Page 8 of 12 FirstFirst ...
6
7
8
9
10
... LastLast
  1. #141
    Quote Originally Posted by Malzra View Post
    I didn't know shamans were ever known to split into three elemental spirits. You win.

    Oh wait. What's that? SE&F was a BREWMASTER spell? Whuch is now part of the monk class? Nevermind.
    Then lets adress your previous example of stealth. Feral druids wear leather, fight in melee with energy and fight with stealth. This has no impact on rogue identity. At all.

  2. #142
    Elemental Lord
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    8,016
    Quote Originally Posted by Thimagryn View Post
    Then lets adress your previous example of stealth. Feral druids wear leather, fight in melee with energy and fight with stealth. This has no impact on rogue identity. At all.
    No. It doesn't. Because the identity of neither is based upon stealth. Stealth has never been a unique aspect of any class; it's always been just a tool.

    An iconic tool in many ways - but still just a part of the toolkit.

    EJL
    Last edited by Talen; 2014-02-09 at 02:09 AM.

  3. #143
    The Lightbringer Lovestar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    3,079
    Quote Originally Posted by Thimagryn View Post
    Then lets adress your previous example of stealth. Feral druids wear leather, fight in melee with energy and fight with stealth. This has no impact on rogue identity. At all.
    Actually, Feral Druids Prowl, and have a completely different toolkit while stealthed. Actual 'I AM SNEAKING AROUND ON MY TIPTOES' Stealth stealth is still the Rogue's domain.

    The point is that while mechanically it's all stealth, conceptually, one is a sneaky man and the other is a great cat stalking its prey. Metamorphosis is Meta is Meta, unless you a) take Demon Form away from Demo (unlikely) or b) change Demon Hunters to not turn into Demons. Or otherwise deliberately modify it on a conceptual level.

    It's absolutely possible to say, turn Metamorphosis into some other thing (but keep the playstyle) then split Meta back to Demon Hunter, similar to what happened with Death Coil. But it would be a very deliberate choice and it's still a different type of thing than the other examples being fished for here.

  4. #144
    The Lightbringer Agoonga's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Montana
    Posts
    3,167
    My brother was able to tank heroics easily as his Demonology Warlock with Glyph of Demon Hunting and I would like to see that implemented as Demon Hunter for Warlock's 4th spec, and then Demonlogy can go back to just having strong demons.
    Last edited by Agoonga; 2014-02-09 at 01:47 AM.

  5. #145
    Field Marshal SpookySkeleton's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    KnowYourMeme.com
    Posts
    71
    Ugh. I hate demon hunters. I deal with them enough already on RP servers, I don't want more.

  6. #146
    Elemental Lord Teriz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Beach City
    Posts
    8,777
    Quote Originally Posted by Thimagryn View Post
    Because they'e never retconned any of their design to make a class fit?

    Death Knights are champions of the scourge. They retconned the entire character of Darius Mograine into the picture, a character that was supposed to be a lowly Blacksmith somewhere in Outland. Without Darius, the Death Knights would not be a class playable in the Horde and Alliance.

    Chen Stormstout is also retconned, being a Pandaren from Pandaria but changed to having his origins stem from the Wandering Isle. In MoP, he has never been to Pandaria. Without Chen, we may not have found Pandaria (as Nazgrel/Taylor could have killed each other on that island)

    So yes, retcons happen.
    None of that was design. That's lore. The design we're talking about is class design.

    Since the beginning of WoW, Blizzard has methodically placed DH aspects in the Warlock and Rogue classes. They also named the bow-class Hunters because they had no intention of introducing a class called Demon Hunters. Just like they wouldn't introduce an Archdruid, Archmage, or Battle Mage class. Your argument is that Blizzard is going to undo all of that and purposely piss off Rogue, Warlock, and Hunter players for no real reason.

    The only reason you've provided is because they can do it.

    The problem with that reasoning is that it doesn't make sense given Blizzard's course of action over the last 10 years. It also doesn't make sense period.

  7. #147
    I agree with the previous post. Anyways, if Blizzard really wants to add the Demon Hunter back, I see this in a 4th spe for the Hunter. It would be a retribution hunter spe, the retribution hunter, toward the vile demons obviously....

  8. #148
    I stopped taking this seriously at "doesn't".

  9. #149
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    None of that was design. That's lore. The design we're talking about is class design.

    Since the beginning of WoW, Blizzard has methodically placed DH aspects in the Warlock and Rogue classes. They also named the bow-class Hunters because they had no intention of introducing a class called Demon Hunters. Just like they wouldn't introduce an Archdruid, Archmage, or Battle Mage class. Your argument is that Blizzard is going to undo all of that and purposely piss off Rogue, Warlock, and Hunter players for no real reason.
    Since the beginning Priests were defined as pure Holy users. A Priest using Shadow Magic was purely an invention of WoW. Even the Dark Troll Shadow Priests had 'Heal' and 'Dispel', and absolutely no shadow magic. Priests being able to use Shadow Magic is clearly a retcon, considering it is an anti-thesis to the identity of the class prior to WoW.

    The only reason you've provided is because they can do it.
    Because my reasons are not claims. I am not claiming that Blizzard will do it, whereas you are directly making a claim that Blizzard will never pursue a Demon Hunter class. I don't need evidence to tell you that you can't predict the future. You can't use what hasn't happened yet as clear evidence against any new class. You can only say it is unlikely to happen, yet you continually say it will not happen. You have no evidence, only theories based on patterns that may change at any moment.

    The problem with that reasoning is that it doesn't make sense given Blizzard's course of action over the last 10 years. It also doesn't make sense period.
    It doesn't matter whether you think I'm right or wrong, you can't make predictions and say it's fact. You only have theories, that is all. You may be 100% right over the course of WoW's lifespan, but you can not make claims as though it is fact just because you find a pattern that is convenient to your argument.

    You used the DK NPC argument and said it was clear evidence, only to be 100% wrong in your assumption. You can't predict the future, period. This is the only reason I am continually debating your points. I do not make any claims that Demon Hunters should or will happen, I am simply saying you can not dismiss the possibility that they can be a playable class, and I am providing theoretical examples of how it could be possible.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Lovestar View Post
    Actually, Feral Druids Prowl, and have a completely different toolkit while stealthed. Actual 'I AM SNEAKING AROUND ON MY TIPTOES' Stealth stealth is still the Rogue's domain.

    The point is that while mechanically it's all stealth, conceptually, one is a sneaky man and the other is a great cat stalking its prey. Metamorphosis is Meta is Meta, unless you a) take Demon Form away from Demo (unlikely) or b) change Demon Hunters to not turn into Demons. Or otherwise deliberately modify it on a conceptual level.

    It's absolutely possible to say, turn Metamorphosis into some other thing (but keep the playstyle) then split Meta back to Demon Hunter, similar to what happened with Death Coil. But it would be a very deliberate choice and it's still a different type of thing than the other examples being fished for here.
    That is all possibility, but I will maintain that 'turning into a demon' can still be different as long as it is a different type, or explained as a different method of accessing that ability. It's difficult to wrap your head around the concept because it does not yet exist, but consider the unique mechanic of Turning into Beasts as an iconic Druid theme, then taking Ghost Wolf into consideration. It doesn't matter if it is non-combat or not, it is a theme that is shared with Druids. If I suggested a non-combat Demon Form ability for Demon Hunters, you would still argue that it's too similar to Warlocks, am I wrong?
    Last edited by Thimagryn; 2014-02-09 at 07:27 AM.

