Page 4 of 28 FirstFirst ...
2
3
4
5
6
14
... LastLast
  1. #61
    The Unstoppable Force Ielenia's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Brazil
    Posts
    21,507
    Quote Originally Posted by Mixxy Scratch View Post
    So are Fighters, Rangers, and Clerics. But you wouldn't want them added, because the stuff that they can bring to the table is already represented by WoW's Warriors, Hunters, Priests and Paladins.
    You already answered your own question. Fights are already in WoW in the form of warriors. Rangers are in the game in the form of hunters. Clerics are already in the game in the form of priests. Bards? No bards yet.

    I really just can't see Bards offering anything other than visual differences in terms of gameplay. There's very little they could offer, mechanically, that other classes don't already.
    I'm pretty sure this is an argument that one could use against each and every class idea presented in the game. "What could Demon Hunters offer, mechanically, that other classes don't already?" "What could Monks offer, mechanically, that other classes don't already?" "What could Death Knights offer, mechanically, that other classes don't already?" "What could Tinkers offer, mechanically, that other classes don't already?" "What could Necromancers offer, mechanically, that other classes don't already?" Etc, etc.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Mixxy Scratch View Post
    A DoT-heavy melee class that can spread its diseases around packs of mobs, that didn't rely on stealth, and could raise corpses from the dead to do its bidding?
    Why would it be dot-heavy class, though? The WC3 death knight has nothing about diseases or anything of the sort. As for "raising corpses" we had two pet classes and one class with a pet spec (frost mages).

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by yeast View Post
    That's exactly what my point is. You would have to completely build the class from scratch for it to work. It could work, but so could ideas that are slightly more idiosyncratic and fit the theme of the game more.
    We were just in a spaceship using mechs to fight space demons.
    The Death Knight class was completely built from the ground up. So were every single new class added to the game.
    "Torturing someone is not an evil thing to do if it is done for good reasons" by Varodoc
    "You sit in OG/SW waiting on a Mythic+ queue" by Altmer <- Oh, the pearls in this forum...
    "They sort of did this Dragonriding, which ushered in the Dracthyr race." by Teriz <- the BS some people reach for their narratives...

  2. #62
    Merely a Setback Teriz's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Soul of Azeroth
    Posts
    29,047
    Quote Originally Posted by Echoherb View Post
    Just like there was no estabilished monk in WoW, and guess what they did? They created the class and built lore to support it. There's no reason at all they wouldn't also be able to do this with Bards if they wanted to, especially if they decide to not make it a hero class.
    To be fair, they did base a lot of the Monk class on Chen Stormstout and the Brewmaster hero from WC3. That said, they really didn't do a good job establishing the Monk itself in WoW before it debuted at Blizzcon, so the class felt out of place. Some even mistakenly believing that Blizzard stole the idea from Kung Fu panda.

    This is why I think they're establishing the Tinker over multiple expansions instead of just bringing it out at once. You start with Helix Blackfuse, then you give players the Sky Golem, then in the next expansion you fight the Iron Reaver, reinforce Gazlowe as a technician, and then you give players the Fel Annihilator and the Lumber Extraxtor. Then in Legion you introduce Mekkatorque and Gazlowe in their own mech suits and you give players the light forged golem and the option to build Reeves.

    So now if Blizzard brought in a Tinker class, it simply won't be a big deal because we've gotten used to it.

  3. #63
    Quote Originally Posted by Ielenia View Post
    The Death Knight class was completely built from the ground up. So were every single new class added to the game.
    Tell that to the warlocks who are still complaining about losing metamorphasis.

    Anyway, classes at the very least had very concrete concepts to build off of. Even monks had the brewmaster spec. Can you tell me what primal force bards would draw from? Who would teach them? Why they would choose that vocation as a means of fighting in the first place? Sure, you can guess, but there's absolutely no concrete evidence in the game whatsoever.

  4. #64
    Quote Originally Posted by Ielenia View Post
    You already answered your own question. Fights are already in WoW in the form of warriors. Rangers are in the game in the form of hunters. Clerics are already in the game in the form of priests. Bards? No bards yet.
    Bards don't really have much to offer that aren't already part of other classes' toolkits. Their AoE-support shtick is pretty thinly spread across all the Healing classes, their typical combat abilities are pretty evenly spit between Hunters and Rogues, and even if you wanted to give a more aggressive spin on their magic, that's pretty well covered by Spriests.

    So while Bards don't have any direct representation in WoW, their identity has more or less been spread out over, like, half the classes that are here.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ielenia View Post
    I'm pretty sure this is an argument that one could use against each and every class idea presented in the game. "What could Demon Hunters offer, mechanically, that other classes don't already?" "What could Monks offer, mechanically, that other classes don't already?" "What could Death Knights offer, mechanically, that other classes don't already?" "What could Tinkers offer, mechanically, that other classes don't already?" "What could Necromancers offer, mechanically, that other classes don't already?" Etc, etc.
    Demon Hunters can offer rapid, movement-heavy melee combat that (again) doesn't rely on Stealth, and is fuelled by temporary transformations (distinct from the Druid, who basically picks one form and sticks with it for the entire fight.)

    Monks couldn't offer much aside from the Brewmaster spec, and they're still constantly brought up as an example of a class badly forced into the game.

    Death Knights, again, can offer the DoT-heavy melee playstyle that revolves around spreading diseases and reanimating the dead.

    Tinkers can offer turrets and mech-based cooldowns and form-changes, a playstyle that revolves around proper placement of stationary pseudo-pets and proper use of temporary buffs to those machines.

    Necromancers can't really offer anything that DKs and Warlocks don't. I'm generally against them in WoW, conceptually.

  5. #65
    NO one talks about them because they don't exist lore wise.

  6. #66
    Quote Originally Posted by Ielenia View Post
    Why would it be dot-heavy class, though? The WC3 death knight has nothing about diseases or anything of the sort. As for "raising corpses" we had two pet classes and one class with a pet spec (frost mages).
    None of those classes revolved around raising the dead as minions. And they certainly didn't have the ability to raise a literal Army of the Dead - which, while not exactly an ability iconic of Death Knights specifically, certainly fit into the Scourge theme that they were a part of.

    As for why they'd be DoT-heavy, the Scourge was literally a disease of undeath, seen in-universe as a plague, that made all who were affected by it very, very sick. And then dead.

    The Death Knights we got in WoW aren't solely based on the Hero class from WC3, they also take a lot of inspiration from their Scourge roots.



    It's not like when DKs were announced, players were like "OH MAN I CAN'T WAIT TO PLAY A CLASS THAT ALWAYS FIGHTS ON HORSEBACK AND ONLY HAS THREE SPELLS."
    You gotta look at where else a class can draw from. And honestly, Bards just don't have a lot to draw from that aren't already a part of other classes.
    Last edited by Mixxy; 2018-09-10 at 06:22 AM.

  7. #67
    Quote Originally Posted by derpkitteh View Post
    literally only dragon age ever did bards in a good way, and that's covered by assassin rogues in wow.

    that stupid meme shit of playing a lute in combat has no place in wow. it's just dumb.
    Actually I really like the Warframe method of handling a "bard" archetype. You got to literally compose songs, with each note responding to a kind of movement/action. In combat you could play your different songs. If you/squad members performed the action you could get a buff of some sort. So people on the team could choose to act to get the buff or ignore it and not get the buff.

    I don't think they could implement that in WoW without doing some heavy backend interface reworking. The point is that there are lots of options for the bard beyond someone who hangs out in the corner and just buffs the group and acts like Vanilla OoC rezzers or Shaman totem bots. As far as table tops go, I like the Starfinder variation of Envoy: You tell people to do things or you pull off inspiring maneuvers, and if they do as they are told or witness your cool actions they get buffs. The Envoy and party then have to work together to best synergize the buffs, the group has to adjust their actions on the fly to maximize whatever buff the Envoy puts out and the Envoy has to know when to put out certain buffs. The Envoy conceptually plays like every main hero in every space opera/adventure ever. Saying or telling people to do things that wins the day, or pulling off crazy stunts that causes people to become inspired and do their jobs better.

    That being said, a bard type class could never come into WoW without a buffer/debuffer combat role being put back into the game. Honestly I think the game is the better off for having those kind of tertiary support roles available. Such roles provide less dps, but contribute improving the group overall, and just like with healing/absorb meters, if there is a way to measure contribution then it will be a rewarding experience. Blizzard does currently have the buff/debuff architecture in place to handle buffs and debuffs that overlap duration to stack intensity and can roll off to decrease intensity (i.e. ironfur) so having something like a disc priest that instead of healing provides buffs to the group or debuffs to enemies is not too difficult to adapt to. Honestly, I'd love to see a bard class in WoW play kind of like a Red Mage from FFXIV, dash in with some melee attacks, leap back into range and buff the group. Hell it could easily play like a tank if you've ever see the Pathfinder Mesmerist class, Dervish Dancer Archetype, or even the GW2 Mesmer. Using illusion magic and well articulated and timed taunts to keep an enemy's attention but never get hit.

    There is a lot of things you can do with someone that has a bit of magic at their disposal, is charismatic and is studied in arts of some form, as far as gameplay is concerned.

    Anyways, just my thoughts on the matter, and I could go on a lot more, because Paizo has a ton of material on different kind of playstyles you can iterate on for a "bard" character, between their straight bards to their skalds (barbarians that rage and sing to buff the party) and mesmerists (provide the same mathematical buffs, but do so by debuffing the enemy instead of helping the party). The D&D 2e bard is what people classically think of when they think bard, but there is a lot to a bard beyond "plays a lute".
    What are you willing to sacrifice?

  8. #68
    The Undying Lochton's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    FEEL THE WRATH OF MY SPANNER!!
    Posts
    37,495
    Quote Originally Posted by BedlamBros View Post
    In the recent poll of which class should be next, the Bard finished a close third behind the Tinker and the Necromancer. I was a little surprised since I never see anyone ever bring this class up. There are no huge massive class write-ups for this idea and I was wondering why that is given the Bard's apparent popularity. I suppose the general consensus is that this class simply doesn't fit the "Trinity" set up of WoW, since Bards are traditionally a support class that has auras of auto healing or power-ups to keep their allies up. Despite that, I believe that such auras could work in WoW and you could simply have a class with 2 healing specs and a DPS spec all ranged, and all mail.

    I'm pretty sure that that's the standard demand for the next class right?

    Unfortunately I'm not talented (or patient) enough to come up with crazy new class ideas like some others are around these parts, so I was just wondering what exactly a Bard could do in WoW, and why this concept was so seemingly popular (yet rarely discussed) on this forum.
    To be honest, I think it is because Blizzard once mentioned that they would like Bards but that they don't have the right setup for it.
    FOMO: "Fear Of Missing Out", also commonly known as people with a mental issue of managing time and activities, many expecting others to fit into their schedule so they don't miss out on things to come. If FOMO becomes a problem for you, do seek help, it can be a very unhealthy lifestyle..

  9. #69
    Brewmaster Alkizon's Avatar
    7+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    Strasbourg
    Posts
    1,439
    Nupomaniac
    Making it a rogue then? Or do you want to make it a spellcaster?
    You think too narrow. To be precise, it's not even narrow, more like in modern context of classes (= specs, like if they already been cut in pieces) - too limited. But it's not your fault, just Blizzard makes everyone think only in such concepts since Legion. Suppose that bards has 3 branches (this isn't concept or proposal, just sketch of something less unrealistic for warcraft), and they can more precisely fulfill those abilities that give class its name, while their "others-classes" abilities are either ineffective (cooldown, haste, range, damage, resource consumption: no stealth, no poisons, no traps/disarm, no way to effectively use secondary remote devices (pistols, bows, crossbows, etc.), no controlled combat pets and other rogues/hunters tricks; no full arsenal of "engineering" abilities (purely general set, to divert eyes) and many other limitations), or are effective only when you use them together with first (class specific) and therefore in fact are no longer "others-classes". So they aren't rogues, hunters, monks and warriors, but then who are they?

    Paladins and shamans (light magic, elemental magic) have already mentioned, so why does bard can't use arcane for this or may be not so effective, but much wider set of abilities together with own specific ones (be at times much more functional, albeit weak in every single "wrong" direction... and then everyone remembered old WoW support classes)?

    As a consequence, Blizzard's problems with support classes were also mentioned here (I even spoke about it last week - design of these requires strong ties/dependability/coherence within classes, which in turn will greatly hinder "headless" devs from "shuffling/cutting elements" and implementing their silly "borrowed powers"). I mean RPG component (range of possible "unique" characteristics that they can "support" is too narrow now), poverty of its base and company's fear to give players more variable potential mathematical cataclysm once again (and current devs aren't big specialists in mathematics, well, apparently, it's different only when question is about money...)

    I also agree that there won't be much lore component distortion, since there are musicians in the game (also a lot of references to them), there is attempt to add through profession (drums), private voice and encourage allies/opponents manipulation (there were shouts and banners system, I mentioned this in sketch in first link), there are items which secondary characteristics exploit this image (guitars, lutes, flutes) and much more.

    The last paragraph is fully relevant to regularly discussed Necromancers and Tinkers.

    Can we say that most of bards "fantasy" isn't taking away by any classes now, but rather by... for example - Azerite armor?

    ps. In short, it's still only on paper, and I'm pretty sure that Blizzard doesn't want to add any other class to the game. They have incredible amount of problems even with those who're already there.
    Last edited by Alkizon; 2020-12-08 at 07:12 AM.
    __---=== IMHO(+cg) and MORE |"links-inside" ===---__

    __---=== PM me WHERE if I'm unnecessarily "notifying" you ===---__

  10. #70
    Quote Originally Posted by kendro1200 View Post
    Actually I really like the Warframe method of handling a "bard" archetype. You got to literally compose songs, with each note responding to a kind of movement/action. In combat you could play your different songs. If you/squad members performed the action you could get a buff of some sort. So people on the team could choose to act to get the buff or ignore it and not get the buff.
    the reason i say the bards of dragon age is because they're literally just master class assassins, real kgb shit. deep cover, doing what's needed, then they just lay the blade across the throat and leave. they can be a tavern wench, a noble, a traveling performer, whatever role gets them closer to the target.

    the only music involved is if they're playing a role that requires it.

    having music in combat as a magic though? that's just dumb.

  11. #71
    Because they are a support class. Wow has ZERO support classes. The entire game would need to be completely adjusted to account for them. They would immediately be 100% mandatory in all serious content.

  12. #72
    Well aside from being a niche theme (like monks) frankly i would not like to keep hearing the same tunes over and over as a nearby bard does his thing.

    And if bard abilities had no tunes/notes...... well its not much of a bard then?

    Overall its a boring class concept that appeals to like.... the tiniest amount of players, which you can see from the lack of detailed suggestions for it on mmo.

  13. #73
    Quote Originally Posted by cparle87 View Post
    What weapon type was added just for hunters? Up until Cata, I think, warriors, rogues, and a few others could also use ranged.
    LBRS bow with 1% hit until Dire Maul release. Warrior dream tbh.

  14. #74
    The Elite Tauren Chieftain band are bards. I'd be down for that.

  15. #75
    Stood in the Fire zubaja's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Under sea level
    Posts
    435
    I play a Bard in the Tabletop D&D, and it's the best thing ever. I can cuss someone to death; I once insulted a skeleton's ancestor so hard (rolled a 20) he crumbled to dust, or make them die by causing them to laugh hysterically. All this while also supporting my teammates with healing, illusions, and the occasional firing of a crossbow bolt from behind a tree.
    If they were to introduce the class in such a fashion in WoW, I'd play it.

  16. #76
    We really do not need another agility based leather class.

    So no need to talk about bards

  17. #77
    Bards are no part of Warcraft so why should we talk about them? They'll never be a class because in that form they're just not existing in the WC universe.
    MAGA - Make Alliance Great Again

  18. #78
    Herald of the Titans Detheavn's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    The Nether .... lands
    Posts
    2,670
    Quote Originally Posted by skannerz22 View Post
    go look at baldurs gate class list and you will see how bards ARE ROGUES
    the game that mimics dungeons and dragons in digital form
    Yeah, AD&D is far from structured as to what their bards are. The class varies per edition (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bard_(...s_%26_Dragons)). Baldur's Gate lends more of the 2nd edition than any other in this respect. So if you want to implement this in WoW, every class should have the possibility to become a Bard as an extra spec. Imagine having to balance the various bard specs with one another, let alone balance them versus all other specs

  19. #79
    Quote Originally Posted by AwkwardSquirtle View Post
    The Elite Tauren Chieftain band are bards. I'd be down for that.
    Arthas was also a bard in warcraft 3, at the credits cut scenes! Just like the darkmoon faire's death knight and his eletric guitar (rare drop)

    On a more serious note, dark rangers (shadowlands theme), tinkers and chronomancer/battlemage/spell breaker mage are more interesting, useful and more connected to wow's lore than bard.

  20. #80
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by RangerDaz View Post
    Arthas was also a bard in warcraft 3, at the credits cut scenes! Just like the darkmoon faire's death knight and his eletric guitar (rare drop)

    On a more serious note, dark rangers (shadowlands theme), tinkers and chronomancer/battlemage/spell breaker mage are more interesting, useful and more connected to wow's lore than bard.
    Not only do they fit the lore better they won’t break the holy trinity that is working so well for wow. I honestly can’t see a single reason to add bards if they aren’t a support buffer, and that won’t happen. Plus going around playing instruments sounds more like a kiddie jrpg thing tbh.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •