If they made a new class in the future, what would it be?

[Teriz]

Why limit it to some of the least played races and 2 allied races?

Because you don't base a future class' success or population numbers on current population numbers. The goal of a new class is to bring people not currently playing the game into the game.

Also the class' aesthetics work best with those races.

- - - Updated - - -

It doesn't matter. "Profession item" and "class ability" have no differences in the lore. And again, you said that the profession couldn't do those things (rockets, heal others, fight in mechs) but I've shown that they can. You're now moving the goalposts to "you cannot do it as well as a class can".

Except even in the case of lore you're wrong because we have the Tinker abilities in WoW and they're not engineering items and those Tinker abilities which are in WoW aren't in the engineering profession. So on every side of the argument you're just spouting nonsense.

These differences you speak of are little more than nitpicking in the lore. One doing more in-game damage than the other is just a game mechanic, not lore. Shooting a rocket is shooting a rocket. Fighting in a mech is fighting in a mech.

That's head canon.

And this, ladies and gentlemen, is dishonest at its most blatant. Notice the shoddily constructed strawman. I never even mentioned the name "goblin mortar" nor have I ever equated it to xplodium charge.

Ever.

Feel free to replace Goblin Mortar with any engineering item you want to claim is actually a Tinker ability. The same argument applies.

And nowhere in that statement says "Heroes of the Storm is canon to WoW" or "Hearthstone is canon to WoW". It doesn't matter that a handful of abilities from HotS made it into WoW. Everything in those games, unless expressly stated otherwise by Blizzard, is not canon to WoW.

Actually it does matter because that statement means that non-canon content can still be brought into WoW and be made canon. In short, your entire argument here is meaningless.

Unlike the original Warcraft 3 game, the Reforged version has been touched and altered by a third party: Lemon Sky Studios.

That puts the canonicity of the game in question, in lieu of the myriad of lore inconsistencies shown within the Reforged game.

Blizzard published the game, and it's Warcraft, so it's canon.

[jellmoo]

Well sure there would be. For example, just because lots of people are engineers in the MCU doesn't mean that all those engineers can be Tony Stark/Iron Man for example.

And before people jump on me for using Iron Man as an example, this is Mekkatorque after Mechagon;

https://wow.gamepedia.com/Spark_Reactor

That object on his chest is actually called the Spark Reactor, a homage to Iron Man.

Well, except that's exactly the case with Iron Man, where you have his buddy War Machine in his own suit and his girlfriends Rescue in her own suit. Heck, we see War Monger in his own devised suit in the first Iron Man movie, and Whiplash in his own style of suit in the second.

In the case of WoW though, it's established that everyone can be an Engineer. Or at least every race in the game has members that are Engineers. These are people that build a variety of items that are ridiculously close to what a Tinker would do. Saying that they can do that but somehow can't be a Tinker is more than a little weird.

Yeah, I'm sure we'll get people demanding that Dwarves, Orcs, and other races be allowed to be Tinkers, just like people beg Blizzard to make Draenei, Orcs, Humans, Nightborne, etc. to be Demon Hunters, and they haven't budged an inch. So with that said, I could totally see Blizzard bend lore to allow Vulpera into the Tinker class just to even things out.

But then we're bending lore to allow a race with no ties at all to Tinkers to be one, and a race with tons of ties not to. It would be like if Blizzard had created Demon Hunters and made the playable races Night Elves and Tauren. Sure, they can do it, but it doesn't make any sense.

I'd agree with you if we simply didn't have so many examples of Goblins and Gnomes in mechs at this point. We have Mekkatorque's mech, we have Gazlowe's shredder, we have Gallywix in a mech, we fought Blackfuse's mech, etc. I think the community really wants a mech.

I mean, saying that the community wants mechs is a bit of an assumption. I know I'm not particularly enamored with the idea, and I can't imagine I'm alone in that. But it's not really a point to argue since I'm pretty much mostly voicing an opinion.

Also there's something really cool about a little character inside a big machine of death;



I mean, it's absolutely absurd, but seems incredibly fun to play at the same time.

And I agree with that. When the setting matches that expectation. You give me an adorable little penguin in a mech in a sci fi setting and I'm eating that up. But for my money, it's not really what I want to see in WoW. It's one of those things that feels like something I grudgingly accept in small does (like say, seeing the odd NPC every once in a while) where it remains exceptional. But as a class where I might see a veritable ton of mechs rolling around a zone? Ehhhhhh...

As mentioned, for my money, I want to play an inventor that whips out a flamethrower, toss a grenade, drops a rocket turret, jumps across the area with rocket boots, uses goggles to see dudes in stealth, uses a hologram to make a distraction... Essentially using tech to solve every problem. There's this point in the Goblin starting quest where some Orcs ask you to cut down a bunch of plants using tech in your tool belt and you pull out these blades and whirl around. That's what I want, only in a class.

I'd give the healing spec a mech too. What's wrong with a medical/hospital mech?

Nothing's wrong with it. It's just not what I'd want out of the class. Let me play an alchemist with potions, sprays, acids, transmutations... That sort of thing. To me, that's cool. Playing a mech healing people just isn't my cup of tea.

[Triceron]

If you're talking about player skill, then yes, a Bear could surpass a Warrior. But, at the end of the day, a Warrior is hardier Tank than a Druid.

No, I'm literally talking about game mechanics and how it reflects into the lore.

Bears have more raw Armor stats than Warriors. Their base stats add a bonus to their armor. Abilities like Ironfur boost that considerably on top of a higher base than Warriors or Paladins. This is all because Guardian Druids don't benefit from Parry and Block stats, and make up for it with higher base health and armor.

So if you're considering that a Tinker would have way more higher than a Plate-wearing Warrior, then that's just your own headcanon because Blizzard has already built in the idea that Guardian Druids have the highest base armor of all classes, or that the concept of Armor in WoW is not consistent to your real-life comparisons.

Also, realistically speaking, Plate armor is not all that strong as you think it is. A Rifle Bullet can pierce Plate Mail and kill the person wearing it, a Rifle Bullet will not stop a Bear.

[Teriz]

Well, except that's exactly the case with Iron Man, where you have his buddy War Machine in his own suit and his girlfriends Rescue in her own suit. Heck, we see War Monger in his own devised suit in the first Iron Man movie, and Whiplash in his own style of suit in the second.

Well to be fair, War Machine, Rescue, and War Monger wouldn't have operational suits if not for Stark. War Machine and Rescue's suits were both built by Stark. War Monger copied Stark's design, but still had to steal Stark's Arc Reactor to power it. Whiplash is on Stark's level of brilliance, so him being able to build a suit isn't surprising.

In the case of WoW though, it's established that everyone can be an Engineer. Or at least every race in the game has members that are Engineers. These are people that build a variety of items that are ridiculously close to what a Tinker would do. Saying that they can do that but somehow can't be a Tinker is more than a little weird.

I would argue that it isn't ridiculously close. Mekkatorque and Blackfuse for example are building stuff that the Engineering profession can't match. I would argue that the difference between Tinkers and engineering is the same difference as Mage and enchanting.

But then we're bending lore to allow a race with no ties at all to Tinkers to be one, and a race with tons of ties not to. It would be like if Blizzard had created Demon Hunters and made the playable races Night Elves and Tauren. Sure, they can do it, but it doesn't make any sense.

Eh I wouldn't go that far. Vulpera are nomads who were under the oppression of another race for generations. They were smart, adaptable and very good with alchemy. I think there's even some missions within Vol'dum where the Vulpera use technology. Anyway, those are qualities that could lead them to picking up technology very quickly if exposed to it.

Tauren despise fel/demonic magic, so there's zero chance of them becoming Demon Hunters.

And I agree with that. When the setting matches that expectation. You give me an adorable little penguin in a mech in a sci fi setting and I'm eating that up. But for my money, it's not really what I want to see in WoW. It's one of those things that feels like something I grudgingly accept in small does (like say, seeing the odd NPC every once in a while) where it remains exceptional. But as a class where I might see a veritable ton of mechs rolling around a zone? Ehhhhhh...

Well this is what we've had so far in WoW since MoP;




So it's easy to see why a lot of people are assuming mechs for a technology-based class.

Nothing's wrong with it. It's just not what I'd want out of the class. Let me play an alchemist with potions, sprays, acids, transmutations... That sort of thing. To me, that's cool. Playing a mech healing people just isn't my cup of tea.

Understood.

[Ielenia]

Except even in the case of lore you're wrong because we have the Tinker abilities in WoW and they're not engineering items and those Tinker abilities which are in WoW aren't in the engineering profession.

Again, abilities and items that perform an action are indistinguishable in the lore. You're using ability name and ability damage to create a distinction that simply does not exist outside of game mechanics. The action of throwing a bomb, launching a missile or piloting a mech have no difference whatsoever in the lore regardless if it came from a "tinker" or an engineer.

So on every side of the argument you're just spouting nonsense.

This is oh so very precious coming from you, the king of bad faith arguments and misrepresentations.

That's head canon.

It's basic logic. See the first quote above for the explanation.

Feel free to replace Goblin Mortar with any engineering item you want to claim is actually a Tinker ability. The same argument applies.

Your whole argument is a misrepresentation of mine. I never said the engineering profession abilities are 1:1 with the tinker abilities from WC3 and HotS.

Actually it does matter because that statement means that non-canon content can still be brought into WoW and be made canon.

And the reason it doesn't matter is because until said non-canon content is brought into WoW, it is not canon content.

Blizzard published the game, and it's Warcraft, so it's canon.

I'll repeat: Unlike the original Warcraft 3 game, the Reforged version has been touched and altered by a third party: Lemon Sky Studios. That puts the canonicity of the game in question, in lieu of the myriad of lore inconsistencies shown within the Reforged game.

[Teriz]

Again, abilities and items that perform an action are indistinguishable in the lore.

Head canon.

You're using ability name and ability damageto create a distinction that simply does not exist outside of game mechanics.

Head canon.

The action of throwing a bomb, launching a missile or piloting a mech have no difference whatsoever in the lore regardless if it came from a "tinker" or an engineer

And more Head canon.

Here's the point;

This is an HotS ability from the Tinker hero.

This is an example of that HotS ability translated into WoW. This ability does not exist in engineering whatsoever.

This is an example of a profession bomb that has absolutely nothing to do with the HotS/WoW ability I just posted.

Stop bringing up lore. You clearly have no idea what you're talking about.

Your whole argument is a misrepresentation of mine. I never said the engineering profession items are 1:1 with the tinker abilities from WC3 and HotS.

Again, abilities and items that perform an action are indistinguishable in the lore.

And the reason it doesn't matter is because until said non-canon content is brought into WoW, it is not canon content.

One last time; Since all of that material has the potential to be moved into WoW, your entire canon vs non-canon argument is completely meaningless.

I'll repeat: Unlike the original Warcraft 3 game, the Reforged version has been touched and altered by a third party: Lemon Sky Studios. That puts the canonicity of the game in question, in lieu of the myriad of lore inconsistencies shown within the Reforged game.

And I'll repeat;

Which sources are canon and non-canon?
Canon
Everything released by Blizzard except mods and the table-top RPG is considered canon.[1] This includes games, novels, short stories, manga, and comics[1][2] as well as trailers and cinematics.

https://wow.gamepedia.com/Lore

Gee, I wonder who published Warcraft 3: Reforged.....

https://www.google.com/search?client...4dUDCAw&uact=5

[razorpax]

Because you don't base a future class' success or population numbers on current population numbers. The goal of a new class is to bring people not currently playing the game into the game.

Also the class' aesthetics work best with those races.

- - - Updated - - -



Except even in the case of lore you're wrong because we have the Tinker abilities in WoW and they're not engineering items and those Tinker abilities which are in WoW aren't in the engineering profession. So on every side of the argument you're just spouting nonsense.




That's head canon.



Feel free to replace Goblin Mortar with any engineering item you want to claim is actually a Tinker ability. The same argument applies.




Actually it does matter because that statement means that non-canon content can still be brought into WoW and be made canon. In short, your entire argument here is meaningless.



Blizzard published the game, and it's Warcraft, so it's canon.

How does it work with the fox race??

[Teriz]

How does it work with the fox race??

They're smart, adaptable, good with alchemy, and have limited lore due to being a new race.

Mechanics-wise they share the same skeleton as Goblins, so that makes development easier.

[Deneios]

All fair points. I'm honestly just surprised people still give THAT guy the time of day given we all know he has no interest actually having an honest discussion. Discussing things with them is equal parts nauseating and infuriating. But you do you (general you, not you specifically), if you're enjoying it or whatever, keep it up, I guess, lol.

You dont have to turn your opponent to your side. More important is to get the audience to your side.

[razorpax]

They're smart, adaptable, good with alchemy, and have limited lore due to being a new race.

Mechanics-wise they share the same skeleton as Goblins, so that makes development easier.

They have 0 technology and the class can be designed so the mechs size doesn’t scale

[Teriz]

They have 0 technology and the class can be designed so the mechs size doesn’t scale

Again, brand new race. Blizzard can just give them technological skill. Like I said earlier, Junker tech and look would fit their race just fine;

[jellmoo]

Well to be fair, War Machine, Rescue, and War Monger wouldn't have operational suits if not for Stark. War Machine and Rescue's suits were both built by Stark. War Monger copied Stark's design, but still had to steal Stark's Arc Reactor to power it. Whiplash is on Stark's level of brilliance, so him being able to build a suit isn't surprising.

