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

[derpkitteh]

I don't think Necromancy is limited to simple Shadow and Death magic.

necromancy is specifically only achieved through death magic, so far. the creation of true undead entities.

everything else is ultimately a different effect. puppetry, or demonic habitation.

[Katchii]

necromancy is specifically only achieved through death magic, so far. the creation of true undead entities.

everything else is ultimately a different effect. puppetry, or demonic habitation.

Calia Menethil is at least one example of this being untrue. She was not resurrected using death magic, she was resurrected by a Naaru using Light magic.

[derpkitteh]

Calia Menethil is at least one example of this being untrue. She was not resurrected using death magic, she was resurrected by a Naaru using Light magic.

the only example thus far. though a proof of concept, i guess you could say.

but it's unclear if something like a warlock could specifically target the binders of the soul to the body to do it imperfectly and result in undead. if light can do it, i'd assume void could as well though.

i doubt arcane magic could do anything like this.

[Katchii]

the only example thus far. though a proof of concept, i guess you could say.

but it's unclear if something like a warlock could specifically target the binders of the soul to the body to do it imperfectly and result in undead. if light can do it, i'd assume void could as well though.

i doubt arcane magic could do anything like this.

There's at least a precedent for another canon version of resurrection vs just a game mechanic like all the class abilities that allow resurrection (Shamans, Druids, Priests, Paladins, Warlocks, Monks, etc...).

We'll have to wait and see. Just because the theme hasn't been explored yet doesn't mean it won't or that it's impossible.

[derpkitteh]

There's at least a precedent for another canon version of resurrection vs just a game mechanic like all the class abilities that allow resurrection (Shamans, Druids, Priests, Paladins, Warlocks, Monks, etc...).

We'll have to wait and see. Just because the theme hasn't been explored yet doesn't mean it won't or that it's impossible.

the resurrection done by all other classes is a perfect resurrection, meaning the person's soul is fully restored to the body perfectly. the way we do it in game is not canon, it's a miracle when it actually happens in lore.

death knights shouldn't have one, either. completely gameplay for them to have one.

[Katchii]

the resurrection done by all other classes is a perfect resurrection, meaning the person's soul is fully restored to the body perfectly. the way we do it in game is not canon, it's a miracle when it actually happens in lore.

death knights shouldn't have one, either. completely gameplay for them to have one.

That's what I meant. The in game class resurrection spells aren't canon. Calia being resurrected by a Naaru is a new canon version of it vs the miracles rarely seen, the undead reanimations done on the forsaken, etc...

[henrike]

Calia Menethil is at least one example of this being untrue. She was not resurrected using death magic, she was resurrected by a Naaru using Light magic.

Which might be the dumbest piece of lolore in recent history.

As for the topic: I don't think dark rangers are likely, at least as a standalone class. The ones in Orgrimmar (the only place they were ever accepted) are openly persecuted in the story. From a gameplay perspective they step on way too many toes when it comes to hunters or death knights. The generic ones we see in game aren't much more powerful than a standard quest lieutenant, nor do they have any unique abilities. Lastly, we already have a hero class limited to elves.

[Guildenstern]

Yes it does. Blizzard can invent any class and there would be material for it. Think Deathknight and Demon Hunter who both took some of the Warlock's class fantasy.
Dark Ranger could combine Hunter, Shadowpriest and warlock.

[Katchii]

Which might be the dumbest piece of lolore in recent history.

Doesn't change the fact that it's canon though. How silly or stupid or whatever it is...it's canon lore now.

As for the topic: I don't think dark rangers are likely, at least as a standalone class. The ones in Orgrimmar (the only place they were ever accepted) are openly persecuted in the story. From a gameplay perspective they step on way too many toes when it comes to hunters or death knights. The generic ones we see in game aren't much more powerful than a standard quest lieutenant, nor do they have any unique abilities. Lastly, we already have a hero class limited to elves.

I don't really see them as likely either, my argument was that there's enough material for them to exist as long as their mechanics were sufficiently different from classes who's theme they overlap with.

They wouldn't HAVE to be elf exclusive, any more than Monks were when they came out. If a trainer exists that has the potential to train them in the ways of the Dark Ranger, that's sufficient enough to open it up to other races. If there's a stipulation for them being undead or whatever to be a Dark Ranger, then just have them use Death Knights as a precedent and just use different skins for Dark Rangers that make them look undead, with the pale skin and red eyes. The lore could be that after a certain point in training on the martial skills, for them to take the next steps in training they have to imbibe some concoction that allows them to undergo the transformation or whatever into undeath to get trained in the magical side of things that's only available when they're undead.

It won't take much stretching of current lore or addition of new lore to make it plausible for a Dark Ranger class to exist, the key would be class mechanics and game play. I'm sure they could do it, but how much work and time would be involved in developing the class in such a way that it's deep enough and different enough from other classes to warrant being implemented?

[Buliwyf the Omen]

They wouldn't HAVE to be elf exclusive, any more than Monks were when they came out.

The issue here is that when people make a Dark Ranger, a lot of them sure as hell want to be like Sylvanas and make a undead elf as usual.

