Tinker Class

[Thimagryn]

These obtuse arguments on both sides are tiring and silly.

I'm illustrating the fallacies by using the logic he uses against a Demon Hunter against his ideas of a Tinker, which stem almost purely from overlap and conflict between themes. The point is, thematic overlap can exist, and it does not affect or conflict with gameplay. If he persists that overlap is an issue, then Engineering would pose the same threat to his own ideas of a Tinker.

[Beergod]

So to finally debunk this

Notable Tinkers
Sicco Thermaplugg
Gelbin Mekkatorque

Weapon types
Explosives, various devices

Armor proficiency

Heavy armor, Mail or Plate

Skill(s)
Engineering

Could also be
Warrior

http://wowpedia.org/Tinker

Looks like they are already in game

- - - Updated - - -

Also only two races are them Goblins and Gnomes

Leper Gnomes next new race confirmed.

[tangers58]

I've seen tons of people recently say how if we get a new class it will "most likely be the Tinker" So, I was wondering is there any actual evidence? Other than we don't have a "tech" class, and people really want one? It seems to be the way it goes on the forums, a couple people get an idea, they throw their opinion as fact, then some people foolishly believe it and start spreading it, So I was curious is there any evidence this time around to what I keep seeing?

There is no evidence, thank the gods, because it would be a terrible gimmicky class

[Teriz]

I'm illustrating the fallacies by using the logic he uses against a Demon Hunter against his ideas of a Tinker, which stem almost purely from overlap and conflict between themes. The point is, thematic overlap can exist, and it does not affect or conflict with gameplay. If he persists that overlap is an issue, then Engineering would pose the same threat to his own ideas of a Tinker.

You seem to not understand that significant overlap between classes and professions can exist.

Significant overlap between two classes cannot.

[Thimagryn]

Your entire theory revolves around the lack of Mechanical theme represented in the game. That theme does exist within the gamespace of Engineering, and is readily available for every class. Your theory is based on the last two Heroes from Warcraft 3, the Tinker and Alchemist, Heroes whose themes have been incorporated into the game as professions.

So really there is nothing that constitutes the next class undeniably being Tinker. It could be anything.

[Teriz]

Your entire theory revolves around the lack of Mechanical theme represented in the game. That theme does exist within the gamespace of Engineering, and is readily available for every class. Your theory is based on the last two Heroes from Warcraft 3, the Tinker and Alchemist, Heroes whose themes have been incorporated into the game as professions.

The lack of mechanical theme within the classes. Professions have several themes that overlap with classes. Magic and Enchanting, Monk brews and alchemy, healing specs and First Aid, Mage food and a cooking, etc. there is no mechanical class in the game, and a mechanical class would be unlike any other class in the game.

So really there is nothing that constitutes the next class undeniably being Tinker. It could be anything.

Other than everything I mentioned throughout this thread.

[Talen]

Oh but I did not! Because he NEVER confirmed Tinkers

No. But he didn't rule them out either. Nor did he point out any major fundamental flaws in the class concept.
Whimsical is a matter of taste; design room is a matter of core fundamental design principles. No design room means no class. Too whimsical means it gets tweaked into a more serious incarnation.

At the same time, I really wouldn't expect Tinkers. A tech themed class? Yes...Tinkers? No.

Absorbing a demon isn't really the same as having one do your bidding.

No - but I suspect it svery similar to sacrificing one and absorbing its power.

While that happens, it is not a defining characteristic of being a warlock. Warlocks are reaching for demonic power for their own goals, Demon Hunters do it to destroy demons with their own power. Similar, yet different - warlocks would hate seeing all demons destroyed, DHs actively work towards it.

Personal motivations have never ever mattered in class design. Why start here?

Um, no and no? I have no idea what you are talking about here. DHs are a cross between rogue (martial prowess, light armor) and warlocks (some spells, metamorphosis), just like paladins are holy warriors or martial clerics.

He's pointing out that before he was a Demon Hunter, Illidan was a Mage.

EJL

[Hengwulf]

No - but I suspect it svery similar to sacrificing one and absorbing its power.

Similar, yes. Paladins and priests also use Holy light in a similar way, even to similar purposes (as Holy paladin), but in a different way - and that is enough.

Personal motivations have never ever mattered in class design. Why start here?

Because it defines what Warlocks is, and to much greater extent, what Demon Hunter is. Warlocks are defined by their method of gaining power, Demon Hunters with both the method and their goal. I would say that personal philosophy also matters much for Monks, and pretty much all the spiritual classes.

He's pointing out that before he was a Demon Hunter, Illidan was a Mage.

I don't really think in a discussion about Demon Hunters it is really relevant who was Illidan before he became one.

[Thimagryn]

The problem with drawing comparisons with Illidan is that he is such a unique character, beyond being the first and most iconic Demon Hunter there is.

He was a Night Elf born with golden eyes, a sign of greatness amongst the Kaldorei. He was an extremely gifted sorcerer, and magic was difficult to use even among the most adept casters. Sargeras himself changed Illidan, blinding his eyes and granting him spectral sight, and burning arcane tattooes onto his body. Illidan gained his warglaives off the doomguard commander, Azzinoth, and over time became adept at using them.

Then there's the post Warcraft 3 Illidan, who transformed himself into a half-demon by consuming the Skull of Gul'dan. He also takes over outland and teaches the Blood Elves how to consume mana from Demons as a source of power.

Then we have the Demon Hunters who represent the many Heroes of Warcraft 3, such as Loramus, Altruis and Telarius. They were the ones either trained by Illidan or followed in his footsteps. Not much is known about these characters, but we know they still exist. What we is that they all have blindfolds, meaning they went through a the Spectral Sight ritual; and all are Warglaive users. We don't know what their backgrounds were, what exactly they went through to become Demon Hunters, and the full extent of their skills or abilities in combat. We also don't know what motivations these characters had to become what they are today.

If we have a Playable Demon Hunter class, it would more likely be based off these Demon Hunters than off Illidan himself. This much should be inferred, since Illidan himself has such a sordid and complicated past. To say that Demon Hunters are all spellcasters because Illidan was a mage is a large assumption, one which could go both ways. We don't know where they get their Warglaives from, since Illidan's blades are of Demonic origin. There's a lot that is still up in the air as far as lore is concerned.

The more I look into the class though, the more I see differences from Warlocks. One thing I'm noticing is that Demon Hunters don't actually have any Shadow based abilities. Immolation is fire, Mana Burn is argubly arcane. Demon Form is the only shadowy thing about them, but that's more fel-based, which is an extension of raw arcane power. Demon Hunters could very well represent a melee class that uses Arcane/Fire spells.

[Cooper]

We don't know where they get their Warglaives from, since Illidan's blades are of Demonic origin. There's a lot that is still up in the air as far as lore is concerned.

Warglaives are actually pretty common. They're all over the place. The Silvermoon Guardians use them, as well as the Night Elves in Silithus. There are also Twilight warglaives. There are also warglaives just lying around as part of the scenery in Night Elf towns. Having said that, I don't think it's a requirement that Demon Hunters MUST use warglaives. Given the nature of the game, it's a virtual certainty player Demon Hunters would also use other weapons.

The fact that there are so many warglaives around in the game, and yet only a single set available to players (and a legendary set at that), is one reason I'm skeptical that Blizzard has given up on player Demon Hunters. If they aren't saving them for the introduction of playable Demon Hunters, there's really no reason to hold them back.

Or maybe they just think warglaives are too cool for players. Sometimes I get the impression Blizzard just doesn't want to share some things with us plebs.

If we have a Playable Demon Hunter class, it would more likely be based off these Demon Hunters than off Illidan himself.

I completely concur. Look at the Demon Hunter in the screenshot on the vanilla box - no wings, no horns, just warglaives and a blindfold, like all the other not-a-raid-boss representatives. I imagine Telrius would be the very base of playable Demon Hunters.

[Thimagryn]

That's how I feel about Tauren Totems. Even in the vanilla Behind the Scenes dvd, they showed Taurens swinging giant Totems as weapons, and we never got that.

[Hengwulf]

That's how I feel about Tauren Totems. Even in the vanilla Behind the Scenes dvd, they showed Taurens swinging giant Totems as weapons, and we never got that.

Those bloody Tauren in Hyjal instance :/ Gnomes got their own Very Light Sabre, why Tauren can't get a race specific quest for huge totem 2h mace, available for transmog

[Wildmoon]

The problem with drawing comparisons with Illidan is that he is such a unique character, beyond being the first and most iconic Demon Hunter there is.

He was a Night Elf born with golden eyes, a sign of greatness amongst the Kaldorei. He was an extremely gifted sorcerer, and magic was difficult to use even among the most adept casters. Sargeras himself changed Illidan, blinding his eyes and granting him spectral sight, and burning arcane tattooes onto his body. Illidan gained his warglaives off the doomguard commander, Azzinoth, and over time became adept at using them.

Then there's the post Warcraft 3 Illidan, who transformed himself into a half-demon by consuming the Skull of Gul'dan. He also takes over outland and teaches the Blood Elves how to consume mana from Demons as a source of power.

Then we have the Demon Hunters who represent the many Heroes of Warcraft 3, such as Loramus, Altruis and Telarius. They were the ones either trained by Illidan or followed in his footsteps. Not much is known about these characters, but we know they still exist. What we is that they all have blindfolds, meaning they went through a the Spectral Sight ritual; and all are Warglaive users. We don't know what their backgrounds were, what exactly they went through to become Demon Hunters, and the full extent of their skills or abilities in combat. We also don't know what motivations these characters had to become what they are today.

If we have a Playable Demon Hunter class, it would more likely be based off these Demon Hunters than off Illidan himself. This much should be inferred, since Illidan himself has such a sordid and complicated past. To say that Demon Hunters are all spellcasters because Illidan was a mage is a large assumption, one which could go both ways. We don't know where they get their Warglaives from, since Illidan's blades are of Demonic origin. There's a lot that is still up in the air as far as lore is concerned.

The more I look into the class though, the more I see differences from Warlocks. One thing I'm noticing is that Demon Hunters don't actually have any Shadow based abilities. Immolation is fire, Mana Burn is argubly arcane. Demon Form is the only shadowy thing about them, but that's more fel-based, which is an extension of raw arcane power. Demon Hunters could very well represent a melee class that uses Arcane/Fire spells.

It's safe to assume that DHs followed Illidan's footstep. That's why they look like Illidan. Illidan himself paved the way for the art of DH. All magics DH use could be just called arcane too. Fel,Fire,Shadow they are all arcane manipulation. Illidan himself saw through all forms of magics to its truest form so I think he must have helped finding alternative ways for others to gain the sight and arcane tattoo of DH.

[PowerOfTwo]

Ok, lets look at it from this perspective. Like i mentioned earlier i came to the conclusion tinker would be the next class while sitting on the can one day before i saw alot of people on the internet reached the same conclusion. First off, while i like the lore, i accept and don't care if mechanics trumps lore, so some of this presentation might have some "unlorey" , or even illogical things so they fit within wow's mechanics.

Second, the idea for tinker being the next class comes from the fact that first and foremost , there is a gaping 3rd spot in the mail roster that needs filling.
(tinkers would also take care of the ranged weapon monopoly)

2nd while not every WoW ability is a WC 3 ability, at this point 90% of WC3 abilitties are wow abilities, so we look at one hasn't been touched yet from WC3 (both new classes came from WC3, pandaren brewmaster hero an ... well the undead faction allmost in its entirety respectively.)

3rd Since we've had two exclusively meele classes added, one would hope the next is a ranged class.

4th while not necesary, pure dps in today enviroment would be extreemly wierd and not attract alot of ppl imo so we assume that the class will be able to do either tank or heal (idealy both) besides dps.

If you look at all the wc3 units you can see that the goblin tinker and alchemist have allmost 0 represenation in wow, not even the goblin racial funcstions the same. Also, allthough this is not cannon, we can also look at dotas take on the tinker and alchemist, since theese abilities also thematicaly fit a engineering / tech character archtype.

So then we have spec nr 1 - "Mechanical". It would be a tanking spec based around the idea that the tinker uses technology to compensate its weak physical prowess , so, the tanking tinker would tank from inside some kind of suit. Since we dont exactly have an example of an exoskeleton in WoW, a shreder type suit will do just fine. This functions as a shapeshift form / stance and uses energy (the energy of the shredder). The idea is that you revolve around sonic based attacks (you're goal being to anoy enemies, to get their attention after all) with a bit of bleeding mixed it from the sawblade. Alot of creatures or constructs have shown the ability to use sonic attacks and no class does it. The tanking form is based on the tinkers ultimate in Wc3.

Spec nr 2 - "technology" the idea is you use you're advanced custom built rifle (model replaces ranged weapon slot so that you can also equip a bow) and an assortment of technological and alchemical devices to deal ranged dps. This is the most straight up spec realy. Can work on either focus or energy (the idea is that your gun has a charge level , some attacks increase it, while you're big nuks decrease it, or just go with generic energy). You use lazers, bombs, grenades , mines (could even have something called "shrapnel" as your dot since aparently every dps spec has to ahve at least 1 dot by law) to deal damage. This could incorporate the dota tinker's march of the machines, the wc 3 rocket barage and acid flask wich applies the weakened armor effect for example.

Spec nr 3 - "alchemy" Ok, this kind of apes the engineer from gw2 and the agent / scoundrel from ToR but the idea is you use.... a chemical thrower. You're resource is mana, maybe even visualy indicated on the back of you're tank. (there are many examples in wow of how arcane energy can be harnessed in a physical form thus the mana mechanic). Healing is straight forward, you fire darts with healing liquid for those instant cast emergency situations , low damage heal would be a sort of chanelled light of dawn effect where you spray healing mist from you're chemical thrower and you can use say flasks / bombs with restorative elixirs inside to dispens AoE healing. And for soloing porpouses you use a few nature based acid attacks. This is also the spec that would provide chemical raid to party / raid members as either a dps buff (deal more damage take less healing) or a tanking cooldown (take less damage and more healing)

Thats the basic idea, obviously don't have concreete abilities or numbers but how exactly does that not fit into WoW? and i didn't even use mechanical chickens or anything.... And to kill two birds in one stone about everybody whineing that alchemy and engineering are allready in game... those are proffesions, jobs, the guy who builds a wall or a siege engine or a gun is a engineer, the guy who uses it is a tinker. Engineers and alchemists are either civilians (npcs) or passtimes, hobbys, something to either make you're character better at the OTHER THINGS he actualy does, fight , heal tank, or to make you money. A tinker is a combatant that uses technology to fight because he is physicaly weak.

[Teriz]

/snip.

Great post.

In general, I think you're right on track. I personally believe that the Tinker/Technician/Inventor/Mechanic/Gearmaster/whatever wouldn't pilot a mech. I don't think Blizzard is quite ready for vehicular combat. However, I do think that there's a strong chance that we'd see the Hammer Tank system that we saw the Tinker Hero have in WC3;



What if the Tinker class had variations on that set up?

http://www.cyborgmatt.com/wp-content...N_Teleport.jpg
http://mobyfrancke.com/wp-content/up...013/06/009.jpg
http://images3.wikia.nocookie.net/__...t_Seaclock.jpg
http://www.allvatar.com/rex/files/goblin_tinker.jpg
http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lz...jgtpo1_500.jpg
http://i238.photobucket.com/albums/f...suchun/c07.jpg

That would be the best way to have a class that uses a mech, without it being some type of vehicle. Additionally, that set up could persist through different specs. Just use a different hammer tank for different purposes. For example, A tanking tinker would probably use the more arm-like hammer tank with large hands. The healing tinker would probably have medical like devices that fire healing beams or sprays at friendly targets. Meanwhile the DPS tinker would probably have a hammer tank with cannons, missiles, lasers, etc. Basically that hammer tank would be a mobile weapon platform.

[But I Hate You All]

Great post.

In general, I think you're right on track. I personally believe that the Tinker/Technician/Inventor/Mechanic/Gearmaster/whatever wouldn't pilot a mech. I don't think Blizzard is quite ready for vehicular combat. However, I do think that there's a strong chance that we'd see the Hammer Tank system that we saw the Tinker Hero have in WC3;



What if the Tinker class had variations on that set up?

http://www.cyborgmatt.com/wp-content...N_Teleport.jpg
http://mobyfrancke.com/wp-content/up...013/06/009.jpg
http://images3.wikia.nocookie.net/__...t_Seaclock.jpg
http://www.allvatar.com/rex/files/goblin_tinker.jpg
http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lz...jgtpo1_500.jpg

That would be the best way to have a class that uses a mech, without it being some type of vehicle. Additionally, that set up could persist through different specs. Just use a different hammer tank for different purposes. For example, A tanking tinker would probably use the more arm-like hammer tank with large hands. The healing tinker would probably have medical like devices that fire healing beams or sprays at friendly targets. Meanwhile the DPS tinker would probably have a hammer tank with cannons, missiles, lasers, etc. Basically that hammer tank would be a mobile weapon platform.

There you go again first and second image are form DOTA 2 has nothing to do with wow or warcraft. The third image is copyrighted and was made by Moby Francke besides the fact it has nothing to do with wow thier website says All images in this website are for viewing purposes only and may not be reproduced in any form without written permission from Moby Francke. The Forth image is from the TCG I am not sure if that is cannon with wow or not. The fifth image is from the Goblin race once again not sure if that's cannon. the final image is from Atlantica Online again nothing to do with wow. Can I start posting images from Twilight and say vampires are coming now? Seriously you can't take stuff that has nothing to do with wow and try to use it to prove your "tinker" is coming

[Teriz]

There you go again first and second image are form DOTA 2 has nothing to do with wow or warcraft. The third image is copyrighted and was made by Moby Francke besides the fact it has nothing to do with wow thier website says All images in this website are for viewing purposes only and may not be reproduced in any form without written permission from Moby Francke. The Forth image is from the TCG I am not sure if that is cannon with wow or not. The fifth image is from the Goblin race once again not sure if that's cannon. the final image is from Atlantica Online again nothing to do with wow. Can I start posting images from Twilight and say vampires are coming now? Seriously you can't take stuff that has nothing to do with wow and try to use it to prove your "tinker" is coming

Relax. I'm simply giving examples of what a Tinker's hammer tank COULD look like in the future.

And btw, its important to note that all of those images were inspired by the original WC3 Tinker hero.

Oh, and I forgot a couple more;

http://i238.photobucket.com/albums/f...suchun/c07.jpg
http://images1.wikia.nocookie.net/__...Epictinker.jpg
http://www.wowtcgvault.com/images/ca..._Bixy_Blue.jpg

So the hammer tank is a pretty common concept.

[Talen]

Similar, yes. Paladins and priests also use Holy light in a similar way, even to similar purposes (as Holy paladin), but in a different way - and that is enough.

Leaving aside the paladin/priest comparison...what you are talking about is a potential difference, that may or may not exist.

Blizzard first of all would have to first codify the lore that states that DHs do absorb demonic powers. Then they would have to decide whether that was, in fact, the same as a Warlocks ability to sacrifice the Demon.

Because, in both cases, the players would be killing off his demon to empower his own character.

Because it defines what Warlocks is, and to much greater extent, what Demon Hunter is

In both cases, what defines the class is their relationship with Demons. In both cases, personal motivations are decided by the player. As they are in ALL classes and all players. There is nothing stopping a player from being a bad Paladin for example. If we can have that...why not a good Warlock?

Warlocks are defined by their method of gaining power, Demon Hunters with both the method and their goal. I would say that personal philosophy also matters much for Monks, and pretty much all the spiritual classes.

And in all cases, that's pretty much up to the player. Personal motivations, personal philosophies...all this is the type of personal backstory that the game and class design totally ignores.

But it's also an issue some people want to see reflected in the design of a Demon Hunter.

I don't really think in a discussion about Demon Hunters it is really relevant who was Illidan before he became one.

If you want to try and show that a caster can turn into a meleer almost literally overnight, then it could be.

What if the Tinker class had variations on that set up?

Then they'd look utterly ridiculous.

EJL

[Thimagryn]

In both cases, what defines the class is their relationship with Demons. In both cases, personal motivations are decided by the player. As they are in ALL classes and all players. There is nothing stopping a player from being a bad Paladin for example. If we can have that...why not a good Warlock?
EJL

But what exactly is the Demon Hunter's relationship with demons? Is it fundamentally the same as the Warlock's relationship with demons?

The answer is no.

[Hengwulf]

Leaving aside the paladin/priest comparison...what you are talking about is a potential difference, that may or may not exist.

Blizzard first of all would have to first codify the lore that states that DHs do absorb demonic powers. Then they would have to decide whether that was, in fact, the same as a Warlocks ability to sacrifice the Demon.

Because, in both cases, the players would be killing off his demon to empower his own character.

I can't recall DHs killing their own demon, since the demon is sort of merged with DH, it is inside him - at least that is what I remember from WC3 and encounters like Leotheras the Blind. It is nothing like with a warlock - warlock's demon is his servant, or in case of demonology, warlock becomes a demon. In case of DH, demon for a time becomes a dominant part of that demon/elf amalgam.

In both cases, what defines the class is their relationship with Demons. In both cases, personal motivations are decided by the player. As they are in ALL classes and all players. There is nothing stopping a player from being a bad Paladin for example. If we can have that...why not a good Warlock?

Good warlock still enslaves a demon to do his bidding. It is not about being good or bad, but as Thimagryn said, about relationship with demons. Demon Hunter, as the name suggest, is individual skilled in Demon Hunting - even if he went rogue and isn't really interested in hunting them demons, his skillset still revolves around killing demons.

And in all cases, that's pretty much up to the player. Personal motivations, personal philosophies...all this is the type of personal backstory that the game and class design totally ignores.

I disagree. Some things are given.

If you want to try and show that a caster can turn into a meleer almost literally overnight, then it could be.

I can't see how does that matter. Whatever the DH was before is irrelevant, because he isn't it anymore.