Will Tinkers be a class in WoW?

[Thimagryn]

That has NEVER - I repeat NEVER - been a problem. If Blizzard want to rework the concept, they can easily do so. You can even attach it to the Tech class. A tech based Demon Hunter.

Except that's not the concept we're talking about. The concept we're talking about is the Warcraft 3 incarnation of the Demon Hunter, which is a Shadowy Warrior who uses Demonic Magic to augment their weaponry. That is all.

Except there is a problem with that take. What you end up with won't be a DH.

What I describe is very much a Demon Hunter. I want to play a class that incorporates the theme and identity of Illidan as he is presented in Warcraft 3 and Heroes of the Storm. I even prefer seeing the Heroes version of Metamorphosis over the shadow Nathrezim that shoots fireballs. That is what a Demon Hunter is in terms of gameplay, not a frail spellcaster who summons demons.

You might end up with Valla. You might end up with Buffy. You might end up with Van Helsing. You might end up with Dante or Belmont.

What you won't get is Illidan.

I don't WANT Illidan. I want a Demon Hunter. Illidan became corrupted and walks a dark path that I wouldn't care for. He became a Demon. He became a villain. I want to play as an anti-hero.

So really, you're wrong on all levels when you tell me I want to play Illidan. As long as there is one spec in the game that allows the Warcraft 3/Heroes identity to be maintained (As Unholy maintains War3 DK and Brewmaster maintains War3 Brewmaster identities) then I'm fine with whatever branching the class will have. Let them use ranged weaponry, let them use tech, let them be slayers hellbent on vengeance. Whatever identity they take up, it will be their own, and that is the main point.

The last thing I want to see is having all the potential for a Demon Hunter identity be squandered by folding it into the Warlock class, a class that does not represent any of the ideals a Demon Hunter does. Warlocks will always be Demon Summoners, while Demon Hunters are strictly Hunters of Evil. They inhabit a sense of Dark Justice, paralleling Paladins' zeal but using methods of darkness that wouldn't be considered 'honourable'.

And that's the DH players want. Which does tend to limit Blizzard opportunity to redesign and rework the class. WHy give players what they want....only to give them something very different?

The exact same can be said of Brewmasters of Warcraft 3 and the Monk class. The Brewmaster was completely reworked to become a martial artist, which it WASN'T in Warcraft 3. The Brewmaster Hero was purely based on Beer-based spells and attacks consisted of swinging a keg and smacking things with his bamboo staff; no punches, kicks or stances at all. You can say that many elements were inspired by Martial Arts, but the entire class was redesigned from the ground up to provide new gameplay. It's not a bad thing to have a class play differently than what it was originally presented as.

As long as a Demon Hunter class retains the themes of using Demonic Augmentation (Bursting into flames, transforming into a Demonic form), and being a melee fighter, then the Demon Hunter retains everything Illidan represented. These are the EXACT themes that Heroes of the Storm kept for Illidan. He doesn't even have Immolation as a spell, but as a talent that burns enemies in close range. His Metamorphosis is designed to augment his melee abilities. He's given 3+ new abilities designed for fast-paced melee combat. THIS is what I want to play as a Demon Hunter - not just to use Immolation and Warcraft 3 style Metamorphosis.

None of these overlap with Rogue, Warlock or Hunter gameplay at all.

Yes. They are. YOU are. It is simply your refusal to accept that the Illidari ARE Demon Hunters that makes yous ee them as soemhow different.

The problem is you're using Illidari as an example of Demon Hunters being too close to Warlocks. You're unable to envision a Demon Hunter concept that is separate from the Illidari, so you're blind to all other possibilities. You may say you can accept other concepts, but it's not true at all considering you will not let go of the Illidari as a Demon Hunter influence. They're an enemy faction, and no class in the game has ever been built around enemy factions. Not even the Death Knight.

The Illidari may have Demon Hunters, but they are an NPC faction with no direct relationship with a Player Class; just as all Scourge Death Knights have no relations to the Ebon Hand. By saying they represent all Demon Hunters is akin to saying Scarlet Crusade represents all Paladins. It's a logical fallacy, nothing more.

Repeating that which is false dos not make it true. There are differences in both comparisons, but the difference in the former is with the fine detail of the deisgn space, the difference in the latter lies in the huge swathes of design space which don't overlap.

It was your own example, so blame yourself for even bringing up something so obviously ridiculous. Point remains, you are not seeing any division between Demon Hunter and Warlock despite all their obvious differences.

You are still saying the personal motivation is the only key difference between a Warlock and a Demon Hunter. Even if we were to accept that....that's not enough to justofy a class. What's more is....you are wrong in this. We've seen in novels such as ToW or the Guide and in agme that you are wrong. Both DHs and Warlocks have good and bad.

I'm not saying ALL Demon Hunters are good. I'm making a case for PLAYER Demon Hunters to be good. It would make no sense if we played as Illidari as they are currently represented in WoW. Now if Illidan came back, was given a redemption story and his Illidari were also redeemed akin to the Blood Elf backstory with overcoming Arcane/Fel addiction? Sure, we could play as a redeemed Illidari. Overall they would not be the malicious personal power-hungry maniacs that we slaughtered by wholesale at Black Temple.

This is EXACTLY what we got with the Death Knight redemption story.

The funny thing is...I am. There is nothing in that decsription which rules out a Warlock connection. Simply your mistaken belief that motivation counts.

Right, there's nothing to rule out that Rexxar is a Warrior either. There is no proof that anyone can say he's not a Warrior. Absence of evidence doesn't prove anything. You're using fallacious logic to come to a conclusion that Demon Hunters are Warlocks. It is only true if it is explicitly stated from a canonical source, not derived from gameplay design. This is why Vol'jin is always a Shadow Hunter and never a Shaman.

THAT is for the individual player to decide. Just as it is with every class. Are you going to sit there and tell me that if I want my Warlock to be seen as a kindly soul, using Demons to protect family, friends and nation that I am wrong?

Whatever you roleplay does not change the Class Identity. Paladins uphold justice, and no matter how dishonourably you choose to play, you are not affecting the overall identity of the class. All Paladins are identified as being righteous because that is their Class Identity. Roleplaying is purely headcanon. I am going to tell you that you choosing to play as a kind-hearted Warlock has no affect on how the Warlock class is defined by Blizzard.

[Teriz]

What did I say that you are claiming falsehood? All I said is that Blizzard doesn't carbon-copy heros from WC3 and makes them into WoW classes. You just proved my point.

Well, the hero is an ArchMage. The class is called Mage. In other words, it should encompass a pretty wide swath of Azerothian magic. Clearly Blood Mages and Sorcerers would fall under that umbrella.

You're reaching. Where does it say that Priest's shadow magic is 'psionic'?

Mindbemder, Psychic Horror, Psychic Scream, Mind Flay, Psyfiend, Dominate Mind, Mind Spike, Mind Sear, and Mind Blast.

And undeath was created by demonic magic, or did you forget that it were the demons who brought the Scourge to 'life', so to speak, so both kinds of 'shadow' are the same.

Which means nothing really. Necromancy and Demonology are two very different themes. Just because Blizzard had demons create it in Warcraft doesn't change that,

Priests also use Holy Magic offensively with the Discipline spec, as well. But again, both heal, both deal damage. A melee shadow class, the Demon Hunter, would have as much overlap with warlocks as paladins have with priests.

Discipline is a healing spec. You can't successfully DPS as Discipline. The DPS spec for Priests is Shadow.

Btw, a Demon Hunter class would need to utilize more than just Shadow magic to be a complete class. It would need the full spectrum of Demonic magic. The problem is that Demon Hunters would use the same magic as warlocks. Mainly because they share the same theme as Warlocks, and the same schools of magic.

[Traveler Voltin]

how many times must i repeat myself. demon hunters only use fel magic as a last resort.
their main magic type are arcane, fire, and shadow.

[Thimagryn]

His argument are that the Illidari Demon Hunters aren't Demon Hunters because they aren't "heroes". It comes back to his insistence that personal motivation is a core defining trait of the class - a concept that lore does not agree with and game design could not allow. It is akin to saying that the Paladins of the Scarlet Crusade are not Paladins because they don't meet his definition of good.

Quite the opposite. I recognize that they have Demon Hunters, but they like Hrugner said, they do not represent a Player class. So why are we talking about a Demon Hunter class who would Summon Demons, Sacrifice them for power and are generally Malicious when that isn't what a Player Class Demon Hunter would be? That's already the Class Identity of a Warlock.

Lores hows us that both DHs and Warlocks can be good and bad. But, for Thimagryn, once a Demon Hunter stops meeting his defintion of altruistic...he isn't a Demon Hunter anymore. And because he doesn't see the Illidari as those who accept the Trials of a DH in order to protect their people he sees them as anything other than Demon Hunters. It doesn't matter what the game calls them. It doesn't matter that they are trained as Demon Hunters by Demon Hunters (who also are no longer Demon Hunters). It just matters that they aren't altruistic

Well let me put it this way - If we were to get a Demon Hunter class, would you want their identity to overlap with the Warlock identity? No.

Do the Demon Hunters have any sort of identity that is separate from the Warlocks that is relevant to the type of Demon Hunter people want to play? Yes. Warcraft 3 explicitly defines them as often maligned and misunderstood for their selfless sacrifices. Warlocks are not misunderstood at all, they are what they are and are very transparent with what they do.

Sure - they are the bad guys. But is that enough to stop them being Demon Hunters?

They're not players, that's the driving point.

[Teriz]

how many times must i repeat myself. demon hunters only use fel magic as a last resort.
their main magic type are arcane, fire, and shadow.

Even if that were true, its irrelevant in terms of class design.

Also fire and shadow are part of demonic magic.

[Traveler Voltin]

Even if that were true, its irrelevant in terms of class design.

Also fire and shadow are part of demonic magic.

says you and only you.

shadow is not demonic magic or else priests would be demonic. shadow is a school of light magic.

warlocks and mages both use fire magic. well up until someone does the green fire quest then its actually felfire which is fel magic.

[Ielenia]

Well, the hero is an ArchMage. The class is called Mage. In other words, it should encompass a pretty wide swath of Azerothian magic. Clearly Blood Mages and Sorcerers would fall under that umbrella.

If you're going by names and titles, 'archmage' would be the more powerful and have a 'wider swath' of Azerothian magic than the mage, would it not?

Mindbemder, Psychic Horror, Psychic Scream, Mind Flay, Psyfiend, Dominate Mind, Mind Spike, Mind Sear, and Mind Blast.

Wouldn't Fear, Soul Shatter, Haunt, Soul Link and the like wouldn't fit the bill too?

Which means nothing really. Necromancy and Demonology are two very different themes. Just because Blizzard had demons create it in Warcraft doesn't change that,

Actually it means a lot. It means 'Necromancy' and 'Demonology' are the same kind of 'shadow' spells.

Discipline is a healing spec. You can't successfully DPS as Discipline. The DPS spec for Priests is Shadow.

Btw, a Demon Hunter class would need to utilize more than just Shadow magic to be a complete class. It would need the full spectrum of Demonic magic. The problem is that Demon Hunters would use the same magic as warlocks. Mainly because they share the same theme as Warlocks, and the same schools of magic.

Paladins have only 'Holy magic' and they work just fine. So the precedent for a shadow-only melee Demon Hunter exists.

- - - Updated - - -

Also fire and shadow are part of demonic magic.

Wrong. Fire is not part of demonic magic.

[Teriz]

says you and only you.

Blizzard says it too, which is why Demons have Shadow abilities.

shadow is not demonic magic or else priests would be demonic. shadow is a school of light magic.

Again, Shadow Priests are using a different type of shadow magic. It's not demonic-based like Warlock Shadow.

warlocks and mages both use fire magic. well up until someone does the green fire quest then its actually felfire which is fel magic.

Yeah, Destruction is demonic fire, since it has Shadow undercurrents. Mage fire is simply fire, though via lore, fire magic can lead Mages towards demonic magic.

[hrugner]

You're reaching. Where does it say that Priest's shadow magic is 'psionic'? And undeath was created by demonic magic, or did you forget that it were the demons who brought the Scourge to 'life', so to speak, so both kinds of 'shadow' are the same.

The "psionic" theory of priest abilities is something that came up often during vanilla on the official forums. They had a number of mind affecting abilities and some people took it to mean that the shadow aspect of priests was mind control, effectively making their "evil" version proslytes using the light to control people. Eventually there was an official response to the thread stating that the abilities were holy and shadow magic that affected the mind, and not psychic powers working from one mind to another.

I remember cause it was my theory and the first time I got an official response to a thread. I wish I'd saved it.

[Teriz]

If you're going by names and titles, 'archmage' would be the more powerful and have a 'wider swath' of Azerothian magic than the mage, would it not?

It has nothing to do with something being more powerful. Its about an umbrella term to fit the various related magic units of WC3 into. The point is that WC3 is definitely the origin of WoW classes.

Wouldn't Fear, Soul Shatter, Haunt, Soul Link and the like wouldn't fit the bill too?

Out of those, only Fear has a link.

Actually it means a lot. It means 'Necromancy' and 'Demonology' are the same kind of 'shadow' spells.

Necromancy controls and manipulates the dead. Demonology controls and manipulates demons. How is that remotely the same?

Paladins have only 'Holy magic' and they work just fine. So the precedent for a shadow-only melee Demon Hunter exists.

Except Demon Hunters are known to use all aspects of demonic magic. If you need to artificially limit the Demon Hunter because of class overlap, you really shouldn't better.

Yet another reason a technology class is by far the better option.

Wrong. Fire is not part of demonic magic.

The fire magic that Warlocks, Infernals, and Imps use is definitely demonic in nature.

[Ielenia]

Necromancy controls and manipulates the dead. Demonology controls and manipulates demons. How is that remotely the same?

Warlock shadow spells also deal with controlling and manipulating the soul, which is, to a point, the basis of the necromancy, manipulating the souls of the dead and living.

Except Demon Hunters are known to use all aspects of demonic magic. If you need to artificially limit the Demon Hunter because of class overlap, you really shouldn't better.

Paladins and priests aren't limited to their access to the Holy magic. Both can attack, heal and defend.

The fire magic that Warlocks, Infernals, and Imps use is definitely demonic in nature.

How do you figure? How do you know it's not the same kind of 'fire' magic mages deal with? Remember, lore-wise, warlocks were once mages.

[hrugner]

Warlock shadow spells also deal with controlling and manipulating the soul, which is, to a point, the basis of the necromancy, manipulating the souls of the dead and living.


Paladins and priests aren't limited to their access to the Holy magic. Both can attack, heal and defend.


How do you figure? How do you know it's not the same kind of 'fire' magic mages deal with? Remember, lore-wise, warlocks were once mages.

or shaman, which also helps the case. Energy manipulation and consorting with other worldly powers seems to be their shtick.

[Teriz]

Warlock shadow spells also deal with controlling and manipulating the soul, which is, to a point, the basis of the necromancy, manipulating the souls of the dead and living.

Yet still doesn't mean that demonic magic and necromancy are the same thing.

Paladins and priests aren't limited to their access to the Holy magic. Both can attack, heal and defend.

Where did I say they were limited? I simply said that Priests use Holy magic to heal, Paladins use Holy magic to heal, tank, and DPS. Priests make up for this lack by being able to access Shadow Magic. Regardless, Priests and Paladins have very different themes, which allow them to share a magic school, yet be distinct from one another. Several classes do this. The problem with DHs and Warlocks is that they share the same school, abilities, themes, and lore.

How do you figure? How do you know it's not the same kind of 'fire' magic mages deal with? Remember, lore-wise, warlocks were once mages.

Because Destruction has undertones of Shadow Magic. Mages don't use Shadow Magic.

- - - Updated - - -

or shaman, which also helps the case. Energy manipulation and consorting with other worldly powers seems to be their shtick.

"Other worldy powers" being Elementals and spirits, not demons and the Burning Legion coming out of the twisted Nether.

[Talen]

Except that's not the concept we're talking about. The concept we're talking about is the Warcraft 3 incarnation of the Demon Hunter

Yes. Which is why your idea won't work. It's also based on the idea that tou can simply ignore all other canon sources


As I stated before - you can do a lot to justify the inclusion of a DH class....IF you are willing to ignore the existing lore and canon.


I am not. It's not what players expect. Its not what manmy palyers wnat. And even the use of the name Demon Hunter will simply associate this new class with the old, and all the design baggage that comes with it.


Conversely - you are willing the class lore and design space.

, which is a Shadowy Warrior who uses Demonic Magic to augment their weaponry. That is all.

And turn into a Demon. And casts spells. And call upon dmeonic energies.

I want to play a class that incorporates the theme and identity of Illidan as he is presented in Warcraft 3 and Heroes of the Storm.

Can be done as a Warlock.


Sorry - can be done as a Warlocks for those players who adhere to the lore and design practise regarding character motivation.

I don't WANT Illidan. I want a Demon Hunter. Illidan became corrupted and walks a dark path that I wouldn't care for. He became a Demon. He became a villain. I want to play as an anti-hero.

