Are Evokers getting a new spec?

[[Apok]]

This is true, especially if its happening in the middle of an expansion.
Support: 0% I don't see a support spec happening because it would force Blizzard to create multiple support specs in other classes to make it fair.

Depends really, i would think that this would lead more options for other clasess, and dependant on how it's implemented nd received we'd likely seethem extending thisin 11.0 with more races capable of playing as a similar support spec.

Could even be pushed with the nest-apansion pre-oreder, preo-order to get acces to support roles on other classes

[Teriz]

Depends really, i would think that this would lead more options for other clasess, and dependant on how it's implemented nd received we'd likely seethem extending thisin 11.0 with more races capable of playing as a similar support spec.

Could even be pushed with the nest-apansion pre-oreder, preo-order to get acces to support roles on other classes

I just think that would be too much for a single class to carry for several months leading up to the next expansion. Adding a support spec would be a major shift in WoW gameplay, and I don't think that would be something happening in mid-expansion. That would have to be a new expansion feature, because Blizzard would have to introduce a support spec with multiple classes at once to make it fair. If Evokers are the only class with a support spec, they would be required in the final raid tier, and I don't think Blizzard or the community really wants that.

If Blizzard is going to introduce a new spec mid-expansion, its going to be something part of the standard trinity.

[[Apok]]

Well,they wouldn't introduce them ithout a testbed first, if it is support it'll be the test to see how it works.

No point in spending resopurces and time fleshing out other classes if they decide to scrap it following performance and feedback.

It also adds a new feature, prepurchase 11.0 and get accesss to support specs in 10.3

[Teriz]

Well,they wouldn't introduce them ithout a testbed first, if it is support it'll be the test to see how it works.

No point in spending resopurces and time fleshing out other classes if they decide to scrap it following performance and feedback.

It also adds a new feature, prepurchase 11.0 and get accesss to support specs in 10.3

Well consider if they were to do this, they would have to add a new role to the game, and for almost a year, the Evoker would be the only class that can be this new role. That would cause massive disruptions in raid tiers and groups, because now raids are going to have to have geared Evokers to take on this new role. It would piss quite a few people off. Also how would this work in existing raid compositions of 10 man and above? Would they increase the raid and group sizes to accommodate this new role? Would a healer get removed? Would a DPS get removed? How would this effect previous raid tiers in the current expansion? We're talking about fundamentally altering how the game is played mid-expansion. I simply think it's a bit unrealistic.

If Blizzard is going to introduce a new support role, it would have to be an expansion feature that gets a lot of testing over multiple classes. The only way that would work is if you introduce multiple support specs at once for multiple classes. We're talking about probably the most extensive testing we've seen in WoW's history. It could definitely happen, but I don't think this is what we're looking at in the case of an Evoker 3rd spec.

[[Apok]]

Well consider if they were to do this, they would have to add a new role to the game, and for almost a year, the Evoker would be the only class that can be this new role. That would cause massive disruptions in raid tiers and groups, because now raids are going to have to have geared Evokers to take on this new role. It would piss quite a few people off. Also how would this work in existing raid compositions of 10 man and above? Would they increase the raid and group sizes to accommodate this new role? Would a healer get removed? Would a DPS get removed? How would this effect previous raid tiers in the current expansion? We're talking about fundamentally altering how the game is played mid-expansion. I simply think it's a bit unrealistic.

Depends on how wow does it's support specs, amd how much they bring, if they are tuned right then they are no more desirable than other specs.

It makes sense to introduce a single spec in a patch, that way if it doesn't fit, it can always be worked into another ranged spec, if you bring in multiple specs and the idea doesn't work reworking those extra specs into just another spec it's a greater issue. If they test it and it works then that leaves it easier to introduce it to he other classes.

personally i dont think we'd have them at 10.1 launch anyway, probs 10.1.5.

I would prefer a support spec but i don't believ were getting one.

If Blizzard is going to introduce a new support role, it would have to be an expansion feature that gets a lot of testing over multiple classes. The only way that would work is if you introduce multiple support specs at once for multiple classes. We're talking about probably the most extensive testing we've seen in WoW's history. It could definitely happen, but I don't think this is what we're looking at in the case of an Evoker 3rd spec.

I think we're more likely getting an offensive healer spec, with less damage and healing done by damage or healing focused roles whilst also providing buffs.

