1. #6341
    Quote Originally Posted by Ielenia View Post
    Actually, just to clarify this point, but the warrior class did have the "bash" as a passive back during vanilla WoW and now in Classic WoW. It's the "Mace Specialization" talent.
    Ah, good to know. Even if it's not in the game any more, it's good to know that they attempted to represent it in some way.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Syegfryed View Post

    just like https://wowpedia.fandom.com/wiki/Swo...arrior_talent) and https://wowpedia.fandom.com/wiki/Poleaxe_Specialization providing extra critical

    abilities being removed/new being added, gameplay evolving trough the years, who would know
    And that's fine. Do you see how no one is actually making an argument that Blademaster needs Critical Strike passive in WoW? Whether or not they have a specific 'Specialization' or not, it doesn't really matter because we know Critical Strike as a stat is already being represented in the game.

    What's more important to focus on are the other aspects of its theme and design that have not been represented, namely the Windwalk and Mirror Image abilites which are widely associated with the WC3 Blademaster. If the Warrior had *any* type of Stealth-like mechanic, then I could consider this to be satisfied. If the Warrior had *any* type of deception or damage redirection mechanic, I could consider this to be satisfied. The Warrior does not have anything that comes close to representing either of these two spells.

    Do we agree?
    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.

  2. #6342
    Quote Originally Posted by Syegfryed View Post
    i literally refute everything you said with examples, ingame even the dumb armor argument

    I literally showed you Blademaster armor is higher than mountain king, paladins and DeathKnights, yet, you keep saying blademaster is "unarmored" or "don't use armor", phrasing, you are still ignoring somethign that direct contradict your idea of what a blademaster is

    you entire argument is making something up, a caricature of what a wow blademaster based on other games, and being made when pointed that is not the case here.
    LOOK AT THE GODDAMN BLADEMASTER. He is a shirtless warrior. He is not wearing armor. How many times do I have to tell you that aesthetic matters?

    My entire argument is that theme + abilities + aesthetic + playstyle = playing the archetype. It's not fucking hard to understand. You haven't refuted a single thing, you just dismiss everything with your magic wand. Again and again and again. Literally everyone in the thread is telling you the same thing. Why aren't you getting this???

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Triceron View Post
    His use of hyperbole is definitely aggravating. I can understand his intention, but he is unwilling to use the right arguments to convey his message.

    I mean, I personally don't even think a Blademaster class should be made, and I can't get him to agree with me on this point. He just keeps saying Blademasters are already playable.
    I get hyperbole for effect, but when every statement is hyperbole, it loses all effect and reads... well... not great.

    I don't think the Blademaster should be a class either. I think we're at a point where we can't add a class for every concept under the sun and there are other ways to get archetypes playable. But the logic being used here means that every concept is already playable, you just have to pretend hard enough. Necromancers? playable. Dark Rangers? Playable. Tinkers? Playable. Bards? Oh yeah, playable. Pastry Chef? Totally playable.
    Last edited by jellmoo; 2021-05-04 at 03:51 AM.

  3. #6343
    The Insane Ielenia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Brazil
    Posts
    16,187
    Quote Originally Posted by Syegfryed View Post
    I literally showed you Blademaster armor is higher than mountain king, paladins and DeathKnights, yet, you keep saying blademaster is "unarmored" or "don't use armor", phrasing, you are still ignoring somethign that direct contradict your idea of what a blademaster is
    You keep harping on the "armor" value. That is just a gameplay value so the unit isn't instantly killed the moment it shows its face in combat. We're talking about the blademaster concept, not its stats. Even when we mention "it's an agility-based class" we're talking about its concept, not its stats.

    If those were major points, blizzard would make sure to highlight that in their lore in wow, in the blademaster npcs, and the blademaster playable class, aka warrior, But they didn't, they seem fine with just bladestorm being enough.
    Except we do have the characters in the lore representing the WC3 blademaster. NPCs such as Jubei'thos

    I think they should still add those skills to the warrior yes.
    And completely change the warrior class' theme and gameplay style, just because you don't want the blademaster to be its own class? Really?

    just like https://wowpedia.fandom.com/wiki/Swo...arrior_talent) and https://wowpedia.fandom.com/wiki/Poleaxe_Specialization providing extra critical

    abilities being removed/new being added, gameplay evolving trough the years, who would know
    Still missing key components of the blademaster's concept, though. The warrior class is not an agile character who uses stealth and subterfuge.
    Last edited by Ielenia; 2021-05-04 at 04:10 AM.
    I did a Necromancer thing. Check it out! All feedback welcome!
    I also did a Bard thing! Questions, comments and ideas, all welcome!

  4. #6344
    Titan Syegfryed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    Darkshore, Killing Living and Dead elves
    Posts
    12,052
    Quote Originally Posted by jellmoo View Post
    LOOK AT THE GODDAMN BLADEMASTER. He is a shirtless warrior. He is not wearing armor. How many times do I have to tell you that aesthetic matters?
    Aesthetic only matter when it suits you apperently? you can literally play as a shirtless orc warrior in wow, you said you don't, you were wrong
    My entire argument is that theme + abilities + aesthetic + playstyle = playing the archetype. It's not fucking hard to understand
    Is not hard to understand we have that, we don't have the entirety of the abilities neither the exact same playstyle, true, because its impossible to put the same playstyle from a RTS to a MMORPG, others don't have it too, a DH in WoW don't play exact the same like in the RTS, asking for another DH class because is not the same is as much nonsensical

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Ielenia View Post
    You keep harping on the "armor" value. That is just a gameplay value so the unit isn't instantly killed the moment it shows its face in combat.
    is so funny when you double standard, agi being the base stat is not just a "gameplay value" and matter a lot, but this is. Very funny.

    Except we do have the characters in the lore representing the WC3 blademaster. NPCs such as Jubei'thos
    And for one who have it, ten don't, like i said, pretty bad job if it is to show this is a key factor to then if blizzard almost never put on then

    And completely change the warrior class' theme and gameplay style, just because you don't want the blademaster to be its own class? Really?
    ?? only in your head it would do that

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Triceron View Post

    The Warrior does not have anything that comes close to representing either of these two spells.

    Do we agree?
    They have spell reflection to highlight a "deceptive", since it is directly a damage redirection mechanic.

    Like i said, yes, they don't have 100% the blademaster spells, but does not mean they aren't, and does not mean they can't change those abilities to fit the MMO mechanics, They did that with Avatar and Stormbolt, it would be the easiest thing to do,but trying to make up a entire different class that would dilute and rip off the warrior? to justify two spells? and with more than one spec? is just nonsensical
    Last edited by Syegfryed; 2021-05-04 at 04:32 AM.

  5. #6345
    The Insane Ielenia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Brazil
    Posts
    16,187
    Quote Originally Posted by Syegfryed View Post
    is so funny when you double standard, agi being the base stat is not just a "gameplay value" and matter a lot, but this is. Very funny.
    What is "funny" is the lengths you go to attempt to do a "gotcha" that you edit out the part that counters your "gotcha". Let me repost the part you removed (and likely ignored):
    Quote Originally Posted by Ielenia View Post
    You keep harping on the "armor" value. That is just a gameplay value so the unit isn't instantly killed the moment it shows its face in combat. We're talking about the blademaster concept, not its stats. Even when we mention "it's an agility-based class" we're talking about its concept, not its stats.

    And for one who have it, ten don't, like i said, pretty bad job if it is to show this is a key factor to then if blizzard almost never put on then
    How many demon hunters before the Legion had wings? Horns? Could shoot eye beams? Self-immolate?

    ?? only in your head it would do that
    Dude, giving a class the ability to go stealth and create mirror images of itself to deflect damage completely changes a class' theme and gameplay style. That'd be like giving the rogue ranged magic spells. Or melee attacks to the mage class.
    I did a Necromancer thing. Check it out! All feedback welcome!
    I also did a Bard thing! Questions, comments and ideas, all welcome!

  6. #6346
    Quote Originally Posted by Syegfryed View Post
    Is not hard to understand we have that, we don't have the entirety of the abilities neither the exact same playstyle, true, because its impossible to put the same playstyle from a RTS to a MMORPG, others don't have it too, a DH in WoW don't play exact the same like in the RTS, asking for another DH class because is not the same is as much nonsensical
    And in every single other case we have abilities that may be changed to fit the confine of an MMO vs an RTS, but at least they are there. Or we have abilities that are thematically similar enough that we can connect them to what was present in Warcraft 3.

    You are trying to make a connection when two thirds of the unit's abilities aren't there. At all. Not just not made exactly, not present in any way, shape or form. Where the entire playstyle of the class is different. A DH in WoW has differences from WC 3, absolutely. But it has way more similarities. They gave it a version of Metamorphosis, a version of Immolation. They gavr them Blur to emulate Evasion. The only thing they don't have is Mana Burn. They keep their primary stat and their overall playstyle intact.

    It's not that we don't have the entirety of the package. We barely have any of the package.

  7. #6347
    The Insane Ielenia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Brazil
    Posts
    16,187
    Quote Originally Posted by Syegfryed View Post
    They have spell reflection to highlight a "deceptive", since it is directly a damage redirection mechanic.
    That is not "deception".

