1. #3421
    Quote Originally Posted by TheRevenantHero View Post
    That is the most ridiculous comparison I have EVER heard.

    - - - Updated - - -



    Ok well then tinker can be literally any race ever since Blizzard can just change the canon whenever they want right?
    Sure? I mean Monks can basically.

    Some people might have a hard time accepting say Tauren Tinkers I guess but people seemed to have gotten over Taruen Paladins so....

    I'm not arguing for tinkers I'm arguing against Anti-tinkers.

  2. #3422
    Quote Originally Posted by WonderZebra View Post
    Sure? I mean Monks can basically.

    Some people might have a hard time accepting say Tauren Tinkers I guess but people seemed to have gotten over Taruen Paladins so....
    they have not gotten over tauren paladins. it is still being joked about.
    Anemo: traveler, Sucrose
    Pyro: Yanfei, Amber, diluc, xiangling, thoma, Xinyan, Bennett
    Geo: Noelle, Ningguang, Yun Jin, Gorou
    Hydro: Barbara, Zingqiu, Ayato
    Cyro: Shenhe, Kaeya, Chongyun, Diona, Ayaka, Rosaria
    Electro: Fischl, Lisa, Miko, Kujou, Raiden, Razor

  3. #3423
    Quote Originally Posted by The Council View Post
    they have not gotten over tauren paladins. it is still being joked about.
    I think most people are.

  4. #3424
    Quote Originally Posted by WonderZebra View Post
    Sure? I mean Monks can basically.

    Some people might have a hard time accepting say Tauren Tinkers I guess but people seemed to have gotten over Taruen Paladins so....

    I'm not arguing for tinkers I'm arguing against Anti-tinkers.
    I argue against tinker because people like Teriz want it to remain restricted to gnomes and goblins. Which makes me prefer that the class just never becomes playable.

  5. #3425
    Merely a Setback Teriz's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Soul of Azeroth
    Posts
    29,821
    Quote Originally Posted by TheRevenantHero View Post
    As I just said, pocket factory doesn't exist in canon anymore. And DKs and necromancers are different because unlike tinker, they both exist separate from each other in the game. Meanwhile, there is literally zero separation between tinker and engineer.
    Based on what? Blizzard not putting them in WoW yet?

    Gazlowe and the Tinker both have claw packs in WC3 and WC3:R. According to Blizzard, that would make them canon lore. So that simply means we haven't encountered those devices in WoW yet.

    Interestingly though, we've encountered the technology for Pocket Factory already;

    https://wow.gamepedia.com/Town-In-A-Box

  6. #3426
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    He’s about twice as large as a Tauren, far larger than a pocket factory.
    You mean the pocket factory which was bigger than guard towers?

    So in other words you can’t find any NPC abilities in WoW that have level requirements.
    Why would I? It has nothing to do with player classes.

    Rock-it turret, Deth Lazor, and Robo Goblin aren’t bombs.
    But they are technology which is covered by Engineering.

    I mean what exactly are you looking for in terms of themes and avilities that Engineering doesn't cover? It seems your arguments are very specific about Technology which you deem not fit in Engineering, despite many examples of similar examples that already fit.

    If you want to say a Tinker should have new abilities then sure. However your argument is that these abilities haven't been translated in the game, and Engineering already covers a bunch of that. Your specificity requiring clawpacks and pocket factories and clockwork goblins specifically is just your personal wishlist, not any means for a new class.
    Last edited by Triceron; 2021-01-24 at 12:41 AM.

  7. #3427
    Quote Originally Posted by TheRevenantHero View Post
    I argue against tinker because people like Teriz want it to remain restricted to gnomes and goblins. Which makes me prefer that the class just never becomes playable.
    I mean I get why asethically those races make more sense. But it would be piss easy to write some lore about how all the playerable tinkers are the most gifted of thier races.

  8. #3428
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    Based on what? Blizzard not putting them in WoW yet?

    Gazlowe and the Tinker both have claw packs in WC3 and WC3:R. According to Blizzard, that would make them canon lore. So that simply means we haven't encountered those devices in WoW yet.

    Interestingly though, we've encountered the technology for Pocket Factory already;

    https://wow.gamepedia.com/Town-In-A-Box
    They've had the opportunity to add them for the past 16 years and they haven't. There's CLEARLY a reason for that especially after MoP and WoD giving them ample opportunity to introduce them. As a result, they just don't exist anymore and you should really stop using them as examples.

  9. #3429
    Merely a Setback Teriz's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Soul of Azeroth
    Posts
    29,821
    Quote Originally Posted by TheRevenantHero View Post
    I argue against tinker because people like Teriz want it to remain restricted to gnomes and goblins. Which makes me prefer that the class just never becomes playable.
    You do know that the Tinker is overwhelmingly a Goblin concept right? If you don't like Goblins or Gnomes, you're probably not going to like the Tinker.

