Void class > Tinkerer for 9.0.

[Teriz]

I think you're getting lost in your own stuff there. That part has nothing about that. It was about you really not knowing what the word "arguable" means.

Nah, Im just noticing you trying to avoid admitting you were wrong.

Then why should I provide a quote when the constant expansion of the Engineering profession by Blizzard is a prime example of technology being just for the profession?

Because there's an example of a melee Necromancer created by Blizzard. There's no evidence of technology being confined to the profession. In fact, there's evidence that contradicts that argument.

We can go round and round with this, Teriz. But you made the first claim, then you need to provide the first quote.

See above.

Yes. Because: a) it's just your opinion that it is a heavy factor; and b) we have examples of races who go against your idea, since their "faction leader" class rank as some of the lowest numbers in that given race.

Well we have that and the popularity of the Tinkerer class concept. So if people just hated Gnomes and Goblins, then it would stand to reason that the Tinkerer concept would be the least popular class concept, instead of the most popular one. That gives us some evidence that people are merely waiting for a class to come along that suits the racial lore of those races.

- - - Updated - - -

Pretty sure the Undead would disagree with you here, unless you think Sylvanas is just a Hunter or that Hunters somehow have a talent to turn them into crazed banshees.

Hunters had Black Arrow for years. Black Arrow is one of the defining abilities of the Dark Ranger, which is what Sylvanas is.

[tyrlaan]

Mainly because there's a Tinker hero in WC3 and HotS with ranged abilities that are unique from Hunters, and they can wear mail armor. Many people desire that in the next WoW class. WC3 has been the source of WoW expansion classes in the past, so that adds some legitimacy to its possibility as a future class.

Sure, but WC3 and HotS don't have an Engineering profession. I just think the overlap is significant enough that a Tinker class in WoW seems unlikely.

I agree we're due for another mail wearer though.

[Felfuhrer]

Yeah that's perfectly fine, it would need more tools to counter the times when the evasion fails, but i don't want anything like stagger, just something that increases your chance to avoid attacks, and then a minor mechanic for 'oh shit got hit'.

You have one, its called a healer.

Tanking is horrible in this game now because all tanks, sans warrior, have a retarded amount of self healing. The only tank that is even remotely what tanking should be is a warrior.

[Farath]

Proper class and spec balance > more classes.

[Teriz]

Sure, but WC3 and HotS don't have an Engineering profession. I just think the overlap is significant enough that a Tinker class in WoW seems unlikely.

And none of the abilities of the Tinker hero in WC3 or HotS appear within the profession, Hunters have Bombs and Grenades (almost got turrets) and there's zero issues, and a Tinker class wouldn't overlap with the profession because a player can be both at the same time.

Blizzard completely revamped a Warlock spec in order to bring the Demon Hunter class into WoW. The Engineering profession isn't going to stop a Tinker class from entering the game.

[AngerFork]

Hunters had Black Arrow for years. Black Arrow is one of the defining abilities of the Dark Ranger, which is what Sylvanas is.

Yeah, but one ability does not make an entire class. If that were the case, you could just as easily say we have Tinkers in the game with Rogues dropping smoke bombs. After all, they are a mechanical device used to attack on a class level, are they not?

[Saverem]

I dunno what the hell a void class would look like, but since I agree that the trajectory of the story suggests we're going to be knee deep in void, a void class makes the most sense.

Meanwhile, I don't get all the clamoring for a tinker class which feels a lot like taking a profession and turning it into a class.

A void class can look like whatever the Devs want it to be, that's the beauty of it. Void magic can heal, damage, teleport, shield, etc. They can make it to whatever they want, they can design any play style around it from cloth to plate.

[Teriz]

Yeah, but one ability does not make an entire class. If that were the case, you could just as easily say we have Tinkers in the game with Rogues dropping smoke bombs. After all, they are a mechanical device used to attack on a class level, are they not?

Except Hunters possess multiple attributes that Dark Rangers also possess (Ranged Weapons, Pets, poisons, erc.) So no, it isnt just one ability, its multiple attrubutes. Hunters and DRs share so many attributes that a Dark Ranger class would be redundant. This is why at one point Blizzard gave Hunters a talent literally called The Dark Ranger. Hunters are Rangers, and Dark Rangers are Forsaken Hunters by definition.

