Page 40 of 46 FirstFirst ...
30
38
39
40
41
42
... LastLast
  1. #781
    Quote Originally Posted by Monstercloud View Post
    There's no such thing as "Soul-based magic"
    Magic involving souls is heavily involved in WoW, so yes there is. Demons used to require a Soul shard, which was earned through Drain Soul, to summon them. Soulstones and Healthstones were created from Soul Shards, as were Fire and Spellstones. (RIP) They're still used by the Affliction spec as their secondary resource, for Soulburn.

    To say no soul-based magic exists is a foolish claim.

    That's some heavy conjecture. Paladins have faith too, and their faith is rigorous and unerring compared to priests. One of the warlocks themes is demons... I don't know why you people think that all classes only have 1 theme that encompasses them entirely. Some hunters are experts with handling beasts, others are experts at firearms or their bow. One theme of rogues is poisons, another is being quick and agile in combat. Druids either embrace the wild and go for a feral angle, or are more in touch with nature, and go for a healing theme or "moon" theme..
    Of course Paladins have faith. Druids have faith as well. And Shaman. But it's not what their class idea is based on. Paladins are based on righteous retribution through the Light. Druids are based on Nature; The plants and the animals included. Animal spirits in WoW are considered Nature Spirits. Shamans are based on serving the Elements and the Ancestors.

    Once again...

    No such thing as "Soul-based spells." There's enough examples what constitutes as necromancy for anything to dealing with souls with arcane magic to include Drain Souls as a part of necromancy.
    What a coincidence, the class based on undeath has a spell related to a dead character being brought back to life. Whodathunk.

    As proven above, there is plenty of soul-based magic. All of it is encompased in the Warlock class.

    Pretty sure if a soul is getting reaped, the soul is affected.
    Pretty sure when I execute someone, they die. Yet Execute does not instantly kill my target, it just does damage.
    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.

  2. #782
    Quote Originally Posted by Fleugen View Post
    For a musician, he seems quite unwilling to make music.
    Source of Lorewalker singing or it didn't happen.
    He never ever said he doesn't like making music. And he even sings the Ballad of Liu Lang for this achievement.

    Mind Freeze. As it says before, Smash the target's mind with cold.
    Nice try. But we're talking magic type, not magic element. Spells that deal with the mind are psyonic. Fear and Mind Freeze are psyonic spells.

    Vampiric Touch is similar to Drain Life; Shadow magic, not necromancy. It involves no disease, no undeath.
    Vampiric Embrace is also Shadow magic, not necromancy. Involves no disease, no undeath.
    No disease, but does deal with necromancy for draining a target's life. You need to read more about necromancy in role-playing games.

    Sig image by Best-Signatures.com

  3. #783
    Quote Originally Posted by Thimagryn View Post
    Early in Warcraft's lore, Warlocks and Necromancy went hand in hand. Gul'dan was the first Warlock, and Kil'Jaedan taught him his craft, of which the use of Necromancy was 'reopened'. Who was it who instilled the original Death Knights with necromantic powers? Gul'dan. Who is it that granted Ner'zhul the powers of the Lich King? Kil'Jaedan.
    Actually, the original Death Knights were just humans with orc souls forced into their bodies. If you'll notice, Teron Gorefiend (The one example of an original death knight in WoW) has many abilities similar to Warlocks.

    Incinerate - Self explanatory.
    Doom Blossom - Dark cloud which casts Shadow Bolts.
    Crushing Shadows - Increases Shadow damage taken.

    His one necromantic ability is Shadow of Death, which spawns four Shadowy Constructs and turns the target into a ghost. Which, arguably, can be considered a soul-based magic as many Warlocks have.

    When it comes down to it, the only real separation is through gameplay. The themes are separated just enough so that there is room for 2 separate classes rather than one. This is exactly how Paladins came into play, originally having been part of the Priests/Clerics of Northshire Abbey.

    Priests having Shadow is simply an invention of WoW to separate them further from Paladins. If you look at all Shadow Priest in Warcraft 3, they all used Holy magic. If you look at examples of Priests in WoW even, there were no Shadow Priests until the Scarlet Onslaught in Wrath. It was a new concept that was brought to make Priests distinct, absolutely unsourced from anything prior.
    Indeed, it was not until they decided the Undead should have Priests that they gave Priests the Shadow side of things. And just as easily as you can say "They only gave Priests Shadow so they could be different from Paladins," I can say "They gave Priests Shadow because Undead had faith in the Forgotton Shadow." Equally true.

    Regardless of the reasoning, however, Priests had that option available to them. Paladins did not. Paladins were determined from the start to have been faithful only to the Light, as a force of righteous reckoning. Which does not fit the Forgotten Shadow, which is entirely based on preserving oneself.

    Demon Hunters do not have the option to not hunt Demons. It's in their name.

    So basically if you're requiring Bards or any class to be sourced from existing material, you're argument would mean Priests should not have Shadow magic at all because there was no existing material that showed they could use it. This means Paladins would have immediate overlap with Priests. Do you see how your argument runs thin when we stick to 'what we know'?
    Incorrect. Basically what I'm saying is Priests are based on Priests from Warcraft III, and expanded upon to include more Faiths. Demon Hunters, if they are based on Demon Hunters from Warcraft III (Which is what everyone wants), will NEED to be based on the idea fighting Demons with Demonic magic. Which they can't as Warlocks already cover Demonic magic.

    As I've already said, Bards CAN exist. They simply have no starting point. That doesn't prevent them from existing; They just need more work than something that does already exist.
    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.

  4. #784
    Eh, can't really see that happening.