Plus we don't know how much they have been possibly testing a support spec, they would have started work on 12.0 aswell by now, one of the features could be the new support spec for some classes, with talents reworks being done in congruence with the ideas surrounding next expansion, some specs could be getting prepped for that having a support spec, and changing things so the playstyle feels different between those specs is something that needs addressing.

[Teriz]

This guy makes some very good points about how Morgan Day’s answer was very ambiguous and open to the possibility of not only a third spec, but it being a tank spec. Additionally, he doesn’t think support is likely, and he gives some great reasons why.

Gotta say, it’s pretty interesting that many WoW streamers are leaning towards this being actually a new spec.

- - - Updated - - -

/snip

Really curious to hear your view on the video I posted above.

[[Apok]]

But to you would a healer that doesnt provide as much raw healing but provides buffs which lower damage taken or increase healing taken, whilst doing some damage class as support spec or a healer spec?

I do think wow will get support at some point, it's the power of that support role that decides how game changing it is, ideally youd have a spec that could bring buffs/debuffs instead of a class, if you have limited spaces (20 in mythic) certain buffs mean that there will always be one of that class is a raid, this is somewhat problematic for non-organised raiding. if you had support specs which brought buffs but didn't stack, you could potentially shift the power of class buffs to that spec.

Whilst people might make this feel like they are gutting classes more, it allows them more freedom to play with what utility other classes can have.
Say if you pug, and you dont manange to get a mage or DH, you're doing substantially less damage than someone equal gear and skill who has the buffs those classes provide. with a support spec that means they are covered. Taking this further, you could seperate them between melee classes with support roles and ranged classes with support roles. That way if support spec enters mythic + you can cater to the group you want to run with, stack melee take melee support, stack ranged take ranged support.



Im not saying its likely at all i wonder if this is a scenario they would likely think of

/snip

Really curious to hear your view on the video I posted above.

Just watching it now, will let you know

So yes he does have some good points, especially on the support side.

And whilst morgan days answer is unambiguous, the tanks were "discussed in the early days" leads me to think that whilst not an outright denial that they didnt think the evoker would fit a tank role. there are other interviews recently where they were asked about dracthyr tank with their wording and context pointing towards drac tank not being a thing.

there have been other times this has been stated like Ion stating

"Tanking didn’t feel quite right for Evokers, due to being an up close role, while the Dracthyr theme revolves more around ranged breath weapons and winged mobility"

And with graham berger saying in an interview "Much of the group ability and utility focus was a nod to the "communal" aspect of the dragonflights themselves, with dragons typically being communal creatures that work for the benefit of the brood."

Which plays into their deisng for the dracthyr


As i said the heal boost part of it more points towards a second ranged spec.



You can do damage to adamanthia or boost/heal the dragons, says boost/heal most effective. the boost part could simply be an ability tied to the fight, but could also be ambiguously worded and might mean fucking cast hero and heal them.

The tank, im less convinced it's a tank spec.

[Teriz]

But to you would a healer that doesnt provide as much raw healing but provides buffs which lower damage taken or increase healing taken, whilst doing some damage class as support spec or a healer spec?

I think as long as it remains in one of the trinity roles, it's fine. You run into problems if you open up a 4th role in the game. That would require new expansion-level development. I do think adding a new spec (within the trinity) can be done in a patch.

I do think wow will get support at some point, it's the power of that support role that decides how game changing it is, ideally youd have a spec that could bring buffs/debuffs instead of a class, if you have limited spaces (20 in mythic) certain buffs mean that there will always be one of that class is a raid, this is somewhat problematic for non-organised raiding. if you had support specs which brought buffs but didn't stack, you could potentially shift the power of class buffs to that spec.

Again, if we're talking about simply a healing spec that we're calling support, but its still operating in the role of healer, it should be fine as long as its competitive with other healers. If we're talking about opening up a 4th role in WoW, we're talking about a fundamental shift in how the game is played and structured.

Whilst people might make this feel like they are gutting classes more, it allows them more freedom to play with what utility other classes can have.
Say if you pug, and you dont manange to get a mage or DH, you're doing substantially less damage than someone equal gear and skill who has the buffs those classes provide. with a support spec that means they are covered. Taking this further, you could seperate them between melee classes with support roles and ranged classes with support roles. That way if support spec enters mythic + you can cater to the group you want to run with, stack melee take melee support, stack ranged take ranged support.

Im not saying its likely at all i wonder if this is a scenario they would likely think of

I think its definitely possible. I just don't think its something they would do in the situation we're talking about (adding a spec in the middle of an expansion). Adding a fourth role would be a sea change in WoW, something bigger than a new class and maybe even bigger than adding a new continent. It's something they would announce far in advance of its actual implementation, like in an expansion announcement.

[[Apok]]

Which is why i don't think we'd technically get it as a seperate role, but as a dps/healer that does less dps/healing than the traditional classes but is made up for by the other things they bring.

[chrisisvacant]

Well consider if they were to do this, they would have to add a new role to the game, and for almost a year, the Evoker would be the only class that can be this new role. That would cause massive disruptions in raid tiers and groups, because now raids are going to have to have geared Evokers to take on this new role. It would piss quite a few people off. Also how would this work in existing raid compositions of 10 man and above? Would they increase the raid and group sizes to accommodate this new role? Would a healer get removed? Would a DPS get removed? How would this effect previous raid tiers in the current expansion? We're talking about fundamentally altering how the game is played mid-expansion. I simply think it's a bit unrealistic.

If Blizzard is going to introduce a new support role, it would have to be an expansion feature that gets a lot of testing over multiple classes. The only way that would work is if you introduce multiple support specs at once for multiple classes. We're talking about probably the most extensive testing we've seen in WoW's history. It could definitely happen, but I don't think this is what we're looking at in the case of an Evoker 3rd spec.

I think you're being a bit exaggerated here.

Just adding a spec has been done. A dps/support/support exists already. And just because the word "boost" exists means nothing irregular - if the solo encounter is designed to not be tanked and the player has to channel a device to boost the NPCs then there you go.

[Ielenia]

Blizzard hacked apart Warlocks to make room for Demon Hunters,
...
Like they did with Demonology in WoD to make room for Demon Hunters.

You don't know that they did that for that specific reason, and claiming it as fact is fallacious. And the rebuttal "bUt WhY eLsE wOuLd ThEy Do ThAt?" is nothing but an argument from ignorance fallacy, i.e., "it is true because it hasn't been proven to be false" or "I cannot see any other reason, therefore this is the reason". Please avoid using this fallacious argument.

[Teriz]

I think you're being a bit exaggerated here.

Just adding a spec has been done. A dps/support/support exists already. And just because the word "boost" exists means nothing irregular - if the solo encounter is designed to not be tanked and the player has to channel a device to boost the NPCs then there you go.

I don't believe that Evoker is going to get a support spec. As I said, I believe the chances of that happening are close to 0. Support (and healing) doesn't even really match the theme of black dragons anyway.

- - - Updated - - -

You don't know that they did that for that specific reason, and claiming it as fact is fallacious. And the rebuttal "bUt WhY eLsE wOuLd ThEy Do ThAt?" is nothing but an argument from ignorance fallacy, i.e., "it is true because it hasn't been proven to be false" or "I cannot see any other reason, therefore this is the reason". Please avoid using this fallacious argument.

This isn't even worth arguing over anymore, because its clear that's exactly what happened. Blizzard cleared design space from multiple classes in order to open up design space for DHs. They took from Warlocks and Monks in order to provide unique spells and niches for the new class.

The important point here is that it could possibly be happening again with SPriests, since Evokers have a very good chance of getting a void-based spec. However unlike Monks and Warlocks, SPriests might actually end up in decent shape, and not get screwed over like Monks and Warlocks did.

[Triceron]

You don't know that they did that for that specific reason, and claiming it as fact is fallacious. And the rebuttal "bUt WhY eLsE wOuLd ThEy Do ThAt?" is nothing but an argument from ignorance fallacy, i.e., "it is true because it hasn't been proven to be false" or "I cannot see any other reason, therefore this is the reason". Please avoid using this fallacious argument.

You don't need to confirm it to see that it happened.

Even if you want to deny the correlations of the past, if they repeat in the future it's not going to be mere coincidence.

[Ielenia]

This isn't even worth arguing over anymore, because its clear that's exactly what happened.

Again: claiming it as so is an argument from ignorance, especially since Blizzard

Blizzard cleared design space from multiple classes in order to open up design space for DHs.

