If they made a new class in the future, what would it be?

[loras]

Frankly all this odd support for dark rangers and necromancers seems like a desire to be more snowflakey than the classes that already represent them (namely hunter and death knight).

Strap some goth-y armor on a hunter and find yourself a robe and tadaa: dark ranger and necromancer.


And hell all that talk of alchemical and poison attacks somehow fitting necromancers makes me think that deep down some people are just tinker-lovers in denial. ^^

[username993720]

If you didn't already know it, every class blizzard has added to the game has been exclusively based on the warcraft 3 hero units (melee, not campaign) - like the death knight, the pandaren brewmaster (monk) and the demon hunter. therefore, i believe the next classes to be introduced into the game will be based on the warcraft 3 hero units as well:

Blademaster

I know some would say that the blademaster is already playable through the warrior class because of the bladestorm ability. but i, personally, feel that it is not fully represented in-game through the warrior class. it is lacking the mirror image ability (which was given to the mage) and the windwalk ability. i don't know if the blademaster deserves its own class, but it could definitely be a specialization (maybe a re-imagining of the windwalker specialization?). blizzard can take inspiration from samuro's abilities and talents in heroes of the storm when designing the class/spec.

Dark Ranger/Priestess of the Moon/Naga Sea Witch

I think they should be 3 different specializations of the same class (ranger), as they all use bows and magical attacks. but isn't the hunter class a ranger already? technically yes, but none of the specializations really focus on magical attacks, except for a few abilities here and there. the sea witch spec could focus on frost and water magics (and even lightning and arcane); the priestess of the moon spec could focus on moon abilities, fiery shots and spectral pets; and the dark ranger spec could focus on necromancy and manipulation. blizzard can take inspiration from tyrande's and sylvanas's abilities and talents in heroes of the storm when designing the class/specs.

Tinker

Could definitely be a potential new class. some would argue that the engineering profession already fills that niche, but i highly doubt it as it is not as combat oriented as it used to be. the specializations of the class could focus on either gnomish engineering or goblin engineering (two different approaches to engineering), and even a dwarven engineering style (like torbjorn in overwatch). blizzard can take inspiration from gazlowe's abilities and talents in heroes of the storm when designing the class.

Shadow Hunter

Definitely could be a potential new class. although the shadow hunter abilities are already a part of the shaman toolkit, none of the specializations really embody the shadow hunter class. healing wave is basically chain heal (and is described as a wave of energy rather than a wave of water). hence, the unique appearance in contrast to the other healing abilities. hex is a voodoo curse, and therefore, should be a shadow spell rather than a nature one. serpent ward is a toy in-game (because shamans use totems and not wards). and big bad voodoo isn't in the game. my point is, that the shadow hunter is not fully represented in-game and should be taken out of the shaman repertoire and be given to a shadow hunter class.

Warden

The warden hero unit could definitely be an upcoming class or spec, as it is not fully represented in-game. some would say it is already represented through the rogue class, because of the 'fan of knives' ability. but it also has the mage 'blink' ability; a shadow strike ability and avatar of vengeance ability. people used to say the demon hunter would never be playable because warlocks had a demon form ability and the rogue could wield illidan's glaives. and yet, it still came in legion. the umbra crescent weapon of the warden could finally be viable weapon in-game, with the addition of glaives in legion. rogues were not seen using this weapon, and are not depicted as jailors, seeking out justice. therefore, i believe it is a viable option. blizzard can take inspiration from maiev's abilities and talents in heroes of the storm when designing the class.

Alchemist

Another viable option, like the tinker. again, people would claim it is already represented through the alchemy profession in-game. but only few abilities actually have an impact in combat. therefore, i believe that the representation is lacking. and so, it is still a viable option for me. the 3 specializations of the class could be: goblin alchemist style (like the warcraft 3 hero unit); a troll witch doctor style, with voodoo and mysticism; and a forsaken apothecary style, focusing on plague and blight.

as for the necromancer class everybody has been asking for, the wowpedia page says the following: "The necromancer class was one of three front runners to becoming the first hero class released with Wrath of the Lich King, however, the ideas surrounding them were incorporated into the death knight (The two other front runners being runemasters and monks). Eventually, the runemaster was merged into the death knight hero class (along with the necromancer), and later with the monk".

Night Warrior is just a pumped-up version of a Priestess of the Moon.

As for a Bard. if it's a joke class, wielding electric guitars and performing rock n' roll, count me out. if it's a sound-based class, like Murmur the elemental, then i'm all for it. could be a profession or a 4th shaman specialization.

[loras]

If you didn't already know it, every class blizzard has added to the game has been exclusively based on the warcraft 3 hero units (melee, not campaign) - like the death knight, the pandaren brewmaster (monk) and the demon hunter. therefore, i believe the next classes to be introduced into the game will be based on the warcraft 3 hero units as well:

Blademaster

I know some would say that the blademaster is already playable through the warrior class because of the bladestorm ability. but i, personally, feel that it is not fully represented in-game through the warrior class. it is lacking the mirror image ability (which was given to the mage) and the windwalk ability. i don't know if the blademaster deserves its own class, but it could definitely be a specialization (maybe a re-imagining of the windwalker specialization?). blizzard can take inspiration from samuro's abilities and talents in heroes of the storm when designing the class/spec.

Dark Ranger/Priestess of the Moon/Naga Sea Witch

I think they should be 3 different specializations of the same class (ranger), as they all use bows and magical attacks. but isn't the hunter class a ranger already? technically yes, but none of the specializations really focus on magical attacks, except for a few abilities here and there. the sea witch spec could focus on frost and water magics (and even lightning and arcane); the priestess of the moon spec could focus on moon abilities, fiery shots and spectral pets; and the dark ranger spec could focus on necromancy and manipulation. blizzard can take inspiration from tyrande's and sylvanas's abilities and talents in heroes of the storm when designing the class/specs.

Tinker

Could definitely be a potential new class. some would argue that the engineering profession already fills that niche, but i highly doubt it as it is not as combat oriented as it used to be. the specializations of the class could focus on either gnomish engineering or goblin engineering (two different approaches to engineering), and even a dwarven engineering style (like torbjorn in overwatch). blizzard can take inspiration from gazlowe's abilities and talents in heroes of the storm when designing the class.

Shadow Hunter

Definitely could be a potential new class. although the shadow hunter abilities are already a part of the shaman toolkit, none of the specializations really embody the shadow hunter class. healing wave is basically chain heal (and is described as a wave of energy rather than a wave of water). hence, the unique appearance in contrast to the other healing abilities. hex is a voodoo curse, and therefore, should be a shadow spell rather than a nature one. serpent ward is a toy in-game (because shamans use totems and not wards). and big bad voodoo isn't in the game. my point is, that the shadow hunter is not fully represented in-game and should be taken out of the shaman repertoire and be given to a shadow hunter class.

Warden

The warden hero unit could definitely be an upcoming class or spec, as it is not fully represented in-game. some would say it is already represented through the rogue class, because of the 'fan of knives' ability. but it also has the mage 'blink' ability; a shadow strike ability and avatar of vengeance ability. people used to say the demon hunter would never be playable because warlocks had a demon form ability and the rogue could wield illidan's glaives. and yet, it still came in legion. the umbra crescent weapon of the warden could finally be viable weapon in-game, with the addition of glaives in legion. rogues were not seen using this weapon, and are not depicted as jailors, seeking out justice. therefore, i believe it is a viable option. blizzard can take inspiration from maiev's abilities and talents in heroes of the storm when designing the class.

Alchemist

Another viable option, like the tinker. again, people would claim it is already represented through the alchemy profession in-game. but only few abilities actually have an impact in combat. therefore, i believe that the representation is lacking. and so, it is still a viable option for me. the 3 specializations of the class could be: goblin alchemist style (like the warcraft 3 hero unit); a troll witch doctor style, with voodoo and mysticism; and a forsaken apothecary style, focusing on plague and blight.

as for the necromancer class everybody has been asking for, the wowpedia page says the following: "The necromancer class was one of three front runners to becoming the first hero class released with Wrath of the Lich King, however, the ideas surrounding them were incorporated into the death knight (The two other front runners being runemasters and monks). Eventually, the runemaster was merged into the death knight hero class (along with the necromancer), and later with the monk".

Wow, the first dark ranger concept i've seen that makes some sort of sense and doesn't seem dead on arrival, kudos. Consider my earlier tentatively retracted.

Also they could mix up tinker and alchemist just fine in much the same way, different speccs/aspects of the same class.

Perhaps wardens and shadow hunters could be made out to be of the same class as well, but i'll admit that's a stretch.

[username993720]

Wow, the first dark ranger concept i've seen that makes some sort of sense and doesn't seem dead on arrival, kudos. Consider my earlier tentatively retracted.

Also they could mix up tinker and alchemist just fine in much the same way, different speccs/aspects of the same class.

Perhaps wardens and shadow hunters could be made out to be of the same class as well, but i'll admit that's a stretch.

Could be. it would be called a 'Scientist'.

I don't know about the Warden and Shadow Hunter. one is a tribal mysticist, the other a jailer.

[Teriz]

Dark Ranger/Priestess of the Moon/Naga Sea Witch

I think they should be 3 different specializations of the same class (ranger), as they all use bows and magical attacks. but isn't the hunter class a ranger already? technically yes, but none of the specializations really focus on magical attacks, except for a few abilities here and there. the sea witch spec could focus on frost and water magics (and even lightning and arcane); the priestess of the moon spec could focus on moon abilities, fiery shots and spectral pets; and the dark ranger spec could focus on necromancy and manipulation. blizzard can take inspiration from tyrande's and sylvanas's abilities and talents in heroes of the storm when designing the class/specs.

I honestly think most of those ideas would be better served as additions to the MM Hunter spec instead of being placed in a new class. Hunters already had the majority of those abilities and mechanics (including the core of the Dark Ranger hero Black Arrow), and it really didn't alter their play style in any significant way, because it was still just shots and arrows.

[loras]

Could be. it would be called a 'Scientist'.

I don't know about the Warden and Shadow Hunter. one is a tribal mysticist, the other a jailer.

Both could be described as magical rogues too though, hence my suggestion.

And a scientist is not about practical applications but rather research, so then either tinker or alchemist would be better names i think.

[username993720]

I honestly think most of those ideas would be better served as additions to the MM Hunter spec instead of being placed in a new class. Hunters already had the majority of those abilities and mechanics (including the core of the Dark Ranger hero Black Arrow), and it really didn't alter their play style in any significant way, because it was still just shots and arrows.

So does the Warlock having Metamorphosis and Death Coil, Shamans having Healing Wave and Hex, Warriors having Bladestorm, Mages having Blink and Mirror Images.

It's not so much about gameplay, but the fantasy they fulfill. having only 1-2 abilities within a class does not satisfy the fantasy of playing a dark ranger. Look at all of Sylvanas' abilities and talents in heroes of the storm. how many of them does the Hunter class have?

The Marksmanship Hunter can be a physical ranged specialization.

Both could be described as magical rogues too though, hence my suggestion.

And a scientist is not about practical applications but rather research, so then either tinker or alchemist would be better names i think.

So is the Demon Hunter, and it is a separate class. behaving like another class does not mean they have anything in common, thematically.

the problem is a Tinker is not an Alchemist, and an Alchemist is not a Tinker. you gotta find a name that describes them both.

Void Knight

As it stands now, the Void is the ONLY cosmic force that does not have its own unique class. Meanwhile...

Death: Death Knight
Fel: Warlock, Demon Hunter
Light: Paladin, Priest (2 specs)
Life: Druid, possibly Shaman and Hunter (as they are both connected to the elements and/or the animal life)
Arcane: Mage (all 3 specs are derived from the Arcane)

Void? It has no unique class. It only has Shadow Priest, which is ONE SPEC of the Priest class.

Lorewise, we already have examples of Paladin-esque figures serving in the Twilight's Hammer, the apocalyptic cult that worships the Old Gods, who are beings of pure Void. These individuals are known as Twilight Vindicators.

Logically, 10.0 will be about the Void Lords. A Void-based class would therefore be the perfect tie-in, and it would be introduced to the Alliance and Horde by the Ren'dorei and Shadowmoon Mag'har respectively.

As well, marketing-wise, the trope of "Black Knight" tends to be massively popular and attract A LOT of people. One only needs to look at the massive hype that Death Knight, another class that fits this trope, generated.

They wouldn't add a made-up class, with no background or lore. Regardless of how much you desire it.

Necromancer would be my first pick, with bard coming a close second.


You have no idea how "unique" the tinker class' gameplay is because the class does not exist. No one does. It's fine if you personally prefer a class over all the other options, but let's not make up falsehoods.

Jesus christ, lelenia. You have a knack for being anti all the time.

as for your idea of cosmetic classes, like Shaman and Druid being able to fill the role of a Tinker:

Why add the Death Knight, when they could have just given it to the Warlock? why add the Monk, when they could have just given it to the Warrior? why add the Demon hunter, when it could have been given to the Warlock? why add 2 light wielder classes, when one is enough? why separate Druid and Hunter, and not just combine them into one? why not fuse monk and rogue together? waste of a class position...

Saying every class can fill the niche of another, mechanically, with just a paintbrush tossed over it, will ruin the fantasy and RPG elements of this game.

[Teriz]

Frankly all this odd support for dark rangers and necromancers seems like a desire to be more snowflakey than the classes that already represent them (namely hunter and death knight).

Strap some goth-y armor on a hunter and find yourself a robe and tadaa: dark ranger and necromancer.


And hell all that talk of alchemical and poison attacks somehow fitting necromancers makes me think that deep down some people are just tinker-lovers in denial. ^^

Yep. Necromancers with spray guns, injecting chemicals and tossing Acid bombs....

It's exactly like this;



And it would be better served in a Tinker class.

- - - Updated - - -

So does the Warlock having Metamorphosis and Death Coil, Shamans having Healing Wave and Hex, Warriors having Bladestorm, Mages having Blink and Mirror Images.

It's not so much about gameplay, but the fantasy they fulfill. having only 1-2 abilities within a class does not satisfy the fantasy of playing a dark ranger. Look at all of Sylvanas' abilities and talents in heroes of the storm. how many of them does the Hunter class have?

The Marksmanship Hunter can be a physical ranged specialization.

It had two, Black Arrow, and Silencing Shot (Wailing Arrow). If you look at Dark Rangers in WoW, that's pretty much all they have too. Pretty much everything else associated with Sylvanas; Possession, Haunting Wave, etc. comes from the Banshee aspect which has never been shown to transfer to any Dark Rangers she created. Nathanos Blightcaller for example isn't a Banshee, he's just a forsaken Hunter, and he's the trainer of the Dark Rangers.

Also bringing in PotM and Naga Witch abilities into a Dark Ranger concept just shows how little meat this concept has on its bones. Especially when those abilities are better served in the Hunter, Mage, and Shaman classes, and have actually appeared in those classes.

[loras]

So does the Warlock having Metamorphosis and Death Coil, Shamans having Healing Wave and Hex, Warriors having Bladestorm, Mages having Blink and Mirror Images.

It's not so much about gameplay, but the fantasy they fulfill. having only 1-2 abilities within a class does not satisfy the fantasy of playing a dark ranger. Look at all of Sylvanas' abilities and talents in heroes of the storm. how many of them does the Hunter class have?

The Marksmanship Hunter can be a physical ranged specialization.



So is the Demon Hunter, and it is a separate class. behaving like another class does not mean they have anything in common, thematically.

the problem is a Tinker is not an Alchemist, and an Alchemist is not a Tinker. you gotta find a name that describes them both.



They wouldn't add a made-up class, with no background or lore. Regardless of how much you desire it.



Jesus christ, lelenia. You have a knack for being anti all the time.

as for your idea of cosmetic classes, like Shaman and Druid being able to fill the role of a Tinker:

Why add the Death Knight, when they could have just given it to the Warlock? why add the Monk, when they could have just given it to the Warrior? why add the Demon hunter, when it could have been given to the Warlock? why add 2 light wielder classes, when one is enough? why separate Druid and Hunter, and not just combine them into one? why not fuse monk and rogue together? waste of a class position...

Saying every class can fill the niche of another, mechanically, with just a paintbrush tossed over it, will ruin the fantasy and RPG elements of this game.

Fair point, and engineer is taken...
Hmm...

Adeptus Mechanicus.

[username993720]

It had two, Black Arrow, and Silencing Shot (Wailing Arrow). If you look at Dark Rangers in WoW, that's pretty much all they have too. Pretty much everything else associated with Sylvanas; Possession, Haunting Wave, etc. comes from the Banshee aspect which has never been shown to transfer to any Dark Rangers she created. Nathanos Blightcaller for example isn't a Banshee, he's just a forsaken Hunter, and he's the trainer of the Dark Rangers.

Also bringing in PotM and Naga Witch abilities into a Dark Ranger concept just shows how little meat this concept has on its bones. Especially when those abilities are better served in the Hunter, Mage, and Shaman classes, and have actually appeared in those classes.

No, i integrated them into one Ranger class because they are all using Bows and magical attacks. adding just one at a time, when you can add all 3, is a waste of an expansion feature.

No Warcraft 3 unit has enough meat on them. having just 3 abilities, and one Ultimate ability, does not provide enough to constitute an entire class. but, there we are, with Death Knight, Monk (which never had mistweaver and windwalker before) and demon hunter.

Silence was given to the Priest class. but, you could say the silencing shot does this as well. Life Drain was given to the Warlock. Charm was given to the Succubus pet, or Dominate Mind to the Priest class.

The hunter class does not fulfill the fantasy of being a Ranger who uses necromancy, with just one ability. not to say that the hunter class does not utilize daggers in its abilities (let alone, dual-wielding).

I would say it could draw more theme and abilities from the demon hunter class of Diablo, as they resemble each other, if you think it doesn't have enough going for it.

[Teriz]

No, i integrated them into one Ranger class because they are all using Bows and magical attacks. adding just one at a time, when you can add all 3, is a waste of an expansion feature.

Sure, but the Dark Ranger has a very specific theme. The Naga Witch and PotM don't really work with its theme. It isn't helped that Forked Lightning went to Shaman, Mana Shield went to Mages, and Black Arrow, Frost Arrow, Searing Arrow, Sentinel, Trueshot Aura all went to Hunters.

No Warcraft 3 unit has enough meat on them. having just 3 abilities, and one Ultimate ability, does not provide enough to constitute an entire class. but, there we are, with Death Knight, Monk (which never had mistweaver and windwalker before) and demon hunter.

Tinker does, since it has the WC3 abilities and the HotS abilities. Also if we stretch the concept a bit, you can incorporate the Alchemist's abilities as well since its a Goblin using tech.

Death Knights incorporated Necromancers, Lichs, Dreadlords, Abominations, Frost Wyrms, Banshees, and other UD units.

The Monk class incorporated Brewmasters and general Monk RPG archetypes.

Again, the issue with Dark Ranger is lore and design constraints. Like I said before, Black Arrow really didn't alter Hunter gameplay much if at all, and at best you're looking at a Hunter/Shadow Priest combo that really doesn't add much to the table, because at its core it's going to play exactly like the Hunter class.

Silence was given to the Priest class. but, you could say the silencing shot does this as well. Life Drain was given to the Warlock. Charm was given to the Succubus pet, or Dominate Mind to the Priest class.

The hunter class does not fulfill the fantasy of being a Ranger who uses necromancy, with just one ability. not to say that the hunter class does not utilize daggers in its abilities (let alone, dual-wielding).

I would say it could draw more theme and abilities from the demon hunter class of Diablo, as they resemble each other, if you think it doesn't have enough going for it.

Well being a Ranger that uses Necromancy isn't the fantasy of being a Dark Ranger. The fantasy of being a Dark Ranger is being Sylvanas. That's it, and that's all. Unfortunately Blizzard has done everything in its power to show that Sylvanas is completely one of a kind, and that doesn't bode well for the foundation of a class.

With that said, I would be VERY interested in a Dark Ranger concept that uses ideas from the Diablo Demon Hunter, and combined it some attributes from Sylvanas HotS. There are obvious problems, but I'd be lying if I said that wouldn't be cool to see.

- - - Updated - - -

Fair point, and engineer is taken...
Hmm...

Adeptus Mechanicus.

Mechanic, Technician, Mekkgineer, Machinist, Gadgeteer, etc.

[Triceron]

Sure, but the Dark Ranger has a very specific theme. The Naga Witch and PotM don't really work with its theme. It isn't helped that Forked Lightning went to Shaman, Mana Shield went to Mages, and Black Arrow, Frost Arrow, Searing Arrow, Sentinel, Trueshot Aura all went to Hunters.

Specs in general can have a very specific theme. They are effectively classes within themselves, connected loosely to other 'classes' by the means of some common abilities and the barest of themes.

Shadow Priest has almost no real tangible connection to the rest of the Priest kit, and you could take away all the Holy abilities without affecting how Shadow Priest would function. Marksman Hunter doesn't even use Pets any more, and is very far removed than say the Survival spec or Beastmastery spec.

And as with any new class, it doesn't matter if X ability went to another class. New abilities can be made that function the same way. Howling Blast = renamed WC3 Frost Nova.

Well being a Ranger that uses Necromancy isn't the fantasy of being a Dark Ranger. The fantasy of being a Dark Ranger is being Sylvanas. That's it, and that's all. Unfortunately Blizzard has done everything in its power to show that Sylvanas is completely one of a kind, and that doesn't bode well for the foundation of a class.

Which means the Hunter doesn't fulfill this either. Even with Black Arrow in their arsenal, we wouldn't get a 'Sylvanas' class out of it. I think a Ranger class could inhabit much of that identity if it was simply using the Dark Ranger themes as a base for a new spec, just like DK's inhabit the identity of Liches for their Frost Spec without actually being magical casters, or having Blood spec that gives them Dreadlord themes. Or how Hunters have Beastmastery that homages Beastmasters, even though they don't get the dual wield axes/throwing axes that Rexxar has. Dark Ranger could be represented through a magical Ranger class with a Dark-themed spec.

All the banshee themes, all the shadow abilities, all the mind control/charm effects can be incorporated into this spec. The idea is that the Ranger has access to magical abilities and is tapping into some greater power that allows them to use these types of abilities; much like how Death Knights tap into their Runeswords to cast Necromancy. Tapping into different sources of power could explain how the specs work; such as tapping into Elune for a POTM spec or tapping into the powers of the Tidestone to gain access to powers of Storms and Sea.

[Al Gorefiend]

I'm only here for the inevitable bitching between Teriz and Ielenia that carries 40+ pages of two people who get notifications whenever the word "Tinker" is posted on MMO-C.

On topic: Tinker, I prefer the idea that they are ranged and use guns and technology. Setting turrets like vanilla shaman totems, call in air strikes and long range artillery bombardments , throw some grenades.

I'd like to see them as ranged DPS with a close-range tank spec that capitalizes on using mechs, shredders of that nature.

There's such a niche for a class that doesn't use magic. We need an Iron Man to fight alongside Thor

[stigz]

Superclass bundled with next expansions most expensive purchase option.

Choose 2 classes and it combines them into a fusion of the two with different sets of abilities based on the 2 clases you choose to combine.

And blizzard says fuck you to the balance issues

[username993720]

Sure, but the Dark Ranger has a very specific theme. The Naga Witch and PotM don't really work with its theme. It isn't helped that Forked Lightning went to Shaman, Mana Shield went to Mages, and Black Arrow, Frost Arrow, Searing Arrow, Sentinel, Trueshot Aura all went to Hunters.



Tinker does, since it has the WC3 abilities and the HotS abilities. Also if we stretch the concept a bit, you can incorporate the Alchemist's abilities as well since its a Goblin using tech.

Death Knights incorporated Necromancers, Lichs, Dreadlords, Abominations, Frost Wyrms, Banshees, and other UD units.

The Monk class incorporated Brewmasters and general Monk RPG archetypes.

Again, the issue with Dark Ranger is lore and design constraints. Like I said before, Black Arrow really didn't alter Hunter gameplay much if at all, and at best you're looking at a Hunter/Shadow Priest combo that really doesn't add much to the table, because at its core it's going to play exactly like the Hunter class.



Well being a Ranger that uses Necromancy isn't the fantasy of being a Dark Ranger. The fantasy of being a Dark Ranger is being Sylvanas. That's it, and that's all. Unfortunately Blizzard has done everything in its power to show that Sylvanas is completely one of a kind, and that doesn't bode well for the foundation of a class.

With that said, I would be VERY interested in a Dark Ranger concept that uses ideas from the Diablo Demon Hunter, and combined it some attributes from Sylvanas HotS. There are obvious problems, but I'd be lying if I said that wouldn't be cool to see.

- - - Updated - - -



Mechanic, Technician, Mekkgineer, Machinist, Gadgeteer, etc.

You keep saying the Dark Ranger. i said a Ranger class, not a Dark Ranger class. every class has distinctive themes through their specializations. what connects all of them together is the use of bows and magical attacks.

Have you heard about transferring abilities? when the Death Knight was added, it took the Death Coil ability from the Warlock. when the Demon Hunter was added, it took the Metamorphosis ability of Warlocks.

You just answered you own argument. if the Death Knight incorporated abilities from different warcraft 3 units, so can the Dark Ranger. in this case, the Banshee unit.

The Alchemist and Tinker were Goblin units in Warcraft 3, but it does not mean the classes are only about goblin tech or chemistry.

Well, people didn't believe the Demon Hunter would be added, because it resembled a Warlock in Metamorphosis or a Rogue using Illidan's Glaives. and yet, it was added in Legion, and they managed to make it distinct enough. if you gut the Hunter class of its Dark Ranger/Priestess of the Moon/Naga Sea witch abilities (and the Shaman, mage and others of theirs) then it does feel different and unique in contrast to them.

Weapon Types: Axe, bow, Crossbow, Dagger, Scythe, Sword.

Armor Proficiency: Leather.

Skill(s): Archery, Necromancy.

Every class has its representative. it's like saying Demon Hunter is just Illidan, Death Knight is just Arthas, Monk is just Chen, Druid is just Malfurion, Warlock is just Gul'dan, and Shaman is just Thrall. Based on them and them only would not constitute a class. thankfully, Blizzard can make an entire class out of one specialization (case: Monk).

The names you've suggested are only tech-specific. nothing that points to an Alchemy. how about a Doctor?

[Al Gorefiend]

You keep saying the Dark Ranger. i said a Ranger class, not a Dark Ranger class. every class has distinctive themes through their specializations. what connects all of them together is the use of bows and magical attacks.

Have you heard about transferring abilities? when the Death Knight was added, it took the Death Coil ability from the Warlock. when the Demon Hunter was added, it took the Metamorphosis ability of Warlocks.

You just answered you own argument. if the Death Knight incorporated abilities from different warcraft 3 units, so can the Dark Ranger. in this case, the Banshee unit.

The Alchemist and Tinker were Goblin units in Warcraft 3, but it does not mean the class is only about goblin tech or alchemy.

Well, people didn't believe the Demon Hunter would be added, because it resembled a Warlock in Metamorphosis or a Rogue using Illidan's Glaives. and yet, it was added in Legion, and they managed to make it distinct enough. if you gut the Hunter class of its Dark Ranger/Priestess of the Moon/Naga Sea witch abilities (and the Shaman, mage and others of theirs) then it does feel different and unique in contrast to them.

Weapon Types: Axe, bow, Crossbow, Dagger, Scythe, Sword.

Armor Proficiency: Leather.

Skill(s): Archery, Necromancy.

Every class has its representative. it's like saying Demon Hunter is just Illidan, Death Knight is just Arthas, Monk is just Chen, Druid is just Malfurion, Warlock is just Gul'dan, and Shaman is just Thrall. Based on them and them only would not constitute a class. thankfully, Blizzard can make an entire class out of one specialization (case: Monk).

The names you've suggested are only tech-specific. nothing that points to an Alchemy. how about a Doctor?

Honestly I think any and all hopes for an "Alchemist" style class went to Monks. You're chugging "potions" AKA brews that briefly empower you, they even chuck explosive barrels of brew and breath fire.

Honestly Monk is just a Pandaren-themed Alchemist class. We STILL do not have a class that uses Tech-themed abilities and the few that existed in the game and were historically given to Hunters are being removed expansion by expansion.

And Engineering already existing is such a moot point by now... Do Engineers even craft damage consumables anymore? Things like Frost Grenades being specific to a class sounds so much better than further gutting that profession

[Teriz]

Specs in general can have a very specific theme. They are effectively classes within themselves, connected loosely to other 'classes' by the means of some common abilities and the barest of themes.

Shadow Priest has almost no real tangible connection to the rest of the Priest kit, and you could take away all the Holy abilities without affecting how Shadow Priest would function. Marksman Hunter doesn't even use Pets any more, and is very far removed than say the Survival spec or Beastmastery spec.

And as with any new class, it doesn't matter if X ability went to another class. New abilities can be made that function the same way. Howling Blast = renamed WC3 Frost Nova.

Actually Shadow is one of the major points of the class. Priests are all about worshipping the light and/or the shadow and balancing those forces. Because of that, a Shadow spec makes sense, and shadow abilities exist in all three specs. Discipline is supposed to be the balance between the two forces.

The Hunter class is about a Ranger or Huntsman who uses the wilds to develop survival skills and abilities. MM Hunters are sharpshooters and rifleman who still fight with nature despite not having pets.

In short, all specs work with the general theme of the class itself. And it always matters if abilities proposed for this class already exist or have existed in existing classes. If we have a situation where you can pretty much place every proposed new class ability in an existing class, why do we need the new class?

Which means the Hunter doesn't fulfill this either. Even with Black Arrow in their arsenal, we wouldn't get a 'Sylvanas' class out of it. I think a Ranger class could inhabit much of that identity if it was simply using the Dark Ranger themes as a base for a new spec, just like DK's inhabit the identity of Liches for their Frost Spec without actually being magical casters, or having Blood spec that gives them Dreadlord themes. Or how Hunters have Beastmastery that homages Beastmasters, even though they don't get the dual wield axes/throwing axes that Rexxar has. Dark Ranger could be represented through a magical Ranger class with a Dark-themed spec.

All the banshee themes, all the shadow abilities, all the mind control/charm effects can be incorporated into this spec. The idea is that the Ranger has access to magical abilities and is tapping into some greater power that allows them to use these types of abilities; much like how Death Knights tap into their Runeswords to cast Necromancy. Tapping into different sources of power could explain how the specs work; such as tapping into Elune for a POTM spec or tapping into the powers of the Tidestone to gain access to powers of Storms and Sea.

Okay, but how exactly would this be any different than how a Hunter played while utilizing Black Arrow? In that case you had a physical ranged class that could use Necromancy along with various other magical arrow abilities like Arcane and Chimera shot, and it felt no different than the typical Hunter class. In short, I'm simply not seeing how this would play any different than the existing Hunter class.

[Triceron]

Actually Shadow is one of the major points of the class. Priests are all about worshipping the light and/or the shadow and balancing those forces. Because of that, a Shadow spec makes sense, and shadow abilities exist in all three specs. Discipline is supposed to be the balance between the two forces.

Right, and the Ranger class that we're talking about is not yet defined. If we have a core Ranger class that is able to tap into external powers then we can explain why they would use Sylvanas-level Necromancy, Azshara-level Storm/Sea/Arcane powers and Elune-level Moon/Light powers all in one class. The shift in power is simply a specialization.

why do we need the new class?

WoW doesn't need anything, so this is pointless to ask. For that matter, we don't need a Tinker either. The game has come this far without it and is still thriving strong.

Okay, but how exactly would this be any different than how a Hunter played while utilizing Black Arrow? In that case you had a physical ranged class that could use Necromancy along with various other magical arrow abilities like Arcane and Chimera shot, and it felt no different than the typical Hunter class. In short, I'm simply not seeing how this would play any different than the existing Hunter class.

Why would the gameplay mechanics of a different class be exactly the same as one that is existing? It's kind of pointless question here.

A new class, no matter what it is, would have new gameplay. A Death Knight isn't just a different flavour of Paladin, a Monk isn't just a different flavour of Shaman. Why are we suddenly assuming a new class would play like a Hunter? Just because it uses a Bow?

The way I see it, it's as different as comparing Rogues to Shamans. Just because they dual wield doesn't mean their mechanics would be the same. They have very different specs, they have very different motivations and backgrounds, they have very different gameplay. A Hunter doesn't tap into the magical powers of external forces, a Hunter doesn't cast Arcane or Divine spells. They are survivalists and beast tamers and expert sharpshooters. The Ranger class would be built around the use of magic, with the Bow simply being their weapon of choice through which they channel their magical energies. Priestess of the Moon and Sea Witches weren't mere hunters, and they don't even fit that classification. They were magic users that simply chose to use a bow as a means of attack. Sylvanas, with her extensive use of magic, has far surpassed being a mere hunter. These identities have outgrown the Hunter, and unless we're talking about changing the Hunter entirely to be a Magic-user type class, it won't be able to satisfy any of these identities properly.

The POTM spec be built as a psuedo healer spec, perhaps similar to old Fistweaving or Discipline. Sea/Storm spec could be a caster-heavy spec that uses bow auto attacks to generate spellcasting resource. The core theme of the Ranger is the use of magical abilities supported by the use of a Bow, as the POTM and Sea Witch were; and how Sylvanas is shown now through her heavy use of magical power. Look at her fight with Bolvar where her arrows produced magical chains; that's something that doesn't fit a Hunter's kit or identity. It would fit perfectly with a core Bow user class that has strong magical aptitude and an affinity for tapping into greater sources of magical power.

[Teriz]

You keep saying the Dark Ranger. i said a Ranger class, not a Dark Ranger class. every class has distinctive themes through their specializations. what connects all of them together is the use of bows and magical attacks.

But the Hunter is already a Ranger. The Survival Spec is even called a Ranger in its description.

Have you heard about transferring abilities? when the Death Knight was added, it took the Death Coil ability from the Warlock. when the Demon Hunter was added, it took the Metamorphosis ability of Warlocks.

You just answered you own argument. if the Death Knight incorporated abilities from different warcraft 3 units, so can the Dark Ranger. in this case, the Banshee unit.

The difference is that the Death Knight was to be the Necromancer class in WoW, so it got every Necromancer ability, and that pulled in various abilities from multiple NPCs.

The Alchemist and Tinker were Goblin units in Warcraft 3, but it does not mean the classes are only about goblin tech or chemistry.

Well it sort of does. If you think of WoW as a whole, technology from races tends to revolve around Goblin and Gnomish races. Goblin and Gnomish homelands are technology-based. In fact, pretty much everytime you run into a Gnome or Goblin NPC, they're using tech in some fashion. Both the Goblin and Gnome faction leaders are Tinkers also. In addition, the Tinker concept in both WC3 and HotS are based around Goblin (and Gnome) tech.

Well, people didn't believe the Demon Hunter would be added, because it resembled a Warlock in Metamorphosis or a Rogue using Illidan's Glaives. and yet, it was added in Legion, and they managed to make it distinct enough. if you gut the Hunter class of its Dark Ranger/Priestess of the Moon/Naga Sea witch abilities (and the Shaman, mage and others of theirs) then it does feel different and unique in contrast to them.

Weapon Types: Axe, bow, Crossbow, Dagger, Scythe, Sword.

Armor Proficiency: Leather.

Skill(s): Archery, Necromancy.

Every class has its representative. it's like saying Demon Hunter is just Illidan, Death Knight is just Arthas, Monk is just Chen, Druid is just Malfurion, Warlock is just Gul'dan, and Shaman is just Thrall. Based on them and them only would not constitute a class. thankfully, Blizzard can make an entire class out of one specialization (case: Monk).

The names you've suggested are only tech-specific. nothing that points to an Alchemy. how about a Doctor?

Eh... Blizzard couldn't make three physical ranged specs different enough in the Hunter class itself. This is why Survival became a melee spec. You honestly believe you could make a class feel different from Hunter by using discarded Hunter abilities?

[Al Gorefiend]

Right, and the Ranger class that we're talking about is not yet defined. If we have a core Ranger class that is able to tap into external powers then we can explain why they would use Sylvanas-level Necromancy, Azshara-level Storm/Sea/Arcane powers and Elune-level Moon/Light powers all in one class. The shift in power is simply a specialization.



WoW doesn't need anything, so this is pointless to ask. For that matter, we don't need a Tinker either. The game has come this far without it and is still thriving strong.




Why would the gameplay mechanics of a different class be exactly the same as one that is existing? It's kind of pointless question here.

A new class, no matter what it is, would have new gameplay. A Death Knight isn't just a different flavour of Paladin, a Monk isn't just a different flavour of Shaman. Why are we suddenly assuming a new class would play like a Hunter? Just because it uses a Bow?

The way I see it, it's as different as comparing Rogues to Shamans. Just because they dual wield doesn't mean their mechanics would be the same. The POTM spec could even be built as a healer spec, perhaps similar to old Fistweaving or Discipline.

Someone who gets it. I swear half the people in threads like this have such a lack of imagination it's like discussing hypotheticals with bureaucrats.

They can make a Barbarian class and make it play different from a Fury Warrior if they wanted to, it's a creative team of 100+ people. They can make a cloth-wearing light bending cleric class and make it play nothing like a holy priest or paladin.

Unlikely? Duh. Impossible? Not at all.

Considering there exists 100 different fantasy universes alongside Warcraft each with their own ideas of magic and fighting styles that Warcraft hasn't tapped into...

A class that uses technology
A class that uses music like a Bard
A class that uses insects and arachnids like D&D's Blightmancer (surrounding an enemy in a swarm of biting, stinging bees and locusts)
A class that uses blood magic
A class that uses celestial space magic like balance druids
A class that uses mirages and mind tricks like Mysterio
A class that uses an unconventional weapon like a whip, flail, nunchuks etc.
A class that uses magic through voice, like the Dragonborn of Skyrim or Black Bolt of Marvel

Idk people who crap on Tinker in this thread are some of the same posters who crapped on Demon Hunter and Monk