  5. #785
    Quote Originally Posted by Ielenia View Post
    He never ever said he doesn't like making music. And he even sings the Ballad of Liu Lang for this achievement.
    Never saw that, but in the comments of that achievement:
    It's not actually Cho's hymn, but Liu Lang's. Lorewalker Ruolin in the Wandering Isle is likely the first person in game players will hear singing it, though.
    Nice try. But we're talking magic type, not magic element. Spells that deal with the mind are psyonic. Fear and Mind Freeze are psyonic spells.
    Fear affects the mind, yes. Mind Freeze is an assault of cold magic on the mind; It doesn't actually affect the mind any more than a Frost Fever aimed at someone's head.

    It's like a brain freeze. The cause is not an attack on your mind; It's the effect of cold on nerves attached to your mind.

    No disease, but does deal with necromancy for draining a target's life. You need to read more about necromancy in role-playing games.
    WoW is not the exact same as all other roleplaying games. They can, and all do, deviate in their definitions.

    Warlocks can drain a target's life through shadow magic. So too can Shadow Priests. Involves no necromancy.
    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.

  6. #786
    Quote Originally Posted by Fleugen View Post
    Indeed, it was not until they decided the Undead should have Priests that they gave Priests the Shadow side of things. And just as easily as you can say "They only gave Priests Shadow so they could be different from Paladins," I can say "They gave Priests Shadow because Undead had faith in the Forgotton Shadow." Equally true.
    Isn't that Headcanon? No spec is developed because of any one race. You seem to derive conclusions based on observation rather than design philosophy. Shadow was designed as a part of the Priest class, and therefore applies equally to all Priests. Priests even had unique racial abilities like Devouring Plague and Star Shards, so if you were to make any hint at Forsaken getting anything tailored to them, it would be the fact they used Diseases, not that they used Shadow. Every race can use Shadow.

    Regardless of the reasoning, however, Priests had that option available to them. Paladins did not. Paladins were determined from the start to have been faithful only to the Light, as a force of righteous reckoning. Which does not fit the Forgotten Shadow, which is entirely based on preserving oneself.
    You can't dismiss it so easily. The entire point you have been making against any class potentially similar to existing ones is that there are no distinction. That distinction comes from new concepts inserted into classes upon implemenation. We know Paladins are different mechanically and thematically from Priests because they GAVE Priests the use of Shadow magic. Priests and Paladins share the same faith regardless, as explained through Blood Elf, Draenei and Taurens. They derive the powers from the same source for the same reasons, the only difference being that Paladins wear armor and fight in melee whereas Priests do not. The fact that they use Shadow magic is superfluous to lore, since it does not inhabit any thematic difference in their faith to the Holy Light/Sun/Naaru.

    Demon Hunters do not have the option to not hunt Demons. It's in their name.
    Hunters seem to do plenty of things other than Hunt.

    Incorrect. Basically what I'm saying is Priests are based on Priests from Warcraft III, and expanded upon to include more Faiths. Demon Hunters, if they are based on Demon Hunters from Warcraft III (Which is what everyone wants), will NEED to be based on the idea fighting Demons with Demonic magic. Which they can't as Warlocks already cover Demonic magic.
    Yet you are scrutinizing Demon Hunters as if they can not be expanded upon. You just said Priest class is okay because it expanded a concept that would have overlapped, but in the case of Demon Hunters they can't be expanded? Why?

    If it was explained clearly that the method of using Demonic Magic was indeed a different method or source of power, it would be all that was needed to explain why your Demon Hunter class isn't summoning demons or casting curses and afflictions. Right now, it doesn't exist, because the Demon Hunter origins and methods are wrapped in complete mystery. Since we know they're mysterious, how is it logical that differences could not be epxlained?

    As I've already said, Bards CAN exist. They simply have no starting point. That doesn't prevent them from existing; They just need more work than something that does already exist.
    Yeah, but you're also being an unimaginative hardass considering your criteria for any class to work is to have a 100% fully functional example from Warcraft 3 or WoW NPCs. It's a requirement that fails to work against 90% of the classes in WoW, considering every class has brought new concepts and twists on every Unit or Hero it was based on.
    Last edited by Thimagryn; 2014-06-23 at 07:06 PM.

  7. #787
    Quote Originally Posted by Fleugen View Post
    Never saw that, but in the comments of that achievement:
    Which means nothing. Lorewalker still sings the Ballad, and he happily does so.

    Fear affects the mind, yes. Mind Freeze is an assault of cold magic on the mind; It doesn't actually affect the mind any more than a Frost Fever aimed at someone's head.
    Attacking the brain is not the same as attacking the mind. The spell says "mind" in both its name and tooltip.

    It's like a brain freeze. The cause is not an attack on your mind;
    No, it is an attack on your mind. The spell's name and tooltip both say so.

    WoW is not the exact same as all other roleplaying games. They can, and all do, deviate in their definitions.
    Warlocks can drain a target's life through shadow magic. So too can Shadow Priests. Involves no necromancy.
    Which are still necromancy. That's necromancy in RPGs. Manipulating the dead and draining the life of the living.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Fleugen View Post
    As I've already said, Bards CAN exist. They simply have no starting point. That doesn't prevent them from existing; They just need more work than something that does already exist.
    The Lorewalkers in Pandaria make for a pretty good starting point, does it not? Even the Explorer's League for the Alliance and the Reliquary for the Horde made some decent starting points.

    Sig image by Best-Signatures.com

  8. #788
    Quote Originally Posted by Thimagryn View Post
    Early in Warcraft's lore, Warlocks and Necromancy went hand in hand. Gul'dan was the first Warlock, and Kil'Jaedan taught him his craft, of which the use of Necromancy was 'reopened'. Who was it who instilled the original Death Knights with necromantic powers? Gul'dan. Who is it that granted Ner'zhul the powers of the Lich King? Kil'Jaedan.

    When it comes down to it, the only real separation is through gameplay. The themes are separated just enough so that there is room for 2 separate classes rather than one. This is exactly how Paladins came into play, originally having been part of the Priests/Clerics of Northshire Abbey.



