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

[TheRevenantHero]

Not really, considering we have other class abilities that have "on kill" procs. Victory Rush, for example.


Black Arrow in WC3 is an auto-attack buff, so nine out of ten times, you're killing the mobs with Black Arrow. In WoW, though, Black Arrow is a damage over time debuff. So it's easy to kill a mob under the effects of Black Arrow.


Except the WoW version of the WC3 ability is a dot, so it's super easy to kill a mob under the effect of the Black Arrow debuff, considering considering the ability has no CD.


It is the WoW version of it, though. The only difference is that BA is not an auto-cast buff that increases auto-attack damage, but an active ability that leaves a dot instead of dealing direct damage. Everything else about the spell is the exact same.


According to logic, that is a red herring. That says a lot. The priest's mind control ability being considered a charm is meaningless.


Because necromaqncy is not the kind of stuff you find in nature. Necromancy, by its very design, is unnatural.

- - - Updated - - -


Can you show me an example of a paladin using frost magic before Wrath, though? It doesn't matter that the current NPCs don't do any of that. It's a possible part of their concept.


In other words: they were paladins who turned evil. Just like I wrote. No death knight prior to Wrath were once anything other than paladins. And yet the death knights of today come from all "classes" and characters. Which is why saying "all dark rangers are undead quel'dorei hunters" is meaningless.

I don't need to show you anything because it's a ridiculous thing to ask. It's irrelevant. A lot of them were paladins, sure, but they were given NEW powers by the Lich King and lost their connection to the Light. Just because you want to disregard the lore to fit your narrative doesn't make you right. You're being incredibly dishonest with your comments because it doesn't fucking matter what class they were before. Unlike death knights, dark rangers weren't granted a completely new set of abilities. So the comparison is just you being purposely misconstruing things to fit your narrative.

[Triceron]

Back? Dark Rangers never had mind control before it showed up in the WoW Priest class.

Then you are operating under double standards considering you define Metamorphosis as class defining despite Warlocks having it, while Mind Control is currently only available to Shadow Priests but was exclusive to Dark Rangers in WC3 and HOTS (No other hero has mind control.)

You have no intention of reaching common ground. Bad faith argument.

Again, standard RPG classes don’t need defining abilities or concepts

Sure, I wholeheartedly agree.

And here you are making bad faith arguments that deny all defining abilities and concepts specifically to a Dark Ranger.

The problem isn't the assessment you presented here, the problem is you have no intention of honoring your own words.

It's come to the point where you generalized Sylvanas' unique abilities into some form of excuse that you can dismiss, and you shift the narrative when it doesn't suot you like being unable to explain why Paladins don't have a class defining ability.

It's to the point where you've lied so much that you forgot you were defining the Shaman as a core class earlier, but now admitted that Shamans need to be defined, and for whatever reason you lumped Druid in there as need in definition even though it's a core RPG class in D&D.

Keep up the charade though. You're close to convincing me.

[Diaphin]

giving to other elf races, "just because they are elves" is "shallowing" the lore and by a stupid reason, which is worse

Dark ranger already is a bad choice for new class, and very unlikely by itself, make it elf-centric would be just dumb

How is an elf-centric class dumb when elves are overwhelmingly the most popular races in the game?

[TheRevenantHero]

How is an elf-centric class dumb when elves are overwhelmingly the most popular races in the game?

Because we already have one elf-centric class. We don't need another one.

[Ielenia]

Paladins are a standard RPG class. They don’t need defining abilities. Shaman had totems, Druids had shape shifting, and Warlocks controlled demons.

Dark Rangers?

Druids are also a "standard rpg class". And what ability defines the death knight? Raising the dead? How can it be "defining" if it also "defines" another concept, the necromancer?

[Alphabet]

There should be some kind of class which will act as buffer. Unique party/raid buffs with rotation which will buff players and refill their resource in some way. I played this kind of class in DCUO. It was Controller class and if you execute your dps rotation right you will replenish some of the resource (energy) of other players. Main job of this class was CC in party. They can make it work in WoW. Lets say you will carry raid Standart and buff players with some unique yells and shit like this

[Ielenia]

2) Doesn't change the fact that they are incorporeal undead, something that players will likely never get access to.

The priest's "disperse" form is basically becoming incorporeal.

3)Banshee form is not just a fucking form. There is no banshee form. You either are a banshee or you're not. Period.

Shamans can turn into ascendants without becoming actual elementals. Demon hunters take demon forms without becoming actual demons. So why couldn't dark rangers take on banshee forms without being an actual banshee?

[Teriz]

Then you are operating under double standards considering you define Metamorphosis as class defining despite Warlocks having it, while Mind Control is currently only available to Shadow Priests but was exclusive to Dark Rangers in WC3 and HOTS (No other hero has mind control.)

Demon Hunters had metamorphosis in WC3. They got it again when Illidan and the Illidari showed up in TBC. Even when Warlocks got it in WoW it was still viewed as a Demon Hunter ability.

Again, Dark Rangers never had mind control before Priests. Mind Control and Charm are two very different abilities.

And here you are making bad faith arguments that deny all defining abilities and concepts specifically to a Dark Ranger.

The problem isn't the assessment you presented here, the problem is you have no intention of honoring your own words.

It's come to the point where you generalized Sylvanas' unique abilities into some form of excuse that you can dismiss, and you shift the narrative when it doesn't suot you like being unable to explain why Paladins don't have a class defining ability.

Again, Paladins are a classic, standard RPG class. The Dark Ranger class isn’t defined. It’s not even defined in Warcraft, with Sylvanas, Nathanos, and Summermoon all being Dark Rangers, yet all being very different from each other.

Hence why the class needs a defining ability.

It's to the point where you've lied so much that you forgot you were defining the Shaman as a core class earlier, but now admitted that Shamans need to be defined, and for whatever reason you lumped Druid in there as need in definition even though it's a core RPG class in D&D.

Keep up the charade though. You're close to convincing me.

Please don’t accuse me of lying. I said from the start that Shaman are defined by Totems and Druids are defined by shapeshifting.

[TheRevenantHero]

The priest's "disperse" form is basically becoming incorporeal.


Shamans can turn into ascendants without becoming actual elementals. Demon hunters take demon forms without becoming actual demons. So why couldn't dark rangers take on banshee forms without being an actual banshee?

"Basically" is not the same as "Actually incorporeal". You still can't phase through objects with Disperse.

Shamans are channeling the elements to take on a hybrid elemental form. Demon hunters are channeling their inner demon to take on a demonic form. Banshees are incorporeal spirits with no physical form so I really don't see dark rangers capable of doing that at all. The fact that I need to explain this is ridiculous.

- - - Updated - - -

Demon Hunters had metamorphosis in WC3. They got it again when Illidan and the Illidari showed up in TBC. Even when Warlocks got it in WoW it was still viewed as a Demon Hunter ability.

Again, Dark Rangers never had mind control before Priests. Mind Control and Charm are two very different abilities.



Again, Paladins are a classic, standard RPG class. The Dark Ranger class isn’t defined. It’s not even defined in Warcraft, with Sylvanas, Nathanos, and Summermoon all being Dark Rangers, yet all being very different from each other.

Hence why the class needs a defining ability.



Please don’t accuse me of lying. I said from the start that Shaman are defined by Totems and Druids are defined by shapeshifting.

Charm is literally an ability that allows you to take control of an enemy unit. Just because it's not CALLED Mind Control doesn't change the fact that it IS mind control.

Though dark rangers in WoW don't have any form of mind control in WoW so it's safe to say that was scrapped in the transition.

[Diaphin]

Because we already have one elf-centric class. We don't need another one.

Why not? They are proven to be the most favorite, so why shouldn't more ressources dedicated to them? It sounds more reasonable than dedicating ressources like a new class to unpopular races.

[Ielenia]

Back? Dark Rangers never had mind control before it showed up in the WoW Priest class.

They had Charm back in Warcraft 3, and as you pointed out, Mind Control is considered a Charm. And, in your own words, "that says a lot", right?

[TheRevenantHero]

Why not? They are proven to be the most favorite, so why shouldn't more ressources dedicated to them? It sounds more reasonable than dedicating ressources like a new class to unpopular races.

I'm not advocating for introducing another class that is race specific. I'd prefer if a new class can be played by ALL races.

[Ielenia]

I don't need to show you anything because it's a ridiculous thing to ask. It's irrelevant.

It's not "irrelevant". You are the one claiming that none of the current dark ranger NPCs has any form of mind control, therefore, if realized into a playable class, the concept should not have any mind-altering abilities. I am countering that notion by asking you to show me death knight NPCs before Wrath who had access to frost magic, considering the class today has an entire spec dedicated to frost magic.

The point of my counter is to demonstrate that saying "X concept's NPCs do not have that ability, therefore the playable class should not have that ability" is a dead-in-the-waters argument to make. I could also ask you to show me monk NPCs healing with magic mists. Or demon hunters being able to "fel rush" or spit breaths of fire.

A lot of them were paladins, sure, but they were given NEW powers by the Lich King and lost their connection to the Light. Just because you want to disregard the lore to fit your narrative doesn't make you right.

I'm not "disregarding" anything. All you said is both meaningless, because I'm not talking about the details that caused the paladins to become death knights, but it also further reinforces what I'm saying because it shows that what a concept is, right now, does not set in stone what he concept can become tomorrow. Just like "all death knights were once paladins" did not set in stone what the death knights are today.

Unlike death knights, dark rangers weren't granted a completely new set of abilities. So the comparison is just you being purposely misconstruing things to fit your narrative.

Except they obviously were? Search for "dark ranger" on WoWHead and check their abilities. Many of them have abilities that the hunters do not possess. The Warcraft 3 dark ranger unit also possesses abilities the WoW hunter class does not possess.

- - - Updated - - -

"Basically" is not the same as "Actually incorporeal". You still can't phase through objects with Disperse.

And neither would players with the "incorporeal" ability, so I don't know what the problem is. "Incorporeal" would be a game mechanic to make the player immune to physical attacks and maybe magical attacks.

Shamans are channeling the elements to take on a hybrid elemental form. Demon hunters are channeling their inner demon to take on a demonic form. Banshees are incorporeal spirits with no physical form so I really don't see dark rangers capable of doing that at all. The fact that I need to explain this is ridiculous.

They would be able to temporarily take on a banshee form much like a demon hunter can take on a demonic form, and a shaman can take on an elemental form. And the mage can take a skeletal form. Etc.

[TheRevenantHero]

It's not "irrelevant". You are the one claiming that none of the current dark ranger NPCs has any form of mind control, therefore, if realized into a playable class, the concept should not have any mind-altering abilities. I am countering that notion by asking you to show me death knight NPCs before Wrath who had access to frost magic, considering the class today has an entire spec dedicated to frost magic.

The point of my counter is to demonstrate that saying "X concept's NPCs do not have that ability, therefore the playable class should not have that ability" is a dead-in-the-waters argument to make. I could also ask you to show me monk NPCs healing with magic mists. Or demon hunters being able to "fel rush" or spit breaths of fire.


I'm not "disregarding" anything. All you said is both meaningless, because I'm not talking about the details that caused the paladins to become death knights, but it also further reinforces what I'm saying because it shows that what a concept is, right now, does not set in stone what he concept can become tomorrow. Just like "all death knights were once paladins" did not set in stone what the death knights are today.


Except they obviously were? Search for "dark ranger" on WoWHead and check their abilities. Many of them have abilities that the hunters do not possess. The Warcraft 3 dark ranger unit also possesses abilities the WoW hunter class does not possess.

I'm not even going to humor dark ranger becoming a class. The most it could be is a hunter spec and even then that's REALLY stretching it. There is absolutely nothing unique about dark rangers that would justify an entire class. You can say there is until you're blue in the face but you'll be wrong each and every time.

I have looked at dark ranger. They have Black Arrow(A former hunter spell), Multi-shot(A hunter spell), Shoot(A hunter auto-attack), and Wailing Arrow(Explosive Shot that does shadow damage and adds a silence). Oh and some have Hooked Net(Which is a different animation for Steel Trap on Survival hunters). They really have absolutely nothing unique about them to justify an entire class.

[Teriz]

They had Charm back in Warcraft 3, and as you pointed out, Mind Control is considered a Charm. And, in your own words, "that says a lot", right?

Yeah, Mind Control is a charm ability, but it isn’t Charm. Charm operated more like a universal tame ability, whereas Mind Control gives you direct control over the mind of a target for a short period of time.

Tame is more similar to Charm than Mind Control, but all three are in the same family of abilities.

- - - Updated - - -

Why not? They are proven to be the most favorite, so why shouldn't more ressources dedicated to them? It sounds more reasonable than dedicating ressources like a new class to unpopular races.

Actually Tinker, Necromancer, and Dragonsworn tend to be the most favored. You rarely hear about DRs anymore due to people disliking Nathanos and tiring of Sylvanas.

[Ielenia]

Yeah, Mind Control is a charm ability, but it isn’t Charm.

Then what was the point of pointing that "mind control is considered a charm ability"? Are you admitting to using a red herring fallacy?

- - - Updated - - -

I'm not even going to humor dark ranger becoming a class.

Then what's the point of you being here, discussing dark ranger? If you're "not even going to humor" the possibility, then this means you're here in bad faith.

There is absolutely nothing unique about dark rangers that would justify an entire class.

In your opinion.

You can say there is until you're blue in the face but you'll be wrong each and every time.

And now you are being the dishonest one by stating your own subjective opinion as hard, objective fact.

I have looked at dark ranger. They have Black Arrow(A former hunter spell), Multi-shot(A hunter spell), Shoot(A hunter auto-attack), and Wailing Arrow(Explosive Shot that does shadow damage and adds a silence). Oh and some have Hooked Net(Which is a different animation for Steel Trap on Survival hunters). They really have absolutely nothing unique about them to justify an entire class.

This is further proof that you are arguing here in bad faith. You literally acknowledge how they have spells that the hunter class does not have, but have to twist and add several caveats in an attempt to liken those abilities to others in the hunter class. By that same reasoning, I can say that metamorphosis is just the shaman's ascendance ability, except it's baseline and not a talent, and its graphics are of a demon instead of an elemental. Or that the mage's fireball ability is the exact same as the warlock's shadow bolt ability, only it's fire instead of shadow and adds a dot.

[Teriz]

Then what was the point of pointing that "mind control is considered a charm ability"? Are you admitting to using a red herring fallacy?

It states that it is a charm ability in the Wowiki you were using as evidence.

[TheRevenantHero]

Then what was the point of pointing that "mind control is considered a charm ability"? Are you admitting to using a red herring fallacy?

- - - Updated - - -


Then what's the point of you being here, discussing dark ranger? If you're "not even going to humor" the possibility, then this means you're here in bad faith.


In your opinion.


And now you are being the dishonest one by stating your own subjective opinion as hard, objective fact.


This is further proof that you are arguing here in bad faith. You literally acknowledge how they have spells that the hunter class does not have, but have to twist and add several caveats in an attempt to liken those abilities to others in the hunter class. By that same reasoning, I can say that metamorphosis is just the shaman's ascendance ability, except it's baseline and not a talent, and its graphics are of a demon instead of an elemental. Or that the mage's fireball ability is the exact same as the warlock's shadow bolt ability, only it's fire instead of shadow and adds a dot.

No I didn't. Wailing Arrow is BARELY reason enough to give them their own class at all because, as I said, it's just explosive shot with an added effect. As for Black Arrow, it was a hunter staple for the longest time so using that as justification for why dark ranger is pretty ridiculous. Though your comment about ascendance is in bad faith because it doesn't function AT ALL like Metamorphosis. As for the mage and warlock example, I agree. It's really fucking lazy on Blizzard's behalf. And I'd rather not have MORE laziness. Dark ranger could maybe be a new hunter spec but making it an entire class would be a waste of resources that could have been spent on something more unique like Dragonsworn.

This thread isn't "Should Dark Ranger be the next class?" This is a thread about future potential classes. Dark ranger would make no fucking sense and I'm not arguing in bad faith just because I won't bend for an idea that shouldn't really be discussed because it's a dead end.

[Triceron]

Again, Paladins are a classic, standard RPG class. The Dark Ranger class isn’t defined.

Hence why the class needs a defining ability.

Then Blizzard can create a new class defining ability or hook to cover the gap that you personally regard exists.

Same as giving Shamans the use of Totems, which was a Witchdoctor feature.

Please don’t accuse me of lying. I said from the start that Shaman are defined by Totems and Druids are defined by shapeshifting.

If you don't want to be accused of lying, then stop lying. It's that simple. Admit that you have no intention of reaching common ground

Saying the Druid needs to be defined when it's a core class in D&D is you being caught up in your own lies.

And Shaman never originally had Totems in WC3, so what you consider class defining is absolutely new and was actually part of the Witchdoctor. How is that class defining if Thrall and ever Shaman in WC3 never uses Totems?

Again, calling you out on continuing bad faith arguments. Everything you say is specifically making exceptions for existing classes, while you will dismiss any example for Dark Ranger using double standards. If you're not lying, then you're openly being dishonest and willingly ignorant to your own terms.

[Ielenia]

No I didn't. Wailing Arrow is BARELY reason enough to give them their own class at all because, as I said, it's just explosive shot with an added effect.

Again, this denotes bad faith from you, because many, if not all player abilities in the game can be described as "X ability, but with an added effect". And as it was pointed out to you already by other posters, we don't need unique abilities currently within the game to decide if a concept is viable or not. We just need the concept itself to be considered viable. Abilities are meaningless, considering 90+% of a class' abilities are created from scratch the moment that Blizzard starts designing the player class.

As for Black Arrow, it was a hunter staple for the longest time so using that as justification for why dark ranger is pretty ridiculous.

So was the metamorphosis ability. It stayed with the warlock class for just as long as the hunter's black arrow, if not more so. And worse: it was a much closer incarnation to the WC3 ability than the hunter's ability was, too. And yet... did it matter when Blizzard decided to implement the demon hunter class?

Though your comment about ascendance is in bad faith because it doesn't function AT ALL like Metamorphosis.

It works just like the metamorphosis ability: it gives extra stats to the player, and changes certain abilities to give them new power.

This thread isn't "Should Dark Ranger be the next class?" This is a thread about future potential classes.

The point stands. Why are you wasting our time discussing dark rangers if you don't even want to entertain the possibility of the class being possible? Why aren't you instead saving us both some time and just discuss the ones you want to discuss?

Dark ranger would make no fucking sense

In your opinion.

and I'm not arguing in bad faith

By refusing to entertain the possibility of the class being possible, you are arguing in bad faith.

just because I won't bend for an idea that shouldn't really be discussed

You're not the arbiter who decides what should be discussed and was shouldn't. You're not even the OP.

because it's a dead end.

Again, in your opinion.

- - - Updated - - -

It states that it is a charm ability in the Wowiki you were using as evidence.

You must've been confused since I never used WoWWiki as evidence.