Will Tinkers be a class in WoW?

[Ielenia]

You're wrong. Gameplay does trump lore. And in this case, it doesn't need to. This isn't a gameplay issue. This is a lore issue. All Blizzard needs to do to get the NElfs using Warlocks is to call them Demon Hunters. Those are around. Those exist.

That would mean completely spitting and stomping on both Demon Hunter and Night Elf lore.

a: You speak as if Blizzard won't or can't add new race combos.

And you totally missed the real intention of my post. The reason those two races cannot be rogues is because they have hooves instead of feet, and they don't use anything on their hooves. Hooves are not made to walk silently.

The answer is simple...because such a take would again undermine the argument that Demon Hunters and Warlocks are somehow (in gameplay terms) "different". A Demon Hunter who focussed his training on spells? Who worked by summoning demons, controlling them and unleashing them directly against his foes? A Warlock. A warlock by another name, but still a Warlock. He might be uncommon, but it would be possible.

Because a Demon Hunter is just like a Paladin, a Priest that decided to take up arms and fight in the front lines. You cannot argue Demon Hunters and Warlocks are the same thing while accepting Priests and Paladins are their own separate classes. It's almost hypocrisy. Priests and Paladins share the whole of protective Holy magic, the same with shadow magic for Warlocks and Demon Hunters.

Yes. And the Demon Hunter will be a spec of that class. He'll have everything that comes with Warlocks, access to everything Blizzard took from DHs and gave to Warlocks. And he'll have access to his own spec lore as well, his own abilities as well.

Again. But it won't be a Demon Hunter. It'll be a Warlock. Not Demon Hunter, but a Warlock.

Yep. He'd be a Warlock. Just as a Shadow priests is still a Priest. Or a Brewmaster is still a Monk.

Except we have Paladins and Priests, and their existence is proof that making a Demon Hunter separate from Warlocks is possible.

That implies a startling ignorance of how the class system works on your part.

Except we're not talking 'how the class system works', we're talking class identity. If Priests and Paladins can exist separate from each other, then so can Warlocks and Demon Hunters.

Yes. I can. Because it takes much more than a shared school of magic to make two classes the same. Paladins and Priest don't share that much.

They are both practitioners of the Light, are embodiments of faith and are the defenders of the Light.

Warlocks and Demon Hunters do. Now, if you're talking lore....yes, DHs and Warlock are different. Just as Fury Warriors and Arms Warriors are different. Just as Holy and Shadow Priests are different. Just as Brewmasters and Mistwalkers are different.

Wrong. Warlocks and Demon Hunters are just as different as Priests and Paladins. Your argument bases on your idea that DH is nothing but a spec to be added to the Warlock class. I defend that because we have Paladins and Priests in game, it's perfectly possible and viable to make DHs their own class.

They'd be right. You're mixing confusing Justice with Law.

And they'd be wrong. Go read on both Justice and Revenge, again. Besides, even the Horde has laws. After all, they have a Warchief.

And venegance is part and parcel of that. If I wrong you, you'll take me to court to seek justice. Others? Others would simply seek me out and seek justice on their own terms. They'd seek vengeance. Personal retribution for the wrong done to them. Justice on their terms, not the laws.

"Justice on their terms" is not justice. It's simply revenge, plain and simple. Calling it 'justice' is just something they use to rationalize their actions and, in their minds, escape punishment for their actions.

- - - Updated - - -

Number 3 is a fact, so anyone who disagrees doesnt understand the game.
Again, two more facts. Neither can be disputed, and those that find faults with both are trolling.
Like I said; Six basic fact based arguments. The only people who decide to argue against those facts are those who oppose the idea of Tinkers in general. However, it's important to note that they don't use fact-based arguments to counter those 6 main points.

#2: all charaters have the ability to use tech items; bombs, robots, mechas, etc;
#3: only gameplay-wise;
#4: WC3 Tinker concept used in engineering;
#5: look above;
#6: GC said 'class is too whymsical', I don't see how that's 'favorable'.

[Thimagryn]

The problem with that comparison is that the Brewmaster was linked up to an established RPG trope; the Monk. From that trope/archetype, you have the martial artist (Windwalker), and the healer martial artist (mistweaver).

