[Concept] Tinkerer Class

[Teriz]

So stuck as a gnome or goblin. No weapon to worry about and no way to customize your mech you’re stuck in. Cool. Sounds awful.

Read again. You still have to worry about weapons, and the mech is customizable.

[Ielenia]

Ascendance and Metamorphosis have different forms and different attributes/abilities per their respective specs.

They're still the same ability. To the point that they don't change names when you change spec.

So you didn't just say that abilities like Fireball and Shadowbolt are just "coats of paint"?

If you read the entire paragraph, you'll see that's not the case. I said they're a "coat of pain" in terms that what makes they look like a fireball or shadow bolt. That saying things like "a druid cannot deploy robots" is nonsensical since the only difference would be the "coat of paint. The very next part of the paragraph explains that:

There's no MECHANICAL difference between "deploying robot pets" and "summoning treants". The only difference, again, is the "coat of paint".

They're only mechanically identical because I chose to use the Druid shapeshifting mechanic for the Tinker class to avoid trolls like yourself from saying that it isn't viable. Blizzard could obviously find a different way to mechanically implement the concept. If they DO choose to go the easy route and just copy the Druid mechanic, there's still abilities like Self-Destruct, Pocket Factory, Protective Frenzy, Salvager, etc. that would be mechanically different than what's in the Druid class.

The moment you say "give class X 'permanent-until-toggled-off' forms for each spec" you're treading and infringing into druid territory. And no, those abilities would just derive different names. But the mechanics? All stuff that could be given to druids. "Pocket Factory"? The druid could get an ability that does the exact same: summon a hive that continue to spawn bees that make a bee-line to the closest enemy and explode. "Protective Frenzy"? Generic dps cooldown. Etc, etc.

I think having a Cooldown for a mech when the concept calls for a permanent mech form...

The concept doesn't "call" for that. You just insist to push that idea.

So now you're saying that you're NOT confused about Goblins and Gnomes being higher up while piloting a mech? Please make up your mind.

Again, this is just your strawman. I was never "confused". Your strawman was.

the Tinker, (a concept that revolves around a Goblin or Gnome piloting a robot suit)

False. The tinker is about a class based around technology. This "goblin or gnome piloting robot suit" is nothing but your idea that you insist to push over all otehrs.

So now what you personally like or dislike is relevant in a discussion about a potential future WoW class? Okay......

As relevant as what you "like or dislike", buddy. And very relevant when you pretend to speak for everyone.

[Teriz]

They're still the same ability. To the point that they don't change names when you change spec.

They're the same ability mechanically. Just like almost all of those types of abilities are. However, they look different and have different attributes.

If you read the entire paragraph, you'll see that's not the case. I said they're a "coat of pain" in terms that what makes they look like a fireball or shadow bolt. That saying things like "a druid cannot deploy robots" is nonsensical since the only difference would be the "coat of paint. The very next part of the paragraph explains that:


The moment you say "give class X 'permanent-until-toggled-off' forms for each spec" you're treading and infringing into druid territory.

You mean like Shadowform?

And no, those abilities would just derive different names. But the mechanics? All stuff that could be given to druids. "Pocket Factory"? The druid could get an ability that does the exact same: summon a hive that continue to spawn bees that make a bee-line to the closest enemy and explode. "Protective Frenzy"? Generic dps cooldown. Etc, etc.

Which is a silly argument to make, because regardless of any potential ability or future WoW class put forward you can just say that a current class could get a mechanically similar ability.

The point is that Druids don't use robots, and abilities like Self Destruct, Pocket Factory or Salvager don't exist within the Druid class and almost certainly never will. You're just using this tactic to try to say that the Tinker brings nothing new to the table because of "coats of paint".

Oh, and protective frenzy isn't a generic DPS cooldown. It's actually a pretty unique DPS cooldown.

The concept doesn't "call" for that. You just insist to push that idea.

Based on both Tinker heroes, Blackfuse, Gelbin, Gazlowe, Gallywix, etc. it does.

