A time skip in 10.0 would make Tinkers possible.

[Triceron]

And as you stated, that concept has been a mainstay within Warcraft for decades now.

Yes, but the difference is it's not like a class was ever tied exclusively to comic relief. I think that's the point you're missing time and time again.

It's not that there is comic relief, it's that there is literally no alternative to it. You're forcing this new class to be played by Gnomes and Goblins (extended to Junkers and Vulp, doesn't matter) and it's not really a mainstay.

I'd be happy if Tinker was one of the Vanilla races of WoW alongside Warriors, Priests, Druids etc etc; but we're talking about adding one new class with big expectations behind it, and limiting it to the joke races of the game.

It's like if the Star Wars MMO added a new Engineer class, but you can only play as a Jawa. It's a mixed bag for the general public.

[Teriz]

This game don’t need tinkers thats why. They done survey and no one wants them apart from few people on mmoc. So no, you won’t get them.

What survey??

- - - Updated - - -

Yes, but the difference is it's not like a class was ever tied exclusively to comic relief. I think that's the point you're missing time and time again.

Except a Tinker class isn’t tied to comic relief, it’s tied to multiple races within the game. Additionally, I would argue that a Tinker actually makes those races less comical than they currently are. For example, what’s more silly a Gnome warrior swinging around a sword larger than their body, or a Gnome inside a mech? What’s more silly; a mecha gnome Death Knight or a Mechagnome Tinker?

Even without the Tinker you have three technology-based races with no class that fits them.

It's not that there is comic relief, it's that there is literally no alternative to it. You're forcing this new class to be played by Gnomes and Goblins (extended to Junkers and Vulp, doesn't matter) and it's not really a mainstay.

I'd be happy if Tinker was one of the Vanilla races of WoW alongside Warriors, Priests, Druids etc etc; but we're talking about adding one new class with big expectations behind it, and limiting it to the joke races of the game.
It's like if the Star Wars MMO added a new Engineer class, but you can only play as a Jawa. It's a mixed bag for the general public.

That analogy only works if the only race in Star Wars with significant engineering prowess were Ewoks.

[Triceron]

Except a Tinker class isn’t tied to comic relief, it’s tied to multiple races within the game.

Multiple comic relief races.

Additionally, I would argue that a Tinker actually makes those races less comical than they currently are. For example, what’s more silly a Gnome warrior swinging around a sword larger than their body, or a Gnome inside a mech? What’s more silly; a mecha gnome Death Knight or a Mechagnome Tinker?

They are all equally silly because the Gnome is what makes it silly, not just the juxtaposition or environment they're in.

Even without the Tinker you have three technology-based races with no class that fits them.

Which makes it very difficult make it a well-accepted major feature for an expansion if you are suggesting it to be exclusive to comic races.

That analogy only works if the only race in Star Wars with significant engineering prowess were Ewoks.

Jawas.

And we already have examples of Dwarves, Dark Iron, Forsaken, Gilneans, Humans, Orcs, Mag'har, Lightforged Draenei, Draenei, Blood Elves all having varying degrees of significant technological prowess. It just so happens to not fit in your headcanon of requiring a mech suit that is sized to fit diminutive comic relief races.

[Syegfryed]

We have actual examples of human and night elf tinkers. Tinkmaster Overspark says: "I hand-picked these tinkologists myself! They're the best and the brightest!" Skip to 2:42:

yah dawg i will have to pass that, some random NE and Humans working for a gnome is hardly something i could call a proper tinker class, like the hero in WC3 or similar

and since they died, that you have it

So Siegecrafter Blackfuse is not a tinker? Sicco Thermaplugg is not a tinker, either? Is Varian not a warrior because he is never called one, specifically? Is Shaw not a rogue because he is never called one, specifically?

now you are just playing with semantics

It's not false. Because to be a tinker you need to be a tech user.

yes, but not just that, i don't know how you can't grasp such small things like that.

To be a paladin you need to be a light user as well, but just because you can use the light, don't mean you will be a paladin

Blood elves already comprised of 33% of the Horde's entire population, and night elves were 22% of the Alliance's population by January 2nd, 2016 which is before Demon Hunters were available for those who pre-ordered Legion. So, no. There was no need to heavily alter the demon hunter lore to fit more races into the class because the two races that were already part of it were already very popular races.

you mean 33% of the horde players blood elves, what about the other 67% of players who don't fucking care about elves? why those 67% have to be forced to play an elf because you think they don't need more?

in the alliance is worse, you have 78% of non elf players with no alternative except to play an elf

why one is fair and the other isn't? just because they have a few more? bullshit

So, no. There is no need to heavily alter the tinker lore to fit less races into the class because the two races that you want it to be restricted to are very unpopular races.

if their numbers are low, expand the tinker lore(not heavily alter like you implied) to be playable just for goblins and gnomes would help to boost their numbers, so they would not be so low

Its only fair since the tinker fantasy is heavy tied to goblins and gnomes, those races SHOULD, have their turn in the spotlight for once, and an exclusive class( for a while would help that. it would be shit to make a expansion revolved around their fantasy and give the class to other races so most of the tinker can be more fucking elves

Lore to expand? Of course. Lore to lock? Of course not.

for a while there is no problem, next expansions the tinker could teach others in their secrets

Looks like someone is "claiming ideas as fact", there. I offered a possibility (the concubines could be for the blood elf council, not Illidan) but you are claiming a fact (Illidan nailed them all).

those were illidan concubines in his temple, anything beyond that is your headcanon

It's not. Saying "Blizzard can break the lore if they want to" is a non-argument because it holds no value when we're discussing the lore how it is currently presented.

except there is nothing about "breaking the lore" you made that up yourself

This is your argument:
Someone: "Superman is weak against green kryptonite! That's a fact! So a sword blade made of kryptonite can kill Superman!"
You: "It doesn't matter. DC can make Superman immune to green kryptonite if they want."

you are again using the false equivalence, you just can't control yourself right?

you are basically saying a "green sword" can kill superman, without knowing the sword is indeed of kypronite

or even saying its just kryptonite sword and could be from any color

Restricting 'tinker' to just gnomes and goblins is not an 'expansion' of the lore. It's a retraction. It is a retcon. Because we have tinkers of other races in the lore.

it is only in your head, since the tinker, as per said, like the hero in WC3 is only tied to goblins and gnomes, they can expand on that and ignore all the engineers you said since they matter a little and nothing about that will "break the lore"

This has nothing to do with "class availability". I'm saying no one was taking the demons as seriously as Illidan wanted them to. Which is why he joined the Legion to work to dismantle them from within.

so youa re backtracking in your nonsense? cause you ltierally said Ilidan tried anything.

Wow. You just did a leap of logic so immense with that misrepresentation that you could go from America to Europe in a single jump.

you literally said illidan tied everything, and only found the DH

again, your argument in this case is completely nonsense

... Really? That's the BS you're going with? You're going to challenge that notion that one needs to know technology to become a tinker?

i want a confirmation that to be a tinker YOU JUST NEED TO KNOW TECNOLOGY

is like saying you only need to know the light to become a paladin, thats just a bullshit simplification

all tinker are tech users, not all tech users are tinker
all paladins are light users, not all light users are paladin

can't make more simple than that

That's the hill you wish to die on? What's next, you're going to challenge the notion that one needs to know magic to become a mage?

since you have being dead on the hill for a long time, you didn't realize that one could still know magic and not be a mage right? cause to be a mage you don't need to just know magic, you need to know the right magic, the arcane magic, you need training, you need the right knowledge, the right teachers, the right study and maybe even more, same logic is applies to other classes, why not tinker? why tinker would be downgroaded?

Objectively false.

objectively true per the wiki, the rest are just wannabes

The "precedence" does not fit, as explained before.

indeed it does, but on the hill you can't see it, and to think your "explanations" bear any ground other that your personal opinion, is laughable.

- - - Updated - - -

This game don’t need tinkers thats why. They done survey and no one wants them apart from few people on mmoc. So no, you won’t get them.

who did? blizzard? i never saw one of those

[Dreyen]

Tinkers get brought up often... but the class would never live to the hype of death knights and demon hunters honestly. Monk was at least a typical fantasy in most games.

The races associated with tinkering are just memes on top of it.

[Teriz]

Multiple comic relief races.
They are all equally silly because the Gnome is what makes it silly, not just the juxtaposition or environment they're in.

Nice dodge instead of honestly answering the question. One isn't more silly than the other and you know it.

Which makes it very difficult make it a well-accepted major feature for an expansion if you are suggesting it to be exclusive to comic races.

Except you don't know how accepted it would be. This is especially the case when you consider that the concept isn't something alien to WoW players, nor is it something that players have ever asked to be removed from the game.The way you talk one would think that Gnomes and Goblins are the most hated races in WoW, but that has never been the case. Again, the backlash that Monks and Pandaren endured largely came from them coming out of nowhere. That simply isn't the case with Gnomes and Goblins, or the concept of their races piloting mechs. This concept has been introduced to WoW players and they have largely accepted it. Why would they suddenly recoil at the idea of it being a class?

Jawas.

And we already have examples of Dwarves, Dark Iron, Forsaken, Gilneans, Humans, Orcs, Mag'har, Lightforged Draenei, Draenei, Blood Elves all having varying degrees of significant technological prowess. It just so happens to not fit in your headcanon of requiring a mech suit that is sized to fit diminutive comic relief races.

Except there's a difference; The Gnome and Goblin leader both use mechs to fight in. Both races come from from industrialized/high tech cities. Both races have mechanical mounts. Both races have tech-based racials. Nearly all of their prominent lore figures revolve around technology. If you can find another race from your list that fits all of that, you'll have a valid argument.

Everything about those races are tech based and yet they don't have a tech-based class. Of course they seem out of place and silly in that context. Again, a technology based class would actually make them seem LESS silly and out of place.

- - - Updated - - -

Tinkers get brought up often... but the class would never live to the hype of death knights and demon hunters honestly. Monk was at least a typical fantasy in most games.

At this point, it would appear that the majority of players want a new class that isn't dark/edgy like DKs and DHs. With almost half the class roster housing at least one shadow-based spec, it's easy to see why.

A class based on unused themes in the current class lineup would be the best way to go.

[Triceron]

Nice dodge instead of honestly answering the question. One isn't more silly than the other and you know it.

Yes, one isn't more silly than the other. They're equally silly. You're agreeing with me so I don't know what you mean by dodging.

Except you don't know how accepted it would be.

They have a track record of being low picked, are historically divisive amongst the fanbase, and generally are not even featured in major media regarding WoW.

Where they are most popular are used in Hearthstone, which is designed purposefully to be a whimsical and light-hearted game. And Hearthstone would be a great place to have a Tinker class, since they recently added Demon Hunters.

There is no precedent for Gnome/Goblin exclusive Tinkers being popular in WoW. You can suggest that it would make Gnomes and Goblins more popular, and that is true, but that is hardly something in Blizzard's best interests if they want to market a new class that is appealing to their entire audience. It's simply not very accessible.

Why shoot themselves in the foot when they could totally open it up to other races? There's nothing to gain by keeping them exclusive.

Except there's a difference; The Gnome and Goblin leader both use mechs to fight in. Both races come from from industrialized/high tech cities. Both races have mechanical mounts. Both races have tech-based racials. Nearly all of their prominent lore figures revolve around technology. If you can find another race from your list that fits all of that, you'll have a valid argument.

Well then you just shifted goal posts from requireing 'Significant technological prowess' to 'Requires a racial leader who revolve around technology'. I mean, I'll just call it out as bullshit, since it is.

Even Lightforged Draenei made Mechs for everyone to use in Legion. The fact they don't have a technological Racial Leader representative is supposed to diminish this accomplishment how?

[Ielenia]

yah dawg i will have to pass that, some random NE and Humans working for a gnome is hardly something i could call a proper tinker class, like the hero in WC3 or similar

and since they died, that you have it

So you're literally openly admitting you're going to ignore in-game evidence.

Tinkmaster Overspark literally calls them the BEST and the BRIGHTEST TINKERS but you're dismissing hard evidence because it contradicts your views.

now you are just playing with semantics

It's not semantics. You were literally the one who said "not a tinker because not called tinker":

sine they are not called "tinker" they are not tinkers

To be a paladin you need to be a light user as well, but just because you can use the light, don't mean you will be a paladin

You got it backwards. You're a "Light user" because you're a paladin, not the other way around.

you mean 33% of the horde players blood elves, what about the other 67% of players who don't fucking care about elves?

Your premise is wrong. At no point I said "players". I said "population", i.e., characters. A player can have more than one character. I, myself, have four I play regularly, plus a few more I play sporadically when bored.

if their numbers are low, expand the tinker lore(not heavily alter like you implied) to be playable just for goblins and gnomes would help to boost their numbers, so they would not be so low

It would much more severely hurt the class' potential popularity than it would help boost the gnome and goblins' popularity. It makes no sense from a marketing standpoint. Or from a lore standpoint, too.

Its only fair since the tinker fantasy is heavy tied to goblins and gnomes, those races SHOULD, have their turn in the spotlight for once, and an exclusive class( for a while would help that. it would be shit to make a expansion revolved around their fantasy and give the class to other races so most of the tinker can be more fucking elves

for a while there is no problem

Two big problems:
• Gnomes and goblins are not popular enough to warrant a class exclusive for them.
• Technology has been shown to be not exclusive to gnomes and goblins.

those were illidan concubines in his temple, anything beyond that is your headcanon

You state your headcanon as fact, and accuse me of making headcanons. The lack of self-awareness is immense. Show me: where in the lore does it say they're Illidan's concubines.

except there is nothing about "breaking the lore" you made that up yourself

Making a tinker class exclusive to gnomes and goblins "breaks" the lore because it retcons the fact all races can use technology, and the fact we even have night elf and human tinkers.

you are again using the false equivalence, you just can't control yourself right?

you are basically saying a "green sword" can kill superman, without knowing the sword is indeed of kypronite

or even saying its just kryptonite sword and could be from any color

You went on a smarmy rant because I forgot to add the word "green" when I mentioned "kryptonite" the second time? So I guess I should be super-hyper-mega-specific with my wording for you to understand basic concepts? And no, it's not "false equivalence". That is exactly what you're doing. Someone is presenting lore facts to you, and you're just dismissing everything by saying "Blizzard can change it".

it is only in your head, since the tinker, as per said, like the hero in WC3 is only tied to goblins and gnomes,

• The Warcraft 3 paladin was tied to only humans.
• The Warcraft 3 mage was tied to only humans and high elves.
• The Warcraft 3 priest was tied to only high elves.
• The Warcraft 3 druid was tied to only night elves.
• The Warcraft 3 warlock was tied to only orcs.
• And so on and so forth.

so youa re backtracking in your nonsense? cause you ltierally said Ilidan tried anything.

I didn't backtrack on anything.

you literally said illidan tied everything, and only found the DH

... He didn't "find the DH". He became one after Sargeras gifted him with powers and then betrayed the Legion.

i want a confirmation that to be a tinker YOU JUST NEED TO KNOW TECNOLOGY

I'm starting to think that you lack reading comprehension since this isn't the first nor the second time you misunderstand what I wrote in this post alone. I never said that "knowing technology" is "all you need to know".

is like saying you only need to know the light to become a paladin, thats just a bullshit simplification

all tinker are tech users, not all tech users are tinker
all paladins are light users, not all light users are paladin

False equivalence. You are a "Light user" because you're a paladin, not the other way around.


since you have being dead on the hill for a long time, you didn't realize that one could still know magic and not be a mage right? cause to be a mage you don't need to just know magic, you need to know the right magic, the arcane magic, you need training, you need the right knowledge, the right teachers, the right study and maybe even more, same logic is applies to other classes, why not tinker? why tinker would be downgroaded?

objectively true per the wiki, the rest are just wannabes

So you're dismissing actual in-game information to trust an unofficial website. Bravo. Keep up with that agenda. Can't let facts get in the way of your narrative, right?

indeed it does,

It does not. Because you keep ignoring in-game lore facts.

[Teriz]

Yes, one isn't more silly than the other. They're equally silly. You're agreeing with me so I don't know what you mean by dodging.

Except they’re not equally silly since Gnomes in mechs is an actual lore characteristic among Gnomes, and Gnome warriors with oversized weapons is not.

They have a track record of being low picked, are historically divisive amongst the fanbase, and generally are not even featured in major media regarding WoW.

They have a history of being low picked because no class fits their racial theme. Also while they aren’t generally featured in WoW media, they are featured in Warcraft related media and games. As for being divisive among the fan base, I would need to see evidence of that.

Where they are most popular are used in Hearthstone, which is designed purposefully to be a whimsical and light-hearted game. And Hearthstone would be a great place to have a Tinker class, since they recently added Demon Hunters.

There is no precedent for Gnome/Goblin exclusive Tinkers being popular in WoW. You can suggest that it would make Gnomes and Goblins more popular, and that is true, but that is hardly something in Blizzard's best interests if they want to market a new class that is appealing to their entire audience. It's simply not very accessible.

Except no new class would be appealing to their entire audience. Also I disagree that going with a non-edgy class would work against Blizzard’s best interest. What the community desires more than anything is a ranged class and a healing spec, and a class that doesn’t take abilities from existing classes like Demon Hunters did. The Tinker ticks all of those boxes better than any other future class concept.

Why shoot themselves in the foot when they could totally open it up to other races? There's nothing to gain by keeping them exclusive.

Except common sense. There’s no way Blizzard is going to make multiple types of abilities for a single class, so magitech-based tinkers like Lightforged Draenei and Nightborne are out of the question. What else is there really?

Even beyond that, let’s say that Blizzard doesn’t go with mechs in the class but instead uses the Claw Pack like in WC3 and HotS? Do you honestly believe something like that would look right on anything other than a Goblin or Gnome?

Well then you just shifted goal posts from requireing 'Significant technological prowess' to 'Requires a racial leader who revolve around technology'. I mean, I'll just call it out as bullshit, since it is.

Even Lightforged Draenei made Mechs for everyone to use in Legion. The fact they don't have a technological Racial Leader representative is supposed to diminish this accomplishment how?

Actually that isn’t what I said. I said that Goblins and Gnomes have multiple layers of technological association in their lore right down to their racials and mounts. No other races are married to technology on that level in the game. So while there are races that show a few signs of technological prowess, none of them do it on the level of goblins and gnomes.

[Triceron]

Except they’re not equally silly since Gnomes in mechs is an actual lore characteristic among Gnomes, and Gnome warriors with oversized weapons is not.

And neither are considered to be taken very seriously.

It doesn't matter if you want to try and point out that one concept is somehow sillier than the other if the point is that neither are options that can be taken very seriously. People would want a choice to play as a character that can be taken seriously, and a Tinker exclusive to diminutive races would not offer any of that.

They have a history of being low picked because no class fits their racial theme.

No evidence behind this claim. That's simply correlation.

You're banking the potential of a Gnome/Goblin exclusive class on correlations. That's not very convincing.

Except no new class would be appealing to their entire audience. Also I disagree that going with a non-edgy class would work against Blizzard’s best interest. What the community desires more than anything is a ranged class and a healing spec, and a class that doesn’t take abilities from existing classes like Demon Hunters did. The Tinker ticks all of those boxes better than any other future class concept.

That is why you provide options. Due to the divisive nature of the diminutive races, it would reason to open Tinkers to other races that are already known for being apt at Engineering. My personal opinion, open up to introducing multiple classes at the same time through Class Skins. That is Blizzard's best interest, and it works perfectly for Allied Races.

If Highmountain Tauren don't tickle your fancy, then you can choose any number of other Allied Races to play. But what if Highmountain Tauren were the only new Horde playable race? That would be a hard feature to sell, and a hard pill for players to swallow.

Except common sense. There’s no way Blizzard is going to make multiple types of abilities for a single class, so magitech-based tinkers like Lightforged Draenei and Nightborne are out of the question. What else is there really?

Dark Iron Dwarves, Dwarves, Orcs, Mag'har, Humans, Gilneans, Blood Elves (they have built functional non-magical Warmachines, Vehicles, Ballistae, etc) and Forsaken. All have examples of non-magical mechanical works in the game.

Even beyond that, let’s say that Blizzard doesn’t go with mechs in the class but instead uses the Claw Pack like in WC3 and HotS? Do you honestly believe something like that would look right on anything other than a Goblin or Gnome?

No, I don't think it would look right on anything other than a Goblin or Gnome.

I also think it would not look right in World of Warcraft, considering no Goblin or Gnome Tinker in the game has a Claw Pack. That's my personal opinion. Blizzard can go ahead and add them, but you're asking my honest opinion so here it is.

Actually that isn’t what I said. I said that Goblins and Gnomes have multiple layers of technological association in their lore right down to their racials and mounts. No other races are married to technology on that level in the game. So while there are races that show a few signs of technological prowess, none of them do it on the level of goblins and gnomes.

Races don't have to be married to technology to become Tinkers. It's a class that uses technology in battle. It's literally Engineering in Class form. If Engineering is not exclusive to any race, and certain races can indeed master Engineering, then the precedent is functionally in the game. There is no ifs ands or buts about it, considering Tinker is not a defined concept in WoW that says they must only consist of races married to technology.

[Teriz]

And neither are considered to be taken very seriously.

It doesn't matter if you want to try and point out that one concept is somehow sillier than the other if the point is that neither are options that can be taken very seriously. People would want a choice to play as a character that can be taken seriously, and a Tinker exclusive to diminutive races would not offer any of that.

Interesting, I never heard anyone ever say that Seigecrafter Blackfuse or mech-based Mekkatorque were "silly" or not serious characters during either of their raid encounters. However, I heard many people say that they choose to play Gnome warriors because of the absurd nature of it.

No evidence behind this claim. That's simply correlation.

Right, it just so happens that every other race has classes that fit their theme and those classes tend to drive their population numbers.

Want to see the top three classes for Night Elves?



But hey, there's no evidence right?

You're banking the potential of a Gnome/Goblin exclusive class on correlations. That's not very convincing.

Nope, I'm banking it on evidence that you're choosing to ignore because it doesn't gel with your narrative that people simply hate Goblins and Gnomes.

That is why you provide options. Due to the divisive nature of the diminutive races, it would reason to open Tinkers to other races that are already known for being apt at Engineering. My personal opinion, open up to introducing multiple classes at the same time through Class Skins. That is Blizzard's best interest, and it works perfectly for Allied Races.

Again, you have yet to prove that Goblins and Gnomes are divisive. My evidence for the low Goblin and Gnome population is backed by evidence, yours is backed by personal opinion and anecdotes.

Races don't have to be married to technology to become Tinkers. It's a class that uses technology in battle. It's literally Engineering in Class form. If Engineering is not exclusive to any race, and certain races can indeed master Engineering, then the precedent is functionally in the game. There is no ifs ands or buts about it, considering Tinker is not a defined concept in WoW that says they must only consist of races married to technology.

Except Goblins and Gnomes are trainers of the engineering profession, and when you learn engineering you either learn Goblin or Gnome engineering. Further, it really needs to be said that just because someone can learn to make goggles doesn't mean that they're capable of inventing, designing, and building a battle mech or a claw pack. As I've said numerous times, it's like comparing a generic engineer to Tony Stark. Stark can build an arc reactor in a cave from scraps, and engineer couldn't build an arc reactor in a high tech lab with all the necessary materials. Profession engineering is at best a hobby that adventurers engage in to make some extra coin. Comparing that to what we see from Blackfuse, Mekkatorque, or even Gazlowe is pretty laughable.

[Tartys]

Technology has advanced.

With Turallion in charge? When we go back, we will find a sort of religious fanaticism of Light... seeking to spread the Light's influence across Azeroth by force.

[Syegfryed]

So you're literally openly admitting you're going to ignore in-game evidence.

Tinkmaster Overspark literally calls them the BEST and the BRIGHTEST TINKERS but you're dismissing hard evidence because it contradicts your views.

he call then tinkologists, not tinkers

and like i said "a proper tinker class", you don't see then doing the things the hero of wc3 did, and they DIED, to the shadowlands with the "brightest tinkologists" that are pure engineers wanabe

You got it backwards. You're a "Light user" because you're a paladin, not the other way around.

?????????

Your premise is wrong. At no point I said "players". I said "population", i.e., characters. A player can have more than one character. I, myself, have four I play regularly, plus a few more I play sporadically when bored.

and? the point sill stands

It would much more severely hurt the class' potential popularity than it would help boost the gnome and goblins' popularity.

we have no sources of that, neither we can say hat for certain, its your opinion

It makes no sense from a marketing standpoint. Or from a lore standpoint, too.

again, your opinion, you don't work at the marketing neither the lore team to see it

Two big problems:

two small problems, or meaningless problems

• Gnomes and goblins are not popular enough to warrant a class exclusive for them.

and why they are not popular? because there is nothing on then to appeal to people, with a exclusive and thematic class it will change that, will boost their numbers and make then more playable

• Technology has been shown to be not exclusive to gnomes and goblins.

right, but just like the light and nature magic, its not because you can use it that you will be a paladin or a druid

You state your headcanon as fact, and accuse me of making headcanons. The lack of self-awareness is immense. Show me: where in the lore does it say they're Illidan's concubines.

his comcubines in his temple, unless you prove otherwise that is your headcanon

Making a tinker class exclusive to gnomes and goblins "breaks" the lore because it retcons the fact all races can use technology, and the fact we even have night elf and human tinkers.

you alwaus keep parroting "break the lore" like it is not something just from your personal opinion, is astonishing.

you have one human and one night elf doing engineer work, who died, and think the tinker class can be from those races, regardless of the n not having fuck to do with the fantasy of the class

You went on a smarmy rant because I forgot to add the word "green" when I mentioned "kryptonite" the second time? So I guess I should be super-hyper-mega-specific with my wording for you to understand basic concepts? And no, it's not "false equivalence". That is exactly what you're doing. Someone is presenting lore facts to you, and you're just dismissing everything by saying "Blizzard can change it".

you are not presenting "lore facts" you are presenting "opinions" trying to invalidate possible lore routes blizzard can take with their game

• The Warcraft 3 paladin was tied to only humans.
• The Warcraft 3 mage was tied to only humans and high elves.
• The Warcraft 3 priest was tied to only high elves.
• The Warcraft 3 druid was tied to only night elves.
• The Warcraft 3 warlock was tied to only orcs.
• And so on and so forth.

yes, and see how many years they need to give those races to other classes, before, only taurens and night elves were druids, despise other races using nature magic, only later they add the class to other races, make all sense to put tinker exclusive to goblins and gnomes and later on expand to other races

... He didn't "find the DH". He became one after Sargeras gifted him with powers and then betrayed the Legion.

therefore it goes against your argument of "he tried everything"

I'm starting to think that you lack reading comprehension since this isn't the first nor the second time you misunderstand what I wrote in this post alone. I never said that "knowing technology" is "all you need to know".

that is exactly what you are writing in this entire topic, use tech = tinker and just that, don't backtrack on this too

False equivalence. You are a "Light user" because you're a paladin, not the other way around.

as someone who use the false equivalence of course you don't know when they indeed happens

So you're dismissing actual in-game information to trust an unofficial website. Bravo. Keep up with that agenda. Can't let facts get in the way of your narrative, right?

im dismissing the nonsense words of a NPC, isn't like npcs are true all the time, he just contracted some engineers, caled then "tinkologists" and you think they are a proper class

It does not. Because you keep ignoring in-game lore facts.

Again, you think they are ingame lore facts, and for some reason you think they corroborate your arguments.

for the record, there still taurens rogues and warlocks, green orcs druid and priests, a goblin monk, a night elf and forsaken paladin, and they are not playable either, you think blizzard can't lock a proper tinker class - FOR A WHILE - to goblins and gnomes because some random ass night elf and hunters were called the best by their boss( and we all know they don't brag am i right?) is somehow "OM BREAKING THE LORE (((" is like i said laughable.

[Teriz]

Yeah, making the Tinker exclusive to smaller races simply makes sense, because it would be the smaller races who require technology in order to compensate for their lack of physical power. That's the lore behind the use of mech suits going back to the RPG. With the WC3 Tinker, Blizzard gave them a claw pack so that the character could be easier to see on the map.

In the end, it simply makes sense to give the Tinker class to Gnomes, Goblins, and their respective allied races. I would also argue that Vulpera should get Junker mechs to reflect their unique racial lore. Players will love it.

[Triceron]

Interesting, I never heard anyone ever say that Seigecrafter Blackfuse or mech-based Mekkatorque were "silly" or not serious characters

But you don't get to play as Mekkatorque or Siegecrafter Blackfuse. You are suggesting Gnomes and Goblins with clawpacks. If Mekkatorque had a clawpack, that changes his look and feel.

Think about Arthas wielding a Frostmourne 3 times his body size. That would be silly.

Right, it just so happens that every other race has classes that fit their theme and those classes tend to drive their population numbers.

But hey, there's no evidence right?

Yes, because you cherry picked races that are already popular because they are easy on the eyes.

Orcs and Tauren also had classes that fit their races like Warrior, Shaman and Warlock, but their population numbers remained low (comparatively) throughout WoW. Pandarens literally came with their own class and still very low pop. The numbers aren't even comparable to Humans or Blood Elves. It's not like we can even attribute Blood Elves being popular because they now have Demon Hunters; they were always popular since the start. They completely overshadowed all Horde race options, and not as a result of your so-called evidence.

What you have is correlation, not evidence.

Nope, I'm banking it on evidence that you're choosing to ignore because it doesn't gel with your narrative that people simply hate Goblins and Gnomes.

I am not saying everyone hates gnomes and goblins. I didn't even say hate.

Objectionally looking at feedback from general opinion of Gnomes, many people like/are fine with Gnomes and Goblins.

If I'm going to illustrate a problem with your idea, then I point out the population that isn't fine with it that sort of exclusivity.

https://us.forums.blizzard.com/en/wo...-only/273972/4

Just look at this thread. Yes, there are a lot of people who are okay with it being exclusive, but should we simply ignore those who have a different opinion? Especially if it could be *easily* resolved by opening up the class to more races?

Tinkers being Gnome and Goblin exclusive would very much boost their population numbers, but at the cost of limiting overall Tinkers due to a lack of appealing race options. It's not a sound move for the sake of a singular agenda of boosting Gnome and Goblin pops.

Again, you have yet to prove that Goblins and Gnomes are divisive. My evidence for the low Goblin and Gnome population is backed by evidence, yours is backed by personal opinion and anecdotes.

Correlation isn't evidence. Pandaren have Monk class, and they remain low population. Nothing comparable to any Elven race.

Except Goblins and Gnomes are trainers of the engineering profession, and when you learn engineering you either learn Goblin or Gnome engineering. Further, it really needs to be said that just because someone can learn to make goggles doesn't mean that they're capable of inventing, designing, and building a battle mech or a claw pack. As I've said numerous times, it's like comparing a generic engineer to Tony Stark. Stark can build an arc reactor in a cave from scraps, and engineer couldn't build an arc reactor in a high tech lab with all the necessary materials. Profession engineering is at best a hobby that adventurers engage in to make some extra coin. Comparing that to what we see from Blackfuse, Mekkatorque, or even Gazlowe is pretty laughable.

There are plenty of engineer trainers of other races in the game. Gnome and Goblin are Specializations of Engineering.

You could say that it wouldn't make sense that Tinker class gets added without Gnome and Goblin options, and use that to make your case. That would work since Tinker is associated with Gnomes and Goblins.

You can't use it as a means to exclude other races that have shown an aptitude in engineering, especially when your reasoning is opinion-driven (but its too magical, but they don't have a Tech racial leader, but they don't have racial Engineering specializations!)

None of your reasoning would apply to a new class that has no racial exclusivity. Death Knights can be Gnomes, Draenei, Worgen, Goblins and now Pandaren. These other races were not even in Northrend at the time of the creation of the Death Knights. By your logic, the Death Knight should have been exclusively Human and Undead (and to an extent, Orc) because that is what all Death Knights NPC racial leaders were and those are the only races at the time shown to use Necromancy.

[Ielenia]

he call then tinkologists, not tinkers

Literally in that exact same post, just below the video:

Humans and night elves. And before you say anything about the word "tinkologist": "Tinkers (or tinkerers and tinkologists)"

Way to go showing how you don't fully read what people write.

and like i said "a proper tinker class", you don't see then doing the things the hero of wc3 did, and they DIED, to the shadowlands with the "brightest tinkologists" that are pure engineers wanabe

So, "engineers are tinkers" only when it suits you? Kinda hypocrite, don't you think?

?????????

Really? Did you really not understand such a basic concept? It's "A" because of "B", not "B" because of "A".

and? the point sill stands

No. It doesn't. Because this "player" thing is just a red herring from you trying to muddle the argument.

we have no sources of that, neither we can say hat for certain, its your opinion

We have basic logic, and marketing logic.

again, your opinion, you don't work at the marketing neither the lore team to see it

... So you're saying that me, as a marketer, am not qualified to comment on what a marketing team is doing... because I'm not part of said marketing team?

Is that your logic?

and why they are not popular?

Because they look ugly to most people. And "lack of representative class" is one of the least picked reasons.

right, but just like the light and nature magic, its not because you can use it that you will be a paladin or a druid

Here's the thing, though: Teriz keeps mentioning that only gnomes and goblins can be tinkers because "no one can do tech like the gnomes and goblins" when this is just objectively false. Again, we have examples of night elf and human tinkers.

his comcubines

You've yet to prove they're Illidan's concubines. You just keep trying to assert your headcanon as fact. Come on. Show the conclusive evidence they're Illidan's, and not the blood elves'. Because, if you look at it objectively, Illidan doesn't seem the type to dwell in the "pleasures of the flesh", while blood elves are more likely to, since BEs tend to enjoy lavish luxury, while Illidan doesn't seem to care for such.

you have one human and one night elf doing engineer work, who died, and think the tinker class can be from those races, regardless of the n not having fuck to do with the fantasy of the class

Considering tauren paladins and troll druids came from absolute zero NPCs and lore... human and night elf tinkers have over 1000% more basis than those race/class combos.

you are not presenting "lore facts"

Yes. I am. You, on the other hand, are dismissing hard canon from the lore by simply saying "doesn't matter cuz Blizzard can change it".

yes, and see how many years they need to give those races to other classes

• It took them ZERO (0) years to give paladins to dwarves.
• It took them ZERO (0) years to give mages to gnomes, forsaken, trolls.
• It took them ZERO (0) years to give priest to humans, trolls, dwarf, forsaken.
• It took them ZERO (0) years to give druids to tauren.
• It took them ZERO (0) years to give warlock to humans, gnomes, forsaken.

And what about two of the three expansion classes so far?
• It took them ZERO (0) years to give death knights to night elves, gnomes, dwarves, draenei, worgen, orc, tauren, forsaken, troll, blood elf, goblin.
• It took them ZERO (0) years to give monks to humans, night elves, gnomes, dwarves, draenei, worgen, orc, tauren, forsaken, troll, blood elf, goblin.

therefore it goes against your argument of "he tried everything"

No. No, it does not, at all. Seeing nobody was taking this as seriously as he wanted he took it upon himself to sabotage the Legion from within.

that is exactly what you are writing in this entire topic, use tech = tinker and just that, don't backtrack on this too

Once again, you display a lack of reading comprehension. No. That is not what I've been saying. I'm saying it's a requirement, not the only requirement.

as someone who use the false equivalence of course you don't know when they indeed happens

This feels more like projection than anything. You're the one throwing "fallacies" left and right, hoping something sticks. None did so far, though.

im dismissing the nonsense words of a NPC,

So in-game evidence is dismiss-able if it contradicts your agenda. Got it.

isn't like npcs are true all the time, he just contracted some engineers, caled then "tinkologists" and you think they are a proper class

Ok. Show me that this is the case, them. We have actual in-game, in-lore evidence that they are. The burden of proof is on you to show that Tinkmaster Overspark is lying about his crew.

Again, you think they are ingame lore facts,

Because they are. It's an in-game lore cutscene.

- - - Updated - - -

Yeah, making the Tinker exclusive to smaller races simply makes sense,

No, it doesn't.

because it would be the smaller races who require technology in order to compensate for their lack of physical power.

That would only make sense if this more powerful entity called MAGIC did not exist in Warcraft.

[Rhelyo]

Technology has advanced. Horde with goblin tech, Alliance with gnome tech. Would love to see more modern inventions spread to the main cities, a la Legend of Korra. Orcish motorbikes, human horseless carriages.

And tinkers.

I think they already said that time flows different in Shadowlands,as in slower.So by the time we finish with the expansion nothing changes in main timeline.

[Teriz]

But you don't get to play as Mekkatorque or Siegecrafter Blackfuse. You are suggesting Gnomes and Goblins with clawpacks. If Mekkatorque had a clawpack, that changes his look and feel.

Think about Arthas wielding a Frostmourne 3 times his body size. That would be silly.

So you need to play as Arthas wielding a Frostmourne 3 times his size to recognize that as being silly? You've actually made my point for me.

Yes, because you cherry picked races that are already popular because they are easy on the eyes.

Orcs and Tauren also had classes that fit their races like Warrior, Shaman and Warlock, but their population numbers remained low (comparatively) throughout WoW. Pandarens literally came with their own class and still very low pop. The numbers aren't even comparable to Humans or Blood Elves. It's not like we can even attribute Blood Elves being popular because they now have Demon Hunters; they were always popular since the start. They completely overshadowed all Horde race options, and not as a result of your so-called evidence.

Except you're missing the point. The GOAL is not to have Gnomes and Goblins reach Blood Elf or Night Elf numbers. The GOAL is to give Goblins and Gnomes their racial population drivers. In EVERY case, the racial population drivers are classes that match their racial themes. In other words, you can't claim that Goblins and Gnomes are hated or unpopular based on population numbers when they're the only race whose racial population drivers are not in place. Heck, Mechagnomes are the most unpopular Allied Race. Why? More than likely because they're a cybernetic race with nothing to choose from but medieval character classes.

I am not saying everyone hates gnomes and goblins. I didn't even say hate.

Objectionally looking at feedback from general opinion of Gnomes, many people like/are fine with Gnomes and Goblins.

If I'm going to illustrate a problem with your idea, then I point out the population that isn't fine with it that sort of exclusivity.

https://us.forums.blizzard.com/en/wo...-only/273972/4

Just look at this thread. Yes, there are a lot of people who are okay with it being exclusive, but should we simply ignore those who have a different opinion? Especially if it could be *easily* resolved by opening up the class to more races?

Tinkers being Gnome and Goblin exclusive would very much boost their population numbers, but at the cost of limiting overall Tinkers due to a lack of appealing race options. It's not a sound move for the sake of a singular agenda of boosting Gnome and Goblin pops.

Again, limiting racial options but increasing class immersion is a good trade off. I can assure you if we ran a poll among Tinker fans where the option was a Tinker class available to all races, but all the Tinkers had the same mech forms, and the same animations, versus a Tinker class limited to Gnomes, Goblins, and Vulpera with different mech forms for each race, customizable options for the mech, and unique animations for Alliance and Horde Tinkers, people wanting to play the Tinker class would overwhelmingly choose the second option.

Correlation isn't evidence. Pandaren have Monk class, and they remain low population. Nothing comparable to any Elven race.

Well actually you're wrong. There's more Pandaren than Nightborne, and their total population numbers rival Void Elves. It should also be noted that there's more pandaren than Goblins and Gnomes, and most of that is driven by (surprise) the Monk class.

There are plenty of engineer trainers of other races in the game. Gnome and Goblin are Specializations of Engineering.

You could say that it wouldn't make sense that Tinker class gets added without Gnome and Goblin options, and use that to make your case. That would work since Tinker is associated with Gnomes and Goblins.

You can't use it as a means to exclude other races that have shown an aptitude in engineering, especially when your reasoning is opinion-driven (but its too magical, but they don't have a Tech racial leader, but they don't have racial Engineering specializations!)

None of your reasoning would apply to a new class that has no racial exclusivity. Death Knights can be Gnomes, Draenei, Worgen, Goblins and now Pandaren. These other races were not even in Northrend at the time of the creation of the Death Knights. By your logic, the Death Knight should have been exclusively Human and Undead (and to an extent, Orc) because that is what all Death Knights NPC racial leaders were and those are the only races at the time shown to use Necromancy.

Again, this is a haphazard argument. On one hand you're saying that any race can spec into beginner level Goblin and Gnome engineering, then you flip and discuss the unique technology among each race. Those aren't the same thing, and in fact work to undermine your viewpoint. The Tinker concept is based on Goblin technology. This was expanded in WoW to include Gnomes, since they consider their leader a Tinker, and their capital is called Tinkertown. Beyond that, you're looking at entirely different types of technology that could never be represented in a class if the established tech-type is Goblin/Gnome. For example, would players wanting to engage with Draenei "magi tech" be satisfied with abilities that resemble a Gnome Tinker? Would Nightborne players wishing to portray Nightborne artificers be okay with shooting missiles and grenades instead of Arcane beams of energy? My guess would be no.

Death Knights can be any type of race because any race can logically be an undead corpse. Further, even in WC3, the DK's ultimate ability would animate the corpses of fallen units, and those units could be of any race. Thus, if you have an undead class, why would there be a racial limitation?

In short, it's not the same thing.

[Segus1992]

Technology has advanced. Horde with goblin tech, Alliance with gnome tech. Would love to see more modern inventions spread to the main cities, a la Legend of Korra. Orcish motorbikes, human horseless carriages.

And tinkers.

Fucking Christ, spare me. This sounds awful.

[Ielenia]

Well actually you're wrong. There's more Pandaren than Nightborne, and their total population numbers rival Void Elves. It should also be noted that there's more pandaren than Goblins and Gnomes, and most of that is driven by (surprise) the Monk class.

You keep adding the pandaren numbers together, despite them being on separate factions. So if you're going to add them together, you should also add the gnome and goblin populations as well.

"But they are the same race!" It's irrelevant because they're in separate factions. Pandaren only make up for 4% of the Horde's total population, and Goblins are also at 4% with a slight margin ahead. Meanwhile, in the Alliance, Pandaren are only a meager 3% while gnomes are at 5%.

On top of that, even if we grant you adding the two pandaren races together, both still just barely have more population than goblins, overall: 3.5% of the entire game's population being pandaren (both Alliance and Horde put together), vs 2.25% of the entire game's population being goblins.

It shows how this "a class of their own makes them popular" argument doesn't hold any water, considering the pandaren are just slightly ahead of gnomes or goblins, or behind them, depending on how you view this.