1. #3501
    The Insane Teriz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Undermine
    Posts
    17,648
    Quote Originally Posted by Triceron View Post
    You have proven nothing. Of course I refuted your statements, they aren't based on sound logic.
    Which of my statements did you refute? That NPC abilities don't go to professions? That NPC abilities don't have level requirements? That Blingtrons aren't the same thing a Clockwork Gnomes? That building a Blingtron that hands out party gifts isn't the same thing as building a factory that mass produces kamikaze bots?

    Help me out, I've lost track.

    Because they were freeing the ability up from the Demon Hunter with the change to the Warlock fantasy to make Demonology into a Summoner spec.

    Warlocks had _multiple_ Demon Hunter forms that were all taken away in Legion. Why take away Dark Apotheosis too when it was perfectly usable by either class? Well the answer is it had no place in either since Meta was already freed up and Warlocks were moving away from it altogether.

    It's that simple. We have the answers straight from Legion dev interviews and their intentions on Legion adhering to class fantasies and revamping certain specs.

    If it were just about Metamorphosis then can you explain where Dark Apotheosis went? You couldn't.
    Yeah, here's the problem; Warlock metamorphosis was mechanically different than DH metamorphosis, so it could have remained in place as well. Despite Blizzard's official statements, their goal was to completely purge all aspects of metamorphosis from the Warlock class. We know this because they nuked Demonology from orbit in 6.2 and literally told players not to play the spec. And when I say nuked, I'm talking about nerfing it to the point where it was nearly unplayable. If you have any example of something like that happening in the history of WoW, please show me.

    So yeah, it was entirely about metamorphosis. Blizzard knew that there was no way they were bringing in a Demon Hunter class as long as Warlocks had that ability, whether it was the Demonology version, or the Glyphed version.


    Yes and what were Gul'dan's abilities? Keep in mind in he lore he used Necromancy. The WoW warlocks are their own thing, which actually retroactively changed who Gul'dan is today.
    Well no, there were Orc Warlocks in WC3 as well. Their abilities were fire bolts, Frenzy, and Cripple.

    So it's apparent that that change had already occurred by the time we got to WC3. Keep in mind, they had altered Death Knights as well.

    Sure, and I would agree with you. This has nothing to do with abilities though, it is about Class Fantasy as I've been saying takes priority first and foremost. If the Bard had a stronger identity, then we can move on to the next step of deciding what abilities it has. The Bard isn't lacking for having less Warcraft abilities than a Tinker any more than a Tinker is lacking than having less abilities than a Rogue or Warlock.
    The Bard has NO warcraft abilities. That's the point. Without those abilities we have no direction to take the concept.

    Why else would a class fantasy based on Warcraft 2 non-playable Guldan take precedent over an actual playable Tinker who had a full playable kit? Think about this.

    Tinker wasn't even considered in any Vanilla classes when talked about. Runemasters even had more consideration than a Tinker, so can we point at abilities informing this decision?

    The class fantasy of a Runemaster was to fulfill a non-standard magic-user in the game, which the Warlock eventually won over. This is how Blizzard considered the root of their class design, not just picking abilities or basing it on WC2/3 Heroes.
    Which would also mean that those concepts took precedence and had higher consideration than Monks and Demon Hunters.

    Does that matter?

    Nope.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by zantheus1993 View Post
    you said "oh discuss other concepts its ok" yet bitch about any concept that isnt yours WITH THIS AS A REAL EXAMPLE!!!

    this isnt a thread discussing the guaranteed new class but new classes that are possible

    - - - Updated - - -
    I'm just trying to keep this discussion focused. Vague concepts like "Dragon Knights" don't really stack up to more established concepts like a class that emulates Wrathion, Chromie, and Alexstraza. Thanks to HotS we have a functioning method of how such a class would work, and as I pointed out before, this concept has all the necessary ingredients of a future class.

    HES A DRAGON!!!!!!!!!
    just alike a class isnt a profession a race isnt a class
    I would argue that it's a class of dragon.

