Sadly looking like Tinkers could become a reality.

[Katchii]

If that isn't the pot calling the kettle black, then I don't know what is.

Absolutely agreed, I can't even count the number of times the goalposts have shifted positions because the line of discussion wasn't going their way. That's why I stopped trying, it's completely useless trying to have an honest discussion with them.

[Teriz]

Do you really want me to link again all the blatant evidence of your "difficulty to grasp" things regarding WoW class concepts and design?

In other words, there is no such DK ability.

Thank you.

But it was fine to you for hunters to have an ability "with a different name that does the same thing": raising an undead minion? (I.E. Black Arrow)

Yes, because Black Arrow was a different ability than Raise Dead even in WC3.

Give the druid an ability to temporarily manifest his spirit animal patron separate from themselves, which would cause them to revert to humanoid form for the duration of the ability. There's your "eject" and "park".

Please link me to these abilities on wowhead.

Except Stratholme was infected with poisoned grain. We also have a necromacer school teaching young necromancers alchemy. We also have plague cauldrons that are created through alchemy. It's not headcanon. It's a direct, in-game lore connection.

Teaching someone to use poison.... We talking about Necromancers or Rogues here?

[Ielenia]

In other words, there is no such DK ability.

Thank you.

And I'm telling you that abilities are drawn from class concepts, not WC3 abilities.

Yes, because Black Arrow was a different ability than Raise Dead even in WC3.

No, it's not: it does, according to your logic, the "exact same thing": raise an undead minion.

On top of that: the rogue's Evasion ability did the exact same thing the demon hunter's ability of the same name did: dodge. But when DHs became playable, they gained a new ability with a different name, but similar functionality: Blur.

Please link me to these abilities on wowhead.

Except I never said those abilities exist, but could be abilities given to the druid class.

Teaching someone to use poison.... We talking about Necromancers or Rogues here?

Necromancers, of course. Unless you're going to say rogues are frail cloth-wearing spellcasters that cast spells from range, and is going ot say Scholomance, a place described in the lore as a necromancer school, teaches rogues, instead?

[Aleax]

I wanted to add...

...and why humans could not be tinkers?

They are too dumb?

Looks that races for tinkers here are partial, but whatever floats the boat.

[jellmoo]

Yeah, we'll just have to agree to disagree here. I dont see a situation where Necromancers enter WoW without DKs losing at least two specs. Meanwhile, there's zero chance that Druids would lose shapeshifting if Tinkers enter the game with mechs.

I mean, we can agree to disagree if you want, but what I was trying to do is get a handle on your line of thought. Because I really don't understand why it's cool for you to want a class concept to exist and continually denying others their class concept. Why is it that what other people feel makes their character fantasy work is irrelevant but what makes your character fantasy is sacrosanct?

[Jetstream]

shhh, don't say that out loud, you might break his fragile fantasy world were is opinion = fact.

as I said, tinker people are just as crazy as the high elf crowd, they can't accept that their minority opinion is just that, a minor group of loud demanding nerds. They don't care what is best for the game or the majority of the players as long as they get their toys. On top of that, they try to prove their right with nothing but opinions and shitty polls from some minority site as if it where legitimate somehow, or come up with even more backwards ass logic just to prove some nonsensical point. Point and case this entire thread.

Okay, just so we’re clear, I don’t agree with the detractors either.

Let’s be real here, people. Tinkers/Mech Pilots, Dark Rangers, Necromancers, any of them could be added to the game and they’d be fine, make sense, and work with lore.

Anyone who says one is possible but the others are stupid is, themselves, a goddamned putz.

[protip]

I wanted to add...

...and why humans could not be tinkers?

They are too dumb?

Looks that races for tinkers here are partial, but whatever floats the boat.

I mean, generally the idea is that they're not the most suited, because they are too dumb. That doesn't mean that it's not totally possible they get the option. It mostly depends on how much Blizzard incorporates the design of technology into the concept versus the use of it. I mean, ogres can push buttons, if that's all it is then basically anyone can be a tinker.

[Dragtox]

Blizzards lame necromancers and death knights are to similar to be a thing.

only if you count diablo 3 version but right now DK is more closer to lich king then necromancer i meen it look at their similarity

[tyrlaan]

Except you're still summoning an undead minion when there's another class that summons an undead minion. That's overlap. Especially when we consider that abilities and talents are going to be built around that mechanic that will further impede on the existing undead minion using class.

So reductive arguments are only allowed when they support your views. Thanks for clarifying.

Sorry, but I simply don't believe you're arguing in good faith here.

Damn, that's a hell of a statement right there.

I mean, we can agree to disagree if you want, but what I was trying to do is get a handle on your line of thought. Because I really don't understand why it's cool for you to want a class concept to exist and continually denying others their class concept. Why is it that what other people feel makes their character fantasy work is irrelevant but what makes your character fantasy is sacrosanct?

Good luck. I'd love to see an answer to this as well. My attempts so far have been blatantly disregarded. I'll be impressed if you get a response.

- - - Updated - - -

only if you count diablo 3 version but right now DK is more closer to lich king then necromancer i meen it look at their similarity

Spot on. DK is clearly inspired by the Lich King and WC3 Death Knights (which are generic Lich Kings really). Necromancers are a completely different thing.

[Ielenia]

I mean, generally the idea is that they're not the most suited, because they are too dumb.

"Too dumb"? Then how come many of the most accomplished mages are humans? Come on, dude, saying "humans are too dumb" is well, "too dumb".

[Polybius]

You're missing the point. I'm telling you that abilities are derived from class concepts, which is why warriors don't have Reincarnation despite it being a 'warrior' ability in WC3, and why warriors don't have Mirror Image despite it being a 'warrior' ability in WC3.


Mechanic- and gameplay-wise, exact same thing.


No. Class overlap is giving a class a similar theme as another class. What you're talking about is ability overlap. Neither is an issue, though necromancers wouldn't have an ability "called 'Raise Dead' that summons a ghoul". Necromancers would have a different ability with a similar (but not exact same) effect, much like demon hunters got "blur" since rogues already had "evasion", a skill that demon hunter units had back in WC3.


All stuff that could be done, mechanically, by the druid as well. Druids shifting out of their forms is 'eject'. They can also already 'park', it's called '/sit'. Anything else can be adapted to a nature theme.

Which is why I keep saying that "themes" (fire, nature, tech, etc) are nothing but coats of paint. Look different, but functionally the same.


Where's the death knight poison spec?

- - - Updated - - -


Objectively false.

Name your abilities that couldn't be done in a nature theme as new abilities for druids.


Healing with the Holy Light is healing with the Holy Light. And yet we have two classes that do that exact same thing.

I take it you're fine with Necromancer simply being a class skin for Warlocks.

[Ielenia]

So reductive arguments are only allowed when they support your views. Thanks for clarifying.

Remember that argument from Teriz: "you're still summoning an undead minion when there's another class that summons an undead minion"... and yet he's completely fine with the existence of the Black Arrow ability... which summons an undead minion.

- - - Updated - - -

I take it you're fine with Necromancer simply being a class skin for Warlocks.

I am 100% opposed to the entire idea of "class skins", so, no, I'm not fine with the idea of necromancers being a class skin for Warlocks.

Class skins are a waste of potential class concepts.

[Polybius]

Remember that argument from Teriz: "you're still summoning an undead minion when there's another class that summons an undead minion"... and yet he's completely fine with the existence of the Black Arrow ability... which summons an undead minion.

- - - Updated - - -


I am 100% opposed to the entire idea of "class skins", so, no, I'm not fine with the idea of necromancers being a class skin for Warlocks.

Class skins are a waste of potential class concepts.

Then why draw comparisons betweens between the function of a potential Tinker and mechanics of Druid? Or conflating potential Tinker mechanics with elemental themes? Or is potential irrelevant now? When it suits you?

[Teriz]

I mean, we can agree to disagree if you want, but what I was trying to do is get a handle on your line of thought. Because I really don't understand why it's cool for you to want a class concept to exist and continually denying others their class concept. Why is it that what other people feel makes their character fantasy work is irrelevant but what makes your character fantasy is sacrosanct?

Because for all intents and purposes, those other class concepts already exist in the WoW class lineup. This is especially the case with the Necromancer concept.

[protip]

"Too dumb"? Then how come many of the most accomplished mages are humans? Come on, dude, saying "humans are too dumb" is well, "too dumb".

Right, they're not the most suited because there are other races that are smarter. I'm not suggesting that they're actually incapable, just that they're not the most capable. We've had that discussion already, right? I'm not trying to mislead anyone here, and I don't think that's a dumb statement, either. It's just true. I even put most in italics from the start, what do you want from me? D:

[Dragtox]

Then why draw comparisons betweens between the function of a potential Tinker and mechanics of Druid? Or conflating potential Tinker mechanics with elemental themes? Or is potential irrelevant now? When it suits you?

becus that is what Teriz is doing aswell with ranger and hunter therefor ranger cant be a thing or dark ranger wich has simlair story to dk abut their class but goes diffrent direction

[jellmoo]

Because for all intents and purposes, those other class concepts already exist in the WoW class lineup. This is especially the case with the Necromancer concept.

But they're not matching the class fantasy/character concept that people want, which is what they are telling you. It's like them saying you can play a Tinker with Gnome + Hunter + Mechanimal Pet + Engineering.

You reject that because it doesn't check all the boxes of what a Tinker is to you. They reject your suggestions because it doesn't represent what the class concept is to them.

[Ielenia]

Then why draw comparisons betweens between the function of a potential Tinker and mechanics of Druid? Or conflating potential Tinker mechanics with elemental themes? Or is potential irrelevant now? When it suits you?

Because Teriz is convinced that a tech theme inherently brings "exclusive gameplay" options, and I'm trying to get it through to him that this is not the case.

[Triceron]

Looks like a lot of people are discrediting Jericho's leaks on the basis of his most recent 'Blizz is threatening legal action' comments.

Razorpax on the other hand is confirming a Dragon class immediately, Tinker class eventually. I'm a bit torn with this because I'd love this to happen, I'm 100% behind the Dragonsworn concept, but... I don't know if I can handle another 4 years of people pining for Tinkers.

[protip]

Looks like a lot of people are discrediting Jericho's leaks on the basis of his most recent 'Blizz is threatening legal action' comments.

Razorpax on the other hand is confirming a Dragon class immediately, Tinker class eventually. I'm a bit torn with this because I'd love this to happen, I'm 100% behind the Dragonsworn concept, but... I don't know if I can handle another 4 years of people pining for Tinkers.

That's basically my take, too. I think people have a pretty well developed idea of what a tinker looks like, such that not being able to play one starts to seem like something is missing. At least it does for me. I'd like to see classes come more frequently in general, though.