The Bard will be the next class in WoW. Here's why...

[Teriz]

A) Snide.

B) As I've told you in past debates, I've brought this up down in the Warlock forum. People who actually play warlocks do not think the class represents demon hunters, and a majority felt that the two classes can coexist in game.

Of course if the option presented itself, people would prefer to play a stand alone DH class. The problem is in actual WoW itself, there's no space for such a class to exist, thus that option isn't really on the table.

It would be better to rephrase your question into this;

Would you be okay with Blizzard completely overhauling and revamping the Warlock class in order to bring a Demon Hunter class into the game?

That would be the more accurate scenario. See how many people on the Warlock forum support that one.

[Daez]

I just see no use of a full on support class. We already have hybrids and raid utility abilities. What could a bard truly offer what a healer or a hybrid can not? You have to remember that in the end the bard will have to be useful enough in order to replace either a healing spot or a DPS spot and I just don't see Blizzard trying to balance a whole fight just so bards can be viable.

Taking the example of one of the bards "buffs" or abilities. Giving yourself a 10% dmg buff that scales depending on group size. You'd have to make that buff 100% for it to be even viable in 10/25 man mode. You would literally have to give the raid a spread 100% dmg buff for a bard not to be replaced by a DPS as the way I see it.

Bards are a hybrid class. They have been designed as a hybrid in almost all games. They would be a dps/healer hybrid with probably something along instruments, songs and battle as their specs. That being said, I just don't see them being a WoW class. Blizzard has had two games where they could have introduced them and chose not to before WoW even came on the scene. We are much more likely to get a class that is truly steeped in WoW lore.

[Florena]

Again, I'm just not seeing what the problem is.

1. Warlocks already have Metamorphosis, Immolation, and a glyph that enhances their armor and allows them to fight in close (10yd) range.
2. Illidan and Demon Hunters are already heavily connected to Warlock lore.
3. Warlocks can already use 1h swords.
4. Warlocks already have DH-type abilities like Grimore of Sacrifice, Sense Demon, Fury Ward, Pursuit, and Burning Wrath.
5. Night Elves being able to become Mages in Cataclysm opens the door to them eventually being able to become Warlocks.
6. We already have an example of a spell-casting ranged spec being able to also fight in melee range (Mistweaver Monks).

What's the issue? All the pieces are in place, and all it would take is for Blizzard to execute it.

It appears that the only argument against this is that DH fans are spoiled rotten children who want an entire class all their own at the expense of existing classes that already possess DH abilities and themes.

1. Yes, they do have those abilities. No argument there and is the main reason I don't expect to actually ever see a DH class.
2. Not really. They're both connected to demon lore, but differ in motives and methods. They're similar 'enough' to not warrant another class but still different enough that a demon hunter fan likely isn't going to be satisfied by a warlock with a glyph.
3. Yes but they don't have a full set of melee abilltiies. A full fledged DH warlock spec would need those.
4. See #1. But being a DH isn't just about spellcasting, people want the dual wielding melee fighter that uses magic as support, not a spell caster that 'can' poke things with a 1h sword.
5. IF they ever add more race/class combos and even then accepting highborn mages back in is a far cry from having any sort of tolerance for warlocks in Darnassus. Even the Highborne have restrictions put on them.
6. The difference is that A. mistweavers are healers, not ranged dps and do not have ranged attacks other than jade lightning, and 2. fistweavers use the same same melee attack options that all monks have access to, that the class was built from the ground up to have. Warlocks to have a melee spec would need a slew of new melee abillities, otherwise it would feel cheap and tacked on.

[Jtree]

Of course if the option presented itself, people would prefer to play a stand alone DH class. The problem is in actual WoW itself, there's no space for such a class to exist, thus that option isn't really on the table.

It would be better to rephrase your question into this;

Would you be okay with Blizzard completely overhauling and revamping the Warlock class in order to bring a Demon Hunter class into the game?

That would be the more accurate scenario. See how many people on the Warlock forum support that one.

That's the thing: Warlocks do not see a need for an "overhaul" to make room for a DH.

Demo is overall in a good design spot right now. DA is liked and wanted as a legit tanking spec. Neither of them represent demon hunters to those of us who play warlocks. (I am far from a great lock myself, but I've been merrily playing Demo since BC.)

[Teriz]

1. Yes, they do have those abilities. No argument there and is the main reason I don't expect to actually ever see a DH class.
2. Not really. They're both connected to demon lore, but differ in motives and methods. They're similar 'enough' to not warrant another class but still different enough that a demon hunter fan likely isn't going to be satisfied by a warlock with a glyph.

The Warlock Green Fire quest and the Black Harvest connects Warlocks to DH lore.

3. Yes but they don't have a full set of melee abilltiies. A full fledged DH warlock spec would need those.

Warlocks already have Demon Slash. All they need is 1 more melee ability. A magic/melee hybrid doesn't require a large amount of melee abilities. Enhancement Shaman for example only have 2 melee abilities.

4. See #1. But being a DH isn't just about spellcasting, people want the dual wielding melee fighter that uses magic as support, not a spell caster that 'can' poke things with a 1h sword.

Then let them Dual wield, and give them an additional melee ability that works with their existing one.

5. IF they ever add more race/class combos and even then accepting highborn mages back in is a far cry from having any sort of tolerance for warlocks in Darnassus. Even the Highborne have restrictions put on them.

All you need to do is have their covens hidden in the underbelly of Darnassus. Blizzard can easily circumnavigate the lore if necessary.

6. The difference is that A. mistweavers are healers, not ranged dps and do not have ranged attacks other than jade lightning, and 2. fistweavers use the same same melee attack options that all monks have access to, that the class was built from the ground up to have. Warlocks to have a melee spec would need a slew of new melee abillities, otherwise it would feel cheap and tacked on.

Fair point. However like I said earlier, you only need a couple more melee abilities to make a functional melee specialization ala Enhancement Shaman.

- - - Updated - - -

That's the thing: Warlocks do not see a need for an "overhaul" to make room for a DH.

Yes, but Blizzard would. You can't have two different classes that share the same theme and ability set.

[Hammerfest]

You can't have two different classes that share the same theme and ability set.

We already do.

[Ielenia]

Three plate specializations (Strength Tank, Strength DPS, Int Healer) means 31-ish plate pieces each.
Three mail specializations (Agility DPS (Enhancement + all 3 hunter specs), Int DPS (Elemental), Int Healer (Resto)) means 21-ish pieces each
Three leather specializations (Agility DPS/Tank, Int DPS, Int Healer) means 22 pieces each
Two cloth specializations (Int DPS, Int Healer) means 35 cloth pieces each

Using your logic, Mail is still in the worst situation, with Leather only slightly better. And that doesn't get into the differing stat priority between Enhance, Survival, Marksmanship, and Beast Mastery. (I don't play a hunter so I won't even try to compare.)

You do one small fallacy: 'Int DPS' mail and 'Int Healer' mail are simply just one and the same. Because elemental shamans have a passive skill that turns 'Spirit' into 'Hit'. So, two specs, meaning still 32 mail pieces for each spec average.

[Teriz]

We already do.

If you're talking about priests and paladins, you're wrong.

[Jtree]

The Warlock Green Fire quest and the Black Harvest connects Warlocks to DH lore.

Only so far as it tells us that Kanrethad Ebonlock was present when Illidan was killed, and he stole the secret of metamorphosis afterwards.

The full story also tells us that other Harvest Members set out to study the Old God derived powers of the Twilight's Hammer (affliction), and the unlimited flames of Firelands (destruction).

Kanrethad did not become a DH; rather, he became the ultimate demonic summoner, and was also quite proud of his Deathwing derived Cataclysm spell.

The lesson of the Council of the Black Harvest is that warlocks are agents of every dangerous and destructive power.

Yes, but Blizzard would. You can't have two different classes that share the same theme and ability set.

This is the part where you say "demons" and I say "that's an absurdly narrow definition of either class".

As for "ability set"? A playable DH class is going to need a huge new spellbook. The only limit to their new spells, abilities, proficiencies, glyphs, talents, and reources, is imagination. And it doesn't take a lot of that to see that they could diverge wildly from warlocks.

[Teriz]

The lesson of the Council of the Black Harvest is that warlocks are agents of every dangerous and destructive power.

The lesson of the Black Harvest is that all things demonic-based in WoW go to the Warlock class.

This is the part where you say "demons" and I say "that's an absurdly narrow definition of either class".

As for "ability set"? A playable DH class is going to need a huge new spellbook. The only limit to their new spells, abilities, proficiencies, glyphs, talents, and reources, is imagination. And it doesn't take a lot of that to see that they could diverge wildly from warlocks.

The melee ability set resembles Rogues. The spell casting ability set resembles Warlocks. You simply cannot create a WC3-based DH class (the version the fans want) without severely overlapping with those two classes. Blizzard DESIGNED Rogues and Warlocks to have aspects of the DH class from the beginning.

[Thimagryn]

MW Monks show that you can have an INT ranged magic spec that can perform Melee DPS. Exactly as a DH subspec would.

You mean a Warlock melee subspec. Again, there's no reason to bring Demon Hunter into this particular example when there's absolutely no need to. What you are talking about is a Warlock spec and not a Demon Hunter. Demon Hunters being identified as INT-based Ranged Magic users who can perform Melee DPS misrepresents what they are generally identified as - Melee-centric fighters who employ the use of spells. You wouldn't confuse MW Monks with Enhancement Shamans would you?

Except the only thing stopping Warlocks from completely owning the DH identity at this point is the Melee component.

And Night Elves? And Ritual Blinding? And all the lore that has been telling us Warlocks aren't actually Demon Hunters? There's plenty of stopgaps that require addressing. Like I said, we could say the Priest and Paladins are essentially the same with the missing 'Plate Armor and Shield' components, but that would be ignoring the Paladin Identity. The difference here is the Paladin is fully fleshed out whereas the Demon Hunter simply has lore that has not been addressed yet in WoW.

That's quite a ridiculous comparison. Priests and Paladins are quite different from each other, and Blizzard has widened those differences throughout the life of WoW. The very fact that Priests use Shadow magic makes a merger of those classes impossible, because Paladins cannot wield shadow magic. That's just one example of several.another one being that. Paladins come from a pretty large archetype, whereas DHs come from a very narrow one completely constructed by Blizzard

And Warlocks use Afflictions and Curses which Demon Hunters do not. Warlocks summon a wealth of Demons which Demon Hunters have not been shown to do since Vanilla. Warlocks are even described as frail spellcasters, an antithesis to the martially trained Demon Hunters that we have seen at Black Temple even. If they are truly one and the same, then the Green Fire quest wouldn't have to dance around Warlocks imitating Illidan. They could have said they obtained the Writings of the Dark Herald and did the full jump into Demon Hunter. Yet they did not, and they left things completely separated. It's as separate as Priestess of the Moon and Druids despite sharing one spell.

When you say the only missing component is Warlock Melee, that is akin to saying Druids only need to use a Bow and they would be a Priestess of the Moon since they already have Moon-based magic and ranged attacks. It is akin to Priests using Shields and Plate armor. Yes, these class identities are different and well defined. In the case of the Demon Hunter, what little we know of them tells us they are not Warlocks. The distinction remains even when Illidan consumed the powers OF a Warlock. The only time the name has been referenced is through the Glyph of Demon Hunting, and frankly that was a simply game mechanic designed by one who no longer works at Blizzard. The glyph remains as a supplement, not a basis for a new spec.

You could even say now that over 10 years, Blizzard has implemented many heroes' abilities into the existing classes. Rogues got more Warden spells, Druids got Priestess of the Moon spells, Hunters got Dark Ranger and Sentinel spells. Yet it remains that these classes are undeniably Rogues, Druids and Hunters; not Wardens, Priestesses or Dark Rangers. Not once has any other class been merged into any existing one. That is why a Warlock with a Melee spec will always remain a Warlock.

[Ielenia]

There are many pieces of non-spirit gear also created, as spirit becomes useless beyond the hit cap for Elemental. Resto can technically stack spirit on every piece. Not ideal, but still an option. So no, not a fallacy.

Yes. Yes, it's a fallacy, because both sides can use either piece without any really meaningful drawback to their DPS/HPS.

[Thimagryn]

A DH class would need to reinvent itself without these abilities. And that in and of itself is risky because how do you make the class still feel like a DH without its WC 3 spells, and without taking away too much and making it fee like something else? It could be done, but the end result won't be what many people want out of the class.

Heroes of the Storm did exactly that. Evasion is now a short-cooldown active skill, he has dashing and sweeping strikes, his Meta is Melee focusing on Attack speed and his basic attacks reduce his cooldowns.

Then there are multiple units from Warcraft 3 that have a similar vein to Demon Hunter abilties. Faerie Dragons, Obsidian Destroyers and Spellbreakers are all themed on the same anti-magic as Mana Burn. Anti-magic is a theme that fits the 'Fight fire with fire' theme, draws inspiration from Warcraft 3 and is a spell theme that Warlocks do not actually use. While these spells don't necessarily need Mana Drain mechanics, they could easily be used to theme how Demon Hunters use spells in battle. Spell reflection, Spell absorption, Control Magic... It's all there.

[Jtree]

The lesson of the Black Harvest is that all things demonic-based in WoW go to the Warlock class.

For the time being.

Once, all things Undead were part of the paladin story. Then we got death knights.

Once, mending a sick world was for druids. Then we got a World Shaman.

Decent story telling can flesh out a sizable gap in the motivations, purposes, and powers of both classes.

The melee ability set resembles Rogues. The spell casting ability set resembles Warlocks. You simply cannot create a WC3-based DH class (the version the fans want) without severely overlapping with those two classes. Blizzard DESIGNED Rogues and Warlocks to have aspects of the DH class from the beginning.

So, can you list out this full "ability set"? Mind you, I'm talking about 150 to 170 total entries on this list.

And do rule out place-holder trash mobs from old expansions. Blizz has repeatedly demonstrated that they will redesign old trash mobs when a new, appropriate class has been created.

[Deleted]

Only if my bard can do magical songs of enchantment!

[Ielenia]

If a Resto Shaman uses all non-spirit pieces, they will run oom long before the boss dies. That is a major drawback to their HPS.

If an Elemental Shaman uses all spirit pieces, they will lose a significant amount of DPS due to the missing stats. That is a major drawback to their DPS.

And never, in any moment, I mentioned that resto shamans would wear ONLY non-spirit mail, and elemental shamans would wear ONLY spirit mail. For the same reason an arms warrior would not wear only plate with +hit on it. Because past a certain point it becomes useless and detrimental to his DPS. Just like a protection paladin won't wear only dodge plate. It would be detrimental to his survivability thanks to diminishing returns.

But if a resto shaman wears two, three or even maybe four pieces of non-spirit mail, it would not significantly alter his HPS to make a meaningful difference.

EDIT: BTW, ask any healer, no matter its class: there is a 'sort of' break-point for stacking +spirit. Past that point, the regen would be just too much, in detrimental of other stats like haste or crit.

[Teriz]

You mean a Warlock melee subspec. Again, there's no reason to bring Demon Hunter into this particular example when there's absolutely no need to. What you are talking about is a Warlock spec and not a Demon Hunter. Demon Hunters being identified as INT-based Ranged Magic users who can perform Melee DPS misrepresents what they are generally identified as - Melee-centric fighters who employ the use of spells. You wouldn't confuse MW Monks with Enhancement Shamans would you?

If the argument is that the game needs Demon Hunters to fight the Legion, then lore-based Warlocks beginning to become a new generation of Demon Hunters makes perfect sense. There's already a lore basis for this, since Warlocks have actively studied Demon Hunters for years and have taken their secrets. As for this DH spec being INT-based, WoD changes armor stats based on spec. So a DH spec could switch INT specs for AGI specs on the fly without a need for an entire itemization change.

And Night Elves? And Ritual Blinding? And all the lore that has been telling us Warlocks aren't actually Demon Hunters? There's plenty of stopgaps that require addressing.

You can address that with a paragraph's worth of lore changes. The obstacles you're talking about are insignificant at best. Certainly not on the scale of removing spells and abilities from existing classes, or bastardizing the DH concept to fit in modern WoW.

Like I said, we could say the Priest and Paladins are essentially the same with the missing 'Plate Armor and Shield' components, but that would be ignoring the Paladin Identity. The difference here is the Paladin is fully fleshed out whereas the Demon Hunter simply has lore that has not been addressed yet in WoW.

The difference here is that Paladins and Priests are different on the core level. Priests have a large shadow undercurrent that Paladins don't have. Paladins have an offensive, holy warrior aspect that Priests don't have. Warlocks and Demon Hunters are essentially the same on all levels except for the melee component.

And Warlocks use Afflictions and Curses which Demon Hunters do not.

http://www.wowhead.com/spell=38010/curse-of-flames

Warlocks summon a wealth of Demons which Demon Hunters have not been shown to do since Vanilla.

http://www.wowhead.com/spell=41117

Warlocks are even described as frail spellcasters, an antithesis to the martially trained Demon Hunters that we have seen at Black Temple even.

I don't know where you pulled that from. Blizzard has made Warlocks probably the most sturdy casters in the game. Their demonic form gives them the equivalent of plate armor.

If they are truly one and the same, then the Green Fire quest wouldn't have to dance around Warlocks imitating Illidan. They could have said they obtained the Writings of the Dark Herald and did the full jump into Demon Hunter. Yet they did not, and they left things completely separated. It's as separate as Priestess of the Moon and Druids despite sharing one spell.

Druids and Priestess of the Moon don't share the same theme. Warlocks and DHs do. That's the difference. As for DHs and Warlocks being completely separated, I couldn't disagree more. There's an earlier post in this thread where someone lists DH attributes, and I link him directly to those exact same attributes in the Warlock class.

When you say the only missing component is Warlock Melee, that is akin to saying Druids only need to use a Bow and they would be a Priestess of the Moon since they already have Moon-based magic and ranged attacks.

Again, false equivalence. PotMs and Druids do not share the same theme.

Yes, these class identities are different and well defined. In the case of the Demon Hunter, what little we know of them tells us they are not Warlocks. The distinction remains even when Illidan consumed the powers OF a Warlock. The only time the name has been referenced is through the Glyph of Demon Hunting, and frankly that was a simply game mechanic designed by one who no longer works at Blizzard. The glyph remains as a supplement, not a basis for a new spec.

Except you forget that even DH lore states that Illidan was once a Mage or some other form of spellcaster that defeated a demon and took his melee weapons. So the very nature of the DH is a former spellcaster who develops melee abilities.

You could even say now that over 10 years, Blizzard has implemented many heroes' abilities into the existing classes. Rogues got more Warden spells, Druids got Priestess of the Moon spells, Hunters got Dark Ranger and Sentinel spells. Yet it remains that these classes are undeniably Rogues, Druids and Hunters; not Wardens, Priestesses or Dark Rangers. Not once has any other class been merged into any existing one. That is why a Warlock with a Melee spec will always remain a Warlock.

Demon Hunters aren't a existing class though. So its not an issue to merge its concepts into an existing class. Which is exactly what Blizzard has been doing for the last decade.

[Teriz]

For the time being.

Once, all things Undead were part of the paladin story. Then we got death knights.

Um, wrong. Paladins fought the undead, they never were undead warriors themselves. That niche were the Death Knights from WC3.

Once, mending a sick world was for druids. Then we got a World Shaman.

Shaman and Druid have shared the nature theme since WC3. The difference is that Shaman are Elemental-based totemic warriors, and Druids are Shape-shifters who utilize the moon and stars. Blizzard gave nature that level of broadness for those classes to fit within. They never made demon magic broad enough for that to occur. Blizzard funneled all of the demonic-based WC3 attributes and abilities into the Warlock class at the end of WC3.

So, can you list out this full "ability set"? Mind you, I'm talking about 150 to 170 total entries on this list.

And do rule out place-holder trash mobs from old expansions. Blizz has repeatedly demonstrated that they will redesign old trash mobs when a new, appropriate class has been created.

http://www.mmo-champion.com/threads/...Hunters-(Long)

Enjoy.

[Hammerfest]

If you're talking about priests and paladins, you're wrong.

I'm right and I'm not just talking about priests and paladins.

[Thimagryn]

If the argument is that the game needs Demon Hunters to fight the Legion, then lore-based Warlocks beginning to become a new generation of Demon Hunters makes perfect sense. There's already a lore basis for this, since Warlocks have actively studied Demon Hunters for years and have taken their secrets. As for this DH spec being INT-based, WoD changes armor stats based on spec. So a DH spec could switch INT specs for AGI specs on the fly without a need for an entire itemization change.

Would be like saying Shamans would be the best class to become Monks in Pandaria because they already use Fist weapons and are attuned to the spirits of the land. Yes, they could write it in that way, but what is the reason for that?

The Legion coming back isn't a reason we need Demon Hunters. Player demand is what calls for this class, not lore. If you understand this, you will know why your idea of making it a Warlock subspec will never satisfy this. Again, it is the exact same as bringing in Tinker gameplay through any other means other than its own class. It wouldn't satisfy the underlying issues. When people are hungry for a new class, bandaids are not the solution.

Certainly not on the scale of removing spells and abilities from existing classes, or bastardizing the DH concept to fit in modern WoW.

You mean the stuff that happens during every Homogenization cycle for each expansion? Changing/removing spells and abilities is a natural progression of the game. Innervate, the spell that defined the Druid class in Vanilla, is on the chopping block for WoD. Player outrage is more of a myth than you make it out to be.

Demon Hunters aren't a existing class though. So its not an issue to merge its concepts into an existing class. Which is exactly what Blizzard has been doing for the last decade.

They aren't an existing class, so why would you define a Demon Hunter using Warlock terms? Warlocks are their own separate entity. No one brings up Shamans when discussing Monks. No one brings up Warriors when discussing Death Knights. No one brings up Priests when discussing Paladins. So why retain that Warlocks are necessary to define a Demon Hunter? There is no reason to when we've been shown, by example of Blizzard, that they will do whatever it takes to make their design work. This includes Blood Elves on the Horde, Death Knights playable despite being Scourge champions, and Pandaria as a full expansion that has no major villain associated with its theme. Gameplay, theme and lore are all adaptable to whatever design they choose.