Tinker Class Concept 2018 (long)

[Edlarel]

Alright, I'm done with Ielenia. The only thing we can do now is wait and see. There's nothing to add to that conversation. I'll check back in again down the road.

[Teriz]

Alright, I'm done with Ielenia. The only thing we can do now is wait and see. There's nothing to add to that conversation. I'll check back in again down the road.

Honestly I would be shocked if the expansion after BfA doesn't contain a new class. There's no reason to believe otherwise.

[Edlarel]

Honestly I would be shocked if the expansion after BfA doesn't contain a new class. There's no reason to believe otherwise.

While we're on this subject, Legion did recreate several specs, in addition to their new class. Survival and once again with Demonology/destruction (to a lesser extent). The work to get those to fit on their existing chasis was enough to warrant a new class in and of itself. I will concede that an expansion doesn't "HAVE" to have a new class (even though so far they have). Rather, that the next expansion will somehow focus back on classes as a whole.

As an alternative, they could always do something specific with existing classes again, like create 2-3 more specs and having those be the stars. It would be akin to creating new specs for a new class, but the groundwork is already laid. That would satisfy "not" giving us a new class while still giving us new class options. And, since we're already used to relearning specs every expansion (cough, demonology, cough survival), adding something entirely new wouldn't put off any existing characters. They could bring back gladiator and fistweaving, and add earth-tanking, for example. That would give us a new dps spec, healing spec, and tanking spec.

I'm just spitballing here, obviously. I wouldn't be surprised at no new class as much as nothing new related to a focus on classes as a whole.

[Ielenia]

Where did I say that the stories are solely about heroes and villains? My argument is that classes are based off of heroes of the story, not the peasants and canon fodder. You base a class off of Captain America and Iron Man, not the random people that they save in the street.

No. Your argument was that the lightforged draenei lose their ability to pilot mechs when arriving on Azeroth, and I've asked you again and again and again to explain that, and you never did. I pointed out that no character whatsoever is shown to lose any skill or ability at all on the trip to or from Argus, and then asked you to explain why only the lightforged draenei lose a skill, and why it's only their mech-piloting skill, and nothing else.

And so far, all you did was say "they just do".

Amazing how every other class has a "theme" yet for some reason the technology theme is just "a coat of paint".

When have I ever claimed that "every other class has a theme but technology is just a 'coat of paint'"? Themes are 'coats of paint'.

As for vehicle-based combat, the WC3 Tinker hero had that ability, so it stands to reason that if Blizzard brought the class into the game, that would be a feature.

No, it won't. It just won't. Blizzard tried that with Wrath and, to a lesser extent, Cataclysm. Didn't work out. Also, vehicle combat have their own hotkey bars that only allow for five (six?) abilities, hiding all your other extra bars in the process. On top of that, vehicles have a lot of advantages, immunity to fall damage and their own health bar being just two of them.

The alternative is to treat it like a druid form, but, in that case, we got druids already.

It certainly can be since Blizzard has made little effort to develop a unique Bard concept in Warcraft beyond homage and spoof characters.

Funny, that. Blizzard also did little to develop a unique monk concept in Warcraft before the Mists of Pandaria expansion.

Kind of hard to build a wall without any bricks....

And when have I ever claimed that? I just said that specific, individual abilities don't really matter, especially nowhere near the interactions between them. Gameplay is about how the abilities interact with each other.

[Teriz]

No. Your argument was that the lightforged draenei lose their ability to pilot mechs when arriving on Azeroth, and I've asked you again and again and again to explain that, and you never did. I pointed out that no character whatsoever is shown to lose any skill or ability at all on the trip to or from Argus, and then asked you to explain why only the lightforged draenei lose a skill, and why it's only their mech-piloting skill, and nothing else.

And again, What character are you talking about? If you're talking about some random LF Draenei NPC, that really means nothing. They mean as much as the farmers in Northrend. More than likely one and done unless they pop up again down the line.

When have I ever claimed that "every other class has a theme but technology is just a 'coat of paint'"? Themes are 'coats of paint'.

For some reason, a Tinker doing something different is "just a coat of paint", yet when any other class does something different, it's a "theme".

No, it won't. It just won't. Blizzard tried that with Wrath and, to a lesser extent, Cataclysm. Didn't work out. Also, vehicle combat have their own hotkey bars that only allow for five (six?) abilities, hiding all your other extra bars in the process. On top of that, vehicles have a lot of advantages, immunity to fall damage and their own health bar being just two of them.

We already have Paladins performing mounted combat, so its there. Additionally, they could just make the gameplay similar to how Druid shape-shifting operates, where you change forms, yet have vehicle based abilities.

The alternative is to treat it like a druid form, but, in that case, we got druids already.

Which isn't remotely the same thing.

Funny, that. Blizzard also did little to develop a unique monk concept in Warcraft before the Mists of Pandaria expansion.

And they also had the Brewmaster and Pandaren concept from WC3 to attach the Monk class to. There's no such hero unit to attach the Bard to.

And when have I ever claimed that? I just said that specific, individual abilities don't really matter, especially nowhere near the interactions between them. Gameplay is about how the abilities interact with each other.

You said that the individual "bricks" mean little, but you can't build a wall without bricks, and you can't create gameplay without abilities.

[Ielenia]

And again, What character are you talking about? If you're talking about some random LF Draenei NPC, that really means nothing. They mean as much as the farmers in Northrend. More than likely one and done unless they pop up again down the line.

I've said it, time and again: I'm talking about every single character, named or otherwise. No character whatsoever, named or otherwise, has displayed the loss of any ability or skill whatsoever when traveling to or from Argus, so your claims that lightforged draenei suddenly, for some unexplained reason, lose their ability to pilot mechs when setting hoof on Azeroth are what really mean nothing, here.

We already have Paladins performing mounted combat, so its there.

So "mounted combat" to you is just normal combat... only with a big speed buff? Like we get on Halls of Valor after beating the first three bosses? Sounds boring.

Additionally, they could just make the gameplay similar to how Druid shape-shifting operates, where you change forms, yet have vehicle based abilities.

So... a druid. Y'know, since druids have form-specific abilities. Only, of course, with a different texture applied to the character and visual graphics for the abilities?

You said that the individual "bricks" mean little, but you can't build a wall without bricks, and you can't create gameplay without abilities.

I said individual abilities mean little. What really matters is the interaction between them all. Y'know, gameplay. It doesn't matter if the character has cool-looking, flashy abilities, if the rotation (for example) is uninteresting.

[Teriz]

I've said it, time and again: I'm talking about every single character, named or otherwise. No character whatsoever, named or otherwise, has displayed the loss of any ability or skill whatsoever when traveling to or from Argus, so your claims that lightforged draenei suddenly, for some unexplained reason, lose their ability to pilot mechs when setting hoof on Azeroth are what really mean nothing, here.

I never made that argument. I simply said that LF Draenei haven't showcased the ability to fly Warframes on Azeroth. If that happens, then I'll happily admit I was mistaken.

So "mounted combat" to you is just normal combat... only with a big speed buff? Like we get on Halls of Valor after beating the first three bosses? Sounds boring.

Paladins can also knock targets back while mounted in PvP, so no, it isn't just a speed boost.

So... a druid. Y'know, since druids have form-specific abilities. Only, of course, with a different texture applied to the character and visual graphics for the abilities?

Ah there's that double standard again. Of course Mages, Warlocks, Priests, Elemental Shaman, Balance Druids, and other casters can be considered different and unique despite them all performing generic spell casting, yet another class utilizing the shape-shifting mechanic is simply a Druid with a new coat of paint.

I said individual abilities mean little. What really matters is the interaction between them all. Y'know, gameplay. It doesn't matter if the character has cool-looking, flashy abilities, if the rotation (for example) is uninteresting.

I would say that an ability like Metamorphosis means a great deal, wouldn't you? You can strip all the passives away from it, and it is still a class-defining ability.

[Ielenia]

I never made that argument.

Um... Teriz? You did. You really did. Sorry, bud, but you can't weasel yourself out of that, because it's right there, on my sig.

Paladins can also knock targets back while mounted in PvP, so no, it isn't just a speed boost.

It's essentially basically a big speed boost. As for the knockback, I honestly doubt it'll be there if this "mounted combat" was a permanent thing and not just a 5-second speed buff.

Ah there's that double standard again. Of course Mages, Warlocks, Priests, Elemental Shaman, Balance Druids, and other casters can be considered different and unique despite them all performing generic spell casting, yet another class utilizing the shape-shifting mechanic is simply a Druid with a new coat of paint.

Speaking of double-standards, for someone advocating for "uniqueness" of a class, and who argued heavily against necromancers because of death knights, you sure don't mind copying another class' 'shtick' (namely, what makes druids unique, their concept, their shapeshifting), for your class idea.

As for addressing that paragraph itself: what makes those classes unique is their gameplay. Making a mage look different than a warlock but have both play essentially the same way wouldn't really make one class more fun to play than the other.

I would say that an ability like Metamorphosis means a great deal, wouldn't you? You can strip all the passives away from it, and it is still a class-defining ability.

Not really. You can still make a demon-hunter without it.

[Teriz]

Um... Teriz? You did. You really did. Sorry, bud, but you can't weasel yourself out of that, because it's right there, on my sig.

Uh huh.

This entire argument is like saying that the Monk class should include the Monks from the Scarlet Crusade, since they were also Monks. However, Blizzard completely ignored them and focused on the Pandaren Monk.

Why?

Because the WC3 hero that the Monk class is based on is Pandaren. A Tinker class would also be based on the WC3 hero unit.

It's essentially basically a big speed boost. As for the knockback, I honestly doubt it'll be there if this "mounted combat" was a permanent thing and not just a 5-second speed buff.

The knockback is part of the talent.

Speaking of double-standards, for someone advocating for "uniqueness" of a class, and who argued heavily against necromancers because of death knights, you sure don't mind copying another class' 'shtick' (namely, what makes druids unique, their concept, their shapeshifting), for your class idea.

Yes, because changing into an animal is the same as a Gnome or Goblin hopping into a mech.

As for addressing that paragraph itself: what makes those classes unique is their gameplay. Making a mage look different than a warlock but have both play essentially the same way wouldn't really make one class more fun to play than the other.

I don't recall anyone looking at this class concept and saying "Gee, those abilities sounds just like what a Druid would do!".

Not really. You can still make a demon-hunter without it.

Blizzard couldn't.

[Ielenia]

Uh huh.

This entire argument is like saying that the Monk class should include the Monks from the Scarlet Crusade, since they were also Monks. However, Blizzard completely ignored them and focused on the Pandaren Monk.

No, it's not. It's about your stupid, nonsensical argument that lightforged draenei lose their ability to pilot a mech when arriving on Azeroth. You seem to have finally realized how stupid that argument is, as you seem to be doing all you can to deflect and avoid it.

The knockback is part of the talent.

You missed the point: it has a knockback only because it's so short a buff. Do you really think it'd have the knockback if it was a permanent buff? Balance wouldn't allow it.

Yes, because changing into an animal is the same as a Gnome or Goblin hopping into a mech.

You compared to a druid. Not me. And again, if we're talking about a 'changing forms' mechanic, "hopping into a mech" is no different than "turning into a bear/cat/lazerchicken/whatever". All it changes are the graphics. Mechanic is the same.

I don't recall anyone looking at this class concept and saying "Gee, those abilities sounds just like what a Druid would do!".

Except that's not the point. The point is that you claim that "individual abilities matter", and they don't. It's the interaction between the abilities that do matter. Again, you can have a class with the flashiest and cool-looking abilities in the game... but if the gameplay, i.e., the interactions among the abilities, is not interesting, not fun, the class won't be popular.

Blizzard couldn't.

"Couldn't"? Or did they just opt not to? There's a huge difference between those two. I'm not surprised you don't know the difference.

[Teriz]

No, it's not. It's about your stupid, nonsensical argument that lightforged draenei lose their ability to pilot a mech when arriving on Azeroth. You seem to have finally realized how stupid that argument is, as you seem to be doing all you can to deflect and avoid it.

Like I said from the beginning; If we start seeing LF Draenei piloting warframes on Azeroth, you'll have an argument.

Until then...

You missed the point: it has a knockback only because it's so short a buff. Do you really think it'd have the knockback if it was a permanent buff? Balance wouldn't allow it.

You missed my point: Paladins can attack opponents while mounted. Hence, it's vehicle-based combat, regardless of how short the duration is.

You compared to a druid. Not me. And again, if we're talking about a 'changing forms' mechanic, "hopping into a mech" is no different than "turning into a bear/cat/lazerchicken/whatever". All it changes are the graphics. Mechanic is the same.

And we're back to the double standards again. Fireball, Frostbolt, Lightning Bolt, Shadow Bolt, and Solar Wrath all share the same mechanic. Is there no difference between them?

Except that's not the point. The point is that you claim that "individual abilities matter", and they don't. It's the interaction between the abilities that do matter. Again, you can have a class with the flashiest and cool-looking abilities in the game... but if the gameplay, i.e., the interactions among the abilities, is not interesting, not fun, the class won't be popular.

Laughable. I'm sure all of those early DH adopters were rolling Demon Hunters because they knew the ins and outs of the DH rotation instead of wanting to transform into demons, double jumping, fighting with a warglaive and gliding around on demonic wings.

"Couldn't"? Or did they just opt not to? There's a huge difference between those two. I'm not surprised you don't know the difference.

I'm sure if Blizzard could create the DH class without Metamorphosis (avoiding the debacle with Demonology) they would have. Clearly you can't have a Demon Hunter class without its signature abilities.

[Ielenia]

Like I said from the beginning; If we start seeing LF Draenei piloting warframes on Azeroth, you'll have an argument.

Until then...

You're the one without any real argument. Your claim is completely nonsensical and anyone with at least a single working brain cell between their ears would calls you out on that argument.

You missed my point: Paladins can attack opponents while mounted. Hence, it's vehicle-based combat, regardless of how short the duration is.

... Um, no, it's not. First, it's not a vehicle. The tanks and bikes in Ulduar are vehicles. Second, it's not "-based combat" because it's just a short-duration buff. That's like saying shamans and DKs have water-walking based combat, that warriors have bladestorm-based combat, and warlocks have portal-based combat.

And we're back to the double standards again. Fireball, Frostbolt, Lightning Bolt, Shadow Bolt, and Solar Wrath all share the same mechanic. Is there no difference between them?

By themselves? Little difference. Fireball leaves a dot, and frostbolts slow. Other than that, by themselves, no, they're not really different. Again, what matters is the interaction among the abilities a class possesses. How abilities work with each other.

Which, by the way, has been one of my points way back before Legion, in demon hunter posts, when I claimed that a warlock meta and demon hunter meta could still easily co-exist. So, no, there are no double-standards, here.

Laughable.

Yes, you are.

I'm sure all of those early DH adopters were rolling Demon Hunters because they knew the ins and outs of the DH rotation instead of wanting to transform into demons, double jumping, fighting with a warglaive and gliding around on demonic wings.

"Come for the meta, stay for the fun gameplay." On a more serious and related note, how many times have you seen a movie trailer, and thought the movie looked cool and would be awesome.. only to find out the movie was actually 'meh' at best, or just bad, at worst? Also, this is anecdotal, but once I made a druid because I liked how others in my guild played and liked their druids, and how cool the forms look. The gameplay of the class, though, did not appeal to me, but I still worked all the way up to max level, thinking things would pick up once reaching level 100 (back in WoD). I've deleted that druid a couple months after reaching max level, after trying all four specs.

I'm sure if Blizzard could create the DH class without Metamorphosis (avoiding the debacle with Demonology) they would have.

Again, perhaps they simply opted not to. It's not a hard concept to grasp, Teriz.

[Teriz]

You're the one without any real argument. Your claim is completely nonsensical and anyone with at least a single working brain cell between their ears would calls you out on that argument.

My claim that no-name background characters have zero influence over classes is nonsensical to you?

Okay.

... Um, no, it's not. First, it's not a vehicle. The tanks and bikes in Ulduar are vehicles. Second, it's not "-based combat" because it's just a short-duration buff. That's like saying shamans and DKs have water-walking based combat, that warriors have bladestorm-based combat, and warlocks have portal-based combat.

ve·hi·cle
ˈvēək(ə)l,ˈvēˌhik(ə)l/Submit
noun
1.
a thing used for transporting people or goods, especially on land..

Beasts of burden such as Horses fall under that definition.

By themselves? Little difference. Fireball leaves a dot, and frostbolts slow. Other than that, by themselves, no, they're not really different. Again, what matters is the interaction among the abilities a class possesses. How abilities work with each other.

Little difference or no difference?

"Come for the meta, stay for the fun gameplay." On a more serious and related note, how many times have you seen a movie trailer, and thought the movie looked cool and would be awesome.. only to find out the movie was actually 'meh' at best, or just bad, at worst? Also, this is anecdotal, but once I made a druid because I liked how others in my guild played and liked their druids, and how cool the forms look. The gameplay of the class, though, did not appeal to me, but I still worked all the way up to max level, thinking things would pick up once reaching level 100 (back in WoD). I've deleted that druid a couple months after reaching max level, after trying all four specs.

Here's the thing though; There's plenty of people who love Druid gameplay, but the overall point is that its the individual abilities that bring people into the class in the first place. Truth be told, Blizzard rarely screws up in the gameplay department, so this entire line of argument is really moot. You create a class with cool looking individual abilities and people are going to want to check it out.

Again, perhaps they simply opted not to. It's not a hard concept to grasp, Teriz.

Except the Demon Hunter IS in the game WITH Metamorphosis. There's no "perhaps" about it. You don't have a WC Demon Hunter without it.

[Ielenia]

My claim that no-name background characters have zero influence over classes is nonsensical to you?

Except that wasn't your original argument. If you need a reminder, look at my sig.

Beasts of burden such as Horses fall under that definition.

Not for the game. A mount is different, mechanically, than a vehicle.

Little difference or no difference?

Re-read what I wrote.

Here's the thing though; There's plenty of people who love Druid gameplay, but the overall point is that its the individual abilities that bring people into the class in the first place.

Source for the claim underlined, please?

Except the Demon Hunter IS in the game WITH Metamorphosis. There's no "perhaps" about it. You don't have a WC Demon Hunter without it.

Irrelevant. Just because they didn't does not mean they couldn't. We're not privy to Blizzard's design philosophies and rules, so all we do is speculate, and the option most likely to be correct is that they opted not to.

[Teriz]

Except that wasn't your original argument. If you need a reminder, look at my sig.

No reminder needed. I stand by what I said. Until something changes, that is the indication.

No different than how Warlocks "forgot" how to perform metamorphosis.

Not for the game. A mount is different, mechanically, than a vehicle.

Fine. The point is that a class based around combat inside a vehicle is a unique class concept.

Re-read what I wrote.

How about you answer the question.

Source for the claim underlined, please?

So you're saying that people don't choose classes based on the abilities of that class? Didn't you say that the Druids ability to turn into an animal was why you initially chose the class?

Irrelevant. Just because they didn't does not mean they couldn't. We're not privy to Blizzard's design philosophies and rules, so all we do is speculate, and the option most likely to be correct is that they opted not to.

The most likely option is that there was no way a Demon Hunter could enter WoW without Metamorphosis in its spell book. Which is why it was nerfed and then removed from the Warlock class.

[Ielenia]

No reminder needed. I stand by what I said. Until something changes, that is the indication.

Like I said, an illogical claim to make. You are actually going against basic logic, here. You're basically saying a person loses their ability to drive cars if they move to a different country, here.

Fine. The point is that a class based around combat inside a vehicle is a unique class concept.

And that won't happen. Blizzard has promised that in the past, and the experience was not a good one. Plus, as I mentioned earlier, vehicles have many advantages, two of them being immunity to fall damage, and a second health bar.

How about you answer the question.

You, demanding a question be answered. Oh, the hilarious irony never stops. Their differences are basically negligible.

So you're saying that people don't choose classes based on the abilities of that class? Didn't you say that the Druids ability to turn into an animal was why you initially chose the class?

It's one thing to choose a class, and it's another thing entirely to continue playing the class after the novelty ends.

The most likely option is that there was no way a Demon Hunter could enter WoW without Metamorphosis in its spell book.

You're demonstrably wrong. The most likely solution is "they opted not to", because, unlike you, I don't think Blizzard is so creatively handicapped to the point of not being able to develop a class without one, single ability. The demon hunter class could have easily existed without metamorphosis. Off the top of my head, Blizzard, for example, could have stated in the lore that 'metamorphosis' is such a high-level skill that those few who mastered it ended up falling to madness, with Illidan being an exception because of his strong will and convictions (and even this 'golden eyes on night elves mean greatness in their futures' prophecy), so playable demon hunters could exist without metamorphosis.

[Teriz]

Like I said, an illogical claim to make. You are actually going against basic logic, here. You're basically saying a person loses their ability to drive cars if they move to a different country, here.

You mean like Warlocks losing the ability to perform metamorphosis?

And that won't happen. Blizzard has promised that in the past, and the experience was not a good one. Plus, as I mentioned earlier, vehicles have many advantages, two of them being immunity to fall damage, and a second health bar.

Read the OP of this thread. That's the kind of vehicle gameplay I'm talking about, and its perfectly doable by Blizzard.

You, demanding a question be answered. Oh, the hilarious irony never stops. Their differences are basically negligible.

So you're saying that Fireball, Frostbolt, Lightning Bolt, Shadow Bolt, and Solar Wrath have negligible differences, but a Gnome hopping into a mech and a Druid turning into a cat has zero differences? Didn't you claim that mechanical similarities make abilities the same?

It's one thing to choose a class, and it's another thing entirely to continue playing the class after the novelty ends.

You're still choosing the class based on the individual abilities, which means that individual abilities matter a great deal.

You're demonstrably wrong.

No, that would be you. There would be no Demon Hunter class without Metamorphosis.

[Ielenia]

You mean like Warlocks losing the ability to perform metamorphosis?

Why does that matter if you claim the player character is "not canon"? I mean, you don't consider player heroes riding mechs as canon, so why do you now consider them canon when you mention player warlocks lost metamorphosis? On top of that, all classes have lost abilities from expansion to expansion. Monks, for example, lost their long-range disarm ability that sometimes gave them 5% extra defense/attack power.

So you're saying that Fireball, Frostbolt, Lightning Bolt, Shadow Bolt, and Solar Wrath have negligible differences, but a Gnome hopping into a mech and a Druid turning into a cat has zero differences? Didn't you claim that mechanical similarities make abilities the same?

It's actually negligible difference, if you want an exact statement. The problem is that you claim they're different, but when questioned, you sometimes defer to the druid example.

You're still choosing the class based on the individual abilities, which means that individual abilities matter a great deal.

When we say "choose a class", we mean play it thoroughly: level it, gear it, and overall enjoy playing the class. Just "picking" the class is useless if they drop the class after some time because the gameplay isn't enjoyable.

No, that would be you. There would be no Demon Hunter class without Metamorphosis.

Hah. Such a childish rebuttal. Then again, not surprised. Especially since you ignored the whole rest of the paragraph where, off the top of my head, I came up with an explanation of how player demon hunters could exist without metamorphosis.

[Teriz]

Why does that matter if you claim the player character is "not canon"? I mean, you don't consider player heroes riding mechs as canon, so why do you now consider them canon when you mention player warlocks lost metamorphosis? On top of that, all classes have lost abilities from expansion to expansion. Monks, for example, lost their long-range disarm ability that sometimes gave them 5% extra defense/attack power.

I said the player character is BARELY canon. In other words, the character you play as is the generic champion of the story. That character's gender, class, race, etc. changes depending on the player themselves.

However, the Warlock class IS canon, and there was a lore basis for Warlocks to have metamorphosis. All of that was simply "erased" after WoD. No reason was ever given by Blizzard, and there was no lore to indicate what happened. Essentially, Warlocks "forgot" how to use metamorphosis.

It's actually negligible difference, if you want an exact statement. The problem is that you claim they're different, but when questioned, you sometimes defer to the druid example.

I defer to the Druid example for simplicity's sake, and because the WC3 Tinker mech form could be entered and exited just like the WC3 Druid of the Claw or Talon.

It should also be noted that the only one bringing any of this up is you.

When we say "choose a class", we mean play it thoroughly: level it, gear it, and overall enjoy playing the class. Just "picking" the class is useless if they drop the class after some time because the gameplay isn't enjoyable.

But again, the enjoyment of gameplay differs from person to person. For example, you disliked the Druid's gameplay, yet the Druid is one of the most popular classes in the game. The POINT is that individual abilities mean quite a bit within classes. To say they mean little is ridiculous.

Hah. Such a childish rebuttal. Then again, not surprised. Especially since you ignored the whole rest of the paragraph where, off the top of my head, I came up with an explanation of how player demon hunters could exist without metamorphosis.

And you wasted your time. The fact of the matter is that Metamorphosis is in the Demon Hunter class at the expense of Metamorphosis in the Warlock class. That's really all the evidence we need that the DH couldn't enter the game without that spell.

[Ielenia]

I said the player character is BARELY canon. In other words, the character you play as is the generic champion of the story. That character's gender, class, race, etc. changes depending on the player themselves.

Either they're canon, or they're not. If they "losing a spell" is canon, then them being able to pilot mechs is also canon.

However, the Warlock class IS canon,

Then so is the class piloting mechs.

But again, the enjoyment of gameplay differs from person to person. For example, you disliked the Druid's gameplay, yet the Druid is one of the most popular classes in the game. The POINT is that individual abilities mean quite a bit within classes. To say they mean little is ridiculous.

No, they don't. Again, a class can have all the coolest, flashiest abilities, but if the gameplay isn't interesting, the class won't stick with the player. I only mentioned the druid because it was my own example. Let's take a look at the monk, then: they have several 'flashy', 'cool' abilities, yet few people find its gameplay interesting.

And you wasted your time.

Explaining basic logic to you truly is a waste of time. Oh, well, I soldier on!

The fact of the matter is that Metamorphosis is in the Demon Hunter class at the expense of Metamorphosis in the Warlock class.

That's not a fact. It's just what many people claim. Popular =/= fact.

That's really all the evidence we need that the DH couldn't enter the game without that spell.

If you were a prosecutor and this was your case, the judge would laugh right at your face and dismiss the case outright. If this was a murder in a crowded mall, you'd basically be accusing a random person out a crowd because said person was there and because said person was the same gender as the alleged killer, without confirming if the accused really is the killer.