Sadly looking like Tinkers could become a reality.

[Ielenia]

And that would be a rather huge retcon, since Blizzard has always made it clear that Sylvanas' current state is a unique process, and that she is definitely not your typical Dark Ranger due to being part Banshee. Again, Death Knights getting Frost abilities from the Lich, and an expansion of their Vampiric abilities in WC3 wasn't a retcon, it was an expansion, since Blizzard long established that necromancy is part of the DK's abilities.

And Arthas's transformation into the Lich King was just as unique, if not more so, due to possessing Frostmourne, an unique sword that can consume the souls of the ones it kills, and the Helm of Domination, also an unique artifact, both possessing the soul of Ner'zhul.

And yet we still had death knights.

We do; The corpses of fallen Rangers.

We didn't need paladin corpses for death knights, then it stands to reason we don't need the dark rangers to be risen from dead hunters/rangers.

Dark Rangers aren't Death Knights. WoW has established that Dark Rangers are risen Rangers hence why they're all elves save for Nathanos (who was a Human trained by elven rangers).

And lore had established that death knights were paladins who fell into bitterness and disgrace. Meaning: all humans. Until the Lich King came along and made new batches of death knights.

Hell, even the Wrath of the Lich King's announcement trailer depicted a paladin falling into "death knight-ness".

Except arguing that you know what a fictional character is thinking or planning is exactly that, and not worth arguing over.

Except I never argued I know what she's thinking? I'm just giving potential explanations to what she's doing and why she's reacting the way she is.

Sylvanas' story ending doesn't mean she dies at the end.

Except you and I both know Sylvanas won't stop until she's dead.

And all three just happened to be the lore figures of each class introduced in those expansions.

And, like I said, I can easily argue coincidence.

If Dark Rangers are the next class and they're based on her, she has to be.

False. You're only interpreting perceived trends as "hard rules".

[Dragtox]

dark iron dwarf, lightforged draenei, gnome, mechagnome and dwarf use alot machines pretty much perfect tinker class + can get their race based tinker machine like druid forms and shaman totems
undead, orc, goblin, mag'har orc and maby blood elf those race works well for tinker if i look around blizzard story ingame to see what machine the diffrent races builded

but to add here no dark ranger = death knight hunter mix
it can even be void ranger with alleria windrunner

funny enof warlock is not looking like a necromancer in abilitys anymore after all the changes so they can easy make necromancer a class
if you can see necromancer then you have not watched close to all diffrent stuff necromancer can be in wotlk and later mobs plauge doctor/alchemist is 1 maby even healing spec
i dont mind a new dot based spec aswell as to be said check abit more deeper in to possible classes in the wow lore with all the void stuff you seen in bfa you can easy see a void class as a possible thing even tho we got shadow priest

Rouge got Warden based abilitys

who knows maby they do a 4th spec instead of new class but wuld prefer new class and maby sub class with 1 spec so that we may get more class options to lvl up with all the new allied races we get

final point the way classes looks right now in bfa is really simlair rouge feel simlair to demon hunter depending on attack move
survival hunter feels like bear form and dont really feel like it has anything to do with survival anymore

paladin got rouge element while it lost spells to feel more boring....

alot to be criticized on classes in bfa

just to add in beast master evolution does not really show any beast mastery it is just you shouting at a pet while shooting size of pet does not matter

survival needs a rework equip both ranged and meele weapon while BM is meele

shaman totem feels pointless and needs to have some new changes

frost dk still makes sense to be tank making frost armor etc to block i dont care if that gives 2 tank spec... priest got 2 healing spec

[protip]

I hadn’t seen the T&E vid about tinkers, but it gives a pretty good explanation of the situation. I see this like the Zandalari paladin situation: there are too many recent developments that put combat with tech front and center in the story for it to be coincidence. It’s pretty clearly a setup for tinkers, even having spec roles demonstrated in the island expeditions, new heroes with the same combat styles rise in prominence, a zone dedicated to technology, and a constant presence in the war campaign. I don’t mind seeing a dark ranger or necromancer class once we’ve explored death as a force a bit more, but tinkers are ready to go for 9.0.

[Triceron]

Nope, because again, Shadow Shot isn't a HotS or WC3 ability for either Dark Rangers or Shadow Hunters.

Seriously, this isnt that conplicated.

And the Dark Rangers that have Wailing Arrow? Thats from HotS.

[BB8]

Personally I would prefer another magic user blood/necro/sorcery/witchcraft.
Lets wait until blizzcon and then wait that if a Tinker really comes, what they can do. Maybe its very nice.

[ercarp]

"Sadly"? Nice bait. No one has ever seriously considered Wardens as a possible class. They're more of a faction than anything else.

The two main fan favorites have always been Tinkers and Necromancers. The former has more room for being unique than the latter considering Necromancers are just Caster DKs.

[protip]

God I hope not

I would much rather they incorporate any 'tinkerer' ideas for a rehaul of the engineering profession, and then do the same level of 'revamp' for all the other major professions so that they are actually good and a big part of the game. Hell maybe choosing your professions could be an actual choice again for gameplay and playstyle preferences.

Just tinker, not tinkerer. Anyway, tinkers are clearly being set up as a combat style, which implies a class. Blacksmithing, for example, doesn't have that same sort of outlet. Even if all professions did translate well into a combat style, Blizzard isn't going to try to balance 12 classes with however many combat perks for professions all over again. That went away a long time ago.

[Teriz]

And Arthas's transformation into the Lich King was just as unique, if not more so, due to possessing Frostmourne, an unique sword that can consume the souls of the ones it kills, and the Helm of Domination, also an unique artifact, both possessing the soul of Ner'zhul.

And yet we still had death knights.

And when Arthas turned, three others were raised from the dead and became DKs, and all of them could use Necromancy. There was also the four horsemen in Naxx, and they could perform necromancy as well. Do you see the pattern there? Blizzard established pretty early on that you could produce multiple DKs with Necromantic abilities.

They didn't do that with Dark Rangers. With Dark Rangers all they established was that they're undead hunters raised by Sylvanas.

We didn't need paladin corpses for death knights, then it stands to reason we don't need the dark rangers to be risen from dead hunters/rangers.

Because Blizzard established early on that not all DK were former Paladins. Baron Rivendare for example wasn't a Paladin, he was just a greedy rich guy. That was established in Vanilla WoW, way before DKs entered as a class.

Where did Blizzard ever establish that a non-ranger could be raised as a Dark Ranger? Do you have any examples?

And lore had established that death knights were paladins who fell into bitterness and disgrace. Meaning: all humans. Until the Lich King came along and made new batches of death knights.

Hell, even the Wrath of the Lich King's announcement trailer depicted a paladin falling into "death knight-ness".

Again see Baron Rivendare. Also I'm pretty sure one of the first DKs with Arthas was a Dwarf.

Except I never argued I know what she's thinking? I'm just giving potential explanations to what she's doing and why she's reacting the way she is.

And that's headcanon.

Except you and I both know Sylvanas won't stop until she's dead.

And that's more headcanon.

And, like I said, I can easily argue coincidence.


False. You're only interpreting perceived trends as "hard rules".

Considering that new classes have followed the theme of their expansion, their lore character graces the cover of said expansion, and that lore character has always played a huge role in that expansion, it would be quite a change to just drop off Dark Rangers in the next expansion without their lore character being front and center.

Just like she is front and center in THIS expansion. I'm sure that fans who enjoy pleasuring themselves to pictures of undead elves would be quite happy to have
2 back to back expansions focused on Sylvanas, but I don't think the rest of the playerbase would be all that interested.

- - - Updated - - -

Because talking cows are much cooler than talking foxes right?

- - - Updated - - -



Meh, I mean you have a valid point, but I just can't shake the feeling that if they really do go with tinkerer class it will be something I just find boring and they will gut the engi profession because of it.

Engineering wouldn't be touched by a tech-based class. Professions and classes serve two totally different purposes and they don't compete with each other.

- - - Updated - - -

And the Dark Rangers that have Wailing Arrow? Thats from HotS.

Okay, so that's one indicator of a potential Dark Ranger class.

[protip]

I can very easily see a world where Blizz gets rid of nitro boots, or the slow fall, or the portals, etc from engineering in favor of giving them to the tinkerer as ''abilities''.

I hope I'm very much wrong, but it really wouldn't surprise me.

I'd expect tinkers to get some similar abilities, but I don't see any reason to remove them from engineering. For example, an engineer might have nitro boosts and goblin gliders, while a tinker could ride a rocket for a few seconds and serves the purpose of both. Otherwise, tinkers could even have a reduced cooldown on engineering items, and the restriction on using those items in raids could be lifted by a class passive. It's certainly possible that they would remove engineering perks to give them to a tinker class, but I'd see that as an abject failure, because I just don't see any need to reuse the exact same concepts. The applications of technology in a fantasy universe like Warcraft's are literally endless, so why push the most popular profession aside for it?

[Teriz]

I can very easily see a world where Blizz gets rid of nitro boots, or the slow fall, or the portals, etc from engineering in favor of giving them to the tinkerer as ''abilities''.

I hope I'm very much wrong, but it really wouldn't surprise me.

Why would they do that? The purpose of those Engineering items is to give classes who don't have those abilities the ability to teleport or to slow fall. A Tinker getting a wormhole or slow fall ability doesn't change the fact that a Paladin will purchase a wormhole generator or Goblin Glider from an engineer.

[Dragtox]

its wierd when it starting to be obvious what class that can work people keep compare it to old...
as to be said sub classes with 1 spec is something blizzard should do it works with dark ranger, shadow hunter and void ranger..

tinker got alot potential a new mail user hopefully
spec 1 can be turret based... spec 2 a tank spec in machine/robot spec 3 a dps ranged spec in machine/robot and yes i can see a healing spec thing aswell but it has to be shield based but we got monk, druid and paladin with all roles..

necromancer spec 1 a new spec based around dots becus why not warlock changed all their ability so much that it is not even feeling like a necromancer only their older class sets are kinda... spec 2 can easy be based around Professor Putricide in icecrown and we now know voodo magic is part necromancer so wuld say healing spec works fine even a necromancer alchemist spec works with necromancer so please get out of here with closed minded stuff necromancer is dk but caster do be research and i did not say necromancer needed any buts becus they dont but maby in a healing spec

i want blademaster as a class but i know it is a monk so ofc i wuld rather have it as a new spec on monk


will add in the changes bfa did to marksman is probly better on dark ranger like the rapid fire change while barrage is probly better on Tinker marksman should have bounce shot or pierce shot as main aoe
yes the fast based ability on marksman belongs in ranger/dark ranger becus marksman is suppose to be a slow heavy hit spec


i dont think many mind a dragon based class there is alot creative way to make that work but it will most likly have some simlair stuff to druid on form tf but atlaset dragons are not bear form and cat form wich meens they get abit more magical

just to add in i am still not sure if there is any lore that says that mage cant be a mix between mage and warrior/hunter arcana based ranged bow
fire based meele attack then the challenge do magic reach something different then frost but i guess arcana based meele wuld be intresting aswell blink meele attack and arcane slash but this is part is me thinking abut possbiltys that may not work i just dont have found any lore that says it is not possible yet

there is people that made alot better ideas then me even on tinker if you check around forum

[Ielenia]

And when Arthas turned, three others were raised from the dead and became DKs, and all of them could use Necromancy. There was also the four horsemen in Naxx, and they could perform necromancy as well. Do you see the pattern there? Blizzard established pretty early on that you could produce multiple DKs with Necromantic abilities.

They didn't do that with Dark Rangers. With Dark Rangers all they established was that they're undead hunters raised by Sylvanas.

You're moving the goalposts. Your original arguments it that "we don't see dark rangers with banshee powers". Which is a fine argument, on it's own. But then I countered by reminding you that we did not have death knights using frost and blood powers before the Wrath expansion. Only "pure" necromancy (i.e. unholy). But after death knights became a playable class, they gained new abilities that were retroactively given to them, and the same would likely happen to dark rangers if/when they became playable.

Because Blizzard established early on that not all DK were former Paladins. Baron Rivendare for example wasn't a Paladin, he was just a greedy rich guy. That was established in Vanilla WoW, way before DKs entered as a class.

Where did Blizzard ever establish that a non-ranger could be raised as a Dark Ranger? Do you have any examples?

It should be also noted that it was never stated that Baron Rivendare was NEVER a paladin, either. It's not like a paladin can't be "evil". See: Scarlet Crusade.

On top of that: Sira Moonwarden. She was a warden before being raised into undeath, and if "dark warden" is used as a spec for the dark ranger class... wouldn't that fit your bill? "non-rangers being raised as dark rangers"?

Again see Baron Rivendare. Also I'm pretty sure one of the first DKs with Arthas was a Dwarf.

Rivendare was never said to not be a paladin. And you're thinking of Muradin. Muradin was never turned into a death knight.

And that's headcanon.

And that's more headcanon.

Which is fine and not a bad thing, especially since it's based on a heavy load in-game examples. Also, just keep in mind your "headcanon" criticisms next time you're making pro-arguments regarding your class concepts. It's all I'll say.

Considering that new classes have followed the theme of their expansion, their lore character graces the cover of said expansion, and that lore character has always played a huge role in that expansion, it would be quite a change to just drop off Dark Rangers in the next expansion without their lore character being front and center.

Except Chen Stormstout. His role in Mists of Pandaria was pretty negligible, if not meaningless. Chen barely didn't do anything in all in Pandaria. He never came along with us in any of the raids. During the Battle for Barrens patch all he did was look pretty in the rebel encampment. Lorewalker Cho had much bigger role in the Mists of Pandaria than Chen did.

Just like she is front and center in THIS expansion. I'm sure that fans who enjoy pleasuring themselves to pictures of undead elves would be quite happy to have 2 back to back expansions focused on Sylvanas, but I don't think the rest of the playerbase would be all that interested.

Remember kids: when you're out of arguments, use personal attacks. Always works like a charm~ (/s)

- - - Updated - - -

Why would they do that? The purpose of those Engineering items is to give classes who don't have those abilities the ability to teleport or to slow fall. A Tinker getting a wormhole or slow fall ability doesn't change the fact that a Paladin will purchase a wormhole generator or Goblin Glider from an engineer.

Wormholes, nitro boosts, and many of engineering items are engineer-only.

[Teriz]

You're moving the goalposts. Your original arguments it that "we don't see dark rangers with banshee powers". Which is a fine argument, on it's own. But then I countered by reminding you that we did not have death knights using frost and blood powers before the Wrath expansion. Only "pure" necromancy (i.e. unholy). But after death knights became a playable class, they gained new abilities that were retroactively given to them, and the same would likely happen to dark rangers if/when they became playable.

Lichs don't use Necromancy? Draining life from others to empower yourself isnt Necromancy?

It should be also noted that it was never stated that Baron Rivendare was NEVER a paladin, either. It's not like a paladin can't be "evil". See: Scarlet Crusade.

Read his bio. He isnt a Paladin.

On top of that: Sira Moonwarden. She was a warden before being raised into undeath, and if "dark warden" is used as a spec for the dark ranger class... wouldn't that fit your bill? "non-rangers being raised as dark rangers"?

I'm not seeing how that helps your case. She was a Warden BEFORE getting risen by Sylvanas.

Rivendare was never said to not be a paladin. And you're thinking of Muradin. Muradin was never turned into a death knight.

Read Rivendare's bio. He was never a Paladin.

Except Chen Stormstout. His role in Mists of Pandaria was pretty negligible, if not meaningless. Chen barely didn't do anything in all in Pandaria. He never came along with us in any of the raids. During the Battle for Barrens patch all he did was look pretty in the rebel encampment. Lorewalker Cho had much bigger role in the Mists of Pandaria than Chen did.

In your opinion. The simple fact is that Chen participated in multiple quests, scenarios, and adventures. You viewing that participation as meaningless is meaningless.

Remember kids: when you're out of arguments, use personal attacks. Always works like a charm~ (/s)

Is there another group of people clamoring for yet another expansion of Sylvanas?

[Buliwyf the Omen]

Tbh I would be shocked if we get something like DR/Necro/Shadow Hunter before the last interesting and unique WC3 Hero.

Seems like we are gonna get easily over 100k+ thread views and 1k+ comments before BlizzCon, and people say this class is not wanted nor a fan favorite with all the discussion it gets.

Or have we seen Necromancers and Dark Ranger in a similiar light?

[matrix123mko]

How would tinker fit a void themed expansion such as shadowlands. It makes as much sense as fire in a vacuum.

Shadowlands are as void-themed as Emerald Dream is arcane.

[Teriz]

How would tinker fit a void themed expansion such as shadowlands. It makes as much sense as fire in a vacuum.

This is a void (and Death) themed expansion. I would be amazed if the next one encompasses either of those themes.

Honestly, I see a "curveball" expansion ala MoP on the horizon.

[Usernameforforums]

Shadowlands are as void-themed as Emerald Dream is arcane.

Wasn’t the leak showing nyalotha in it or some shit? That’s where I interpreted void from. Doesn’t matter though. That Shadowlands leak is 100% fake now with 8.3. Now we could get a official shadowlands announcement but the leak is now fake.

[Swnem]

Wasn’t the leak showing nyalotha in it or some shit? That’s where I interpreted void from. Doesn’t matter though. That Shadowlands leak is 100% fake now with 8.3. Now we could get a official shadowlands announcement but the leak is now fake.

If Ny'alotha is already a raid in 8.3, what is the motivator to go to the shadowlands? Besides, i very much doubt that is a thing now that it's proven fake. There's no way that Blizz would make a whole expansion in the shadowlands when they didn't for the emerald dream cause it was too samey.

I'm with Teriz. A curveball is coming our way. Shadowlands is content for a patch, not an expansion.

[Usernameforforums]

This is a void (and Death) themed expansion. I would be amazed if the next one encompasses either of those themes.

Honestly, I see a "curveball" expansion ala MoP on the horizon.

Actually, I do too. And I think the dragon isles is gonna be that expansion. It’s been a while since we had dragon lore so i think it’s perfect and with wrathion showin up, he could lead us there.

[Teriz]

Actually, I do too. And I think the dragon isles is gonna be that expansion. It’s been a while since we had dragon lore so i think it’s perfect and with wrathion showin up, he could lead us there.

We've already had a dragon expansion, and Wrathion's purpose in BFA is to be a raid boss, and to create a potion to help us fight Nzoth.