1. #5461
    The Insane Ielenia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Brazil
    Posts
    16,577
    Quote Originally Posted by username993720 View Post
    Yes, it does. Because you can't attribute all of them to Hero units.
    I and others have literally shown you that we can. Death Knights come from a myriad of different sources, and the majority of the monk class itself come from sources outside Warcraft.

    Worse: part of the demon hunter's abilities and concept also seem to have taken inspiration from Heroes of the Storm, considering his HotS ability "Sweeping Strike" could be argued to be the inspiration for Fel Rush and Momentum. The Metamorphosis ability also works kind of like the HotS version, making the DH jump and land on a target location, dealing damage as they transform.

    Of course it can. He fucking featured in the cinematic trailer and on the game box.
    That's like saying Arthas and Illidan weren't for the Demon Hunter and Death Knight.
    Being featured in the cinematic trailer and the game box is irrelevant, because that does not tell us if the character was used as the basis of the class' design or not. All it tell us is that Blizzard decided to use Chen as the centerpiece because he's the most famous pandaren known in lore. And, frankly, the only pandaren in existence at that moment in time.

    As for Arthas and Illidan, they are indeed representatives of their respective classes, because: a) the playable classes are called "death knight" and "demon hunter", i.e. the exact names as the WC3 units; and b) we have explicit lore saying that the death knights and demon hunters we have today is because Arthas and Illidan, respectively, created/trained them.

    The unit is called "Eredar Warlock". -_-
    But it's a demon. And I'd assume it's basic knowledge that demons cast demonic magic (i.e. fel magic). We have no examples of Azerothian warlocks using fel magic and summoning demons.
    I did a Necromancer thing. Check it out! All feedback welcome!
    I also did a Bard thing! Questions, comments and ideas, all welcome!

  2. #5462
    After binge watching first two seasons of Castlevania on Netflix I started to think. Hmm. We really dont have traditional vampires in WoW. Clearly very vampire in revendreth but anima is replaced with blood.

    Could a vampire hero class fit in the wow universe?

  3. #5463
    Quote Originally Posted by Ielenia View Post
    I and others have literally shown you that we can. Death Knights come from a myriad of different sources, and the majority of the monk class itself come from sources outside Warcraft.

    Worse: part of the demon hunter's abilities and concept also seem to have taken inspiration from Heroes of the Storm, considering his HotS ability "Sweeping Strike" could be argued to be the inspiration for Fel Rush and Momentum. The Metamorphosis ability also works kind of like the HotS version, making the DH jump and land on a target location, dealing damage as they transform.
    I was referring to the Vanilla classes.
    But, to answer your argument:
    HotS is based on the Warcraft 3 Hero. Not the other way around.
    Monk's Mistweaver and Windwalker was, indeed, outsourced. You can't, really, tell me from where. But the basis for the class was the Pandaren Brewmaster.
    Death Knight integrating different units into it is not a problem. In the end, it was based on the Death Knight Hero unit.
    What you refer to here is what those classes are made of, instead of what classes have been added.
    At the end of the day, they are all WC3 Hero units.

    Being featured in the cinematic trailer and the game box is irrelevant, because that does not tell us if the character was used as the basis of the class' design or not. All it tell us is that Blizzard decided to use Chen as the centerpiece because he's the most famous pandaren known in lore. And, frankly, the only pandaren in existence at that moment in time.

    As for Arthas and Illidan, they are indeed representatives of their respective classes, because: a) the playable classes are called "death knight" and "demon hunter", i.e. the exact names as the WC3 units; and b) we have explicit lore saying that the death knights and demon hunters we have today is because Arthas and Illidan, respectively, created/trained them.
    * Chen is a Pandaren Monk (Brewmaster). Not just a general Pandaren.

    The Brewmaster spec tells you the same as the class' name.

    But it's a demon. And I'd assume it's basic knowledge that demons cast demonic magic (i.e. fel magic). We have no examples of Azerothian warlocks using fel magic and summoning demons.
    Demonic-corrupted race. Not an original one. Like Fel orcs. And they have no difference in Warlock from the Green orcs.
    And you can't just assume that it derives from them being demonic and not a Warlock. Because they have other classes. That doesn't mean they all use green fel fire.

    It doesn't have to be azerothian. Draenei are not from azeroth. Neither are Orcs.

    Quote Originally Posted by Stoffmeister View Post
    After binge watching first two seasons of Castlevania on Netflix I started to think. Hmm. We really dont have traditional vampires in WoW. Clearly very vampire in revendreth but anima is replaced with blood.

    Could a vampire hero class fit in the wow universe?
    No, but playable Venthyr are coming. Fits perfectly with the Blood Death Knight.
    Commenting on these forums is like walking on eggshells - you never know where the next infraction is gonna come from.

  4. #5464
    Quote Originally Posted by Stoffmeister View Post
    After binge watching first two seasons of Castlevania on Netflix I started to think. Hmm. We really dont have traditional vampires in WoW. Clearly very vampire in revendreth but anima is replaced with blood.

    Could a vampire hero class fit in the wow universe?
    You're forgetting the San'layn vampire elves from Wrath.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by username993720 View Post
    No, but playable Venthyr are coming. Fits perfectly with the Blood Death Knight.
    A race that is a soul with no physical body is going to become a playable race?

  5. #5465
    Quote Originally Posted by Calfredd View Post
    A race that is a soul with no physical body is going to become a playable race?
    Yep. It has a physical body. That of the Venthyr. Otherwise, they would look like those little souls with hands.

    Male and female? ✓
    Playable character skeleton? ✓
    Up-to-date textures? ✓
    Customization options? ✓
    part of a reputation? ✓
    Commenting on these forums is like walking on eggshells - you never know where the next infraction is gonna come from.

