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

[Ielenia]

I played a bow class with the Black Arrow ability throughout Legion.

And I have played a class with robotic minions since Cataclysm. In other words: you did not play a dark ranger class.

Is there some other Dark Ranger ability that was missing that would have significantly altered that gameplay?

One or two or three abilities does not a class make.

So the Hunter version was actually the superior version of the Black Arrow ability?

How do we know? Do you know if the undead beast summoned by the Hunter's version of the weapon is stronger than the skeletal humanoid minion summoned by the dark ranger? Is it tougher? Does it last longer? Can you have more than one? Because the Dark Ranger's ability allowed for more than one. The Hunter's undead beast would despawn long before the ability came off cooldown.

Wouldn’t it be fair to say that Hunters were using necromantic magic in Legion

No. No more fair to say that hunters use technology to counter the idea of a tinker class.

and it really offered nothing new mechanically to the class, because the Legion version of Dire Beast was doing essentially the same thing?

Two things. First: "Dire Beast" is a beastmaster talent, while Black Arrow was a MM ability. So your argument fails because those abilities were exclusive to separate specs. That's like saying "why give frostbolt to the mage, if they have fireball already?"

Second: it doing nothing "mechanically new" for the class is irrelevant. Because we don't know how it would interact with the rest of the dark ranger's other abilities and passives, since the class does not yet exist in playable form.

A bow class that would be a mechanical mirror of the Hunter class unfortunately.

I'll repeat what I said:

Have you played with an actual dark ranger class to know how the ability can influence the class' gameplay? Do you have special insight into Blizzard's internal development builds that no one else outside the company has?

No. No, you don't. You're just making an unfounded, baseless assertion.

In other words: if a dark ranger class does not currently exist in playable form, how do you know it would be a "mechanical mirror" of the hunter class? That's like saying the warlock is a "mechanical mirror" of the mage class because both are spellcasters that can deal fire damage before vanilla WoW went live.

Well the entire point of Black Arrow was to summon an undead beast to tank for the MM Hunter (something Hunters couldn’t tame at the time). Now Hunters can tame and use undead beasts without the need for Black Arrow.

In other words: hunters can permanently tame beasts, so why should they have the ability to summon temporary beasts? Oh, wait: they have both abilities.

As for what replaced it, Serpent Sting and Lone Wolf’s changes in BFA replaced it.

I didn't ask "what replaced it". I asked it why Blizzard simply didn't rework the talent, since you're claiming that the hunter and the dark ranger are one and the same. Why did Blizzard remove the talent in its entirety without even keeping the name?

[Unbelievable]

And what would be the difference beyond a skeleton walking on two legs instead of four?




Okay, but why would a bow-based class ever use life drain as a rotational ability? Warlocks use it as a rotational DoT, but they can do that because their pets are smacking the mob as they’re channeling it. Additionally, they use it as a HoT because Health is actually a resource for them.

Btw, Warlocks would lose this ability if Dark Rangers had to have it.



Well considering that Mind Control and Life Drain aren’t generic abilities like dodge, they would be relocated to this new Ranger class. You think Warlock and Priest players would be happy about that?



Those are specs. Hunters and Dark Rangers would be two classes.



You’ve established that. Again, gameplay wise, what’s the difference?



LoL! Okay.



The Void Elf class doesn’t need to, because the Hunter class does all of that.

Would be like a mechanical squirrel instead of a robot.

Why? because Dark Rangers, in WC3, and Sylvanas, in HotS, use it. that's why.
Warlocks would not lose it, like how Gul'dan didn't lose Drain Life in HotS, despite Sylvanas having Life Drain. Like Rogues didn't lose Evasion, even though Demon Hunters got Blur.

Scenario 1: They wouldn't, necessarily, be relocated but, renamed as Charm and Life Drain.

Scenario 2: They would be relocated like Metamorphosis, Mana Burn and Death Coil.

Players endured changes in the past, like Legion revamps so, that's not a problem.

Spec or not, why add two similar gameplay specs? That's a big no no in your book.
They could have, easily, just made the Priest a Holy, Shadow and Fel class, like your perverted vision seems to suggest.

I can ask you the same: gameplay-wise, what's the difference between a Priest's and a Paladin's holy light? a Warlock's and a Mage's fire? a Priest's and a Warlock's shadow? a Mage's and a Death Knight's frost? A monk's and a Shaman's nature?

Oh, really? show me where a Hunter drains life, raises an undead skeleton with an arrow or mind controls someone.

[Triceron]

.
Or hear me out, Dark Rangers are a variation of Hunters, same way Prelates, Sunwalkers & Blood Knights can be variations of Paladins? or Priests of the Moon, Loa Priests and Dark Clerics can be variations of priests

This hasn't been confirmed, and the Dark Ranger isn't applied to any player Hunter the way Seers, Sunwalkers and Vindicators are applied in lore directly for Priest and Paladin.

If they are a variation of Hunter in lore, then it is more akin to Death Knight having been a variation of Paladins/Champions who died and learned Necromancy. Same deal applies. This is just a looser application of 'variation', much like how we could consider a Paladin's origins being a 'variation' of a Priest who took up martial arms back in WC2. That was their origins, and they became something different completely.

This is why Nathanos and Zeliek are both special cases. They are both examples of characters raised as a new class who retain more of their original class than any other. They aren't prime examples of what their new class is about thematically or mechanically, they are exceptions to the rule.

It's just easier to distinguish now since DK's have a completely fleshed out theme and kit to show us how they should be different. Yet back in Vanilla WoW Naxxramas, Death Knights were limited by being represented using Warrior and Warlock abilities; sort of the same limits current Dark Rangers in WoW have with just slight variations of existing abilities in the game. Sylvanas in BFA was the first time we saw a true Dark Ranger's potential with all the Banshee abilities and the Chain arrow shots she used against Bolvar; but she's become something so different that it's hard to define where she starts and ends as a Dark Ranger and as an 'Avatar' of the Jailer.

[Imperator4321]

This hasn't been confirmed, and the Dark Ranger isn't applied to any player Hunter the way Seers, Sunwalkers and Vindicators are.

If they are a variation of Hunter in lore, then it is more akin to Death Knight having been Paladins/Champions who died and learned Necromancy. Same deal applies.

Fair point i'm just not personally seeing what makes Dark Ranger so uniquely special in comparison to other cultural/racial variations of classes that aren't fully expressed in the base class, a forsaken raanger not being able to Mind Control someone is the same as a Troll priest not being able to "hex" someone, or a night elf priest not being able to starfall.

Paladin's origins being a 'variation' of a Priest who took up martial arms back in WC2. That was their origins, and they became something different completely.

Thats true but Paladins and Priests have pretty heavily evolved from their origins, now Paladins have the "champion of the light"/crusade archetype and gameplay style while Priests have become and Light & Void with Holy using Light to heal, Shadow using Void to harm and Discipline balancing the two to harm and heal.

Sylvanas in BFA was the first time we saw a true Dark Ranger's potential with all the Banshee abilities and the Chain arrow shots she used against Bolvar; but she's become something so different that it's hard to define where she starts and ends as a Dark Ranger and as an 'Avatar' of the Jailer.

How much of that is Sylvanas's power exactly though? the dark blast that killed Saurfang & the Chains that Binded Bolvar likely came from the Jailor's power instead of Sylvanas being a Dark Ranger, Hunters do also have blatantly magical abilities like Binding Shot, Everything else we've seen her done is mostly standard Hunter fair of magically imbued arrows and archery.

Dark Rangers in BFA also recieved a pretty defined skill set, mostly using Hunter abilities like disengage/multi-shot and Forsaken/Necromancy themed Hunter abilities like Shadowburn Shot, Plague Tipped Arrows and Dark Revivial, that honestly makes them feel more like just an undead flavored Hunter than a unique "class".

I suppose they could all be made former Banshees who are mawsworn to give them maximum amount of "unique" abilities but thats another can of worms (like how it would be another elf themed/focused class after we already got demon hunters)

Warlocks would not lose it, like how Gul'dan didn't lose Drain Life in HotS, despite Sylvanas having Life Drain. Like Rogues didn't lose Evasion, even though Demon Hunters got Blur.

"Life Drain" in HotS gives Sylvanas 15% lifesteal against enemies she has 3 stacks of Banshee's Curse on, Drain Life in HotS is a channeled DoT over 3 seconds that dealing 132 damage per second and healing Gul'dan for 188 Health per second with 4.00% scaling, all those two abilities share is the gaining health part but they have very little gameplay overlap one is passive lifesteal that needs a prerequisite the other being an active channeled spell, theres also how the greater context of how "Drain Life" interacts with Sylvanas's kit vs how Drain Life works with Gul'dans kit, Life Drain is just an extra boost to what Sylvanas already does (apply a damage boost via stacks of banshee's curse), Drain Life interacts with the rest of Gul'dans spells, high mana costs but he can restore mana with life tap and restore health with Drain Life but he puts himself in a vunerable position due to the channeled nature of the ability.

If a WoW version of "Life Drain" worked like the HoTS version it would just be "gain x% of leech" maybe with a similar prerequisite and yeah it would have no overlap with Drain Life as it exists in the Warlocks spell list.

[Teriz]

How do we know? Do you know if the undead beast summoned by the Hunter's version of the weapon is stronger than the skeletal humanoid minion summoned by the dark ranger? Is it tougher? Does it last longer? Can you have more than one? Because the Dark Ranger's ability allowed for more than one. The Hunter's undead beast would despawn long before the ability came off cooldown.

Black Arrow that summons a minion every time it attacks is superior to Black Arrow that only summons a minion if you kill the target with it.

No. No more fair to say that hunters use technology to counter the idea of a tinker class.

The difference being that Black Arrow is the actual Necromantic ability from the Dark Ranger class, while the Hunter class contains none of the Tinker’s abilities from WC3 or HotS.

Two things. First: "Dire Beast" is a beastmaster talent, while Black Arrow was a MM ability. So your argument fails because those abilities were exclusive to separate specs. That's like saying "why give frostbolt to the mage, if they have fireball already?"

Specs are irrelevant. I’m talking about mechanics.

Second: it doing nothing "mechanically new" for the class is irrelevant. Because we don't know how it would interact with the rest of the dark ranger's other abilities and passives, since the class does not yet exist in playable form.

Except we know how spells like Drain Life, Silence, and Mind Control work. These are not novel abilities.

I'll repeat what I said:

In other words: if a dark ranger class does not currently exist in playable form, how do you know it would be a "mechanical mirror" of the hunter class? That's like saying the warlock is a "mechanical mirror" of the mage class because both are spellcasters that can deal fire damage before vanilla WoW went live.

See above.

In other words: hunters can permanently tame beasts, so why should they have the ability to summon temporary beasts? Oh, wait: they have both abilities.

They couldn’t tame undead beasts. Now they can.

I didn't ask "what replaced it". I asked it why Blizzard simply didn't rework the talent, since you're claiming that the hunter and the dark ranger are one and the same. Why did Blizzard remove the talent in its entirety without even keeping the name?

I have no idea. Just like I have no idea why an expansion that prominently features Sylvanas (probably for the last time) didn’t introduce a Dark Ranger class. Perhaps Blizzard no longer needed to have Black Arrow in the Hunter spell book for people to recognize that both Hunters and Dark Rangers are one in the same?

- - - Updated - - -

Oh, really? show me where a Hunter drains life, raises an undead skeleton with an arrow or mind controls someone.

Drains Life; Leech from a variety of pets
Raises Undead: Undead pets (some of which are skeletons)
Controls someone: Tame Beast

[Triceron]

Fair point i'm just not personally seeing what makes Dark Ranger so uniquely special in comparison to other cultural/racial variations of classes that aren't fully expressed in the base class, a forsaken raanger not being able to Mind Control someone is the same as a Troll priest not being able to "hex" someone, or a night elf priest not being able to starfall.

That's the kicker though- Core classes aren't exactly anything other than the core class that they are. Anything reaching beyond that scope is all assumed.

Are Troll Priests considered Witchdoctors? Only unofficially. There is no confirmation that they are Shadow Hunters or Witchdoctors within the lore.

It's very easy for Blizzard to make that connection official considering we have Tauren Seers and Dranei Vindicators showing us that there are Race-Specific names for existing classes. But a Troll Priest is never tied to a Witchdoctor or Shadow Hunter directly. Same with Priest directly as a 'Priestess of the Moon', they are officially different even if most people simply choose to associate them. They are always treated as their own, individual NPC class. Dark Ranger is very specific in the lore too to be a specific subset of Sylvanas' followers. Same with the Royal Apothecaries; they're not just names of Forsaken Priest.

Even Assassination Rogue and Beastmastery Hunter are not quite exactly Assassins and Beastmasters; they are a specialization of a core class. If they were to be one and the same, then it would have to be named specifically; thus Brewmaster and not simply a 'Brewmastery Monk'. I know it might sound like semantics, but keep in mind that it is Blizzard themselves defining this. Even Rexxar in WoW is not officially called a Hunter; even if he may be classified as such in Hearthstone (which is non-canonical, and only loosely ties classes together. Such as Maiev being Rogue class; these connections are not officiated in WoW lore). There is also the contentual Warlock connection to DH prior to Legion; Glyph of Demon Hunting was carefully named as an adjective and not as a re-classification.

We all like to think we have access to being able to play a Blademaster or a Blood Mage or a Priestess of the Moon; but all of these specific titles aren't officially tied to our classes. We simply have core classes with the abilities derived from these other classes; and we know for a fact that multiple classes can have their own variations of the same spell. Sometimes it's historic; like Warlocks having Death Coil and Metamorphosis or Hunters having Black Arrow; and sometimes it's legitimate, like Shamans having Totems making it undeniably a Shaman thing and not just a Troll racial trait (as it was in WC3) or DK's forever having Frost abilities when they historically only ever used Unholy magic. Either way, the overlap hasn't really done much to reclassify an existing class as something else just because of a few carried-over abilities.

"Life Drain" in HotS gives Sylvanas 15% lifesteal against enemies she has 3 stacks of Banshee's Curse on, Drain Life in HotS is a channeled DoT over 3 seconds that dealing 132 damage per second and healing Gul'dan for 188 Health per second with 4.00% scaling, all those two abilities share is the gaining health part but they have very little gameplay overlap one is passive lifesteal that needs a prerequisite the other being an active channeled spell.

If a WoW version of "Life Drain" worked like the HoTS version it would just be "gain x% of leech" maybe with a similar prerequisite and yeah it would have no overlap with Drain Life.

I think that's absolutely fair. A Life Drain ability with a modified mechanic would suit a Dark Ranger very well, and help separate it from any existing class. We already have DK's doing the same with having their own variation of Lich's Frost Nova; Howling Blast.

How much of that is Sylvanas's power exactly though? the dark blast that killed Saurfang & the Chains that Binded Bolvar likely came from the Jailor's power instead of Sylvanas being a Dark Ranger, Hunters do also have blatantly magical abilities like Binding Shot, Everything else we've seen her done is mostly standard Hunter fair of magically imbued arrows and archery.

Dark Rangers in BFA also recieved a pretty defined skill set, mostly using Hunter abilities like disengage/multi-shot and Forsaken/Necromancy themed Hunter abilities like Shadowburn Shot, Plague Tipped Arrows and Dark Revivial, that honestly makes them feel more like just an undead flavored Hunter than a unique "class".

I suppose they could all be made former Banshees who are mawsworn to give them maximum amount of "unique" abilities but thats another can of worms (like how it would be another elf themed/focused class after we already got demon hunters)

I think that's why I'm so personally adamant on sticking to what Blizzard is defining as a class officially; rather than just assume connections based on observational. There was a lot of talk of whether Anduin upgraded himself into a Paladin, and Blizzard had to chime in officially to announce that he is still a Priest; it's not so simply to just assume changes where applicable.

For the Dark Ranger, it's very up in the air. I don't know where they draw the line with Sylvanas honestly; her uber Banshee powers came from nowhere and worked more like magical macguffins than any sensible potential game mechanic. Like, Arthas could raise Sindragosa with his powers, sure, but that was still a carry over from Warcraft 3 when he raised the Blue Dragon Sapphiron. BFA carried her into completely new territory with Banshee flight, insta-kill Banshee smoke, super blasts and chain arrows. And it's hard to tell if any of this is supposed to be potential carry over to Dark Rangers (the way DK's can summon Sindragosa or use Ice powers like Arthas) or something purely unique to her.

Either way, I'll be quick to adopt the Hunter as the Dark Ranger if Blizzard does so. Until then, I think the connection is still assumed.

[Teriz]

They are raised by other Dark Rangers (Sylvanas herself), whereas Nathanos was not. He was a Human Ranger in life who was raised as Forsaken, and became a champion of Sylvanas under the title of Dark Ranger.

His origin, his professions, his overall gameplay tied closely to dark variation of Hunter abilities. It's not about being human or elf, it's about the completely different origin of Nathanos. He was never by profession a Dark Ranger, and never really trained Dark Rangers either. He was a Forsaken Hunter who trained other Forsaken Hunters; he was a Forsaken Ranger who trained other Rangers. He was a Dark Ranger in title, but he never raised or trained Dark Rangers. At most he has 'Dark Revival' for pets, which is a variation of a Hunter ability.


Same as asking what the difference is between Calia and other Forsaken. There's plenty different. Just being 'undead with independance from the Lich King' doesn't make everything equally the same. She can even call herself Forsaken, but we all acknowledge there is plenty more different about her.

So no answer to my question. Got it.

[Imperator4321]

That's the kicker though- Core classes aren't exactly anything other than the core class that they are. Anything reaching beyond that scope is all assumed.

Are Troll Priests considered Witchdoctors? Only unofficially. There is no confirmation that they are Shadow Hunters or Witchdoctors within the lore.

It's very easy for Blizzard to make that connection official considering we have Tauren Seers and Dranei Vindicators showing us that there are Race-Specific names for existing classes. But a Troll Priest is never tied to a Witchdoctor or Shadow Hunter directly. Same with Priest directly as a 'Priestess of the Moon', they are officially different even if most people simply choose to associate them. They are always treated as their own, individual NPC class. Dark Ranger is very specific in the lore too to be a specific subset of Sylvanas' followers. Same with the Royal Apothecaries; they're not just names of Forsaken Priest.

Even Assassination Rogue and Beastmastery Hunter are not quite exactly Assassins and Beastmasters; they are a specialization of a core class. If they were to be one and the same, then it would have to be named specifically; thus Brewmaster and not simply a 'Brewmastery Monk'. I know it might sound like semantics, but keep in mind that it is Blizzard themselves defining this. Even Rexxar in WoW is not officially called a Hunter; even if he may be classified as such in Hearthstone (which is non-canonical, and only loosely ties classes together. Such as Maiev being Rogue class; these connections are not officiated in WoW lore). There is also the contentual Warlock connection to DH prior to Legion; Glyph of Demon Hunting was carefully named as an adjective and not as a re-classification.

We all like to think we have access to being able to play a Blademaster or a Blood Mage or a Priestess of the Moon; but all of these specific titles aren't officially tied to our classes. We simply have core classes with the abilities derived from these other classes; and we know for a fact that multiple classes can have their own variations of the same spell. Sometimes it's historic; like Warlocks having Death Coil and Metamorphosis or Hunters having Black Arrow; and sometimes it's legitimate, like Shamans having Totems making it undeniably a Shaman thing and not just a Troll racial trait (as it was in WC3) or DK's forever having Frost abilities when they historically only ever used Unholy magic. Either way, the overlap hasn't really done much to reclassify an existing class as something else just because of a few carried-over abilities.

Well that's mostly just a gameplay concession in the transition to WoW units & heroes abilties and thematics got split between different classes, Shamans got troll wards (renamed to totems), elemental abilities & spiritual/ancestral abilities, Priests got Light & Shadow, Warlocks got curses & ritualistic abilities. In the Lore Witch Doctors are Priest-Shaman-Warlocks who can do all of those things (and whenever witch doctors show up they are usually given a mish-mash of those abilities to represent this) but it doesn't really work for a class based mmo so Witch Doctors (and Shadow Hunters by extension) got split between those 3, same way even now stuff like Tidesages who in the lore are Priest-Shaman-Mages and can't be accurately portrayed by any one of those classes on their own.

Priests did have unique racial spells to represent what they're worshipping in classic (NElves got Starshards which was essentially single target starfall, Trolls got hexes & shadowguard, Forsaken got devouring plague, Dwarves & humans got light-related abilities) but it was difficult to balance, same way stuff like Horde/Alliance exclusive classes or how something like how metzen wanted druids to be Night Elf exclusive would have been difficult/impossible to properly balance

I think that's absolutely fair. A Life Drain ability with a modified mechanic would suit a Dark Ranger very well, and help separate it from any existing class. We already have DK's doing the same with having their own variation of Lich's Frost Nova; Howling Blast.

Think theres also a bit of how gameplay transition works, like how DH's didn't get Mana Burn because a single target cast time ranged spell didn't really fit the gameplay concept what DH's were (an agile melee class) stopping to cast a magical bolt doesn't really fit that, so it became Mana Break which was a melee ability

A ranged weapon-based dps class stopping to cast a channeled DoT ability to heal themselves doesn't really work in terms of creating a cohesive gameplay identity so it would make sense for it to become something like passive leech

Anduin upgraded himself into a Paladin, and Blizzard had to chime in officially to announce that he is still a Priest; it's not so simply to just assume changes where applicable.

I can sorta understand that from how he wore heavy armor & used a sword, but they also showed him failing to fight with his weapon and his biggest feats have always been related to spellcasting (holy word salvation in the BFA cinematic, his barrier preventing the jailors forces) instead of the combination martial & holy abilities that define a Paladin and hes also been shown capable of shadow based abilities even after MoP (think the most recent novel has him almost using shadow magic) something paladins have never been associated with. If we're using HotS he's also pretty heavily defined as a priest stand-in there (leap of faith, divine star, holy word salvation, flash heal, chastise, lightbomb).

Like yeah Anduin's a priest who learned how to wear heavy armor and poorly use a sword, Sylvanas is a Hunter who learned some necromancy, has screaming/mind control from her banshee nature and made a pact with uber-satan, i don't think she's truly crossed the point into being something distinct from a Empowered Hunter (at least in a way that can be turned into a class for us, Banshee + Mawsworn isn't really enough)

[Triceron]

So no answer to my question. Got it.

Dark Rangers aren't just Forsaken Hunters, and Nathanos is a unique NPC who is also now dead.

That answers every question you have on the matter. You just don't like the answer.

[Teriz]

Dark Rangers aren't just Forsaken Hunters, and Nathanos is a unique NPC who is also now dead.

That answers every question you have on the matter. You just don't like the answer.

Yeah, I’m talking mechanical/ability differences, not your viewpoints on lore.

For example, Nathanos shares some of the same abilities as Delaryn Summermoon.

[Triceron]

In the Lore Witch Doctors are Priest-Shaman-Warlocks who can do all of those things (and whenever witch doctors show up they are usually given a mish-mash of those abilities to represent this) but it doesn't really work for a class based mmo so Witch Doctors (and Shadow Hunters by extension) got split between those 3, same way even now stuff like Tidesages who in the lore are Priest-Shaman-Mages and can't be accurately portrayed by any one of those classes on their own.

I completely understand.

My reservations are more based on my own interpretations of Blizzard's potential directions, especially based on what we've seen on the Demon Hunter breaking all association from Warlocks to be defined as its own class, or how Allied Races officially separated certain assumed connections (Dark skin Dwarf options = Dark Iron, Brown skin Orc option = Mag'har) into their own specific race.

I see them potentially doing this with many assumed classes if they ever get around to a Class Skin system. Taliesin and Evitel did a pretty good video covering the potential for Class Skins and bridging in concepts like Tide Sage as an official class/title.

Priests did have unique racial spells to represent what they're worshipping in classic (NElves got Starshards which was essentially single target starfall, Trolls got hexes & shadowguard, Forsaken got devouring plague, Dwarves & humans got light-related abilities) but it was difficult to balance, same way stuff like Horde/Alliance exclusive classes or how something like how metzen wanted druids to be Night Elf exclusive would have been difficult/impossible to properly balance

I do miss those racials. I really wish they kept them in or brought them back in some capacity. Hopefully Covenants is one step towards them being more flexible about allowing fairly balanceable 'fun' abilities in the game without worrying about designing the game around min-maxers.

I'm all for more fantasy and more customization options to achieve it. Most of my characters were made specifically to fulfill a fantasy; a Male Night Elf Druid, a Troll Priest Alchemist who had racial Hexes, etc. I just wish there was more to it so I had a reason to make say a Gnome 'Battle Medic' who wasn't using Holy and Shadow abilities breaking that whole experience.

A ranged weapon-based dps class stopping to cast a channeled DoT ability to heal themselves doesn't really work in terms of creating a cohesive gameplay identity so it would make sense for it to become something like passive leech

I think there is potential to convert the whole physical ranged gameplay into a viable Healing spec. They have a connection to Banshees, and the Banshee was the Healer unit in the Darkshore Warfronts. There's a lot of room to play; and whatever ideas could have been for a Necromancer Heal spec (using essence, anima, animation magic) could be applied directly here. Spirit healing is totally up for grabs.

Thats true but Paladins and Priests have pretty heavily evolved from their origins

From an older post you updated, just wanted to touch on this.

Paladins and Priests did heavily evolve from their origins, which is my very reasoning and case to keep Hunter and Dark Ranger separate for the sake of Blizzard choosing to 'evolve' them into completely separate concepts down the line. My personal basis on this is how Dwarf and Dark Iron were separated through Allied Race; so could Hunter and Dark Ranger be defined through Class Skins.


- - - Updated - - -

Yeah, I’m talking mechanical/ability differences, not your viewpoints on lore.

Why? Dark Ranger mechanics don't exist in the game since there is no formal Dark Ranger class.

For example, Nathanos shares some of the same abilities as Delaryn Summermoon.

You're talking about mechanical ability differences of Non Player Characters. The 'N' implies you're not talking about Player Classes.

I don't believe this thread topic is about the mechanical differences between Non Player Characters; they're not bound by any class limitations.

Zeliek is a Death Knight who uses Holy magic. Fandral Staghelm is a Druid who uses Elemental Fire magic. NPCs, especially special unique characters, aren't good representation of Player classes.

[Teriz]

Why? Dark Ranger mechanics don't exist in the game since there is no formal Dark Ranger class.

Nathanos shares abilities and the title of Dark Ranger with other Dark Rangers, thus he’s a Dark Ranger. This isn’t difficult.

[Triceron]

Nathanos shares abilities and the title of Dark Ranger with other Dark Rangers, thus he’s a Dark Ranger. This isn’t difficult.

Yes, I said he was a Dark Ranger.

Didn't you see all the times that I said he was a Dark Ranger? That's his official title.


He's a Dark Ranger who leans towards his Hunter identity, including being a Hunter Trainer, using dual wield axes, taming undead pets and training a new generation of Forsaken Ranger NPCs that resemble Woodsmen. He can share abilities with other Dark Ranger NPCs too, because he is a Dark Ranger in title and name.

Just like a Dark Iron Brewmaster NPC and Player Class Monk Brewmaster can both make Brews, it's a part of their class description even if they're not the same class.

[Imperator4321]

I completely understand.

My reservations are more based on my own interpretations of Blizzard's potential directions, especially based on what we've seen on the Demon Hunter breaking all association from Warlocks to be defined as its own class, or how Allied Races officially separated certain assumed connections (Dark skin Dwarf options = Dark Iron, Brown skin Orc option = Mag'har) into their own specific race.

I see them potentially doing this with many assumed classes if they ever get around to a Class Skin system. Taliesin and Evitel did a pretty good video covering the potential for Class Skins and bridging in concepts like Tide Sage as an official class/title.

I'm somewhat tentative on the "Warlock was intended as the Demon Hunter stand-in" while they did have metamorphosis (and it ironically works a lot closer to the WC3 meta in look and style than the one we've got now with the Demon Hunter Class) but if they truly intended for Warlock = Demon Hunter they probably would have given the warlock class to Night Elves since the iconic Demon Hunter was a Night Elf

I do miss those racials. I really wish they kept them in or brought them back in some capacity. Hopefully Covenants is one step towards them being more flexible about allowing fairly balanceable 'fun' abilities in the game without worrying about designing the game around min-maxers.

They were nice flavor but there were issues with how they were balanced against eachother, so i can understand why they were moved even if it did impact the uniqueness of Night Elf/Troll/Forsaken Priests.

I'm all for more fantasy and more customization options to achieve it. Most of my characters were made specifically to fulfill a fantasy; a Male Night Elf Druid, a Troll Priest Alchemist who had racial Hexes, etc. I just wish there was more to it so I had a reason to make say a Gnome 'Battle Medic' who wasn't using Holy and Shadow abilities breaking that whole experience.

I agree quite a lot on this, not in terms of abilities, I think covenants are the most customization we'll get in that kind of regard (borrowed power thats removed once the expansion is over), racial class locked stuff that affects gameplay is probably off the table due to long term balancing concerns.

I'd love it if we did get more options for visuals within our classes (within reason) stuff like autumnal/winter visuals for Druids, Elune themed Light for Priests (for nelf priests) & Shadow replacing Light & vice versa (for forsaken priests & draenei/lightforged priests), spiritual energy replacing water for shamans (for that shadow hunter/witch doctor fantasy), Allowing more options with titles would also be great i'd like it if my Kul Tiran Druid could have the Thornspeaker/Thornguard/Thornclaw title along with more autmnal/decayed style visuals to reflect the Thornspeakers beliefs on the Light/Death cycle compared to the typical Cenarion Circle views.

I think there is potential to convert the whole physical ranged gameplay into a viable Healing spec. They have a connection to Banshees, and the Banshee was the Healer unit in the Darkshore Warfronts. There's a lot of room to play; and whatever ideas could have been for a Necromancer Heal spec (using essence, anima, animation magic) could be applied directly here. Spirit healing is totally up for grabs.

One thing I was thinking was how there are elements of the Scourge that are underused by the current DK Class that could work for making a Necromancer class distinct visually, a DoT/Poison spec themed around Nerubians/Insects (currently the nerubian stuff is only represented by unholy blight), a Construct/Corpse themed around summoning/creating abominations/constructs and using corpses to fuel spells (similar to the corpse explosion/lance spells from diablo 3) we even got a bunch of different abomination types from Maldraxxus to use instead of the Ghoul/Plague eruptor models used by DK's


Blood Healing is a intesting idea that's been brought up before but has issues (Red in the games color language is usually used to represent danger not healing which was the issue Mistweaver ran into when they were the Chi-Ji Spec instead of the Yu'Lon spec) but Anima/Soul based healing could be alternative.

It's likely some covenant abilities will become future talents/baseline abilities (like wake of ashes going from ashbringer artifact ability to default retribution ability) could be interesting if some covenant stuff could become the foundations for a future class.

so could Hunter and Dark Ranger be defined through Class Skins

Think this would be the most viable way for Dark Rangers to be represented in-game, changing the Arcane/Cobra shot & animal related themes to become shadow/plague and undead related, changing stuff like revive pet to be more necromantic in visuals, it's not perfect but I think it works the best.

[Teriz]

Yes, I said he was a Dark Ranger.

Didn't you see all the times that I said he was a Dark Ranger? That's his official title.


He's a Dark Ranger who leans towards his Hunter identity, including being a Hunter Trainer, using dual wield axes, taming undead pets and training a new generation of Forsaken Ranger NPCs that resemble Woodsmen. He can share abilities with other Dark Ranger NPCs too, because he is a Dark Ranger in title and name.

Just like a Dark Iron Brewmaster NPC and Player Class Monk Brewmaster can both make Brews, it's a part of their class description even if they're not the same class.

Yeah, but the Dark Iron Brewnaster has NONE
of the Brewmaster Monk’s abilities, and it certainly isn’t a monk.

Nathanos is Dark Ranger who shares Dark Ranger abilities with Elven Dark Rangers. Essentially the only real difference between the two is racial.

[Triceron]

I'm somewhat tentative on the "Warlock was intended as the Demon Hunter stand-in" while they did have metamorphosis (and it ironically works a lot closer to the WC3 meta in look and style than the one we've got now with the Demon Hunter Class) but if they truly intended for Warlock = Demon Hunter they probably would have given the warlock class to Night Elves since the iconic Demon Hunter was a Night Elf

Actually it's officially confirmed by the former Warlock designer, Xelnath, that he purposely tried to push for Warlocks to officially become and absorb all aspects of Demon Hunters. It was more than just being a stand-in, he wanted it to be official; and he was the sole credit to Warlocks having Metamorphosis and Glyph of Demon Hunting. Very controversial figure in WoW's history, very interesting stuff actually.

- Were there any races or classes that were considered but had to be scrapped for time, or expansion thematic reasons? -
"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

They were nice flavor but there were issues with how they were balanced against eachother, so i can understand why they were moved even if it did impact the uniqueness of Night Elf/Troll/Forsaken Priests.

I feel like we're in a good position in time to bring them back, knowing how far they've progressed with parallel, choice-driven balanceable abilities. The entire Talent system and Covenants system is what the Priest Racials should have been like.

One thing I was thinking was how there are elements of the Scourge that are underused by the current DK Class that could work for making a Necromancer class distinct visually, a DoT/Poison spec themed around Nerubians/Insects (currently the nerubian stuff is only represented by unholy blight), a Construct/Corpse themed around summoning/creating abominations/constructs and using corpses to fuel spells (similar to the corpse explosion/lance spells from diablo 3) we even got a bunch of different abomination types from Maldraxxus to use instead of the Ghoul/Plague eruptor models used by DK's


Blood Healing is a intesting idea that's been brought up before but has issues (Red in the games color language is usually used to represent danger not healing which was the issue Mistweaver ran into when they were the Chi-Ji Spec instead of the Yu'Lon spec) but Anima/Soul based healing could be alternative.

Oh I completely agree.

The way I see the parallels; Death Knight is based on the themes of Icecrown Citadel; Frostwing Halls, Crimson Halls and Plagueworks representing Frost, Blood and Unholy respectively.

Necromancer could be based on the themes of Naxxramas; Arachnid Quarter, Construct Quarter, Plague Quarter. The overall theme would be spreading Plague and Poisons (Spiders, Alchemical and Fungal Blight), Constructs and Animated creatures, and all the Nerubians and Spider-creatures that are well associated with the Scourge but not present in Death Knights. These don't have to be directly translated as specs, but general themes that encapsulate the Necromancer's theme and identity.

- - - Updated - - -

Nathanos is Dark Ranger who shares Dark Ranger abilities with Elven Dark Rangers. Essentially the only real difference between the two is racial.

So why don't Elven Dark Rangers have undead pets or dual wield axes or train Hunters? If that's the only real difference to you then you're purposefully being ignorant.

I mean I can't exactly answer your question of what the differences are if you're purposely ignoring the differences, lol. I dub thee, confirmation blindness.

"What's the differences between Nathanos and Sylvanas?"
* Lists all the differences *
"Looks like the only real difference between the two is racial"

[LemonDemonGirl]

That's the kicker though- Core classes aren't exactly anything other than the core class that they are. Anything reaching beyond that scope is all assumed.

Are Troll Priests considered Witchdoctors? Only unofficially. There is no confirmation that they are Shadow Hunters or Witchdoctors within the lore.

It's very easy for Blizzard to make that connection official considering we have Tauren Seers and Dranei Vindicators showing us that there are Race-Specific names for existing classes. But a Troll Priest is never tied to a Witchdoctor or Shadow Hunter directly. Same with Priest directly as a 'Priestess of the Moon', they are officially different even if most people simply choose to associate them. They are always treated as their own, individual NPC class. Dark Ranger is very specific in the lore too to be a specific subset of Sylvanas' followers. Same with the Royal Apothecaries; they're not just names of Forsaken Priest.

Yeah, I think maybe some Priest abilities could be made to be more 'troll-like'. Hell, they could even bring back racial Priest abilties, and the Zandalari could get a small blessing that has a tiny visual of a chosen Loa everytime it's used, think like how the Human racials are in GW2. Oh and I think that troll characters using Light/Holy spells are just weird.

Why would a troll want to worship the Light? I think it be better if you could choose between a Holy/Shadow visual for some spells if you're a troll

[Teriz]

So why don't Elven Dark Rangers have undead pets or dual wield axes or train Hunters? If that's the only real difference to you then you're purposefully being ignorant.

Like this?



And there’s elven Dark Rangers who had tamed spiders near under city.

Only thing we’re missing are the ones who train Hunters.

I mean I can't exactly answer your question of what the differences are if you're purposely ignoring the differences, lol. I dub thee, confirmation blindness.

"What's the differences between Nathanos and Sylvanas?"
* Lists all the differences *
"Looks like the only real difference between the two is racial"

Except we weren’t talking about the difference between Sylvanas and Nathanos. We were talking about the difference between Nathanos and Delaryn.

[Imperator4321]

Actually it's officially confirmed by the former Warlock designer, Xelnath, that he purposely tried to push for Warlocks to officially become and absorb all aspects of Demon Hunters. It was more than just being a stand-in, he wanted it to be official; and he was the sole credit to Warlocks having Metamorphosis and Glyph of Demon Hunting. Very controversial figure in WoW's history, very interesting stuff actually.

- Were there any races or classes that were considered but had to be scrapped for time, or expansion thematic reasons? -
"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

Ah yeah, i recall seeing discussion about how a lot of the Warlock stuff pre-wod was fueled by a "overzealous warlock developer", personally i never really liked demonology as the "become a demon spec" and prefer the master summoner style we have now which i feel fits warlocks a lot better than discount demon hunter (even if it did take awhile for current demonology to actually become decent).

I feel like we're in a good position in time to bring them back, knowing how far they've progressed with parallel, choice-driven balanceable abilities. The entire Talent system and Covenants system is what the Priest Racials should have been like.

An overhaul to the Talent system to allow these class skins could be an interesting route but i feel keeping it mostly visual is the safest and most likely route

Oh I completely agree.

The way I see the parallels; Death Knight is based on the themes of Icecrown Citadel; Frostwing Halls, Crimson Halls and Plagueworks representing Frost, Blood and Unholy respectively.

Necromancer could be based on the themes of Naxxramas; Arachnid Quarter, Construct Quarter, Plague Quarter. The overall theme would be spreading Plague and Poisons (Spiders, Alchemical and Fungal Blight), Constructs and Animated creatures, and all the Nerubians and Spider-creatures that are well associated with the Scourge but not present in Death Knights. These don't have to be directly translated as specs, but general themes that encapsulate the Necromancer's theme and identity.

I think the Necrolord (and some of the other covenant abilities) could serve as a really good way to set the foundations of a Necromancer class in the visual/gameplay direction (stuff like adaptive swarm, fleshcraft, serrated bone spiked, abomination limb, primordial wave, chain harvest), a DoT based spellcaster who spreads poison plague through insects, spiders, alchemy and would be thematically/visually tied to nerubians/arachnid quarter, house of plagues, plague quarter, a spellcaster who summons/abominations and then uses the corpses to fuel their spells/create more power constructs and would be thematically/visually inspired by the House of Constructs and Construct Quarter.

Being themed around Bone, Corpses, Constructs, Insect Swarms and Poison/Plague I think makes them visually distinct enough from Death Knights since those elements are underepresented in the current Death Knight ability lineup, really we have bone shield, unholy blight and i guess corpse explosion (which is a cosmetic/glorified toy at this point) to represent those elements of the scourge.

Yeah, I think maybe some Priest abilities could be made to be more 'troll-like'. Hell, they could even bring back racial Priest abilties, and the Zandalari could get a small blessing that has a tiny visual of a chosen Loa everytime it's used, think like how the Human racials are in GW2. Oh and I think that troll characters using Light/Holy spells are just weird.

Why would a troll want to worship the Light? I think it be better if you could choose between a Holy/Shadow visual for some spells if you're a troll

it's somewhat more nuanced than all Troll loa priests are shadow based We've seen Light/Shadow based Loa Priests throughout the game, High Priestess Mar'li would shift between casting holy based "wrath of the loa" spell and a shadow version and would also summon "blessed" or "shadowed" loa spirits and Talanji used exclusively light based powers since she was a Priestess of Rezan (although thats probably changed now that shes bound to Bwonsamdi)

Basically "the light" doesn't care who you worship, its a neutral force thats summoned by having enough faith in something (or willpower) which is how races that don't directly worship the Light can still use it so a Troll Loa Priest simply has enough faith in their Loa to call upon "The Light of Rezan" (for those that worshipped Rezan as their Loa) or just "the light of the Loa" in a more generic use, same way Draenei might say they call on the "light of the Naaru" or Tauren the "light of an'she"

Would be neat if we could have the option for certain spells to invoke an image of a chosen loa (perhaps tied to your currently selected one for zandalari) so you could have Akunda, Pa'ku, Gonk, ect show up when you cast Divine Hymn, Power Word Barrier and other "big" spells, Darkspear could have their own set of Loa.

[Kumorii]

Dark Ranger obviously.