Tinker Class

[Drilnos]

GC also said maybe someday, So slim chances it will come anytime soon if it comes.

Also do we really need 9 tinker threads

http://www.mmo-champion.com/threads/...ely-to-be-next
http://www.mmo-champion.com/threads/...ss-Idea-(Long)
http://www.mmo-champion.com/threads/...w-class-in-WoW
http://www.mmo-champion.com/threads/...ghlight=Tinker
http://www.mmo-champion.com/threads/...ghlight=Tinker
http://www.mmo-champion.com/threads/...ghlight=Tinker
http://www.mmo-champion.com/threads/...ghlight=Tinker
http://www.mmo-champion.com/threads/...ghlight=Tinker
http://www.mmo-champion.com/threads/...Burning-Legion

There are at least eight threads about Demon Hunters, not including the ones discussing a Legion expansion in which Demon Hunters are mentioned, or the Tinker threads that got hijacked by Demon Hunter discussion. Ought we do something about that too?

[dokilar]

i think everyone here is off their rocker if they think theyre going to release a whole new other class right after they released one in MoP. i just dont see it happening

[kensim]

Oh Teriz...if they don't call it a Tinker then how does it fit into your pattern about WC3 hero classes. I mean DK is DK, Monk is Monk.

Oh wait your own rules don't apply when it is a negative versus your OPINION.

Ready to admit there is at least some chance that Engineering is Tinker? Even if it is 1% the fact is it is possible, your continued denial is making you look so bias and horrible.

Ready to own up yet?

[Teriz]

Oh Teriz...if they don't call it a Tinker then how does it fit into your pattern about WC3 hero classes. I mean DK is DK, Monk is Monk.

Actually it fits right in the pattern, since the hero that inspired the Monk class was the Pandaren brewmaster. The Tinker hero's full name is also race based, since its called Goblin Tinker.

It stands to reason that the Tinker would get the same treatment as the Brewmaster. Make the hero units name one of the specs and expand from there with a broader class title. Makes sense, given the scope of the technology archetype.

[Sukhoi]

There are at least eight threads about Demon Hunters, not including the ones discussing a Legion expansion in which Demon Hunters are mentioned, or the Tinker threads that got hijacked by Demon Hunter discussion. Ought we do something about that too?

Like what? Demon hunter threads have been around forever. So this is null. And demon hunter hijacks threads because its more interesting than tinker. Unlike tinker, which hijacks every thread. Regardless what its about.

[TheWindWalker]

An underwater xpac is the onky chance I can see them coming. You think tinkers would come in a burning legion xpac? Wake up.

You mean like "Burning Crusade" where the mobs that people like to point at as "Tinkers" are from?

[kensim]

You mean like "Burning Crusade" where the mobs that people like to point at as "Tinkers" are from?

But Teriz says they must be based off of WC3. So that no work.

Btw if we can base stuff off of BC then DH is cool. Illidan doesn't use Warlock abilities and I am pretty sure he is a demon hunter.

[Sukhoi]

You mean like "Burning Crusade" where the mobs that people like to point at as "Tinkers" are from?

There's a couple named insignificant mobs that are the demon engineers. And i dont think a technology class would be building fel machines? Tinkers have been in Azeroth forever. It's just for some reason now the tinkerbells decided to come out from hiding.

[Talen]

Nothing, huh?

Yes...nothing. First - its lore. Second - it's non-canonical lore. Thirdly - it grants the Sense Demons Ability. It only explains "HOW". Fourthly - the RPG itself contradicts your assertion. Fifthly - as does the game itself.

I don't want to see that as an option, because it suggest that is optional. Really, spectral sight is one of the things that should be intrinsically tied to the class and not an option, just as permanent undeath is a characteristic of all Death Knights. It is not an option to not be an undead version of your character class.

"I don't want" pretty much says it all. **YOU** don't want. And that's OK. But you are arguing about what IS an option. The game and RPG BOTH present it as optional. Sure, becoming a member of the Sacred Order of Demon Hunters may require that sacrifice so you get to learn all the sceret hanshakes, but neither depict it as something that is needed to BE a Demon Hunter. YEs, it IS part of their look, and its important for that....but that doens't make it an essential element to design around. The "look" can be given to another class.

What do Warlocks have to do with Demon Hunters being badass? Nothing. It's a different class that has its own identity and its own reasons for being awesome. Having spectral sight and runic tattooes? Not a part of the Warlock identity, and doubtful to ever become it.

Why can they not be part of the Demon Hunter Warlock Spec? Why can the Warlock not be a "badass"?

