Remarks from former WoW designer gives insight on WoW's classes

[Triceron]

But the idea of a spellcaster DH doesn't fit the concept of the demon hunter, like I mentioned earlier.

And warlocks are warlocks, demon hunters are demon hunters. Warlocks are inherently a spellcaster concept, so it makes sense they would use the demon form to empower their magics and not to go toe-to-toe with their foes.

Sure it could.

Illidan was a known sorcerer, who is also the one who defined Demon Hunters altogether. Demon Hunters ultimately train in the use of fel magic. And WC3 already depicted them with a fully ranged attack in demon form.

It just as much makes sense if they had a spellcaster spec. Blizzard simply didn't choose to pursue it. Doesn't mean it doesn't fit the concept. For example, Warlocks didn't get a full 'Summoner' spec until Legion revamp, even if Demonology spec always focused on the use of just one demon, or even no demons while empowering the Warlock. It doesn't mean that the Summoner style of gameplay 'didn't fit the concept of the Warlock'; it was just not fully realized until Legion.

A few years back, would you say melee doesn't fit a Hunter's concept? Just because Hunters didn't have a proper melee spec until Legion doesn't mean melee gameplay didn't fit the Hunter concept. And let's be clear, Hunters never having a proper melee representation is the same right now as Demon Hunters not having a proper ranged representation. It doesn't mean it's outside of the class concept, it just means the gameplay hasn't been represented in such a way at the moment.

And on the topic of what fits a concept, anything can also be added. Look at how Paladins are definitively attached to the concept of using Shields, or Shamans being tied to the use of Totems. These were never part of the original WC3 depiction of Paladins and Shamans, they were introduced from other sources. So if we're talking about spellcasting Demon Hunters, then it would be no different bridging in spellcasting concepts from other sources such as what we already have; Fel-based demonic Warlocks, Anti-magic specialists like Spellbreakers and Arcane-trained Sorcerers like Illidan. It's all about bridging concepts into a WoW class.

I mean look at it this way - there was never a tanking Demon Hunter who used Vengeance Form and wielding the half-blade Warglaives before Legion. Demon Hunters were not associated with tanking either; their evasion exists completely in the Rogue class which is also a melee combatant that is not a tank. The Vengeance concept was never a part of Illidan's core concept, yet you willingly accept that it fits in the Demon Hunter Concept even though it never existed. Curious that, no?

[Al Gorefiend]

If you have to compare it to a monk of all classes, show me that you didn't bother to read what I wrote.

- - - Updated - - -


Not really.

The tanky demon form and spec is still fully within the concepts presented about the class in WC3 and TBC. The tank spec is a melee spec, incorporating abilities we saw before, like immolation aura and still using warglaives.

A ranged (or spellcaster, or healer) demon hunter would be a demon hunter in name only.

Nothing stops them from making a 3rd demon hunter spec that does the same thing as havoc but only kinda different.
Assassination/Outlaw/Subtlety don't exactly have a huge variation

[babalou1]

I mean at this point who gives a shit.


Give Tauren Warriors a quest chain that turns them into Chieftans. Rename the spells, add extra flair, maybe an ability.

Give Dwarf Warriors a quest that turns them into Mountain Kings. Rename the spells, add extra flair, maybe a new ability (same dmg/cd/functionality as TC).

Repeat for whatever.

Give transmog armor/weapon. etc.

Call it a day.,


Do fun shit with it. Even if its just cosmetic. Do fun shit. What is it going to hurt at this point?

[Teriz]

Classes over the years have become less and less unique. That didn't need to happen and they could undo it. They simply refuse to. So they could add more classes that are unique. There's tons of stuff out there. But current Blizzard isn't willing to put a new class into the game, that is truly unique, other than visually. And part of that is because the team has given up on the gameplay aspect of things since Legion, at which point the biggest selling point of the game have been cosmetics.

