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

[username993720]

A Warden class is unlikely, since there isn't enough material to create a viable class from the concept.

Yes there is:
1. The Warcraft 3 hero unit.
2. Maiev Heroes of the Storm abilities and talents.

Just like the Demon Hunter, Monk and Death Knight were based on their WC3 heroes (let alone monks, who were based on a specialization alone - the brewmaster).

[Directionalk9]

If they do bring out a new class i hope it's something silly. People going on about tinkers, necros and dark rangers until every thread about them just comes down to bitching about semantics. I hope it's something like hairdresser or painter.

Cowboy... Gunslinger, double pistols, you know you want it.

[Shadowferal]

Archaeologists...
Based on the new archaeology...and digsites all over.

Wut?

[Teriz]

That's pretty much all we need to see here.

We don't need one. We don't need a WC3 hero to base a new playable class on.

With the classic classes no, since they're mostly combinations of multiple units fitting a theme with an occasional hero attached.

However with the expansion classes, every single one comes from a hero unit with their entire kits attached from the start.

But it's not a good argument either considering there is no Rogue Hero in WC3. The Warden is still a Warden, the Demon Hunter a Demon Hunter, the Blademaster a Blademaster. None of these are technically Rogues. If they were, we would have seen Wardens in the Rogue Class hall.

Again there was a Rogue hero planned. It simply didn't make it into the game. That Rogue hero ironically IS in the Rogue class hall.

How is it an assumption when it simply wasn't connected when you imply it was at the very start?

An Assassination-based hero from WC3 not being connected to Rogues from the start is highly unlikely.

Nonetheless true. Facts are facts, and if you doubt it then by all means provide proof of the alternative.

Simply saying DK's have runeblades doesn't change the fact the Developers worked on adding the Runemaster, a concept never seen in Warcraft.

And just for history sake, the Runemaster was not developed in Wrath of the Lich King. It actually was planned for WoW.

The runemaster was considered as a playable class in classic World of Warcraft but was scrapped early in development.[3] According to John Staats, runemasters were replaced by druids,[4] while according to Kevin Jordan they were replaced by warlocks in the role of a "freak class" that differed from standard RPG tropes.

Yeah, I'm not sure I buy that either when Druids were in WC3 and a major lore character was attached to them, and even in that quote there is a discrepancy about which class replaced the Runemaster. In addition, multiple hero and creep units had abilities that were automatically sourced to Warlocks, so what WC3 abilities would they have sourced for a Runemaster?

[Rendark]

Cowboy... Gunslinger, double pistols, you know you want it.

I don't know, when ever i play western games i tend to use shotguns more then anything.

[Teriz]

Yes there is:
1. The Warcraft 3 hero unit.
2. Maiev Heroes of the Storm abilities and talents.

Just like the Demon Hunter, Monk and Death Knight were based on their WC3 heroes (let alone monks, who were based on a specialization alone - the brewmaster).

1. Wardens are only Night Elves.
2. Most of the Wardens unique abilities are sourced out to other classes.
3. What does Warden bring to the table that Rogues, Monks, Survival Hunters, and Demon Hunters don't already bring?
4. Good luck making multiple specializations.

[InflaterMouse]

My first guess is race specific versions of current classes. Making them different based on the race is a much easier plan, and probably easier to balance.

[Rendark]

Its always funny read the tinker lovers wanting for that class. I expect the next pre new exp announce months to enjoy their eternal ask for the class, only to get disappointed when its not released.

Tinkers will never happen. Next class will be a death magic user. Deal with it.

And, even if next class is not a death magic user, it wont be tinkers. Tinkers will never be a class in this game.

Never say never, because if it does happen (I don't there should be any more new classes) you're just going to look dumb.

[Triceron]

Yeah, I'm not sure I buy that either when Druids were in WC3 and a major lore character was attached to them, and even in that quote there is a discrepancy about which class replaced the Runemaster. In addition, multiple hero and creep units had abilities that were automatically sourced to Warlocks, so what WC3 abilities would they have sourced for a Runemaster?

You need to know the full context of why the devs are saying what they say.

Originally Druids were Night Elf exclusive. They also planned FAR MORE classes to compete with the very game they were basing WoW on - Everquest - which had 23 classes at the time.

"Several classes were scrapped early. The one big one that broke my heart was the Runemaster.

Alas it was killed along with several others that I can’t recall.

Remember that at first we were going up against EQ and they had something like 15 and 23 classes. We got a lot of grief (and there were lots of internal arguments about) only have 9 classes & 6 races."


That you don't believe it is simply you being you. The devs spoke out clearly on this.

In addition, multiple hero and creep units had abilities that were automatically sourced to Warlocks, so what WC3 abilities would they have sourced for a Runemaster?

WoW was only loosely developed based on WC3. Everquest and other RPGs had major influence over its development too, which is why we have non WC3 heroes like the Rogue and Warlock class, which only have very loose connections to WC3.

That being said, it wouldn't have sourced WC3. We already have examples of abilities in the RPG books to show us what they loosely planned. Also, consider that every class in WoW is 95% new mechanics and abiltiies that aren't derived from WC3. Less than 10% of abilities in WoW are carry overs from WC3, and even less during Vanilla considering a majority of those WC3 abilities weren't even added yet.

[Teriz]

You need to know the full context of why the devs are saying what they say.

Originally Druids were Night Elf exclusive. They also planned FAR MORE classes to compete with the very game they were basing WoW on - Everquest - which had 23 classes at the time.

"Several classes were scrapped early. The one big one that broke my heart was the Runemaster.

Alas it was killed along with several others that I can’t recall.

Remember that at first we were going up against EQ and they had something like 15 and 23 classes. We got a lot of grief (and there were lots of internal arguments about) only have 9 classes & 6 races."


That you don't believe it is simply you being you. The devs spoke out clearly on this.

Ah, so they were scrapped early, that makes sense. When they say early, they must mean in the extremely early stages, which could indicate that at first they were trying to copy Everquest, then settled on a different class strategy which moved them towards using the WC3 hero units. I've also heard that one of the reasons they chose Warlocks over Necromancers was to avoid being too much like Everquest's class lineup.

WoW was only loosely developed based on WC3. Everquest and other RPGs had major influence over its development too, which is why we have non WC3 heroes like the Rogue and Warlock class, which only have very loose connections to WC3.

Uh, WoW is the direct sequel to WC3 featuring every major character from the latter game, so I would say it's quite a bit more than "loosely based".

[Traveler Voltin]

well since i am bored. i am going to ask some questions for the People that want Necromancer.

how would you create it without butchering DK and warlock?
When people think necromancer they think raising the dead, so would all the spec have pets or just one?
Keep in mind this is Warcraft and i think quite a few people want the D2 style necromancer for WoW which i am not sure fits. (i dont know what the D3 version fights like)

[Teriz]

That being said, it wouldn't have sourced WC3. We already have examples of abilities in the RPG books to show us what they loosely planned. Also, consider that every class in WoW is 95% new mechanics and abiltiies that aren't derived from WC3. Less than 10% of abilities in WoW are carry overs from WC3, and even less during Vanilla considering a majority of those WC3 abilities weren't even added yet.

Yes, and in the decades since WC3 and Vanilla WoW, they've still stuck to utilizing established Warcraft heroes with WC3 abilities attached and ready to utilize in a class structure. So despite them having multiple classes via the RPG books, they're still pulling material for the classes from WC3 and its heroes.

And again, we have two remaining WC3 heroes who share a theme and a race, have NO abilities in the class lineup (or the professions as much as detractors wish were the case) and just so happen to be within a thematic not present in the class lineup. Coincidence? I don't think so.

- - - Updated - - -

well since i am bored. i am going to ask some questions for the People that want Necromancer.

how would you create it without butchering DK and warlock?
When people think necromancer they think raising the dead, so would all the spec have pets or just one?
Keep in mind this is Warcraft and i think quite a few people want the D2 style necromancer for WoW which i am not sure fits. (i dont know what the D3 version fights like)

I'd be very curious to hear answers to this as well.

[ThatsOurEric]

In terms of the Guild Wars "professions"/classes

-Thief, Ranger, & Warrior = WoW already has these covered.

-Elementalist = Given the already large variety of elemental classes and specs already, namely the Mage (Fire & Frost respectively)
Shaman (Enhancement, Restoration, & Elemental use all the elements to varying degrees), and the Monk (Wind), I doubt they'd
make another elemental class. Although one could argue that certain elements aren't given enough representation, and you could
potentially make classes out of them, but what would make say, a spellcaster who uses Water or Earth exclusively do different from
what we have already?

-Engineer = Probably the only class not in WoW, but we already have a profession that would pretty much negate any of the
uniqueness of the Engineer or "Tinker" in this case as a class.

-Guardian = I assume that's the tank of the game? I know nothing of this one.

-Mesmer = I'm pretty sure the Shadow Priest has this covered, as a lot of spells are flavor themed to being Mind-based.

-Necromancer = The problem with this class is that nearly all it's flavor and spells are already taken by the Death Knight.
You would have to redesign the Death Knight class in order to make the Necromancer exist.

The only example I see here is the Dragon Knight (no idea about the others), but this is something they could do.
This could be another hero class, and since there are several Aspects with their own element to correspond to,
there's a lot of freedom of creativity here. Plus who doesn't want to play as a goddamn dragon. Probably the
strongest class option they have to make imo.

-Cryomancer, Paladin, Lightbinder, Archer, Berserker, Slayer, Warlock, & Knight = WoW already has these covered.

-Kinetic = I assume this is a mix between Monk and Arcane Mage? It's a unique enough idea, but there's
nothing in WoW, to my knowledge, that would allow this class to exist.

-Necromancer = See above. Cannot be done.

-Gunner = There's several Hunter talents and skills that use the theme of guns already, so I
don't see the need to add a dedicated "gun only" class.

-Witch = This could potentially be done, but you'd be hard pressed to find a way of making Witches
different from Warlocks since Affliction Warlocks already exist. Imo you'd need to essentially make
an amalgam of an Affliction Warlock and a Balance Druid.

-Alchemist = Another unique idea, especially since you could have this class use various items taken
from either vendors or drops from enemies and craft items to use offensively/defensively. But there's
already a profession of Alchemy that heavily follows this theme, so it can't be done.

-Knight, Thief, Dark Knight, Ranger, Sage, Monk, Paladin, White Mage, & Black Mage = WoW already has these covered.

-Bard = A very unique idea, and this isn't in WoW. The biggest issue though is that WoW most likely will not create
dedicated "buffer" classes. There's also the fact that a class entirely based on singing is just completely non-existent.
Yes, there are songs with powers, but no dedicated (lore wise) classes for them. So atm, this cannot be done. That is,
unless they were to introduce a new race with this as a class. Then it could be done.

-Samurai = Lore-wise, Bladesmasters are samurai. I *assume* the Arms Warrior is supposed to be a Bladesmaster. If I'm
right, this is already done. If I'm not, it could be done I suppose, but what separates them from Arms Warriors?

-Ninja = The Subtlety Rogue has talents that are "ninja-esque" in theme. Granted, the name of "subtlety" for a Rogue is
fucking stupid, and I'd love it if they just renamed them. Either way, if this was to be done, the Pandaren were the best
way to do it, so this chance is long gone unfortunately.

-Dragoon = A unique idea, but I believe the Demon Hunter with it's many acrobatic animations and attacks pretty much
have this covered.

-Machinist = See my comments on the Gunner class.

-Red Mage = A mix of magic and melee already exists with the Enhancement Shaman and Retribution Paladin. One could
also make the argument that the hybrid classes in WoW (such as the Druid) already can do it, depending on the spec you
pick. The problem with an actual Red Mage is Blizzard needing to find the right place for it, and also, I can't imagine the
nightmare it would be to balance this class.

-Alchemist = See above, not possible.

-Beastmaster = Pretty sure the Survival Hunter fills the niche for this.

-Freelancer = Yeah there's no way this class would work in WoW.

-Geomancer = I actually don't know this class. It's it Earth based? If so, the Shaman has this covered.

-Time Mage = A unique idea, but there are already time-like spells and talents that Mages use, particularly Arcane Mages,
so I can't see them making a dedicated class.

-Blue Mage = A very unique class idea, but Blizzard would have a helluva time implementing the core aspect of this
class, namely the how one goes about "learning" enemy skills. And bliz would need to go over which ones this class
could learn, because some enemy skills could be hilariously overpowered.

All of the classes here are covered by an existing WoW class or spec. The sole exception is the Bard, which see above.

All of the classes here are covered by an existing WoW class or spec. The sole exception is the Bard, which see above.

[username993720]

1. Wardens are only Night Elves.
2. Most of the Wardens unique abilities are sourced out to other classes.
3. What does Warden bring to the table that Rogues, Monks, Survival Hunters, and Demon Hunters don't already bring?
4. Good luck making multiple specializations.

1. easily fixable - as Demon Hunters were mostly associated with Night elves, Death Knights with Humans and Monks with Pandaren.
2. Death Coil was sourced to the Warlock, Mana Burn was sourced to the Priest, Immolate was sourced to the Warlock, Evasion is sourced to the Rogue and Metamorphosis was sourced to the Warlock. and yet, here we are.
3. What did Demon Hunters bring to the table that Warlocks didn't already bring when they had Metamorphosis? they bring another theme - that of the Warden, a criminal hunter, a justice seeker, an imprisoner that is not a Holy user, like a Paladin or a Fel user, like a Demon Hunter.
4. It's not up to me. it's up to Blizzard. if they can pull out a whole monk class out of their ass, they can pull out a Warden, as well.

[Ielenia]

Dragonsworn is an RPG class. They are unlikely to pull a new class out of the RPG, as the classes that were added through the expansions were based on WC3 hero units.

And my whole point is that we don't know that new classes have to be based off Warcraft 3 hero units. Like I said, multiple times: it's needlessly restrictive to limit their creativity to only what's inside the Warcraft 3 game, and it's also a rather nonsensical argument when you see at all the things they added into WoW that did not exist in Warcraft 3, like the continent of Pandaria, the jinyu/ankoan, the mogu, alternate Draenor, etc.

[Teriz]

1. easily fixable - as Demon Hunters were mostly associated with Night elves, Death Knights with Humans and Monks with Pandaren.

Blood Elf Demon Hunters were established in TBC, and set up in WC3. Non-human DKs were set up before WotLK. We had non-Pandaren Monks for years in WoW before MoP. Every Warden we've run across has been NE.

2. Death Coil was sourced to the Warlock,

Different ability.

Mana Burn was sourced to the Priest, Immolate was sourced to the Warlock, Evasion is sourced to the Rogue and Metamorphosis was sourced to the Warlock. and yet, here we are.

Yeah, I never supported the entrance of Demon Hunters into WoW, but they still had more material to work with than Wardens. The Warden is an even narrower concept than Demon Hunters.

3. What did Demon Hunters bring to the table that Warlocks didn't already bring when they had Metamorphosis? they bring another theme - that of the Warden, a criminal hunter, a justice seeker, an imprisoner that is not a Holy user, like a Paladin or a Fel user, like a Demon Hunter.

Yes, which is why Metamorphosis was removed for Warlocks and placed in the DH class. So now with Demon Hunters you have this quick agile fighter that can transform into a huge hulking demon. Its a unique enough concept to carry a class. The Warden doesn't have that. The Warden is just an assassin who uses shadow magic and poison. It doesn't have that "Oh shit" ability like Demon Hunters had, which is why Rogues are more than enough to handle their concept.

4. It's not up to me. it's up to Blizzard. if they can pull out a whole monk class out of their ass, they can pull out a Warden, as well.

Well they didn't pull the entire Monk class out of their ass. They took the Brewmaster concept, the Pandaren theme, and the general Martial arts tropes, and crafted a fairly unique melee class. However, the difference is that we didn't have a true Martial arts class, so the Monk filled a gap in the class lineup. There's no gaps for the Warden to fill.

[Triceron]

Ah, so they were scrapped early, that makes sense. When they say early, they must mean in the extremely early stages, which could indicate that at first they were trying to copy Everquest, then settled on a different class strategy which moved them towards using the WC3 hero units. I've also heard that one of the reasons they chose Warlocks over Necromancers was to avoid being too much like Everquest's class lineup.

They'd always had WC3 heros, its just that they weren't all implemented.

Runemaster sounds like it would have been awesome. Do you remember much about what kind of abilities or playstyle it would have? ( Healer, DPS? ) Or did the planning not even get that far?


Necromancer, Runemaster and Death Knight - all got rolled together into DK.
Demon Hunter, Monk - eventually showed up (even tho I tried to poach demon hunter into Warlock, that didn't last) - Xelnath, the former Warlock designer behind adding Metamorphosis to Warlocks

And no, they were not cut at extremely early stages. Gameplay was already created for many of the classes including Necromancer, Runemaster, Monk and Demon Hunter. They were just forcibly cut sometime during development to keep things streamlined and simplified.