Rogues on the other hand have next to nothing in common with Tinkers. Tinkers pilot robots into battle, Rogues do not.

[Ielenia]

Nah, Im just noticing me trying to avoid admitting I was wrong.

FTFY. You need to tone down the projection.

Because there's an example of a melee Necromancer created by Blizzard. There's no evidence of technology being confined to the profession. In fact, there's evidence that contradicts that argument.

Yeah, sure. There's no evidence of technology being confined to the profession except all the technology being confined to the profession.

Well we have that and the popularity of the Tinkerer class concept. So if people just hated Gnomes and Goblins, then it would stand to reason that the Tinkerer concept would be the least popular class concept, instead of the most popular one. That gives us some evidence that people are merely waiting for a class to come along that suits the racial lore of those races.

First: correlation does not imply causation, Teriz. That's basic logic. Want another example of correlation? Death knights were added in Wrath of the Lich King expansion. WotLK was also the expansion that plateau'ed the subscriber count growth. What you're doing here is akin to saying that adding death knights caused the beginning of WoW's subscription decline.

Second: Tinkerer is a "popular" class concept. In any tinker threads, don't we always have the same "suspects" posting in favor of the tinker idea? And of those who are warm to the idea of the tech class, I see many, if not the majority of them want the class idea open to more than just the two least popular races in the game, implying that you can like the idea of a tech class while still dislike the two most unpopular non-allied races in the game.

- - - Updated - - -

Except Hunters possess multiple attributes that Dark Rangers also possess (Ranged Weapons, Pets, poisons, erc.) So no, it isnt just one ability, its multiple attrubutes. Hunters and DRs share so many attributes that a Dark Ranger class would be redundant. This is why at one point Blizzard gave Hunters a talent literally called The Dark Ranger.

... Really? You're citing "ranged weapons" as a restriction? Hey, we have a warrior class already, we can't have a paladin because warriors already possess multiple attributes the paladins also posses: plate armor, shield, two-handed weapons, etc.

[tyrlaan]

And none of the abilities of the Tinker hero in WC3 or HotS appear within the profession, Hunters have Bombs and Grenades (almost got turrets) and there's zero issues, and a Tinker class wouldn't overlap with the profession because a player can be both at the same time.

Blizzard completely revamped a Warlock spec in order to bring the Demon Hunter class into WoW. The Engineering profession isn't going to stop a Tinker class from entering the game.

Obviously there's no technical reason it can't be done, but thematically the overlap is pretty damn extensive.

P1: "Oh you're a Tinker? Cool, man. Does that let you have cool things like goggles and trick belts and rocket boots."
P2: "Oh no, man. I'm not an Engineer so I don't have those."

And since you brought up Warlock, I don't think you can look to that for inspiration on how they'd negotiate adding a Tinker with Engineering in the game unless they absolutely gutted Engineering. I mean the two are thematically identical. Meanwhile they needed to change one spec, and just one ability in that spec - Metamorphosis - to affect the change to make room for the DH. Yes, obviously removing Metamorphosis made for big changes to demo, but the change arguably reinforced the "class fantasy" of the demonology warlock. How would you do the same to Engineering?

A void class can look like whatever the Devs want it to be, that's the beauty of it. Void magic can heal, damage, teleport, shield, etc. They can make it to whatever they want, they can design any play style around it from cloth to plate.

Yeah true. Which actually made me think... what if they gave every class a void spec?? (and I assume some other thing for priests so they don't feel left out )

[Teriz]

FTFY. You need to tone down the projection.

Riiight.

Yeah, sure. There's no evidence of technology being confined to the profession except all the technology being confined to the profession.

And the Bombs, Grenades, and Nets within the Hunter class?

First: correlation does not imply causation, Teriz. That's basic logic. Want another example of correlation? Death knights were added in Wrath of the Lich King expansion. WotLK was also the expansion that plateau'ed the subscriber count growth. What you're doing here is akin to saying that adding death knights caused the beginning of WoW's subscription decline.

That would be evidence for an argument, and that's all I'm doing here. You wanted evidence, I'm giving you evidence.

