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

[Teriz]

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.

You didn’t need them (although both represent two mage specs) because vanilla classes didn’t have to have an expansion theme tied to them. Expansion classes do, which is why you need a hero tied to the class.

- - - Updated - - -

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

Which isn't possible, so a Crypt Lord class is the next best option. Also there's a possible Azjol-Nerub expansion in WoW's future.

[Jaggler]

You didn’t need them (although both represent two mage specs) because vanilla classes didn’t have to have an expansion theme tied to them. Expansion classes do, which is why you need a hero tied to the class.

You don't need one. We didn't need one for Evoker and we are perfectly fine.

You only need to make the concept of the class understandable. A Bard is such a basic concept, that it just explain itself.

[Teriz]

You don't need one. We didn't need one for Evoker and we are perfectly fine.

Uh Evokers had multiple draconic heroes (Wrathion, Chromie, Deathwing, Ysera, Kalecgos, Nozdormu, etc) with Alexstraza being the face of the expansion (an expansion called Dragonflight btw). So yeah, they needed one too, they simply had several to utilize which is why their class is so broad and diverse (two schools of magic per spec).

You only need to make the concept of the class understandable. A Bard is such a basic concept, that it just explain itself.

And they’ve done that with the ETC. The problem is that you can’t build an expansion around him, and that’s by design.

[Lorgar Aurelian]

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.

Ya id think they could add in some symbols like the big breakers have and let you change the colour of them.

[Syegfryed]

I prefer the original panther, Bethekk.

Didn't find any images of it, but i preffer kimbul from zandalar personally

And, anyway, i still think a green lion/tiger with tusks would be dope as fuck

[Ielenia]

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.

And yet the class (and race) is based in no specific dragon whatsoever in existence, but for some reason the bard class concept must be based off on a singular character that isn't even a hero in the Warcraft lore?

Also, didn't you agree to not derail the thread further with non-druid talk?

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

Nah. That's just your opinion. One that is shared by... I believe no one but yourself?

- - - Updated - - -

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.

I meant more the core definition of a class. In the DH examples, I don't think we can go from "they take the power of demons they consume into their own bodies" to "they infuse themselves with fel".

- - - 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.

Hmm, for a Guardian form for orcs, I could see them having a Gronn shape, using the yeti/werebear skeleton.

[Teriz]

And yet the class (and race) is based in no specific dragon whatsoever in existence,

Correct, it's based on all of them, from Alexstraza to Chromie to Onyxia to Kalecgos. Once again, this is why the Evoker class is broad and diverse, with each spec containing 2 magic schools that could be specs onto themselves. It's also why it has a ton of customization options for the Dracthyr model, allowing you to imitate the color scheme of every flight, and also the color scheme of off-flights like Chromatic dragons.

but for some reason the bard class concept must be based off on a singular character that isn't even a hero in the Warcraft lore?

Yes, because unlike the numerous draconic heroes, there is only a single bardic hero in Warcraft.

Also, didn't you agree to not derail the thread further with non-druid talk?

Yes, I'll make a new thread to carry this on further.

Nah. That's just your opinion. One that is shared by... I believe no one but yourself?

Most people also didn't believe that the next class would be a race/class combination (yourself included), yet here we are.

[Ielenia]

Correct, it's based on all of them,

Which shows the hypocrisy as you see no problem in the class being "based on all of them" but refuse to allow the same courtesy to other class concepts.

Yes, because unlike the numerous draconic heroes, there is only a single bardic hero in Warcraft.

And that "hero" is not the ETC because, again, the ETC is not a hero in the Warcraft universe. He's just a musician. Russell Brower is more of a 'hero' than the ETC.

Yes, I'll make a new thread to carry this on further.

You already have one, that got 'ratio'ed' to hell and back if memory serves. I recall that idea being called... 'creatively bankrupt'?

Most people also didn't believe that the next class would be a race/class combination (yourself included), yet here we are.

Even a broken clock can be right twice a day.

[Teriz]

You already have one, that got 'ratio'ed' to hell and back if memory serves. I recall that idea being called... 'creatively bankrupt'?

I got "ratio'ed to hell and back" in the Dragon class threads and the Evoker 3rd spec thread as well. It's okay.

[Shadowferal]

The highlight of arrogance to quote oneself, but to pivot my idea;

"Druid for all races" is just the idiocy of lazy writing playing itself out.

What blizz should do is build a similar template and attach an appropriate label/name.
Example; gnomes.
Three specs, two of which focus on robotics, a tank spec, and a dps spec. The third spec focuses on the "curse of the flesh" giving the Gnome certain transformative abilities.

And such a class isn't going to be called "druid" because that's not just lazy, but blindingly ridiculous. The class..."tinker."

I can see the template for a dwarf "earth-warder" that can transform into a gronnling...and fighting a tinker inside his own "tank." (Runic war golem)

[Vaedan]

I got "ratio'ed to hell and back" in the Dragon class threads and the Evoker 3rd spec thread as well. It's okay.

If I remember correctly, you also predicted that 3rd Evoker spec would be tank based on Black Flight, because nothing else make sense. You also argumented against that this spec would be a DPS one... now we get black/bronze DPS/support spec.

You were right that we would be getting spec, but it was not that hard to predict, based on datamined evidence. Many people were predicting it.

[Ielenia]

I got "ratio'ed to hell and back" in the Dragon class threads and the Evoker 3rd spec thread as well. It's okay.

Were you, really? I recall many were more or less on your side, including the poster who called your """""bard""""" concept 'creatively bankrupt' in that other thread.

- - - Updated - - -

I can see the template for a dwarf "earth-warder" that can transform into a gronnling...

I think gronnlings suit orcs better than dwarves. I see no reason for why dwarves would become gronn considering they're a race natural to Draenor, not Azeroth.

[Triceron]

Uh Evokers had multiple draconic heroes (Wrathion, Chromie, Deathwing, Ysera, Kalecgos, Nozdormu, etc) with Alexstraza being the face of the expansion (an expansion called Dragonflight btw). So yeah, they needed one too, they simply had several to utilize which is why their class is so broad and diverse (two schools of magic per spec).

These are all different characters to draw inspirstion from yes?

Some have gameplay some don't.
Some have non elf forms
Some are raid bosses some are heroes

The only connection is they are dragons, and we have a class based on dragons. Any further connection is merely confirmstion bias.

You can look like Wrathion and Alexstraza, sure, but you can't look like Chromie or Ebonhorn. You can say gameplay is based on Chromie and Alrxstrazaa,, but not on Wrathion or Nozdormu. The argument is all confirmstion bias, and you pick what suits your argument while picking everything that doesn't to use against a Musical class, which has just as much basis in WoW.

And they’ve done that with the ETC. The problem is that you can’t build an expansion around him, and that’s by design.

There are plenty of lore characters associated with Music.

ETC is a solid basis for a spec, and if you want even be the posterboy for the class like Chen is for Monks. ETC could be the example of one spec.

Hellscream and Lirath for example can be the basis for two other specs based on characters with strong Musical backgrounds. Like Wrathion, we are looking at physical presence and aesthetics rather than gameplay.



As for gameplay, well we know they can invent new specs with completely new gameplay. And like Augmentation's six degrees of Kevin Bacon, these new gameplay mechanics would be associated to Grom, Lirath and ETC through the theme of Music.


So clearly, merely using ETC can be a basis for a new classs
be would merely not be the ONLY character the class is based on.


You're excluding all non-ETC related musicians for very little reasoning to do so. And it's pretty clear you intentionally do it to make the concept as absurd as you can in order to dismiss it (Can't build an expansion based on ETC).

[Teriz]

If I remember correctly, you also predicted that 3rd Evoker spec would be tank based on Black Flight, because nothing else make sense. You also argumented against that this spec would be a DPS one... now we get black/bronze DPS/support spec.

I argued that the tank spec made the most sense until more evidence appeared that it would be more support based. I never removed the possibility that the spec could be something other than a tank spec.

You were right that we would be getting spec, but it was not that hard to predict, based on datamined evidence. Many people were predicting it.

Re-read the thread. Plenty of posters did think it was hard to predict. Here's one prime example;

Seeing this storyline, the RP that happens throughout the story campaign in the Zaralek caverns and the RP that happens within the Aberrus raid, it becomes more than clear that a third spec based on black dragonflight magic is not coming, much less one focus on "augmentation".

Because as we saw in the Forbidden Reach storyline, the entire point of Emberthal's story is the rejection of Neltharion's and the black dragonflight's legacy, which heavily implies that whatever Emberthal's creche was about, it's now dead and over for good, and whatever "black dragonflight essence" that still containing Adamanthia is not going back to the dracthyr, and instead is likely going to be lost once released. Especially since the idea that the essence would go back to all the dracthyr on its own is rather ludicrous and, as far as I know, something like this has never happened in WoW, having the essence of an entire group of people suddenly return to its own individual owners by itself.

And that was the day of the actual reveal.

- - - Updated - - -

Were you, really? I recall many were more or less on your side, including the poster who called your """""bard""""" concept 'creatively bankrupt' in that other thread.

Triceron was pretty much the only one. There were a few others. However, the nays were definitely the majority. They popped up in force when Ion's interview came out.

Good times.

[Vaedan]

I argued that the tank spec made the most sense until more evidence appeared that it would be more support based. I never removed the possibility that the spec could be something other than a tank spec.



Re-read the thread. Plenty of posters did think it was hard to predict. Here's one prime example;



And that was the day of the actual reveal.

As more evidence surfaced, people actually accepted it. Nobody really expected Blizz to put it in the game mid-expansion, so I give you credit on that.

Other than that, your predictions did not ended up as reality. I would not list them among your list of successful predictions, really.

[Shadowferal]

I think gronnlings suit orcs better than dwarves. I see no reason for why dwarves would become gronn considering they're a race natural to Draenor, not Azeroth.

It's more to do with the "template" I quoted above. To me dwarves can't be druids. But make them Earth-warders and one of their primal transformations at an "elite" level would harken back to a more elemental form.

[Teriz]

These are all different characters to draw inspirstion from yes?

Some have gameplay some don't.
Some have non elf forms
Some are raid bosses some are heroes

The only connection is they are dragons, and we have a class based on dragons. Any further connection is merely confirmstion bias.

You can look like Wrathion and Alexstraza, sure, but you can't look like Chromie or Ebonhorn. You can say gameplay is based on Chromie and Alrxstrazaa,, but not on Wrathion or Nozdormu. The argument is all confirmstion bias, and you pick what suits your argument while picking everything that doesn't to use against a Musical class, which has just as much basis in WoW.

TBF, we can't look like Chromie and Ebonhorn due to technical and gameplay limitations of a playable class. Blizzard explains these limitations away as Dracthyr visage forms being different than Dragon visage forms, but that's all simply due to the limits of the game. That doesn't alter the facts of what the origins of the class are, and what heroes the class is based on.

There are plenty of lore characters associated with Music.

Only one can be on a cover of an expansion. You could have put Wrathion, Kalecgos, Chromie, Ysera, or Nozdormu on an expansion and it would have worked out fine. Deathwing was already on the cover of an expansion. The only "Bard" character in WoW that works in that fashion is the ETC.

Again, don't shoot the messenger, that's just the way it is.

- - - Updated - - -

As more evidence surfaced, people actually accepted it. Nobody really expected Blizz to put it in the game mid-expansion, so I give you credit on that.

Other than that, your predictions did not ended up as reality. I would not list them among your list of successful predictions, really.

You're being petty. I predicted that WoW would release an Evoker 3rd spec mid-expansion. That's what happened.

[Ielenia]

TBF, we can't look like Chromie and Ebonhorn due to technical and gameplay limitations of a playable class.

Blizzard could've easily allowed dracthyr players to pick a different race than "male BE/female human" for their visages. They chose otherwise, probably to further showcase how dracthyrs are different from actual dragons.

that's all simply due to the limits of the game.

It's not a limitation of the game. It's a conscious choice from the developers.

Only one can be on a cover of an expansion.

Vanilla WoW box art had two characters. TBC had two characters on their expansion box cover art. BfA had two characters.

The only "Bard" character in WoW that works in that fashion is the ETC.

We don't need them to be in the cover art. Having the BBEG on the cover art would've worked. After all, we don't have the new playabe goblins and worgen races on the cover art for Cataclysm.

Again, don't shoot the messenger, that's just the way it is.

Except the "messenger" is the one crafting the message, here. That's why they're being "shot". In other words: don't try to pass your own opinions as "Blizzard facts".

[Triceron]

TBF, we can't look like Chromie and Ebonhorn due to technical and gameplay limitations of a playable class. Blizzard explains these limitations away as Dracthyr visage forms being different than Dragon visage forms, but that's all simply due to the limits of the game. That doesn't alter the facts of what the origins of the class are, and what heroes the class is based on.

Then that's not fair at all since you're excluding the aesthetics of Musicians in WoW that a Bard could be based on that isn't ETC. There are no technical limitations there, only your absurd opinion that ETC is the only one that they could base a Bard's aesthetics around.

Only one can be on a cover of an expansion. You could have put Wrathion, Kalecgos, Chromie, Ysera, or Nozdormu on an expansion and it would have worked out fine. Deathwing was already on the cover of an expansion. The only "Bard" character in WoW that works in that fashion is the ETC.

Or you just put the next big bad on the cover instead, which has worked for numerous expansions as well.

Again, don't shoot the messenger, that's just the way it is.

You're not a messenger though, you're pushing your own interpretations, not conveying information directly from Blizzard.

Interpretations that are being falsely applied as messages from Blizzard's should be shot down.

[Vaedan]

You're being petty. I predicted that WoW would release an Evoker 3rd spec mid-expansion. That's what happened.

Yes, and I said you were right on that... But just on that. Nothing else you predicted on 3rd Evoker spec turned to be true.

My point also was that it was not even that hard to predict new spec. Youtubers, people on official forums were all rumoring that. It's not that only you and nobody else saw it coming.