Head over to tvtropes.com and find the archetype that your "Slayer" belongs to. Hopefully it won't overlap with an existing class. That would help with this discussion if we could link your Slayer to an established RPG archetype.

Dude, I linked you the Magekiller, which IS the archetype I'm using for the Slayer.

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/MageKiller

A Mage Killer is basically a Badass Normal, or something close, whose capabilities of dealing with mages are somehow improved. He may be able to detect or track magic, resist harmful spells, prevent enemies from using them or even reflect them back to enemies. Defeating a Mage Killer with magic is difficult or impossible, and his mundane skills give him a major physical advantage over mages with no combat prowess, which is most of them. Some Mage Killers even use magic themselves, but not regularly, and not the usual earthquakes and meteors but something subtle or affecting only mages. If a Mage Killer is a member of an order who specializes in hunting mages, his anti-magic abilities are very likely to be a result of specific training. Anyway, a Mage Killer is usually very similar to a Magic Knight, only with anti-magic instead of magic.

How does this class even relate to Demon Hunters? It's mentioned right at the bottom of this specific trope.

See also Demon Slayer, for someone who hunts demons instead of mages.

A Hunter who hunts down and kills demons for revenge or other personal reasons.
A Chosen One who kills demons because of destiny.
A Demon or Half-Demon Hunter Of Their Own Kind.
A protector of the helpless.
A descendant/member of The Clan dedicated to fighting them.

The class incorporates spectral sight, meaning every Slayer is magically blinded in order to Spellbend. Anti-magic is the main theme, and the Demon Hunter is the only Hero in Warcraft 3 able to damage an opponent's source of magic. This theme has been reinforced by the addition of units like Spellbreakers, Faerie Dragons and Obsidian Destroyers, who are all Anti-magic units. This does not have to be translated into WoW as literally attacking a player's resource, rather it is a theme for resisting, preventing and reflecting spells.

This all explains the general archetype of the class. It does not address the visual aesthetic of the class in general, which could would be a mix of both DH themes as well as armor sets themed to a 'Slayer' in general. As with any class, there would be compromise of wearing what is appropriate for a MMORPG. Even if the DH was folded into the Warlock class, you would have had Demon Hunters wearing Warlock Tier sets, which alters the original identity of a bare-chested badass. The original Warcraft 3 Visual aesthetic would be difficult to maintain without the ability to 'hide chest piece', so I would say a Slayer class would have its armor designed to whatever is appropriate. Special transmogs could also be available to create a classic Runic, Bare-chested 'Demon Hunter'.

[hrugner]

Thimagryn, is it really worth engaging someone who doesn't understand "proof of concept"?

[Teriz]

Dude, I linked you the Magekiller, which IS the archetype I'm using for the Slayer.
'.

Its not the Warcraft Demon Hunter though, its something completely different. Which sort of proves the point; You cant create a WC3 DH class or spec without Warlocks.

No one said you couldn't create a "Mage Killer" class, we just said it wouldnt be the WC Demon Hunter. Something tells me that more people would prefer the WC3 DH linked to the Warlock class over what you posted above.

- - - Updated - - -

Thimagryn, is it really worth engaging someone who doesn't understand "proof of concept"?

In order for him to have that, he needs a workable concept first.

He doesn't have one.

[Thimagryn]

Its not the Warcraft Demon Hunter though, its something completely different. Which sort of proves the point; You cant create a WC3 DH class or spec without Warlocks.

The Demon Hunter IS a Magekiller. Mana Burn is a primary reason to pick and choose the Demon Hunter in Warcraft 3, it effectively denies your opponent's ability to cast spells and can effectively ruin a Caster hero's early advantage with summons to harass or creep. The Anti-magic theme of the Demon Hunter exists solely within this one Hero. The Demon Hunter is also one of the fastest moving ground heroes, making them very effective at getting in and out to sap away an opponent's ability to cast magic before closing in on the kill.

The Demon theme only kicks in once you get to lvl 6, at which point it's not much more than a short-duration Focus Fire ability for you to gather your troops. The rest of the time the Demon Hunter plays as the Anti-Magic Tank and Hero killer.

And that is exactly what we would be getting out of a DH spec in the Slayer class.

No one said you couldn't create a "Mage Killer" class, we just said it wouldnt be the WC Demon Hunter. Something tells me that more people would prefer the WC3 DH linked to the Warlock class over what you posted above.

It's always easier to agree with what is clearly tangible. A Monk class faced the same criticisms when they were initially announced, since specs like Windwalker and Mistweaver were still abstract concepts with no basis for gameplay. Even the 'No Auto Attack' was something new and different that couldn't be clearly discussed. Warlocks are clearly tangible concepts, but they do not represent the Physically imposing Demon Hunter.

Besides all of this, you haven't made any counters to my point other than saying 'it's not a demon hunter because I don't think people will like it'.

[Teriz]

The Demon Hunter IS a Magekiller. Mana Burn is a primary reason to pick and choose the Demon Hunter in Warcraft 3, it effectively denies your opponent's ability to cast spells and can effectively ruin a Caster hero's early advantage with summons to harass or creep. The Anti-magic theme of the Demon Hunter exists solely within this one Hero. The Demon Hunter is also one of the fastest moving ground heroes, making them very effective at getting in and out to sap away an opponent's ability to cast magic before closing in on the kill.

Actually, Blood Mage had mana drain, which did the same thing, just over time instead of instantly.

Also it was the Shadow Priest who got Mana Burn in WoW. Does that mean that they were Mage Killers?

The Demon theme only kicks in once you get to lvl 6, at which point it's not much more than a short-duration Focus Fire ability for you to gather your troops. The rest of the time the Demon Hunter plays as the Anti-Magic Tank and Hero killer.

No, just hero killer. All heroes in WC3 used mana.

And that is exactly what we would be getting out of a DH spec in the Slayer class.

It's always easier to agree with what is clearly tangible. A Monk class faced the same criticisms when they were initially announced, since specs like Windwalker and Mistweaver were still abstract concepts with no basis for gameplay. Even the 'No Auto Attack' was something new and different that couldn't be clearly discussed. Warlocks are clearly tangible concepts, but they do not represent the Physically imposing Demon Hunter.

All of that came from the Monk archetype. The benefit of that archetype was that it was nonexistent in WoW at the time.

Besides all of this, you haven't made any counters to my point other than saying 'it's not a demon hunter because I don't think people will like it'.

Well it's not a Demon Hunter. What you've constructed is simply a Hunter. Hunters do exactly what your "Magekiller" does.

[Thimagryn]

Actually, Blood Mage had mana drain, which did the same thing, just over time instead of instantly.

Also it was the Shadow Priest who got Mana Burn in WoW. Does that mean that they were Mage Killers?

It did give the Priest the unfortunate role of being the most powerful heal cast that could stomp other healers and casters by draining their mana. It was why the ability was eventually removed.

But Priests also had that one ability, not the theme of Anti-magic. It would be much more prevalent on the Demon Hunter.

No, just hero killer. All heroes in WC3 used mana.

You asked for an archetype and I provided. The theme is beyond core gameplay mechanics of Warcraft 3 :/

Are you going to attack the Keeper of the Grove for not being Druidic because they can't shapeshift? Their theme isn't impacted by mechanics.

All of that came from the Monk archetype. The benefit of that archetype was that it was nonexistent in WoW at the time.

Slayers benefit from being an archetype that does not yet exist in WoW too. Yet the themes are readily available to be used. Vengeance is present in the Warden, Demon Hunter and oddly enough even the Naga Sea Witch. Anti-magic is represented by many of the units included in TFT. From here we have a solid jumping point to inspire any type of hero archetype needed to fit a Demon Hunter inspired Spec.

Well it's not a Demon Hunter. What you've constructed is simply a Hunter. Hunters do exactly what your "Magekiller" does.

Hunters have no anti-magic abilities. They track and shoot from afar, that's about it. You're generalizing it to any class that kills. That is not a theme, that is semantics.

[Teriz]

Hunters have no anti-magic abilities.

Silencing Shot and Counter Shot. Also several of their pets have anti-magic abilities, like Spore Cloud, Serenity Dust, and Nether Shock.

They track and shoot from afar, that's about it.

Yes, they can track and Slay anything. This includes the Undead and Demons;

http://www.wowhead.com/spell=19884/track-undead
http://www.wowhead.com/spell=19878

You're generalizing it to any class that kills. That is not a theme, that is semantics.

No, I'm basing it on a class that hunts. Your Slayer hunts and kills magic based stuff, the Hunter class hunts and kills everything.

That makes your Slayer concept pretty pointless.

[Thimagryn]

Silencing Shot and Counter Shot. Also several of their pets have anti-magic abilities, like Spore Cloud, Serenity Dust, and Nether Shock.

All of which are generic interrupts. There is no Anti-magic theme such as Mana Flare or Feedback. The theme is using magical abilities to resist harmful spells, prevent enemies from using them or even reflect them back to enemies. Silencing Shot and Counter Shot are no different than Kick. They interrupt a Caster through physical harm, not by manipulating their own spells against them. This is what Anti-magic is.

Yes, they can track and Slay anything.

And anyone can assassinate. It doesn't make them an Assassin spec Rogue does it? A Slayer is a name for a class, just as Hunter is a name for a class. The Hunter is represented by the theme of the Wilds, while a Slayer is represented by themes of Vengeance and Anti-magic. You're only debating semantics and strawmanning a generic 'killer'.

That makes your Slayer concept pretty pointless.

You have nothing left to prove if all you have left is to attack the Concept rather than address the actual themes it represents.

[Teriz]

All of which are generic interrupts. There is no Anti-magic theme such as Mana Flare or Feedback.

Nor will there be since such abilities are permanently banned from the game due to them being OP in PvP. Even the interrupts and silences are being considered for scale back because they lock down casters too hard. So the closest thing you're going to get to anti-magic in WoW is what I listed above for the Hunter.

Like I said, you don't have a workable concept.

The theme is using magical abilities to resist harmful spells,

Aspect of the Iron Hawk, Deterrence

prevent enemies from using them or even reflect them back to enemies.

The abilities I listed above.

Silencing Shot and Counter Shot are no different than Kick. They interrupt a Caster through physical harm, not by manipulating their own spells against them. This is what Anti-magic is.

And like I said, its like that because anti-magic abilities like the ones you describe are no longer usuable by classes in WoW.

And anyone can assassinate. It doesn't make them an Assassin spec Rogue does it? A Slayer is a name for a class, just as Hunter is a name for a class. The Hunter is represented by the theme of the Wilds, while a Slayer is represented by themes of Vengeance and Anti-magic. You're only debating semantics and strawmanning a generic 'killer'.

The Hunter is also themed as a Hunter. Which is why it can track anything in the game except mechanicals. So if I want to play a "slayer" of mages, I'd simply click track humanoids, set up the pets I need, make sure Silencing Shot and Counter Shot are ready to go, and hunt the target down.

Am I hunting that target out of vengeance or for sport? Who knows, and who cares? The point is that your concept isn't workable in WoW.

BTW, this is why Blizzard purposely moved the DH concept to Warlocks and away from hunting.

[Thimagryn]

A Feral Druid can also a Hunter because they have Track Beast and Track Humanoid. What is your point? That another class has skills passingly similar to another? That's great, but a Hunter does not encompass the core values of a Slayer no matter how hard you try. They have no anti-magic, because they do not cast magic. They do not manipulate it in the way a Slayer class would.

Anti-magic would be implemented as a core theme, and flavour all Slayer abilities, just as 'Beer' flavours the Brewmaster abilities like Keg Smash and Dizzying Haze.

Despite this, you are continually strawmanning the concept and arguing semantics. Try harder.

[Futhark]

Don't go there. Since the only thing a Tinker brings to the table are physical ranged attacks, traps, and mechanical pets, they could easily be a Hunter fourth spec.

[Ielenia]

Aspect of the Iron Hawk, Deterrence

The abilities I listed above.

Teriz, you are giving examples of random abilities that have a semblance of the effect Thimagryn is talking about.

You are doing the exact same thing other people did against your Tinker class idea, and you rebuked by saying those aren't valid arguments because they're not the especific abilities you were asking for.

Don't go there. Since the only thing a Tinker brings to the table are physical ranged attacks, traps, and mechanical pets, they could easily be a Hunter fourth spec.

100% on the money there.

[Teriz]

Don't go there. Since the only thing a Tinker brings to the table are physical ranged attacks, traps, and mechanical pets, they could easily be a Hunter fourth spec.

Actually it couldn't, since technology is outside the Hunter's design space.

[Ielenia]

Actually it couldn't, since technology is outside the Hunter's design space.

Are you sure? One could make the argument that using traps, bombs, pets, guns and wear mail could make the hunter a good candidate to have the tinker as its 4th spec.

[Teriz]

Are you sure? One could make the argument that using traps, bombs, pets, guns and wear mail could make the hunter a good candidate to have the tinker as its 4th spec.

Except Hunter pets aren't machines, and they don't throw bombs. Tinkers don't use traps, and if they follow the WC3 model, they won't even use guns.

[Hatecore]

Except Hunter pets aren't machines, and they don't throw bombs. Tinkers don't use traps, and if they follow the WC3 model, they won't even use guns.

Tinkers (aka tinkerers) are among the smartest of the adventurers setting out to explore and conquer Azeroth. The creators of incredible inventions, from crazy multipurpose knives to steam saws to siege engines, their devices allow them to overcome nearly any situation — and if they don't have the device they need, they just might be able to design and create a new one on the spot. Tinkers have a reputation for being dangerous companions, born mainly of reckless goblins experimenting with explosives. However, tinkers are not usually danger-prone. The real problem arises when they mess with gunpowder or try to build a better steam engine, and even then mishaps and explosions do not occur as often as many believe. However, the true heart of the tinker profession can be found in the steady craftsmanship of the dwarves and the wild-eyed curiosity of the gnomes. As tinkers begin to spread to all the races of Azeroth, the idea of the "typical tinker" may continue to change, but inventiveness and intelligence will always be an important part. Tinkers are most commonly found among the dwarves, gnomes, and goblins as they produce rifles, zeppelins, and other technological innovations currently found on Azeroth. With their general disinterest in technology, night elves, orcs and tauren are the least likely to be tinkers

Engineering and only 3 races are them lore wise

http://www.wowwiki.com/Tinker

[Ielenia]

Except Hunter pets aren't machines, and they don't throw bombs. Tinkers don't use traps, and if they follow the WC3 model, they won't even use guns.

Hunters use bombs, hunters use guns, hunters use traps... heck, the Survival spec deals with technology to deal damage. Sure, it's not the central theme of the spec, but it's very much present all over its abilities, namely explosive shot and all the traps. Plus, as for your 'tinker won't even use guns', if it wants to be a class in WoW it needs to use either melee or ranged weapons. Axes, swords and maces, or guns and bows or staves and wands. Besides, which would be the core stat of your tinker? intellect, agility or strength?

EDIT: Hatecore, where did you find that quote?

[Hatecore]

Hunters use bombs, hunters use guns, hunters use traps... heck, the Survival spec deals with technology to deal damage. Sure, it's not the central theme of the spec, but it's very much present all over its abilities, namely explosive shot and all the traps. Plus, as for your 'tinker won't even use guns', if it wants to be a class in WoW it needs to use either melee or ranged weapons. Axes, swords and maces, or guns and bows or staves and wands. Besides, which would be the core stat of your tinker? intellect, agility or strength?

EDIT: Hatecore, where did you find that quote?

From http://www.wowwiki.com/Tinker

taken from The Warcraft RPG page 63 and World of Warcraft: The Roleplaying Game page 86

[Teriz]

Hunters use bombs,

Hunters use bombs? Since when?

hunters use guns, hunters use traps...

Tinkers use none if those things.

heck, the Survival spec deals with technology to deal damage.

Link?

Sure, it's not the central theme of the spec, but it's very much present all over its abilities, namely explosive shot and all the traps.

Yeah, none of that is based on tech.

Plus, as for your 'tinker won't even use guns', if it wants to be a class in WoW it needs to use either melee or ranged weapons. Axes, swords and maces, or guns and bows or staves and wands. Besides, which would be the core stat of your tinker? intellect, agility or strength?

It doesn't really matter what weapon they would equip. Their attacks and abilities would come from the hammer tank.

- - - Updated - - -

From http://www.wowwiki.com/Tinker

taken from The Warcraft RPG page 63 and World of Warcraft: The Roleplaying Game page 86

The RPG isn't cannon lore chief.