And I really dont think that we should get another class that heavily favors elfs and rises its population even further, dont you agree?

Unless Blizzard doesnt care anymore and is on the same "sex sells" trip like a lot of the other gaming Companies (cough cough Riot Games cough cough).

[Triceron]

The issue here is that when people make a Dark Ranger, a lot of them sure as hell want to be like Sylvanas and make a undead elf as usual.

And I really dont think that we should get another class that heavily favors elfs and rises its population even further, dont you agree?

Unless Blizzard doesnt care anymore and is on the same "sex sells" trip like a lot of the other gaming Companies (cough cough Riot Games cough cough).

I don't think we have any control over that.

Blood Elves comprise of 32% of the Horde, based on current statistics. That's almost a third. Before Blood Elves, the Horde population was very low compared to the Alliance.

http://www.warcraftrealms.com/census.php?class=Monk

I mean look at this graph. While Pandarens are definitely popular, we still see the highest played race is Blood Elf, followed by Pandaren, then Human, Night Elf and Void Elf. Even with a Monk you can't really escape the Elf popularity.

What we have here is a conflict of interest. Either we have a class that doesn't allow Elves, which means the class itself may be unpopular as a result; or we allow them to be Elves and have a popularly played class. I don't think we can avoid that. There's no artificial means of 'balancing' out the races. If there is an Elf option, people will take it.

[Katchii]

The issue here is that when people make a Dark Ranger, a lot of them sure as hell want to be like Sylvanas and make a undead elf as usual.

And I really dont think that we should get another class that heavily favors elfs and rises its population even further, dont you agree?

Unless Blizzard doesnt care anymore and is on the same "sex sells" trip like a lot of the other gaming Companies (cough cough Riot Games cough cough).

I honestly don't care about race distribution, as long as the options are there let people make what they want. There's nothing inherently wrong with a lot of people favoring the same race. I don't like classes being locked to specific races though unless it really makes sense lore wise, like Demon Hunters.

[Buliwyf the Omen]

I don't think we have any control over that.

Blood Elves comprise of 32% of the Horde, based on current statistics. That's almost a third. Before Blood Elves, the Horde population was very low compared to the Alliance.

http://www.warcraftrealms.com/census.php?class=Monk

I mean look at this graph. While Pandarens are definitely popular, we still see the highest played race is Blood Elf, followed by Pandaren, then Human, Night Elf and Void Elf. Even with a Monk you can't really escape the Elf popularity.

What we have here is a conflict of interest. Either we have a class that doesn't allow Elves, which means the class itself may be unpopular as a result; or we allow them to be Elves and have a popularly played class. I don't think we can avoid that. There's no artificial means of 'balancing' out the races. If there is an Elf option, people will take it.

Thats the problem though. Do we really need more elfs plagueing our lands? I slowly understand Garithos.

Either they'll make a class that is restricted to races, like Tinker to Gnome/Goblins, Dragonsworn to a Dragonsworn neutral race, Necromancer to Undead and Human.

Or they re-do the same mistake they did with Monks, open the new class to a big variety of races, if not all of them.

One of the things I really miss in this game is class uniqueness. It doesnt have to be as limited as human/dwarf paladin and Orc/Troll/Tauren shaman only, but something like DH only being elves makes both sense in lore and is more fun to see because they are just so much more focused designwise to make these two look good with it.

[Triceron]

Thats the problem though. Do we really need more elfs plagueing our lands? I slowly understand Garithos.

Either they'll make a class that is restricted to races, like Tinker to Gnome/Goblins, Dragonsworn to a Dragonsworn neutral race, Necromancer to Undead and Human.

Or they re-do the same mistake they did with Monks, open the new class to a big variety of races, if not all of them.

One of the things I really miss in this game is class uniqueness. It doesnt have to be as limited as human/dwarf paladin and Orc/Troll/Tauren shaman only, but something like DH only being elves makes both sense in lore and is more fun to see because they are just so much more focused designwise to make these two look good with it.

Then the Tinker population would be in the bottom of the barrel, far lower than Monks. That isn't doing anything to prevent new Elves being played anyways, because it just means less people will roll a Tinker (or whatever non-Elf class you are talking about).

It's the same conundrum with Blizzard adding new tanks to the game. Just because they add more options doesn't actually get people rolling more tanks; all it does it give the actual Players who tank more choices while the rest of the 90+% of players are gonna be DPS/Healers.

So no, I don't think preventing Elves from being played is a solution at all.

[Buliwyf the Omen]

Then the Tinker population would be in the bottom of the barrel, far lower than Monks. That isn't doing anything to prevent new Elves being played anyways, because it just means less people will roll a Tinker (or whatever non-Elf class you are talking about).

It's the same conundrum with Blizzard adding new tanks to the game. Just because they add more options doesn't actually get people rolling more tanks; all it does it give the actual Players who tank more choices while the rest of the 90+% of players are gonna be DPS/Healers.

So no, I don't think preventing Elves from being played is a solution at all.

This isnt exactly known though. I know I dont play neither goblin (except Hunter) and gnome because there is no class fitting it and thats why I ultimately wait for Tinker to finally main one. I am extremely pumped to become a Mechagnome Tinker for example. (if these two together ever will be a thing)

If they really want to go Dark Ranger route (which I find cooler than Necromancer or Dragonsworn, tbh, since I love Nathanos) they should make it Undead Human & Night Elf undead (alliance) and undead blood elf model & forsaken (horde) only.

Just so they can make these four the best they possibly can look wise.

I do not agree with your last point. If the next class is made very nicely and has no elves in it as an option, it can lead up to elf players rolling it, resulting in less elves seen overall.

[deviantcultist]

I understand that making an Elf-only class isn't good for the game, yet making a Gnome/Goblin based class is very bad as is. If we get Dark Rangers, I expect them to be like Death Knights - every race raised by Sylvanas or touched by N'Zoth or both.

Like with DK, I expect Dark Ranger to be a lot more than Sylvanas currently is. Same case was a thing for Arthas who was a lot less before he became the Lich King. With that being said, I cannot really predict the gameplay/lore outcome of a Dark Ranger. However, I'm certain that it will surprise even fans of the class.

Even if we get Tinkers for some reason, I expect them to be completely different compared to what people have in mind. Not called Tinkers, not being Gnome/Goblin based and potentially be exclusively Titan related. Something like a Space Marine with Titan shenanigans.

[Teriz]

The issue here is that when people make a Dark Ranger, a lot of them sure as hell want to be like Sylvanas and make a undead elf as usual.

And I really dont think that we should get another class that heavily favors elfs and rises its population even further, dont you agree?

Unless Blizzard doesnt care anymore and is on the same "sex sells" trip like a lot of the other gaming Companies (cough cough Riot Games cough cough).

That is a strong point. The majority of Dark Ranger players would no doubt play as an undead elf or elf in general in order to get close to being like Sylvanas. The Dark Ranger for all intents and purposes is an elf-based class, just like Demon Hunters.

Will Blizzard produce yet another (shadowy) elf-based hero class right after Demon Hunters? I guess we'll see soon enough.

- - - Updated - - -

I understand that making an Elf-only class isn't good for the game, yet making a Gnome/Goblin based class is very bad as is.

Honestly, a tech-based class centering around Goblins and Gnomes feels like a breath of fresh air compared to another elf-centric shadow class that will no doubt be 2-specs and take abilities from existing classes.

[deviantcultist]

That is a strong point. The majority of Dark Ranger players would no doubt play as an undead elf or elf in general in order to get close to being like Sylvanas. The Dark Ranger for all intents and purposes is an elf-based class, just like Demon Hunters.

Will Blizzard produce yet another (shadowy) elf-based hero class right after Demon Hunters? I guess we'll see soon enough.

- - - Updated - - -



Honestly, a tech-based class centering around Goblins and Gnomes feels like a breath of fresh air compared to another elf-centric shadow class that will no doubt be 2-specs and take abilities from existing classes.

Demon Hunter is "dark", but not shadowy. As for the rest we cannot tell. I do expect them to pull something unique in terms of mechanics because the class may fit too well for the theme context of the coming expansion.

Guess November 1st cannot arrive fast enough!

[Buliwyf the Omen]

That is a strong point. The majority of Dark Ranger players would no doubt play as an undead elf or elf in general in order to get close to being like Sylvanas. The Dark Ranger for all intents and purposes is an elf-based class, just like Demon Hunters.

Will Blizzard produce yet another (shadowy) elf-based hero class right after Demon Hunters? I guess we'll see soon enough.

- - - Updated - - -



Honestly, a tech-based class centering around Goblins and Gnomes feels like a breath of fresh air compared to another elf-centric shadow class that will no doubt be 2-specs and take abilities from existing classes.

They made an dark hero tank/dps class, then they made a normal... normal hybrid class and then they made another dark hero tank/dps class.

Is this really a coincidence...?

To be fair, I am open for any cool class idea. If they give us Dragonsworn and make me be able to become a fancy Dragon in combat, I am all up for it.

If they give us Dark Rangers and I can be like Nathanos (especially as a undead human model with more beard options) I am all up for it especially since they destroyed Hunter with Legion and buried it with BfA.

If they give us Necromancers, I really hope they are slightly like D2 & D3 Necromancers but I doubt that.

Of course, all above those would be Mech Tinkers!

[Katchii]

Honestly, a tech-based class centering around Goblins and Gnomes feels like a breath of fresh air compared to another elf-centric shadow class that will no doubt be 2-specs and take abilities from existing classes.

While this might be true, stepping away from an elf centric class or having a class that can't be an elf would be "refreshing"....Goblins and Gnomes just aren't popular at all as a race. The smaller, shorter, goofier, cutesy races are a niche thing in most games - WoW included. Most folks tend to gravitate towards the more normal sized races with an emphasis on the ones that can be considered more attractive or more aggressive/ savage.

As fun as I think a Tinker class would be, I doubt I'd ever play one longer than a couple hours through the starting zone/ experience if it was class locked to one Goblin or Gnome (or Mechagnome/ Vulpera if they get implemented).