Page 18 of 66 FirstFirst ...
8
16
17
18
19
20
28
... LastLast
  1. #341
    No more new classes, give Demon Hunters a ranged dps before even thinking of a new class.

    And let it be death themed

    If they do add a new class, I want it to have a lot of different flavor depending on faction or even race, not necessarily mechanics, but cosmetically. Like how druids and shamans have differences.
    Last edited by MikeBogina; 2020-11-22 at 04:06 AM.

  2. #342
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    Well your ability doesn’t exist,
    So what if it doesn't exist? What's the relevance, considering we were literally talking about possible future abilities to give to the present classes.

    doesn’t really fit the spec you’re assigning it to,
    A spec that revolves around using the moon and nature to attack? I mean, by that logic, entangling roots, cyclone, force of nature, and thorns shouldn't be part of the spec. But they are. Because those abilities don't befit a "laser chicken", as you put it:
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    A spec that shoots beams of nature and arcane magic to the point where it's affectionately called "laser chicken", suddenly gets an ability where it drops a flower that spits out "spores"....
    Care to explain that?

    and it was created by you merely for contrarian purposes, so yes it’s stupid.
    No, it was created as a counter to the claims that mechanic themes have "unique mechanics" and "unique gameplay".

    The point is that since those mechanics DONT exist in the class lineup, the class that introduces those mechanics to the game would have UNIQUE mechanics until another class emerges with a similar ability.
    And that has nothing to do with the class theme. And, again, those mechanics not existing in the class lineup doesn't mean they cannot be given to the current classes as time goes on. Shadow Priests got the 'insanity' mechanic later in the game. Balance druids got the 'sun/moon' mechanic later in the game.

    So you’re comparing the similarity between two agility based classes with two classes that share abilities, themes, origins, and purpose. In fact they’re so similar that the concepts for the Necromancer has the same spec configuration as the existing DK class.
    You say so, but I have not seen a single concept of necromancer that has "blood/frost/unholy" as their specs, despite you claiming they're the majority, and you've failed so far to present examples. You just assert they exist.

    Aren’t you advocating for a poison based spec based purely on Diablo 2? Your class write definitely indicates that.
    Nope. Just because I remembered that the D2 necromancer has a poison tree doesn't mean I based my idea "purely" on it. In fact, that's all the inspiration I took from the D2 class. I didn't base a single ability I designed in the D2 game.

    And this is relevant how?
    Are you being obtuse, or something? You literally said:
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    And when he popped up in WC3 as a Necromancer he wasn't using any of those abilities, he was using Necromancy.

    The difference being that we have multiple mechanical abilities for the Tinker class that don’t exist in the Hunter class (in fact none of the Tinker’s abilities exist in the Hunter class). However, DKs have all of the Necromancer’s abilities and there’s no Necromancer that uses poison magic.

    Hopefully you can understand the difference.
    There is none, though. We literally have a necromancer school in where necromancer acolytes learn alchemy from a guy who favors poison and fire. You're basically saying that a hypothetical NPC tagged "Kirin Tor apprentice" doesn't know how to cast spells because we never see the NPC casting magic, despite flavor text when you speak to him, he talks about how he finds the abjuration classes easy...
    I did a Necromancer thing. Check it out! All feedback welcome!
    I also did a Bard thing! Questions, comments and ideas, all welcome!

  3. #343
    @Teriz @Ielenia Why do you both argue the same thing in every thread about possible future classes? Can't you take it to PMs?
    Goodbye-Forever-MMO-Champ
    Still here and still posting

  4. #344
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    Because they're a brand new race and Blizzard can do pretty much whatever they want them since their lore is wide open.
    So according to this hypothetical scenario the Vulpera who have only just been introduced to the Horde learn how to be Tinkers despite their prior existence being subsistence level scavenging the deserts of Vol'dun with the most advanced stuff available to them being alpaca pulled wagons because of the Goblins but the Mag'har who have been using technology introduced to them by Goblins for over 30 years can't because they're too physically inclined? too big? they can already be spellcasters who have absolutely no abilities that require physical strength or ability.

  5. #345
    Quote Originally Posted by Pebrocks The Warlock View Post
    @Teriz @Ielenia Why do you both argue the same thing in every thread about possible future classes? Can't you take it to PMs?
    But you can't publicly display the size of your epeen in PMs
    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.

  6. #346
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    I’ve already explained why it doesn’t fit. You’re free to ignore those facts to push your agenda.
    BeCaUsE I SaId So!

    That's your argument.

    Yeah, under no circumstance is a flower the same as a building. What are we talking about here? Some super massive huge flower? Now we’re getting even more silly.
    Two player summoned NPC's with a health bar that generates minions who then follow and do damage to the target aren't the same?

    Are you high?

    A spore that floats towards its target and explodes is also not functionally the same as a robot that attacks its target and explodes. For example, due to it producing robots, they could upgrade to having better weaponry, produce faster, heal allies, produce scrap when they expire, etc.
    And the plant couldn't generate different kinds of spores that could do more damage, heal allies, leave debris when they expire, etc.?

    Uh no, they’re fundamentally different on pretty much every level
    Uh, no they're not. The only difference is their theme, their "palette" as you called it one of your earlier posts. You're simply refusing to acknowledge it.

    Further we should also acknowledge that one ability actually exists in Warcraft and one does not.
    And what does this have anything to do with this specific discussion? This is entirely around theme =/=mechanics.

    And with that I'm just done. I should have put you on ignore a long time ago.

  7. #347
    Tinker, as others have said. There's so many NPC examples of how this could work.

    Bard, there are a number of musical characters in the world now. What started as a meme is now a clear theme.

    Necromancer, once we're done with Shadowlands Blizz will have a whole pile of death-themed abilities from covenants to cannibalize, ensuring it is distinct from DK and Warlock.

    I think another way to do it would be to just drop new specs on existing classes. It wouldn't work for all of them, but for example you could create a "death" spec for mage, a "dragon" spec for druid, etc.

  8. #348
    Still hoping for necromancer despite this being the perfect xpac for it and the correct time period for a new class and still no luck.

    and I'm talking about a proper spell casting necromancer and not a death knight (plate wearing melee) or warlock (demons, nothing to do with undead)

  9. #349
    For Tinker to be added, it needs to be part of an expansion theme. That theme will have to be a "comedy break" expansion. According to recent interviews, Danuser has mentioned that we are currently only scratching the surface of bigger things to come.

    With the above being said, it is almost impossible to get a curveball expansion in 10.0. If they ever add Tinker, it will probably be a technology flavored class from outer space that has somehow tackled cosmic threats.

  10. #350
    Quote Originally Posted by deviantcultist View Post
    For Tinker to be added, it needs to be part of an expansion theme. That theme will have to be a "comedy break" expansion. According to recent interviews, Danuser has mentioned that we are currently only scratching the surface of bigger things to come.

    With the above being said, it is almost impossible to get a curveball expansion in 10.0. If they ever add Tinker, it will probably be a technology flavored class from outer space that has somehow tackled cosmic threats.
    I could see Tinker maybe in a expansion about the Titans since they tend to be heavy on technology just look at place like Uldir or any other Titan facility (although The Pantheon are being Sargeras jailors)

  11. #351
    Quote Originally Posted by Imperator4321 View Post
    I could see Tinker maybe in a expansion about the Titans since they tend to be heavy on technology just look at place like Uldir or any other Titan facility (although The Pantheon are being Sargeras jailors)
    Agreed. Before arguing about which class may be added, people need to think about what an expansion could be about and how something can be added to that. As cool as it might be, the Necromancer ship has sailed.

    The most likely thematic class is something related to Elune and the Night Warrior, given that we are to deal with the First Ones and other next level cosmic threats.

  12. #352
    Quote Originally Posted by Imperator4321 View Post
    So according to this hypothetical scenario the Vulpera who have only just been introduced to the Horde learn how to be Tinkers despite their prior existence being subsistence level scavenging the deserts of Vol'dun with the most advanced stuff available to them being alpaca pulled wagons because of the Goblins but the Mag'har who have been using technology introduced to them by Goblins for over 30 years can't because they're too physically inclined? too big? they can already be spellcasters who have absolutely no abilities that require physical strength or ability.
    Shhh shh. You're making far too much sense and that dismantles his entire argument.

