Anduin and Sylvanas and WoW's Third Faction

[vertigo12]

Social gameplay would tie to communications, PvE and PvP.

Social gameplay involves a lot of aspect not only just communication: chat, raid warning, mail,etc. but also other non-verbal queues and element. The mere presence of an enemy from your opposing faction in a PvP realm or War mode are catalyst for social interaction and gameplay, a world boss or a specific mob, a quest objective and other interactive elements in the map. The mere size of a bag's space and the number of bags you readily carry is a catalyst for social interaction. Having two opposing player or players within a same contested zone or area will definitely spark a social interaction: with players of the same faction, party, guild, friends list, and even against your enemy with an /emote.

Why do you need that when Ebon Hand was tepresenting that with the Lich King Bolvar raising the Four Horsemen, or the Cenarion Circle delegating the defense of nature and the world?

Because the moment you choose a race and class you willfully let yourself be sorted. A Druid will be part of Cenarion Circle, A Shaman with the Earthen Ring, The Knights of Ebon Blade for the DK's but you will learn soon that these subgroup or faction dillutes or tone down your faction color, it takes the back seat and only be important when the PvP aspect is the utmost consideration.

This is an example of Socially integrated design; we don't have guilds that are cross faction.

Rather, the reason why you have such complication is because of the inherent restrictive nature of side one vs. side two so you end up not having guild able to migrate across the other faction and not the other way around.

New factions will inevitably bring social problems. It's bad design overall, and Blizzard will be blamed for implementing new content that breaks up guilds.

This problem has been existing because how was guild system have been addressed from the start. The root cause of such complication was how things originally started because even without the introduction of a 3rd and neutral faction that specific problem already exist. If you try to pass the blame on a third faction then you're evading the real source of your so called dilemma.

More Bag space gives you more inventory room. So what social aspect changes here? Nothing.

The reason why you start with one bag and with the alloted slot is to alarm you of the urgency and importance of having more inventory space. So you try your best to look for the commodity. You may ask someone where did he get or bought the bag, does he have any extra?, where can I find the vendor, ask about whether it's possible to make one on your own leading to a question what profession can make bags, do you make one yourself and are you selling them? It then grows to a meaningful interaction, you get to invite him to form a party, or you trade with one another. You may even ask him if it's possible to carry a few things for you. Bag space can be an issue for you and can even be a major source of drama for a guild. Since inventory in WoW is modular, you can increase the size of your storage space depending on the available bag you would be using and what's the maximum size. You seem to miss these important details that disregard. They have social implications in game and I can even enumerate more for you.

then your Forsaken character's always going to be a Night Elf fighting for the Sentinels every time you raid with them.

Sylvanas raised Nightelves to be part of the Forsaken most of them are considered Dark Rangers. Are they NightElves? Yes they were previously Nightevles. Are they Night Elves still even if they became forsaken? Yes, they are Nightelves, undead ones.

and do not get carried over to other future expansions of the game; card abilities like Slivers that only affect other 'Sliver' type cards, which are only featured in one expansion)

They get to be revisited in their Xth edition and some of the card effects have been ressurected at future storyblock/card cycle. Doesnçt Vanilla content doesn't ring any bell when you see WoW:Classic?

[Triceron]

Because the moment you choose a race and class you willfully let yourself be sorted. A Druid will be part of Cenarion Circle, A Shaman with the Earthen Ring, The Knights of Ebon Blade for the DK's but you will learn soon that these subgroup or faction dillutes or tone down your faction color, it takes the back seat and only be important when the PvP aspect is the utmost consideration.

If you want Ebon Blade represented in PVP, what happens to all the Druids who are part of Cenarion Circle, all the Shamans in Earthen Ring, all the Hunters of the Unseen Path? Do they all start fighting for the Ebon Blade suddenly? Well that makes no sense, since they aren't part of the Ebon Blade. Do you only get to play as DK in an Ebon Blade PVP run? Well that's just imbalanced having Class vs Class combat for PVP.

How do you imagine PVP representing factions if each class is its own 'Faction'?

This problem has been existing because how was guild system have been addressed from the start. The root cause of such complication was how things originally started because even without the introduction of a 3rd and neutral faction that specific problem already exist. If you try to pass the blame on a third faction then you're evading the real source of your so called dilemma.

I'm not evading the root at all, I'm pointing out that the roots are there and you've done nothing to address them. You've made no attempt to sort out the problems at all, while I'm still pointing out at the problem still exists.

And if you don't try and add more factions at all? Everything still works fine, as intended, because we all recognize WoW as being built around a 2-Faction system, take it or leave it. It's just that you're unhappy with the system itself, and you're not willing to take it, or willing to leave it. You want to change it, while you have absolutely no clue how.

So you try your best to look for the commodity. You may ask someone where did he get or bought the bag, does he have any extra?,

That's not a social implication. That's just describing social interaction.

Bag space can be an issue for you and can even be a major source of drama for a guild.

So I'm literally going to take your own response, and swap out 3rd Faction swapped for Bag Space:

This problem has been existing because how was guild system have been addressed from the start. The root cause of such complication was how things originally started because even without the introduction of a 3rd and neutral faction More bag space that specific problem already exist. If you try to pass the blame on a third faction Bag Space then you're evading the real source of your so called dilemma.

This is what we call a Double Standard. When I say Guilds would be affected, you say the problem is with the Guild structure. But when you say Guilds would be affected, then somehow that's a legitimate social implication. Funny how that works, eh? It's almost like you're being completely dishonest to your own arguments.

[username993720]

Warcraft 3 doesn't have 1 Hunter class, they have like 12 different Physically Ranged units in the game. Riflemen, Archers, Headhunters, Berserkers, Huntresses, Crossbowmen, Priestess of the Moon, Dark Rangers, Beastmasters, Shadow Hunters, Sea Witches, etc. Each has its own identity, so if we're talking about race/class comboes, then by your own argument, each should be its own class as it is represented in Warcraft 3. Why? Because we don't have each of these WC3 units properly represented with their own gameplay in WoW.

No. They should be class skins.
Aside from the Priestess of the Moon, Dark Ranger and Shadow Hunter (which, isn't a hunter), which deserve their own classes.

Your argument is that Class Skins is not a good solution for representing identities like Priestess of the Moon or Dark Rangers or Shadow Hunters because it shares gameplay with existing classes. Well, so do Beastmasters and Berserkers and Huntresses and Riflemen and Archers right now, they all share Hunter gameplay, so there's no reason to have these type of race/class combos be "Class Skins" of a Hunter either. By your own argument dismissing Class Skins, these Race/Class combinations that represent WC3 units should all be their own playable classes.

No, because the classes cannot fully represent these Hero units as they should, while the basic units can.

And ultimately, that's where I disagree with your argument. I think we do need to talk about realistic possibilities. I think we do need to consider the amount of work and resources that go into implementing any given feature. I think it's necessary to factor in all the potential design problems that are faced with adding ideas like entirely new Factions. Class Skins isn't an idea of what players actually want to see, Class Skins is a realistic appropriation of what Blizzard could do, because they've already set the precedent for reusing existing content and presenting it as something new. Of course I'd rather have a Necromancer Class instead of a Necromancer Class Skin that only uses Warlock gameplay, but I doubt a standalone Necromancer class would even ever happen. It's just not a realistic outcome. Just the same I would rather have an actual Wildhammer race instead of them being customizations for Dwarf. It's just more realistic to assume that Blizzard will leave it as a customization right now instead of holding on to any possibility that Wildhammers will get their own Allied Race in the near future.

That you compromise, doesn't mean i should too. All you expect from Blizzard is to recycle old content, instead of creating new ones. And where did that lead us? borrowed power. Who needs new systems when you can create the same thing over and over, every expansion, and just call it by a different name. I don't think that attitude will lead them far.

A Necromancer, like you said, fits a class skin more than it does a new class because it doesn't have much to it, that the Death Knight doesn't have already, in the first place.

I think there's a reason why they gave Wildhammer customizations to Bronzebeards while separating the Dark Irons. There's not enough separating between them, characteristically, to justify a new race.

[Triceron]

No. They should be class skins.
Aside from the Priestess of the Moon, Dark Ranger and Shadow Hunter (which, isn't a hunter), which deserve their own classes.

Interesting. Why?

No, because the classes cannot fully represent these Hero units as they should, while the basic units can.

Which is why we have multiple basic unit Classes, like Priest, Druid and Shaman. They're not just different racial combinations of the same 'Cleric' represents all faith and culture based Healers from Warcraft 3.

Yet Hunter makes no division at all, and even Beastmasters aren't given their own class separate from the Rangers. All Archers and Rangers from WC3 are now being represented in the same Pet-based class as the Beastmaster, they're sharing the same space.

You don't think they should be split off into their own class?

That you compromise, doesn't mean i should too. All you expect from Blizzard is to recycle old content, instead of creating new ones. And where did that lead us? borrowed power. Who needs new systems when you can create the same thing over and over, every expansion, and just call it by a different name. I don't think that attitude will lead them far.

I completely agree.

I hate what WoW has done with borrowed power mechanics. I don't think it's realistic to expect them to go away just because we all hate it though. Most of us hate LFR too and Blizzard still kept that in the game.

When it comes to realistic expectations, we have to look at what defines success for them, as a feature. Borrowed mechanics are fairly hated by many people by now, but it's really the only way Blizzard can keep WoW fresh every expansion.

A Necromancer, like you said, fits a class skin more than it does a new class because it doesn't have much to it, that the Death Knight doesn't have already, in the first place.

What makes a Priestess of the Moon much different that Priests, Hunters and Druids don't already have already?

I think your answer would be that we don't have a class that fully represents Tyrande as a full package, right? Well we don't have a Necromantic spellcaster that represents what Kel'thuzad and Ner'zhul would have been in their mortal forms either. I'm not quite sure what in your mind separates one from being a Class Skin and the other being a Class other than your personal preference.

Why would a Dark Ranger be a new class and not a class skin when literally it's just a Hunter that uses some Necromantic abilities? We even have Sylvanas' weapons that adapt Hunter abilities into Dark Ranger ones.

I think there's a reason why they gave Wildhammer customizations to Bronzebeards while separating the Dark Irons. There's not enough separating between them, characteristically, to justify a new race.

Wildhammers are literally physically taller and leaner than all other Dwarves. I hope you're not using willful ignorance for the sake of answering a question.

[username993720]

Interesting. Why?

Because, as we've seen, these archetypes have never managed to be fully represented within a class, other than a few abilities here and there. Meanwhile, basic units don't bring much to the table that hugely differs mechanically.

Which is why we have multiple basic unit Classes, like Priest, Druid and Shaman. They're not just different racial combinations of the same 'Cleric' represents all faith and culture based Healers from Warcraft 3.

Yet Hunter makes no division at all, and even Beastmasters aren't given their own class separate from the Rangers. All Archers and Rangers from WC3 are now being represented in the same Pet-based class as the Beastmaster, they're sharing the same space.

You don't think they should be split off into their own class?

The beastmaster is already represented through the Beast Mastery spec (and do not you begin telling me it isn't, we have already been through it). Rangers like the PotM and Dark Ranger are not well represented within the Hunter class (unlike the basic nature-based Ranger). That's why i believe it should be given its own class.

I completely agree.

I hate what WoW has done with borrowed power mechanics. I don't think it's realistic to expect them to go away just because we all hate it though. Most of us hate LFR too and Blizzard still kept that in the game.

When it comes to realistic expectations, we have to look at what defines success for them, as a feature. Borrowed mechanics are fairly hated by many people by now, but it's really the only way Blizzard can keep WoW fresh every expansion.

LFR is not a feature they reiterate on every single expansion and market it as a new and exciting feature. Borrowed power, on the other hand, is.

What makes a Priestess of the Moon much different that Priests, Hunters and Druids don't already have already?

I think your answer would be that we don't have a class that fully represents Tyrande as a full package, right? Well we don't have a Necromantic spellcaster that represents what Kel'thuzad and Ner'zhul would have been in their mortal forms either. I'm not quite sure what in your mind separates one from being a Class Skin and the other being a Class other than your personal preference.

Why would a Dark Ranger be a new class and not a class skin when literally it's just a Hunter that uses some Necromantic abilities? We even have Sylvanas' weapons that adapt Hunter abilities into Dark Ranger ones.

That's the thing. PotM is all three and therefore can never be fully represented by either of them. Hence, why it's a class.

The Necromancer, overall, is no more than a basic version of the Death Knight.

Nothing about the Hunter represents the Dark Ranger except for the temporary bow you wield.

Wildhammers are literally physically taller and leaner than all other Dwarves. I hope you're not using willful ignorance for the sake of answering a question.

These minor physical traits aren't strong enough of a cause to separate between races.

[Triceron]

These minor physical traits aren't strong enough of a cause to separate between races.

Couldn't you apply that to Dark Iron Dwarves?

Could you say the traits weren't strong enough to deserve to be their own race?

Hell, Mag'har have even less physical traits different from Orcs. It's literally the same level of customization as Sand Trolls for Trolls; they're literally just recolors. Whatever cosmetic Hair or Tattoo options could have just as easily been applied to Orcs as universal options, just as Dwarves got Tattooes and hairstyles that represent Wildhammers. Mag'har still got their own playable Race. So who are we to say which physical traits aren't strong enough?

LFR is not a feature they reiterate on every single expansion and market it as a new and exciting feature. Borrowed power, on the other hand, is.

But they chose borrowed power over a new class in shadowlands. What does that say about new classes?

It's the same general attitude that would apply to talking about something groundbreaking like a 3rd faction. They'd more likely add a new form of Covenants and call it a day, knowing people like everyone in this forum are still going to buy it and play regardless.

[vertigo12]

A third faction won't fix anything, what we need is more viable stuff for the two we have allready.

Then kindly tell the community why on earth a third faction can't fix anything and if doesn't suit the purpose of having more viable stuff for the two already's having.

If you want Ebon Blade represented in PVP, what happens to all the Druids who are part of Cenarion Circle, all the Shamans in Earthen Ring, all the Hunters of the Unseen Path?

yet again you misuse this statement into an analogy which doesn't fit the bill. You fight for your color not for your class faction because PvP in WoW is classified as a faction war. You are individually representing yourself and not an emissary of your class when you PvP you simply fight for which ever side you are one. You join the PvP war because you are alliance or horde first and it doesn't matter what class you are.

You know what thanks for trying but maybe it would best to stick with your expertise and be good at being someone working with VFX. Not trying to be mean or anything since VFX is ubiquitous.

[username993720]

Couldn't you apply that to Dark Iron Dwarves?

No. They are infused with fire by Ragnaros in lore - something you can't simply apply to dwarves cosmetically and call it a day. Plus, in D&D they are the equivalents of Duergars, a race that is separate from other Dwarves, while in Warhammer Dwarves are depicted both with Wildhammer tattoos and without.

Could you say the traits weren't strong enough to deserve to be their own race?

No. While you lister minor height and weight differences, i pointed out characteristic differences.

Hell, Mag'har have even less physical traits different from Orcs. It's literally the same level of customization as Sand Trolls for Trolls; they're literally just recolors. Whatever cosmetic Hair or Tattoo options could have just as easily been applied to Orcs as universal options, just as Dwarves got Tattooes and hairstyles that represent Wildhammers. Mag'har still got their own playable Race. So who are we to say which physical traits aren't strong enough?

Again, you come from a technical POV while Blizzard clearly chose to separate them based on lore. For example, Savage Blood shows how they differ from Green Orcs, racially. You couldn't give Warlocks to the Mag'har, otherwise they would have been "impure".

But they chose borrowed power over a new class in shadowlands. What does that say about new classes?

It's the same general attitude that would apply to talking about something groundbreaking like a 3rd faction. They'd more likely add a new form of Covenants and call it a day, knowing people like everyone in this forum are still going to buy it and play regardless.

True. This is probably the course they're going to take. Yet, i'm not here to nod my head and agree with everything they do. I'm here to debate and suggest how they could improve that.

[Deventh]

As the title suggest it seems Shadowlands is foreshadowing a break from the norm and a new neutral faction would be part of WoW but seems to be an inverse of how Pandaren pick a faction.

With the addition of Shadowlands, the Covenant and all the "potential allied race" as addition to the existing Horde/Alliance: Ven'thyr, Bastion, Ardenweald and perhaps Maldraxxus, they might be the core races for this potential 3rd faction.

What are your thoughts? Do you approve on finally having a 3rd faction and break the norms of having just the Horde or Alliance?

Would be nice, but knowing Blizzard they will never do it. The Horde is not even a faction anymore. It's a circus of backstabbing traitors who kiss Alliance foot all the time. Lore wise only the Alliance is left, but gameplay wise we need the 2 factions.

[Triceron]

True. This is probably the course they're going to take. Yet, i'm not here to nod my head and agree with everything they do. I'm here to debate and suggest how they could improve that.

Then we actually should be discussing improvements, right?

3rd and 4th factions unfortunately are not concepts that are immediate improvements because the context of retrofitting it into a game that was never designed to handle any more than 2. Thats how we need to look at the system.

Same way you can look at Player Housing as an improvement. Is it a good idea for the game? Would it make it better for players? Of course it would, but the context of adding it now to WoW would be a pretty big waste of time considering its too little content to matter for most collectors, and we saw how Garrisons drove tje players away from the open world which should be the focus instead. These are not improvements if there are some major systemic issues that come with them. They're not ideas to take lightly.

- - - Updated - - -

Again, you come from a technical POV while Blizzard clearly chose to separate them based on lore. For example, Savage Blood shows how they differ from Green Orcs, racially. You couldn't give Warlocks to the Mag'har, otherwise they would have been "impure".

I love the mental gymnastics here that has you explaining that Mag'har need their own race because they shouldn't have Warlocks to keep em pure, all the while Wildhammers are canonically extensions of the Dwarf race and would have Warlocks as an option. I guess lore only matters for Dark Irons and Mag'har but fuck the lore for Wildhammer, eh?

[Rhelyo]

You had to reopen this can of worms again? I remember a few years back there was a thread saying we will get a 3rd faction and that pretty much died and got burried. Now you come.

[username993720]

Then we actually should be discussing improvements, right?

3rd and 4th factions unfortunately are not concepts that are immediate improvements because the context of retrofitting it into a game that was never designed to handle any more than 2. Thats how we need to look at the system.

Same way you can look at Player Housing as an improvement. Is it a good idea for the game? Would it make it better for players? Of course it would, but the context of adding it now to WoW would be a pretty big waste of time considering its too little content to matter for most collectors, and we saw how Garrisons drove tje players away from the open world which should be the focus instead. These are not improvements if there are some major systemic issues that come with them. They're not ideas to take lightly.

Housing isn't as integral to the game's identity and immersion as factions. There's a pretty large importance gap there.

I love the mental gymnastics here that has you explaining that Mag'har need their own race because they shouldn't have Warlocks to keep em pure, all the while Wildhammers are canonically extensions of the Dwarf race and would have Warlocks as an option. I guess lore only matters for Dark Irons and Mag'har but fuck the lore for Wildhammer, eh?

Interesting thought...
While they aren't Warlocks in lore, there's nothing restricting them from becoming one. However, they haven't provided any explanation for that.

[Khann]

It solves the one where you can't actually play with any of your friends who happen to play on a different faction.

Yes, it's a working-as-intended system, but it's also a division of the playerbase that really doesn't have much purpose these days when gameplay between factions has been fairly homogenized to the point where neither faction has any real unique advantages that the other does not.

Solution to your problem costs 30 euros or dollars. In which way gameplay between factions has been fairly homogenized?
Reason for factions is not system wise, its lore wise and there is probably a thousand and one reason that I alone can mention why factions exist.

[Triceron]

Solution to your problem costs 30 euros or dollars. In which way gameplay between factions has been fairly homogenized?
Reason for factions is not system wise, its lore wise and there is probably a thousand and one reason that I alone can mention why factions exist.

Vanilla WoW set out the factions to be completely independant of each other, to the point where entire classes are exclusive to factions. Paladins were Alliance only, Shamans were exclusive to Horde. You don't see that now because it was homogenized.

We used to have racials that were far more diverse in gameplay, now they're much more moderately scaled.

Theres plenty of things that systemically do nit necessitate 2 factions for the sake of gameplay, rather its just something grandfathered from Vanilla's original design intentions for two wildly different factions.


If you want to point to a thousand and one lore reasons, then anything can be made up. We could have every Playable race in the game divided between a Horde and Alliance option, and still make sense of it all. I mean, Blood Elves were already given plenty of reason to join the Horde while in the lore High Elves remained as a part of the Alliance (even if not playable), so we could apply this unilaterally across all races and divide them just as Pandaren get to pick a side. This would make gameplay across all content unified to all races with no more systemic split, while Alliance and Horde still exist as social structures for which you group your guild or choose your PVP groups in. But when it comes to PVE and raids, it wouldn't have to filter through Alliance or Horde, it could have players of both factions. Just implement a neutral faction to raid together under, like the Ashen Verdict from Wrath. And in PVP, if you join 'Mercenary Mode', you don't need to be automatically race changed, since all races are playable on either faction.

Lore-wise, every race can be given reasons to join either side. Tauren and Highmountain are fairly neutral, the Nightborne were neutral before BFA, the Forsaken are well divided already with Calia being fairly neutral to both factions, Lightforged were fairly neutral in Legion, etc.

Other sub-factions like Alterac can be brought back into the lore, as Horde supporters. The remnants of the Defias maintain their hatred of the Alliance, and willingly side with the Horde. And some Orcs could join the Alliance, particularly those who saw the honor that Anduin granted to Saurfang and wish to build bridges with the former enemy. There's no race that is absolutely exclusive to any faction, and it's always been divided for the sake of maintaining the racial divisions that simply existed since Vanilla. They were intended to be completely separate, but now those lines and the lore doesn't really matter that much any more, especially when we literally go through expansions worth of rep-building with races like Highmountain and Nightborne only to have them arbitrarily become faction-exclusive without any substantial lore reasons why they picked one over the other.

The purpose of PVP doesn't have to continue on a large scale at all, and you could still maintain the border conflicts and disputes in certain territories. You could RP Alteraci Humans refusing to side with the Alliance due to historic bad treatment. Or you could have a Horde traditionalists see any Orc clan siding with the Alliance as being traitors to their race, and bearing a grudge that exists well beyond the relative diplomatic peace between the factions.

[Khann]

Vanilla WoW set out the factions to be completely independant of each other, to the point where entire classes are exclusive to factions. Paladins were Alliance only, Shamans were exclusive to Horde. You don't see that now because it was homogenized.

We used to have racials that were far more diverse in gameplay, now they're much more moderately scaled.

Theres plenty of things that systemically do nit necessitate 2 factions for the sake of gameplay, rather its just something grandfathered from Vanilla's original design intentions for two wildly different factions.

I know that, I played that. As I said, factions do not exist because of the system that players interact with. There are very good lore reasons for it and one of them is constant tension between Alliance and Horde. Another one is that it's too damn naive to think that two factions kill each other for years and everyone is fine with it.

I mean, people may think "I am a hordie and I NEVER wanted Sylvannas to be a warchief", yeah but Vol'jin made her and everyone loves Vol'jin. For alliance, that means, you love people who scheme a war.

Tensions. War. WarCraft. 2 factions, preferably more.

[Triceron]

Housing isn't as integral to the game's identity and immersion as factions. There's a pretty large importance gap there.

We already have factions. There's an importance gap if you're implying we need more, too. The fact is, we don't need any more than 2 factions in the game, any more than we need housing. They're both just wish fulfillment.

Interesting thought...
While they aren't Warlocks in lore, there's nothing restricting them from becoming one. However, they haven't provided any explanation for that.

Yes, because your explanation and comparison is utter bullshit.

They don't need to provide any explanation because these decisions to split off certain clans as playable races wasn't made based on lore, as you are trying to infer. If it was based on lore, then Wildhammer would not be part of Dwarves who have Warlock and Paladin options. Wildhammers would have neither of these.

You can say there's nothing in the lore restricting them from becoming them, but then you could apply this with literally any race then. Nothing restricts a Mag'har being curious and exploring the depths of Orgimmar and coming upon the dark coven and joining it, to become Warlocks. So saying that Mag'har need to be its own race because they aren't Warlocks is just cherry picking your lore reason while completely excluding this reason for Wildhammers. I'm not a fan of these kind of double standard, unofficial 'lore' explanations that you're trying to reason out.

The way I see it, Blizzard operate on the 'Rule of Cool' rather than adhering to lore. It's not about what makes sense, it's about what they think players would be more hyped over, while being absolutely fine with inconsistent representation across the board. Zandalari are playable, Amani are not, but somehow Sand Trolls are a customization option even though no Sand Trolls joined the Horde in the lore. Why? Because rule of cool and what they wish to explore for the content - BFA introduces Zandalar into the story so playable Zandalari would be hype. Amani have no relevance in the current content, so nothing changes for them. Sand Trolls are just a quick and easy skin recolor, so the artists added it regardless of any lore implications. It's all driven by game design purposes, not lore.

- - - Updated - - -

Tensions. War. WarCraft. 2 factions, preferably more.

Which is exactly what would be kept if you read my updated post that explains how you could open both factions up to all races, and have gameplay systems be unified without compromising 2 Faction system for the purpose of PVP and territorial division.

Factions would just be treated the way they are in Guild Wars or FF14 instead, where every race has a choice to choose their faction. Factions would no longer be exclusive to any races. That would be the best way to allow more factions into the game, because they would be decoupled from the gameplay systems and rather exist purely for the sake of RP; as a personal faction choice, a means of grouping through Guilds, and through PVP.

We aren't being split because of the lore, we're being split because it carries over design intents from Vanilla. And there's no way to really add more factions without gutting that system, which isn't likely to happen any time soon.

- - - Updated - - -

You know what thanks for trying but maybe it would best to stick with your expertise and be good at being someone working with VFX. Not trying to be mean or anything since VFX is ubiquitous.

I like how you did nothing to address the terrible Bag Space analogy you made and how it has social implications, while using double standards to push your own narrative. Just saying, maybe the reason why you don't value the problems I'm pointing out is because you don't want to believe they are problems at all, and you think it's just an inconvenience when it doesn't suit your narrative.

Yet at the same time, you really don't have any case to explain how 3rd factions would actually work in the game. You made comparisons that more factions would work like Order Halls or Covenants. I point out how Order Halls can't be represented in PVP, you just say "Well Order Halls aren't Factions" and circle around to having no plan whatsoever for how 3rd Factions actually work out. I mean, no one needs game design experience to point out all the bullshit in your argument here.

You have zero plan on outlining how 3rd factions would actually be implemented in the game, and have only argued so far on how Alliance and Horde conflict is just too boring and needs to be spiced up. I mean, is it any different than if I said this game needs Gandalf playable because he's a really cool character that should be playable? We'd both be throwing out wishful thinking ideas with no practical cause behind it.

[Florena]

I think loosening faction restrictions is way more feasible than a third faction, especially with war mode making world pvp entirely opt in instead of varying by server. But I still don't expect to ever see it happen.

A third faction is never going to happen outside of a from the ground up WoW 2.

[vertigo12]

I think loosening faction restrictions is way more feasible than a third faction, especially with war mode making world pvp entirely opt in instead of varying by server. But I still don't expect to ever see it happen. A third faction is never going to happen outside of a from the ground up WoW 2.

That was the whole point of this expansion if it is still not obvious. The reality or structure for the longest time existent had been torn apart symbolized by the tearing of the veil: A boundary between life and in death. Mortals are never meant to physically be able to enter Shadowlands because that was not the preconceived notion. Sylvanas taunted everyone ang got everybody's attention by doing a henious action, now I got your attention now follow me we have some very pressing matter to deal with. When she said the Horde is nothing, she meant it in any means possible. The idea of faction means nothing in Shadowlands red and blue dilutes and turn to gray. You cannot choose to be Alliance nor Horde since you will end up a Kyrian/Valkyr, who would readily discard their past to be able to render fair judgement and ferrying souls; a penitent soul of Revendreth who have humbled themselves to become one of the Venthyr or be ready to be sent to the other three zones upon fair trial, be part of the House of Maldraxxus and be a stalwart of the respective house, become one of the anima to be used to nourish those chosen to enter rebirth in Ardrnweald or be lucky enough to return to the mortal realm then only be able to regain your faction color or forever prisoned and damned in the Maw. You have no choice in the afterlife you get sorted made to render duty or be harvested.Sylvanas was even able to convince Anduin and be part of the cause to reset and restructure reality. Heck it was even the designated aborted protocol when we fought Algalon and defeated him as well fight for the living in Azeroth. The Pantheon and Titans themselves even installed infrastructure for that intended reorigination.If a third faction should be introduced the next expansion would be the perfect time as there is a very great likelyhood that Shadowlands denizen will be dragged into whatever rollercoaster ride this trip has been going. Should they follow the same protocol of moving 2 of the covenant to either faction as allied race only to bloat the already crowded list and cause further disruption in balance between the two faction? The motion has been even starting from Legion, when Helya gave the Soulcage and be able to control/subdue creature of Light. It was already a breadcrumb and hint why Zovaal disturbingly entered a portal of light when it was questionable to do so in the raid's cinematic finale. So, is he going to rally the Nathrezims similar to Lothraxion now?

The fact is, we don't need any more than 2 factions in the game, any more than we need housing. They're both just wish fulfillment.

This is exactly the reason why better focus on VFX since you can focus on your job to use visual assets to be used in a ubiquitous manner. You're stuck up with the notion that things are fine the way they are and there is no need for improvement. If you have this kind of mentality then game design and development or conceptualizing further improvement on existing model or system is not for you. Until you break free from that notion, maybe it would be best in dabbling in conceptual development.

The way I see it, Blizzard operate on the 'Rule of Cool' rather than adhering to lore.

Stop assuming that your design philosophy is Blizzard's design phisolophy because it's pretty clear there is a big distinction perceivable like night and day. You have outdated, worn out and discarded design phisolophy which you have adapted from Vivendi in today's standard obsolete. You have no idea how Blizzard acts or think how they design the game stop insisting to be relevant.

Factions would just be treated the way they are in Guild Wars or FF14 instead, where every race has a choice to choose their faction.

Look how pathetic your statements are now. I thought you are insisting that this kind of idea will not work out on WoW and others should just be playing Guild Wars 2. Talking about eating your own shit.

I like how you did nothing to address the terrible Bag Space analogy you made and how it has social implications,

If you think you come out on top by simply disregarding a paragraph long explanation only to be silenced by it and now trying to regain compose. Please, you're as old as blue cheese with your old dog's tricks. You try to make an excuse that implication is not the same as impact when I have given a full enumeration how inventory and in this specific case bag & bagspace are integral part of social impact, dynamics and parameter. Let me copy paste it for you if your senility can't be helped:

That's not a social implication. That's just describing social interaction.

when I made it clear:

Social gameplay would tie to communications, PvE and PvP.Social gameplay involves a lot of aspect not only just communication: chat, raid warning, mail,etc. but also other non-verbal queues and element. The mere presence of an enemy from your opposing faction in a PvP realm or War mode are catalyst for social interaction and gameplay, a world boss or a specific mob, a quest objective and other interactive elements in the map. The mere size of a bag's space and the number of bags you readily carry is a catalyst for social interaction. Having two opposing player or players within a same contested zone or area will definitely spark a social interaction: with players of the same faction, party, guild, friends list, and even against your enemy with an /emote

More Bag space gives you more inventory room. So what social aspect changes here? Nothing.

The reason why you start with one bag and with the alloted slot is to alarm you of the urgency and importance of having more inventory space. So you try your best to look for the commodity. You may ask someone where did he get or bought the bag, does he have any extra?, where can I find the vendor, ask about whether it's possible to make one on your own leading to a question what profession can make bags, do you make one yourself and are you selling them? It then grows to a meaningful interaction, you get to invite him to form a party, or you trade with one another. You may even ask him if it's possible to carry a few things for you. Bag space can be an issue for you and can even be a major source of drama for a guild. Since inventory in WoW is modular, you can increase the size of your storage space depending on the available bag you would be using and what's the maximum size. You seem to miss these important details that disregard. They have social implications in game and I can even enumerate more for you.

you really don't have any case to explain how 3rd factions would actually work in the game.

I'm not sure if you have impaired comprehension or your too worned out. Or are you simply trying to fit in and be relevant without thinking properly on your comments? I guess you don't understand the rationale why I posted the content of my post. It was not mean for me to showcase my discourse and present my own conceptual design for a 3rd class but I am encouraging a discussion for the community if they think now is the right time to have a third faction and thus I ended my topic with:

What are your thoughts? Do you approve on finally having a 3rd faction and break the norms of having just the Horde or Alliance?

Is this one sentence really hard to comprehend?

[username993720]

We already have factions. There's an importance gap if you're implying we need more, too. The fact is, we don't need any more than 2 factions in the game, any more than we need housing. They're both just wish fulfillment.

In roleplaying terms, factions are more crucial to your character's identity, pride, immersion and the overall story than sitting in a structure you customized.

Yes, because your explanation and comparison is utter bullshit.

They don't need to provide any explanation because these decisions to split off certain clans as playable races wasn't made based on lore, as you are trying to infer. If it was based on lore, then Wildhammer would not be part of Dwarves who have Warlock and Paladin options. Wildhammers would have neither of these.

You can say there's nothing in the lore restricting them from becoming them, but then you could apply this with literally any race then. Nothing restricts a Mag'har being curious and exploring the depths of Orgimmar and coming upon the dark coven and joining it, to become Warlocks. So saying that Mag'har need to be its own race because they aren't Warlocks is just cherry picking your lore reason while completely excluding this reason for Wildhammers. I'm not a fan of these kind of double standard, unofficial 'lore' explanations that you're trying to reason out.

The way I see it, Blizzard operate on the 'Rule of Cool' rather than adhering to lore. It's not about what makes sense, it's about what they think players would be more hyped over, while being absolutely fine with inconsistent representation across the board. Zandalari are playable, Amani are not, but somehow Sand Trolls are a customization option even though no Sand Trolls joined the Horde in the lore. Why? Because rule of cool and what they wish to explore for the content - BFA introduces Zandalar into the story so playable Zandalari would be hype. Amani have no relevance in the current content, so nothing changes for them. Sand Trolls are just a quick and easy skin recolor, so the artists added it regardless of any lore implications. It's all driven by game design purposes, not lore.

I'm not just arbitrarily applying reasons. It's in the Mag'har's racials. Since we don't have the Wildhanmer's racials, i cannot say for certain what they can or cannot be (other than my own speculation). You are right to say that Warlocks and Paladins do not match their aesthetics. They should have added the Druid class to the Dwarf race with their addition.
Listen, i wasn't part of the choice decision. But, from what i remember, they went through almost every playable humanoid and considered if it can be an allied race. With Shadowlands' customization options, i recall them saying that they went through lore to check what was appropriate and what was not.
One example you mentioned was Forest Trolls. Why not add them as a customization option, when they are already part of the Horde? well, perhaps, because they deserve their own race. From what i can infer, Sand Troll and Dark Troll customization options were given to the Darkspear Trolls because of their lean physique, while Forest Trolls (and, perhaps, even Frost Trolls) are more robust and muscular (model-wise).

[Triceron]

In roleplaying terms, factions are more crucial to your character's identity, pride, immersion and the overall story than sitting in a structure you customized.

Subjective at best. You seen the housing in FF14? Check some highlight videos of the best ones, you can personalize the crap out if it. I'd say that has way more potential RP value than anything a 3rd faction would offer, considering we _right now_ have very little connection to our own factions in Shadowlands, with us literally being detached from Azeroth and the rest of the world where faction even matters. PVP doesn't even exist in Shadowlands, you're literally playing an anachronistic gameplay mode on Azeroth with zero connection to Shadowlands when you PVP.

I'm not just arbitrarily applying reasons.

Anyways, my point is that gameplay reasons are more likely than lore reasons, and I use all the examples of lore inconsistancies to support my argument.

If we talk about Class Skins, Blizzard would treat it the same way. Why POTM as a class skin and not its own class? Because class skin is easier to add than full new class, and they could dedicate resources to making a bunch of these playable while dedicating resources to a New Class that isn't already share themes/gameplay with 3 other existing classes.

Blizzard doesn't have to be consistent on what gets to be a new class or a class skin, the same way they don't treat Dark Irons and Wildhammers equally. If Class skins existed, then they would only really follow the lore up to a certain extent enough to make a class concept playable while reusing gameplay. Just like Wildhammer being a Dwarf extension is just enough to consider the race as being playable, but very shittily represented by sharing all their Racials and gameplay of a Bronzebeard Dwarf. Any Class Skin would share a similar fate of not being a full new class and having to have compromises that share existing gameplay and some flexible lore shenaigans. And the reason why Class skins could exist is because Blizzard Devs are proven to be comfortable with recycling content and passing it off as new.