Dark Ranger Customizations (Coming in 9.2.5)!!!

[pacotaco]

Dark rangers in game have hunter spells so they're not mechanically different either.

The NPCs. Nothing stops Blizzard to create a new class with a new different gameplay while lorewise, they're just a subset of hunters.
Just like warlocks are not a spec/costomization of mage, but a completely different class.

[plz delete account]

Sadly with Legion, Blizzard did lump Dark Rangers and the Farstriders in with the Hunter Order Hall, making them effectively Hunters. I never really agreed with their decision, but it's pretty much part of the lore now.

Again, a gameplay thing so that the dark rangers and farstriders, which are completely different could be shown as being in the fight against the Legion.

[Triceron]

Again, a gameplay thing so that the dark rangers and farstriders, which are completely different could be shown as being in the fight against the Legion.

So far, they are shown differently.

As racial terms for the same class, Farstrider being that for Blood Elf Hunter and Dark Ranger for Darkfallen Hunter

- - - Updated - - -

Well, not really. They are part of the same organization, but they're not necesarilly the same.
E.g.: On the Paladin Order Hall you have:
- The Silver Hand: classic paladin.
- The Blood Knights: they get the powers from the Sunwell.
- The Hand of Argus: They get the powers from the N'aaru.
- The Sunwalkers: They get the powers from An'she (the sun)
- The 2 Priest of the Moon night elves that they change to a more warrior like stance.

You can argue that the 3 first could be the same, but Sunwalkers and the Moon Paladins are just represented like paladins for mechanical pourposes, but they are presented clearly in lore as something different.

And aside from the 'Priest of the Moon', the rest are all represented by Paladins and their gameplay, and in lore are merely racial titles of the same class.

Guess how Blizzard is defining a Dark Ranger in WoW lore. They literally are using the term as a catchall for any Darkfallen Hunter.

Once they start opening up the Paladin race class combos, you will see more lore open up, and those Priests of the Moon in a 'melee stance' may become how NE Paladins are officially rolled out, rather than being some actual new class. That is generally how Blizzard does it.

If Sunwalker isn't getting its own class then the argument we present with lore 'defining them differently' doesn't matter when the end result is they're still being portrayed by an existing class' gameplay. That is the whole point here.

Also, as an added note, Sunwalkers have recently joined the ranks of the Silver Hand officially, so even if they are still using Sun magic, they are officially recognized as a part of the Paladin order as a Paladin.

[Eapoe]

Dark Rangers ARE in the game. Make a Forsaken Assassination/Sub Rogue, or a Forsaken MM Hunter and you have your Dark Ranger.

[TheramoreIsTheBomb]

Dark Rangers ARE in the game. Make a Forsaken Assassination/Sub Rogue, or a Forsaken MM Hunter and you have your Dark Ranger.

so by this logic a night elf demon hunter is a night elf rogue with warglaives and a blood elf paladin is just a blood elf priest in plate

[Kiria]

Dark Rangers ARE in the game. Make a Forsaken Assassination/Sub Rogue, or a Forsaken MM Hunter and you have your Dark Ranger.

This post is disingenuous at best.

[wowrefugee]

Dark Rangers ARE in the game. Make a Forsaken Assassination/Sub Rogue, or a Forsaken MM Hunter and you have your Dark Ranger.

This is the type of wrong, arrogant answer a Blizz senior lead would've given a few years back.

[shoc]

those aren't what dark rangers are.

Sylvanas is not a Dark Ranger is the hottest take I've seen in this thread so far

[Triceron]

Sylvanas is not a Dark Ranger is the hottest take I've seen in this thread so far

Yep, the hottest take that no one made.

[TheRevenantHero]

The NPCs. Nothing stops Blizzard to create a new class with a new different gameplay while lorewise, they're just a subset of hunters.
Just like warlocks are not a spec/costomization of mage, but a completely different class.

But there really isn't anything separating hunters and dark rangers. Warlocks are magic users who wield shadow magic and even the feel through making pacts. Theres a lot that separates images and warlocks so it's not a good comparison.

[RayenDark]

Shit, you even seem to forget that Blizzard also gave her abilities to Rogues, yet you insist on Hunter:

Edge of Night
Item Level 233
Binds when picked up
Dagger
One-Hand
Speed 1.80
66 – 111 Damage
(49.2 damage per second)
+43 Agility
+65 Stamina
Equip: Your attacks apply Banshee's Blight, giving your finishing moves a 3% chance per combo point spent to deal 1391 Shadow damage. Banshee's Blight stacks up to 4 times as the target becomes more injured. (500ms cooldown)

Blizzard has stated in the past that "Hero" characters often pull their abilities from more than one class, as in, they are not defined by just being a rogue or a hunter. Sylvanas has attributes of both, hence the dagger while also being a nod to her dual wielding swords in melee combat, which is tradition in most fantasy genres and D&D for elves. It doesn't make sense to just have a bow for your only weapon but that's more a limitation to WoW's class design then anything.

That being said, for gameplay wise- it would make most sense for it to be a class quest for the Hunter (Any spec similar to locks) then rogue. With SV being melee you get the 'rogue' side of it covered, if they were allowed to dual wield. Currently gameplay rogues do not use bows. Ranger being the key point in making it a hunter skin. Dark Rangers in lore are majority hunters that happen to carry other weapons, unlike "Modern" Hunters.

[username993720]

Classes are still a big selling feature for expansions though. And Blizzard uses them to push forward the story and settings of their upcoming expansions.

Exactly.
So, you need to know what is skin material and what is class material.

I agree.

But Blizzard seems to think Dark Rangers can fit into the Hunter class, otherwise they wouldn't have pawned off Dark Ranger abilities onto Hunter and Rogue weapons and had Dark Rangers join the Unseen Path in the lore. Again, I'm pointing out Blizzard's own actions here.

Now that you've acknowledged Rogues, what are they exactly? Because you make a Dark Ranger into just one of them. And by doing that, some aspects are lost in the process

If you listened to the interview instead of just talking about something you just assume based on descriptions, you wouldn't need to ask these questions.

I literally linked the source of the Twitter interview and timestamped it for you. If you expect the courtesy of people providing you sources and links in a discussion, least you could do is actually listen to them so you'd know it was an Official WoW Twitter interview hosted by Taliesen.

https://mobile.twitter.com/Warcraft/...05942943297537

It's absolutely shameful that you didn't even take a second to check the sources before you went off on a rant about 'youtubers'. The questions being asked were all taken from the community.

You think they'd just do 1 class skin (a feature on its own) and axe the other classes? Unlikely...

The Shaman class was only partially based on him and he became powerless, which means the class doesn't need to carry forth with any changes to his character.

Other Shamans exist in the world, and we can point at other NPCs being that example. Not every Shaman lost their powers, only Thrall.

So by the same reasoning Sylvanas losing Banshee and Domination powers would literally only be relative to her story, considering no other known Dark Ranger had those powers to begin with.

The Dark Ranger concept has become more than just Sylvanas, and Blizzard already showed this by having them split off from Sylvanas and rejoin the Horde (and yet to be Alliance)

Just like I would say DKs and DH now are well beyond just Arthas and Illidan clones. They've expanded well beyond that, and in a different direction that allows for Gnome DKs or Vengeance tanking Demon Hunters.

But, at the end of the day, they are just clones. Very poor clones. If they supposedly expanded the concept to other characters they wouldn't have dedicated 3 entire expansion to her, building up the concept using her and introducing new abilities to her. Everything Dark Ranger is dedicated to her. From WC3, to HotS, to SoD and cinematics. You'd be blind to not notice it.

Boy, Vol'jin sure got shafted then for becoming Warchief at the end of MoP then being completely absent for the entirety of WoD.

5.4, not 5.4.5.
And, he did feature in the Garrison cutscene.

You're grasping at straws for this one. There's no condition that implies they 'usually' carry over story from one expansion into the next. They sometimes do and sometimes start completely fresh.

Like how BFA totally ignored Sargeras' stabbing of Azeroth, which continues to be a meme today.

What Sword?

The whole azerite is the continuation of the sword. You literally try to heal her wound during BfA. It's after this that the sword was ignored.

The last X.5 patch usually introduces features that relate to the next expansion, like Allied races. Same would be the case for 9.2.5.

The lore for Velonara and the Dark Rangers under her is that they literally join the Unseen Path. They're not just merely present there in a supporting role, they are an active part of their organization. This is not a miscategorization. Rexxar literally did the same thing, and he is now regarded officially as a Hunter in WoW lore.

He was always a Hunter. A Beastmaster Hunter.
The same applies to the other examples i've given you. They played an active role, they were part of their class halls, but are not related to the classes mentioned.
You don't realize that they have to force some things into other ones because they have no other alternative. Like Demon Hunter abilities in the Warlock, like Blademaster abilities in the Warrior, etc etc...
Why are there no Dark Rangers in the Rogue class hall if they're Rogues too? The Edge of Night dagger makes it abundantly clear, just like the Sylvanas bow.

Not ALL hunters can commune with nature. As was pointed out already, they are canonically hunters.

Which Hunters can't?

Dark rangers in game have hunter spells so they're not mechanically different either.

Are all of them Hunter spells?
Are you aware Death Knights had Warrior and Warlock abilities before WotlK?

are mage the only people who use spells? Do Druids shamans (more Impotent two) priest pallys warlocks and DH’s not exist?

They have clear magic that they are associated with.
What magic does the Hunter use?

The aspects give them any thing from movement speed resistance to other nature magic to harder hitting arrows.

I know what they technically give. I meant in lore. What does that cause them in lore?

we have already confirmed that you don’t know any thing about bows and arrows but again better eye sight isn’t going to make your arrows hit harder if you have a poor release or poor wind speed your arrow is going to be less effective no matter how good your aim is.

The only part of a hawk that could effect the damage of an arrow would be the way it cuts through the air when it dives which when applied to an arrow would be giving your give it more speed making them punch deeper and hit harder.

So, it gives it air speed? I didn't know aspects were arrow enchants.

the change to focus was for game play reasons which is why they didn’t just copy energy and gave focus its own regen rates and mechanics.

Source?

When the change went through they didn’t remove the magical parts of hunter they just the gameplay function just like how they removed arrows and quivers at the same time.

What magical parts? Except for magically imbued arrows, i don't recall them casting any spells in lore.

Huln uses nature magic after being blessed by a wild god,

Eche'ro's Blessing — Eche'ro heals Huln.

troll hunters use magic tied to there Loa.

Shadow Hunters? Not hunters.

there are notably more hunters that use magic then there are dark rangers who use drain life or mind control the abilities you were trying to say weren’t just game play earlier.

Hunters are associated with nature magic at best due to their closeness to the wilds. Meaning, plant life magic. All others animalistic "spells" are fantasy representations of physical capabilties.

they are influenced by Feedback and that feed back is seemingly leading to them adding dark rangers as part of hunters.

Why only Hunters? Do other classes not deserve class skins as well?

well I’ll wait with baited breath for the mountain king class as that’s more likely to happen then dark rangers with Mangi and there already being recent quest about strengthening the old mountain king powers in BFA.

Not going to happen.
But, you can probably expect Dark Rangers, Wardens, Night Warriors, Blademasters, Tinkers, Shadow Hunters and Alchemists.

This is form the Rpg the Rpg is not canon dark rangers have no block to nature abilities in canon lore.

They do:
"The Forsaken's Banshee Queen, Sylvanas Windrunner, was a hunter/ranger during her lifetime and after being raised into undeath by Arthas Menethil found herself out of touch with the wilds, which was replaced by necromancy, making her a dark ranger which would later be taken up by others in the Forsaken."

Dark Rangers ARE in the game. Make a Forsaken Assassination/Sub Rogue, or a Forsaken MM Hunter and you have your Dark Ranger.

I like how there are two options for a Dark Ranger.
It's almost like it's undefined by just one class.

But there really isn't anything separating hunters and dark rangers.

There is. Shadow like magic akin to Sub Rogues.

Blizzard has stated in the past that "Hero" characters often pull their abilities from more than one class, as in, they are not defined by just being a rogue or a hunter. Sylvanas has attributes of both, hence the dagger while also being a nod to her dual wielding swords in melee combat, which is tradition in most fantasy genres and D&D for elves. It doesn't make sense to just have a bow for your only weapon but that's more a limitation to WoW's class design then anything.

That being said, for gameplay wise- it would make most sense for it to be a class quest for the Hunter (Any spec similar to locks) then rogue. With SV being melee you get the 'rogue' side of it covered, if they were allowed to dual wield. Currently gameplay rogues do not use bows. Ranger being the key point in making it a hunter skin. Dark Rangers in lore are majority hunters that happen to carry other weapons, unlike "Modern" Hunters.

Hunters do not use dark magic.
You confuse Rangers with Dark Rangers because of the similarities, but they are as distinct as Death Knights are from Knights.

[shoc]

I think Blizzard should go all-in with a bunch of race specific classes, that could be interesting in their own way.

- Goblin / Gnome Tinkers
- Orc Blademasters
- Blood Elf (Undead) Dark Rangers
- Troll Shadow Hunters
- Tauren Chieftan
- Dwarf Mountain King
- Forsaken Necromancer
- Night Elf Wardens

There could potentially be unique classes for each race, micro-classes with no specs.

[Triceron]

Exactly.
So, you need to know what is skin material and what is class material.

Yes, and Blizzard has indicated they may be representing Dark Rangers through the Hunter class. This is an intent in PTR lore, potentially in conjunction with Darkfallen.

Now that you've acknowledged Rogues, what are they exactly? Because you make a Dark Ranger into just one of them. And by doing that, some aspects are lost in the process

Then that's exactly what Blizzard would be doing. What are we actually arguing against here?

That you don't agree with it or that it isn't possible? Because I'm fine if you don't agree, just like I wouldn't agree with it. It doesn't change what Blizzard has done with pawning off Dark Ranger abilities directly to existing classes.

You think they'd just do 1 class skin (a feature on its own) and axe the other classes? Unlikely...

What other classes are you talking about? We're literally talking about just the Dark Ranger getting customizations here in this thread. This is directly related to Dark Rangers through the interviews and the PTR datamines. There is no indication for class skins for 'other classes' as far as we know right now.

I mean if you really wanna stretch it, maybe we will be getting customizations for Tinkers too if they wish to make Tinker Backpacks as part of the Profession Customizations that they showed like the Miner's gear.

But, at the end of the day, they are just clones. Very poor clones. If they supposedly expanded the concept to other characters they wouldn't have dedicated 3 entire expansion to her, building up the concept using her and introducing new abilities to her. Everything Dark Ranger is dedicated to her. From WC3, to HotS, to SoD and cinematics. You'd be blind to not notice it.

My point isn't whether it is a good concept or not. My point is we have information that points to what Blizzard may be intending to happen.

Are the planning a Dark Ranger full 3 spec class through the 9.2.5 PTR quests? Probably not, since that's a big enough feature to warrant a major announcement for, not just slipping something in through a 'minor content' patch.

The whole azerite is the continuation of the sword. You literally try to heal her wound during BfA. It's after this that the sword was ignored.

The last X.5 patch usually introduces features that relate to the next expansion, like Allied races. Same would be the case for 9.2.5.

But your argument is centered around a specific piece of lore not being carried forward. Which is exactly the same as tunnel visioning on the Sword as being necessary to connect straight into BFA.

We will have post-Shadowlands story that will lead into Dragonflight. If Darkfallen are introduced in 9.2.5, they don't have to be front and center a part of Dragonflight story, because there are other story threads that will be connected instead. Darkfallen would merely be participants in the new adventure, just like any other Alliance or Horde race.

Not all the 9.2.5 content is connected to Dragonflight. Like, what would the new 9.2.5 datamined Blood Elf and Dark Iron mounts have anything to do with Dragonflight? They don't.

Why are there no Dark Rangers in the Rogue class hall if they're Rogues too? The Edge of Night dagger makes it abundantly clear, just like the Sylvanas bow.

It doesn't because Edge of Night is not lore, and I never used Sylvanas' Bow and Quiver as a reason to say why Dark Rangers are considered Hunters. These are two separate arguments.

Dark Rangers are considered Hunters because of direct lore. They are literally part of the Unseen Path, the Hunter organization. That is lore. Whenever I bring up the Bow and Quiver, it is in direct response to your arguments that Hunters do not have access to any special Dark Ranger abilities, or that Dark Rangers have room to be their own class. If this were true then I see no reason why Blizzard, at this moment in time, would wish to pawn off their unique abilities onto Legendary and Epic weapons instead of saving them for a class which you're implying they are set to make in the future.

This is an argument for Blizzard's lack of intent on treating Dark Rangers as their own potential class, not an argument that the weapons make Rogues and Hunters into Dark Rangers.

You need to recognize the nuances in these arguments. As I said many times, Classes and Heroes are not defined by Abilities or by what Weapons they use. You can have a different opinion, but as I point out if you use Weapons or Abilities as any standard, then you are using an inconsistent argument considering Blizzard doesn't define Classes through specific weapon drops or by Heroes having certain abilities. I pointed out Thrall losing his Shaman abilities having no effect on the overall Shaman class as an example of this.

[Lorgar Aurelian]

They have clear magic that they are associated with.
What magic does the Hunter use?

some of the classes have multiple magic's, warlocks have fel, fire and shadow, shamans have elemental, nature, and spirit, and hunters have nature, shadow, and arcane.

I know what they technically give. I meant in lore. What does that cause them in lore?

in lore they either don't exist or they are wild god/loa blessings as those come closest to the effects we see from the aspects.

