Blademaster Class Concept Updated

[username993720]

*Once again: You can't edit you post while i'm in the middle of answering you and expect to get a full reply*

She is an Archmage who happens to be shown using frost more often than any other type, but that doesn't make her a 'Frost Mage' because that specialization in WoW is specific to WoW player gameplay and has plenty of specifications in place that restricts your gameplay intentionally.

Jaina isn't respeccing to Arcane to raise a giant battleship and make it shoot arcane blasts from its cannons. She is capable of doing all things Mage is known to do without limits because she is an Archmage. She simply chooses not to use Fire magic, not that her for magic is any weaker (less profound) because she isn't the right spec. Specs are notable for this, using one aspect while leaving other aspects behind and having them notably weaker or less powered. NPC heroes do not have this limitation, they represent the class fully without arbitrary spec limitations.

This is why MK isn't just Fury. The 2H and Dual Wield differentiations of a WoW Player Class do not apply or exist to a Mointain King. He is a full Warrior, capable of tanking without a shield, mastering Arms while Dual Wielding.

You do know an Archmage uses a combination of Frost and Arcane spells and in Heroes of the Storm that concept has been expanded to be predominantly Frost, right?
Frostbite, Frostbolt, Blizzard (WC3), Cone of Cold, Ring of Frost, Summon Water Elemental (WC3), Ice Block, Winter's Reach, Lingering Chill, Fingers of Frost, Frost Shards, Arcane Intellect (Brilliance Aura), Frost Armor, Ice Lance, Ice Floes, Icefury Wand, Storm Front, Ice Barrier, Icy Veins, Snowstorm, Northern Exposure, Numbing Blast, Cold Snap, Wintermute, Ice Blink, Deep Chill.

The only thing missing is Mass Teleport. But i guess you can consider Ice Blink a sort of translation of that ability (That's what happens with some of the transitions of character from WC3 to HotS).

Her raid abilities:
Chilling Touch, Frozen Solid, Gathering Blizzard, Freezing Blood, Ice Shard, Avalanche, Time Warp, Grasp of Frost, Freezing Blast, Ring of Ice, Frozen Siege, Howling Winds, Glacial Shards, Arctic Ground, Hand of Frost, Glacial Ray, Icefall, Flash Freeze, Crystalline Dust, Orb of Frost, Shattering Lance, Prismatic Image.

Yes, there are some case of her being depicted using fire magic, like in Hearthstone, where the hero's ability is Fireball. But, that hero can be replaced with others, so it doesn't stand to represent her.
Or, Echo of Jaina in End Time dungeon, where she uses Flarecore and Pyroblast. Yet, this is an alternate reality version of her.

I think we can, safely, assume she is, predominantly, a Frost Mage.

The Mountain King doesn't fit all 3 specs, just because he is a rigid individual or because he wield two types of weapons.

That Blademaster quote.

Where us that sourced from? It looks like a statement from the non-canon pen and paper RPG. Mind giving me a proper source for it? Just pulling from WoWpedia without fact checking is going to lead you down rabbit holes.

A Blademaster has never been officially described as 'Master of polearms and axes' in any official source I've seen. The Blademaster has been specific to the 2H sword samurai style, no where have I seen Axe and Polearm stated except from the Pen and Paper RPG books which took massive creative liberties.

https://wowpedia.fandom.com/wiki/Blademaster

First Paragraph.

And Kaelthas being a mage has no citation.

Officially he is always a Blood Mage. He could be referred to as a Mage as well, yes, since a Blood Mage is colloquially a type of mage just like an Archmage, but that is not a 'WoW Class' definition. It is more akin to calling a Paladin a Holy Warrior, a generalized description.

A Blood Mage is the combination of 'Blood', the name given to the race after their decimation (in contrast with 'High') and Mage, the class in discussion. Blood, in this case, doesn't mean Blood magic. Even when Kael'thas is in Revendreth, surrounded by Blood Orbs and having red blood eyes, his spells are fire spells.
Therefore, the name implies on the Blood Elven/Mage combination which, in lore, are said to prefer fire magic over frost. His unique Verdant Spheres and fel aesthetics are what sets him apart from other Blood elven Mages. But, he he is still a fire mage in heart.

My problem is if we simply equate what is closest, it will misinform people reading to assume that is just factual rather than conversational. Let's say we all regard Greymane as an Outlaw Rogue and it's listed on Wowpedia, now we know that Greymane is a Rogue. And what is an Outlaw Rogue archetype? A person who has no regard for rules of engagement, who uses underhanded techniques, who has no true sense of honor.

Now does this truly apply to Greymane? No, it does not. We are just arbitrarily assigning an Outlaw Rogue identity yo him because he uses a sword and pistol and has a stealth talent. As you said yourself, he doesn't actually embody an Outlaw Rogue. But at the same time, you'd say you agree.

We shouldn't regard these attributions at all because they completely misrepresent what these characters identities actually represent. Greymane is most appropriate a class-less representation of a Worgen. Blizzard has yet to officially assign him any class, and there is no need to assign him a Fury Warrior or Outlaw Rogue connection when he isn't either. He is a representation of a cursed Worgen, not purposefully raging fighter. He happens to use a sword and pistol, that's simply how he chooses to fight in HotS, and he isn't class-changing to do so.

Identities need to ve respected otherwise arguments get muddled.

Case in point, why should Blademaster ever get its own class if one can argue that they are already represented as Arms Warrior? Because of Windwalk and Mirrror Image? Nonneed, since we're already associating Blademaster to being Arms Warrior. Blademasters don't need Windwalk or Mirror Image because they are an Arms Warrior, and Arms doesn't use those abilities.

Oh you want to say that Blademaster is also its own class because of its theme? Blizzard has muddled themes into classes too, like calling a Gnome Priest a secular Medic and Tauren Paladins being Sunwalkers who use a modified form of Druidism to channel Light. These are culturally themed aspects of existing classes, so since Blademaster is an Arms Warrior we can assume the Eastern influences are just an aspect of the Burning Blade.

You have zero argument for making a new class if you are already attributing the identity to an existing class and spec. You are admitting that Blademasters are just Arms Warriors. You are revealing this publicly and convincing people to regard that a Blademaster is an Arms Warrior.

WoW classes and specs are not modular. There are specific rules that define what a Spec is. There is no class that has multiple identities or associations. Anduin can't be a Priest who is also a Ret Paladin spec. There is no such thing as a Blademaster Class that is also an Arms Warrior. If you call Blademaster an Arms Warrior, then he is a Warrior Class specializing in Arms, and people agreeing with your classification can disregard the idea of making Blademaster its own class because you've already represented in the game. A couple of missing abilities doesn't matter ince this argument is made; as we said the Brewmaster doesn't have Storm Earth and Fire and is still a Brewmaster right?

You're both arguing against Syg and making his argument for him.

Neither do Kul Tirans. They distaste piracy. Yet, they are, obviously, Outlaw Rogues. The only way to represent their sailor natures is through this spec. Even though they are not, necessarily, scoundrels.

So is Daelin Proudmoore. He is listed as some kind of a Hydromancer in WC3 and uses sea and storm related abilities, when he's clearly not a spellcaster. He is, clearly, a type of an Outlaw Rogue. But, Blizzard didn't have any abilities available for him, so they assigned him with what fits the Kul Tiran sea-faring nature the most.

I argued with you about Blademasters being closer to Arms Warrior because you claimed them to be Fury, for some reason. That doesn't mean i believe they are fully-represented in game.

The medic aspect of the Gnomes would be better represented when the Alchemist gets added to the game. Currently, they are just a cover up.

Saying the Blademaster is more of an Arms Warrior does not renders this discussion obsolete. Stop freaking out about it. We can say the Dark Ranger/Priestess of the Moon and Sea Witch are more of a Marksmanship than a Beastmaster or Survival, because that spec used to encompass the Archer. We can say the Shadow Hunter is more of an Enhancement Shaman than Elemental or Restoration because it uses Wards and wields a Glaive. We can say the Warden is more of an Assassination Rogue, because it used poison in Warcraft III. It doesn't mean they are in-game. It is just that, in the meantime, Blizzard decided to mildly represent them to appease the player-base.

Storm, Earth and Fire is in the Monk class, though. Wind Walk and Mirror Image are not.

I regard all Heroes and Units as their own Class Identity, and every one of them has the potential to be made into a playable class.

If you've been paying attention to Blizzard's patterns, they have been adding classes, exclusively, from the Warcraft 3 Hero units. Basic units, like the Spellbreaker and Necromancer, are therefore very unlikely. I made a thread about it:
https://www.mmo-champion.com/threads...pecializations

We can focus the argument to Abilities like Windwalk and Mirror Image being unique to the Blademaster. The problem is if we all commonly associate the Blademaster as already being an Arms Warrior, then that can easily get shut down to exactly Syg's point - these could just be abilities added to the Arms spec in the future instead of a new class. Why bother with a new class then? And that's a valid point, because Blizzard could just opt to make it a talent, or simply never make it at all. The association of them being Arms Warriors is already well accepted by you, even without those abilities, right?

Then, you'd have to provide an explanation as to why they would be added to the Warrior class.

The difference in my conversation with you is that I know you don't regard the Blademaster as an actual 'Warrior Class'. But what if you did believe it was already a Warrior? How could I convince you that it isn't? I can't.

I, actually, did believe that in the past. But, further research into Blizzard's patterns and the unit's abilities led me to believe this is not the case.

All I can hope to achieve is allowing people to realize the facts; that Blizzard does not officially regard 'Specs' and 'Classes' as applicable to WC3 Heroes (with exceptions of course, like Brewmaster or Farseer).

Why do you regard the Brewmaster and Far Seer, but not the Beastmaster? You have yet to explain it.

Could we have Beastmaster? Yes, because they haven't officially tied them to any existing class; though the merit of it happening is very low. We can then discuss the merits of the class being playable or not.

Why, though?
How come it is not tied to the Beast Mastery spec? You provided, literally, no explanation.

If we simply establish that he is a Mage class, we don't need to consider all the other unique abilities a Blood Mage has that differs from Mages at this point. We can just assume that the Mage class would absorb those unique abilities.

Exactly
Blood Mage is one type of Fire Mage, like Dark Irons have Pyromancers to represent theirs.

Listen. You can't just claim everything and everybody to be special snowflakes that deserve their own class just because of a single spell or a unique aesthetic. And i'm not siding with Syg or helping him in any way. I'm just saying - distinguish between the ones deserving of a new class and those that just need modification.

[cocomen2]

People can't get that specs and abilities exist only for gameplay reasons , from lore standpoint each character has his unique amount of knowledge over specific field and by any given moment when writer choses so character can get MORE knowledge and go out bounds of specific class. We can have lets say Paladin lore character that was Priest given warrior training , character not gonna magically forget priest knowledge and warrior training ; but playable Paladin can't get access to Priest and Warrior skills otherwise that would be game breaking point.

Yes you can transmog and look like Blademaster, but cosplaying Blademaster will never make you one.

Jaina is Archmage, yes we see a things that she do with ICE, some can think that she is frost mage but she uses ice only because writers wants to do so, you never gonna see playable frost mage that lifts ships and freezes whole city. She is poster child for frost mages only because writers wants it , by any given moment she able to use arcane and fire on same level.... but is there a reason for her to burn whole city?

Listen. You can't just claim everything and everybody to be special snowflakes that deserve their own class just because of a single spell or a unique aesthetic. And i'm not siding with Syg or helping him in any way. I'm just saying - distinguish between the ones deserving of a new class and those that just need modification.

But everyone lore character is special snowflake , that given unique backstory and knowledge , knowledge that has one archemage(example) not 100% translated to all other archemages by telepathy .... we can have 80+ lore archemages and each of them gonna have warry their own story and knowledge .... but of course its up to writers to tell us their story or not.

Its up to blizzard to distinguish and chose ones deserving , not to you. As if this tread called "Can blademasters be new class? haters pls give your opinion"

LIKe or Dislike , and move on with your life.

[Triceron]

[B]
Neither do Kul Tirans. They distaste piracy. Yet, they are, obviously, Outlaw Rogues. The only way to represent their sailor natures is through this spec. Even though they are not, necessarily, scoundrels.

Which is missing the point. Why would you equate a non-playable Kul Tiran NPC that is not a pirate and would not associate themselves with pirates as being Outlaw Rogues? 'The only way to represent their sailor natures' is by not misappropriating them as Rogues at all. The only way is to respectfully regard them as whatever the NPCs is referred as. You didn't consider that an option at all, and you regard 'Outlaw Rogue' as the _ONLY_ way to represent them.

Therein lies the problem with your perspective. NPCs aren't meant to be classified by WoW Player Specializations. You're just muddling their identity by doing so.

If you've been paying attention to Blizzard's patterns, they have been adding classes, exclusively, from the Warcraft 3 Hero units. Basic units, like the Spellbreaker and Necromancer, are therefore very unlikely. I made a thread about it:
https://www.mmo-champion.com/threads...pecializations

And judging by many of the comments within, there is no unilateral agreement to that list.

It's a mishmash of ideas with everyone commenting their own nuance and perspective on different concepts. I don't see your particular perspective to be any more convincing than anyone elses on the matter.

Just look at the Necromancer. Different opinions on the merits of the class. But at no point does anyone start tying the class to existing specs or classes; just a more appropriate analysis that many aspects of their themes already exist in other classes. There's no arbitrary attribution needed to address the Necromancer as some form of Warlock, Mage or Death Knight.

Then, you'd have to provide an explanation as to why they would be added to the Warrior class.

You mean like how you have no explanation for how Beastmasters are actually added to the Hunter class?

You've only ever compared their themed and pointed out similarities. You haven't actually been able to source where Blizzard actually regards the two as one and the same class. That is my argument, that Blizzard does not regard these connections.

Same applies for Blademaster. The WC3 description does not call them Warrior at all, they call them swordsmen at most. Blademaster has no reason to be attributed as a Warrior or type of Warrior. No reason for you to call then an Arms Warrior.

Why do you regard the Brewmaster and Far Seer, but not the Beastmaster? You have yet to explain it.

Blizzard themselves regard Brewmasters as being playable in WoW, through the Monk class. They literally used the name Brewmaster.
Blizzard themselves regard the Farseer as being a form of Shaman. It is literally in the WC3 text
"Far Seers are ancient Orcs who represent the pinnacle of Shamanistic power. These powerful Shamans are counted amongst Thrall's closest advisors "

We have official sources to corroborate these class titles. We're not talking about loose definitions like 'Holy warrior' or 'Shadowy warrior', this is a direct connection to the Shamans within Thrall's Horde.

Yet for Beastmaster, there is no direct association to the WoW Hunter class.

Exactly
Blood Mage is one type of Fire Mage, like Dark Irons have Pyromancers to represent theirs.

Listen. You can't just claim everything and everybody to be special snowflakes that deserve their own class just because of a single spell or a unique aesthetic. And i'm not siding with Syg or helping him in any way. I'm just saying - distinguish between the ones deserving of a new class and those that just need modification.

Blizzard is the only one to make those distinctions.

*I* am not making those distinctions. I am pointing out what is official and what is not.

WoWpedia is not an *official* source, and you actually have to parse out what is officially cited and what is not.

Everything that I've pointed out is based on *OFFICIALLY SOURCED* information, and not just an abstraction of what I personally think any particular hero or class should be.

I agree that Kael'thas is a Mage and a Fire spec mage if we're just talking conversationally, but my point is Blizzard does not OFFICIALLY designate Kael'thas or the Blood Mage Identity as directly being a Fire Mage or simply a type of WoW Mage class. They have not defined the Blood Mage completely.

And I agree that we should discuss on basis of merit to be its own class or as an extension of an existing one, but the attribution of existing class is unnecessary and confusing. You and me can recognize a Blademaster as its own class despiteb you calling it Arms Warrior conversationally, but to someone like Syg you are only reinforcing his belief that they are only a Warrior class.

And look below, Teriz has now entered the conversation eith that same classification. Good luck to you trying to argue that the Blademaster can be its own class.

[Teriz]

Out of curiosity, if Blademaster is not enough different from Warrior to be a class, what can they add that it's not already on the game?

Tinker or Dragonsworn (HotS).

We should avoid adding classes to the game that can be achieved by adding 1-3 abilities to existing specializations. Considering that Arms could use something that makes it interesting, making it a Blademaster spec would be the better way to go. There simply isn’t enough unique material to create a Blademaster class.

[username993720]

please not this bullshit of hots again, why you guys act like that is canon and already invalidade the entire discussion? those are npc made totally different from a moba, they have unique abilities to fit their single playstyle, stop bringing hots as a trumph card.

It is a continuation of the Warcraft III unit. How hard is it to see that?

necromancers = clotch, staves, daggers, spellcasters only
Death knights = plate, swords, axes, maces, Melee DPS/tank

Warrior = plate, swords, axes, maces, melee dps
Blademaster = plate, swords, axes, melee dps

ther eis no duplicity, one is different, the other is the same

So, you advocate for a class based on armor type and weapons alone? even though their spells are identical?
And i'm the madman...

they had in wc3, stop for a while and got it back, which make sense since is a high lv ability, only high lv warriros would learn.

And level 60 or 70 is not high enough? -_-

Death coil was never a warlock ability in Wc3

It is, if you considered the Death Knight a Warlock.

metamorphosis was enver a warlock ability in wc3

It is, if you consideres the Demon Hunter a Warlock.

You see, both the Affliction and Demonology Warlocks contained the necromancy and demon transformation of the Death Knight and Demon Hunter. So, in essence, they fulfilled those types until their addition. The same way you associate the Blademaster with the Warrior, due to mastery over weapons and the Bladestorm ability.

then tell me why it is even barely MENTIONED in wow lifestory? you can cound ony our fingers, of one hand how many npcs actually do that

if those two skills defined the blademaster gameplay and fantasy, every blademaster would ahve those skills, and of then would use, it ould be mentioned int heir lore, yada yada, and surprise, isn't.

Mentioned? The most famous Blademaster isn't, even, present in game. So, you can't say the Blademaster was represented much in WoW's story.

NPCs are the worst thing to take example of. They, rarely, represent their archetype appropriately, with many of them having just one known ability and drawing the other ones from other classes.

Warlord Dharl of the Thrice-Bloodied Blade uses Mirror Image.
Blademaster Jubei'thos uses Windwalk and Mirror Image.
Gorn uses ​Windwalk.
Katsuo uses Wind Walk and Mirror Image.
Akatha Bladeburn uses Wind Walk.

You know how many of them even use Bladestorm or Critical Strike? 1.
Krell the Serene (a Saberon) uses Bladestorm.
None of them even use an ability called Critical Strike.

Mentioned in lore? of course they are mentioned in lore: "Though blademasters are masters of stealth and guile, they value personal honor above all else."
"One of the blademasters' more mystical abilities is to create duplicate phantom images of themselves. Though the phantom images can move about freely of their own volition, they are not true entities unto themselves".
"So adept and agile are the blademasters that they can move so quickly that they appear to be invisible to the naked eye".
(Warcraft III: Reign of Chaos manual, pg. 84).

Breaking Mirrors
"Defeat Telaamon's mirror images within Zalamar."

"We have reports dat Telaamon, de Lightforged in charge of dis attack, can create mirror images of himself to strike us down.

Two Zandalari, Witch Doctor Kejabu and Jo'chunga, have offered to go in and help fight his mirror images.

I want you to ensure dey survive.

Eliminating dese strange images should make Telaamon weaker, allowing you and Rokhan to slay him."
https://wowpedia.fandom.com/wiki/Breaking_Mirrors

How much lore is there about Bladestorm or Critical Strike? I'll tell you how much. The same as the other two. From the same source. Only that Bladestorm and Critical Strike are not referenced in the Blademaster's description. And they are not referenced in a quest, like Mirror Image is.

Priestss of the moon is just the nigth efly clergy, is a religion, they could be any class that use bow.

A Hunter then, Right?
Can a Hunter use moon abilities?

if it is the blademaster style, it is the warrior style

because blademasters are warrior, is a matter ofa dding new abilities/talents

Stealth and Decoys?
Are you thinking clearly?

there is no trickery in the blademaster, go read their lore and find me any piece that emphatize or focus their trickery, none, nothing

"One of the blademasters' more mystical abilities is to create duplicate phantom images of themselves." - pretty self explanatory.

Warlock in WC3 didn't had those things, they had a firebolt kind of spell(incinerate), cripple enemy targets like the curse of fragility

Warlocks never had metamorphosis, it was a illidan ability, not gul'dan, or other warlock, so, i see no problem in they being removed

Not if you considered the Warlock a Demon Hunter, which many did. And that is because it encompassed the fantasy and gameplay of the Demon Hunter through Metamorphosis. Much like how you consider the Blademaster a Warrior because of Bladestorm and similar description.

Neither is Hots, but you guys sued as trumphy cards, i might as well use to show some things

HotS is way more recent and relevant than the RPG sources.

i didn't need to, if blizzard itself does, only Jubeithos in a long while used wind walk, because fel energies shenanigans.

I, already, showed you this is wrong above. There are more NPCs using Mirror Image and Wind Walk.

to be invisible

We ltierally saw a trialler where rogues were invisible attacking thrall and saurfang.

To stealth.
Mages use invisibility.
How did you want them to portray stealth in a cinematic?

Again, the failure of this logic is that you build ana rgument assuming your base is true, you are again, making a comparison of those with the blademaster when there is none

Of course it is. It shows you how ill-represented classes are, by NPCs, before their addition. Even your precious Necromancer used, mostly, Warlock abilities before the introduction of Death Knights.
Tinkers are still misrepresented in terms of their abilities. Thank god for Mekkatorque being a raid boss.

when didlighforged draeneis used wind walk? pandarnes with mirror image and wind walk? any mage race will bea ble too because mages can mirror image? what a mess

*Sigh* -_-
No, because they are listed as Blademasters. Blademaster Telaamon is one example. He uses Mirror Image.
I included Pandaren and Night Elves because of their asiatic influences (Chinese/Japanese).

They enver did that, stop with the false equivalence, you are trying to seel me just because a potato is different than a tomato, those two aples are different, is unreal

​They never did? Metamorphosis-style gameplay was not the Demonology Warlock throughout Wrath of the Lich King, up until Legion?

Except bremaster being in the game, and ltos of references about pandaria, sure

​What, as vendors? come on...
A lot of references to Pandaria? like what? the Pandaren Monk pet? the Empty Keg quest in the Barren? you gotta be kidding me...

Again, no point in adding the same class, again, but with hots bulshit, to archieve the same thing, and the same niche other classes already do, is reduntant, unecessary and pointless

intead, they could,a ct normall and logicall, and work on the class to give more blademaster vibe, since it already have

Sounds, exactly, like the Demon Hunter and Warlock debate.

manipualte fire = creating fire

they jsut throw fire at you with the blade, nothing mystic or magical

No, manipulating fire implies on a magical or shamanistic direction:
"Given that blademasters wear neck-beads similar to some shaman and monks, and some possess elemental (Blazing Coil, Molten Weapon) or supernatural (Wind Walk, Mirror Image) abilities, it is possible that they also utilize their spirit to empower themselves or draw from the elemental spirits either by command or request."

it is not magical, is manually

Debatable.

ah yes, another hots meme reference

And Hearthstone.
It shows you that a Blademaster that didn't appear in WoD ignites his weapon, as well.

and how they learn ancient and secret orcish techiniques? they jsut make up their own whoa re the same? all right

It's no longer orcish, you know.
Krell is of the Blackfang Tribe, Blademaster Telaamon is part of the Army of the Light and Blademaster Okani is of the Waveblade clan.

lmao, just because they master that don't mean is the main part of their fantasy, it is, a secondary aspect

And guile = astut, cunning, intelligence, not a liar or deceptive guy.

Says who?
If you focus so much on mastery over blade, then you should give the same weight to mastery over stealth and guile.

Guile also means/synonymous with deceit, tricks, deception, trickiness. Look it up.

that is because blademasters = warriors, they can all be warriros and masters of the blade in their own way.

The one you want though, the ones who use mirror image, wind walk, aka samuro, are orcs only.

The only race who even somehow made close was that draenei using mirror image, and that was bullshit at this own

You never saw an ankoan or a saberon using those skills

What the hell? We are discriminating now?
All Blademasters, from all races, are Blademasters.
There's no specific Blademaster i want, because there are no different types of Blademasters.

Dragon roar by tiself is an almost magical ability, if itsn't one, amgical in the sense a warior can do.

I, probably, should have emphasized the word "similar". There are no abilities similar to Mirror Image, like you claimed there were.
And no, Dragon Roar in not a magical ability. Definitely not in the same manner of Mirror Image.

not magic, therefore, normal warriors can do, since they already do supernatural things

Can warriors be attributed to being extremely fast? I doubt that...
I'd give that to a Demon Hunter, not a Warrior.

with reincarnation? are you even trying to be funny?

Not necessarily. It could stay a remnant of the past (Warcraft 3). Jeez, i wish they had done a Tauren Chieftain in Heroes of the Storm, rather than that stupid music character, E.T.C.

the meme again

That's how they were viewed back then.

is funny that youa re saying those are "no" but blademaster is a yes, don't you see the hypocrisy in that?

And yes, necromancer is a spellcaster with clotch that use staves, that is totally different from a juggernaut of death who sometimes invoke the death.

No. Hypocrisy would be suggesting a class based on its armor and weapons, instead of abilities.

the "talents' don't exist in wc3 neither in wow.

They don't need to. They are there to expand upon the base gameplay of the Blademaster, containing Mirror Image, Wind Walk, Critical Strike and Bladestorm.

No its not, because warriors in the game use those abilities, again, see jubeithos in hellfire citadel, those are not alien, those are warriroa bilities not avaiable to players

Yea, if you categorize Blademasters as Warriors. How convenient...
Jubei'thos also uses Fel Blade and Felstorm. Would you consider them Warrior abilities?

blademasters don't use elemental magic

If you consider fire manipulation, they do.

She is poster child for frost mages only because writers wants it , by any given moment she able to use arcane and fire on same level.... but is there a reason for her to burn whole city?

Yes, actually.
She planned to drown Orgrimmar with a massive tidal wave in MoP. Once again, pertaining to her Frost nature.

[kugarm]

Very nice!!!

[Teriz]

I agree with Teriz largely, not sure about dragonsworn but tinker sure, but specifically on the adjusting of arms, the problem is how do you give arms mirror image from mages and windwalk without feeling like you're taking iconic abilities from other classes.

Mirror Image can work like one of the previous iterations of Storm Earth Fire. I think one iteration of SEF even allowed you to switch between spirits.

Wind Walk can be a charge replacement. Like you turn invisible and charge a target. If you hit the target you deal increased damage. If you don’t hit anything, you stay invisible for a few seconds with increased move speed.

War Banner: Just bring back the old warrior ability, giving the spec a banner on their back.

Simple.

Again, not enough for a class, but more than enough to make Arms interesting.

[Capultro]

when i saw " Tank spec" I lost all interest.only play pure dps classes,so I will never be wrong



np.

[cocomen2]

Yes, actually.
She planned to drown Orgrimmar with a massive tidal wave in MoP. Once again, pertaining to her Frost nature.

I meant to say is there a reason for her to use FIRE, over ice or arcane bomb, drown them with water is one thing , but if she ever gonna burn city then kids gonna cry that she is genocide maniac and must be pinned down. (even if these apes were living on easy flammable tree for years)

But as long she just freeze everything , she just cool and nice Frozen princess.

[Teriz]

Yeah the SEF thing you mentioned sounds great, especially switching between the spirits.

Im not 100% on the wind walk thing, I think personally wind walk and charge should be there, I think maybe, replacing heroic leap with a stealth ability that lasts a few seconds with decently increased movement speed and perhaps small damage reduction would be super cool

Not enough for a class I personally do agree, but I think replacing arms is a bit much, I genuinely do feel they could flesh out more classes with 4th specs and really feed into the fantasy more, but I understand your POV.

I disagree. I think Arms is rather aimless right now and could use a shot in the arm. A remake in the same vein as Combat to Outlaw would do some good.

[AthranThom]

Arms is the warrior spec that i think the devs have an idea of what they want it to be but the execution makes it far too generic.

Arms is likely supposed to be the Weapon-master spec.

This could be accomplished in 2 ways.Either give them a weapon switch mechanic that would reinforce the Master of All Weapons fantasy thus giving it more identity, OR lean heavily into the spiritual side of weapon-mastery thus making them more like blademasters.

Edit: That said the concept of the blademaster suggested here is i think a very good direction to take for the lore of the blademasters. It would have to be followed by a substantial amount of lore to flesh it out though(mostly to explain the reason why other races other than orcs that have never interacted with them - lightforged, ankoan- would have found the same fighting style).

[username993720]

Which is missing the point. Why would you equate a non-playable Kul Tiran NPC that is not a pirate and would not associate themselves with pirates as being Outlaw Rogues? 'The only way to represent their sailor natures' is by not misappropriating them as Rogues at all. The only way is to respectfully regard them as whatever the NPCs is referred as. You didn't consider that an option at all, and you regard 'Outlaw Rogue' as the _ONLY_ way to represent them.

Therein lies the problem with your perspective. NPCs aren't meant to be classified by WoW Player Specializations. You're just muddling their identity by doing so.

Do you really see him as a Hydromancer? come on...
That's just wrong classification. Like Blademaster Grommash.
An Admiral is, basically, an Outlaw Rogue. Even if the description is misleading.

And judging by many of the comments within, there is no unilateral agreement to that list.

It's a mishmash of ideas with everyone commenting their own nuance and perspective on different concepts. I don't see your particular perspective to be any more convincing than anyone elses on the matter.

Just look at the Necromancer. Different opinions on the merits of the class. But at no point does anyone start tying the class to existing specs or classes; just a more appropriate analysis that many aspects of their themes already exist in other classes. There's no arbitrary attribution needed to address the Necromancer as some form of Warlock, Mage or Death Knight.

They comment on what they want.
I listed what i predict is gonna come.
Two different approaches. One is emotional, the other calculated.

Of course it is tied to existing classes/specs. The Unholy Death Knight and the Affliction Warlock.

You mean like how you have no explanation for how Beastmasters are actually added to the Hunter class?

You've only ever compared their themed and pointed out similarities. You haven't actually been able to source where Blizzard actually regards the two as one and the same class. That is my argument, that Blizzard does not regard these connections.

Same applies for Blademaster. The WC3 description does not call them Warrior at all, they call them swordsmen at most. Blademaster has no reason to be attributed as a Warrior or type of Warrior. No reason for you to call then an Arms Warrior.

I have, you just chose to disregard it.
The name Beast Mastery for the spec cannot be any more obvious.
Their description matches perfectly with the spec's description.
Its abilities are all accounted for in the class.
I don't know how much more persuasion you need.

Blizzard themselves regard Brewmasters as being playable in WoW, through the Monk class. They literally used the name Brewmaster.
Blizzard themselves regard the Farseer as being a form of Shaman. It is literally in the WC3 text
"Far Seers are ancient Orcs who represent the pinnacle of Shamanistic power. These powerful Shamans are counted amongst Thrall's closest advisors "

We have official sources to corroborate these class titles. We're not talking about loose definitions like 'Holy warrior' or 'Shadowy warrior', this is a direct connection to the Shamans within Thrall's Horde.

Yet for Beastmaster, there is no direct association to the WoW Hunter class.

Unbelievable.
claiming the Brewmaster is represented through the Monk spec because of its name, but not Beast Mastery, is the biggest facepalm i've experienced in my life. Are you, really, going to be that petty over a Y at the end of the name? It's the same case, here, as the Brewmaster. If it was called Brew Mastery, would you claim it not to be? Because that would be silly as hell...

Funny how you take the Far Seer's description as a proof of them being Shamans, but when it comes to Brewmasters being pointed out as Warriors not once, but 3 times, in their description, you don't regard them as Warriors. Nowhere in their description they are said to be Monks. That is being selective on purpose.

By the way:
"Among the most gifted hunters, there are those who have from birth felt a profound bond with the creatures of the wild. These beast masters are drawn to the perilous primal world, invigorated by its dangerous and untamed nature. Primitive landscape becomes home. Ferocious predator becomes kin. Whether in the thrill of the hunt or the heat of battle, beast masters call forth a litany of vicious animals to overwhelm prey and gnaw at their enemies' will." - Legion Class Preview Series: Hunter

So yeah, Blizzard does regard them as such.

Blizzard is the only one to make those distinctions.

*I* am not making those distinctions. I am pointing out what is official and what is not.

WoWpedia is not an *official* source, and you actually have to parse out what is officially cited and what is not.

Everything that I've pointed out is based on *OFFICIALLY SOURCED* information, and not just an abstraction of what I personally think any particular hero or class should be.

I agree that Kael'thas is a Mage and a Fire spec mage if we're just talking conversationally, but my point is Blizzard does not OFFICIALLY designate Kael'thas or the Blood Mage Identity as directly being a Fire Mage or simply a type of WoW Mage class. They have not defined the Blood Mage completely.

And I agree that we should discuss on basis of merit to be its own class or as an extension of an existing one, but the attribution of existing class is unnecessary and confusing. You and me can recognize a Blademaster as its own class despiteb you calling it Arms Warrior conversationally, but to someone like Syg you are only reinforcing his belief that they are only a Warrior class.

And look below, Teriz has now entered the conversation eith that same classification. Good luck to you trying to argue that the Blademaster can be its own class.

I'm not going to deal with him. I've, already, learned that he's here to divert it towards the Tinker.

Actually, no its not. A knighthood does. Knights were nobles, not average soldiers placed on horses.

I've heard they were, actually, juveniles challenging people to combat on the roads. And that the stories just romanticized them as being these noble and fare individuals. Basically, making them little teenager rascals looking for trouble. And if they managed to beat their opponents (kill), they would take their stuff. Which is, basically, a highwayman.

I wouldnt even continue this argument with him mate. At least me and you had a really nice back and forth about what we envisioned different warrior related stuff to be, from Grom to footman etc etc etc and could see each others POV and agree with each other, you're talking to a wall with him mate.

Don't worry, i've seen worse. I'm used to it.
I would advise you to avoid replying to T eriz, for your own good. Believe me, i talk from experience.

This could be accomplished in 2 ways.Either give them a weapon switch mechanic that would reinforce the Master of All Weapons fantasy thus giving it more identity, OR lean heavily into the spiritual side of weapon-mastery thus making them more like blademasters.

Well, they had sword, mace and axe specialization talents in the old days.

[AthranThom]

Well, they had sword, mace and axe specialization talents in the old days.

I was thinking more along the lines of actually changing weapons mid-combat.

Like say the Gladiator stance would have you pull out a shield way back when.

Or smth like "Throw/Unsheathe sidearm" which would throw or equip a onehander for a few seconds that would add different effects to the Arms warrior's base abilities based on the type of 1hander.
Those effects would be increased duration of deep wounds if ts an axe, or armor penetration if its a mace etc.

In fact you could also add the Blademaster fantasy by giving the a Wind Walk/Mirror Image spell that works only when the sidearm equipped is an off-hand. There could even have the off-hand give you the beads on your neck as a transmog kind of like they did with the Libram and the Holy Paladin artifact.

There you go. A Talent row for Arms Warrior that satisfies all versions of a weapon master lol

[username993720]

I was thinking more along the lines of actually changing weapons mid-combat.

Like say the Gladiator stance would have you pull out a shield way back when.

Or smth like "Throw/Unsheathe sidearm" which would throw or equip a onehander for a few seconds that would add different effects to the Arms warrior's base abilities based on the type of 1hander.
Those effects would be increased duration of deep wounds if ts an axe, or armor penetration if its a mace etc.

In fact you could also add the Blademaster fantasy by giving the a Wind Walk/Mirror Image spell that works only when the sidearm equipped is an off-hand. There could even have the off-hand give you the beads on your neck as a transmog kind of like they did with the Libram and the Holy Paladin artifact.

There you go. A Talent row for Arms Warrior that satisfies all versions of a weapon master lol

Actually, i would have liked Gladiator to be a 4th Warrior spec. We, already, have a two hander, a one/two hander dual-wield and a one hander with a shield. But there is no two hander with a shield.

Sword Specialization gave you chance for an extra attack. Mace Specialization gave you a chance to ignore your opponent's armor. And Axe Specialization gave you increased Critical Strike chance. They could bring that back for more RP.

Actually, a lot of these characters are depicted with many types of sheathed weapons on them, that never get used. They could do something like Assassin's Creed, where you utilize multiple weapons on your character.

Personally, i'd avoid giving the Warrior Wind Walk and Mirror Image. It's kinda fantasy-breaking. fast-paced sword slashing is something i would associate with the Monk, the Rogue or the Demon Hunter.

[Syegfryed]

Jesus christ you're on something for real. You started randomly harping on to me about how you can tmog into an asian themed warrior and I already explained I never spoke about tmog, and nor do I give a crap that you're discussing it with others, stop trying to prove me wrong about this, you screwed up, stop talking to me about tmog and admit you are talking to the wrong person by mistake.

you will start nittpicking something i never said to you, and get salty about it? is that it?

Says the person who provides no counter argument to facts. Is a Viking warrior a knight - No. Is your average spartan a knight - no. Is a samurai a knight - no. Is a medieval lord who has been granted a KNIGHTHOOD a knight - yes. Is a footsoldier or even a mounted warrior in armour on a medieval battlefield a knight, no, not unless they've been knighted.

You are again, trying to do absurdism and false equivalence, vikings are essentially pirates

A samurai is a medieval warlord who had some sort of knighthood, again, they share a lot of similarities and thats why they say they are coutnerparts, you bringing something that is not related is not a prof, learn how to discuss

You know there was a period in the middle ages where nobles would reject being a knight because it meant they would have to pay more taxes, and a law was introduced in England to make it so that if you have the noble right to be a knight, you couldn't reject it. Being in armour doesn't make you a f"$%^g knight for the last time.

Thank you for bringing irrelevant stuff to the conversation

Yes you did, you claimed Samurai were knights and basically tried to make a mockery that apparently 'I couldn't see it'

No, i said theya re similar and share aspects, youa re the one assuming they are "exactly the same"

What is the resemblance

you are ltierally blinding yourself to not see lmao

Actually, no its not. A knighthood does. Knights were nobles, not average soldiers placed on horses.

And jokes on you, Samurais were also nobles

No I cant, one is noble, one is not, both of them fight, one of them runs businesses and manages land, the other is given a ration of rice daily to survive by the people of the land, both are warriors, one is a full time warrior, one is part time.

There are a lot more similarities between a spartan soldier and a samurai than a medieval knight and a samurai, the spartan and samurai are full time warriors and post were not wealthy at all. Knights are elites of society who are trained in the art of war, and fight part time while managing land and businesses on the side.

The Kamakura period (1185–1333) saw the rise of the samurai under shogun rule as they were "entrusted with the security of the estates" and were symbols of the ideal warrior and citizen.[7] Originally, the emperor and non-warrior nobility employed these warrior nobles. In time they amassed enough manpower, resources and political backing, in the form of alliances with one another, to establish the first samurai-dominated government

So, no, friend, they are not nearly as close to the spartans,, knights and samurais could be wealthy, they could both be elites of society, who trained in the art of war, and also managed amtters of the land

Youa re just further confirming my point

Nice nice resort to mockery. Ironically, I don't even know what Naruto is, and I don't watch any anime, but okay, keep digging yourself deeper, ill say it again, I'm basing my idea on you know, warcraft games.

suuure you don't know what a "naruto is" you could come up with a better excuse

and hots isn't a warcraft game.

Honestly STFU lol you're making yourself look like such a tool, you clearly know nothing about history you're just some typical forum keyboard expert, one person here actually studied this stuff the other clearly didn't. Where did I say I was an expert on the story, where did I even talk about the story!! I literally said my entire point is based on the samurai class in WC3 and HOTS Samuro!! You're on something for real! What a joke!

Claim knows shit about story and i don't, can't form an argument without fallacy, and you are obvlious and biased towards orcs in the game

Your point is based on headcanon, stop trying to paint as something more valid than anything else

Yep lots of people do, that's why there's a thread about it here, that's why lots of people are arguing with you and that's why its in HOTS because people want a 'fancy blademaster ninja to be a thing'

don't try to win this with ad populum, only 3 persons are "arguing with me" that is not even nearly close to lots of people

If people want a fancy blademaster ninja they can play hots, in wow there is the real blademaster

Played like 3 hours total in HOTS and never watched anime in my life, you're such a fool. I don't talk like I'm some story expert, I keep my points simple and to point. Everything is based on what I've seen in WC3/HOTS.

So, you played like 3 hours of HOTS but already saw that samuro from hots is such an essential thing to be in the game? something that need to happens and hots is the perfect place to take the class from?

3 entire hours?

you argument is based around what you saw in 3 hours of gameplay?

no surprise at all

This is a comedy at this point, you're resorting to insulting my wc3 gameplay skills as a means to insult me/win this argument, absolutely HILARIOUS. Im pretty sure you're the image of your profile picture when arguing in these threads, or at least a 12 year old version of it hahahaha.

Dude, that is how everyone in high level played orcs, go watch Grubby, dude stream warcraft 3 to this very day, he is called "king of orcs" see how he play

At least I'm not denying I'm biased though? You are, you're acting like your this omnipotent expert on the subject and its cringe as hell

Im literally showing you facts, one, the lore of the blademasters, two, blademasters in the game, not making up stuff, just showing you what is already there.

Blizzard clearly doesn't disagree with me because its in HOTS.

hots =/= wow

Just because they haven't done something yet doesn't mean they don't intend to do something in the future too, of course you'll see blademasters in wow tagged as warriors. They arent going to make unique tags for everything. They're a subclass of warrior obviously.

they never tagged demon hunters as warlocks, neither DKs as paladins or warriors

Great, you finally said something reasonable.

My argument the entire time is o make the warrior class, witch already have 90% of the blademaster fatasy/theme to be designed to feel even more like the blademaster

especially the arms spec, who is, in a bad spot at this point, trying to be different from fury, wind walk and mirror iamge can be talents, and they can rework the spec to be more about fast pacing, there is no necessity to create another class if the class is already in the game.

A 4th spec is also unlikely because it would be another warrior who focus and master 2h, a gladiator sword and shield style warrior would more likely make the cut, seeing how loved it was in wod, a 5th spec is unlikely.

[username993720]

hots =/= wow

You, clearly, don't see it, do you?
Chen is an extension of the Warcraft 3 Pandaren Brewmaster. Gazlowe is an extension of the Goblin Tinker. Ragnaros is an extension of the Firelord. Rexxar is an extension of the Beastmaster. Thrall is an extension of the Far Seer. Brightwing is an extension of the Faerie Dragon unit. Malfurion is an extension of the Keeper of the Grove. Rehgar is an extension of the Shaman unit. Tyrande is an extension of the Priestess of the Moon. Uther is an extension of the Paladin Hero unit. Illidan is an extension of the Demon Hunter Hero unit. Maiev is an extension of the Warden. Murky is an extension of the Murloc units. Samuro is an extension of the Blademaster. Falstad is an extension of the Gryphon Rider. Cho'gall is an extension of the Ogre-mage unit. Gul'dan is an extension of the Warlock unit. Jaina is an extension of the Archmage. Kael'thas is an extension of the Blood Mage. Kel'thuzad is an extension of the Lich unit. Lunara is an extension of the Dryad unit. Sylvanas is an extension of the Dark Ranger. Zul'jin is an extension of the Axethrower unit. Anu'barak is an extension of the Crypt Lord unit. Arthas is an extension of the Death Knight Hero unit. E.T.C is a mockup of the Tauren Chieftain Hero unit. Mal'ganis is an extension of the Dreadlord unit. Muradin is an extension of the Mountain King and Stitches is an extension of the Abomination unit.

My argument the entire time is o make the warrior class, witch already have 90% of the blademaster fatasy/theme to be designed to feel even more like the blademaster

especially the arms spec, who is, in a bad spot at this point, trying to be different from fury, wind walk and mirror iamge can be talents, and they can rework the spec to be more about fast pacing, there is no necessity to create another class if the class is already in the game.

A 4th spec is also unlikely because it would be another warrior who focus and master 2h, a gladiator sword and shield style warrior would more likely make the cut, seeing how loved it was in wod, a 5th spec is unlikely.

It's 60%, at most - with, supposedly, 2 abilities and a mastery over weapons.
The Warlock, also, constituted that much of the Demon Hunter, with abilities like Metamorphosis and Immolate, and the fantasy of fel and demon transformation. And, it didn't prevent it from being added as a class.

As i've said before. Stealth and duplicates, along with swift sword slashes fit the Monk, Rogue and Demon Hunter, more than it does the Warrior.

The only thing i can agree with you on is the Gladiator spec.

[Syegfryed]

It is a continuation of the Warcraft III unit. How hard is it to see that?

is.not.canon

they can do impossible things there because is not a real warcraft world

So, you advocate for a class based on armor type and weapons alone? even though their spells are identical?
And i'm the madman...

you are the one thinking its just "that alone" that alone is to show the blatantly and structural differences of the class and how they work totally different in gameplay and thematically, the spells can be done alter cause there is necromancers spells in the game and old game sunused.

And level 60 or 70 is not high enough? -_-

80 is higher

It is, if you considered the Death Knight a Warlock.

like i said, the argument is solidify upon a lie, death knights were not warlocks, warlocks were the orcs who once were shamans who appear in the game.

you could also find eredars warlocks,funny thing both had different skills showing a transition from their previous backgrounds, shamans from otcs and mages from eredar.

It is, if you consideres the Demon Hunter a Warlock.

argument is solidify upon a lie

You see, both the Affliction and Demonology Warlocks contained the necromancy and demon transformation of the Death Knight and Demon Hunter. So, in essence, they fulfilled those types until their addition. The same way you associate the Blademaster with the Warrior, due to mastery over weapons and the Bladestorm ability.

I don't even think youa re reading what you type anymore.

do you realize that you are saying that just because one class have one skill, they already fulfil a class, and are comparing that to the warrior and blademaster whiile trying to minimize their similarities to just "mastery over weapons and bladesotrm"? and even that is two more than one.

My dude, the single fact that warlocks and necromancers are ranged, spellcaster with clotch and DKs are armored juggernauts who use weapons and DH are glaive users assassins already put your argument that they are the same as blademaster in the dumpster

Mentioned? The most famous Blademaster isn't, even, present in game.

To show you, how little theyc are about your idea of blademasters, then again,d oy ou ahve any idea how little role Samuro performed? dude appear in one, questto destroy the kul'tiras city, thats it, compltely irrelevant outside of that

So, you can't say the Blademaster was represented much in WoW's story.

Just because samuro isn't in the game does not mean the class isn't represented, we have countless and we even have Jubei'thos, who jad an important role in wow.

NPCs are the worst thing to take example of. They, rarely, represent their archetype appropriately, with many of them having just one known ability and drawing the other ones from other classes.

Exactly, yes, thats why you should not take samuro as an example or a proof of anything else. now you get it, we can even end the conversation here.

Warlord Dharl of the Thrice-Bloodied Blade uses Mirror Image.
Blademaster Jubei'thos uses Windwalk and Mirror Image.
Gorn uses ​Windwalk.
Katsuo uses Wind Walk and Mirror Image.
Akatha Bladeburn uses Wind Walk.

Literally like i said, you could count then on your hand, and, never saw gorn using any skiills in the wowhead link

You know how many of them even use Bladestorm or Critical Strike? 1.
Krell the Serene (a Saberon) uses Bladestorm.
None of them even use an ability called Critical Strike.

Because critical strike is now a passive in the game, the gameplay evolved, isn't a rts anymore.

Rokanada and Mazuru have all the warriors skills:

Battle Shout
Bloodthirst
Rend
Shattering Throw
Slam

Mankrik use bladestorm:
https://www.wowhead.com/npc=37847/mankrik#abilities

Ishi used a weak version of bladestorm.

Lantresor used mortal strike and heroic leap

So, seing that, warrior and blademasters are the same class, some just have different skil sets, and wind walk and mirror iamge are not avaiable to players.

Mentioned in lore? of course they are mentioned in lore

i said they were barely mentioned, not that they were never mentioned, the mirror image and wind walk is something abrely touched upon the blademaster lore, that is a fact.

A Hunter then, Right?
Can a Hunter use moon abilities?

what is a moon ability? hunters can use magic

Stealth and Decoys?
Are you thinking clearly?

Yes, warrior use stealtha nd decoy in the battlefield all the time, is one of the tools of generals

i told you how saurfang did that to win the war of thorns and he was not evena blademaster

"One of the blademasters' more mystical abilities is to create duplicate phantom images of themselves." - pretty self explanatory.

that is the explanation of their skills in the warcraft 3 game, i asked you pieces of lore that talk about blademaster being magic users and how magic and this kind of amgic is their main thing.

there is none

Not if you considered the Warlock a Demon Hunter, which many did.

they were wrong period, if this is wrong, no point in taking that as argument

HotS is way more recent and relevant than the RPG sources.

it is not, Hots if anything is even more irrelevant because it is a meme world for fun in a moba, while RPG sources try to be true and faithful

I, already, showed you this is wrong above. There are more NPCs using Mirror Image and Wind Walk.

nope, there is more blademasters not using any of those, and you can abrely find any blademaster who ue both

To stealth.
Mages use invisibility.
How did you want them to portray stealth in a cinematic?

in any way they would like, rogues become invisible, that is a canon fact

Of course it is.

no is not, warlocks are not demon hunters, this is a false equivalence

just because the warrior PLAYER, do not ahve access to two skills don't mean the blademaster is " ill-represented" and thry have to create another class, no, it means they should enhance the current class to give more blademaster vibes.

*Sigh* -_-
No, because they are listed as Blademasters. Blademaster Telaamon is one example. He uses Mirror Image.
I included Pandaren and Night Elves because of their asiatic influences (Chinese/Japanese).

thats why this fails hard, anything asian theme would get this meme class, anyone who use mirror iamge would, is just rly a mess

​They never did? Metamorphosis-style gameplay was not the Demonology Warlock throughout Wrath of the Lich King, up until Legion?

warlocks didn't use methamorphosis in warcraft, period

​What, as vendors? come on...
A lot of references to Pandaria? like what? the Pandaren Monk pet? the Empty Keg quest in the Barren? you gotta be kidding me...

refferences show possibility, the devs said before they would like to explore that, people thinking it was impossible, knowing blizzard would end up with a drought of lore were just playing fool

Sounds, exactly, like the Demon Hunter and Warlock debate.

No it don't, stop with the false equivalence

No, manipulating fire implies on a magical or shamanistic direction:
"Given that blademasters wear neck-beads similar to some shaman and monks, and some possess elemental (Blazing Coil, Molten Weapon) or supernatural (Wind Walk, Mirror Image) abilities, it is possible that they also utilize their spirit to empower themselves or draw from the elemental spirits either by command or request."

only the ones in wod do that, and no one is creating fire or calling fire like a shaman do, their elemental capabilitiies consit of using products and putting fire on then.

And Hearthstone.
It shows you that a Blademaster that didn't appear in WoD ignites his weapon, as well.

another meme game that cames after wod and of course would use the wod as base, just like wc3 reforged used the wod aesthetic when it would not be valid, all right

It's no longer orcish, you know.
Krell is of the Blackfang Tribe, Blademaster Telaamon is part of the Army of the Light and Blademaster Okani is of the Waveblade clan.

Telaamon does not use any other blademaster skill other than mirror image, krell could ahve elarned seeing orcs in Tanaan and like you said, no mirror image or windwalk, and okani also, have completely different sets of skills who does not include mirror image or windwalk

so who is true blademaster and who isn't? what is necessary to be? when you start to nitpick then everyone is wrong.

Says who?

Blizzard

Guile also means/synonymous with deceit, tricks, deception, trickiness. Look it up.

is not used for that, is most used for being cunning and astut, and orcish warriors are

What the hell? We are discriminating now?
All Blademasters, from all races, are Blademasters.
There's no specific Blademaster i want, because there are no different types of Blademasters.

if they don't use wind walk and mirror iamge, therefore, don't use "deception and stealth" how they can fit your vision of blademaster?

that seems off

I, probably, should have emphasized the word "similar". There are no abilities similar to Mirror Image, like you claimed there were.

similar in being supernatural and not magical, there is yes

And no, Dragon Roar in not a magical ability. Definitely not in the same manner of Mirror Image.

mirror iamge is "supernatural" mystic" just like dragon roar, you can make copies using your warrior energy you can screm as loud to make an aoe thunderous boost of damage

Can warriors be attributed to being extremely fast? I doubt that...

i mean, yes,

I'd give that to a Demon Hunter, not a Warrior.

"no mean, cheetas are't fast, you know who is fast? peregrine falcons'

that is your logic

Not necessarily. It could stay a remnant of the past (Warcraft 3).

like wind walk and mirror image?


That's how they were viewed back then.

No. Hypocrisy would be suggesting a class based on its armor and weapons, instead of abilities.

armor and weapon is more of ana rgument than abilities, seeing how different classes can get the same ability along the game, how npcs ahve different abilities and so on.

Armor and weapons are something who didn't change, is solid, is reliable and defines theme and fantasy, they are not the only one argument like youa re tying to llook like im saying they are, they are just a solid argument

They don't need to. They are there to expand upon the base gameplay of the Blademaster, containing Mirror Image, Wind Walk, Critical Strike and Bladestorm.

if it is to "expand upon the base gameplay" they can expand upon the base, the warrior class, not create another one

Yea, if you categorize Blademasters as Warriors. How convenient...

because is how they are categorized in the game in the lore by blizzard! not me.

Jubei'thos also uses Fel Blade and Felstorm. Would you consider them Warrior abilities?

warrior abilities corrupter by fel magic

If you consider fire manipulation, they do.

see how much things you ahve to "consider" different form the reality? how much you ahve to "assume" and amke up?

and fire manipulation is not elemental magic, go to a circus you find lots of then, none of then use magic

- - - Updated - - -

You, clearly, don't see it, do you?

im seeing clearly, hots is not canon, is a meme game to be fun, it does not folow rules or logic, it ahve flash and sparkling abilities, thats it, is not to be taken serious, even the devs abandoned that

It's 60%, at most - with, supposedly, 2 abilities and a mastery over weapons.

Arms warriors in their description literally say they have mastery over weapons, they jsut don't stop of blades.

you can't put two skills as 40% of the class when they are barely a thing even among the npcs in wow

The Warlock, also, constituted that much of the Demon Hunter, with abilities like Metamorphosis and Immolate, and the fantasy of fel and demon transformation. And, it didn't prevent it from being added as a class.

This has t o e a joke by now, you want to force a pararel between warlocks and demonshutners so hard to validate the warrior/blademaster thing and you can't see past that.

even immolate work completely different, there is a difference between setting yourself on fire and the enemy

no, they didn't constitute much of the demon hunter, theyw ere completely different, just because "fel and demons" don't make then remotely the same

As i've said before. Stealth and duplicates, along with swift sword slashes fit the Monk, Rogue and Demon Hunter, more than it does the Warrior.

The only thing i can agree with you on is the Gladiator spec.

rogues, monks and demon hunters don't use 2h swords, for pete's sake monks don't even use weapons most of their time, their fantasy is literally unarmored combat, DH use glaives and magic, the gameplay of a blademaster is not a rogue., and yes it fits more of a warrior, just give then the skills and call a day

[username993720]

is.not.canon

they can do impossible things there because is not a real warcraft world

Impossible things? like what? cosmetic skins?

you are the one thinking its just "that alone" that alone is to show the blatantly and structural differences of the class and how they work totally different in gameplay and thematically, the spells can be done alter cause there is necromancers spells in the game and old game sunused.

How are they different in games and thematic when both of them use necromantic magic?
The only difference would be in armor and weapons. Again, showing you deem classes by their looks, rather than skills.

80 is higher

And 85, 90, 100, 110 and 120 are higher. Why 80, in particular?

like i said, the argument is solidify upon a lie, death knights were not warlocks, warlocks were the orcs who once were shamans who appear in the game.

you could also find eredars warlocks,funny thing both had different skills showing a transition from their previous backgrounds, shamans from otcs and mages from eredar.

I know what Warlocks are in lore. But, if you consider Blademasters to be Warrior based on their abilities and gameplay, so were Demon Hunters considered Warlocks, for a very long time, by the playerbase, because of that.

argument is solidify upon a lie

Not a lie. An assessment. Just like the Blademaster and Warrior.

I don't even think youa re reading what you type anymore.

do you realize that you are saying that just because one class have one skill, they already fulfil a class, and are comparing that to the warrior and blademaster whiile trying to minimize their similarities to just "mastery over weapons and bladesotrm"? and even that is two more than one.

My dude, the single fact that warlocks and necromancers are ranged, spellcaster with clotch and DKs are armored juggernauts who use weapons and DH are glaive users assassins already put your argument that they are the same as blademaster in the dumpster

2 skills (one by name: Immolate). Amazingly, like how you consider the Blademaster a Warrior based on 2 abilities (one's general, not even specific, that is encompassed by other classes: Critical Strike).

Would you like to elaborate on the Blademaster more? Because the same as "mastery over weapons", Warlocks had demon transformation and demonic powers in their spec description. So, it's actually 2/2.

Again, going off by appearances rather than abilities. The necromancer, affliction Warlock and Death Knight all use necromancy. Demon Hunters and Warlocks both transformed into a Demon. So, no. It doesn't invalidate the Blademaster discussion. Because, once again, you are using appearances over abilities when it comes to Blademasters.

To show you, how little theyc are about your idea of blademasters, then again,d oy ou ahve any idea how little role Samuro performed? dude appear in one, questto destroy the kul'tiras city, thats it, compltely irrelevant outside of that

Oh, so the fact the Chen didn't appear in game up until MoP, and the fact that he only appeared in the bonus campaign of Warcraft 3 as a random brewer who offered his help to the Horde, made it so that Blizzard didn't, really, care about him? Funny how they added the Pandaren race and Monk class, based on him

Just because samuro isn't in the game does not mean the class isn't represented, we have countless and we even have Jubei'thos, who jad an important role in wow.

Of course it is.
You can see how important Arthas, Illidan and Chen are to the Death Knight, Demon Hunter and Monk classes.
Jubei'thos is not the representative of the class, like Samuro is. That would be like saying Mojo Stormstout is enough for the Monk class.

Exactly, yes, thats why you should not take samuro as an example or a proof of anything else. now you get it, we can even end the conversation here.

I meant lesser, unknown NPCs, with only 4-5 abilities top.
Samuro would, definitely, represent the Blademaster.
A name like Sesk, for example, won't.

Literally like i said, you could count then on your hand, and, never saw gorn using any skiills in the wowhead link

That's because there are not many of them to begin with. Most of them stayed in Warcraft 3.
Only 27 of them exist in game. And you found only two that use Bladestorm.
Gorn: https://wowpedia.fandom.com/wiki/Gor...rse)#Abilities

Because critical strike is now a passive in the game, the gameplay evolved, isn't a rts anymore.

So, you can't, really, attribute it, exclusively, to the Warrior class, can you?

Rokanada and Mazuru have all the warriors skills:

Mankrik use bladestorm:
https://www.wowhead.com/npc=37847/mankrik#abilities

Ishi used a weak version of bladestorm.

Lantresor used mortal strike and heroic leap

So, seing that, warrior and blademasters are the same class, some just have different skil sets, and wind walk and mirror iamge are not avaiable to players.

Oh, so now we're looking for Warrior abilities in Blademaster NPCs? because i can find you Warrior and Warlock abilities in Death Knight NPCs.

What do you think Monk NPCs used before the Monk class got added? pre-existing abilities.

I'm not looking for a weak version of Bladestorm. Whirlwind, already, kinda does that. I'm looking for Bladestorm, exclusively.

Wind Walk is not available to players. Mirror Image is (Mage).

i said they were barely mentioned, not that they were never mentioned, the mirror image and wind walk is something abrely touched upon the blademaster lore, that is a fact.

And so are Bladestorm and Critical Strike.

what is a moon ability? hunters can use magic

Really? -_-
A lunar ability would be Starfall, for example.

Yes, warrior use stealtha nd decoy in the battlefield all the time, is one of the tools of generals

i told you how saurfang did that to win the war of thorns and he was not evena blademaster

No, they don't.
How is this manifested in-game?

that is the explanation of their skills in the warcraft 3 game, i asked you pieces of lore that talk about blademaster being magic users and how magic and this kind of amgic is their main thing.

there is none

That is all the lore about Blademasters, really. That's what happen when the class isn't in game yet.
I never said they were magic users. Mystical abilities is the word being used. And, even then, it won't be Arcane like it is categorized now in the Mage class.

they were wrong period, if this is wrong, no point in taking that as argument

Now we know that, because we have the Demon Hunter class.
You can be proven wrong in the future, too, you know...

it is not, Hots if anything is even more irrelevant because it is a meme world for fun in a moba, while RPG sources try to be true and faithful

Not all of it. Skins might be. E.T.C might be. But, generally, it is taken quite seriously.

nope, there is more blademasters not using any of those, and you can abrely find any blademaster who ue both

There are more not using Bladestorm, than there are. What does that say about your Blademaster preconception as Warriors?
I could find two that use both. Same as the amount of those using Bladestorm.
In essence, there are none that use all of them. Does that mean that there are no true Blademasters in game? only halves of them?

in any way they would like, rogues become invisible, that is a canon fact

They would disappear out of sight, if that is what you mean.
There is a difference between Stealth and Invisibility, both in lore and mechanically.

no is not, warlocks are not demon hunters, this is a false equivalence

Same can be said on Blademasters and Warriors.

just because the warrior PLAYER, do not ahve access to two skills don't mean the blademaster is " ill-represented" and thry have to create another class, no, it means they should enhance the current class to give more blademaster vibes.

They are missing more than that. They don't have Samuro's Image Transmission, Advancing Strikes, Illusion Master or any of his talents. And before you say they are not relevant, Demon Hunters, Death Knights and Monks are not constituted from 4 abilities alone. They have many more. So, discarding other, potential, abilities would be foolish.

And no, i don't believe you should enhance the Warrior to have more Blademaster vibes.

thats why this fails hard, anything asian theme would get this meme class, anyone who use mirror iamge would, is just rly a mess

Anything asian themed? I, only, suggested Pandaren and Night Elves. Anyone who use Mirror Image? No, just an NPC called a Blademaster. Mages are not included.

warlocks didn't use methamorphosis in warcraft, period

In WoW they did.

refferences show possibility, the devs said before they would like to explore that, people thinking it was impossible, knowing blizzard would end up with a drought of lore were just playing fool

Well, it shows you how something, completely, considered impossible comes to life *ahem* * ahem*.
Considering there are numerous Blademaster references, i don't see why it couldn't be.

No it don't, stop with the false equivalence

The only false equivalence is brushing off the Demon Hunter and Warlock situation while accepting the Blademaster and Warrior one. That is a double standard.

only the ones in wod do that, and no one is creating fire or calling fire like a shaman do, their elemental capabilitiies consit of using products and putting fire on then.

Well, it is debatable, as some sources claim it is Shamanistic element manipulation while others say it is manually applied.

another meme game that cames after wod and of course would use the wod as base, just like wc3 reforged used the wod aesthetic when it would not be valid, all right

It shows you that Critical Strike is meant to represent that fiery aspect.

Telaamon does not use any other blademaster skill other than mirror image, krell could ahve elarned seeing orcs in Tanaan and like you said, no mirror image or windwalk, and okani also, have completely different sets of skills who does not include mirror image or windwalk

so who is true blademaster and who isn't? what is necessary to be? when you start to nitpick then everyone is wrong.

Telaamon is, literally, called a Blademaster in name. How more precise do you want them to be?
So what? Krell has Bladestorm and is called a Blademaster. Would you not consider Mankrik one based on the same criteria?
Many of the Orc Blademasters don't have a single Blademaster ability. So, i guess they are not Blademasters by your own standards.

There isn't true and wrong. If you are classified as one, you are one. It just comes to show you that it is nothing unique to the Orcs.

Blizzard

Where?

is not used for that, is most used for being cunning and astut, and orcish warriors are

It is only used for that in the context of the Blademaster. it doesn't have anything else related to guile.

if they don't use wind walk and mirror iamge, therefore, don't use "deception and stealth" how they can fit your vision of blademaster?

So are many Orc Blademaster NPCs, and you don't rule them out. The thing is, again, that NPCs do not represent their class so well.

similar in being supernatural and not magical, there is yes

No, i meant similar in the sense of creating duplicates, like the Monk does, for example. Or the Rogue's Shadow Clone. Nothing the Warrior has is close to that.

mirror iamge is "supernatural" mystic" just like dragon roar, you can make copies using your warrior energy you can screm as loud to make an aoe thunderous boost of damage

Stop categorizing everything as mystical and magical. That would not get us anywhere. In reality, none of the Warrior abilities are similar to that of the Mirror Image.

i mean, yes,

No. Rogues can. Monks can. Demon Hunters can. Less so the Warrior.

"no mean, cheetas are't fast, you know who is fast? peregrine falcons'

that is your logic

The Samurai is fast. The Ninja is fast. The Martial Artist is fast. The Barbarian, Knight or Warlord are not.

like wind walk and mirror image?


That's how they were viewed back then.

No. They were transitioned, pretty much, as they are to HotS. Meaning, Blizzard views them as relevant. Can't say yet about Reincarnation because of that stupid E.T.C character.

armor and weapon is more of ana rgument than abilities, seeing how different classes can get the same ability along the game, how npcs ahve different abilities and so on.

Armor and weapons are something who didn't change, is solid, is reliable and defines theme and fantasy, they are not the only one argument like youa re tying to llook like im saying they are, they are just a solid argument

Solid argument? when there's transmogrification in game and a lot of armor sets and weapons, already, pass in visuals as something else?
No, it isn't. Saying it is shows how little you know about class additions.

if it is to "expand upon the base gameplay" they can expand upon the base, the warrior class, not create another one

*Facepalm*.
They need something to draw from. Even if it was for the Warrior.

because is how they are categorized in the game in the lore by blizzard! not me.

More like our assumption, combined with the closest thing possible.

warrior abilities corrupter by fel magic

-_-
Demon Hunters have Felblade. Would you consider them Warrior corrupted by Fel, then?

see how much things you ahve to "consider" different form the reality? how much you ahve to "assume" and amke up?

and fire manipulation is not elemental magic, go to a circus you find lots of then, none of then use magic

Because it is not yet decided whether they manipulate fire like Shamans, or apply it physically.

Are you, really, going to give me a real life example?
News flash, kiddo, there is no such thing as magic in real-life.
There are magic tricks, associated with magicians.

im seeing clearly, hots is not canon, is a meme game to be fun, it does not folow rules or logic, it ahve flash and sparkling abilities, thats it, is not to be taken serious, even the devs abandoned that

Because it didn't produce them as much money as they expected it, in competition with LoL and DotA.

Sparkly and Flashy? what? did you even check them? They are direct development of the Warcraft 3 ones.

Arms warriors in their description literally say they have mastery over weapons, they jsut don't stop of blades.

you can't put two skills as 40% of the class when they are barely a thing even among the npcs in wow

Demonology Warlock had "transform into a Demon" in their description. Didn't make them Demon Hunters, at the end of the day.

So, i can't put 2 skills (Bladestorm and Critical Strike) at 50%, either, when they are barely found among NPCs. So, all you, basically, have is the description.

This has t o e a joke by now, you want to force a pararel between warlocks and demonshutners so hard to validate the warrior/blademaster thing and you can't see past that.

even immolate work completely different, there is a difference between setting yourself on fire and the enemy

no, they didn't constitute much of the demon hunter, theyw ere completely different, just because "fel and demons" don't make then remotely the same

I'm not forcing anything. You disregarding 2 abilities lacking from the Warrior while shrugging off when it came to the Demon Hunter is the problem.

Demon transformation and fel magic.
Well, now we know that, because we have much more abilities. Back then, it was only 4. So, yeah, it did fill that niche for a time.

rogues, monks and demon hunters don't use 2h swords, for pete's sake monks don't even use weapons most of their time, their fantasy is literally unarmored combat, DH use glaives and magic, the gameplay of a blademaster is not a rogue., and yes it fits more of a warrior, just give then the skills and call a day

Well, Blademasters can dual-wield, as can be seen by the Ankoan.
I could say the same. Just give Warlocks the skills of the Demon Hunter/Death Knight, some transmogs and call it a day.

[pacotaco]

I see a lot of confusion (dunno if intentional or not).
To clarify, I think Warrior and Blademaster are 2 completely different concepts:
- Warrior is the brute force in the front lines. An unstopable juggernaut, or a frothing berserker. Big armor. Big weapon. Any weapon. Just go, kill stuff, don't stop.
- Blademaster is the commando that infiltrates the enemy, take swiftly the target and gets out. He's more methodical, he just masters one weapon, but can use magic to fill the gaps.

Saying that Blademasters are just Warriors with Mirror Image and Windwalk is like saying that Warlocks are Mages with pets. Themeatically and mechanically different concepts.
You could cram Blademasters into Warriors? Yes, the same way you could put Warlocks and Priests into Mages, or Monks and DHs into Rogues, or DK and Paladin into Warriors, etc. Where do we put the line that makes some class/concept different enough from another to justify the split?

The problem I see in this discussion is that some people are not seeing that they're not using the same standard for all, and makes other people think they're just cherry-picking arguments instead of being unbiased.

[Teriz]

- Blademaster is the commando that infiltrates the enemy, take swiftly the target and gets out. He's more methodical, he just masters one weapon, but can use magic to fill the gaps.

That's a Rogue, not a Blademaster. You've literally described someone out of SI-7.

Blademasters, also known as blade masters,[1] are legendary orc warriors of the Burning Blade clan, known for their mastery over swords, axes and polearms.

https://wowpedia.fandom.com/wiki/Bla...and%20polearms.

Saying that Blademasters are just Warriors with Mirror Image and Windwalk is like saying that Warlocks are Mages with pets. Themeatically and mechanically different concepts.
You could cram Blademasters into Warriors? Yes, the same way you could put Warlocks and Priests into Mages, or Monks and DHs into Rogues, or DK and Paladin into Warriors, etc. Where do we put the line that makes some class/concept different enough from another to justify the split?

Yeah, this is a false equivalence. Mages and Priests don't use demonic magic, so they could never house the Warlock concept. On the other hand, there's plenty of room in the Warrior class for warriors who move so quickly that they appear to be in multiple places at once, or invisible.