    Priests having Shadow is simply an invention of WoW to separate them further from Paladins. If you look at all Shadow Priest in Warcraft 3, they all used Holy magic. If you look at examples of Priests in WoW even, there were no Shadow Priests until the Scarlet Onslaught in Wrath. It was a new concept that was brought to make Priests distinct, absolutely unsourced from anything prior.

    So basically if you're requiring Bards or any class to be sourced from existing material, you're argument would mean Priests should not have Shadow magic at all because there was no existing material that showed they could use it. This means Paladins would have immediate overlap with Priests. Do you see how your argument runs thin when we stick to 'what we know'?

    Not disagreeing with you on anything, but just wanted to add in something about Paladins. You can call them all being about the "light" your forgetting to take the race aspect into a lot of the game as well. Blood Elf Paladins, do not have faith in the light, they channel their power through the Sunwell, and in actual lore terms are Blood Knights. In reality some due chose to have "Faith" but it's only a minor thing for the most part, they are just channeling a spell in the end that happens to be light-based. Race and the class do sometimes adjust the class a tiny bit hence why their are races that don't have certain classes because it is against their beliefs like Tauren Rogues or Warlocks..

    As for Bards...ehh....doesn't seem to feel very WoW-like, but hey, Blizzard tends to do somethings off the wall at times. The only reason I think it won't happen, is Blizzard played a giant April Fools Joke about bringing the Bard Class around a few years ago. If they thought it was something to laugh at, why would they suddenly get serious about it.

    IMO even though many do have points about Demon Hunters already sort of being in the game, I still think its most likely. Blizzard has a man-crush for Illidan and so does most of the player community. He's really the only Hero class left that hasn't been directly in the game. Blizzard has made hints, that it is possible Illidan isn't dead and may appear in the game again and a class trainer seems like a very likely thing for them to do, specially when they decide to address the Burning Legion again, which as most of you know wasn't exactly put to bed in Burning Crusader.

  9. #789
    Quote Originally Posted by Thimagryn View Post
    Isn't that Headcanon? No spec is developed because of any one race. You seem to derive conclusions based on observation rather than design philosophy. Shadow was designed as a part of the Priest class, and therefore applies equally to all Priests. Priests even had unique racial abilities like Devouring Plague and Star Shards, so if you were to make any hint at Forsaken getting anything tailored to them, it would be the fact they used Diseases, not that they used Shadow. Every race can use Shadow.
    Incorrect. It was confirmed that in Vanilla WoW, all Forsaken Priests were Shadow Priests. This has been expanded over the years to allow Forsaken Priests to also be the other kinds, but at the start it was not headcanon that all Shadow Priests were Forsaken and all Forsaken Priests were Shadow.

    Gameplay is the only reason every race had all three options available at the start.

    You can't dismiss it so easily. The entire point you have been making against any class potentially similar to existing ones is that there are no distinction. That distinction comes from new concepts inserted into classes upon implemenation. We know Paladins are different mechanically and thematically from Priests because they GAVE Priests the use of Shadow magic. Priests and Paladins share the same faith regardless, as explained through Blood Elf, Draenei and Taurens. They derive the powers from the same source for the same reasons, the only difference being that Paladins wear armor and fight in melee whereas Priests do not. The fact that they use Shadow magic is superfluous to lore, since it does not inhabit any thematic difference in their faith to the Holy Light/Sun/Naaru.
    The fact that they use Shadow magic immediately differentiates them from Paladins, and nothing inhibited Priests from using Shadow magic. It did, however, inhibit Paladins who, again, are all about righteous retribution, not preserving oneself as the faith in the Forgotten Shadow requires.

    Where their faith lies is different. We've already had it confirmed that the deities one race serves (The exact comparison was Celestials to Loa) does not change the faith; Faith in An'she, the Naaru, and the Holy Light are all the same faith called by different names. Yes, Priests and Paladin share the faith in the Light, but they DO NOT share the faith in the Shadow; That is the difference. Paladins MUST be faithful ONLY to the Light, Priests can CHOOSE their faith.

    Hunters seem to do plenty of things other than Hunt.
    They hunt many things. If they were "Animal Hunters" you'd have a point.

    Yet you are scrutinizing Demon Hunters as if they can not be expanded upon. You just said Priest class is okay because it expanded a concept that would have overlapped, but in the case of Demon Hunters they can't be expanded? Why?
    Because they still need to stay true to their demonic magic use, which is covered by Warlocks. They need to stay true to their agile melee weapon abilities, which Rogues cover. They cannot without overlapping heavily.

    If it was explained clearly that the method of using Demonic Magic was indeed a different method or source of power, it would be all that was needed to explain why your Demon Hunter class isn't summoning demons or casting curses and afflictions. Right now, it doesn't exist, because the Demon Hunter origins and methods are wrapped in complete mystery.
    There is no other source of power for Demonic Magic. It all comes from Fel and Arcane, both of which are covered by Warlocks with the introduction of green fire.

    Yeah, but you're also being an unimaginative hardass considering your criteria for any class to work is to have a 100% fully functional example from Warcraft 3 or WoW NPCs.
    Incorrect. My criteria is a decent starting point that doesn't overlap with other classes, and a reason for the class to exist. Starting points usually point back to Warcraft III (But don't have to), and reasons for the class to exist include but are not limited to gameplay aspects, missing fighting techniques, or to fill gaps in lore.

    Demon Hunter's starting point clearly proves the similarities between themselves and Warlocks. Their reason to exist boils down to "A vocal minority won't accept how similar they are to Warlocks." They cannot exist.

    Bards have a starting point in WoW (The Dwarf fiddler); their reason to exist is a support class, which is flakey as it's hard to imagine a support class. But they CAN exist.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Ielenia View Post
    Which means nothing. Lorewalker still sings the Ballad, and he happily does so.
    Have yet to see proof.

    Attacking the brain is not the same as attacking the mind. The spell says "mind" in both its name and tooltip.

    No, it is an attack on your mind. The spell's name and tooltip both say so.
    Citation needed.

    Which are still necromancy. That's necromancy in RPGs. Manipulating the dead and draining the life of the living.
    You make many claims and provide no proof. Definition of WoW's necromancy needed.

    The Lorewalkers in Pandaria make for a pretty good starting point, does it not? Even the Explorer's League for the Alliance and the Reliquary for the Horde made some decent starting points.
    No, it does not. Despite Lorewalker Cho boring me to death, he was weak and couldn't defend himself from anything.

    The Reliquary appeared rather conveniently at the same time as Archaeology. Almost as if they were trying to say the Reliquary was filled with Archaeologists, just like the Explorer's League. They're not Bards.

    The only real starting point is the Dwarven Fiddler.
    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.

  10. #790
    Quote Originally Posted by AzazeltheRuthless View Post
    Not disagreeing with you on anything, but just wanted to add in something about Paladins. You can call them all being about the "light" your forgetting to take the race aspect into a lot of the game as well. Blood Elf Paladins, do not have faith in the light, they channel their power through the Sunwell, and in actual lore terms are Blood Knights. In reality some due chose to have "Faith" but it's only a minor thing for the most part, they are just channeling a spell in the end that happens to be light-based. Race and the class do sometimes adjust the class a tiny bit hence why their are races that don't have certain classes because it is against their beliefs like Tauren Rogues or Warlocks..
    What's important to not the fact that Paladins of all races use the same faith, but that Paladins and Priests use the same faith.

    Blood Elf Paladins may be sourcing their 'light' from the Sunwell, but so are Blood Elf Priests. Tauren Sunwalkers draw from the sun, just as Tauren Seers (Priests) do. Draenei derive their magic from the teachings of the naaru, which again applies to both their Paladins and Priests. That is the point that I am making, that there is no difference between these two classes from a faith perspective.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Fleugen View Post
    Incorrect. It was confirmed that in Vanilla WoW, all Forsaken Priests were Shadow Priests. This has been expanded over the years to allow Forsaken Priests to also be the other kinds, but at the start it was not headcanon that all Shadow Priests were Forsaken and all Forsaken Priests were Shadow.
    It was confirmed that Forsaken Priests could use Holy magic. Prior to that, it was assumed that they used Shadow to heal.

    Q: When undead use or are healed by the Holy Light, does it cause them any actual damage or harm, or does it only cause them pain (in addition to the intended effects of the spell)?

    A: Channeling the Light in any way, or receiving healing from the Light, only causes pain. Forsaken priests do not disintegrate or explode from channeling the Light for an extended period of time… though they may wish they would.
    Since we know Forsaken CAN use the light, it would explain away your insistence that they are all Shadow Priests.

    The fact that they use Shadow magic immediately differentiates them from Paladins, and nothing inhibited Priests from using Shadow magic. It did, however, inhibit Paladins who, again, are all about righteous retribution, not preserving oneself as the faith in the Forgotten Shadow requires.
    Shadow Magic doesn't explain the fact that you are using Faith as a reason of distinction between Paladins and Priests, despite the continued fact they both derive powers from the same Faiths. The only difference is that Priests are open to the added knowledge of Shadow.

    So how is this different than Demon Hunters and Warlocks being able to use Demonic Magic, while Warlocks Summon and Demon Hunters would have other themes such as Spellbreaking or Vengeance?

    Paladins MUST be faithful ONLY to the Light, Priests can CHOOSE their faith
    Headcanon. Shadow isn't a different faith, it's a counterpart to the core faith. That's explicitly stated in the lore for Shadow Priests. The idea is that to better understand the Light and Life, you must understand the balance of Darkness and Death. Priests aren't changing or choosing their faiths. These are still the exact same faiths being used by Paladins. The difference is the Paladin focuses on martial aspects while Priests focus on the spiritual. That is literally the only difference between these two classes in lore.

    They hunt many things. If they were "Animal Hunters" you'd have a point.
    And yet they do many things besides Hunt. This is a case of arguing semantics, of which you are using a double standard against an existing class.

    Because they still need to stay true to their demonic magic use, which is covered by Warlocks. They need to stay true to their agile melee weapon abilities, which Rogues cover. They cannot without overlapping heavily.
    Warlocks never had exclusive use over Demonic Magic, otherwise the Demon Hunter class would have effectively been called 'Warlock' in Warcraft 3. You see how silly arguing semantics is?

    There is no other source of power for Demonic Magic. It all comes from Fel and Arcane, both of which are covered by Warlocks with the introduction of green fire.
    There are as many sources as Blizzard wishes to create.

    Shadow magic was only derived from Necromancy and Demonology in all previous states of Warcraft. Again, Priest Shadow magic was invented purely in WoW for Priests to differentiate them from Paladins. You can't say there are no other sources of Demonic magic when you're only basing it on current assumed knowledge. You are making the argument that no new source could be invented, and that's a fallacy you're consistently making.

    Incorrect. My criteria is a decent starting point that doesn't overlap with other classes, and a reason for the class to exist. Starting points usually point back to Warcraft III (But don't have to), and reasons for the class to exist include but are not limited to gameplay aspects, missing fighting techniques, or to fill gaps in lore.
    Your reasons are always made in retrospect. The crux of your argument is 'It can't exist until it exists'.

    How could you explain the inclusion of Mistweaving if your entire criteria for a new class was that it had to be based on existing material with no deviation? I'm saying this because you seem to be rigidly against the idea that Demon Hunters get any expanded lore that makes them distinct from Warlocks.
    Last edited by Thimagryn; 2014-06-23 at 07:43 PM.

  11. #791
    Quote Originally Posted by Fleugen View Post
    Have yet to see proof.
    I linked you the freaking achievement. But if you really want to see undeniable proof, here is the video proof!! No more excuses from you, now.

    Citation needed.
    Here's your 'citation', now stop trying to play dumb.

    No, it does not. Despite Lorewalker Cho boring me to death, he was weak and couldn't defend himself from anything.
    So your denials base on your own opinions (Cho boring you), and because you never saw him fight, which means nothing, since a bard that travels around the world would know how to defend himself?

    The Reliquary appeared rather conveniently at the same time as Archaeology. Almost as if they were trying to say the Reliquary was filled with Archaeologists, just like the Explorer's League. They're not Bards.
    They're not all bards, no. But they're a good starting point because the Reliquary was created as a horde-version of the Explorer's League, and the Explorer's League is not just about archaeology. It's about lore as well.
    Last edited by Ielenia; 2014-06-23 at 07:43 PM.

    Sig image by Best-Signatures.com

  12. #792
    Quote Originally Posted by Thimagryn View Post
    It was confirmed that Forsaken Priests could use Holy magic. Prior to that, it was assumed that they used Shadow to heal.

    Since we know Forsaken CAN use the light, it would explain away your insistence that they are all Shadow Priests.
    Again; You're using a different headcanon to explain away a non-headcanon.

    Forsaken Priests COULD NOT heal lore-wise in Vanilla. That was only for gameplay. Forsaken Priests in Vanilla were all Shadow. People presumed that meant their healing specs, lore-wise, were Shadow. In truth, no Forsaken Priest had a healing spec lore-wise. They were all Shadow.

    Shadow Magic doesn't explain the fact that you are using Faith as a reason of distinction between Paladins and Priests, despite the continued fact they both derive powers from the same Faiths. The only difference is that Priests are open to the added knowledge of Shadow.

    So how is this different than Demon Hunters and Warlocks being able to use Demonic Magic, while Warlocks Summon and Demon Hunters would have other themes such as Spellbreaking or Vengeance?
    Because they DON'T derive their power from the same faiths. Paladins derive it only from Light, Priests derive it from Light and Shadow. What is so hard to understand about this? Paladins DO NOT and CAN NOT have faith in the Shadow.

    Warlocks and Demon Hunters would still derive their power from the same places: Arcane and Fel.

    And yet they do many things besides Hunt. This is a case of arguing semantics, of which you are using a double standard against an existing class.
    Does it make sense for a Hunter to do something other than hunt? Of course. Does it make sense for a Demon Hunter to do something other than hunt demons? Of course. Does it make sense for a Demon Hunter to never hunt demons? No.

    Warlocks never had exclusive use over Demonic Magic, otherwise the Demon Hunter class would have effectively been called 'Warlock' in Warcraft 3. You see how silly arguing semantics is?
    It's not semantics, you're simply being obtuse. I mean, they COULD have called Archmage and Sorceress and Blood Mage just Mages and had them have all different abilities in Warcraft III, yet it's undeniable that all three were absorbed into the Mage class in WoW. They COULD have called the Priestess of the Moon, Druid of the Talon, Keeper of the Grove, and Druid of the Claw units Druids, yet it's undeniable those units were absorbed into the Druid class in WoW.

    They could have called the Demon Hunter, Dreadlord, and Infernal units Warlocks, but it's undeniable those units were absorbed into the Warlock class. Simple as that.

    There are as many sources as Blizzard wishes to create.
    So despite learning all this information about demons, seeing dozens of different types, and all Demons having some form of existance with the Legion, there must be a different source of demon magic. You realize how silly you sound, right?

    Even if there was another source that Blizzard pulled out of their asses to make Demon Hunters exist, Demon Hunters absorbed their original power from the Legion. Which has been confirmed to be Fel magic. So it STILL wouldn't make sense.

    Shadow magic was only derived from Necromancy and Demonology in all previous states of Warcraft. Again, Priest Shadow magic was invented purely in WoW for Priests to differentiate them from Paladins. You can't say there are no other sources of Demonic magic when you're only basing it on current assumed knowledge. You are making the argument that no new source could be invented, and that's a fallacy you're consistently making.
    Actually, I'm making the argument that Demon Hunters used demons of the Legion, which we already know use Fel magic as their source, to empower themselves. Meaning, their source is Fel magic. We can already confirm that based on what we know of Demon Hunters. You're simply assuming Blizzard will make something new, which is very, very silly. Because if I wanted to, I could say Blizzard will make Demon Hunters not exist tomorrow, and it'll have just as much backing it as your claim that Blizzard will just make a new source of Fel magic.

    Your reasons are always made in retrospect. The crux of your argument is 'It can't exist until it exists'.
    Incorrect. My argument is "If there's no evidence of it existing, chances are it doesn't exist."

    How could you explain the inclusion of Mistweaving if your entire criteria for a new class was that it had to be based on existing material with no deviation? I'm saying this because you seem to be rigidly against the idea that Demon Hunters get any expanded lore that makes them distinct from Warlocks.
    For the third time in the past two pages, I have never once said it had to be based on existing material with no deviation. What I AM saying is, we know ENOUGH about Demon Hunters to pin them where they belong. We know they use demons of the Legion to empower themselves, and we know demons of the Legion are empowered by Fel magic. We know they fight with two weapons; Warglaives specifically, of which many classes in game today can wield a la Warglaives of Azzinoth. We know their starting point (Illidan in Warcraft III) has been wholly absorbed into other classes. We know they have no reason to exist other than a vocal minority demanding it, as proven by many, many, MANY threads trying to make Demon Hunters work, and NOT A SINGLE ONE SUCCEEDING SO FAR.

    You still claim it's just me not being willing to let them deviate. They CAN'T deviate because we ALREADY KNOW enough about them to pin them where they belong. They have been expanded upon and found wanting when it comes to a new class.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Ielenia View Post
    I linked you the freaking achievement. But if you really want to see undeniable proof, here is the video proof!! No more excuses from you, now.
    See, was that so hard?

    Although his song STILL doesn't do anything, so your proof still doesn't do anything. He's just singing, just like the band in the shrines. It's not magic. It doesn't hurt, heal, buff, anything. Not a bard.

    Here's your 'citation', now stop trying to play dumb.
    Not a citation for "Attacking the brain is not the same as attacking the mind."

    So your denials base on your own opinions (Cho boring you), and because you never saw him fight, which means nothing, since a bard that travels around the world would know how to defend himself?
    I wish I could experience the next chapter of the story, but alas, I am just the storyteller.
    -Lorewalker Cho, during the quest chain with the Seer.

    They're not all bards, no. But they're a good starting point because the Reliquary was created as a horde-version of the Explorer's League, and the Explorer's League is not just about archaeology. It's about lore as well.
    How many times must I repeat "Talking/Singing/Music is not a starting point for a Bard."

    If their words/music doesn't actually do anything, it proves nothing. Hell, my character can talk, is that proof of a Bard? In that case, every non-mute is a Bard and we have no need for the class.
    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.

  13. #793
    Quote Originally Posted by Fleugen View Post
    See, was that so hard?
    Although his song STILL doesn't do anything, so your proof still doesn't do anything. He's just singing, just like the band in the shrines. It's not magic. It doesn't hurt, heal, buff, anything. Not a bard.
    Stop being obtuse. Lorewalkers are keepers of lore, just like Bards are also known for. Lorewalker Cho sings a ballad about a hero, which is another thing Bards are known to do. And World of Warcraft has song-based spells.

    Not a citation for "Attacking the brain is not the same as attacking the mind."
    Ugh. Brain is physical, mind is mental. It's not hard to search for things like that, yourself, instead of playing dumb, you know?

    Lorewalker Cho, during the quest chain with the Seer.
    And what's the point in that quote?

    How many times must I repeat "Talking/Singing/Music is not a starting point for a Bard."
    If their words/music doesn't actually do anything, it proves nothing. Hell, my character can talk, is that proof of a Bard? In that case, every non-mute is a Bard and we have no need for the class.
    You love to be obtuse and playing stupid, don't you? We have 'lore keepers', we have spells that are cast by singing. All this is proof of concept that a bard class is very possible.
    Last edited by Ielenia; 2014-06-23 at 08:33 PM.

    Sig image by Best-Signatures.com

  14. #794
    Quote Originally Posted by Ielenia View Post
    Stop being obtuse. Lorewalkers are keepers of lore, just like Bards are also known for. Lorewalker Cho sings a ballad about a hero, which is another thing Bards are known to do. And World of Warcraft has song-based spells.
    And this is not one of them. Lorewalker Cho is not a bard. Stop making comparisons that don't exist.

    Ugh. Brain is physical, mind is mental. It's not hard to search for things like that, yourself, instead of playing dumb, you know?
    Burden of proof and all that. And that has nothing to do with WoW, nor it's spell effects.

    If you can't prove that a spell effect on the MIND is different than one on the BRAIN in WoW, then you cannot prove that spell is not simply cast on the target's brain. In which case, you cannot prove it is a mind spell. End of story.

    And what's the point in that quote?
    He, himself, says he is just a storyteller. Not an adventurer, or a combat master, nor a bard. He's a storyteller. All throughout Pandaria he avoids combat. All throughout Pandaria he says he uses "a quill in place of a sword." He's a fucking PACIFIST.

    You love to be obtuse and playing stupid, don't you? We have 'lore keepers', we have spells that are cast by singing. All this is proof of concept that a bard class is very likely.
    None of the lorewalkers use their words to cast spells, none of the spells cast by singing include lore. They are not proofs of concept for an idea that is not related to it.

    The only example is the Dwarf Fiddler, who actually casts spells with his music. The rest just play music. No spells involved, nor proof that spells COULD be involved with that music.

    So again. If talking and lore is all you need to be a Bard, then Bards already exist in player classes. In which case, it's not needed. End of story.
    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.

  15. #795
    Blizzard dev said that Bards are too "soft" for WoW.

    I agree. They don't fit the game at all.

  16. #796
    Quote Originally Posted by Fleugen View Post
    Again; You're using a different headcanon to explain away a non-headcanon.

    Forsaken Priests COULD NOT heal lore-wise in Vanilla. That was only for gameplay. Forsaken Priests in Vanilla were all Shadow. People presumed that meant their healing specs, lore-wise, were Shadow. In truth, no Forsaken Priest had a healing spec lore-wise. They were all Shadow.



    Because they DON'T derive their power from the same faiths. Paladins derive it only from Light, Priests derive it from Light and Shadow. What is so hard to understand about this? Paladins DO NOT and CAN NOT have faith in the Shadow.

    Warlocks and Demon Hunters would still derive their power from the same places: Arcane and Fel.



    Does it make sense for a Hunter to do something other than hunt? Of course. Does it make sense for a Demon Hunter to do something other than hunt demons? Of course. Does it make sense for a Demon Hunter to never hunt demons? No.

    So despite learning all this information about demons, seeing dozens of different types, and all Demons having some form of existance with the Legion, there must be a different source of demon magic. You realize how silly you sound, right?

    Even if there was another source that Blizzard pulled out of their asses to make Demon Hunters exist, Demon Hunters absorbed their original power from the Legion. Which has been confirmed to be Fel magic. So it STILL wouldn't make sense.

    Actually, I'm making the argument that Demon Hunters used demons of the Legion, which we already know use Fel magic as their source, to empower themselves. Meaning, their source is Fel magic. We can already confirm that based on what we know of Demon Hunters. You're simply assuming Blizzard will make something new, which is very, very silly. Because if I wanted to, I could say Blizzard will make Demon Hunters not exist tomorrow, and it'll have just as much backing it as your claim that Blizzard will just make a new source of Fel magic.