I think the problem is that outside of a few specific themes, WoW's classes cover pretty much the entire gamut of RPG classes. The vast majority of future class concepts demanded by the player base can rather easily be slotted into the existing class lineup. As I said before, I really don't see many classes left for future implementation. I could honestly see one more class implemented to bring in the remaining RTS heroes (a stated goal by Jordan), and to fill in a 3rd mail armor slot. Anything beyond that point will be delivered via spec overhauls in the existing classes.

[shoc]

I mean at this point who gives a shit.


Give Tauren Warriors a quest chain that turns them into Chieftans. Rename the spells, add extra flair, maybe an ability.

Give Dwarf Warriors a quest that turns them into Mountain Kings. Rename the spells, add extra flair, maybe a new ability (same dmg/cd/functionality as TC).

Repeat for whatever.

Give transmog armor/weapon. etc.

Call it a day.,


Do fun shit with it. Even if its just cosmetic. Do fun shit. What is it going to hurt at this point?

Blizzard in 2021 will make you pay $25 bucks for it.

[ntlntl]

Imagine a minigame mod for WOW, something MOBA-like or deathmatch arena within WOW where people control heroes with a limited set of interesting abilities, just like the modified warcraft 3 heroes in DOTA and some custom maps.

Oh wait, we already have HOTS for that

[Ielenia]

A few years back, would you say melee doesn't fit a Hunter's concept? Just because Hunters didn't have a proper melee spec until Legion doesn't mean melee gameplay didn't fit the Hunter concept. And let's be clear, Hunters never having a proper melee representation is the same right now as Demon Hunters not having a proper ranged representation. It doesn't mean it's outside of the class concept, it just means the gameplay hasn't been represented in such a way at the moment.

And on the topic of what fits a concept, anything can also be added. Look at how Paladins are definitively attached to the concept of using Shields, or Shamans being tied to the use of Totems. These were never part of the original WC3 depiction of Paladins and Shamans, they were introduced from other sources. So if we're talking about spellcasting Demon Hunters, then it would be no different bridging in spellcasting concepts from other sources such as what we already have; Fel-based demonic Warlocks, Anti-magic specialists like Spellbreakers and Arcane-trained Sorcerers like Illidan. It's all about bridging concepts into a WoW class.

Your comparisons here fail to fit the situation because hunters, paladins, shamans and warlocks in the game are broad representations of several archetypes together, and the paladin concept is also one of a defender, which has been represented in different media all around the world as wielding a shield. So yes: the idea of a melee hunter makes sense. The idea of paladins wielding shields make sense. Shamans using totems also makes sense.

But on the other hand, like I've said multiple times before, the demon hunter is a single, very narrow, specific concept, which is why the idea of a spellcaster, a healer, or a bow-wielding demon hunter simply does not fit in my opinion.

- - - Updated - - -

Nothing stops them from making a 3rd demon hunter spec that does the same thing as havoc but only kinda different.
Assassination/Outlaw/Subtlety don't exactly have a huge variation

Yes, they could. They also touched on that in the Legion announcement, as they felt that giving it a second melee DPS spec would "dilute the two specs".

[heldok]

I think the problem is that outside of a few specific themes, WoW's classes cover pretty much the entire gamut of RPG classes. The vast majority of future class concepts demanded by the player base can rather easily be slotted into the existing class lineup. As I said before, I really don't see many classes left for future implementation. I could honestly see one more class implemented to bring in the remaining RTS heroes (a stated goal by Jordan), and to fill in a 3rd mail armor slot. Anything beyond that point will be delivered via spec overhauls in the existing classes.

There's tons of different fantasies, that aren't covered. Tons of hero classes, that aren't in the game yet. The problem is that with the way Blizzard is doing things, any newly implemented class would feel like all the other classes, because they've stripped classes of everything that made them unique.

Warrior stances, rogue poisons, warlock shards as they used to be, hunter ammo, shaman totems as they used to be. Things like using reagents, everybody getting an interrupt, even things like buffs being taken away.

[Teriz]

There's tons of different fantasies, that aren't covered. Tons of hero classes, that aren't in the game yet. The problem is that with the way Blizzard is doing things, any newly implemented class would feel like all the other classes, because they've stripped classes of everything that made them unique.

Warrior stances, rogue poisons, warlock shards as they used to be, hunter ammo, shaman totems as they used to be. Things like using reagents, everybody getting an interrupt, even things like buffs being taken away.

I'm very curious what fantasies you feel are not covered. Could you name them? I can only think of one fantasy that is really not covered by the existing classes. Additionally, there's only like 2 heroes whose abilities have never appeared in the class lineup. Every other RTS hero has had their abilities brought into the class lineup in one form or another.

As for the poisons, shards, ammo, etc. A lot of that stuff was removed because players at the time thought it was tedious. For example, Hunter players would run out of ammo mid-raid, and they had to dedicate bag space, and it costed money/resources/time to maintain it, thus Blizzard felt it better to remove. Personally, I feel that was the right decision.

[heldok]

I'm very curious what fantasies you feel are not covered. Could you name them? I can only think of one fantasy that is really not covered by the existing classes. Additionally, there's only like 2 heroes whose abilities have never appeared in the class lineup. Every other RTS hero has had their abilities brought into the class lineup in one form or another.

Necromancer, Warden, Tinker (I know you've been waiting for that one), Blademaster, Runemaster... basically anything that in some form was a class in any of the Warcraft games or has some kind of unique concept behind it.

And please don't try to tell me that Death Knights are pretty much Necromancer. They tried to pull that same shit with Warlocks and Demon Hunters.

There's a way to do any of these as their own unique classes, but Blizzard just doesn't design classes to be unique anymore.

Hell, even Bard could be a class in the game.

As for the poisons, shards, ammo, etc. A lot of that stuff was removed because players at the time thought it was tedious. For example, Hunter players would run out of ammo mid-raid, and they had to dedicate bag space, and it costed money/resources/time to maintain it, thus Blizzard felt it better to remove. Personally, I feel that was the right decision.

Introducing more convenience to make classes feel more the same and rob them of their unique aspects that people enjoyed was not the right decision. It's why we're sitting here discussing how all the classes feel the same and lack uniqueness, and why people are looking fondly towards Classic WoW.

[Triceron]

But on the other hand, like I've said multiple times before, the demon hunter is a single, very narrow, specific concept, which is why the idea of a spellcaster, a healer, or a bow-wielding demon hunter simply does not fit in my opinion.

And that's your opinion.

Just because you view it one way doesn't mean it the Demon Hunter has to be a narrow concept.

Again, as narrow as you want to paint it, you're completely fine with a Tanking spec that never existed in that same narrow design space. The WC3 Hero was basically a Melee DPS with supernatural abilities. There was no basis for tanking, and despite this you have no complaint over Vengeance and half-blade Warglaives in the same design space. Just look how you've completely dodged a reply on that.

[Teriz]

Necromancer, Warden, Tinker (I know you've been waiting for that one), Blademaster, Runemaster... basically anything that in some form was a class in any of the Warcraft games or has some kind of unique concept behind it.

And please don't try to tell me that Death Knights are pretty much Necromancer. They tried to pull that same shit with Warlocks and Demon Hunters.

Wouldn't that be a fair statement though, considering that they possess all the abilities of the Necromancer, and necromancer-based units from WC3? Further, we didn't get a necromancer class in SL, which was tailor fit for such a class entry. Instead, Death Knights got more necromancer-style abilities and race upgrades.

Warden abilities show up mainly in the Rogue class, and the Warden class was originally the NE assassin. Blademasters were clearly melded into the Warrior class, and Runemaster was scrapped to make way for Warlocks and their overall concept were granted to Death Knights.

There's a way to do any of these as their own unique classes, but Blizzard just doesn't design classes to be unique anymore.

Hell, even Bard could be a class in the game.

Well I think it's rather easy to when you recognize what these class concepts would bring to the table. The core of a Warden for example is an agile assassin that uses shadow abilities and envenomed daggers. How is that any different than your typical (Subtlety) Rogue?

Introducing more convenience to make classes feel more the same and rob them of their unique aspects that people enjoyed was not the right decision. It's why we're sitting here discussing how all the classes feel the same and lack uniqueness, and why people are looking fondly towards Classic WoW.

I can somewhat agree with this actually, but I do feel that some of those "flavor" concepts were more tedious than endearing.

[Unholyground]

I don't think that's particularly interesting, I find it quit obvious. Adding a new class takes away possible ways to develop existing classes, or even takes away existing traits from a class and give it to another (like Metamorphosis). So I never really get why people are so obsessed with adding new classes.

Honestly it's how they design the classes currently and the shitty talent system that locks them behind mediocrity. None of the classes are really fun to play anymore outside of a handful. Most times they are over complex for the sake of being complex.

[Ielenia]

Just because you view it one way doesn't mean it the Demon Hunter has to be a narrow concept.

The demon hunter being a singular, narrow and specific concept is not an opinion, though. The demon hunter concept, and the demon hunter class, is unique in comparison to the other classes in the game in that it takes from a single concept and does not incorporate anything else into it.

The DH class is basically the undiluted demon hunter concept, unlike all the other classes in the game.

Again, as narrow as you want to paint it, you're completely fine with a Tanking spec that never existed in that same narrow design space.

I've already explained it: it fits the concept of the demon hunter.

[Teriz]

Honestly it's how they design the classes currently and the shitty talent system that locks them behind mediocrity. None of the classes are really fun to play anymore outside of a handful. Most times they are over complex for the sake of being complex.

I do feel that an overhaul to the talent system is due. Maybe we'll get that in 10.0.

[qwerty123456]

My bad on that. I was thinking of the warlock's meta form by mistake.


Blur is a dodge ability.


All demon hunters wield warglaives. No demon hunter in this game, save one singular exception AFAIK, wields anything other than warglaives.


Except this is false as every single ability in WC3 remains the exact same even while in metamorphosis form.


And here you completely miss the point. The concepts of mage in WoW do not allow for a melee spec, just like the death knight concept in WoW does not allow for a spellcaster spec.

Blur is the dps spec defensive skill. Vengeance is all about taking less dmg and healing.


And demon hunters have ranged warglaive skills. It's also already established that different types of demons give you different abilities. It's not hard to see a ranged demonform is possible. So you have 3 different options for a ranged spec 1 around war glaives and the other around a demon form or a mix of the two.

They gain a ranged attack dude..... Thats clearly something new they couldn't do before transforming. Warglaives are literally just a weapon skin in WC3 none of their actual skills are related to a warglaive.

No it doesn't. A paladin is still a holy knight if it heals, tanks, or dpses. If they had a shadow/void melee dps instead of ret that would change their concept. You aren't giving a mage leather/mail/plate so it can dps in melee they are still a magical spell caster in cloth. A mage that uses frost, fire, and arcane spells at a shorter range (melee) isn't changing the concept of the class. It's also already established they can do defensive skills like frost armor. And the same with a death knight as long as it keeps to being a necromantic/frost/blood plate user with a runeblade a ranged spec can work.

[cocomen2]

While "Demon hunter" as class product is pretty basic trope Become demon to fight Demons, its can take many shapes in imagination, for unique type Metamorphosis.

1) Demon Hunter spec based on ranged attacking form, while melee basic attack becomes ranged and more focused on throwing warglaives and fel bolts, main point for this form can be low gravity mode that allows very long midair jumps with flappy wings.

2) Demon Hunter that uses warglaives as a bow for fell arrows, demon transformation would have four hands to pull out second warglaives as additional bow.

3) Demon Hunter with more wild form like Felhunter, while main point of this form would be copy and steal abilities of other creatures around you for certain duration.

Yes its generic things that anyone can come up with, but as whole fantasy side of classes not so unique to WoW. Bonus spec for demon hunter is not hard to do, thing, just wow devs don't give a f@ck about it, they already sold Legion.

[Triceron]

I've already explained it: it fits the concept of the demon hunter.

Your explanation is vague and unspecific.

Why wouldn't spellcasting or bow-based gameplay fit the concept of a demon hunter? We already have these concepts explored in other games, like Hearthstone and HOTS (Betrayer Malfurion).

You're not defining what that concept really is or why you are making exceptions for one thing, yet not another. When was Vengeance tanking ever considered a valid part of the Demon Hunter concept prior to Legion? We have classes like the Rogue and Shamans who have melee capabilities but do not have Tanking, so what makes you think Demon Hunters have that in their concept as well?

The demon hunter being a singular, narrow and specific concept is not an opinion, though.

If it was singular, then it shouldn't be able to tank. Singular means one; and in depiction of both HOTS and WC3, it is specifically and fully represented by the Havoc spec. Melee DPS. That is what the Demon Hunter concept singularly is.

You have no explanation for why Vengeance is accepted into the concept beyond this.

[Ielenia]

No it doesn't. A paladin is still a holy knight if it heals, tanks, or dpses. If they had a shadow/void melee dps instead of ret that would change their concept. You aren't giving a mage leather/mail/plate so it can dps in melee they are still a magical spell caster in cloth. A mage that uses frost, fire, and arcane spells at a shorter range (melee) isn't changing the concept of the class. It's also already established they can do defensive skills like frost armor. And the same with a death knight as long as it keeps to being a necromantic/frost/blood plate user with a runeblade a ranged spec can work.

It's confusing to me how you can grasp that concept... but for some reason cannot grasp how a spellcaster or bow-wielding spec for the demon hunter would change their concept into something that it's not.

- - - Updated - - -

And why wouldn't spellcasting or bow-based gameplay?

Because demon hunters have never been depicted as spellcasters or utilizing any weapon other than warglaives save for one specific exception, AFAIK, that exists for one very specific reason.

If it was singular, then it shouldn't be able to tank.

Yes. Yes, it can. Because it still fits fully into the singular concept of the demon hunter that has been presented to us since its inception.

[Triceron]

Because demon hunters have never been depicted as spellcasters or utilizing any weapon other than warglaives save for one specific exception, AFAIK, that exists for one very specific reason.

Hearthstone has already with bow-wielding Demon Hunters.

Also, just because it was never depicted doesn't mean anything. Paladins were never depicted with Shields, Shamans never depicted with Totems. And they are not generic concepts, the Paladin is absolutely as specific as a Demon Hunter is. Remember that these were faction exclusive classes when they entered the game; a concept which was opened up to both factions over time. This shows that a concept can grow and adapt over time.

Yes. Yes, it can. Because it still fits fully into the singular concept of the demon hunter that has been presented to us since its inception.

Then so can spellcasting or ranged gameplay. They can also fit fully into the singular concept of a demon hunter that would be presented has been presented to us since its inception, considering Demon Hunters have ranged abilities in WC3. Both Mana Burn and Metamophosis are ranged. That's more than you can say for Blademasters or Paladins.


Your argument is tantamount to being 'I can accept Vengeance form and Tanking, but I can't accept Spellcasting because reasons'. Your explanation of 'concept' is no different than a vague answer of 'reasons'. You're unable to present any cohesive argument that doesn't contradict itself, considering everything you're saying doesn't exist in the Demon Hunter concept is clearly and presently there. Metamorphosis DH in WC3 doesn't use Warglaives and melee combat, so already you're full of bullshit. You haven't even regarded that the WoW Metamorphosis gameplay changes the concept that was already presented to us since its inception (WC3); a clearly RANGED, MAGICAL-BASED attack. Demon Form was never originally a melee form.

If you're talking about a concept that was presented to us from the original inception, then you can't pick and choose what you like and disregard the rest as if it isn't as important. You can say you prefer one depiction over another, but you can't make any cohesive argument to say spellcasting and ranged combat was not a part of the Demon Hunter. Even themes like summoning were not part of the original DH concept, yet here we are in Shadowlands with talents that summon demons from the Theatre of Pain. Concepts are flexible, not rigid as you're trying to argue.