  10. #150
    Elemental Lord Teriz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Beach City
    Posts
    8,777
    Quote Originally Posted by Thimagryn View Post
    Since the beginning Priests were defined as pure Holy users. A Priest using Shadow Magic was purely an invention of WoW. Even the Dark Troll Shadow Priests had 'Heal' and 'Dispel', and absolutely no shadow magic. Priests being able to use Shadow Magic is clearly a retcon, considering it is an anti-thesis to the identity of the class prior to WoW.
    Which isn't the same thing as the DH situation. Priests having a Shadow spec doesn't overlap with multiple classes in the game.

    Because my reasons are not claims. I am not claiming that Blizzard will do it, whereas you are directly making a claim that Blizzard will never pursue a Demon Hunter class. I don't need evidence to tell you that you can't predict the future. You can't use what hasn't happened yet as clear evidence against any new class. You can only say it is unlikely to happen, yet you continually say it will not happen. You have no evidence, only theories based on patterns that may change at any moment.
    The Warlock class possessing the core DH ability, several other DH abilities, Illidan-inspired armor, and the glyph of Demon Hunting is quite a lot of evidence. Blizzard pointing out DH overlap and saying they have no plans for a DH class is evidence. Hunters being in the game and having Track Demons is evidence.

    All of that evidence points to Blizzard not wanting DHs to be a stand alone class. Why? Because Blizzard has no design space left to construct a DH class. Blizzard themselves removed the design space from DHs, and they started doing that at the beginning of WoW.

    None of that is a theory. It's all facts.

    It doesn't matter whether you think I'm right or wrong, you can't make predictions and say it's fact. You only have theories, that is all. You may be 100% right over the course of WoW's lifespan, but you can not make claims as though it is fact just because you find a pattern that is convenient to your argument.

    You used the DK NPC argument and said it was clear evidence, only to be 100% wrong in your assumption. You can't predict the future, period. This is the only reason I am continually debating your points. I do not make any claims that Demon Hunters should or will happen, I am simply saying you can not dismiss the possibility that they can be a playable class, and I am providing theoretical examples of how it could be possible.
    Actually I can dismiss it. Blizzard's actions over the better part of a decade points to a DH class never being implemented. Your theoretical examples are nonsense, because the popular DH concept is the concept currently being occupied by Warlocks, Rogues, and Hunters. Blizzard introducing a DH class free of the design space of Warlocks, Rogues, and Hunters wouldn't be popular among the very core group it's supposed to appeal to in the first place, and still tick off the existing player base.

    In short, the only way Blizzard could introduce a DH class is the following;

    1. Ignore the overlap and shoehorn the class into the game.
    2. Create a completely new DH class that doesn't use the tradtional theme.
    3. Utilize the Diablo3 theme of Demon Hunters, and tack on the Illidan version.

    None of those three things are a remote possibility, because each one either causes a ridiculous amount of overlap, or it would anger the current WoW player base.

    If you actually sit back and think, you would realize how dumb your argument truly is.

  11. #151
    Bloodsail Admiral DonQShot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Guimaraes
    Posts
    1,085
    Quote Originally Posted by Thimagryn View Post
    Illidan in Hearthstone is also classified as a Hunter.
    Go on Teriz, answer this post!

  12. #152
    Elemental Lord Teriz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Beach City
    Posts
    8,777
    Quote Originally Posted by DonQShot View Post
    Go on Teriz, answer this post!
    There's no Hunter class in WoW?

  13. #153
    The Patient Arberian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Moonglade
    Posts
    303
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    In short, the only way Blizzard could introduce a DH class is the following;

    1. Ignore the overlap and shoehorn the class into the game.
    2. Create a completely new DH class that doesn't use the tradtional theme.
    3. Utilize the Diablo3 theme of Demon Hunters, and tack on the Illidan version.

    None of those three things are a remote possibility, because each one either causes a ridiculous amount of overlap, or it would anger the current WoW player base.

    If you actually sit back and think, you would realize how dumb your argument truly is.
    Teriz in the name of the facts Demon Hunters are not casters , but they are Demonic Warriors Taunt . So there is a possibility that Blizzard may create Demonic Stances that can give the Demon Hunters different Demon Forms .