Let me pull back for a quick second and throw out a hypothetical: Nothing is necessarily saying that a Tinker playable class needs to be the pinnacle genius inventor that creates a mech from scratch. That's certainly one archetype, but it's not the only one. For every Tony Stark, there's a James Rohodes. For every Hank Pym, there's a Scott Lang. The playable class could incorporate the archetype of the hotshot test pilot. Perhaps, the genius inventor Tinker is one that also takes the Engineering profession. The one that uses tech designed by another is one that does not. Similar to how not all Mages are adventurers, it's quite possible that not all genius inventors are. The Tinker class could be made up of those brave souls wanting to use technology to battle.

I would argue that it isn't ridiculously close. Mekkatorque and Blackfuse for example are building stuff that the Engineering profession can't match. I would argue that the difference between Tinkers and engineering is the same difference as Mage and enchanting.

That's a pretty massive stretch though. Mages throw fire, ice and arcane magics at enemies, teleport across the globe, and conjure food and water out of thin air. Enchanters take a piece of equipment and make it better. Engineers make bombs, guns, gizmos, mechs and robots. Tinkers would make bombs, guns, gizmos, mechs and robots.

And we have to be careful if we compare what NPCs can do. Sure, Mekkatorque can build things Engineers can't, but Mages also can't conjure a giant flying ship complete with magic firing cannons.

Eh I wouldn't go that far. Vulpera are nomads who were under the oppression of another race for generations. They were smart, adaptable and very good with alchemy. I think there's even some missions within Vol'dum where the Vulpera use technology. Anyway, those are qualities that could lead them to picking up technology very quickly if exposed to it.

It's still a very far stretch from the tech that Dwarves build and use, and doesn't include the close relationship with Goblins like Dwarves have with Gnomes.

Tauren despise fel/demonic magic, so there's zero chance of them becoming Demon Hunters.

Sure. Replace Tauren with Trolls or Undead in that example.

So it's easy to see why a lot of people are assuming mechs for a technology-based class.

But what we don't know is if that number of people is greater or lesser than the number of people put off by it. There may be a ton of people clamouring for mechs in WoW, but it's also quite possible that there are more people that enjoy WoW despite the inclusion of the occasional mech rather than because of it, and would rather there not be more.

[Grimbold21]

Came in to see what the fuss as all about.


Another tinker circle jerk

[Unbelievable]

Well sure there would be. For example, just because lots of people are engineers in the MCU doesn't mean that all those engineers can be Tony Stark/Iron Man for example.

And before people jump on me for using Iron Man as an example, this is Mekkatorque after Mechagon;

https://wow.gamepedia.com/Spark_Reactor

That object on his chest is actually called the Spark Reactor, a homage to Iron Man.




Yeah, I'm sure we'll get people demanding that Dwarves, Orcs, and other races be allowed to be Tinkers, just like people beg Blizzard to make Draenei, Orcs, Humans, Nightborne, etc. to be Demon Hunters, and they haven't budged an inch. So with that said, I could totally see Blizzard bend lore to allow Vulpera into the Tinker class just to even things out.



I'd agree with you if we simply didn't have so many examples of Goblins and Gnomes in mechs at this point. We have Mekkatorque's mech, we have Gazlowe's shredder, we have Gallywix in a mech, we fought Blackfuse's mech, etc. I think the community really wants a mech.

Also there's something really cool about a little character inside a big machine of death;



I mean, it's absolutely absurd, but seems incredibly fun to play at the same time.



I'd give the healing spec a mech too. What's wrong with a medical/hospital mech?

- - - Updated - - -



None of which is viable for anything other than goofing around, and none of them are Tinker abilities.



Except they don't do the same thing, and we have the actual abilities in the game.

Your literal argument here is that Goblin Mortar is actually the WoW version of Xplodium Charge from HotS when we actually have Xplodim Charge in WoW.



I linked you to the literal statement from Blizzard, and gave you an example of a character they canonized from the RPGs after they were decolonized. We also have multiple HotS abilities in WoW now. The point is that just because they're not canon doesn't mean that Blizzard won't pull them into WoW.




Until Blizzard says it's not canon, WC3:R is canon;



https://wow.gamepedia.com/Lore

- - - Updated - - -



That is a possibility honestly. I could see Tinker being a specialization within a larger technology class.

Also it sort of helps that the Goblin Alchemist hero used an ability called Healing Spray.

Something like this, but maybe not quite so on the nose?



- - - Updated - - -



We were discussing lore differences between the Tinker and the Engineering profession. Obviously I would use the Claw Pack as a lore difference since it doesn't exist in the engineering profession, but is quite prevalent in the Tinker concept.

However, when we switch to a conversation about gameplay, I'm all about mechs, since I think a technology class is better served as a vehicle-based technology class.



Actually it does. The Claw Pack transforms into the mech, and the mech can transform back into the claw pack.



Again, the problem is that every expansion class has had equal representation on both factions. If you pull in the Dwarves and Black Irons then you gotta pull in a horde equivalent, let's say Orcs. Well then people are going to want to know why Forsaken and Humans can be Tinkers since they use tech more often than Orcs. Well since Humans are Tinkers why aren't Kul Ti'rans? And on and on and on. Before you know it, everyone is piloting a mech in WoW and it's just weird.

Meanwhile, you can just snub Dwarves and keep it Goblin/Vulpera/Gnome/Mecha Gnome.

Simple.

There's a lot of pop culture references in WoW:
https://wow.gamepedia.com/List_of_po...es_in_Warcraft

You just want to play an Iron Man, not a Tinker. And that can be fulfilled by other shooter games.

Except, you don't need to bend lore for Dwarves, as they are, already, Tinkers. So, you won't see people begging to add them as ones. On the other hand, your Vulpera suggestion has no grip in reality, aside from your size obsession. I'm gonna bet it has nothing to do with their size but, a small-furry obsession you have, like you have for Iron Man.

I think you really want a mech, not the community. the community wants to play a Tinker (what has been portrayed so far, not your perversion of it). You just project your own desires on everyone else, like an egocentric would.

What's wrong with a medical/hospital mech? is that it doesn't follow lore but, your mech obsession. In WC3 the Alchemist does not apply healing spray from a mech, and even the Blackfuse Engineers are mech-less when applying healing spray.

Lelenia never argued for a Goblin Mortar, it was me.

No, you weren't discussing lore only for 150 pages. You were, literally, asking for the Claw Pack/Hammer Tank combo to be playable in the Tinker. You insisted how integral is it to the Tinker's gameplay. Yet, now you throw it all away when mech is on the table. You were just using it for you own benefit.

And no, a technology-class is not all about mechs. It's one of the abilities. You forget all the explosives, devices and robots that are associated with an inventor. It's like asking for a Demon Hunter to have permanent Metamorphosis, because it's so integral to the identity. You don't want to play a Tinker, you want to play an Iron Man. and, that can be achieved through other means. It, actually, surprises me you are playing this game, when you're so obsessed with Mech fighting (which, is a lot more prominent in other games).

I know that. But, you don't see one of those two aspects being tossed aside in favor for the other. They co-exist together within the Tinker.

I never said Dark Iron Dwarves are Tinkers in lore. You're just projecting it to allied races, which has been proved to be flawed (humans being able to be paladins and Kul Tirans not. Kul Tirans being able to be Shamans and Humans not).

Dwarves would only need one counterpart in the Horde. Whether it is Mag'har Orcs or Forsaken is of no concern of mine. Because like i said, and unlike other races, these two have had a connection to Goblins and their technology.
Meanwhile, Vulpera doesn't follow any existing lore. They are not tech-savvy and do not have a connection to Goblins and their technology. They are just there to supplement you midget fetish.

Also the class' aesthetics work best with those races.

Wrong. It doesn't work better with a race of nomadic primitives, more than a race that had an entire expansion revolving around their use of technology.

You are just too influenced by other games and their depiction of cute little animals in large mech suit. Try not to confuse the two.

As mentioned, for my money, I want to play an inventor that whips out a flamethrower, toss a grenade, drops a rocket turret, jumps across the area with rocket boots, uses goggles to see dudes in stealth, uses a hologram to make a distraction... Essentially using tech to solve every problem. There's this point in the Goblin starting quest where some Orcs ask you to cut down a bunch of plants using tech in your tool belt and you pull out these blades and whirl around. That's what I want, only in a class.



Nothing's wrong with it. It's just not what I'd want out of the class. Let me play an alchemist with potions, sprays, acids, transmutations... That sort of thing. To me, that's cool. Playing a mech healing people just isn't my cup of tea.

It's not just that it isn't your cup of tea, it isn't even lore based. What you described is a Tinker and an Alchemist. What Teriz wants is his own anime whims to come true.

No, I'm literally talking about game mechanics and how it reflects into the lore.

Bears have more raw Armor stats than Warriors. Their base stats add a bonus to their armor. Abilities like Ironfur boost that considerably on top of a higher base than Warriors or Paladins. This is all because Guardian Druids don't benefit from Parry and Block stats, and make up for it with higher base health and armor.

So if you're considering that a Tinker would have way more higher than a Plate-wearing Warrior, then that's just your own headcanon because Blizzard has already built in the idea that Guardian Druids have the highest base armor of all classes, or that the concept of Armor in WoW is not consistent to your real-life comparisons.

Also, realistically speaking, Plate armor is not all that strong as you think it is. A Rifle Bullet can pierce Plate Mail and kill the person wearing it, a Rifle Bullet will not stop a Bear.

Robo-Goblin
Transforms the Tinker into a Robo-Goblin, a powerful armored form that has the following traits:
+5 strength and +1 armor.
Use of the Demolish ability, which grants bonus damage against buildings.
The Tinker becomes mechanical, rendering him immune to stun, most offensive spells, and several beneficial spells.

Demolish Causes attacks to 200% of their damage to buildings.

Engineering Upgrade
Improves other Tinker abilities with each level learned.
Also increases the Tinker's attack damage and movement speed.

Robo-Goblin Increases armor by 1 and Strength by 2 per level,
+50% to Demolishs' damage multiplier.

Level Effect Hero Level Req
1 +2 damage, +10% movement 1
2 +4 damage, +20% movement 3
3 +6 damage, +30% movement 5

Bear Form
Transforms the Druid into a bear, slowing mana regeneration, but making him an excellent warrior. While in Bear Form he cannot cast any spells unless you upgrade to Mark of the Claw, allowing you to use Roar in Bear Form.

Metamorphosis
Transforms the Demon Hunter into a powerful demon with a ranged attack (600 range) and 500 bonus hit points.

I don't know... i have this feeling it would be more like a Metamorphosis. call it a hunch

[Teriz]

Let me pull back for a quick second and throw out a hypothetical: Nothing is necessarily saying that a Tinker playable class needs to be the pinnacle genius inventor that creates a mech from scratch. That's certainly one archetype, but it's not the only one. For every Tony Stark, there's a James Rohodes. For every Hank Pym, there's a Scott Lang. The playable class could incorporate the archetype of the hotshot test pilot. Perhaps, the genius inventor Tinker is one that also takes the Engineering profession. The one that uses tech designed by another is one that does not. Similar to how not all Mages are adventurers, it's quite possible that not all genius inventors are. The Tinker class could be made up of those brave souls wanting to use technology to battle.

Well the WC3 Tinker was an inventor who created incredible machines, so that aspect is part of the lore. Further, characters like Mekkatorque and Blackfuse are very powerful inventors who also create very powerful machines. Blackfuse for example repurposed titan technology and merged goblin tech with Legion tech to create the Iron Reaver. I think Blizzard pretty much reinforced this concept by giving Mekkatorque the Spark Reactor.

While the "hotshot pilot" is a viable archetype, the main purpose of a engineer-style class is the wiley inventor who creates machines that are so advanced that they rival magic and physical power, thus making Science a third branch of power in a sword and sorcery world.

That's a pretty massive stretch though. Mages throw fire, ice and arcane magics at enemies, teleport across the globe, and conjure food and water out of thin air. Enchanters take a piece of equipment and make it better. Engineers make bombs, guns, gizmos, mechs and robots. Tinkers would make bombs, guns, gizmos, mechs and robots.

That's being a bit generous towards engineering. Engineering also makes enchanters, and it makes equipment. It's bombs and offensive gizmos are secondary, and it can only build two "mechs". One mech is a mount, and the other is an invalid novelty that only works in a specified area and is a cumbersome nightmare to build. The implied power of engineering's weaponry is that of a one-off or a toy due to their heavy limitations.

So, if we had a mage who could only use enchanting go up against a mage who could use actual mage spells, it would be a complete bloodbath.

If we had a class who could only use engineering items against a Tinker, it would also be a complete bloodbath.

That's how much more powerful a Tinker is against a profession engineer.

And we have to be careful if we compare what NPCs can do. Sure, Mekkatorque can build things Engineers can't, but Mages also can't conjure a giant flying ship complete with magic firing cannons.

No, but the class should be an approximation of the lore figure it's emulating. I certainly don't expect to be able to do all the stuff Blackfuse or Mekkatorque could do in the specific raid appearances, but I certainly expect the ability to be able to pilot a mech and use advanced weaponry in a standard class rotation with talents and passives that enhance my abilities.

It's still a very far stretch from the tech that Dwarves build and use, and doesn't include the close relationship with Goblins like Dwarves have with Gnomes.

I don't view that as a barrier. Blizzard could simply make it that way with a stroke of a pen. Keeping it Goblins and Gnomes with their allied races is truly the most elegant solution. I know some wouldn't like it, but it's really for the best.

But what we don't know is if that number of people is greater or lesser than the number of people put off by it. There may be a ton of people clamouring for mechs in WoW, but it's also quite possible that there are more people that enjoy WoW despite the inclusion of the occasional mech rather than because of it, and would rather there not be more.

I would definitely take the bet that far more people would prefer a technology class based around mechs than a technology class that amounts to Hunters with Gizmos. Mechs simply add too many new and interesting mechanics to class gameplay to be ignored.

[Ielenia]

Head canon.

No, that's a fact. Swinging your arm in an arm while holding a bomb and releasing the hold on said bomb at some point in the arc's trajectory because you left-clicked on an ability on your character's spell book that says "throw a bomb" is the exact same thing as swinging your arm in an arm while holding a bomb and releasing the hold on said bomb at some point in the arc's trajectory because you right-clicked on an item in your bags that says "use: throw a bomb".

Head canon.

And more Head canon.

No, those are facts. It is a fact that you're trying to create a distinction based on game mechanics (ability name and ability damage), and it is a fact that said difference is not shown in the lore.

And also: just saying "headcanon" does nothing to dismiss my arguments, because you haven't explained why it should be dismissed. Dismissing just because "headcanon" also dismisses your arguments because yours are just as much "headcanon" as you accuse mine to be.

Here's the point;

This is an HotS ability from the Tinker hero.

This is an example of that HotS ability translated into WoW. This ability does not exist in engineering whatsoever.

This is an example of a profession bomb that has absolutely nothing to do with the HotS/WoW ability I just posted.

Why did you use an engineering ability that only incapacitates, and not one that actually stuns the target? That would be the same effects the HotS ability.

Also: I never said profession items are 1:1 to abilities from WC3 and HotS. I said they're indistinguishable in the lore. Important caveat you missed.

Stop bringing up lore. You clearly have no idea what you're talking about.

Just because you're unable or unwilling to address the lore concerns regarding your headcanons does not mean we should stop bringing them up. "Stop bringing up holes and inaccuracies with my ideas!" is basically what you're saying.

And considering you keep either ignoring or fudging the lore to fit your narrative (tinkers of other races being an example of lore you ignore, and saying "vulperas can be tinkers" is an example of you fudging the lore), I would say, of the two of us, it's not me the one who "doesn't know what they're talking about", here.

One last time; Since all of that material has the potential to be moved into WoW, your entire canon vs non-canon argument is completely meaningless.

No, it's not. Because "potential" means nothing if said potential is not realized. Just become something CAN happen, doesn't mean it WILL. So until Blizzard canonize more parts of HotS by including them into WoW, said parts are not canon and should not be considered as such.

And I'll repeat;

Gee, I wonder who published Warcraft 3: Reforged.....

But Blizzard did not develop it. Again: the canonicity of the game can arguably be questioned, considering it was developed by a third party company that brought in so many lore inconsistencies in comparison to the main franchise games' lore.

- - - Updated - - -

They're smart, adaptable, good with alchemy, and have limited lore due to being a new race.

They're smart, but not technology-smart. And their lore is not "limited". It's actually pretty well-established, already.

- - - Updated - - -

Again, brand new race. Blizzard can just give them technological skill.

By that reasoning, they could give any race the technological skill. Even tauren and night elves.

And they did so, already, for night elves, mind you.

[Teriz]

There's a lot of pop culture references in WoW:
https://wow.gamepedia.com/List_of_po...es_in_Warcraft

You just want to play an Iron Man, not a Tinker. And that can be fulfilled by other shooter games.

I didn't give Mekkatorque the Spark Reactor and a Mech suit, Blizzard did.

Except, you don't need to bend lore for Dwarves, as they are, already, Tinkers. So, you won't see people begging to add them as ones. On the other hand, your Vulpera suggestion has no grip in reality, aside from your size obsession. I'm gonna bet it has nothing to do with their size but, a small-furry obsession you have, like you have for Iron Man.

Right, because there's absolutely NO way that Blizzard could make Vulpera Tinkers despite it being advantageous to both the class and to Blizzard.

The hilarious thing about this is that Blizzard doesn't even have to change anything, they could just make them Tinkers with no additions to the lore. No one would care one bit, and players would love it.

I think you really want a mech, not the community. the community wants to play a Tinker (what has been portrayed so far, not your perversion of it). You just project your own desires on everyone else, like an egocentric would.

I guess you missed the conversation in this thread earlier. We were actually talking about Tinker gameplay and everyone brought up mechs and Claw Packs (which are half mechs). Honestly Jellmoo is the first person I've seen on here who doesn't like the mech idea. This video here by Tailisen talks about the mech-based Tinker;



So yeah I'm hardly the only person liking the idea of the mech Tinker.

What's wrong with a medical/hospital mech? is that it doesn't follow lore but, your mech obsession. In WC3 the Alchemist does not apply healing spray from a mech, and even the Blackfuse Engineers are mech-less when applying healing spray.

So are you saying it would be impossible for Blizzard to create a medical-based mech for a Tinker healing spec?

Lelenia never argued for a Goblin Mortar, it was me.

I know, you're both pushing the same head canon nonsense.

And no, a technology-class is not all about mechs. It's one of the abilities. You forget all the explosives, devices and robots that are associated with an inventor.

That are launched from a mech.

It's like asking for a Demon Hunter to have permanent Metamorphosis, because it's so integral to the identity. You don't want to play a Tinker, you want to play an Iron Man. and, that can be achieved through other means. It, actually, surprises me you are playing this game, when you're so obsessed with Mech fighting (which, is a lot more prominent in other games).

Except the Tinker did have permanent mech form in WC3 and HotS.

I know that. But, you don't see one of those two aspects being tossed aside in favor for the other. They co-exist together within the Tinker.

I never said Dark Iron Dwarves are Tinkers in lore. You're just projecting it to allied races, which has been proved to be flawed (humans being able to be paladins and Kul Tirans not. Kul Tirans being able to be Shamans and Humans not).

Dwarves would only need one counterpart in the Horde. Whether it is Mag'har Orcs or Forsaken is of no concern of mine. Because like i said, and unlike other races, these two have had a connection to Goblins and their technology.
Meanwhile, Vulpera doesn't follow any existing lore. They are not tech-savvy and do not have a connection to Goblins and their technology. They are just there to supplement you midget fetish.

Dark Iron Dwarves are also mechanically inclined (Mole Machines and their leader being an inventor) so if you're making baseline Dwarves Tinkers, then Dark Irons should be as well. So now both Orc Races need to be Tinkers as well. But guess what? You still have a racial disparity between Horde and Alliance, so where you going to get the additional Horde race? Forsaken? Well what about Humans? If undead zombies can build and pilot mechs, why not humans? Okay, but what about Worgen? They're still human intellect-wise, and their city is actually more advanced than Stormwind, so why can't they be Tinkers? What about Draenei? If LF Draenei can be Tinkers why can't the Draenei? Now you need 4 more Horde races to keep up.

See how ridiculous this gets?

Meanwhile all you have to do is make Vulpera Tinkers and we're done.

Wrong. It doesn't work better with a race of nomadic primitives, more than a race that had an entire expansion revolving around their use of technology.

You are just too influenced by other games and their depiction of cute little animals in large mech suit. Try not to confuse the two.

You do know that Blizzard is highly influenced by other games right?

It's not just that it isn't your cup of tea, it isn't even lore based. What you described is a Tinker and an Alchemist. What Teriz wants is his own anime whims to come true.

Lore-based.

- - - Updated - - -

No, that's a fact. Swinging your arm in an arm while holding a bomb and releasing the hold on said bomb at some point in the arc's trajectory because you left-clicked on an ability on your character's spell book that says "throw a bomb" is the exact same thing as swinging your arm in an arm while holding a bomb and releasing the hold on said bomb at some point in the arc's trajectory because you right-clicked on an item in your bags that says "use: throw a bomb".

Except again, a Tinker wouldn't toss a bomb, they would press a button and the bomb would be launched from their mech.

No, those are facts. It is a fact that you're trying to create a distinction based on game mechanics (ability name and ability damage), and it is a fact that said difference is not shown in the lore.

Your opinion of lore is not facts.

And also: just saying "headcanon" does nothing to dismiss my arguments, because you haven't explained why it should be dismissed. Dismissing just because "headcanon" also dismisses your arguments because yours are just as much "headcanon" as you accuse mine to be.

Discussing actual game mechanics is not head canon.

Why did you use an engineering ability that only incapacitates, and not one that actually stuns the target? That would be the same effects the HotS ability.

Feel free to use an engineering item that stuns, the exact same argument applies.

Also: I never said profession items are 1:1 to abilities from WC3 and HotS. I said they're indistinguishable in the lore. Important caveat you missed.

So does lore matter or does it not matter? You're speaking out of both sides of your mouth here. If it's indistinguishable in the lore in your opinion, why are we wasting time talking about this?

Just because you're unable or unwilling to address the lore concerns regarding your headcanons does not mean we should stop bringing them up. "Stop bringing up holes and inaccuracies with my ideas!" is basically what you're saying.

Except there are no lore concerns. Goblins and Gnomes (and Mechagnomes) use pilotable mechs to fight in and I believe that gameplay should be fully extended to the player. What's the lore concern? Your OPINION that engineering fully satisfies that gameplay desire?

And considering you keep either ignoring or fudging the lore to fit your narrative (tinkers of other races being an example of lore you ignore, and saying "vulperas can be tinkers" is an example of you fudging the lore), I would say, of the two of us, it's not me the one who "doesn't know what they're talking about", here.

It's not about fitting a narrative, it's about getting more out of less. With the Vulpera you get the second Horde Tinker race that's also using the Goblin skeleton, and since its a new race it has malleable lore. Also it wouldn't be the first time Blizzard just pulled something out of their butt to make a class fit. Look at Zandalari Paladins and Goblin Shaman.

No, it's not. Because "potential" means nothing if said potential is not realized. Just become something CAN happen, doesn't mean it WILL.[/B]

Except it's already happened multiple times.......

But Blizzard did not develop it. Again: the canonicity of the game can arguably be questioned, considering it was developed by a third party company that brought in so many lore inconsistencies in comparison to the main franchise games' lore.

Actually they co-developed it. Further, anything RELEASED by Blizzard. In other words, they don't have to develop it, just publish it. So if you make a Warcraft game and Blizzard publishes it, then it's canon.

[jellmoo]

Well the WC3 Tinker was an inventor who created incredible machines, so that aspect is part of the lore. Further, characters like Mekkatorque and Blackfuse are very powerful inventors who also create very powerful machines. Blackfuse for example repurposed titan technology and merged goblin tech with Legion tech to create the Iron Reaver. I think Blizzard pretty much reinforced this concept by giving Mekkatorque the Spark Reactor.

Sure, but we don't play as NPCs, we play as a member of a class that is a representation of some of what they do. For example, Blizzard could just as easily say "We're introducing Tinkers! Each Tinker is a member of a school depending on faction: either Mekkatorque's Mechanist Academy or Gazlowe's Gearworks Emporium. There they learn how to build their first mech, which as they gain experience, they will upgrade throughout their Tinkering career.

There's a lot of room in the "how" a Tinker class could be made playable. They could be genius inventors, hotshot pilots, scrapmaster upgraders, tech based adventurers, etc... The best solution is probably to allow multiple archetypes to be fulfilled by the class.

While the "hotshot pilot" is a viable archetype, the main purpose of a engineer-style class is the wiley inventor who creates machines that are so advanced that they rival magic and physical power, thus making Science a third branch of power in a sword and sorcery world.

But that isn't necessarily true. The purpose of the class could just as easily be to use "machines that are so advanced that they rival magic and physical power". You can be Iron Man without being Tony Stark, for example.

That's being a bit generous towards engineering. Engineering also makes enchanters, and it makes equipment. It's bombs and offensive gizmos are secondary, and it can only build two "mechs". One mech is a mount, and the other is an invalid novelty that only works in a specified area and is a cumbersome nightmare to build. The implied power of engineering's weaponry is that of a one-off or a toy due to their heavy limitations.

So, if we had a mage who could only use enchanting go up against a mage who could use actual mage spells, it would be a complete bloodbath.

If we had a class who could only use engineering items against a Tinker, it would also be a complete bloodbath.

That's how much more powerful a Tinker is against a profession engineer.

Sure, but that isn't what I'm saying. I'm saying that they do the same thing. Build bombs, weapons, guns, weapons, mechs, etc... It's not efficacy I'm talking about. Engineering is largely a joke of a profession these days. But the point is that every race can do it. They can already build guns, and bombs, and turrets, and gizmos, and mechs. It's a weird step to say that they can all do that, but only these select races can use this tech in an efficient way to fight.

No, but the class should be an approximation of the lore figure it's emulating. I certainly don't expect to be able to do all the stuff Blackfuse or Mekkatorque could do in the specific raid appearances, but I certainly expect the ability to be able to pilot a mech and use advanced weaponry in a standard class rotation with talents and passives that enhance my abilities.

Absolutely, but what that representation is would obviously be open to interpretation. For example, we see ample examples of tech use outside of mechs as well, which I think would be equally important to represent in such a class. Archetypes need to include more than a single thing, generally, to be a base class. Now, if the decision was made to make Tinkers a HEro class, that might lead to a much narrower vision of class, but as a base class, it should be able to allow for multiple archetypes within,

I don't view that as a barrier. Blizzard could simply make it that way with a stroke of a pen. Keeping it Goblins and Gnomes with their allied races is truly the most elegant solution. I know some wouldn't like it, but it's really for the best.

I mean, that's kind of a terrible argument. Of course Blizzard can do whatever they want. That doesn't mean that it's a good idea, that fans will like it, or that it jives with the story they've been telling thus far. They tend to get crapped on when they bend lore to fit their new narrative, and this would be a big one, one that actually has implications to the players directly.

It almost feels like the inclusion of Mechagnomes is what really hurts your notion. Without them, you have Gnomes and Goblins. Easy Peasy. But with them existing, you need to have another Horde race, which necessitates the mental gymnastics needed to include Vulpera, and in turn leaves out Dwarves. Which, according to the narrative that Blizzard built, is silly. Ultimately trying to restrict the class this much has too many strikes against it to be viable.

I would definitely take the bet that far more people would prefer a technology class based around mechs than a technology class that amounts to Hunters with Gizmos. Mechs simply add too many new and interesting mechanics to class gameplay to be ignored.

I honestly have no idea. My inclination would be to say that more people are turned off by the idea of rampant mechs in WoW, but I play on RP realms, so it may be my sample that is off base.

[Unbelievable]

Well the WC3 Tinker was an inventor who created incredible machines, so that aspect is part of the lore. Further, characters like Mekkatorque and Blackfuse are very powerful inventors who also create very powerful machines. Blackfuse for example repurposed titan technology and merged goblin tech with Legion tech to create the Iron Reaver. I think Blizzard pretty much reinforced this concept by giving Mekkatorque the Spark Reactor.

That's being a bit generous towards engineering. Engineering also makes enchanters, and it makes equipment. It's bombs and offensive gizmos are secondary, and it can only build two "mechs". One mech is a mount, and the other is an invalid novelty that only works in a specified area and is a cumbersome nightmare to build. The implied power of engineering's weaponry is that of a one-off or a toy due to their heavy limitations.

If we had a class who could only use engineering items against a Tinker, it would also be a complete bloodbath.

That's how much more powerful a Tinker is against a profession engineer.

No, but the class should be an approximation of the lore figure it's emulating. I certainly don't expect to be able to do all the stuff Blackfuse or Mekkatorque could do in the specific raid appearances, but I certainly expect the ability to be able to pilot a mech and use advanced weaponry in a standard class rotation with talents and passives that enhance my abilities.

I don't view that as a barrier. Blizzard could simply make it that way with a stroke of a pen. Keeping it Goblins and Gnomes with their allied races is truly the most elegant solution. I know some wouldn't like it, but it's really for the best.

I would definitely take the bet that far more people would prefer a technology class based around mechs than a technology class that amounts to Hunters with Gizmos. Mechs simply add too many new and interesting mechanics to class gameplay to be ignored.

Mekkatorque? i don't know how an unofficial Tinker with unofficial Tinker abilities have anything to do with the conversation.
I though he was just a Warrior

Have you considered that if the Engineering items were as powerful as you want them to be, it wouldn't have been a profession? You can't compare them damage-wise but, you can compare them lore-wise.

Oh? so, suddenly, a Tinker without a mech is a Hunter with Gizmos? That, pretty much, destroys what you have been arguing for 150 pages and confirms what me and lelenia were saying.

I didn't give Mekkatorque the Spark Reactor and a Mech suit, Blizzard did.



Right, because there's absolutely NO way that Blizzard could make Vulpera Tinkers despite it being advantageous to both the class and to Blizzard.

The hilarious thing about this is that Blizzard doesn't even have to change anything, they could just make them Tinkers with no additions to the lore. No one would care one bit, and players would love it.



I guess you missed the conversation in this thread earlier. We were actually talking about Tinker gameplay and everyone brought up mechs and Claw Packs (which are half mechs). Honestly Jellmoo is the first person I've seen on here who doesn't like the mech idea. This video here by Tailisen talks about the mech-based Tinker;



So yeah I'm hardly the only person liking the idea of the mech Tinker.



So are you saying it would be impossible for Blizzard to create a medical-based mech for a Tinker healing spec?



I know, you're both pushing the same head canon nonsense.



That are launched from a mech.



Except the Tinker did have permanent mech form in WC3 and HotS.



Dark Iron Dwarves are also mechanically inclined (Mole Machines and their leader being an inventor) so if you're making baseline Dwarves Tinkers, then Dark Irons should be as well. So now both Orc Races need to be Tinkers as well. But guess what? You still have a racial disparity between Horde and Alliance, so where you going to get the additional Horde race? Forsaken? Well what about Humans? If undead zombies can build and pilot mechs, why not humans? Okay, but what about Worgen? They're still human intellect-wise, and their city is actually more advanced than Stormwind, so why can't they be Tinkers? What about Draenei? If LF Draenei can be Tinkers why can't the Draenei? Now you need 4 more Horde races to keep up.

See how ridiculous this gets?

Meanwhile all you have to do is make Vulpera Tinkers and we're done.




You do know that Blizzard is highly influenced by other games right?





Lore-based.

It doesn't matter who gave Mekkatorque the spark reactor. You are having a hard time grasping that Blizzard uses pop-culture references in their game.

No one said they couldn't. If they want to, they can make a Tauren a Tinker. What we're asking you is you give lore reasons for Vulpera Tinkers, that overrides other Horde races. And, currently, you don't have any.

Of course they would have to change something in lore to explain their sudden expertise in technology. And saying everybody would love it is, again, your egocentrism talking.

You missed the whole point of my argument. I wasn't saying no mechs. As you put it yourself, "mechs and claw-packs". You want to dump the claw pack to have a permanent mech. That's what i'm against.

Nothing is impossible for Blizzard. What i was saying is that they don't, usually, follow your wishlist when creating a new class but, their own established lore. So, when you say a medic mech, it is possible, but it isn't coming from Blizzard but, from you.

That are launched from a mech? i guess you missed the part where mech-less Tinkers use explosives, devices and robots.

Robo-Goblin
Cooldown: 40 seconds
Activate to become Unstoppable for 1.5 seconds.
Passive: Basic Attacks deal 90 bonus damage over 5 seconds, stacking up to 3 times.

Once again, you're making the assumption that main races' classes extend to their allied races, even though i showed you it was wrong in several cases. Currently, Dark Irons are not listed as Tinkers, unlike Dwarves. Could they be? yes. But, it doesn't, automatically, makes them one because the Dwarves are.

Your stupid-ass logic about this chain reaction does not make sense, in the slightest. Humans are not technologically-inclined because of Forsaken, and Worgen are not technologically-inclined because of Humans. You can see how Human Paladinism didn't extend to Forsaken, Worgen and Kul tirans; Worgen and Kul Tiran Druidism didn't extend to Stormwind Humans and Forsaken; and Kul Tiran Shamanism didn't extend to Stormwind Humans, Worgens or Forsaken. Heck, even Demon Hunters elven-exclusivity didn't extend to the Night elf and Blood elf allied races - the Nightborne and Void elves. So, your logic is flawed from the beginning.
As a matter of fact, your Vulpera argument is, exactly, what would cause such a chain reaction because if a nomadic tribe of furry primitives can be Tinkers, then so do Tauren and Worgen.

If Blizzard is highly influenced by other games then, a war-based race having a technology class is on the table, as well. You just refuted your own argument.

Lore-based? all i see is a Gnome Warrior in that picture. wouldn't you say so, since he is an unofficial Tinker with unofficial Tinker abilities?
You can't use Mekkatorque, one moment, as a counter measure argument, saying his abilities don't count, and the other moment as a proof of Tinkers using permanent mechs.
That just shows how manipulative you are.

Posting a picture of an NPC in a permanent mech is like posting Illidan in a permanent Metamorphosis state:


If you're arguing for a permanent mech, it's gotta have a downside. Otherwise, the claw pack and the standard form are rendered, completely, useless. It's gotta have its disadvantages, not just advantages.

[Teriz]

Sure, but we don't play as NPCs, we play as a member of a class that is a representation of some of what they do. For example, Blizzard could just as easily say "We're introducing Tinkers! Each Tinker is a member of a school depending on faction: either Mekkatorque's Mechanist Academy or Gazlowe's Gearworks Emporium. There they learn how to build their first mech, which as they gain experience, they will upgrade throughout their Tinkering career.

There's a lot of room in the "how" a Tinker class could be made playable. They could be genius inventors, hotshot pilots, scrapmaster upgraders, tech based adventurers, etc... The best solution is probably to allow multiple archetypes to be fulfilled by the class.

I actually have no problem with the "academy" idea, though I think I more likely scenario would be similar to a Druid where you start in caster mode until you learn your first form, which would be around level 5 or so. That could easily be implemented as your trainer shows up (or some holographic image of Gazlowe or Mekkatorque) and informs you that its time to construct your mech. Conversely, your first 5 levels could be you gathering the necessary materials to construct your first mech (lvl 5) which is rather crude, and then when you reach level 10 you construct your actual mech.

Heck, I'd be down for them to parody the first Iron Man film. Like you're a famous Gnome or Goblin inventor and then you get kidnapped by troggs or trolls, and you escape them by building your first mech.

With that said, hot shot pilot doesn't really fit the Tinker concept. The Tinker is an inventor first a foremost. He's like Tony Stark, not Maverick from Top Gun.

But that isn't necessarily true. The purpose of the class could just as easily be to use "machines that are so advanced that they rival magic and physical power". You can be Iron Man without being Tony Stark, for example.

Again, invention is kind of the core aspect of the Tinker concept. They're inventors, first and foremost.

Sure, but that isn't what I'm saying. I'm saying that they do the same thing. Build bombs, weapons, guns, weapons, mechs, etc... It's not efficacy I'm talking about. Engineering is largely a joke of a profession these days. But the point is that every race can do it. They can already build guns, and bombs, and turrets, and gizmos, and mechs. It's a weird step to say that they can all do that, but only these select races can use this tech in an efficient way to fight.

Yeah I disagree with that assessment. Just because the hero of the game (you) can do it, doesn't mean that everyone can do it. In other words, just because you're a Tauren priest engaged in engineering doesn't mean the entire Tauren race is involved in Goblin/Gnome engineering, or even that the entire Tauren race could become involved in Goblin/Gnome engineering.

There's also a difference of purpose. Why are you building bombs, weapons, guns, etc. in engineering? Are you building those weapons for personal use, or are you building those devices to sell to others? A Tinker doesn't sell their devices. Whatever a Tinker builds is for personal use. A warrior dabbling in engineering is building items and knick-knacks to primarily sell them other players. You could also argue that does devices are sellable because they're more simple to use than a Tinker's devices. This is head canon I know, but it does make sense when you think about it.

Absolutely, but what that representation is would obviously be open to interpretation. For example, we see ample examples of tech use outside of mechs as well, which I think would be equally important to represent in such a class. Archetypes need to include more than a single thing, generally, to be a base class. Now, if the decision was made to make Tinkers a HEro class, that might lead to a much narrower vision of class, but as a base class, it should be able to allow for multiple archetypes within,

Yeah, but here's the thing; Classes themselves tend to be rather narrow, and technology is an extremely broad concept. I mean just consider a technology class in WoW and could have 5-10 class ideas that don't override each other. However, if you REALLY look at the WoW expansion classes, they aren't very broad at all. They actually stick rather close to their WC3 roots. The Death Knight is essentially an armored horseman with a broad sword just like he was in WC3. The Monk class is pretty much the Pandaren Brewmaster to the point where all other Monk types were ignored. Demon Hunters are essentially the half-demon elves that Illidan was, despite people saying that human and orc DHs make sense, etc.

When we look at the Tinker from WC3 what do we see? We see a Goblin using a large mechanical device to fight with. Later that machine can turn into a mech that the Goblin can drive around in, and he can switch in and out of that form at will. When you consider that, and the various mechs we see Goblins and Gnomes using in WoW today, it looks pretty clear where this is heading.

I mean, that's kind of a terrible argument. Of course Blizzard can do whatever they want. That doesn't mean that it's a good idea, that fans will like it, or that it jives with the story they've been telling thus far. They tend to get crapped on when they bend lore to fit their new narrative, and this would be a big one, one that actually has implications to the players directly.

It almost feels like the inclusion of Mechagnomes is what really hurts your notion. Without them, you have Gnomes and Goblins. Easy Peasy. But with them existing, you need to have another Horde race, which necessitates the mental gymnastics needed to include Vulpera, and in turn leaves out Dwarves. Which, according to the narrative that Blizzard built, is silly. Ultimately trying to restrict the class this much has too many strikes against it to be viable.

Again, I don't find the inclusion of Vulpera to be a huge lore-breaking situation. If Blizzard incorporates them as a Tinker race option, and give them two sentences worth of lore justifying it, I could see most players just shrugging their shoulders and not caring at all.

I honestly have no idea. My inclination would be to say that more people are turned off by the idea of rampant mechs in WoW, but I play on RP realms, so it may be my sample that is off base.

Well that's the thing; If you limit this to Goblins, Gnomes and their allied races, it won't be rampant, it'd just be something that those quirky races do. You're a small race with a lot of brains but not a lot of strength, so you're going to build a mech to compensate.

I mean, in all seriousness would a Goblin stand toe-to-toe with a Tauren and beat them in a physical contest? Never. However a Goblin in a mech;



Has a fighting chance.