New Classes Vs Change

[arkanon]

Hello,

I frequently see thread after thread of people putting fantastic effort into creating and building on new classes to add to WoW. Tinker and Necro being pretty popular, but half a dozen more on a weekly basis. Some of the ideas are pretty lackluster, but others, people have put HUGE effort into abilities, skills, talents, aesthetics, and even balancing.

My question is - would some of these people be happy if Blizzard took some of their ideas and where suitable, rebuilt some of the current classes from scratch to represent these specs.

I am someone who is not particularly happy with the current class design on the vast majority of classes/specs, and feel there is serious room for improvement. But rather than continued iterations of things we have already seen - what if we encouraged Blizzard and let them off their leash, and said "go for it, rebuild all the specs from the ground up - we will win some, lose some, but overall, change is as good as a holiday".

Some absolutely random ideas without any thought -

- UH dk becomes a plate caster class - the necromancer
- Arms becomes the Blademaster
- Warlocks finally get a true tanking option
- full dps prot pally option (similar to warriors back in wod??)

I would love to hear some of your ideas that morph current classes / specs with some of the more popular future class ideas floating out there.

[TigTone]

If anyone should get a tank option it should be shamans. Earth magic for the win.

[arkanon]

If anyone should get a tank option it should be shamans. Earth magic for the win.

Yeah im fine with this - i think More tanks and healers isnt a bad thing at all - if it encourages more people to try out tanking/healing, i think its a good thing for the community in general. And yes, the theme fits for sure.

[Evaddon]

If anyone should get a tank option it should be shamans. Earth magic for the win.

That would be awesome, have a mix of Earth/Magma. Be the Earthbender

Enhancement can be our Thundergod/Stormlord :P

[Onikaroshi]

if it encourages more people to try out tanking/healing

It really doesn't, it's been proven. All it does is shift around people who area already tanking.

It's not a BAD thing to add more tanks, but it doesn't create more people WANTING to tank.

[Shakana]

Dark ranger is very popular too but in my opinion, "you think you do, but you don't" kind of scenario lol

Necromancer, i wouldn't like to see dks turning into casters, unless there's a spec for that which i don't see it coming anytime soon, frost, unholy and blood are 3 all time specs playable, sometimes tho unholy and frost compete, sometimes one is nerfed, like frost in this case, this doesn't mean it won't be good again at a certain period of time and people won't play it. So i would see a necromancer instead, being a healer too and dps spec.

Arms being blademaster i wouldn't mind, i think fury is amazing and blademaster-arms would be possible.
Just like what they did with the combat rogue, turned into a outlaw, not everything is the same, and has new additions to it, hence why the name being changed as well.

I had a true love for the talent tree, actually that's even the reason why it got me less interested in wow, might seem superficial and stupid but was something that was important for me as a rogue cause i could be whatever i wanted from 2 specs, there's always better options, but for rogue in PVP (i did a lot PVP at that time), MoP made rogue be different and a little too awkward for me to play. I came back later to the game but took me a lot of time to adapt.

And for me this single specs, sometimes seems hard to balance, while the talent tree was easier imo. But, well, it's in the past now.

I think it would be a great idea to just transform an less-used spec and less popular into something new. Like mages arcane spec as i spoke to someone today in the forum that thought about the spellblade class, instead of being a single new class, being add to the arcane spec itself. It's very interesting this changes and not adding more stuff to the equation. Would be the best thing maybe.

[AngerFork]

While I like the overall idea and do feel that the current classes could use more variety (Shaman tanks for instance), my fear here is how the player base will react if Blizz announces some class revamps rather than a new class.

As an example of what I mean, look at how people were discussing expansion ideas before we got to BfA. "No new races since Cata," I seem to recall being a common refrain. Even since, people have been angry about the Allied Races being lazy knock offs rather than full races. Not that I agree, just what I've seen a lot on these boards.

With this in mind, imagine Blizzcon. Ion is on stage, the video for 9.0 is playing...and we get "spec revamps" or "class revamps" rather than an actual new class. People will absolutely rip on the new expansion for being "lazy" because Blizz didn't want to give us a new class. Not that I agree with these people or that your idea isn't a pretty good one, but not having some sort of new class IMO will mean Blizz loses the marketing blitz before it starts.

That being said, no reason they couldn't do both. Make an Earth Shaman for tanking, give Hunters a Dark Ranger spec, give DKs a Necromancer casting spec, maybe one or two others...then top it off with a 3 spec Tinker (currently the furthest design-wise from any class currently in game).

[Shakana]

While I like the overall idea and do feel that the current classes could use more variety (Shaman tanks for instance), my fear here is how the player base will react if Blizz announces some class revamps rather than a new class.

As an example of what I mean, look at how people were discussing expansion ideas before we got to BfA. "No new races since Cata," I seem to recall being a common refrain. Even since, people have been angry about the Allied Races being lazy knock offs rather than full races. Not that I agree, just what I've seen a lot on these boards.

With this in mind, imagine Blizzcon. Ion is on stage, the video for 9.0 is playing...and we get "spec revamps" or "class revamps" rather than an actual new class. People will absolutely rip on the new expansion for being "lazy" because Blizz didn't want to give us a new class. Not that I agree with these people or that your idea isn't a pretty good one, but not having some sort of new class IMO will mean Blizz loses the marketing blitz before it starts.

That being said, no reason they couldn't do both. Make an Earth Shaman for tanking, give Hunters a Dark Ranger spec, give DKs a Necromancer casting spec, maybe one or two others...then top it off with a 3 spec Tinker (currently the furthest design-wise from any class currently in game).

For hunter:
BM-Survival-Dark Ranger (with MM stuff since they are pretty much the same and the most similar to change)?

[Directionalk9]

For sure yes, but not the ones you suggest, I like the ideas I have more...it's a personal bias.

[Cosmic Janitor]

The idea of turning some specs into random shit that it wasn't before is not exactly great, as the survival changes have proven since legion. Alot of people, despite specs being utter garbage compared to their alternatives, still play certain classes purely because they like that spec. Especially in the casual circles that make up the majority of the playerbase it is a rather risky thing to just villy-nilly change specs into something completely different.

Turning a melee into a caster is simply not the same and while some would like it others would absolutely loathe it. If you turn demonology into a tank spec then the ardously carved out niche of demo warlocks that finally actually focuses on demon minions would be ruined again, which in turn would give more credence to just make an actual necromancer class since the niche is no longer occupied. Turning the 1x2h spec into another furry warrior wannabe will certainly be well received as well..

Adding new specs to existing classes is a promising concept when you can find a niche that fits these classes, randomly changing aspects is just bound to cause drama.

[Triceron]

My question is - would some of these people be happy if Blizzard took some of their ideas and where suitable, rebuilt some of the current classes from scratch to represent these specs.

- UH dk becomes a plate caster class - the necromancer
- Arms becomes the Blademaster
- Warlocks finally get a true tanking option
- full dps prot pally option (similar to warriors back in wod??)

I would love to hear some of your ideas that morph current classes / specs with some of the more popular future class ideas floating out there.

The problem I have with this is lore and identity. A lot of the classes we have are classes not because of a Spec they have or a Spell they use.

For instance- Why isn't a Warlock with Metamorphosis a Demon Hunter? Well you don't have any of the identity of one. So what if we gave the Warlock the identity of the Demon Hunter by making him blind, giving him warglaives and all that? That doesn't make sense then, since a Warlock simply is not a Demon Hunter and specs are Specializations, not Classes.

