists on springs and other gadgets, a steam punk mech with any number of duct taped animals, plants, or minerals incorporated into their abilities and buffs. Bombs being tossed, beams of light focused through lenses and beamed through refining gems locking on like targeting lasers, missile clusters. Gnomeregan bosses on PCP. Accidental chicken canons.

No matter what, you're basically either a variation of a warrior, a hunter, a mage, or priest. And beyond the aesthetic visual theme, there's not much difference between an archer and a spellcaster with ranged dps beyond visual flavor and resource mechanics. Monks went with a weird hand to hand blend with neat custom kung fu animations which made them more than a melee class, hybridized with totem like healing abilities. For years I said that is exactly what they should do with Pandaren after I saw the Pandaren companion pet break into his kung fu. It was obvious to me there was a new class niche waiting to be realized with those animations alone.

Tinkers are about the most novel direction to go in some ways next to what we've gotten so far. But they don't have much traction concerning fan demand. People have overwhelmingly wanted 3 things since WOW's beta. Deathknights, Demon Hunters, and Pandaren Brewmasters. We've almost gotten them all, almost.

Now everyone wants to make some weird ass class they pull out of their ass that has nothing to do with the hero classes we talked about in beta from Warcraft 3 in the first place. Some weird wizard or knight or something dealing with titans or dragon aspects, but other than fun flavor mechanics and atmosphere, it's all just melee dps, ranged dps, tanking, or healing. Mixed up and hybridized with a new resource mechanic game.

So what offers value to the game if you don't give a fuck about lore or the iconic atmosphere of Warcraft 3? It's certainly not another tank, another ranged dps, or another melee class. So new new classes ever?

The trick is always going to be in making the way these things melee, range, tank, and heal feel new and different.

The only place to go is in new resource mechanics games and new flavor. Imagine a warrior that fights with the tone and the experience of a Barbarian from Diablo 3. That's what a warrior should feel like, a vicious howling berserker smashing the ground and liquefying hordes of his enemies while screaming like a a mad man in leaps and bounds and tornadoes of carnage. We sort of have that, but it's a neutered reflection in our current Warrior in WOW.

But things like that are going to spice up new classes, and things like that are being ignored here for the most part by the naysayers.

New movement mechanics are another area to be explored, and that's something a demon hunter would be perfect for.

[Teriz]

Standing still casting spells while looking like a demon and occasionally moving aren't pulling from Illidan.

Turning into a demon that uses Illidan's model, having class armor named for Illidan, having talents for Warlocks named after Illidan, and having abilities pulled from Illidan is pulling from Illidan. Furthermore, Blizzard is toying with the idea to make metamorphosis last even longer via talent choices. So I'm not really understanding the purpose behind your posts.
Its clear that Blizzard views Warlocks as the base of all things demonic powered within the classes, and they view Illidan as a source of demonic power. How do you legitimately have a stand-alone demon Hunter class without Illidan?

As for fans demanding Demon Hunters, you're quite right. Blizzard is meeting that demand by slowly turning Demonology into a spec with demon Hunter aspects, and by allowing players to wield DH weapons and items.

[Talen]

lass defining for warlocks than the Light is for priests and paladins

Why should I care? I am, after all, taking about the basic theme of the class as opposed to the school of magic it uses. As fas as theme goes, the class of magic associated with the class is irrelevant. Its a part of lore.

But the class theme? That isn't Shadow for Warlocks just as it isn't Holy for Paladins. Yes, Warlocks and DHs both use Fel Magics just as Paladins and Priests use the Light but as far as class theme goes.....just as it would be an exploration of technology for Tinkers, just as Shamans explore the Elements and Death Knights own the realm of Undeath....Warlocks control the theme of Demons. And that theme is one the WoW Demon Hunter, the iteration we see in game, shares.

And given that...just how likely is it for Blizzard to bring in a new class that overlaps the theme of an existing class so completely? Given their stated concerns about Warlock population and satisfaction, how likely is it that they will bring in a separate class that can be used to explore that theme?

So...do I think that Fel magic for Warlocks is more class defining than the Light is for Paladins? Leaving aside not all Paladins recognise the Light, I think they have equal value. Which is to say...as far as theme is concerned, none.

And Demon Hunters aren't known for keeping pets or minions beyond Thalipedes in the Blasted Lands

This point has been brought up before. Is there any reason why it should be treated as anything other than the "I am going to ignore this in game example that destroys my case because it destroys my case" argument it has been before? I will also draw your attention to the Grimoire of Sacrifice...how many Warlocks forego controlling a demon directly?

Demon hunters would not in my mind require or need a pet based class or spec. They want to kill demons

And as pointed out by yourself.....this personal interpretation of yours regarding how YOU think DHs should act and behave is contradicted in game. Whether you wish to believe they require, need want Demons or simply use them as necessary or not...the simple fact is that the game shows they can and do.

established demon hunter zeitgeist we've created as a fanbase

Yes...that the FANS have created.