  6. #5466
    Titan Syegfryed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    Darkshore, Killing Living and Dead elves
    Posts
    12,949
    Quote Originally Posted by jellmoo View Post
    I'm not particularly fond of Dark Rangers (I'm honestly tired of 'dark and edgy') but I do think that they absolutely could create a class out of it. Though I think it would be a mistake to make it Elf centric. We simply don't need a bevy of Elf centric classes in the game. I think going the Death Knight route would actually make the most sense, and essentially give fans of every race another solid ranged option, which is way better than just shoehorning in an exact replica of the Dark Ranger.
    neither do i, but i don't want to bash any "possible" classes, but i do think dark ranger is something totally unnecessary and redundant, i would prefer something like a 4th spec and that would change based around the race lore, like trolls and others tribal races would be shadow hunters, in the alliance they could have those elune priests.

    Basically same class but with different animations/colors and names of skills, but i don't think blizzard is ready for that kind of gameplay

  7. #5467
    Quote Originally Posted by username993720 View Post
    Yep. It has a physical body. That of the Venthyr. Otherwise, they would look like those little souls with hands.

    Male and female? ✓
    Playable character skeleton? ✓
    Up-to-date textures? ✓
    Customization options? ✓
    part of a reputation? ✓
    Literally living in a plane of existence where only the dead can live under normal circumstances? ✓

  8. #5468
    Titan Syegfryed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    Darkshore, Killing Living and Dead elves
    Posts
    12,949
    Quote Originally Posted by username993720 View Post
    Because everyone can be undead? Whoopy-fucking-doo.
    It's a Dark Ranger for a reason.
    everyone can shut a fucking bow, literally, every single race is able to shot bows and can be hunters/aka rangers, they just need to die and ahve trianing to be dark rangers.

    the fact that they are undead when they choose that class.
    that makes literally no sense.

    "some dead elves are dark ranges, that mans void elves can be dark rangers, this is a grotesque example of fallacy
    In Necromancy background, i would lean more towards the Banshee orientation - like Elves of all sorts.
    banshees are a form of undead not someone who dabble with necromancy, nonsensical


    A background nonetheless.
    Unlike you giving free classes, because of "reasons".
    you think "because elves" is a better background of races dying being resurrected and trained as dark rangers? your bias have no limits

  9. #5469
    Quote Originally Posted by username993720 View Post
    Well, maybe because you didn't consider the Ankoan to be a hint. Not for an Asian-themed expansion, though. But, at playable Blademasters.
    And that's where the problem arises. We don't, necessarily, have to associate it with the Burning Blade clan, because it is the most famous. There are other races, like Ankoan, Lightforged Draenei, Saberon, Saurok and Mantid.
    Yes, these are complete possibilities.

    However the core concept of the Blademaster is ultimately going to be Samuro and the Burning Blade. It's undeniable that these guys are the ones who will usher in the Blademaster class.

    As talked about before, Blizzard backs their new classes behind well established Heroes. Who is going to be the mainline Blademaster? Not some Ankoan who ushers in a new Japanese themed expansion.

    It's like talking about the Monk class. Sure, they can open it up to every race, but ultimately it's going to boil down to the Pandarens and their specific cultural themes. Or the DK, we can have gnome DKs and any race be DK and that's cool, but the ones who are front-and-center of the lore are undead Humans like Mograine and Arthas.

    With Blademaster, it's going to have to tie in to the Burning Blade some way some how, because that's what most people automatically associate the Blademaster class with. It's the elephant in the room, so to speak.

    What? you have to be crazy to not associate Rexxar with the Hunter class. Have you looked into his lore and background, at all? his abilities and theme?
    So doing more digging, I found that I was wrong about this assessment, and you are completely right about this connection.

    I was unaware that they tied Rexxar completely into the Hunter lore in Legion, which is exactly what I was looking for to formally bridge the two concepts together.

    Since Rexxar joined the Unseen Path in the war against the Legion and was referred in game text as 'one of the greatest hunters of his time', it's now clear to me that they do intend the Hunter class to unambiguously represent the Beastmaster.

    No, not class abilities that can be borrowed.
    Racial abilities, like War Stomp and Endurance mirroring the Tauren Chieftain's War Stomp and Endurance Aura. Stoneform, often referred to as Avatar, and of course Might of the Mountain.
    Er, that doesn't quite make sense to me. Why are you equating racials into this?

    Does that mean my Dwarf Mage with Stoneform is a Mountain King then? My Tauren Priest with Warstomp is now a Chieftain? I don't understand this reasoning unless I'm misinterpreting what you are saying here.

    Stoneform and Warstomp racials are not exclusive to Chieftains or Mountain Kings. If all Tauren get Warstomp, then it's implied that the Chieftain's ability in WC3 is actually an ability that is inherent to all Tauren. It's a poor way to retcon a really cool class ability, but that's what it is.

    Well, they do it because they don't want a certain class or don't believe it will be added.
    I do it because i've carefully examined the mindset of class additions and those that are intended by Blizzard to be in-game, using hints.
    It's not that i'm against or don't like it. But, more like my calculations have brought me to that conclusion.
    But you are still prone to human error, which is what I'm pointing out.

    Do I like Tinkers or believe in Tinkers? No, not particularly so. I am using in-game hints as well to conclude that they have the highest possibility of being playable.
    Do I like Dragonsworn or believe in Dragonsworn? I like the concept, but I don't entirely believe in it either since I regard it in the same 'Name on a list' potential that the Runemaster had in Wrath. I've clearly explained all the in-game hints that lead to the possibility, even if it also equally points to a new Race or Covenant. It's the same path that they all take just like if we were talking about how Monks and Pandaren could be added to the game, there's no one path that says we could only get one Chinese-culturally inspired Race OR Class just because the pattern that came before was an expansion adding one or the other.

    And this plays into the human error of applying patterns into the discussion, like implying that Warcraft 3 Heroes will be the main or only picks. It doesn't take into account that those patterns always change (like every second expansion gives us a Class, or any expansion with a new Class can't have a new Race). We're all prone to our own subjective biases.

    Which is why I choose not to prop my own theories as arguments *against* anyone else's ideas. That I've mentioned Tinkers and Dragonsworn and explained my reasoning is *solely* because you asked for my opinion on the matter, not because I'm trying to convince anyone else of my personal reasons.

    If you think everything has to be obvious, then you run into the same problem as the others. As was said there, O and U are sometimes interchangeable and Thia is used as a suffix, like many names in game.
    Well, why should I think it has to be obscure either?

    I mean, you're talking about your own personal theory on the matter which is absolutely questionable, and based on the comments of your own thread, fairly contestable. How many people actually agree with your theory, have you considered that before jumping in to defend it? Sometimes we blind ourselves in thinking our theories are right because we go on defense mode and stop taking an objective approach. I admit I am the same way, and I've reacted the same way in assessing the Beastmaster. Once I dug deep enough, I found I was wrong, and I can at least admit my faults in that.

    If I have an idea to propose, I try not to commit myself to the idea before I present it publicly. I throw it out there, and I purposely try to distance myself from my own idea and see how people react. If someone doesn't understand it, I will try to explain, but otherwise I will try and hold back from actually *defending* the idea, since I'm comfortable knowing that people can have different opinions. It's best to take an objective approach, otherwise we're going to be blinding ourselves to facts as we see some people in this forum already doing.

    We have to be open to the possibilities that we are wrong.

    I don't mind the Pandaren, either, or any furry, for that matter, because they have a culture behind them. Unlike eastern games that add them for their cute value.

    Though, i don't think you can say it wasn't there and just, 'suddenly', erupted with their appearance on the MoP expansion's features. It must have been under the surface, for a time.
    All I have to respond is anecdotal, but as a long-term fan of Warcraft since WC2, and as someone who pays close attention to the community reactions of certain things... no, I would say there has been no vocal community hate towards Pandaren prior to Mists of Pandaria. Whatever 'pocket discrimination' was present, it certainly never made itself public any time before MoP. Even in discussions where people talk about playable Pandaren, you don't hear anyone speak up against it saying it'd be stupid or terrible. Remember, Pandaren were actually praised when they were an April Fools joke in Vanilla WC3, which is the reason why the Brewmaster was even made. The most controversy that the Pandaren ever had in the community was when Blizzard originally designed the Brewmaster with Japanese armor and weaponry instead of Chinese, which was considered cultural misappropriation. Otherwise, I personally did not see any significant hate of the level that Mists of Pandaria brought out. It was eye opening to me.

    And truth be told, I saw zero Gnome hate until WoW as well. I heard zero complaints about Gnomes being in Warcraft 2, but once they were made playable in WoW, it was all out there front and center.

    And i don't get Gnomes and Goblins hate, either. They, literally, have an interesting and distinct culture, aside from being 'cute'. Yes, when you apply them to classes like Warriors, they look ridiculous, but that is the whole point. They are more of a scientific/technology race.
    Anecdotally speaking, I think 80% of the people in my small guild (~25 people) vocally expressed a dislike of Gnomes, with maybe 30% openly expressing it any time they could. When asked about the reasons, it ranged from the SD proportions making them look like freaky muppets, or the 4 fingers making them look deformed, or the 'stupid faces'. It never really bothered me, but I do fully acknowledge that it does bother others, even if it's just a general 'dislike' and not a full on mouth-frothing hatred.

    Why not, simply, do it? because it is a monumental task, overall. And doing it every other expansion must be exhausting, alongside balancing it all with the other classes.
    Right, I agree. It's a monumental task.

    Which also implies it's a big decision in choosing what class concept deserves the focus of all their time and effort. It's not something lightly chosen like 'Shadow Hunter, because we have Trolls in the next expansion' or 'Blademaster, because we have a Japanese-inspired nation in mind'. There are plenty more factors to consider, wouldn't you agree?

    Right. But, you speak as you are some sort of their spokesman, in regards to opinions on the races and classes. I don't think they hate it as much as the playerbase does. They made it, themselves, after all.
    Right, but they don't hate Pandaren either yet we clearly see them taking a back seat to the lore. We have to consider all the angles here.

    Blizzard isn't bound to pleasing the fans. They have ultimate control of their designs, we are aware of this.

    Yet Blizzard's aim is also to please the fans because ultimately that is what will bring them back and keep them in the game. And as we both recognize, something like the Pandarens was completely a shock and a gamechanger when it comes to making decisions on a whim. It's not going to be Heroes of the Storm level fanfare when they add a fan favourite like Hogger into the game that anyone can choose to love or hate. These decisions have lasting effects on the community, because the community is vocal and fickle and prone to *influencing others* in significant ways. Look at how the whole Classic situation was poorly dealt with prior to their ultimate decision to actually make a Classic WoW. The whole Nostalrius and 'You think you do but you don't' and everything else. Blizzard has ultimate control over their decisions, but they can't make them all in a vacuum where the fans don't matter.

    We have to consider the ebb and flow of trends when considering these things.

    We can talk about the possibilities of side adventure expansions like a Japanese themed expansion or an Australian themed expansion, and that's fine as discussion material. But if we're realistically talking about the merits of these ideas, then we have to consider that MoP and WoD were both highly criticized for being 'side adventures' that didn't feel like they moved the big-picture plot forward significantly. We haven't had a side adventure, light-hearted exploration expansion since MoP, and I don't think there is much interest in revisiting that type of expansion in the near or possible future, because it's garnered mixed results. People want an expansion that will have a direct connection to the greater 'Void Lords are a big threat' plotline. Even now, BFA and Shadowlands are both building up towards that even though we're dealing with different enemies on the way there. If we just consider a Japanese continent, what established lore connections are there to the bigger threat? I mean even with Pandaria having the Sha directly connected to an Old God, people didn't really see this expansion as being plot-relevant overall, it was still seen primarily as a side adventure.

    When considering future expansions, we have to consider what people actually want to see. And you're right, Light vs Void is definitely front and center, though I personally think they will stretch it out as long as they can before we ultimately get there.

    But, we're not talking class skins.
    If we're talking Class identities, then Class Skin is part of that conversation.

    I mean, would you exclude Allied Races from new Race discussion? I wouldn't, because they are ultimately new Races.

    Same thing when I talk about Class Skins. I'm not talking about a Warlock with a Necromancer transmog, I'm talking about a new Necromancer class that simply re-uses Warlock core gameplay. I'm talking about a new Blademaster class that uses Warrior core gameplay. These are independent identities.

    I want to be clear that when I say Class Skin and use this term, I mean it as new individual Classes. These are not just 'Play a Warlock and retheme yourself with this fancy menu option'.

    Dragonman, perhaps?
    What does Wrathion have to do with Dragonmen? There's no connection there.

    I'm not asking about possibilities, I'm implying that we have no information or game hints we have for what Race he's representing in BFA alpha would have been. We could only assume it's dragon related, but to what extent we would be absolutely unsure.

    Pretty sure Kharazim speaks in a russian accent, like the Draenei. And Zenyatta is said to be from Nepal.
    And they're both Monks using Shaolin Monk inspired Martial Arts and Buddhist concepts of Chi. the D3 Monk's whole kit is still influenced by Chinese pop culture (martial arts movies, RPG archetypes etc). Zenyatta may be slightly more tuned towards the original Indian style buddhism, so I'll give you that, but Zenyatta has no real connection to either the D3 or Pandaren style Monk either so not quite sure why he's relevant to the discussion. He's more of an RPG Mystic, to be honest; the Spellcaster variety of Monk.

    Draenei Monks also speak in russian accents, right? They're still using Chinese influenced Martial Arts.

    Like i told lelenia: This is an Eredar Warlock unit.
    Yes, and the fel connection was directly implied to them being Demons.

    Look at Demon Hunters and the fel-green connection in WoW. Do you know what color flame Immolation is? It's red.

    Do you know what color attack you get when you use Metamorphosis and demonic? Green flames.

    The association made and implied in WC3 was that Demons use green flames, while if you're just demonically empowered like a Demon Hunter or Chaos Orc, you're still a mortal who uses Red colored flames. There was no direct correlation between the green color of "Fel" magic, since the term loosely applied to any and all dark magic. Warlock units at the time were not exclusive to using Fel magic, though an Eredar would be because they are themselves Demonic units.

    TBC is when that changed, where they gave Blood Elves green eyes due to fel exposure and started to tie it in directly as being green colored magic in the Outland. Mists of Pandaria is when they officially allowed mortals to use Green flames and directly associated it as being Fel magic as it should have always been.
    Last edited by Triceron; 2021-04-09 at 11:48 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    Since Arthas used Frostmourne, which is a Runeblade, and Frostmourne's power eminates from those runes, that made him a Runemaster by default.

  10. #5470
    The Insane Ielenia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Brazil
    Posts
    16,577
    Quote Originally Posted by username993720 View Post
    I was referring to the Vanilla classes.
    Vanilla, expansion, doesn't matter.

    HotS is based on the Warcraft 3 Hero. Not the other way around.
    I never claimed the Warcraft 3 demon hunter was based off HotS Illidan, so I don't know why you felt like pointing that out. It's an objectively absurd claim to make, too. I simply said that the WoW class has taken inspiration from HotS Illidan.

    Monk's Mistweaver and Windwalker was, indeed, outsourced. You can't, really, tell me from where.
    It doesn't matter that we don't know exactly from where the inspiration came from. It suffices to know it came from outside the Warcraft franchise.

    But the basis for the class was the Pandaren Brewmaster.
    Again, it's an easy argument to say that the basis was not the WC3 unit.

    Death Knight integrating different units into it is not a problem. In the end, it was based on the Death Knight Hero unit.
    Except we're not talking about "basis" of the death knight class. We're talking about the class as a whole and how it has several different sources. It didn't came solely from the DK unit.

    What you refer to here is what those classes are made of, instead of what classes have been added.
    What do you mean by "added"?

    At the end of the day, they are all WC3 Hero units.
    But we know that they don't have to be, thanks to the runemaster idea.

    * Chen is a Pandaren Monk (Brewmaster). Not just a general Pandaren.

    The Brewmaster spec tells you the same as the class' name.
    Chen was never a monk in the lore until the MoP expansion came along and Blizzard retconed him into being a monk all along. Until then, he was just a brewmaster, seemingly no different than the dwarven brewmasters we meet during Brewfest.

    Demonic-corrupted race. Not an original one. Like Fel orcs. And they have no difference in Warlock from the Green orcs.
    Fel orcs are not demons. Man'ari are demons. And you haven't shown any orc, green, red, brown or whatever rainbow color, using fel magic and/or summoning demons prior to WoW.

    And you can't just assume that it derives from them being demonic and not a Warlock. Because they have other classes. That doesn't mean they all use green fel fire.
    That's like saying elementals casting magic don't have to cast elemental magic. They're demons, their bodies are teeming with fel magic.

    It doesn't have to be azerothian. Draenei are not from azeroth. Neither are Orcs.
    Again: you haven't shown any orc being able to summon demons or use fel magic.
    I did a Necromancer thing. Check it out! All feedback welcome!
    I also did a Bard thing! Questions, comments and ideas, all welcome!

