Why do Hunters and Shamans have to use mail ??

[Radaney]

Who knows, and who knows why Demon Hunters don't wear mail.

Some of WoWs many mysteries.

[Kyphael]

Not sure but even lore-wise it doesn't make sense. Hunters in real-life wear animal hides, IE: leather. Shamans are the same, either leather/animal hide or cloth. Mail is more like what knights should wear, like paladins. If you ask me, mail either shouldn't exist or it should be worn by paladins and warriors.

- - - Updated - - -

Who knows, and who knows why DH don't wear mail.

IMO Demon Hunters should wear plate. Fel steel comes to mind. DH's and DK's. Saronite plates and stuff. Paladins and Warriors mail. Shamans, hunters, and rogues leather.

[cocomen2]

I mean , how this set that made out of insect hide (skin) counts as Mail armor and not a Leather?........and this is only one of few "Mail" items that not force me to puke.

[paxen]

Scale armor can be made from metal scales too... That's what it was made out of IRL.

Oh, clearly. But currently mail is all about scale, with very little chain in sight (which is sad given that mail is the word for armour made of linked rings). You could still have scale armour in the heavy armour category, it just wouldn't be the only thing mail users got.

Ok, historically, you're wrong. "Mail" armor, while heavy, maybe, was still lighter than Plate.... because most plate armor had mail under it, and the full plate and field plate armor was twice the weight of a mail set, and often, even that still had a mail internal suit with it. The only reason Plate armor didn't weigh the wearers down as if they were wearing cinder blocks on their legs is because the rigid plates helped support itself.

But weight is just a shorthand for how encumberance and protection. Heavy armour as a category is much better, heavy vs light is actually a useful categorization.

I hate to spoil your subjective view of armor, here, but in earlier times, archer units wore mail far more often than they wore leather armor. But much like mail armor, what do you think they wore under that mail gambeson, anyway? Leather padding. Many of them also had chest plates, buckler shields, and even tower shields from which they would mount into the ground and fire from behind.

But very few of them would be classified as heavy anything. That's reserved for stuff like cataphracts, pikes, legionnaires, knights etc etc.

What are you talking about? They would still have to make cloth agility gear so how is that not applicable anymore??

No. Gear doesn't work like that anymore. It gets the main stat that your current spec uses. When monks were first released gear had just one main stat, and you had to collect entire sets of offspec armour if you played a hybrid. Now all gear with an armour type just changes main stat to match your spec.

(This might involve blizzard manually adding agi as an option to all cloth, or more likely running a couple of batch scripts, but it wouldn't muck up loot tables. Not that much can muck up loot tables these days.)

- - - Updated - - -

Ok, historically, you're wrong. "Mail" armor, while heavy, maybe, was still lighter than Plate.... because most plate armor had mail under it, and the full plate and field plate armor was twice the weight of a mail set, and often, even that still had a mail internal suit with it. The only reason Plate armor didn't weigh the wearers down as if they were wearing cinder blocks on their legs is because the rigid plates helped support itself.

This is just nitpicking, but a proper suit of plate (which is something which appeared pretty late historically) is much less encumbering than a mail shirt - because it was strapped in and evenly distributed all over the body. A mail shirt puts most of its weight on your shoulders (you strap it on with belts and such as much as you can, of course).

[Pakheth]

Yes, monks in cloth armour, that's stupid. I mean, why would you import the fantasy concept famous for being the "unarmoured melee" and then not give them leather armour, duh.

Not to mention that irl monks in Asia wouldn't wear much leather due to it being animal based and for a Buddhist monk that would in many cases be considered unclean and in violation of not harming living things if you can avoid it. And to be honest I don't think I've seen a monk in the western world wear much leather either(apart from the Pope's shoes). They are men of the cloth after all.
But then again the fantasy trope is slightly different than irl.

[Kaver]

Let's get to the main topic:
You have to admit that when Blizzard shows us the sets for the first time, they has to tell us what the leather is and what the mail is. Right?
If they doesn’t do that you (and me too) would never know which is leather and which is mail. Right?

No, I very much disagree. It’s very easy to visually differentiate leather sets and mail sets. So your argument holds no merit in my opinion.

[KrayZ33]

Snip

"xXShadowhunterXx" - Hello there.

[oblakoff]

The problem is why the hell Blizzard decided Demon Hunters to be 4th leather class, instead of balancing all 4 armor types to have 3 classes each.

[confety]

Clases in a fantasy world are not 100% roles in real world, you cant compare directly both.

Hunters in wow are not archers from real life medieval time.
In fact hunters in wow are not archers in wow.
"Hunters have a powerful connection to the wild, and an uncanny ability to befriend even the wildest of beasts."
They can be "the archer class" in wow, but they are more than that, they are more close to Life on the cosmological chart.
I always thought that wow archer npcs were just warriors with a bow/gun and thats it, hunters are linked to the Wild as described by their class description.

So i guess they would be using leather armour, but they were designed as mail as it suited them more that a agile rogue assassin or a druid and there were already some leather classes already.

About the shaman, the same, it makes no sense that they wear mail or shields, i guess they just wanted them to be some form of offtank, but i guess they designed them that way because it made more sense than making the other leather classes mail.

What they should do is making more cosmetic items from different armour types, you can already play half naked with a rugged pants, i see no difference why someone shouldnt be able to tank in leather o cloth armour. Transmogrification is an illusion at the end of the day so it doesnt impact the functionality of said armour piece. They can use the trial of style events to achieve that and it would be good for the game.

[VinceVega]

Nah i am fine with the way it is.
I like that we have 4 different and it is too late to play around with the armor types.

Put monks into cloth: What happens with the old monk leather sets? Do they go into cloth? Stay in Leather? Can mages then look like rogues because the monk sets look like leather but are cloth?

I like mail armor. And i don't think it is as bad as people make it out to be. Also i think it fits Hunters and Shamans, as they are not as agile as rouges and monks but have to be more free than say warriors and paladins.
And again, i don't want half the mail transmogs to go into plate.

The only point i agree upon in this threat is, that sometimes the Letaher and mail sets are a bit difficult to keep apart. Bt if you look close you always find something to distinguish them. Scales or leather straps for exmaple.
I think it fits mail.
Leather is sometimes a bit to "heavy" for my taste. But is still like them.

[Melusine]

But weight is just a shorthand for how encumberance and protection. Heavy armour as a category is much better, heavy vs light is actually a useful categorization.

No it isn't. Most plate sets were put over a mail shirt. Knights didn't wear plates on their body with nothing under them. That right there would have been suicide. The mail underneath was what kept joint locations from becoming weak points for swords, and helped absorb armor strikes from maces, or heavy crossbow bolts from punching through the plate. The bottom line is.... The full plate didn't function the way Ironman's suits worked. And saying mail was heavier than full plate, despite the fact that inside full plate suits was a set of mail armor, that's not how it works. Mail armor is not going to become more lightweight when you add an exoskeleton of iron around it.

This is just nitpicking, but a proper suit of plate (which is something which appeared pretty late historically) is much less encumbering than a mail shirt - because it was strapped in and evenly distributed all over the body. A mail shirt puts most of its weight on your shoulders (you strap it on with belts and such as much as you can, of course).

Have you ever tried walking in full plate? It's like walking in a hip-deep stream. And it's heavy. Just because it supports its own weight to some degree doesn't mean it isn't encumbering. And the set I tried on, yeah, it had a mail shirt that had a hood on it. The weight of the entire suit was almost 40 pounds, which is fairly light for that sort of a suit of armor. And another one of the less awesome parts about that sort of armor, besides the slowed movement and lack of ability to really run in it, and such, it took me about 15 minutes with 3 people helping to get it on. I can put a head to toe suit of chain mail on myself in about as much time as it would take me to get dressed 3 times, though, and without assistance.

[Tantypops]

The same tier, from which the OP liked the rogue set, contains one of the few "not for shamans" mail set which match the MM artifact. I personally main a shaman and love the over-the-top aesthetics we have. Notice that it was toned down since the divergence from class sets (uldir and nyalotha mail). Also, again proving that it is subjective, I love the Night Fae mail set, with or without the kilt, and its "seasons of the year" color schemes.

[paxen]

Put monks into cloth: What happens with the old monk leather sets? Do they go into cloth? Stay in Leather? Can mages then look like rogues because the monk sets look like leather but are cloth?

Monk sets would go into cloth, yes. This would only affect old monk tier sets (mists to legion).

As a bonus, cloth vests and jackets would come back in style now that cloth also covers monks. This should please the Big Blue Dress guy!

No it isn't. Most plate sets were put over a mail shirt. Knights didn't wear plates on their body with nothing under them. That right there would have been suicide. The mail underneath was what kept joint locations from becoming weak points for swords, and helped absorb armor strikes from maces, or heavy crossbow bolts from punching through the plate. The bottom line is.... The full plate didn't function the way Ironman's suits worked. And saying mail was heavier than full plate, despite the fact that inside full plate suits was a set of mail armor, that's not how it works. Mail armor is not going to become more lightweight when you add an exoskeleton of iron around it.



Have you ever tried walking in full plate? It's like walking in a hip-deep stream. And it's heavy. Just because it supports its own weight to some degree doesn't mean it isn't encumbering. And the set I tried on, yeah, it had a mail shirt that had a hood on it. The weight of the entire suit was almost 40 pounds, which is fairly light for that sort of a suit of armor. And another one of the less awesome parts about that sort of armor, besides the slowed movement and lack of ability to really run in it, and such, it took me about 15 minutes with 3 people helping to get it on. I can put a head to toe suit of chain mail on myself in about as much time as it would take me to get dressed 3 times, though, and without assistance.

Really getting off topic here, but...I never said plate wasn't *heavy*. Only that a proper fitted suit can be less encumbering than mail. But I will admit that I don't have personal experience. I can however point you to videos of people doing all kinds of stuff in plate armour.

But in the end my argument isn't really that plate is "lighter" than mail in any way, but that they're both a type of heavy armour.

[Surfacin9]

What are you talking about? They would still have to make cloth agility gear so how is that not applicable anymore??

When monks were just introduced we still had primary stats fixed on gear, it was later when they decided to put 2 primary stats on a piece and have them activate based on your spec. So back in MoP they'd have to create separate agi cloth gear to satisfy the needs of brewmasters and windwalkers, but now, they can simply add greyed out agi on all cloth gear to be activated for those specs.

[Logwyn]

What would help honestly is being able to transmog across types of armor. If you really wanted your warrior running around in cloth you could. Want to beef up your mage in plate go ahead. You get the look of the gear. But..... It doesn't fit Bliizzard's class fantasy. So not really your class fantasy.

I think also some whine from the PVP crowd not being able to tell exactly what class something is in the arena based on armor. Cloth Paladins and Plate warlocks would be confusing. No like they don't run add-ons that tell you what you are facing.

[VinceVega]

Monk sets would go into cloth, yes. This would only affect old monk tier sets (mists to legion).

As a bonus, cloth vests and jackets would come back in style now that cloth also covers monks. This should please the Big Blue Dress guy!

Nah i don't like it. Monks using Warlock transmogs and stuff. Does not fit. Or a priest with leather shoulders. No idea why people think the Warcraft Monk fits the warcraft cloth category. Leather is where they belong.
But this is really hypotheical as they will never change that. Way too much work for a thing which will piss of way to many people. Imagine. You loose nearly all of your tranmogs except your tier sets as a monk. NEVER in a thousand years will this be a thing.

[Dundebuns]

What it is:

Cloth	Leather	Mail	Plate
Mage Priest Warlock	Rogue Demon Hunter Monk Druid	Hunter Shaman	Paladin Warrior Death Knight

What it should be

Cloth	Leather	Plate
Mage Priest Warlock Monk	Rogue Demon Hunter Druid Hunter	Paladin Warrior Death Knight Shaman

This way Shaman become the battlemage esque spec. My thoughts are though that the next released class will be a mail wearer to try and establish some kind of gear parity.

[paxen]

What it is:

What it should be

This way Shaman become the battlemage esque spec.

This, exactly.

Sigh I want a like button on these forums.

[Schattenlied]

which is sad given that mail is the word for armour made of linked rings

Actually it's just the word for armor made of linked anythings. Scale armor is called scale mail, linked rings is called ring/chain mail, they are both "mail", just different types with different benefits (chain being more flexible, scale having better piercing protection).

[Lord Pebbleton]

It makes sense to me that hunters/shamans would wear mail. I do agree however that most hunter sets SUCK.

Shamans have an overarching element theme with their sets which represents the whole class. Earth, wind, fire, sometimes water with a bit of leeway if you want a more generic choice.

Hunters have possibly 1 or 2 sets that represent the stalking, furtive and survivalist aspect of the class. Otherwise it's just beasts grossly skinned and worn. Hunters can't help but deck out in their prey/main companion which is pretty gruesome too. It's as if warriors ONLY had sets that were made out of swords or random parts of enemy bodies. Warlocks for example have a demon theme to them, but they don't put a doomguard's severed head on their own head and call it an helm.

What about sets that do not represent this horrible class fantasy for hunters? Sure! But they also suck. Go ahead and transmo to the Siege of Orgrimmar tier so you can become a laser hobo. Or get the Gronnstalker so instead of wearing a victim you only get to wear ten to twelve eyes that still twitch!

Yes I am mad. Hunter sets suck balls. My main is a hunter and I have been sporting the Garrison+Savage Hunt set since WoD, and I change transmo on all my other characters regularly. That's how much hunter sets suck balls.