Uh, WoW is the direct sequel to WC3 featuring every major character from the latter game, so I would say it's quite a bit more than "loosely based".

The major characters sure, but the classes very loosely represent any of those major characters. The major characters aren't even limited by any of the class restrictions that players have; such as armor class or weapon types or schools of magic. They're able to do anything and everything. It's all loosely based considering major characters are literally portrayed outside of classes.

Greymane, for example, fights with unarmed claw strikes. Anduin is a main character Priest who uses 2H swords. Wrathion doesn't even have a class. These are all examples of WoW growing beyond WC3. If we're going to talk about new classes today, we have to regard how the new class fits in the game; much like how Demon Hunters barely resemble their WC3 portrayal down to the use of Metamorphosis. WC3 Metamorphosis was almost exactly like how Warlocks had it; a ranged DPS form that uses spells and ranged attacks; while the Demon Hunter class got an improved melee form that is more themed off of Heroes of the Storm. This is on top of all the dashing attacks that the Demon Hunter has now.

We can gather that Heroes of the Storm has a greater influence on modern class design than WC3, even if the core concept came from WC3.

This is primarily what informs us that a Dragon class could easily be themed through HOTS abilities, considering we have 3 playable Dragons in the game and plenty of non-dragons with draconic-themed abilities

[Teriz]

They'd always had WC3 heros, its just that they weren't all implemented.

Runemaster sounds like it would have been awesome. Do you remember much about what kind of abilities or playstyle it would have? ( Healer, DPS? ) Or did the planning not even get that far?


Necromancer, Runemaster and Death Knight - all got rolled together into DK.
Demon Hunter, Monk - eventually showed up (even tho I tried to poach demon hunter into Warlock, that didn't last) - Xelnath, the former Warlock designer behind adding Metamorphosis to Warlocks

And no, early was not extremely early stages. Gameplay was already created for many of the classes including Necromancer, Runemaster, Monk and Demon Hunter. They were just forcibly cut sometime during development to keep things streamlined and simplified.

So what aspect of Runemaster made it into Death Knights? The Rune resource system? Because everything else is Death Knight, Undead heroes, and Necromancers.

The major characters sure, but the classes very loosely represent any of those major characters. The major characters aren't even limited by any of the class restrictions that players have; such as armor class or weapon types or schools of magic. They're able to do anything and everything. It's all loosely based considering major characters are literally portrayed outside of classes.

Greymane, for example, fights with unarmed claw strikes. Anduin is a main character Priest who uses 2H swords. Wrathion doesn't even have a class.

I'd consider Anduin a porto-paladin. Wrathion is a dragon, so obviously he isn't a character class. Greymane is a Worgen who breaks the rules of his race's lore for plot purposes, so what he is doesn't matter all that much.

We can gather that Heroes of the Storm has a greater influence on modern class design than WC3, even if the core concept came from WC3.

Considering the placement of HotS Tinker abilities into the Island Expedition teams in BFA, you might be right about that.

[Ielenia]

Well for starters, that's not Tirion, that's Uther, so its 3 out of ten.

My mistake. The point still stands, though.

Also where did I say that WoW exists to push WC3? I said that Blizzard pushes their WC3 characters into other games, since they're clearly franchise characters, and those WC3 characters are used as templates for new characters.

Riiiiiiight... here:

How is the fact that the majority of the Warcraft characters in HotS come from WC3 make my argument "nonsense" when my argument is that WC3 characters are pushed heavily by Blizzard throughout their WC games?

Again, when it's exhibited in every single class, what else should we treat it as? Chance? A coincidence?

Exactly: we should treat it as a coincidence. And you know why? Because we don't have any word from Blizzard whatsoever about it being a rule for class creation. Even if the first three expansions classes being tied to those WC3 units was intentional, we still need word from Blizzard.

Find a statement from Blizzard so that you can ignore and deny it like your done several times when Blizzard's statements have been presented to you? No thanks.

In other words: you have nothing. Because when you do have statements from Blizzards, you have no problem whatsoever to post them, like you did here barely two pages ago.

Well Demonic magic is fundamentally different than the magic used by Mages since it uses Shadow magic. Shadow magic behaves differently than Arcane, Fire, and Ice magic. Poison doesn't behave fundamentally differently than Diseases.

There we go. "Rules for thee but not for me". Guess what? Poison magic that deals "nature damage" is also fundamentally different than diseases. That deal frost and shadow damage, mind you.

Except we have multiple spell caster specs, so that isn't it. Again, the selling point of the Necromancer class is already present in the existing Death Knight class.

Yes, that is a selling point, because we are long overdue for another spellcaster class considering all three expansion classes have been melee classes. And, Teriz, please don't try to speak for other people. You don't get to tell us what the selling points of the necromancer are. That is so condescendingly arrogant of you.

Yes, because they do fundamentally different things. A Necromancer and a DK do not.

Yes. Healing with holy magic is fundamentally different than healing with holy magic, right?

What you're proposing is like the difference between an Enhance and Elemental Shaman.

Again, wrong. What we're proposing is the difference between the priest class and the paladin class.

Quite doubtful since none of the abilities of either have appeared in either profession. Also professions are based on the WC3 item shop, not the hero units.

Abilities are irrelevant considering I was talking about the concepts themselves, and the engineering profession adheres to a 'T' the lore description of the WC3 tinker hero regarding technology malfunctions.

Triceron was attempting to argue that a Dragonsworn has the same pedigree as a Dark Ranger or a Tinker. They don't.

Because you speak for Blizzard to decide that, right? I said it before, and I'll say it again: any "pedigree" or "requirements" exist in your head, and in your head only.

I'm saying that the argument that the Rogue isn't based on any heroes from WC3 is false.

That is actually very true. The rogue class was not based on a single WC3 hero unit. And neither was the warlock, too. And "taking abilities from random creeps/basic units" does not count as "being based on".

- - - Updated - - -

With the classic classes no, since they're mostly combinations of multiple units fitting a theme with an occasional hero attached.

However with the expansion classes, every single one comes from a hero unit with their entire kits attached from the start.

But the vanilla classes prove that we don't need a WC3 hero, though.

- - - Updated - - -

Also, Teriz, I'm still waiting on your reply on this:

Not really, since the biggest characters in WoW are the WC3 characters. Again, it's the WC3 characters that have ended up on the covers of WoW.

Saurfang is not a WC3 character.
Lor'themar Theron is not a WC3 character.
Gallywix is not a WC3 character.
Varian is not a WC3 character.
Anduin is not a WC3 character.
Hamuul Runetotem is not a WC3 character.
Valeera is not a WC3 character.
Greymane is not a WC3 character.
There are more, but those are just off the top of my head.

[Triceron]

So what aspect of Runemaster made it into Death Knights? The Rune resource system? Because everything else is Death Knight, Undead heroes, and Necromancers.

If we knew then it wouldn't be a mystery. We don't even know what a Runemaster is outside of the RPG books, which is the only source of the class. But the fact it existed shows that not everything has to derive from WC3 as a 1:1 concept.

It's a class that's been mentioned multiple times by different devs, all corroborating the idea that this concept got fairly far in the dev process, enough for some to have personal attachment to. I don't think that would happen if it were just a paper-concept like what we know of in the RPG books that got scrapped before given any gameplay. The fact that it has zero conceptual themes shared with a DK and was named as a class that got folded into the DK shows that there was indeed some form of gameplay; and we see that in the DK's rune system today. Whatever more was taken we won't really know unless the devs could provide more detail to what this Runemaster originally was going to be. I find it curious that it was being compared to Druids and Warlocks, which makes me thing it was actually more of a caster than the melee representation we know of in the RPG books.

Gameplay wise, I'd imagine if they took any of the gameplay from the Runemaster it might have been the dual-wield Parry tanking of Frost, which would have made a lot more sense applied to a Runemaster who tanked with enchantment cooldowns and parrying with his fists.

Considering the placement of HotS Tinker abilities into the Island Expedition teams in BFA, you might be right about that.

Yes, which makes a new class based on HOTS design more likely than in WC3.

And with something like a Draconic themed class, we have far more to draw from than simple technology from one class. Consider that Mekkatorque was shown at Blizzcon as a hero already made in Heroes of the Storm , but they never ended up adding him in and have since added 3 Dragon heroes from WoW instead.

https://heroesofthestorm.fandom.com/wiki/Gelbin