  11. #5471
    Quote Originally Posted by Syegfryed View Post
    neither do i, but i don't want to bash any "possible" classes, but i do think dark ranger is something totally unnecessary and redundant, i would prefer something like a 4th spec and that would change based around the race lore, like trolls and others tribal races would be shadow hunters, in the alliance they could have those elune priests.

    Basically same class but with different animations/colors and names of skills, but i don't think blizzard is ready for that kind of gameplay
    I don't disagree, though to be fair I felt the same way about Demon Hunters. I would much rather have something based around voodoo, which seems incredibly under represented in a playable form, considering how prevalent it is in the lore of a major race.

    When it comes to Dark Rangers, the only real thing of note from my point of view comes when people say "Blizzard can't make a Dark Ranger class". They absolutely can. If somebody says "they shouldn't make a Dark Ranger class", that's a completely different argument and discussion, and honestly, a more interesting one.

  12. #5472
    And necromancer doesn't overlap?
    Yes. It overlaps with the other 4 'dark' mage specs and death knights.

    Not that i dont want it added, but i dont think it needs to exist as a class, i dont think you could get 3 distinct specs out of it unless they did some nonsense like it having 4 specs based on each covenant.

    I dont think we need 2 more dark caster specs, though i could see them easily adding a blood themed healing spec with bone shields and blood transference, and a baseline necro spec that we all expect with diseases and skeletons but not an unholy death knight...
    Third spec could be something more akin to kel'thuzad with ice magic etc.

    But there is overlap, a tinker could have a fresh kit with literally NOTHING from any other classes. I mean, the necromancer you could cobble together out of existing specs, tack frost mage, unholy DK but ranged and reskin disc priest red and bony and we have our necro, which id be cool with but there is still overlap.
    Tinker could have 5 specs and still not touch a single thing any other class has. They could easily fulfill every role in the game, ranged physical 'engineer' spec with grenades, rockets, specialist weapons like a flamer or rapid fire machine gun, a caster spec with tesla coils, death rays, robo bobombs and utility belts, a healer spec either with healing drones or an apothecary style scientist, a tank mech driver, a melee 'iron man' kind of hero with tons of augments etc etc.
    They could go in so many directions in so many ways and none of it would come close to any existing spec. I think i mentioned dragonsworn elsewhere but even that would only steal from existing specs.

    So imo tinker is easily the best option for a new spec.

    As for necro, i think they should develop a new class system entirely for one off spec classes and i have mentioned that elsewhere. I do think they should add in necromancer and dark ranger to the game, but i dont think they should be in the same class and i certainly dont think either is deserving of its own class.
    I would also love to see thing's like mage knights, elemental specialists and almost every other magic/discipline option available

  13. #5473
    Quote Originally Posted by Calfredd View Post
    Literally living in a plane of existence where only the dead can live under normal circumstances? ✓
    Which we, living mortals, are visiting? ✓

    Quote Originally Posted by Syegfryed View Post
    everyone can shut a fucking bow, literally, every single race is able to shot bows and can be hunters/aka rangers, they just need to die and ahve trianing to be dark rangers.
    A Ranger is more than just shooting a bow. It uses minor nature magic, stealth (or camouflage), and melee combat with daggers/one handed-swords.

    Races affiliated with that profession:
    Blood elf, High elf, Night elf, Void elf, Human, Forsaken, Draenei, Pandaren.

    "some dead elves are dark ranges, that mans void elves can be dark rangers, this is a grotesque example of fallacy
    No. They are former High elves. High elves have rangers. Void elves have Umbral Rangers.

    banshees are a form of undead not someone who dabble with necromancy, nonsensical
    All undeads use a form of necromancy. Not all master it, like the necromancer. You can see it in the Touch of the Grave racial or the fact that undead used to create rot wherever they went (like in the cinematic).

    you think "because elves" is a better background of races dying being resurrected and trained as dark rangers? your bias have no limits
    It makes sense lore-wise, unlike your liberty of giving all classes to every race.

    Quote Originally Posted by Triceron View Post
    Yes, these are complete possibilities.

    However the core concept of the Blademaster is ultimately going to be Samuro and the Burning Blade. It's undeniable that these guys are the ones who will usher in the Blademaster class.

    As talked about before, Blizzard backs their new classes behind well established Heroes. Who is going to be the mainline Blademaster? Not some Ankoan who ushers in a new Japanese themed expansion.

    It's like talking about the Monk class. Sure, they can open it up to every race, but ultimately it's going to boil down to the Pandarens and their specific cultural themes. Or the DK, we can have gnome DKs and any race be DK and that's cool, but the ones who are front-and-center of the lore are undead Humans like Mograine and Arthas.

    With Blademaster, it's going to have to tie in to the Burning Blade some way some how, because that's what most people automatically associate the Blademaster class with. It's the elephant in the room, so to speak.
    I guess you're right.

    So doing more digging, I found that I was wrong about this assessment, and you are completely right about this connection.

    I was unaware that they tied Rexxar completely into the Hunter lore in Legion, which is exactly what I was looking for to formally bridge the two concepts together.

    Since Rexxar joined the Unseen Path in the war against the Legion and was referred in game text as 'one of the greatest hunters of his time', it's now clear to me that they do intend the Hunter class to unambiguously represent the Beastmaster.
    Finally.
    Though, i expected someone as articulated as you to, already, be aware of it.

    Er, that doesn't quite make sense to me. Why are you equating racials into this?

    Does that mean my Dwarf Mage with Stoneform is a Mountain King then? My Tauren Priest with Warstomp is now a Chieftain? I don't understand this reasoning unless I'm misinterpreting what you are saying here.

    Stoneform and Warstomp racials are not exclusive to Warriors, so there's no real connection to bridge here. If all Tauren get Warstomp, then it's implied that the Chieftain's ability in WC3 is actually an ability that is inherent to all Tauren.
    They aren't. But, Blizzard meant for them to imply on the class they are leaning towards. Otherwise, you'd have racial abilities from the Spiritwalker instead, for example.

    But you are still prone to human error, which is what I'm pointing out.

    Do I like Tinkers or believe in Tinkers? No, not particularly so. I am using in-game hints as well to conclude that they have the highest possibility of being playable.
    Do I like Dragonsworn or believe in Dragonsworn? I like the concept, but I don't entirely believe in it either since I regard it in the same 'Name on a list' potential that the Runemaster had in Wrath. I've clearly explained all the in-game hints that lead to the possibility, even if it also equally points to a new Race or Covenant. It's the same path that they all take just like if we were talking about how Monks and Pandaren could be added to the game, there's no one path that says we could only get one Chinese-culturally inspired Race OR Class just because the pattern that came before was an expansion adding one or the other.

    And this plays into the human error of applying patterns into the discussion, like implying that Warcraft 3 Heroes will be the main or only picks. It doesn't take into account that those patterns always change (like every second expansion gives us a Class, or any expansion with a new Class can't have a new Race). We're all prone to our own subjective biases.

    Which is why I choose not to prop my own theories as arguments *against* anyone else's ideas. That I've mentioned Tinkers and Dragonsworn and explained my reasoning is *solely* because you asked for my opinion on the matter, not because I'm trying to convince anyone else of my personal reasons.
    Everyone is prone to error.
    For example, i tried to predict the expansion after BFA and failed miserably. I thought it was going to be Light vs. Void, based on my analysis of cinematic trailers and last raids. Yet, it is not off the table. So, while we can all give up and claim everything is fair and square in class additions, i'd rather use my methods of prediction. Otherwise, there's not, really, much fun in that.

    Well, why should I think it has to be obscure either?

    I mean, you're talking about your own personal theory on the matter which is absolutely questionable, and based on the comments of your own thread, fairly contestable. How many people actually agree with your theory, have you considered that before jumping in to defend it? Sometimes we blind ourselves in thinking our theories are right because we go on defense mode and stop taking an objective approach. I admit I am the same way, and I've reacted the same way in assessing the Beastmaster. Once I dug deep enough, I found I was wrong, and I can at least admit my faults in that.

    If I have an idea to propose, I try not to commit myself to the idea before I present it publicly. I throw it out there, and I purposely try to distance myself from my own idea and see how people react. If someone doesn't understand it, I will try to explain, but otherwise I will try and hold back from actually *defending* the idea, since I'm comfortable knowing that people can have different opinions. It's best to take an objective approach, otherwise we're going to be blinding ourselves to facts as we see some people in this forum already doing.

    We have to be open to the possibilities that we are wrong.
    Well, you're right. But, i didn't just come up with it. The Korthia connection to Kur is mentioned in two WoWpedia pages.

    All I have to respond is anecdotal, but as a long-term fan of Warcraft since WC2, and as someone who pays close attention to the community reactions of certain things... no, I would say there has been no vocal community hate towards Pandaren prior to Mists of Pandaria. Whatever 'pocket discrimination' was present, it certainly never made itself public any time before MoP. Even in discussions where people talk about playable Pandaren, you don't hear anyone speak up against it saying it'd be stupid or terrible. Remember, Pandaren were actually praised when they were an April Fools joke in Vanilla WC3, which is the reason why the Brewmaster was even made. The most controversy that the Pandaren ever had in the community was when Blizzard originally designed the Brewmaster with Japanese armor and weaponry instead of Chinese, which was considered cultural misappropriation. Otherwise, I personally did not see any significant hate of the level that Mists of Pandaria brought out. It was eye opening to me.

    And truth be told, I saw zero Gnome hate until WoW as well. I heard zero complaints about Gnomes being in Warcraft 2, but once they were made playable in WoW, it was all out there front and center.
    Then, i guess we can come to the conclusion that WoW players are toxic (and even some people here )

    Anecdotally speaking, I think 80% of the people in my small guild (~25 people) vocally expressed a dislike of Gnomes, with maybe 30% openly expressing it any time they could. When asked about the reasons, it ranged from the SD proportions making them look like freaky muppets, or the 4 fingers making them look deformed, or the 'stupid faces'. It never really bothered me, but I do fully acknowledge that it does bother others, even if it's just a general 'dislike' and not a full on mouth-frothing hatred.
    Visuals are a fair argument.
    But, they're more than just disfigured creatures. They're a uniquely technological race.

    Right, I agree. It's a monumental task.

    Which also implies it's a big decision in choosing what class concept deserves the focus of all their time and effort. It's not something lightly chosen like 'Shadow Hunter, because we have Trolls in the next expansion' or 'Blademaster, because we have a Japanese-inspired nation in mind'. There are plenty more factors to consider, wouldn't you agree?
    Well, it was the case up until Shadowlands.

    Right, but they don't hate Pandaren either yet we clearly see them taking a back seat to the lore. We have to consider all the angles here.

    Blizzard isn't bound to pleasing the fans. They have ultimate control of their designs, we are aware of this.

    Yet Blizzard's aim is also to please the fans because ultimately that is what will bring them back and keep them in the game. And as we both recognize, something like the Pandarens was completely a shock and a gamechanger when it comes to making decisions on a whim. It's not going to be Heroes of the Storm level fanfare when they add a fan favourite like Hogger into the game that anyone can choose to love or hate. These decisions have lasting effects on the community, because the community is vocal and fickle and prone to *influencing others* in significant ways. Look at how the whole Classic situation was poorly dealt with prior to their ultimate decision to actually make a Classic WoW. The whole Nostalrius and 'You think you do but you don't' and everything else. Blizzard has ultimate control over their decisions, but they can't make them all in a vacuum where the fans don't matter.

