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

[Triceron]

Mechagnomes aren't actually clockwork, they simply resemble it. They're actually sentient beings, as is the Clockwork Gnome pet.

So does this definition of Mechagnome make the Blingtron any more different from a Clockwork Goblin?

Yes, but in BFA those NPC abilities had level requirements just like class abilities.

NPCs aren't bound by player class limits.

Then what is he?

He's an NPC.

This is the only verified Clockwork Gnome in the game;

The Pandaren Monk was just a Pet and only verified Pandaren Monk in the game before MoP too. It wasn't the only type of Pandaren or Monk in the game.

There can be many types of Clockwork Gnome lol

[Teriz]

So does this definition of Mechagnome make the Blingtron any more different from a Clockwork Goblin?

The Blingtron is really nothing like the Clockwerk Goblin. One is a gift giving bot, the other is a wound up device that attacks and then explodes. One is manufactured by a hobbyist engineer, the other is manufactured by a miniaturized factory.

NPCs aren't bound by player class limits.

I'm pretty sure that NPC abilities don't have level requirements, only class abilities do. Those HotS abilities had level requirements.

He's an NPC.

He's also a lore character. So is he the Tinker vendor in WC3, or is he a Tinker adventurer in WoW?

You mean a Mechagnome Pet called a Clockwork Goblin, just like the Pandaren Monk was just a Pet and didn't really have any direct relation to the Monk class.

There can be many types of Clockwork Gnome lol

Well the Pandaren Monk was a hint towards the forthcoming Monk class. It even had a letter of introduction from Chen Stormstout.

However, we only have one example of a Clockwork Gnome, and now you're attempting to apply that definition to Blingtrons when that's not what they are.

[Ielenia]

So I take it you have no statement from Blizzard to back up what you're saying.

It's downright irritating how you blatantly ignore common sense when it suits you.

I'll stick to what Blizzard actually said about lore.

You mean you'll cherry-pick what Blizzard says about lore, right? Because, to this day, you still ignore Blizzard's statements about engineers being inventors in the lore. You still ignore that we have tinkers who are vendors and engineers who are adventurers. You still ignore that the lore has not demonstrated any real, tangible difference between the terms "engineer" and "tinker".

That's not what I'm saying at all. I'm saying you can't call the Warcraft material in those games "meaningless" because Blizzard pulls concepts and abilities from them.

I can because they are. It doesn't matter if abilities from the Heroes of the Storm game were used as inspiration for new abilities for the World of Warcraft game. Those abilities are not evidence that HotS is canon to WoW any more than Diablo and WoW having an "appearance pane" and "transmogrification" means the two game franchises are canon to each other.

Cool. Find a statement from Blizzard backing up your claim that they find the lore in that game questionable and thus it's not canon. If you can't, then it is, despite any lore issues you believe it has.

We have a statement from Blizzard stating that games developed by third parties are not canon to WoW. Warcraft 3: Reforged was developed by a third party. That game fits in both statements about canon and non-canon, which is why it's canonicity is arguably in question.

- - - Updated - - -

a hobbyist engineer

The name of the feature is called "profession", not "hobby", therefore the player character is a professional, not a hobbyist.

[Teriz]

It's downright irritating how you blatantly ignore common sense when it suits you.

You mean you'll cherry-pick what Blizzard says about lore, right? Because, to this day, you still ignore Blizzard's statements about engineers being inventors in the lore. You still ignore that we have tinkers who are vendors and engineers who are adventurers. You still ignore that the lore has not demonstrated any real, tangible difference between the terms "engineer" and "tinker".

You mean I choose Blizzard's statements over your head canon.

Yes, that would be correct.

Look at what you wrote above for example. Tinkers are a type of engineer, so when Blizzard "says" that engineers are inventors, which engineers are they talking about? Tinkers? profession engineers? The engineers who built the tram? This is what I'm talking about when I say that all you're using is semantics, because you're lumping the term "engineer" completely into the profession, when the game shows that the profession doesn't cover every type of technology, and profession engineers don't reach the same heights as the class-level engineers.

I can because they are. It doesn't matter if abilities from the Heroes of the Storm game were used as inspiration for new abilities for the World of Warcraft game. Those abilities are not evidence that HotS is canon to WoW any more than Diablo and WoW having an "appearance pane" and "transmogrification" means the two game franchises are canon to each other.

So when those abilities enter WoW from HotS are they canon at that point, or are they still not canon since they came from HotS?

We have a statement from Blizzard stating that games developed by third parties are not canon to WoW.

Where is that statement?

The name of the feature is called "profession", not "hobby", therefore the player character is a professional, not a hobbyist.

So if they're a professional why do they lose all of their professional knowledge when they drop it for another hobby?

[Triceron]

The Blingtron is really nothing like the Clockwerk Goblin.

They're actually quite similar. They're both constructs created for utility and combat.

I'm pretty sure that NPC abilities don't have level requirements, only class abilities do. Those HotS abilities had level requirements.

Sure, but HOTS doesn't translate its stats, talents, levels
or resource systems over to WoW either. Different games, different mechanics. That's why they work on NPCs, because they don't need to be scaled or balanced.

He's also a lore character. So is he the Tinker vendor in WC3, or is he a Tinker adventurer in WoW?

He's an NPC and questgiver, that's about it. Not quite sure why you consider him an adventurer. Because he is in some Island Expeditions? That just makes him an enemy NPC.

However, we only have one example of a Clockwork Gnome, and now you're attempting to apply that definition to Blingtrons when that's not what they are.

Would it make you happier if I called them Clockwerk Gnomes instead?

[Unbelievable]

One day, you'll post without typing a condescending novel. Today is not that day. Notice how it says "voodoo and loa". Wanna know why? Because they're two different fucking things.

Read the whole thing. They are interconnected. The Shadow Hunter is a master of voodoo and a loa class for a reason.

Comment when you, actually, have a clue about lore.

I never said he wasn't. I'm saying his abilities aren't Tinker abilities. They possibly could be, but as of now they're less likely than what we're seeing out of Island Expeditions.



That's not what I'm talking about. I'm saying that Pandaren could have easily been designed to be villains if Blizzard so desired. Instead they simply them our sidekicks on their own continent.



You brought up that they don't use a mech in WC3 and HotS. I'm pointing out that Claw Pack was a type of mech.



You need to play HotS. The Tinker level 10 ability Robo Goblin is a passive that boosts armor and damage. It ALSO has a CD ability which is what you're talking about.



Nope, that would be an expansion of the Tinker concept.



In WC3 the Tinker could toggle in and out of mech form like a Druid ability.

Also in WC3 the Demon Hunter's metamorphosis was a temporary cooldown.

Well, so are Lady Sena's. Yet, you treat her like she has official Tinker abilities.

Yes, like making a villainous Vulpera. If i post a picture of a Vulpera Death Knight, it wouldn't be ridiculous anymore? Your argument is a joke.

No, i never said that. You are the one who, suddenly, uses the claw pack and Robo-goblin interchangeably, when we both know you want to get rid of the claw pack and have a permanent robo-goblin.

You mean this?:
Mecha-Lord
Basic Attacks increase Gazlowe's Armor by 10 for 10 seconds, up to a maximum of 30, and deal 50% bonus damage to Stunned or Slowed enemies.

The talent doesn't even state you need to be in Robo-Goblin form.

The passive associated with the active ability:
Passive: Basic Attacks deal 90 bonus damage over 5 seconds, stacking up to 3 times.

Nope. That would be an utter violation of the Tinker concept which you, strictly, advocated for. Once again, you're changing your agenda to suit whatever the hell you want. The Tinker in both WC3 and HotS can use his abilities, regardless if he's in mech form or not.

Not shit, sherlock.
The point is that the Robo-Goblin was more in-line with the power of Metamorphosis in WC3, than the power of a Bear form. They clarified that these two are powerful, for a reason.

To be fair, there is very much a connection between voodoo and loa in the real world, so associating the two in game really isn't a stretch. Plus, in game we have practitioners of voodoo venerating loa and interacting with them regularly.

Exactly.
He just want to dismiss class concepts, like Teriz.
What was the point of wanting a Shadow Hunter class really badly, and then opposing it a comment later?

And this is Gazlowe in WC3:R

Notice how he is depicted with a claw pack and not in mech, all the time.

Witch-doctor is an interesting way to make Necromancer more unique. There are virtually only a couple spells related to this in Shaman, and Warlocks don't have anywhere the same vibe a Witch Doctor would. Witch Doctor also has an angle of Shadow Hunter to work with as another spec in addition to others that can be made around curses, medicine, poisons, diseases, and reanimation I imagine would make up parts of the kit in addition to some other hexing and animal spirit powers. But admittedly there isn't a lot of precedent for other races reaching into deep troll magic unless we count Wild God or darker druidism magic in the same vein - then Night Elves, Draenei, Worgen, and Pandaren have precedent along with Orcs and of course Trolls and Tauren, plus Kul'Tiran and Mag'har and Zandalari and Vulpera as well. And considering it's a fairly primal class, there's a good amount of other non-playable races in the setting that can make use of it, too. There are a lot of 'hexers' and 'ritualists' and other kinds of dark voodoo npcs wandering around to pick abilities and lore from to flesh out such a class.

There are, already, Orc Witch Doctors like Jeeda. I can imagine Kul Tirans, with their Witchcraft and wicca Drust, being Witch Doctors.

Yeah, I agree with this. Mail has always seemed redundant and unnecessary with Leather there. I think Leather fits Hunters and Shaman better thematically, anyway. (And they could always put in an increased armor passive to make up the difference if need be for balance.)

Well, there are Shamans in plate armor, like Thrall:

Look at what you wrote above for example. Tinkers are a type of engineer, so when Blizzard "says" that engineers are inventors, which engineers are they talking about? Tinkers? profession engineers? The engineers who built the tram? This is what I'm talking about when I say that all you're using is semantics, because you're lumping the term "engineer" completely into the profession, when the game shows that the profession doesn't cover every type of technology, and profession engineers don't reach the same heights as the class-level engineers.

So if they're a professional why do they lose all of their professional knowledge when they drop it for another hobby?

In what terms? lore-wise, they're on the same level.

Dropping a profession is a game mechanic.

[Teriz]

They're actually quite similar. They're both constructs created for utility and combat.

Blingtrons aren’t created for combat, and Clockwerk Goblins aren’t created for utility. Also Clockwerk Goblins are built by pocket factories.

Sure, but HOTS doesn't translate its stats, talents, levels
or resource systems over to WoW either. Different games, different mechanics. That's why they work on NPCs, because they don't need to be scaled or balanced.

The HotS abilities on the IE team were already translated to WoW though, so I don’t see the point you’re trying to make here. Also we have Abilities from HotS within the class lineup already, like Sundering in the Shaman class, and The Hunt in the Demon Hunter class.

My point is that NPC abilities don’t have level requirements, yet these NPC abilities did. In addition they were the only team to have abilities from HotS. Why would that be the case?

He's an NPC and questgiver, that's about it. Not quite sure why you consider him an adventurer. Because he is in some Island Expeditions? That just makes him an enemy NPC.

He traveled with us to Draenor and helped us take down the Iron Horde’s technology. He defended Durator against the legion invasion (inside his mech), and he helped us liberate Mechagon.

Would it make you happier if I called them Clockwerk Gnomes instead?

It would be more helpful if we stopped with the semantics and identified things as what they are. Blingtrons aren’t clockwork Gnomes.

- - - Updated - - -

Well, so are Lady Sena's. Yet, you treat her like she has official Tinker abilities.

I’m more concerned about the abilities, not the characters housing them.

Yes, like making a villainous Vulpera. If i post a picture of a Vulpera Death Knight, it wouldn't be ridiculous anymore? Your argument is a joke.

I didn’t find that picture of the dark Pandaren ridiculous at all. I feel that it would have helped the expansion for us to encounter some evil Pandaren.

No, i never said that. You are the one who, suddenly, uses the claw pack and Robo-goblin interchangeably, when we both know you want to get rid of the claw pack and have a permanent robo-goblin.

You did say it. In fact you said it again in this post. Stay tuned....

I use the claw pack and Robo goblin interchangeably because the claw pack transforms into the mech in WC3 and HotS. Personal preference aside, I think that is a potential aspect of gameplay.

The passive associated with the active ability:
Passive: Basic Attacks deal 90 bonus damage over 5 seconds, stacking up to 3 times.

Nope. That would be an utter violation of the Tinker concept which you, strictly, advocated for. Once again, you're changing your agenda to suit whatever the hell you want. The Tinker in both WC3 and HotS can use his abilities, regardless if he's in mech form or not.

See, you said it again. Once again, the Tinker had a mech the entire time, since the claw pack is a mech.

Not shit, sherlock.
The point is that the Robo-Goblin was more in-line with the power of Metamorphosis in WC3, than the power of a Bear form. They clarified that these two are powerful, for a reason.

Irrelevant. Robo Goblin was permanent, and is permanent in both HotS and WC3. Thus it makes sense for it to be permanent in WoW. The permanent mech may be restricted to tank, but it’s going to be present in some capacity.

In what terms? lore-wise, they're on the same level.

Please provide an example of a profession trainer on the level of Mekkatorque, Thermaplugg, Gazlowe, or Blackfuse.

Dropping a profession is a game mechanic.

So is dropping your class. However when you drop your class the game ends. You must pick up a class to play the game. You never need to pick up a profession, and when you do, you can totally ignore it, or drop it. That indicates how important your class is, and how unimportant professions are.

[razorpax]

If we are arguing hearthstone is canon then dragonsworn are coming...along with ragnaros the light lord

[Ielenia]

Yes, that would be correct.

... Are you really admitting to cherry-picking?

Look at what you wrote above for example. Tinkers are a type of engineer, so when Blizzard "says" that engineers are inventors, which engineers are they talking about? Tinkers? profession engineers? The engineers who built the tram? This is what I'm talking about when I say that all you're using is semantics, because you're lumping the term "engineer" completely into the profession, when the game shows that the profession doesn't cover every type of technology, and profession engineers don't reach the same heights as the class-level engineers.

The name of the player feature is literally called "profession", which means our player characters are professionals, not "hobbyists" as you claim as per your headcanon. This is literally semantics as you are trying to redefine what the word "profession" means. The official information that says that engineers are inventors comes straight out of the player profession webpage of the old website. Which means it's talking about the player profession, not NPCs.

So when those abilities enter WoW from HotS are they canon at that point, or are they still not canon since they came from HotS?

They are still not canon.

Where is that statement?

Still trying to find it. Will update when I find it.

So if they're a professional why do they lose all of their professional knowledge when they drop it for another hobby?

Profession. Not hobby, profession. Please stop with the semantics. Also, why are you so concerned with them "losing all professional knowledge when swapping professions" when you literally posited the idea that the player characters are super-powered mutants that don't need food, water or sleep to survive? Why are you NOW concerned with logic?

Oh, right, I forgot: because it suits you. It's your tired old "rules for thee but not for me" bullshit.

[razorpax]

Blingtrons aren’t created for combat, and Clockwerk Goblins aren’t created for utility. Also Clockwerk Goblins are built by pocket factories.



The HotS abilities on the IE team were already translated to WoW though, so I don’t see the point you’re trying to make here. Also we have Abilities from HotS within the class lineup already, like Sundering in the Shaman class, and The Hunt in the Demon Hunter class.

My point is that NPC abilities don’t have level requirements, yet these NPC abilities did. In addition they were the only team to have abilities from HotS. Why would that be the case?



He traveled with us to Draenor and helped us take down the Iron Horde’s technology. He defended Durator against the legion invasion (inside his mech), and he helped us liberate Mechagon.




It would be more helpful if we stopped with the semantics and identified things as what they are. Blingtrons aren’t clockwork Gnomes.

- - - Updated - - -




I’m more concerned about the abilities, not the characters housing them.



I didn’t find that picture of the dark Pandaren ridiculous at all. I feel that it would have helped the expansion for us to encounter some evil Pandaren.



You did say it. In fact you said it again in this post. Stay tuned....

I use the claw pack and Robo goblin interchangeably because the claw pack transforms into the mech in WC3 and HotS. Personal preference aside, I think that is a potential aspect of gameplay.



See, you said it again. Once again, the Tinker had a mech the entire time, since the claw pack is a mech.



Irrelevant. Robo Goblin was permanent, and is permanent in both HotS and WC3. Thus it makes sense for it to be permanent in WoW. The permanent mech may be restricted to tank, but it’s going to be present in some capacity.



Please provide an example of a profession trainer on the level of Mekkatorque, Thermaplugg, Gazlowe, or Blackfuse.



So is dropping your class. However when you drop your class the game ends. You must pick up a class to play the game. You never need to pick up a profession, and when you do, you can totally ignore it, or drop it. That indicates how important your class is, and how unimportant professions are.

How the hell do you drop your class??

[Teriz]

If we are arguing hearthstone is canon then dragonsworn are coming...along with ragnaros the light lord

No one is arguing that.

- - - Updated - - -

How the hell do you drop your class??

You can't. That's the point.

- - - Updated - - -

The name of the player feature is literally called "profession", which means our player characters are professionals, not "hobbyists" as you claim as per your headcanon. This is literally semantics as you are trying to redefine what the word "profession" means. The official information that says that engineers are inventors comes straight out of the player profession webpage of the old website. Which means it's talking about the player profession, not NPCs.

Then once again, when your player drops their profession, why is all of their knowledge lost?

Also when the site stated "engineers" were they talking about the Warrior who picks up engineering to make some toys to sell on the market, or engineers like Mekkatorque? Those two examples are not the same thing.

They are still not canon.

So this ability;

https://www.wowhead.com/spell=197214/sundering

Is not a canon?

Still trying to find it. Will update when I find it.

Uh huh.

Profession. Not hobby, profession. Please stop with the semantics. Also, why are you so concerned with them "losing all professional knowledge when swapping professions" when you literally posited the idea that the player characters are super-powered mutants that don't need food, water or sleep to survive? Why are you NOW concerned with logic?

I'm just keeping along with gameplay mechanics, since as demonstrated by you, lore is an absolute mess to base anything on.

[razorpax]

No one is arguing that.

- - - Updated - - -



You can't. That's the point.

If all blizzard games are canon that means we are getting the return of galakrond and we are getting the lightlord

Also if you can’t drop your class then it’s not a mechanic in the game


Dragonsworn are coming

[Teriz]

If all blizzard games are canon that means we are getting the return of galakrond and we are getting the lightlord

Also if you can’t drop your class then it’s not a mechanic in the game


Dragonsworn are coming

Yeah, you misread. All Warcraft games released by Blizzard are canon. If you look at the link, Hearthstone is considered non-canon, and so is HotS. However, Blizzard has stated that they can pull from those non canon sources to influence WoW. Again, we've already seen this happen with HotS abilities trickling into WoW, and Mogul Razdunk being yanked out of the TTRPG and made into a boss in Motherlode.

[Ielenia]

No one is arguing that.

You are, when you use HotS and Hearthstone sources for your claims. A huge chunk of our arguments, here, is you refusing to admit that Heroes of the Storm is NOT canon to Warcraft.

Then once again, when your player drops their profession, why is all of their knowledge lost?

Game mechanics. This argument of yours is nonsensical, because, even if we granted you that the player profession are just "hobbyists", they shouldn't "lose their knowledge" either when switching "hobbies".

Also when the site stated "engineers" were they talking about the Warrior who picks up engineering to make some toys to sell on the market, or engineers like Mekkatorque? Those two examples are not the same thing.

Except they are the same thing. The site expressly stated that the engineers are inventors, and speak both of selling items, and improving themselves and others.

So this ability;

https://www.wowhead.com/spell=197214/sundering

Is not a canon?

That is a World of Warcraft ability, and therefore canon. This one, on the other hand, is not canon.

I'm just keeping along with gameplay mechanics, since as demonstrated by you, lore is an absolute mess to base anything on.

No, you're trying to do a "reductio ad absurdum" and yet the only "absurd" here is you. Lore is not a mess, just because it doesn't fit your narrative.

Blingtrons aren’t created for combat, and Clockwerk Goblins aren’t created for utility.

Blingtrons cannot fight? They're not created to fight? Put two of them close together and guess what happens? Hint: they don't start a tea party.

[Teriz]

You are, when you use HotS and Hearthstone sources for your claims. A huge chunk of our arguments, here, is you refusing to admit that Heroes of the Storm is NOT canon to Warcraft.

And you're simply pushing a straw man. I never said that HotS and Hearthstone are lore. I said that elements of those games can be pulled into WoW and become canon. Blizzard themselves have stated this, so I don't know why you're still arguing against that point.

Game mechanics. This argument of yours is nonsensical, because, even if we granted you that the player profession are just "hobbyists", they shouldn't "lose their knowledge" either when switching "hobbies".

Depends on the hobby. I know plenty of folks who took karate as kids who can't remember any movements.

Except they are the same thing. The site expressly stated that the engineers are inventors, and speak both of selling items, and improving themselves and others.

Yeah, but that doesn't mean that your character making copper screws is an engineer, just a Warrior/Shaman/Hunter/etc. messing around.

That is a World of Warcraft ability, and therefore canon. This one, on the other hand, is not canon.

So in other words when HotS abilities enter WoW they are canon.

That's all you had to say.

No, you're trying to do a "reductio ad absurdum" and yet the only "absurd" here is you. Lore is not a mess, just because it doesn't fit your narrative.

Lore is a mess. That's why you have to constantly use head canon to justify your arguments.

Blingtrons cannot fight? They're not created to fight? Put two of them close together and guess what happens? Hint: they don't start a tea party.

Yeah, that's because of this;

https://wow.gamepedia.com/The_War

That isn't what Clockwerk Goblins do. Clockwerk Goblins are designed to be kamikaze solider bots. That's it and that's all.

[Razion]

Well, there are Shamans in plate armor, like Thrall:

He's the only shaman I remember wearing plate... which he wears as Warchief (and then virtually never again). It's kind of a symbol of his leadership, status, power, and of war. While shaman are often advisors and sometimes leaders I don't think generally speaking the plate transfers as well into the fantasy for shaman as elemental and resto make up more than half of what shaman are spec-wise, so the leathers I think lend themselves more to that kind of wise advisor or wise medicine man which the shaman basically is.

While the warrior aspect is cool and probably the most bad-ass version of the shaman, it's not really the basic and traditional shaman we would expect to reflect an average shaman citizen or troop or member of the Horde. It's pretty Thrall-exclusive. If every Shaman ever started wearing plate (even Trolls, sitting in huts together, chanting over fires to whisper to elements) it seems less appropriate. It only seems appropriate as, basically, Enhancement while in-combat. Maybe Ascendance should put Enhancement in metal looking like that called from the Earth so that that aspect can be represented, but baseline maybe leather I think is still more appropriate. Enhancement gains power for Agility, which Leather fantasy-wise fits best. Though I guess maybe we could argue if Enhancement should be a Strength spec in plate or something. But the specs can't exactly have different armor types because of how un-fun that would be for players to collect various armor types just for other specs. It's funny - Paladins are often seen as the Battle Priests for the Alliance, but Shaman are still a common village archetype or something that isn't strictly only out in the field fighting. The Shaman have a communal presence too, a place in towns and cities whereas something like a Paladin is more on the front-lines all the time. And maybe in war it makes sense for Shaman to wear plate, but in terms of all the other situations it seems less appropriate. It wouldn't feel right to see like a normal Shaman NPC sitting down, staring into the fire, while smoldering under a huge weight of plate. Kinda kills the vibe, y'know? And sure they could just dress NPCs in leathers when not fighting, and only in plate when Enhancement and in combat... maybe.

Thrall has changed his position a lot, too. Warrior, shaman, father, hermit... he'll probably change again before long. Shaman as a class meanwhile, like, should it be based entirely on Thrall or on all the other things Shaman are? Thrall learned from Drek'thar. Most Shaman take on knowledge from ancestors and leathers for that seems more appropriate whereas with plate that just kinda... kills the vibe again, I think. I can imagine Thrall communing with spirits in plate, but for other Shaman not as much.

When I think of Shaman I do think of the leather robes and the wolf heads... that kind of WC3 unit, those old vanilla NPCs, those old leathers from the Barrens and such. Thrall is pretty iconic, and while he very much is a Shaman even in plate I'm not sure I would look at a normal Shaman in plate and immediately recognize it, whereas I think most normal Shaman in leathers would be easily recognized for what they are with the wolf heads and such. Maybe some kind of shaman plate could make for a cool orc heritage, but as far as class armor goes I think leather wolf head is kind of the iconic... y'know, class style for like, tier sets and all that. All races can use the wolf head leather style for Shaman I think appropriately, but only really that Thrall Enhancement type is kind of appropriate for that kind of plate, I think. It is a very complicated issue.

[Unbelievable]

I’m more concerned about the abilities, not the characters housing them.



I didn’t find that picture of the dark Pandaren ridiculous at all. I feel that it would have helped the expansion for us to encounter some evil Pandaren.



You did say it. In fact you said it again in this post. Stay tuned....

I use the claw pack and Robo goblin interchangeably because the claw pack transforms into the mech in WC3 and HotS. Personal preference aside, I think that is a potential aspect of gameplay.



See, you said it again. Once again, the Tinker had a mech the entire time, since the claw pack is a mech.



Irrelevant. Robo Goblin was permanent, and is permanent in both HotS and WC3. Thus it makes sense for it to be permanent in WoW. The permanent mech may be restricted to tank, but it’s going to be present in some capacity.



Please provide an example of a profession trainer on the level of Mekkatorque, Thermaplugg, Gazlowe, or Blackfuse.



So is dropping your class. However when you drop your class the game ends. You must pick up a class to play the game. You never need to pick up a profession, and when you do, you can totally ignore it, or drop it. That indicates how important your class is, and how unimportant professions are.

You, clearly, do care. Otherwise, you wouldn't have pointed out, multiple times, how they are part of the Island Expedition AI, which draws inspiration from HotS and, therefore are official abilities according to your opinion. There's nothing more cannonicaly about Lady Sena's abilities than those of Mekkatorque. Especially, considering he's the most famous Gnome Tinker. According to my knowledge, Blizzard bases their Classes on Heroes, not on insignificant, unknown mobs.

Of course you didn't find it ridiculous. You're special. Most of the community would grin at the sight of a Pandaren Death Knight being the big bad of the expansion.

Nope, i didn't. You need to read my comments more thoroughly. When talking about mech, we're talking about Robo-Goblin. When talking about claw pack, we're referring to caster form. Know the differences.

*Facepalm*
My head is red from the amount of stupidity right here. Mech Form = Robo-Goblin. Caster Form = Claw Pack. It's really simple to grasp.

Man, you gotta provide a proof for the permanent Robo-Goblin in HotS. And, i'm not talking about visuals but, the bonuses it provides.

That's where your problem comes from. There is no difference in lore between an Engineering trainer and an Engineer NPC. Some may be more flashed out than others, due to their popularity but, in the end of the day, they are both categorized as Engineers.

You need to differentiate between game mechanics and lore. You picking a class doesn't make it important in lore.

Depends on the hobby. I know plenty of folks who took karate as kids who can't remember any movements.

And i know many priests who are amateurs. Does that not make them priests?
Listen, there are pros and there are amateurs. Not everyone can be a top specialist at what they do. This does not invalidate their profession. Not all Death Knights are as strong as Arthas. Not all Demon Hunters are as powerful as Illidan. That doesn't mean they are not Death Knights and Demon Hunters. You take certain, famous, cases of Engineers and point out that no one is as flashed out as they are. That's how games work. Some are more in the spotlight than others. It does not mean they don't do as the other, less known ones, do.

By the way, you just pointed out that the Monk class is nothing but, a hobby. If one can learn martial arts and forget it later on then, it is no different to a profession.

[Triceron]

Blingtrons aren’t created for combat, and Clockwerk Goblins aren’t created for utility. Also Clockwerk Goblins are built by pocket factories.

Which would translate into WoW Engineering as being similar to Blingtrons in function. Just like Army of the Dead translated Animate Dead without the corpse mechanic or using bodies of dead enemies and just using generic ghouls instead.

The HotS abilities on the IE team were already translated to WoW though

Sure, that's for NPCs and existing classes.

The Hunt wasn't even added until this expansion, and as a Covenant ability no less.

My point is that NPC abilities don’t have level requirements, yet these NPC abilities did. In addition they were the only team to have abilities from HotS. Why would that be the case?

My point is that NPCs aren't Player Characters.

It would be more helpful if we stopped with the semantics and identified things as what they are. Blingtrons aren’t clockwork Gnomes.

It would be more helpful if you stopped calling it semantics, considering you are calling Gazlowe a Tinker instead of identifying him as what he is; an Engineer.

Blingtron is just as much a Clockwork Gnome as Gazlowe is a Tinker; these are both names applied to how they look compared to existing Tinkers and Clockwork Gnomes that we know of without considering a direct name association. If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, amirite?

[Teriz]

Which would translate into WoW Engineering as being similar to Blingtrons in function. Just like Army of the Dead translated Animate Dead without the corpse mechanic or using bodies of dead enemies and just using generic ghouls instead.

Army of the dead is an ability, not an item. There’s no way to translate pocket factory into an item.

Sure, that's for NPCs and existing classes.

The Hunt wasn't even added until this expansion, and as a Covenant ability no less.

Sundering and Crash Lightning were added back in Legion.

My point is that NPCs aren't Player Characters.

My point is that the HotS abilities added to the IE teams don’t match NPC abilities.

It would be more helpful if you stopped calling it semantics, considering you are calling Gazlowe a Tinker instead of identifying him as what he is; an Engineer.

Blingtron is just as much a Clockwork Gnome as Gazlowe is a Tinker; these are both names applied to how they look compared to existing Tinkers and Clockwork Gnomes that we know of without considering a direct name association. If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, amirite?

Again, Tinkers are a type of engineer. Blingtrons are not clockwork Gnomes, and they’re definitely not Clockwerk Goblins.

[Unbelievable]

Army of the dead is an ability, not an item. There’s no way to translate pocket factory into an item.

Why not?

Goblin Bomb Dispenser
Item Level 46
Binds when picked up
Trinket
Use: Creates a mobile bomb that charges the nearest enemy and explodes for 350 fire damage.
Requires Engineering (230)

Instead of one bomb, it will create several ones.