1. #5561
    Quote Originally Posted by draugril View Post
    Because we had so many Monks running around pre-MoP...
    Well, that's what "Unlikely" means.
    I doubt back in Cata anyone tough about adding monk was probable.

    It just depends on Blizzard thinking that the class matches the theme of the expansion and having the technology/design for the class.

  2. #5562
    Banned Teriz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Undermine
    Posts
    18,698
    Quote Originally Posted by draugril View Post
    To be completely fair... can you find a pre-WoW hero unit called a Rogue or Warrior?
    https://wowpedia.fandom.com/wiki/Rogue_(Warcraft_III)

    Also multiple units in WC3 were considered "warriors";

    The Mountain Kings, or 'Thanes' as they are known in Khaz Modan, are the mightiest Dwarven warriors under the mountain.
    (Tauren Chieftain) These elder Tauren warriors lead their Tribes in daily life as well as in battle.
    Though the hearty Knights of Azeroth were destroyed during the First War, the shining Knights of Lordaeron still continue to serve amongst the warriors of the Alliance.
    (Footmen)Though these fierce warriors lack the shining plate mail and specialized training of their noble predecessors, they still fight with bravery and honor on the field of battle.
    etc.

    It should also be noted that Warrior and Rogue are very generic RPG classes. They don't require the level of seeding that something like a Bard would require.

  3. #5563
    The Insane Ielenia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Brazil
    Posts
    16,218
    Quote Originally Posted by username993720 View Post
    That's called speculation, my friend.
    Nothing is 100% factual. That's why we're here to speculate. But, at least i have some obeservational evidence.
    Then why do you get overly defensive when I point out your arguments are arbitrary and pure speculation?
    Quote Originally Posted by username993720 View Post
    Claiming one's argument is arbitrary because you're frustrated in your inability to prove me wrong, doesn't make you any righter.

    Are you claiming there is no connection, whatsoever, between the WC3 Demon Hunter unit and Illidan on HotS?
    That was never my argument, and it shows, so not sure why you felt like asking that. I simply said that the HotS Illidan is a different concept than the WC3 demon hunter, and I've explained why: different abilities and playstyles.

    Nah. If we want to make some progress with class predictions, we'd have to dive deeper than just general definitions.
    Nah. Again, that's purely on you.

    You forgot what this thread is about
    I'm talking about our particular conversation about the merits of the monk class' origin and design, not the thread as a whole.

    I hope you don't, really, believe that they took the Panda, martial arts and came up with the Monk class for Mists of Pandaria. Because they did a long time before when Samwise Didier drew a Pandaren sketch, and then made the whole RPG information about them. It came from this, which in turn, produced the Pandaren Brewmaster for WC3.
    But they did, though. The Brewmaster RPG prestige class doesn't have much "monk" in them, really.

    Of course it is. But, you've mixed up you timelines. They, already, drew upon that when they made the Pandaren in the RPG sources and the subsequent Warcraft 3. It didn't just pop one day when they decided they're gonna make MoP. Heck, Pandaren were considered as far back as TBC. China just didn't allow them to use pandas.
    You accuse me of "mixing up timelines" and yet you claim that a TTRPG expansion book that came out in 2008 somehow came first than a game expansion that came out in 2003. Food for thought.

    Almost made the cut?
    Lost twice shows how it's, most often, integrated into more prominent classes.
    It doesn't matter. The fact it was not only considered, but was one of the top three shows that we don't need WC3 units for class concepts. Otherwise the runemaster concept wouldn't even be considered at all, in the first place.

    Said the one who outright claimed Pandaren and Monk are, clearly, based on China's Pandas and martial arts.
    I said that because they are. Any claim to the contrary is being delusional.

    The Venthyr are more likely to be added the same way Sylvar are more likely than Satyr and Kyrians are more likely than Val'kyr. You know why? because those guys are just modified races (Night elves, Vrykul).
    You would have a point if Allied Races wasn't a thing. We have LF draenei who are just modified draenei. We have nightborne who are modified night elves. And also: unless Blizzard does something to fundamentally change Shadowlands, the Venthyr cannot exist in Azeroth, because of one little problem: they burn and go mad under the light.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    That doesn’t sound like a monk. That sounds like a spellcaster.
    Still waiting on your reply, by the way.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    It should also be noted that Warrior and Rogue are very generic RPG classes. They don't require the level of seeding that something like a Bard would require.
    Bards are also rather generic rpg class, really.
    I did a Necromancer thing. Check it out! All feedback welcome!
    I also did a Bard thing! Questions, comments and ideas, all welcome!

  4. #5564
    Banned Teriz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Undermine
    Posts
    18,698
    Quote Originally Posted by Ielenia View Post

    Bards are also rather generic rpg class, really.
    I'm talking about the five base (generic) RPG classes;

    Fighter/Warrior, Thief/Rogue, Archer/Hunter, Wizard/Mage, Cleric/Priest

    Classes like the Bard aren't really a part of that group, and in the case of Warcraft would require a great deal of seeding since they simply don't exist beyond a few scattered, disparate NPCs. Compare that to the remaining 4 original WoW classes:

    Shaman, Warlock, Paladin, Druid. Those classes received a great deal of seeding, and were concepts pretty steeped in Warcraft lore, with major characters being members of those classes. Nothing like that exists for the Bard.

    A prominent hero character would be a good first step.
    Last edited by Teriz; 2021-04-13 at 04:10 PM.

  5. #5565
    Banned Syegfryed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    Darkshore, Killing Living and Dead elves
    Posts
    12,082
    Quote Originally Posted by username993720 View Post
    Not all Hunters are rangers in lore.
    the distinction is like water and h20, and the point is not that they aren't is that they can be, ranger is not something so alien or exceptional, is just guys with bows.

    Everything fits if you push it hard enough.
    Point is, they would have been mentioned if they were rangers.
    they were literally, mentioned in the wiki that you linked, are you blind or just pretending?

    and you are just "pushing hard" until it gits your agenda
    Wrong again.
    Dark Rangers are not forsaken only, but undead High elves, Night elves and Humans, too.
    All those are forsaken, lol, forsaken is the group that encompass all the undeads, talking about a joke, trying to correct someone by being wrong.
    This can be attributed to their ranger backgrounds in life.
    nope, thats a lie, in part, you see

    Take your link to the ranger section in the wiki, there is not a single mention of night elves or void elves, so they are not rangers, threfore, they do not fit your vision

    but orcs and draeneis by example, are rangers, listed there

    Whatever you say...
    *Literally backing up my argument with lore sources, but who cares, eh?*
    youd din't even read the source, you would know that literally refutew you.

  6. #5566
    Keyboard Turner Mike tang 1991's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2021
    Location
    Address: 185 Oneida Cres, Richmond Hill, Ontario
    Posts
    7
    A REAL Cloth tank like shadow priest in vanilla (they could tank up to nefarian)

  7. #5567
    Quote Originally Posted by Starbrand View Post
    [B][SIZE=2]But what if they introduced a new one in a future expansion? What would it be?
    Considering the times we live in, I'd say an offended and outraged vegan genderless lgqbt+ (sj)warrior.
    success comes in the form of technical solutions to problems, not appeals to our emotional side

  8. #5568
    Quote Originally Posted by pacotaco View Post
    Most probable (as they all were strongly hinted during BFA):
    - Tinker
    - Dark Ranger
    - Warden

    Less likely (as they all are Warcraft 3 heroe units, like the 3 previous classes added to the game):
    - Blademaster
    - Shadowhunter
    - Priestess of the Moon/Night Warrior

    Unlikely (from the non-canon TTRPG and non-hero units from WC3):
    - Runemaster (something like a monk using runes like DKs)
    - Necromancer
    - Dragonsworn
    - Alchemist/Apotecary
    - Spellbreaker
    Actually, Shadow Hunter is likely as Vol'jin is set to be reborn. Furthermore, a Light/Void theme would fit it as Shadow Hunters are said to "walk the line between light and darkness".

    Blademasters might somehow slip into a Dragon themed expansion, as Blizzard made a Dragon samurai concept long ago, called Dragonman.

    Priestess of the Moon is very likely as Tyrande is currently relevant to the story, the Night Warrior background is expanded and Elune as an entity becomes more and more prominent.

    Alchemist is a Hero unit by the way, and you can probably expect it in a Gnome vs Goblins themed expansion, alongside a Tinker.

    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    I know. The point is that there is no defined Runemaster hero or class concept in Warcraft. Arguably there never was. The Monk-like version is now decanonized, and the WoW version is an undefined mush of Mage and DK abilities. Even before the decanonization occurred, the concept was still undefined due to a lack of a hero character.
    You can't, really, call it a Death Knight, though.

    Quote Originally Posted by cocomen2 View Post
    As for ShadowHunter , sadly but after Vol'jin died to random mob that class become somewhat a meme. (will kids really want to play it?)
    Vol'jin is set to be reborn.

    Quote Originally Posted by Maxilian View Post
    There's no lore reason that would exclude another race for becoming a new generation of Dark Rangers
    There would.
    Lack of a ranger background in life.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ielenia View Post
    Then why do you get overly defensive when I point out your arguments are arbitrary and pure speculation?
    I'm not.
    You're just accusing without backing your arguments or suggesting an alternative.

    That was never my argument, and it shows, so not sure why you felt like asking that. I simply said that the HotS Illidan is a different concept than the WC3 demon hunter, and I've explained why: different abilities and playstyles.
    Not at all. You're nitpicking. Calling it a different concept would imply of it not being a Demon Hunter.

    Nah. Again, that's purely on you.
    Go ahead. Find a general method that works.

    I'm talking about our particular conversation about the merits of the monk class' origin and design, not the thread as a whole.
    Which is from the Pandaren Brewmaster Hero unit and other non-canon Pandaren sources.

    But they did, though. The Brewmaster RPG prestige class doesn't have much "monk" in them, really.
    The Pandaren RPG does, though.

    You accuse me of "mixing up timelines" and yet you claim that a TTRPG expansion book that came out in 2008 somehow came first than a game expansion that came out in 2003. Food for thought.
    My bad.
    I meant that they, already, had a notion of a Pandaren and Monk prior to Mists of Pandaria. They didn't need to draw from outside sources of Pandas using martial arts.

    It doesn't matter. The fact it was not only considered, but was one of the top three shows that we don't need WC3 units for class concepts. Otherwise the runemaster concept wouldn't even be considered at all, in the first place.
    We'll have to ask ourselves to what stage did it get in the development process.
    And, by the way, my claim is that they 'add' classes from Warcraft 3, not 'consider' them.

    I said that because they are. Any claim to the contrary is being delusional.
    Of course they are. Indirectly.
    Because Blizzard, already had pandas and martial arts in their lore that was based upon that. No need to draw from it once again to create the Monk class. Supplement - yes. Base - no.

    You would have a point if Allied Races wasn't a thing. We have LF draenei who are just modified draenei. We have nightborne who are modified night elves. And also: unless Blizzard does something to fundamentally change Shadowlands, the Venthyr cannot exist in Azeroth, because of one little problem: they burn and go mad under the light.
    You're right about that.
    Though, it seems Prince Renathal has made a connection with Z'rali.

    Quote Originally Posted by Syegfryed View Post
    the distinction is like water and h20, and the point is not that they aren't is that they can be, ranger is not something so alien or exceptional, is just guys with bows.
    You shallow the lore.
    You need to distinguish between rangers, Beastmasters, Headhunters and so on...

    they were literally, mentioned in the wiki that you linked, are you blind or just pretending?

    and you are just "pushing hard" until it gits your agenda
    Point them out, then, if you claim i missed them.

    All those are forsaken, lol, forsaken is the group that encompass all the undeads, talking about a joke, trying to correct someone by being wrong.
    Well, technically, yes. You're right. I just pictured an undead when i read it.

    nope, thats a lie, in part, you see

    Take your link to the ranger section in the wiki, there is not a single mention of night elves or void elves, so they are not rangers, threfore, they do not fit your vision

    but orcs and draeneis by example, are rangers, listed there
    It's called "Elven Ranger". It has a whole page dedicated to it. You must have missed it:
    https://wowpedia.fandom.com/wiki/Elven_ranger

    I'm aware about the Rangari Draenei.
    It's weird that they call Thunderlord Hunters rangers. They are probably like Zandalari spearangers. Which, i'd define as Headhunters.
    What i meant are more defined ranger groups, rather than unknown individual NPCs. Though, i can't ignore them, either.

    youd din't even read the source, you would know that literally refutew you.
    I read it, alright.
    Last edited by username993720; 2021-04-13 at 04:18 PM.
    Read First! (Very Important)
    Dear Scrapbot or Moderator:
    Before you, recklessly, hand out an infraction - if i, accidently, broke the rules without being aware, i would very much appreciate a warning first, in the manner of a green text/edit or a private message.
    Thank you in advance.

  9. #5569
    Titan Maxilian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Dominican Republic
    Posts
    11,438
    Quote Originally Posted by username993720 View Post
    There would.
    Lack of a ranger background in life.
    Well if its only for the title "ranger", we also have the Draneai, the Pandaren and it can be debated, that the Gnomes also have rangers.

    Note: I guess the Zandalari, though they normally use spears

  10. #5570
    Banned Teriz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Undermine
    Posts
    18,698
    Quote Originally Posted by username993720 View Post
    You can't, really, call it a Death Knight, though.
    Why not? It uses runeblades and runes, and generates runic power. How are DKs NOT runemasters?

  11. #5571
    Quote Originally Posted by Maxilian View Post
    Well if its only for the title "ranger", we also have the Draneai, the Pandaren and it can be debated, that the Gnomes also have rangers.

    Note: I guess the Zandalari, though they normally use spears
    I'm aware of it.

    Gnomes seem to be more technological, rather than traditional rangers.
    And Zandalari seem to be spear users, like headhunters, rather than bow users.

    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    Why not? It uses runeblades and runes, and generates runic power. How are DKs NOT runemasters?
    One, there are several different types of runes.
    Two, Runemasters do not use Runeblades.
    It's one aspect out of two. The other being Monk (martial arts).
    You can see that Mages, also, use Runes. Blood elves, Vrykul, and many other races employ it in their cultures. Nothing, really, too specific to Death Knights. It doesn't even say Runemasters use Domination type of runes.
    Read First! (Very Important)
    Dear Scrapbot or Moderator:
    Before you, recklessly, hand out an infraction - if i, accidently, broke the rules without being aware, i would very much appreciate a warning first, in the manner of a green text/edit or a private message.
    Thank you in advance.

  12. #5572
    Banned Teriz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Undermine
    Posts
    18,698
    Quote Originally Posted by username993720 View Post
    One, there are several different types of runes.
    There's also different types of Druid forms beyond Cat, Bear, Moonkin, and Tree. Doesn't mean we're not playing as Druids.

    Two, Runemasters do not use Runeblades.
    Where is this stated?

    It's one aspect out of two. The other being Monk (martial arts).
    From a non-canon source.

    You can see that Mages, also, use Runes. Blood elves, Vrykul, and many other races employ it in their cultures. Nothing, really, too specific to Death Knights. It doesn't even say Runemasters use Domination type of runes.
    Races using Runes is irrelevant when we're talking about classes. The mage class doesn't use Runes to the extent that DKs do. DKs use runes extensively in multiple forms. I'm not seeing how they can't be considered runemasters. They should be considered such based on their resource alone.

  13. #5573
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    There's also different types of Druid forms beyond Cat, Bear, Moonkin, and Tree. Doesn't mean we're not playing as Druids.



    Where is this stated?



    From a non-canon source.



    Races using Runes is irrelevant when we're talking about classes. The mage class doesn't use Runes to the extent that DKs do. DKs use runes extensively in multiple forms. I'm not seeing how they can't be considered runemasters. They should be considered such based on their resource alone.
    DK uses them more than mages but DH uses them more than both so....illidan rune master??

  14. #5574
    Banned Teriz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Undermine
    Posts
    18,698
    Quote Originally Posted by razorpax View Post
    DK uses them more than mages but DH uses them more than both so....illidan rune master??
    What are some rune-based DH abilities? Keep in mind, DKs use runes and runic power as a resource. That's pretty extensive in of itself. Not to mention the multiple runes they affix to their weapons, rune forging, and their rune-based abilities.

    But yeah, what runic abilities are DHs utilizing?

  15. #5575
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    There's also different types of Druid forms beyond Cat, Bear, Moonkin, and Tree. Doesn't mean we're not playing as Druids.
    Not the same thing, i'm afraid.
    As you can see, not all Runes belong to the Death Knight (see: Rune of Power). Doesn't make the Mage a Death Knight.

    Where is this stated?
    Let's not be naive.
    That would be like asking you to provide me with a source that states that Death Knights do not use martial arts.

    From a non-canon source.
    No, actually. We know they integrated it into the Monk.

    Races using Runes is irrelevant when we're talking about classes. The mage class doesn't use Runes to the extent that DKs do. DKs use runes extensively in multiple forms. I'm not seeing how they can't be considered runemasters. They should be considered such based on their resource alone.
    That's because you're oblivious to lore and only see what's infront of you.

    "Runic magic is a magic that employs runes/sigils, symbols that hold magical power. Types of magic that runes can access include light, void, fel, arcane, and death."

    We know that Demon Hunters use sigils and that Death Knight do not use light, void, fel or arcane in their spells.

    "The Warlock sect demands payment in precious metals for any services they may offer, as it is then converted into the mystic symbols used in their castings. Metal cages in which to place the subjects of the Warlocks' experiments must be constructed, as well as the ornate metal runes that need to be built into the stone floors for the Warlocks' spells of summoning."

    "The casting of ancient and powerful Runes enables the Ogre-Mage to lay an abstruse trap for those hapless enough to enter into it. When these Runes explode, they cause massive damage to anyone standing over them as well as all those in adjacent areas. Those who are diligent and watchful will catch a glimpse of the Rune as they approach it. The chaotic forces that make up this enchantment can not discern between ally or enemy and will kill a friend as surely as a foe. Heed these warnings well, as even staying near these Runes can be hazardous - for when the dwoemer dissolves, they explode as if their magiks had been triggered."

    "Runes feature in the Inscription profession".

    "The Shadowmoon clan uses runes for protecting the Shadowmoon Burial Grounds. Shadowmoon runecarvers were notable, responsible for the runes used by the clan. Runes were inscribed on the flesh of the Shadowmoon clan in order to more clearly speak to their ancestors and the elements. The Kirin Tor seem to use runes, as an incarceration rune was used on Garona."

    "The Highborne used spell runes, and the scholars of Nar'thalas Academy in Azsuna were renowned for their knowledge on them. The Legion used runes to corrupt the land with fel energy. The Army of the Light use [Lightbound Runestone] to transport their troops to distant worlds."

    "The Drust and their offshoot the Thornspeakers use runes for empowerment, protection, and as tools. The Tidesages use runes for controlling machines, and for protecting their ships into dangerous territory like Fate's End."

    "Warlocks use runic symbols in their summoning circles. The key to binding a wrathguard is to reduce the number of runic symbols used in the summoning circle".

    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    What are some rune-based DH abilities? Keep in mind, DKs use runes and runic power as a resource. That's pretty extensive in of itself. Not to mention the multiple runes they affix to their weapons, rune forging, and their rune-based abilities.

    But yeah, what runic abilities are DHs utilizing?
    Sigil of Misery
    30 yd range
    Instant 3 min cooldown
    Requires Demon Hunter (Vengeance)
    Place a Sigil of Misery at the target location that activates after 2 sec.

    Causes all enemies affected by the sigil to cower in fear, disorienting them for 20 sec.

    Sigil of Flame
    30 yd range
    Instant 30 sec cooldown
    Requires Demon Hunter (Vengeance)
    Requires level 12
    Place a Sigil of Flame at the target location that activates after 2 sec.

    Deals (11.5% of Attack power) Fire damage

    Vengeance (Level 22)
    and an additional (28.38% of Attack power) Fire damage over 6 sec

    to all enemies affected by the sigil.

    Sigil of Silence
    30 yd range
    Instant 2 min cooldown
    Requires Demon Hunter (Vengeance)
    Requires level 39
    Place a Sigil of Silence at the target location that activates after 2 sec.

    Silences all enemies affected by the sigil for 6 sec.

    Sigil of Chains
    Talent
    30 yd range
    Instant 1.5 min cooldown
    Requires Demon Hunter (Vengeance)
    Requires level 40
    Place a Sigil of Chains at the target location that activates after 2 sec.

    All enemies affected by the sigil are pulled to its center and are snared, reducing movement speed by 70% for 6 sec.
    Last edited by username993720; 2021-04-13 at 07:45 PM.
    Read First! (Very Important)
    Dear Scrapbot or Moderator:
    Before you, recklessly, hand out an infraction - if i, accidently, broke the rules without being aware, i would very much appreciate a warning first, in the manner of a green text/edit or a private message.
    Thank you in advance.

  16. #5576
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    I'll never understand the desire for a Bard class in WoW. There's no point to it from a gameplay or lore perspective. It's quite telling that in the history of Warcraft, there has never been a Bard class or Bard hero. There wasn't even a Bard unit in any WC game.

    And before you trot out the Kodo Rider, I mean a unit actually called Bard.
    It's very pedantic to get hung up on the name "bard," especially when I called them wardrummers (which is the name for them in Legion and BFA).

    https://wowpedia.fandom.com/wiki/War_Drummer

    https://www.wowhead.com/npc=126907/wardrummer-zurula

    Here is a class with WC3 lore that hasn't been fully realized in playable form. It is the perfect class addition, and fits the theme of warcraft as these drummers drum the rhythm of battle. It thematically fits the game even better than a traditional bard class does (like the ones in Everquest or Final Fantasy 14), because it can apply to savage races like orcs without clashing with their aesthetic.

  17. #5577
    The Insane Ielenia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Brazil
    Posts
    16,218
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    I'm talking about the five base (generic) RPG classes;

    Fighter/Warrior, Thief/Rogue, Archer/Hunter, Wizard/Mage, Cleric/Priest
    Bards are also part of the "base (generic) RPG classes" as you call them. They're present in D&D, arguably THE most famous TTRPG, have been present in many other games like Final Fantasy XIV, Ragnarok Online, Everquest, etc.

    A prominent hero character would be a good first step.
    Not really, as the runemaster concept has shown.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by username993720 View Post
    I'm not.
    You're just accusing without backing your arguments or suggesting an alternative.
    It's not without evidence. You are constantly trying to create arbitrary differences between "expansion classes" and "vanilla classes" that are, as I pointed out multiple times, just subjective. Blizzard has never made that distinction, and yet you claim there is one. Because you want to there be one so your arguments don't fall over.

    Not at all. You're nitpicking. Calling it a different concept would imply of it not being a Demon Hunter.
    I literally explained how the concepts are different.

    Go ahead. Find a general method that works.
    How about watch what Blizzard is doing right now with the game, which characters and concepts are they adding? Like how Shadowlands literally has expanded the idea that music on its own can have magical power?

    Which is from the Pandaren Brewmaster Hero unit and other non-canon Pandaren sources.
    Mostly the sources outside Warcraft, really.

    The Pandaren RPG does, though.
    Being chinese themed does not mean "martial arts monk."

    I meant that they, already, had a notion of a Pandaren and Monk prior to Mists of Pandaria. They didn't need to draw from outside sources of Pandas using martial arts.
    Again, not really. They had the pandaren, and had this idea that the pandaren are about ales and are Chinese-themed. More than that, came from outside sources.

    We'll have to ask ourselves to what stage did it get in the development process.
    We don't have to, because Blizzard themselves told us: "the runemaster was one of the three runner-ups" means that the runemaster made it up until the point where they decide which concept to realize into an actual class in the game.

    Of course they are. Indirectly.
    Because Blizzard, already had pandas and martial arts in their lore that was based upon that. No need to draw from it once again to create the Monk class. Supplement - yes. Base - no
    But the majority of the class' concept has been taken from outside sources. The basis of the class itself (the 'monk') is also sourced from outside Warcraft since the franchise did not have oriental style monk characters.

    You're right about that.
    Though, it seems Prince Renathal has made a connection with Z'rali.
    No, he hasn't. All they have argued about is that Z'rali is now the jailer of Sire Denathrius. Nothing more, nothing less.
    I did a Necromancer thing. Check it out! All feedback welcome!
    I also did a Bard thing! Questions, comments and ideas, all welcome!

  18. #5578
    Banned Teriz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Undermine
    Posts
    18,698
    Quote Originally Posted by username993720 View Post
    Not the same thing, i'm afraid.
    As you can see, not all Runes belong to the Death Knight (see: Rune of Power). Doesn't make the Mage a Death Knight.
    I never said they did. I’m saying that DKs use runes and runic magic more extensively than any other class. It’s a major theme within their concept.


    Let's not be naive.
    That would be like asking you to provide me with a source that states that Death Knights do not use martial arts.
    No one is arguing that Death Knights use martial arts, however you’re arguing that Runemasters don’t use blades. Where’s your evidence?


    No, actually. We know they integrated it into the Monk.
    What Runemaster abilities were placed into the Monk class?


    That's because you're oblivious to lore and only see what's infront of you.

    "Runic magic is a magic that employs runes/sigils, symbols that hold magical power. Types of magic that runes can access include light, void, fel, arcane, and death."

    Sigils are not the same as runes:

    https://www.google.com/amp/s/aminoap...1mwbBKnRrebdBR

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Ielenia View Post
    Bards are also part of the "base (generic) RPG classes" as you call them. They're present in D&D, arguably THE most famous TTRPG, have been present in many other games like Final Fantasy XIV, Ragnarok Online, Everquest, etc.
    I’m talking about the original RPG classes. In many games, Bards are offshoots of Thieves or Archers. Considering that Bards are found in the Rogue class hall, that’s more than likely the case for WoW as well.

    Not really, as the runemaster concept has shown.
    What Runemaster concept?
    Last edited by Teriz; 2021-04-13 at 09:58 PM.

  19. #5579
    The Insane Ielenia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Brazil
    Posts
    16,218
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    I’m talking about the original RPG classes. In many games, Bards are offshoots of Thieves or Archers. Considering that Bards are found in the Rogue class hall, that’s more than likely the case for WoW as well.
    Again, bard is one of the "original RPG classes". D&D is almost as old as it gets and it's one of its core classes. And bards showing up in the rogue class hall doesn't mean anything, considering that bards are not a playable class currently, so they have no class hall of their own. Remember I pointed out tinkers (gnomes skilled enough in technology to build sentient robots) in the hunter class hall.

    What Runemaster concept?
    The one that almost made the cut for the Wrath's expansion class.
    I did a Necromancer thing. Check it out! All feedback welcome!
    I also did a Bard thing! Questions, comments and ideas, all welcome!

  20. #5580
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    What Runemaster concept?
    The one that existed in the TTRPG (monk-like fighter who empowered themselves with runes), released 4 years before Wrath of the Lich King gave the Death Knight any rune-based abilties of any degree of significance, the Runemaster that also happens to be pretty similar to what Blizzard conceptualized for Wrath of the Lich King before it was "absorbed" into the eventual Death Knight Class.

    The RPG books are non-canon now (it was in 2011 that they were declared non-canon), but everything in them as they were released was approved and known by Blizzard. It's not hard to imagine they saw the Runemaster class that existed in the TTRPG and considered it's implimentmented as a WoW Class since the Monk and Death Knight class didn't exist then.

    Is the idea really incomprehensible that they could take inspiration from the TTRPG?

    You can listen to the Blizzcast right here (around 2:50) Kaplan says "think rogue or monk type character" when talking about the Runemaster, the TTRPG runemaster has fantasy monk staples like Flurry of Blows and lack of armor, their abilties to inscribe runes on themselves for effects sounds like what the runeforging mechanic DK's got (abiet with weapons).

    We have others developers talking about how the Runemaster was considered for classic, Jeff Bell, John Staats, Kevin Jordan, Bo Bell, Alexander Brazie are all of these developers lying just to obfuscate their class selection process and pretend the only concepts that consider for classes are WC3 hero units?

    "Necromancer, Runemaster and Death Knight - all got rolled together into DK." - Alexander Brazie

    "Several classes were scrapped early. The one big one that broke my heart was the Runemaster. " - Bo Bell

    "After we had the basics covered, we also wanted to have a freak class that was unusual and different from the standard RPG tropes. It came down to two choices. The Warlock and the Runemaster. Warlock KO'd Runemaster! :P" - Kevin Jordan

    some of them are former devs at the time they stated these, they have no interest in protecting Blizzards class selection or design process
    Last edited by Imperator4321; 2021-04-13 at 10:45 PM.

Posting Permissions

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