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

[Teriz]

Tinker concept is translated into the engineering profession, yes.

But you didn't say this earlier, you said "It has to do with your argument that the Tinker class was placed into the engineering profession." and I clarified that I did not say the CLASS was being represented in Engineering, I'm saying its concept and themes are.[/qup

Just like we can look at the Pandaren Monk pet, it is both a representation of a Pandaren and a Monk in WoW. All of the Pandaren Brewmaster tropes are in this pet. But this pet is not a Class or a replacement for the Class. It's an example of the themes existing in WoW before MoP.

I'm contending with your arguments that say that the Tinker's abilities and themes are not in Warcraft. Well, Engineering has translated many of those abilities already. We have robotic constructs that fight and explosive weaponry and battle mechs that can be used in combat.

So in other words your entire argument is irrelevant since like the Monk pet not replacing the Monk class, the engineering profession also does not replace the Tinker class?

Which is correlation

Backed by causation.

Those changes all happened because Legion decided to focus on solidifying certain class fantasies, rather than the patchwork designs that were skewing them further and further away from being what they originally intended to be.

Legion was a perfect time to do this since they were already pushing the fantasy further with unique Artifacts, including weapons that normally wouldn't be accessible to certain class/spec combinations like Druids using Claw weapons or Warlocks using Skull offhands.

And they didn't do that with Metamorphosis. They created two completely new abilities for the DH that weren't in the game before. Havoc Metamorphosis and Vengeance Metamorphosis are mechanically different from Warlock Metamorphosis and Dark Apotheosis. The only carry over is the name.

This is actually more like the differences between Death Coil and Mortal Coil. That's the situation that could have played out had Warlocks kept that path for Demonology. But we know from the Devs themselves that they wanted to bring it back into a Summoner spec, which absolutely makes sense if you look at what the Demonology spec originally started out as.

Demonology Warlock was my primary alt for 3 expansions. I did miss the focus on Demon summons in the spec, since Metamorphosis seemed more in line with Destruction. While Metamorphosis was a great, but it was purely ripped off of Guild Wars 2 Necromancer gameplay and slightly overtuned throughout the time we had it. It wasn't exactly what I consider Warlock gameplay.

None of that contradicts the fact that Blizzard removed metamorphosis from Warlocks because of the incoming Demon Hunter class. Thus highlighting the importance of abilities to class concepts.

Two classes who can summon elementals.

But they can't summon the same elementals.

And Warlocks already had their own Metamorphosis gameplay that was not melee. I think it's important to note that the Warlock can't use Warglaives.

I think it's important to note that Blizzard is so hard core about two classes sharing a class-defining ability that they won't let them share said ability.

It's just the fact that Warlocks wouldn't have kept the ability anyways since it wasn't very fitting for their class concept since the beginning. They simply had it because of an overzealous designer, who has even fully admit to being overzealous and having his ideas overturned.

Warlocks had metamorphosis before that designer went wild in MoP.

It houses Technological themes.

You asked where Technology themed HOTS/NPC abilities would go if they were added in WoW. As I've explained, those NPC abilities would likely be translated into Engineering since that's where all Technology themed abilities already go.

Except none of those abilities went to engineering. Cluster Rocket, Healing Spray and Adrenaline Bomb (if its a translation of Chemical Rage) have been in the game since MoP, and they never went into the engineering profession. An expansion later, none of the HotS abilities in the IE teams have wound up in the profession either.

So where is this translation you're talking about?

If you want to talk about a Tinker class then by all means, we should talk about it. That's not what I'm seeing here. You were suggesting Tech-themed abilities from other games could only fit into WoW through a new class, but it's pretty clear that Engineering is where everything Tech-related traditionally resides.

Amazing theory considering that it has yet to happen after nearly 17 years of WoW.

Nothing? We have War Drums from Kodo Riders which is the most Bardic ability Warcraft 3 has to offer. Music that provides a damage buff to surrounding allies. Fancy that.

Hmm, I guess you could also consider this a Warcraft 3 ability that made its way into Professions since Leatherworking also make Drums of War.

The Kodo Rider isn't a hero concept.

Bards don't lack in inspiration or abilities from other games. It simply lacks in having its own strong Class Fantasy that fits in WoW's gameplay. If there were a defined support role in the game today, I could see it happening. Without a support role though, I don't see it being much more than a Music-themed Priest, and that's why I think it'd be more ideal as a Class Skin.

Actually it lacks both.

[jellmoo]

Because the dragon form would be cool down based, not constant, as shown via Alexstraza and Chromie in HotS.

Also the Dragon Form should be no larger than a mount;



That should be the maximum size.

I mean, that kind of discounts the existence of Deathwing though, if we look at HotS for inspiration. Also, nothing in lore seems to indicate that dragons can't be in dragon form all the time.

Also, that's huge to have suddenly in front of you in a dungeon or a raid. I'm not sure how that's better than having a Draenei in a mech which would be smaller but permanent. It actually seems more invasive for the other players to have this dragon character growing and shrinking throughout combat. Especially if there are are multiple dragon players in that group.

[Teriz]

And I am requesting a cloth-based class that can heal with blood magic.

DKs can heal with Blood magic and wear cloth-looking robes. Are you seriously complaining that a cloth looking piece of armor says "plate" instead of "cloth"? Should we create a Necromancer class because DKs wear plate instead of cloth?

"Frostmourne" is just a name. It's just a name. Nothing more, nothing less. Just like "Sulfuras, Hand of Ragnaros" is not actually Ragnaros' hand.

Didn't Frostmourne turn Kelthuzad into a Lich?

They lost an ability name. The ability itself remained. Also, the name change happened when the Mists of Pandaria expansion went live, two expansions AFTER the death knight was made playable. That debunks your claim that "classes losing abilities when new classes enter the game."

They lost the damage and healing component as well.

Shamans lost that talent one entire expansion before monks came along. It was removed when the Cataclysm expansion went live. That debunks your claim that "classes losing abilities when new classes enter the game."

Irrelevant. They still lost the ability, and they probably lost it because Blizzard new they were bringing in a Monk class and needed the name.

Monks did not lose that ability. Windwalker monks could still dual-wield. They didn't lose that ability to demon hunters. It was a design decision because they were giving a staff artifact weapon to the tank spec. And guess what: brewmaster monks can dual-wield again.

Nah, the weapons became nothing more than stat sticks in Legion. In WoD Monks had the weapon-based attack animation. Now all they do is punch, which hurts the fantasy and makes you just want to use fist weapons.

So you're admitting that the tinker class, at its core, overlaps heavily with the engineering profession, therefore you're advocating for the destruction of the profession?

It's impossible for a class to overlap with a profession.

False. Blizzard opted to not work around it. There is a huge difference.

Blizzard's MO is to not work around it. If they bring in a Necromancer or Dark Ranger class, multiple classes risk losing abilities. I know you don't care about that, but other players will.

- - - Updated - - -

I mean, that kind of discounts the existence of Deathwing though, if we look at HotS for inspiration. Also, nothing in lore seems to indicate that dragons can't be in dragon form all the time.

I'm not saying use the World Breaker model, I'm saying that's about as large as the dragon form should be.

Also, that's huge to have suddenly in front of you in a dungeon or a raid. I'm not sure how that's better than having a Draenei in a mech which would be smaller but permanent. It actually seems more invasive for the other players to have this dragon character growing and shrinking throughout combat. Especially if there are are multiple dragon players in that group.

Nah, raid players deal with stuff like that happening all the time. A constant, large Draenei mech on the other hand could be an issue.

However if its not, then Blizzard should go ahead and make Draenei Tinkers.

- - - Updated - - -

Then, try harder to find the Druid ability.

Found it;

https://wow.gamepedia.com/Savage_Defense

Then, what kind of dark and edgy hero classes would they add, if not the Dark Ranger, Priestess of the Moon (Night Warrior), Sea Witch, Shadow Hunter and Warden (Dark Warden)?

Because those class concepts are already absorbed by existing classes.

[Triceron]

So in other words your entire argument is irrelevant since like the Monk pet not replacing the Monk class, the engineering profession also does not replace the Tinker class?

? It was always intended to address your insistence that Tech themed abilities like Pocket Factories and Cluster Rockets haven't been translated into WoW.

They have, through Engineering. I don't think this replaces the Tinker, but it does address those legacy WC3 abilities.

Backed by causation.

Which is still a logical fallacy :/

None of that contradicts the fact that Blizzard removed metamorphosis from Warlocks because of the incoming Demon Hunter class. Thus highlighting the importance of abilities to class concepts.

You're right, it doesn't contradict or support it since it's completely unrelated to the Demon Hunter having their own Metamorphosis gameplay and simply using the name since it was going away anyways.

But they can't summon the same elementals.

Warlocks don't use the same forms as Demon Hunters either. They used a Ranged demon ability that doesn't use weapons.

Warlocks had metamorphosis before that designer went wild in MoP.

It's the same designer who worked on all iterations, and added it in the first place. Who said MoP Metamorphosis was the issue with veering the Class Fantasy away from summoning?

Except none of those abilities went to engineering. Cluster Rocket, Healing Spray and Adrenaline Bomb (if its a translation of Chemical Rage) have been in the game since MoP, and they never went into the engineering profession. An expansion later, none of the HotS abilities in the IE teams have wound up in the profession either.

So where is this translation you're talking about?

Battle Chickens, Exploding Sheep, Reaves, Rocket Launcher augments on Gloves. It's all there.

Amazing theory considering that it has yet to happen after nearly 17 years of WoW.

Which has more credibility than assuming Tinkers would have been playable instead of Demon Hunters.

The Kodo Rider isn't a hero concept.

No, it's not a Hero concept. It's a potential influence for a WoW Class concept.

Much like how Rogues and Warlocks simply used units and heroes as influences to their design.

Actually it lacks both.

So does the Tinker, since it doesn't exist. I don't see it being a problem. New abilities can be invented.

[Nightmare Queen]

I mean, that kind of discounts the existence of Deathwing though, if we look at HotS for inspiration. Also, nothing in lore seems to indicate that dragons can't be in dragon form all the time.

Also, that's huge to have suddenly in front of you in a dungeon or a raid. I'm not sure how that's better than having a Draenei in a mech which would be smaller but permanent. It actually seems more invasive for the other players to have this dragon character growing and shrinking throughout combat. Especially if there are are multiple dragon players in that group.

Maybe a 'dragon' player would just grow a more reptillian head, wings and a tail, and maybe claws on the hands/feet, while still being about the size of a tauren?

[Unbelievable]

Yeah... that's just grasping at straws, and isn't gonna happen. And yes, the entire reason I brought up Pirate class was because that fantasy was obviously baked into combat and became Outlaw- the very fact you missed that point and instead got defensive about it says more than enough.

"I sure hope Blizzard undo 3 expansions of design on the reworked Outlaw and Survival class so that my class that is effectively an edgy bowman can exist!" yeah no lol.

Blizzard classes are general archetypes. Even our "holy warrior" paladin buddy has virtually 0 overlap with priests and warriors besides one or two light-based healing spells. The Dark Ranger isn't happening, and will never happen because even if you spin your synonyms from "edgy spooky bowman" to something else, you're absurd to think that Blizzard would waste all of that time and money into an entirely new class like that.

I have a better idea, campaign for Death Knight or Hunter to get a 4th spec- make forum posts, gauge public opinion. A Dark Ranger spec for Hunter, or a Deathsworn Archer for DKs. Demon Hunter is the only example of a WoW class that isn't a traditional archetype and look where it got them- the class has 40% less abilities than every other class, and only 2 specs. Should Dark Ranger be a class, that's exactly where it would find itself- starved of ideas because Hunter and DK occupy so many of those already. Best of luck, chum!

Paladins are, literally a combination of Warrior and Priests. Saying there's no overlap is being ignorant:
"The first paladins on Azeroth were humans. They originally started out as clerics under the Holy Order of Northshire Clerics, carrying the mission of spreading the wisdom of the Holy Light across Azeroth. When the Horde invaded the Eastern Kingdoms through the Dark Portal during the First War, the clerics rushed to the battlefield to fend off the beasts. Although wielding powerful magic, the clerics were unprepared for war and suffered heavy losses. At the end of the war, Archbishop Alonsus Faol and his apprentice Uther Lightbringer founded the Knights of the Silver Hand. This order trained clerics and knights in both the ways of war and divinity."

Discipline Priest
Uses magic to shield allies from taking damage as well as heal their wounds.

Holy Paladin
Invokes the power of the Light to heal and protect allies and vanquish evil from the darkest corners of the world.

Protection Paladin
Uses Holy magic to shield and defend allies from attackers.

Protection Warrior
A stalwart protector who uses a shield to safeguard allies.

The Dark Ranger wouldn't, simply, be an edgy spooky bowman. It will include the Priestess of the Moon and perhaps, also, the Sea Witch.

The Dark Ranger does not posses any of the Death Knight or Hunter abilities, aside from, maybe, Festering Wounds and Barbed Shot.

In the context of WoW, there really isn't any room for a highly different method of healing based on Music. It has to fit in the resource-centric RPG gameplay that many other Blizzard games that use Music-based healing don't abide by.

Not necessarily.
What if Blizzard regards the Bard gameplay as E.T.C and Lucio gameplay from HotS?

But they can't summon the same elementals.

The question is: Where do elementals belong to?
Do they belong in the Shaman (Fire, Storm, Earth elementals)? Do they belong in the Mage (Water elemental)? Do they belong in the Monk (Pandaren elemental spirits)? As an adamant that classes should, by no means, overlap, even in the slightest, there appears to be a "glitch in the matrix".

Didn't Frostmourne turn Kelthuzad into a Lich?

They lost the damage and healing component as well.

Blizzard's MO is to not work around it. If they bring in a Necromancer or Dark Ranger class, multiple classes risk losing abilities. I know you don't care about that, but other players will.

- - - Updated - - -

Nah, raid players deal with stuff like that happening all the time. A constant, large Draenei mech on the other hand could be an issue.

Found it;

https://wow.gamepedia.com/Savage_Defense

Because those class concepts are already absorbed by existing classes.

No. It was the Sunwell that resurrected him:
"Arthas placed Kel'Thuzad's remains within the well, and with the help of Tichondrius, Kel'Thuzad was reborn into the terrifying form of a lich."

Not, entirely, true:

Mortal Coil
Talent
2% of base mana 20 yd range
Instant 45 sec cooldown
Requires Warlock
Horrifies an enemy target into fleeing, incapacitating for 3 sec and healing you for 20% of maximum health.

What abilities other classes are at risk of losing? Festering Wounds? Barbed Shot?

A Draenei in a mech would be the same size as a Gnome in a mech. The size of the mech doesn't change, much like a mount. The only exception are Tauren, which will never be Tinkers.

Both of these Dodge abilities are no longer in the game:

Elusive Brew - Patch 7.0.3 (2016-07-19): Removed.
Savage Defense - Patch 7.0.3 (2016-07-19): Removed.

Well, so is the Tinker and Alchemist absorbed into the Engineering and Alchemy professions. So was the Demon Hunter absorbed by the Warlock, Rogue and Priest classes. So was the Death Knight absorbed into the Warlock. The question is, if not them, what other "dark and edgy" hero classes would be? considering they only take from Warcraft III heroes (and their only Hero classes were from WC3, which were fulfilled by other classes). Saying anything else would contradict your beliefs.

[Triceron]

I mean, that kind of discounts the existence of Deathwing though, if we look at HotS for inspiration. Also, nothing in lore seems to indicate that dragons can't be in dragon form all the time.

Also, that's huge to have suddenly in front of you in a dungeon or a raid. I'm not sure how that's better than having a Draenei in a mech which would be smaller but permanent. It actually seems more invasive for the other players to have this dragon character growing and shrinking throughout combat. Especially if there are are multiple dragon players in that group.

I figure it all boils down to mechanics and suspension of disbelief.

I mean, honestly there's no reason to ever worry about any character death in the game if anyone can be ressurected, but we still do care. There's no reason why Vol'jin getting stabbed or Calia getting killed had to result in permanent deaths when the ingame mechanic does away with death through ressurection.

Same can be said of why a Dragon character would be limited to forms and not always be in Dragon form. It's just the natural state they prefer, just as we see Wrathion in his mortal form 90% of the time and only rarely ever see him take on his Dragon form. Same with Chromie.

- - - Updated - - -

Not necessarily.
What if Blizzard regards the Bard gameplay as E.T.C and Lucio gameplay from HotS?

Then we're talking about a very different WoW that is no longer bound by the fine-tune MMORPG design and balance that everyone comes to expect.

I mean, what if Blizzard regards WoW as a Battle Royale shooter? We'd be talking about a different game entirely.

I'm focusing my points on what would pragmatically fit in WoW, and ETC's concepts are very Warrior-based while Lucio's mechanics are all baked into his 'Aura' and he has few active heals. This doesn't translate well into WoW.

[Unbelievable]

Then we're talking about a very different WoW that is no longer bound by the fine-tune MMORPG design and balance that everyone comes to expect.

I mean, what if Blizzard regards WoW as a Battle Royale shooter? We'd be talking about a different game entirely.

I'm focusing my points on what would pragmatically fit in WoW, and ETC's concepts are very Warrior-based while Lucio's mechanics are all baked into his 'Aura' and he has few active heals. This doesn't translate well into WoW.

Who said they have to abide by traditional depictions of the bard and his incarnations in other well known RPGs?

I'm not saying the Bard would behave like them, being a Rock N' Roll and a skating DJ.
All i'm saying is that it would heal, damage, stun, knockback, buff and other things the two do in HotS.

[Teriz]

? It was always intended to address your insistence that Tech themed abilities like Pocket Factories and Cluster Rockets haven't been translated into WoW.

They have, through Engineering. I don't think this replaces the Tinker, but it does address those legacy WC3 abilities.

You'd have to be a rather silly person to believe that Blingtron is a translation of Pocket Factory.

Which is still a logical fallacy :/

You're right, it doesn't contradict or support it since it's completely unrelated to the Demon Hunter having their own Metamorphosis gameplay and simply using the name since it was going away anyways.

Warlocks don't use the same forms as Demon Hunters either. They used a Ranged demon ability that doesn't use weapons.

It's the WC3 version of the spell. DHs got the HotS version. Again, the point being that Warlocks only lost the ability when Demon Hunters entered the game, showcasing how important the ability was to the class concept.

Battle Chickens, Exploding Sheep, Reaves, Rocket Launcher augments on Gloves. It's all there.

None of that is part of the Tinker hero concept, and none of that stuff is viable for class roles.

Which has more credibility than assuming Tinkers would have been playable instead of Demon Hunters.

What's your point? That Tinkers are less important than Demon Hunters because they were released first? Would that mean that Brewmasters/Monks were more important than Demon Hunters, or did the Pandaren expansion simply come before the Legion expansion?

No, it's not a Hero concept. It's a potential influence for a WoW Class concept.

It's not an influence for a class concept either.

Much like how Rogues and Warlocks simply used units and heroes as influences to their design.

Except there are no Bard heroes, and Blizzard has never made a Bard hero character in the history of Warcraft.

So does the Tinker, since it doesn't exist. I don't see it being a problem. New abilities can be invented.

The Tinker exists in WC3, WC3:R, both TTRPGs, HotS, and within WoW lore. There's also about 2 dozen abilities attributed to the Tinker concept.

There's nothing like that for the Bard.

- - - Updated - - -

The question is: Where do elementals belong to?Do they belong in the Shaman (Fire, Storm, Earth elementals)? Do they belong in the Mage (Water elemental)? Do they belong in the Monk (Pandaren elemental spirits)? As an adamant that classes should, by no means, overlap, even in the slightest, there appears to be a "glitch in the matrix".

Mages enslave their Water (Frost) elementals. Shaman asks for assistance from Fire, Earth, and Storm elementals.

Monks don't use the Pandaren Elementals.

No. It was the Sunwell that resurrected him:
"Arthas placed Kel'Thuzad's remains within the well, and with the help of Tichondrius, Kel'Thuzad was reborn into the terrifying form of a lich."

That's fine. I'm just pointing out that it's rather easy to see that a being called the Lich King and a Death Knight swinging around a blade called Frostmourne, and them residing in the polar regions of Azeroth sort of signaled that a Death Knight class would have frost powers.

Not, entirely, true:
What abilities other classes are at risk of losing? Festering Wounds? Barbed Shot?

This was the original ability;

Death Coil
Level 42 warlock ability
30 yd range
23% of base mana
2 min cooldown
Instant cast
Causes the enemy target to run in horror for 3 sec and causes X Shadow damage. The caster gains 300% of the damage caused in health.

Like I said, Warlocks lost the healing and damage component, and now only have the fear component.

Both of these Dodge abilities are no longer in the game:

Elusive Brew - Patch 7.0.3 (2016-07-19): Removed.
Savage Defense - Patch 7.0.3 (2016-07-19): Removed.

Just in time for Demon Hunters.

Well, so is the Tinker and Alchemist absorbed into the Engineering and Alchemy professions. So was the Demon Hunter absorbed by the Warlock, Rogue and Priest classes. So was the Death Knight absorbed into the Warlock. The question is, if not them, what other "dark and edgy" hero classes would be? considering they only take from Warcraft III heroes (and their only Hero classes were from WC3, which were fulfilled by other classes). Saying anything else would contradict your beliefs.

You have yet to show any Tinker or Alchemist abilities in any classes. Items with a vague connection to the theme of the Tinker concept simply don't cut it. I know you and others would like to believe that they do, but they don't. Feel free to continue to be silly like others in here, you just solidify my arguments when you do so.

[Triceron]

It's the WC3 version of the spell. DHs got the HotS version.

Yes, two different spells from two different games, sharing only a name.

Death Coil and Mortal Coil. Both literally being two different spells both having been named "Death Coil" at one point in time.

It's not a gameplay conflict, only a name conflict. I'm not quite sure why you seem to think it decides whether the DH could be added to the game or not. It seemed like there were plenty of other 'patterns' that it broke, like only being 2 Specs, being a 4th Leather Wearing Agi-based Dual Wield DPS. Seemed like they had immediate overlap in theme with Warlocks too. You seemed to be okay with all this and only point at Metamorphosis being the solitary reason the DH could not be implemented. Not sure if that's very credible.

None of that is part of the Tinker hero concept, and none of that stuff is viable for class roles.

It covers what Tech-themed NPC abilities have that aren't already in the game, thematically. You do remember your question right? You never said Tinker Hero concept, you inferred where NPC Tech abilities would end up. It's all gonna end up in Engineering, and those are the abilities that represent it.

What's your point? That Tinkers are less important than Demon Hunters because they were released first?

Important? No. I think all Class concepts are equally important, and I don't weigh them by importance.

I weight it on viability. A Tinker is viable so long as it isn't built around too many whimsical concepts that will run itself into the ground. I'm an advocate for a Tinker class that hits a greater demographic and gets people interested in exploring Tech themes in a class. That isn't exclusive to requiring them to be Gnomes or Goblins, or having Pocket Factories and Claw Packs.

It's not an influence for a class concept either.

Why not?

Except there are no Bard heroes, and Blizzard has never made a Bard hero character in the history of Warcraft.

And they could make one.

They were quite close to adding a Runemaster, and there was never a Runemaster hero character in the history of Warcraft.

There is never a Dragonsworn hero character in the history of Warcraft either, yet we're both in agreement that it could be possible, right?

The Tinker exists in WC3, WC3:R, both TTRPGs, HotS, and within WoW lore. There's also about 2 dozen abilities attributed to the Tinker concept.

Part of the problem. There's no singular Tinker concept that makes sense for WoW. Many of those other concepts are great for an RTS or MOBA or Card game; not so much for an MMO where you get to choose your race and gender.

What I think we should have is a more open Tinker concept that includes many race options and focus more on broad, more practical tech themes.

Mekkatorque's battle suit A-OK. Gazlowe's Claw Pack not so much.

- - - Updated - - -

All i'm saying is that it would heal, damage, stun, knockback, buff and other things the two do in HotS.

Then isn't that just basic class mechanics that aren't specific to any particular type of gameplay?

Which is why I was able to equate the Bard to being a Musical Priest. You'd have your heal, damage, buff, fear and mind control all in one package already.

As for HOTS mechanics like Knockbacks or Stuns, these could just as easily be added through Talents; just like how Druids have Might Bash or Typhoon as Talent picks.

[jellmoo]

Maybe a 'dragon' player would just grow a more reptillian head, wings and a tail, and maybe claws on the hands/feet, while still being about the size of a tauren?

Something like that would make more sense to me than playing a full sized dragon.

That being said, this kinda of sounds like a class skin for a Demon Hunter. Essentially take all the mechanics of the Demon Hunter, change the demony looking stuff so that it is dragony looking, and boom. Dragon themes character customization options, Dragon Wings instead of Demon ones, Eye Beam turns into a breath weapon, etc...

- - - Updated - - -

I figure it all boils down to mechanics and suspension of disbelief.

I mean, honestly there's no reason to ever worry about any character death in the game if anyone can be ressurected, but we still do care. There's no reason why Vol'jin getting stabbed or Calia getting killed had to result in permanent deaths when the ingame mechanic does away with death through ressurection.

Same can be said of why a Dragon character would be limited to forms and not always be in Dragon form. It's just the natural state they prefer, just as we see Wrathion in his mortal form 90% of the time and only rarely ever see him take on his Dragon form. Same with Chromie.

I get what you're saying, but I do think that you need to be careful with suspension of disbelief. The player shouldhave some measure of understanding of the "why" of things. What I mean is, if you give the players a reason as to why they can't be a dragon all the time, even if it's flimsy, it would sit better than it just being a cooldown. Just cuz.

Like, imagine if the setup to this becoming a class is the fact that everywhere, Dragons are dying. Nobody knows why. The only way to save them is to fuse a Dragon soul into a mortal body. This is what playable Dragons are. Now, mortal bodies aren't meant to contain the power of a Dragon, nor are they meant to transform all willy nilly, so this becomes a balancing act of using the Dragon's power without having it destroy you.

Give players a solid reason for a restriction so it doesn't feel arbitrary and it will go down a lot easier.

[Ielenia]

DKs can heal with Blood magic

No. No, they cannot. This is what I originally wrote a few posts back:

And necromancer fans are asking for a class that allows us to heal their allies

Didn't Frostmourne turn Kelthuzad into a Lich?

As far as I know? Nope: "Arthas placed Kel'Thuzad's remains within the well, and with the help of Tichondrius, Kel'Thuzad was reborn into the terrifying form of a lich." No mention of Frostmourne being used, whatsoever.

They lost the damage and healing component as well.

And that can be attributed to Blizzard's balance decision, as they may have thought that an ability that dealt damage AND healed the caster AND feared the target might be a bit too OP. And it did not lose its healing components.

Irrelevant. They still lost the ability, and they probably lost it because Blizzard new they were bringing in a Monk class and needed the name.

It's not. It's not irrelevant because it debunks your claim that the shamans lost Storm, Earth and Fire when the monk class was added, since they lost it a whole expansion BEFORE that happened.

Nah, the weapons became nothing more than stat sticks in Legion. In WoD Monks had the weapon-based attack animation. Now all they do is punch, which hurts the fantasy and makes you just want to use fist weapons.

That's irrelevant. They still possess the ability to dual-wield, because you can equip two one-handed weapons in both the brewmaster and windwalker specs. I have not tried to do so in mistweaver spec.

It's impossible for a class to overlap with a profession.

Concept- and theme-wise, which is technology, they can and do.

Blizzard's MO is to not work around it. If they bring in a Necromancer or Dark Ranger class, multiple classes risk losing abilities.

But they don't have to lose anything. That's the point. You're the one insisting they have to.

I know you don't care about that, but other players will.

You saying that shows how dishonest you are, and how you don't really care about actually understanding other people's position. Not only I never said I don't care, but I've demonstrated how I actually care when I argued, time and again, that present classes don't have to lose anything.

Backed by causation.

That's not causation. There is no causation. To establish causation, you need to prove that Blizzard removed the metamorphosis ability from the warlock class for the express intention of giving it to the new demon hunter class, and not because they wanted to remake the spec. And you cannot prove that. Therefore you do not have causation.

[Teriz]

Yes, two different spells from two different games, sharing only a name.

Death Coil and Mortal Coil. Both literally being two different spells both having been named "Death Coil" at one point in time.

Both examples showing that Blizzard will remove any abilities that are deemed to be too similar with existing classes. That doesn't bode well for classes like Necromancers that would pretty much force a dismantling of multiple existing specs.

It's not a gameplay conflict, only a name conflict. I'm not quite sure why you seem to think it decides whether the DH could be added to the game or not. It seemed like there were plenty of other 'patterns' that it broke, like only being 2 Specs, being a 4th Leather Wearing Agi-based Dual Wield DPS. Seemed like they had immediate overlap in theme with Warlocks too. You seemed to be okay with all this and only point at Metamorphosis being the solitary reason the DH could not be implemented. Not sure if that's very credible.

No, it's still a gameplay conflict. Blizzard obviously doesn't want two classes that can turn into demons. Blizzard doesn't want two classes that use ranged demonic magic. Blizzard doesn't want two classes to have demonic pets. Which is why Demon Hunters only have two specs.

It covers what Tech-themed NPC abilities have that aren't already in the game, thematically. You do remember your question right? You never said Tinker Hero concept, you inferred where NPC Tech abilities would end up. It's all gonna end up in Engineering, and those are the abilities that represent it.

But once again, the NPC tech abilities aren't going to end up in engineering. Further, those NPCs using HotS abilities display a level of engineering outside of both the profession and existing engineer NPCs which makes their existence even more interesting.

You mentioned the Pandaren Monk pet. The Pandaren Monk pet was a hint of the future Monk class. It would appear that those NPC abilities are a hint of a future Tinker class. That's really the only logical explanation.

Important? No. I think all Class concepts are equally important, and I don't weigh them by importance.

I weight it on viability. A Tinker is viable so long as it isn't built around too many whimsical concepts that will run itself into the ground. I'm an advocate for a Tinker class that hits a greater demographic and gets people interested in exploring Tech themes in a class. That isn't exclusive to requiring them to be Gnomes or Goblins, or having Pocket Factories and Claw Packs.

Well the thing is that multiple companies have used Blizzard's Tinker design for their games, so the Claw Pack isn't an unknown concept;







Especially given games like Dota2. So yeah, I don't think the Claw Pack would have any problem appealing to a wide audience.

Why not?

What are you going to base it on? A character riding the back of a Kodo beating drums?

And they could make one.

They were quite close to adding a Runemaster, and there was never a Runemaster hero character in the history of Warcraft.

If you believe that. Interestingly, the DK class had Runic blades back in WC3 which predates the Runemaster showing up in the TTRPGs. It seems far more likely that they just took the Runic blade concept of the DKs and just ran with it. I'm also skeptical of them saying that they have 100s of class ideas, because they've done nothing but bring out WC3-based expansion classes since 2008.

There is never a Dragonsworn hero character in the history of Warcraft either, yet we're both in agreement that it could be possible, right?

Wrathion says hello. And he's EXTREMELY popular, especially with the creepy shipping of him and Anduin. Again, I have no idea why the HotS team made a Deathwing hero instead of a Wrathion hero. They missed the boat big time on that one.

Part of the problem. There's no singular Tinker concept that makes sense for WoW. Many of those other concepts are great for an RTS or MOBA or Card game; not so much for an MMO where you get to choose your race and gender.

Nah, the WC3 hero concept works just fine for WoW. Again, the concept of exo-arms/claw pack isn't some crazy unknown concept. If Blizzard's art team does their job, the Tinker will look just fine.

If the Claw pack is too wild, just jump straight to the mech concept.

[Revamp Man]

ok i got this
the draconic fury resource will increase healing/damage/damage reduction until maxxed at 100 then dragon force hits
this adds the whole "do you build until 100 fury to pop a CD or hold it" thought process

you also have a glyph that lets you look kinda draconic outside of combat similar to shadows shadowform

[Ielenia]

Both examples showing that Blizzard will remove any abilities that are deemed to be too similar with existing classes.

Blizzard did not remove the Death Coil ability from the necromancers. They just changed the ability name.

classes like Necromancers that would pretty much force a dismantling of multiple existing specs.

They force nothing. Stop acting like you work for Blizzard and know how they operate internally.

[Triceron]

Both examples showing that Blizzard will remove any abilities that are deemed to be too similar with existing classes. That doesn't bode well for classes like Necromancers that would pretty much force a dismantling of multiple existing specs.

That all depends on the nature of the spell and how it ties into the class mechanics.

'Deemed too similar' is absolutely subjective too, considering we have, as you listed, shared mechanics such as Evasion abilities, on top of unique and iconic abilities like Bloodlust and Timewarp. Every ability is subject to individual cases, and I don't think there's any reason to lump them all as boding anything for any class.

I mean would you ever look at a Monk and say it's too similar to a Shaman because they happen to share the same use of Elements? Tint the lightning green and the watery effects tealish and no one seems to mind at all. The gameplay of the two classes are so varied that the shared use of Spiritual Elemental Magic is supplementary to the core gameplay differences.

Necromancers already have the benefit of having a strong Class Fantasy from all the previous Warcraft RTS games. Necrolytes were a completely separate unit to Warlocks, which shows there's room for multiple 'Summoner' class themes. And DK isn't even a comparison since it's a plated melee DPSer.

No, it's still a gameplay conflict. Blizzard obviously doesn't want two classes that can turn into demons.

Yes, because it should be unique to Demon Hunters. I totally agree with Blizzard since it was never a part of the Warlocks's Class Fantasy.

But once again, the NPC tech abilities aren't going to end up in engineering. Further, those NPCs using HotS abilities display a level of engineering outside of both the profession and existing engineer NPCs which makes their existence even more interesting.

They're also clearly Engineers, so there's actually very little ties to any Tinker class since it doesn't formally exist. You're literally pointing at Engineering NPCs and saying their abilities aren't going to be in Engineering. But hey, you be you.

You mentioned the Pandaren Monk pet. The Pandaren Monk pet was a hint of the future Monk class. It would appear that those NPC abilities are a hint of a future Tinker class. That's really the only logical explanation.

Except those NPC abilities are on Engineer NPCs. Just saying, that's what they're listed as and referred to. Tinkers are Engineers, but not all Engineers are Tinkers, right? Gazlowe is an Engineer, his HOTS abilities are being used by Engineers in WoW, so we're looking at NPCs with Engineer abilities that already coincide with a profession of the same theme, profession and title.

Well the thing is that multiple companies have used Blizzard's Tinker design for their games

Especially given games like Dota2. So yeah, I don't think the Claw Pack would have any problem appealing to a wide audience.

Sure, if WoW was a MOBA I'd be all over that. Heroes of the Storm is the best place a Claw Pack works. I have no problems against that.

If you want to talk about WoW though, I don't think a Claw Pack will translate well. And this has been discussed thoroughly and I think I've been clear on my stance on visual clutter regarding Claw Packs.

It's simply unnecessary for the Tinker class fantasy. Like you said, many other games have done Engineers, and none of the MMORPGs implemented Claw Packs to their Engineer classes. For good reason!

Wrathion says hello. And he's EXTREMELY popular, especially with the creepy shipping of him and Anduin. Again, I have no idea why the HotS team made a Deathwing hero instead of a Wrathion hero. They missed the boat big time on that one.

Well they could still add Wrathion, it'll just be another 10 years before it happens at the rate we're at with Heroes. We got both Varian and Anduin after all.

But not quite sure I'd equate an actual Dragon to Dragonsworn quite yet. We don't know how Blizzard would approach the class if it were, and I'm not quite sold on actual Dragons being Dragonsworn simply because of the limits it puts on what magic they use. Why would a Black Dragon character suddenly have powers over Time, Life and Dream? I'd like to see this class presented in a way that makes sense.

[Teriz]

Blizzard did not remove the Death Coil ability from the necromancers. They just changed the ability name.

Again, Death Coil Warlock used to have a sizable damage and healing component. Both were removed.

They force nothing. Stop acting like you work for Blizzard and know how they operate internally.

If you think Blizzard is going to allow 2 classes to have undead pets/minions, you haven't been paying attention.

[Ielenia]

Again, Death Coil Warlock used to have a sizable damage and healing component. Both were removed.

The healing component was NOT removed. Stop saying demonstrably false nonsense.

If you think Blizzard is going to allow 2 classes to have undead pets/minions, you haven't been paying attention.

Don't hunters have the ability to have undead minions now? Looks like your argument got debunked.

[Teriz]

That all depends on the nature of the spell and how it ties into the class mechanics.

'Deemed too similar' is absolutely subjective too, considering we have, as you listed, shared mechanics such as Evasion abilities, on top of unique and iconic abilities like Bloodlust and Timewarp. Every ability is subject to individual cases, and I don't think there's any reason to lump them all as boding anything for any class.

Evasion abilities for tanking specs and some DPS specs within the agility based classes. Not surprising, since Brewmasters and Demon Hunters in WC3 both had passive dodge bonuses. Timewarp was added to give Mages utility, as was the Hunter version. Abilities like Bloodlust and Evasion can be shared by multiple classes since it provides utility. Abilities like Metamorphosis or Demonic Pets or Beast Pets are class defining attributes and won't be shared.

I mean would you ever look at a Monk and say it's too similar to a Shaman because they happen to share the same use of Elements? Tint the lightning green and the watery effects tealish and no one seems to mind at all. The gameplay of the two classes are so varied that the shared use of Spiritual Elemental Magic is supplementary to the core gameplay differences.

The fact that the majority of the Monk's ability lists consist of punches and kicks instead of nature spells disproves that notion.

Necromancers already have the benefit of having a strong Class Fantasy from all the previous Warcraft RTS games. Necrolytes were a completely separate unit to Warlocks, which shows there's room for multiple 'Summoner' class themes. And DK isn't even a comparison since it's a plated melee DPSer.

What does the fact that the DK wears plate have to do with it's summoning abilities? UH DKs can summon a lot of minions at any given time, and they're 1-2 abilities away from being fully ranged.

Also what really separates Warlocks from Necrolytes? Summoning skeletons instead of imps? BTW, in some games Imps and Succubi are Necromancer minions.

Yes, because it should be unique to Demon Hunters. I totally agree with Blizzard since it was never a part of the Warlocks's Class Fantasy.

But Apotheosis was. Unfortunately since it was a demon form and the concept of "Transforms into a Demon" is a conerstone of the Demon Hunter concept, that had to go as well.

They're also clearly Engineers, so there's actually very little ties to any Tinker class since it doesn't formally exist. You're literally pointing at Engineering NPCs and saying their abilities aren't going to be in Engineering. But hey, you be you.

Which is semantics. Tinkers are a type of engineer, so what type of engineer are you talking about? The NPCs on the Island Expeditions are clearly not profession engineers because they're not using profession gadgets. They're not (entirely) like Mekkatorque because they're not all inside Mechs, so what type of engineer are they?

Except those NPC abilities are on Engineer NPCs. Just saying, that's what they're listed as and referred to. Tinkers are Engineers, but not all Engineers are Tinkers, right? Gazlowe is an Engineer, his HOTS abilities are being used by Engineers in WoW, so we're looking at NPCs with Engineer abilities that already coincide with a profession of the same theme, profession and title.

See above.

Sure, if WoW was a MOBA I'd be all over that. Heroes of the Storm is the best place a Claw Pack works. I have no problems against that.

If you want to talk about WoW though, I don't think a Claw Pack will translate well. And this has been discussed thoroughly and I think I've been clear on my stance on visual clutter regarding Claw Packs.

It's simply unnecessary for the Tinker class fantasy. Like you said, many other games have done Engineers, and none of the MMORPGs implemented Claw Packs to their Engineer classes. For good reason!

Atlantica Online uses it. However I largely agree, which is why I lean towards the Tinker being mech-based. My point is that if Blizzard wants to utilize the claw pack, their artists/designers could have a field day with it and make it look interesting.

But yes, I believe the Tinker is more likely going the mech route.

Well they could still add Wrathion, it'll just be another 10 years before it happens at the rate we're at with Heroes. We got both Varian and Anduin after all.

But not quite sure I'd equate an actual Dragon to Dragonsworn quite yet. We don't know how Blizzard would approach the class if it were, and I'm not quite sold on actual Dragons being Dragonsworn simply because of the limits it puts on what magic they use. Why would a Black Dragon character suddenly have powers over Time, Life and Dream? I'd like to see this class presented in a way that makes sense.

You make the character a chromatic dragon. Chromatic Dragons can take on the power of any dragon flight.

- - - Updated - - -

The healing component was NOT removed. Stop saying demonstrably false nonsense.

Fine, the damage component was removed though, so either way it was altered beyond simply just the name.

Don't hunters have the ability to have undead minions now? Looks like your argument got debunked.

Yep, but they do it differently than how Death Knights and Necromancers would do it. Necromancers would do it exactly the way DKs do it.

Thank you for finally admitting that Hunters can do Necromancy. Guess there's no need for Dark Rangers after all. I suppose that explains their (and the Necromancer's) absence in the class lineup despite Shadowlands' heavy Necromancer theme....

[TheRevenantHero]

Really not looking to get back into the Tinker debate, but I have to ask:

How is playing as an actual Dragon a good thing, but a Draenei in a mech suit is too big for gameplay reasons?

I've tried asking this. you will not get a logical answer.

- - - Updated - - -

Evasion abilities for tanking specs and some DPS specs within the agility based classes. Not surprising, since Brewmasters and Demon Hunters in WC3 both had passive dodge bonuses. Timewarp was added to give Mages utility, as was the Hunter version. Abilities like Bloodlust and Evasion can be shared by multiple classes since it provides utility. Abilities like Metamorphosis or Demonic Pets or Beast Pets are class defining attributes and won't be shared.



The fact that the majority of the Monk's ability lists consist of punches and kicks instead of nature spells disproves that notion.



What does the fact that the DK wears plate have to do with it's summoning abilities? UH DKs can summon a lot of minions at any given time, and they're 1-2 abilities away from being fully ranged.

Also what really separates Warlocks from Necrolytes? Summoning skeletons instead of imps? BTW, in some games Imps and Succubi are Necromancer minions.




But Apotheosis was. Unfortunately since it was a demon form and the concept of "Transforms into a Demon" is a conerstone of the Demon Hunter concept, that had to go as well.



Which is semantics. Tinkers are a type of engineer, so what type of engineer are you talking about? The NPCs on the Island Expeditions are clearly not profession engineers because they're not using profession gadgets. They're not (entirely) like Mekkatorque because they're not all inside Mechs, so what type of engineer are they?



See above.



Atlantica Online uses it. However I largely agree, which is why I lean towards the Tinker being mech-based. My point is that if Blizzard wants to utilize the claw pack, their artists/designers could have a field day with it and make it look interesting.

But yes, I believe the Tinker is more likely going the mech route.



You make the character a chromatic dragon. Chromatic Dragons can take on the power of any dragon flight.

- - - Updated - - -



Fine, the damage component was removed though, so either way it was altered beyond simply just the name.



Yep, but they do it differently than how Death Knights and Necromancers would do it. Necromancers would do it exactly the way DKs do it.

Thank you for finally admitting that Hunters can do Necromancy. Guess there's no need for Dark Rangers after all. I suppose that explains their (and the Necromancer's) absence in the class lineup despite Shadowlands' heavy Necromancer theme....

There is only ONE chromatic dragon in existence in the lore. Literally one. And he's locked away.