Will Tinkers be a class in WoW?

[hrugner]

I don't understand the dislike for the robotic arms. I think they look interesting and cool. I definitely wouldn't mind a different mechanic, but if Blizzard created a tech class that was 1:1 the WC3 hero, I wouldn't mind. I'm sure Blizzard could easily make such a class fun and interesting. That's what's important.

- - - Updated - - -



If you don't like this topic, don't post in this thread.

I think the arms are cool, but having them out all the time would be a bit of clutter, particularly on the larger races; it would be a big negative to base the class around. It would probably be fine as part of a temporary spell or stance though.

[Teriz]

Wow. That is a brilliant link. This part was the best:

Sounds like the basis for Pandaren Shaman. Nothing to see there.

[Talen]

We know enough for a class. That class would be Warlock, since what we see with the Illidari are 1:1 concurrent with the Warlock class. They were built with those spells in mind. It's why they cast Shadowbolts instead of having a full set of spells they call their own.

And the Illidari Demon Hunters are Demon Hunters. Yoiu just have this notion that thye aren't because they aer "selfish".

Guess what? Motivation is never ever going to be part and parcel of a class. It will always be up to the player. If I want to play an evil Demon Hunter in game...I can and will. And yes, while you may want to argue that this slefless aspect is part of their nature...justa s being good is part of a Paladins...that aspect is based upon a single word in a single description that you are taking literally and over generalising. It was proven wrong in WC3, with the Demon hunter illidan showing he was anything BUT selfless and THAT aspect has been shown to be wrong when you apply it to every single Demon Hunter in game, Illidari or not.

Your vision of a Demon Hunter doesn't exist and never has. All it is is a way for you to simply try and dismiss the Illidari as a source of DH. That, because they work with demons - just as Loramus did, justvas PCs would need to - that they somehow don't count.

Because gameplay also dictates that your idea of a Demon Hunter can never work as a class. Why? Because a Demon Hunter will, regardless of anthing else, HAVE to work with Demons because he will have to work with Warlocks. Just as the Illidari do. There's no choice in the matter.

Which were derived from Warlocks.

And I'm not just basing all that on the Illidari either. The Illidari are important mainly because they show that Blizzard had linked Warlock and Demon Hunters as far back as Vanilla. We also see their trainers...NElf Master Demon Hunters who follow Illidan and who, like Loramus, work with Demons.

NPCs aren't developed with their own identities in mind, most are given parallels to Player Classes because the resources are readily available. It's why early Death Knight NPCs were using Warrior and Warlock spells.

Yes. DKs used Warrior and Warlocks spells because that was the closest they could get with the tools they had developed at the time. And DHs use Warlock spells. They use Warlock Demons. They work with Demons. They are empowered by Demons. They use Demon Magic. They empower both themselves and their weapons with Demon energies. All of which also applies to Warlocks.

You're turning that around to say we can make a copy of a copy of a class. I wouldn't settle for a cheap facsimile when designing a new class.

I want a Demon Hunter. A Demon Hunter who made a pact to gain his powers. A Demon Hunters who uses Demons and Dmeonic power to augment himself and his weapons. A Demon Hunter who can turn into a Demon.

Why should I see a Demon Hunter based off a 4th spec as a cheap facsimile? If it has the lore I like, the looks I like and the abilities that make it a DH...why does it matter?

You are willing to drop all that. Think on that. To get a DH into the game...you are willing to drop the lore, looks, theme, abilities and even the very class name.

I don't want a Demon Slayer. I want a Demon Hunter. And because I'm not hung up on the word "selfless" I can accept it as part and parcel of a Warlock spec. Especially because I do know enough about game design to understand Blizzards concerns about the design space and so don't see a standalone class as viable.

If I have a choice between a Warlock 4th spec that gives me the DH I want, and this Slayer concept of yours....Warlocks all the way.

Warcraft lore is full of contradictions. They made their pacts selflessly, and were considered among the Night Elves' greatest warriors. They disappeared considering we know they gained these powers 'long ago' and there had been no mention of them appearing until the 3rd War when the Legion returned to Azeroth. The only one who could have trained them was Illidan, and there's no time between his release from prison to his escape where he could have trained so many Demon Hunters to fight alongside the Night Elf army.

We have huge gaps in lore.

Which does nothing about the lore and design space we DO have.

I have kept every core pillar of Demon Hunters that we know from Warcraft 3. They are still Shadowy Warriors who use Demonic energy to augment their weaponry.

And immediately thrat overlaps with Warlocks.

[quote]They are still selfless, and hellbent on vengeance. They are still able to tap into a Demonic Form, fueled by Fel Magic, warped to a physical image that represents their inner self.[.quote]

Now adding in paladin themes and expanding on the Warlock influence.

I've gotten support from Demon Hunter advocates who say it is a viable direction to go in.

Yes. One wonders if they read what you actually posted since what you presneted is essentially a new class that shares only the fact it has the word "Demon" in the title.

Regardless...if Blizzard were willing and able to drop the existing Design Space, then the overlap isn't a problem. The challenge here is to assume they don't want to and add in the traditional Demon Hunter we see in game, in WC3. Because your Demon Slayer isn't it.

It may not be the optimal, but I trust Blizzard designers to find one that suits the needs much better.

They already have one...and they've raised several issues against it including the big one on Design Space.

If I were designing a Monk class, I would have never come to the idea of using Mists, Chi and Celestial Animals to form the basis of their theme.

Mists? I'll grants. Chi and Animal aspects? Really? Two staples of the Martial Arts trope.

In the end, we have playable Demon Hunters as they look and appeared in Warcraft 3. That's what people want.

And they'd get that as a Warlock 4th spec as well.

Just a few pages ago you said Justice and Vengeance were two different things and chastised me for having even relating the two. Hypocrite.

Don't recall that. Or the context in which I said it if I did. Vengeance is a form of Justice.

Others would disagree with you.

And others have tried to show I'm wrong. Every single one - you included - has failed. Mostly becasue they focus on gameplay instead of the actual problem.

The "I can give DHs a unique gameplay" argument doesn't do much to address the Design Space issue but its about the best argument players come up with.

You don't present a strong enough argument against design space conflict.

Blizzard would disagree.

I've presented a concept that does not have conflict

Except with Paladins.

yet retains all pillars of DH identity

And Warlocks.

EJL

[Teriz]

The only ones who care to play as a Warlock are Warlock enthusiasts. Folding the DH concept does nothing to resolve the fact you're still playing a Warlock. What benefit does this have to actually presenting a Demon Hunter identity? You're not doing anything to present the Demon Hunter's themes, you're only masking it with Warlock themes. To cement the fallacy of the idea, you do not have Night Elf Warlocks available to present the original Illidan archetype.

The crazy thing about this is how easy it would be to make a Demon Hunter spec from Warlocks.

Here's a quick write up:

Demon Hunter: Warlock 4th Spec

Intro: The Black Harvest wishes to increase their power, and decide to form a new Demon Hunter order within their ranks. They travel the world recruiting the last remaining Demon Hunters to help them train this new order. The Demon Hunters in turn decide to join the Black Harvest to also increase their power, and to bolster their ranks for the inevitable return of the Burning Legion. Warlocks replace the more dangerous aspects of DH training with their own dark skills. For example, instead of removing eyes in order to see demons, the Warlocks simply teach their recruits to use Sense Demons instead. These safer and easier methods allow more recruits to survive the training process. Demon Hunters in turn teach Warlocks, whom they view as frail spellcasters, how to use demonic abilities in more martial ways.

Races: Night Elves can now roll Warlocks.

Weapons: Swords, Maces, Axes, Glaives (new weapon type only Warlocks can purchase). Warlocks can now use Warglaives of Azzinoth.

Abilities: Dark Slash, Crescent Sweep, Betrayer's Strike, Debilitating Strike, Shadowcloak, Wall of Shadows, Demon Rush, Absorb Fel Energies (CD), Immolation, Metamorphosis, Sense Demons, Demonic Evasion, Demon Lunge, Dark Lance, Demon Armor, Curse of Elements

Abilities while under Metamorphosis: Dark Apotheosis abilities

Resource: Demonic Fury; While fighting, Demon Hunters build Demonic Fury. When full, Demon Hunters transform into Demons via Metamorphosis until the bar runs out.
Melee attacks cause more demonic fury than ranged attacks.

It's that easy.

[Hatecore]

Wow, this thread is still going? The last 20 pages all look the same

OFC Teriz will keep it alive till the Zealot makes a new thread about tinkers

- - - Updated - - -

On topic:

well ghostcrawler has come straight out and said he sees i as highly unlikely and that its too whimsical for wow, So let it go Teriz it wont happen

[Teriz]

OFC Teriz will keep it alive till the Zealot makes a new thread about tinkers

- - - Updated - - -

On topic:

well ghostcrawler has come straight out and said he sees i as highly unlikely and that its too whimsical for wow, So let it go Teriz it wont happen

Ghostcrawler didnt say that though. He said that he wasn't sure, that the concept might be too whimsical, and that its inclusion depended on its treatment.

As the Bard/Psionic thread, and my post about Demon Hunters as a spec shows, Tinker is the strongest class concept, and has the strongest chance for implementation.

[Hatecore]

Ghostcrawler didnt say that though. He said that he wasn't sure, that the concept might be too whimsical, and that its inclusion depended on its treatment.

As the Bard/Psionic thread, and my post about Demon Hunters as a spec shows, Tinker is the strongest class concept, and has the strongest chance for implementation.

All your opinion. Not fact

[Teriz]

All your opinion. Not fact

It's not entirely my opinion.

Fact: Bards wouldn't work in WoW's gameplay system. There's no foundation for their theme (no WC3 unit). GC said that they're too "soft" for WoW.
Fact: Shadow Priests use mind powers/psionics
Fact: Demon Hunters have been almost completely folded intothe Warlock class.

So with those facts in place, my informed opinion is that Tinker/technology class is the strongest contender for class inclusion.

[Hatecore]

It's not entirely my opinion.


Fact: Bards wouldn't work in WoW's gameplay system.

Says who?

There's no foundation for their theme (no WC3 unit).

I don't think WC3 is a must for a new class

GC said that they're too "soft" for WoW.

And he said Tinkers are too too whimsical

Fact: Shadow Priests use mind powers/psionics

Use shadow magic

Fact: Demon Hunters have been almost completely folded intothe Warlock class.

Tinkers are all most almost completely folded into Engineering. I do not see how Warlocks are Demon hunters

FSo with those facts in place, my informed opinion is that Tinker/technology class is the strongest contender for class inclusion.

No lol you have no informed opinion You do not work for blizz. You are some nutjob Zealot who has a obsession with Tinkers and think they are coming to wow because it is what you want.

- - - Updated - - -

Remember prior to Blizzcon you screamed they were going announce Tinkers, the dark below and 4th spec

[Teriz]

I don't think WC3 is a must for a new class

Every class has a base in WC3.

And he said Tinkers are too too whimsical

He said they might be too whimsical.

Use shadow magic

Shadow magic based around mind attacks and psionics.

Tinkers are all most almost completely folded into Engineering. I do not see how Warlocks are Demon hunters

None of the Tinker abilities exist in Engineering. Several DH abilities lie within the Warlock class, as well as several of he themes.

No lol you have no informed opinion You do not work for blizz. You are some nutjob Zealot who has a obsession with Tinkers and think they are coming to wow because it is what you want.

I want Tinkers because they best fit the current class lineup.

Remember prior to Blizzcon you screamed they were going announce Tinkers, the dark below and 4th spec

Actually, I said that there wouldn't be a Dark Below expansion or a Burning Legion expansion, but an expansion based on technology/steampunk, based around the Iron Horde.

The only thing I got wrong was the Tinker class. Probably because WoD is a race expansion.

- - - Updated - - -

http://www.mmo-champion.com/threads/1330466-The-clues-from-various-quot-leaks-quot-show-that-the-next-Expansion-may-not-be-Burning-Legion

Just in case you needed the thread to jog your memory.

[Thimagryn]

The crazy thing about this is how easy it would be to make a Demon Hunter spec from Warlocks.

Which is no different than applying the same type of changes to any current class to incorporate elements of any other. You could fold Priestess of the Moon into a Druid 5th spec by doing the exact same thing. Witchdoctor could be Priest just as easily.

What you miss is the fact that the identity of the core class would overwhelm the identity of the spec. Warlocks don't represent the identity of Demon Hunters any more than Druids would properly represent Priestesses of the Moon (despite having use of Moon magic) and Priests don't represent Witchdoctors. All you're doing is adding gameplay and disregarding theme.

- - - Updated - - -

I wnat a Demon Hunter. A Demon Hunter who made a pact to gain his powers. A Demon Hunters who uses Demons and Dmeonic power to augment himself and his weapons. A Demon Hunter who can turn into a Demon.

You don't want a Demon Hunter. You want a Warlock. That's the problem with your argument. You want a Warlock who can melee. You want it to have the Demon Hunter name to popularize the Warlock. Nothing you have said actually addresses the core theme of a Demon Hunter, which is a class motivated and driven by Vengeance. Power mongering is only represented by Illidan and his villainous faction of Illidari. There is nothing wrong with Illidari having Demon Hunters, but you can not ignore the fact they represent Warlock themes by being so closely related to Demons.

You're trying to make a case that Korkron Dark Shamans are representative of the current Horde's Shamans, and that all Shamans should subvert and enslave Elementals because it's in lore. We know that Goblins do this, and they are an exception. The theme of Shaman player class is that of a benevolent, spiritual user of Elemental magic. The Korkron do not change this identity any more than Illidari change the identity of a selfless, vengeance-driven Demon Hunter.

Do you really believe the Korkron Dark Shaman represent the Shaman player class?

[Teriz]

Which is no different than applying the same type of changes to any current class to incorporate elements of any other. You could fold Priestess of the Moon into a Druid 5th spec by doing the exact same thing. Witchdoctor could be Priest just as easily.

No, Priestess of the Moon aren't shapeshifters, and they don't use nature magic. However, yes, a Troll Shadowpriest could also be a Witchdoctor.

What you miss is the fact that the identity of the core class would overwhelm the identity of the spec. Warlocks don't represent the identity of Demon Hunters any more than Druids would properly represent Priestesses of the Moon (despite having use of Moon magic) and Priests don't represent Witchdoctors. All you're doing is adding gameplay and disregarding theme.

Actually Warlocks do, since they've co-opted Illidan's identity, utilize the Demon Hunter's source of power, and posses a pretty wide swath of Demon Hunter and Illidan's WoE abilities.

[Ielenia]

I think Demon Hunters as a spec would work if given to rogues. Intellect-leather gear, shadow melee rogues. I think it'd fit.

[-Superman-]

And 52% still say, "No." to the thread title - [Will Tinkers be a class in WoW?] Only 5% even think it is a certainty. If 5% are certain it won't, Blizz is likely 99% sure it won't.

[Traveler Voltin]

I think Demon Hunters as a spec would work if given to rogues. Intellect-leather gear, shadow melee rogues. I think it'd fit.

that is worse than giving it to warlocks.

[Teriz]

And 52% still say, "No." to the thread title - [Will Tinkers be a class in WoW?] Only 5% even think it is a certainty. If 5% are certain it won't, Blizz is likely 99% sure it won't.

I remember when the majority here said that the Iron Horde was just a texture and not the major part of the next expansion.

The masses' record on predicting future content isn't very good.

[Ielenia]

that is worse than giving it to warlocks.

Why? Rogues are everything Demon Hunter already, minus the shadow magic. They dual-wield, they're shadowy fighters, they're not exactly well-received around for being, y'know, thieves and assassins... all they need is shadow magic.

[Traveler Voltin]

Why? Rogues are everything Demon Hunter already, minus the shadow magic. They dual-wield, they're shadowy fighters, they're not exactly well-received around for being, y'know, thieves and assassins... all they need is shadow magic.

demon hunter use more than shadow magic. they use arcane and fire.
rogues dont use magic. their "magic" is poison based.

[Alpharius]

I remember when the majority here said that the Iron Horde was just a texture and not the major part of the next expansion.

I remember when you said tinker will be announced on blizzcon because of the custume contest.

[Teriz]

I remember when you said tinker will be announced on blizzcon because of the custume contest.

Yes, I was wrong about that, but I was right about the Iron Horde.