5 reasons why you may see a Ranger or Tinker class in WoW

[Scot]

So, we now have 11 classes in WoW. In stands to reason that Blizzard would want this game to end with 12 classes. Its generally not a good idea to end things off on an odd number. Of course the argument could be made that Blizzard can do whatever they want, and a 12th class may never appear in WoW. With that said, let's just assume that Blizzard is going to make a 12th class; What could that class possibly be? Well, let's look at the pattern of class implementation since TBC;

If you want to look at patterns, there won't be a new class.

[Prancing Minstrel]

Alright, I'll take a stab at this.

Class: Dark Ranger

- ranged dps and healing (Agi mail, and Int mail)
- ranged weapons, shadow and nature magic
- no pets, no traps
- has stealth
- resource system is paladin holy power (skinned appropriately, maybe Dark Marks) and energy (mana if choosing healer)
- first tree is Sniper, concentrates on physical damage
- second tree is Deception, concentrates on shadow damage and stealthy stuff
- third tree is Field Medic, uses nature magic to heal

That's not a WoW Dark Ranger. Dark rangers use necromancy and do have pets, just lots of temporary skeletons that spawn from corpses which are awesome, and I really can't see them ever healing, especially with nature magic.

Dark Rangers > normal rangers. Otherwise it'd just be a petless hunter.

[Teriz]

Id prefer a blade-master but a tinker (gnome/goblin only) that would be kinda awesome

You should check out my blademaster idea as a 4th warrior spec in the other thread. I'd like to hear your opinion about it.

[St1ckman]

What I'm about to say has been speculated by some as the theme for the Last expac.

If there is in fact going to be one or two more expacs, the last one has been speculated by a few to be focused on the final battle with Titans, Old gods, and Sargaras. If they add in one last additional class, it would certainly be focused on Titan power or technology. New classes have so far been connected with a like minded themed expansion. The idea would be around what we have seen of titan technology and of titan physical presence such as the titan avatar's in Ulduar, and most importantly.... Algalon and Elegon.

I'm not saying we'll have a new sparkly star race in the game that would quite frankly result in "That Retarded Player" (a poke at that retarded horse incident). But rather a class that focuses on the use of titan power: Creation, Astral, Stars, Black holes, Runes, etc.

If you want to apply tinker to this, it would make the class feel different then being just a class that has engineering. And quite frankly would be easy enough to make them any healer, dps, possibly tank combo. Though I'd like to see another dps, healer, healer combo like what we have for priests.

Plus I'd want to macro bind their abilities to what algalon says when you fight him..... "The Stars, come to my aid...."

[asharia]

ranger is just a hunter. they can't make then different enough

i'd vote for tinker

[Deleted]

[...]

Not quite, since I was talking about a class that is called a Demon Hunter and operates like the Hunter class

Why, because they both shoot with a gun or a bow? Rohan provided enough differentiation. If you find using the same weapon (bow, gun, x-bow) or weapon type (ranged weapon) a big deal feel free, but then I'd like to see your cry posts about "DK also DW" and "DK also being melee DPS". Of course retridin and warrior weren't standing on their head with big smile to celebrate the competition on gear. Neither would hunter (mail-type, ranged weapon) and (enhance) shaman (ranged weapon). The latter likely weren't too happy with monk melee DPS either.

If your ideal tinker would use mail and gun/bow (which is very much possible) then I would support it because it fits in a gameplay niche. However, lorewise, how do you see it fit? DK - Northrend / LK, Monk - Pandaria / Garrosh. These 2 fit. So my question to you (and all these threads of yours boil down to the same): what expansion do you envision?

---------- Post added 2013-01-27 at 02:43 PM ----------

You know what I'd love for a new class? Some kind of Plate-wearing, Spear-wielding Warlord.

There is no spear weapon in game. You must mean polyarm? Monk, warrior.

Basically a melee-oriented healer that isn't mana-based.

They tried that with monk healing. Didn't work. Healers in WoW have mana as resource (and maybe a secondary resource as well). End of story.

As for melee. I'm not saying the following because I like or dislike melee but WoW does not need more tanks (look at LFR queues), it needs more healers (look at LFR queues) and ranged (more melee is a problem in especially 10m, and for encounter design in general).

So gameplay-wise a new class either has the following traits:

• 1 melee spec, if yes pref hybrid, pref no melee spec.
• 1 healer spec.
• At least 1 ranged spec, pref 2.
• Mail armor.
• Guns/(x)bows.
• Conqueror token (tho can shuffle around).

[Hyde]

I literally *just* posted something like this in another thread (The one about Blademasters), so I'll repost here:

I'll have something along the line but more blizzardier I think

[Deleted]

If your ideal tinker would use mail and gun/bow (which is very much possible) then I would support it because it fits in a gameplay niche. However, lorewise, how do you see it fit? DK - Northrend / LK, Monk - Pandaria / Garrosh. These 2 fit. So my question to you (and all these threads of yours boil down to the same): what expansion do you envision?[COLOR="red"]

A Titan expansion, and the tinker would take base in their Titan technology, just imagine them bringing back something like an upgraded XT-002 Deconstructor boss and recycle Gnomeregan as a new hc for nostalgia in that expansion, it doesn't sound far from what blizz could use as a base for an expansion.

[Amnasty]

So, we now have 11 classes in WoW. In stands to reason that Blizzard would want this game to end with 12 classes. Its generally not a good idea to end things off on an odd number. Of course the argument could be made that Blizzard can do whatever they want, and a 12th class may never appear in WoW. With that said, let's just assume that Blizzard is going to make a 12th class; What could that class possibly be? Well, let's look at the pattern of class implementation since TBC;

Death Knights: Filled the archetype of a Dark/Evil knight. Filled the missing scourge heroes from WC3. Filled the void of the ever popular Necromancer class. Went extremely well with its expansion. Filled in the third plate slot. Was a great counterbalance to the very popular Paladin class.

Monks: Filled in the archetype of Martial Arts fighter. Filled in third leather slot. Went a long way to improving Tank and Healer diversity in the game. Unique style and abilities fit in well with the general WoW class structure. Perfectly utilized the WC3 hero's abilities.

So what's left in WoW? What could the next class in WoW be? While numerous ideas have been tossed around, my theory is that the next class will either be Rangers or Tinkers. Here's five reasons why;

1. Ranged Weapons and Mail Armor

This factoid has been beaten to death, but its a well known fact that there's 2 glaring voids in current WoW class balance: Hunters are the only class that can fully use Guns and Bows, and that only 2 classes currently wear mail armor. Every other armor set is currently at three classes apiece. Hunters are also very powerful because they are the only class that are physical ranged. They hit faster and harder than magic users, and can kill you from afar. In battlegrounds and world PvP, Hunters are absolutely devastating PvP opponents (a different story in arena though). No one can match them. Bringing in another class can finally give them the competition they deserve.

Also bows and guns are cool. Other classes should be able to wield a gun and a bow than just a hunter.

Mail armor is also an issue. Hunters use AGI Mail, Shaman use AGI and INT Mail. This provides a great opening for a mail using class to enter the game.

2. Popularity

Hunters are the most popular class in the game by a wide margin. They're powerful, have lots of abilities, utilize numerous types of pets, etc. Also archers and bow users are popular archetypes in RPGs and other media. Legloas from Lord of the Rings, and Hawkeye from The Avengers are just two such examples. I'm sure this isn't lost on Blizzard, trying to find ways to bring in new players. I'm also sure you've had numerous players looking for that archer class, only to see that you had to drag a pet along with you.

3. WC3 Hero factor

There's quite a few WC3 heroes left that could help flesh out these potential classes. Goblin Tinkers, Dark Rangers, PotM, Dryads, Goblin Alchemist, Wardens, etc. could all be utilized to create the new class. For the Ranger pool alone we can pull abilities like Sinister Strike, Searing Arrow, Scout, Frost Arrow, Charm, Vengance, Abolish magic, and Mana flare. Toss in some abilities from the Diablo 3 Demon Hunter, and we have the makings of a pretty strong class template.

Tinkers are also pretty varied. You can utilize the abilities from Goblin Tinkers, Goblin Alchemists, Sappers, Shredders, and numerous examples of Tinkers in WoW. The Engineering archetype for RPG classes is almost as large as the Archer's.

4. The Race Factor

I'll keep this one brief; Several races can be Tinkers or Rangers/Archers. Also they don't have a significant appearance or weapon requirement to make them "feel" like they're the proper class (unlike another proposed future WoW class). This gives the classes significant flexibility in terms of implementation.

5. Hybrid Vigor

Tinkers have this as a slight advantage over Rangers. Its pretty easy to make a Tinker into a tank via their affiliation with Robots and machinery. I mean, what better tank for a dungeon than an actual tank or giant Robot? They can also heal because obviously technology improves medicine by default. A more advanced army also has more advanced medicine. This could help make Tinkers feel a bit different than already existing healing classes that use magic to heal.

Rangers could also heal, since they'd be more than likely users of nature magic. However, tanking would be a bit more difficult to pull off since we're talking about a ranged class. Regardless, I don't see another pure DPS class entering this game given the queue problems with LFR and LFD. Blizzard will more than likely stress a class that can do more than one role. Given that, both classes could potentially be implemented as any hybrid combination.

Conclusion

In the end, I feel that Tinkers have a large advantage over Rangers. They can be made to be a lot more distinct than Hunters. They can easily be made into a tri-spec (Tank/Heal/DPS) hybrid. Finally, they would be unlike any other class currently in the game. The main drawback for Tinkers would be their closeness to the Engineering profession. However, it shouldn't be that difficult to differentiate a class from a crafting profession. Robotics, Chemicals, Gunpowder, Magic-based tech, Steam, and gadgetry are all aspects that can be explored for this class. Also Tinkers have been shown to fight in melee range;



Rangers have the advantage of not being associated with a profession, and having a large archetype to work with from WC3, Diablo 3, and RPG lore in general. The problem for Rangers is making them completely distinct from Hunters. I mean, you're going to have to make them really different from the Hunter class to make their implementation work. Simply removing pets isn't enough. A melee spec and a healing spec could help, but even then, some overlap is possible.

Despite those drawbacks, those classes have the best chance of entering WoW as the next class. Clearly Blizzard could create a completely different class than these two, or maybe even a combination? We'll just have to wait and see.

Based on your beliefs from your last forum Post. 5 reasons why we wont see DH. This thread shoulda been called 5 reasons we wont see Tinkers Ranger or Alchemists.

You cant differentiate a class who is driven by a profession and simply say, OH tinkering and engineering are different.

As you said with warlocks and demon hunters.... to similar, warlocks have kit abilities demon hunters have so it wouldnt be rational.
So with your own train of thought that rangers and surely excluded because their kit will be exactly that of a hunter.

Alchemist falls flat also as it is a class who is driven by a profession.

Why cant the orc warrior who took herb and alchemy be an "alchemist" archytype? Does he not know how to throw vials of the potions and elixers he brews? That would make him an "alchemist" class.

Has Geblin Mechatorque never thought of building a giant tank to tank or a robot? Geblin is the "HIGH TINKER" and he fights in melee range, what makes him so different from the warrior he is... maybe he uses the cloth hat from Gnomer? Or other on use trinkets?

Either way i dont see either of these ever happening or even being considered as legitimate classes seeing as 2 are already professions, and 1 is a cookie cutter range damage dealer that will have a kit near identical to a class we already have.

[Deleted]

You cant differentiate a class who is driven by a profession and simply say, OH tinkering and engineering are different.

Alchemist falls flat also as it is a class who is driven by a profession.

Why cant the orc warrior who took herb and alchemy be an "alchemist" archytype? Does he not know how to throw vials of the potions and elixers he brews? That would make him an "alchemist" class.

Has Geblin Mechatorque never thought of building a giant tank to tank or a robot? Geblin is the "HIGH TINKER" and he fights in melee range, what makes him so different from the warrior he is... maybe he uses the cloth hat from Gnomer? Or other on use trinkets?

Either way i dont see either of these ever happening or even being considered as legitimate classes seeing as 2 are already professions, and 1 is a cookie cutter range damage dealer that will have a kit near identical to a class we already have.

You are working of the basis that the majority of player's would have a problem with a class that bases it's ability of a profession, personally i doubt it, it would be a totally new thing we had never seen before, and your logic of how if your character knows one thing, then he should surely be able to know other things that are close to the same thing but then why can't goblin engineers figure out how to do gnomish engineering and all alchemists figure out how to do all recipes from the start? It's a game it doesn't all make sense, a tinker could maybe even feel like as engineer in training as a part of it's leveling process so you would see it's a totally new branch not related to how the profession works, much like monks they would have to go back every 10 levels and work on new tech in the "workshop/scrapyard" teaching them to improve their engineer based capability's.

If you had a tinker he could have ability's that felt engineer'ish but had nothing to do with the profession (like a tanking cd where the tinker would temporarily short circuit and redirect all energy to their plasma shield for 10 sec reducing dmg taken by 40% but unable to use X specific ability's for 5 sec afterwards because of low energy) Lightning or fire based AoE and so on.

And alchemy based healing spec where he would just have spells that sounded alchmist'ish like breaking a vial and releasing a cloud of vapor that would heal all nearby friendly players, and throwing vials at players in a combo, where the first one would work like a small heal but the second different vial would trigger a larger heal (much like riptide and greater healing wave works for a shaman) It would all have to be imbued with magic so they need mana (mail with int and spirit)

The main point is that it could "sound" like it had a link to the profession, but have nothing directly to do with it, and share pretty much the same basic game mechanics as we already know but in a new and fresh interpretation.

[Deleted]

I think tinkers would seriously be the best thing ever Gimme a gnome tinker now!

[Skayth]

/sigh You did 5 reasons why dhs wont be in game, and even in the thread you showed your bias-ness to ranger/tinkers, and loe and behold, this thread shows. Tinkers= Engineers. Rangers=Hunters.

There are many other classes that could simply be added to the game better than these two. These two are already taken by a profession and by a class. Sure, some gimmicks to tinkers are not in the engineer's profession, but most of it is already there. Hunters have everything that a ranger wants (besides dark ranger). You cannot make another class with everything that another class has.

Personally, I want sea witches, then have naga join either horde or alliance. That will give you another "ranger" class, with lightning and tornadoes mixed in. But hey, we can all be biased, much.

[Solzan Nemesis]

I want Tanker a lot. Ranger would make me mad because I RP my blood elf hunter as a ranger and I do not think Blizzard would give me a class change.

---------- Post added 2013-01-27 at 11:15 AM ----------

/sigh You did 5 reasons why dhs wont be in game, and even in the thread you showed your bias-ness to ranger/tinkers, and loe and behold, this thread shows. Tinkers= Engineers. Rangers=Hunters.

There are many other classes that could simply be added to the game better than these two. These two are already taken by a profession and by a class. Sure, some gimmicks to tinkers are not in the engineer's profession, but most of it is already there. Hunters have everything that a ranger wants (besides dark ranger). You cannot make another class with everything that another class has.

Personally, I want sea witches, then have naga join either horde or alliance. That will give you another "ranger" class, with lightning and tornadoes mixed in. But hey, we can all be biased, much.

Little, but I disagree with all of you who said no about Tinker. There is a lot good reasons to have Tinker and ways to make it different form Engineering.

[Drilnos]

You cant differentiate a class who is driven by a profession and simply say, OH tinkering and engineering are different.

As you said with warlocks and demon hunters.... to similar, warlocks have kit abilities demon hunters have so it wouldnt be rational.
So with your own train of thought that rangers and surely excluded because their kit will be exactly that of a hunter.

Alchemist falls flat also as it is a class who is driven by a profession.

Why cant the orc warrior who took herb and alchemy be an "alchemist" archytype? Does he not know how to throw vials of the potions and elixers he brews? That would make him an "alchemist" class.

Has Geblin Mechatorque never thought of building a giant tank to tank or a robot? Geblin is the "HIGH TINKER" and he fights in melee range, what makes him so different from the warrior he is... maybe he uses the cloth hat from Gnomer? Or other on use trinkets?

Either way i dont see either of these ever happening or even being considered as legitimate classes seeing as 2 are already professions, and 1 is a cookie cutter range damage dealer that will have a kit near identical to a class we already have.

First off, all classes are professions. Characters aren't born warriors or mages or hunters, they go through intense training to become good at their chosen specialization and by doing so move up the ranks of the military. That's a profession. The in-game professions are all side jobs. Being a warrior or a mage is the day job.

Second, when he fought in the retaking of Gnomeregan Gelbin Mekkatorque fought while mounted on a mechanostrider which by lore he both invented and built himself. He used lasers, flamethrowers, missile barrages and an orbital death ray. And yes, he hit things. With a wrench. He might use warrior abilities when fighting For the Horde groups now, but if they add the Tinker class those placeholder abilities would be gone in a hurry.

Tinker spells and abilities would use gadgets, but they wouldn't be on-use items in their bags. And, for the record, Tinker abilities have crossover with alchemy too. It's a multidisciplinary science.

[Deleted]

A Titan expansion, and the tinker would take base in their Titan technology, just imagine them bringing back something like an upgraded XT-002 Deconstructor boss and recycle Gnomeregan as a new hc for nostalgia in that expansion, it doesn't sound far from what blizz could use as a base for an expansion.

..and then we all switch to some kind of steampunk MMORPG.

[Deleted]

..and then we all switch to some kind of steampunk MMORPG.

We already have tinkers, tanks, mechanostriders, helicopters, motor bikers, explosive engineering, and huge battling air ships, so what is your point again? just because one new class will be centered more around these things that are already in the game doesn't mean that the rest of the game changes with it, you will still have mages doing their magic thing, druids doing their nature thing, and warriors bashing face with medieval fantasy swords.

[Legebril]

I would love to see tinker as a class in WoW. Ofc if that happen i will reroll inmediatly.

It can works with steam as resource (Energy, mana, etc), and generate something similar to combo points or chi. The tinker uses his gun for gaining this combo points and spend them with different kind of explosives.

..and then we all switch to some kind of steampunk MMORPG.

With BC we have a star wars MMORPG

[Deleted]

Love it how neither of you got the reference to Project Titan. Keyword = migration path.

[Deleted]

Love it how neither of you got the reference to Project Titan. Keyword = migration path.

I see what you did there, but that seems like something very few people would have gotten from what you said, since no one knows what "Titan project" is gonna be about, and Titan constructs are already in World of Warcraft and is a big part of this particular discussion i fail to see how i am suppose to guess that you are very vaguely referring to a game that we know nothing about.

[Theendgamelv3]

Tinkers would be a great class. I would love to see it. Rangers unlike a Demon Hunter with a long range weapon would have way too much crossover with hunters.