As a 4th spec, for one you have to have night elves available to be a demon hunter.

You mean, add NElfs to the list of classes available to be Warlocks?

I'd rather see metamorphosis stripped myself, to hell with what people think, and see rogues given a 4th spec as demon hunters.

Isn't going to happen.

Illidan was only capable of metamorph as of the events of WC3 after Arthas manipulated him

What matters is who has it...not how.

We're in many ways arguing something very intangible here and we're struggling to find common ground beyond personal interpretation. But I'm trying to go with a classical and popular view shared by more than just myself here.

Yes. But too many forget/overlook one key fact. Warlocks are a live ingame player class now. DHs are not. Unless Blizzard undergoes a radical change in the way it designs classes, that means that if there is a choice between he two....Warlocks win. Blizzard isn't going to bring in a second class that shares so much with Warlocks because doing so will inevitably cannibalise the Warlock population and cause resentment due to the huge overlap in class theme.

For Night Elves to be warlocks, we could feasibly have a

snip extraneous explanation and replace with "..a bunch of warriors who decided to use demon power against the Legion. They thus developed a melee mindset and are different from the Warlocks of other races who approached it from a ranged caster point of viewas they developed from mages and shamans, not warriors and rogues"

Or whatever. NElf warlocks can be explained away. Easily.

The Dark Embrace, despite your dismissal of them

The dismissal was of the automatic assumption that they are a DH organisation, an assumption based on one single solitary mention of whatever it is in the entire game. Telarius is a Herald...we know nothing else and the DE could be such an organisation or a metaphor for death or a sign of corruption by the Legion or any one of a number of other possibilities.

Saying the DE is a DH organisation of any kind is pure assumption.

Right now, what we know is that Warlocks are in the game and share an obvious thematic link with DHs. We know they share THE iconic move and a whole host of lesser abilities. We know Warlocks have had quite a bit of work put into their development as a tank, including such possibilities as making Demonology a fuly viable tank and that the current iteratin is intended to have at least a modicumof tanking viabiity.We know Warlocks have been the greatest beeficiaries,by far, of Blizzard ripping apart the DH class and using its looks and concepts for existing player classes. We know Blizzard has already set a 4th spec precedent.We know Blizzard has already added a new dual wielding AGI based melee specialist that can also cast spells.

Against, we know Blizzard didn't go through with the change - partially attributable to a lack of time and the requirement for a 4th spec for full viability but it still didn't go thrugh - and the latest revamp isn't seen as being overly successful.

Given all that...Blizzard isn't going to hurt Warlocks by bringing in a class that essentially copies an existing spec. Blizzard is also very nlikely to bring into the game yet another DWing meleeing caster given thats what the Monk is.

While adding a 4th spec may be too much change to be acceptable, the odds of Blizzard bringing in a Monk clone that simply copies a Demonologists move list is somewhat remote.

Getting back to the OP...all this means is that a DH class - unless vastly redesigned from the WoW standard - isn't going to happen. It has too much baggage, too much overlap and no design room of its own. Between the two, Tinkers have much less baggage. I could see a DH/Warden/Dark Ranger hybrid but even then, the DH would lose something.

EJL

[Thimagryn]

Turning into a demon that uses Illidan's model, having class armor named for Illidan, having talents for Warlocks named after Illidan, and having abilities pulled from Illidan is pulling from Illidan.

Which has been specifically explained in lore that Warlocks mimic'd Illidan's metamorphosis, so yes.

Again, I'd use the example from Heroes of the Storm. Illidan doesn't have Metamorphosis, Immolation, Evasion or Mana Burn, but he's still a Demon Hunter. Even if they did turn into Demon Form, it doesn't have to conflict with Warlocks. Heroes-Illidan's Heroic ability turns him into a Demon, but he does an AoE leap attack that boosts attack speed. It's still a viable Demon Hunter ability, it doesn't conflict with Warlock/War3 Metamorphosis, and it's not an ability that is deeply rooted in the Demonic theme.

[Wildmoon]

Which has been specifically explained in lore that Warlocks mimic'd Illidan's metamorphosis, so yes.

Again, I'd use the example from Heroes of the Storm. Illidan doesn't have Metamorphosis, Immolation, Evasion or Mana Burn, but he's still a Demon Hunter. This is basically what we want, not a 1:1 Warcraft 3 hero concept.

Illidan has metamorphosis in HotS but it doesn't work exactly like metamorphosis but it turns him into demonic form. It's his second heroic ability. Turning into demon is iconic for DH. There's no way around it.

- - - Updated - - -

Which has been specifically explained in lore that Warlocks mimic'd Illidan's metamorphosis, so yes.

Again, I'd use the example from Heroes of the Storm. Illidan doesn't have Metamorphosis, Immolation, Evasion or Mana Burn, but he's still a Demon Hunter. Even if they did turn into Demon Form, it doesn't have to conflict with Warlocks. Heroes-Illidan's Heroic ability turns him into a Demon, but he does an AoE leap attack that boosts attack speed. It's still a viable Demon Hunter ability, it doesn't conflict with Warlock/War3 Metamorphosis, and it's not an ability that is deeply rooted in the Demonic theme.

Not sure if that's true. Thw whole DH concept is deeply rooted in the demon within theme. The agile warrior theme comes second.

[Arberian]

I have recently seen a lot of demonhunter posts and tinker/alchemist class posts
Which class out of these would you like to see implemented, if any


Gogogogo discuss

Demon hunter because it's more attractive to players and its a complete new style of class. New Agility User that uses Dark Magic and Dual Wields Weapons like Warblades to fight against the Legion . 2 Racess can become Demon Hunter: Blood Elves/Night Elves . Demon Hunters may choose different transformations based on dark energy types like: Shadow Energy/Fel Energy etc . Their 2 bars are: HP bar and Fel energy Bar. They can attack from medium range and meele range and can also sue the transformation to increase the range of attacks or to increase the power of the attacks .

Demon Hunter is more attractive to players thats why i think it will be implemented .

[Thimagryn]

And what if Blizzard defines a DH as a Warlock who simply focussed his training on melee combat? What if we see Illidan and Feronas and Altruism all brought back as Warlock trainers? What if Blizzard calls this hypothetical 4th spec Demon Hunter?

Then you're looking for confirmation in a one-sided scenario, where you got what you wanted and we have nothing else to talk about. I hope you understand there's no reason to even pose a question like that, just as if I said 'What if Blood Elves were playable on the Alliance?' then the answer is... Blood Elves would be playable on the Alliance. You're not going to get anywhere by debating semantics.

It's not a matter of 'What happens if Blizzard actually did it', it's a matter of 'What is the possibility that Blizzard makes it happen'.

Frankly, Demon Hunter becoming a Warlock spec has a very low chance of happening. The closest it would get is 'Demon Hunting' spec, if even, and it would still not be any more confirmation of being Demon Hunters than 'Beast Mastery' makes Hunters into true Beastmasters.

Those aren't themes. That would be the basis for a gameplay style

Core Class design centers around gameplay. Blizzard designs gameplay first. The core concept of the Death Knight started with the idea of using Runes, having 3 viable tanking specs and 3 viable DPS specs. The concept of 'Frost', 'Unholy' and 'Blood' were then based around the gameplay. The whole concept of a 'Frost spec' doesn't center around a specific 'Frost' theme. Frost was primarily Tanking and 2H DPS spec in early Wrath, but now it's a Dual Wield DPS spec. The only thing it maintained thematically was the use of Spec-based Frost spells.

Theme, like lore, is flexible. It's built around Core Class mechanics, like icing on a cake. Theme is not causation for creation or abandonment.

This would be how YOU would design them, how YOU see their play style and discounts the possibility the DH could play like that as a warlock spec.

Yet again, anything that plays as a Warlock spec is not a DH. It is a Warlock with a Melee spec that plays like a Demon Hunter.

A Police Officer who is undercover as a Mafioso is not the same as a Mafioso. He is still a Police Officer. He can specialize in doing everything a Mafioso does, but he is not a true part of the Mafia. He is a Police Officer.

It's very clear that Warlocks and Demon Hunters are not the same thing. If they were, then Blizzard could have added Night Elf Warlocks, with the explanation that they are Demon Hunters, and we wouldn't need to discuss any further. But the separation still stands, and it is clear as to what a Demon Hunter is, and what it requires to become one. Just because a Warlock is similar in theme, and can potentially take up arms and act like a Demon Hunter doesn't automatically make them one. For them to make the full jump would require them to no longer be Warlocks, just like if a Police Officer was going to be a true Mafioso, he would have to leave the Police force. There is no middle ground.

- - - Updated - - -

Illidan has metamorphosis in HotS but it doesn't work exactly like metamorphosis but it turns him into demonic form. It's his second heroic ability. Turning into demon is iconic for DH. There's no way around it.

The core issue has always been about Warlocks having Metamorphosis, the iconic DH ability. The HOTS Heroic ability is an example of how an alternative can exist and be perfectly viable for a Demon Hunter class, and does not really conflict with Warlock gameplay. It may muddle with identity, but it could be easily rectified by having the demon form be character-specific rather than turning specifically into Shadowy Illidan-form. Orc Metamorph -> Orc with Wings, Horns and Hooves.

Not sure if that's true. The whole DH concept is deeply rooted in the demon within theme. The agile warrior theme comes second.

The DH concept revolves more around demonic augmentation and empowerment. HOTS' concept of using Mark of Azzinoth and martial abilities over spell-based ones like Immolation, Mana Burn and Metamorphosis provides an alternative style of gameplay and theme that differs from the way Warlocks use Demonic themes and abilities. I'm not saying this is what the WoW class should be, but this is proof of concept for a Demon Hunter that doesn't rely on demonic magic.

[Bumbasta]

tinker/alchemists are both profs, demonhunter is already implemented in different classes: rogue/priest/warlock. So none of them.

[Gothicshark]

It's so ironic that Teriz hates the idea of a DH class, yet created perhaps the best DH class concept ever.

Sad but true. What funny is his love for 'Tinker' which is really a bad idea.

- - - Updated - - -

A couple months ago, I argued that with 9+ years of lorebuilding, WoW has more than enough of its own story to not need the RTS as a lore-crutch anymore.

Then we get an expansion that has us playing WC2 over again, and I have to just shake my head in dismay. I don't understand why they don't have more faith in themselves.

WoD is getting back to the Core story 'Orcs VS Humans'. And it is set before WC1, not 2. Granted 1/2 of 2 was set on Draenor, but by that point the world had been corrupted by Demons. WoD is set before the corruption. I should also point out the fail expansions Cataclysm and MoP, were all about creating new lore. Look at how well that went over.

[Yig]

This point has been brought up before. Is there any reason why it should be treated as anything other than the "I am going to ignore this in game example that destroys my case because it destroys my case" argument it has been before? I will also draw your attention to the Grimoire of Sacrifice...how many Warlocks forego controlling a demon directly?
And as pointed out by yourself.....this personal interpretation of yours regarding how YOU think DHs should act and behave is contradicted in game. Whether you wish to believe they require, need want Demons or simply use them as necessary or not...the simple fact is that the game shows they can and do.

Context is just somehow constantly being lost here. One demon hunter out of every demon hunter we have ever met having some fel hounds sitting around his cave doesn't make him into a minion using class. He never used them in combat, they have nothing to do with him but decorating his home, on an island, in a cave, in Azshara. In the Blasted Lands when he is raised from death via blood magic, he fights like any other demon hunter would be expected to fight.

I haven't cited a single fan created example of demon hunters here at all outside of my own personal preferences. There is quite a bit of demon hunter information the fans of demon hunters base their desires and expectations upon. Namely their description as a class in the Warcraft 3 manual, and their once canon but now subject to change information as a class in the d20 game. And then there's playing as one in Wacraft 3.

You rarely use metamorphosis in WC3, it's very temporary and you use it tactically. Most of the time you charge around like a ninja from hell with 2 massive whirling blades spinning around you acting simultaneously as armor and offensive weaponry, to see that realized in game would be an elaborate dance of whirling death, they were based on Warhammer dwarven slayers and Warhammer Wood Elf Wardancers. They charge about weaving in and out of combat, zig zagging their enemies, burning anything that get's too close with immolation aura, sucking your mana from you, and becoming unusually adapt and fleet footed at dodging attacks.
At one time, the fact rogues had evasion, demon hunter ability, as well as night elves having a fake cheap demon hunter tattoo on their eyes, as well as finally giving the rogue class a pair of warglaives, a set of tier gear designed around the theme of demon hunting, and an eye binding, all would have precluded any warlock from daring to ask or predict they would ever get to touch a demon hunter as a possible spec they would incorporate, and you would be sitting here claiming rogues make it impossible because besides metamorphosis and mana drain, a combat rogue is essentially a demon hunter without any demonic flavor.

Then Blizzard thought it would be neat to throw demon hunter fans another bone and they recycled Illidans model for an interesting experimental mechanic.

So now we're left ignoring the bulk of the experience people from Warcraft 3 enjoyed about demon hunters all over semantics and the ability to use a reskinned Illidan model for temporary windows of time while you stand around casting spells, using a spell that in the lore specifically makes it a point to create a distinction between warlocks and demon hunters. The warlock council are imitating some of Illidan's abilities, they recognized his techniques and adapted and incorporated them into their own personal school of magic. It's quite possible this faux demon hunter is now the closest we'll ever get, and it will be a damn shame if that's all because someone thought it would be a neat idea to give Warlocks a little homage to the demon hunter with a recycled model.

Meanwhile, watching Illidan in action as a real demon hunter at the Well of Eternity, he's more like a subtlety rogue now than ever with aspects of combat. Then he is retconned or altered from time travel loop holes into using metamorphosis against Manneroth at the end of the instance. Meanwhile he shadowmelds and cuts things to pieces for the majority of the entire encounter.

Yes...that the FANS have created.

What are you talking about? What did the fans create other than the impression they were given from the only sources available? I'm not talking about fan fiction here or role playing scenarios on RP servers. I'm referencing two things, the impression the WC3 manual implied, and the D20 RPG which made them into a full class distinct from Warlocks. Metzen once considered it canon, and yes, it's now subject to change, but that doesn't mean the fans have created anything I'm citing here. It's the only precedent we have outside of the Illidari, who were nothing but power hungry lackeys of an Illidan who was no longer sane. And we killed the Illidari.

The few demon hunters not among the Illidari we've enountered were all martrys interested in protecting society and the world, clearly inspired by the group alluded to in the WC3 manual which has been hiding in the shadows for ten centuries with one focus, and that's not fan created.

We were told in the WC3 game manual there is a clandestine order of demon hunters who have been protecting Kaldorei society for the last ten thousand years who undergo a series of rituals including binding their very soul to a demon and ritually blinding themselves.

Nevermind the details over master and apprentice and the rituals involved in the D20 RPG. None of this is fan speculation.

Now in Cataclysm we finally learn of a group affiliated with ancient demon hunter spirits that is quite reasonably worthy of note for conjecture alone, and you want to hand wave it away because it doesn't meet your contradictory and fluctuating standards of evidence. You are biased as much as I am, only I seem to be the one here willing to argue both for and against my wishes. You strike me as continually interested in only satisfying your own suppositions. If you honestly want to dismiss the Dark Embrace as a mere coincidence while it's both spoken of as a group and is then connected with "rituals concerning the path to becoming a demon hunter" through implication because it's not spelled out for you, well be my guest. But that seems a bit desperate to me to dismiss something because it isn't enough evidence to pass a double blind study and prove the paranormal exists to the Great James Randi. If that's what you require to warrant speculation, you need to place that standard of evidence towards your own conjectures.

As it stands, Blizzard probably screwed up the chances for a demon hunter class, at least as we classically know them in the most rigid sense. But there are still options to see them realized and to play them with a style reminiscent of their actual hero class rather than dressing up in pretend Illidan costumes while being a warlock.

There are good reasons to think they will forever be precluded as nothing more than NPCs, and there are good reasons to see them in the game as a playable option beyond the Essence of a Demon Hunter loot card. Letting Richard Knaack create the origin of Illidan's abilities willy nilly created a tangled retcon that remains to be ironed out. I'm certainly not prepared to sit here with your level of confidence concerning what's going to happen and what won't happen. It just doesn't seem intellectually honest as this point with the limited and conflicting data we have to work with. We are both citing precedents that could as easily support our positions as they could contradict them. Too much of this discussion falls into an issue of aesthetics to argue comfortably for me with the finality some of you are showing.

I believe there is enough room in the demon hunter theme to flesh out a new class without stepping on the toes of people who play warlocks, and I don't feel it's been demonstrated I need to rely on fabricated fan conjecture to support that plausibility.

I think I've reached as much demon hunter discussion as I can stomach for the next six months at this point again, but I'll inevitably return. Perhaps someone will have something novel to offer.

Right now, Heroes of the Storm seems to be lending some nice credence to base some hope around in this debacle. You heard me Blizzard, I know your robots are reading our minds, I've accused you of inciting a debacle. And I only took off the tin foil long enough to transmit that thought.

[Teriz]

tinker/alchemists are both profs, demonhunter is already implemented in different classes: rogue/priest/warlock. So none of them.

Just to clarify, the Alchemist and Tinker hero abilities and themes don't exist in either profession.

Meanwhile, Evasion, Mana Burn, Immolation, and Metamorphosis already exist in game in existing classes.

[Arberian]

Then you're looking for confirmation in a one-sided scenario, where you got what you wanted and we have nothing else to talk about. I hope you understand there's no reason to even pose a question like that, just as if I said 'What if Blood Elves were playable on the Alliance?' then the answer is... Blood Elves would be playable on the Alliance. You're not going to get anywhere by debating semantics.

It's not a matter of 'What happens if Blizzard actually did it', it's a matter of 'What is the possibility that Blizzard makes it happen'.

Frankly, Demon Hunter becoming a Warlock spec has a very low chance of happening. The closest it would get is 'Demon Hunting' spec, if even, and it would still not be any more confirmation of being Demon Hunters than 'Beast Mastery' makes Hunters into true Beastmasters.

Warlocks enslave Demons while Demon Hunters kill them. Warlocks use Dark Powers as Demon Hunters do, but Demon Hnuters use agility such as many classes like Feral Druids , Monks , Rogues. Demon Hunter is more attractive than Tinker. Thats why i think Blizzard may implement this.

Just to clarify, the Alchemist and Tinker hero abilities and themes don't exist in either profession.

Meanwhile, Evasion, Mana Burn, Immolation, and Metamorphosis already exist in game in existing classes.

Immolation isnt equal to Immolation Shield that BLizzard may implement to the Demon Hunters. Demon Hunters burns NEARBY ENEMIES not a 40 yard range enemy .
Mana Burn is no longer a Priest ability so Demon Hunters may have this ability.
Evasion isnt required on Demon Hunters. Blizzard may create a spell which may be named Dark Defence : Reduces Damage taken by 20% , and increases dodge chance by 60% for the next 15 seconds.
Methamorphosis ?! Demon Hunters' transformations must not be equal to the Warlocks' transformations.

[Teriz]

Immolation isnt equal to Immolation Shield that BLizzard may implement to the Demon Hunters. Demon Hunters burns NEARBY ENEMIES not a 40 yard range enemy .

So in other words, Warlocks already have a more powerful version of this ability? Okay.

Mana Burn is no longer a Priest ability so Demon Hunters may have this ability.

No one is getting this ability. Blizzard removed those types of abilities from the game.

Evasion isnt required on Demon Hunters. Blizzard may create a spell which may be named Dark Defence : Reduces Damage taken by 20% , and increases dodge chance by 60% for the next 15 seconds.

Warlocks already have Fury Ward.

Metamorphosis ?! Demon Hunters' transformations must not be equal to the Warlocks' transformations.

The point is that a Demon Hunter class cannot exist as long as Warlocks have their key spell. Metamorphosis should be the core of any proposed DH class.

[Wildmoon]

The point is that a Demon Hunter class cannot exist as long as Warlocks have their key spell. Metamorphosis should be the core of any proposed DH class.

This is not entirely true. What DH has to have is the ability to transform into demonic form. Mechanics could be different.

[edw]

I have recently seen a lot of demonhunter posts and tinker/alchemist class posts
Which class out of these would you like to see implemented, if any


Gogogogo discuss

Demonhunter demonhunter and demonhunter

But I think the next new class will ware Cloth

[Talen]

You're not going to get anywhere by debating semantics.

The point is, if Blizzard does bring in DHs as Warlock 4th spec, then the situation I described would be the reality. Demon Hunters would be Warlocks who focussed their powers on melee combat and tanking instead of ranged shadow, ranged fire or demon based combat.

It's not a matter of 'What happens if Blizzard actually did it', it's a matter of 'What is the possibility that Blizzard makes it happen'.

Much greater than the possibility Blizzard will recreate the Monk with purple magic instead of jade green.

Frankly, Demon Hunter becoming a Warlock spec has a very low chance of happening.

Maybe. It would still be far greater than a class which largely duplicates the Warlocks Demonology spec, copies the Warlocks Demon theme or has a baseline style near identical to Monks.

And the DH manages all three.

The closest it would get is 'Demon Hunting' spec, if even, and it would still not be any more confirmation of being Demon Hunters than 'Beast Mastery' makes Hunters into true Beastmasters.

Please. That's a patently ridiculous argument. You are trying to make the point that a PC who is a master of beasts, specs into Beast Mastery, has the skill Beast master and makes heavy use of beasts isn't a Beast master. Why? Because there base class is hunter.

If Blizzard sees fit to identify Rexxar as a Hunter, that's good enough to destroy this particular argument. And that in turns means your objection to Warlocks becoming true Demon Hunters also fails.

Theme is not causation for creation or abandonment.

What made the Death Knight possible to add as a class was the fact no class has a theme of undeath. Had that not been the case, then Blizzard would still have kept the gameplay it developed...but the class would be called, for example, RuneMaster, class lore would be built upon Rune Mastery, class skills and abilities would follow a Runic theme, the starter quests might have seen the Frostborn and Iron Dwarves instead of New Avalon and so on.

But we wouldn't have had DKs.

In the same way, Warlocks have the Demon theme. That isn't going to be shared just as no other class would get a theme of Elementals (shaman) or Undeath (DKs). Blizzard aren't going to damage Warlocks by letting a new class share their theme. And without that, there is no DH. At least, not as shown in game. I could see a reworked version come in...but it'd follow a different theme (no more empowerment through demons) and get some new moves. But it wouldn't be a DH except in name.

Yet again, anything that plays as a Warlock spec is not a DH. It is a Warlock with a Melee spec that plays like a Demon Hunter.

Blizzard doesn't follow that line of reasoning so why should I? A warlock which looks like a DH and plays like a DH will **BE** a DH.

A Police Officer who is undercover as a Mafioso is not the same as a Mafioso. He is still a Police Officer. He can specialize in doing everything a Mafioso does, but he is not a true part of the Mafia. He is a Police Officer.

Leaving aside Blizzards own attitude, this is circular reasoning. Your cop isn't a Mafioso because he isn't a Mafioso. He's a cop because he is a cop.

As it is..if Blizzard bring in DHs as a Warlock 4th spec, then DHs will BE Warlocks. Just as a BeastMaster is a Hunter. Your analogy doesn't work.

A better analogy? Would a police sniper, a plainclothes detective and a uniformed traffic officer all be cops? As in, different specialisations of the same base class? Or would the detective not be a true cop because he doesn't wear a uniform? Or the sniper because he'd be a ranged specialist?

It's very clear that Warlocks and Demon Hunters are not the same thing. If they were, then Blizzard could have added Night Elf Warlocks, with the explanation that they are Demon Hunters, and we wouldn't need to discuss any further.

They still can.

The core issue has always been about Warlocks having Metamorphosis, the iconic DH ability.

No. As a matter of fact, it isn't. While Meta is and always has been important to the DH class identity, the truth is that if that was the only or even main issue, it could be sidestepped.

It isn't. The big problem is the overlap between the DH and other existing classes which leave no design room of its own. You could develop a DH right now and bring it into the game...but the issue isn't with gameplay but the fact that it wouldn't really have anything of its own, the fact that it doesn't bring anything new to the game that other classes do not already have.

Meta is important because of its effect on class identity but by itself, it doesn't kill the idea. If you want to get design room for the class, a concept and theme that it can explore, then you need to redesign it from the ground up. But then....it wouldn't be a DH.

