Page 24 of 48 FirstFirst ...
14
22
23
24
25
26
34
... LastLast
  1. #461
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by Ielenia View Post
    *SNIP*
    Sure enough it could do all that. And then some, I think you can just about recreate every class with engineering gizmo's, including taunts and combat pets. It was and never will be as good as a class ability though, just a fun thing to do as extra and even when it was current most things weren't very viable and just convinient at best.

    I think currently engineering boils down to headgear and gimmicks (toys/pets), neither of which have anything to do with class abilities. If abilities can't exist because professions can do them half-assed there is long list of things we can scrap.
    And yes I'm aware of the thematic overlap, I'm just not convinced that's a problem. A class with fleshed out abilities that does on par damage/healing/tanking should not conflict with the gimmicks of a profession.

  2. #462
    Epic! Uoyredrum's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Middle of Nowhere, USA
    Posts
    1,714
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    Gameplay ideally reflects lore, and most mounts aren't based on lore, they're simply fun game additions. Which is why you can see Tauren players flying around in Sky Golems, where in actuality, Tauren wouldn't be able to fit inside them.
    They would if they're custom made, which considering the cost and parts I would assume they are.




    Yeah, but having a gun on a mech suit, and having an ability based on a gun is different than equipping a gun and having multiple shot abilities like Hunters do.
    Well if you're talking about a permanent mech suit (which I assume that's what you've been talking about this entire time), then yes it's the same thing. If it's an ability with a cooldown, that's still not a problem. It's just an ability that requires context, like spell reflect used to.

    You must mean exploding sheep right? Those have a 1 minute Cool down between uses. There's nothing quick about that.
    Yeah those. And the cooldown is a gameplay mechanic, it doesn't affect lore.

    Do you see any other race beyond Goblins or Gnomes piloting mechs? Like, have you ever seen a cut scene where a human or a Night Elf piloting a mech? Have you ever seen a non-Goblin/Gnome lore character piloting a mech (outside of an Iron Horde Orc in WoD)?
    Why should it be outside of that? I see it all the time in quests, and the iron horde piloting them is a good example that also fits your earlier example. Custom made shredders sometimes made for a different purpose being piloted by other races.

    Please provide a video of your Rogue throwing bombs and shooting rockets while inside your mech. Somehow I doubt you'll be able to provide that video.
    1. I haven't been subbed for a year
    2. If mechs can have flamethrowers, guns and rocket launchers, having a player piloting one that shoots bombs and rockets isn't that special.

    How would a profession be watered down by a class when the two have nothing in common with each other beyond the theme? For example, how would a Tinker fighting a raid boss interfere with an engineer gathering scraps to craft a toy squirrel?
    In the same way they removed or changed abilities for other classes in order to allow new ones to make sense, since they shared abilities with the same basis. Since tinkers are just engineers, the same would likely happen.

    A dispenser that pops out a bomb and has a 30-minute cool down every time it does it. That doesn't sound like a factory that rapidly produces robots.
    Gameplay mechanics =/= lore.

  3. #463
    Quote Originally Posted by Uoyredrum View Post
    In the same way they removed or changed abilities for other classes in order to allow new ones to make sense, since they shared abilities with the same basis. Since tinkers are just engineers, the same would likely happen.
    They took class abilities away from other classes. They've never taken profession abilities away to give to a class. Death knights have the class ability to enchant their own weapons. This ability was added to the game two expansions after the enchanting profession itself was. Professional enchanters did not subsequently lose the ability to enchant weapons. They didn't take enchanting away and give it to the death knights. They copy pasted it. And...nobody cares. Nobody thinks twice about it.

  4. #464
    Merely a Setback Teriz's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Soul of Azeroth
    Posts
    29,653
    Quote Originally Posted by Uoyredrum View Post
    They would if they're custom made, which considering the cost and parts I would assume they are.
    Except they aren't. They're based on a blueprint/schematic.



    Well if you're talking about a permanent mech suit (which I assume that's what you've been talking about this entire time), then yes it's the same thing. If it's an ability with a cooldown, that's still not a problem. It's just an ability that requires context, like spell reflect used to
    Again, items aren't the same as abilities. Guns are an item, Machine Gun is an ability, and an ability that Hunters don't have.

    Yeah those. And the cooldown is a gameplay mechanic, it doesn't affect lore.
    Actually it does effect lore because Gelbin and Gazlowe aren't launching exploding sheep at demons and monsters. That indicates that the profession in game mirrors the profession in lore.


    Why should it be outside of that? I see it all the time in quests, and the iron horde piloting them is a good example that also fits your earlier example. Custom made shredders sometimes made for a different purpose being piloted by other races.
    Again, the shredders aren't custom made.

    1. I haven't been subbed for a year
    2. If mechs can have flamethrowers, guns and rocket launchers, having a player piloting one that shoots bombs and rockets isn't that special.
    It would because players currently can't shoot bombs on rockets while piloting a mech outside of a couple of quests and highly limited circumstances.


    In the same way they removed or changed abilities for other classes in order to allow new ones to make sense, since they shared abilities with the same basis. Since tinkers are just engineers, the same would likely happen.
    Except abilities popping up in classes have never effected the professions. Alchemy didn't start losing potions because Monks and Rogues could craft potions and give it to other players. First Aid didn't lose bandages because Hunters coukd create band-aids.

    Rest assured, a profession will never be placed on equal footing with a class, and the items they craft will never not have heavy drawbacks.

    Gameplay mechanics =/= lore.
    Again, gameplay mechanics are supposed to reflect lore. Additionally, a dispenser is not a factory, and a bomb isn't a clockwork goblin in lore or in gameplay.
    Last edited by Teriz; 2017-11-27 at 02:45 PM.

  5. #465
    The Unstoppable Force Ielenia's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Brazil
    Posts
    21,797
    Quote Originally Posted by InsaneOstrich View Post
    Sure enough it could do all that. And then some, I think you can just about recreate every class with engineering gizmo's, including taunts and combat pets. It was and never will be as good as a class ability though, just a fun thing to do as extra and even when it was current most things weren't very viable and just convinient at best.
    Except that wasn't the point, was it? You're just moving the goal posts. The claim was "there's plenty of mechanical things engineers haven't done before". So now that it's shown that they have, you're moving the goal posts to "they can't do it as well as player classes."

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    If they plan to eventually base a class off of that NPC, then absolutely.
    Then you are factually delusional. You are making stuff up to avoid even entertaining the idea that you could be wrong. Even when Blizzard goes straight up against your claims, you move the goalposts to make it look like you are still right.

    Possibly. Blizzard removed several beast restrictions on the Druid class. Don't see why the same wouldn't be the case with Tinkers.
    So they'd just be an inferior version of druids, then?

    So every class in the game has the same abilities with a different coat of paint?
    You're claiming that two abilities that have the exact same functionality are different just because one is fired from a canon, the other is fired through spellcasting. If that was true, then all classes would basically play the same, only with different graphic effects and ability names for their skillset. But Blizzard hasn't done that. They've worked hard to try to make every class and every spec feel different from each other, functionality-wise. And no, "one is nature, the other mechanical" is not enough.

    A dispenser that pops out a bomb and has a 30-minute cool down every time it does it. That doesn't sound like a factory that rapidly produces robots.
    What you're complaining about is gameplay balance, not lore. Can they do it? Yes, they can. And it's been shown they can.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    Do you see any other race beyond Goblins or Gnomes piloting mechs? Like, have you ever seen a cut scene where a human or a Night Elf piloting a mech? Have you ever seen a non-Goblin/Gnome lore character piloting a mech (outside of an Iron Horde Orc in WoD)?
    Well, we haven't seen a cutscene with a gnome hunter or gnome warlock, but those still exist.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    Again, items aren't the same as abilities.
    In lore, they are.
    Guns are an item, Machine Gun is an ability, and an ability that Hunters don't have.
    Yes, they do. Functionality-wise, the same thing.

    Actually it does effect lore
    No, it doesn't. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

    Rest assured, a profession will never be placed on equal footing with a class, and the items they craft will never not have heavy drawbacks.
    Just like we could "rest assured" that Demon Hunters would never happen?

    Again, gameplay mechanics are supposed to reflect lore.
    Not necessarily. Level 1 mage player can have up to five huge backpacks, all filled with giant stacks of iron ores, and still be able to run non-stopfrom Light's Chapel all the way down to Booty Bay, without getting even slightly winded. According to gameplay, our characters also never have to eat or drink to survive, too.
    "Torturing someone is not an evil thing to do if it is done for good reasons" by Varodoc
    "You sit in OG/SW waiting on a Mythic+ queue" by Altmer <- Oh, the pearls in this forum...
    "They sort of did this Dragonriding, which ushered in the Dracthyr race." by Teriz <- the BS some people reach for their narratives...

  6. #466
    Merely a Setback Teriz's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Soul of Azeroth
    Posts
    29,653
    Quote Originally Posted by Ielenia View Post
    Then you are factually delusional. You are making stuff up to avoid even entertaining the idea that you could be wrong. Even when Blizzard goes straight up against your claims, you move the goalposts to make it look like you are still right.
    I didn't move any goalposts. I said plainly that a Lich would play like a Frost Mage if implemented, and the NPCs back that belief up.


    So they'd just be an inferior version of druids, then?
    I don't see how you could draw that conclusion.


    You're claiming that two abilities that have the exact same functionality are different just because one is fired from a canon, the other is fired through spellcasting. If that was true, then all classes would basically play the same, only with different graphic effects and ability names for their skillset. But Blizzard hasn't done that. They've worked hard to try to make every class and every spec feel different from each other, functionality-wise. And no, "one is nature, the other mechanical" is not enough.
    Um no. I'm claiming that two abilities can have the same function, but serve entirely different purposes, and be entirely different from each other. You're the one claiming that if abilities have the same function they're essentially the same, which is utter nonsense.

    For example, Regrowth and Flash of Light serve the same function (healing yourself or a friendly target), but serve entirely different purposes in their classes, and are different spells from one another.


    What you're complaining about is gameplay balance, not lore. Can they do it? Yes, they can. And it's been shown they can.
    Uh, it goes beyond simple balance. A dispenser isn't a factory, and a bombling isn't a robotic goblin lore-wise or common sense-wise.


    Well, we haven't seen a cutscene with a gnome hunter or gnome warlock, but those still exist.
    Yes, because we have GNome Hunter and Warlock trainers, as well as lore figures. Please point out some examples of some non-Gnomes or Goblins piloting mechs in lore beyond that lone Iron Horde boss in HFC.


    Yes, they do. Functionality-wise, the same thing.
    False again. The lore behind barrage is the Hunter rapidly firing of a gun or a bow. A machine gun is a technological device that rapidly fires bullets.

    No, it doesn't. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
    Um, that goes for every Gnome or Goblin piloting a mech in lore. The evidence is in the weaponry they use, which isn't shooting exploding farm animals, or other silly stuff.

    Just like we could "rest assured" that Demon Hunters would never happen?
    Different circumstance, since professions becoming like classes would break game balance.

    Not necessarily. Level 1 mage player can have up to five huge backpacks, all filled with giant stacks of iron ores, and still be able to run non-stopfrom Light's Chapel all the way down to Booty Bay, without getting even slightly winded. According to gameplay, our characters also never have to eat or drink to survive, too.
    I said "supposed" to reflect lore. Obviously gameplay needs to bend lore in some cases in order to make the game enjoyable for players. A prime example of that is Hunters having unlimited ammunition and grenades.

  7. #467
    Agree , I would love to see more Death Knight

  8. #468
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    Well let's check out Kel'Thuzad the NPC:

    http://www.wowhead.com/npc=15990/kelthuzad#abilities

    Well what do you know, he actually casts Frostbolt!

    Also Lil' KT casts Howling Blast, Death and Decay and Frost Nova:

    http://www.wowhead.com/npc=36979/lil-k-t
    Ok.you got the basic spell.What about the other 6 spells i mentioned that make the Frost Mage gameplay?What about Ring of Frost?Would they cast that?Will they summon a Water elemental?Ice Nova?Flurry?Blink?Invisibility?Would a Lich/necromancer have any of this?

    Gameplay is the what makes the spec works.So it doesn't matter if you have one or two spells from wc3.BECAUSE THE CLASS/SPEC IS MADE OF WAY MORE THEN THAT.

    You can take Meta/Blurr/consume magic from Havoc Dh and he will still work.But if you remove everything else and leave only Wc3 abilities the spec WILL NOT WORK.

    So stop bringing Wc3 over and over.It makes no sense.

    By the way.Frost nova doesn't even work like the Lich spell and isn't even in the Frost mage rotation.So How i may ask, how can you say that they are the same thing?


    No, I'm saying that its pretty hard to take a Lich concept seriously when it wouldn't add anything gameplay wise. Again, you're essentially asking for another Frost Mage. The DK and Mages already cover the Lich pretty fully, since they have a good amount of its abilities.
    Yes, you mean everything that is ice and how you know that they won't add anything?I know, because you are assuming that they will have similar playstyle.Which is stupid assumption, like the specs or not, Blizzard made shure that even specs that would be similar, play differently on gameplay.All Rogue specs and AFF and Shadow, two dot specs but play way differently, with Shadow being more active and Aff being more sit and wait.

    Again, you are assuming they would play the same because they use Ice, thats why you are using the only two specs that have ice with strong theme.


    Just because a rocket ability fits into the Tinker idea doesn't mean that a Hunter fills the design space of the Tinker class. In the end, a Hunter is essentially an archer or a gunner, not a Gnome or Goblin using high tech weaponry and gadgets.
    I can say the same about the Lich and the Necromancer.The ideas fit other classes but that doesn't make them Necromancer.The Necromancer is a Dark caster that summons undead and Lich is the a giant undead caster that uses necrotic and frost magic.
    Dks touch only the summon undead and Mages only touch Frost.While the Necromancer would/could embody all of them, and even if they have those aspects.Neither can transform into a gigant mage skeleton.


    Okay, but my point is that a profession can never take the place of a class, lore-wise or gameplay-wise.
    Idc for your point, you tried to debunk him with a quote from blizzard, but that quote proves him right on HIS POINT.You can spin it to fit what you want, but that doesn't make him wrong.
    Last edited by Darktbs; 2017-11-27 at 04:58 PM.

  9. #469
    Quote Originally Posted by Meethos1985 View Post
    As much as I'd like to see some of those, most of them are in the game or are so close that they'd never add them as a distinct class.

    Necromancer - Unholy DK
    Berzerker - Fury Warrior
    Land/plant Shaper - Sounds like a mix of Shaman/Druid

    And others just wouldn't mesh well with how wow works for the most part.

    Puppeteer - Assuming you mean something along the lines of an enchantment caster, it leaves little compatibility with any of the three standard roles (DPS/Healer/Tank) unless you mean for it to be a heavy pet/follower class. In that case you've just got something like a BM hunter or Demo Warlock

    Bard - Similar to above, a little more viable maybe, but still an old-school support class. I can see maybe as a spec, but not as a class.

    Mesmer/Trickster - Again, very indirect method of combat. Possible, but I don't see much of a chance for it to happen.


    I can see why people call for a tinker class, but it's not likely to happen at all, let alone anytime soon. I fear it may be a step too steampunk for Blizzard's taste. Maybe someday, but if/when they make a WoW 2, that's when I'd expect to see it at the exclusion of engineering as a profession.
    I don't see any of these classes coming to fruition either, but saying "there's already X, or it's just a hybrid of X and Y" is just flawed logic. By this logic Blizzard would have never made the DK because it's just a Warlock/paladin.. There won't be DH because demo warlocks already exist, Monks are too similar to Paladins/rogues, etc.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    Yes, because we have GNome Hunter and Warlock trainers, as well as lore figures. Please point out some examples of some non-Gnomes or Goblins piloting mechs in lore beyond that lone Iron Horde boss in HFC.
    Why does this matter? Show me non elf Demon Hunters? Blizzard has shown they're okay with limiting classes to specific races. No reason they couldn't make it gnome/goblin exclusive.

    OT: I personally think Dark Ranger is the most plausible next class, or spec. I could see them adding a 4th spec to Rogue for example. It would be nice to have another Bow class that isn't in the nature/hunter fantasy. Probably won't happen.
    Last edited by barrsftw; 2017-11-27 at 05:56 PM.

  10. #470
    The Unstoppable Force Ielenia's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Brazil
    Posts
    21,797
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    I didn't move any goalposts. I said plainly that a Lich would play like a Frost Mage if implemented, and the NPCs back that belief up.
    You're claiming-- as fact, mind you-- that one of the main concerns Blizzard has when designing NPCs is "how would a class based on this NPC would play like?".

    I don't see how you could draw that conclusion.
    "Like a druid, only without the immunity to polymorph."

    Um no. I'm claiming that two abilities can have the same function, but serve entirely different purposes, and be entirely different from each other. You're the one claiming that if abilities have the same function they're essentially the same, which is utter nonsense.
    If two objects have the same function, then they serve the same purpose. What you're saying is basically akin to having to nearly identical screwdrivers, and the sole difference between the two is the color of the handle, one green, the other yellow. And then you're saying that because one screwdriver is green, that means it has a different purpose than the one with the yellow handle.

    For example, Regrowth and Flash of Light serve the same function (healing yourself or a friendly target), but serve entirely different purposes in their classes, and are different spells from one another.
    No, both have the same purpose: healing yourself or a friendly target.

    Uh, it goes beyond simple balance. A dispenser isn't a factory, and a bombling isn't a robotic goblin lore-wise or common sense-wise.
    Funny you mention "common-sense-wise". And this "a bombling isn't a robotic goblin" is just almost grasping at straws, here. Both are walking robotic bombs that home in on a target and explode when they get near it. How they look like is irrelevant.

    Yes, because we have GNome Hunter and Warlock trainers, as well as lore figures. Please point out some examples of some non-Gnomes or Goblins piloting mechs in lore beyond that lone Iron Horde boss in HFC.
    Why doesn't the boss in HFC count? Because "reasons"? And again, I'll repeat one simple fact you love to ignore: "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence"

    False again. The lore behind barrage is the Hunter rapidly firing of a gun or a bow. A machine gun is a technological device that rapidly fires bullets.
    It's a good thing I said functionality-wise, then, right? Besides, there are "machine guns" already in the game. You're just trying to split hairs, here.

    Um, that goes for every Gnome or Goblin piloting a mech in lore. The evidence is in the weaponry they use, which isn't shooting exploding farm animals, or other silly stuff.
    No. Gameplay does not affect or reflect lore. For example, in a hypothetical melee fight between a farmer wielding a pitchfork and Varian Wrynn wearing full armor, the farmer still has a very minimal chance of landing a lucky strike and winning the fight, lore-wise. But gameplay-wise, not even a max level player would have even the slightest chance of winning against Varian, because Varian would have 'raid boss' status and stats.

    Different circumstance, since professions becoming like classes would break game balance.
    How do you know? Are you assuming Blizzard would just simply boost up profession damage and utility without doing any balance whatsoever?

    I said "supposed" to reflect lore.
    No, gameplay is not supposed to reflect lore. Most of the time, gameplay flies in the face of lore.
    "Torturing someone is not an evil thing to do if it is done for good reasons" by Varodoc
    "You sit in OG/SW waiting on a Mythic+ queue" by Altmer <- Oh, the pearls in this forum...
    "They sort of did this Dragonriding, which ushered in the Dracthyr race." by Teriz <- the BS some people reach for their narratives...

  11. #471
    Merely a Setback Teriz's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Soul of Azeroth
    Posts
    29,653
    Quote Originally Posted by Darktbs View Post
    Ok.you got the basic spell.What about the other 6 spells i mentioned that make the Frost Mage gameplay?What about Ring of Frost?Would they cast that?Will they summon a Water elemental?Ice Nova?Flurry?Blink?Invisibility?Would a Lich/necromancer have any of this?
    No. They'd have Frost Nova, Ice Barrier, Ice Form, Frost Bomb, Glacial Spike, Lonely Winter, Ray of Frost, Ebonbolt, Glacial Eruption, Frozen Orb etc.

    Gameplay is the what makes the spec works.So it doesn't matter if you have one or two spells from wc3.BECAUSE THE CLASS/SPEC IS MADE OF WAY MORE THEN THAT.
    The problem is that those abilities don't exist in a vacuum. An entire theme tends to emerge from those individual abilities. For example, DKs can raise Skeletal Archers and Abominations in WoW because they took Raise Dead from the Necromancer unit.

    You can take Meta/Blurr/consume magic from Havoc Dh and he will still work.But if you remove everything else and leave only Wc3 abilities the spec WILL NOT WORK.
    Again, you're forgetting the associated abilities and talents to those abilities. You're also forgetting Immolation Aura, another ability that came from WC3.

    So stop bringing Wc3 over and over.It makes no sense.
    The fact that the last 3 expansion classes have foundations in WC3 hero units makes no sense to you?

    By the way.Frost nova doesn't even work like the Lich spell and isn't even in the Frost mage rotation.So How i may ask, how can you say that they are the same thing?
    WC3 Frost Nova: Frost Nova
    Blasts enemy units around a target enemy unit with a wave of damaging frost that slows movement and attack rate.

    WoW Frost Nova: Frost Nova
    Blasts enemies within 12 yds of you for (17.91% of Spell power) Frost damage and freezes them in place for 8 sec. Damage may interrupt the freeze effect.

    They seem quite similar, it's just a slow effect instead of a freezing effect.

    Frost Mages also have Ice Nova.


    Yes, you mean everything that is ice and how you know that they won't add anything?I know, because you are assuming that they will have similar playstyle.Which is stupid assumption, like the specs or not, Blizzard made shure that even specs that would be similar, play differently on gameplay.All Rogue specs and AFF and Shadow, two dot specs but play way differently, with Shadow being more active and Aff being more sit and wait.

    Again, you are assuming they would play the same because they use Ice, thats why you are using the only two specs that have ice with strong theme.
    Well the difference between Shadow and Affliction is the classes they're attached to. Clearly a Priest using Shadow abilities is going to be different than a Warlock using shadow abilities. Just like a Mage using Frost abilities is going to be different than a Necromancer using Frost abilities. The problem with incorporating a Lich into the game is that Frost Mages control its gameplay and DKs control its theme. So if you want to play as a spell caster that utilizes frost abilities, you have the Frost Mage. If you want to blend Frost with Shadow magic, you have the DK.


    I can say the same about the Lich and the Necromancer.The ideas fit other classes but that doesn't make them Necromancer.The Necromancer is a Dark caster that summons undead and Lich is the a giant undead caster that uses necrotic and frost magic.
    Dks touch only the summon undead and Mages only touch Frost.While the Necromancer would/could embody all of them, and even if they have those aspects.Neither can transform into a gigant mage skeleton.
    You seem to be forgetting that DKs have a Frost spec. Additionally, nothing says that a Necromancer HAS to be a caster. Examples of melee Necromancers exist in other Blizzard games like HotS and D3. So by all standards, a DK could just as well be considered a Necromancer.


    Idc for your point, you tried to debunk him with a quote from blizzard, but that quote proves him right on HIS POINT.You can spin it to fit what you want, but that doesn't make him wrong.
    His point is that classes are the same as professions. There's nothing correct about that statement.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Ielenia View Post
    You're claiming-- as fact, mind you-- that one of the main concerns Blizzard has when designing NPCs is "how would a class based on this NPC would play like?".
    And NPC that could be a potential class. Yes.


    "Like a druid, only without the immunity to polymorph."
    I never said that.


    If two objects have the same function, then they serve the same purpose. What you're saying is basically akin to having to nearly identical screwdrivers, and the sole difference between the two is the color of the handle, one green, the other yellow. And then you're saying that because one screwdriver is green, that means it has a different purpose than the one with the yellow handle.
    Nope. The purpose of Regrowth is to heal the target instantly, but also give it an additional HoT afterwards, and it has a 40% critical strike chance. Flash of Light is a single heal and is expensive to cast. Both are healing spells, but a Restoration Druid is going to be using Regrowth at different points of the encounter than a Paladin is going to be using Flash of Light, thus in their tool kits, the two spells serve different purposes.


    No, both have the same purpose: healing yourself or a friendly target.
    See above.


    Funny you mention "common-sense-wise". And this "a bombling isn't a robotic goblin" is just almost grasping at straws, here. Both are walking robotic bombs that home in on a target and explode when they get near it. How they look like is irrelevant.
    So is a Ghoul the same as an Abomination since they're both undead minions that just look different?

    Why doesn't the boss in HFC count? Because "reasons"? And again, I'll repeat one simple fact you love to ignore: "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence"
    The HFC boss doesn't count because it comes from an alternate reality. A stronger simple fact is that the only races that can successfully pilot mechs in Azeroth are Gnomes and Goblins. I'll wait to see evidence to the contrary.


    No. Gameplay does not affect or reflect lore. For example, in a hypothetical melee fight between a farmer wielding a pitchfork and Varian Wrynn wearing full armor, the farmer still has a very minimal chance of landing a lucky strike and winning the fight, lore-wise. But gameplay-wise, not even a max level player would have even the slightest chance of winning against Varian, because Varian would have 'raid boss' status and stats.
    Which is why I said its "supposed" to reflect lore. Again, gameplay can be bent for the player experience.

    How do you know? Are you assuming Blizzard would just simply boost up profession damage and utility without doing any balance whatsoever?
    Again, that's never going to happen because a profession doing a respectable amount of damage would force players to spec into that profession in order to be competitive DPS wise. This is why Engineering was nerfed heavily after WotLK after the huge Saronite Grenade glitch that allowed people to cheese raid mechanics.

    So yeah, the chances of a profession ever matching or coming in a stone's throw of class damage isn't likely.


    No, gameplay is not supposed to reflect lore. Most of the time, gameplay flies in the face of lore.
    So Paladins shouldn't have abilities that merge holy magic and melee without any shadow magic? After all, that's what their lore states, and that's exactly how their class plays.

  12. #472
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    No. They'd have Frost Nova, Ice Barrier, Ice Form, Frost Bomb, Glacial Spike, Lonely Winter, Ray of Frost, Ebonbolt, Glacial Eruption, Frozen Orb etc.
    May i ask who are you talking about?Because, Lich/Necro don't have this(they don't exist) and if the mage you are agreeing with me.
    The problem is that those abilities don't exist in a vacuum. An entire theme tends to emerge from those individual abilities. For example, DKs can raise Skeletal Archers and Abominations in WoW because they took Raise Dead from the Necromancer unit.
    The problem is that you are assuming they are the core and foundation of the Spec the Frost Dk don't have any of the Lich abilities and it works just as fine.Flamestrike is not the primary power of the Fire mages.

    And what about Mist weaver and Outlaw that were created based in anything but Warcraft 3.

    Again, you're forgetting the associated abilities and talents to those abilities. You're also forgetting Immolation Aura, another ability that came from WC3.
    With Consume magic a interrupt spell or Blurr that is a defensive Cd?Both having no talents whatsoever related to them?

    Or you mean Meta that doesn't exactly need to exist because the other spells will turn you into a Demon, making the spell Meta Kinda pointless?

    The fact that the last 3 expansion classes have foundations in WC3 hero units makes no sense to you?
    Despite then clearly having way more inspirations then just Wc3?That you are for some reason pretending they don't exist?

    WC3 Frost Nova: Frost Nova
    Blasts enemy units around a target enemy unit with a wave of damaging frost that slows movement and attack rate.

    WoW Frost Nova: Frost Nova
    Blasts enemies within 12 yds of you for (17.91% of Spell power) Frost damage and freezes them in place for 8 sec. Damage may interrupt the freeze effect.

    They seem quite similar, it's just a slow effect instead of a freezing effect.

    Frost Mages also have Ice Nova.
    Despite the fact the Wc3 was ranged and the wow one is Melee range, used primarly in pvp and Pve for utility and not really necessary while the Wc3 was actually a good Cd spell?

    Well the difference between Shadow and Affliction is the classes they're attached to. Clearly a Priest using Shadow abilities is going to be different than a Warlock using shadow abilities. Just like a Mage using Frost abilities is going to be different than a Necromancer using Frost abilities. The problem with incorporating a Lich into the game is that Frost Mages control its gameplay and DKs control its theme. So if you want to play as a spell caster that utilizes frost abilities, you have the Frost Mage. If you want to blend Frost with Shadow magic, you have the DK.
    Teriz, you just agreed with me that they are going to play different, negating everything you said up to this point and agreeing with me.Why?Because my entire point was that they weren't going to have the same playstyle/gameplay.You tried to debunk showing me that they know two spells that the Mage knows.

    You CAN'T say they are going to play different THEN say that the Frost mage control its gameplay.YOU CAN'T HAVE BOTH WAYS.

    And the Dk bit.No, because Frost Dks aren't about Shadow/Frost magic.They are Physical/Frost magic.They have ONE spell that deals Shadow frost is breath of Sindragosa, a spell that has nothing to do with a Lich, and the rest of the abilities are Physical attacks, frost attacks and things that support both.The Frost Dk has NOTHING of the Lich besides using ICE magic but as Blizzard made clear multiple times, using the same type of magic isn't a issue.


    You seem to be forgetting that DKs have a Frost spec. Additionally, nothing says that a Necromancer HAS to be a caster. Examples of melee Necromancers exist in other Blizzard games like HotS and D3. So by all standards, a DK could just as well be considered a Necromancer.
    Except many if not all necromancer in WARCRAFT are treated as ranged?BUt that is not at all a argument agaisn't or in favor that i bring.

    His point is that classes are the same as professions. There's nothing correct about that statement.
    I will not discuss this any longer, first its just you, again, trying to twist what he said to fit your argument.I know what he said and it isn't what you are claiming.

  13. #473
    The Unstoppable Force Ielenia's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Brazil
    Posts
    21,797
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    And NPC that could be a potential class. Yes.
    Then I repeat: you're delusional. And I add: you're also in denial.

    I never said that.
    You haven't? Then what's this:
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    a Tinker wouldn't be immune to Polymorph like Druids are.
    Nope. The purpose of Regrowth is to heal the target instantly, but also give it an additional HoT afterwards, and it has a 40% critical strike chance. Flash of Light is a single heal and is expensive to cast. Both are healing spells, but a Restoration Druid is going to be using Regrowth at different points of the encounter than a Paladin is going to be using Flash of Light, thus in their tool kits, the two spells serve different purposes.
    You're conflating "purpose" and "effect". The spells' purpose is to heal others. But their effects differ.

    So is a Ghoul the same as an Abomination since they're both undead minions that just look different?
    In terms of gameplay? Yes. Both are undead minions. Both are subject to the same immunities and weaknesses.

    The HFC boss doesn't count because it comes from an alternate reality.
    That's completely irrelevant since it's still the same orcs we have in our main universe.
    A stronger simple fact is that the only races that can successfully pilot mechs in Azeroth are Gnomes and Goblins.
    That's not a fact. You're making that up.

    Which is why I said its "supposed" to reflect lore.
    It's not. It's not supposed to reflect lore. It only happens to reflect lore when it suits gameplay.

    Again, that's never going to happen because a profession doing a respectable amount of damage would force players to spec into that profession in order to be competitive DPS wise. This is why Engineering was nerfed heavily after WotLK after the huge Saronite Grenade glitch that allowed people to cheese raid mechanics.
    Blizzard can always change their mind. They did so regarding many controversial topics.

    So Paladins shouldn't have abilities that merge holy magic and melee without any shadow magic? After all, that's what their lore states, and that's exactly how their class plays.
    That's a red herring if I ever saw one. You're making stuff up with the paladin thing. They were never even mentioned in this.
    "Torturing someone is not an evil thing to do if it is done for good reasons" by Varodoc
    "You sit in OG/SW waiting on a Mythic+ queue" by Altmer <- Oh, the pearls in this forum...
    "They sort of did this Dragonriding, which ushered in the Dracthyr race." by Teriz <- the BS some people reach for their narratives...

  14. #474
    Merely a Setback Teriz's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Soul of Azeroth
    Posts
    29,653
    Quote Originally Posted by Darktbs View Post
    May i ask who are you talking about?Because, Lich/Necro don't have this(they don't exist) and if the mage you are agreeing with me.
    The Lich hero was very much about control and movement manipulation, alongside protecting itself with a frost shield, and using shadow magic. All of those abilities follow that basic theme.

    The problem is that you are assuming they are the core and foundation of the Spec the Frost Dk don't have any of the Lich abilities and it works just as fine.Flamestrike is not the primary power of the Fire mages.
    Are we now going to pretend that Death and Decay never existed in the Frost spec because Blizzard decided to remove it from the spec for one expansion?

    Yes, in its current form Frost DK doesn't have any of the Lich hero's abilities, however Blizzard originally took the concept of the Lich and applied it to a melee knight, which is why the DK has a Frost spec in the first place.

    And while Flamestrike isn't the primary power of Fire Mages, it's fairly easy to develop a Fire-based spec based on the abilities from the Blood Mage hero.

    And what about Mist weaver and Outlaw that were created based in anything but Warcraft 3.
    So now we're going to purposely ignore the Brewmaster spec, and the fact that the entire class is Pandaren-themed, and has a sub-theme of brewmaking throughout? Rogues are not an expansion class.

    Or you mean Meta that doesn't exactly need to exist because the other spells will turn you into a Demon, making the spell Meta Kinda pointless?
    It would seem that Blizzard disagrees with you, since they changed entire Warlock spec in order to place Meta in the DH class.


    Despite then clearly having way more inspirations then just Wc3?
    Such as?

    Despite the fact the Wc3 was ranged and the wow one is Melee range, used primarly in pvp and Pve for utility and not really necessary while the Wc3 was actually a good Cd spell?
    12 yards is quite a bit outside of melee range.

    Teriz, you just agreed with me that they are going to play different, negating everything you said up to this point and agreeing with me.Why?Because my entire point was that they weren't going to have the same playstyle/gameplay.You tried to debunk showing me that they know two spells that the Mage knows.

    You CAN'T say they are going to play different THEN say that the Frost mage control its gameplay.YOU CAN'T HAVE BOTH WAYS.
    Read the sentence immediately after the one you bolded.

    And the Dk bit.No, because Frost Dks aren't about Shadow/Frost magic.They are Physical/Frost magic.They have ONE spell that deals Shadow frost is breath of Sindragosa, a spell that has nothing to do with a Lich, and the rest of the abilities are Physical attacks, frost attacks and things that support both.The Frost Dk has NOTHING of the Lich besides using ICE magic but as Blizzard made clear multiple times, using the same type of magic isn't a issue.
    Again, are we going to pretend that changes to the DK Frost spec in this one expansion are somehow permanent and Blizzard can't simply just reintroduce older abilities or create new ones? Frost Dks control the Lich theme, and that gives Blizzard the window to create Lich-style spells within the spec with no issue whatsoever. They could even create your beloved "Lich Form" as long as it doesn't clash too much with Mages.

    Except many if not all necromancer in WARCRAFT are treated as ranged?BUt that is not at all a argument agaisn't or in favor that i bring.
    Yes, and the Necromancer spells the Death Knight took from the WARCRAFT Necromancer were also ranged. Imagine that.

    I will not discuss this any longer, first its just you, again, trying to twist what he said to fit your argument.I know what he said and it isn't what you are claiming.
    You clearly didn't read his subsequent posts.

  15. #475
    Blizzard combined three possible class ideas (Death Knight, Necromancer, Runemaster) to make one class. I'm sure they'll likely do it again.

    Tinker is never going to happen, the reason for that is it involves so much engineering and probably will revoke engineering as a profession if it ever did come into the game. You'd effectively be given "Engineering: the class".

    I don't think Blizzard is going to add a new class anytime soon, if at all, WoW is reaching the end now.

  16. #476
    Merely a Setback Teriz's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Soul of Azeroth
    Posts
    29,653
    Quote Originally Posted by Ielenia View Post
    Then I repeat: you're delusional. And I add: you're also in denial.
    If you say so.

    You haven't? Then what's this:
    Where in that quote does it say "Like a Druid, only without the immunity to Polymorph"?

    You're conflating "purpose" and "effect". The spells' purpose is to heal others. But their effects differ.
    No, their purpose depends on what the healing spell is designed to do. Heals like Regrowth's purpose is to heal more heavily injured targets, while something like Renew is designed to heal less injured targets. Again, same function, different purpose.

    In terms of gameplay? Yes. Both are undead minions. Both are subject to the same immunities and weaknesses.
    That isn't what I asked you, I asked you if they both were the same, since according to you anything that is the same "family" and serves the same basic function is the same in lore and gameplay regardless of how they look.

    That's completely irrelevant since it's still the same orcs we have in our main universe.
    The same Orcs led by Garrosh and Grom Hellscream that were specially trained in various technologies by the Blackfuse Company for the purpose of war? I thought our Orcs were tainted by demonic blood, defeated by Azerothian forces, imprisoned, and then led by Thrall to rediscover their Shamanistic heritage and found Ogrimmar?

    I don't know, sounds quite a bit different to me.

    That's not a fact. You're making that up.
    Let me know when you find evidence to the contrary.

    It's not. It's not supposed to reflect lore. It only happens to reflect lore when it suits gameplay.
    You mean the time when a player is interacting with the game world? Which is essentially every time we play the game?

    Blizzard can always change their mind. They did so regarding many controversial topics.
    So you actually believe that Blizzard would purposely make the Engineering profession powerful enough to effect balance in PvP and PvE? You do understand that that would break the profession system right? No one would learn anything else, everyone would choose Engineering as their profession of choice in order to get an edge in PvP or Raiding.

    That's a red herring if I ever saw one. You're making stuff up with the paladin thing. They were never even mentioned in this.
    Hilarious. Would you prefer Warlock lore?:

    Channelers of Forbidden Powers

    In the face of demonic power, most heroes see death. Warlocks see only opportunity. Dominance is their aim, and they have found a path to it in the dark arts. These voracious spellcasters summon demonic minions to fight beside them. At first, they command only the service of imps, but as a warlock’s knowledge grows, seductive succubi, loyal voidwalkers, and horrific felhunters join the dark sorcerer’s ranks to wreak havoc on anyone who stands in their master’s way.

    https://worldofwarcraft.com/en-us/game/classes/warlock

    In terms of Gameplay, Warlocks initially learn to summon Imps, but eventually they learn to summon more powerful demons, just like their lore states. That's not an example of gameplay reflecting lore?

    Or does your bizarre, obtuse nonsense only apply to Tinkers?

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by JohnnyMccrum View Post
    Tinker is never going to happen, the reason for that is it involves so much engineering and probably will revoke engineering as a profession if it ever did come into the game. You'd effectively be given "Engineering: the class". .
    How would an engineer cobbling together a pair of goggles be effected in any fashion by a Tinker tanking a dungeon? Saying that the engineering profession would need to be revoked by a technology-based class is akin to saying that Enchanting should have been revoked with the Mage class.

  17. #477
    The Unstoppable Force Ielenia's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Brazil
    Posts
    21,797
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    Where in that quote does it say "Like a Druid, only without the immunity to Polymorph"?
    If your class idea needs to be in an "alternate form" to fight, then it's like a druid. And you also said the tinker wouldn't be immune to polymorph. Hence: "like a druid, only without immunity to polymoprh."

    No, their purpose depends on what the healing spell is designed to do.
    And they're designed to heal.

    That isn't what I asked you, I asked you if they both were the same, since according to you anything that is the same "family" and serves the same basic function is the same in lore and gameplay regardless of how they look.
    That's not what you asked. Here's your question in its integrity:
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    So is a Ghoul the same as an Abomination since they're both undead minions that just look different?
    And I answered your question.

    The same Orcs led by Garrosh and Grom Hellscream that were specially trained in various technologies by the Blackfuse Company for the purpose of war? I thought our Orcs were tainted by demonic blood, defeated by Azerothian forces, imprisoned, and then led by Thrall to rediscover their Shamanistic heritage and found Ogrimmar?

    I don't know, sounds quite a bit different to me.
    And tinkers would be trained in the usage of weapons, just like the AU orcs were. I see no issue. Engineering is not exclusive to goblins and gnomes. Other races would have the potential to be tinkers as well.

    Let me know when you find evidence to the contrary.
    That's not how it works. You made the claim the only races that can pilot mechs are gnomes and goblins. The burden of proof falls on you. And let me preempt what you're going to say with this: absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

    You mean the time when a player is interacting with the game world? Which is essentially every time we play the game?
    Our characters who can traverse entire continents carrying five giant backpacks stacked full with heavy metal ore, run non-stop from Light's Chapel all the way down to Booty Bay without getting winded even in the slightest? Our characters who never need to eat or drink to survive? Or sleep? Our mounts which spawn out of nowhere when we call them? What about the fact that a chicken feather takes up just as much space as a two-handed sword? Or how the same plate chest piece can fit a gnome just as easily as it can fit a tauren? Need I go on?

    So you actually believe that Blizzard would purposely make the Engineering profession powerful enough to effect balance in PvP and PvE? You do understand that that would break the profession system right? No one would learn anything else, everyone would choose Engineering as their profession of choice in order to get an edge in PvP or Raiding.
    It would not "break" the profession system because Blizzard would obviously make other changes to the system to make sure nothing "breaks".

    In terms of Gameplay, Warlocks initially learn to summon Imps, but eventually they learn to summon more powerful demons, just like their lore states. That's not an example of gameplay reflecting lore?

    Or does your bizarre, obtuse nonsense only apply to Tinkers?
    Except I never said that gameplay never reflects lore, I only said it reflects lore when it suits gameplay.

    Also, thanks for the new sig, btw. It was due for a reformat.
    "Torturing someone is not an evil thing to do if it is done for good reasons" by Varodoc
    "You sit in OG/SW waiting on a Mythic+ queue" by Altmer <- Oh, the pearls in this forum...
    "They sort of did this Dragonriding, which ushered in the Dracthyr race." by Teriz <- the BS some people reach for their narratives...

  18. #478
    Merely a Setback Teriz's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Soul of Azeroth
    Posts
    29,653
    Quote Originally Posted by Ielenia View Post
    If your class idea needs to be in an "alternate form" to fight, then it's like a druid. And you also said the tinker wouldn't be immune to polymorph. Hence: "like a druid, only without immunity to polymoprh."
    Yeah it's like a Druid, except for theme, abilities, purpose, and lore.

    And they're designed to heal.
    That's their function. Each healing spell has a different purpose within a given spec, and between different specs. Unless you want to now argue that all healing spells are the same since they heal stuff.


    That's not what you asked. Here's your question in its integrity:

    And I answered your question.
    So let me ask you again; Since you believe that a Bombling and a Clockwork Goblin are the same but just look different (lol), are a Ghoul and an Abomination the same for the same reason?

    And tinkers would be trained in the usage of weapons, just like the AU orcs were. I see no issue. Engineering is not exclusive to goblins and gnomes. Other races would have the potential to be tinkers as well.
    Except the Orcs didn't create or develop the tech, the Goblins did. Also while generic engineering isn't exclusive to Goblins and Gnomes, none of the races on Azeroth have been shown creating or piloting advanced vehicles like Mechs.

    That's not how it works. You made the claim the only races that can pilot mechs are gnomes and goblins. The burden of proof falls on you. And let me preempt what you're going to say with this: absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
    Considering that this is a video game, and everything in the game world is created by people and thus known, we know that there aren't any non-goblin or gnomes piloting mechs outside of that alternate reality orc. Thus it's a fact that there are no non-Goblin or Gnome races building and piloting mechs.

    Our characters who can traverse entire continents carrying five giant backpacks stacked full with heavy metal ore, run non-stop from Light's Chapel all the way down to Booty Bay without getting winded even in the slightest? Our characters who never need to eat or drink to survive? Or sleep? Our mounts which spawn out of nowhere when we call them? What about the fact that a chicken feather takes up just as much space as a two-handed sword? Or how the same plate chest piece can fit a gnome just as easily as it can fit a tauren? Need I go on?
    That's called bending lore for player convenience. I mentioned that multiple pages ago. I'm talking about lore as it works within how classes and their abilities are structured. If the lore states that a Tinker is capable of producing a factory that rapidly produces robotic minions, then Pocket Factory is the logical gameplay equivalent, not an obscure Engineering item that isn't a factory, and produces a bomb every 30 minutes.

    It would not "break" the profession system because Blizzard would obviously make other changes to the system to make sure nothing "breaks".
    Except it couldn't because every profession doesn't make weaponry. For example, if you enhance the power levels of engineering weapons, how would Enchanting or Jewelcrafting be able to compete? Again this happened in the past, and it was a disaster, which is why it was changed in the first place.

    Except I never said that gameplay never reflects lore, I only said it reflects lore when it suits gameplay.
    That's not what you said earlier;

    Quote Originally Posted by Ielenia View Post
    No, gameplay is not supposed to reflect lore. Most of the time, gameplay flies in the face of lore.

  19. #479
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    The Lich hero was very much about control and movement manipulation, alongside protecting itself with a frost shield, and using shadow magic. All of those abilities follow that basic theme.
    1-There is one spell that uses shadow magic, so no, not all of them fololwo this, not even half of it.
    2-Not it wasnt, The Wc3 Lich is focused around heavy Aoe damage.Thats why Frost nova and Death and decay deal so much damage and you have Dark ritual to assist in Mana loss.
    3-Again, you do not prove that a Necromancer/lich would have the same abilities or the same playstyle.Control and Movement manipulation can be done in many ways, Frost mages, MM Hunters, Frost Dks, Prot Warriors in pvp and etc.



    Are we now going to pretend that Death and Decay never existed in the Frost spec because Blizzard decided to remove it from the spec for one expansion?
    Considering all 3 specs got reworked and only the Frost Dk had undead summoning and Death and decay removed, why should it be relevant?
    Yes, in its current form Frost DK doesn't have any of the Lich hero's abilities, however Blizzard originally took the concept of the Lich and applied it to a melee knight, which is why the DK has a Frost spec in the first place.
    Good, so the spot is open.Can we end this conversation?
    And while Flamestrike isn't the primary power of Fire Mages, it's fairly easy to develop a Fire-based spec based on the abilities from the Blood Mage hero.
    And so can be done with the Lich?Why not trade Death and decay in the Lich for spell called "Unending storm" that deals heavy Aoe damage but instead of Shadow damage is Frost.

    This isn't even removing is just adapting the spell to fit better in another concept.Fire and Arcane shield were created/reworked just so they could have their own shields.
    So now we're going to purposely ignore the Brewmaster spec, and the fact that the entire class is Pandaren-themed, and has a sub-theme of brewmaking throughout? Rogues are not an expansion class.
    But rogues are the class that is made from least references from WC3, you got what, Poison, the Warden and Stealth.

    Im not ignoring the Brewmaster, but there is simply one and a half specs that are completly new and don't really have nothing in common with the Brewmaster other then being a Monk class.

    It would seem that Blizzard disagrees with you, since they changed entire Warlock spec in order to place Meta in the DH class.
    They said it was because they wanted the Warlock to be a Demon summoner instead of turning into the Demon.And considering they are the producers, im inclining to belive in them and not on you.
    Such as?
    Idk, D&D, Rpgs they played together, other midias, im not blizzard to know everysingle thing, i just know there were more because there aren't that many spells in Wc3 for them to put into the game.

    12 yards is quite a bit outside of melee range.
    The Mage's range is 40.If someone got to 12 the mage he should probably be worrying about his safety.

    Read the sentence immediately after the one you bolded.
    i did, thats why i made my point.
    Again, are we going to pretend that changes to the DK Frost spec in this one expansion are somehow permanent and Blizzard can't simply just reintroduce older abilities or create new ones? Frost Dks control the Lich theme, and that gives Blizzard the window to create Lich-style spells within the spec with no issue whatsoever. They could even create your beloved "Lich Form" as long as it doesn't clash too much with Mages.
    Its really funny this argumment.

    Blizzard already said they aren't planning in adding a bunch of abilities and they are happy with how the majority of the classes are playing.

    If they are willing to go so far to change the spec just so they can add one spell, why not just make the Class and be done with?

    The Dk was always focused on melee attacks with Necrotic magic and now they are adding Frost based spells and Frostwyrm themed spells.Why change all that just so they can add new spell?Or make a spell be completly out of place?

    Why not make a class where these spells will activelly be used in a more creative way instead of being limited to what they already existing class can do?

    And for the love of god, how can you say that that the Lich is the ultimate inspiration for the Frost Dk, when over half of its original spells are all melee attacks and most of its talents are focused around melee combat?
    Its the ice right?Damn ice.
    Yes, and the Necromancer spells the Death Knight took from the WARCRAFT Necromancer were also ranged. Imagine that.
    You mean Raise dead?

  20. #480
    Disclaimer: Only read first three pages.

    Legit all I want is a spellblade. Like Spellblade Aluriel. Melee class with elemental imbues of the Mage schools, opposed to the "Natural" affinities like shamans. None of that spiritual BS
    Quote Originally Posted by Winstonwolfe View Post
    In other words, he's worried about how sharp your bayonet is when you are firing RPG's.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •