The Dark Ranger: Does it have enough material to become a class?

[Ielenia]

Considering that Blizzard gave Hunters Black Arrow for almost a decade contradicts that assessment.

It does not. At all. Hunters having the "Black Arrow" never felt right because the ability's concept never fit with the class' concept, especially after Blizzard altered it to summon an undead minion.

Untrue. Based on DK and DH inclusions, the abilities mattered a great deal. Warlocks losing Metamorphosis and getting Death Coil changed should be proof enough of that.

This statement of yours has nothing to do with what I wrote. I said that it doesn't matter that hunters had Black Arrow for many years, because the ability's concept simply does not fit the class concept. It's like a druid having a fel-based spell. Or a warlock having a holy-based spell.

Or just place their abilities in the existing Hunter class.

They could. Or perhaps Blizzard would put those abilities in a new class whose concept is much more in line with those abilities than shoehorning them where they don't belong.

The main difference here is that you can put Nathanos' entire ability set in the Hunter class without changing a thing.

Oh, gee, perhaps because Nathanos is a hunter, while Sylvanas is something else, which is why people are pinning for Sylvanas as the base of the dark ranger instead of Nathanos?

They should. The majority of DR characters in WoW are more like Nathanos than Sylvanas.

So what? They don't want Nathanos. They want Sylvanas. Prior to the Wrath expansion all DKs were more like Baron Rivendare than the Lich King. Look how it turned out.

It's in the Q&As.

Ah. Right. Still, it doesn't mean Black Arrow is coming back. I'm 99% sure that ability is not coming back, since it doesn't fit the hunter class concept now that it summons an undead minion.

- - - Updated - - -

Death Knight and Paladin.

Also, Robogoblin isn't ranged. In fact its a melee transformation, so even Tinker is not a melee hero with all ranged abilities.

I'd like to add the night elf Warden and Demon Hunter, and the undead Dread Lord and Crypt Lord to that list.

[Teriz]

And then they removed it,
Like due to the fact that Black Arrow doesn't fit the wilderness wanderer Blizzard has established

More likely it was an awful talent that no one picked, and was replaced with Serpent Sting.

Aside from the fact that Black Arrow doesn't fit the class fantasy Blizzard is trying to create
Simply adding a few dark ranger themed talents to MM, would not encompass everything a dark ranger class like sylvanas is.

What about Nathanos? Isn't he a Dark Ranger too? In fact, isn't Nathanos more similar to other Dark Rangers ability-wise than Sylvanas herself? Additionally, isn't Nathanos the one training new Dark Rangers, so wouldn't Dark Rangers be more like him than Sylvanas?

But we don't want to be the 'Nathanos variant' of Dark Ranger, we want to be the Sylvanas variant.

Of course you would. Nathanos is nothing more than a MM Hunter.

You need to be consistent with your logic, Teriz

Not every tinker in WoW has a mech suit, but because Gelbin and Gazlowe have ones you think the class should as well,

The WC3 and HotS Tinker had a mech suit too.

- - - Updated - - -

First off let me say I would much rather have a mech class than a Dark Ranger. I'm only trying to point out your hypocrisy when it comes to tinkers.

For example you have stated how Sylvanas's skills shouldn't be counted for Dark Ranger skills as she is also a banshee. And because heroes multiclass it would be silly to assume they are dark rangers skills. YET you sit here claiming all of Gazlowe's hero of the storm skills because he has one tinker skill Robo-goblin(which I will get to in a moment) even though he has had a history of being a sapper and engineer (which both use explosives and shit) and hasn't even been mentioned as a tinker in wow, wc3, etc..
This is even funnier because you hang so much hope on his Robo-goblin skill and yet you seem to have never played Heroes of the Storm. Because if you did you would realize that he doesn't get a vehicle he just receives an energy shield. So you either need to discount HoTs as a separate universe or accept that Robo-goblin isn't this amazing vehicle skill that you want it to be. And if you discount it then you gotta discount all of Gazlowes other skills(which you already should since you refuse to accept Sylvanas's skills as potential dark ranger skills)

Er, no. I said that Sylvanas shouldn't be counted for Dark Ranger skills because her origin is highly unique, and no other Dark Ranger NPC has her abilities. There's Sylvanas, and then there's every other Dark Ranger we encounter, including Nathanos. I really don't understand why you guys can't understand that simple fact.

Gazlowe actually also has Deth Lazor and Xplodium charge in WoW. But by all means, continue to be wrong.

As for Robo-Goblin being a vehicle, you clearly didn't play the earlier versions of HotS. Robo Goblin was a vehicle but was streamlined into a permanent state with a shield. Here's how it used to look before it was changed;

You try to make it out like Blizzard putting a classes skills into another class makes it less viable and yet What happened to Locks demon form? Oh yeah...... Blizzard removed it because it was a Demon Hunter ability......

Yes. Which indicates that Demon Hunters couldn't enter the game UNTIL Blizzard removed the ability from the Warlock class.

You have also tried to put tinkers in mail when if you look at every tinker in every game mail is the least used gear they use behind plate and leather, and even cloth.

So if they can wear pretty much any type of armor, what's wrong with putting them in mail?

You also claim every tech skill as a tinker skill. And yet when someone tries to add a necromantic/ranger skill you claim its bullshit and not a dark ranger skill. You have even tried to add titan tech to tinkers which is about 1000 times less related to tinkers than adding a summon undead to a dark ranger. Not every tech skill is a tinker skill. And in fact when you get into the rpg lore Tinkers are shit tier engineers which when you look into the etymology of the words it should be fairly obvious.

Considering that Goblins and Gnomes are building machines and weapons that utilize Azerite which is the literal blood of a titan, I don't see how that is "1000 times less related to Tinkers".

As for your accusation that I'm adding random skills to the Tinker, by all means, tell me a tech skill that I've added to the core 15 abilities I mentioned that aren't associated with the Tinker in any Blizzard incarnation.

And finally you continually mention skills that are already in wow as engineering skills , toys, actual robotic creatures spells etc... Atleast the Dark Ranger had skills that were found on other classes and we already know Blizzard is willing to remove them to produce a full class.

Okay, the skills are as follows; Pocket Factory, Cluster Rocket, Engineering Upgrade, Robo-Goblin, Xplodium Charge, Rock-It turret, Deth Lazor, Grav-O-Bomb 3000, Salvager, Healbot, Turbocharged, and Robo-Goblin shield. Where in engineering, toys, or robotic create spells are those abilities located?

[Kaleredar]

It's less an issue of cobbling together abilities and more an issue of... who can even be dark rangers? They're exclusively the servants of Sylvanas.


Forsaken? Blood Elves? You're going to need more than that.

Who else? Void elves? Maybe night elves as some sort of dark avenger hunter? Does WoW really need another "elf only" class?

Dwarf Dark ranger, Tauren Dark ranger, gnome dark ranger, orc dark ranger... none of those make sense.

[Teriz]

It does not. At all. Hunters having the "Black Arrow" never felt right because the ability's concept never fit with the class' concept, especially after Blizzard altered it to summon an undead minion.

Actually Survival Hunter players seemed to really like the ability.

This statement of yours has nothing to do with what I wrote. I said that it doesn't matter that hunters had Black Arrow for many years, because the ability's concept simply does not fit the class concept. It's like a druid having a fel-based spell. Or a warlock having a holy-based spell.

How is Hunters having Black Arrow for 10 years like Druids getting a fel-based spell? Druids NEVER had a fel-based spell and Warlocks never had a Holy spell, but Hunters had Black Arrow for several years over multiple expansions. Your comparisons are absolutely terrible.

Oh, gee, perhaps because Nathanos is a hunter, while Sylvanas is something else, which is why people are pinning for Sylvanas as the base of the dark ranger instead of Nathanos?

So Nathanos the Hunter is training new Dark Rangers? Wouldn't that mean that Dark Rangers themselves are nothing more than a derivative of Hunters?

So what? They don't want Nathanos. They want Sylvanas. Prior to the Wrath expansion all DKs were more like Baron Rivendare than the Lich King. Look how it turned out.

Yeah, but all the Death Knights were warriors with Shadow abilities and necromancer abilities. All Demon Hunters were warglaives users who could transform into demons. What does it say when ALL Dark Rangers are just Hunters like Nathanos?

[Kagdar]

A Death Knight is a risen fighter who was retrained with the necromatic side to imbue himself and his weapon with darkness and spread disease.

And a Dark Ranger is a risen hunter who was retrained with the necromatic side to imbue himself and his weapon with darkness.

That's the whole point Hunters and DR don't have the same back story. DR have to go through a really big step from hunter to DR. You can't simply put that step into a 4th spec with a simple "change spec" button.

"Oh wait guys imma change spec" -sacrifice himself, get rezzed, go train in necromancy, comeback. "ok i'm ready now"
"oh wait i'll change spec again for that boss" -somehow stop being undead and regain his humanity????

It's thousands time way easier form Blizz to just make a new class than to create 2/3 more specs and try to fit them to hunters and explain how they got there.
They can literally create a completely new lore behind DR with countless abilities that goes with the necromancer+hunter+rogue playstyle/theme WITHOUT having any restrictions of the hunter.

[Teriz]

Death Knight and Paladin.

Devotion Aura and Divine Shield were ranged abilities? Uther has hammer of justice in HotS.

The Lich King in HotS has multiple melee abilities.

Also, Robogoblin isn't ranged. In fact its a melee transformation, so even Tinker is not a melee hero with all ranged abilities.

Er, you can still use all of the Tinker's ranged abilities in Robo-Goblin form.

[Kagdar]

So Nathanos the Hunter is training new Dark Rangers? Wouldn't that mean that Dark Rangers themselves are nothing more than a derivate of Hunters?

Yeah, but all the Death Knights were warriors with Shadow abilities and necromancer abilities. All Demon Hunters were warglaives users who could transform into demons. What does it say when ALL Dark Rangers are just Hunters like Nathanos?

And when i play my shaman i encounter plenty of shamans in game that don't have 10% of all skills Thrall or me use. Does't make them less shaman, doesn't prevent the playable class to have skills they don't have.

When people make Dark Rangers fan class concepts they see Sylvannas and they want to play a class that is as close as possible to HER. We don't care that other in game DR don't have all her cool abilities.

So in all the concepts, people give DR skills(invented ones or already existing) that are related to what Sylvannas do.
So in order to make those fan created concepts BLizz just has to create a story that make the playable DR class able to do those abilities.

It's the beauty of creating a NEW class, they can create new lore that fit what they want to introduce in the game.
And the concepts those people want... guess what. It doesn't fit the hunter theme.

[DotEleven]

And a Dark Ranger is a risen hunter who was retrained with the necromatic side to imbue himself and his weapon with darkness.

That's the whole point Hunters and DR don't have the same back story. DR have to go through a really big step from hunter to DR. You can't simply put that step into a 4th spec with a simple "change spec" button.

"Oh wait guys imma change spec" -sacrifice himself, get rezzed, go train in necromancy, comeback. "ok i'm ready now"
"oh wait i'll change spec again for that boss" -somehow stop being undead and regain his humanity????

It's thousands time way easier form Blizz to just make a new class than to create 2/3 more specs and try to fit them to hunters and explain how they got there.
They can literally create a completely new lore behind DR with countless abilities that goes with the necromancer+hunter+rogue playstyle/theme WITHOUT having any restrictions of the hunter.

You're literally saying it's easier to make 3 specs out of Dark Ranger than to say "A hunter forsook nature and learned some necromantic arts" and created one spec.

Right now, the reason Dark Hunter can't be implemented at all is because it's stuck to a single race, the forsaken. If they're willing to break that to make it a class, I don't see why they wouldn't be willing to break it to make it a 4th spec with some BS about no longer needing to die to get the necromantic side of it.

Like, once again, do you think they would make a Dark Ranger and a Ranger class separately?

[threads]

It's less an issue of cobbling together abilities and more an issue of... who can even be dark rangers? They're exclusively the servants of Sylvanas.


Forsaken? Blood Elves? You're going to need more than that.

Who else? Void elves? Maybe night elves as some sort of dark avenger hunter? Does WoW really need another "elf only" class?

Dwarf Dark ranger, Tauren Dark ranger, gnome dark ranger, orc dark ranger... none of those make sense.

well we already have dark ranger models for night elf and human (nathanos). honestly they could just go the death knight route and give every race a dark ranger skin if they wanted. despite what some people here think blizzard can do whatever they want and make up any new lore they need to fulfill a new class.

[Kagdar]

You're literally saying it's easier to make 3 specs out of Dark Ranger than to say "A hunter forsook nature and learned some necromantic arts" and created one spec.

Yes i am, and i said so in my post. It's easier because they have the complete freedom of doing whatever they want without restraints from the Hunter lore.

Having a 4th necromantic spec on the hunter would only integrate 1 aspec of what people want as a DR class.

So are you suggesting they add 2/3 other specs to the hunter?
Or would you add a 4th spec to the rogue too and give them a necromantic spec too?

How about adding a necromantic spec to all class while we're at it.

Why divide the DR class into multiple already existing class when you can just make 1 new class that has all this at the same place.

[Kaleredar]

well we already have dark ranger models for night elf and human (nathanos). honestly they could just go the death knight route and give every race a dark ranger skin if they wanted. despite what some people here think blizzard can do whatever they want and make up any new lore they need to fulfill a new class.

Sure, but that doesn't make it compelling lore. They could add protoss if they wanted to; wouldn't make it a good idea.


They have a single human dark ranger model; Nathaniel... who's still empowered by and a servant to Sylvanas. Hell, it was pretty explicitly pointed out that he was the only human ranger prior to his death.

Like I said, Dark Rangers draw their powers from Sylvanas and Sylvanas alone. And with her... exodus... from the Horde, it's not like she's firing up any training camps. Nor is there any reason the alliance would ever have dark rangers, at least as we know them.

The only other source of necromantic death powers are the knights of acherus and... they seem pretty happy with their death knights.

[DotEleven]

Yes i am, and i said so in my post. It's easier because they have the complete freedom of doing whatever they want without restraints from the Hunter lore.

Having a 4th necromantic spec on the hunter would only integrate 1 aspec of what people want as a DR class.

So are you suggesting they add 2/3 other specs to the hunter?
Or would you add a 4th spec to the rogue too and give them a necromantic spec too?

How about adding a necromantic spec to all class while we're at it.

Why divide the DR class into multiple already existing class when you can just make 1 new class that has all this at the same place.

What 2/3 other specs. You can easily get what a Dark Ranger is by adding in some necromantic magic. Dual wield is as necessary to Dark Ranger as it is to hunter. It would be nice, but not needed. You have a death themed ranger, using nercomantic magic. Black Arrow with the skeleton summon. bring Silencing Shot back, some poisons to wittle down. Turn Disengage into a Banshee form style retreat. Badabing badaboom. You're trying to delve way too deep into it for no reason. You could easily fit it into one spec.

BTW, not all classes have a necromantic equivalent or the lore already in place. The lore of a Dark Ranger is literally a ranger that died. Once again, do you believe they would create separate Ranger and Dark Ranger classes?

[Aliven]

I remember when i played MM hunter in mop and could more or less shape him into troll shadow hunter. Using poisons, ranged attacks etc. It was nice.

That taught me that there is only room for one bow wielding class and that is hunter. Make it shadow hunter, dark hunter whatever.

I believe the solution for more fantasy within a class is not creating new ones or making another spec but expanding option within talent system.

[DotEleven]

I remember when i played MM hunter in mop and could more or less shape him into troll shadow hunter. Using poisons, ranged attacks etc. It was nice.

That taught me that there is only room for one bow wielding class and that is hunter. Make it shadow hunter, dark hunter whatever.

I believe the solution for more fantasy within a class is not creating new ones or making another spec but expanding option within talent system.

I've always seen Shadow Hunter as much more Shaman-ish.

[Kagdar]

BTW, not all classes have a necromantic equivalent or the lore already in place. The lore of a Dark Ranger is literally a ranger that died. Once again, do you believe they would create separate Ranger and Dark Ranger classes?

Why couldn't they? they can create whatever story they want that could explain the difference between rangers and dark rangers. They introduced DK with new lore that was completely different than the story DK had prior to that.

You can easily get what a Dark Ranger is by adding in some necromantic magic.

They totally could do that. But i'm pretty sure a lot of players would complain that they aren't real Dark Rangers. And if they want to introduce DR at a later date players would complain that they had to remove that new 4th hunter spec.
And like i said, having DR as a new class gives them the possibility of expanding the class beyond what little stuff it currently have.

Just answer me this easy question : Can Blizzard expand on the concept of the Dark Rangers and make it a completely different class than Hunters? Or are they too limited and if so how are they limited(like they are with DH 3rd spec)

[Teriz]

And when i play my shaman i encounter plenty of shamans in game that don't have 10% of all skills Thrall or me use. Does't make them less shaman, doesn't prevent the playable class to have skills they don't have.

When people make Dark Rangers fan class concepts they see Sylvannas and they want to play a class that is as close as possible to HER. We don't care that other in game DR don't have all her cool abilities.

So in all the concepts, people give DR skills(invented ones or already existing) that are related to what Sylvannas do.
So in order to make those fan created concepts BLizz just has to create a story that make the playable DR class able to do those abilities.

It's the beauty of creating a NEW class, they can create new lore that fit what they want to introduce in the game.
And the concepts those people want... guess what. It doesn't fit the hunter theme.

There's a difference between Thrall having a higher order of power over the elements than the Shaman player, and Sylvanas utilizing a completely different ability set that every other Dark Ranger doesn't have.

Look at it this way; We have Sylvanas on one side, and Nathanos, Alina, Aya, Clea, Cyndia, and every other Dark Ranger that has ever appeared on WoW on the other. Lorewise, if you're going to become a Dark Ranger, which side are you more likely to be on?

BTW, should we point out once again that Nathanos is training new Dark Rangers yet gameplay wise he is a Hunter trainer, and that Dark Rangers are in the Hunter class hall?

[Kagdar]

I've always seen Shadow Hunter as much more Shaman-ish.

They are pretty much the Demon Hunters of the shamans. But instead of possessing demon souls within them, they can channel the Loa spirit through them.

[threads]

There's a difference between Thrall having a higher order of power over the elements than the Shaman player, and Sylvanas utilizing a completely different ability set that every other Dark Ranger doesn't have.

Look at it this way; We have Sylvanas on one side, and Nathanos, Alina, Aya, Clea, Cyndia, and every other Dark Ranger that has ever appeared on WoW on the other. Lorewise, if you're going to become a Dark Ranger, which side are you more likely to be on?

BTW, should we point out once again that Nathanos is training new Dark Rangers yet gameplay wise he is a Hunter trainer, and that Dark Rangers are in the Hunter class hall?

yea well there's tinkers in iron forge that are engineering trainers. or are you going to make more excuses for tinkers that somehow do not apply to dark rangers?

[Teriz]

yea well there's tinkers in iron forge that are engineering trainers. or are you going to make more excuses for tinkers that somehow do not apply to dark rangers?

Engineering isn't a class, and none of the abilities of the Tinker ever existed in the engineering profession.

Nathanos is a Dark Ranger. He trains new Dark Rangers, and he is a Hunter trainer. Further, the Hunter class housed Black Arrow for years.

Those are simply the facts.

[threads]

Engineering isn't a class, and none of the abilities of the Tinker ever existed in the engineering profession.

Nathanos is a Dark Ranger. He trains new Dark Rangers, and he is a Hunter trainer. Further, the Hunter class housed Black Arrow for years.

Those are simply the facts.

Yet black arrow was removed over a year ago, suspiciously right before an xpac with a growing focus on dark rangers. It's almost as if blizzard wants to separate that ability and magic with the hunter class.