    - - - Updated - - -

    What do you think about this Teriz :
    Quote Originally Posted by Rhaide View Post
    Said it before, and I'll say it again:

    If it makes sense in the lore to allow DH to be a new class, it WILL happen, and frankly, it's more likely to happen than most other ideas (ie tinker). The EXACT same arguments were being made about death knights before they were released: "ALL death knights are evil without exception, it CAN'T happen", "half their abilities are already on other classes in one way or another"

    People need to realize, the abilities each class 'has' are based on WCIII, where a unit had 4 abilities max. FOUR. In WoW, EVERY class has many times that amount. Do you remember paladins in WCIII having avenging wrath? Me either, but it's an (if not THE) iconic paladin ability.

    Another interesting tidbit is that warlocks and death knights are SO CLOSELY related, that Gul'dan (arguably the MOST notable warlock, even standing in for the role in hearthstone) is listed as a DEATH KNIGHT in warcraft 2 (http://www.wowwiki.com/Warcraft_II_units), and don't whine about the source being wowwiki, his abilities in WCII were specifically those given to death knights.

    In order to differentiate DK's for Warlocks, Blizzard changed their entire Fu relating to death knights. Death Knights created by ner'zhul/arthas were more combat focused, whereas the death knights of old were more casting focused. Just take a look at their abilities: http://www.wowwiki.com/Warcraft_II_abilities.

    As a matter of fact, almost HALF their abilities are keystone abilities of other classes in Warcraft lore.
    -Unholy Armor is essentially synonymous with the warlock spells fel armor and plays like a dark version of a bubble.
    -Haste, yes DK's had the ability to magically buff their allies with haste. This is a targeted self/ally buff with a punishingly limited duration, so it is different than the passive self haste buff DK's enjoy in WoW.
    -Whirlwind, yep, the druid spell cyclone. To the letter, identical.

    Did Blizzard edit this fact out with the changes in WCIII? No. They explained it away saying that DK's were varied in style and the 'newer generation' favored direct combat and disease over spells. This is evident when you realize that the ghost of an old Death Knight haunts SMV and has the iconic WCII abilities (http://www.wowhead.com/npc=21797#abilities)

    What's the point I'm making? If Blizzard thinks DH is a good choice for the lore setting, it wouldn't be difficult in the least to explain that while they harness similar magics to that of the warlock, they feel in essence, more like a rogue.
    My youtube Channel : Arberian021
    WoW isn't all about new concepts or themes, it's about classic archetypes that fit the Holy Trinity gameplay style of Warcraft.
    Demon Hunter Class Idea
    "Where is the difference between Flash Heal and Flash of Light ?!Where is the difference between Conflagrate and Fire Blast ?!"

  14. #154
    Elemental Lord Teriz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Beach City
    Posts
    8,777
    Quote Originally Posted by Arberian View Post
    Teriz in the name of the facts Demon Hunters are not casters , but they are Demonic Warriors Taunt . So there is a possibility that Blizzard may create Demonic Stances that can give the Demon Hunters different Demon Forms.
    Warlocks also have a taunt;

    http://www.wowhead.com/spell=97827/provocation

    Warlocks already have a charge (via Grimore of Sacrifice);

    http://www.wowhead.com/spell=103129

    Warlocks already have a melee ability;

    http://www.wowhead.com/spell=114175

    Warlocks already have an ability that increases damage to any target melee range;

    http://www.wowhead.com/spell=116202/...f-the-elements

    Warlocks have an ability that gives them the equivalent of Plate armor;

    http://www.wowhead.com/spell=114129

    So while in Dark Apothoesis, how are they not Demonic Warriors?



    What do you think about this Teriz :
    I've already responded to that post. Every argument made from that quote has been thoroughly debunked.

  15. #155
    The Patient Arberian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Moonglade
    Posts
    303
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    Warlocks also have a taunt;

    http://www.wowhead.com/spell=97827/provocation

    Warlocks already have a charge (via Grimore of Sacrifice);

    http://www.wowhead.com/spell=103129

    Warlocks already have a melee ability;

    http://www.wowhead.com/spell=114175

    Warlocks already have an ability that increases damage to any target melee range;

    http://www.wowhead.com/spell=116202/...f-the-elements

    Warlocks have an ability that gives them the equivalent of Plate armor;

    http://www.wowhead.com/spell=114129

    So while in Dark Apothoesis, how are they not Demonic Warriors?





    I've already responded to that post. Every argument made from that quote has been thoroughly debunked.
    Demonic Slash is 10 yards away , that is not melee. Demon Hunters are Warriors and not pure Casters. And that ability doesnt give equivalent of plate. It gives equivalent of mail armor. An good example of melee ability is Mortal Strike. No Range = Melee.
    My youtube Channel : Arberian021
    WoW isn't all about new concepts or themes, it's about classic archetypes that fit the Holy Trinity gameplay style of Warcraft.
    Demon Hunter Class Idea
    "Where is the difference between Flash Heal and Flash of Light ?!Where is the difference between Conflagrate and Fire Blast ?!"

  16. #156
    Elemental Lord Teriz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Beach City
    Posts
    8,777
    Quote Originally Posted by Arberian View Post
    Demonic Slash is 10 yards away , that is not melee.
    Semantics. If you're fighting a target 10 yards away, how quickly do you think they'll enter melee range? 1 second?

    Demon Hunters are Warriors and not pure Casters.
    Again, what makes a DA Warlock not a demonic warrior? It was designed to fight in melee range.

    And that ability doesnt give equivalent of plate. It gives equivalent of mail armor.
    When you add the DA passive damage reduction, it becomes plate armor equivalent.

  17. #157
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    Which isn't the same thing as the DH situation. Priests having a Shadow spec doesn't overlap with multiple classes in the game.
    You've even said it yourself before that Death Knights embrace a Vampiric theme from Blood. Shadow Priests have had that same theme, with Vampiric Embrace and Vampiric Touch. On top of this, they spread plagues, which is what the Priest also had with Devouring Plague. No one considers this overlap because they don't work the same way for either class. The class identity of both Priests and DK's are not impacted whatsoever for having Disease-based spells or Vampiric spells.

    If we are to assume there are different mechanics and a different looking form for the Demon Hunter, then it is plausible that they would not immediately overlap with Warlocks. The only thing needed to make this work is an explanation on how broad the 'Demon' spectrum really is, and why it is possible for multiple classes to share in the use of the magic and in the theme.

    Is this an issue of any other classes being able to use Demonic magic at all? Would it be any more acceptable if Demon Hunters did not purely have 'Demon Form' but retain Fel-magic related abilities? I seriously don't buy 'Warlocks are already Demon themed' as a reason, given that no one class has dominion over any one type of theme or spell. Druid shapeshifting is shared with Shaman, Mage Elemental summoning and polymorph is shared with Shaman, Priest Holy healing is shared with Paladin, Rogue Stealth is shared with Druid. Even if you take the broader cycles of applying 'Magic', 'Nature' and 'Elemental' into consideration, you would still have overlap between classes.

    The Warlock class possessing the core DH ability, several other DH abilities, Illidan-inspired armor, and the glyph of Demon Hunting is quite a lot of evidence. Blizzard pointing out DH overlap and saying they have no plans for a DH class is evidence. Hunters being in the game and having Track Demons is evidence.
    It does not matter. Why does the Warlock possessing Metamorphosis impact a DH having a new ability alternately themed on Demon Form. This is what you're still avoiding. If the differences are as great as they are between Water Elemental and Fire/Earth Elemental summoning, then what is the problem? If Warlocks use 'Demonology' to metamorph, and Demon Hunters use 'Runic Transmutation', it would thematically be different, even if the end result is fel-based. You need to explain why any alternative not acceptable.