    And like I said, players want to be Wrathion or Kalecgos, they don't want to be some mortal who runs around and kisses dragon butt for power.

    last i checked each flight has the power of 1 aspect
    its ok though they will empower random dragons they find over mortals they have trained and trusted because it fits your idea "well if you tell players they can transform into dragons it will be super popular" in your opinion...from the same person who believed the most likely class in shadowlands was a ghostbuster tinker
    I've already taken care of that; Your character is a chromatic dragon that can take on the powers of a different aspect as needed. That can act as your specialization switch. Simple.

    make it a mortal make them gain the power of the aspects
    every aspect but bronze because their leader is MIA and a good storyline for the expansion while the other aspects have at least an accepted stand in
    How would a mortal be able to jump from aspect to aspect and gain their powers? Further, if a mortal's powers are based on a dragon flight, what would their base abilities be?

    With the dragon-based concept for example, the base abilities would your dragon abilities, like Dragon Fire or Dragon Form.
    Last edited by Teriz; Today at 07:10 AM.

  2. #3502
    dragon knight
    mail wearer
    int based for all specs
    4 specs
    hero class starts at 58

    intro experience being a mortal guard of wrathion who throughout multiple points in a time skipping story you see the hero of azeroth and interact including but not limited to the MoP story and the storyline with abyssion needing a potion. After the old gods defeat Wrathion convinces the other flights to join him in finding the dragon isles which in order to locate requires the power of all flights. You must earn the blessing of each flight except the bronze due to their leader missing however chromie givews you some basic skills including time warp and a battle rez.

    specs are

    blue: ranged spell caster using any and all weapons with int
    red: melee using all weapons except staves and wands
    black: tank using shields
    green: healer using any and all weapons with int

    for those of you needing something to have a basis for this we have
    yseras gift for healing druids
    nelfarions scales being a tank artifact
    the spellweavers of the blue flight
    the fact red dragons in most of warcraft media and lore being destructive

    red spec will focus on dealing damage via dots including a ST strike that refreshes them
    a breath that adds a stack
    a wing flap that adds a stack
    you have abilities that treat these DoTs as a kind of combo point for damage so for example using the ability when you have 1 stack on the enemy you do 10 damage where using it when you have 2 stacks its 20 damage. The trade off being the possibility of the DoTs falling off and killing your damage

    blue plays almost the opposite where you use abilities to buff yourself then burn the buffs so a similar way to arcane but not using mana as a resource

    green is about HoTs and AoE spells like dream seeds that pop and release healing. Like a monk statue in a way where you can target it and the healing is copied to allies within range until so much healing is done and it pops

    black is straight up armor and badass tanking with retaliation damage.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    Which of my statements did you refute? That NPC abilities don't go to professions? That NPC abilities don't have level requirements? That Blingtrons aren't the same thing a Clockwork Gnomes? That building a Blingtron that hands out party gifts isn't the same thing as building a factory that mass produces kamikaze bots?

    Help me out, I've lost track.



    Yeah, here's the problem; Warlock metamorphosis was mechanically different than DH metamorphosis, so it could have remained in place as well. Despite Blizzard's official statements, their goal was to completely purge all aspects of metamorphosis from the Warlock class. We know this because they nuked Demonology from orbit in 6.2 and literally told players not to play the spec. And when I say nuked, I'm talking about nerfing it to the point where it was nearly unplayable. If you have any example of something like that happening in the history of WoW, please show me.

    So yeah, it was entirely about metamorphosis. Blizzard knew that there was no way they were bringing in a Demon Hunter class as long as Warlocks had that ability, whether it was the Demonology version, or the Glyphed version.




    Well no, there were Orc Warlocks in WC3 as well. Their abilities were fire bolts, Frenzy, and Cripple.

    So it's apparent that that change had already occurred by the time we got to WC3. Keep in mind, they had altered Death Knights as well.



    The Bard has NO warcraft abilities. That's the point. Without those abilities we have no direction to take the concept.



    Which would also mean that those concepts took precedence and had higher consideration than Monks and Demon Hunters.

    Does that matter?

    Nope.

    - - - Updated - - -



    I'm just trying to keep this discussion focused. Vague concepts like "Dragon Knights" don't really stack up to more established concepts like a class that emulates Wrathion, Chromie, and Alexstraza. Thanks to HotS we have a functioning method of how such a class would work, and as I pointed out before, this concept has all the necessary ingredients of a future class.



    I would argue that it's a class of dragon.

    And like I said, players want to be Wrathion or Kalecgos, they don't want to be some mortal who runs around and kisses dragon butt for power.



    I've already taken care of that; Your character is a chromatic dragon that can take on the powers of a different aspect as needed. That can act as your specialization switch. Simple.



    How would a mortal be able to jump from aspect to aspect and gain their powers? Further, if a mortal's powers are based on a dragon flight, what would their base abilities be?

    With the dragon-based concept for example, the base abilities would your dragon abilities, like Dragon Fire or Dragon Form.
    you did play BfA right??
    they empowered the heart of azeroth they would empower the mortal in the same way....like multiple npcs have done to players and other npcs throughout the game...do you even play WoW??

  3. #3503
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    Which of my statements did you refute? That NPC abilities don't go to professions? That NPC abilities don't have level requirements? That Blingtrons aren't the same thing a Clockwork Gnomes? That building a Blingtron that hands out party gifts isn't the same thing as building a factory that mass produces kamikaze bots?
    All of the above on the basis that Blizzard doesn't base any of their class design on those criteria.

    There is no consistency between NPCs and classes, that is the issue with your argument. It's based on confirmation bias, nit on what the devs actually have stated in interviews and postmortems.

    As for Blingtron not being like Clockwork Goblin, they're both constructs based on races. How is that not similar? Blingtron is literally a clockwork gnome. Do Blingtrons fight? Yes they do.


    Yeah, here's the problem; Warlock metamorphosis was mechanically different than DH metamorphosis, so it could have remained in place as well. Despite Blizzard's official statements, their goal was to completely purge all aspects of metamorphosis from the Warlock class. We know this because they nuked Demonology from orbit in 6.2 and literally told players not to play the spec. And when I say nuked, I'm talking about nerfing it to the point where it was nearly unplayable. If you have any example of something like that happening in the history of WoW, please show me.

    So yeah, it was entirely about metamorphosis. Blizzard knew that there was no way they were bringing in a Demon Hunter class as long as Warlocks had that ability, whether it was the Demonology version, or the Glyphed version.
    The Warlock fantsay was never about Metamorphosis. It's that simple. Does Gul'dan in WC2 turn into a giant winged shadow demon that looks like Illidan? Or would he rather summon an army of minions like the WC1 Warlock class fantasy? It's clear why it changed.

    Well no, there were Orc Warlocks in WC3 as well. Their abilities were fire bolts, Frenzy, and Cripple.
    They also had monsoon and raise skeleton :/

    Abilities don't mean much if the class fantasy isn't covering Warlock NPCs in War3 which had Necro abilities.

    The Bard has NO warcraft abilities. That's the point. Without those abilities we have no direction to take the concept.
    Well that's correlation. They obviously made new ones for the April Fools, and consider that all of the Tinker abilities you are so fond of are also April Fools abilities.

    Which would also mean that those concepts took precedence and had higher consideration than Monks and Demon Hunters.

    Does that matter?

    Nope.
    Right. So why discount the Bard any more than Tinkers on the basis of abilities when both concepts are rooted in April Fools and both have characters representing them in HOTS with full list of abilities? ETC and Gazlowe are your Bard and Tinker, both based on April Fools.

    The only difference is the Bard does not have a rooted concept in WC3 whereas the Tinker does, simple as that.
    Last edited by Triceron; Today at 08:47 AM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ielenia View Post
    Well, yes. Our opinions are below the canon lore of the game, because we're not the ones writing the lore.

  4. #3504
    Elemental Lord Kithelle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Somewhere where canon still exists
    Posts
    8,358
    Quote Originally Posted by razorpax View Post
    Im sorry I didn’t know WoW lore stopped progressing after WC3

    I mean it’s not like the dragons have been feeding their power into the HoA
    It’s not like Wrathion took mortals as hard personal guard
    It’s not like he had the idea of making an army to fight the legion then disappeared to go find the dragon isles (island expedition lore)
    I don’t think he would empower mortals to be able to fight the demons and other similar entities and the other aspects wouldn’t go along with it
    “I won’t attack other class concepts” lasted half a page eh?

    Dragons are a race
    Dragon knight is a class

    And with the return of galakrond and the inevitable creation of the infinite (galakrond remains missing from the map that was data mined and the fact nozdormu wasn’t found during BfA and chromie was the stand in)

    Fight dragon fire with dragon fire
    It's not like Dragons have been severely weakened and depleted to the point they lost their immortality
    It's not like every Dragon that has used and empowered mortals were evil
    It's not like other than a select few individuals most Dragons have been keeping to themselves
    It's not like we had to help a Dragon flight fight off simple withered
    #WithoutRespectWeReject

  5. #3505
    Quote Originally Posted by Kithelle View Post
    It's not like Dragons have been severely weakened and depleted to the point they lost their immortality
    It's not like every Dragon that has used and empowered mortals were evil
    It's not like other than a select few individuals most Dragons have been keeping to themselves
    It's not like we had to help a Dragon flight fight off simple withered
    1. lost immortality but still have the blessings of titans...bfa questline
    2. so when the dragons helped us in boss fights they were evil?? the dragons empowering the heart were evil??
    3. that kinda helps against the idea of dragons being a class (they are a race anyways but hey cant have classes that go against tinker boys thoughts)
    4. its almost as though that flight was a small part of a bigger flight and their leader was weakened while they were over run by large amounts of enemies...again why do ppl act like they havent played this game

  6. #3506
    Quote Originally Posted by Kithelle View Post
    It's not like Dragons have been severely weakened and depleted to the point they lost their immortality
    It's not like every Dragon that has used and empowered mortals were evil
    It's not like other than a select few individuals most Dragons have been keeping to themselves
    It's not like we had to help a Dragon flight fight off simple withered
    Dragons are still super important in the story, otherwise Yseras death and rebirth would have been pointless.

    Even when 'nerfed', they still hold over powers that mere mortals don't possess, like thr emerald dream connections, life-giving fire and sands of time.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ielenia View Post
    Well, yes. Our opinions are below the canon lore of the game, because we're not the ones writing the lore.

  7. #3507
    Quote Originally Posted by Triceron View Post
    Dragons are still super important in the story, otherwise Yseras death and rebirth would have been pointless.

    Even when 'nerfed', they still hold over powers that mere mortals don't possess, like thr emerald dream connections, life-giving fire and sands of time.
    no no no you dont get it

    time travel isnt super powerful
    obviously wrathion is super duper evil which is why he has empowered mortals twice

    and the old blue dragon dying due to lack of mana and his clutch being used as batteries by crack addicts means the dragons as a whole are super weak

  8. #3508
    Old God Orby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Essex, England
    Posts
    10,630
    Quote Originally Posted by ForrestAnthony View Post
    I hope to god they don't pull the same 2-race class bullshit like they did with Demon Hunter.

    Mag'har (Iron Horde), Orcs, Goblins, Blood Elves, Undead, Humans, Dwarves, Dark Irons, Void Elves (literally former Blood Elves), Draenei, Gnomes, and Mechagnomes ALL have backgrounds in machinery. I'd be willing to admit that Mechagnomes, Goblins, and Gnomes would likely be the lore-forefathers of the class, just like Belves and Nelves are for Demon Hunters, but yeah we're so deep into Azeroth lore now that we've all seen these races display some form or another of ingenuity when it comes to machinery.

    Oh and also- I'd absolutely love it if the Exo-suit tank spec and Torbjorn ranged DPS spec (assuming there are) had turrets/suits themed after their races art style. The Dwarven exo suit could look like Ulduar tech. The Dark Iron's like Dark Iron Golems, the Mag'har's like Iron Horde, Goblin's like Shredders, etc. None of this would be stuff we haven't already seen exist in azeroth already.
    Oh I do think there are more than just gnomes and goblins who can be Tinker in lore, but its more for me personally as I do not currently have a gnome alt and I will only accept Tinker:P
    Last edited by Orby; Today at 10:35 AM.

  9. #3509
    Quote Originally Posted by WonderZebra View Post
    I'm convinced anyone who thinks tinker couldn't be a class just lacks imagination.
    I wouldn't say i'm against the Tinker.
    I'm against Teriz.

    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    That item has a 30 minute cool down.
    And....?

    You said it can't be translated into an item. It, definitely, can. Visuals, functionality and all. It just won't be on the scale of a class ability, like you want it to.

    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    The difference being that we have engineers in mech suits as raid bosses. I don’t recall a baker ever being a raid boss in WoW.


    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    Warlocks have a talent where they summon a Fel lord that blocks the path of anyone or anything that crosses it. So that would be incorrect. Alternatively, the factory could simply not block anyone.
    You mean this?:

    Call Fel Lord PvP Talent
    Tank Specs – Row 1 PvP Talent
    2 Soul Shards 40 yd range
    Instant cast 1.5 min cooldown
    Requires Warlock (Demonology)
    Requires level 20
    Summon a fel lord to guard the location for 15 sec. Any enemy that comes within 6 yards will suffer up to 5% of their maximum health in damage, and players struck will be stunned for 1 sec.

    Nothing about blocking.

    Quote Originally Posted by TheRevenantHero View Post
    As I just said, pocket factory doesn't exist in canon anymore. And DKs and necromancers are different because unlike tinker, they both exist separate from each other in the game. Meanwhile, there is literally zero separation between tinker and engineer.
    Yet, Dark Rangers are just like Hunters?
    You and Teriz are both comedians.
    You, guys, dismiss everyone else's class concepts yet, you push for your own Necromancer/Tinker classes.

    Quote Originally Posted by TheRevenantHero View Post
    I argue against tinker because people like Teriz want it to remain restricted to gnomes and goblins. Which makes me prefer that the class just never becomes playable.
    There's nothing wrong with limiting it to Gnomes and Goblins. The problem arises when he asks for Vulpera Tinkers, which nothing in lore supports it yet, he dismisses Dwarves which are, literally, Tinkers in lore.

    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    So do you think Blizzard is done bringing classes into WoW?
    Same question to you.
    You think that Blizzard is gonna add Tinkers next expansion and just stop adding other classes just because you don't want them.

    Quote Originally Posted by TheRevenantHero View Post
    It has nothing to do with the aesthetics. The races themselves look like utter dogshit and their voicelines are grating. I don't care if the look of the abilities would maybe look like goblin stuff. I just don't want to play the two worst races in the game.

    - - - Updated - - -



    Yes. I really do. And I hope that I'm right. Because they can't even balance the ones that are already in the game.
    So, don't play them. Problem solved.
    You and Teriz are delusional if you think that Blizzard is never going to add new classes into the game. Or, add the classes you, guys, want and then stop, completely.

    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    This is purely head canon. You have no idea if they retain any knowledge or not. You're applying real world logic to a video game. A video game where we have talking trees and elves who can turn into birds.

    A mech that is absurd to gather mats for, can't leave Broken Isles, and can't loot anything. Quite the engineering feat.

    But other races simply don't fit the class. Just like other races simply don't fit Demon Hunter except Blood and Night Elves.
    Said the guy who gave karate friends, as an example.

    That is the gameplay of the mech. Not the lore.

    Wrong. Dwarves fit the class. They are Tinkers in lore. Kind of a hypocritic thing to say, for a guy who offers Vulpera as Tinker, with no real reason.

    Quote Originally Posted by TheRevenantHero View Post
    .Also, necromancers and death knights are linked but not the same. Are you going to say that priests and paladins are the same because they both wield the Light?
    Are you going to say that Dark Rangers and Hunters are the same because the both use bows and arrows?

    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    Trolls aren't fans of technology. Vulpera seems curious and resourceful enough. Plus who doesn't like little tech fox people?
    Let me guess. You're a Ratchet and Clank fan. That's why you want them, right?

    That's, actually, quite interesting.
    I'm gonna up two, by these:
    https://www.wowhead.com/npc=20890/siflaed-coldhammer
    https://www.wowhead.com/npc=74688/mad-tinker

    We, basically, solved the problem of faction balance:
    Gnomes - Goblins
    Mechagnomes - Vulpera
    Dwarves - Forsaken.

    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    Sure, if they were the right size.....
    According to who, besides you?

    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    Actually it matters quite a bit. Lore wise there’s no reason for physically strong races to build mechs. Gameplay-wise an Orc mechs would have to be significantly larger than an Orc to have an effect and not look silly. That can cause clipping and visibility issues. Smaller races match the lore, and prevent visibility problems.
    Then, they don't need magic either. Yet, they do use it. Your logic is flawed from the base.
    We, already, have Orcs in mechs in game. So, everything about silliness and size is irrelevant.

    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    Dark Ranger: Hunters had Black Arrow for years.
    Demon Hunters: Warlocks had Metamorphosis for years.

    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    At most I could see it break down as Horde: Goblin, Vulpera, Orc, Maghar
    Alliance: Gnome, Mechgnome, Dwarf, Dark Iron.

    Nightborne and L Draenei are more of a long shot, but possible.

    Personally I’d be surprised if they went beyond Goblins, Gnomes and their allied races.

    I definitely think you’re going to see some elements of D.va and Torb within the class.
    You forgot forsaken.

    I thought you disliked my Torbjorn spec concept.

    Quote Originally Posted by ForrestAnthony View Post
    Hate to break it to you but it has about as much of a chance of happening as the Pirate class does. They're not going to invest literal tens of millions of dollars into building a class that can instead be realized through a spec instead.

    Even Demon Hunter was unique enough to stand on its own. Can you imagine any other class being a glaive wielding, fel-fuelled shapeshifter? Definitely not Warlock, as to make an agi-melee-spec for a cloth class would be crazy.

    As for Dark Ranger? In a Venn diagram sense it has way too much thematic overlap with MM Hunter and what Death Knights can do. Honestly it's more likely that Unholy get reworked to be a bow-wielding ranged plate spec OR sword-caster that can fight from a distance like SV hunter OR Marksmanship finds itself more dark ranger themed abilities.

    Because when the song's been sung there's no way, with conclusive evidence or not, there will ever be a class that can effectively be boiled down to "its a spooky bowman" when there are already 2 "spooky" classes, and 1 "bowman" class.

    case closed get on with your day bud learn to let go
    What? Blizzard is never going to redesign the Death Knight as a bow-wielding class.

    You forget that the Dark Ranger could include the Priestess of the Moon and Sea Witch, as well, which are not spooky.

    And you forget that we, already, have 2 holy light wielding classes. So, having another bow class is not a problem. Especially, if they redesign the Hunter to be more of an Axes, Gun and Spear wielding class.

    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    You do know that applying real world logic to fantasy or video games is textbook head canon right?
    Yes. Like saying a Tinker's explosives are stronger than Hunter's explosives, based on real-life.

    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    Yes to both.



    Blizzard shared it, since we didn't get a DH class until Metamorphosis was completely purged from Warlocks. I'm still shocked there was no Dark Ranger class in Shadowlands. I guess despite the loss of Black Arrow, Hunters still cover it.
    Wrong. Otherwise, they wouldn't have added the Demon Hunter.

    You argued that black arrow covers it. Now, it is covered without it? stay consistent....

    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    Without the abilities you have no class fantasy. Look at the situation with Bards for example. No one here can agree exactly what the class fantasy would be because they have no abilities to show what that fantasy is.
    Actually, there are E.T.C and Lucio gameplay in HotS to rely on.

    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    That's great, but there's really no basis for it in Warcraft. The only concept really that we've seen are Dragons disguising themselves as mortals and influencing the story. You can definitely make a class out of that.

    As for Rogues, you got the Stealth and Ambush from Blademasters, Hide and Envenomed Weapon from Rogue/Bandit creeps, and other junk from other heroes.

    I only have a laser focus on WC3 and HotS because that has been the source of 100% of WoW's expansion classes. Why would we be laser focused anywhere else?
    There's no such class, either. Do you see the hypocrisy in that? You're dismissing his idea, saying it's not based on lore and then, you shove your own idea which, is also not based on lore. The only lore class is the Dragonsworn.

    Rogues didn't take Stealth and Ambush from the Blademaster. Ambush wasn't a Blademaster ability, and Stealth isn't called Windwalk. In WC3, it was an invisibility.

    The only reason you're focused on WC3 and HotS is because of me. I pointed it out for you.

    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    .The only hard part for Blizzard is figuring out which Dragonflights to base specs on.
    It's easy:
    Blue and Bronze Dragonflight = Arcane and Time magic DPS spec.
    Red and Green dragonflights = Nature and Fire healing spec.
    Black Dragonflight = Earth and Fire tanking spec.

    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    And like I said, players want to be Wrathion or Kalecgos, they don't want to be some mortal who runs around and kisses dragon butt for power.
    It's like saying Death Knights kiss the ass of the Lich King, Demon Hunters kiss the ass of Illidan and Monks kiss the ass of their Monk trainers.
    They are their disciples. They gain their masters' abilities. That's why Arthas says: "I bestow upon you, my chosen knight, my powers". That's why you can turn into an Undead using Lichborne, and into a Demon using Metamorphosis. A Dragonswon would be no different. The Dragonflights will bestow their powers upon us, which would include transforming into a Dragon. Plus, they might add a Dragonman race.

    Quote Originally Posted by Orby View Post
    Oh I do think there are more than just gnomes and goblins who can be Tinker in lore, but its more for me personally as I do not currently have a gnome alt and I will only accept Tinker:P
    You do know their racials point towards Arcane mage, right?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •