9.0 General Discussion

[huth]

Still though, that still doesnt explain why not allowing hunters to transmog the vampire hunter set is good.

It doesn't need to. What needs to be explained is why Hunters, who're mostly about the kind that goes out hunting and trapping animals, should have any claim to a set that is for people hunting a specific, most definitely not animal, thing.

[Sondrelk]

It doesn't need to. What needs to be explained is why Hunters, who're mostly about the kind that goes out hunting and trapping animals, should have any claim to a set that is for people hunting a specific, most definitely not animal, thing.

When vampire hunters are usually shown with a crossbow i do wonder why it shouldnt be possible for hunters to look like that. The best you can do is play as an outlaw rogue with the tiny gun.
And it isnt like this is the only one, this is just the latest in a long string of cases where Blizzard has a leather set that would have fit hunter perfectly. As i mentioned above with the nelves. If Blizzard itself doesnt think that the mail sets are good enough for hunters when the leather is when it comes to their NPCs, then why are players not allowed to transmog it?

[Yarathir]

It doesn't need to. What needs to be explained is why Hunters, who're mostly about the kind that goes out hunting and trapping animals, should have any claim to a set that is for people hunting a specific, most definitely not animal, thing.

Hunters are trackers, trappers, beast masters, marksmen and a bunch of other thematics in one.

That fits a Witch Hunter far more than it does Demon Hunters, Druids and Rogues.

- - - Updated - - -

If transmog restrictions were loosened then this would not be as big a problem. You would still likely have the problem that Mail isnt part of the usual gear trifecta, and therefore is difficult to create gear sets for, but at least you would give people more options.
Take Kul Tirans for instance, tidesages could not more clearly be shamans who specialize in water, yet since they are wearing cloth there is no way to make a tidesage look like the NPC ones.

The argument that it dilutes gear fantasy is one i would call absolute bullshit on, players barely notice what other players are wearing, I also cannot seem to think that transmog restrictions being loosened would lead to all warlocks wearing full plate either.
Not to mention, as i said above, this is an arbitrary restriction that Blizzard does not adhere to itself anyways. Anduin is implicitly stated to be a priest, yet he wears full plate. There is a survival hunter in Boralus that wears noticeable pieces of the Antorus druid set. And of course as i mentioned before, entire legions of Nelf hunters wearing leather, not pieces of the set, but the entire thing.

So what if each character could transmog an armor type below their own.

So plate can mog mail, mail can mog leather, leather can mog cloth and cloth.. well, cloth is shit-out-of-luck.

And yeah, this whole "gear fantasy" thing is.. so-so. I get why it exists and is adhered to, but at the same time, we already have a Stormwind Guard set that can be worn by priests, a shovel that can be worn by paladins, a literal fish mace. Etc.

People will generally flock to what they think is a good representation of their class or the character they want to play, anyway. This just gives them more freedom to mix and match pieces to accomplish that. Sure, you'll have some clowns, but you have them now.

[huth]

Hunters are trackers, trappers, beast masters, marksmen and a bunch of other thematics in one.

That fits a Witch Hunter far more than it does Demon Hunters, Druids and Rogues.

Actually, i'd argue the rogue fits best, with the Hunter class being a worse fit than Demon Hunters but better than Druid.

A Witch Hunter needs connections and information first and foremost, not trapping and tracking skills.

[Sondrelk]

Actually, i'd argue the rogue fits best, with the Hunter class being a worse fit than Demon Hunters but better than Druid.

A Witch Hunter needs connections and information first and foremost, not trapping and tracking skills.

A witch/vampire hunter is however usually shown as using a crossbow, and is supposedly adept at tracking. Both traits that fit far better with a hunter than it does a rogue.


edit:
Also, why is a rogue supposedly better than a hunter at information gathering? And why is information gathering more important than tracking? Seems like a pretty weak argument to disguise the fact that it is in fact called a vampire hunter

[Lahis]

A witch/vampire hunter is however usually shown as using a crossbow, and is supposedly adept at tracking. Both traits that fit far better with a hunter than it does a rogue.


edit:
Also, why is a rogue supposedly better than a hunter at information gathering? And why is information gathering more important than tracking? Seems like a pretty weak argument to disguise the fact that it is in fact called a vampire hunter

Rogues in Warcraft are literal spies. I'm pretty sure that makes them leagues better information gatherers than Hunters who know how to follow pawprints in a forest.

[gunner_recall]

My hunter weeps.

My mage is beyond tears anymore.

[Sondrelk]

Rogues in Warcraft are literal spies. I'm pretty sure that makes them leagues better information gatherers than Hunters who know how to follow pawprints in a forest.

That still doesnt explain why a Vampire hunter who hunts vampires during the night should be a stabby spy instead of a hunters who knows how to track prey.

[Hitei]

Also, why is a rogue supposedly better than a hunter at information gathering? And why is information gathering more important than tracking? Seems like a pretty weak argument to disguise the fact that it is in fact called a vampire hunter

Pointing out it has hunter in the name is a pretty weak argument when vampire hunters are really just specialized assassins, not actual "hunters". Sneaking into a mansion/crypt/cave and stabbing someone to death (with a stake) is textbook rogue, not the domain of a woodland ranger whose good at traps, animals and archery.

[gunner_recall]

The cloth set is officially the potion set

Mana potion set:
https://wow.zamimg.com/uploads/scree...mal/933313.jpg

Health potion set:
https://wow.zamimg.com/uploads/scree...mal/933298.jpg

If the robe doesn't have the leg portion and that's tied to the pants model, then I actually quite like it on it's own.

Like I like the entire set as a whole. It's just very...busy. And why plague doctor? Why couldn't they make a wizard witch hunter?

Edit: also the belt for one of my many, many, MANY alliance themed mage sets.

[Yarathir]

Pointing out it has hunter in the name is a pretty weak argument when vampire hunters are really just specialized assassins, not actual "hunters". Sneaking into a mansion/crypt/cave and stabbing someone to death (with a stake) is textbook rogue, not the domain of a woodland ranger whose good at traps, animals and archery.

This seems like an oversimplification of what a hunter is.

[Lahis]

This seems like an oversimplification of what a hunter is.

Even adding in more detailed description wouldn't turn them into assassins.

[Jaggler]

Yeah, kinda have to agree with the "rogue-camp" here.

[Sondrelk]

Even adding in more detailed description wouldn't turn them into assassins.

I suppose rogues are better for everything a hunter does then, considering a hunter is the one usually best suited for hunting down and killing what is usually shown as a monster, scouting out where it shows up, tracking it through hostile terrain and then killing it where it lives.

The only real difference here is that you somehow think that just because it is a humanoid killing it isnt the same as if it was, say, a giant bear terrorizing the townsfolk. Both could easily begin with a lone wanderer showing up in tiny hamlet, learning about what is killing people at night, and then tracking it down to kill it.
Yet somehow your opinion is that the lone wanderer here is best exemplified in WoW by the stabby spy rogue, instead of the hunter.

- - - Updated - - -

Yeah, kinda have to agree with the "rogue-camp" here.

Why? As i pointed out just before the only thing that possibly veers it closer to the spy side of things is that vampires and witches are humanoids, yet if you assumed them to be an animal, then the idea that the stabby rogue is best suited to finding it and killing it becomes pretty silly.
Besides, the point here is more which WoW class best exemplifies what a vampire hunter is, and given rogues in WoW are shown to be ninjas, assassins or pirates i don't think those fit the usual vampire hunter fantasy of a coat wearing ranger strolling into the tiny hamlet beset by a monster that kills people in hte night.

[Cosmic Janitor]

And instead they gave it to leather, where it doesn't fit 3 out of 4 classes? Yeah, no. I think you're getting way to hung up about the Hunter part of Vampire Hunter.

Looks to me like they just decided it doesn't look anywhere remotely heavy enough to qualify for the medium-to-heavy armour category. It's barely above regular clothes.

I think so too. This is more a symptom of mail being just weird for hunters (and anything related to the fantasy of a ranger class).

[Sondrelk]

I think so too. This is more a symptom of mail being just weird for hunters (and anything related to the fantasy of a ranger class).

Mail is weird in general, the only time it ever fit anyone is during Classic when warriors used it until they were trained enough to use proper plate.
Which is why Blizzard continued insistence on having hunters transmog mail when they won't even adhere to that restriction themselves with their NPCs is pretty dumb.

[Jaggler]

Besides, the point here is more which WoW class best exemplifies what a vampire hunter is, and given rogues in WoW are shown to be ninjas, assassins or pirates i don't think those fit the usual vampire hunter fantasy of a coat wearing ranger strolling into the tiny hamlet beset by a monster that kills people in hte night.

If we go by that logic, none of the WoW-classes qualify.

To me, if I break it down, hunter hunt beasts while rogues hunt people.

[Adoxe]

Mail has always been a dumb armor type and I'm still shocked that they haven't allowed Plate to transmog into Mail and Mail into Leather yet.

[gunner_recall]

Mail has always been a dumb armor type and I'm still shocked that they haven't allowed Plate to transmog into Mail and Mail into Leather yet.

Honestly, they should just do away with armor types and keep it aesthetic. Like tanking gear would look more like plate, melee dps gear would look like leather/mail, caster gear would look like cloth but there's no armor types so anyone can wear anything(outside tier sets).

But that's a pretty big fucking leap and I don't think they'll do away with it. We might see a shift from plate/mail/leather/cloth to heavy/medium/light at some point but I doubt even that.

[Cosmic Janitor]

Mail is weird in general, the only time it ever fit anyone is during Classic when warriors used it until they were trained enough to use proper plate.
Which is why Blizzard continued insistence on having hunters transmog mail when they won't even adhere to that restriction themselves with their NPCs is pretty dumb.

I guess there is some argument that mail would fit the fantasy of an english longbow man or pre 14th century soldier, I mean there might be a chance that they actually wore chainmail. As far as the class fantasy of both hunter and shaman go, yea it never made a lick of sense. Unless you are very specifically go for human hunter that is just a stomwind soldier, the whole mail thing always clashed with the whole concept of the class. This is actually made even more obvious by the fact that humans couldn't even be fucking hunters in classic. I guess it was to appease some very niche dwarf fantasy?

All of this is why I'm an advocate for removing chain mail entirely and just roll it into leather. I don't think there are many hunters who would mourn having access to more less god-awful transmog pieces.