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

[draugril]

a bit of work.

That's why I don't see it happening. It would have to be forced - an unnatural addition. I find it to be much like Necromancer in that regard. The class itself is fantastic in other settings, and I see why people would like to see it in WoW... but the WarCraft franchise isn't really the proper place for them.

[Alanar]

This thread is about *all* possible new classes for WoW, not just Tinkers. The thread needs a bit of breathing room from the "pro-" and "anti-" debate about Tinkers. Let's pivot on to some other possible classes and put this rolling debate to rest.

Agree, that being said I would play the hell out of a Dark ranger or warden.

I dont care single bit about tinkers.

[Katchii]

That's why I don't see it happening. It would have to be forced - an unnatural addition. I find it to be much like Necromancer in that regard. The class itself is fantastic in other settings, and I see why people would like to see it in WoW... but the WarCraft franchise isn't really the proper place for them.

How would Necromancer be an unnatural addition to WoW, when they're all over the place and a school of Necromancy exists?

Or is that not what you were saying?

[pinstripe]

How would Necromancer be an unnatural addition to WoW, when they're all over the place and a school of Necromancy exists?

Or is that not what you were saying?

Necromancer would be such a cool class, and I agree it fits perfectly into WoW

[Cosmic Janitor]

Bard would be really difficult in WoW for various reasons. While I love the idea of the class in a campaign, WoW simply doesn't have enough opportunities with it's rigid role system and baby-tier, borderline vestigal, RPG implementation to facilitate it. So all we'd get is a dps/healer with some awkward flavor in their spells, since even the utility angle is kinda closed off in WoW, because it doesn't gel well with the morbid competive streak of WoW.

Even more so than a bard I personally would love to play a proper necromancer, but here we have the issue - that has been discussed to death - that the design space for minion gameplay and the thematic space of darkness and undeath have been kinda exhausted already. Since I got into D&D again during covid I've been itching to play a full on necomancer wizard, but looking through the spells, I've realized that WoW could simply not do it justice. Frankly give me an effects artist and I'll reskin you warlocks into a complete necromancer class, just by swapping some strings and animation files.

My personal hope would be something like a battlemage / spellbreaker, essentially a spellblade alluriel as a 4th spec for mages that reintroduces seal gameplay back into the game by charging up depending on the active seal (a buff) and then using it in different ways (cleave/cone, st, aoe, defense) and playing around with different combos by switching between the elements, like shattering frozen targets with arcane. I know I've been repeating myself, but given the other people here and the last 298 pages that shouldn't be too much of an issue .

Another one I'm missing is a caster spec that focuses mostly on wind/lightning/storm, not just the half-assed shaman stuff. A high fantasy game without "wind blades" magic seems kinda like a scam. Also, I'm defnitely open to a magical archer type of class as well, but I'd prefer if it wasn't pigeon-holed by the very niche dark ranger fantasy (could be one spec though).

[pacotaco]

Tanks/siege machines - existed back in WC3, they're steam powered machines with canons and armour, nothing fancy, its not like some modern MBT.

Yeah, but they're still mechanical siege machines.
What I traied to convey is that Warcraft is not the traditional high fantasy like Lord of the Rings. I don't know if there's a term for it, but is more a type of epic fantasy mixed with steampunk (which is no surprise knowing that has its origins on Warhammer and the heavy metal passion from the original creators).

Its completely different a zeppelin flying about and being visible every few minutes to 500 tinkers running around shooting rockets and jetpacking around orgrimmar.

The difference is all of these things are present but not common. You don't often see tanks, you see them in big battlegrounds and sieges.

Zeppelins are part of very traditional goblin tech, as seen regularly in WC3

Well, on that I agree. But it's nothing we can't do. And I think over time it would decrease, like it happened with all other new classes.

Teleporters are magic based

No, they're not. I'm talking about the ones like the one you use to go to Gnomeregan.


Or the wormholes that engineers do.
They're technomagical at most.

Starships - Yes, and for one as a fan of the original WC1,2,3 RTS games, I find all this stuff very jarring, I hate it infact. Not the reason I came to love WoW and I hope to see as little as possible of it in the future.

Most people agree with that. But once you open the can, you can't close it. Now it feels weird why they were never used on BFA: "Hey, we have a Light-shooting flying death machine over here, do you want some help?" "Nah, we'll ship some tanks and lots of cannon fodder, thanks".

Cannons and rifles are too primitive, a traditional WC3 rifleman 'blunderbuss' is a very early form of rifle, we see primitive canons and rifles in the 1300s which is fairly between the dark ages and medieval period. Laser-based projectiles again, I find jarring unless its just on some random goblin boss.

Still, not very typical on classical high fantasy.

Mechanical beast??? How do you mean.

As in beasts that are machines: https://es.wowhead.com/mechanical-hunter-pet-guide
Lots, and I mean LOTS of them.

Long story short, I can stomach a mortar, cannon, rifle etc, black powder weapons etc, but laser beams, rockets, starships, jetpacks etc I find jarring. And please, don't tell me maybe Warcraft isn't for me. I played 1,2,3 all on release and consider this franchise my favorite game franchise of all time, Im well aware of what Warcraft is, its just that its increasingly getting less fantasy and more techy, and I personally don't like that.

One word: Mechagon.
Warcraft always was very techy. It's closer to D&D Eberron than it is to Lord of the Rings.

[Ielenia]

I wouldn't consider them generic classes either.

Bards and paladins are generic classes. They have been part of THE most famous RPG of all time, Dungeons and Dragons, for decades. It was added in a supplement during the first edition, and then became a staple of the genre, being forever a part of it. And then any subsequent games, comics, animation set in a high fantasy medieval world always have their paladins. To say they're not "generic classes" is downright dishonest.

We had Arthas, Chen, and Illidan for the Monk, DK, and DH classes. What character do we have lined up for Bards?

We didn't have a character for the monk, though. Blizzard had to make an existing character into a monk for the monk class. And I'll repeat what you've ignored a thousand times: the runemaster class concept proves that we do not need an already established and lore-important hero, considering we never had a "runemaster" NPC in WoW, and still don't.

Then what purpose do they serve?

What is the purpose of a death knight? What is the purpose of a warrior? A rogue? A monk? A paladin? A mage? Define "purpose".

Again, it is the support aspect that makes the Bard and Dancer aspects appealing.

I'll repeat what I said and you ignored, Teriz: you don't get to speak for the bard supporters about what they want out of the class or not. Especially since you're against the class in the first place. That'd be like me saying that tinker fans just want to gut the engineering profession to make room for their class idea.

Turning the Bard into just another magic user strips away the uniqueness and purpose of the concept.

It does not. You don't get to say what is the "uniqueness" and "purpose" of a class concept you do not like.

At that point you might as well just divide the music/sound abilities among the existing classes (which Blizzard has largely done).

Like Blizzard did with the demon hunter, "dividing the demon hunter abilities among existing classes"?

[Ielenia]

I kind of like the idea of the Bard from the "Dragon Age" series, which in that world was a combination of the classical musical storyteller and also a skilled assassin. In classical D&D the Bard is sort of a jack of all trades type of class, combining a Rogue, a Sorcerer/Wizard, and a basic Fighter. How that gets implemented would require some thought, but you could easily wind up with a class who can functionally be a melee DPS (for example wielding a guitar as a melee weapon, taking a kind of Thrash Metal approach to the Bard stereotype), a ranged DPS (using music to generate spell-like effects and/or DoT's), and also a healer using music to heal and/or buff, similar to a Disc Priest.

Personally speaking I don't have a lot of interest in a Bard class myself, but I could see it working in WoW with a bit of work.

My idea I is that the bard could have a spec being an "intellect melee DPS", with an int sword on the main hand, and an off-hand item, basically to leave that hand 'free' (as in, not participating in the fight) as if he's fighting fencing style. The ranged DPS would be a spellcaster spec. As for the instruments, my idea is that the casting/channeling animations would be of them playing their instrument, instead of the basic casting/channeling animations, like the paladin has its own custom casting animations with them flipping the pages of their holy books.

[Katchii]

Necromancer would be such a cool class, and I agree it fits perfectly into WoW

I won't deny that making one would take a bit of work to ensure that it's mechanics don't significantly overlap with Warlock and Death Knight, but that wouldn't be that difficult. There's plenty of inspiration to draw from.