Again, this is just your strawman. I was never "confused". Your strawman was.

Except me saying that Goblins and Gnomes in mechsuits would be taller wasn't a strawman.

False. The tinker is about a class based around technology. This "goblin or gnome piloting robot suit" is nothing but your idea that you insist to push over all otehrs.

That's too broad. That's like saying that the Druid is a class based around nature. No, what makes the Druid concept unique is shapeshifting. What makes the Tinker concept unique is mech piloting. That goes back to the ultimate Tinker ability in WC3, and has continued all the way up to Gelbin's appearance on Broken Shore.

[Ielenia]

You mean like Shadowform?

I didn't know Shadowform was available to Holy and Discipline priests. I'm not seeing those abilities in my spellbooks. Either way, I'll repeat:

The moment you say "give class X 'permanent-until-toggled-off' forms for each spec" you're treading and infringing into druid territory.

Not to mention that with shadow/void form and avatar, you still look as your character.

Which is a silly argument to make, because regardless of any potential ability put forward you can just say that a current class could get a mechanically similar ability. The point is that Druids don't use robots, and abilities like Self Destruct, Pocket Factory or Salvager don't exist within the Druid class and almost certainly never will. You're just using this tactic to try to say that the Tinker brings nothing new to the table because of "coats of paint".

Because you insist that "being in a mech" offers "unique gameplay" that cannot be given to any other class, and I'm just showing you it's not the case. Things like what you're mentioning could easily be done by the tinker without a mech, for example.

Oh, and protective frenzy isn't a generic DPS cooldown. It's actually a pretty unique DPS cooldown.

Increases haste. Sounds pretty generic.

Based on both Tinker heroes, Blackfuse, Gelbin, Gazlowe, Gallywix, etc. it does.

You base your concept around them. Others base it around technology.

Except me saying that Goblins and Gnomes in mechsuits would be taller wasn't a strawman.

... Are you strawmaning your strawman, now? Geez. Looks like you got lost somewhere, in there. That's what happens when you continue to build strawman after strawman, I guess.

That's too broad. That's like saying that the Druid is a class based around nature. No, what makes the Druid concept unique is shapeshifting. What makes the Tinker concept unique is mech piloting.

No, what makes the tinker concept unique is using technology. This "perma-mech-form" thing is nothing but what you constantly push.

[Teriz]

I didn't know Shadowform was available to Holy and Discipline priests. I'm not seeing those abilities in my spellbooks. Either way, I'll repeat:
Not to mention that with shadow/void form and avatar, you still look as your character.

And the Tinker would still look like the character as well, just on top of a mech.

Because you insist that "being in a mech" offers "unique gameplay" that cannot be given to any other class, and I'm just showing you it's not the case. Things like what you're mentioning could easily be done by the tinker without a mech, for example.

Because it does offer unique gameplay. It wouldn't be "easy" for a self destruct ability to exist in the Druid class. Druids will never produce a bee hive that shoots out giant exploding melee bees.

Increases haste. Sounds pretty generic.

Increases haste when one of your creations are destroyed. Quite unique.

You base your concept around them. Others base it around technology.

Blizzard based the concept on mechs as well.

... Are you strawmaning your strawman, now? Geez. Looks like you got lost somewhere, in there. That's what happens when you continue to build strawman after strawman, I guess.

So you're doing all this silly misdirection instead of just admitting that Gnomes and Goblins would be taller in mech form. Wow.

No, what makes the tinker concept unique is using technology. This "perma-mech-form" thing is nothing but what you constantly push.

This has already been explained multiple times.

[Ielenia]

And the Tinker would still look like the character as well, just on top of a mech.

Except 90% of the mob would be "not gnome/goblin", and also assuming it's an open cockpit.

Because it does offer unique gameplay.

And so far you've failed to show anything really "unique" that "could only be done with a mech".

It wouldn't be "easy" for a self destruct ability to exist in the Druid class.

Shoot thorns all around itself, and force the druid to shift back to humanoid form. Not to mention a "self destruct" ability sounds, again using your own words, "too gimmicky and pointless"...

Druids will never produce a bee hive that shoots out giant exploding melee bees.

Why not? They used to summon swarms of insects. Summoning a bee hive sounds right within their domain.

Increases haste when one of your creations are destroyed. Quite unique.

So it has a unique trigger. Fair. But the ability effect itself? Not unique.

Blizzard based the concept on mechs as well.

Considering 90% of the tinkers around WoW are not "based around mechs", I'm calling BS on that claim.

So you're doing all this silly misdirection instead of just admitting that Gnomes and Goblins would be taller in mech form. Wow.

Dude. You're the one claiming I said something I never did. I don't have to "admit" to anything because I never made the claim you're insisting I made.

This has already been explained multiple times.

And debunked every time. This "must-have-mech" thing is just your pet idea. And your pet idea does not reflect everyone else's. The OP's concept, for example, has no mechs in it.

[Teriz]

Except 90% of the mob would be "not gnome/goblin", and also assuming it's an open cockpit.

Irrelevant. The point is that your character is still visible.

And so far you've failed to show anything really "unique" that "could only be done with a mech".

Yeah, treants aren't robots or bees, shooting thorns and creating a hive isn't anything like self destruct or Pocket Factory.

Why not? They used to summon swarms of insects. Summoning a bee hive sounds right within their domain

Summoning a bee hive that summons giant exploding bees? O-kay. I'm sure that would fit perfectly with the Sun and Moon theme of Balance.

So it has a unique trigger. Fair. But the ability effect itself? Not unique.

You not considering a unique ability unique because it's attached to the Tinker class? Shocking!

Considering 90% of the tinkers around WoW are not "based around mechs", I'm calling BS on that claim.

Yeah, every other expansion class has been heavily associated with WC3 and HotS heroes, but for "some" reason the Tinker wont be. Interesting....

Dude. You're the one claiming I said something I never did. I don't have to "admit" to anything because I never made the claim you're insisting I made.

Uh huh.

[Ielenia]

Irrelevant. The point is that your character is still visible.

It's still an ability that alters how 90% of how your character looks.

Yeah, treants aren't robots or bees, shooting thorns and creating a hive isn't anything like self destruct or Pocket Factory.

"Gimmickiness and pointlessness" of "self destruct" aside, why not? Coat of paint aside, of course.

Summoning a bee hive that summons giant exploding bees? O-kay. I'm sure that would fit perfectly with the Sun and Moon theme of Balance.

Tell me how summoning treants "fits perfectly" with the "sun and moon" theme of the Balance spec.

You not considering a unique ability unique because it's attached to the Tinker class? Shocking!

Give that same ability to a warlock and I'll say the same thing.

Yeah, every other expansion class has been heavily associated with WC3 and HotS heroes, but for "some" reason the Tinker wont be. Interesting....

Gazlowe never stays "full time" (as in, starts and ends the matches) with his mech deployed in Warcraft 3 or in Heroes of the Storm, and it's an "ultimate ability" on both games. So by that logic, it's going to be a cooldown, with limited duration for "game balance".

[Teriz]

It's still an ability that alters how 90% of how your character looks.

It's simply your character inside a mech. Your character isn't being altered at all.

"Gimmickiness and pointlessness" of "self destruct" aside, why not? Coat of paint aside, of course.

Shooting thorns from out if nowhere is the same as a machine exploding? What's the lore behind that? Your cat or bear is full of thorns?

Tell me how summoning treants "fits perfectly" with the "sun and moon" theme of the Balance spec.

It doesnt need to. Force of Nature is a prime Druid ability stretching all the way back to KotG in WC3.

Give that same ability to a warlock and I'll say the same thing.

Considering how you had no problem giving Necromancers refried DK abilities, I call BS on that one.