    For the third time in the past two pages, I have never once said it had to be based on existing material with no deviation. What I AM saying is, we know ENOUGH about Demon Hunters to pin them where they belong. We know they use demons of the Legion to empower themselves, and we know demons of the Legion are empowered by Fel magic. We know they fight with two weapons; Warglaives specifically, of which many classes in game today can wield a la Warglaives of Azzinoth. We know their starting point (Illidan in Warcraft III) has been wholly absorbed into other classes. We know they have no reason to exist other than a vocal minority demanding it, as proven by many, many, MANY threads trying to make Demon Hunters work, and NOT A SINGLE ONE SUCCEEDING SO FAR.
    As I said above, Blood Elf Paladins do not have faith at all in the light, actually most don't even believe it exists. They use magic to corrupt their powers and castit with a light attunement, basically they are tank mages weaving a spell, and it specifically states in their lore that they do not have faith in the light. This is why I was saying the race has to be taken into effect as well, Blood Elves derive all their power from the Sunwell and that is about all they care about, and it does state in their lore that they don't have faith or worship anything.

    Also Warlocks don't wield Arcane magic, actually it specifically states in their lore a lot of them use to be Arcanists who decided instead to wield shadow, fire, and fel magic. Warlocks have no relation with any of their tools and basically only strive for power. They prefer to fight the demon using their own powers against them.

    Since you seem to be stuck on the beliefs of classes, Warlocks see demons as pawns and tools they an use for whatever purpose they deem necessary. Hence why they aren't allowed to name their demons because they don't care about them, they only see them as slaves. Demon Hunters on the other hand seek solely to destroy and annihilate demons and do use their powers to augment their abilities, but would never use one as a tool. Demon Hunters also wield Arcane Magic which Warlocks don't at all, they never use Shadow-based abilities. Their energy is chaos energy which they get by basically sapping the power from demons, which is why they themselves slowly start turning demonic in apperance, typically they use it to augment their weapons. A lot of their power, is put into their glaives to wield different abilities.

    Now I"m not saying that Blizzard didn't use their abilities and give them to other classes which they obviously did, they can easily remove them if they decided Demon Hunter was a viable class to add to the game. I do think Illidan will appear in the game again and I do imagine Blizzard will try and do fan service to that by bringing in Demon Hunter someway, now lore wise one major thing people forget is all Demon Hunters are all Elves, either Night or Blood. Could that be something they work in possibly...

    I do think it would be interesting to go more race specific clases which you could see in ways such as Goblins and Gnomes getting Tinkerer, Night Elf and Blood Elf getting Demon Hunter etc....and keep the balance that way.

    I do doubt Bard will ever be put into the game as I said before, the only time Blizzard ever talked about a Bard was as an April Fools Joke. If they think the only way to discuss it as a viable class is by playing a giant prank on everybody and laughing at it...really hurts its credibility.

  17. #797
    Quote Originally Posted by Fleugen View Post
    And this is not one of them. Lorewalker Cho is not a bard. Stop making comparisons that don't exist.
    I never claimed he is a bard. I said he is the closest thing to a bard in WoW!! He's a lore keeper, and he sings ballads about heroes!!

    Burden of proof and all that. And that has nothing to do with WoW, nor it's spell effects.
    If you can't prove that a spell effect on the MIND is different than one on the BRAIN in WoW, then you cannot prove that spell is not simply cast on the target's brain. In which case, you cannot prove it is a mind spell. End of story.
    So, there's no difference, to you, between psyonic and physical effects? 'Psyonic' effects affect the mind. And 'psyonic' is not shadow-based magic. It has no element to it. So it could be a cold spell, or fire spell, or holy spell, or shadow spell...

    He, himself, says he is just a storyteller. Not an adventurer, or a combat master, nor a bard. He's a storyteller. All throughout Pandaria he avoids combat. All throughout Pandaria he says he uses "a quill in place of a sword." He's a fucking PACIFIST.
    Which doesn't prove there are not adventurer storytellers. Lorewalker Cho being a, as you put it, 'pacifist', does not mean other storytellers would not feel the thirst for adventure. After all, adventures can make for great stories.

    None of the lorewalkers use their words to cast spells, none of the spells cast by singing include lore. They are not proofs of concept for an idea that is not related to it.
    Lorewalkers are lore keepers and sing. They travel around. And there are spells that are cast by singing. Go read the definition of "proof of concept" before trying to say anything again, please.
    Last edited by Ielenia; 2014-06-23 at 08:48 PM.

    Sig image by Best-Signatures.com

  18. #798
    I would play a bard only if I could go completely ridiculous with it. I'm talking Tiny Tim or Barry Gibb falsetto voice, those ridiculous curly-toed boots and ukulele ridiculous. I must also be able to prance around singing the praises of Brave Sir Robin.

    Edit: Just remembered we already have possible class-specific items in game; Piccolo of the Flaming Fire and Woollies of the Prancing Minstrel. We're halfway there!
    Last edited by echoSAW; 2014-06-23 at 08:47 PM.

  19. #799
    Quote Originally Posted by Fleugen View Post
    Magic involving souls is heavily involved in WoW, so yes there is. Demons used to require a Soul shard, which was earned through Drain Soul, to summon them. Soulstones and Healthstones were created from Soul Shards, as were Fire and Spellstones. (RIP) They're still used by the Affliction spec as their secondary resource, for Soulburn.

    To say no soul-based magic exists is a foolish claim.
    No, there's no "Soul-based Magic". Using souls as a catalyst or reagent does not make it "Soul-based", it simply means it's a part of a spell. It's a spell that requires a soul. No where has there ever been talk of "Soul magic" even as a subschool of necromancy. All magic is either divine or arcane based. There is no such thing as "Soul Magic". You are literally the first person to ever mention such nonsense as "soul magic".

    Of course Paladins have faith. Druids have faith as well. And Shaman. But it's not what their class idea is based on. Paladins are based on righteous retribution through the Light. Druids are based on Nature; The plants and the animals included. Animal spirits in WoW are considered Nature Spirits. Shamans are based on serving the Elements and the Ancestors.
    Paladins and Priests require faith because their power is from a more or less intangible source. Druids and Shaman don't need faith, as all their nature-related stuff is tangible... do you understand what faith means? If you completely ignore the different specializations, yes you can just say "Nature" or "Elements" to describe a class, but taking in the specializations into consideration (which I have no idea why you wouldn't), then the themes become more diverse.

    Warlock by itself doesn't inherently bring "Demons" to mind. Three specializations, one of them is demons. One of them has to do with magical afflictions, and the other has to do with, as lore would describe it, "harness the shadows into bolts of incendiary energy". Neither have to do with demons or souls. It's necromancy.


    What a coincidence, the class based on undeath has a spell related to a dead character being brought back to life. Whodathunk.
    Point is genius, it's still working with souls. Arguing that souls and spirits are different is semantics.

    -snip-
    At this point I'm ignoring any further discussion of "Soul-based magic". It's a made up term. It's Necromancy. Deal with it.

    Pretty sure when I execute someone, they die. Yet Execute does not instantly kill my target, it just does damage.
    Yeah no, you're not going to use a different ability that acts like Soul Reaper as your counter point. Soul Reaper is a execute-like ability. It is not execute.



    By the way mods, I'm not sure what else you qualify as "Bickering", but this thread is it...

  20. #800
    Quote Originally Posted by Fleugen View Post
    Again; You're using a different headcanon to explain away a non-headcanon.

    Forsaken Priests COULD NOT heal lore-wise in Vanilla. That was only for gameplay. Forsaken Priests in Vanilla were all Shadow. People presumed that meant their healing specs, lore-wise, were Shadow. In truth, no Forsaken Priest had a healing spec lore-wise. They were all Shadow.
    There was no lore stating Forsaken Priests in Vanilla were all Shadow, or that they could not use Holy magic. Again, that is headcanon used to explain what was not being officially stated. Absence of lore is not evidence of the contrary, just like we can't say 'Night Elves can't be Mages', which would have been true in Vanilla just as well.

    Because they DON'T derive their power from the same faiths. Paladins derive it only from Light, Priests derive it from Light and Shadow. What is so hard to understand about this? Paladins DO NOT and CAN NOT have faith in the Shadow.
    Shadow is not a faith separate from the Light, unless you are talking about an entirely different faith altogether. Paladins derive from the same source as every Priest of the same race. It's not a case of understanding, it's a case of what words you're using and confusing the meaning with your intent.

    I can understand that you mean that Priests use Shadow magic which is beyond what Paladins do, but that's not 'FAITH'. If anything, that is simply a theme and game mechanic that is unique to Priests. The problem for you is without a clear line of separation, you can't easily distinguish the two classes without pointing at specific game and theme mechanics, as their Lore indicates they draw from the same source with no true distinguishing differences. The use of 'Mind Control' is no different than a Paladin using a Shield whereas a Priest can not. You can't use those differences to explain away the fact they are still followers of their faith.

    Warlocks and Demon Hunters would still derive their power from the same places: Arcane and Fel.
    Which we should establish that there is no exclusivity for Warlocks in this regard. There is a common theme of using Fel magic. It is still highly plausible and likely for a Demon Hunter class to use Arcane and Fel magic differently than a Warlock (who doesn't actually use Arcane).

    Does it make sense for a Hunter to do something other than hunt? Of course. Does it make sense for a Demon Hunter to do something other than hunt demons? Of course. Does it make sense for a Demon Hunter to never hunt demons? No.
    So what did you prove by stating this? You're just reinforcing the benefits of having a Demon Hunter, whose identity would be at its core a hunter-of-demons. It doesn't limit them to this, so why is it a problem again?

    It's not semantics, you're simply being obtuse. I mean, they COULD have called Archmage and Sorceress and Blood Mage just Mages and had them have all different abilities in Warcraft III, yet it's undeniable that all three were absorbed into the Mage class in WoW. They COULD have called the Priestess of the Moon, Druid of the Talon, Keeper of the Grove, and Druid of the Claw units Druids, yet it's undeniable those units were absorbed into the Druid class in WoW.
    No, it's not undeniable. That's the issue we're dealing with right now.

    The Priest had Vampiric themes, Death magic and even Diseases. That's a strong case to give them a full-on Necromancy theme. Even then, it is not undeniable that Death Knights or Necromancers be folded into a Priest class. Again, you're only making a case against Death Knights and Monks by using your examples. Brewmasters having Storm Earth and Fire would get them absorbed into Shamans if we were using your example.

    They could have called the Demon Hunter, Dreadlord, and Infernal units Warlocks, but it's undeniable those units were absorbed into the Warlock class. Simple as that.
    The Demon Hunter is also shared by the Rogue and Priest. Dreadlord by the Death Knight and Druid (Hibernate). It doesn't help your case that you are trying to prove Warlocks have dominion over the DH or Dreadlord class in all themes and aspects. The fact remains, if there is enough plausibility to build a separate identity out of the DH (ie. Slayer based on Exotic fighting style and Spellbreaking, and a DH spec) then it could well be possible and likely to happen.

    we know ENOUGH about Demon Hunters to pin them where they belong
    And we knew enough of the Death Knights to tell us they are eternal champions of the Scourge, and followers of the Lich King. There was NO lore that would have hinted that they could be come playable by the Alliance and Horde, which exactly mirrors the current Demon Hunter situation. If DK's could have become playable, then so can DH.
    Last edited by Thimagryn; 2014-06-23 at 09:36 PM.

Posting Permissions

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