In other words, there is no such DK ability.
Thank you.
Yes, because Black Arrow was a different ability than Raise Dead even in WC3.But it was fine to you for hunters to have an ability "with a different name that does the same thing": raising an undead minion? (I.E. Black Arrow)
Please link me to these abilities on wowhead.Give the druid an ability to temporarily manifest his spirit animal patron separate from themselves, which would cause them to revert to humanoid form for the duration of the ability. There's your "eject" and "park".
Teaching someone to use poison.... We talking about Necromancers or Rogues here?Except Stratholme was infected with poisoned grain. We also have a necromacer school teaching young necromancers alchemy. We also have plague cauldrons that are created through alchemy. It's not headcanon. It's a direct, in-game lore connection.
And I'm telling you that abilities are drawn from class concepts, not WC3 abilities.
No, it's not: it does, according to your logic, the "exact same thing": raise an undead minion.Yes, because Black Arrow was a different ability than Raise Dead even in WC3.
On top of that: the rogue's Evasion ability did the exact same thing the demon hunter's ability of the same name did: dodge. But when DHs became playable, they gained a new ability with a different name, but similar functionality: Blur.
Except I never said those abilities exist, but could be abilities given to the druid class.Please link me to these abilities on wowhead.
Necromancers, of course. Unless you're going to say rogues are frail cloth-wearing spellcasters that cast spells from range, and is going ot say Scholomance, a place described in the lore as a necromancer school, teaches rogues, instead?Teaching someone to use poison.... We talking about Necromancers or Rogues here?
Last edited by Ielenia; 2019-10-21 at 04:41 PM.
I wanted to add...
...and why humans could not be tinkers?
They are too dumb?
Looks that races for tinkers here are partial, but whatever floats the boat.
I mean, we can agree to disagree if you want, but what I was trying to do is get a handle on your line of thought. Because I really don't understand why it's cool for you to want a class concept to exist and continually denying others their class concept. Why is it that what other people feel makes their character fantasy work is irrelevant but what makes your character fantasy is sacrosanct?
Okay, just so we’re clear, I don’t agree with the detractors either.
Let’s be real here, people. Tinkers/Mech Pilots, Dark Rangers, Necromancers, any of them could be added to the game and they’d be fine, make sense, and work with lore.
Anyone who says one is possible but the others are stupid is, themselves, a goddamned putz.
Last edited by Jetstream; 2019-10-21 at 05:45 PM.
I mean, generally the idea is that they're not the most suited, because they are too dumb. That doesn't mean that it's not totally possible they get the option. It mostly depends on how much Blizzard incorporates the design of technology into the concept versus the use of it. I mean, ogres can push buttons, if that's all it is then basically anyone can be a tinker.
So reductive arguments are only allowed when they support your views. Thanks for clarifying.
Damn, that's a hell of a statement right there.
Good luck. I'd love to see an answer to this as well. My attempts so far have been blatantly disregarded. I'll be impressed if you get a response.
- - - Updated - - -
Spot on. DK is clearly inspired by the Lich King and WC3 Death Knights (which are generic Lich Kings really). Necromancers are a completely different thing.
Remember that argument from Teriz: "you're still summoning an undead minion when there's another class that summons an undead minion"... and yet he's completely fine with the existence of the Black Arrow ability... which summons an undead minion.
- - - Updated - - -
I am 100% opposed to the entire idea of "class skins", so, no, I'm not fine with the idea of necromancers being a class skin for Warlocks.
Class skins are a waste of potential class concepts.
Right, they're not the most suited because there are other races that are smarter. I'm not suggesting that they're actually incapable, just that they're not the most capable. We've had that discussion already, right? I'm not trying to mislead anyone here, and I don't think that's a dumb statement, either. It's just true. I even put most in italics from the start, what do you want from me? D:
But they're not matching the class fantasy/character concept that people want, which is what they are telling you. It's like them saying you can play a Tinker with Gnome + Hunter + Mechanimal Pet + Engineering.
You reject that because it doesn't check all the boxes of what a Tinker is to you. They reject your suggestions because it doesn't represent what the class concept is to them.
Looks like a lot of people are discrediting Jericho's leaks on the basis of his most recent 'Blizz is threatening legal action' comments.
Razorpax on the other hand is confirming a Dragon class immediately, Tinker class eventually. I'm a bit torn with this because I'd love this to happen, I'm 100% behind the Dragonsworn concept, but... I don't know if I can handle another 4 years of people pining for Tinkers.
That's basically my take, too. I think people have a pretty well developed idea of what a tinker looks like, such that not being able to play one starts to seem like something is missing. At least it does for me. I'd like to see classes come more frequently in general, though.