Gazlowe never stays "full time" (as in, starts and ends the matches) with his mech deployed in Warcraft 3 or in Heroes of the Storm, and it's an "ultimate ability" on both games. So by that logic, it's going to be a cooldown, with limited duration for "game balance".

And Druids dont start the game being able to shapeshift They only have Roar and Faerie Fire. You have to train multiple levels for Druids of the Claw or Talon to be able to turn into animals. However, once you spec into "master training" the Druid can shapeshift and stay in animal form indefinitely.

Just like the WC3 Tinker can stay in mech form indefinitely after you spec into Robo Goblin.

[Ielenia]

It's simply your character inside a mech. Your character isn't being altered at all.

"Your character" is the model you see highlighted when you click on your own health bar, which would include the mech.

Shooting thorns from out if nowhere is the same as a machine exploding? What's the lore behind that? Your cat or bear is full of thorns?

"Thorns" is an actual druid ability, you know? Used to be able to cast on others, then it become a defensive CD, then it became a PvP talent. The point is, the druid 'growing thorns' is actually pretty much "in line" with it.

It doesnt need to. Force of Nature is a prime Druid ability stretching all the way back to KotG in WC3.

So you admit a "perfect fit" is not a requirement, making the ability to summon a bee hive plausible and possible.

Considering how you had no problem giving Necromancers refried DK abilities, I call BS on that one.

Except I haven't? I haven't given my necromancer idea any "refried DK abilities".

And Druids dont start the game being able to shapeshift They only have Roar and Faerie Fire. You have to train multiple levels for Druids of the Claw or Talon to be able to turn into animals. However, once you spec into "master training" the Druid can shapeshift and stay in animal form indefinitely.

In HotS, D.Va starts the match on her mech, and ends it on her mech, assuming it wasn't destroyed. Gazlowe doesn't do that. Hence why the idea of it being a cooldown.

Just like the WC3 Tinker can stay in mech form indefinitely after you spec into Robo Goblin.

Thanks for reminding me of that. You actually have to spec into robo-goblin in HotS. Another evidence it'll be a cooldown.

[Teriz]

"Your character" is the model you see highlighted when you click on your own health bar, which would include the mech.

The character which you can still see perfectly fine.

"Thorns" is an actual druid ability, you know? Used to be able to cast on others, then it become a defensive CD, then it became a PvP talent. The point is, the druid 'growing thorns' is actually pretty much "in line" with it.

Thorns exploding out of a Druid's body is not though.

So you admit a "perfect fit" is not a requirement, making the ability to summon a bee hive plausible and possible.

Force of Nature has always been a perfect fit for Balance Druids. It's one of the original Druid abilities dating all the way back to WC3 with Malfurion.

Summoning a bee hive on the other hand....

Except I haven't? I haven't given my necromancer idea any "refried DK abilities".

Weren't you a huge advocate for "Plague Cauldrons"?

In HotS, D.Va starts the match on her mech, and ends it on her mech, assuming it wasn't destroyed. Gazlowe doesn't do that. Hence why the idea of it being a cooldown.

You mean other than that huge machine on his back with huge claws that he controls with joysticks?

Thanks for reminding me of that. You actually have to spec into robo-goblin in HotS. Another evidence it'll be a cooldown.

You mean just like Druid shapeshifting which you also had to spec into?

[Ielenia]

The character which you can still see perfectly fine.

So you're admitting that this "mech mode" does not fix one huge issue with the race: the way they look.

Thorns exploding out of a Druid's body is not though.

The druids who can grow thorns all around themselves cannot gain an ability sent flying all around themselves... but a death knight's tanking spec can gain healing spell like a healing spec because once, in the long distance past, it had an ability that passively gave leech to party members. Inconsistent much?

Force of Nature has always been a perfect fit for Balance Druids. It's one of the original Druid abilities dating all the way back to WC3 with Malfurion.

Didn't you say the KotG was not a druid? Yes, you were:

There's only 2 Druid units, and there's no Druid-based hero.

