1. #3061
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    Well yes. I have always supported a class based on Sylvanas' HotS incarnation.
    Isn't she essentially a Dark Ranger?

  2. #3062
    Titan Teriz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Beach City
    Posts
    14,836
    Quote Originally Posted by Ielenia View Post
    I'm not saying it is. I'm just pointing out your hypocrisy in using non-canon sources as "sources of canon lore". You berated the other poster for him pointing out Cho's card in Hearthstone as an example of what bards could do, when you have been using Hearthstone and HotS to back up your tinker.
    More lies and half-truths. Why am I not surprised?

    Still non-canon.
    Gazlowe's Greasemonkeys and the Island Expeditions aren't canon? Interesting take.

    And strawman. Absolutely no one is saying to use Cho's HS card as "foundation". This is just you lying through your teeth, because you'd have no arguments whatsoever if you accurately represented other people's opinions and posts.
    Jellmoo did, and you backed him up.

    But by all means, feel free to have the last word on this conversation where you make up stuff and then deny everything is boring.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by GenericDragon View Post
    Isn't she essentially a Dark Ranger?
    "Essentially" is the key word. She's a Dark Ranger plus a banshee, and none of the other Dark Rangers are like that.
    Last edited by Teriz; 2019-10-22 at 09:29 AM.
    My comic series inspired by WoW and MMOs:

    Tinker Class Concept 2018 Dragonsworn Class Concept 2019

  3. #3063
    What a shitshow of a thread. Jesus Christ people, go outside.

  4. #3064
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    "Essentially" is the key word. She's a Dark Ranger plus a banshee, and none of the other Dark Rangers are like that.
    I was just wondering since you previously seemed against a Dark Ranger class. Does that mean you support a Dark Ranger that iterated on Sylvanas' current abilities, since she seems to be getting some new tricks from whomever she's serving now?

  5. #3065
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    More lies and half-truths. Why am I not surprised?
    That's not my M.O., Teriz. That's yours. You've been caught on your hypocrisy several times, already. You attack others for mentioning out-of-canon sources, but you have no problem doing it for your own gains. You attack others by accusing them of "not knowing how Blizzard design classes", when you've demonstrated you don't know the first thing about Blizzard's class design rules processes.

    You're nothing but a poser, acting high and mighty, bullshitting away and hoping no one finds out how little you actually know, only to double-down on your nonsense after you get exposed.

    Gazlowe's Greasemonkeys and the Island Expeditions aren't canon? Interesting take.
    Oh, my god, Teriz. Please stop the blatant strawman and misrepresentation. I said HotS is not canon.

    Jellmoo did, and you backed him up.
    No, he said to use Lorewalker Cho, the character that exists in Warcraft lore, as a basis. He simply pointed at the HS card as an example of abilities he could have.

    But by all means, feel free to have the last word on this. This conversation where you make up stuff and then deny everything is boring.
    This is highly ironic coming from the guy being a hypocrite and can't argue against other people without resorting to strawmans.
    I did a Necromancer thing. Check it out! All feedback welcome!
    Update 08/17: I changed how the Bone spec's golem mechanic works, as well as some other minor changes.
    I also did a Bard thing! Questions, comments and ideas, all welcome!
    Update 09/02: Apparently the mods decided to merge my class concept thread with an existing one.

  6. #3066
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    We're talking about Warcraft, not D&D.
    No, we're talking about the bard. Try to keep up.

    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    Russell Brower, a homage character based on WoW's sound designer.
    And Pandaren started as an April Fool's joke. You have no point here.

    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    Weren't those just Drums? You could move the drums over to the "bard" profession and add some more instruments to it.
    Why do you insist on thinking a bard is just about playing instruments? Do you not know what a bard is?

    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    One Brewmaster hero and the entire lore of Pandaria from which that Brewmaster came from that you can base an expansion around. Neither exists for the Bard.
    Ironically, a lot of bardic inspiration could come from the expansion you mention here. I suspect you missed that because I don't you understand what a bard is.

    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    And zero connections between any of those characters.
    Indeed there is. The connection is that they are all bards.

    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    The Loremaster would need some abilities in order for it to be the basis of a class spec.
    That's where the Blizzard design team would come in. You seem to presume if it doesn't already exist in game then it can't exist in the future. That's really odd and limiting.

    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    Yeah it won't happen, so why are we even wasting time discussing it?
    Interesting. Do you have inside info that we lack such that you can say this like it's fact rather than your opinion?

    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    Actually coming off of WC3 the Brewmasters had quite a lot of lore
    A couple brief paragraphs is "quite a lot" of lore? Lol.

    I guess than an entire Pandaren organization steeped in lore plus a smattering of other examples throughout the game is a a metric ton of lore.


    ---

    Let's cut through the crap, shall we? If it doesn't start with Tink- and end in -er, you will argue against it. Like somehow people being interested in another class concept or demonstrating its viability suddenly makes the Tinker less likely to become reality. Like if you can't shoot all the other ideas down, then maybe Tinker won't happen (skipping past the fact that you've been predicting it for at least 6 years now).

    You don't like other class concepts? That's fine. You don't need to shoot them down just because you don't like them. Their discussion does no harm to you, except to your credibility as you flail against them with every fallacy, goal post shift, and hypocritical argument you can imagine. The level of bad faith posting on your part is off the damn charts.

    I'd be happy if we get a Tinker (or just about any other class tbh), but holy hell man, this is ridiculous.

    We should all just stop engaging with you because you've given us no reason to give you our time and you surely don't deserve the audience.

  7. #3067
    Quote Originally Posted by jellmoo View Post
    Except we received Brewmasters (well, Monks) before we saw that Lore. Now we've seen and experienced that lore. And there wasn't any lore connecting Brewmasters to a Monk class before it happened. I don't see why that couldn't be the same with Lorewalkers and a Bard class.
    There's obviously nothing explicitly preventing Blizzard from doing such a thing, but I do see two major problems with adding Lorewalkers as a specialization for bards.

    First, Lorewalkers seem to be pretty heavily established as non-combatants. Lorewalker Cho, the most prominent Lorewalker, doesn't aid us in combat whatsoever, despite being present in a bunch of raids and quests. It's entirely possible to change their image by focusing on their desire to explore and unearth secrets, but that simultaneously ruins part of their original appeal as a group and distances them from the aspects that make them fit with the bard class.

    My other point kind of stems from this. What makes bard the most suitable class for a Lorewalker spec? Personally, I think they'd fit much better in an explorer-type class. As it stands now, the elements of Lorewalkers that would be more likely to fit in any given storyline and give them more of a reason to engage in dangerous situations, are ones that would also make them gravitate towards the explorers in the Explorer's League and Reliquary. As a bonus, explorers are pretty much a staple of WoW's identity at this point, whereas bards would just dilute it.

    That said, I'm not super keen on a playable Lorewalker spec or an explorer class, but they do seem like better options. Bonus points if it encourages Blizzard to do something with archaeology, even if it is just giving it a merciful death.

  8. #3068
    Titan Teriz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Beach City
    Posts
    14,836
    Quote Originally Posted by GenericDragon View Post
    I was just wondering since you previously seemed against a Dark Ranger class. Does that mean you support a Dark Ranger that iterated on Sylvanas' current abilities, since she seems to be getting some new tricks from whomever she's serving now?
    It wouldn't be my preference for a future class, but it would be better than a Necromancer class. As always, the issue with Dark Rangers are three-fold:

    1. Sylvanas doesn't produce dark rangers like herself.

    2. Sylvanas was the main character in BFA, and a class based on her in the next expansion would mean that she takes center stage yet again.

    3. Dark Rangers seem to be undead only, and forsaken only.

    None of those are impossible barriers to overcome. It would just be strange to see Blizzard bypass the lore barriers they created to make a Sylvanas style Dark Ranger into the game.

    The alternative would be a standard Dark Ranger, and that's just a Hunter firing shadow arrows. While boring, it's still better than a Necromancer.
    My comic series inspired by WoW and MMOs:

    Tinker Class Concept 2018 Dragonsworn Class Concept 2019

  9. #3069
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    The HotS abilities are canon. Please keep up.
    Murky Confirmed canon class the ability is in the game
    we murk we die we murk again!

  10. #3070
    Quote Originally Posted by Dragtox View Post
    Murky Confirmed canon class the ability is in the game
    we murk we die we murk again!
    Going by Teriz's logic this seems plausible.

  11. #3071
    Quote Originally Posted by Serenity River View Post
    Going by Teriz's logic this seems plausible.
    Not just plausible. I mean, we've had Murky quests literally IN WOW now for 2 expansions. We already have a 4 button rotation in game! Coupled with HotS, this is a slam dunk.

    We can expect this in 9.0! All alternative ideas are ridiculous!

  12. #3072
    Titan Teriz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Beach City
    Posts
    14,836
    Quote Originally Posted by Dragtox View Post
    Murky Confirmed canon class the ability is in the game
    we murk we die we murk again!
    This is why it's canon;

    https://www.wowhead.com/npc=134998/gazlowe
    https://www.wowhead.com/npc=130871/skaggit#abilities

    I don't know what the heck you're talking about.
    My comic series inspired by WoW and MMOs:

    Tinker Class Concept 2018 Dragonsworn Class Concept 2019

  13. #3073
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    This is why it's canon;

    https://www.wowhead.com/npc=134998/gazlowe
    https://www.wowhead.com/npc=130871/skaggit#abilities

    I don't know what the heck you're talking about.

    murloc class its canon deal with it

  14. #3074
    Bloodsail Admiral Kagdar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    QC! but mostly in my head
    Posts
    1,051
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    This is why it's canon;

    https://www.wowhead.com/npc=130871/skaggit#abilities

    I don't know what the heck you're talking about.
    Mogu Rune of Power, Shadowy Decoy Disengage, Vanish.... What is he? a rogue? a DK/Runemaster? or a Hunter with shadow abilities?

  15. #3075
    Titan Teriz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Beach City
    Posts
    14,836
    Quote Originally Posted by Kagdar View Post
    Mogu Rune of Power, Shadowy Decoy Disengage, Vanish.... What is he? a rogue? a DK/Runemaster? or a Hunter with shadow abilities?
    Those are merely placeholder abilities. No different than when Death Knights had Warrior and Warlock abilities alongside Necromancer abilities.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Dragtox View Post
    murloc class its canon deal with it
    Murloc is a race, not a class.
    My comic series inspired by WoW and MMOs:

    Tinker Class Concept 2018 Dragonsworn Class Concept 2019

  16. #3076
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    Those are merely placeholder abilities. No different than when Death Knights had Warrior and Warlock abilities alongside Necromancer abilities.

    - - - Updated - - -



    Murloc is a race, not a class.
    its both not everyone can be both

  17. #3077
    Bloodsail Admiral Kagdar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    QC! but mostly in my head
    Posts
    1,051
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    Those are merely placeholder abilities. No different than when Death Knights had Warrior and Warlock abilities alongside Necromancer abilities.
    But he does use those abilities, so in a way his class does have a way of vanishing/stealthing even if they wouls call it something else than Vanish.
    And Shadowy Decoy Disengage is not a placeholder because it doesn't exist anywhere else. It's a generic name because the player is not really supposed to know the name of that ability. But it's still a disengage like ability, so a hunter. And it's shadowy so it's a shadow ability, so Tinkers use shadow abilities?.

    Or just the simpler explanation is that he is a Goblin rogue that has engineering as a profession.

  18. #3078
    Titan Teriz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Beach City
    Posts
    14,836
    Quote Originally Posted by Kagdar View Post
    But he does use those abilities, so in a way his class does have a way of vanishing/stealthing even if they wouls call it something else than Vanish.
    And Shadowy Decoy Disengage is not a placeholder because it doesn't exist anywhere else. It's a generic name because the player is not really supposed to know the name of that ability. But it's still a disengage like ability, so a hunter. And it's shadowy so it's a shadow ability, so Tinkers use shadow abilities?.

    Or just the simpler explanation is that he is a Goblin rogue that has engineering as a profession.
    Just like Baron Rivendare had Shadow Bolt, Mortal Blow and Cleave, yet Death Knights have none of those abilities.

    Again, just placeholder abilities.
    My comic series inspired by WoW and MMOs:

    Tinker Class Concept 2018 Dragonsworn Class Concept 2019

  19. #3079
    Quote Originally Posted by Kagdar View Post
    But he does use those abilities, so in a way his class does have a way of vanishing/stealthing even if they wouls call it something else than Vanish.
    And Shadowy Decoy Disengage is not a placeholder because it doesn't exist anywhere else. It's a generic name because the player is not really supposed to know the name of that ability. But it's still a disengage like ability, so a hunter. And it's shadowy so it's a shadow ability, so Tinkers use shadow abilities?.

    Or just the simpler explanation is that he is a Goblin rogue that has engineering as a profession.
    There's way too much logic here...

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    Just like Baron Rivendare had Shadow Bolt, Mortal Blow and Cleave, yet Death Knights have none of those abilities.

    Again, just placeholder abilities.
    You failed to explain the ability that is not a placeholder because it's found nowhere else in the game.
    I did a Necromancer thing. Check it out! All feedback welcome!
    Update 08/17: I changed how the Bone spec's golem mechanic works, as well as some other minor changes.
    I also did a Bard thing! Questions, comments and ideas, all welcome!
    Update 09/02: Apparently the mods decided to merge my class concept thread with an existing one.

  20. #3080
    Titan Teriz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Beach City
    Posts
    14,836
    Quote Originally Posted by Ielenia View Post
    You failed to explain the ability that is not a placeholder because it's found nowhere else in the game.
    Because it's obviously a potential Tinker ability.

    Jumping backwards and dropping a robotic decoy doesn't sound like a Tinker ability to you?

    Whoops, nevermind, I forgot who I was responding to.
    Last edited by Teriz; 2019-10-22 at 02:09 PM.
    My comic series inspired by WoW and MMOs:

    Tinker Class Concept 2018 Dragonsworn Class Concept 2019

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •