Theres only one possible class left they can add to the game

[De Lupe]

I seriously don't get why people want to ruin the game by adding this garbage.

I thought the same thing about Demon Hunter. See how that turned out?

In the end, if it fits the expansion theme, I see no problem with a class.

[LanToaster]

Please. You know what I meant. Another example is that we can one-shot Kil'Jaeden back in the Sunwell, and he's huge! But we need at least nine other people to struggle against him in a long fight, here. Archimonde, we kill the guy with a simple, instant cast spell, in Hyjal... yet just last expansions we were having a lot of trouble fighting him. Today, we can head in, alone, and kill him without much trouble. How about killing Old Gods by practically just looking at them funny? That's the issue of using "power level" as an argument in a progressive RPG.

Actually no, I didn´t.

What you are talking about is the GamePlay PowerCreep. Obviously while we *should* be stronger now from a Lore Standpoint than when we were back in Icecrown. It obviously isnt like this.
Just "How Much" stronger we are now to the Lichking, can only the Lore tell. But I think, with our artifacts, we should be on par with the Lichking. Or at least slightly below. I mean, we killed those we could only deal with due to circumstances before now ourselves.

But, I wasn´t refering to Players in my Power Argument, I was refering to NPC, like how Tirion is much stronger than Arthas was back in the Culling of Stratholme.

Except common sense doesn't work like that. Why do we have to assume something has changed, when there is no reason nor indication that it has ever changed?

Common sense works exactly like that. Change is one of the few constants.
If the Priest and Paladin order wouldn´t adept their Training to face the Threats/Objectives they currently have, they would be Stupid.

I don't think I ever made the argument that all priests have the same training. I mean, it's logical to infer that when I said that "all paladins have priest training", I meant that human paladins have the same clerical training as human priests. Dwarf paladins have the same clerical training as dwarf priests. Blood elf paladins have the same clerical training as blood elf priests, and so on and so forth.

If you base "Paladin = Priests" on the fact that one singular Paladin Order was founded on Priests and Knights, then you assume that everything went the same.

Thats kinda like, claiming: "Shamans are Paladins", because the first Dreanei Shaman was a Paladin. Or, every shaman will have Paladin Training.

And when you say: "Clerical Training", I dont really think Paladins have that. Or actually "Need" that.
I´m not sure about Priests, but Paladins (even more so of the Draenei and Lightforged) follow the light directly, they kinda do what "feels" right.
The Draenei can even follow the light directly as they talk/learn from the Naaru. (Which appears to be "The Light")

And again: It would be Idiotic to not Outfit your Priests with Plate Armor, if Paladins were just Priests with Plate Amor. This would defeat the Purpose of having Priests around. Its a different thing to be a Priest, than its to be a Paladin. And any training in any of those.
Should (or it would be plain stupid) be different.

And dont start with same kind of spells (tools). I learned to use Hammer, does that make me a Carpenter?

- - - Updated - - -

Furthermore, I forgot Tauren:
The one who Created the Sunwalkers was a Warrior.
Also, Priests and Paladins of the Tauren came at roughly the same time.
If you have to have Priest training to be a Paladin, then why should they create two classes?

- - - Updated - - -

So he was a simple Warrior turned Paladin, while the others had been Priests turned Paladins.

Soo, as you have your sources, did he recieve "Priest" Training. Or did the Archbishop just teach him to wield the Light.

There is more to beeing a Priest than just wield the light.

[Teriz]

Yeah Machine Guns are not guns. Okay. Technically even attacking with your weapon is an ability. It's called auto attack.

The Machine Gun ability, which is what I'm talking about is not a gun, it is simply an ability called Machine Gun;

Machine Gun
40 yd range
Channeled (3 sec cast)
A channeled attack that deals 1272 to 1428 damage every quarter-second to target enemy for 3 sec. This effect ignores armor.

http://www.wowhead.com/spell=74438/machine-gun

That ability does not require a weapon (since it is connected to Razo Crushcog's mech) and Hunters do not have that ability.

No issue with lasers? Good.

Since when do Hunters use potions? Since Vanilla when Alchemy became available.

So you're saying that this class wouldn't be allowed to use Alchemy either? You do know that alchemy is available to every class right? You do know that a potion-based ability would operate completely differently than a potion-based item correct? A Chemist-based spec wouldn't resemble the alchemy profession in any real sense. Just like the Monk brewing sub spec doesn't resemble the alchemy profession.

I made a claim. That a marksmanship hunter with alchemy and engineering covers everything a Tinker would do. So far you said nothing to prove me wrong.
While it's no big deal since Blizzard loves reusing class concepts, spec ideas and spec names, I have read claims that I am wrong, yet nothing to back it up.
So I will continue to wait patiently.

Well your claims are wrong. Saying that a MM hunter covers everything a Tinker would do is simply a false statement. The Tinker is a class concept largely based on a character that utilizes heavy technology and machinery. That means that the class could potentially be using things like lasers, energy shields, gravity weapons, and advanced robotics. That's a bit beyond the scope of a character whose lore is to live in the wilds and befriend animals.

[Deleted]

I think the issue with tinkers is that they're associated with gnomes, which in turn makes them lame as fuck

No the issue with Tinkers is that their supporters are annoying AF, pretending that Tinker is the only choice for new class and being physically unable to formulate proper arguments. Exhibit A: Teriz

[Deleted]

No there isn't, Blizzard can make up anything they want. I remember the years of threads where people wrote essays about the impossibilities of Demon Hunters happening (too much leather, too much melee, too restrictive race wise, abilities doled out to other classes, etc etc)

[Teriz]

No the issue with Tinkers is that their supporters are annoying AF, pretending that Tinker is the only choice for new class and being physically unable to formulate proper arguments. Exhibit A: Teriz

Says the poster who thinks this;



Is the same as this;

[Directionalk9]

Ahahaha, how did this thread pop, get fifteen pages and me not notice?

Going of the main post, no there is not only one class possibility left.

For as long as Blizzard keeps the servers up and actively continue to develop the game, the potential for new classes exist.

Tinkers are a possibility, a new and fresh take on necromancers are possible, chronomancer could happen, let’s not rule out bards when pickings get slim.

Side note: is this the only time Teriz posts, is to say “only Tinkers, nothing else”?

[Teriz]

Side note: is this the only time Teriz posts, is to say “only Tinkers, nothing else”?

Where did I say "only Tinkers, nothing else"?

I think Tinkers are probably the strongest contenders for a future class, but I'm well aware that Blizzard may toss something out of left field to satisfy the players who prefer dark edgy classes that cannibalize existing classes.

[taaveti]

I don't think the problem is the lack of class to pick from. It is to have a class with enough specs that could bring different gameplays to the table. (Because right now, adding another typical tank/healer/dps would just be too boring imho)

I have always loved the idea of a mid-range DPS (i.e. Reaver in TERA), that attacks at 15-20 yard range with decent mobility. Outlaw would make for a decent candidate here, replacing regular melee attacks with short-range pistol shots/throwing daggers. Any one-handed-weapons could be made throw-able by attaching a chain to it (or just poof back with magic) so weapon types should be a non-issue there.

Another idea is a full-support class (i.e. enchanter/shaman/bard in EQ). However, that role is usually way too powerful to have in raids (i.e. how TBC shamans were needed in melee groups) but too hard to balance in groups which make it too low a chance to be considered by the devs. A turret builder would likely fall into this category, along with most iterations of bards (even though I absolutely loved playing a bard back in EQ).
They have already failed so badly at balancing Disc, I can't possibly think what would happen if they try making a partial-support role.

Ranged tank is probably way too boss-specific to be had in wow. Think back at the bosses we needed a warlock/mage tank on. You either need one to win the fight, or had none and were forced to approach the fight in a much more complicated manner.

[Directionalk9]

Where did I say "only Tinkers, nothing else"?

I think Tinkers are probably the strongest contenders for a future class, but I'm well aware that Blizzard may toss something out of left field to satisfy the players who prefer dark edgy classes that cannibalize existing classes.

Blizzard could easily toss something out of left field to satisfy the players who prefer light whimsical classes that cannibalize existing classes.

I’m a Tinker supporter too, but I don’t operate under the guise that won’t take away from other classes, the only thing that makes them unique from a class perspective is the machine-theme.

[Teriz]

Blizzard could easily toss something out of left field to satisfy the players who prefer light whimsical classes that cannibalize existing classes.

I’m a Tinker supporter too, but I don’t operate under the guise that won’t take away from other classes, the only thing that makes them unique from a class perspective is the machine-theme.

Really? Which classes do you think they would take from?

[Directionalk9]

Really? Which classes do you think they would take from?

You and I have been down this road before, but...

I guess it depends on how you look at it, from my perspective, a hunters range and physical based damage are more or less going to be the same as a Tinker’s range and physical based damage.

A turret is a totem by another name, something you place beside you and it does something.

Again, for the sake of clarity, I welcome that into the game. I will not be offended if in a five man dungeon group a Tinker shoots an explosive missle at a boss, while a Hunter lays explosive trap at the bosses feet, then I place a searing totem that hurls fireballs, while the Tinker’s turrets shoots bullets at the same boss.

Yes I know searing totem isn’t in the game

[Bas Prime]

I disagree, OP- There are a lot of classes they could easily add to the game.
Bladeamster. First and foremost no something really new, but still a very well known hero unit from wc3. Dmg and Tank spec, easily done, could be orcs only, could be orcs and draenei only. (No, Warrior is not a Blademaster, Monk is close, but a 4th spec would be a waste of potential.)
Tinker. I agree. Possible. Would like to see Gnome and Goblins only.
Warden. Same as Blademaster, Tank and Dmg spec.
Those three are the more basic and grounded classes I have heard of (Necromancer is possible, but I think it would be a cooler 4th spec for the DK)

In my opinion it does not matter how many classes there are in the game. As long as the utility spells are evenly given to more than one class (Bloodlust/Heroism, Battle Rez, etc) Many raids (strickly talking about raids here) have some classes that they do not have in their set up. Some are in the raid more than one time. Some are missing all the time. So Adding more classes (pls always hybrids) would be a good thing in my opinion.
I also think that Blizz has to move away from the "fitting to the theme of the expansion" thing. It stops a lot of classes from being added and stops potential.

[McFuu]

If Tinkerer gets put into the game ahead of Shadow Hunter, Spellbreaker, Blademaster, or any of the other classes I can walk around and visibly see day in and day out, I'd unsub.
Tinkerer really has limited space to exist in the Warcraft world outside of exceptional NPCs.

[Teriz]

You and I have been down this road before, but...

I guess it depends on how you look at it, from my perspective, a hunters range and physical based damage are more or less going to be the same as a Tinker’s range and physical based damage.

And we have multiple melee classes and caster classes who share range and damage type. People want another physical ranged class because they feel that Hunters need some competition in that department.

A turret is a totem by another name, something you place beside you and it does something.

A turret system and a totem system would have some pretty big differences. Mainly the types of turrets wouldn't be as diverse as the types of totems, and you should be able to summon the same type of turret (ex. deploy 3 gun turrets), whereas with totems you can only summon one type of totem at a time (untalented). Additionally turrets should be upgradable and possibly repairable (ex. a talent where the turrets can move with you, or have a higher rate of fire).

Again, for the sake of clarity, I welcome that into the game. I will not be offended if in a five man dungeon group a Tinker shoots an explosive missle at a boss, while a Hunter lays explosive trap at the bosses feet, then I place a searing totem that hurls fireballs, while the Tinker’s turrets shoots bullets at the same boss.

Yes I know searing totem isn’t in the game

Well the problem here is that two or more classes shooting, slicing, or casting magic isn't taking anything from each other. An example of a class taking something away is Demon Hunters taking away metamorphosis, or a possible Necromancer class taking away DK summoning abilities.

Saying that a Tinker shooting a missile steps on the toes of a Hunter shooting a gun is like saying a DK swinging a sword is stepping on the toes of a Warrior, Paladin, Demon Hunter, Rogue, Hunter, etc. who are also swinging swords.

- - - Updated - - -

If Tinkerer gets put into the game ahead of Shadow Hunter, Spellbreaker, Blademaster, or any of the other classes I can walk around and visibly see day in and day out, I'd unsub.
Tinkerer really has limited space to exist in the Warcraft world outside of exceptional NPCs.

LoL! Man, there's so much wrong with this post, I don't even know where to begin.

[McFuu]

And we have multiple melee classes and caster classes who share range and damage type. People want another physical ranged class because they feel that Hunters need some competition in that department.



A turret system and a totem system would have some pretty big differences. Mainly the types of turrets wouldn't be as diverse as the types of totems, and you should be able to summon the same type of turret (ex. deploy 3 gun turrets), whereas with totems you can only summon one type of totem at a time (untalented). Additionally turrets should be upgradable and possibly repairable (ex. a talent where the turrets can move with you, or have a higher rate of fire).



Well the problem here is that two or more classes shooting, slicing, or casting magic isn't taking anything from each other. An example of a class taking something away is Demon Hunters taking away metamorphosis, or a possible Necromancer class taking away DK summoning abilities.

Saying that a Tinker shooting a missile steps on the toes of a Hunter shooting a gun is like saying a DK swinging a sword is stepping on the toes of a Warrior, Paladin, Demon Hunter, Rogue, Hunter, etc. who are also swinging swords.

- - - Updated - - -



LoL! Man, there's so much wrong with this post, I don't even know where to begin.

But you didn't begin because you know it's true.

You are going to say look at this NPC or look at that NPC. On that same token, where is my Dragon class? Tinkerer which isn't even in the game by that name, so let's call them modified shredders because that's what they are. There are very few outside of special NPCs, and a camp or 2 where they are cutting down logs. Shadow hunters are everywhere, SpellBreakers, ever been to Silvermoon?
You also have the major issue of "leveling up" because it's a tool, it's already Max level.
But I hate to say it, Blizz has been in a customer wanking mood as of late just throwing any old shit in the game, so you might get Tinkerer. Just saying if it comes before actual established class that people have wanted since Beta, I'm out. I like the lore of Warcraft, but it's all getting very outlandish. Hopefully BFA grounds us again.

[Sigxy]

It's kinda sad that people just go for things we once saw during the RTS game and say "It's the only class left they can add in!" when there are things from even the previous games.

We -still- don't have a ranged class that focuses on throwing weapons. Something AT LEAST trolls should be having by now, surely, with their Headhunters.

[Teriz]

But you didn't begin because you know it's true.

You are going to say look at this NPC or look at that NPC. On that same token, where is my Dragon class? Tinkerer which isn't even in the game by that name, so let's call them modified shredders because that's what they are. There are very few outside of special NPCs, and a camp or 2 where they are cutting down logs. Shadow hunters are everywhere, SpellBreakers, ever been to Silvermoon?

Shadow Hunters are trolls and the WC3 hero's abilities went directly to the Shaman class.

Spellbreakers are Blood Elves and their kit went to Mages with a little flavor sprinkled into Demon Hunters. Personally, I felt that Blizzard should have given DHs a Spellbreaker spec, but there probably wasn't enough flavor to do that, since the concept is pretty damn limited.

As for Tinkerers, I'll certainly grant you that there are none in the game piloting mechs (though there are several NPCs called "Tinkerers), which probably indicates that Blizzard will bring them in under a different name. The term "Tinker" is just a broad term given to a class of Goblins and Gnomes that use advanced technology as a weapon. Unlike Shadow Hunters and Spellbreakers, the WC3 heroes abilities haven't been siphoned off to existing classes.

You also have the major issue of "leveling up" because it's a tool, it's already Max level.

Or the class simply gaining more advanced mechs as they level, similar to how Druids used to get Bear form at level 10, and then Dire Bear form at level 40.

But I hate to say it, Blizz has been in a customer wanking mood as of late just throwing any old shit in the game, so you might get Tinkerer. Just saying if it comes before actual established class that people have wanted since Beta, I'm out. I like the lore of Warcraft, but it's all getting very outlandish. Hopefully BFA grounds us again.

Uh, people have wanted the Tinker since beta as well. It was a WC3 hero you know.

[Ielenia]

Actually no, I didn´t.

What you are talking about is the GamePlay PowerCreep. Obviously while we *should* be stronger now from a Lore Standpoint than when we were back in Icecrown. It obviously isnt like this.
Just "How Much" stronger we are now to the Lichking, can only the Lore tell. But I think, with our artifacts, we should be on par with the Lichking. Or at least slightly below. I mean, we killed those we could only deal with due to circumstances before now ourselves.

But, I wasn´t refering to Players in my Power Argument, I was refering to NPC, like how Tirion is much stronger than Arthas was back in the Culling of Stratholme.

There are two types of "power level". Lore and gameplay. "Power level" is something that does exist in the lore. Tirion is arguably as powerful as the Lich King (I'd argue he's not). Old golds are more powerful than brown orc supremacists. A night elf Warden is more powerful than a city guard. Etc. That exists.

Now, "power level" in gameplay is a different beast altogether. It is what allows us to kill a world-breaking power-mad dragon as easily today as we killed critters at level 1. It also explains why professions are not as effective as classes.

The issue comes when someone uses gameplay "power level" as lore "power level", like saying how "tinker bombs would be more effective than engineer bombs", or that "tinkers won't need to harvest resources to build their stuff". Things like that.

Common sense works exactly like that. Change is one of the few constants.
If the Priest and Paladin order wouldn´t adept their Training to face the Threats/Objectives they currently have, they would be Stupid.

And what if the original methods they had still work just as well for the "threats/objectives they currently have"? You're assuming change for change's sake. At no point we ever saw anything about either the priest or paladin order changing their training methods, nor have we seen anything that would require a change in their teaching methods.

If you base "Paladin = Priests" on the fact that one singular Paladin Order was founded on Priests and Knights, then you assume that everything went the same.

Thats kinda like, claiming: "Shamans are Paladins", because the first Dreanei Shaman was a Paladin. Or, every shaman will have Paladin Training.

That's a false equivalence. As far as I can tell, paladins (at least the Azerothian paladins, except Tauren) are priests who use their priest skills combined with martial training (and warriors who use their martial trained combined with priest training). Shamans are not like that.

And when you say: "Clerical Training", I dont really think Paladins have that. Or actually "Need" that.
I´m not sure about Priests, but Paladins (even more so of the Draenei and Lightforged) follow the light directly, they kinda do what "feels" right.
The Draenei can even follow the light directly as they talk/learn from the Naaru. (Which appears to be "The Light")

And again: It would be Idiotic to not Outfit your Priests with Plate Armor, if Paladins were just Priests with Plate Amor. This would defeat the Purpose of having Priests around. Its a different thing to be a Priest, than its to be a Paladin. And any training in any of those.
Should (or it would be plain stupid) be different.

And dont start with same kind of spells (tools). I learned to use Hammer, does that make me a Carpenter?

*heavy sigh* When I said "priests in plate" I was just making a 'tongue-in-cheek' over-simplification. You're taking that way too seriously.

[Directionalk9]

It's kinda sad that people just go for things we once saw during the RTS game and say "It's the only class left they can add in!" when there are things from even the previous games.

We -still- don't have a ranged class that focuses on throwing weapons. Something AT LEAST trolls should be having by now, surely, with their Headhunters.

My sentiments exactly. There is no need at all to base classes around an almost 20 year old game from a different gaming genre.

As long as the servers are live and development is active the only barrier to new classes is lack of imagination.