Class Skins would add many new classes and be a major draw for a new expansion

[jellmoo]

Only in your mind.

Well, considering there seems to be quite a few more people within this thread agreeing with my point of view than yours, it's not only in my mind. The fact that you don't like the idea is fine. Just don't say that something isn't viable simply because you don't like it.

Sounds great on paper. Not so much in reality. First of all, they would deplete all of their potential future classes with that kind of a feature. Second of all, they would only be a pale version of the true class. If you want class skins, apply it to "subclasses" just like allied races were (mostly) applied to "subraces. Meaning, you'd get your Sunwalker, Blood Mage and Tidesage. That would be great because class skins are meant to be a cosmetic feature, and these guys only really differ in aesthetic from their "parent class".

Well yes, it potentially would deplete the addition of new classes, or they could always just add a new class. It wouldn't mean that any new class would have to be added as a class skin. Merely that it would be am option. One that would allow them to more easily allow for character concepts to be playable without affecting the very tenuous balance of the game. They could very easily use whichever system, brand new class or class skin, as they feel like.

Necromancer? Let's make it a class skin.
Bard? That's a new class.
Tinker? Class skin.
Dragonsworn? New class.

The sky is the limit.

How many Tinker have you seen (perma) stealthing?

None, obviously, because they're stealthed.

But seriously, how many Death Knights did you see death gripping enemies before it was added to the game? How many Monks did you see rolling around? The reality is that it doesn't matter. Abilities are just thematical representations of a concept. The idea of using technology to stealth is already in the game and it's a staple of the genre. There's no reason that it doesn't work, and people would absolutely not be going "WHAT? Technology based stealth? Ludicrous!"

Because there's really no need to separate the two. If the Tank would already employ heavy melee combat, you can't expect a melee dps spec to be fast and agile like a rogue or a feral druid, while another ranged spec would shoot missiles and stuff. It's just unnecessary division, which shows how little thought was given to the concept.

Again, why on earth not? Why wouldn't there be Tinkers that like to go pew pew pew from far away, while others like to shred their enemies from up close, along with those that are happy to shield their allies from harm? It's all just technology and how they use it. It's no more an "unnecessary division" than any other set of specs in the game.

You say lack of thought, I say lack of imagination.

Representative NPCs. One's the iconic Goblin Tinker, the other the most known Gnome Tinker. While we wouldn't be exactly doing what they do, you can bet your ass it'd be based on these and not on your weird fantasies.

And why do abilities have to match 1 for 1? They have a series of tech based abilities, and this concept gives Tinkers a series of tech based abilities. Running around in a mech? Yup. Firing guns and lasers? Yup. Smacking enemies upside the head? Yup. If you put the High Tinker next to a player using this class skin concept it would look perfectly in place. They would be filling the same archetype, have very similar visuals, and do incredibly similar things.

A class based on a race's aesthetics and culture.

Again, this proves my point. We're talking all about aesthetic here. You want a Goblin themed Tinker? You have it, You want a Gnomish themed Tinker? You have it. It's all just window dressing. You want your Tinker to be tanky? Sure. Be zappy? Yup. Tear apart an enemy with a claw pack? Go nuts. Use alchemy to heal? Absolutely. It allows for people to find whatever aspect of the Tinker archetype they love and actually play it. It affords them the actual visual representation of Goblin or Gnomish culture and ingenuity, and play that concept. Easily and without Blizzard being concerned about balance, requiring far less effort to create and manage.

[username993720]

You are simply incapable of basic abstraction, a very usefull skill. There is really no way to put this nicely. So let me just put it this way: If you are on a road and everyone keeps talking about a wrong-way-driver and your reaction is "one? hundrets!", the probelm is you.

Because i don't follow the herd mentality?
Sure, buddy. whatever you say...

Is like to add that tech in wow is basically just magic with a tech theme. That's it. Since magic allows for anything you can come up with, so you can with Tinker stuff.

So you saying you can just make up anything is true... And it is so by design. Which is why so many toys and engineering stuff do all sorts of crazy shit with a tech theme. It's magic reskinned.

Stealth is somewhat viable in a Tinker, like a Mage's invisibility. Not perma stealth like a Rogue.

"tinker will be added bcs it was hero in w3"
so was sea witch, dark ranger, alchymist... and monk WASNT
but definitely, tinker is the next class to be added, bcs... reasons
i think ignore is the only way to deal with people like that...

It's called Pandaren Brewmaster, genius.
And you've got the Death Knight and Demon Hunter from that game.

He also says Spellbreaker can never happen because it's too racial focused yet insists that Tinker be a gnome and goblin class only. All of his arguments involve bad faith, double standards, and utterly illogical points. Spellbreaker could EASILY be a new class because the identity and lore of it is super unique. But I could also see it being a class skin for Warriors if Blizzard went the class skin route instead of adding a new class.

It's more likely to be a class skin for Warriors, since the Spellbreaker unit is merely a basic unit.

What's really strange that you can totally just say that a Class Skin wouldn't do justice to the Tinker fantasy and concept, that's a rational if subjective opinion. It's fine. But the nonsense that "It just would be impossible for it to be a Class Skin!" because you can't make abilities work the way Tinker abilities work in other games, despite the fact that not only do abilities work differently in different games across the board, but that specs themselves have been reworked in WoW, is just irrational.

So, you want them to rework the Druid to fit the Tinker? that's the extra work your class skins are trying to avoid.

And then is the simple lack of imagination of being unable how the same gameplay could be reframed to represent a whole different fantasy in a visual level. It's very telling that you just can't seem to get that possibility, which is just... sad.

Everyone can imagine it. The question is would it actually work outside of concept? hardly...

This right here.

If we lived in a world where Time and Resources were not concepts that people had to worry about, this idea of "class skins" would be asinine. We don't live that in world, however. Time and resources are factors that need to be considered. One might make the argument that Blizzard has reached their operating capacity for classes and there is a very real possibility that we'll never see another addition. In this world, class skins make sense. Because the alternative very may well be never getting the desired thematics playable in any form.

It's not a question of if they would do it. Their lazy asses would probably do it.
It's more of a question if they should do it.

Well, considering there seems to be quite a few more people within this thread agreeing with my point of view than yours, it's not only in my mind. The fact that you don't like the idea is fine. Just don't say that something isn't viable simply because you don't like it.

Overall agreement does not make the concept more viable.
The basic problem here is that this is only in idea stages. No one actually took the time to check if it actually works and applicable to the Druid. "the Druid can tank, dps and heal? a prime Tinker candidate!". The Tinker actually varies from the Druid quite a bit. But, you guys are so hanged up on the forms aspect that you can't see it.

Well yes, it potentially would deplete the addition of new classes, or they could always just add a new class. It wouldn't mean that any new class would have to be added as a class skin. Merely that it would be am option. One that would allow them to more easily allow for character concepts to be playable without affecting the very tenuous balance of the game. They could very easily use whichever system, brand new class or class skin, as they feel like.

Necromancer? Let's make it a class skin.
Bard? That's a new class.
Tinker? Class skin.
Dragonsworn? New class.

The sky is the limit.

Oh, so it's merely a matter of how you can't distinguish between the ones who deserve a new class and the ones that don't.

Tinker, for example, deserves a new class.
Necromancer? a class skin.
Bard? probably not even viable as neither.
Dragonsworn? haven't even made it out of the RPG sources.

I wonder. What makes you think Dragonsworn deserves it's own class? Dragon forms? modified Druid forms. aspect of magic and time? Mage. aspect of life and dream? Druid. Earthwarder? Shaman. see? i can do the same as you do to the Tinker.

None, obviously, because they're stealthed.

But seriously, how many Death Knights did you see death gripping enemies before it was added to the game? How many Monks did you see rolling around? The reality is that it doesn't matter. Abilities are just thematical representations of a concept. The idea of using technology to stealth is already in the game and it's a staple of the genre. There's no reason that it doesn't work, and people would absolutely not be going "WHAT? Technology based stealth? Ludicrous!"

Stealth is not out of question. What kind of stealth is. Tinkers do not lurk in the shadows to ambush their prey. They might use technology to hide themselves like a Mage's invisibility.

Again, why on earth not? Why wouldn't there be Tinkers that like to go pew pew pew from far away, while others like to shred their enemies from up close, along with those that are happy to shield their allies from harm? It's all just technology and how they use it. It's no more an "unnecessary division" than any other set of specs in the game.

You say lack of thought, I say lack of imagination.

Again, i explained why. There wouldn't be much different from the Tanking spec because Tinkers aren't agile, fast combatants like Rogues and Feral Druids.

And why do abilities have to match 1 for 1? They have a series of tech based abilities, and this concept gives Tinkers a series of tech based abilities. Running around in a mech? Yup. Firing guns and lasers? Yup. Smacking enemies upside the head? Yup. If you put the High Tinker next to a player using this class skin concept it would look perfectly in place. They would be filling the same archetype, have very similar visuals, and do incredibly similar things.

They don't have to be 1:1, but they have to account for most of their abilities, which your idea doesn't.

Again, this proves my point. We're talking all about aesthetic here. You want a Goblin themed Tinker? You have it, You want a Gnomish themed Tinker? You have it. It's all just window dressing. You want your Tinker to be tanky? Sure. Be zappy? Yup. Tear apart an enemy with a claw pack? Go nuts. Use alchemy to heal? Absolutely. It allows for people to find whatever aspect of the Tinker archetype they love and actually play it. It affords them the actual visual representation of Goblin or Gnomish culture and ingenuity, and play that concept. Easily and without Blizzard being concerned about balance, requiring far less effort to create and manage.

Again, sounds good. Doesn't actually mesh well with existing classes. For a Tinker to be a class skin, you would need to take bits of gameplay mechanics from different classes.

[8bithamster]

Sea Witch's abilities were placed in the Hunter, Mage, and Shaman classes.
Dark Ranger's abilities were placed in the Hunter, Warlock and Priest classes.

The Alchemist is a technology based hero (and a Goblin) so there's speculation that it's abilities would be utilized for a Tinker healing spec. Like the Tinker, the Alchemist's abilities have never appeared in the class lineup.

Monks were originally the Brewmaster class. Blizzard changed the class to Monks early in development. Which is why the Monk class is Pandaren based, and is largely based on the Brewmaster hero from WC3.

I mean, this was the cover to the expansion where the Monk class was introduced;






See above. But yes, feel free to place me on ignore. It doesn't change the facts.

And Tinker abilities were rolled into a profession called Engineering. Next argument please!


Anything else?

If you miss my obvious sarcasm, which you're known to do. You keep claiming "omg Class X can't exist!!! because abilities are on class Y!!!"

Yet we have known this to happen several times. Does that mean it can happen with engineering & Tinker? Sure. It's a class option.

But claiming it's the most likely is just being oblivious..

[Teriz]

Again, this proves my point. We're talking all about aesthetic here. You want a Goblin themed Tinker? You have it, You want a Gnomish themed Tinker? You have it. It's all just window dressing. You want your Tinker to be tanky? Sure. Be zappy? Yup. Tear apart an enemy with a claw pack? Go nuts. Use alchemy to heal? Absolutely. It allows for people to find whatever aspect of the Tinker archetype they love and actually play it. It affords them the actual visual representation of Goblin or Gnomish culture and ingenuity, and play that concept. Easily and without Blizzard being concerned about balance, requiring far less effort to create and manage.

Except in order for that to work you're going to have to change the animation, icon, and name of pretty much every Druid ability and talent, and continuously do that every time the class is updated, changed, or gets new abilities.

Again, not a problem if we're talking about Dark Rangers since the existing Hunter specs don't really deviate much from Dark Ranger abilities. However, you can't have a mech-based technology class casting Entangled Roots, New Moon, Tiger's Bite, Tranquility, and Tree of Life.

- - - Updated - - -

And Tinker abilities were rolled into a profession called Engineering. Next argument please!


Anything else?

A completely false statement.

If you disagree, please list the Tinker abilities currently in Engineering. Feel free to use Wowhead as your source.

To make this easier, you can start with the WC3 abilities Robo Goblin, Pocket Factory, Cluster Rockets, and Engineering Upgrade.

[8bithamster]

Except in order for that to work you're going to have to change the animation, icon, and name of pretty much every Druid ability and talent, and continuously do that every time the class is updated, changed, or gets new abilities.

Again, not a problem if we're talking about Dark Rangers since the existing Hunter specs don't really deviate much from Dark Ranger abilities. However, you can't have a mech-based technology class casting Entangled Roots, New Moon, Tiger's Bite, Tranquility, and Tree of Life.

- - - Updated - - -



A completely false statement.

If you disagree, please list the Tinker abilities currently in Engineering. Feel free to use Wowhead as your source.

To make this easier, you can start with the WC3 abilities Robo Goblin, Pocket Factory, Cluster Rockets, and Engineering Upgrade.

And as usual, you ignore the part about my sarcasm... Yea, anything else?

[Prozach]

lol this guy really does have a problem. How many years has he been going on with the whole tinker class thing?

- - - Updated - - -

If you disagree, please list the Tinker abilities currently in Engineering. Feel free to use Wowhead as your source.

Please list the tinker abilities in WoW--any of them. Feel free to use Wowhead as your source.

[Lolites]

Don't forget firelord hero xD

and crypt lord, pit lord, warden, shadow hunter, dreadlord, and whoever i cant remember but no, none of them have chance, tinker is definitely next in line

[Aucald]

While a Tinker class was mentioned by the OP, this thread isn't really solely about the potential of the Tinker class. Let's shelf the rolling back-and-forth about Tinkers for now and instead focus on the idea of class-based "skins" for the existing classes.

[jellmoo]

SNIP

I had originally put together a full reply, but saw Aucald's message after posting. So, for the sake of keeping the thread on target, I suggest we simply agree to disagree and move on witin the larger framework of class skins as a whole.

[draugril]

As for class skins, I would like to see a draconic revamp of every single of them of them for an expansion. If they wind up going with a Dragonflight Covenant system, allow us to gradually unlock more and more reskins as the expansion progresses until the entire class has been rethemed... then let us keep that customization when the next expansion rolls around, potentially doing the same with another theme (say, Void? Light?) and allowing us to mix and match.

[Edoll]

I want a necromancer skin for druids! The forms could be different bone armors or bone mechs and all the balance spells could be bone themed! Imagine Wrath casting animation summoning a little bird skeleton that explodes on the target! Moonfire could be a bonespike! Roots would be skeletal arms!

[bloodkin]

You would first need to make a valid argument that such a situation exists. Thus far, nothing indicates that scenario is currently playing out.

We should also point out that there's no indication that Blizzard would even do class skins in the first place. However, there are indications that Blizzard is planning a Tinker class.

no, there are exactly 0 indications that any new class is coming, let alone something as unfitting as a tech class. Stop talking shit and pulling this bullshit out of your ass, nobody believes your delusional crap.

You always seem to defile every class thread in this forum, kind of disappointing you didn't get permabanned for this shit.

[Neverafter]

A Tinker class skin for druid would be perfect. Theres always been controversy or what exactly the specs should be. Tanking and healing are usually a given, but then theres debate over whether to make the 3rd spec ranged or melee. Reskinning the druid, you get both. Your Tank Mech (bear), melee mech (cat), your ranged mech (moonkin) and the healing spec (resto).

I also think making the Paladin into a Spellbreaker/Spellblade skin would be great. Retribution would essentially remain the same with arcane sparkles instead of yellow light sparkles.

The biggest issue I see with Class Skins though, is, while Tinker/Druid and Spellblade/Paladin's work pretty good, what about Rogues or Shaman or any other random class? There is going to be at least one class that feels their new skin is just lackluster compared to Tinkers and Spellblades. There could always been new skins added in the future, tied to beating certain bosses, collecting certain items or achievements, etc. but it would still feel bad to be a Rogue that uses X element instead of shadow when your standing between a bunch of tinkers and spellblades.

[Teriz]

As I said before, I fully support class skins for Dark Rangers (Hunters), Necromancers (Warlocks), Dark Shaman (Shaman), Druid of the Fang/Flame (Druid), Sunwalkers (Paladin) etc. That makes more sense for a class skin; A customization option that already closely resembles the base class, and has abilities currently within the base class.

[DarkAmbient]

An actual good idea on the forum, am I dreaming?

[Ielenia]

There's really nothing agile, fast or stealthy about the Tinker.

Engineers can make devices that make you invisible. Why couldn't the tinker also develop something like that?

That would be stupid.

Thank you for your unhelpful opinion.

They're not tech-savvy either.

And? You do know that "primitive" and "tech-savvy" are extreme ends of a spectrum and there are in-betweens, right?

That would go against the whole premise of a Druid. suddenly, they're not nature lovers but tech experts? come on....

Except the class skin tinker would not be druids, just use the class' underlying mechanics with a new coat of paint. "Class skins" would not be transmogs you can change at a moment's notice by talking to an NPC. Class skins and base classes would be separate and have different race/class combos. Just like draenei can be shamans, but lightforged draenei can't. Just like blood elves can be paladins, but void elves cannot.

EDIT: Kul'tiran druids are not exactly "nature lovers" as they deal with the "death" side of the cycle. Their forms are even wicker constructs, too. Also, the zandalari druids aren't "nature lovers" either.

The Mage's Arcane intellect (Brilliance) and Phoenix Flames.
There were other undead-damaging Paladin abilities.
Endurance Aura was most likely translated into the Tauren's Endurance. Reincarnation was too Shamanistic for the Warrior, i guess.
Shamans aren't Shadow Hunters.
Druids had Thorns.
Unholy Aura was a Death Knight ability.
Death Knights have Raise Ally.

Read what the original poster said. He said abilities have been directly

It would need to be tweaked because the Druids abilities don't exactly fit those of the Tinker 100%. That tweaking is called (and would require) balancing.

No. No, it would not. The game mechanics would remain exactly as they are. At worst, what might need tweaking are the animations. Those are not game mechanics.

- - - Updated - - -

Where's the dishonesty? Imps and succubi being considered undead minions in some games is a fact. The main point is that there are loads of Necromancer abilities in the Warlock class, so a class skin there makes sense.

It's an irrelevant fact because those "some games" games are not WoW. That would be akin to saying "some games have support type of player class, therefore support classes can exist in WoW."

Well that's irrelevant. There are arm cannons on the mech, so it stands to reason that such a mech form should be able to utilize such weapons.

Except it's not. How a character fights directly correlates to how a character fights, if you didn't know. Also, combat rogues possess guns and yet they're a melee class.

And that's the whole point of how a class skin simply wouldn't work for a Tinker.

Except it does, as all it needs are, at worst, animation/model tweaks.

Humans as a whole aren't primitive, but we still have people who live primitive lifestyles throughout the world.

Except we are talking about "races as a whole".

Except you have to talk new mechanics or you're simply being dishonest.

No, we don't. Because we're talking class skins, not entirely new classes. Class skins would keep the exact same game mechanics as the "base class" and only change animations. models and sound effects,

There's no way you can alter abilities to that point without mechanics coming into play.

Except that is completely possible. A druid's Wrath spell can easily be reskinned to be a missile, and the trees it summons can be reskinned into robots. You continuing to parrot this debunked argument show how little you know what you're talking about.

Is WoW dead? Is Blizzard not intending to ever add abilities to the game ever again?

Sorry, we're talking about classes being added to the game, not "what could be added to classes in an unknown, far-flung future."

[Teriz]

It's an irrelevant fact because those "some games" games are not WoW. That would be akin to saying "some games have support type of player class, therefore support classes can exist in WoW."

Actually it's a very relevant fact because it supports the notion that the Warlock class was a stand in for a Necromancer class.This explains why we never got a Necromancer class in Shadowlands. The abundance of Necromancer abilities in the Warlock class would definitely make the Necromancer a suitable class skin for the Warlock class.

As for the rest, read Aulcad's post.

[Gaidax]

Sea Witch's abilities were placed in the Hunter, Mage, and Shaman classes.
Dark Ranger's abilities were placed in the Hunter, Warlock and Priest classes.

And Demon Hunter/Death Knight abilities were placed in the Warlock...

If you think that current classes having (supposedly) abilities that should have been for some other potential class somehow means that class won't be introduced - that's just silly. Tell that to WoD Demo that got completely reworked so that Demon Hunter can be put in.

[Ielenia]

If you actually believe that you can change the animations and purpose of an entire class' abilities and talents without altering the mechanics you're being completely delusional.

Actually, I'm not delusional. I just know what I'm talking about, unlike you.

Animations and graphic effects are completely separate from game mechanics. Changing the druid's Wrath spell to look like a tech missile will not change how the ability itself behaves. It won't change its cast time, or how it synergizes with the rest of the class skin's abilities and passives.

Class skins are coats of paint, nothing more.

[Teriz]

And Demon Hunter/Death Knight abilities were placed in the Warlock...

If you think that current classes having (supposedly) abilities that should have been for some other potential class somehow means that class won't be introduced - that's just silly. Tell that to WoD Demo that got completely reworked so that Demon Hunter can be put in.

The difference being that Warlocks were nothing like DKs or DHs, thus giving design space for those hero classes.

Meanwhile a Dark Ranger is very similar to a Hunter, and a Sea Witch is pretty much a Shaman with a bow. Hence why Dark Rangers would make a perfect skin for the Hunter class. Since the Sea Witch is a Naga and not much different than a Shaman, it is doubtful that would become a class.