Arms... Or Blademaster?

[Putin-Chan]

I'd be overjoyed to see the samurai/swiftblade/blademaster archetype be fufilled in WoW, but I feel like they should be in mail or leather armor, and exclusively use two hand bladed weapons (mainly swords, but also axes and polearms). Arms always felt like it was supposed to be butchering enemies with an axe, not slicing their enemies to a thousand pieces using a longblade. Hopefully, survival has a quick enough rotation and the option to mog their spears into swords/axes for me to fufill that fantasy for me.

[Ralikon]

I'd probably like Blademaster simply because it's shiny and new. But, you know damn well that the time it would take them to change the whole name over would be much too long and perhaps take a raid tier from us.


I don't want to be the guy who took a raid tier from everyone...



"Hey you fucking Arms warrior, nice going man, all so you could get a name change?!"

"Blademaster? More like Baldmaster!!"

"Hah, Baldmaster, screw you Baldmaster"

"Yeah! Screw you, Baldmaster!"

[Throren]

My arms warrior is a heavy plated dwarf with one big two handed hammer. Not some shirtless samurai sword wielder. Blademaster would only fit arms warrior if arms could only use swords, only wear cloth pants, that's it, and only be orcs. Otherwise, blademaster doesn't fit.

A better name would have been like warmaster or Warlord or...idk, anything other than Blademaster.

[Secondwind]

My arms warrior is a heavy plated dwarf with one big two handed hammer. Not some shirtless samurai sword wielder. Blademaster would only fit arms warrior if arms could only use swords, only wear cloth pants, that's it, and only be orcs. Otherwise, blademaster doesn't fit.

A better name would have been like warmaster or Warlord or...idk, anything other than Blademaster.

Yeah, I was kind of leaning towards voting for Blademaster at first glance, because the core theme of the name evokes the right imagery for the spec.

The problem is immediately after I remember what a Blademaster is not in general, but in the Warcraft Specifically. When you think of all that extra baggage, it's really not worth it. The warcraft blademasters are heavily stepped not in warrior lore, but in Orc lore specifically. It has its roots as an agi cloth wearing hero, with lots of quasi-magical abilities and a focus on stealth. In practice a rogue or a demon hunter is closer to "blademaster" as it was in any prior incarnation than Warrior is. Trying to take that and shoehorn it into a Warrior spec would be awful.

I could totally get behind renaming Arms to Warlord, Battlemaster, or something else along those lines that evokes the same sort of themes without the weird ninja-orc overtones.

[Pua]

My point is that I think the idea of an Arms warrior, someone who studies the philosophy of the axe and sword, shield and mace, is already perfect. But Blizz just doesn't understand what it should be. It's not about methodically waiting for a moment to strike. It's about becoming one with your weapon, a single entity of flesh and steel, destroying all who stand in your way!

And it's a good point. Blizzard don't really seem to grasp what the real fantasy of the "Arms warrior" should be (I'm not sure they grasp Fury or Protection either, going off the blog), and Blademaster is enticing because it seems to have a lot more fantasy readily available to use.

The warcraft blademasters are heavily stepped not in warrior lore, but in Orc lore specifically. It has its roots as an agi cloth wearing hero, with lots of quasi-magical abilities and a focus on stealth. In practice a rogue or a demon hunter is closer to "blademaster" as it was in any prior incarnation than Warrior is. Trying to take that and shoehorn it into a Warrior spec would be awful.

I could totally get behind renaming Arms to Warlord, Battlemaster, or something else along those lines that evokes the same sort of themes without the weird ninja-orc overtones.

Yeah, now we're getting to the meat of the conversation. I take your point about orc-lore (though, were monks really more than Pandaren lore? I'm not sure), but you're talking a lot about how the fantasy of Arms is proving difficult to nail down for Blizzard. I mean, we're here in this thread and, despite all being very different people, there are a number of common themes that are popping up that just don't pop up; the most pronounced of which is "weapon master", and there's simply no appreciable example of this in the game.

The problem, ultimately, is the theme and how that plays with the specialization. Players clearly think Arms has a strong theme, and it appears badly divorced from what Blizzard seems to think it is.

[Bigbazz]

Arms fits the fantasy more, it's a master of all 2handed weapons... Blademaster is pretty specific, it's in the name.

[mrchee]

Blademaster is a "prestige" class in DnD terms. It's not a basic class like Arms is.

[Pua]

Arms fits the fantasy more, it's a master of all 2handed weapons... Blademaster is pretty specific, it's in the name.

"Master of all two-handed weapons"... How does that fit into the gameplay? What visceral aspect of that fantasy can you feel when you play an Arms warrior?

This is the real question. The answer, of course, is "it doesn't". It's not a core part of the gameplay at all, it's a convenience that Retribution, Unholy and Blood also have. As a result, it's a fantasy that simply doesn't deliver in gameplay terms, and isn't going to in 7.0 from what we've seen.

[Bigbazz]

"Master of all two-handed weapons"... How does that fit into the gameplay? What visceral aspect of that fantasy can you feel when you play an Arms warrior?

This is the real question. The answer, of course, is "it doesn't". It's not a core part of the gameplay at all, it's a convenience that Retribution, Unholy and Blood also have. As a result, it's a fantasy that simply doesn't deliver in gameplay terms, and isn't going to in 7.0 from what we've seen.

Would have thought that was fairly obvious

Man-at-arms was a term used from the High Medieval to Renaissance periods to describe a soldier, almost always a professional warrior in the sense of being well-trained in the use of arms, who served as a fully armoured heavy cavalryman.[a] It could refer to knights or noblemen, and to members of their retinues or to mercenaries in companies under captains. Such men could serve for pay or through a feudal obligation. The terms knight and man-at-arms are often used interchangeably, but while all knights equipped for war certainly were men-at-arms, not all men-at-arms were knights.

Blademaster does not fit the Warrior class very well and Arms Warriors are not Blademasters, they are masters of all weapons and highly trained Warriors.

[Pua]

Would have thought that was fairly obvious.

Well, no.

There's no real example of the two-handed specialist in the game. Weapon masteries were removed, due to looting complaints, and every plate class can use any two-hander... So what's the Arms fantasy in this specific regard? There doesn't appear to be one.

[Gladio]

Well, no.

There's no real example of the two-handed specialist in the game. Weapon masteries were removed, due to looting complaints, and every plate class can use any two-hander... So what's the Arms fantasy in this specific regard? There doesn't appear to be one.

This is my problem with Arms in a nutshell. In my head Arms is supposed to be a master with a variety of weapons, a tactician on the battlefield and a controlled precise warrior. From Blizz's preview: "Arms warriors are patient in a fight, waiting to capitalize on moments when an opponent is left exposed."

My problem is that in gameplay terms it doesn't come across like this at all. First off your weapon type doesn't have any impact on your character so that's out the window. And second, we don't capitalize on anything, we sit there and we wait for rage, wait for CS, wait for MS to come off cd. We have absolutely no control over our rotation at all.

I don't think we should be renamed Blademaster but I think if I'm actually a master of the flow of battle I should be able to force those opportunistic moments. I shouldn't have to wait and sit until the enemy makes a mistake or until I finally get enough rage from auto attacks, I should be 5, 6 or 7 steps ahead and already know where they're going to be. This is one of the reasons overpower thematically makes sense. You didn't really dodge, I allowed you to move yourself into a position of weakness for what you thought was a cleverly executed move.

I'd like to see our capitalization of battle moments reflected in our resource. In the totally bogus leak a while back it was mentioned that we might get a precision bar. I personally think this would be amazing. I'd love to have rage replaced or supplemented by precision or whatever you want to call it. In my mind it would work like shadow priests insanity, we build it up through the ebb and flow of battle and when our enemy is in position we strike and do enormous amounts of damage.

That way it would feel like we were controlling things, we'd build rage and/or precision and tie it all together to unleash a devastating wombo combo. Right now it looks like we're going to be sitting and waiting a lot which I absolutely hate. I really want to love Arms but they're doing their damndest to make it the most hollow and boring spec ever.

Edit: Just to make the idea more clear, when you hit Max precision CS would become available for use to start your rampage. So now we have clear timing on when CS is available, no need for RNG resets. When you're at max precision the rage cost and gcd of your abilities is reduced. Now we have the ability to spam shit inside the CS window. After a certain allotted time or a condition is met your precision state ends and you repeat the cycle. It would provide a much more tangible feel of controlling the battle and wouldn't have so much bs rng and waiting.

[Bigbazz]

Well, no.

There's no real example of the two-handed specialist in the game. Weapon masteries were removed, due to looting complaints, and every plate class can use any two-hander... So what's the Arms fantasy in this specific regard? There doesn't appear to be one.

Being able to use a weapon / being a master in straight combat with said weapon.

They are not the same thing, the other classes use magic with their weapons, a Fury Warrior is just a brute force fighter. An Arms Warrior is a master of weilding the weapons, a calculated tactician.. It makes perfect sense.

[badaku]

Doesn't matter, I'm gonna call them MS warriors anyway

[Deleted]

Blademaster=combat rogue

- - - Updated - - -

Arms=executioner

Aye combat rogues - I mean outlaw rogue..

[Toppy]

This poll really demonstrates why the class fantasy is rather difficult for warrior.


I see arms as a master of weapons. Others see it as a samurai.

I imagine many see fury as a berserker, others see it as something akin to the mountain king from WC3.

Still no excuse for blizz going the low road of making warrior = short vrykul.

[ghostblade]

honestly Blademaster or.. weaponmaster would be a beter then arms or atleast turn arms into it. The problem with arms and fury is thats there is no real good difference between it. Fury is supposed to be the Raging bersekers that kills without concer for his own health ( which it is turning back into) and arms is supposed to be this master of weapons and balance of strikes. Which it is not realy.

[Ravingmad]

In Cataclysm, the 2 Faction leader were (to me) the 2 archetypes for Warriors.



Varian is a Fury Warrior, reckless and blind with rage but more on his Logosh side. While Garrosh is a perfect example of Arm warrior, strength incarnated.

Warriors got some perks from the Blademaster, Whirwind/Bladestorm, from Cairn - Tauren Chieftain (Shockwave), and from Muradin - Mountain King (Stormbolt, Avatar, Thunderclap).
So its basically a mix of everything.