Bard popularity in the eyes of the general audience

[Teriz]

It would apply perfectly to the theme of the class, plus are perfect for a spellcasting and/or healer spec.

A Lute like this (which is also an axe, and you can do rock music);



Sure.

A lute like this?



Nope.

Also a Harp? Nope.

Except it literally is, since there is no "tea", no "chi", no "healing" and no "mist" in the original concept.

It was never said that they couldn't brew tea, use chi, could heal or use mists. So no, its not a deviation, it's an expansion.

Much like lutes, guitars, liras and harps would be housed under the theme of music to fit a specialization.

What type of weapon would Liras and Harps be? Lutes and Guitars can be axes, maces, and swords.

- - - Updated - - -

Are you arguing that they can't create them? Or that they won't?

They won't, because they've already established a Lute as an ETC-appropriate axe.

Yes, which is the same huge leap we have between wicker bears and pterodactyl men.

Again, you're confusing stylization between races with stylization between specs.

The leaps aren't important as long as there is a fundamental connection to core class themes; which would be centralized around performance and musical aptitude. What is the problem here? Nothing. You just personally don't think it works, and that's fine, it's just not a convincing argument to make. No one else but you has this issue. No one.

Okay, once again;

This;


Is not the same concept as this;



And wouldn't be in the same class.

It's fine to have an unpopular opinion. As long as everyone clear that's all it is. Your opinion that a Bard built around ETC can absolutely not also contain any traditional music themes whatsoever, for no real reason other than you don't think it would happen. I have no problem with this as long as this is made clear.

I've listed multiple reasons. You can look at it and see it wouldn't work. The concepts are way too different.

[Triceron]

I've listed multiple reasons. You can look at it and see it wouldn't work. The concepts are way too different.

None of the reasons you list are consistent with how you've explained other classes derive their concepts from basic themes.

If we're talking about a class that plays music with instruments, then it doesn't really matter what style of music is being played or what instrument is being used.

Would you say a Mage that uses a spell sword and casts Fire magic is fundamentally different from a Mage that uses a staff and casts Frost magic? You already acknowledge that the functionality is the same while the styles are different.

And wouldn't be in the same class.

Consider that in the 2008 Bard concept, Blizzard has all of these concept arts as the same class



Blizzard acknowledges that Bards can come in all sorts of styles and still be considered a Bard. Otherwise they could have called this class 'Rockstar' and stuck 100% with the ETC theme.

This is proof of how wildly varied the styles of a bard class can conceptually be. This is all official Blizzard concept art.

[Teriz]

None of the reasons you list are consistent with how you've explained other classes derive their concepts from basic themes.

If we're talking about a class that plays music with instruments, then it doesn't really matter what style of music is being played or what instrument is being used.

They don't just play music with instruments, the instrument is an actual weapon (axe, sword, mace). So with that being the case, it limits the type of instruments they can use. So no Kodorider beating drums, not harp player doing whatever, no flutes, etc. That simply makes more sense, because it allows the player to both fight and play music seamlessly. It also orients the class in a very believable WoW play style.

Would you say a Mage that uses a spell sword and casts Fire magic is fundamentally different from a Mage that uses a staff and casts Frost magic? You already acknowledge that the functionality is the same while the styles are different.

Again, that's not an equivalent example. The weapon the mage uses is immaterial, whereas the weapon used for the ETC-style Bard is fundamental since it also functions as their instrument and is a foundation of the class concept.

Consider that in the 2008 Bard concept, Blizzard has all of these concept arts as the same class

And that was an April Fool's gag.

[Ielenia]

A lute like this?

https://i.ibb.co/wsZ12j3/Png-transpa...weapon-wit.png

Nope.

Also a Harp? Nope.

Yes, and yes. It works perfectly as a spellcaster weapon or off-hand, since you won't be hitting people on the head with it since that is the purpose of spellcaster specs they cast spells they don't hit people on the head with their weapons.

It was never said that they couldn't brew tea, use chi, could heal or use mists.

By that very logic, it was never said that ETC can't play the lute, harp, violin, banjo, flute, etc. You just keep digging your own hole deeper and deeper.

What type of weapon would Liras and Harps be? Lutes and Guitars can be axes, maces, and swords.

Off-hand weapons. Hell, you can make a 'combo' for the violin, with the bow being a dagger or mace, and the violin an off-hand.

[Teriz]

Yes, and yes. It works perfectly as a spellcaster weapon or off-hand, since you won't be hitting people on the head with it since that is the purpose of spellcaster specs they cast spells they don't hit people on the head with their weapons.

Mistweavers still kick and punch people while they're healing. No reason a Bard could still perform melee attacks while healing.

Also I don't see an ETC-style Bard being a spell-caster. Especially given that they would have a tank spec.

By that very logic, it was never said that ETC can't play the lute, harp, violin, banjo, flute, etc.

True, but it simply doesn't fit the concept, since the ETC utilizes his weapon/instrument like a standard axe when not playing it.

Off-hand weapons. Hell, you can make a 'combo' for the violin, with the bow being a dagger or mace, and the violin an off-hand.

Since a healer would more likely be like this;



I don't see them holding an off-hand weapon of any kind.

Anyway, it's clear that you and Triceron don't agree. So I'm going to bow out of this conversation, and let you guys construct the Bard class as you see fit (and let others discuss this topic). I'll probably make a Bard concept based on the ETC at some point, since I think it has the most potential to be the WoW Bard class (if Blizzard decides to ever make such a class).

[Ielenia]

Mistweavers still kick and punch people while they're healing. No reason a Bard could still perform melee attacks while healing.

Just because mistweavers do that, doesn't mean bards should. And guess what? Mistweavers are doing that while wielding non-combat off-hands like lamps, books, vials, etc.

Also I don't see an ETC-style Bard being a spell-caster.

And that is why ETC is not a good fit for the bard class concept, like everyone has been telling you from the beginning. It's overly restrictive, and, as someone else pointed out, "it's creatively bankrupt".

Especially given that they would have a tank spec.

Except it shouldn't have a tank spec. Because it doesn't fit the concept of the bard.

True,

Then don't employ double-standards. If you're going to argue "nothing said X can't do A, B and C", then the exact same argument is valid when saying "nothing said Y can't do D, E and F"

but it simply doesn't fit the concept, since the ETC utilizes his weapon/instrument like a standard axe when not playing it.

The bard concept is music, and a song played by an electric guitar is just as much music as a song played by a lute, a flute, a harp or a violin.

The problem here, Teriz, is that you're employing double-standards. You allow the "brew" concept of the original WC3 unit to expand beyond its scope to encompass tea, and allowing the very specific concept of "martial arts" to expand beyond its scope to allow for chi, mist manipulation and healing. All things that are not present in the original iteration of the character. And yet you refuse to allow the same courtesy to your ETC bard. That is called double-standards, and makes it even more glaring that your sole intention here is to make the bard concept to look as silly as possible with the intention to discredit it.

Since a healer would more likely be like this;

A healer wouldn't be like that. Again, Teriz, your opinion isn't fact.

[Triceron]

They don't just play music with instruments, the instrument is an actual weapon (axe, sword, mace).

Again, if you bring up bad examples then we can agree they wouldn't work. It's obvious that a Bard class wouldn't just be using swords and axes to play music. Abilities come from the class, not from what weapons are used.

Hell, Leatherworking drum Kits aren't weapons and already provide the buffs we are talking about. The only difference being these are profession items, rather than Class abilities.

Again, that's not an equivalent example. The weapon the mage uses is immaterial, whereas the weapon used for the ETC-style Bard is fundamental since it also functions as their instrument and is a foundation of the class concept.

And so are you arguong that Blizzard can not create Instruments for a Bard to use? Because it seems like this is the case.

And if true we can agree that your idea of a Bard needing to be creatively bankrupt and using axes and swords to play music like you think ETC does would be a bad idea.

And that was an April Fool's gag.

So was the Brewmaster, so is the Tinker. Tinker with claw pack even now remains an April fools character.

[Teriz]

Again, if you bring up bad examples then we can agree they wouldn't work. It's obvious that a Bard class wouldn't just be using swords and axes to play music. Abilities come from the class, not from what weapons are used.

TBF, there are abilities that require certain weapon types to be equipped in order for them to work. This is commonly found in DK and Paladin classes.

- - - Updated - - -

Except it shouldn't have a tank spec. Because it doesn't fit the concept of the bard.

And that's a prime reason why Blizzard could be pushing the concept for eventual class implementation; It subverts the concept of the traditional Bard, and gives WoW its own unique spin on the concept that fits into the trinity. I also believe that if Evokers don't get a tank spec, players will highly desire another true hybrid (Tank/Heal/DPS) class.

It's very interesting how much framework they've built around this. The only thing its really missing is lore to actually place it in the gameworld.

Okay, I'm seriously bowing out of the thread this time. Buh bye!

[Triceron]

TBF, there are abilities that require certain weapon types to be equipped in order for them to work. This is commonly found in DK and Paladin classes.

Well the Bard isn't a Paladin or DK, nor does it have to work like they do.

There are plenty of classes without weapon restrictions, especially for a psuedo caster class like Bards who use magical abilities. They could treat instruments like librams, merely brought out when casting certain abilities with no physical item slot. Different instrument visuals could be glyphed or transmogged, like green flame customization or DK Runeforging.

There are plenty of ways Blizzard could tackle the concept without sticking to any one system. Paladins cast spells through books all the time, and none of that gameplay is tied to physical weapons or items.

[Ielenia]

And that's a prime reason why Blizzard could be pushing the concept for eventual class implementation;

It doesn't need a "push". It just need to happen. Blizzard didn't "push" the monk. They didn't "push" the death knight. They didn't "push" the demon hunter. They just happened.

It subverts the concept of the traditional Bard,

Except your "subvertion" is on the level of the Velma show: nobody wants it, it doesn't look good, and frankly it was made with the intent of mockery and ridicule.

and gives WoW its own unique spin on the concept that fits into the trinity.

The bard concept fits perfectly well within WoW's trinity of roles without a tank spec. Unless you are going to claim that the mage class, the priest class, the hunter specs, etc, don't fit the trinity because they lack a tanking spec?

I also believe that if Evokers don't get a tank spec, players will highly desire another true hybrid (Tank/Heal/DPS) class.

Nah. We already have plenty of tank classes. Before the evoker, every single expansion class had a tanking spec. Getting two non-tank classes back-to-back won't hurt anyone.

The only thing its really missing is lore to actually place it in the gameworld.

We already have plenty of lore, as pointed out multiple times in the past.

Okay, I'm seriously bowing out of the thread this time. Buh bye!

Didn't you already said you were bowing out? Should I expect another response from you despite this claim?

[Vaedan]

Mistweavers still kick and punch people while they're healing. No reason a Bard could still perform melee attacks while healing.

Also I don't see an ETC-style Bard being a spell-caster. Especially given that they would have a tank spec.



True, but it simply doesn't fit the concept, since the ETC utilizes his weapon/instrument like a standard axe when not playing it.



Since a healer would more likely be like this;



I don't see them holding an off-hand weapon of any kind.

Anyway, it's clear that you and Triceron don't agree. So I'm going to bow out of this conversation, and let you guys construct the Bard class as you see fit (and let others discuss this topic). I'll probably make a Bard concept based on the ETC at some point, since I think it has the most potential to be the WoW Bard class (if Blizzard decides to ever make such a class).

In fact, they can equip any standard weapon. Their instrument can be tied to ability animation, like when outlaw rogues use pistol for ability called Pistol Shot and survival hunters use one hand crossbow for all their shots. Neither pistols or one handed crossbows are actual weapons in WoW, but are utilized as a part of ability animation. Same could be done with bards.

Another solution is that musical instruments would be implemented as new weapons for Bards, in the same way DHs got glaives. Than they can make them easily in 2hand and 1hand versions. One spec could utilize 2hands, other like healer or caster could prioritize 1hand with offhand. There are such classes already.

[Lahis]

You honestly believe that Blizzard would provide the customization options of the visage form for every single racial model in the game? Do you realize how much work that would take on Blizzard's part? They'd still be working on it.

Who says they needed to do that? Most dragon visages don't have visible horns and scales. Had they chosen to give Dracthyr free choice of visage form, they could have just given them all other races with no extra customizations. Maybe add in the Dragon eyes they gave every race for NPCs but no need for anything extra beyond that. Being able to pick any race in barbershop is freedom enough.