  13. #353
    The Insane Teriz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Beach City
    Posts
    16,734
    Quote Originally Posted by TheRevenantHero View Post
    Once again, hunters don't exist in lore either. Nobody is lore is labeled a "hunter".
    As shown in another post, that isn't the case.

    Furthermore, your reasoning is exceptionally flawed because Vulpera have absolutely no technological leaning and have no lore character that is a tinker. Meanwhile, the draenei have Grand Artificer Romuul. The Nightborne have Oculeth. The sin'dorei fucking created the manaforges as well as the various automatons that patrol sin'dorei territory. But you disregard other races being tinkers by a different name in lore purely because they're not outright called tinkers. Which is probably one of the more asinine pieces of logic you use.
    Again, it's far easier for Blizzard to simply add lore to the Vulpera than it would be to create a class with various types of technology at work. If we go by previous expansion class iterations, abilities like Pocket Factory, Rock-It-Turret, and Cluster Rocket would be in the ability set. Those abilities simply don't work with Nightborne or Lightforged style technology. However, those abilities work fine with Gnome technology and Vulpera basing their tech off of Goblins. This is also why Tinker being attached to Goblins and Gnomes is a very important point.

  14. #354
    Quote Originally Posted by deviantcultist View Post
    Agreed. Before arguing about which class may be added, people need to think about what an expansion could be about and how something can be added to that. As cool as it might be, the Necromancer ship has sailed.

    The most likely thematic class is something related to Elune and the Night Warrior, given that we are to deal with the First Ones and other next level cosmic threats.
    I'd love it if Night Elf priests could get silver light for their holy spells and night warrior looking shadow spells, give them paladins as well (we already have Delas Moonfang from the paladin order hall)
    Last edited by Imperator4321; 2020-11-22 at 05:23 AM.

  15. #355
    The Insane Teriz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Beach City
    Posts
    16,734
    Quote Originally Posted by Ielenia View Post
    So what if it doesn't exist? What's the relevance, considering we were literally talking about possible future abilities to give to the present classes.
    Your argument is that a mechanic isn't unique because it can be replicated by an ability that doesn't exist. That's what makes the fact that it doesn't exist relevant, also why it makes your argument silly.

    And that has nothing to do with the class theme. And, again, those mechanics not existing in the class lineup doesn't mean they cannot be given to the current classes as time goes on. Shadow Priests got the 'insanity' mechanic later in the game. Balance druids got the 'sun/moon' mechanic later in the game.
    Again, this is a silly contrarian argument that isn't based on facts. The fact of the matter is that there are no existing class abilities with those mechanics, thus a Tinker class with those abilities would have unique mechanics. Is it themed based? I would say that a miniature factory producing robots is very heavily tied to a technology theme. Wouldn't you?

    You say so, but I have not seen a single concept of necromancer that has "blood/frost/unholy" as their specs, despite you claiming they're the majority, and you've failed so far to present examples. You just assert they exist.
    Well here's a very popular one;

    https://www.mmo-champion.com/threads...r-Concept-2017

    Dread is Unholy, Faithless is Blood, and Undeath is a combination of Frost and Unholy.

    Pretty much every Necromancer concept is a variation of that.

    Nope. Just because I remembered that the D2 necromancer has a poison tree doesn't mean I based my idea "purely" on it. In fact, that's all the inspiration I took from the D2 class. I didn't base a single ability I designed in the D2 game.
    You took the concept of Golems from the D2 Necromancer.

    I'm sure if I cared enough, I could find quite a few spells you pilfered from D2.


    Are you being obtuse, or something? You literally said:
    I know what I said. I'm wondering why its relevant.

    There is none, though. We literally have a necromancer school in where necromancer acolytes learn alchemy from a guy who favors poison and fire. You're basically saying that a hypothetical NPC tagged "Kirin Tor apprentice" doesn't know how to cast spells because we never see the NPC casting magic, despite flavor text when you speak to him, he talks about how he finds the abjuration classes easy...
    Again, there's no Necromancer in Warcraft casting fire or arcane spells. You believing Kel'thuzad could do it while he was "transitioning" is purely head canon, and another of your asinine contrarian arguments.

  16. #356
    Old God Mirishka's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Get off my lawn!
    Posts
    10,674
    Tinker, period. That's the only class that I'm actually like 'omg add it already Blizzard!'

    We've already got necromancers (DKs, sorry but they are) and all the 'dragon' classes people suggest just seem silly to me because ultimately they'd have to be balanced around the other classes. So no matter how big and badass your dragon-such-and-such is, ultimately they couldn't be any more powerful than your rogues, warriors, etc.
    My greatest fear is that one day, my MMO-Champion ignore list will run out of space.

  17. #357
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    As shown in another post, that isn't the case.



    Again, it's far easier for Blizzard to simply add lore to the Vulpera than it would be to create a class with various types of technology at work. If we go by previous expansion class iterations, abilities like Pocket Factory, Rock-It-Turret, and Cluster Rocket would be in the ability set. Those abilities simply don't work with Nightborne or Lightforged style technology. However, those abilities work fine with Gnome technology and Vulpera basing their tech off of Goblins. This is also why Tinker being attached to Goblins and Gnomes is a very important point.
    Ah ok so it's ok to use the excuse of "Blizzard can write lore for the race" when it comes to Vulpera but not any other race? Are you seriously incapable of seeing how much of an egregious double standard that is?

  18. #358
    Old God Mirishka's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Get off my lawn!
    Posts
    10,674
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    Again, it's far easier for Blizzard to simply add lore to the Vulpera than it would be to create a class with various types of technology at work. If we go by previous expansion class iterations, abilities like Pocket Factory, Rock-It-Turret, and Cluster Rocket would be in the ability set. Those abilities simply don't work with Nightborne or Lightforged style technology. However, those abilities work fine with Gnome technology and Vulpera basing their tech off of Goblins. This is also why Tinker being attached to Goblins and Gnomes is a very important point.
    Don't forget Anti-personnel Squirrels!
    My greatest fear is that one day, my MMO-Champion ignore list will run out of space.

  19. #359
    The Insane Teriz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Beach City
    Posts
    16,734
    Quote Originally Posted by Imperator4321 View Post
    So according to this hypothetical scenario the Vulpera who have only just been introduced to the Horde learn how to be Tinkers despite their prior existence being subsistence level scavenging the deserts of Vol'dun with the most advanced stuff available to them being alpaca pulled wagons because of the Goblins but the Mag'har who have been using technology introduced to them by Goblins for over 30 years can't because they're too physically inclined? too big? they can already be spellcasters who have absolutely no abilities that require physical strength or ability.
    Actually we have Vulpera gunners;

    https://www.wowhead.com/npc=137527/vulpera-gunner

    And we had Tinkerin' Taji;

    https://www.wowhead.com/npc=138151/tinkerin-taji

    So there's potential there. As I said, it would make sense for them to use more "junker" tech, which also allows them to simply use Goblin technology. It really makes little sense for an Orc to pilot a mech. Even within the Iron Horde, Orcs didn't pilot mechs (except one that was as big as a building). Further when we revisited the Mag'Har 30 years later, they weren't exactly living in a bustling technological wonderland.

  20. #360
    - Tinker: (Plate armor - this one needs to come into WoW at some point)
    - Alchemist: (Leather armor - potion/mixologist class of sorts, think rogue with poisons but potions)
    - Defiler: (Mail armor - Cult of the Damned/Dark Shamans that previously worshipped Deathwing+ChoGall+Garrosh)
    - Dark Ranger: (Mail armor - Sylvanas' created archers, not under her control)
    - Necromancer: (Cloth armor - blood based spells, think death knight but make it ranged and lightweight)
    - Chronomancer/Spellblade: (Cloth armor - sword and shield, mage-like class)
    - Botanist: (Leather Armor - mutation and plant based class, almost alchemist + druid like)
    - Dragonborne: (Any armor type - you are a dragon, you descend from one of the aspects, mortal post Deathwing)
    - Titanforged: (Any armor type - you descend from the titans, you have not been affected by the curse of flesh)
    - Speaker: (Any armor type - azerite and essences but as a class, there's some many spells they could've made a class and not a grind)

    Wow has all of these in lore already, these exist in one way or another.

Posting Permissions

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