What will you get to 60 first?

[zmp]

Ill probably wait to make a decision until i find a guild and organize what class/role would seem to be needed. Otherwise a Huntard - would probably tame a pig and name it Muhamed.

- - - Updated - - -

I doubt, many people will go past level 10, before they get bored and return to BfA..

If they get bored, they can always discuss fake news in the politics section of MMO-C - no need to switch to casual mode (aka Retail).

[Pua]

I doubt, many people will go past level 10, before they get bored and return to BfA..

Personally, I have no interrest in Vanilla content..

Then don’t post in the thread, for crying out loud.

[Dannyzk]

Pally
BECAUSE
Tankadin is real!

And just for the lolz don't tell me that Paladin Tank sucks in this game, i Play him myself on a private with no Problems, only Problem ist that i have no taunt so i won't tank some bosses but that's fine for me.

[Daedius]

Me !

(As in my age)

[Eleccybubb]

Probably Shaman and play Resto.

Then do an Alliance Warlock and probably go Demo. If not then BM Hunter.

[Mage in Pajamas]

This really depends on whether I'm playing solo or if other guildies want to play. Loved being a warrior tank in Vanilla but did not like levelling. Very slow.

My guess is that Classic is something we do in between patches when content feels stale. As opposed to recycling content on multiple alts.

[Armourboy]

Paladin and yes I'll probably play as holy because I enjoyed it then. After that probably a Warlock or Warrior.

[Pua]

My guess is that Classic is something we do in between patches when content feels stale. As opposed to recycling content on multiple alts.

I think there’ll be a lot of that, actually.

[Azelas]

probably a Paladin since it was my class way back when I played wow for the first time in Vanilla

[gaymer77]

<snip>

So for your shining example of a fight that paladins and druids excelled over warrior tanks is a fight that was essentially a single target fight that had warlocks banishing adds all the time? How exactly were they better than warriors on that single target fight? Also which bosses were immune to taunt again in vanilla which would make a paladin ok to use as a tank since the bosses were immune to taunt anyway? Congrats on that prot paladin who got Thunderfury over that warrior tank, warrior dps, or rogue who would use it much better since it had no tanking stats on it or paladin-ish stats (int & spell damage) on it.

Curious what itemization you are talking about that would give paladins a better job at tanking. If anything the Lawbringer set was the most tanky set they had. Judgement was a ret set, Redemption was a holy set, AQ40 was hybrid a ret/holy set, ZG was a holy set, but their T0 set had a 2 piece bonus of +200 armor which could be considered a "tank" set but was more designed for holy or even ret while the 0.5 version was the opposite and gave the +200 armor at 8 piece. Druids were in a similar boat. Both paladins and druids weren't better itemized for most stuff until BC when the whole stat system was revamped.

Which extra buff are you talking about from a balance druid? Is it the increased spell damage buff from their faerie fire that they got in BC or their raid-wide crit aura buff they got in BC (the vanilla one was only party-wide) or the RESTO talent of insect swam that reduced the target's to hit or are you talking about MOTW/GOTW that any druid could have provided? But I will agree with you that they were good in pvp situations because their damaging spells hit hard. Outside of pvp, they sucked for the reasons I said previously. Oh and that combat res reason for bringing a feral or balance druid is nullified by the fact that rebirth was a baseline spell that restro druids could also use so there was no need to bring a subpar dps just for that extra combat res when you could bring an extra healer that can give innervate and combat res.

Warrior tanks were indeed the go-to tank of vanilla for a reason. They did the best job. Why would a group or guild take a sub par tank that had to work harder just to even be sub par when they could take a warrior and get the job done right without having to do any work arounds?

[JerseyGhoul]

mage first, then warrior, then priest, then paladin, then hunter.

Wow, you really think Classic WoW will be around five years after it launches? :P

[Orby]

Hunter, I had a hunter in vanilla but only used it as a twink in PVP. Totally regret not going max level and getting that epic bow.

My main in current WoW is a mage, and I have had him since 2005 but there's no way I am replaying my mage all over again in WoW Classic. He is staying put. :P

[TheDeeGee]

Missing the option None.

[Eleccybubb]

I've already decided to only roll one character and then sticking with it. I know I'll be a troll male, and right now I'm thinking shaman, but we'll see.

I wish monk was available though

Hah same as me then. Although I might go Tauren for a change. Not sure yet.

[Deleted]

A death knight

[Linkedblade]

Mage first, as I did over a decade ago. I would usually level a paladin second, but I play Horde, so probably shaman. Or I might switch it up and level the holy trinity: priest and warrior.

[Deleted]

tauren warrior or undead mage

[Kilkarik]

A warrior! Cant wait to dagger-tank bosses the size of skyscrapers!

[Kynario]

I wanted to try the Druid, but then I completely forgot about the ugly ass bear and cat forms which I couldn't bear to look at. Yuck. I'm too used to the new ones...

So it'll probably be a Priest

[Deleted]

It's funny how Warrior is always top of the pile of classes people plan to roll because it's perceived to be "the best" class; but consider that you can't make a group out of all Warriors.

The guy who rolled a Druid is getting taken to the raids over the 5th or 6th Prot Warrior asking for an invite.