View Poll Results: Psionics and Bards

Voters
151. You may not vote on this poll
  • Psionic

    27 17.88%
  • Bard

    36 23.84%
  • Psionics & Bards

    17 11.26%
  • No.

    71 47.02%
Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst ...
2
3
4
5
6
LastLast
  1. #61
    I RP my shadow priest (who started out as a guild NPC but took on a life as his own) as a "bard" in terms of combat ability-- his primary focus is emotional manipulation, rather than direct combat. If I translated him to a Pathfinder-system game, I'd probably want to use the bard class as a starting point and modify the specific class abilities, flavor text, and spell lists to suit the character (with the DM's oversight, of course.) This doesn't carry over to gameplay, however.

    However, WoW doesn't have a support role, so a bard-like class would be difficult to implement. Even if you're giving the other DPS a boost to their output and reducing the enemy's effectiveness at the cost of doing much lower personal DPS, some idiot is still going to spam meters and try to get you kicked for being "bad." (Seriously, this is from someone who's seen healers kicked from groups for not doing enough DPS before, meter worshipers are idiots.)

  2. #62
    Elemental Lord Teriz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Beach City
    Posts
    8,664
    Quote Originally Posted by Darkvoltinx View Post
    the no pet option one?
    That would be the one. Its like the Hunter version of GoSac.

  3. #63
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    That would be the one. Its like the Hunter version of GoSac.
    its a nice option for those who want it. the only complaint i have seen about it is.
    "why do we have to wait until level 100 to get it?"
    http://us.battle.net/wow/en/characte.../Zanjin/simple horde main
    http://www.mmo-champion.com/threads/...2#post25856782
    Coming soon Expansion ideas: Age of N'zoth, Assault on Agrus.

  4. #64
    Elemental Lord Teriz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Beach City
    Posts
    8,664
    Quote Originally Posted by Darkvoltinx View Post
    its a nice option for those who want it. the only complaint i have seen about it is.
    "why do we have to wait until level 100 to get it?"
    True, I'd rather see it earlier like in the level 30-60 talent range. However, the point is that that talent effectively killed the Ranger as a possible class concept.

  5. #65
    I'm a stronger supporter of Tinkerers and even Demon Hunters over either of these options.
    Originally Posted by Ghostcrawler
    Q: But who are the forum QQers going to QQ at now?
    A: They'll find another name and still miss the point that Blizzard designs as a collective.

  6. #66
    Quote Originally Posted by Ixuzcc View Post
    I'm a stronger supporter of Tinkerers and even Demon Hunters over either of these options.
    This. And that says a lot considering how against Demon Hunters I am.

    Psionic literally has no space for design that has not been taken by Shadow Priest, and honestly, while Warcraft has room for some silly stuff, hurting people with sound is just beyond silly into the territory of ridiculous. Bards were a bad April Fools joke, and should stay that way.
    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    If a building's about to collapse, you can debate whether it's better to demolish it or repair it, and you can make political-agenda arguments either way. Disputing gravity itself to claim it won't fall down is not a political position, it's just ignorance.

  7. #67
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    True, I'd rather see it earlier like in the level 30-60 talent range. However, the point is that that talent effectively killed the Ranger as a possible class concept.
    i think someone at blizzard said if the petless option works well enough it might be moved to a lower tier.
    http://us.battle.net/wow/en/characte.../Zanjin/simple horde main
    http://www.mmo-champion.com/threads/...2#post25856782
    Coming soon Expansion ideas: Age of N'zoth, Assault on Agrus.

  8. #68
    Quote Originally Posted by Fleugen View Post
    Bards were a bad April Fools joke, and should stay that way.
    Careful, you don't want all the anti-pandaren folks see you posting that.
    Originally Posted by Ghostcrawler
    Q: But who are the forum QQers going to QQ at now?
    A: They'll find another name and still miss the point that Blizzard designs as a collective.

  9. #69
    Quote Originally Posted by Dawnshadow View Post
    However, WoW doesn't have a support role, so a bard-like class would be difficult to implement. Even if you're giving the other DPS a boost to their output and reducing the enemy's effectiveness at the cost of doing much lower personal DPS, some idiot is still going to spam meters and try to get you kicked for being "bad." (Seriously, this is from someone who's seen healers kicked from groups for not doing enough DPS before, meter worshipers are idiots.)
    I think Blizzard would have an easier time making a support class than fixing the brand of stupid you note is already in the game.
    blah, new sig... something something

  10. #70
    Quote Originally Posted by Ixuzcc View Post
    Careful, you don't want all the anti-pandaren folks see you posting that.
    Technically I am one of those anti-pandaren folk. But what's done is done. All I can hope is Blizzard is at least competent enough to see the backlash created from the addition of such a joke, and never, ever repeat it.
    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    If a building's about to collapse, you can debate whether it's better to demolish it or repair it, and you can make political-agenda arguments either way. Disputing gravity itself to claim it won't fall down is not a political position, it's just ignorance.

  11. #71
    Dreadlord
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Kadath, Cold Wastes
    Posts
    903
    Quote Originally Posted by DomesticViolence View Post
    I thought these might be cool Character Classes in World Of Warcraft.

    I remember when Psionics were added to D&D and I was so excited when I got the Psionic's Handbook.


    I think it adds an interesting flavor to the mix.

    I think Bards could potentially be something really cool. Imagine if their weapons were varied? Different instruments had different graphical flares/properties when used. Maybe each spec uses a different set of instruments or songs. I thought it'd be cool if the Bard's music tied into whatever music was playing in the area you're in. It would be like another layer.

    What do you all think about those options?
    I also remember that book...the 2nd edition one, right? Yeah, problem is, I remember 1st edition Psionics too. And I remember incidents that began with "okay, break out the cards," ... and 5 hours later ended with "...now round 1 of combat begins".

    As long as psionics looked nothing at all like that, I'd be OK with it. I have absolutely no interest in a Bard, Tinker, Minstrel, or any other such ridiculous thing.
    The plural of anecdote is not "data".

  12. #72
    Quote Originally Posted by Fleugen View Post
    Technically I am one of those anti-pandaren folk. But what's done is done. All I can hope is Blizzard is at least competent enough to see the backlash created from the addition of such a joke, and never, ever repeat it.
    And here I thought that the Pandaren inclusion was widely praised and enjoyed by the majority.
    Originally Posted by Ghostcrawler
    Q: But who are the forum QQers going to QQ at now?
    A: They'll find another name and still miss the point that Blizzard designs as a collective.

  13. #73
    Quote Originally Posted by Ixuzcc View Post
    And here I thought that the Pandaren inclusion was widely praised and enjoyed by the majority.
    'Content' =/= 'Widely praised'

    The majority likely couldn't care less if they added walking sticks as a playable race. The two vocal minorities (For and Against) are about equal. But that's a discussion for another thread.
    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    If a building's about to collapse, you can debate whether it's better to demolish it or repair it, and you can make political-agenda arguments either way. Disputing gravity itself to claim it won't fall down is not a political position, it's just ignorance.

  14. #74
    The Patient Kowloon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Walled City
    Posts
    322
    While I do think it would be cool to add a fourth dynamic to the game; (ie: pure support class like a Bard), I think it would imbalance the game for PVP. I do see it's potential in PVE. However, that might make it feel like a requirement and simply put, nobody wants that.

    I voted "No".
    In the company of thieves, liars, beggars and whores
    I'll lay waiting, just waiting for my time to come.

  15. #75
    Quote Originally Posted by Ixuzcc View Post
    And here I thought that the Pandaren inclusion was widely praised and enjoyed by the majority.
    the joke was them being a playable race in WC3. which people actually like the idea.
    http://us.battle.net/wow/en/characte.../Zanjin/simple horde main
    http://www.mmo-champion.com/threads/...2#post25856782
    Coming soon Expansion ideas: Age of N'zoth, Assault on Agrus.

  16. #76
    Quote Originally Posted by Fleugen View Post
    'Content' =/= 'Widely praised'

    The majority likely couldn't care less if they added walking sticks as a playable race. The two vocal minorities (For and Against) are about equal. But that's a discussion for another thread.
    Im just saying, the inclusion of what once was used - but not conceptualized, as they came before - as a joke was obviously succesful enough that there isn't a case for Blizzard not to repeat it. Pandaren turned out just fine, it's a solid playable race. The very vocal hate for the race died out fairly quickly.

    Could be just the same with a bard class, if they conceptualized it well enough.

    That said, not a supporter of the idea of a bard class and I hope we won't get one. Tinkerers sound way more awesome.
    Originally Posted by Ghostcrawler
    Q: But who are the forum QQers going to QQ at now?
    A: They'll find another name and still miss the point that Blizzard designs as a collective.

  17. #77
    Quote Originally Posted by Ixuzcc View Post
    Im just saying, the inclusion of what once was used - but not conceptualized, as they came before - as a joke was obviously succesful enough that there isn't a case for Blizzard not to repeat it. Pandaren turned out just fine, it's a solid playable race. The very vocal hate for the race died out fairly quickly.

    Could be just the same with a bard class, if they conceptualized it well enough.

    That said, not a supporter of the idea of a bard class and I hope we won't get one. Tinkerers sound way more awesome.
    I wouldn't say it died. It comes up almost equally as often as the people who praise it.

    That said, I'd love a spellbreaker/mage knight class above anything else, but I know it's unlikely to happen.
    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    If a building's about to collapse, you can debate whether it's better to demolish it or repair it, and you can make political-agenda arguments either way. Disputing gravity itself to claim it won't fall down is not a political position, it's just ignorance.

  18. #78
    Quote Originally Posted by Fleugen View Post
    I wouldn't say it died. It comes up almost equally as often as the people who praise it.

    That said, I'd love a spellbreaker/mage knight class above anything else, but I know it's unlikely to happen.
    Well, I can't talk for the majority as I only really persude this website but I felt that the overwhelming Pandaren hatred spiked around Blizzcon and slowly died out until it was virtually non-existent around release of the game.

    Wasn't Death Knights, perhaps Unholy in particular, envisioned as a sort of spellbreaker class very early on?
    Originally Posted by Ghostcrawler
    Q: But who are the forum QQers going to QQ at now?
    A: They'll find another name and still miss the point that Blizzard designs as a collective.

  19. #79
    Elemental Lord Teriz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Beach City
    Posts
    8,664
    Quote Originally Posted by Kowloon View Post
    While I do think it would be cool to add a fourth dynamic to the game; (ie: pure support class like a Bard), I think it would imbalance the game for PVP. I do see it's potential in PVE. However, that might make it feel like a requirement and simply put, nobody wants that.

    I voted "No".
    Yeah, the only way a 4th role works is if Blizzard spread the support role to other classes as well. Like making Mistweaver a support role, or adding a 4th spec to Monks that was called support. In theory it could work, but why bother? Support works fine as is with classes giving buffs to groups. Adding a support spec just seems totally unnecessary.

  20. #80
    Quote Originally Posted by Ixuzcc View Post
    Well, I can't talk for the majority as I only really persude this website but I felt that the overwhelming Pandaren hatred spiked around Blizzcon and slowly died out until it was virtually non-existent around release of the game.

    Wasn't Death Knights, perhaps Unholy in particular, envisioned as a sort of spellbreaker class very early on?
    I wouldn't say nonexistant. It's more like they knew it was inevitable and couldn't be prevented no matter what they did, so they slowly stopped posting their hate. It still comes up, just now similarly to the pandaren praisers, it only comes up in threads asking how people enjoyed MoP as a whole. It's still around. Just less noticable.

    Yes, but I meant less of a necromantic feel and more of a battle mage (Tanks using shields and arcane bubbles mainly) feel to it. The Timewalker was my ideal vision, time-based heal spec, ranged time-based damage, and a bubble sort of like the Mage's alter time that reverted damage rather than prevented it. But I also realize it overlaps with mages, hence why I said I know it's unlikely to happen.

    What I described as Spellbreaker wasn't necessarily anti-magic class, but rather magical tank class. A tank that uses magic, and possibly due to it is more resistant to magic. But like I said, it's unlikely and I understand that.
    Last edited by Fleugen; 2014-03-14 at 11:42 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    If a building's about to collapse, you can debate whether it's better to demolish it or repair it, and you can make political-agenda arguments either way. Disputing gravity itself to claim it won't fall down is not a political position, it's just ignorance.

Posting Permissions

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