Second: Tinkerer is a "popular" class concept. In any tinker threads, don't we always have the same "suspects" posting in favor of the tinker idea? And of those who are warm to the idea of the tech class, I see many, if not the majority of them want the class idea open to more than just the two least popular races in the game, implying that you can like the idea of a tech class while still dislike the two most unpopular non-allied races in the game.

Well if we look at the most recent class threads (this one and the "which class do you expect" thread) the Tinkerer is the clear favorite in both threads. Also people are well aware that there's a good chance that such a class would be Gnome and Goblin only, since the Tinkerer is very much a Gnome/Goblin concept.

[threads]

Except Hunters possess multiple attributes that Dark Rangers also possess (Ranged Weapons, Pets, poisons, erc.) So no, it isnt just one ability, its multiple attrubutes. Hunters and DRs share so many attributes that a Dark Ranger class would be redundant. This is why at one point Blizzard gave Hunters a talent literally called The Dark Ranger. Hunters are Rangers, and Dark Rangers are Forsaken Hunters by definition.

Rogues on the other hand have next to nothing in common with Tinkers. Tinkers pilot robots into battle, Rogues do not.

black arrow got removed in bfa dark rangers dont use pets and hunters arent raising skeletons so youre wrong. just cause you post 5000 times in tinker thread doesn't mean its popular and everyone wants them.

[Teriz]

Obviously there's no technical reason it can't be done, but thematically the overlap is pretty damn extensive.

P1: "Oh you're a Tinker? Cool, man. Does that let you have cool things like goggles and trick belts and rocket boots."
P2: "Oh no, man. I'm not an Engineer so I don't have those."

Yeah, I don't think a Tinkerer player is going to care about not having goggles and Rocket boots. If they do, they can train in the engineering profession and still play as a Tinkerer.

And since you brought up Warlock, I don't think you can look to that for inspiration on how they'd negotiate adding a Tinker with Engineering in the game unless they absolutely gutted Engineering. I mean the two are thematically identical. Meanwhile they needed to change one spec, and just one ability in that spec - Metamorphosis - to affect the change to make room for the DH. Yes, obviously removing Metamorphosis made for big changes to demo, but the change arguably reinforced the "class fantasy" of the demonology warlock. How would you do the same to Engineering?

Nah. The theme of the profession is to build items for sale at the auction house. The theme of a Tinkerer class is to utilize technology to fight monsters and support your allies in combat. A Tinkerer piloting their mech into a dungeon wouldn't interfere with an Engineer gathering scraps to make a pair of goggles.

[tyrlaan]

Yeah, I don't think a Tinkerer player is going to care about not having goggles and Rocket boots. If they do, they can train in the engineering profession and still play as a Tinkerer.

That's a bold claim my man.

Nah. The theme of the profession is to build items for sale at the auction house. The theme of a Tinkerer class is to utilize technology to fight monsters and support your allies in combat. A Tinkerer piloting their mech into a dungeon wouldn't interfere with an Engineer gathering scraps to make a pair of goggles.

And this is a ridiculous one.

I guess you just hate Engineering? That's cool I guess, but hating Engineering doesn't lay the groundwork for a reasoned justification for a Tinker. It just means you hate Engineering.


But to drive my point home a bit more about how much thematic overlap there is, Engineers already have some things they can make that are literally called Tinkers. Honestly, in TRPGs my experience is the two words are just synonyms.

[Deleted]

Sure, but WC3 and HotS don't have an Engineering profession. I just think the overlap is significant enough that a Tinker class in WoW seems unlikely.

I agree we're due for another mail wearer though.

We have enchanting and the mage class as well.

There is no overlap. All that engineering makes in BfA is belt enchants, mounts and really crappy bombs no one uses. You can't overlap when engineering is so insignificant. It should be removed and things of use rolled into another profession, imo.

[Teriz]

black arrow got removed in bfa dark rangers dont use pets and hunters arent raising skeletons so youre wrong. just cause you post 5000 times in tinker thread doesn't mean its popular and everyone wants them.

Hunters were raising skeletons up until Legion. They're pretty likely to be doing it again real soon.

[tyrlaan]

We have enchanting and the mage class as well.

There is no overlap. All that engineering makes in BfA is belt enchants, mounts and really crappy bombs no one uses. You can't overlap when engineering is so insignificant. It should be removed and things of use rolled into another profession, imo.

Wait, what does a mage do that an enchanter does?