The point I'm making is that no class has any other identity other than its own. We like to think that Hunters are Beastmasters and Marksmen and Dark Rangers, but in truth Hunters are only Hunters. We don't play Beastmasters, we play Beastmastery Hunters. We may be able to do all the same things as a Beastmaster in practice, but the difference is we are not truly a Beastmaster Class even if the differences are subtle. An Assassination Rogue is not truly an Assassin, they are first and foremost a Rogue. An actual Assassin may not have any skills to pick-pocket at all, while the class we play will always have that trait as a baseline, and is one of the things that defines the class that we play.

That being said, I think the best way to approach redesigning without rebalancing is Class Skins. Give us a completely new class identity, but with remixed Specs; either being a complete reskin of a class, or something more creative like mix-matching specs from multiple classes to create something new. One issue with this concept is resource systems and balancing nuances (new talents, Glyphs), but I think this would be the best approach rather than adding 4th specs or reimagining existing class specs into new identities.

One example of this is a Necromancer. It could be a full reskin of the Warlock, or it could be a mix of different specs from various classes. If we get creative, we can take Demonology and reskin it as a undead summoning spec (Wild Imps -> Skeleton Mages), Balance as a Lichform-themed direct DPS spec (with Skeletons filling in for Treants) and Mistweaver reskinned as a blood funneling Healing spec.

Spellbreaker could be an Arcane-themed revision of Holy Paladin, complete with an Arcane healing spec. Or if we get creative, it could take Protection from Paladin, Enhancement DPS with an Arcane theme, and Discipline for semi-offensive shield-based healing.

Overall, I think this satisfies a number of issues.
- Classes rolled by players are left relatively unchanged, untouched. There is no fear of losing out to another class.
- Gameplay is familiar, and relatively balanced. On a DPS chart, the performance of the same base spec should be mostly the same.
- Class identity remains strong and unintrusive to existing classes. You aren't getting a Plate-wearing Necromancer or Cloth-wearing DK.
- No Spec bloat. These are literally piggybacking existing core gameplay, and if treated like Allied Races, they can add multiple 'Classes' at the same time without compromising balance.

[arkanon]

The problem I have with this is lore and identity. A lot of the classes we have are classes not because of a Spec they have or a Spell they use.

For instance- Why isn't a Warlock with Metamorphosis a Demon Hunter? Well you don't have any of the identity of one. So what if we gave the Warlock the identity of the Demon Hunter by making him blind, giving him warglaives and all that? That doesn't make sense then, since a Warlock simply is not a Demon Hunter and specs are Specializations, not Classes.

The point I'm making is that no class has any other identity other than its own. We like to think that Hunters are Beastmasters and Marksmen and Dark Rangers, but in truth Hunters are only Hunters. We don't play Beastmasters, we play Beastmastery Hunters. We may be able to do all the same things as a Beastmaster in practice, but the difference is we are not truly a Beastmaster Class even if the differences are subtle. An Assassination Rogue is not truly an Assassin, they are first and foremost a Rogue. An actual Assassin may not have any skills to pick-pocket at all, while the class we play will always have that trait as a baseline, and is one of the things that defines the class that we play.

That being said, I think the best way to approach redesigning without rebalancing is Class Skins. Give us a completely new class identity, but with remixed Specs; either being a complete reskin of a class, or something more creative like mix-matching specs from multiple classes to create something new. One issue with this concept is resource systems and balancing nuances (new talents, Glyphs), but I think this would be the best approach rather than adding 4th specs or reimagining existing class specs into new identities.

One example of this is a Necromancer. It could be a full reskin of the Warlock, or it could be a mix of different specs from various classes. If we get creative, we can take Demonology and reskin it as a undead summoning spec (Wild Imps -> Skeleton Mages), Balance as a Lichform-themed direct DPS spec (with Skeletons filling in for Treants) and Mistweaver reskinned as a blood funneling Healing spec.

Spellbreaker could be an Arcane-themed revision of Holy Paladin, complete with an Arcane healing spec. Or if we get creative, it could take Protection from Paladin, Enhancement DPS with an Arcane theme, and Discipline for semi-offensive shield-based healing.

Honestly, and i mean no offense, this is one of the most confusing posts i have seen on here in a long time. You say that rebuilding the specs would lose class identity, then offer your alternative, using the phrase "reskin" but totally rebuilding the specs? Sorry if i am misunderstanding something here, but i am extremely confused by your entire post, and honestly have no idea what you are talking about when you say " re skin", especially when you then go on to describe something completely different?

- - - Updated - - -

The idea of turning some specs into random shit that it wasn't before is not exactly great, as the survival changes have proven since legion. Alot of people, despite specs being utter garbage compared to their alternatives, still play certain classes purely because they like that spec. Especially in the casual circles that make up the majority of the playerbase it is a rather risky thing to just villy-nilly change specs into something completely different.

Turning a melee into a caster is simply not the same and while some would like it others would absolutely loathe it. If you turn demonology into a tank spec then the ardously carved out niche of demo warlocks that finally actually focuses on demon minions would be ruined again, which in turn would give more credence to just make an actual necromancer class since the niche is no longer occupied. Turning the 1x2h spec into another furry warrior wannabe will certainly be well received as well..

Adding new specs to existing classes is a promising concept when you can find a niche that fits these classes, randomly changing aspects is just bound to cause drama.

So you dont want the specs changed, but acknowledge that the Demo rebuild was a success. Interesting. You start off by suggesting Blizzard would be changing the specs into "random shit" something never mentioned in the post - it would be a well thought out process, and only bring these popular ideas onbaord to classes where it works, and in situations where they believe it could be a positive. No one said anything about just throwing together "random shit"

[Vampyr78]

UH dk becomes a plate caster class - the necromancer

Necromancer has to be cloth wearer. Otherwise I refuse to accept it.

Warlocks finally get a true tanking option

And maybe you think they should once again completely change how demo plays? Let us rest for a while and play with the spec longer than one expansion. Also if there would be tanking option for warlocks it should be a new spec.

So yeah I support adding new classes and specs instead of completely changing a certain spec to the point of it being unrecognizible. I pretty much like the theme for each current spec and don't want to be completely changed. On a mechanical level some could use the work but the theme that fits is there and it should stay. On top of that there's an ongoing theme for each class.

[AngerFork]

For hunter:
BM-Survival-Dark Ranger (with MM stuff since they are pretty much the same and the most similar to change)?

Sure, I could see that. Even though MM is my fave Hunter spec, it's definitely the closest to Dark Ranger and Dark Ranger as a 4th spec would likely greatly limit abilities that MM and DR would have.

[Directionalk9]

Honestly, and i mean no offense, this is one of the most confusing posts i have seen on here in a long time. You say that rebuilding the specs would lose class identity, then offer your alternative, using the phrase "reskin" but totally rebuilding the specs? Sorry if i am misunderstanding something here, but i am extremely confused by your entire post, and honestly have no idea what you are talking about when you say " re skin", especially when you then go on to describe something completely different?

Hmm, I thought it was well explained, and a brilliant idea.

I’m always saying this in class related threads, but Tricerons idea of “reskinning” specs and then mix and matching them is fun and exciting too. It delivers a more niche class fantasy that players want, that don’t currently exist within the game.

To explain “reskinning” as best as I can, it would be like the Warlock green fire quest, but more. The spec plays the same as it’s original spec, but the ability names, visual appearance, and animation are different (at its more extreme implementation)

[DotEleven]

That would be awesome, have a mix of Earth/Magma. Be the Earthbender

Enhancement can be our Thundergod/Stormlord :P

I always considered the name "Earthwarden" for the earthen tank Shaman.

[arkanon]

Hmm, I thought it was well explained, and a brilliant idea.

I’m always saying this in class related threads, but Tricerons idea of “reskinning” specs and then mix and matching them is fun and exciting too. It delivers a more niche class fantasy that players want, that don’t currently exist within the game.

To explain “reskinning” as best as I can, it would be like the Warlock green fire quest, but more. The spec plays the same as it’s original spec, but the ability names, visual appearance, and animation are different (at its more extreme implementation)

So you are trying to suggest blizzard support client side modding, by providing a legitimate game system? Chaos bolts that look like pyroblasts? Who does it look like a pyroblast to? just clientside? or everyone?

Essentially trying to copy the systems from FTP games like PoE. Just sounds like a robust Glyph system. Doesnt address any of the gameplay concerns many people have. In fact, it does follow Blizzards current mindset of "just add more hats, dont worry about gameplay"

- - - Updated - - -

Hmm, I thought it was well explained, and a brilliant idea.

You rewrote it three times while i was trying to reply. And it got more confusing each time. Forget reskinning or anything like that. what you want is more glyphs. - And you have gone back again and rewriten it and added more to it. It was a shambles, and still is.

[Cosmic Janitor]

So you dont want the specs changed, but acknowledge that the Demo rebuild was a success. Interesting. You start off by suggesting Blizzard would be changing the specs into "random shit" something never mentioned in the post - it would be a well thought out process, and only bring these popular ideas onbaord to classes where it works, and in situations where they believe it could be a positive. No one said anything about just throwing together "random shit"

Demonolgy had a constant "under construction" sign stapled to it's ass since 2005. The warlock class has always been just WoW's version of the necromancer, since in lore necromancers were even more reprehensible than warlocks and pretty much all of them were allied with the scourge. For the first couple of years the whole spec was pretty much centered around buffing other specs with small gimmiks and being more sturdy by letting your summon share in the pain. Later around having an aditional summon that could tank and dps. In MoP they started experimenting with the spec and gave it the ability to become a demon, a cool thing, but that was unheard of up until that point. But even then they already shifted to summoning lots of smaller minions like imps, that was technically already the birth of the current demonology warlock. Later with legion they went back to an even heavier focus on demons since they wanted meta exclusively for demon hunters. I'm not sure why they never properly realized the core aspect of the spec and build it around various minions, but since other specs at that time didn't have them either I'm guessing that it was mostly because they didn't have the appropriate tech until MoP (they also added stampede back then iirc).

But even then, they never changed a spec to such a degree that nothing of it's core concept remained until the survival failure back in legion and that one is still not accepted to this day. Your suggestions were random shit, because you just turned a melee plate dps into a caster that usually wears cloth, demo warlocks into a vengenance demon hunter and .. not sure what you want to do with prot, since it looks like you are arguing for adding another spec here instead of turning prot into a dps spec. Kind of besides your original point, isn't it? I guess you could turn an arms warrior into a weeabo orc samurai.. err I mean a blade master, but that really only works for orcs, since that is a pretty much a unique tradition of them alone. Some concepts, like blade master, shadow hunter and even the spellblade I personally favor, are pretty much racial tradions that make little to no sense to have everyone have them.

[Directionalk9]

So you are trying to suggest blizzard support client side modding, by providing a legitimate game system? Chaos bolts that look like pyroblasts? Who does it look like a pyroblast to? just clientside? or everyone?

Essentially trying to copy the systems from FTP games like PoE. Just sounds like a robust Glyph system. Doesnt address any of the gameplay concerns many people have. In fact, it does follow Blizzards current mindset of "just add more hats, dont worry about gameplay"

- - - Updated - - -



You rewrote it three times while i was trying to reply. And it got more confusing each time. Forget reskinning or anything like that. what you want is more glyphs. - And you have gone back again and rewriten it and added more to it. It was a shambles, and still is.

I’ve got no idea what you’re talking “re-writing three times”

I guess it’s glyphs, don’t really know, don’t use em. But glyphs feel not robust enough.

[Teriz]

Unlike Dark Rangers and Necromancers, you really can't morph any of the WoW classes into a Tinker class.