Druids for all races -- What druid forms are you looking forward to?

[FossilFree]

Normal orcs should really be a cat version of the Fel boars if you ask me make em red and give them Spikes, would be sick, and then Maghar can have a boringer none Fel touched Verizon.

Mag'har should get Draenor inspired forms. Combinations of rocks, vines, and carnivorous plants.

[Lorgar Aurelian]

Mag'har should get Draenor inspired forms. Combinations of rocks, vines, and carnivorous plants.

given that orcs came from the breakers who were made to smush the plants I don't think the vines and carnivorous plant thing would be all that fitting, rocky though would be perfect.

[Triceron]

In short, a bard class can only be a playable version of the ETC unless another Bard hero is introduced.

And since Blizzard can create a new Bard Hero any time and introduce them into the game at the same time as the class, this means ETC isn't the only concept for a Bard Hero.

We literally have Evokers that can use all 5 types of dragon magic for this reason. They aren't based on Chromatics, they are based on newly introduced Dracthyr, who are represented by new hero characters like Emberthal.

[Teriz]

And since Blizzard can create a new Bard Hero any time and introduce them into the game at the same time as the class, this means ETC isn't the only concept for a Bard Hero.

It is until they create said Bard hero. Also Blizzard doesn't tend to create the hero a class is based on in the expansion where the class is introduced. The hero a class is based on is typically introduced years in advance.

We literally have Evokers that can use all 5 types of dragon magic for this reason. They aren't based on Chromatics, they are based on newly introduced Dracthyr, who are represented by new hero characters like Emberthal.

Dracthyr Evokers are based on the draconic heroes of WoW; Alexstraza, Kalecgos, Chromie, Deathwing, Ysera, Nozdormu, Onyxia, etc. With the mechanics largely coming from the three Dragon heroes in HotS.

It's no different than Demon Hunters who are based on Illidan Stormrage, and their mechanics also largely coming from WC3 and HotS.

Emberthal is similar to Kayn Sunfury, a character largely created to be a leader of the class, but not what the class is based upon.

[Ielenia]

Because the ETC is the only Bard hero ever shown in Warcraft.

Demonstrably false. Plenty of bard characters. But anyways.

On topic: for a hypothetical draenei class, what do you guys think of clefthooves as their Guardian forms? Or perhaps elekks? As for feral form, what could they use?

[Teriz]

Demonstrably false. Plenty of bard characters. But anyways.

Characters, not heroes. In other words, a character you can put on an expansion cover would be an example of a hero/franchise character. That's what WoW classes are based upon. Especially expansion classes.

That said, let's not derail the thread any further.

[Ielenia]

Characters, not heroes.

Irrelevant. We had zero evoker heroes in Warcraft. Also, ETC is not a 'hero' in the official Warcraft franchise. Being a playable character in HotS does not make him a "hero of Warcraft", mind you.

That said, let's not derail the thread any further.

Yes.

[Triceron]

It is until they create said Bard hero. Also Blizzard doesn't tend to create the hero a class is based on in the expansion where the class is introduced. The hero a class is based on is typically introduced years in advance.

Blizzard doesn't tend to create Hero classes period. Over almost 20 years we have a whopping 3.

There is no consistent rule to any of them other than whatever confirmation biaa you wish to apply to them.

Remember when you said we never had a hero based on a non WC3 hero and had to change that for Evoker/Dragonsworn? Those lines keep shifting as Blizzard continually proves that they have no creative restraints. Even now, Alexstraza and the Dragons are not Evokers, because they can't actually use all 5 Dragonflight powers. Evoker is literally more conceptually new than Bards would be.

They don't tend to create any class at all. We've gotten far more new races than new classes. You could imply all sorts of confirmation bias to say anything about the 3 Hero Classes and make up bullshit to exclude any others.

'Hero Classes can only be classes that start with the letters D or E. Blizzard doesn't tend to make Hero classes using any other letter'

These patterns are all arbitrary.

[Teriz]

Irrelevant. We had zero evoker heroes in Warcraft.

Evoker is merely the class name for a dragon that utilizes the power of dragons. As I said before, the class is called Dracthyr Evoker because it couldn’t be called Dragon Dragon.

- - - Updated - - -

Blizzard doesn't tend to create Hero classes period. Over almost 20 years we have a whopping 3

I didn’t say hero classes. I said that WoW classes are based on hero characters, especially expansion classes.

There is no consistent rule to any of them other than whatever confirmation biaa you wish to apply to them.

Every WoW expansion class has been based on a hero character, and has had playable mechanics in a RTS/MOBA format before they appeared as a class.

Remember when you said we never had a hero based on a non WC3 hero and had to change that for Evoker/Dragonsworn? Those lines keep shifting as Blizzard continually proves that they have no creative restraints. Even now, Alexstraza and the Dragons are not Evokers, because they can't actually use all 5 Dragonflight powers. Evoker is literally more conceptually new than Bards would be.

You have it backwards: Evokers are Warcraft dragons in playable form. The goal is not to turn Alexstraza into an Evoker, the goal is to allow the player to experience being a playable dragon that utilizes Alexstraza’s ;(and other aspects) abilities within the constraints of a WoW class.

A Bard class will follow a similar path, but that path is currently occupied by the ETC.

[FossilFree]

given that orcs came from the breakers who were made to smush the plants I don't think the vines and carnivorous plant thing would be all that fitting, rocky though would be perfect.

Maybe like the stone bear model from the Legion artifact? Only with an orcish theme. A whole set of stone forms would be pretty cool too.

[Triceron]

I didn’t say hero classes. I said that WoW classes are based on hero characters, especially expansion classes.

Every WoW expansion class has been based on a hero character, and has had playable mechanics in a RTS/MOBA format before they appeared as a class.

That's merely confirmstion bias.

Evoker as a class never existed before Dragonflight. Dracthyr never existed either. You could say they're based on Dragon heros, but they're still themed very differently than any individual.

It's like pointing at the Hunter class and saying they're based on Sylvanas. How much of that is true?

You have it backwards: Evokers are Warcraft dragons in playable form. The goal is not to turn Alexstraza into an Evoker, the goal is to allow the player to experience being a playable dragon that utilizes Alexstraza’s ;(and other aspects) abilities within the constraints of a WoW class.

A Bard class will follow a similar path, but that path is currently occupied by the ETC.

There are plenty of Bards and traditional musicians in WoW.

Again, even Lirath Windrunner was a musician and a very close associate to the Windrunner sisters. The entire Warsong clan is known for battle-hymns. The Kodorider literally was a bardic unit in the RTS games, who was not based on heavy metal and guitar axes. There is plenty of traditional musicians to draw inspiration from and to represent.

And if you circle back to the gameplay thing, you originally argued Evokers allowed players to play as Wrathion, a hero who had no unique gameplay to call his own.

What would be the difference in having a class that represents the Warsong clan or the Windrunners' musical legacy?

- - - Updated - - -

Maybe like the stone bear model from the Legion artifact? Only with an orcish theme. A whole set of stone forms would be pretty cool too.

Make it a stone boar and I'd be all for it.

I always felt they had a strong connection to boars and pigs. The pig-like tusks, the pig farms of WC2, the rivalry with Quillboars in the Barrens. Boars are even commonly seen mounts for the Orcs in Warhammer. Orcs should have had a more direct connection to em.

Dire wolf would probably be the next best thing, like a burly wolf the size of a bear.

[Syegfryed]

I always felt they had a strong connection to boars and pigs. The pig-like tusks

Orc tusk and boars/pigs tusks are different, orcs have from the lower jaw, boars have from the upper jaw, the way they sprout too(orcs tot he front and boars to the sides) is also different. Troll tusks in other hand grow from the upper jaw.

Anyway, boars would not fit a feral form because no claws and fangs to do the shenanigans cat forms do, at beast some sort of bear form

[username993720]

Yes, and thankfully it seems that Blizzard won’t ruin that dragon class by adding other races to it.

You can't, really. They don't have wings.

That said, don’t sleep on Crypt Lords. I have a feeling we may be hanging with nerubian Spider kings in the near future.

Don't give them ideas, for crying out loud. A spider class... it's getting more ridiculous as time goes on...

What about Bard? Maybe not his absurd ETC version, but now that Blizz opened up a Support role, who knows?

A medieval minstrel, yes.
A rock N' roll class? No thank you.

The ETC version is the only viable Bard option in WoW. If they do a Bard, it’s going to be ETC-style. HotS gives them the mechanics, Hearthstone gives them an expanded theme.

Jesus christ... how much do you want to ruin the game?
I don't mind the mechanics, but the rock n' roll theme will completely break immersion.

you mean this one?


Seems fine to me, some sort of ancient primal/ancient feline, that holds up traces of lions, tigers and sabertooth tigers

I prefer the original panther, Bethekk.

[Triceron]

Orc tusk and boars/pigs tusks are different, orcs have from the lower jaw, boars have from the upper jaw, the way they sprout too(orcs tot he front and boars to the sides) is also different. Troll tusks in other hand grow from the upper jaw.

Anyway, boars would not fit a feral form because no claws and fangs to do the shenanigans cat forms do, at beast some sort of bear form

Boar form wouldn't be the DPS form.

It was a direct response to stone bear form.

[Nathanyel]

Regarding things such as class lore, it cannot be changed.

Of course class lore can be changed. It used to be that only Night Elf Men could be Druids, while Night Elf Women were the only Priests and Warriors of their race.

Nope, because it would use abilities and concepts from the ETC, like using his guitar like an axe;

https://i.ibb.co/7WBYCHX/ETC-Mercenaries-2.jpg

While I wouldn't have anything against a melee Bard spec, would even play it, using your instrument as a melee weapon sounds odd, in general.

While much of this can be handwaived by the Rule of Cool: Is it a guitar with sharpened edges, or did the Bard string up a regular axe? (could be a Bard-only 'enchant' akin to DK Runeforging, except mandatory)

Regarding Transmog, would you be forced into a couple Guitaxe appearances no matter your equipped weapon, or would there be visual strings on every Axe/Sword used by a Bard?

To me, the ideal approach would be the Bard to be mostly ranged, playing the instrument to buff friendlies and harm hostiles, but there's also a cooldown to rush in and hit enemies with the "Axe".
The instrument would be a class customization, while the equipped weapon type is something else, but actually it's just a stat stick. (Alternatively, the Bard can dualwield 1h weapons in melee, particularly for soloing, but the instrument remains a class visual, not a gear slot, visible during certain abilities)

Tbh I have no idea how D&D or other RPGs with a bard class handle the dichotomy of instruments and melee combat, so there might be way more elegant approaches.

[Teriz]

That's merely confirmstion bias.

I was using that criteria before DHs were released. Both DHs and Evokers followed that criteria.

Evoker as a class never existed before Dragonflight. You could say they're based on Dragon heros, but they're still themed very differently than any individual.

Actually they did. Evoker is the class name for a user of the 5 aspect powers. Dracthyr are merely playable versions of Warcraft dragons. That's all it is. And yes, they're themed differently than any individual hero because they're a combination of several characters. Which is why your Dracthyr can resemble a black dragon or even a chromatic dragon, and its visage form can resemble Wrathion to Alexstraza.

It's like pointing at the Hunter class and saying they're based on Sylvanas. How much of that is true?

Well no, since I said that they're pulling from multiple draconic characters, it's like saying the Hunter class is based on several characters like Rexxar, Alleria, Sylvanas, Tyrande, etc. Which it is.

There are plenty of Bards and traditional musicians in WoW.

Again, even Lirath Windrunner was a musician and a very close associate to the Windrunner sisters. The entire Warsong clan is known for battle-hymns. The Kodorider literally was a bardic unit in the RTS games, who was not based on heavy metal and guitar axes. There is plenty of traditional musicians to draw inspiration from and to represent.

And if you circle back to the gameplay thing, you originally argued Evokers allowed players to play as Wrathion, a hero who had no unique gameplay to call his own.

Evokers can make their Dracthyr appear like a black dragon, and make their visage form resemble Wrathion's, so yeah you can be a playable version of Wrathion as a DE. However, it's important to note that you can link Wrathion's potential gameplay to other black dragons which do have unique gameplay, since he himself is a black dragon. We can't do that with Lirath Windrunner who has zero gameplay or unique abilities.

What would be the difference in having a class that represents the Warsong clan or the Windrunners' musical legacy?

There's not enough material to base a class upon it. Again, no unique mechanics or abilities.

- - - Updated - - -

While I wouldn't have anything against a melee Bard spec, would even play it, using your instrument as a melee weapon sounds odd, in general.

While much of this can be handwaived by the Rule of Cool: Is it a guitar with sharpened edges, or did the Bard string up a regular axe? (could be a Bard-only 'enchant' akin to DK Runeforging, except mandatory)

Regarding Transmog, would you be forced into a couple Guitaxe appearances no matter your equipped weapon, or would there be visual strings on every Axe/Sword used by a Bard?

They are weapons similar to the Arcanite Ripper;
https://www.wowhead.com/wotlk/item=3...rcanite-ripper

Also Hearthstone introduced the concept of other such instrument weaponry like guitar swords and guitar maces (ignore the keyboard);




You could transmog within any of those three weapon types. I would imagine like Warglaives and Demon Hunters, Blizzard would create several such weapons for an ETC Bard class.

To me, the ideal approach would be the Bard to be mostly ranged, playing the instrument to buff friendlies and harm hostiles, but there's also a cooldown to rush in and hit enemies with the "Axe".
The instrument would be a class customization, while the equipped weapon type is something else, but actually it's just a stat stick. (Alternatively, the Bard can dualwield 1h weapons in melee, particularly for soloing, but the instrument remains a class visual, not a gear slot, visible during certain abilities)

Tbh I have no idea how D&D or other RPGs with a bard class handle the dichotomy of instruments and melee combat, so there might be way more elegant approaches.

I really think the best option is to merely follow HotS' example; Have the Bard be a melee fighter who can use their instrument as a weapon, and as a way to influence the battlefield. It can essentially be a melee version of Augmentation Evoker. The only thing we're missing is the appropriate lore for the ETC that justifies placing his class into an expansion (which is honestly the problem with the bard concept in general). Structurally speaking, the class concept works as WoW's interpretation of the Bard.

- - - Updated - - -

Don't give them ideas, for crying out loud. A spider class... it's getting more ridiculous as time goes on...

https://www.mmo-champion.com/threads...acthyr-Evokers

Consider it a darker version of the Druid class. Much like Death Knights are the darker version of Paladins.

[Jaggler]

There is no reason to hyperfixate on ETC in regards to Bard. It's such a universal concept that you don't have to have a figuere head. like you don't need to have Antonidas or Rhonin to explain a mage in a fantasy setting.

[czarek]

There is no reason to hyperfixate on ETC in regards to Bard. It's such a universal concept that you don't have to have a figuere head. like you don't need to have Antonidas or Rhonin to explain a mage in a fantasy setting.

Yea thats kind a wierd like everyone now want explanation or proof in WoW Like why do we have to explain anythin in fantasy world?

[username993720]

https://www.mmo-champion.com/threads...acthyr-Evokers

Consider it a darker version of the Druid class. Much like Death Knights are the darker version of Paladins.

No, thank you. It looks like Digimon or something.
A dark Druid would be a Druid of the Nightmare.

[Jaggler]

No, thank you. It looks like Digimon or something.
A dark Druid would be a Druid of the Nightmare.

Also Death Knights as "darker versions of a Paladin" doesn't add up apart from the fact that both wear plate