1. #2681
    Merely a Setback Teriz's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Soul of Azeroth
    Posts
    29,822
    Quote Originally Posted by jellmoo View Post
    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.
    I don't see how what someone "wants" is relevant to the fact that their wanted class already exists in the lineup. For example, you can say you want a Shadow Hunter, but that doesn't change the fact that the SH concept was incorporated into the Shaman class.

  2. #2682
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    I don't see how what someone "wants" is relevant to the fact that their wanted class already exists in the lineup. For example, you can say you want a Shadow Hunter, but that doesn't change the fact that the SH concept was incorporated into the Shaman class.
    Because what they want isn't in the game? Because the class concept or fantasy cannot be accurately accomplished by existing classes. The same way you feel that the Tinker concept cannot be accurately accomplished by existing classes.

  3. #2683
    Merely a Setback Teriz's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Soul of Azeroth
    Posts
    29,822
    Quote Originally Posted by jellmoo View Post
    Because what they want isn't in the game? Because the class concept or fantasy cannot be accurately accomplished by existing classes. The same way you feel that the Tinker concept cannot be accurately accomplished by existing classes.
    Saying the DK isnt a Necromancer for example because it's a hybrid instead of a pure spell caster isnt the same as the class lineup completely lacking a technology class.

  4. #2684
    Quote Originally Posted by protip View Post
    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.
    TBH, people have a well developed idea of what Necromancers, Bards, Dark Rangers, Wardens and Dragonsworn would look like too. It's just that not everyone shares these ideas. Same applies with Tinkers, and what people have in mind when we say it.

    All class ideas are taken with a grain of salt. When someone points out X can't happen or Y isn't possible, it really is meaningless because in the eyes of Blizzard's devs, they can make it work. If this means taking something out of a class and repurposing it, or renaming an existing ability just to avoid conflicts, or even just making something up completely out of the blue, it'll all happen for the purpose of creating a new identity.

    To me, Tinker is just another in the line of many potential classes. They don't even all need to be drawn from WC3 as a source, considering Runemaster was on the shortlist in Wrath, and that's a concept that never appeared in Warcraft before. No one really knows what a Runemaster would play like, but Blizzard took the concept far enough to build an entire resource system around, and appropriately it matched what they had settled for the Death Knight. I think when it comes to what people feel is 'missing' from the game is just a matter of perception. Truth be told, as far as RPG archetypes go, we are definitely missing a Bard class; and a lot of people really want this class to be a thing, but I personally wouldn't consider it a very 'Warcraft' class concept unless it was tied to another existing archetype.

  5. #2685
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    Saying the DK isnt a Necromancer for example because it's a hybrid instead of a pure spell caster isnt the same as the class lineup completely lacking a technology class.
    I'm not saying that at all though. I'm saying that we have multiple class fantasies/archetypes that can't be satisfied by the classes as they exist. At the end of the day the situation is the same: People want to play a character concept they currently cannot play.

  6. #2686
    We already have tinkers ingame. it's called engineering.

  7. #2687
    Merely a Setback Teriz's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Soul of Azeroth
    Posts
    29,822
    Quote Originally Posted by Triceron View Post
    TBH, people have a well developed idea of what Necromancers, Bards, Dark Rangers, Wardens and Dragonsworn would look like too. It's just that not everyone shares these ideas. Same applies with Tinkers, and what people have in mind when we say it.

    All class ideas are taken with a grain of salt. When someone points out X can't happen or Y isn't possible, it really is meaningless because in the eyes of Blizzard's devs, they can make it work. If this means taking something out of a class and repurposing it, or renaming an existing ability just to avoid conflicts, or even just making something up completely out of the blue, it'll all happen for the purpose of creating a new identity.

    To me, Tinker is just another in the line of many potential classes. They don't even all need to be drawn from WC3 as a source, considering Runemaster was on the shortlist in Wrath, and that's a concept that never appeared in Warcraft before. No one really knows what a Runemaster would play like, but Blizzard took the concept far enough to build an entire resource system around, and appropriately it matched what they had settled for the Death Knight. I think when it comes to what people feel is 'missing' from the game is just a matter of perception. Truth be told, as far as RPG archetypes go, we are definitely missing a Bard class; and a lot of people really want this class to be a thing, but I personally wouldn't consider it a very 'Warcraft' class concept unless it was tied to another existing archetype.
    Blizzard typically telegraphs their future classes. A Dragonsworn class would be a pretty huge departure from how they typically release classes.

  8. #2688
    Scarab Lord Polybius's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Under Your Bed
    Posts
    4,405
    Quote Originally Posted by Triceron View Post
    TBH, people have a well developed idea of what Necromancers, Bards, Dark Rangers, Wardens and Dragonsworn would look like too. It's just that not everyone shares these ideas. Same applies with Tinkers, and what people have in mind when we say it.

    All class ideas are taken with a grain of salt. When someone points out X can't happen or Y isn't possible, it really is meaningless because in the eyes of Blizzard's devs, they can make it work. If this means taking something out of a class and repurposing it, or renaming an existing ability just to avoid conflicts, or even just making something up completely out of the blue, it'll all happen for the purpose of creating a new identity.

    To me, Tinker is just another in the line of many potential classes. They don't even all need to be drawn from WC3 as a source, considering Runemaster was on the shortlist in Wrath, and that's a concept that never appeared in Warcraft before. No one really knows what a Runemaster would play like, but Blizzard took the concept far enough to build an entire resource system around, and appropriately it matched what they had settled for the Death Knight. I think when it comes to what people feel is 'missing' from the game is just a matter of perception. Truth be told, as far as RPG archetypes go, we are definitely missing a Bard class; and a lot of people really want this class to be a thing, but I personally wouldn't consider it a very 'Warcraft' class concept unless it was tied to another existing archetype.
    Here's hoping they've figured out classes and bring in at least 2 new ones. There have been "leaks" mentioning classes as the new Allied Races. They can cut down on time depruning by drawing from previous class iterations.

  9. #2689
    Quote Originally Posted by Triceron View Post
    TBH, people have a well developed idea of what Necromancers, Bards, Dark Rangers, Wardens and Dragonsworn would look like too. It's just that not everyone shares these ideas. Same applies with Tinkers, and what people have in mind when we say it.

    All class ideas are taken with a grain of salt. When someone points out X can't happen or Y isn't possible, it really is meaningless because in the eyes of Blizzard's devs, they can make it work. If this means taking something out of a class and repurposing it, or renaming an existing ability just to avoid conflicts, or even just making something up completely out of the blue, it'll all happen for the purpose of creating a new identity.

    To me, Tinker is just another in the line of many potential classes. They don't even all need to be drawn from WC3 as a source, considering Runemaster was on the shortlist in Wrath, and that's a concept that never appeared in Warcraft before. No one really knows what a Runemaster would play like, but Blizzard took the concept far enough to build an entire resource system around, and appropriately it matched what they had settled for the Death Knight. I think when it comes to what people feel is 'missing' from the game is just a matter of perception. Truth be told, as far as RPG archetypes go, we are definitely missing a Bard class; and a lot of people really want this class to be a thing, but I personally wouldn't consider it a very 'Warcraft' class concept unless it was tied to another existing archetype.
    the bard thing it kinda depends aswell i am not sure it is a good idea to base it on other bards from other mmorpg concepts
    more clever to go into technology to help make sound wave based weapon and you know i think people wuld prefer it to go the direction of rock guitar
    ofc they can also base guitar string based attack with the pandaria stuff wich is maby for the better so that ranger or wich version of ranger can be a class

  10. #2690
    Quote Originally Posted by Triceron View Post
    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.
    I messaged him about the class theme and told me it will be a "dragon knight" closer to the Titans than anything. Nothing too othewordly or Shadow/Void based. To me, that sounds very straightforward and boring.

  11. #2691
    Scarab Lord Polybius's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Under Your Bed
    Posts
    4,405
    Quote Originally Posted by Ielenia View Post
    Because Teriz is convinced that a tech theme inherently brings "exclusive gameplay" options, and I'm trying to get it through to him that this is not the case.
    Both can. It's just a matter of creativity, which a lot of posters have forgotten because they don't pay attention to their in-game surroundings. Class concepts on forums for Tinker and Necro are inspired by preexisting assets and data.

  12. #2692
    Merely a Setback Teriz's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Soul of Azeroth
    Posts
    29,822
    Quote Originally Posted by deviantcultist View Post
    I messaged him about the class theme and told me it will be a "dragon knight" closer to the Titans than anything. Nothing too othewordly or Shadow/Void based. To me, that sounds very straightforward and boring.
    It also sounds like nonsense, because itd be another 2 spec tank/dps melee class.

  13. #2693
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    Blizzard typically telegraphs their future classes. A Dragonsworn class would be a pretty huge departure from how they typically release classes.
    No it wouldn't.

    And no, Blizzard doesn't typically telegraph. If that were true, we would have known about Monks and Demon Hunters well before announcement. If anything, you have been a proponent of Tinker being telegraphed well before Legion, and that didn't turn out at all.

    What reason would you have to believe anything is telegraphed, and that a Dragon-based class is not being hinted at? You can draw pretty much any conclusion based on what we've seen so far in all of WoW. This includes all the Wrathion content and the upcoming Dragon Isles, which haven't been featured in BFA but was mentioned by name as future content.

  14. #2694
    The Unstoppable Force Ielenia's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Brazil
    Posts
    21,877
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    Blizzard typically telegraphs their future classes. A Dragonsworn class would be a pretty huge departure from how they typically release classes.
    There were zero "telegraphs" about a monk class during Cataclysm. The pre-MoP event, the bombing of Theramore, also did not "telegraph" anything about the class.
    "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...

  15. #2695
    Quote Originally Posted by deviantcultist View Post
    I messaged him about the class theme and told me it will be a "dragon knight" closer to the Titans than anything. Nothing too othewordly or Shadow/Void based. To me, that sounds very straightforward and boring.
    Well it all depends on how Blizzard designs the class.

    TBH a lot of WoW's classes sounded boring to me, until I delved into their gameplay and figured out how they actually work.

    When I played WoW open beta back in 2004, I first played a Rogue and I really enjoyed the class and gameplay. Sneaking around doing awesome DPS, it was great. I then rolled my least-favourite class option, the Druid, just to see how the Rogue gameplay would compare to something I don't like. Druid happened to end up being my main and favoured class out of all classes in WOW, utterly squashing all of my first impressions of this class being nothing more than a boring tree-hugging nature-boy.
    Last edited by Triceron; 2019-10-21 at 07:59 PM.

  16. #2696
    The Unstoppable Force Ielenia's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Brazil
    Posts
    21,877
    Quote Originally Posted by Polybius View Post
    It's just a matter of creativity,
    Exactly. No theme brings "exclusive gameplay" or "exclusive mechanics".
    "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...

  17. #2697
    Merely a Setback Teriz's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Soul of Azeroth
    Posts
    29,822
    Quote Originally Posted by Ielenia View Post
    There were zero "telegraphs" about a monk class during Cataclysm. The pre-MoP event, the bombing of Theramore, also did not "telegraph" anything about the class.
    https://www.wowhead.com/item=49665/pandaren-monk

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Triceron View Post
    No it wouldn't.

    And no, Blizzard doesn't typically telegraph. If that were true, we would have known about Monks and Demon Hunters well before announcement. If anything, you have been a proponent of Tinker being telegraphed well before Legion, and that didn't turn out at all.

    What reason would you have to believe anything is telegraphed, and that a Dragon-based class is not being hinted at? You can draw pretty much any conclusion based on what we've seen so far in all of WoW. This includes all the Wrathion content and the upcoming Dragon Isles, which haven't been featured in BFA but was mentioned by name as future content.
    https://www.wowhead.com/item=49665/pandaren-monk

    https://wowwiki.fandom.com/wiki/Black_Temple

    And of course the WC3 hero units.

  18. #2698
    Err.....

    What is this even?

    If I said Black Temple 4 years ago, I think you would have still stuck to your '5 reasons Demon Hunters will not be playable'.

  19. #2699
    Merely a Setback Teriz's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Soul of Azeroth
    Posts
    29,822
    Quote Originally Posted by Triceron View Post
    Err.....

    What is this even?
    Pandaren Monks and Demon Hunters in WoW before MoP and Legion.

  20. #2700
    Quote Originally Posted by Polybius View Post
    Both can. It's just a matter of creativity
    I'm not anything close to development, but I can think of a Dark Ranger example.

    - Black Arrow: DoT and summon

    - CD that blackens the target and once the timer runs out, deal % of all damage as burst (visual like HotS Black Arrows)

    - Return of the old Hunter Volley, but in a Shadow version similar to Rain of Vengeance for Demon Hunter in D3

    - Leech CD that features black smokey wings

    - Burst close range AoE based on what Sylvanas did during the BfA trailer

    - Blink-like teleportation tools featuring shadowy movement

    - Channeling of Shadow arrow barrage based on Withering Fire from HotS

    - Heavy DoT with "increased damage taken" effect in the form of a thrown Shadow knife

    - Mind Control-like utility



    These are my first brief thoughts. Just like with Monk and DH, that's one spec I can think of and that's closer to the classic example of the class. Blizz can develop an unexpected Necromancer/Summoner spec or even a healer spec that features "healing with trade-offs".

Posting Permissions

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