EJL

[Teriz]

This is not entirely true. What DH has to have is the ability to transform into demonic form. Mechanics could be different.

A mechanic that Warlocks already have, and that mechanic was based on/came from Illidan, the alpha Demon Hunter.

As stated numerous times; There's no design room left for a stand alone DH class. The ability to transform into a demon to empower yourself? Taken. Agile melee with magical abilities? Taken several times over. Hunting Demons? Taken. This class would chop several existing classes off at the knee caps. Who would play a Warlock when they could play a Demon Hunter? Who would play a Rogue when they could play a Demon Hunter? Blizzard did the right thing by breaking up the DH concept into pieces and distributing it out to several classes.

[Thimagryn]

The point is, if Blizzard does bring in DHs as Warlock 4th spec, then the situation I described would be the reality.

Except you have no point. A Warlock spec is a Warlock. A spec is only a Specialization for a class, and a Demon Hunter is not a Specialization, it is a Class.

Leaving aside Blizzards own attitude, this is circular reasoning. Your cop isn't a Mafioso because he isn't a Mafioso. He's a cop because he is a cop.

As it is..if Blizzard bring in DHs as a Warlock 4th spec, then DHs will BE Warlocks. Just as a BeastMaster is a Hunter. Your analogy doesn't work.

Hunters aren't Beastmasters. They are Beastmastery Hunters. Just like Warlocks would be nothing but Warlocks no matter what other title you put on their specs.

A better analogy? Would a police sniper, a plainclothes detective and a uniformed traffic officer all be cops? As in, different specialisations of the same base class? Or would the detective not be a true cop because he doesn't wear a uniform? Or the sniper because he'd be a ranged specialist?

Except you can't become a Demon Hunter simply by picking up Warglaives and using Demonic magic. If this were true, then Rogues with Warglaives equates your 'Police Sniper' because he picked up the right weapon. Demon Hunters are a complete separate entity to Warlocks and Rogues. Your logic suggests that Warlocks should be called 'Specialized Demon Mages' because they're just Mages who use Demonic magic anyways.

A Demon Hunter is not a specialization of any one class, it is a separate class entirely.

No. As a matter of fact, it isn't. While Meta is and always has been important to the DH class identity, the truth is that if that was the only or even main issue, it could be sidestepped.

It isn't. The big problem is the overlap between the DH and other existing classes which leave no design room of its own. You could develop a DH right now and bring it into the game...but the issue isn't with gameplay but the fact that it wouldn't really have anything of its own, the fact that it doesn't bring anything new to the game that other classes do not already have.

Please explain to me the gameplay of a Demon Hunter. If you're talking about Warcraft 3, then you're suggesting a full WoW character class that simply auto attacks with Immolation turned on, who occassionally hits the Mana Burn and Metamorphosis button. No other abilities, because you are suggesting it would deviate from that type of simplistic gameplay. Am I wrong here?

Unless you actually think Demon Hunters play like Warlocks, which has even less of a basis in reality since even the Warcraft 3 incarnation of DH don't play anything like a ranged caster.

Meta is important because of its effect on class identity but by itself, it doesn't kill the idea. If you want to get design room for the class, a concept and theme that it can explore, then you need to redesign it from the ground up. But then....it wouldn't be a DH.

EJL

Heroes of the Storm says otherwise. You can play the Illidan character, never take the Metamorphosis Heroic ability, and he will still be easily identified as a Demon Hunter. Our perception of the class' mechanics will change and adapt to whatever changes Blizzard makes to the them. It is all a part of an evolving class identity, and Heroes of the Storm is completely indicative of that. Legacy spells are irrelevant to the Core Class identity.

What you have been suggesting all along is to combine Demon Hunter and Warlock identities into one, which is like suggesting Warlocks and Mages are the same class with different specializations.

- - - Updated - - -

A mechanic that Warlocks already have, and that mechanic was based on/came from Illidan, the alpha Demon Hunter.

As stated numerous times; There's no design room left for a stand alone DH class. The ability to transform into a demon to empower yourself? Taken. Agile melee with magical abilities? Taken several times over. Hunting Demons? Taken. This class would chop several existing classes off at the knee caps. Who would play a Warlock when they could play a Demon Hunter? Who would play a Rogue when they could play a Demon Hunter? Blizzard did the right thing by breaking up the DH concept into pieces and distributing it out to several classes.

It's a conflicted statement when you say a Warlock already has that mechanic, and say there is no design room left, when the Monk perfectly exists despite the fact we already had Dual Wield melee, a Parry Tank, a Dodge Tank and a Healer in the game. Your logic works against the Monk because you're comparing similarities and ignoring the obvious differences that separate one class from another.

Monks aren't just healers, they aren't just Agi melee with magical abilities, they aren't just Healers who use healing magic. Just as Demon Hunters wouldn't just be Agi Melee with magical abilities, Hunters of Demons, or guys who empower themselves by transforming into a demon; they would be all that and more.