Keeper of the Grove. Malfurion.

I'm unaware of Druids being able to transform into a KotG form, or the KotG being able to transform into animals. Malfurion wasn't a playable hero unit.

Summoning a bee hive on the other hand....

They used to summon insects, so very much a good fit, like summoning treants.

Weren't you a huge advocate for "Plague Cauldrons"?

Nope. Your strawman was, though. Also, I'd use your "find me X ability" on you, but it'd derail this thread.

You mean other than that huge machine on his back with huge claws that he controls with joysticks?

You mean just like Druid shapeshifting which you also had to spec into?

It's not him in a mech suit. That'd be like saying Tony Stark is "wearing his suit of armor" because he's carrying it in a suitcase.

[Teriz]

So you're admitting that this "mech mode" does not fix one huge issue with the race: the way they look.

Again if you look at the poll I posted, people like the concept of a class based around a Gnome or Goblin riding a mech.

The druids who can grow thorns all around themselves cannot gain an ability sent flying all around themselves... but a death knight's tanking spec can gain healing spell like a healing spec because once, in the long distance past, it had an ability that passively gave leech to party members. Inconsistent much?

Shooting thorns in all directions is not a self destruct. Self Destruct means that the form blows up and in the case of a Tinker it would restrict access to their mech for a certain amount of time. Under what context would a Druid fill their body up with thorns and blow themselves up?

I never said that the tanking spec would transform into a healing spec. I said that Blood DK has typically had the ability to heal others, which includes exploding blood worms that heal the party, healing the party with rune tap, and as you mentioned, passive giving leech to party members.

Didn't you say the KotG was not a druid? Yes, you were:

I'm talking about Malfurion, not the KotG centaur.

They used to summon insects, so very much a good fit, like summoning treants.

Insect Swarm was replaced by Sunfire, since they moved the nature damage into a solar theme. It is doubtful that they would revert that theme, especially with something so dumb as a bee hive.

Druids still have Treants, and again, Treants are a defining Druid ability stretching all the way back to WC3.

Nope. Your strawman was, though. Also, I'd use your "find me X ability" on you, but it'd derail this thread.

So then you admit that the Necromancer getting "poison" is nothing more than a "coat of paint" on the Death Knight's disease ability, and a DK could easily get a variation of Posion Nova thus making the entire idea of a Necromancer class pointless? Just making sure.

It's not him in a mech suit. That'd be like saying Tony Stark is "wearing his suit of armor" because he's carrying it in a suitcase.

I never said its a mech suit. I said that it's a mech that he's piloting.

[shade3891]

If I can play tinker, I don't mind playing a gnome/goblin.

Like DH I hope they lock the class to these races. Not to increase the number of Gnomes and goblins but the visuals/spell effects tend to be better fitted and animated.

[Teriz]

If I can play tinker, I don't mind playing a gnome/goblin.

Like DH I hope they lock the class to these races. Not to increase the number of Gnomes and goblins but the visuals/spell effects tend to be better fitted and animated.

Some people get hung up on their personal distaste of Goblins and Gnomes not realizing that that racial limit is the best route for the class to take.

[shade3891]

Well personally I would feel weird playing a warrior gnome, because he fantasy doesn't fit. I don't hate gnomes but I do think spells and effects almost all gear looks better on other races that can access the same class so why would I ever roll a gnome?

[Ielenia]

Again if you look at the poll I posted, people like the concept of a class based around a Gnome or Goblin riding a mech.

Objectively false. The poll option says "tinker", not "gnome or goblin riding a mech". A "goblin or gnome riding a mech" may be a tinker, but a tinker is not necessarily a "goblin or gnome riding a mech". This thread's OP design confirms that.

Shooting thorns in all directions is not a self destruct. Self Destruct means that the form blows up and in the case of a Tinker it would restrict access to their mech for a certain amount of time. Under what context would a Druid fill their body up with thorns and blow themselves up?

Once again, I must reiterate how "gimmicky and pointless" a "self-destruct" ability is. But for the sake of the argument, I explained how:

Shoot thorns all around itself, and force the druid to shift back to humanoid form. Not to mention a "self destruct" ability sounds, again using your own words, "too gimmicky and pointless"...

I never said that the tanking spec would transform into a healing spec. I said that Blood DK has typically had the ability to heal others, which includes exploding blood worms that heal the party, healing the party with rune tap, and as you mentioned, passive giving leech to party members.

It's a TANK spec, Teriz!

Are you really arguing that a healing spec based on blood magic cannot exist because the death knight's TANK spec, a couple times in the past, had a couple abilities that offered very very very minor healing to your party members as a side-effect? As in, not the ability's main purpose?

So the death knight having some abilities in the past that had very minor party off-healing side-effects precludes the inclusion of an actual healing spec based on blood magic. But somehow the hunter having some minor tech abilities does not preclude the inclusion of a class based on tech. The double-think is intense here.

I'm talking about Malfurion, not the KotG centaur.

You excluded both.

Insect Swarm was replaced by Sunfire, since they moved the nature damage into a solar theme. It is doubtful that they would revert that theme, especially with something so dumb as a bee hive.

Irrelevant. Because your own argument against a class using blood magic to heal others is pointing at a removed ability from the Death Knight roster and saying that because of that ability, another class cannot have healing abilities based on blood magic.

Druids still have Treants, and again, Treants are a defining Druid ability stretching all the way back to WC3.

I don't see any druids of the talon or druids of the claw using that ability, so what you're saying is false.

So then you admit that the Necromancer getting "poison" is nothing more than a "coat of paint" on the Death Knight's disease ability, and a DK could easily get a variation of Posion Nova thus making the entire idea of a Necromancer class pointless? Just making sure.

If I simply said "they get poison" and nothing else, never elaborating on how it would differently than the DK's diseases, yes. Thankfully, that's not what I did.

I never said its a mech suit. I said that it's a mech that he's piloting.

Except he's not "piloting" any mech. He only does that when he uses his ultimate ability.

[Teriz]

Objectively false. The poll option says "tinker", not "gnome or goblin riding a mech". A "goblin or gnome riding a mech" may be a tinker, but a tinker is not necessarily a "goblin or gnome riding a mech". This thread's OP design confirms that.

So you're saying that NO ONE associates a Tinker with a Gnome or Goblin riding a mech, or a Gnome and/or Goblin in general?

Once again, I must reiterate how "gimmicky and pointless" a "self-destruct" ability is. But for the sake of the argument, I explained how:

It's not gimmicky or pointless at all for a class using machines. Definitely gimmicky and pointless for Druids if you're trying to create a ridiculous argument that a Tinker is merely a graphical swap of the Druid class.

And also how you describe the ability is not a self-destruct. Just like Arcane Explosion is not a self destruct.

It's a TANK spec, Teriz!

Are you really arguing that a healing spec based on blood magic cannot exist because the death knight's TANK spec, a couple times in the past, had a couple abilities that offered very very very minor healing to your party members as a side-effect? As in, not the ability's main purpose?

So the death knight having some abilities in the past that had very minor party off-healing side-effects precludes the inclusion of an actual healing spec based on blood magic. But somehow the hunter having some minor tech abilities does not preclude the inclusion of a class based on tech. The double-think is intense here.

Yes, because its a Necromancer with a Blood, Frost, and Unholy spec, which is exactly the same as a DK with a Blood, Frost, and Unholy spec. And before you try to argue that a Frost spec wouldn't be on the table, keep in mind that the only major Necromancer character left is Kel'thuzad which is a Lich.

I find it hilarious how you have no issue with a Necromancer class that is so close in concept to an existing class that it will more than likely require the DK to get abilities pruned from it, but you're arguing that a Druid and a Tinker are too much alike because of proposed mechanics, or that a Hunter and a Tinker are too much alike because Hunters have a grenade ability.

Irrelevant. Because your own argument against a class using blood magic to heal others is pointing at a removed ability from the Death Knight roster and saying that because of that ability, another class cannot have healing abilities based on blood magic.

Yeah you're confused. I'm saying that the entire thematic is problematic because Blood DKs are performing their role through blood magic healing, just like a proposed Necromancer would be preforming their role through blood magic healing. Along with Frost and Unholy DPS.

I don't see any druids of the talon or druids of the claw using that ability, so what you're saying is false.

Malfurion is an Archdruid.

If I simply said "they get poison" and nothing else, never elaborating on how it would differently than the DK's diseases, yes. Thankfully, that's not what I did.

I believe you said Poison Nova, which could easily be done by a DK utilizing diseases. The fact that you think a Necromancer using poison and a DK using disease is some massive thematic and mechanical difference while arguing that a Tinker is a Druid with a "different coat of paint" simply shows the depths of your hypocrisy.

Except he's not "piloting" any mech. He only does that when he uses his ultimate ability.

Play HotS again. He pilots the mech from level 1.

[Ielenia]

So you're saying that NO ONE associates a Tinker with a Gnome or Goblin riding a mech, or a Gnome and/or Goblin in general?

False equivalence. This is not a dichotomy, Teriz. You're acting as if they all associate the tinker to "gnomes and goblins riding mechs", and I'm showing to you that's not the case.

It's not gimmicky or pointless at all for a class using machines.

Then you don't know what "gimmicky" means.

Yes, because its a Necromancer with a Blood, Frost, and Unholy spec,

Which no one, especially me, argues for.

I find it hilarious how you have no issue with a Necromancer class that is so close in concept to an existing class that it will more than likely require the DK to get abilities pruned from it,

Except none needs to be pruned.

Yeah you're confused. I'm saying that the entire thematic is problematic because Blood DKs are performing their role through blood magic healing, just like a proposed Necromancer would be preforming their role through blood magic healing. Along with Frost and Unholy DPS.

Which is a bollocks argument to begin with, that no sane person would use. Especially since we have both priests and paladins healing with holy magic and yet both exist. We have frost mages and frost dks, fire mages and destruction warlocks, etc...

Malfurion is an Archdruid.

Malfurion wasn't a playable hero unit.

So which is it?

Play HotS again. He pilots the mech from level 1.

Nope. He only does that at level 10 if you take the correct Heroic ability.

[Teriz]

False equivalence. This is not a dichotomy, Teriz. You're acting as if they all associate the tinker to "gnomes and goblins riding mechs", and I'm showing to you that's not the case.

Then what are the majority associating it with?

Then you don't know what "gimmicky" means.

I do, and your silly thorn explosion garbage definitely falls under the definition of gimmicky.

Which no one, especially me, argues for.

So you're saying that NO ONE wants a Necromancer class with a spec based on Kel'thuzad (Frost)? Are you saying that NO ONE wants a Necromancer class with a healing spec that uses blood magic (Blood)? You're saying that NO ONE wants a Necromancer class that can raise the undead and spread blight (Unholy)?

Except none needs to be pruned.

Blizzard changed both the name and the ability of the Warlock version of Death Coil because of the inclusion of DKs. Blizzard completely removed metamorphosis from Warlocks and redid the entire Demonology spec because of the inclusion of Demon Hunters, and wouldn't even give Demon Hunters the Warlock version of the ability.

You really think Blizzard is going to allow two "different" classes to summon undead pets and minions?

Which is a bollocks argument to begin with, that no sane person would use. Especially since we have both priests and paladins healing with holy magic and yet both exist. We have frost mages and frost dks, fire mages and destruction warlocks, etc...

Paladins and Priests are different classes. There's plenty of argument to be made that the Death Knight is a type of Necromancer.

So which is it?

Why does it have to be either or? Malfurion is an Archdruid, and was an unplayable hero unit.

Nope. He only does that at level 10 if you take the correct Heroic ability.

That's him at level 1.