    We have to consider the ebb and flow of trends when considering these things.

    We can talk about the possibilities of side adventure expansions like a Japanese themed expansion or an Australian themed expansion, and that's fine as discussion material. But if we're realistically talking about the merits of these ideas, then we have to consider that MoP and WoD were both highly criticized for being 'side adventures' that didn't feel like they moved the big-picture plot forward significantly. We haven't had a side adventure, light-hearted exploration expansion since MoP, and I don't think there is much interest in revisiting that type of expansion in the near or possible future, because it's garnered mixed results. People want an expansion that will have a direct connection to the greater 'Void Lords are a big threat' plotline. Even now, BFA and Shadowlands are both building up towards that even though we're dealing with different enemies on the way there. If we just consider a Japanese continent, what established lore connections are there to the bigger threat? I mean even with Pandaria having the Sha directly connected to an Old God, people didn't really see this expansion as being plot-relevant overall, it was still seen primarily as a side adventure.

    When considering future expansions, we have to consider what people actually want to see. And you're right, Light vs Void is definitely front and center, though I personally think they will stretch it out as long as they can before we ultimately get there.
    From what i know, they considered the neutrality of Pandaren a failure. The theme of the expansion and race was deemed as too light-hearted by the playerbase, so i can only guess they took note of that.
    I don't know how many world-threat expansions they can come up with, though.
    As for the cosmic scale, i can't really associate a Blademaster with any of them. I can only tie it to the Dragonman Samurai concept they had made a long time ago, possibly connecting it to a Dragon expansion.

    If we're talking Class identities, then Class Skin is part of that conversation.

    I mean, would you exclude Allied Races from new Race discussion? I wouldn't, because they are ultimately new Races.

    Same thing when I talk about Class Skins. I'm not talking about a Warlock with a Necromancer transmog, I'm talking about a new Necromancer class that simply re-uses Warlock core gameplay. I'm talking about a new Blademaster class that uses Warrior core gameplay. These are independent identities.

    I want to be clear that when I say Class Skin and use this term, I mean it as new individual Classes. These are not just 'Play a Warlock and retheme yourself with this fancy menu option'.
    Oh. Because that sounded more like customization options than Allied races.
    Though, i don't know how much people want to repeat the gameplay of existing classes.

    What does Wrathion have to do with Dragonmen? There's no connection there.

    I'm not asking about possibilities, I'm implying that we have no information or game hints we have for what Race he's representing in BFA alpha would have been. We could only assume it's dragon related, but to what extent we would be absolutely unsure.
    Because that's the only dragon option available, and he's a dragon, after all.

    And they're both Monks using Shaolin Monk inspired Martial Arts and Buddhist concepts of Chi. the D3 Monk's whole kit is still influenced by Chinese pop culture (martial arts movies, RPG archetypes etc). Zenyatta may be slightly more tuned towards the original Indian style buddhism, so I'll give you that, but Zenyatta has no real connection to either the D3 or Pandaren style Monk either so not quite sure why he's relevant to the discussion. He's more of an RPG Mystic, to be honest; the Spellcaster variety of Monk.

    Draenei Monks also speak in russian accents, right? They're still using Chinese influenced Martial Arts.
    He's somewhat based on the Monk character of Diablo 3. Look at his garment, beads, dots on the head and light-based abilities.

    Well, Draenei Monks before Mists of Pandaria were Auchenai. A different breed of Monks. Like Humans Scarlet Monastery ones.
    I'm saying, they never took the clothing, the dots on the head, the light-based attacks and applied it to the Monk in WoW.

    Yes, and the fel connection was directly implied to them being Demons.

    Look at Demon Hunters and the fel-green connection in WoW. Do you know what color flame Immolation is? It's red.

    Do you know what color attack you get when you use Metamorphosis and demonic? Green flames.

    The association made and implied in WC3 was that Demons use green flames, while if you're just demonically empowered like a Demon Hunter or Chaos Orc, you're still a mortal who uses Red colored flames. There was no direct correlation between the green color of "Fel" magic, since the term loosely applied to any and all dark magic. Warlock units at the time were not exclusive to using Fel magic, though an Eredar would be because they are themselves Demonic units.

    TBC is when that changed, where they gave Blood Elves green eyes due to fel exposure and started to tie it in directly as being green colored magic in the Outland. Mists of Pandaria is when they officially allowed mortals to use Green flames and directly associated it as being Fel magic as it should have always been.
    "Kil'jaeden taught the orcs the secrets of warlock magics, but the orcs could never master the powers of entropy and destruction as well as the wicked eredar."

    Quote Originally Posted by Ielenia View Post
    Vanilla, expansion, doesn't matter.
    Does so.
    You can't correlate Vanilla classes to WC3 Heroes as well as expansion ones.

    I never claimed the Warcraft 3 demon hunter was based off HotS Illidan, so I don't know why you felt like pointing that out. It's an objectively absurd claim to make, too. I simply said that the WoW class has taken inspiration from HotS Illidan.
    Which, in turn, is based on the WC3 Hero unit.

    It doesn't matter that we don't know exactly from where the inspiration came from. It suffices to know it came from outside the Warcraft franchise.
    It does. Because i can point out to where they pull out classes from.
    Nonetheless, the point is that they used the Brewmaster as a basis, and had to invent more for it to encompass more specs than 1.

    Again, it's an easy argument to say that the basis was not the WC3 unit.
    Then, you have to back it up.
    Because, as far as i know, the Monk class is based, exclusively, on the Pandaren. Which, was only Chen the Brewmaster back then.