[Teriz]

That's a bold claim my man.

What's bold about it?

And this is a ridiculous one.

I guess you just hate Engineering? That's cool I guess, but hating Engineering doesn't lay the groundwork for a reasoned justification for a Tinker. It just means you hate Engineering.

http://classic.battle.net/war3/neutr...intinker.shtml
http://i.imgur.com/r0ONPK8.jpg

That's the groundwork for the Tinker class. The profession really has nothing to do with it.

But to drive my point home a bit more about how much thematic overlap there is, Engineers already have some things they can make that are literally called Tinkers. Honestly, in TRPGs my experience is the two words are just synonyms.

So is Enchanter and Mage.

[Mellrod]

Problem with Tinker is that they'll suffer from same race limitations as DHs did. They'll probably be limited to like 2 races per faction. Gnomes and Junker Gnomes for Alliance and Goblins and...what other Horde class can be Tinkers? Maybe Vulpera?

Not a lot of tech savvy classes in WoW, it's really only Goblins and Gnomes, anything else would be stretching it.

That's not entirely true:

1. Dwarves are widely known for their ingenuity as well (in WoW, as well as virtually every fantasy story), having built massive mountain fortress-cities of mechanical and architectural prowess, large golems of steel and iron, large drills that allow them to tunnel anywhere they want in the world, many different types of tank-like siege weapons used in the Alliance military even in present day Azeroth, ornate, yet powerful forms of gunnery, and so much more. In WC3 some of their units were engineers, others piloted Dwarven Flying Machines, etc. Not to mention their direct ties to the Titans & Titankeepers, who posses technology far more advanced than virtually any mortal race so far, having originally created Dwarves (among a few other races) within their advanced facilities of the Halls of Stone/Lightning, as well as Ulduar.

2. Draenei are also tech-savy. They posses advanced alien technology based on crystalline structure, often used to store energy or data. They live in entire space ships and are more than capable of interstellar travel. They too have created everything from advanced light-based weapons and armor, to massive mechanical golems they use in their military, guard, and sometimes as vessels for the souls of their fallen. They have an entire branch of government devoted to engineering, represented on their Council of Exarchs, called the Artificer.

3. Blackrock Orcs, even the original ones in MU (non-WoD), have shown their skill with smithing and the forge. While there isn't much more said about MU Blackrocks than this, the AU WoD ones have definitely shown their ability to create massive, mechanical monstrosities of war and instruments of death. Yes, while the original blueprints and plans came from a Goblin, by WoD's time, the Blackrock Orcs made the technology their own, and it's safe to assume that those orcs would be even more tech-savvy now, not even needing the help of any Goblins. Since Blackrocks exist as part of the mag'har allied race, it's not impossible for them to be tinkers as well.

4. Humans. While as a race, they don't particularly have a huge profile when it comes to engineering, they are humans: the most basic race in almost any fantasy. They're just us. What they have is potential to be almost anything in the lore that humans can be in real life (or at least as far as the middle ages are concerned in a fantasy like WoW), so human tinkers are about as far out-of-reach as human hunters were and human druids are (in other words, it's not far-fetched at all).

5. Forsaken. While most of their technology is centered more around Alchemy, when you look at Forsaken post-cata settlements that harness electricity and pump their alchemy around, surrounded by their many different siege vehicles, you can see their potential as well. Since most of the forsaken are humans, they also have that same flexibility to a degree, but what's more is that the Scourge had also incorporated some small amount of technology into their ranks. This mostly took the form of their plague-launchers and other siege weapons, however, you could also consider their Saronite necropolises to an extent.

Anyways, I don't think race stereotypes are really a limitation for classes anymore. Ever since Cataclysm's class-race combos, Blizzard has shown they can create ways to make it work. (Which should be obvious anyway, they are the storytellers here.) They could easily create a faction of tinkers that are made-up of several races. Just because gnomes and goblins are the poster-boys of mechanics doesn't mean other races are somehow unable to invent technology. If that were the case, Engineering would be a gnome/dwarf/goblin-exclusive profession. But instead, i'm able to be an engineer as a night elf druid as much as I am on a gnome rogue or hunter.

[nyc81991]

While I would like to see both a Void based class and also Tinkerer, whatever we get next needs to wear Mail armor.