4th Specs vs New Class

[Cosmic Janitor]

1. Not every class needs to get a new spec, this is a misconception and frankly wishfull thinking. Forcing one for each will just lead to bad design.
2. A new spec gives something interesting to existing characters instead of forcing another reroll, which usually over 90% of people won't do.
3. A new spec can flesh out aspects of classes that have yet to be properly explored.
4. If Blizzard has any sense they could even add a quest and make it unlockable and therefore content.

The problem is Blizzard has reached the limit for level of complexity that they are comfortable with for classes - or at least that they think we can handle. Because of that we are in a situation that prevents us form advancing and everything we get is shittastic rental throwaway systems and abilities. 4th specs in that regard at least provide a new parallel system within a class to get new stuff.

While I would ideally like to keep building upon existing classes and get new permanent things added to classes, that simply isn't going to happen anymore if we are real about it. But it's true that Blizzard is already incabable of addressing glaring issues with some specs as it is. Adding more will not make this better.

- - - Updated - - -

We don't need to give pure DPS classes another DPS spec. That's a terrible idea.

I disagree, people often picked those because that is what they wanted to do. If you can find a way to dps in another way then that is absolutely fine, not everything needs to become worse by hybridization. That people in general tend to be more interested in DPSing already shows that this would still be a viable approach.

[Kumorii]

new class > new specs

[JuanSR]

4th spec to Shaman would be great, the Tank one, it fits really good with the class (shamans were able to "tank" in vanilla-early expansions). Wearing mail, 1h and shield, using defensive earth shields, totems for dmge mitigating (earth), dodge (wind), healing (water)..., AOE aggro with weapon enhance so melee hit jumps between enemies like a chain lighting (Thrall abilitie in HoTS). Could be very interesting and bring more popularity to the class.

3th spec to DH would be great too, a Ranged spec (Retail WoW really needs a new ranged spec, since there is no new ranged spec in wow history, only MeleeDPS, Tanks and a Healer). Could use Bow, Crossbow and Gun as weapon, I imagine some kind of ranged with high mobility, demon-vil based magic abilities, slows, leeching, dodge defensive CD, etc...

Finally, I would say a 4th spec to Hunter, a Healer spec, the Bard. Some kind of healer-support that works a bit like Disc Priest. Bard can buff, shield and aoe heal with "song" abilities, then he can deal dmge and heal the buffed allies a % of the damage done. Big powerfull aoe CDs for buffing and shielding for raids and M+, a bit of mobility with speed increase cds and maybe a dash. Could also have a offensive CD which summons a pet who attack the enemies, the damage deal by the pet also heals buffed allies (like Monk's Chi-Ji or Priest shadowfiend)

That would be my bet for best specs to be added to the game which fits good in the game and could be fun to play with.

[Teriz]

WRONG.

No one takes tinker seriously. If anything its a specialisation of a profession.

If it’s a specialization, which Existing class would allow you to pilot a mech? Also I’m not aware of major lore characters using Blacksmithing, enchanting, Tailoring, Etc. as a source for abilities and power.

[Geckoo]

4th spec all the way.

A new spec for every class (conceptually speaking, so let's ignore druid & dh spec disparity) is a novelty that's easier for everyone to enjoy than a new class with a strong theme that will just work for a few players.

Just as those shadowlands new customization features for every race feels great since it's something that you'll be able to enjoy with all your characters while a new race would also be a great addition, but might be something you don't use or even like at all.

In my mind, 4th specs should be about adding new ways to play with the same class and/or even filling new roles as long as it makes sense within the class archetypes. There is no point in adding a new melee spec to a class like rogue that already has 3 melee specs. But you might add a 100% ranged spec or even a tank spec.

[Chronometer]

The real problem is there's too few tanks and healers.

I have been saying for a while now that with less people playing the game overall, the need for hybridization across classes is increasing.
Some of the queues are just silly if you queue as pure DPS, so I have started pretty much only playing my hybrid toons.

Obviously this doesn't necessarily make sense for all classes, but a mage could be a healer, shaman and warlocks could feasibly tank - even priests with some sort of mace and shield "Cleric" style could maybe tank, though that might shit all over the prot Paladin class fantasy, but you get what I am saying.

[Usernameforforums]

Id say rework the classes to classes rather than specs so balance can be balanced.

[MrKnubbles]

Why does everyone assume that 4th spec means a new spec for EVERY class? Druid already has a 4th spec. There's no reason why they can't add a 4th spec to 2 or 3 classes that make sense.

[Krothar]

Blizzard can hardly balance the specs they already have. Why do so many people want to make it even worse

[Teriz]

Blizzard can hardly balance the specs they already have. Why do so many people want to make it even worse

Because some people accept that perfect balance is impossible, and want new ways to interact with the game world.

New classes is one of the ways that is possible.

[music49]

More of both. However WoW is set in a specific fantasy troupe and artistic style that blizzard is limited to a certain theme that fits. I'm sure they have tons of ideas, but just need to introduce them with the correct story. Monks in Wrath would be a little weird, and DK's in MoP as well. Everyone keeps bring up tinkers but at the same time how do you not take away from engineering? (Cause professions are interesting). Same thing with adding more specs. They've stated DH's started out as 3 specs but both dps specs seemed bare and ended up combining them to make a playable class. How do you add a holy priest dps spec with out it being a re skinned shadow priest or warlock? It can be done and blizzard for sure have the capacity to make it work. Fingers crossed the future specs and classes are awesome with out making existing ones boring and lackluster

[ro9ue]

Id rather a new class + a completely revamped class / progression system like old talent trees or ESO champ points or EQ aas and not just 4th specs in the existing garbage shit system.

[Kallor]

Warlock: 4th spec - Lich - Focused on draining life and energy from their enemies.

Going by WC3, a Lich would be frostbased with an instant aoe nuke (Frost Nova), able to sacrifice friendly undead minions for mana, put a frost shield on himself or others that slows melee attackers, and an ultimate that decimates units and buildings in the area over time.

You could also argue that a Lich is a Mage gone wrong, and not a Warlock specc - so it would be more appropriate to have it as the 4th Mage specc.

However, imo, the games doesn't need more speccs or classes - it needs the classes and specs that are ALREADY there to be fun. Same with races/areas/etc. There is a ridiculous amount of content in WoW, but so much of it is useless.

[BB8]

Hunter: 4th spec - Drew a blank here, sorry

Priest: 4th spec - Another blank here

Hunters:
- Sentinel: Tank spec (polearm/shield, improved tank pet,
- Ranger: Healer (plant medicine, spiderweb triage, unicorn summoning)
- Dark Ranger: DPS Shadow arrows

Priests:
- Moon: Healer
- Shadow: Healer
- Tide Sage: DPS

[Teriz]

More of both. However WoW is set in a specific fantasy troupe and artistic style that blizzard is limited to a certain theme that fits. I'm sure they have tons of ideas, but just need to introduce them with the correct story. Monks in Wrath would be a little weird, and DK's in MoP as well. Everyone keeps bring up tinkers but at the same time how do you not take away from engineering? (Cause professions are interesting). Same thing with adding more specs. They've stated DH's started out as 3 specs but both dps specs seemed bare and ended up combining them to make a playable class. How do you add a holy priest dps spec with out it being a re skinned shadow priest or warlock? It can be done and blizzard for sure have the capacity to make it work. Fingers crossed the future specs and classes are awesome with out making existing ones boring and lackluster

It's been shown multiple times that classes never take anything away from professions. For example, Hunters got Wildfire Grenade, and that took nothing away from Engineering. DKs got Runeforging, Mages had Frost/Molten/Mage armor, and Shaman had imbue weapon. That took nothing away from Enchanting. Monks have brews, and Mages could conjure food, that took nothing away from cooking.

The Tinker will not take anything away from Engineering because technology within a class has a different application than technology within a profession.

[Kyphael]

I prefer 4th specs as I feel we'd get more mileage out of that instead of just introducing a new class that would take away from another while pigeon holing that said new class into one concept, and having to come up with distinct specs. Plus, most new class ideas can be rolled into existing classes' fourth specs. Here are the most common requests as an example.

Bard can be a fourth Rogue spec. It's a thief class, just introduce some off hand items resembling instruments, musical daggers, etc. Can be a healer/spell caster.
Tinker can be a fourth Warrior spec. Let's say it would be like a Warrior Engineer specializing in bombs, traps and gadgets.
Necromancer can be a fourth Warlock spec or a fourth Warlock spec, just make it distinct from Affliction and more on the commanding Undead side.

[Utrrabbit]

The answer is NO to both.

[music49]

It's been shown multiple times that classes never take anything away from professions. For example, Hunters got Wildfire Grenade, and that took nothing away from Engineering. DKs got Runeforging, Mages had Frost/Molten/Mage armor, and Shaman had imbue weapon. That took nothing away from Enchanting. Monks have brews, and Mages could conjure food, that took nothing away from cooking.

The Tinker will not take anything away from Engineering because technology within a class has a different application than technology within a profession.

Mechanically it won't, but story and lore wise whats the difference between a tinker and a warrior with engineering?

[Liarparadox]

I'd prefer 4th spec as opposed to a whole new class.

Warrior - Blademaster
Paladin - Shockadin
Death Knight - Banshee?
Shaman - Earth Warden (tank spec)
Hunter - Dark Ranger or Sentinel
Rogue - Tinker or Warden
Monk - Shadow Hunter (wcIII description for shadow hunters describes them as masters of voodoo magics who use spirit powers)
Warlock - Necromancer
Mage - Spellbreaker
Priest - Cleric (holy dps spec)

I really like this list

[Teriz]

Mechanically it won't, but story and lore wise whats the difference between a tinker and a warrior with engineering?

You mean other than the fact that a warrior with engineering isn’t inventing anything but is just following blueprints and schematics? Just because a warrior uses technology, it doesn’t make them a Tinker. A warrior relies on his strength and fighting ability. Lobbing bombs is just an add on. A Tinker on the other hand would be fully reliant on their technology.

Captain America with a device that allows his shield to return to him doesn’t turn him into Tony . Stark, who is completely reliant on his inventions and technology.