So, it gives it air speed? I didn't know aspects were arrow enchants.

enchating the arrow's is the only way it could work as again hawk eye's wouldn't make your arrows hit harder.

and varies aspects can effect even people around the hunter why wouldn't they be able to enchant arrows?

Source?

The same place your comment on focus came from but with the added knowledge that it works a bit differently then energy.

What magical parts? Except for magically imbued arrows, i don't recall them casting any spells in lore.

refer back to the manual quote about magic enhancing there natural ability's, refer To elf hunters, refer to the druid Claw being enthralled by a hunter in underbog, and so on.

Eche'ro's Blessing — Eche'ro heals Huln.

https://www.wowhead.com/object=245039/tales-of-the-hunt page 32 on.

Shadow Hunters? Not hunters.

no not shadow hunters the followers of Gonk and various other loa who don't use light/shadow like shadow hunter's do.

Hunters are associated with nature magic at best due to their closeness to the wilds. Meaning, plant life magic. All others animalistic "spells" are fantasy representations of physical capabilties.

Yes they do use nature magic, no there spells aren't "fantasy representations of physical capabilities" blizzard has explicitly said they use magic to enhance there abilities, again you not liking the lore doesn't make it not the lore.

Why only Hunters? Do other classes not deserve class skins as well?

to paraphrase, Blizzard can do them when it fits the story, just like the 9.2.5 stuff is fitting dark rangers.

Not going to happen.
But, you can probably expect Dark Rangers, Wardens, Night Warriors, Blademasters, Tinkers, Shadow Hunters and Alchemists.

It's more likely then dark rangers given that not only did mangi get new abilities but they added a quest line tying all dwarfs even further in mountain kings in bfa which is more then dark rangers have got.

They do:
"The Forsaken's Banshee Queen, Sylvanas Windrunner, was a hunter/ranger during her lifetime and after being raised into undeath by Arthas Menethil found herself out of touch with the wilds, which was replaced by necromancy, making her a dark ranger which would later be taken up by others in the Forsaken."

This is source less fanfic taken from RPG info, It's not canon lore.

Didn't we go over how you actually have to check wowpedia for sources and you can't take plain text with no citations as canon already?

[username993720]

Yes, and Blizzard has indicated they may be representing Dark Rangers through the Hunter class. This is an intent in PTR lore, potentially in conjunction with Darkfallen.

What, Red eyes akin to Night Warrior eyes? Barely a customization...
Full-on class skin customization? Why would they do such a feature at the end of the expansion, won't include other classes and won't continue it the next expansion?
Do you realize a race they add must fit an existing class and spec? Unless they make Dark Ranger into a 4th Hunter spec, there's no room for the Darkfallen. If you say it'd fit the supposed class skin, which spec is it? The Marksmanship, Survival or Beastmaster? I find it hard to believe that they'd repaint the whole class kit.

Then that's exactly what Blizzard would be doing. What are we actually arguing against here?

That you don't agree with it or that it isn't possible? Because I'm fine if you don't agree, just like I wouldn't agree with it. It doesn't change what Blizzard has done with pawning off Dark Ranger abilities directly to existing classes.

Again, you say classes. Plural.
Can a class skin encompass several classes?

What other classes are you talking about? We're literally talking about just the Dark Ranger getting customizations here in this thread. This is directly related to Dark Rangers through the interviews and the PTR datamines. There is no indication for class skins for 'other classes' as far as we know right now.

Then, it's a very specific feature. You know you'd be letting down players who play other classes, right? Because they won't get their customizations. Unless, we're simply talking about red eyes and not a full-fledged overhaul.

I mean if you really wanna stretch it, maybe we will be getting customizations for Tinkers too if they wish to make Tinker Backpacks as part of the Profession Customizations that they showed like the Miner's gear.

A backpack is supposed to represent an entire class? At this point you're talking minor customizations, like quiver.
If that's what this discussion is about, there's no need to continue it because it's not that of a big deal and surely not meant to replace the real thing.

My point isn't whether it is a good concept or not. My point is we have information that points to what Blizzard may be intending to happen.

Are the planning a Dark Ranger full 3 spec class through the 9.2.5 PTR quests? Probably not, since that's a big enough feature to warrant a major announcement for, not just slipping something in through a 'minor content' patch.

Then, what is it exactly? Simply red eyes? Purple-colored arrows? Because you seem to imply it's a half-assed feature. If they can't dedicate entirely into it, is it really a Dark Ranger?

But your argument is centered around a specific piece of lore not being carried forward. Which is exactly the same as tunnel visioning on the Sword as being necessary to connect straight into BFA.

We will have post-Shadowlands story that will lead into Dragonflight. If Darkfallen are introduced in 9.2.5, they don't have to be front and center a part of Dragonflight story, because there are other story threads that will be connected instead. Darkfallen would merely be participants in the new adventure, just like any other Alliance or Horde race.

Not all the 9.2.5 content is connected to Dragonflight. Like, what would the new 9.2.5 datamined Blood Elf and Dark Iron mounts have anything to do with Dragonflight? They don't.

Were allied races introduced in Legion not integrated into BfA story?

It doesn't because Edge of Night is not lore, and I never used Sylvanas' Bow and Quiver as a reason to say why Dark Rangers are considered Hunters. These are two separate arguments.

It isn't? Aren't these Sylvanas' daggers? The Daggers of the main Dark Ranger character? You see now how they pawn off themes to what is available since Hunters can no longer dual wield daggers.

Dark Rangers are considered Hunters because of direct lore. They are literally part of the Unseen Path, the Hunter organization. That is lore. Whenever I bring up the Bow and Quiver, it is in direct response to your arguments that Hunters do not have access to any special Dark Ranger abilities, or that Dark Rangers have room to be their own class. If this were true then I see no reason why Blizzard, at this moment in time, would wish to pawn off their unique abilities onto Legendary and Epic weapons instead of saving them for a class which you're implying they are set to make in the future.

I've already showed you NPCs that are part of a class hall that do not match the class represented, yet you keep using it as the main argument.

Why would they give a legendary bow abilities that are associated with a major character for us the players to use? Jeez, i wonder why... it's not like they want players to enjoy what they've earned through RP:
https://wowpedia.fandom.com/wiki/Warglaive_of_Azzinoth
https://wowpedia.fandom.com/wiki/Tho..._Stars%27_Fury
https://wowpedia.fandom.com/wiki/Shadowmourne
https://wowpedia.fandom.com/wiki/Ati...uardian_(mage)

This is an argument for Blizzard's lack of intent on treating Dark Rangers as their own potential class, not an argument that the weapons make Rogues and Hunters into Dark Rangers.

There is no difference. This is exactly what you're implying. Just wield her bow and you're a Dark Ranger. They'll continue to add more Dark Ranger abilities in the future so you can feel as one. This is just the start.

You need to recognize the nuances in these arguments. As I said many times, Classes and Heroes are not defined by Abilities or by what Weapons they use. You can have a different opinion, but as I point out if you use Weapons or Abilities as any standard, then you are using an inconsistent argument considering Blizzard doesn't define Classes through specific weapon drops or by Heroes having certain abilities. I pointed out Thrall losing his Shaman abilities having no effect on the overall Shaman class as an example of this.

Why would Thrall losing his abilities affect the Shaman class? It's already established.
Same as with Dark Ranger, they've already built the concept up through Sylvanas' appearances last 3 expansion, so even if she lost her capabilities, it would still be based on her prime era, when she exhibited new and unqiue Dark Ranger abilities.

some of the classes have multiple magic's, warlocks have fel, fire and shadow, shamans have elemental, nature, and spirit, and hunters have nature, shadow, and arcane.

Fel is both fire and Shadow. Nature is part of the elemental and spirit isn't represented in-game yet.
Hunters, at most, have enchanted arrows, which again relates to elves. They are by no means a magical class.

in lore they either don't exist or they are wild god/loa blessings as those come closest to the effects we see from the aspects.

I would have agreed with you if the abilities' names had a connection to a specific Wild God. But, they don't. They take on the powers of a certain animal to enhance their capabilities. You'd call that mystical in real-life. In game, it is just the animalistic power of Hunters.

enchating the arrow's is the only way it could work as again hawk eye's wouldn't make your arrows hit harder.

and varies aspects can effect even people around the hunter why wouldn't they be able to enchant arrows?

That's where your error comes from. Aspects aren't arrow enchants. If they were, they'd specifically say "enchant you arrow with....". Most times it's a magic school, like Arcane, Fire or Frost.
https://wowpedia.fandom.com/wiki/Exotic_Munitions

Aspects enhance the Hunter, not their quiver.

The same place your comment on focus came from but with the added knowledge that it works a bit differently then energy.

Not a reliable source.
Why do you think it is called "Focus". By chance?

refer back to the manual quote about magic enhancing there natural ability's, refer To elf hunters, refer to the druid Claw being enthralled by a hunter in underbog, and so on.

Yes, elves are known to enchant their arrows or use Nature magic akin to Druids.
The domain over Beasts is a well known aspect of the Hunter. Not magical.

https://www.wowhead.com/object=245039/tales-of-the-hunt page 32 on.

Yes, a weapon blessed by a Wild God.

no not shadow hunters the followers of Gonk and various other loa who don't use light/shadow like shadow hunter's do.

Followers of Gonk are Druids. I don't know what you mean at this point.

Yes they do use nature magic, no there spells aren't "fantasy representations of physical capabilities" blizzard has explicitly said they use magic to enhance there abilities, again you not liking the lore doesn't make it not the lore.

What magic would you categorize a Hunter becoming animalistic?

to paraphrase, Blizzard can do them when it fits the story, just like the 9.2.5 stuff is fitting dark rangers.

So, they'll be splitting class skins? And Hunters deserve to be the first? Weird, haven't heard it being announced... less so being rationed.

It's more likely then dark rangers given that not only did mangi get new abilities but they added a quest line tying all dwarfs even further in mountain kings in bfa which is more then dark rangers have got.

You mean turning into a diamond?
Are you talking about their heritage armor questline?

This is source less fanfic taken from RPG info, It's not canon lore.

Didn't we go over how you actually have to check wowpedia for sources and you can't take plain text with no citations as canon already?

Oh, i'm sorry. Forgot Sylvanas and the other Dark Rangers use nature magic. How foolish of me. Though, can i get an example of such please? I can't seem to recall any ocassion when they did.

[Triceron]

What, Red eyes akin to Night Warrior eyes? Barely a customization...
Full-on class skin customization? Why would they do such a feature at the end of the expansion, won't include other classes and won't continue it the next expansion?
Do you realize a race they add must fit an existing class and spec? Unless they make Dark Ranger into a 4th Hunter spec, there's no room for the Darkfallen. If you say it'd fit the supposed class skin, which spec is it? The Marksmanship, Survival or Beastmaster? I find it hard to believe that they'd repaint the whole class kit.

Why is there no room for Darkfallen?

They literally added Mech Pets specifically for Gnome and Goblin Hunter customizations, when they opened up the Race/Class combo in Cataclysm. The only difference is there was no specific known title for a Gnome or Goblin Hunter like there is for a Darkfallen Hunter who uses Dark magic. All they need to do is provide the Dark magic customizations.

If you find it hard to believe, then sure I would say I agree. They've never run the full gamut of representing an entirely different class through customizations, so this would be a first if it were to happen.

The closest has always been Demon Hunters, and Warlocks got pretty darn close to absorbing its entire identity. I mean, Glyph of Demon Hunting was even designed as a Melee spec that actually changed Warlock abilities into Demon Hunter ones, like Shadow Bolt into Demonic Slash or Hellfire into Immolation Aura. And the most damning part about it all is they actually supported this in the lore with the Green Fire quest officially having Warlocks learn this directly from mimicing Illidan's techniques. Literally the only missing ingredients were the ritual tattooes, the ability to use Warglaives and an official 'Demon Hunter' title to go with.

Again, you say classes. Plural.
Can a class skin encompass several classes?

Yes, it can, and Blizzard has done this with customizations before.

Verdant Spheres appear on both Mage and Warlock. You would associate these customization attributes to Blood Mage, wouldn't you?

Warlocks had Glyph of Verdant Sphere, while Mages obtained it as a visual customization through Felo'melorn.

https://static.wikia.nocookie.net/wo...nt_Spheres.jpg
https://static.wikia.nocookie.net/wo...rn_Spheres.jpg

Then, it's a very specific feature. You know you'd be letting down players who play other classes, right? Because they won't get their customizations. Unless, we're simply talking about red eyes and not a full-fledged overhaul.

I'm talking about whatever Blizzard decides to give us, and how they treat the lore moving forward.

Again, my example with how Blizzard treats lore is literally exemplified with Wildhammers being a customization option for existing Races. They can absolutely do the same with Classes, and they have already been doing it mostly with new lore titles like 'Harvest Witch' or 'Sunwalker'.

And Blood Elf Hunters are officially Farstriders in the lore. The Blood Elf Rangers which you keep touting as being a non-playable class are actually Hunters in the lore.

In the same way player blood elf paladins were considered part of the Blood Knights through their class quests, player blood elf hunters were considered part of the Farstriders,[23] but received comparatively few quests to emphasize this affiliation.

A backpack is supposed to represent an entire class? At this point you're talking minor customizations, like quiver.
If that's what this discussion is about, there's no need to continue it because it's not that of a big deal and surely not meant to replace the real thing.

It depends on how Blizzard feels about official Tinker representation, and whether they would save it for a Class or merely add in more representation through Engineering and make it officially an aspect of the Profession; as they already do with the lore literally regarding Tinkers as a synonym for Engineer. Right now, the lore for 'Tinker' seems to be the Goblin, Dwarf and Gnome specific term for a type of Engineer.

Then, what is it exactly? Simply red eyes? Purple-colored arrows? Because you seem to imply it's a half-assed feature. If they can't dedicate entirely into it, is it really a Dark Ranger?

We'll have to wait for 9.2.5 to know, won't we?

Were allied races introduced in Legion not integrated into BfA story?

Allied Races never existed before Legion, so you can't exactly point at something that's only ever appeared once as being a 'usual' reoccurance.

It isn't? Aren't these Sylvanas' daggers? The Daggers of the main Dark Ranger character? You see now how they pawn off themes to what is available since Hunters can no longer dual wield daggers.

Yet Dark Rangers aren't defined by dual wield dagger combat. You're literally just pointing at how Hunters aren't Sylvanas.

There is no other Dark Ranger that uses Banshee abilities or Charm either, so what's the difference here? We're circling the arguments yet again. You're not talking about wanting to play as a Dark Ranger, you're talking about wanting to specifically play as Sylvanas.

I've already showed you NPCs that are part of a class hall that do not match the class represented, yet you keep using it as the main argument.

Except those NPCs were not fully integrated into the class hall order, while the Hunter ones are.

Velonara and her Dark Rangers pledged themselves to the Unseen Path, as did the Farstriders, as did Rexxar. Rexxar and the Farstriders are already recognized formally as Hunters in the lore. Dark Rangers have yet to be officially recognized as Hunters, considering there is no playable variant to support this, and they don't have any specific lore that regards them as Hunters, yet. With Farstriders and Rexxar, we do.

Why would they give a legendary bow abilities that are associated with a major character for us the players to use? Jeez, i wonder why... it's not like they want players to enjoy what they've earned through RP:
https://wowpedia.fandom.com/wiki/Warglaive_of_Azzinoth
https://wowpedia.fandom.com/wiki/Tho..._Stars%27_Fury
https://wowpedia.fandom.com/wiki/Shadowmourne
https://wowpedia.fandom.com/wiki/Ati...uardian_(mage)

Yes, and in every one of these cases, they didn't intend to make a new Class out of the abilities they granted out. Mages and DK's already existed when they made Atiesh and Shadowmourne. Warglaive of Azzinoth was literally done during a time when they had zero intent to make a Demon Hunter into its own class, which was further exemplified with Warlock gaining their iconic ability. The intent is what is important to note.

If Xelnath had his way, we would likely never have a self contained Demon Hunter class made. In terms of how WoW is right now, there doesn't seem to be anyone vouching for a Dark Ranger standalone class, considering Shadowlands would have been the best time to unveil it and yet that time has come and gone.

If I ask you what other expansion Dark Rangers could be added into, what would you suggest?

There is no difference. This is exactly what you're implying. Just wield her bow and you're a Dark Ranger. They'll continue to add more Dark Ranger abilities in the future so you can feel as one. This is just the start.

Yes, and it can be done purely through cosmetics and, if they're willing, unique Talent options. I'm very much hoping that with the new Talents revamp, they can leave room to expand things into more niche concepts, rather than strictly based on 'Spec' or 'Class'. Like adding options in the future to also tap into 'Racial' or 'Hero' Talents that would open up even more varied customization. You want your Tauren to be able to wield Totems as a 2H weapon? Pick the 'Tauren Racial Talent' that allows you to do so.

This could allow multiple classes to share the same 'Hero' concepts, like Forsaken and Darkfallen Rogues and Hunters both having access to a Dark Ranger Hero talents that open up new abilities, or a Night Elf Priest and Hunter could have access to Priestess of the Moon Hero Talents.

That's how I'd personally would like the gameplay to be handled.

Why would Thrall losing his abilities affect the Shaman class? It's already established.
Same as with Dark Ranger, they've already built the concept up through Sylvanas' appearances last 3 expansion, so even if she lost her capabilities, it would still be based on her prime era, when she exhibited new and unqiue Dark Ranger abilities.

Because you equated a Class having to be based on a Hero. If your argument is Shaman is based on a Hero for their abilities, then Thrall is that hero. And if Thrall loses his Shamanism, you're implying that so would the class.

And I've argued that the Player Class Mechanics are disconnected from individual Heroes. Dark Rangers don't have to be based solely on Sylvanas when they already exist in the lore and Blizzard has already tied their description as literally Darkfallen Hunters.

[Ghanir]

I reckon Blizz is deliberately holding off from adding Dark Rangers since it's like a sub-section of the Hunter fantasy. This however could mean that it could become a 4th spec, but that comes with its own problem.

If Undead Humans and Undead NE can become Dark Rangers then the Trolls would want their Shadow Hunters. This clashes with one another since both of them are a sub-section of hunters, while being similar still have very distinct differences that a lot of people would be upset about if they ignored.

So now we have Hunters and potential Dark Rangers and Shadow Hunters hailing from three different races. What about the other races hunters and their potential sub-section of hunters?


As you can see this idea opens up a massive can of worms, so to say, since this only applies to one specific race. What if we started demanding this for more classes and their sub-sections than just hunters?
And for those that say that Blizz should open up this, and other, sub-sections of classes you need to take a step back and consider the gravity of your request. In due time they perhaps will add one or a few of them, but this request is akin to asking for a new class which is a monumental undertaking and we know how slowly Blizz has been with introducing new classes to WoW.

[Triceron]

I reckon Blizz is deliberately holding off from adding Dark Rangers since it's like a sub-section of the Hunter fantasy. This however could mean that it could become a 4th spec, but that comes with its own problem.

If Undead Humans and Undead NE can become Dark Rangers then the Trolls would want their Shadow Hunters. This clashes with one another since both of them are a sub-section of hunters, while being similar still have very distinct differences that a lot of people would be upset about if they ignored.

So now we have Hunters and potential Dark Rangers and Shadow Hunters hailing from three different races. What about the other races hunters and their potential sub-section of hunters?


As you can see this idea opens up a massive can of worms, so to say, since this only applies to one specific race. What if we started demanding this for more classes and their sub-sections than just hunters?
And for those that say that Blizz should open up this, and other, sub-sections of classes you need to take a step back and consider the gravity of your request. In due time they perhaps will add one or a few of them, but this request is akin to asking for a new class which is a monumental undertaking and we know how slowly Blizz has been with introducing new classes to WoW.

I doubt they would go with 4th spec, because Dark Ranger is still very much tied to certain races. It makes no sense to suddenly open that up to every possible living race in the game, especially if their goal is to eventually have all race/class comboes accessible.

Being a specific customization makes more sense since it can be exclusively for Forsaken or Darkfallen, and you don't get the weirdness of having Gnome and Tauren Dark Rangers.

As a racial customization, it would absolutely leave plenty of room for Troll Shadow Hunters.

[username993720]

Why is there no room for Darkfallen?

They literally added Mech Pets specifically for Gnome and Goblin Hunter customizations, when they opened up the Race/Class combo in Cataclysm. The only difference is there was no specific known title for a Gnome or Goblin Hunter like there is for a Darkfallen Hunter who uses Dark magic. All they need to do is provide the Dark magic customizations.

Doesn't make it a Tinker, does it?

If you find it hard to believe, then sure I would say I agree. They've never run the full gamut of representing an entirely different class through customizations, so this would be a first if it were to happen.

How forturnate that Dark Rangers get to be the first Guinea Pigs, right?

The closest has always been Demon Hunters, and Warlocks got pretty darn close to absorbing its entire identity. I mean, Glyph of Demon Hunting was even designed as a Melee spec that actually changed Warlock abilities into Demon Hunter ones, like Shadow Bolt into Demonic Slash or Hellfire into Immolation Aura. And the most damning part about it all is they actually supported this in the lore with the Green Fire quest officially having Warlocks learn this directly from mimicing Illidan's techniques. Literally the only missing ingredients were the ritual tattooes, the ability to use Warglaives and an official 'Demon Hunter' title to go with.

And it didn't last, did it?
Because no matter how much you force a square into a circle, it's not going to fit.

Yes, it can, and Blizzard has done this with customizations before.

Verdant Spheres appear on both Mage and Warlock. You would associate these customization attributes to Blood Mage, wouldn't you?

Warlocks had Glyph of Verdant Sphere, while Mages obtained it as a visual customization through Felo'melorn.

https://static.wikia.nocookie.net/wo...nt_Spheres.jpg
https://static.wikia.nocookie.net/wo...rn_Spheres.jpg

So, i should expect both Rogues and Hunters getting Dark Ranger customizations?

I'm talking about whatever Blizzard decides to give us, and how they treat the lore moving forward.

Again, my example with how Blizzard treats lore is literally exemplified with Wildhammers being a customization option for existing Races. They can absolutely do the same with Classes, and they have already been doing it mostly with new lore titles like 'Harvest Witch' or 'Sunwalker'.

Harvest-Witches and Sunwalkers were always Druids and Paladins. Do you have any abilities to differentiate them from these classes?

And Blood Elf Hunters are officially Farstriders in the lore. The Blood Elf Rangers which you keep touting as being a non-playable class are actually Hunters in the lore.

In the same way player blood elf paladins were considered part of the Blood Knights through their class quests, player blood elf hunters were considered part of the Farstriders,[23] but received comparatively few quests to emphasize this affiliation.

Never said Farstriders are not Hunters. elven Rangers are in touch with the wilds, which is represented through the Hunter class. Again, this is where your confusion comes from. Rangers and Dark Rangers are not the same being. It's like saying Knights and Death Knights are as one. While Rangers retain their connection with the wilds, Dark Rangers have been cut off from it and have developed a new set of abilities. You could have saved us so much if you knew it from the beginning.

It depends on how Blizzard feels about official Tinker representation, and whether they would save it for a Class or merely add in more representation through Engineering and make it officially an aspect of the Profession; as they already do with the lore literally regarding Tinkers as a synonym for Engineer. Right now, the lore for 'Tinker' seems to be the Goblin, Dwarf and Gnome specific term for a type of Engineer.

As much as i like to throw this in Teriz's face, the profession can't really represent the Tinker. It's as much a Warlock roleplaying a Demon Hunter.

We'll have to wait for 9.2.5 to know, won't we?

I guess we will.

Allied Races never existed before Legion, so you can't exactly point at something that's only ever appeared once as being a 'usual' reoccurance.

Well, BfA didn't have a 8.3.5, so we don't have much to go on. What can a last X.5 add other than features relating to the next expansion? It's already the end of the expansion, there's no reason to fix things relating to the expansion.

Yet Dark Rangers aren't defined by dual wield dagger combat. You're literally just pointing at how Hunters aren't Sylvanas.

There is no other Dark Ranger that uses Banshee abilities or Charm either, so what's the difference here? We're circling the arguments yet again. You're not talking about wanting to play as a Dark Ranger, you're talking about wanting to specifically play as Sylvanas.

How many Dark Rangers dual-wield daggers\swords? Lots.
And, if you've seen Reckoning, it's definitely part of their toolkit.

Except those NPCs were not fully integrated into the class hall order, while the Hunter ones are.

What? What do you mean? They're there. They play a role. They are considered the class. You're just cherrypicking at this point.

Velonara and her Dark Rangers pledged themselves to the Unseen Path, as did the Farstriders, as did Rexxar. Rexxar and the Farstriders are already recognized formally as Hunters in the lore. Dark Rangers have yet to be officially recognized as Hunters, considering there is no playable variant to support this, and they don't have any specific lore that regards them as Hunters, yet. With Farstriders and Rexxar, we do.

Why are you telling me that? I already know this. Rexxar is a Beastmaster. Farstriders are Rangers.
Glad you admit Dark Rangers are not officially Hunters. With this, we can end the conversation, honestly.

Yes, and in every one of these cases, they didn't intend to make a new Class out of the abilities they granted out. Mages and DK's already existed when they made Atiesh and Shadowmourne. Warglaive of Azzinoth was literally done during a time when they had zero intent to make a Demon Hunter into its own class, which was further exemplified with Warlock gaining their iconic ability. The intent is what is important to note.

They had plans to make Demon Hunters in TBC.
Shows you just how temporary items and abilities like these are supposed to fulfill the fantasy, for the meantime.

If Xelnath had his way, we would likely never have a self contained Demon Hunter class made. In terms of how WoW is right now, there doesn't seem to be anyone vouching for a Dark Ranger standalone class, considering Shadowlands would have been the best time to unveil it and yet that time has come and gone.

Come on... even the Blizzard devs know this is wrong. They let him have his fun and that's it. At some point, the Demon Hunter was going to show up because it was planned as far back as TBC - before Warlocks got their abilities (in wrath).

If I ask you what other expansion Dark Rangers could be added into, what would you suggest?

An elven one? Considering it would probably not come alone.

Yes, and it can be done purely through cosmetics and, if they're willing, unique Talent options. I'm very much hoping that with the new Talents revamp, they can leave room to expand things into more niche concepts, rather than strictly based on 'Spec' or 'Class'. Like adding options in the future to also tap into 'Racial' or 'Hero' Talents that would open up even more varied customization. You want your Tauren to be able to wield Totems as a 2H weapon? Pick the 'Tauren Racial Talent' that allows you to do so.

Where will this end? Will the talent tree be full of talents that are meant to represent other classes? Think of all the archetypes the Priest is supposed to fill: Priestesses of the Moon, Seers, Witch Doctors, Medics, Tidesages, etc etc... each and every one of them gets at least 4-5 talents for representation purposes. How much talents does that leave you for the general Priest class?

This could allow multiple classes to share the same 'Hero' concepts, like Forsaken and Darkfallen Rogues and Hunters both having access to a Dark Ranger Hero talents that open up new abilities, or a Night Elf Priest and Hunter could have access to Priestess of the Moon Hero Talents.

Weapons are not a problem. Could literally be a transmog option.

That's how I'd personally would like the gameplay to be handled.

Basically, you don't want any more classes.

Because you equated a Class having to be based on a Hero. If your argument is Shaman is based on a Hero for their abilities, then Thrall is that hero. And if Thrall loses his Shamanism, you're implying that so would the class.

They are.
Think of how silly what you just said:
The Lich King literally disintergrated into oblivion, yet we still have playable Death Knights. Are Death Knights not based on the Lich King?

And I've argued that the Player Class Mechanics are disconnected from individual Heroes. Dark Rangers don't have to be based solely on Sylvanas when they already exist in the lore and Blizzard has already tied their description as literally Darkfallen Hunters.

Scroll up. You literally said Dark Rangers aren't officially hunters a few comments ago. Now you say that they are? Make up you mind.

Dark Rangers have to be based on Sylvanas, just like any other class was based on a major character. Stop living in denial. Simple and non-unique NPCs are never a foundation for a class. never.

If Undead Humans and Undead NE can become Dark Rangers then the Trolls would want their Shadow Hunters. This clashes with one another since both of them are a sub-section of hunters, while being similar still have very distinct differences that a lot of people would be upset about if they ignored.

Shadow Hunters are not a subset of Hunters.
That's like saying Demon Hunters are.

I doubt they would go with 4th spec, because Dark Ranger is still very much tied to certain races. It makes no sense to suddenly open that up to every possible living race in the game, especially if their goal is to eventually have all race/class comboes accessible.

Being a specific customization makes more sense since it can be exclusively for Forsaken or Darkfallen, and you don't get the weirdness of having Gnome and Tauren Dark Rangers.

As a racial customization, it would absolutely leave plenty of room for Troll Shadow Hunters.

So, Forsaken and Darkfallen are the only ones to enjoy the feature? Seems fair.
Not to mention all the other classes getting barred from getting their own customizations...

A class, on the other hand, would not only potentially encompass more races but would also represent it much better.