    Except we're not talking about "basis" of the death knight class. We're talking about the class as a whole and how it has several different sources. It didn't came solely from the DK unit.
    They didn't use the others as a basis for the class. It is still based on the horse-riding knight of Death that is Arthas. It wasn't the Lich that was introduced, nor the dreadlord. Integrating is natural, and very obvious. Like combining the Witch Doctor with the Shadow Hunter, Archer and Huntress with the Priestess of the Moon, Banshee with the Dark Ranger, Naga Siren for Naga Sea Witch and so on. The class would still be based on the Hero one.

    What do you mean by "added"?
    The Death Knight. Not the Lich, nor the Dreadlord. Not the Ghoul, nor the Gargoyle. It is a Death Knight.

    But we know that they don't have to be, thanks to the runemaster idea.
    Consideration does not guarantee addition. In the end, it failed to classes like the Death Knight and was integrated into it and into the Monk. So, you have to see the bigger picture as to what classes end up being added.

    Chen was never a monk in the lore until the MoP expansion came along and Blizzard retconed him into being a monk all along. Until then, he was just a brewmaster, seemingly no different than the dwarven brewmasters we meet during Brewfest.
    Wrong. You did the same mistake as Te riz did back then. The Dwarven Brewmaster creates brews, like the cooking profession. The Pandaren Brewmaster is unique, in the sense that he does not just make brews, like the others, but combines it with martial arts. Go check the lore.

    Fel orcs are not demons. Man'ari are demons. And you haven't shown any orc, green, red, brown or whatever rainbow color, using fel magic and/or summoning demons prior to WoW.
    "Kil'jaeden taught the orcs the secrets of warlock magics, but the orcs could never master the powers of entropy and destruction as well as the wicked eredar."

    That's like saying elementals casting magic don't have to cast elemental magic. They're demons, their bodies are teeming with fel magic.
    Then, there wouldn't be a need to call them Warlocks. Just name them Eredar.

    Again: you haven't shown any orc being able to summon demons or use fel magic.
    Warcraft I description:
    "Spells that channel the fire and brimstone of hell through their bodies, or can summon forth great creatures - even daemons - are theirs to use."

    If you'd know more about lore, you'd know the Horde used to employ many demons with the help of their Warlocks:
    Led by Gul'dan
    Daemon - These dreaded hell spawns were summoned by the warlocks of the Shadow Council to do their bidding.

    Demons - Many members of the Dark Horde practice demon worship and summon imps, felhounds, and felguards to their aid.

    Quote Originally Posted by jellmoo View Post
    I would much rather have something based around voodoo, which seems incredibly under represented in a playable form, considering how prevalent it is in the lore of a major race.
    I agree with that.

    Quote Originally Posted by bloodmoth13 View Post
    Yes. It overlaps with the other 4 'dark' mage specs and death knights.

    Not that i dont want it added, but i dont think it needs to exist as a class, i dont think you could get 3 distinct specs out of it unless they did some nonsense like it having 4 specs based on each covenant.
    The only thing i see viable is the apothecary, which would be integrated into an Alchemist.
    Last edited by username993720; 2021-04-10 at 08:37 AM.
    Commenting on these forums is like walking on eggshells - you never know where the next infraction is gonna come from.

  14. #5474
    Titan Maxilian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Dominican Republic
    Posts
    11,470
    Quote Originally Posted by Stoffmeister View Post
    After binge watching first two seasons of Castlevania on Netflix I started to think. Hmm. We really dont have traditional vampires in WoW. Clearly very vampire in revendreth but anima is replaced with blood.

    Could a vampire hero class fit in the wow universe?
    I guess the closer we have its Blood Death Knight, also we have the Sanlayn, they are basically vampires.

  15. #5475
    Quote Originally Posted by Maxilian View Post
    I guess the closer we have its Blood Death Knight, also we have the Sanlayn, they are basically vampires.
    Which, won't become playable. Venthyr will.
    Commenting on these forums is like walking on eggshells - you never know where the next infraction is gonna come from.

  16. #5476
    Quote Originally Posted by username993720 View Post
    The only thing i see viable is the apothecary, which would be integrated into an Alchemist.
    apothecary healer would be awesome but would need to be tied to a class in the current system so suffers the same issues as dark ranger or shadow hunter (being one spec wonders)

    Would fit well into a tinker class that is based around technology. Its probably its only hope of being added imo.

  17. #5477
    The Lightbringer
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Demacia
    Posts
    3,401
    If they didn't do Necromancer in Shadowlands fam I don't think it's ever going to happen.
    Paladin Bash has spoken.

  18. #5478
    Quote Originally Posted by username993720 View Post
    Which, won't become playable. Venthyr will.
    And why is that? Why are these class ideas wrong but Venthyr are a guaranteed addition?

  19. #5479
    Quote Originally Posted by PaladinBash View Post
    If they didn't do Necromancer in Shadowlands fam I don't think it's ever going to happen.
    Give it another 10 years when we get the next cash-in death expansion, maybe then with the actual scourge again. Nothing in WoW is asured btw, everytime a large part of the dev team changes, so will the overall approach to the game's design. Even if the current team is not eager to implement something right now, down the line that might actually change. Maybe there will be a time when everything goes, even classes that barely offer anything over existing classes/specs.
    Last edited by Haidaes; 2021-04-10 at 10:37 AM.
    MMO-C should be glad that the British Empire is no more, because they'd want a piece of all the copium trade here.
    Angry players come to the forums to complain about the game...
    But what loser comes to the forums to complain about the forums and its users, instead of playing the game they claim to enjoy so much?

  20. #5480
    once again, a necromancer play with the bodies of dead people, while the shadowlands is where the soul of dead people go... really not the same

Posting Permissions

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