The apparent formula for new classes in WoW

[melodramocracy]

There was another class that could handle Necromancy?

Uhhh... yes, easily?

This game has only a few major areas of player capacity:

Physical damage (ex: warriors, rogues, hunters)
Light magic (ex: monks, priests, paladins)
Dark / fel magic (ex: shad priest, lock, dk, dh)
Nature / ele magic (ex: druid, shaman, mage, upcoming evoker)

It'd be a more interesting game to have fewer classes and more spec variety rather than the often non-sensical overlaps and now two (and counting) 2-spec only, arguably unfulfilled classes that this game offers up. At this stage it won't ever happen for a ton of reasons, but eh.

[Ielenia]

You were talking about what WoW players consume or purchase. Again, that’s irrelevant because we’re talking about the entire WC franchise which includes WC RTS, WC comics and novels, HS, WoW CCG, WC TTRPG, HotS, etc. not ONLY WoW.

Except that's the point! The average player base does exactly that: "plays only WoW". They don't really partake on the other Warcraft media such as the comics and especially the books.

It basically means that Blizzard was specifically waiting for an appropriate expansion to release DHs, and Legion with the Broken Isles fit the bill.

Again: that in no way, shape or form supports your argument, that the Broken Isles is "related to demon hunters". As someone else in this thread said: any territory that the demons chose to invade would be a fit to introduce demon hunters.

I think Blizzard made it quite clear that Warlocks are a demonic-based class, not a Necromancer-based class.

"I think Blizzard made it quite clear that the demonology warlock spec are a summoner spec-- ops, now it's a 'turn-into-a-demon' spec."
"I think Blizzard made it quite clear that the survival hunter spec is a ranged spec-- ops, now it's a melee spec."
"I think Blizzard made it quite clear that classes can only have three specs-- ops, now classes can have as much as four and as little as three specs."
Not to mention that warlocks already had some necromantic spells in the form of drain soul and haunt. And by your logic, having one spell of a given type, means the entire concept 'fits' in that class. After all, that was your argument regarding "song magic" and priests because they have Hymn.

Those aren’t new landmasses.

"Opening a portal anywhere on Azeroth" also implies new landmasses, but that's irrelevant: any landmass that the demons decide to use as their staging grounds, regardless if it's new or old, would be a good fit for demon hunters.

[Teriz]

Someone already pointed out your issue. You think that because Demon hunters and Broken Isles are related to the Legion, that Demon hunters and the Broken Isles are also connected. That's not how it works. The Broken Isles have no significance to Demon Hunters other than there were Demons there. Demons are gone, so are the Hunters. They have no actual connection to the land, unlike Monks, DKs, and Evokers.

The Broken Isles had significance to Demon Hunters because it was the location of the Burning Legion invasion. The story backs that up, since the DHs were freed to deal with the demons pouring through the portal.

Drathyr aren't the traditional dragons we've always had. It's a perfect example of Blizzard going outside both the MOBA and RTS to make something we haven't had before.

Again, they're only like that because of technical limitations. Dracthyr are simply an expansion of the well-established lore of Black Dragons attempting to create artificial (Chromatic) drakes. They didn't go outside of a MOBA since the class' abilities are being pulled from a MOBA.

- - - Updated - - -

Immaterial.

So you're saying that Chris Metzen was lying when he said that Pandaren were the most requested WoW race?

- - - Updated - - -

Except that's the point! The average player base does exactly that: "plays only WoW". They don't really partake on the other Warcraft media such as the comics and especially the books.

You have evidence to back that claim up?

Again: that in no way, shape or form supports your argument, that the Broken Isles is "related to demon hunters". As someone else in this thread said: any territory that the demons chose to invade would be a fit to introduce demon hunters.

And again, "any territory" didn't house the Tomb of Sargeras which has connections to Illidan.

"I think Blizzard made it quite clear that the demonology warlock spec are a summoner spec-- ops, now it's a 'turn-into-a-demon' spec."

Please point out a time in the history of WoW where Warlocks didn't revolve around demons.

And by your logic, having one spell of a given type, means the entire concept 'fits' in that class. After all, that was your argument regarding "song magic" and priests because they have Hymn.

Actually, Priests had two hymns at that time.

"Opening a portal anywhere on Azeroth" also implies new landmasses, but that's irrelevant: any landmass that the demons decide to use as their staging grounds, regardless if it's new or old, would be a good fit for demon hunters.

Again, "any" landmass didn't house the tomb of Sargeras.

[Niwes]

So after the Evoker, it appears that this is required for new WoW expansion classes;

1. A major lore figure to tie into. Death Knights have Arthas, Monks have Chen, Demon Hunters have Illidan, and it appears that Evokers have Alexstraza.

2. A playable version in MOBA/RTS format. Blizzard seems to favor players getting a preview of future class mechanics via their MOBA/RTS games. When the new class releases, the pull abilities and mechanics from those games.

3. A landmass that thematically connects to the new class. DKs had Northrend, Monks had Pandaria, Demon Hunters had Broken Isles, Evokers have Dragon Isles. The next class will likely also have a landmass that matches its theme.

4. Abilities that don't fit in existing classes. The expansion classes house abilities that simply wouldn't work with classes that existed at the time.

Obviously, none of this is set in stone, and Blizzard can do whatever they want, but at this point this appears to be the keys for future class implementation. If you look at the recent DR implementation, they seem to fail at #3 and 4, which partially explains why they weren't implemented.

by that logic we should have Tinker class since 8.2 (mechagnome BfA patch)

[Ielenia]

You have evidence to back that claim up?

Really? That's your tactic now? The average casual player doesn't go around buying "everything Warcraft" and keeping up-to-date in all the lore written in physical books and comic shops. They're there to play the game.

Also, just to further correct you: Chen was added to HotS two years AFTER the release of MoP (2014 - HotS; 2012 - MoP)

And again, "any territory" didn't house the Tomb of Sargeras which has connections to Illidan.

It's irrelevant. Because the tomb of Sargeras is not required for the addition of the demon hunter class. Again, any landmass the demons decided to use as their landfall would be fitting for the inclusion of the demon hunter class. That is a fact you cannot escape.

Please point out a time in the history of WoW where Warlocks didn't revolve around demons.

Warlocks had a spell called "death coil" which originally belonged to the death knight. Warlocks also had necromantic spells such as drain soul, haunt and soulwell. Expanding on that concept is easy. After all, I'll remind you again: that was your argument regarding "song spells" and priests.

Actually, Priests had two hymns at that time.

Which changes nothing in the argument. How about you try addressing it?

[Teriz]

by that logic we should have Tinker class since 8.2 (mechagnome BfA patch)

Mechagon wasn’t the key landmass of that expansion. Mechagon wasn’t even a continent, it was just a zone. The main landmasses in BFA were Kul’Tiras and Zandalar.

Further, Blizzard wouldn’t release a class midway through an expansion. And a Tinker was not the main character of that expansion. Look at the cover art, a Tinker is nowhere to be found.

- - - Updated - - -

Really? That's your tactic now? The average casual player doesn't go around buying "everything Warcraft" and keeping up-to-date in all the lore written in physical books and comic shops. They're there to play the game.

Again, where’s your evidence for this claim?

Also, just to further correct you: Chen was added to HotS two years AFTER the release of MoP (2014 - HotS; 2012 - MoP)

That wasn’t my point. My point is that Warcraft encompasses more than just WoW, and WC fans experience the franchise in more places than only WoW. Thus, franchise characters gain popularity outside of the MMO, and Blizzard begins placing aspects of that character into WoW. While HotS doesn’t apply to WC fans in the case of Chen, it applies in the case of Illidan and Alexstraza.

Also a prime example of this is the Explorer’s League gaining popularity in Hearthstone, and then being implemented into WoW.

It's irrelevant. Because the tomb of Sargeras is not required for the addition of the demon hunter class.

I never said it was a requirement. I said that Blizzard waited for a demon-based expansion to release the DH class. Legion was that expansion, and they tied DHs thematically to the Broken Isles.

Warlocks had a spell called "death coil" which originally belonged to the death knight.

It wasn’t the same spell as the DK spell.

Warlocks also had necromantic spells such as drain soul, haunt and soulwell.

Yet they never raised the undead. That’s the key component of necromancy, and why the bulk of DK abilities wouldn’t fit in the Warlock class. Also they’re not heavy-armored melee.

Expanding on that concept is easy. After all, I'll remind you again: that was your argument regarding "song spells" and priests.

The difference between Bards and DKs is that we had a major lore character with unique abilities that defined what a DK was going to be. We also had a potential landmass (Northrend), as well as the other ingredients.

We don’t have that with Bards. We have nothing that defines that concept in Warcraft, and that makes my statement in regards to Priest spells perfectly valid.

[Kiria]

Honestly, I think Evoker will be the very last actual class to be added, there's a reason for this.

People seem to be happy with the compromises, most future class idea's may get the same treatment as the Dark Ranger which involves the least amount of work for Blizz but a payout of happy customer's.

I can see all other class ideas going this way, a skin or 2 a transmog and if you're lucky a talent to an already existing class.

[Teriz]

Honestly, I think Evoker will be the very last actual class to be added, there's a reason for this.

People seem to be happy with the compromises, most future class idea's may get the same treatment as the Dark Ranger which involves the least amount of work for Blizz but a payout of happy customer's.

I can see all other class ideas going this way, a skin or 2 a transmog and if you're lucky a talent to an already existing class.

Admittedly, the Evoker implementation (2 specs), and Dark Rangers being a customization option are definitely bad signs for future classes and the possibility of 4th specs.

That said, Dark Rangers were being pushed towards being a Hunter customization for a long time. I told you this was going to happen months ago, and you angrily rejected it each time.

Also nice name change.

[Kiria]

Admittedly, the Evoker implementation (2 specs), and Dark Rangers being a customization option are definitely bad signs for future classes and the possibility of 4th specs.

That said, Dark Rangers were being pushed towards being a Hunter customization for a long time. I told you this was going to happen months ago, and you angrily rejected it each time.

Also nice name change.

Thank you on the name compliment <3

Yeah I completely agree with you and it was dumb as we could all see it was the way things are going, Blizz might start making the game teeter off over the next few years by the looks of it as they no longer have the pull they used to.

It saddens me they're just bastardizing future class ideas but what else could we expect.

[Swnem]

cries, in demonology warlock

Yeah, that one doesn't fit evokers either. Time magic, fire magic, etc. These are things current classes already do.

- - - Updated - - -

Honestly, I think Evoker will be the very last actual class to be added, there's a reason for this.

People seem to be happy with the compromises, most future class idea's may get the same treatment as the Dark Ranger which involves the least amount of work for Blizz but a payout of happy customer's.

I can see all other class ideas going this way, a skin or 2 a transmog and if you're lucky a talent to an already existing class.

The idea that they will stop adding classes is ludicrous. New classes are new ways to experience the game. Not adding more would be paramount to not let the game grow anymore.
The point of mmo services is to keep expanding the game.

[Teriz]

Yeah, that one doesn't fit evokers either. Time magic, fire magic, etc. These are things current classes already do.

A dragon breathing fire is fundamentally different than a mage casting a fire spell or Monks drinking alcohol and spitting fire from their mouths.

[Kiria]

Yeah, that one doesn't fit evokers either. Time magic, fire magic, etc. These are things current classes already do.

- - - Updated - - -



The idea that they will stop adding classes is ludicrous. New classes are new ways to experience the game. Not adding more would be paramount to not let the game grow anymore.
The point of mmo services is to keep expanding the game.

Is it ludicrous tho? I mean... Whats stopping them going down just adding classes as skins with no added mechanics or overhauls in the future, I think DR is them testing the waters and it looks like its been pretty positive compared to the backlash on Drakthyr Evoker.

If you can get a decent payoff and a happy consumer base with the most minimalistic amount of effort you will carry on working that way.

[Swnem]

A dragon breathing fire is fundamentally different than a mage casting a fire spell or Monks drinking alcohol and spitting fire from their mouths.

I didn't really bring up those things. Just saying time magic and fire magic are things we can already do. Nature and arcane as well.
So, it's not really new. Sure, it has a new animation and all that, and that's ok. I am not saying we can't have new classes step on each others ankles. I don't think it's an issue as long as they add new gameplay.

- - - Updated - - -

Is it ludicrous tho? I mean... Whats stopping them going down just adding classes as skins with no added mechanics or overhauls in the future, I think DR is them testing the waters and it looks like its been pretty positive compared to the backlash on Drakthyr Evoker.

If you can get a decent payoff and a happy consumer base with the most minimalistic amount of effort you will carry on working that way.

Simply because players like new classes and adding more ways to play the game makes it better.
If you don't want, you are not forced to play.
This is no way means they can't make class skins as well. But, eventually players will ask for new gameplay. Which i am sure is why Evoker is a thing.

[Gaidax]

Class powers are not mutually exclusive.

The most obvious examples are Priests and Paladins, then you have Mages, Shamans and Warlocks sharing fire. Especially Shamans and Warlocks, both make use of elemental fire.

Existence of one class does not prevent creation of another class that may have similar theme or concept in part.

[Kiria]

I didn't really bring up those things. Just saying time magic and fire magic are things we can already do. Nature and arcane as well.
So, it's not really new. Sure, it has a new animation and all that, and that's ok. I am not saying we can't have new classes step on each others ankles. I don't think it's an issue as long as they add new gameplay.

- - - Updated - - -



Simply because players like new classes and adding more ways to play the game makes it better.
If you don't want, you are not forced to play.
This is no way means they can't make class skins as well. But, eventually players will ask for new gameplay. Which i am sure is why Evoker is a thing.

lol you are reading me out of context, you are telling me not to play a game because I voiced a concern that I believe I feel there's a route they are going down, your knee jerk reaction to "don't play the game" is aggressive and unwarranted, but the evidence of Blizz potentially not adding more classes is sat right there with the extremely low effort introduction of Dark Ranger, this you cannot deny.

Just because players "like" something doesnt mean Blizz wont try to find a way to compromise to save money/time/resource, The playerbase has proven themselves docile already with the rather lame implementation of High Elves/Dark Rangers and numerous other things and being happy with it.

[Teriz]

I didn't really bring up those things. Just saying time magic and fire magic are things we can already do. Nature and arcane as well.
So, it's not really new. Sure, it has a new animation and all that, and that's ok. I am not saying we can't have new classes step on each others ankles. I don't think it's an issue as long as they add new gameplay.

While we can already do Time magic and Fire magic, we can't transform into dragons and fly around the battlefield and roast targets with dragon fire. Nor does any single class utilize the powers of all 5 five dragonflights (Prismatic/Chromatic magic). So again, the Evokers represent a style of gameplay that couldn't be accomplished by existing classes.

- - - Updated - - -

Existence of one class does not prevent creation of another class that may have similar theme or concept in part.

Death Knights prevent the creation of a Necromancer class. Shaman prevent the creation of a Shadow Hunter class. Hunters prevent the creation of a Ranger class. Warriors prevent the creation of a Blademaster class.

[Eosia]

Evokers are not interesting.
Warden,necromancer,darkranger…they are needed and they are a lot LG interesting.

Dark Ranger = Undead Elf-skinned Hunter. They're in the game now. Roll a Night Elf Hunter for Alliance or High Elf Hunter for Horde and, after the Return to Lordaeron quest line added in 9.2.5, you have a Dark Ranger, complete with transmog armor set.

[Kiria]

Dark Ranger = Undead Elf-skinned Hunter. They're in the game now. Roll a Night Elf Hunter for Alliance or High Elf Hunter for Horde and, after the Return to Lordaeron quest line added in 9.2.5, you have a Dark Ranger, complete with transmog armor set.

No That is still a Hunter, NOT a Undead Dark Ranger, face it, it's a cosplay and thats all it will ever be.

I honestly can't believe people are quite happy to settle for a low effort piece of shit that is Blizz's attempt at Dark Ranger... It's like giving a paladin a Transmog glowy eyes, a skin and a Glyph and saying "You're a Deathknight now".... jesus fucking christ you people, fight against this lazyness other Blizz will fleece you for low effort shit.

[Eosia]

No That is still a Hunter, NOT a Undead Dark Ranger, face it, it's a cosplay and thats all it will ever be.

I honestly can't believe people are quite happy to settle for a low effort piece of shit that is Blizz's attempt at Dark Ranger... It's like giving a paladin a Transmog glowy eyes, a skin and a Glyph and saying "You're a Deathknight now".... jesus fucking christ you people, fight against this lazyness other Blizz will fleece you for low effort shit.

Dark Ranger is NOT a class.

[Kiria]

Dark Ranger is NOT a class.

Not anymore, but you are avoiding the real issue here.