One single class is "multiple classes"?

They took from Warlocks and Monks in order to provide unique spells and niches for the new class.

They took literally nothing from monks.

The important point here

The important point here is that you're making an argument from ignorance, and then using that argument from ignorance as an argument for your "third spec" idea. When the foundation of the argument is flawed, the argument becomes invalid.

- - - Updated - - -

You don't need to confirm it to see that it happened.

Actually, we do. Because until we have confirmation, all we do is correlation. Especially since Blizzard already said that the reason they changed demonology was because it "strayed too far from its summoner roots". Now, you can say Blizzard was lying to cover up their real intentions, but then I have to choose in who to believe: Blizzard, or rando with what amounts to a conspiracy theory?

[Auxis]

I'd worry how powerful a support spec would be and how it would affect forming groups/raids.

Most classes got some form of buff or debuff that provides small support to the group. But then there is Mage/Shaman/Hunter/Evoker with their Bloodlust effects. And any group would be insane to not bring one of them. Support specs might lead to more "Bring the class not the player" scenarios which I dont think is good for a social game where classes are a characters identity.

[Triceron]

Actually, we do. Because until we have confirmation, all we do is correlation. Especially since Blizzard already said that the reason they changed demonology was because it "strayed too far from its summoner roots". Now, you can say Blizzard was lying to cover up their real intentions, but then I have to choose in who to believe: Blizzard, or rando with what amounts to a conspiracy theory?

If you don't like unconfirmed theories, you should probably avoid any and every speculation thread.

Seriously, what point are you making? That speculation is not real without proof? Well fuck yeah, that's why this is all speculation. And you're just being contrarian and gatekeeping for no real reason.

Like what the fuck are you actually expecting the discussion here to be? About facts and confirmations?

[Ielenia]

If you don't like unconfirmed theories,

This isn't about "unconfirmed theories". This is literally a conspiracy theory: "they're lying to cover up the truth".

Seriously, what point are you making?

I thought I was obvious in my original post? "Don't use speculations/conspiracy theories as fact."

[Triceron]

This isn't about "unconfirmed theories". This is literally a conspiracy theory: "they're lying to cover up the truth".

No, it is not conspiracy theory. Spells were literally taken away from one class and presented to the new class. That actually happened. Metamorphosis didn't just naturally gravitate to Demon Hunters. They were removed from one class and ported to another with mechanics in tact.

I thought I was obvious in my original post? "Don't use speculations/conspiracy theories as fact."

No one is using them as facts. We are using them as examples of precedent

[Teriz]

The important point here is that you're making an argument from ignorance, and then using that argument from ignorance as an argument for your "third spec" idea. When the foundation of the argument is flawed, the argument becomes invalid.

We're making an argument based on evidence. There's a difference.

Actually, we do. Because until we have confirmation, all we do is correlation. Especially since Blizzard already said that the reason they changed demonology was because it "strayed too far from its summoner roots". Now, you can say Blizzard was lying to cover up their real intentions, but then I have to choose in who to believe: Blizzard, or rando with what amounts to a conspiracy theory?

Which is like saying you can only convict the murderer if they confess, despite the fact that we found the murder weapon in their car and their DNA was all over the crime scene. You don't return a spec to its summoner roots by nuking it from orbit mid-expansion, and then saying that you don't want people to play the specialization until the next expansion comes out.

Protip: When that happened the next expansion wasn't even announced yet.

- - - Updated - - -

I'd worry how powerful a support spec would be and how it would affect forming groups/raids.

Most classes got some form of buff or debuff that provides small support to the group. But then there is Mage/Shaman/Hunter/Evoker with their Bloodlust effects. And any group would be insane to not bring one of them. Support specs might lead to more "Bring the class not the player" scenarios which I dont think is good for a social game where classes are a characters identity.

I can agree with that. This is why I said IF there is an Evoker 3rd spec, I'd say there's close to 0% chance it's a support spec.

That said, I do wonder if these are the two possibilities from the Evoker-only quest chain in question;



With one role of course not being currently available to the Evoker class.

[Villager720]

I honestly think there’s too much evidence to ignore this as likely. From little hints back around launch to quest text literally telegraphing it on the PTR; if this amounts to nothing it’ll be more wild than the alternative.

…
But … how do you not let us test the spec? How confident could they possibly be? It’s all so crazy!