5 reasons why 4th spec could be in the next WoW Expansion

[fenixazul]

No, please, no. Just make new Talent Trees and I'll be happy. More specs = more balancing. One of the things I hate in MoP is that they give EVERY CLASS almost EVERYTHING, I hate new CCs and new CDs.

ugh seriously , I hate the old talent tree, first use your stone to teleport to a capital city, search for a class teacher, erase ALL your talent tree just for changing ONE single talent because it was more usefull for that specific boss.

With the current talent system you have more flexibility and the talents are more about your gamming preferences, with the former talent tree you were just a carbon copy of something that you researched in a forum.

And returning to the main topic, I will said that if Blizzard implement a 4th spec for the next expansion it was only going to be for the pure DPS classes.

Warlock = Tank (da with maybe a shield that consume your mana)
Rogue = Tank (dodge)
Mage = Healer with time magic

The only problem is the hunter, I dont see this class as a tank or healer

And adding a 4th spec that just do DPS for an already pure DPS class is a total waste of time, seriously

[Deleted]

Rogue Tank
Shaman Tank
Priest Light Magick DPS spec
Hunter Pure Ranged (no pet,) or pure pet Tanking.
Warlock Tank (Demo branch-off)
Mage Tank (Frost branch-off)
DK Healing (Blood branch-off)
Monk Caster DPS
Warrior Field Medic
Paladin Caster DPS

There. 4 specs for everyone.

Yes and most of them sound like something people pulled out of their asses. Field Medic? Warrior doesn't need a healing spec. Stop forcing those ideas on classes. Even Shaman tanking and Warlock tanking aren't anything the class needs.

[slackjawsix]

druids have a 4th spec and shams still have tank abilities so i dont doubt it

[Byniri]

What would they be though?

Warrior: Sword and board DPS
Paladin: Caster DPS
Death Knight: ???

Hunter: ???
Shaman: Tanking spec

Monk: Caster DPS
Druid: already has 4 specs
Rogue: ???

Priest: Holy DPS
Warlock: Tank
Mage: 'Reaver' spec (similar to Boomkin)

[cidic]

Maybe if the 4th specc is a pvp specc?

This right here is what I'm hoping for IF they do indeed ad a 4th spec to all classes. I would love to see them separate the PVE from the PVP spec differences. It would make things so much nicer when they have to nerf something cause of PVP and it effects PVE as well or vice versa.

[Teriz]

Ive read through your other threads before, and to be honest your incredibly hypocritical at times, you freaking love panda's but call the implementation of actual races with a foothold in Azeroth (and not thinly referenced races) "fanboy fantasies".

There are a number of races and classes that can and could have been easily implemented over the previous expansion. The issue they run into is the same one we have right now, adding lets say Ogre's for example, would just be for the sake of it. They would have been a lot easier to add during WoW's inception, but they would be incredibly irrelevant like the pandaren race are currently. A class would be Tinkers, although they run into the same problem of being totally irrelevant and just something to add.

Until you know what the next expansion will be, its impossible to take a decent gander at what could be released. Blizzard however, has proven that even with thinly referenced races, they can make something out of nothing, hell they could take murlocs and make an expansion on them- oh wait, Jinyu... Ill wait and see what Blizz's dev team scrapes out the lore barrel.

You have to agree that Pandaren makes quite a bit more sense as a playable race than Ogres right? There's a reason no hero in WC3 was an Ogre. Ogres are on the same intelligence level of Murlocs and Kobolds. They didn't build cities or civilizations, and are pretty dumb across the board. Also Pandaren are relevant because we discovered Pandaria, which had a pretty solid basis in Warcraft lore stretching back to WC3.

As I said, you'd have to be scrapping the barrel to make races like Ogres or Naga playable. I know some folks don't like to hear that, but frankly its the truth. Comparing Ogres to Pandaren is pretty ridiculous, because you have one race that is established as beasts of burden, or big burly buffoons used by various groups to do their dirty work, and you have another race that clearly comes from a very sophisticated civilization that uses magic, fighting arts, and has many established heroes.

Beyond simple lore though you have the reality that Blizzard is currently working on new models, there's really no great Alliance counterpart for an Ogre implementation into the game, and Pandaren may need more time to establish themselves in the game.

[Deleted]

druids have a 4th spec and shams still have tank abilities so i dont doubt it

Druids have as many specs as they had when the game launched. Having abilities that produce threat doesn't make a class a tank class. Shamans were never viable tanks,

[Teriz]

What would they be though?

Warrior: Sword and board DPS
Paladin: Caster DPS
Death Knight: ???

Hunter: ???
Shaman: Tanking spec

Monk: Caster DPS
Druid: already has 4 specs
Rogue: ???

Priest: Holy DPS
Warlock: Tank
Mage: 'Reaver' spec (similar to Boomkin)

I would say Warriors= Blademasters
Death Knights: Rune (caster DPS)
Hunter: Ranger (Healing spec)
Rogue: Tanking or healing spec
Mage: Time (healing spec)

[Seranthor]

*snip*

1. With the amount of crying over balance issues... Blizzard will not give every class a 4th spec, period.

2. Not every expansion brings a new class, not every expansion brings a new race, they just happen to have collided in MOP.

3. You dont need a new race every expansion... we got them in BC, Cata and MOP.... they WONT be giving us a new race in the next one.

4. You wont get a 4th spec for shaman in the next expac... No... you want to tank, roll a tank...

[crunk]

1 reason why it won't be.


I dare you to find a non-DPS spec for mages. Seeing as they all just DPS as frost anyway.

chronomancer, he heals

[Hishiro]

Blood Elves, Draenei, Goblins, Worgens, and Pandaren were all OBVIOUS future races for the game.

Ok, this is the part I take issue with the most. No one ever thought Pandaren would be playable and would say that they were either a joke race from Warcraft III, or that it would offend the Chinese. Draenei were just completely out of left field. I mean, Blizzard completely retconned the Draenei race from what they originally were, and this initially caused some controversy. I'm not saying that there weren't people who were wanting these races added, but to say they were OBVIOUS races is absurd. OBVIOUSLY, there are a lot of directions Blizzard could take with the next expansion. There is room for growth and expansion of current lore and races.

One big reason Blizzard would not add 4th specs to existing classes is that it would be a huge balancing headache for them. Currently, they only need to balance 34 specs. If they add a new race only, that stays at 34. If they add a new class, with 3 specs, they only need to balance for 37. To add 4th specs to every class, they would have to balance for 44. Plus, while there are a few classes with obvious expansions they could make to have 4 specs, some classes would just be pushing it, or not offer enough that is different from existing classes to make it worth their time.

[Teriz]

1. With the amount of crying over balance issues... Blizzard will not give every class a 4th spec, period.

2. Not every expansion brings a new class, not every expansion brings a new race, they just happen to have collided in MOP.

3. You dont need a new race every expansion... we got them in BC, Cata and MOP.... they WONT be giving us a new race in the next one.

4. You wont get a 4th spec for shaman in the next expac... No... you want to tank, roll a tank...

1. There was balance crying in Cataclysm. Blizzard still introduced a new Talent system, Monks and Pandaren in MoP.

2. I never said they did. I said every expansion brings either a new class or a new race. MoP broke the mold by adding both.

3. I agree, and I also don't think they will be giving as a new class either. However if they aren't going to bring either into the game, what could they possibly add to make up for it? My guess is 4th specs.

4. Of all the classes, few deserve a 4th spec more than Shaman. Also given their spec set up (and lore) an Earth-based tanking spec makes the most sense.

---------- Post added 2013-03-02 at 09:18 PM ----------

Ok, this is the part I take issue with the most. No one ever thought Pandaren would be playable and would say that they were either a joke race from Warcraft III, or that it would offend the Chinese. Draenei were just completely out of left field. I mean, Blizzard completely retconned the Draenei race from what they originally were, and this initially caused some controversy. I'm not saying that there weren't people who were wanting these races added, but to say they were OBVIOUS races is absurd. OBVIOUSLY, there are a lot of directions Blizzard could take with the next expansion. There is room for growth and expansion of current lore and races.

Really? I knew Pandaren were in the running since around a year after the Burning Crusade where sources stated that Pandaren were a possible race for that expansion, but since they didn't fit with the concept, they went with another race instead.

That was late 2008.

[Melilithia]

Yes and most of them sound like something people pulled out of their asses. Field Medic? Warrior doesn't need a healing spec. Stop forcing those ideas on classes. Even Shaman tanking and Warlock tanking aren't anything the class needs.

I have to admit, the Warrior one I really pulled out of nowhere (but it was the only one.) It's hard enough to build on such a plain class.

BUT as somebody whose Main is a level 90 Warlock, with Demo spec, I would LOVE to see a Warlock tank spec (and if it gets me fast queues? Bonus!)

chronomancer, he heals

Reminds me of Orihime, from the Bleach anime.

[butbearform]

BUT druids have 4 specs... Why cant my class have 4? GTFO!!! This is the reason the game is not balanced. People QQ to much and see another class get something they wanted and QQ until something gets done about it. Then the FIRST class to get the ability gets nerfed... Shoot,in BC everyone was crying about stuns and they removed the stun procs to help with this. They said they didnt want all the stuns to be in the game. They gave druids a 4th spec due to balancing issues.Now it seams that everyone has a bunch of CC's and every class is feeling less and less unique. So please stop asking for things that are not needed. Thanks!

[XDurionX]

Never gonna happen. Nothing to gain and much to lose. Nearly impossible to balance the 34 existing Specs, why blow it up with 11 additional specs that add absolutley nothing, since there won´t be any new mechanics anyway?

[ThePlanckEnergy]

Do people still not realilze that giving Druids a 4th spec was intended as, and was, a substantial nerf? Huge nerf to Feral in PvP and a ridiculously huge nerf to Guardian in PvE. Guardian Druid design is absolutely terrible. Probably the most boring and awkward spec in the game. It's never been more than a fifth rate protection warrior but they really got left out in the cold in this whole "active mitigation" philosophy. If you're going to bother splitting it into its own spec, at least flesh it out. It's so ill-conceived I want to vomit.

It would be highly enraging if they added a 4th spec for everyone... an actual fourth spec meant to improve the class. One that improves playability and quality of life. The Guardian spec basically reduced all of these things for Feral Druids.

[butbearform]

My name says it all. I was doing good against this feral druid but bear form. It was OP and needed balanced. As for tanking with a bear. I enjoy tanking as a bear and I know it can be boring but we should just deal with it.You can't always get what you want.

[Skroe]

I think there is a strong likelihood of this coming. It would fit in the game very easily. Most of the classes already have it worked out.

Warlocks-> Dedicated Tanking Druid
Druids-> Guardian Tree
Paladins-> Shockadin Caster DPS
Hunter-> Either a 'melee' hunter or a petless hunter
Rogue-> Ranged Rogue
Priest-> Holy DPS maybe?
Monk-> Caster DPS
Death Knight-> Return of Blood DPS or maybe a pure physical damage spec?
Mage-> Battle Mage?
Shaman-> A more "beast centric" Shaman?
Warrior-> A Combo-points based spec

[Eazy]

Just no, rogues should always be DPS only class because they're rogues. Can you imagine LEATHER WEARER with DAGGERS tanking? Do not talk to me about "dodge spec", because it's ridiculous when I think about tanking 10 NPC with a rogue.

[Teriz]

I

I know for a fact theres a few Ogre fanatics in your other threads that debated you to a silence, chances are they will hone in on this one too. Fact is this expansion proved that Blizzard doesnt need lore to make a race, it just makes the process easier, and makes the race itself more grounded in the wow universe. So to say ogres are unsuited for the horde that they have been a part of for so long, is rediculous.

That wouldn't be a fact since none of my other threads have dealt with Ogres as a playable race. This one really doesn't either.