[Teriz]

In fact, they can equip any standard weapon. Their instrument can be tied to ability animation, like when outlaw rogues use pistol for ability called Pistol Shot and survival hunters use one hand crossbow for all their shots. Neither pistols or one handed crossbows are actual weapons in WoW, but are utilized as a part of ability animation. Same could be done with bards.

Another solution is that musical instruments would be implemented as new weapons for Bards, in the same way DHs got glaives. Than they can make them easily in 2hand and 1hand versions. One spec could utilize 2hands, other like healer or caster could prioritize 1hand with offhand. There are such classes already.

Except it isn't a solution because having 2h weapons double as instruments is not a problem. The WoW Bard doesn't need to use a plethora of instruments, and really shouldn't use a plethora of instruments because the weapon and the instrument can be one in the same. This eliminates the real problem of trying to make music some sort of special magic school and something different than what we currently have in the game. Instead, what makes the class different is that you have the character using their weapon as a melee device as well as a source of magical power;




Additionally, we have examples of such weapons in the game already;

https://www.wowhead.com/item=151255/...eath-resonator
https://www.wowhead.com/item=44924/s...e-phoenix-king
https://www.wowhead.com/wotlk/item=3...rcanite-ripper

And they already do what I'm describing above. Why reinvent the wheel when we already have a perfectly viable option in the game currently? The mechanics are already in place, and players really like owning these weapons. You can simply expand the weapon selection to swords, and give plenty of options for both the alliance and horde.

This is why this particular concept has so much more strength than other Bard concepts in WoW. It pretty much already exists.

- - - Updated - - -

Who says they needed to do that? Most dragon visages don't have visible horns and scales. Had they chosen to give Dracthyr free choice of visage form, they could have just given them all other races with no extra customizations. Maybe add in the Dragon eyes they gave every race for NPCs but no need for anything extra beyond that. Being able to pick any race in barbershop is freedom enough.

We'll simply have to agree to disagree. This thread has been derailed enough with Evoker talk.

[Vaedan]

Except it isn't a solution because having 2h weapons double as instruments is not a problem. The WoW Bard doesn't need to use a plethora of instruments, and really shouldn't use a plethora of instruments because the weapon and the instrument can be one in the same. This eliminates the real problem of trying to make music some sort of special magic school and something different than what we currently have in the game. Instead, what makes the class different is that you have the character using their weapon as a melee device as well as a source of magical power;




Additionally, we have examples of such weapons in the game already;

https://www.wowhead.com/item=151255/...eath-resonator
https://www.wowhead.com/item=44924/s...e-phoenix-king
https://www.wowhead.com/wotlk/item=3...rcanite-ripper

And they already do what I'm describing above. Why reinvent the wheel when we already have a perfectly viable option in the game currently? The mechanics are already in place, and players really like owning these weapons. You can simply expand the weapon selection to swords, and give plenty of options for both the alliance and horde.

This is why this particular concept has so much more strength than other Bard concepts in WoW.

But then you still create another type of weapon, which Are Mace-instrument or Axe-instrument, because you know, normal standard maces and axes are not instruments. Or bard would need to have a skill to adjust these weapons to instruments, which would be quite complicated to do. It's far more convenient to either implement instruments to class animations and/or add instrument weapons anyway.

[Ielenia]

In fact, they can equip any standard weapon. Their instrument can be tied to ability animation, like when outlaw rogues use pistol for ability called Pistol Shot and survival hunters use one hand crossbow for all their shots. Neither pistols or one handed crossbows are actual weapons in WoW, but are utilized as a part of ability animation. Same could be done with bards.

This is one thing I have always been talking about bards, especially for possible casting specs: the musical instruments could be tied to the casting animation, much like a paladin casts some of their spells by holding a libram open and waving their hands above it as pages flip.

Another solution is that musical instruments would be implemented as new weapons for Bards, in the same way DHs got glaives.

I think a good idea would be to make the instruments off-hand weapons, since those can literally be anything (wand, vial, book, etc). A violin could be two-set weapon: an off-hand for the violin, and the bow on the main hand, with the bow itself being mechanically a dagger or mace.

