Demon hunter vs tinker/ alchemist class

[Thimagryn]

Just keep telling yourself that, and maybe one day that will come true.

[Teriz]

Just keep telling yourself that, and maybe one day that will come true.

It came true as soon as Blizzard gave Warlocks Metamorphosis.

[Thimagryn]

Right, cuz that obviously stopped people wanting Demon Hunters.

[Arberian]

It came true as soon as Blizzard gave Warlocks Metamorphosis.

I dont like Demon Hunters cause of Metamorphosis....
I like them because they sacrifice one part of themselves to fight the Burning Legion. I like them because of what they represent. Adding them would be a favor to the lore...

[Jtree]

-Demon Hunters have zero ranged abilities as of this time. And unless you plan for them to throw their glaives and have to pick them up after every auto attack, they will not have a ranged spec. Feel free to contest me on this part; You will NOT manage to make three specs unique for a demonic dual wield class.

I did.

I don't think I'm nearly as imaginative as Blizzard's staff, yet I feel I have a reasonable outline for a wholly new class with unique mechanics, exciting gameplay, and compelling lore. I believe an actual class will be even more unique, with a richer story to be told.

[Yig]

These are also the guys who purposely gave DH design space to Warlocks, to the point where 90% of what makes a DH a DH is already performed by the Warlock class.

Damn, he's got us with that 90%, you can't argue with empirical data like that.

[Teriz]

I dont like Demon Hunters cause of Metamorphosis....
I like them because they sacrifice one part of themselves to fight the Burning Legion. I like them because of what they represent. Adding them would be a favor to the lore...

You're free to like them all you want. The problem is that Warlocks can do just about everything a Demon Hunter can do. Additionally the game has more than enough DW melee, so adding a Demon Hunter would be redundant on multiple fronts, and really add very little to the game.

How exactly would it be a favor to the lore? If anything it would actually be a hindrance.

For example; Why would a Demon Hunter be in Pandaria? There's no demons in Pandaria, so why is a DH there fighting? Their sole purpose is to hunt and destroy demons, so helping the Pandarens defeat the Mogu would be a waste of their time.

So yeah, they add to the lore when we're fighting demons. The problem is that we're not always fighting demons in WoW, so that makes the need for a Demon Hunter pretty limited.

A better class addition? Tinkers, Artificers, or Chemists.

[Thimagryn]

It should be fairly obvious that a Demon Hunter would follow in the footsteps of the Death Knight and be a Hero class. Hero Class would only refer to a 'Class that skips levels and gets better customization options', freeing up any imbalance or 'playing favourites' issues. They get fancier starting zone and quests, extra customization options (choice of tattooes) and skip a large chunk of content, possibly including Pandaria. 1-90 as a Demon Hunter doesn't make much sense. Instead, starting quests would focus on their training, their acquisition of power and how they finally enter the world to aid the Horde and Alliance.

[Jtree]

For example; Why would a Demon Hunter be in Pandaria? There's no demons in Pandaria, so why is a DH there fighting? Their sole purpose is to hunt and destroy demons, so helping the Pandarens defeat the Mogu would be a waste of their time.

So yeah, they add to the lore when we're fighting demons. The problem is that we're not always fighting demons in WoW, so that makes the need for a Demon Hunter pretty limited.

Why would a Death Knight be in Pandaria? There's no Scourge in Pandaria, so why is a DK there fighting? Their sole purpose is to hunt and destroy Scourge, so helping Pandarens defeat the Mogu would be a waste of their time.

So yeah, they add to the lore when we're fighting undead. The problem is that we're not always fighting undead in WoW, so that makes the need for a Death Knight pretty limited.



I suppose I could have changed that to Outland instead of Pandaria, to make it an even closer metaphor, but I think the point is sufficient.

[Teriz]

Why would a Death Knight be in Pandaria? There's no Scourge in Pandaria, so why is a DK there fighting? Their sole purpose is to hunt and destroy Scourge, so helping Pandarens defeat the Mogu would be a waste of their time.

So yeah, they add to the lore when we're fighting undead. The problem is that we're not always fighting undead in WoW, so that makes the need for a Death Knight pretty limited.

You're confusing player DKs with Knights of the Ebon Blade, which player DKs are not a part of. The Ebon Blade hunt scourge, and monitor the Lich King. Player DKs belong to their individual factions (Horde and Alliance), and do as their faction leaders command them to do.

Demon Hunters just hunt demons. Hence why they're called Demon Hunters.

- - - Updated - - -

It should be fairly obvious that a Demon Hunter would follow in the footsteps of the Death Knight and be a Hero class. Hero Class would only refer to a 'Class that skips levels and gets better customization options', freeing up any imbalance or 'playing favourites' issues. They get fancier starting zone and quests, extra customization options (choice of tattooes) and skip a large chunk of content, possibly including Pandaria. 1-90 as a Demon Hunter doesn't make much sense. Instead, starting quests would focus on their training, their acquisition of power and how they finally enter the world to aid the Horde and Alliance.

Is there going to be a significant demonic presence in WoD? From what I heard, WoD takes place before the demons arrived on Draenor.

[Thimagryn]

1. Yes there will be. Gul'Dan has already made promises to the Legion and the Iron Horde has ignored their offer. Shit's gonna hit the fan, whether it's now or the lead up into the next expansion.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0GLxejJ-yYQ#t=3021
2. Does it matter? Demon Hunters fight whatever they want.

[Yig]

This just blatantly shows how narrow minded and rigid you are being. A demon hunter adventurer with his own agendas has just as much place to wander the land as any other class with a heavy vested interest in a main story arc or combat style. Apply this logic to all the classes and watch your petty objection wither. A demon hunter would roam the land looking for demons like the Witcher or Van Helsing, or a paladin, who was originally basically an undead hunter. Yet paladins are also knights of virtue and wander the land seeking to aid the needy, find and guard the most ancient artifacts of the world's lore, have an interest in the existence of their planet and their fellow species, enjoy adventure.

A demon hunter is an anti hero adventurer. He would roam about, being sneered at by civilians and mistrusted, often sleeping in the rain, sitting in dark corners of taverns looking for the demonic cultists who he's been tracking through rumors for months to a small secluded mountain village. Along the way a person in need tells him his daughter was taken by gnolls. Demon hunters aren't just robots with one program telling them to kill all demons. Use your mind, don't discount context. This isn't paper-rock-scissors. There is a spectrum here, not an issue of either or.

He would join the Alliance and Horde armies should they face the Legion in battle.

He would have as much interest in wandering around exploring and being a dark antihero superhero archetype in WOW as demon hunters did in the tabletop RPG, joining parties of adventurers in Outland, paying back old favors to old companions by accompanying them on their quest to the Plaguelands, hanging around the Blasted Lands hunting demons at the Dark Portal.

This is asinine. Demon hunters are one of the main "wandering adventurer" archetypes int his game and to act like they have no purpose other than hunting demons is to act like,.. never mind.

[Talen]

i am trying really hard not to rage at you. i rather not have another infraction. demon hunter will never be a spec for warlocks it breaks lore

And as much as I value lore myself, I don't see one aspect of it that implementing it as a Warlock 4th spec would break. I can see it clashes with your own opinion of how both a DH and Warlock work and operate but the truth is....lore would only be broken if there was something here that contradicts the existing canon.

If I state that Demon Hunters was simply how Warlockism developed amongst the Night Elfs, if I state that Demon Hunters were simply Warlocks who focussed their powers into melee combat rather than ranged, if say that was a result of Night Elf warriors following the path instead of Alliance and Horde casters and that as a result the two developed different traditions and rituals and styles of using the same magic, different ways of exploiting the same demonic pacts which are the source of their powers, then I've created enough lore to fully merge the two into one class with zero lore issues.


Would Blizzard create such lore? They might. They might not. As it is the are several paths, several ways that Blizzard can go to merge the class lore. I's already done so to a great degree - BOTH DHs and Warlocks are those who gain power by making pacts with demons. That is already lore and the difference is simply how they use it.

So - all you mean when you say "it breaks lore" is that YOU don't like the notion. It doesn't fit the lore YOU are willing to accept.

Unfortunately, the lore you aren't willing to accept is canon and already links the DH and Warlock classes to a huge degree. Both of them simply made pacts to gain demonic power. They just use it differently.

if blizzard wouldnt have fucked in cata and move demonology so focused on meta we would not be having this chat

Then we would still have a situation where the DH and Warlock shared a huge overlap in design space and where the only real room for movement was with gameplay. Exactly where we are now. Metas is important, but it can be worked around if the need was great enough. The issue is with the entire design space.

And I don't think you and several others have any real idea how important that aspect is. How critical. I don't think you appreciate just how much that overlap kills the idea.

WoW can only support a finite number of classes. That might be 20. It might be 30. Personally, I can't see Blizzard going beyond 12. But because it can only support a finite number of classes, Blizzard is going to need each class archetype to be as distinct as possible so it can attract that type of players.

The Tinker fits this criteria. There is no class built around the tech theme. Its design space is almost fully open
The Warden fits this criteria. There is no class built around the Bounty Hunter theme (yes, yes...rogue and hunter classes could be adapted). Its very open, with some overlap in existing classes.
We could add Illusionists, or Sound Magic or build a class around the concept of Dragons. And so on. Each cocnept with large tracts of design space open to it.

The Demon Hunter does not have that luxury. Its theme, its basic lore, the core concept, the look of the class...they already belong to existing classes. Other aspects have been written down as part of class lore. Its NPCs share an ability list with Warlocks. Warlocks make use of DH moves. Indeed, by doing that, by giving Warlocks their look and so on, Blizzard has done its best to make the DH **LESS** distinct, less valuable as an additional class concept. And its been going that route for years.

The Demon Hunter does not have that luxury. Blizzard has already added two DW meleers who can cast. Do we want a third?

The Demon Hunter does not have that luxiry. The design overlap is such that it will attract players from the Warlock and Rogue classes. Blizzard is not going to cannibalise players from other classes to prop up a new class.

Much as you might want a dedicated standalone DH class - it isn't going to happen. Its brings nothing to the game and its addition would only harm existing classes. Nor can it be made distinct enough, given a new identity, to change that without changing who they are.

That's not what the lore says. The lore says that DHs wear next to no armor. Some wear no armor at all.

Cursed Vision is leather. Demon Hunters belt is Mail. Most appear (graphically) to wear cloth armor (ie.e a pair of trousers) and very little else.

I've only seen DHs with 1H swords. Sorry.

NPC DHs DW Glaives. It is their signature weapon and is a 1H Sword. Which Warlocks can use (except for the Warglaives Class restrictions). Other than that, the only other offensive tool they've used is Warlock Magic.

Demon Hunters hate Demons, and do not control demons.

Loramus begs to differ.

It's how everyone views Demon Hunters. Again, you believe Warlocks and Demon Hunters are the same thing. Explain to me why people still want Demon Hunter despite Warlocks already having Metamorphosis and Immolation?

Because its more than just a move list.

Do you think giving them Warglaives will really change anything? That giving Warlocks a melee spec would satisfy people who want to play as a Demon Hunter?

As they would then BE Demon Hunters - yes. Why would they be Demon Hunters? Because the game would say they are.

But I'm am confident enough to believe they will never reach that decision because the strength of the Class Identity surpasses that of the Warlock and I don't think the designers would reach the 4th spec conclusion that easily

As I said, its either the 4th spec option or NO Demon Hunter. If you wnat DHs in game, then the option is a no-brainer. A class will add no value to the game and would be harmful in some ways. Blizzard is not going to revrse a 6 year old design direction just so Warlocks and Rogues will lose even more players.

Beyond this, you can see how people are affected by your words against a Demon Hunter class by saying they add nothing to the game. Doesn't that give you any idea of how people feel about this class? You need to factor in the importance of the class to people who actually care about it. We're not talking about some new class identity that no one cares about, like a Bard or a Timewalker. We're talking about the Demon Hunter.

Yes. And Demon Hunters add nothing to the game beyond the ability to play Demon Hunters. In fact, it'd be detrimental to the Warlock and Rogue classes given the design overlap.

Demon Hunters bring no value to the game at all that requires a new class.

None of this satisfies the Demon Hunter crowd. You should realize that no one is asking for a Demon Hunter as a 4th spec.

They're asking for a Demon Hunter and the vast majority will be the vast majority and won't care one whit how it is brought in. And if that means attaching the DH to the Warlocks class then they'll take it.

I did.

I don't think I'm nearly as imaginative as Blizzard's staff, yet I feel I have a reasonable outline for a wholly new class with unique mechanics, exciting gameplay, and compelling lore. I believe an actual class will be even more unique, with a richer story to be told.

You created new abilities, ignored the bit where DHs make pacts with demons, and kept the rest of the same design space DHs already share with Warlocks.

For example; Why would a Demon Hunter be in Pandaria? There's no demons in Pandaria, so why is a DH there fighting? Their sole purpose is to hunt and destroy demons, so helping the Pandarens defeat the Mogu would be a waste of their time.

And if the Mantid had been Demons left over from the War of the Ancients? The Shado-Pan a bunch of Night Elf Demon Hunters stranded there from that time?

Blizzard could easily have added Demon Hunters to Pandaria if they'd wanted to. And its not as if the Far East doesn't have their own demon lore.

But they didn't.

EJL

[Zka]

I have recently seen a lot of demonhunter posts and tinker/alchemist class posts
Which class out of these would you like to see implemented, if any

Gogogogo discuss

None of them, but if I have to choose then anything but demon hunter. I cannot tell how tired I am of that.

[Deleted]

Please be my guests and try any of the concepts in my sig...

[Teriz]

Damn, he's got us with that 90%, you can't argue with empirical data like that.

So to recap:

Warlocks wear light armor. Demon Hunters wear light armor.
Warlocks can fight in melee range. Demon Hunters can fight in melee range.
Warlocks turn into demons. Demon Hunters turn into demons.
Warlocks burn enemies around them with Immolation. Demon Hunters burn enemies around them with Immolation.
Warlocks use demonic magic to fight in melee range. Demon Hunters use demonic magic to fight in melee range.
Warlocks utilize demons to increase their powers. Demon Hunters utilize demons to increase their powers.
Warlocks can equip swords. Demon Hunters can equip swords.
Warlocks apply curses. Demon Hunters apply curses.
Warlocks are shunned by Night Elf society. Demon Hunters are shunned by Night Elf society.

Differences:

Demon Hunters use Warglaives.

Let me know if I missed anything.

Again, the Tinker or Artificer are superior options.

Heck, even a class based on Alchemy is a better option. Any of those classes could provide new gameplay concepts like Ranged Tanking, mechanical-based DPS, or a Healing spec that doesn't require mana.

Demon Hunters just can't say the same.

[Raiju]

So to recap:

Warlocks wear light armor. Demon Hunters wear light armor.
Warlocks can fight in melee range. Demon Hunters can fight in melee range.
Warlocks turn into demons. Demon Hunters turn into demons.
Warlocks burn enemies around them with Immolation. Demon Hunters burn enemies around them with Immolation.
Warlocks use demonic magic to fight in melee range. Demon Hunters use demonic magic to fight in melee range.
Warlocks utilize demons to increase their powers. Demon Hunters utilize demons to increase their powers.
Warlocks can equip swords. Demon Hunters can equip swords.
Warlocks apply curses. Demon Hunters apply curses.
Warlocks are shunned by Night Elf society. Demon Hunters are shunned by Night Elf society.

Differences:

Demon Hunters use Warglaives.

Let me know if I missed anything.

Mages and rogues both wear light armour, too. Different types of armor for different purposes, though.
Mages and hunters can fight in melee range too, doesn't mean they are best at it thematically.
Immolation argument is weak, what is difference between flame shock and fireblast?
doubling a point about melee range, demon hunters are melee capable fighters without magical powers improving that
"can equip swords" - most classes can ingame, and anyone can with arms lorewise
Curses - game mechanic again, demon hunters could rely on magic effectsj ust as easily.
Warlocks are shunned by most societies, not just night elves.

[Deleted]

Demon Hunter, Tinker, Alchemist class!

Everybody happy!

[Teriz]

Mages and rogues both wear light armour, too. Different types of armor for different purposes, though.
Mages and hunters can fight in melee range too, doesn't mean they are best at it thematically.

Warlocks under Dark Apotheosis are best at Melee range thematically.

Immolation argument is weak, what is difference between flame shock and fireblast?

Fireblast isn't a DoT, Fireblast doesn't share a CD with other instant spells, Fireblast doesn't heal the Mage while it does damage, Fireblast doesn't last several seconds.

doubling a point about melee range, demon hunters are melee capable fighters without magical powers improving that

So a magical AoE that burns all enemies in Melee range around them doesn't improve their Melee? That's laughable.

"can equip swords" - most classes can ingame, and anyone can with arms lorewise
Curses - game mechanic again, demon hunters could rely on magic effectsj ust as easily.
Warlocks are shunned by most societies, not just night elves.

Looks like someone missed the point....

[Yig]

So to recap:

Warlocks wear light armor. Demon Hunters wear light armor.
Warlocks can fight in melee range. Demon Hunters can fight in melee range.
Warlocks turn into demons. Demon Hunters turn into demons.
Warlocks burn enemies around them with Immolation. Demon Hunters burn enemies around them with Immolation.
Warlocks use demonic magic to fight in melee range. Demon Hunters use demonic magic to fight in melee range.
Warlocks utilize demons to increase their powers. Demon Hunters utilize demons to increase their powers.
Warlocks can equip swords. Demon Hunters can equip swords.
Warlocks apply curses. Demon Hunters apply curses.
Warlocks are shunned by Night Elf society. Demon Hunters are shunned by Night Elf society.

Differences:

Demon Hunters use Warglaives.

Let me know if I missed anything.

Again, the Tinker or Artificer are superior options.

Heck, even a class based on Alchemy is a better option. Any of those classes could provide new gameplay concepts like Ranged Tanking, mechanical-based DPS, or a Healing spec that doesn't require mana.

Demon Hunters just can't say the same.

You can spin doctor anything to support your argument like that, it just shows how low your standards of evidence are and why you are quite literally trapped trying to demonstrate the subjective is intrinsically objective. Your objections are all arbitrary and ignore the precedents they demonstrate when you apply them to previous classes added to the game, those same objections would preclude Deathknights and Monks.

Yet when faced with that, you just start hair splitting over what merits being embellished and what does not based on what is intrinsically worthy of that distinction.