Illidan IS a Demon Hunter. He is the archetype for the class.

The last thing I want to see is having all the potential for a Demon Hunter identity be squandered by folding it into the Warlock class

Which has been happening for the past 7 years

class that does not represent any of the ideals a Demon Hunter does

Because you will not accept that Warlocks also can "fight fire with fire".

The exact same can be said of Brewmasters of Warcraft 3 and the Monk class.

No. It couldn't. Brewmasters and monks didn't really have much of a presence in WOW until they were introduced in MoP.


You know what that means? Oodles and oodles of design space not filled up. The Brewmaster was a largely empty slate that Blizzard could build upon. There was no lore, no stories, no history. Even the WC3 website simply tells us they come from the Pandaren Empire and love ale.


DHs have had a VERY different treatment. Theyve been used in game. There is a lot more information about the history, their lore, their capabilities. That's great - but it also fills their design space and defines what and who they are and what they can do.


There is no "lets just count WC3" in this regard. You don't just ignore the lore you disagree with.


But lets assume you really just a want a WC3 style DH and just want to use that source. Regardless of how he uses those powers, he is still a player character who gets his powers from Demons. Instant overlap with the Warlock class. His iconic move is metamorphosis....unavailable to him as that is a warlock spell and won't be shared out. His lore still overlaps that of Warlocks thanks to the website description.


Even if we just limit the design space to what we get in just some of WC3, that aspect you like, we are already running into gameplay and identity issues.

None of these overlap with Rogue, Warlock or Hunter gameplay at all.

Whoever said the problem was gameplay? Only those who can't change the rest of the design space.

The problem is you're using Illidari as an example of Demon Hunters being too close to Warlocks.

No. I'm using illidari as exactly what they are. Demon Hunters. Pure straightforward Demon Hunters. Trained by Demon Hunters. Having gone through the same rituals as Demon Hunters. With the same powers and capabilities as Demon Hunters.


They are, in fact, Demon Hunters. But you? You see them an "un-altrusitic" so they aren't.

They're an enemy faction, and no class in the game has ever been built around enemy factions. Not even the Death Knight.

So? What does the faction matter? They are the bad guys, our enemies...but why should that stop them being seen as Demon Hunters?

The Illidari may have Demon Hunters,

There is no "may" about it.

By saying they represent all Demon Hunters is akin to saying Scarlet Crusade represents all Paladins. It's a logical fallacy, nothing more.

What logical fallacy? What are you talking about? The Illidari represent Demon Hunters because they ARE Demon Hunters. That their actions and beliefs may not march step by step with other Demon Hunters doesn't change what they are. The difference in beliefs doesn't stop a Crusade Paladin being a Paladin. It simply means he has different beliefs.

It was your own example, so blame yourself for even bringing up something so obviously ridiculous. Point remains, you are not seeing any division between Demon Hunter and Warlock despite all their obvious differences.

Then give us one. Give us ONE difference that is actually canon based. Something that isn't based on gameplay, or can't be limited to spec based lore.


That rules out game mechanics and abilities. Those are gameplay elements.
That rules out the specific DH rituals and training...spec based.
That rules out motivations - non canon.


Where is your grand difference? Where is the difference that is so great it cannot be explained away via a spec change?


They exist...but only in the fine detail that defines the difference between specs.

I'm not saying ALL Demon Hunters are good. I'm making a case for PLAYER Demon Hunters to be good.

In which case, you are defining MY character. You are taking that choice away from every single plyer in the game. If I wnat to play a power hungry Demon HUnter...why can't I? If I want to play a kind Warlock...why can't I? Because those characyers don't meet with YOUR personal standards? Why do YOU get to choose MY avatars story?


The answer is - you don't. Character motivation will never be a defining aspect of the class. You can make the argument that a class may have an alignment typical of it...the good Paladin, the holy priest....but there will always be exceptions.


And give that there will be exceptions, your entire point about altruism can never work even if the lore supported it. And in this case...it doesn't. Good warlocks exist as do bad DHs.

Overall they would not be the malicious personal power-hungry maniacs that we slaughtered by wholesale at Black Temple.


This is EXACTLY what we got with the Death Knight redemption story.

Are you trying to tell me there are no "evil" DKs in Acherus?

You're using fallacious logic to come to a conclusion that Demon Hunters are Warlocks.

No. I'm using it to point out that there is nothing there that would contradict Blizzard bringing DHs into the game as a Warlock 4th spec. That everything there could also be applied to Warlocks. And that if Blizzard bring in DHs as a Warlock 4th spec...Warlocks are exactly what they'll be

They're not players, that's the driving point.

Uther the Lightbringer isn't a player either. Is he not a Paladin?

If we did get DHs in game...what then would you call these Illidari Demon Hunters?

EJL

[Thimagryn]

If we did get DHs in game...what then would you call these Illidari Demon Hunters?

EJL

Bad guys. Just like Scarlet Crusaders that we kill.

[Ielenia]

Yet still doesn't mean that demonic magic and necromancy are the same thing.

They do the same thing, they have the same 'element', they have the same origin... they're the same thing.

Where did I say they were limited? I simply said that Priests use Holy magic to heal, Paladins use Holy magic to heal, tank, and DPS. Priests make up for this lack by being able to access Shadow Magic. Regardless, Priests and Paladins have very different themes, which allow them to share a magic school, yet be distinct from one another. Several classes do this. The problem with DHs and Warlocks is that they share the same school, abilities, themes, and lore.

So what's the beef with the demon hunters, then? Warlocks have two shadow specs and one fire spec. Demon Hunters have three shadow specs. Practically perfect priest/paladin analogy.

"Other worldy powers" being Elementals and spirits, not demons and the Burning Legion coming out of the twisted Nether.

You know you're not helping your case, right? Gul'dan was a shaman before he became a warlock. Instead of consorting with the elements, he chose to consort with demons.

EDIT: I'm starting to fear Talen's posts. The way he puts double empty lines between each paragraph of his makes his post so damn long it kind of saps the will to read them, in my eyes.

[Teriz]

They do the same thing, they have the same 'element', they have the same origin... they're the same thing.

One revolves around the dead. The other revolves around demons. Please explain how the undead and demons are the same. The only school of magic they share is Shadow. And its a very superficial similarity.

So what's the beef with the demon hunters, then? Warlocks have two shadow specs and one fire spec. Demon Hunters have three shadow specs. Practically perfect priest/paladin analogy.

The "beef" is that their signature abilities are in the Warlock class. What are we basing this "Demon Hunter" on exactly? It can't be WC3. It can't even be the DHs we've encountered in WoW. If we've basing it on HotS, we run into overlap with the Rogue class. There's no way you can get Demon Hunters into the game unless you purposely gut an existing class. And even after you get them in, they'll damage the classes they're similar to.

Again, its a lose-lose. Meanwhile, the Tinker is a win-win.

You know you're not helping your case, right? Gul'dan was a shaman before he became a warlock. Instead of consorting with the elements, he chose to consort with demons.

That doesn't mean that Shamanism and Demonology are related. It simply means that anyone can be seduced and corrupted by demonic magic. That's what makes it so dangerous.

[Thimagryn]

Yes. Which is why your idea won't work. It's also based on the idea that tou can simply ignore all other canon sources

It's not ignoring, it's picking the elements necessary to define a Player class. Ner'zhul was a Shaman, one who eventually turned to dark magic. He never became a Warlock, yet he delved into dark magic and was able to re-open the Dark Portal. So would you say all Shamans should open dark portals into the twisting nether? Is it ignoring canon sources to neglect Ner'zhul's dark ways?

When defining a player class, all external sources are clearly separated by being non-players. They hold no direct influence over the class unless specifically defined. Baron Rivendare has no influence over Death Knight class, yet Darion Mograine does. Saiden Dathrohan no longer has any influence over Paladins, yet Uther remains as the shining example of righteousness.

Illidan (in current lore) has grown beyond what Demon Hunters represent, just as Ner'zhul no longer represents Shamans.

And turn into a Demon. And casts spells. And call upon dmeonic energies.

Right, and Paladins can Heal using Holy spells just as a Priest does. Exclusivity does not exist in Class mechanics. Demon Hunters would still retain a different identity through 2 entirely non-Warlock/Rogue specs, such as your example of a Van Helsing style Vampire Hunter.

A player class Demon Hunter does not need to cast any Demonic spells. NPCs? Sure, but a player class could be limited directly to using Non Demonic, Spellbreaker abilities. Mana Burn was the only ranged spell they had in Warcraft 3, and Heroes of the Storm forgoes spellcasting entirely, replaced with melee-based Slams and Strikes. Augmentation would be the primary use of Demonic magic, as is known from Warcraft 3.

NPC abilities are not canon, considering we've seen Death Knights with Warlock and Warrior abilities.

Illidan IS a Demon Hunter. He is the archetype for the class.

Ner'zhul is a Shaman. Just because a character is a certain class doesn't mean the class is represented by them. In the case of Demon Hunters, Pre-Skull of Gul'dan Illidan would be the prime archetype for the class. This is the Illidan we see represented in Heroes of the Storm, and the one I want to see in WoW. What you are always referring to is Illidan post-Skull consumption, who has become corrupted and evil.

Which has been happening for the past 7 years

And the next 2-3 will change everything that's happened in the past 7 years, just as every expansion changes everything we know about the game because it's constantly evolving. Remember when Paladins and Shamans were faction exclusive? Remember when all races introduced were faction exclusive? Things change, deal with it.

Because you will not accept that Warlocks also can "fight fire with fire".

They fight with Demonic magic, so the idea of 'fighting fire with fire' only applies if they are fighting demons. What do they do when fight against Undead? Against Humans? Against Elementals? A Demon Hunter can fight them all using their own powers against them because they have spells like 'Mana Burn' at their disposal, which thematically fits to using an opponents magic against them. Warlocks simply fight using Demons and dark magic, nothing else.

This is why no one says Warlocks fight fire with fire. This is specifically a Demon Hunter description.

You know what that means? Oodles and oodles of design space not filled up. The Brewmaster was a largely empty slate that Blizzard could build upon. There was no lore, no stories, no history. Even the WC3 website simply tells us they come from the Pandaren Empire and love ale.

DHs have had a VERY different treatment. Theyve been used in game. There is a lot more information about the history, their lore, their capabilities. That's great - but it also fills their design space and defines what and who they are and what they can do.

We know next to NOTHING about Demon Hunters. They have appeared as sparcely as Wardens have in the game. We know very little of their existence, their organization or their current goals. The Illidari are not a good example of a Player Class because they are VILLAINS. It would be like basing a Monk class on Scarlet Monastery Monks; just because they are Monks doesn't mean they have any relationship with the Player Class Identity.

There is no "lets just count WC3" in this regard. You don't just ignore the lore you disagree with.

Monks did this. They ignored all other Monks in WoW. Am I wrong?

The definition of the Monk Player Class is completely new to WoW, and derived straight from Warcraft 3. We already had Monks in WoW with Auchenai Crypts and Scarlet Monastery, so your assertion that Illidari are Demon Hunters parallels this 100%. You see how flawed the logic is?

But lets assume you really just a want a WC3 style DH and just want to use that source. Regardless of how he uses those powers, he is still a player character who gets his powers from Demons. Instant overlap with the Warlock class. His iconic move is metamorphosis....unavailable to him as that is a warlock spell and won't be shared out. His lore still overlaps that of Warlocks thanks to the website description.

We don't know how he gets his powers. There is no overlap until that is explained and resolved. In the same way, at base value you could say 'Paladins derive their powers from the Holy light. Instant overlap with Priests'. We know there is no real overlap because the Priest class is defined further by using Shadow Magic. The overlap doesn't seem so apparant when we have a full picture to separate the two classes from each other.

Yet you don't want to believe a Demon Hunter can be anything different from Warlocks, because you see them as being one and the same. I am fully aware that other types of Demon Hunters exist, and the Illidari DO have Demon Hunters; I've simply understand that they are not related to a potential Player Class who would be working for the Good Guys.

Even if we just limit the design space to what we get in just some of WC3, that aspect you like, we are already running into gameplay and identity issues.

Whoever said the problem was gameplay? Only those who can't change the rest of the design space.

You just contradicted yourself there by saying we have gameplay and identity issues, then saying gameplay isn't a problem. You seem to have a very confused argument here.

No. I'm using illidari as exactly what they are. Demon Hunters. Pure straightforward Demon Hunters. Trained by Demon Hunters. Having gone through the same rituals as Demon Hunters. With the same powers and capabilities as Demon Hunters.

Have you read about the Illidari? The faction is composed primarily of demons who used to serve Magtheridon, and are now serving Illidan. Yes they have Demon Hunters - who are allied DIRECTLY with Demons. The reason why they are malicious and power hungry is not indicative of their class, it is because of the faction they are a part of. Illidan is promoting the use of corrupting techniques and brutal training as a means to an end. He doesn't care if his followers die in training. That is what this entire faction is based on.

Does this represent characters like Loramus and Altruis? Is this what is written in the Writings of the Dark Herald? It's all left unexplained, but these characters may be a key to showing us a less malevolent alternative to training Demon Hunters.

They are, in fact, Demon Hunters. But you? You see them an "un-altrusitic" so they aren't.

I never said they weren't Demon Hunters. I said they shouldn't represent a DH Class. Your strawmanning is getting tiresome.

So? What does the faction matter? They are the bad guys, our enemies...but why should that stop them being seen as Demon Hunters?

So all Paladins follow the teachings of the Scarlet Crusade? All Mages are cultists of the Twilights Hammer? Faction matters because they represent different ideals and creeds. Illidari Demon Hunters aren't malevolent because they are Demon Hunters, they are malevolent because they are Illidari. They follow Illidan, and Illidan doesn't care if a majority of his trainees die or go insane as long as he can train them quickly and effectively. Their malevolence is tied too the faction.

Then give us one. Give us ONE difference that is actually canon based. Something that isn't based on gameplay, or can't be limited to spec based lore.

Read the Warcraft 3 description again. I've linked it way too many times for you to have ignored it. Now read the description of Warlocks on the WoW official page. Those are canon differences in identity. One is misunderstood for selfless sacrifice, the other is motivated by personal power and malevolence. This is the defining identity that separates them as classes.

[hrugner]

What logical fallacy? What are you talking about? The Illidari represent Demon Hunters because they ARE Demon Hunters. That their actions and beliefs may not march step by step with other Demon Hunters doesn't change what they are. The difference in beliefs doesn't stop a Crusade Paladin being a Paladin. It simply means he has different beliefs.

fallacy of composition since you asked.

[Teriz]

And the next 2-3 will change everything that's happened in the past 7 years, just as every expansion changes everything we know about the game because it's constantly evolving. Remember when Paladins and Shamans were faction exclusive? Remember when all races introduced were faction exclusive? Things change, deal with it.

You have a knack for false equivalences.

Paladins and Shaman were given to the Horde and Alliance for game balance purposes. That change was to make the game better, because having Shaman only on the Horde and Paladins only on the Alliance caused several problems within the game itself. Namely forcing Blizzard to have to make Paladins and Shaman equivalent to each other despite them having different themes. Instead, Blizzard made them truly different classes and allowed them to go in independent directions.

With Demon Hunters, you're simply ignoring reality. The reality is that Blizzard has purposely dumped the Demon Hunter thematic into the Warlock class. You may not like that, but it's exactly what they did. They did it because they realized at some point that having two demonic classes would cause severe issues of overlap.

Blizzard retaining the WC3 abilities for classes they implemented into WoW should have been the first clue for you. Mages, Shaman, Druids, Paladins, Death Knights, and Brewmasters (Monks) retained their abilities and became WoW classes. Blademasters, Mountain Kings, Lichs, Priestess of the Moon, Demon Hunters, Wardens, and others got their abilities split among several WoW classes, never to become a stand alone class.

The second clue should have been when Blizzard didn't add Demon Hunters as a playable class in TBC when Illidan was the main antagonist. The fact that we could loot his corpse for iconic Demon Hunter gear should have been a sign of things to come.

The third clue should have been when Blizzard gave Warlocks the Demon Hunter signature ability; Metamorphosis. That should have been the death knell for any talk of a DH class in WoW.

However it wasn't. Blizzard brought Illidan back for Well of Eternity in Cataclysm, gave him a moveset, and then took that move set and gave it all to Warlocks in MoP along with a shiny new glyph entitled "Demon Hunting", and a challenge armor set that looks just like Illidan.

I mean seriously, what more is it going to take? Do you really need Blizzard to come out and slap you in the head and explain to you what they've been doing since Vanilla? Their actions should be enough to convince you. I mean look at your argument. You're arguing for implementing a Demon Hunter into the game without Illidan, without Metamorphosis, without demonic abilities. YTF should Blizzard even bother calling it a "Demon Hunter" at that point?

And don't be surprised if you see those Illidan HotS abilities pop up in the Warlock and Rogue classes in WoD.