Sadly looking like Tinkers could become a reality.

[Buliwyf the Omen]

Sure, I stand corrected. Doesn't change the fact that he wasn't a tinker back in wc3. Nor is he referred to as a Tinker in WoW. It will certainly be retconned in Wc3R and added in WoW. Although I would much prefer him to be a sapper in Wc3R to give him the lore of ascending to status of tinker. As i've mentioned I don't understand the real focus on Gazlowe anyway.

He is Papa Goblin now!

Of course he plays a important role now.

[Kumorii]

He is very stubborn.

But tbh, not like Kumorii or Ielenia are much better in this thread.

Oh no, I'm definitely stubborn, runs in the family. I don't go around in circles or don't ignore things on purpose and often state why when I do. I see myself as fair and have solid arguments. You probably disagree, but being compared to Teriz is sort of an insult. He flip flops more than Jaina and have 0 consistency with his arguments. What's an argument for tinkers is not an argument for any other class just because he say so. Which is what everyone have picked up on.

It's not random why most people are giving up talking to him.

Well, he's also not referred to as a "sapper" in WoW.

One of the reasons why there's a focus on him is because he is from back then and shows a canonical state of Tinker being in the game because you have people that refuse to acknowledge the "Goblin Tinker" hero as canon because it's not in the single player story (although it's funny because those same people will then claim that Firelords and Alchemist are).

I know, his model was the sapper though, which is why I used the term sapper since that's how I can describe his model... not sure how else I would do it. Pretty sure he was chief engineer or something.

And yes, going by the definition of Canon back then Tinker wasn't considered canon, neither was brewmaster panda. They were made canon when later material started to incorporate it. Firelords I think are deeply rooted in wow lore, not sure how far, could be afterwards wc3, not sure. They weren't canon either until they were mentioned or recognized if that were the case.
Alchemist i couldn't give rats ass about.

Also this is pretty irrelevant to Gazlowe since he wasn't considered a tinker back then so he doesn't even support the argument anyway. After we have a confirmed retcon he will be. That doesn't change that Tinkers wasn't Canon back when wc3 released and for a long time afterwards. As far as the wc3 lore was. If there is lore on Tinkers from any other media they could be considered canon, I wouldn't know, nor do I care that much.

[Pigglix]

So what races (on both Horde and Alliance) would you say should be able to be tinkers then?

IMO only nelves, taurens, hm taurens and trolls shouldnt be tinkers. Maybe worgens too.

[Triceron]

One is more fleshed out than the other, and has better potential in adding new gameplay mechanics, overlap or not. Dark Ranger would work best as a spec under a new class.

Classes and specs aren't all that distinct in BFA thanks to streamlining.

But that's the thing. Neither will any new class.

So saying that one has more potential for new new new is a bit misleading, because all those mechanics will irrevocably be hit by the homogenization stick just like Death Knight 6-spec (technically 8 spec considering Frost and Blood had DW and 2H options) got cut, and Monk's were completely changed from having no auto attacks and healing through punches and kicks to being your standard Tank/MDPS/Healer class.

I don't see how the outcry for a Tinker changes this, considering all you'd be getting is a new theme covering variations of existing gameplay that will have to fit the current model. It's not like you could literally have a Vehicle that has its own separate HP as a ridable battle mech; it's not like Rockets and Lasers are going to be any different than Fireballs and Moon Fires. It's gonna be a class that has to fit the same streamlining that you're talking about.

At the end of the day, any new class will bring some new mechanics and have a kit that revolves around the same basic gameplay every other class does. Generate resource ability, Spend resource ability, Cooldown on rotation, 'Oh Shit' Cooldown, 'Free DPS' Proc Ability, etc etc.

[united]

IMO only nelves, taurens, hm taurens and trolls shouldnt be tinkers. Maybe worgens too.

I would add orcs to that list, but overall I agree. They would probably have to create some lore as to why other non gnome/goblins would take up the role of being a tinker, and it would still be something to get used to.

[DotEleven]

So what races (on both Horde and Alliance) would you say should be able to be tinkers then?

Well, we obviously have Gnomes, Mechagnomes, and Goblins. Going by the Island Expedition teams we could add in Undead. Dwarves do a bit but more with the siegeworks kinda side. As he stated the Draenei (Particularly lightforged) Warframes could work if we wouldn't mind a more "Magitech" version in there. I'll admit, the Horde sides a bit lacking.

[protip]

So what races (on both Horde and Alliance) would you say should be able to be tinkers then?

Alliance
Gnomes
Mechagnomes
Dwarves
Dark Iron Dwarves

Horde
Goblins
Forsaken
Mag'har Orc
Vulpera

Draenei are a pretty popular suggestion too, since they have very advanced technology.

[Buliwyf the Omen]

Maybe I should have phrased it as Rangers, but we wont have them in game..

I... corrected that.

[Mardux]

I would add orcs to that list, but overall I agree. They would probably have to create some lore as to why other non gnome/goblins would take up the role of being a tinker, and it would still be something to get used to.

Are kultiran fingers proportionate? Cuz that could be an issue.

[Dragtox]

So what races (on both Horde and Alliance) would you say should be able to be tinkers then?



So then how does one make the concept of Tinkers = one class? (3 specs, and I know that DH's only have 2 but that is pure laziness)

not sure demon hunter 2 spec was laziness more lore problems i am imperess they were even able to make tank spec work

gnome goblin dwarf dark iron dwarf undead is around the machine stuff to be tinker the other races wuld make to big machine and vulpera got no lore to support tinker so only those 5 races size wise

[united]

Well, we obviously have Gnomes, Mechagnomes, and Goblins. Going by the Island Expedition teams we could add in Undead. Dwarves do a bit but more with the siegeworks kinda side. As he stated the Draenei (Particularly lightforged) Warframes could work if we wouldn't mind a more "Magitech" version in there. I'll admit, the Horde sides a bit lacking.

Draenei are a pretty popular suggestion too, since they have very advanced technology.

I could see it working if they made a tinker turret for example work like shaman totems as in the designs and stuff would be different for each race that can be one.

[Buliwyf the Omen]

That's mean and really really petty of you... I'm not talking to you anymore you're going on ignore like Teriz. I'm sad because I was enjoying the debate.

You give up way too soon!

BlizzCon is in 2 weeks, be sad afterwards like I am gonna be w/o Tinkers.

[Kumorii]

I could see it working if they made a tinker turret for example work like shaman totems as in the designs and stuff would be different for each race that can be one.

this is what I'd like to see... talk about how we can realise classes and how we can make a class look good and fulfill a fantasy. Too much smack about talking how class X can't work and all that BS.

[Dragtox]

You give up way too soon!

BlizzCon is in 2 weeks, be sad afterwards like I am gonna be w/o Tinkers.

y that thing gona be intresting more for political reason.....
dont need to make arguments abut it but i hope you know what i meen

[protip]

I could see it working if they made a tinker turret for example work like shaman totems as in the designs and stuff would be different for each race that can be one.

That's what I'd really like to see. Goblin shredders vs. gnome mechs vs. Blackrock reavers etc. I wouldn't expect to see that come through for most of the spell effects, but if the tank spec had a mech ability, or for turrets and the like I can totally see it.

[Teriz]

You’re hopeless. I thought you were finally at a point where you can have a reasonable discussion after you admitted Dark Rangers could be possible.

Sorry, but no one is going to be looking at a Tinker turret and saying "Wow, that's exactly like my Hunter bear pet!" Or, "Hey, that turret reminds me of my bouncy imp that spans from my Warlock's butt every five seconds!"

However, someone using Black, Shadowburn, Shadowdust, shadowhatever arrow is going to be wondering why they couldn't just give some of those abilities to Hunters and save the class slot.

[Buliwyf the Omen]

That's what I'd really like to see. Goblin shredders vs. gnome mechs vs. Blackrock reavers etc. I wouldn't expect to see that come through for most of the spell effects, but if the tank spec had a mech ability, or for turrets and the like I can totally see it.

Thats damn right what we are getting.

[Teriz]

What would a Tinker's mainhand weapon be? How would that work with the mech suit and would they really create an entire unique weapon set for 1 class? (before you say demon hunter and glaives there were several models of glaives ingame before demon hunters were introduced).

If it's a full mech class, the weapons won't matter. They'll just be stat sticks like in Druids. If the DPS spec is more gadgets and less mech, then they will no doubt use guns, weapon wise and ability wise. They'll probably also be able to equip macos due to wrenches.

[Dragtox]

Sorry, but no one is going to be looking at a Tinker turret and saying "Wow, that's exactly like my Hunter bear pet!" Or, "Hey, that turret reminds me of my bouncy imp that spans from my Warlock's butt every five seconds!"

However, someone using Black, Shadowburn, Shadowdust, shadowhatever arrow is going to be wondering why they couldn't just give some of those abilities to Hunters and save the class slot.

i know what you are trying to say but those ability does not really make sense to be hunter ability at all specaly as i said when trueshot aura name does not support its own effect hunter is in the center of tinker and ranger now becus of weapon design issue where bow in the wow universe works diffrent then gun and crossbow so the class fantasy struggles to make its spec make sense the ranged weapon thing does not work well with BM concept but bow works more for survival meenwhile gun/crossbow fits marksman fantasy but the problem is this require more fixing for blizzard to do... and kinda helps both tinker and ranger concepts

edit bow based ability makes gun ability look like machine gun or shotgun depending on ability wich is why i say the tinker thing aswell as bomb to survival but i know rocket wuld be a thing in tinker but it wuld easy be compared to the bomb

[Ielenia]

Sorry, but no one is going to be looking at a Tinker turret and saying "Wow, that's exactly like my Hunter bear pet!" Or, "Hey, that turret reminds me of my bouncy imp that spans from my Warlock's butt every five seconds!"

Except that was never anyone's argument. Ever. All they did was how many of the tinker abilities you would share mechanics with many of the currently existing classes, that the Tinker class is not "so unique" as you claim it is.