Tinker Discussion Thread

[Ielenia]

I used those as an argument before and discovered that the tinker is part of the RPG and therefore, NOT canon. :/

Yet 'High Tinker' really is just a political position within the Gnomes' nation.

- - - Updated - - -

No it's also a lore difference. A farmer swinging around a sword is a far less powerful warrior than the actual Warrior. That's a gameplay difference and a lore difference.

Again, there is no lore difference. You claim there is a lore difference yet you've never shown any evidence of your words.

[Wildberry]

That's not true. I wanted Tinkers before he even made his 1st thread.

Congratulations! 1 person liking something =/= popular idea.

This Tinker stuff really started to pollute MMO-Champion back when Teriz fired up his account and started preaching about technology while making leaps in logic and committing roughly 50% of the logical fallacies in the book.

[Solzan Nemesis]

This Tinker stuff really started to pollute MMO-Champion back when Teriz fired up his account and started preaching about technology while making leaps in logic and committing roughly 50% of the logical fallacies in the book.

If he had not I would have made one myself. Though I would have stopped at one thread, and it would not be for debating but for ideas and some fun conversations... Like Teriz first thread on Tinkers (I think it was his first). Anyways seemlier to others you have new class or expansion ideas.

[Gothicshark]

http://www.wowwiki.com/Tinker <-- Class
http://www.wowwiki.com/Engineering <-- profession

I'll trust wowwiki over your "most likely" guess. I don't see how a dictionary would change that.

WOWWiki has not been moderated since Wrath, the people who ran that site moved to WOWPedia, and are fully Endorsed by Blizzard.

So please adjust accordingly.

http://wowpedia.org/Engineering
http://wowpedia.org/Tinker

[Dispraise]

No it's also a lore difference.

No, it isn't. There is no lore difference. Your level one warrior is still a warrior, despite being weaker.

[Solzan Nemesis]

WOWWiki has not been moderated since Wrath, the people who ran that site moved to WOWPedia, and are fully Endorsed by Blizzard.

So please adjust accordingly.

http://wowpedia.org/Engineering
http://wowpedia.org/Tinker

Agreed . Too bad you are about to put me on ignore for disagreeing with you about Tinkers.

[Manabomb]

And that pertains to the discussion... how?

Well your disclaimer of trying to make engineering seem similar to a tinkerer falls fairly short when other classes use mechanics from different professions, such as enchanting in general taking arcane power, inscription using runes, alchemy using fluids and flasks (see monk teas and brews much?). I mean, if you really really looked hard you could probably give each profession a class in which it "copies" but in reality they really don't and the efforts of trying to use engineering as an excuse for no tinkerer is ultimately redundant. Saying we can't have a tinkerer because of engineering is the same level of stupidity as saying we can't have a warrior because we already have a weaponsmith.

I mean, I know you're a melee warlock champion, but let's be real here, there's no real reason not to have a tinkerer class.

[Ielenia]

Well your disclaimer of trying to make engineering seem similar to a tinkerer falls fairly short when other classes use mechanics from different professions, such as enchanting in general taking arcane power, inscription using runes, alchemy using fluids and flasks (see monk teas and brews much?). I mean, if you really really looked hard you could probably give each profession a class in which it "copies" but in reality they really don't and the efforts of trying to use engineering as an excuse for no tinkerer is ultimately redundant. Saying we can't have a tinkerer because of engineering is the same level of stupidity as saying we can't have a warrior because we already have a weaponsmith.

I mean, I know you're a melee warlock champion, but let's be real here, there's no real reason not to have a tinkerer class.

You... have no idea what we're talking about here, do you?

And calling me a 'melee warlock champion' is so laughable I won't even comment on that. But no, engineering makes a tinker class redundant because thematically, both are one and the same.

[mickybrighteyes]

Tinkers fill a roll that WoW dose not have.

There's tanks... healers... and DD.... We don't have any other roles to fill that the devs will take seriously.

[Solzan Nemesis]

You... have no idea what we're talking about here, do you?

Sure I am basis, but I like Manabomb's point.

There's tanks... healers... and DD.... We don't have any other roles to fill that the devs will take seriously.

I did not mean that kinda of roll. Sorry for not being clear.

[Manabomb]

You... have no idea what we're talking about here, do you?

And calling me a 'melee warlock champion' is so laughable I won't even comment on that. But no, engineering makes a tinker class redundant because thematically, both are one and the same.

Actually on that front you are most definitely wrong. Engineering by design has a few clutch cooldowns and is hardly a class crafted and made around technology. So, I'm pretty sure a melee warlock champion such as yourself is probably too caught up in the fanfics of illidan returning to actually be able to separate the two.

If engineering makes a tinkerer redundant then enchanting means mages should not exist and blacksmithing basically means warriors shouldn't exist, because by your definition a profession should be able to use every single piece of weaponry, technology or magic it creates. Last time I checked an engineer can't make a power suit of robotic death to fight with. And before you link, no, the sky golem doesn't count.

It's almost as bad as saying monks shouldn't have a tanking spec because you can drink alcohol already in the game if you roll a chef.

[Ihnasir]

I just love the design of the Engineer in Torchlight II and think that playstyle would be amazing in WoW, so much awesome solo potential with helpful little robot pets like the Healing Bot and the little Turret Bot.

[Teriz]

No, it isn't. There is no lore difference. Your level one warrior is still a warrior, despite being weaker.

I'm not talking about a level 1warrior, I'm talking about anyone who can pick up a sword and fight. Like those farmers in Farshire who fight the undead. They're also "warriors", and the only difference between them and the warrior class is power levels.

[Ielenia]

Actually on that front you are most definitely wrong. Engineering by design has a few clutch cooldowns and is hardly a class crafted and made around technology. So, I'm pretty sure a melee warlock champion such as yourself is probably too caught up in the fanfics of illidan returning to actually be able to separate the two.

Can you stop with the 'melee warlock champion' and veiled insults BS? One of the very things I've said about both of those classes is that they both have very little to no chance at all of being implemented. The only real 'pro-DH' thing I've said is that, between Tinkers and DHs, DHs have a better chance of being made in the game for already existing in canon and lore, and because of the heavily foreshadowed Burning Legion expansion. That's all.

If engineering makes a tinkerer redundant then enchanting means mages should not exist

A fail argument that was debunked many times before. Engineers and Tinkers are one and the same thematically and in lore. As for Enchanters and mages, enchanters are simply a school of magic, with player mages knowing other schools of magic.

and blacksmithing basically means warriors shouldn't exist

Another fail argument. A blacksmith is nothing like a warrior. One trains in using swords, axes and maces and to move around in plate armor. The other trains the arts of metallurgy and metalwork. How you can consider both one and the same is beyond me.

because by your definition a profession should be able to use every single piece of weaponry, technology or magic it creates.

Nice lie. I never said that. I just said that the reason engineers and tinkers are the same is because both do the same thing: create and use technology armaments.

Last time I checked an engineer can't make a power suit of robotic death to fight with. And before you link, no, the sky golem doesn't count.

I do link it because it does count.

It's almost as bad as saying monks shouldn't have a tanking spec because you can drink alcohol already in the game if you roll a chef.

That has nothing to do with anything, but it's cute to watch you flail around and hitting nothing.

[Solzan Nemesis]

I got an idea. Teriz you should start a Tinkers' Union on these here forums. Get people to use a pro tinker base sig or something and make a fan thread.

[Sylreick]

I do think a class based on tech abilities using tools and mechs being cool, but not being called "Tinkers". The name just sounds ridiculous. Engineer would be better, but there's a profession using that. Also, what weapons would they use? I don't see how a tech based class would even pick up anything except a gun.

[Solzan Nemesis]

A fail argument that was debunked many times before. Engineers and Tinkers are one and the same thematically and in lore. As for Enchanters and mages, enchanters are simply a school of magic, with player mages knowing other schools of magic.

Maybe I missed something when I skipped a few pages but I do not think its been debunked. Some people said something against the idea but not really debunked it.

[Hatecore]

No it's also a lore difference. A farmer swinging around a sword is a far less powerful warrior than the actual Warrior. That's a gameplay difference and a lore difference.

Stop dodging it

show me 1 Tinker who is not Considered a engineer lore wise

[Solzan Nemesis]

Stop dodging it

show me 1 Tinker who is not Considered a engineer lore wise

Huh...I am not Teriz, but do I count if I show one. Mine is Gazlowe. http://wowpedia.org/Gazlowe

[Teriz]

I do think a class based on tech abilities using tools and mechs being cool, but not being called "Tinkers". The name just sounds ridiculous. Engineer would be better, but there's a profession using that. Also, what weapons would they use? I don't see how a tech based class would even pick up anything except a gun.

Technician, Machinist, Gearmaster, Mechanic, Artificer, Inventor, Siegecrafter, Mekkgineer, etc. are all valid names for a WoW technology class.