A Paladin shares much in common with a Priest, but it is their differences that separate the classes apart. They are so separate in fact that you don't even consider their similarities, because their gameplay, use of magic, weapons and entire class identity is fully formed and tangible. This isn't the case for a WoW Demon Hunter class, and to say that there is no design room left is shutting the door on all classes. Cuz to be honest, even your Tinker would fail your own criteria of new design space.

[blackblade]

Except the hero unit from WC3, and the DHs in WoW.

You deviate from that, and you no longer have a DH.

I don't really think that having or removing three abilities is going to make or break the class.

I mean, melee DPS monks are called Windwalkers, but don't utilize the WC3 "Wind Walk" ability. (Or any blade master abilities for that matter.)

All the iconic monk abilities they did pull from WC3 (Breath of fire, storm earth and fire) were either made to be a very teriary skill (BoF's case) or deviated extremely to fit a need in the class later down the road (SEF's case)

Dizzying haze/keg toss is pretty much the only skill that kept anything remotely close to the "flavor" of the RTS.



The only thing that's -iconic- about DH's is that they are dual-glaive-weilding near unarmored melee combatants with a flavor of fel energies.

I'm not saying "DEMON HUNTER CONFIRMED NEXT XPAC" but more that it is possible for them to co-exist in a world with rogues and warlocks, simply because a majority of the playerbase dosen't really care that DH's can't have Mana Burn, Self Immolate, Evasion, or Metamorphosis.


Tinker/Engineer/Alchemist/Call it what you want makes a bit more sense for a class for the same reason that we don't have a "Spellbreaker" class. "Spellbreakers" are a very specific faction, and generally don't enlist non-elves. Demon Hunters, at least the iconic ones, generally were a Night-elven concept, and are a very narrow scope of combat.

Monk, for example, encompasses a WC3 hero (the Pandaren Brewmaster, who once again, was a very specific faction) and then abstracted it into something more. because it was abstracted, it makes sense to have undead, orc, gnome, human monks, despite it being a very pandaren class.

Blizzard has said it time and again. They add new classes when it fits and makes sense.

[Teriz]

It's a conflicted statement when you say a Warlock already has that mechanic, and say there is no design room left, when the Monk perfectly exists despite the fact we already had Dual Wield melee, a Parry Tank, a Dodge Tank and a Healer in the game. Your logic works against the Monk because you're comparing similarities and ignoring the obvious differences that separate one class from another.

The Monk works because they're martial arts based. There was plenty of design room for monks because there was no martial arts class in WoW, and there was the WC3 hero from which Blizzard could pull their theme from. That's what the WC3 heroes are there for; To establish the theme of WoW classes. Monks are in a completely different situation than Demon Hunters. Not only were the themes from WC3 wide open to exploit, but the Monk archetype is large enough to develop a class from. The Demon Hunter theme from WC3 has been completely broken up between existing WoW classes, and Demon Hunter itself is a very narrow archetype to pull from. What little there is to pull from comes from Illidan, and that concept is already being utilized by the Warlock class.

You keep bringing up Heroes of the Storm. Since you're doing that, look at Illidan's bio;

During the Third War, Tyrande released Illidan from millennia of imprisonment, hoping that the Betrayer would redeem himself by battling a returned Burning Legion. Though Illidan fought to defend his people, he soon slipped into darkness: after absorbing the energies of the demonic Skull of Gul'dan, Illidan became a demon, an act for which he was banished by Malfurion. Fleeing the wrath of the night elves, the twice-condemned Illidan allied himself once again with the only entity that would accept him -- the Legion. Illidan's demonic masters sent him to destroy the Lich King, who had broken free of their influence, but Illidan failed to do so. To protect himself from the Legion's vengeance, Illidan hid on Outland, a destroyed world that he would eventually seek to rule.

According to Blizzard, Illidan is a major demon. Is it any wonder then that Warlocks would have dominion over his abilities?

Monks aren't just healers, they aren't just Agi melee with magical abilities, they aren't just Healers who use healing magic. Just as Demon Hunters wouldn't just be Agi Melee with magical abilities, Hunters of Demons, or guys who empower themselves by transforming into a demon; they would be all that and more.

See above. Again, if there were no Warlock class, or at least a Warlock class that wasn't being given Demon Hunter abilities and lore, I would have no problem with your argument.

A Paladin shares much in common with a Priest, but it is their differences that separate the classes apart. They are so separate in fact that you don't even consider their similarities, because their gameplay, use of magic, weapons and entire class identity is fully formed and tangible. This isn't the case for a WoW Demon Hunter class, and to say that there is no design room left is shutting the door on all classes. Cuz to be honest, even your Tinker would fail your own criteria of new design space.

Actually that's false. Tinkers have plenty of design space because there's no class in the game utilizing the mechanical theme, they derive from a large archetype, and its WC3 abilities aren't being used by existing classes. Thus, a Tinker class wouldn't step on the toes of existing classes the way a Demon Hunter class would.