- - - Updated - - -

Who says they needed to do that? Most dragon visages don't have visible horns and scales. Had they chosen to give Dracthyr free choice of visage form, they could have just given them all other races with no extra customizations. Maybe add in the Dragon eyes they gave every race for NPCs but no need for anything extra beyond that. Being able to pick any race in barbershop is freedom enough.

That was literally my argument and he ignored all of that. :/

- - - Updated - - -

Except it isn't a solution because having 2h weapons double as instruments is not a problem. The WoW Bard doesn't need to use a plethora of instruments,

Warriors don't need a plethora of weapon but they still got a plethora of weapons.

This eliminates the real problem of trying to make music some sort of special magic school and something different than what we currently have in the game.

Except it was never a problem. You're the one making up problems that don't exist to use against the class concept idea.

And they already do what I'm describing above. Why reinvent the wheel when we already have a perfectly viable option in the game currently?

Because we don't need the "wheel" for the bard. What you're doing is trying to stick a wheel to something that doesn't use or need a wheel, like a table.

This is why this particular concept has so much more strength than other Bard concepts in WoW. It pretty much already exists.

The fact that next to no actual bard class proponents who actually want the class in the game uses ETC as their base (or even at all in their concepts) should tell you something about your claims here. But hey, the opinions of those who actually want the class don't matter. Only yours matter, right?

[Vaedan]

This is one thing I have always been talking about bards, especially for possible casting specs: the musical instruments could be tied to the casting animation, much like a paladin casts some of their spells by holding a libram open and waving their hands above it as pages flip.

That is one of the easiest solutions. I can imagine bard pulling a flute out of his/her pocket and play it... that could be for instance casting animation for some CC spell, etc.

I think a good idea would be to make the instruments off-hand weapons, since those can literally be anything (wand, vial, book, etc). A violin could be two-set weapon: an off-hand for the violin, and the bow on the main hand, with the bow itself being mechanically a dagger or mace.

I am not against the idea of having 2handed instruments which then bard use to smash in ETC style... I can imagine that being part of one spec. For others, I think they could go either with various 1hand and special class off-hand, like why not. Bards carry swords or other weapons with them anyway, but the main focus is on the instrument. We have ardenweald harps as offhands anyway, so yea... you can give it type: Instrument, which only bards could use. It would be same as Shields. They could appear on your back while not in combat, in the same way shields do.

[Alkizon]

mmm... that brings up some memories ...also.

[Teriz]

But then you still create another type of weapon, which Are Mace-instrument or Axe-instrument, because you know, normal standard maces and axes are not instruments. Or bard would need to have a skill to adjust these weapons to instruments, which would be quite complicated to do. It's far more convenient to either implement instruments to class animations and/or add instrument weapons anyway.

Nah, all of those weapons I posted were listed as axes and maces. So you could equip a standard 2h axe, and simply transmog it into an instrument axe, or simply equip a guitar axe/sword/mace, since Blizzard would create more because of the new class.

[Vaedan]

Nah, all of those weapons I posted were listed as axes and maces. So you could equip a standard 2h axe, and simply transmog it into an instrument axe, or simply equip a guitar axe/sword/mace, since Blizzard would create more because of the new class.

That is extremely weird, because then they would need to make transmogs just to turn weapons into instruments. Players can also ignore transmog, then they would play on regular axes? Sorry Teriz, that does not make any sense.

They would need add instruments in some way as equipment for Bards. These old axe weapons are irrelevant, the same way old Warglaives of Azzinoth being Swords did not stop Blizzard for creating new Glaive weapon type for DHs.

It would be really stupid if they didn't introduce glaives alongside DHs and just told players "Hey, you don't need glaives in game, just t-mog Azzinoths, lol".

[Teriz]

That is extremely weird, because then they would need to make transmogs just to turn weapons into instruments. Players can also ignore transmog, then they would play on regular axes? Sorry Teriz, that does not make any sense.

Incorrect. The class would get instrument weapons to start with, and have access to more instrument weapons as they level. This has been the case with every new class. That said, if players want to play on standard axes, maces, and swords, they would be able to. Just have an animation where the strings magically appear on the weapon.

Easy peasy.