They aren't part of the Warlock class simply because you say they aren't, simply because you don't see them as part of it.

Why not?

Then they wouldn't have a story at all. It would be a Warlock story, not a Demon Hunter story. You understand how that's a conflict of interest, right? Oh, you don't? That's because you don't give a fuck about character class identity.

Actually - I do. But if the DH story is that they are effectively a Warlock, then the DH story will BE the Warlock story. DHs will just be a melee focussed Warlock, drawing on the same power source, using the same spells, having the same look and theme. That isn't a conflict of interest. That would simply be the DH story not being the one you want.

Right now - Warlocks and DHs have a huge overlap in theme, look, abilities and Blizzard has continued to strengthen the links between the classes. You may not see these links as important, but you can't credibly deny that they exist. You can't also deny that Blizzard doesn't want any more homogeneity in the game and that existing classes take a higher priority over potential classes.

I understand the desire for a DH standalone class, but all that brings that a Warlock 4th spec doesn't would be two other specs and the ability to be called Demon Hunter in quest blurbs. Everything else can be achieved via a single spec; that's all it takes. Other specs can also have their own flavor, their own identity, their own way of doing things. But for some reason, you don't seem to think that a Demon Hunter can have all that and still be a Warlock. And the only reason you've given is - you don't want it to be that way.

i think everyone here is off their rocker if they think theyre going to release a whole new other class right after they released one in MoP. I just dont see it happening

I think it possible. Likely? Perhaps not. But possible.

EJL

[Thimagryn]

Why do you think people want to play a Demon Hunter?

[Jessicka]

Warlocks really are badass, just really not in the way DHs are, you don't seem to get that that's why no one but you thinks they're the same, Talen.

[Talen]

Why do you think people want to play a Demon Hunter?

The same reason people want to play Paladins. The problem, from your point of view, is that they'll still get to play a DH if he is a 4th spec, they will still get the look, feel and anti-hero vibe, Blizzard can still keep the background lore and canonise it, the spec will have its own identity and flavor and game history which people can enjoy....what you are looking for is something the Warlock class can provide - IF Blizzard decide to actually develop the lore and story.

EJL

[Hengwulf]

Warlocks can't be DHs any more than Rogues can. Demon Hunter couldn't work as 4th lock spec, because of its rather obvious tiers to Rogue class. Either stand alone class (or spec of new class), or nothing.

[Thimagryn]

So do you believe Warlocks can make the transition to all permanently blind themselves, gain ritualistic tattooes? Or do you believe that Demon Hunters do not need any of that to function as a Warlock spec?

[Cooper]

Yes...nothing. First - its lore. Second - it's non-canonical lore. Thirdly - it grants the Sense Demons Ability. It only explains "HOW". Fourthly - the RPG itself contradicts your assertion. Fifthly - as does the game itself.

LOL, that is from the RPG, you douchebag zealot moron.

You can't even fucking admit when you're wrong when proof is staring you right in your worthless fucking face. Let's review what you wrote, because you're too fucking stupid to cop to it.

No. I'm pointing out that even the (non-canonical) source you draw much of your own vision of DHs from doesn't maintain that tattoos and blindfolds are part and parcel of the DH class. That there is nothing which states that one must blind oneself or tattoo oneself to be a Demon Hunter.

Nothing to suggest that such addtions are more than choices made by individual Demon Hunters for various reasons. True, maybe that reason is to gain an ability or increase ones mystical power or to become one with the Secret Demon Hunter society, but still just a choice.

And let's review what the World of Warcraft RPG, which came out AFTER World of Warcraft, states:

Enlightenment (Su): As part of the ceremony to become a demon hunter, the initiate burns out her eyes with a magic blade to entrap a demonic essence within her body. Most demon hunters then bind their mutilated eyes with strips of cloth.

Guess what, zealot? That's not the only ability trapping a demonic essence gives demon hunters in the rpg:

Warblade (Su): The demon hunter can channel the chaos energy within her into a melee weapon to increase its powers.

or how about

Improved Warblade (Su): At 5th level, the demon hunter becomes more proficient in channeling demonic energy into her weapons. Any melee weapon she wields is considered magic and gains an additional +2 enhancement bonus on attack and damage rolls. (This ability cannot increase a magic weapon’s enhancement
bonus beyond +5.) In addition, on command, any melee weapon she wields is sheathed in green-yellow flames. These flames deal an additional +1d6 points of fire damage on a successful hit.

Or how about what the Warcraft RPG before "World of Warcraft" said:

To become a demon hunter, a hero must find a demon hunter who is willing to lead her through a series of complex rituals. These rituals involve capturing a demon and sacrificing it in order to bind a portion of its spirit inside the hero. The ritual requires that the hero burn out her eyes with a magically-heated blade in order to contain the demon spirit.

This has been the lore for as long as there have been demon hunters in Warcraft. The Leotheras the Blind encounter in Serpentshrine Cavern is derived from these very concepts. You will, of course, ignore these facts and continue to argue that Demon Hunters are Warlocks because you are just another addle-brained zealot who does not care what the truth actually is. You are a worthless human being.

Infracted. Flaming is not tolerated here

[Teriz]

Warlocks really are badass, just really not in the way DHs are, you don't seem to get that that's why no one but you thinks they're the same, Talen.

Evidence seems to show that Blizzard also thinks they're the same.

This btw showcases why DHs will never be a class in this game; They bring nothing new to the class lineup, and the only reason people like yourself want them in the game is because you want them in the game. It has nothing to do with bringing something new or interesting. You just wish to play as a shirtless elf twirling warglaives. Something another class can do already.

Meanwhile. a technology class brings a theme that is expressed throughout the game world, but not in the classes. It would be like no other class currently in the game.
It would also shine some much needed light on two very neglected classes.

Demon Hunters simply can't say the same. Their story has already been told, and their legacy is expressed through Warlocks and Rogues.

[Lor_Azut]

I'd rather see a Spell Breaker, Warden or Dark Ranger than a Demon Hunter or Tinker/SteamWarrior.. But that's just me (:

[Jessicka]

Evidence seems to show that Blizzard also thinks they're the same.

This btw showcases why DHs will never be a class in this game; They bring nothing new to the class lineup, and the only reason people like yourself want them in the game is because you want them in the game. It has nothing to do with bringing something new or interesting. You just wish to play as a shirtless elf twirling warglaives. Something another class can do already.

Meanwhile. a technology class brings a theme that is expressed throughout the game world, but not in the classes. It would be like no other class currently in the game.
It would also shine some much needed light on two very neglected classes.

Demon Hunters simply can't say the same. Their story has already been told, and their legacy is expressed through Warlocks and Rogues.

No. You should know by now that I'm pretty indifferent to Demon Hunters as a class. I wouldn't roll one, certainly not as a main. However, I do think they can easily be distinctive enough to stand alone as a class. As could Tinkerers, I'd just find those very likely to be disruptive to the game world.

Please though for the love of all that is holy, just stop making every thread on the matter into a choice between the two. Its distracting to the real discussion of tinkerers as a class.

[Enthusiastic Steward]

This btw showcases why DHs will never be a class in this game

People insisted Alliance would never have shaman and Horde would never have paladins
People insisted Blizzard would never do something like a Hero Class
People insisted Goblins would never be playable
People insisted Worgen would never be playable
Many times people have adamantly insisted something will never happen, and then it happens because Blizzard feels it would be a good fit.

So there you have it, DH will never be a class. Demon Hunters confirmed as next class by Teriz.

Blizzard is making a product to be sold. If they feel there is a demand for it and they feel there is a way they can do it properly ("they feel they can do it properly" by the way, not "I feel like there is no way to do it properly") they will put it in their game. This is true for Demon Hunters. This is true for Tinkers. This sadly was not true for playable Tuskarr and Nerubians, which would have made WotLK the best expansion of any game ever.

[Hengwulf]

Evidence seems to show that Blizzard also thinks they're the same.

This btw showcases why DHs will never be a class in this game; They bring nothing new to the class lineup, and the only reason people like yourself want them in the game is because you want them in the game. It has nothing to do with bringing something new or interesting. You just wish to play as a shirtless elf twirling warglaives. Something another class can do already.

Meanwhile. a technology class brings a theme that is expressed throughout the game world, but not in the classes. It would be like no other class currently in the game.
It would also shine some much needed light on two very neglected classes.

Demon Hunters simply can't say the same. Their story has already been told, and their legacy is expressed through Warlocks and Rogues.

Evidence shows that Blizzard acknowledges there is a problem with possible future impementation of DH class. Nothing more than that.

Return of the Burning Legion would be actually best opportunity to introduce DHs as class, and it didn't happen yet. Warlocks and Rogues didn't take from DHs what is most powerful and iconic about their image and lore, so there is still a lot left to make use out of.

But indeed Tinker, at least in my opinion, would have much more potential for new mechanics and fresh, new image. But that doesn't mean DH is impossible, or there aren't any more candidates.