You, too, seem to be missing my point. The rune system is very flexible. Had they not used it on death knights (or they never existed in wow) they could have easily used the system they developed for runemasters. Your argument is based on death knights already existing in game. Mine is based on them not being implemented yet.
Runemaster would be a cool and unique class, but there is one problem that would make them hard to implement. They seem to close to shamans and druids combined apart from using their fists as weapons. Though they get their abilities from different sources (nature/elemental spirits and ley lines); their attacks would be about the same as Druids and Shamans.
Ah, I see your point, and yes they could have, but there are also many more avenues for them to travel for a decent resource system for Runemasters that doesnt specifically involve Runes as a resource, which some people seem to think would be the only option :S
List of Possible Classes
Runemaster
Brewmaster
Buccaneer
Demon Hunter
Time Warden
selections that seem possible im stretching demon hunters a bit since id probably be floged if i didnt included them =.=
(To regard if im for any of them yes id very much like brewmaster to become one but this is only an opinion so dont take it as fact and the reason I added the bucaneer is that it may fit with a south seas expansion if that is are next destination but like i said we dont know until Blizzcon 2011)
*cough*Ghostcrawler said of all Hero classes, Demon Hunter is the less likely to make it. They don't want to flood the servers with Demon Hunters, which are far more popular than Death Knights (and we all know what happened when Death Knights were added).*cough*
Buccaneer is a very interesting option tho.
And I say blizz will never add a new class to WoW....
They wouldn't use the DK resource system. And yes, adding a new class would rekindle interest in an 8 year old game.
---------- Post added 2011-02-06 at 08:37 PM ----------
They're similar to one spec in the Shaman tree. That's really it, and even that comparison is a bit of a stretch.
They're nothing like druids though.
---------- Post added 2011-02-06 at 10:43 PM ----------
The only way I could see that happening is if something like this was implemented;
http://www.mmo-champion.com/threads/...ss-idea-Tinker
I don't see Blizzard releasing a new class that can't tank.
Last edited by Teriz; 2011-02-06 at 10:43 PM.
Always wanted a monk class in WoW. Would be nice to see this implemented.
Many different things. How is a character that uses swords (combat rogue) at all like a monk, who uses his own fists? Not fist weapons: empowered fists. Traditionally, a monk-type class draws on power to imbue himself as a living weapon. They are by all accounts a master of martial arts. And if a monk-type class was to be introduced (hybrid tank / healer / dps), my greatest fear would be that Pandaren would make it into the game. And that is something we simply cannot allow to happen. :/
---------- Post added 2011-02-07 at 04:51 PM ----------
Second that. Especially if they could dual wield ranged weapons. O.O
For the Alliance!
So its a mix between Enhance Shamans and DKs....I dont know. I'd see it more as a melee type priest mixed with a shaman but using runes as a resource.
Naga should be a race :P
A Monk is someone who leaves society in the pursuit of knowledge.
A Runemaster is an Arcane Monk.
A Demon Hunter is a Demonic Monk.
A Brewmaster is a Spiritual Monk. (this would have to be a tanking tree; my god. Imagine the awesomeness)
It seems so obvious to me that Blizz could implement a healing/melee hybrid Monk class that has the above three talents and everyone would go nuts and buy tons of expansion copies.
Edit: Honestly though, the only type of class I want next is one with a tanking spec and a ranged DPS spec. There's only one, and I don't want to look like a stupid bear or owl-chicken.
Last edited by Futhark; 2011-02-07 at 12:05 PM.
@Clone347
NOTHING with ARCH will be added - arch mage, arch druid arch priest ( arch bishop lol ) - I don't think you know what archetype means.
monk - not sure bout that, disc priest were supposed to cover that role in vanilla - Was supposed to yes, so this is still a plausible archetype
runemaster - DK - DK is NOT a Runemaster, will never be, never was. Stop trolling.
necromancer - DK - DK is NOT a Necromancer, sure a DK can summon a few ghouls. But that doesn't make them necromancer, that makes them DKs. A necromancer should be able to summon more undead creatures, think undead dogs, skeletal mages, and the likes.
bloodmage - what the fuck it's not even a class definition, Kael was a blood ELF Mage, before that he was a High elf Mage, in other words - Mage - fire with sub spec arcane - Bloodmage IS NOT Kael.. A bloodmage is a mage that uses Stigmatic Magic. Ender the deadmines and look at the bloodmages there for an example.
Clearly, or at least its clear to me, what makes the most sense is just modifying the severely underused priest disc spec. If you think about it, blizzard wouldn't have to change much. Smite would work the same as intended, power word: barrier could be the same. many of the mechanics runecasters have (or at least what people want) already exist under the disc tree. Hell, they could even make it a cata patch instead of an entire xpac for something so "easily" achievable.( I say that with quotes b/c of balancing issues.
This post assumes monks become melee healers.
Last edited by ibprofin; 2011-02-07 at 06:38 PM. Reason: spelling errors - smartphone screwups
"Its hard to tank!"
"....Yeah, maybe in the first 5 seconds... if you don't have a hunter... or a rogue... or competent dps.... maybe...."
Originally Posted by Blizzard Entertainment
A new hero class that i would like to play would be the dragonsworn