    All of that evidence points to Blizzard not wanting DHs to be a stand alone class. Why? Because Blizzard has no design space left to construct a DH class. Blizzard themselves removed the design space from DHs, and they started doing that at the beginning of WoW.

    None of that is a theory. It's all facts.
    It's all theory. Evolution is a theory. Relativity is a theory. You can't prove that there is no design space left when the Lead Designer who said those words left the statement in an ambiguous question form, and is no longer employed there at all. There is no proof of future possibilities in knowing that there 'currently is no plans for a Demon Hunter class'. What you have is a system that can never be proven with factual evidence, because you can't predict the future.

    To top it off, your patterns have been wrong in the past, and only after MoP did you adopt this new style of thinking, believing that the Tinker/Chemist is the only available spot left in the Class spectrum. I can prove to you that your patterns are wrong.

    In short, the only way Blizzard could introduce a DH class is the following;

    1. Ignore the overlap and shoehorn the class into the game.
    2. Create a completely new DH class that doesn't use the tradtional theme.
    3. Utilize the Diablo3 theme of Demon Hunters, and tack on the Illidan version.
    Again these are all based on subjectivity. These are not the only possibilities. On top of this, your criteria would work against both the Death Knight and Monk if you apply the same ruthless 'shoehorning' tactics.

    One could argue Unholy is an extension of 'Shadow', and any use of 'Shadow' magic would overlap with Priests and Warlocks. Adding another Plate Tank/DPS is also overlap in mechanics. Undeath would be a new theme, but it doesn't matter since it's still Shadow-based magic, and Priests and Warlocks have that both.

    None of those three things are a remote possibility, because each one either causes a ridiculous amount of overlap, or it would anger the current WoW player base.

    If you actually sit back and think, you would realize how dumb your argument truly is.
    I think it's dumb to present ultimatums on how Blizzard designs their games

  18. #158
    *Rolls eyes* These multiple rising threads on demon hunters... Theres no class for WoD, why cant people accept it?

    Formely known as Creations
    Signature By Shyama

  19. #159
    Quote Originally Posted by Agoonga View Post
    My brother was able to tank heroics easily as his Demonology Warlock with Glyph of Demon Hunting and I would like to see that implemented as Demon Hunter for Warlock's 4th spec, and then Demonlogy can go back to just having strong demons.
    hell no.
    any person who wants to dps as a demon hunter gets told to shut up and suck it up. so hell no. it has to be its own class.
    and that glyphs should have never made it out of beta but blizzard is too idiotic to remove it. yes lets keep the glyph that is causing a plague in the player base.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Creations View Post
    *Rolls eyes* These multiple rising threads on demon hunters... Theres no class for WoD, why cant people accept it?
    this isnt a class for WoD chat. it never was

  20. #160
    Elemental Lord Teriz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Beach City
    Posts
    8,777
    Quote Originally Posted by Thimagryn View Post
    You've even said it yourself before that Death Knights embrace a Vampiric theme from Blood. Shadow Priests have had that same theme, with Vampiric Embrace and Vampiric Touch. On top of this, they spread plagues, which is what the Priest also had with Devouring Plague. No one considers this overlap because they don't work the same way for either class. The class identity of both Priests and DK's are not impacted whatsoever for having Disease-based spells or Vampiric spells.
    No, its not the same theme. The DK's version is based off of Undead. The Priest version is based off of mental or psionic vampirism. You can tell this by other abilities within the tree (Psionic Scream, Mental Blast, Dominate Mind, etc.). We can tell that the DK's version of Vampirism is more based around blood and undeath also by other abilities in the tree (Blood, Blood Worms, Sanguine Fortitude, Blood Boil, Vampiric Blood, etc.).

    Additionally, that's also what separates the Priest version of Shadow from the Warlock version of Shadow.

    I will admit that there's overlap via Devouring Plague, however that's one ability that was almost removed in MoP.

    If we are to assume there are different mechanics and a different looking form for the Demon Hunter, then it is plausible that they would not immediately overlap with Warlocks. The only thing needed to make this work is an explanation on how broad the 'Demon' spectrum really is, and why it is possible for multiple classes to share in the use of the magic and in the theme.

    Is this an issue of any other classes being able to use Demonic magic at all? Would it be any more acceptable if Demon Hunters did not purely have 'Demon Form' but retain Fel-magic related abilities? I seriously don't buy 'Warlocks are already Demon themed' as a reason, given that no one class has dominion over any one type of theme or spell. Druid shapeshifting is shared with Shaman, Mage Elemental summoning and polymorph is shared with Shaman, Priest Holy healing is shared with Paladin, Rogue Stealth is shared with Druid. Even if you take the broader cycles of applying 'Magic', 'Nature' and 'Elemental' into consideration, you would still have overlap between classes.
    Again, you don't seem to understand my disagreement with you. NO ONE is saying that Blizzard couldn't make this happen if they wanted to make it happen. What I'm saying is that its not going to happen because Blizzard wants Demon Hunters and Warlocks to be the same thing, for WHATEVER reason. All of the evidence supports that.


    It does not matter. Why does the Warlock possessing Metamorphosis impact a DH having a new ability alternately themed on Demon Form. This is what you're still avoiding. If the differences are as great as they are between Water Elemental and Fire/Earth Elemental summoning, then what is the problem? If Warlocks use 'Demonology' to metamorph, and Demon Hunters use 'Runic Transmutation', it would thematically be different, even if the end result is fel-based. You need to explain why any alternative not acceptable.
    Except DHs wouldn't use Runic Transformation, because Blizzard wouldn't be stupid enough to give them Runic Transformation. If Blizzard wanted DHs in the game they would have never given Warlocks Metamorphosis. In fact, they probably wouldn't have had Warlocks in the game to begin with. Blizzard could have easily made Necromancers the "dark magic" class of the game, and made Demon Hunters the hero class. However that didn't happen, so we're in the situation we're in now.


    It's all theory. Evolution is a theory. Relativity is a theory. You can't prove that there is no design space left when the Lead Designer who said those words left the statement in an ambiguous question form, and is no longer employed there at all. There is no proof of future possibilities in knowing that there 'currently is no plans for a Demon Hunter class'. What you have is a system that can never be proven with factual evidence, because you can't predict the future.

    To top it off, your patterns have been wrong in the past, and only after MoP did you adopt this new style of thinking, believing that the Tinker/Chemist is the only available spot left in the Class spectrum. I can prove to you that your patterns are wrong.
    This has been proven over and over again, and has been reinforced and backed up over and over again. You simply don't want to believe the evidence, which is fine btw, but that doesn't change that the facts are the facts. They aren't theories.

    Again these are all based on subjectivity. These are not the only possibilities. On top of this, your criteria would work against both the Death Knight and Monk if you apply the same ruthless 'shoehorning' tactics.

    One could argue Unholy is an extension of 'Shadow', and any use of 'Shadow' magic would overlap with Priests and Warlocks. Adding another Plate Tank/DPS is also overlap in mechanics. Undeath would be a new theme, but it doesn't matter since it's still Shadow-based magic, and Priests and Warlocks have that both.
    Except no one is saying that, and that has never been the argument. The argument is that the DH's theme and abilities were purposely put into the Warlock and Rogue classes by Blizzard, thus making it highly unlikely to almost a certainty that we're not going to see a DH stand alone class. Hell, Blizzard's own statements and tweets back that up. We're not talking about a spec role, or an aspect of a theme, we're talking about an entire theme and the abilities that were attached to that theme almost a decade ago.

    I think it's dumb to present ultimatums on how Blizzard designs their games
    I think its even more dumb to ignore Blizzard's past and current design decisions in an argument about Blizzard's design decisions.
    Last edited by Teriz; 2014-02-09 at 05:54 PM.

Posting Permissions

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