Originally Posted by
barrsftw
I often see discussions about how 'spec xyz' wasn't viable in Vanilla. There's arguments for change and against change, but I won't argue that here. What I'll talk about is how the class design was completely different in Vanilla than it is today, and many people don't acknowledge this.
Today in Legion, there are essentially 36 Classes. Technically there's only 12, but functionally there's 36. All 36 specs play VERY differently. Functionally, they could be separate classes. It would make sense to have a Sorcerer, Pyromancer, and Ice mage class. Or a Gladiator, Barbarian, Blademaster. Crusader, Paladin, Knight. etc. The game today plays as if there are 36 unique classes (for the most part).
In Vanilla, there were only 9 classes. Crusader wasn't a class yet. Knight wasn't a class yet. Paladin (healer) was. Now, you could choose to select a talent path that made you a pseudo knight, or a pseudo crusader, but you're playing a Paladin. All 9 classes available in Vanilla were viable. Many of them even had multiple different viable talent paths, something that could be argued against in today's wow.
Making 'Ret Paladin' viable is the same as adding a new class: Crusader. Crusader exists in Legion, but it didn't in Vanilla. Just as Death Knight didn't exists in Vanilla. People have to realize that there were much fewer classes in Vanilla, and maybe we shouldn't be adding 30+ classes to Classic. Maybe we should.
A final note: During vanilla, when somebody IRL asked what class you play, you answered "Warrior", or "Shaman", or "Priest" or whatever you were playing. Today? "Shadow priest", "Survival Hunter", "Affliction Lock".
Before anyone blasts me, I'm not arguing for or against class changes, just trying to prove a point and start a discussion!