Overlap is fine, in both theme and mechanics, just not too much.

[Cosmic Janitor]

One word: Mechagon.
Warcraft always was very techy. It's closer to D&D Eberron than it is to Lord of the Rings.

Mechagon is about as relevant to the overall franchise as Agamand's Mills.

[Varx]

Bard, tinker or Dragonsworn.

I'm more partial to DS as 10.0 will most likely be the dragon isles.

Necro and DR are the ones that sure as hell won't happen.

Necro had a perfect opportunity this exp and zip. Same goes for DR's. Especially now with the items that Sylv drops for hunters.

[Teriz]

We didn't have a character for the monk, though. Blizzard had to make an existing character into a monk for the monk class.

Then what major lore character could Blizzard "transform" into a Bard? I mean, there wasn't even a TTRPG Bard class, and the TTRPG covered pretty much everything RPG-wise.

And I'll repeat what you've ignored a thousand times: the runemaster class concept proves that we do not need an already established and lore-important hero, considering we never had a "runemaster" NPC in WoW, and still don't.

And that's a poor example, since the Runemaster never became a WoW class.

- - - Updated - - -

Necro had a perfect opportunity this exp and zip. Same goes for DR's. Especially now with the items that Sylv drops for hunters.

While not a supporter of either of those class concepts, I'm genuinely shocked that neither were made playable in this expansion.

And yes, the drops from Sylvanas are very telling indeed.

[draugril]

How would Necromancer be an unnatural addition to WoW, when they're all over the place and a school of Necromancy exists?

Or is that not what you were saying?

The WarCraft universe treats Necromancy very differently from other universes. It exists, of course, but it's such a low-level threat. It would be akin to making a playable "Bandit" class.

For example, the Necrolytes of Draenor existed... Gul'dan deemed them useless and told them to prove their arts equal to those of a Warlock. They failed to do so, and those that could not convert to the demonic arts were used as fuel to create the first Death Knights. In one example, Necromancers proved to be inferior to two playable classes.

The iconic Necromancer from WarCraft III is Kel'Thuzad... who was pretty much instantly killed and the rest of his narrative centers around transcending being a basic Necromancer to become a Lich. Again, Necromancy is used as a stepping stone to a greater power. For the record, I'd be all for a Lich class if done correctly, but that basic Necromancer role is virtually inconsequential.

The best class representative that came out of WoW was Darkmaster Gandling. A dungeon boss. That is the pinnacle people are striving for?

In short, Necromancy is pretty top tier in other settings, but in WarCraft? It's trash tier. It's generally the first step that an individual will take when they begin to explore forbidden knowledge, but there's a whole journey of exploring power beyond that first step. Death Knights, Warlocks and Liches are the ultimate expressions of Necromancy in the WarCaft universe. The actual Necromancers themselves have always been relatively pitiful.

When people ask for Necromancers in this universe, they're actually asking for the Necromancers of other universes to be transplanted here.


That being said, there are a few ways that we could get Necromancers playable here:

The most obvious is as a Necromancy Warlock specialization. Contrary to how playable Warlocks are portrayed, there is more to the class than the demonic. They explore forbidden magic. Take a look at the individuals of the Black Harvest for more detail - they have sought out elemental, Void, and draconic power, among others, including Necromancy.

The second would be a playable Lich class, but it's an incredibly narrow and focused concept that I doubt the developers would explore, especially after doing something as similarly narrow as Demon Hunter. Alternately, a Lich specialization could be added to Death Knight, but that would satisfy few.

Thirdly, and most interestingly, the Necromancers of the Shadowlands could be added in some capacity. They would utilize the power of Death rather than Undeath, to give the class a very unique flair. That being said, if that option was going to be explored, they missed the boat (unless there are still people in denial that we won't see a new class for Shadowlands).

Again, I love Necromancers in other settings, just as I love Bards in other settings. I just don't see them fitting into the fabric of the game as their own playable class. When I think of playing as a Necromancer, I think of DnD, Diablo and Elder Scrolls. My concept of a Necromancer just doesn't align with how they are treated in the WarCraft universe.

[Teriz]

In case anyone is curious, Hunters get Sylvanas' quiver which gives them a chance to cast Withering Fire, and they get a Bow which changes Kill Shot into Wailing Arrow.

https://ptr.wowhead.com/item=186439/...=6805#comments
https://ptr.wowhead.com/item=186414/...nas?bonus=6805

So the good news is that if you want to be a Dark Ranger, you now have a way to do it in 9.1.

[Katchii]

[SNIP]

Again, I love Necromancers in other settings, just as I love Bards in other settings. I just don't see them fitting into the fabric of the game as their own playable class. When I think of playing as a Necromancer, I think of DnD, Diablo and Elder Scrolls. My concept of a Necromancer just doesn't align with how they are treated in the WarCraft universe.

While all somewhat true, the main reason several of the playable classes are seen as notable, powerful and "worthy" is because they were playable and the player character used those classes to achieve great things. I don't know of very many Rogues, Warriors or Priests that were seen as "powerful" until the player character highlighted them to be so. At least not when WoW launched, since then there have been a few.

Just because the notable Necromancer characters all get treated like shit, story wise, doesn't mean Necromancy is useless. If they made a playable Necromancer class it would rival all the other playable classes in power by default. And the story line of Shadowlands and Maldraxxus does show that Necromancy is a power to reckon with.

All that said, Necromancers wouldn't be an "unnatural" addition as you suggested, this is just objectively false. You just seem convinced that necromancy is not powerful enough to be useful, and therefore not a worthwhile addition to the class roster, which is an opinion I disagree with, but is an opinion I can understand.

[Triceron]

In case anyone is curious, Hunters get Sylvanas' quiver which gives them a chance to cast Withering Fire, and they get a Bow which changes Kill Shot into Wailing Arrow.

https://ptr.wowhead.com/item=186439/...=6805#comments
https://ptr.wowhead.com/item=186414/...nas?bonus=6805

So the good news is that if you want to be a Dark Ranger, you now have a way to do it in 9.1.

Kinda sad the backpiece is still just a cloak. It's 2021 and we still have no quiver models?

[draugril]

While all somewhat true, the main reason several of the playable classes are seen as notable, powerful and "worthy" is because they were playable and the player character used those classes to achieve great things.

Just because the notable Necromancer characters all get treated like shit, story wise, doesn't mean Necromancy is useless. If they made a playable Necromancer class it would rival all the other playable classes in power by default. And the story line of Shadowlands and Maldraxxus does show that Necromancy is a power to reckon with.

All that said, Necromancers wouldn't be an "unnatural" addition as you suggested, this is just objectively false. You just seem convinced that necromancy is not powerful enough to be useful, and therefore not a worthwhile addition to the class roster, which is an opinion I disagree with, but is an opinion I can understand.

Fair enough. "Unnatural" was too strong a word to use for Necromancy. It does have its place in the WarCraft universe. I simply see it as more of a tool than a goal unto itself. I won't harp on this much more, as people have done so ad nauseum, but we still the ultimate expressions of Necromancy in the Death Knight, Lich, and Warlock classes. I would be all for leaning into those themes a little more on those classes - I can't fathom a playable Necromancer class contributing anything unique to the playable roster when that slot is in direct competition with other ideas.

That being said... it would definitely be cool to see Warlocks in their playable iteration expand beyond the demonic. How cool would it be to utilize the power of the Firelands, like Ritssyn, or the Sundering, like Zinnin?

[Teriz]

Kinda sad the backpiece is still just a cloak. It's 2021 and we still have no quiver models?

They haven't completed the model yet. We're still in PTR. It's going to be a quiver.

That said, it's quite interesting to see a weapon change a class ability. Very interesting mechanic moving forward.

[Triceron]

They haven't completed the model yet. We're still in PTR. It's going to be a quiver.

That said, it's quite interesting to see a weapon change a class ability. Very interesting mechanic moving forward.

I'm down with it. More customization is always welcomed, and I love it when they add these kind of throwbacks to certain lore heroes, like giving the Mages the Verdant Spheres.

I just hope they can do something to make these effects relevant in future expansions.

[draugril]

I'm down with it. More customization is always welcomed, and I love it when they add these kind of throwbacks to certain lore heroes, like giving the Mages the Verdant Spheres.

I just hope they can do something to make these effects relevant in future expansions.

Let's not forget that Mages got the Spheres only after Warlocks had them taken away.