  10. #3430
    Quote Originally Posted by WonderZebra View Post
    I mean I get why asethically those races make more sense. But it would be piss easy to write some lore about how all the playerable tinkers are the most gifted of thier races.
    Goblins and gnomes are the LEAST played races in the game. Making tinker restricted to those races would do nothing but piss fans off that want to try out the new class and cause next to nobody to play the class.

  11. #3431
    Merely a Setback Teriz's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Soul of Azeroth
    Posts
    29,821
    Quote Originally Posted by TheRevenantHero View Post
    They've had the opportunity to add them for the past 16 years and they haven't. There's CLEARLY a reason for that especially after MoP and WoD giving them ample opportunity to introduce them. As a result, they just don't exist anymore and you should really stop using them as examples.
    So do you think Blizzard is done bringing classes into WoW?

    Quote Originally Posted by TheRevenantHero View Post
    Goblins and gnomes are the LEAST played races in the game. Making tinker restricted to those races would do nothing but piss fans off that want to try out the new class and cause next to nobody to play the class.
    Why would fans be pissed off? If you're a fan of the Tinker you'd have no problem playing a Goblin or a Gnome. lol!

  12. #3432
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    You do know that the Tinker is overwhelmingly a Goblin concept right? If you don't like Goblins or Gnomes, you're probably not going to like the Tinker.
    It has nothing to do with the aesthetics. The races themselves look like utter dogshit and their voicelines are grating. I don't care if the look of the abilities would maybe look like goblin stuff. I just don't want to play the two worst races in the game.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    So do you think Blizzard is done bringing classes into WoW?
    Yes. I really do. And I hope that I'm right. Because they can't even balance the ones that are already in the game.

  13. #3433
    The Unstoppable Force Ielenia's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Brazil
    Posts
    21,877
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    And when translated to WoW those HotS abilities are almost exactly like their HotS equivalent.
    Except when they're not, right? Also, that doesn't change the fact that HotS and HotS player abilities are still non-canon to the Warcraft lore.

    A mechanic that likely reflects the lore.
    That's a false statement. By logic 101, that mechanic does not reflect the lore. Character's don't simply "lose all knowledge" the time they decide to stop practicing something. I would ask you to show evidence of your claim in the lore, but I know there is none.

    Still nothing on the level of a Blackfuse or a Mekkatorque.
    I have not heard of Mekkatorgue or Blackfuse ever designing a device that can bring people back from the dead, or teleport people around the planet or even between planets and even dimensions. Whereas my warrior engineer has created mechas to fight in, and other mechanic mounts.

    Until they’re translated to WoW right?
    Nope. The HotS abilities still remain non-canon.

    Your DH can’t hold a shield because it doesn’t work with your class and force an alteration of gameplay. It’s simple. Lore on the other hand is just a mess of writers writing over each other over and over again. It really has no place in a mechanical discussion about future classes.
    Except the basics of the lore are the same. Characters need food. Characters need water. Characters need sleep. Characters don't suddenly forget skills the moment they stop practicing said skills.

    I find it hilarious that you’re willing to bend over backwards to prove that unrelated items are the equivalent of abilities, yet refuse to acknowledge that a DK is a Necromancer for “reasons”.
    Except I never said that death knights are not necromancers. I only said that death knights are not the type of necromancer we want to play as.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    Why would fans be pissed off? If you're a fan of the Tinker you'd have no problem playing a Goblin or a Gnome. lol!
    Are you so arrogant that you cannot conceive the idea that there are people who want to play as a tech class, but do not want to play as a gnome or goblin?
    "Torturing someone is not an evil thing to do if it is done for good reasons" by Varodoc
    "You sit in OG/SW waiting on a Mythic+ queue" by Altmer <- Oh, the pearls in this forum...
    "They sort of did this Dragonriding, which ushered in the Dracthyr race." by Teriz <- the BS some people reach for their narratives...

  14. #3434
    Quote Originally Posted by TheRevenantHero View Post
    Goblins and gnomes are the LEAST played races in the game. Making tinker restricted to those races would do nothing but piss fans off that want to try out the new class and cause next to nobody to play the class.
    Again i just asethically.

    I'd probably play a goblin tinker but I'm not fussed

  15. #3435
    Merely a Setback Teriz's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Soul of Azeroth
    Posts
    29,821
    Quote Originally Posted by TheRevenantHero View Post
    It has nothing to do with the aesthetics. The races themselves look like utter dogshit and their voicelines are grating. I don't care if the look of the abilities would maybe look like goblin stuff. I just don't want to play the two worst races in the game.
    Then you should happily support Vulpera Tinkers then.


    Yes. I really do. And I hope that I'm right. Because they can't even balance the ones that are already in the game.
    To be fair, they could never introduce another class again and people will still complain about balance.

  16. #3436
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    So do you think Blizzard is done bringing classes into WoW?



    Why would fans be pissed off? If you're a fan of the Tinker you'd have no problem playing a Goblin or a Gnome. lol!
    Your arrogance really knows no bounds. Example: I'd rather not play the class if it was restricted to those horrendous races. But if it WASN'T restricted to those trash races, I'd love to play a tech class. Most people would likely feel the same considering the very VERY low number of players making goblins and gnomes.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    Then you should happily support Vulpera Tinkers then.




    To be fair, they could never introduce another class again and people will still complain about balance.
    I'd be fine with vulpera tinker....if every other race got to play a tinker. Otherwise, that would just piss me off.

  17. #3437
    Merely a Setback Teriz's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Soul of Azeroth
    Posts
    29,821
    Quote Originally Posted by Ielenia View Post
    Except when they're not, right? Also, that doesn't change the fact that HotS and HotS player abilities are still non-canon to the Warcraft lore.
    So does that mean that the lore is meaningless? I mean we have HotS abilities in WoW, and some of those abilities are attached the classes. If we have WoW abilities that exist outside of lore, why are we wasting our time talking about lore?

    That's a false statement. By logic 101, that mechanic does not reflect the lore. Character's don't simply "lose all knowledge" the time they decide to stop practicing something. I would ask you to show evidence of your claim in the lore, but I know there is none.
    This is purely head canon. You have no idea if they retain any knowledge or not. You're applying real world logic to a video game. A video game where we have talking trees and elves who can turn into birds.

    I have not heard of Mekkatorgue or Blackfuse ever designing a device that can bring people back from the dead, or teleport people around the planet or even between planets and even dimensions. Whereas my warrior engineer has created mechas to fight in, and other mechanic mounts.
    A mech that is absurd to gather mats for, can't leave Broken Isles, and can't loot anything. Quite the engineering feat.

    Nope. The HotS abilities still remain non-canon.
    Cool, so then canon and lore are meaningless.

    Except the basics of the lore are the same. Characters need food. Characters need water. Characters need sleep. Characters don't suddenly forget skills the moment they stop practicing said skills.
    You've already stated that we have abilities that aren't canon yet exist in the game and within the classes. Why are we talking about lore? Lore is a non factor.


    Except I never said that death knights are not necromancers. I only said that death knights are not the type of necromancer we want to play as.
    Sort of like Monks aren't the type of Monk you want to play as. So that means we has as much chance of getting a Necromancer class as we do another Monk class.


    Are you so arrogant that you cannot conceive the idea that there are people who want to play as a tech class, but do not want to play as a gnome or goblin?
    There's always Vulpera....

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by TheRevenantHero View Post
    Your arrogance really knows no bounds. Example: I'd rather not play the class if it was restricted to those horrendous races. But if it WASN'T restricted to those trash races, I'd love to play a tech class. Most people would likely feel the same considering the very VERY low number of players making goblins and gnomes.
    But other races simply don't fit the class. Just like other races simply don't fit Demon Hunter except Blood and Night Elves.

    I'd be fine with vulpera tinker....if every other race got to play a tinker. Otherwise, that would just piss me off.
    But you'd still play it, that's the point.

  18. #3438
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    So does that mean that the lore is meaningless? I mean we have HotS abilities in WoW, and some of those abilities are attached the classes. If we have WoW abilities that exist outside of lore, why are we wasting our time talking about lore?



    This is purely head canon. You have no idea if they retain any knowledge or not. You're applying real world logic to a video game. A video game where we have talking trees and elves who can turn into birds.



    A mech that is absurd to gather mats for, can't leave Broken Isles, and can't loot anything. Quite the engineering feat.



    Cool, so then canon and lore are meaningless.



    You've already stated that we have abilities that aren't canon yet exist in the game and within the classes. Why are we talking about lore? Lore is a non factor.




    Sort of like Monks aren't the type of Monk you want to play as. So that means we has as much chance of getting a Necromancer class as we do another Monk class.




    There's always Vulpera....
    Vulpera make as much sense being tinkers as trolls do. So if vulpera can be tinkers, ANY race can.

    Also, necromancers and death knights are linked but not the same. Are you going to say that priests and paladins are the same because they both wield the Light?

  19. #3439
    Merely a Setback Teriz's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Soul of Azeroth
    Posts
    29,821
    Quote Originally Posted by TheRevenantHero View Post
    Vulpera make as much sense being tinkers as trolls do. So if vulpera can be tinkers, ANY race can.
    Trolls aren't fans of technology. Vulpera seems curious and resourceful enough. Plus who doesn't like little tech fox people?

  20. #3440
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    Trolls aren't fans of technology. Vulpera seems curious and resourceful enough. Plus who doesn't like little tech fox people?
    No they don't. There is nothing in the game suggesting they are curious about tech. they're a nomad race from the desert that doesn't bother with technology much like trolls. So if vulpera can be tinkers ANYONE can be one. And I don't little fox people because furry races are cringe.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •