Why Dark Ranger will be the next class added to World of Warcraft.

[Orby]

It seems to be the case that it might be Dark Ranger, I predicted this the moment the undead Night Elves came into play. And this sucks for me as someone who's looking for a reason to play gnome or Goblin it now means we wont get Tinkers

Just another edgy hero class I guess..

[Nero Duskwind]

So you think that class with nanomachines,voltron,mech,lightsaber,blasters ISNT edgy? or DOVAKIN dragonborn ........ not feels edgy for you?)

Just joking, all 4 classes from this pool pure Edgelords and its okay, kids love to play them PEGI 12+.

I get the gist of your joke, so I'll rephrase: We don't need a third dark, broody all-up-in-my-feels edgelord class. I'd like a hero class that, for once, isn't rooted in the same tropes of corruption and redemption as the previous two. Tinker may not personally be my cup of tea, but at least it's a flavorful welcome like the Monk was.

- - - Updated - - -

It seems to be the case that it might be Dark Ranger, I predicted this the moment the undead Night Elves came into play. And this sucks for me as someone who's looking for a reason to play gnome or Goblin it now means we wont get Tinkers

Just another edgy hero class I guess..

It lacks sense to go through with Dark Ranger in that it's even more exclusive (read limited) than DH was. Unless Bolvar and the Four Horsemen plan to make this class the hunter equivalent of DK and fill out the ranks of the Ebon Blade with similar rangers.

[Tiradon]

• Of all the directions they could take Alleria's story, they decide to make her involved with The Void. And then she joins the Alliance. It's almost like they want to add Dark Ranger, but had no representative leader on the Alliance side... so they shoe-horned that in.
• The Windrunner sisters are meeting amongst themselves regardless of faction allegiance. This can allow Blizzard to create a single starting area for both faction Dark Rangers, sanctuary-style, where both Alleria and Sylvanas train their Dark Ranger apprentices. This would be similar to the other hero class starting experiences.
• Dark Ranger teased in Hunter order hall with the hidden quest.
• Dark Ranger teased in Seething Shore by Nathanos.
• We only have 2 mail classes right now.
• We only have 1 class that uses Bows, Guns and Crossbows.
• Dark Ranger is arguably the most requested remaining hero class from WC3 after Demon Hunter - which was a huge success.
• Blizzard originally looked like they were going to add Dark Ranger style abilities to Marksmanship Hunter: 'Dark Ranger', 'Exotic Munitions' and other magical arrows for example - but were later removed. They also temporarily removed Arcane Shot on the BFA beta because I think they are intending to anyway because the Dark Ranger is currently in the works right now. I predict they will remove it in the next expansion after BFA when Dark Rangers are added, similar to how Demonology Warlocks were changed to give clear thematic room for the Demon Hunter (Meta).
• I believe the interactions we'll have with Vol'jin (and I don't know anything about BFA content story wise yet) - to allow for a more troll-like Shadow Hunter themed spec. The other two will likely be themed around Sylvanas and Alleria. Possibly even a Warden, Shadow of Vengeance melee spec.
• The lore events in Stormheim appear to be building up to a new round of Dark Rangers - possibly explaining how the other races could be inducted into the ranks.
• The next expansion appears to very likely be Shadow or Old God themed, and we're getting hints the LK may return. If Legion was BC 2.0, the next expansion after BFA might be Wrath 2.0.

I would re roll instantly from my Hunter

[Orby]

It lacks sense to go through with Dark Ranger in that it's even more exclusive (read limited) than DH was. Unless Bolvar and the Four Horsemen plan to make this class the hunter equivalent of DK and fill out the ranks of the Ebon Blade with similar rangers.

We'll see I guess.

Also love you Dark Legacy avatar

[DotEleven]

The Black Moon is quoted in the Collector's Edition leak. IF that gets confirmed to be true, it shows that Blizz can fit the lore to match "Elune's Dark Side".

Back to the Class Hall point.

DHs have TBC units. DKs have Liches and Necromancers. Paladins and Priest share units. Mages have construct I believe. Warlocks have Shivarra Priest-like units that we've seen in Argus WQ that they are actually being Priestly more than anything. I'm not sure, but I believe Rogues have some odd units there too.

The Dark Ranger in the Unseen Path is an odd unit and is treated accordingly by her fanboy too. Also, back in Legion and Legion Alpha/Beta there were attempts to include Dark Ranger in Hunter and everything got removed in BfA later on.

What I can conclusively assume at this point is that Blizz has the ability to add Dark Rangers if they want to. Even more easily than they did Demon Hunters.

DHs have units from Illdians Army. Death Knights have units from what was previously Arthas'. Paladins have Paladins in there, Priests have Priests. The only Priest in the Paladin camp didn't join Paladins until they became a Paladin. Warlocks have Demons. Which are under Warlock control. Rogues have Rogues or Rogueish people.

And yet you're trying to say the Dark Rangers, because it's not just one, it's the Dark Rangers as a whole that joined the Unseen Path, aren't hunters.

Like, you have the Dark Rangers, the Farstriders, the Silver Covenant, all very obviously hunters, as members of the Unseen Path and still try to argue "Dark Rangers aren't hunters".

Admittedly you do have some like the Val'kyr in the Halls of Valor, but they aren't actual members of the Valarjar but supporting actors to them.

[deviantcultist]

still try to argue "Dark Rangers aren't hunters".

If Hunters could use Black Arrow, Shadow magic, life drain, Mind Control, Necromancy, had Banshee Form/AoE, could use Shadow spells and had a class fantasy that wasn't as mundane as it can possibly be, I could have considered Dark Ranger to be relatable to Hunter.

No? Cause I'm pretty sure that's what Sylvanas does on a day to day basis and Hunter has nothing to do with it.

If people still think the Dark Ranger hero archetype involves a Halloween-dressed Hunter with a spider pet and maybe Black Arrow, I don't see a point in discussing anything.

[Kumorii]

It lacks sense to go through with Dark Ranger in that it's even more exclusive (read limited) than DH was. Unless Bolvar and the Four Horsemen plan to make this class the hunter equivalent of DK and fill out the ranks of the Ebon Blade with similar rangers.

Any class that will be added will have lore attached to why they are currently available as a class compared to previous expansions. Only thing that's required for any class is the possibility of a lore explanation and if death theme expansion with bolvar comes around it can definitely be done. Or if tinkers get added or any other class it will also bring new lore with it.

"Unless they do this in lore" is not a crutch, it's something expected.

[Devonitar]

I'm fine as long as that thing is going to have a healing spec.

[DotEleven]

If Hunters could use Black Arrow, Shadow magic, life drain, Mind Control, Necromancy, had Banshee Form/AoE, could use Shadow spells and had a class fantasy that wasn't as mundane as it can possibly be, I could have considered Dark Ranger to be relatable to Hunter.

No? Cause I'm pretty sure that's what Sylvanas does on a day to day basis and Hunter has nothing to do with it.

If people still think the Dark Ranger hero archetype involves a Halloween-dressed Hunter with a spider pet and maybe Black Arrow, I don't see a point in discussing anything.

This is why it would be a spec. You know, a specialization of a hunter. You take a hunter basis. Give it shadow spells. Why would it be an entirely new class? Like, if they're gonna open it up to other races to make it a class, why not just open it up to other races to make it a spec?

Like, if you had a rogue who suddenly started using frost spells. Why would that be an entire new class instead of a rogue spec?

[deviantcultist]

This is why it would be a spec. You know, a specialization of a hunter. You take a hunter basis. Give it shadow spells. Why would it be an entirely new class? Like, if they're gonna open it up to other races to make it a class, why not just open it up to other races to make it a spec?

Like, if you had a rogue who suddenly started using frost spells. Why would that be an entire new class instead of a rogue spec?

Because this kind of argument had been repeatedly used by a portion of the community to hinder the addition of both DK and DH. Even if Dark Ranger doesn't get added, it won't be because of what you say as it simply won't stop Blizz.

DH was repeatedly being associated with Rogues and Warlocks and 4th spec and whatnot. DK fans were discouraged due to Warlock using Death Coil back in the day and "Undead Warriors" being a thing. Not to mention the "Arthas only raised Humans for DK" argument.

Always the same thing. Even with a Rogue using frost spells, it stops being a Rogue given the lore foundation we have for Rogues.

I'm absolutely certain Dark Ranger cannot be a class skin due to unique mechanics of its theme and doesn't fit anywhere for a 4th spec. The only exception is if Blizz revamps every class to the extreme and oversaturated class identity with "prestige classes". At that point, anyone can get anything and any existing standing will be thrown out of the window.

[Rune B]

Dark Ranger makes all the sense in the world. And it would be so nice to have another ranged physical class, and preferably without pets. I would much prefer it over tinkers as well. Maybe class skins really will be a thing? In which case a lot of lore classes might get added. Even as additional specs.

[DotEleven]

Because this kind of argument had been repeatedly used by a portion of the community to hinder the addition of both DK and DH. Even if Dark Ranger doesn't get added, it won't be because of what you say as it simply won't stop Blizz.

DH was repeatedly being associated with Rogues and Warlocks and 4th spec and whatnot. DK fans were discouraged due to Warlock using Death Coil back in the day and "Undead Warriors" being a thing. Not to mention the "Arthas only raised Humans for DK" argument.

Always the same thing. Even with a Rogue using frost spells, it stops being a Rogue given the lore foundation we have for Rogues.

I'm absolutely certain Dark Ranger cannot be a class skin due to unique mechanics of its theme and doesn't fit anywhere for a 4th spec. The only exception is if Blizz revamps every class to the extreme and oversaturated class identity with "prestige classes". At that point, anyone can get anything and any existing standing will be thrown out of the window.

Where was that used and why? Death Knight has a small lore history in Paladin, but otherwise nothing. Demon Hunter also is nothing like a Warlock (which is what people were trying to say with Metamorphosis). Meanwhile Dark Ranger has a 100% lore basis in hunter. The entire basis behind Dark Ranger is a ranger (read: hunter) died, was brought back to life and after finding that nature didn't respond to them (because being undead is against nature) started using nercomantic arts instead. As such, a Dark Ranger is a form of Ranger which is a form of hunter. They have background as a hunter, They're in the hunter class hall, notable Dark Rangers are Sylvanas, who's considered a hunter, and Nathanos, who is literally a hunter trainer. The hunter class hall even has a quest you can go through to obtain your own Dark Ranger helm. If they're just going to open up non-elves to be Dark Rangers, they could just as easily put it as "You no longer need to be undead, just trained in shadow magic" and make it a hunter spec instead, because why go through all of that hassle to make a class that's going to be incredibly close to a class already implemented in the game, utilizes the same armor type, provides another at least 2 if not 3 dps specs which would mean that armor type would have 6 or 7 DPS specs and 1 healing (which is another reason why Dark Ranger itself is just a terrible idea to implement in a capacity such as a class OR a spec).

[The Betrayer]

I'm betting on the Necromancer.

[deviantcultist]

Where was that used and why? Death Knight has a small lore history in Paladin, but otherwise nothing. Demon Hunter also is nothing like a Warlock (which is what people were trying to say with Metamorphosis). Meanwhile Dark Ranger has a 100% lore basis in hunter. The entire basis behind Dark Ranger is a ranger (read: hunter) died, was brought back to life and after finding that nature didn't respond to them (because being undead is against nature) started using nercomantic arts instead. As such, a Dark Ranger is a form of Ranger which is a form of hunter. They have background as a hunter, They're in the hunter class hall, notable Dark Rangers are Sylvanas, who's considered a hunter, and Nathanos, who is literally a hunter trainer. The hunter class hall even has a quest you can go through to obtain your own Dark Ranger helm. If they're just going to open up non-elves to be Dark Rangers, they could just as easily put it as "You no longer need to be undead, just trained in shadow magic" and make it a hunter spec instead, because why go through all of that hassle to make a class that's going to be incredibly close to a class already implemented in the game, utilizes the same armor type, provides another at least 2 if not 3 dps specs which would mean that armor type would have 6 or 7 DPS specs and 1 healing (which is another reason why Dark Ranger itself is just a terrible idea to implement in a capacity such as a class OR a spec).

The Dark Ranger helm? Just like Rogues in TBC got the "Demon Hunter helm"? I've been there and been part of Demon Hunter debates and everyone bashed them just like how they do it with Dark Rangers nowadays. Demon Hunter was constantly called "pointless and unlikely addition that is already supported by existing classes".

I get it, a class like Dragonsworn of Tinker are completely out of left field and alien to what is playable right now. However, it does not mean that anything that comes close to what we have can only function as a new spec or class skin. DK and DH didn't.

As for DK, people did say "but DK abilities are used by other classes" or "just play Undead Warrior". It feels really annoying to have your class fantasy wish discredited in a way that no true fan of a said concept can really see it that way.

Luckily for them, DK and DH happened. 2 days to find out if that will be the case for Dark Ranger too.

[DotEleven]

The Dark Ranger helm? Just like Rogues in TBC got the "Demon Hunter helm"? I've been there and been part of Demon Hunter debates and everyone bashed them just like how they do it with Dark Rangers nowadays. Demon Hunter was constantly called "pointless and unlikely addition that is already supported by existing classes".

I get it, a class like Dragonsworn of Tinker are completely out of left field and alien to what is playable right now. However, it does not mean that anything that comes close to what we have can only function as a new spec or class skin. DK and DH didn't.

As for DK, people did say "but DK abilities are used by other classes" or "just play Undead Warrior". It feels really annoying to have your class fantasy wish discredited in a way that no true fan of a said concept can really see it that way.

Luckily for them, DK and DH happened. 2 days to find out if that will be the case for Dark Ranger too.

Now, when you say Demon Hunter Helm, are you talking the leather drop off whoever in Black Temple that anyone could wear?

Once again, the difference we have here is that DK didn't have a lore basis in Warrior. Demon Hunter didn't have a lore basis in Warlock. You don't seem to be getting the issue I have with it.

Using the current lore available to us. Dark Rangers are 100% hunters. They have a background as a hunter. They started out as a hunter. They use hunter abilities. They then accentuated these hunter abilities with shadow powers purely because nature stopped responding to them. So they use their martial hunter skills with a shadow theme. This is why it would make more sense for them to be playable as a hunter spec and not a class.

Note for once, I've never said "Dark Rangers aren't happening." just that "It's more likely for them to be a spec than a class".

[shade3891]

Now, when you say Demon Hunter Helm, are you talking the leather drop off whoever in Black Temple that anyone could wear?

Once again, the difference we have here is that DK didn't have a lore basis in Warrior. Demon Hunter didn't have a lore basis in Warlock. You don't seem to be getting the issue I have with it.

Using the current lore available to us. Dark Rangers are 100% hunters. They have a background as a hunter. They started out as a hunter. They use hunter abilities. They then accentuated these hunter abilities with shadow powers purely because nature stopped responding to them. So they use their martial hunter skills with a shadow theme. This is why it would make more sense for them to be playable as a hunter spec and not a class.

Note for once, I've never said "Dark Rangers aren't happening." just that "It's more likely for them to be a spec than a class".

Isnt a Dark Ranger he negative counterpart of Hunters? (Life/death)
Like mages are to warlocks..

Also Dark Ranger could work as a 4th Rogue spec

[RangerDaz]

I have been saying for more than a year: tinker and/or dark rangers... they are whats coming next for wow. Probably together as new classes... or as new specs.

- - - Updated - - -

Isnt a Dark Ranger he negative counterpart of Hunters? (Life/death)
Like mages are to warlocks..

Also Dark Ranger could work as a 4th Rogue spec

Hunter 4th spec makes much more sense than rogue

[Unholyground]

I so hope for Dark Ranger if it's Shadowlands or WotLK 2.0. Really, just like Paladins, Shamans and Druids have been a bit murky as far as "class", there's really nothing stopping Dark Ranger being handled like Shamans in the transition from WC3. What is a Dark Ranger? It's just a Dark Ranger. What's a ranger? Usually a sort of sneaky scout, often using a bow, but some exist who don't. That's why I've previously suggested treating it like how a Tauren Paladin, a Zandalari Paladin, a Zandalari Druid work. By merging Shadow Hunter, Warden, Banshee and Dark Ranger into a Dark Ranger class. Just like how Shamans were in WoW. They're all shadow-based and would allow for ranged and melee options depending on spec. Would mean that you'd have numerous races: Forsaken, Night Elves, Void Elves, Sen'jin Trolls (and possibly Kul'Tiran humans due to Drust). It'd use shadowy powers, summon undead or banshee if Forsaken or if Night Elf, Avatars/Spirits of Vengeance, or if Void Elf, Void Spirits/Voidwraiths? Trolls would use their shadow/voodoo powers and favor of Bwonsamdi to summon vengeaful spirits of the dead. Then you have of course curses which are relevant for all and control spells.

Tinker is something I'd want in a Titan, Ethereals and Mech focused expansion. All in on tech! Would be great and thematically fitting.

It is Shadowlands based on current in-game lore alone, Bolvar is not bad he is full neutral.

- - - Updated - - -

I have been saying for more than a year: tinker and/or dark rangers... they are whats coming next for wow. Probably together as new classes... or as new specs.

- - - Updated - - -



Hunter 4th spec makes much more sense than rogue

Dark Rangers can stealth so very likely we will get 2 specs, one Ranged and one Melee.

[Nihilux]

This is why it would be a spec. You know, a specialization of a hunter. You take a hunter basis. Give it shadow spells. Why would it be an entirely new class? Like, if they're gonna open it up to other races to make it a class, why not just open it up to other races to make it a spec?

Like, if you had a rogue who suddenly started using frost spells. Why would that be an entire new class instead of a rogue spec?

Let's follow this logic. A Warrior is suddenly using frost spells! Why would that be an entire class instead of a warrior spec (it's not like we have any plate armor wearing, melee weapon wielding guys that use Frost right???)? Warrior using HOLY damage spells? Warrior doing shadow damage? Priest wearing plate armor and a sword? Another spec! Warrior wearing leather and with stealth mechanics? Another spec! A warlock equipped with melee weapons and some wings? Another spec. It's really easy to be reductionistic and just end up with a single class or 2-3 classes this way.

Dark Ranger has nothing to do with Hunters outside of both using ranged weapons. That could be equally said about the numerous melee weapon classes. Especially once hunters lost their former miniscule magical aspects, it's pretty apparent that comparing Dark Rangers as comparable to a hunter spec is completely wack. They are as much hunters as paladins and death knights are warriors.

Anyways, I personally don't think just transfering over WC3 Dark Ranger would happen, because it doesn't easily makes sense and you can end up being overly limited in race choices. That's why my suggestion has been to do as has been done with shaman, whereupon multiple classes have been merged to form the class. Since "Dark Ranger" as a class name isn't indicative of anything other than some shadowy/dark origin, my suggestion has been to merge Shadow Hunter, Warden, Dark Ranger and perhaps even Banshee into a single class, functioning differently in lore, like how it's with Zandalari Paladins and Druids in comparison to Tauren Paladins and Druids. This would open up for at least Night Elves, Forsaken, Void Elves and Senjin Trolls (shadow hunters and their connection to voodoo and Bwonsamdi) and perhaps Kul'Tiran (due to Drust connection) and Zandalari Trolls (due to Rastakhan's pact with Bwonsamdi). Rangers are basically scouts, most of them using ranged weapons, but also some using melee weapons. With combining Shadow Hunters and Warden, one could get a melee spec, with possibility of it even being a tanking spec. Healing spec is however very doubtful.

I'd rather hear some actual objections, like the fact that the only hero units we have are "dark/edgy/whatever you call it".That's a good one, although the problem is that there's very few Hero classes left that haven't been merged into other classes. Currently it's Dark Ranger as an iconic hero class. Goblin Tinker is definitely not an iconic hero class. It'd fit more into as a normal class, just like they did with the Pandaren Brewmaster.
Honestly, I wouldn't mind Tinker being introduced, but it should be done the same way as in all previous expansion, as part of the theme. DKs-> Northrend and Arthas. Monk->Pandaria and Chen and all. DHs->Burning Legion and Illidan and all. Honestly, a Titan and mech focused expansion would've probably been a nice breather, as well as a way to establish new lore and perhaps get a Pandaria-like experience. I even wondered whether it might happen with how Mechagon was suddenly a thing in 8.2, but that doesn't look very hopeful, does it with the current storyline?

[Deventh]

The simple truth is that we need another class that wields daggers and most definitely another pure archer and not pet focused class. Dark Ranger provides both. It fits the theme of the expansion and tons of people love the class. It's also a hero class from WC3. You can't go wrong with Dark Ranger.