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

[Teriz]

[
https://www.wowhead.com/item=132531/...ed-combat-mode

Not viable.

Aren't 160 pages enough?
This is kinda getting repetitive....

No one is forcing you to post in this thread.

[jellmoo]

I would actually disagree. Their goggle helmets are easily the most sought after form of equipment, with the non-engineering ones selling for very high amounts.

That's a symptom of the problem though. Professions have changed from being viable for gearing your character and creating things that you'd actually use. Engineering was actually useful for the things you'd make at one time. Now it's used to make vanity items and mounts to sell on the AH.

Actually I would disagree again. The bomb that hit you from the Tinker would be far more powerful than the engineering bomb because it was launched, not tossed like a baseball. In addition, the two don’t do the same thing. Tinkers don’t build bombs and rockets, they build the machine that builds the bombs and rockets.

Considering that the Tinker class doesn't exist yet, we don't know that. A Tinker, for example, might very well be making bombs that they chuck at enemies. Hell, I certainly hope they do because that's a part of the class fantasy I want to see. You're making some really big assumptions here.

I would also disagree with the notion that engineers “build” their mech. They follow schematics to build a rough copy of another engineers mech. Meanwhile, the Tinker builds their own mech without schematics. So yeah, there’s definitely a difference.

That's also a made up piece of headcanon though. Again, we could have a school of Engineers, say, Mekkatorque's Machinarium, where everything they learn is derived from Gelbin. They are making a mech from his specs and schematics. Or we could have Tinkers have an entire crew of people that help build their mechs. Or they could find their mechs in the ruin of a Titan factory. We don't know.

Uh, the entire point of this were class concepts from WC3.

But they aren't because they aren't relevant to what I'm saying. I don't care about units from WC3 as I don't believe that anyone at Blizzard is seriously thinking "we absolutely need to use WC3 as a basis for class design". They may, they may not. I just don't think it terribly matters. What I do think matters is the creation of archetypes that let players fulfill their class fantasy.

Again, the Shaman has multiple hero and unit concepts from WC3 in its class concept. The Monk only has one, and that one concept is a Pandaren martial artist who brews.

I mean, that's because there was a playable faction in WC3 based on a mishmash of Shamanstic cultures. So yeah, they combined a bunch of the units into one and made a class broad enough to cover player concepts across them. There was no Eastern themed faction in WC3. Just the one unit. That's it. If they had made an entire Pandaren faction, we would almost certainly have gotten a class that picked bits and pieces from whatever units it had. Because they were making a class broad enough to fulfill multiple archetypes. Archetypes both inside (represented by those units) and outside of the Warcraft world.

Tea can’t be a tasty beverage?

Dude, please just concede the point. Clearly nothing in the description of the beer loving, spirits drinking, ale brewing Pandaren Brewmaster has to do with a cup of tea. You're digging your heels in on the absolute weirdest point here.

[Teriz]

That's a symptom of the problem though. Professions have changed from being viable for gearing your character and creating things that you'd actually use. Engineering was actually useful for the things you'd make at one time. Now it's used to make vanity items and mounts to sell on the AH.

Vanity items and mounts aren't useful things? Isn't the goal of professions to make items that will maximize profit? I know the Sky Golem still fetches a pretty penny, and again, if you're producing the goggles you're not hurting in terms of money making.

Considering that the Tinker class doesn't exist yet, we don't know that. A Tinker, for example, might very well be making bombs that they chuck at enemies. Hell, I certainly hope they do because that's a part of the class fantasy I want to see. You're making some really big assumptions here.

Except they wouldn't. Every iteration of the Tinker we've seen outside of WoW has utilized some form of mech technology. We also see prominent Gnomes and Goblins in mechs as well, so its pretty much a certainty that a mech will be employed in the class. There's a high chance that a mech will be employed in every single spec.

When we consider that reality, yeah you're going to have a class piloting a machine they built that mass produces explosives and launches those explosives at enemies. Unlike the profession where they have to scavenge for materials, construct an inferior explosive, and toss it at their target.

That's also a made up piece of headcanon though. Again, we could have a school of Engineers, say, Mekkatorque's Machinarium, where everything they learn is derived from Gelbin. They are making a mech from his specs and schematics. Or we could have Tinkers have an entire crew of people that help build their mechs. Or they could find their mechs in the ruin of a Titan factory. We don't know.

I honestly wouldn't have an issue with any of those scenarios taking place. However, the most likely one is that when the Tinker reaches level 5, they have some quest where they're ordered to build their mech, and they simply do it from memory and genius.

But they aren't because they aren't relevant to what I'm saying. I don't care about units from WC3 as I don't believe that anyone at Blizzard is seriously thinking "we absolutely need to use WC3 as a basis for class design". They may, they may not. I just don't think it terribly matters. What I do think matters is the creation of archetypes that let players fulfill their class fantasy.

It's not a "if they may", it's exactly what they do. WC3 heroes aren't just remnants of an old Blizzard game, they're also franchise characters. Consider that the Death Knight is tied to Arthas/Lich King. Monks are tied to Chen Stormstout. Demon Hunters are tied to Illidan. Where else do you see those characters?

In Heroes of the Storm.

In Hearthstone.

In Blizzard promotional material.

They're franchise characters. Now, what would be the benefit of tying your new WoW class to one of your franchise characters?

What's the franchise character for Tinkers? Gazlowe.

I mean, that's because there was a playable faction in WC3 based on a mishmash of Shamanstic cultures. So yeah, they combined a bunch of the units into one and made a class broad enough to cover player concepts across them. There was no Eastern themed faction in WC3. Just the one unit. That's it. If they had made an entire Pandaren faction, we would almost certainly have gotten a class that picked bits and pieces from whatever units it had. Because they were making a class broad enough to fulfill multiple archetypes. Archetypes both inside (represented by those units) and outside of the Warcraft world.

Paladins were part of the Human faction with elves and dwarves. They still only pulled from the Paladin hero for the WoW class.

Dude, please just concede the point. Clearly nothing in the description of the beer loving, spirits drinking, ale brewing Pandaren Brewmaster has to do with a cup of tea. You're digging your heels in on the absolute weirdest point here.

I'm simply pointing out that it's bizarre that you simply won't admit that people brew tea, so it fits the overall brewmaster theme.

[jellmoo]

Vanity items and mounts aren't useful things? Isn't the goal of professions to make items that will maximize profit? I know the Sky Golem still fetches a pretty penny, and again, if you're producing the goggles you're not hurting in terms of money making.

Because back in the day, you would actively use what you crafted. Sure, you'd sell stuff on the AH, but it wasn't the only reason to craft stuff. Engineering items were actually useful. They were regularly used in both PVE and PVP. Now? Not so much. Largely because the system itself hasn't been kept up or updated as the game as progressed.

Except they wouldn't. Every iteration of the Tinker we've seen outside of WoW has utilized some form of mech technology. We also see prominent Gnomes and Goblins in mechs as well, so its pretty much a certainty that a mech will be employed in the class. There's a high chance that a mech will be employed in every single spec.

Again, that's your assumption. Prior to WotLK we could have assumed that a Death Knight would be fighting from horseback. They don't. There's no "high probbility" that every spec flies around in a mech. They might. They might not. A mech might be included in a single spec. It might be a form. It might be a cooldown. It might be something akin to the old Metamorphosis ability from Warlocks. It might not be present at all. Everything is supposition here. My thought would be that it's amazingly unlikely that every spec would have a mech. I could absolutely be wrong, but I just don't see it happening.

When we consider that reality, yeah you're going to have a class piloting a machine they built that mass produces explosives and launches those explosives at enemies. Unlike the profession where they have to scavenge for materials, construct an inferior explosive, and toss it at their target.

Again, supposition. You are assuming a bunch of stuff that we don't know. You may absolutely be right. But you may also be completely wrong. As it stabds, it's very much up to Blizzard to sort out a bunch of stuff if they ever decide to implement a Tinker class. The absolute least of which is how they want to make the class function in a world where Engineering is already a profession.

I honestly wouldn't have an issue with any of those scenarios taking place. However, the most likely one is that when the Tinker reaches level 5, they have some quest where they're ordered to build their mech, and they simply do it from memory and genius.

I would think it's just as likely that they would have to acquire the plans and build the mech from that.

It's not a "if they may", it's exactly what they do. WC3 heroes aren't just remnants of an old Blizzard game, they're also franchise characters. Consider that the Death Knight is tied to Arthas/Lich King. Monks are tied to Chen Stormstout. Demon Hunters are tied to Illidan. Where else do you see those characters?

In Heroes of the Storm.

In Hearthstone.

In Blizzard promotional material.

They're franchise characters. Now, what would be the benefit of tying your new WoW class to one of your franchise characters?

What's the franchise character for Tinkers? Gazlowe.

And none of the Franchise characters are exactly what we got in terms of our classes. Death Knights are not the all powerful Arthas. Monks are clearly way more than the very limited Chen Stormstout. Demon Hunters aren't permanent demons like Illidan is.

Why would Tinkers have to be virtually identical to Gazlowe? There is plenty of room to open the class up to interpretation that can take inspiration from a character, without needing to do a 1 to 1 recreation.

Paladins were part of the Human faction with elves and dwarves. They still only pulled from the Paladin hero for the WoW class.

Sure. And that's fine. Blizzard extrapolated a class purely from that unit, having to create a DPS spec in the process. They could have taken a bunch of different approaches, but that's the one they chose. Because at the end of the day, there's no set rule they have to follow about how they decide to build their classes in WoW.

I'm simply pointing out that it's bizarre that you simply won't admit that people brew tea, so it fits the overall brewmaster theme.

Because in something that is all about the making, drinking and enjoyment of beer and alcohol, brewing tea is clearly not a part of that fantasy and I'm astonished that I even need to spell this out. Grabbing onto the word brew and using it as proof of connection between the brewing of booze, a staple of the Drunken Master archetype the unit is quite clearly based on, and the brewing of tea which is not, is grasping at straws to avoid conceding the point that these things are in fact, not connected.

[Ielenia]

Actually I would disagree again. The bomb that hit you from the Tinker would be far more powerful than the engineering bomb because it was launched, not tossed like a baseball.

Who said the engineer would "tossing it like a baseball" and not launching it through a device? And who said the tinker wouldn't be throwing said bomb "like a baseball"?

That's right: it's your headcanon. It's amazing how you dismiss other people's arguments as headcanon, but you not only have no problem whatsoever in engaging in headcanon of your own, but worse: also stating it as fact.

I would also disagree with the notion that engineers “build” their mech.

Following schematics or not is irrelevant. They do build their mechs. That's a fact. It's amazing how you insist on semantics, trying to redefine words like "build", here.

Meanwhile, the Tinker builds their own mech without schematics.

Pure headcanon with zero basis in lore.

So yeah, there’s definitely a difference.

In your head only.

[Teriz]

Because back in the day, you would actively use what you crafted. Sure, you'd sell stuff on the AH, but it wasn't the only reason to craft stuff. Engineering items were actually useful. They were regularly used in both PVE and PVP. Now? Not so much. Largely because the system itself hasn't been kept up or updated as the game as progressed.

That was changed because the system caused imbalance within the profession system. If you have a profession that can make useable weapons, then everyone is going to spec into that profession to be competitive, and that's what happened. In WotLK you even had a situation where a profession bomb was mistuned and it lead to multiple raids abusing the bomb in order to clear content more quickly. Frankly professions are better off now than they were back then. Blizzard just needs to push the current profession system a bit further.

Interestingly, I believe a Tinker class could actually benefit a profession like engineering. They could create mech packs that allow Tinker players to customize their mechs and robot summons, they could make special armor sets for the character models, they could make decals or paint kits so that players make their mechs different colors or add logos, etc. Alchemists could create concoctions that would increase Tinker move speed, or resource regeneration, alter the color of their chemical weapons, etc. In turn, Tinker players could get a bonus to engineering and alchemy.

That's how you improve professions; Align them closer with the classes.

Again, that's your assumption. Prior to WotLK we could have assumed that a Death Knight would be fighting from horseback. They don't. There's no "high probbility" that every spec flies around in a mech. They might. They might not. A mech might be included in a single spec. It might be a form. It might be a cooldown. It might be something akin to the old Metamorphosis ability from Warlocks. It might not be present at all. Everything is supposition here. My thought would be that it's amazingly unlikely that every spec would have a mech. I could absolutely be wrong, but I just don't see it happening.

DK riding from horseback wasn't an ability. Farseer and Archmage also didn't get to permanently ride around on horseback.

On the hand, the Tinker mech form was the Tinker's ultimate ability. Every expansion class that has entered WoW has received all of its WC3 abilities translated into WoW. It stands to reason that the Tinker would follow suit.

Again, supposition. You are assuming a bunch of stuff that we don't know. You may absolutely be right. But you may also be completely wrong. As it stabds, it's very much up to Blizzard to sort out a bunch of stuff if they ever decide to implement a Tinker class. The absolute least of which is how they want to make the class function in a world where Engineering is already a profession.

If we've established that the Tinker will be piloting a mech, then obviously a mech isn't going to be throwing a bomb, it will be launching one. Both the Tinker from WC3 and Gazlowe from HotS launched bombs and missiles at their targets, they weren't tossing bombs like Super Mario;

https://fantendo.fandom.com/wiki/Bom...io_NSMBDIY.png

Or like Hunters for that matter.

I would think it's just as likely that they would have to acquire the plans and build the mech from that.

Perhaps, or it could just appear as an ability at level 5 with no explanation. Either way, they won't be building it the way engineers build it.

And none of the Franchise characters are exactly what we got in terms of our classes. Death Knights are not the all powerful Arthas. Monks are clearly way more than the very limited Chen Stormstout. Demon Hunters aren't permanent demons like Illidan is.

Why would Tinkers have to be virtually identical to Gazlowe? There is plenty of room to open the class up to interpretation that can take inspiration from a character, without needing to do a 1 to 1 recreation.

Nope, the classes are approximations of the lore character, and the lore character embodies the essence of the class. I never said anything about them being "identical", simply that Gazlowe will be used front and center as an example of a Tinker character, just like Arthas, Chen, and Illidan were used as examples of Death Knights, Monks, and Demon Hunters. In addition, Blizzard can use Gazlowe for advertising and merchandising like they did with the previous three lore characters.

Sure. And that's fine. Blizzard extrapolated a class purely from that unit, having to create a DPS spec in the process. They could have taken a bunch of different approaches, but that's the one they chose. Because at the end of the day, there's no set rule they have to follow about how they decide to build their classes in WoW.

I wouldn't say there's a set "rule" but it's quite clear that Blizzard has a way of building their WoW classes, and one way that is pretty obvious is that they're using WC3 Heroes and franchise characters as builders of their class system. When you really think about it it makes sense. WC3 heroes and major lore characters already have an established fan base, and people want to play as those heroes (or at least an approximation of them).

Because in something that is all about the making, drinking and enjoyment of beer and alcohol, brewing tea is clearly not a part of that fantasy and I'm astonished that I even need to spell this out. Grabbing onto the word brew and using it as proof of connection between the brewing of booze, a staple of the Drunken Master archetype the unit is quite clearly based on, and the brewing of tea which is not, is grasping at straws to avoid conceding the point that these things are in fact, not connected.

I wasn't grabbing onto the word "Brew". I was pointing out that in MoP and WoD Brewmasters, Windwalkers, and Mistweavers ALL had a brewing ability and all had spec-unique brews. These were concepts that came from the fact that the class was based on the Pandaren Brewmaster.

[razorpax]

Dragon slayer class:
Once the old gods were defeated Wrathion was concerned about the planets defense and decided to team up with the other flights to train a force that has the strength of the aspects and in doing so has discovered new troubles on the once lost dragon isles including a new clutch of protodrakes and the rumored return of the biggest threat the dragons faced...Galakrond. The rumors only strengthened by the missing remains in northrend

4 specs

Base abilities:
Dragon breath: breathe a 15yd cone dealing damage based on your spec generates 15 draconic fury
Wing blast: form wings if draconic magic and knock enemies in front of you back 15yds
Dragon claw: slash at a target dealing physical damage and leaving a DoT. Generates 10 draconic fury
Dragon scales: cover your body in scales reducing the damage you take by X%

Dragon force: 100 draconic energy. Empowers your abilities for 20s adding specific secondary abilities based on spec.

Specs:

Black dragon: tank. Generates fury if attacked while using a defensive.
Shield of the warder: 50 fury empowers your draconic scales to reduce damage by X% more dealing aoe damage when struck. If used during dragon force the duration and reduction is doubled.

Blue dragon: ranged dps. Replaces melee abilities with a ranged equivalent.

Spellweave: steals a beneficial magic effect from your target and spreads to up to 5 allies. Can target allies.

Mana surge: 30 fury. Deals damage and increases each consecutive use up to X%. When used during dragon force increases the max % damage bonus and reduces fury cost by 15

Green dragon: healer

Dreamers gift: restores resources to the allies within range

Nature’s roar: generates a large healing zone summoning dream copies of the player that copy the spells cast on injured allies. During dragon force the duration and amount of copies are doubled

Red dragon: melee dps

Sword horn: charges the enemy stunning and leaving aoe and a dot.

Roaring slash: 50 fury. Consumes all of your dots increasing damage for each one. During dragon force damage is increased and Deals AoE damage


Bronze: due to the disappearance of the bronze aspect the flight is too busy too offer extensive training but has allowed Chromie to train the slayers in the ability to warp time and reverse death

[jellmoo]

That was changed because the system caused imbalance within the profession system. If you have a profession that can make useable weapons, then everyone is going to spec into that profession to be competitive, and that's what happened. In WotLK you even had a situation where a profession bomb was mistuned and it lead to multiple raids abusing the bomb in order to clear content more quickly. Frankly professions are better off now than they were back then. Blizzard just needs to push the current profession system a bit further.

Gotta strongly disagree here. Professions are largely meaningless now, other than for gold making, and even then, the time and investment isn't always all that great depending on the server. Professions used to offer the player viable rewards for investing that time and energy. Some crafted weapons were among the best in the game. Some engineering items were vital either for raids or for PVP. Professions offered a viable path for players to invest in, and actually gain a measure of character power from. Look at all of the things you can make with Engineering now, and look how many of those things are utterly meaningless. That's a problem with the Profession system.

Interestingly, I believe a Tinker class could actually benefit a profession like engineering. They could create mech packs that allow Tinker players to customize their mechs and robot summons, they could make special armor sets for the character models, they could make decals or paint kits so that players make their mechs different colors or add logos, etc. Alchemists could create concoctions that would increase Tinker move speed, or resource regeneration, alter the color of their chemical weapons, etc. In turn, Tinker players could get a bonus to engineering and alchemy.

That's how you improve professions; Align them closer with the classes.

Wow, I really don't like that. A profession shouldn't feel mandatory to a class. Players should have at least *some* freedom when it comes to pairing a profession to what they play. A profession should ideally offer *something* to every class. Regardless, we have ventured entirely off topic. My fault, professions are a bit of a pet peeve of mine.

DK riding from horseback wasn't an ability. Farseer and Archmage also didn't get to permanently ride around on horseback.

On the hand, the Tinker mech form was the Tinker's ultimate ability. Every expansion class that has entered WoW has received all of its WC3 abilities translated into WoW. It stands to reason that the Tinker would follow suit.

Not to be trite, but who cares if it's an ability or not? To the guy that was dreaming about playing a mounted Death Knight since WC3 days, it doesn't matter in the least. We can't just dismiss it out of hand and say "well, it wasn't an actual ability, so your desire to fulfill that fantasy isn't valid".

If we've established that the Tinker will be piloting a mech,

Sorry to interrupt, but we haven't.

...then obviously a mech isn't going to be throwing a bomb, it will be launching one. Both the Tinker from WC3 and Gazlowe from HotS launched bombs and missiles at their targets, they weren't tossing bombs like Super Mario;

Let's assume that Tinkers do get a Mech though. Just for this scenario. Now imagine what they do from, say, levels 1 to 5, before they get their first mech.

Is it really a stretch to think that a Tinker might not be tossing a bomb at any enemy?

Perhaps, or it could just appear as an ability at level 5 with no explanation. Either way, they won't be building it the way engineers build it.

Absolute agreement. For a Tinker, it could absolutely just pop up in a spellbook, and next thing they're in a mech. And Engineers are obviously doing it very differently, investing a ton of in game time and resources in order to create their mechs. No argument there.

But that's from a mechanics level. From an in game perspective, what does this look like? What does Farmer Joe think when he sees two mechs roll up to his farm, and from each one springs a Gnome with a wrench to do whatever Gnomish repairs they do. One is a Tinker and one is an Engineer. From the perspective of the inhabitants of Azeroth, what's the difference between the two?

Nope, the classes are approximations of the lore character, and the lore character embodies the essence of the class. I never said anything about them being "identical", simply that Gazlowe will be used front and center as an example of a Tinker character, just like Arthas, Chen, and Illidan were used as examples of Death Knights, Monks, and Demon Hunters. In addition, Blizzard can use Gazlowe for advertising and merchandising like they did with the previous three lore characters.

Then here's the thing that we are disagreeing on: In your opinion, the essence of Gazlowe is a dude in a mech. For my money, the essence of Gazlowe is a clever guy that can improvise pieces of tech that handle a massive variety of situations. Could it include a mech? Sure. Maybe. Does it need to? Nah. No more than Demon Hunters needed to be in Demon Form all the time.

(side note: I would be incredibly surprised to see Gazlowe used in any wide scale merchandising or advertising. Like, super surprised.

I wouldn't say there's a set "rule" but it's quite clear that Blizzard has a way of building their WoW classes, and one way that is pretty obvious is that they're using WC3 Heroes and franchise characters as builders of their class system. When you really think about it it makes sense. WC3 heroes and major lore characters already have an established fan base, and people want to play as those heroes (or at least an approximation of them).

The thing is, I think this is an example of the human brain finding patterns and running with them. I mean, the team that designed and built the core classes is not the same as the one that built the Death Knight, which is not the same as the one that built the Monk, which is not the same as the one that built the Demon Hunter, which won't be the same as whatever the next class built is. WC3 absolutely has fans, no doubt. But that fanbase has been thoroughly eclipsed by people who are fans of WoW. People that probably never touched WC3. And WoW has a longer and richer history than all of the RTS titles combined.

And it absolutely makes a ton of sense that WoW classes we're heavily, heavily influenced by WC3. But, I think that a key difference we're running into is that they just don't need to do that anymore. The world building is done. The core of the game is there. They can still absolutely go back to the well and take inspiration from WC3. For sure. But they really don't have to at this point. WoW is way bigger now.

I wasn't grabbing onto the word "Brew". I was pointing out that in MoP and WoD Brewmasters, Windwalkers, and Mistweavers ALL had a brewing ability and all had spec-unique brews. These were concepts that came from the fact that the class was based on the Pandaren Brewmaster.

Go to bar and ask for a brew. Are you going to get a cup of tea or a beer? Context matters. In the context of the Pandaren Brewmaster, that brews beer, and drinks spirits, and rolls around with ale, and spits out fiery alcohol and whose entire write up is references to drinking beer, the concept of brewing a cup of tea is just not even remotely tied to it. If the ability was "brew mana beer" and the writeup for the Mistweaver made even a passign reference to brewing, or alcholo, or beer, at all, you wwould have a point. But it's not called, and those references aren't there. Largely because the Mistweaver spec is not based on the Drunken Master archetype, nor does it take anything from the Panadren Brewmaster unit from WC3.

[zantheus1993]

Dragon slayer class:
Once the old gods were defeated Wrathion was concerned about the planets defense and decided to team up with the other flights to train a force that has the strength of the aspects and in doing so has discovered new troubles on the once lost dragon isles including a new clutch of protodrakes and the rumored return of the biggest threat the dragons faced...Galakrond. The rumors only strengthened by the missing remains in northrend

4 specs

Base abilities:
Dragon breath: breathe a 15yd cone dealing damage based on your spec generates 15 draconic fury
Wing blast: form wings if draconic magic and knock enemies in front of you back 15yds
Dragon claw: slash at a target dealing physical damage and leaving a DoT. Generates 10 draconic fury
Dragon scales: cover your body in scales reducing the damage you take by X%

Dragon force: 100 draconic energy. Empowers your abilities for 20s adding specific secondary abilities based on spec.

Specs:

Black dragon: tank. Generates fury if attacked while using a defensive.
Shield of the warder: 50 fury empowers your draconic scales to reduce damage by X% more dealing aoe damage when struck. If used during dragon force the duration and reduction is doubled.

Blue dragon: ranged dps. Replaces melee abilities with a ranged equivalent.

Spellweave: steals a beneficial magic effect from your target and spreads to up to 5 allies. Can target allies.

Mana surge: 30 fury. Deals damage and increases each consecutive use up to X%. When used during dragon force increases the max % damage bonus and reduces fury cost by 15

Green dragon: healer

Dreamers gift: restores resources to the allies within range

Nature’s roar: generates a large healing zone summoning dream copies of the player that copy the spells cast on injured allies. During dragon force the duration and amount of copies are doubled

Red dragon: melee dps

Sword horn: charges the enemy stunning and leaving aoe and a dot.

Roaring slash: 50 fury. Consumes all of your dots increasing damage for each one. During dragon force damage is increased and Deals AoE damage


Bronze: due to the disappearance of the bronze aspect the flight is too busy too offer extensive training but has allowed Chromie to train the slayers in the ability to warp time and reverse death

my hero
also another time warp and battle rez would be legit

[Teriz]

Not to be trite, but who cares if it's an ability or not? To the guy that was dreaming about playing a mounted Death Knight since WC3 days, it doesn't matter in the least. We can't just dismiss it out of hand and say "well, it wasn't an actual ability, so your desire to fulfill that fantasy isn't valid".

Obviously Blizzard cared, which is why Mages and Shaman also didn't get that attribute. So when DKs entered WoW in WotLK the precedent had been set.

Honestly I have yet to hear many complain about the DK not being able to be mounted at all times.

Sorry to interrupt, but we haven't.

We have. Again look at the WC3, HotS, and TTRPG character. It is a consistent theme utilized over and over again. Further, the precedent set by previous class implementations shows that Blizzard brings in the expansion classes rather close to their WC3 concept. So while the DK didn't get to be mounted at all times (because it wasn't an ability), it still got the undead horse. It also got ALL of its WC3 abilities. Once again, one of the Tinker's WC3 abilities is permanent mech form.

Let's assume that Tinkers do get a Mech though. Just for this scenario. Now imagine what they do from, say, levels 1 to 5, before they get their first mech.

Is it really a stretch to think that a Tinker might not be tossing a bomb at any enemy?

No, because the Tinker's bombs come from their mechs. Further if they have a permanent mech form, a bomb toss from their "caster" mode wouldn't make much sense. Not saying it's out of the realm of possibility, but I see the caster mode having more laser and shielding abilities than explosive abilities.

Absolute agreement. For a Tinker, it could absolutely just pop up in a spellbook, and next thing they're in a mech. And Engineers are obviously doing it very differently, investing a ton of in game time and resources in order to create their mechs. No argument there.

But that's from a mechanics level. From an in game perspective, what does this look like? What does Farmer Joe think when he sees two mechs roll up to his farm, and from each one springs a Gnome with a wrench to do whatever Gnomish repairs they do. One is a Tinker and one is an Engineer. From the perspective of the inhabitants of Azeroth, what's the difference between the two?

Well if we're talking about Reeves, he isn't going to see it because you can't summon Reeves outside of the broken isles. If its the Sky Golem, the farmer would see a Janky mess with sparks popping out of it, and the overall machine looking like it was going to fall apart. A Tinker's mech should be more like Mekkatorque's, where there is no jankiness, no screws popping out, and the machine looking like it was built by a skilled engineer instead of a hobbyist.

Then here's the thing that we are disagreeing on: In your opinion, the essence of Gazlowe is a dude in a mech. For my money, the essence of Gazlowe is a clever guy that can improvise pieces of tech that handle a massive variety of situations. Could it include a mech? Sure. Maybe. Does it need to? Nah. No more than Demon Hunters needed to be in Demon Form all the time.

(side note: I would be incredibly surprised to see Gazlowe used in any wide scale merchandising or advertising. Like, super surprised.

Well you're thinking of the character in of itself. I'm talking about Gazlowe's association with the Tinker. When he's associated with the Tinker, he gets shown with the "half" mech he had from HotS. He also has his own Goblin Shredder in WoW. My overall point here is simply that if Blizzard introduces the Tinker class, Gazlowe is going to be the lore figure attached to it. Now, how much Blizzard pushes that remains to be seen. I could definitely see a Gazlowe Tinker statue made, and some promotional art for whatever expansion the Tinker releases in.

We also shouldn't discount Blizzard's art team, who are amazing at what they do.

The thing is, I think this is an example of the human brain finding patterns and running with them. I mean, the team that designed and built the core classes is not the same as the one that built the Death Knight, which is not the same as the one that built the Monk, which is not the same as the one that built the Demon Hunter, which won't be the same as whatever the next class built is. WC3 absolutely has fans, no doubt. But that fanbase has been thoroughly eclipsed by people who are fans of WoW. People that probably never touched WC3. And WoW has a longer and richer history than all of the RTS titles combined.

And it absolutely makes a ton of sense that WoW classes we're heavily, heavily influenced by WC3. But, I think that a key difference we're running into is that they just don't need to do that anymore. The world building is done. The core of the game is there. They can still absolutely go back to the well and take inspiration from WC3. For sure. But they really don't have to at this point. WoW is way bigger now.

Well you're looking at it as something that Blizzard doesn't need anymore. Blizzard more than likely views it as a gold mine they can keep mining until the resource runs dry. I mean consider what we have with the Tinker; We have the general design. We have over a dozen abilities. We have a general structure of a three spec class. You could design this class in your sleep, because very little needs to be done to make it a "Warcraft concept". It's been a Warcraft concept for years now, and it has no overlapping abilities with the existing class lineup. You can even attach it to a known character. I mean, it's a no brainer.

I mean at this point, why would you stop using a winning formula? Especially when you have another candidate from the same pedigree ready to drop whenever you're ready to do so?

[razorpax]

my hero
also another time warp and battle rez would be legit

With m+ the utility is very useful

[Unbelievable]

Not viable.



No one is forcing you to post in this thread.

That's why i said it's not satisfying to you.
The element of a Tinker using a mech is there.

I can see that you are getting tired of this, as well. Otherwise, you wouldn't have missed one of my replies to you and only quote one paragraph in a comment of mine.

When we consider that reality, yeah you're going to have a class piloting a machine they built that mass produces explosives and launches those explosives at enemies. Unlike the profession where they have to scavenge for materials, construct an inferior explosive, and toss it at their target.

Reduce, Reuse, Recycle
Cooldown: 0 seconds
Regenerate 1 Scrap every 4 seconds. Destroyed Rock-It! Turrets drop 1 Scrap, which can be picked up.

Superior Schematics
Rock-It! attack up to 2 additional enemies for 60% damage and have 50% increased Basic Attack range.

Overcharged Capacitors (crafting reagent)
Gazlowe gains 5% Spell Power for each active Rock-It! Turret, up to a maximum of 15%. Dealing Basic Attack damage extends the duration of Rock-It! Turrets by 1.25 seconds.

It's Raining Scrap
Reduce the Scrap cost of Turrets by 1. Regain 2 Scrap for every Scrap pickup.

*Cough* *Cough*

No, because the Tinker's bombs come from their mechs. Further if they have a permanent mech form, a bomb toss from their "caster" mode wouldn't make much sense. Not saying it's out of the realm of possibility, but I see the caster mode having more laser and shielding abilities than explosive abilities.

Well if we're talking about Reeves, he isn't going to see it because you can't summon Reeves outside of the broken isles. If its the Sky Golem, the farmer would see a Janky mess with sparks popping out of it, and the overall machine looking like it was going to fall apart. A Tinker's mech should be more like Mekkatorque's, where there is no jankiness, no screws popping out, and the machine looking like it was built by a skilled engineer instead of a hobbyist.

Are you telling me a Tinker can't use Rocket Cluster, Xplodium Charge and Grav-O-Bomb 3000 without a mech?

An Engineer is not a Hobbyist. Otherwise, Gazlowe would be categorized as a Hobbyist.
What you described above is the difference between Goblin tech and Gnomish tech, not an Engineer and a Tinker. While Goblins tech tends to fall apart and quiver, quite often, as can be seen with the Goblin shredder, Gnomish tech tends to be more professionally made. Applying this as the difference between an Engineer and a Tinker is manipulation at its best.

[zantheus1993]

With m+ the utility is very useful

i would totally reroll from monk if the class played like this lol

[Teriz]

That's why i said it's not satisfying to you.
The element of a Tinker using a mech is there.

No, it's not satisfying period. The Reeves Combat module requires weeks to acquire the materials to construct, and once you construct it, you can only use it on Broken Isles. However, even there you can't use Reeves for questing because the quest giver won't recognize you and you can't loot corpses. Also once the duration ends there's a 30 minute cool down. Finally you can't use it for dungeons or raids.

Supposedly there's some trick where you can use it for PvP, but yeah, not viable.

Unlike say, you being a Forsaken Hunter and having a skeletal dog and being a Nathanos-style Dark Ranger, or you being a Void Elf Hunter and being a Sylvanas style Dark Ranger. Those are perfectly viable options that people don't like because it isn't exactly the way they want it.

I can see that you are getting tired of this, as well. Otherwise, you wouldn't have missed one of my replies to you and only quote one paragraph in a comment of mine.

Your paragraphs say the exact same thing over and over again. I consider it trimming the fat.

Are you telling me a Tinker can't use Rocket Cluster, Xplodium Charge and Grav-O-Bomb 3000 without a mech?

That would be correct.

An Engineer is not a Hobbyist. Otherwise, Gazlowe would be categorized as a Hobbyist.
What you described above is the difference between Goblin tech and Gnomish tech, not an Engineer and a Tinker. While Goblins tech tends to fall apart and quiver, quite often, as can be seen with the Goblin shredder, Gnomish tech tends to be more professionally made. Applying this as the difference between an Engineer and a Tinker is manipulation at its best.

A warrior learning engineering is.

Also Blackfuse and Gazlowe's shredder move nothing like the sky golem. They move more like the Lightforged Warframe. The Sky Golem's animations are purposely skewed to give the appearance of a poorly built mech.

[Ielenia]

That would be correct.

Nice headcanon.

A warrior learning engineering is.

Nice headcanon. Oh wait. You're saying it's a fact? In that case, where's the official statement saying that the professions are just hobbies?

Not to mention that the simple name of the feature defeats your claim, since, y'know, since it's called PROFESSION and not "hobby".

[Teriz]

Nice headcanon.

In WC3 and HotS Cluster Rockets, Grav-O Bomb, and Xplodium charge launched from the mech.

Thus, it stands to reason that in class form, you also would only be able to use those abilities in mech form (or if the claw pack is used).

Nice headcanon. Oh wait. You're saying it's a fact? In that case, where's the official statement saying that the professions are just hobbies?

Considering that you can drop them at any point, have multiples of them at once, and don't even need to pick one up at all in the first place to progress in the game, it's safe to say that that's exactly what they are.

[Ielenia]

In WC3 and HotS Cluster Rockets, Grav-O Bomb, and Xplodium charge launched from the mech.

And those games are not WoW. In WC3 and HotS, my orc warrior can use mirror image and go invisible. In HotS, my paladin takes on a spiritual form once killed to continue helping my team.

None of that can be done in WoW.

Thus, it stands to reason...

... that what you have is headcanon.

Considering...

Stop right there. The name of the feature is "PROFESSION", not "hobby". You're literally trying to re-define words and terms to fit your narrative. Again.

[Teriz]

And those games are not WoW. In WC3 and HotS, my orc warrior can use mirror image and go invisible. In HotS, my paladin takes on a spiritual form once killed to continue helping my team.

That would be a Blademaster, not a Warrior. Also I have no idea what hero you're talking about. If you're talking about Uther, the Paladin was already in WoW long before HotS came out.

Stop right there. The name of the feature is "PROFESSION", not "hobby". You're literally trying to re-define words and terms to fit your narrative. Again.

Obviously profession means something different in WoW than it does in the real world. That wouldn't be the first time that's happened, along with you placing far more importance on professions than you should.

[Ielenia]

That would be a Blademaster, not a Warrior. Also I have no idea what hero you're talking about. If you're talking about Uther, the Paladin was already in WoW long before HotS came out.

The whole point is that the way HotS classes play out is different and therefore non-canon to the WoW game. Therefore you pointing at Gazlowe in HotS is meaningless.

Obviously profession means something different in WoW than it does in the real world.

The only "obvious" thing here is you attempting to redefine words and terms to fit your narrative.

[Teriz]

The whole point is that the way HotS classes play out is different and therefore non-canon to the WoW game. Therefore you pointing at Gazlowe in HotS is meaningless.

Except the way the HotS Tinker concept plays is similar to the way the WC3 Tinker hero plays, and we have both WC3 and HotS Tinker abilities in WoW. In addition, we have the precedent of how the previous expansion classes were implemented, which were all rather close to their WC3 and HotS iterations.

Thus calling it "meaningless" is purely your opinion, and an ignorant opinion at that.

The only "obvious" thing here is you attempting to redefine words and terms to fit your narrative.

I'm merely placing the word in its proper context in WoW.