Rejoice! Demon Hunter is already playable in-game, but not clear enough, apparently.

[Spellbreaker]

And Shaman don't have the same play style of Shadow Hunters and Farseers. Unless there's a new Shaman spec where you throw a double bladed lance at a target, or hurl balls of energy at people without casting a spell. Neither the Farseers or Shadow Hunters used totems either.

What makes their connection with Shaman so obvious?



Yeah, because it doesn't exist, much like your argument.

Again, of Blizzard cared about popularity we would have had the DH in the game many years ago. There's a reason why we don't yet, and never will.

Didn't most people say thay about pandarians and yet we have them now and blizzard was looking to add them in burning crusade?

[Thimagryn]

Didn't most people say thay about pandarians and yet we have them now and blizzard was looking to add them in burning crusade?

Pretty much this. People didn't believe it could happen because of the rumor that China wouldn't allow a playable Panda race, but that was later denied as an urban legend.

[nightfalls]

Didn't most people say thay about pandarians and yet we have them now and blizzard was looking to add them in burning crusade?

Bottom line, Blizzard doesn't add things because people predict or fail to predict it in advance.

[Teriz]

Didn't most people say thay about pandarians and yet we have them now and blizzard was looking to add them in burning crusade?

You could make that argument if we rolled into Pandaria durung the TBC and massacred the majority of Pandarens and their leaders like we did with DHs. However, the Pandarens had no presence in TBC, while DHs had a large presence in TBC.

There's a big difference between the two.

[Sukhoi]

You could make that argument if we rolled into Pandaria durung the TBC and massacred the majority of Pandarens and their leaders like we did with DHs. However, the Pandarens had no presence in TBC, while DHs had a large presence in TBC.

There's a big difference between the two.

Theyve said before they didnt add a class in burning crusade because the game didnt have the model for it and they "werent ready". Demon hunters wouldve been the hero class added if it was the case.

- - - Updated - - -

Yeah, because it doesn't exist, much like your argument.

Again, of Blizzard cared about popularity we would have had the DH in the game many years ago. There's a reason why we don't yet, and never will.

I have arguments, youre just too ignorant to consider them. Blizzard cares about popularity.. why wouldnt they? Its a business. They have to make money. If they didnt pick popular additions, theyd be adding to a game for nothing.

So technically, your argument doesnt exist.

[Teriz]

Theyve said before they didnt add a class in burning crusade because the game didnt have the model for it and they "werent ready". Demon hunters wouldve been the hero class added if it was the case.

Source?

I have arguments, youre just too ignorant to consider them. Blizzard cares about popularity.. why wouldnt they? Its a business. They have to make money. If they didnt pick popular additions, theyd be adding to a game for nothing.

So technically, your argument doesnt exist.

If they cared about popularity to that extent, Monks wouldn't be in the game taking up a slot that fits Demon Hunters.

As for my argument not existing, DHs aren't on the game. Warlocks have their iconic moves and attributes. Monks are in the game. That pretty much makes my argument a reality.

I'm still waiting for your source. Don't let me down.

[Sukhoi]

And Shaman don't have the same play style of Shadow Hunters and Farseers. Unless there's a new Shaman spec where you throw a double bladed lance at a target, or hurl balls of energy at people without casting a spell. Neither the Farseers or Shadow Hunters used totems either.

You're kidding right? Shamans hurl electricity from a range. And heal from a range. And turn people into frogs from a range. Summon wolves from a range. See what im doing here... wow.

And to say warlocks have the playstyle of a demon hunter but you cant say far seers dont have the same playstyle of a shaman... im baffled.. i really am

- - - Updated - - -

Source?

It's common knowledge.. /facepalm

[Jtree]

That kind of straw poll is pretty much what I'd expect. I'd probably expect more than 7 of those to have said they'd quit if Pandaren were added. The real 'proof' usually comes in when we see what the class can do, how well it plays and how cool it looks when you see someone else playing it well.

Speaking of polls, for those who don't frequent the warlock forum, I made a poll over there asking if demon hunters overlap with locks too much to be made playable. Over 60% of warlocks said no, DHs could be their own thing. (Jess,you've posted in it IIRC.) As they are the people who play the "threatened" class and understand its dynamics and lore, it suggests a large number of locks wouldn't feel affected by such development.

That's generally your opinion. I'm willing to bet that 80% of players have no clue what a DH even is, or even know or care about DH lore. Heck, I played WoW from the beginning, and been playing Warcraft since WC2, and I pretty much ignored DH lore until this past year. The Demon Hunter was one of my favorite WC3 heroes to boot.

None of your reasons matter much when it comes to class implementation. What appears to matter is uniqueness, flexibility (large archetype), and ties to WC3. In that sense, the DH is not unique, not flexible, and it's ties to WC3 are present in existing classes.

Of the classes you mentioned, only the Tinker fits the bill.

And I'm willing to be less than 10% would get what you're talking about when you say "tinker class". Explain that it's technology and chemical focused, and many probably draw a quick line to engineering and alchemy. Explain the differences, and they might get it. Might even like the idea. Or find it gimmicky, silly, or out of place in a fantasy game (nevermind the longstanding steampunk elements of Warcraft).

But a tinker isn't a franchise icon in WoW. It doesn't already have place in the game, have natural antagonists, and have a connection to the ongoing stories of WoW. Neither did pandaren or monks, true, but if Blizzard should decide to write a new expansion that is a sequel to TBC, the DH is a natural inclusion.

However, this is not a tinker thread, so we'll put that business elsewhere.



That argument against adding more melee specs to the game is also one I've agreed with, but it may be moot at this point. We've already got too many classes for a 10-man raid, while Flex raiding gives a chance for raiders to build groups based on the number of people they have. And, speaking from actual raid leader experience, a hypothetical balance of classes and specs is less relevant when your guild is simply awash in warlocks and plate DPS. I'd have killed for a couple more reliable shaman.

[Sukhoi]

Source?



If they cared about popularity to that extent, Monks wouldn't be in the game taking up a slot that fits Demon Hunters.

As for my argument not existing, DHs aren't on the game. Warlocks have their iconic moves and attributes. Monks are in the game. That pretty much makes my argument a reality.

I'm still waiting for your source. Don't let me down.

And look where blizzard is. With monk classes added, subs are bleeding, and its the lowest played class.

Warlock is not the same playstyle as demon hunter. I dont know what youre not getting. Clearly not thinking shamans and far seers are the same makes me question your knowledge of the matter here.

Teriz logic: Far seers dont play the same as the shaman.
But for the sake of the argument ill say demon hunters have the same exact melee dual wielding playstyle as locks.

[Teriz]

You're kidding right? Shamans hurl electricity from a range. And heal from a range. And turn people into frogs from a range. Summon wolves from a range. See what im doing here... wow.

Warlocks turn into demons. Warlocks ignite themselves with immolation. warlocks had the ability to drain mana from their target. Demon Hunters ignite themselves with immolation. DHs turn themselves into demons. DHs have the ability to drain mana from a target.

So your argument is that Shaman and SH and FS connection is obvious. Then you say that Warlocks and DHs don't have that connection because they have different playstyle.

Hypocrite much?

It's common knowledge.. /facepalm

Then where's the source?

[Sukhoi]

You could make that argument if we rolled into Pandaria durung the TBC and massacred the majority of Pandarens and their leaders like we did with DHs. However, the Pandarens had no presence in TBC, while DHs had a large presence in TBC.

There's a big difference between the two.

Two lore important demon hunters isnt exactly a large presence.

- - - Updated - - -

Warlocks turn into demons. Warlocks ignite themselves with immolation. warlocks had the ability to drain mana from their target. Demon Hunters ignite themselves with immolation. DHs turn themselves into demons. DHs have the ability to drain mana from a target.

So your argument is that Shaman and SH and FS connection is obvious. Then you say that Warlocks and DHs don't have that connection because they have different playstyle.

Hypocrite much?




Then where's the source?

The connections there. Its just not the same playstyle of an "agile fighter" who runs in and out of the battle field. Im not a hypocrite, youre just twisting facts into your fight.

And everyone whos been on mmo champion knows it. I dont need to source it for you.

[Sukhoi]

He's using that against you in case you didn't realize.

"DEMON HUNTERS DON'T PLAY THE SAME AS WARLOCKS THEREFORE THEY MUST BE SEPARATE CLASSES" is what people have been crying out in this thread since page one.
Shaman don't play the same as Farseers, or Shadow Hunters. But we won't see Farseers or Shadow Hunters in game because they overlap with Shaman too greatly. Shadow Hunters are physical range with dark voodoo powers; Nothing like Shaman except their totem abilities. Farseers are a closer relation to Shaman because most Farseer abilities were handed off to Shaman. Should I go starting threads saying Shadow Hunters will be the next class because they're not close enough to Shaman, and abilities can overlap?

Hint: The answer is no, that'd be stupid. Just like claiming that, because Warlocks do not play the exact same as Demon Hunters, we can see a standalone Demon Hunter class that heavily treads on Warlock ground.

Far seers and shamans play exactly the same.. Am i missing something? Is it because shamans dont ride on a wolf 100% of the time?

Well, the worlds gone crazy. Or i have. Im out.

[Thimagryn]

No one is asking for a Shadow Hunter class or Farseer class. You won't see many arguments presented in its defense.

[Teriz]

And look where blizzard is. With monk classes added, subs are bleeding, and its the lowest played class.

WoW is losing subs, but its not because of the addition of Monks. There's countless other reasons. The addition of a DH class and its effects are grossly exaggerated.

Warlock is not the same playstyle as demon hunter. I dont know what youre not getting. Clearly not thinking shamans and far seers are the same makes me question your knowledge of the matter here.

Shaman dont have the same playstyle as Shadow Hunters or Farseers either.

Teriz logic: Far seers dont play the same as the shaman.
But for the sake of the argument ill say demon hunters have the same exact melee dual wielding playstyle as locks.

Yeah, where did I say that? I said that Shaman don't play like SHs or FSs just like Warlocks don't play like DHs. Yet for some reason, you have no issue saying that Shaman are inspired by those two heroes.

[Sukhoi]

WoW is losing subs, but its not because of the addition of Monks. There's countless other reasons. The addition of a DH class and its effects are grossly exaggerated.



Shaman dont have the same playstyle as Shadow Hunters or Farseers either.




Yeah, where did I say that? I said that Shaman don't play like SHs or FSs just like Warlocks don't play like DHs. Yet for some reason, you have no issue saying that Shaman are inspired by those two heroes.

Teriz im going to ask one final question. Do warlocks dual wield have the capability to be viable melee? Or are they just spellcasters?

Are demon hunters just spellcasters?

If you answer yes, youre wrong.

If you answer no, which you should unless youve lost it, then warlocks arent demon hunters.

[Talen]

Lore is the biggest separation between the two classes. Lore is also the only reason for people who believe spellcasters can melee if they could dual wield, or that a melee class is a caster because they have some ranged abilities.

All of which means there is no reason to develop a specific DH class. Could it be done? Yes...but right now the biggest thing separating Warlocks from DH is Warlocks don't have DW or a blindfold. Anything else speaks to the viability of the idea.

Lorewise, you can make the argument that there is a difference between DHs and Warlocks. But class design isn't concerned with lore, but with gameplay.....and from the gameplay point of view, looking at theme, feel, identity, toolkit,etc...Warlocks already ARE Demon Hunters right now.

Motivation has little to nothing to do with it. It is class identity. Sacrificial pacts and ritual blinding is not a specialization. It's also something that is very integral to the Demon Hunter's image. In the same vein, I wouldn't consider Death Knights the same if they weren't undead.

And you think sacrificial pacts and ritual binding doesn't fit with Warlocks? The big difference isn't necessaily in motivation - its in effect; a DH directs his power more towards the melee aspect. A warlock directs his towards ranged casting.

No one is asking for the Demon Hunter as a spec.

But some ARE asking for it as a class.

There is no Demon Hunter gameplay, so assuming that making them Warlocks is something that people want is a misunderstanding of why fans want playable Demon Hunters in the first place.

They like the concept, they like the look, they like how they imagine it will play.

The warlock needs to maintain it's own identity, not by taking the form of another's.

And if a DH is introduced as a Warlock who simply focusses on melee based combbat, that will be the case. At least as much as a Blood Knight/Paladin or Shadow/Holy priest or Arms/Fury warrior.

I wouldn't want a Warrior to be any more of a Blademaster or Mountain King if it meant alienating some of their core values.

And yet you can effectively create both those classes through judicious talent choice.

Warlocks need to be respected as what they are. I don't really know how many people who are pushing for a Warlock DH spec actually play Warlocks, but I feel like it's an idea imposed on them without respecting it as a spell-casting class.

The idea was quite popular during Beta when Warlocks got the DH as a tanking spec. As it was in LK when they got Meta. Or in live when it got the Illidan armor. The similarities have been noted several times before and there have been fw if any pople saying Warlocks shouldn't get DH move or absorb the DH identity into its own.

EJL

[Teriz]

No one is asking for a Shadow Hunter class or Farseer class. You won't see many arguments presented in its defense.

That would be because Shadow Hunters and Farseers aren't nearly as popular. Shaman in general aren't a popular class. So its not surprising. The only class they're more popular than are Monks, and by the end of the expansion, they'll be less popular than them as well.

Haven't you noticed? The base argument for the DHs implementation is that "it's popular".

[Sukhoi]

Easily solved. Fourth spec, melee centric warlock, allows dual weild.

Why is that such a hard concept for you?

Actually i dont even know why im fighting. Thats what i want, and have accepted that if warlocks get a melee tree it could be demon hunter capable. I think i just hate teriz.

[Thimagryn]

Haven't you noticed? The base argument for the DHs implementation is that "it's popular".

And it is. Do you deny that?

[Teriz]

If you answer no, which you should unless youve lost it, then warlocks arent demon hunters.

And Shaman aren't Farseers or Shadow Hunters. On your way out, think about why Shadow Hunters and Farseers will never be classes in WoW.

Thanks for posting.