Why so much hate for Tinkerer?

[Triceron]

Well, i do agree that a class skin would make a lot of sense for Necromancer, based off the demonology warlock, but i don't know if that is something that will satisfy people or not.

Would a new Necromancer class satisfy people either though? I mean honestly speaking, we're at a point in the game's life cycle where Blizzard can't really add more classes and specs without a lot of consideration. They sorta designed themselves into a hole by centering classes on Specs and balancing 'Bring the Player' rather than a Vanilla style of having each class be unique and the Talent system simply supported how you chose to play that class. If you did dungeons, you play X spec, if you raided you play Y spec, if you did PVP then you choose hybrid X spec with a bit of Z. We didn't have this spec homogenization issue where every raider has to feel like their class/spec is balanced equally to every other class/spec. But since we're already in that mess, Class Skins would be the best way to keep supporting it IMO.

By all means, as someone who's only been interested in new expansions for the classes, we should have had a new class for Shadowlands no matter what it is.

[Teriz]

They already exist, it's a profession called engineering

Actually no. The Tinker class is based on a hero from WC3, the same place where nearly all WoW classes originate from. The profession has nothing to do with the Tinker class, and contains none of its abilities.

[Xeenith]

gimme a class named something like "the sinner", wear mail, can use ranged weapons, caster 2H and glaives, with 3 specs :
- dark ranger, with a unique undead pet, ranger weapons with black arrow or whatever skills people dream of : physical ranged with a few magics projectiles & spells
- dark guardian, no pets, focus on glaives (blades or round, they serves the same purpose) : physical melee with some
- necromancer, lots of pets, cycle them a lot, maybe a main one more sturdier : magical caster

[PrivateSmiley]

Actually no. The Tinker class is based on a hero from WC3, the same place where nearly all WoW classes originate from. The profession has nothing to do with the Tinker class, and contains none of its abilities.

That’s not true at all.
Engineering upgrade is totally something engineers have to do in wow.

[Teriz]

That’s not true at all.
Engineering upgrade is totally something engineers have to do in wow.

Uh where?

This is Engineering Upgrade:

Engineering Upgrade (Passive)
Improves other Tinker abilities with each level learned:
Cluster Rockets - Larger Area.
Pocket Factory - Builds Clockwerk Goblins more quickly.
Robo-Goblin - Increases armor and Strength; enhances Demolish.

Also gives bonus damage and increases the Tinker's movement speed.

Where is that in the engineering profession?

[TheRevenantHero]

There’s no way a Necromancer enters WoW and doesn’t negatively impact multiple existing classes. That’s probably why Blizzard didn’t introduce them in Shadowlands.

We should also note that Warlocks are the stated replacement for Necromancers because Blizzard didn’t want a copy of Everquest’s Necromancer class.

There is no way a Tinker enters WoW and doesn't negatively impact Survival Hunters and Engineers. That's probably why Blizzard didn't introduce them in Shadowlands.

I can play this ludicrous game too. Blizzard doesn't care about "stepping on the toes" of other classes considering cat druids and rogues are practically the same thing mechanically. Stealth, quick attacks, and combo points.

[Teriz]

There is no way a Tinker enters WoW and doesn't negatively impact Survival Hunters and Engineers. That's probably why Blizzard didn't introduce them in Shadowlands.

Except there are no Tinker abilities in the Hunter class or the engineering profession. There are multiple Necromancer and Lich abilities in Death Knights, Warlocks, and Mages.

I can play this ludicrous game too. Blizzard doesn't care about "stepping on the toes" of other classes considering cat druids and rogues are practically the same thing mechanically. Stealth, quick attacks, and combo points.

Druids were designed to be mechanical copies of existing classes (Jack of all trades). In Vanilla WoW, Feral was designed to be a copy of Rogue Mechanics, Bear was designed to be a copy of Warrior mechanics, Balance was supposed to be based on Mages, and Restoration was a copy of Priests. It's purpose was to give players a taste of multiple classes, and to be versatile. Over time, Druid has developed more of its own identity, but the core mechanics remain intact.

Conversely, Blizzard put the Necromancer concept into the Death Knight class because they had no intention of creating a stand alone Necromancer class. Also it sort of helps that the DK was a Necromancer-style hero unit in WC3.

[LadyLisanna]

I think we should really stop pretending that avatars in a video game are real people who have thoughts and feelings, and just look at the mechanics itself. Mechanically speaking, using an item is not the same thing as using a class ability.



From Blizzard:



https://worldofwarcraft.com/en-us/game/classes/paladin

- - - Updated - - -



1. Mechs take care of that. A Goblin or Gnome in mech form should be as large as a Tauren or Draenei in plate armor.
2. This is your opinion.
3. Actually quite a few classes fit the Vulpera, since they are scavengers and nomads. That allows them to blend into anything. Starting a Vulpera Warrior in a desert hut is a bit different than starting a Goblin Warrior in a city with robots, highways, and cars.

1. So pretty much you would not be playing a gnome anymore at that point as you would pretyt much be like a druid in druid form.
2. That is the view of lots of people
3. was in response to "when your race lacks a class that closely mirrors it's racial lore."
4.The playable Goblin has lost all his/her fortune so they could not afford any of the things they used to have. As for Gnomes are limited on supplies so that would limit them on making suits for every tom dick and harry. The only way to make the mech suit work would be it would be like a lv 50 or 60 thing they unlock after leveling all the way to that point cause they could not afford it other wise. Cause a mech suit would take a lot of work to build up to and would be dumb to start with at lv 1.

[Dalheim]

Never thought about that, but here is how Blizzard will mega-troll ppl: They will implement the class but call them "Mechanist" and then THAT will piss people off to no end

What if ''Mechromancer''?

[Teriz]

1. So pretty much you would not be playing a gnome anymore at that point as you would pretyt much be like a druid in druid form.
2. That is the view of lots of people
3. was in response to "when your race lacks a class that closely mirrors it's racial lore."
4.The playable Goblin has lost all his/her fortune so they could not afford any of the things they used to have. As for Gnomes are limited on supplies so that would limit them on making suits for every tom dick and harry. The only way to make the mech suit work would be it would be like a lv 50 or 60 thing they unlock after leveling all the way to that point cause they could not afford it other wise. Cause a mech suit would take a lot of work to build up to and would be dumb to start with at lv 1.

1. Sure, you can look at it that way.
2. It's still your opinion.
3. I know. I'm saying that Vulpera really don't have the same issue that Goblins and Gnomes do.
4. In fact, characters of this archetype are capable of building incredible machines from essentially scrap. Tony Stark in iron Man for example built an Arc Reactor and the Mark 1 suit from a defunct missile and scraps in a cave. A Tinker should be no different.

[TheRevenantHero]

Except there are no Tinker abilities in the Hunter class or the engineering profession. There are multiple Necromancer and Lich abilities in Death Knights, Warlocks, and Mages.



Druids were designed to be mechanical copies of existing classes (Jack of all trades). In Vanilla WoW, Feral was designed to be a copy of Rogue Mechanics, Bear was designed to be a copy of Warrior mechanics, Balance was supposed to be based on Mages, and Restoration was a copy of Priests. It's purpose was to give players a taste of multiple classes, and to be versatile. Over time, Druid has developed more of its own identity, but the core mechanics remain intact.

Conversely, Blizzard put the Necromancer concept into the Death Knight class because they had no intention of creating a stand alone Necromancer class. Also it sort of helps that the DK was a Necromancer-style hero unit in WC3.

You literally can't say "there are no Tinker abilities on hunters or engineering" because we don't know what the full kit would be. There is only one skill that was unique to Tinkers in WC3 and it was Pocket Factory. Engineering can replicate the other abilities with gadgets. Also, DK Army of the Dead functions pretty much the same as Pocket Factory just with ghouls instead of bots.

It literally doesn't matter what they were designed to be. My point is that copying what another class does in a new class is absolutely not a concern for Blizzard. Which is why Tinker doesn't have to be unique nor will it. With how Blizzard designs shit, it will just be a class version of Engineering that uses some kind of special resource (like a Hunter's focus) instead of requiring crafting materials.

Also, unless you can link me something that has Blizzard outright saying Necromancer will never be a thing because death knight exists, I'm gonna say that you're simply speculating and should really REALLY stop using your speculation as fact.

- - - Updated - - -

1. Sure, you can look at it that way.
2. It's still your opinion.
3. I know. I'm saying that Vulpera really don't have the same issue that Goblins and Gnomes do.
4. In fact, characters of this archetype are capable of building incredible machines from essentially scrap. Tony Stark in iron Man for example built an Arc Reactor and the Mark 1 suit from a defunct missile and scraps in a cave. A Tinker should be no different.

Ah the incredibly asinine Tony Stark argument. The reason that doesn't work is because Tinker became a class, then your Tony Stark argument would be invalid. There is only ONE Tony Stark. So if Tinker requires to be as smart and inventive as Tony Stark then that means there would be HUNDREDS of Tony Starks running around which isn't realistic AT ALL. Face it. Tinkers are not required to be genius inventors. If you want to keep that as a requirement then it should NEVER be a class because then the whole genius inventor thing becomes more of a meme than an aspect of the class. Otherwise, every single race is capable of being a Tinker.

[Teriz]

You literally can't say "there are no Tinker abilities on hunters or engineering" because we don't know what the full kit would be. There is only one skill that was unique to Tinkers in WC3 and it was Pocket Factory. Engineering can replicate the other abilities with gadgets. Also, DK Army of the Dead functions pretty much the same as Pocket Factory just with ghouls instead of bots.

Actually I can. The known Tinker abilities are Pocket Factory, Engineering Upgrade, Cluster Rockets, Robots Goblin, RG Shield, Rock-it-Turret, Xplodium Charge, Deth Lazor, Grav-O-Bomb, and Salvager.

I can assure you that the Tinker class wouldn't have Wildfire Bomb, and it wouldn't have a bunch of underpowered items that you have to craft.

It literally doesn't matter what they were designed to be. My point is that copying what another class does in a new class is absolutely not a concern for Blizzard. Which is why Tinker doesn't have to be unique nor will it. With how Blizzard designs shit, it will just be a class version of Engineering that uses some kind of special resource (like a Hunter's focus) instead of requiring crafting materials.

Based entirely on the known Tinker abilities, the Tinker concept is already unique compared to the existing class lineup. It sort of helps that unlike the Necromancer, none of the Tinker's abilities would need to be pulled from existing classes.

Also, unless you can link me something that has Blizzard outright saying Necromancer will never be a thing because death knight exists, I'm gonna say that you're simply speculating and should really REALLY stop using your speculation as fact.

Blizzard saying that no new classes fits a death-themed expansion (and includes a faction that are necromancers led by Kel'thuzad), and proclaiming that the Death Knight is the death class of WoW is about as close to saying "No Necromancer" as you can get.

Ah the incredibly asinine Tony Stark argument. The reason that doesn't work is because Tinker became a class, then your Tony Stark argument would be invalid. There is only ONE Tony Stark. So if Tinker requires to be as smart and inventive as Tony Stark then that means there would be HUNDREDS of Tony Starks running around which isn't realistic AT ALL. Face it. Tinkers are not required to be genius inventors. If you want to keep that as a requirement then it should NEVER be a class because then the whole genius inventor thing becomes more of a meme than an aspect of the class. Otherwise, every single race is capable of being a Tinker.

That's opinion mixed with head canon. Amusing, but largely irrelevant.

[Swnem]

Would a new Necromancer class satisfy people either though? I mean honestly speaking, we're at a point in the game's life cycle where Blizzard can't really add more classes and specs without a lot of consideration. They sorta designed themselves into a hole by centering classes on Specs and balancing 'Bring the Player' rather than a Vanilla style of having each class be unique and the Talent system simply supported how you chose to play that class. If you did dungeons, you play X spec, if you raided you play Y spec, if you did PVP then you choose hybrid X spec with a bit of Z. We didn't have this spec homogenization issue where every raider has to feel like their class/spec is balanced equally to every other class/spec. But since we're already in that mess, Class Skins would be the best way to keep supporting it IMO.

By all means, as someone who's only been interested in new expansions for the classes, we should have had a new class for Shadowlands no matter what it is.

I mostly agree with that. I do think they should go for class skins, after, ideally for me, a Tinker class cause of the way i envision it not fitting any existing specs based on how gazlowe plays in heroes. It's a dream scenario though. I guess we will see when the time comes.

[kaminaris]

https://web.archive.org/web/20150628...n/blog/7922536

Oh snap, destroyed completely, there is no recovering from this.

[TheRevenantHero]

Actually I can. The known Tinker abilities are Pocket Factory, Engineering Upgrade, Cluster Rockets, Robots Goblin, RG Shield, Rock-it-Turret, Xplodium Charge, Deth Lazor, Grav-O-Bomb, and Salvager.

I can assure you that the Tinker class wouldn't have Wildfire Bomb, and it wouldn't have a bunch of underpowered items that you have to craft.



Based entirely on the known Tinker abilities, the Tinker concept is already unique compared to the existing class lineup. It sort of helps that unlike the Necromancer, none of the Tinker's abilities would need to be pulled from existing classes.



Blizzard saying that no new classes fits a death-themed expansion (and includes a faction that are necromancers led by Kel'thuzad), and proclaiming that the Death Knight is the death class of WoW is about as close to saying "No Necromancer" as you can get.




That's opinion mixed with head canon. Amusing, but largely irrelevant.

Ok and that's YOUR opinion. An opinion that the vast majority do not agree with. A lot of those abilities have either something similar in engineering or a direct copy.

Except the Tinker really isn't. It's class abilities are literally just engineering gadgets turned into spells. Just because engineering isn't a class doesn't mean it's not basically the same situation when it comes to pulling ideas from other classes/professions.

Once again, either link me where Blizzard said that or I'm gonna go ahead and call bull shit.

No it fucking isn't. I'm pointing out the glaring flaws in your Tony Stark comparison. Every single Tinker isn't required to be an inventor. Sure some of them will be but it absolutely isn't a requirement. Tony Stark was a genius and also the only Tony Stark. There are other characters that create and use gadgets but they're not the same. Which is what Tinker would be. Gelbin and Gazlowe are the Tony Stark characters with the playable tinkers just being people that either apprentice under them, create their own gadgets that aren't as wildly unique as the lore characters, or are simply people that prefer to use gadgets over spells or a weapon. The Tony Stark argument you make is invalidated by your own points and it's baffling how you don't see it. Or you do see it but are absolutely incapable of admitting when you're wrong.

So either Tinkers are exceptional geniuses that perpetually invent new things or it's a class that simply uses gadgets they either buy or create themselves from schematics. In the former, Tinkers aren't playable unless you're willing to say every single player Tinker is unique and and exceptional genius which wouldn't make any sense at all. In the latter, literally any race can be a Tinker because it requires is following directions and then properly using the built item.

[Teriz]

Oh snap, destroyed completely, there is no recovering from this.

I know. LoL!

- - - Updated - - -

Ok and that's YOUR opinion. An opinion that the vast majority do not agree with. A lot of those abilities have either something similar in engineering or a direct copy.

LoL! No they don't. Go ahead, pull up the items you think are similar or direct copies. I can assure you that you're wrong before you even begin.

Except the Tinker really isn't. It's class abilities are literally just engineering gadgets turned into spells. Just because engineering isn't a class doesn't mean it's not basically the same situation when it comes to pulling ideas from other classes/professions.

Uh, since the Tinker is a lore hero, it means that their abilities are actually far and above mere engineering gadgets. In other words, a Warrior dabbling in engineering on the weekends doesn't compare to the Tinker hero's gadgets.

Once again, either link me where Blizzard said that or I'm gonna go ahead and call bull shit.

Look up "Death Knights are the Death class in WoW". It's not hard to find on google.

[TheRevenantHero]

I know. LoL!

- - - Updated - - -



LoL! No they don't. Go ahead, pull up the items you think are similar or direct copies. I can assure you that you're wrong before you even begin.



Uh, since the Tinker is a lore hero, it means that their abilities are actually far and above mere engineering gadgets. In other words, a Warrior dabbling in engineering on the weekends doesn't compare to the Tinker hero's gadgets.



Look up "Death Knights are the Death class in WoW". It's not hard to find on google.

I've already shown you items that replicate Tinker abilities and you disregarded it because it didn't fit your narrative. Not gonna waste my time with doing it again.

You are just full of double standards. You accuse me of having headcanon and then in the next post you have, you supply your OWN headcanon. You can claim Tinker abilities are more advanced than Engineering ones but it's not true. It's literally just your own headcanon.

No no no. You made the claim now you get to back it up. I'm not going to look shit up. Burden of proof falls on the person who made the claim. So either back it up or you're full of it.

[Teriz]

I've already shown you items that replicate Tinker abilities and you disregarded it because it didn't fit your narrative. Not gonna waste my time with doing it again.

Yeah, just FYI, a bunch of fireworks isn't Cluster Rockets. That's the kind of nonsense you were bringing to the table.

You are just full of double standards. You accuse me of having headcanon and then in the next post you have, you supply your OWN headcanon. You can claim Tinker abilities are more advanced than Engineering ones but it's not true. It's literally just your own headcanon.

Again, how can Warrior, Mage, or Rogue dabbling in engineering build better gadgets than an adventurer who is a mechanical genius? Think about it.

No no no. You made the claim now you get to back it up. I'm not going to look shit up. Burden of proof falls on the person who made the claim. So either back it up or you're full of it.

https://www.mmo-champion.com/threads...he-Death-Class

There you go.

[Melusine]

I was actually surprised that Blizzard removed the Metamorphosis entirely from Warlocks. I personally don't think Demonology was redesigned because we couldn't have two Metamorph specs; I think it's fully possible. Keep in mind too that there are some behind-the-scenes shenanigans at play too. Most of the Metamorphosis Warlock and Dark Apotheosis gameplay was the brainchild of one zealous Warlock designer who was very vocal about his design. He didn't really care much about lore and he designed the Warlock more on 'rule of cool'. He was kicked out of Blizz around the time of MoP/Wod (I think) and Legion was a time when the designers felt a whole bunch of classes/specs needed to be redesigned to fit a better class fantasy.

Let me just say, Demon Hunters are lore dumpster fire bullshit. Why do I say this? Well, obviously, because warlocks blah blah blah. Ok, if that's your thought, let me head you off at the past to say, what makes more sense to you? A class (we'll just call them 'warlocks' because that's what they are) that regularly summons demons, makes deals with demons, communes and schemes with demons, and is even able to sacrifice those demons for more power, and does so without concern or regret, that figures out how to manifest a demon within themselves, or a class (we'll call them 'Demon Hunters' because take two), that abhors demons, and makes it their job to find them, kill them, and make them stay away, would then willingly manifest a demon within themselves, even though it is their role to kill demons?

One of two things should have happened with demon hunters. either 1. they are not playable, but we do ally ourselves with them, and then, once the Legion is defeated, those demon hunters hop their fel-infused asses onto the Fel Hammer, and scour the rest of the galaxy for straggler demons. Or... the Demon hunter is a playable spec.... but those demon hunters are more like Illidan was prior to the Felwood. They have the Spectral sight, and many of the same abilities a demon hunter has, but these ones don't have fel magic at their disposal, don't have wings, don't have horns, don't have eye beams, and cannot meta. When a class can only be run on two races, and only have 2 specs to begin with, and that doesn't raise any red flags.... you're doing it wrong.

[TheRevenantHero]

Yeah, just FYI, a bunch of fireworks isn't Cluster Rockets. That's the kind of nonsense you were bringing to the table.



Again, how can Warrior, Mage, or Rogue dabbling in engineering build better gadgets than an adventurer who is a mechanical genius? Think about it.



https://www.mmo-champion.com/threads...he-Death-Class

There you go.

Except the items I had put forth weren't fireworks so try not to lie about what I had shown you. you disregarded examples I gave because of their cooldowns. You literally had no other counter-point.

They can follow a schematic. I'm not a chef but I can still cook food pretty well as long as I follow the recipe. Does me creating a delicious meal from a recipe suddenly make me a chef?

Lmfao you literally misinterpreted what was being said. They didn't say they were THE death class.

"You may have misunderstood us. The irregularity of our "World of Warcraft" project team said that odd-numbered versions must have new classes, or even-numbered versions have new races. We choose to launch the next version of the story based on whether it is suitable for a new class. Then the new version of "Shadow Kingdom" currently announced has a lot to do with our existing death knights, so we chose to let the death knights All ethnicity." was the ACTUAL quote. They didn't say that death knights were going to be the only death class. They just decided not to introduce a new class because they wanted to give the existing DK class more identity.