    Like i said, yes, they don't have 100% the blademaster spells, but does not mean they aren't,
    They are not if we are talking about the concept. Saying the warrior class is the blademaster class because it has bladestorm and can wield two-handed weapons is like saying the rogue is the demon hunter class because it has evasion and can dual-wield Illidan's warglaives and wear his blindfold. People who want a blademaster class do not want to "make believe" and "pretend" they're a blademaster through the usage of transmog and toys. They actually want to be a blademaster, to play the class inspired by the concept showcased by the WC3 unit and, to some extent, the HotS Samuro character. Again: they don't want to "play pretend".
    I did a Necromancer thing. Check it out! All feedback welcome!
    I also did a Bard thing! Questions, comments and ideas, all welcome!

  8. #6348
    Titan Syegfryed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    Darkshore, Killing Living and Dead elves
    Posts
    12,052
    Quote Originally Posted by jellmoo View Post
    And in every single other case we have abilities that may be changed to fit the confine of an MMO vs an RTS, but at least they are there. Or we have abilities that are thematically similar enough that we can connect them to what was present in Warcraft 3.e.
    And others were completed cut

    Like i said, the "problem" you saying it is exist, can simple resolved by adding those skills to the warrior, one way or another, there is no logical reason to rip off warriors and make an entire new class to justify two skills

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Ielenia View Post
    That is not "deception".
    try to say that to the paladin who was going to stun you, or the warlock who casted chaos bolt

    Saying the warrior class is the blademaster class because it has bladestorm and can wield two-handed weapons is like saying the rogue is the demon hunter class because it has evasion and can dual-wield Illidan's warglaives and wear his blindfold..
    is immensely funny when this false equivalence comes up, but you know, dh use fel magic, and blademaster/warriors don't use magic, so dumbing down things cherrypicking things, to fit your agenda, will not work

  9. #6349
    Quote Originally Posted by Syegfryed View Post
    And others were completed cut

    Like i said, the "problem" you saying it is exist, can simple resolved by adding those skills to the warrior, one way or another, there is no logical reason to rip off warriors and make an entire new class to justify two skills
    But. That. Isn't My. Argument.

    I'm saying that I can't play a Blademaster today. Not if they add stuff. Not if they make changes. Right now, the Blademaster as it existed in WC3 is not playable in WoW. I can't play a unarmored or lightly armored agile dude with a giant sword who sneaks around the battlefield and uses deception to trick the enemy and then mow them down. This is what the Blademaster in WC3 was. This is what today I cannot play.

  10. #6350
    The Insane Ielenia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Brazil
    Posts
    16,187
    Quote Originally Posted by Syegfryed View Post
    try to say that to the paladin who was going to stun you, or the warlock who casted chaos bolt
    Again, that is not deception. Deception is to trick someone. There is no trickery in reflecting a spell. By that logic, it's fair to say it's "trickery" when a paladin uses their bubble. Or the mage uses his Ice Block. Spells aren't reflected back, but the paladin and mage "tricked" the opponent by negating all the damage.

    is immensely funny when this false equivalence comes up,
    Which you never explained a single time why you think it's a false equivalence, despite me asking you a hundred times over...

    but you know, dh use fel magic, and blademaster/warriors don't use magic,
    Except they do, as evidenced by the fact they can go invisible and create illusory images of themselves. And in WoW, they can even manipulate fire, too. Also, before you go back to this "warrior energy" thing, it doesn't matter. It's still magic. Just like chi (i.e. "warrior energy") is just spirit magic.

    so dumbing down things cherrypicking things, to fit your agenda, will not work
    I'm not "dumbing down" or "cherry picking" anything. That is literally everything the warrior has that is part of the blademaster concept: bladestorm, and wields two-handed bladed weapons.
    Last edited by Ielenia; 2021-05-04 at 05:19 AM.
    I did a Necromancer thing. Check it out! All feedback welcome!
    I also did a Bard thing! Questions, comments and ideas, all welcome!

  11. #6351
    How about we all agree that its clear that fans of Warcraft/WoW as a franchise want something that plays like the WC3 blademaster in game and we have differing opinions on whether that would be a new class or spec, but ultimately we want it, just as it is in WC3.

  12. #6352
    Titan Syegfryed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    Darkshore, Killing Living and Dead elves
    Posts
    12,052
    Quote Originally Posted by jellmoo View Post
    But. That. Isn't My. Argument.

    I'm saying that I can't play a Blademaster today. Not if they add stuff. Not if they make changes. Right now, the Blademaster as it existed in WC3 is not playable in WoW. I can't play a unarmored or lightly armored agile dude with a giant sword who sneaks around the battlefield and uses deception to trick the enemy and then mow them down. This is what the Blademaster in WC3 was. This is what today I cannot play.
    And if i want to play like the DH in the RTS in wow i can't, thats why im saying your point is nonsensical, you keep adding stuff to make a hyperbole and a caricature of the blademaster, you can't play like a RTS in a MMORPG

    you can play like a blademaster period. because they have everything a blademaster have, missing two skills and again, the class is not revolved around those two skills, neither in play style neither in the lore, they still are blademasters without those skills, to say you can't, you either didn't played blademasters in the RTS, or just played wrong

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Ielenia View Post
    Except they do, as evidenced by the fact they can go invisible and create illusory images of themselves
    That is not magic, and Warriors can do things like that already, like dragon roar, shockwave, thunderclap etc

  13. #6353
    Quote Originally Posted by Syegfryed View Post
    And if i want to play like the DH in the RTS in wow i can't, thats why im saying your point is nonsensical, you keep adding stuff to make a hyperbole and a caricature of the blademaster, you can't play like a RTS in a MMORPG
    Look at the similarities between the DH in WC3 and the DH in WoW. Same stat. Same armor. Same aesthetic. Same function. 2/3 abilities represented.

    Look at the Blademaster as a Warrior. Different stat. Different armor. Different aesthetic. Different function. 1/3 abilities represented.

    These aren't the same thing.

    you can play like a blademaster period. because they have everything a blademaster have, missing two skills and again, the class is not revolved around those two skills, neither in play style neither in the lore, they still are blademasters without those skills, to say you can't, you either didn't played blademasters in the RTS, or just played wrong
    Stop with that bullshit. The Blademaster entirely revolved around stealth and trickery. That's what they did. That was their whole schtick. You contineu with your hand waiving. Their whole fucking point was to sneak up on the enemy and wreak havoc. That's what they were designed to do. That's not what Warriors in WoW do.

    Those two abilities they are missing? THEY ARE THE WHOLE POINT OF THE BLADEMASTER. Have you ever played WC3? Because so help me, I don't think you ever have. Read their fucking write up: http://classic.battle.net/war3/orc/units/blademaster.shtml

    Take a look at how things like tricking the enemy, sneaking behind enemy lines, tricking creeps into attacking the enemy...

  14. #6354
    Titan Syegfryed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    Darkshore, Killing Living and Dead elves
    Posts
    12,052
    Quote Originally Posted by jellmoo View Post
    Look at the similarities between the DH in WC3 and the DH in WoW. Same stat. Same armor. Same aesthetic. Same function. 2/3 abilities represented.




    ah yes, look, totally the same aesthetic

    the "same armor" *look at the dude shirtless*, hum yes we defintly can say what armor he is using

    Same stat, humm yes *Look at the Demon hunter with much higher Strenght than agility*

    2/3 abilities represented, yes, no ranged metamorphosis, no mana burn.
    Look at the Blademaster as a Warrior. Different stat. Different armor. Different aesthetic. Different function. 1/3 abilities represented.


    Ah yes, totally different Aesthetic, they don't look alike at all, you are right

    different? Armor? ah yes, the guy who have the same armor rate as the Knights who use Heavy armor, more armor than death knights and Mountain kings.

    Different stat? yep, their stat gain is different, their Strength score still is as much as their agility.

    Different function? they have the same function, they are warriors that go head on into the fray, showed countless of times, they are not sneaky rogues.

    And yes, they don't have two skills, already mentioned.

    These aren't the same thing.
    They aren't, because you are making shit up

    Stop with that bullshit. The Blademaster entirely revolved around stealth and trickery. That's what they did. That was their whole schtick. You contineu with your hand waiving. Their whole fucking point was to sneak up on the enemy and wreak havoc. That's what they were designed to do. That's not what Warriors in WoW do
    .

    No they aren't, again, go play with a blademaster in the RTS and try to win the game by going for trickery and "stealth", you will lose hard

    The "closest" thing they can do like that is go invisible to the enemy base, because wind walk give then bonus to speed and kill their workers, then get out, because the bonus to movement without being caught, not because "sneaky rogues" and this only work at early low leves and stop being a thing after the enemy create brains and do towers, later they only walk with the army and destroy the enemy focusing on targets like spell casting and heroes, such thing warriors do with their mobility and power.

    Im leading to believe you only played with easy bots and cheats, or not played the game at all, to think a blademaster role in the RTS was that "trick creeps into attack the enemy"

    Those two abilities they are missing? THEY ARE THE WHOLE POINT OF THE BLADEMASTER.
    They are not, rly, stop, Blizzard already made sure of that but not giving much shit about it with tons of blademasters in wow not having that nither being part of their lore across the years

    This is the whole point of the problem, you are made that up and can't accept another thing
    Last edited by Syegfryed; 2021-05-04 at 07:05 AM.

  15. #6355
    Quote Originally Posted by Syegfryed View Post
    Like i said, yes, they don't have 100% the blademaster spells, but does not mean they aren't, and does not mean they can't change those abilities to fit the MMO mechanics
    Then they must do this first before we can all regard them as Blademasters. If they can't fulfill the full theme through the most iconic WC3 abilities, then no Blademaster fan who expects to play as a WC3 Blademaster is going to be satisfied with this incomplete concept. As I said, everyone who is responding to you has been telling you this same thing. The concept is incomplete, whereas we HAVE a fulfilled concept for the Beastmaster, Chieftain and the Mountain King.

    Heroes like the Demon Hunter, Death Knight and Brewmaster are all fully represented in the classes they got.

    Blademaster is not fully represented by the Warrior class. Same can be said of the Dark Ranger not fully represented in the Hunter class. Neither are widely considered as playable in WoW, which is why people want to see more representation for them in the game.


    They did that with Avatar and Stormbolt, it would be the easiest thing to do,but trying to make up a entire different class that would dilute and rip off the warrior? to justify two spells? and with more than one spec? is just nonsensical
    If the Warrior isn't fully representing the Warcraft 3 Blademaster, then there's no reason to consider it as being fully playable in WoW. If it's not fully playable in WoW, then people will continue demand the very things that are missing from the WC3.

    You agree that they do not have 100% Blademaster spells. You also regard that Blizzard can change those abilities into MMO mechanics, like they did for Avatar and Stormbolt.

    So why can't we reach a middle ground and simply agree that Warriors can become Blademasters as long as Blizzard does this same treatment for Windwalk and Mirror Image? Is it such a crazy idea that this is impossible to you? We already have Avatar and Stormbolt added to the Warrior when they originally did not have these abilities. This has turned the Warrior from simply being a Dwarf Warrior into a full representable Mountain King. These abilities allow people to fully represent the Warcraft 3 Hero, even if not in a perfect or exact way. The Vanilla WoW MK was not anywhere close to being fully represented, and would have just been a Dwarf Warrior. Even if Warriors had Thunderclap, it would not really be considered a playable Mountain King without the full package.

    We are still missing abilities that fully represent a Blademaster. The concept is not complete, and we are unable to play as a Blademaster as it was in Warcraft 3.

    Every time you're talking about any NPC that doesn't have those missing abilities, you're using false equivalency. NPCs are not playable, so you're not addressing the problem of not having any representation for Windwalk and Mirror Image in the Warrior class. Do you understand?
    Last edited by Triceron; 2021-05-04 at 08:53 AM.
    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.

  16. #6356
    Titan Syegfryed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    Darkshore, Killing Living and Dead elves
    Posts
    12,052
    Quote Originally Posted by Triceron View Post
    Then they must do this first before we can all regard them as Blademasters.
    Nope, they don't to do that, because blademasters are still blademaster even if they lack those two skills, something you can get away with it

    then there's no reason to consider it as being fully playable in WoW.
    Like i said, i never made that claim, you are attacking a strawman

    So why can't we reach a middle ground and simply agree that Warriors can become Blademasters as long as Blizzard does this same treatment for Windwalk and Mirror Image?
    Because that would imply a warrior/blademaster is only a blademaster if it have those two skills, in this case, if blizzard give then windwalk/mirror image in someway, and that is false, because a blademaster/warrior still is a blademaster even without those skils.

    Quote Originally Posted by Triceron View Post
    Every time you're talking about any NPC that doesn't have those missing abilities, you're using false equivalency. NPCs are not playable, so you're not addressing the problem of not having any representation for Windwalk and Mirror Image in the Warrior class. Do you understand?
    For someone who entire basis of argument is false equivalence, you don't get to say that, even because NPCS are direct representation the blademasters we have, we are not talking about one, particular NPC, one who run from the rule, like shaman thrall and anduin priest using plate armor, we are talking about several npcs, several appearances and mentions in the game and lore, we spend months in old draenor, learning about the clan and no focus on mirror image neither windwalk,
    Last edited by Syegfryed; 2021-05-04 at 09:30 AM.

  17. #6357
    Immortal sam86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    WORST country on earth (aka egypt)
    Posts
    7,641
    Quote Originally Posted by Triceron View Post
    I personally don't think anyone is really optimistic, otherwise we wouldn't be arguing all the time for what the *next* class would be instead of being open to just discussing what could be possible. Classes are so uncommon and the dev team is so ass-backwards with their class design that it's become more and more frustrating to even discuss a single concept without someone else trying to dismiss the idea entirely because it somehow threatens their own hopes for a different class.

    Blizzard has molded too much fantasy out of borrowed power. It's really about time they scale back on it
    Well if u want some optimistic thoughts we have a LOT of spells from the rpg books we still didn't see in wow, some are flat out broken OP
    Berseker charge for example is one that just cross my mind that still doesn't exist in wow
    The beginning of wisdom is the statement 'I do not know.' The person who cannot make that statement is one who will never learn anything. And I have prided myself on my ability to learn
    Thrall
    http://youtu.be/x3ejO7Nssj8 7:20+ "Alliance remaining super power", clearly blizz favor horde too much, that they made alliance the super power

  18. #6358
    Quote Originally Posted by Syegfryed View Post
    This is absurd, none of the heroes in the RTS play exactly like their versions in wow

    A Death Knight in wow don't play like the Death Knight in the RTS

    A demon hunter don't play Like the Demon hunter in the RTS

    A warrior don't play like the warriors in the RTS

    That must be shocking for you, but they are different games, not just a different game but with a different setting, a RTS compared to a MMORPG
    We don't, really, expect the Blademaster to play exactly like the RTS incarnation (or even the HotS iteration). But we do expect more than just 1 ability and a transmog set.

    How can you "measure" their possibilities? especially in the table where giving something to the class is much more easier and simple than ripping off their things and creating a new class just to introduce those 2 skills? seems dumb.
    That's the problem with guys like you and alike. You assume people want 1-2 abilities to be able to play a certain concept. When, in reality, a class contains much more than 4 abilities. You, and others here (like the Dark Ranger deniers) lack imagination, and cannot imagine a concept that holds more than 4 abilities. That's why like-minded people here suggest a Black Arrow and transmog for Hunters, and actually expect others to be satisfied with it (like it, somehow, literally embodies an entire class).

    A Demon Hunter is an example of ripping off an existing class. Yet, now that it is in the game, you guys have nothing to say about it.

    "players define who are blademasters and who aren't discarding blizzard take on this matter" more news at your favorite mmo-forums

    i never disregard warcraft 3, i actually take a lot of the rts to enforce how blademasters are legendary orc warriors and that is their definition in the RTS, but seems that sometimes is nice to disregard that in your part, to show other races in the prol to give blademaster "class" to then, is a funny double standard
    A Blademaster is a samurai, in the end of the day. So, expanding it beyond the RTS is not a crime (as long as you keep faithful to that archetype).

    WC3 also describes Beastmaster, Brewmasters, Demon Hunters and Headhunters as warriors. You don't, really, view them as such, do you?
    The problem is, your concept of a Warrior comes from WoW and WoW alone. So, everything that uses a melee weapon and physical damage you view as a warrior.

    pretty hypocrite coming from someone wh said that a blademaster is only a blademaster if he does have two skills, that is the definition of short sighted.
    A Blademaster is a Blademaster, regardless of abilities, just like Dark Rangers, in-game, lack the skills of the WC3 unit. But, that doesn't make them Hunters, much like how it doesn't make Blademasters Warriors.

    so you are 100% confirming you are doing this just for bait and seek confrontation, trying me to "change" my pov, sadly(or Lucky) for you, isn't gonna happen, that is not my opinion, Warriors are blademasters and blizzard made sure to not make me doubt, by doubling down on that with countless of examples in the MMO.
    I've changed my mind on Dark Ranger races, due to how they handled Death Knight races. Why can't you?

    If blizzard change that in the game and change their lore, i change pov, isn't a mmo shitposter who will do.
    Lore doesn't need to be changed. Dark Rangers having Ranger in their names and using bows doesn't make them Hunters. Why can't you realize them same for Blademasters?

    No, you are acting like the blademaster is just wind walk and mirror image
    And you are acting like it is only Bladestorm and transmog.


    and DH ahve mroe STR and STr gain thana gility
    In WoW. It makes sense, because their agility and maneuverability is like the Japanese samurai (probably based on the Japanese demon slayer archetype).

    that is cute comign from you, who point cmoing from the hots meme game, lets just assume your giant ass post as not trolling, you are so much over your head that you are just saying nonsense if you made a "deep analyzis" of WC3 and the blademaster in general across wow the media, you would know the blademaster like mountain king and tauren chieftain are the warrior we current have, missing two skills that can easily be give to warriors.
    Why consider WC3 as a legitimate source, but not HotS? it, literally, uses the same abilities and even expands upon them. I, really, don't get where you and other come from. Ridiculous skins? have nothing to do with gameplay. Wild, made-up scenarios? it is not Hearthstone. You can see how much the Heroes there are close to in-game classes. Heck, the Demon Hunter is closer to that of HotS than that of WC3. Yet, you dismiss it based on some arbitrary hatred.

    If you, really, delved into the Blademaster concept, and not just a general outline of it, you'd see that like the Dark Ranger not being a Hunter (even though the similarity in abilities, gameplay and lore) The Blademaster isn't in the Warrior as it should be, and therefore a potential class (and before you suggest adding 2 abilities, a class is much more than just 4 abilities).

    Quote Originally Posted by Syegfryed View Post
    the only thing missing are two skills, that only you and some people are categorizing as "important and crucial features" and saying since we don't have two skills, then everything else is invallid and tey are not the same class, faalling flat to the same fallacy.
    The problem with you is you, really, expect people to be satisfied with 3 abilities and a transmog. That's not how roleplaying works. No matter how much a Warlock tried to imitate a Demon Hunter, the feeling was not there.

    not being fully represented don't mean is not playable
    Yes, it does.
    Demon Hunter being half-assed into the Warlock is a prime example.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ielenia View Post
    Except it's not really, though. The vengeance demon hunter is still faithful to the WC3 DH hero unit. It transforms into a demon, uses warglaives, and can self-immolate.
    Never was it a form the Demon Hunter takes, in any other sources.

    It is, though, since the two concepts have different gameplay.
    It isn't. It's like saying the WC3 iteration isn't a Demon Hunter because it plays differently to the WoW one.

    Yes, it almost made the cut, i.e., was almost the one selected to become the expansion's new class. Blizzard doesn't make all the concepts into actual playable classes before deciding which one to use as the expansion's new class, so all this "did it have abilities, animations, spell effects, etc" is a meaningless argument.
    Almost made the cut - regarding consideration. It wasn't near being playable in any form. Blizzard ditches concepts at 90% completion, like any gaming company, what are you talking about?

    None of that proves your claim, though, that the race was "almost ready". In fact, it even disproves your claim, since it expressly says that it was changed mid-development. Unless you're one of those who think a half-finished product is a finished product, like EA and many other gaming companies?
    More than the Runemaster, that's for sure. One, because it wasn't integrated into another thing, like it. And two, because it was introduced in Mists due to the lift of a legal ban. That's technicality, not ditching the idea.

    Probably because the warrior class was created prior to the pandarens? I mean, can you see anything "blood elf" in the warrior class? Or Worgen? Or goblin? Or draenei?
    I meant, the "Pandaren Warrior" art piece is nothing more than a Monk wielding those Ninja Turtle weapons.

    I'm sorry, but you're dead wrong, here. We don't need Warcraft 3 for new classes, period. The runemaster proves that almost as a fact. Because if we did need Warcraft 3, the runemaster concept wouldn't even be considered in the first place.
    Again, disregarding reality. In the end, it lost. Just like the Necromancer, and was integrated into not one, but two classes. Ask yourself this: why everything that eventually makes it into the game is based on a Warcraft 3 Hero (and not a unit or an RPG concept).

    No, we don't. Again, I don't have to point to a specific book, movie, comic or game to know that the 'drunken fight' motiff of the brewmaster came from pop culture, for example.
    There's nothing wrong in expanding the class concept, based on other sources. Heck, even the Blademaster cannot stay true to Hero unit only. Further Samurai inspiration is required. But, at the end of the day, it is based on a WC3 Hero unit.

    Read again. "For gameplay reasons". Meaning, it doesn't stun you or damages you. Same can happen with the Venthyr.

    Quote Originally Posted by Syegfryed View Post
    Bash from the mountian king is missing, the spell immunity from then is missing :^)

    always with the same double standards, false equivalence.
    There was. It was called Mace Specialization.
    Abilities don't have to work exactly like they do in WC3, as long as they are present (considering if they are still relevant today).

    Quote Originally Posted by Syegfryed View Post
    i can cut people with my sword, i can crit, i can kill and i can bladestorm hitting many peoples at once, i am the master of my blade,. i can play just like the rts
    I can use gadgets and explosives with Engineering. That probably means i'm a Tinker (to show you how ridiculous that is).

    Quote Originally Posted by Triceron View Post
    Are you unaware he was made into a Raid Boss and still had nothing noteworthy of being related whatseover to the Dark Rangers of WC3?
    I don't read the technical parts of patch notes. What does it say?

    Regardless, if Blizzard officially makes a Dark Ranger class, they could choose to implement it or ignore it. That's up to them to decide.

    I mean, they gave us a Demon Hunter that doesn't have a ranged Metamorphosis, and they kept with the flavour of HOTS Illidan instead as a fully melee character. As long as that satisfies the full class identity, that is what is important. I'm not going to lose any sleep over missing skeletons.
    Neither do i.

    Consider that the design of the last new class was also pretty shallow. 2 Specs, gutted multiple classes, and has gameplay consisting of a 2 button rotation.

    I am basing these speculations on Blizzard's own trends. We're pretty much beyond the point of innovation and redemption. At most I see is a Tinker or Dragonsworn, and from there Blizzard is pretty much creatively bankrupt.
    What about the Shadow Hunter? it's, pretty, unique if you ask me.

    They can add a spec to the Demon Hunter. Check out my thread:
    https://www.mmo-champion.com/threads...pecializations

    Quote Originally Posted by Syegfryed View Post
    If those were major points, blizzard would make sure to highlight that in their lore in wow, in the blademaster npcs, and the blademaster playable class, aka warrior, But they didn't, they seem fine with just bladestorm being enough.

    I think they should still add those skills to the warrior yes.
    If manipulation was part of the Ranger it would be more accentuated. Yet, is it not part of the concept with Possession and Mind Control?

    Quote Originally Posted by Syegfryed View Post
    Aesthetic only matter when it suits you apperently? you can literally play as a shirtless orc warrior in wow, you said you don't, you were wrong
    I have to agree with you on that.
    Blademasters will wear full-on armor, as well, much like other samurais.

    Is not hard to understand we have that, we don't have the entirety of the abilities neither the exact same playstyle, true, because its impossible to put the same playstyle from a RTS to a MMORPG, others don't have it too, a DH in WoW don't play exact the same like in the RTS, asking for another DH class because is not the same is as much nonsensical
    Let's see, shall we?

    Demon Hunter
    Metamorphosis ✓
    Immolation Aura ✓
    Blur ✓
    Mana Rift ✓

    Warlock (WotLK to WoD)
    Metamorphosis✓
    Immolation Aura ×
    Evasion ×
    Mana Burn ×

    You see how the Warlock scenario matches what we have with the Blademaster right now?

    And for one who have it, ten don't, like i said, pretty bad job if it is to show this is a key factor to then if blizzard almost never put on then
    Samuro is more iconic than Jubei'thos (serving as the art concept for the entire class idea).

    They have spell reflection to highlight a "deceptive", since it is directly a damage redirection mechanic.

    Like i said, yes, they don't have 100% the blademaster spells, but does not mean they aren't, and does not mean they can't change those abilities to fit the MMO mechanics, They did that with Avatar and Stormbolt, it would be the easiest thing to do,but trying to make up a entire different class that would dilute and rip off the warrior? to justify two spells? and with more than one spec? is just nonsensical
    Spell reflection is nothing deceptive. It used to raise your shield and reflect direct, incoming, spells - it is a very common fantasy and trope.

    They can, literally, do that with every class. So, does that mean no new classes? just add a few abilities to an existing one?
    Nothing dilutive or ripping off from the Warrior. The Warrior is, hardly, the Samurai archetype.

    Quote Originally Posted by Syegfryed View Post
    And others were completed cut

    Like i said, the "problem" you saying it is exist, can simple resolved by adding those skills to the warrior, one way or another, there is no logical reason to rip off warriors and make an entire new class to justify two skills
    This solution can be applied to any class and is a cheap one, as we've seen with the Metamorphosis in the Warlock.
    There are more than 2 abilities. That's what you don't grasp. You can't see the bigger picture. A whole class contains much more than 4 abilities.

    Quote Originally Posted by Syegfryed View Post
    And if i want to play like the DH in the RTS in wow i can't, thats why im saying your point is nonsensical, you keep adding stuff to make a hyperbole and a caricature of the blademaster, you can't play like a RTS in a MMORPG

    you can play like a blademaster period. because they have everything a blademaster have, missing two skills and again, the class is not revolved around those two skills, neither in play style neither in the lore, they still are blademasters without those skills, to say you can't, you either didn't played blademasters in the RTS, or just played wrong
    At least there is the Demon Hunter class, which you can't say about the Blademaster. They could add a ranged specialization to that class, because it's not a play pretend like with the Warlock.

    Can you play the Hero unit of WC3, or Samuro in HotS, without those abilities? you should ask yourself that... Because it would massively minimize the gameplay.

    Quote Originally Posted by Syegfryed View Post
    2/3 abilities represented, yes, no ranged metamorphosis, no mana burn.
    You didn't even try to match the looks with those Demon Hunter pictures. (biased much?)

    And, by the way, Demon Hunters have Metamorphosis, Immolation Aura, Blur and Mana Rift. So everything is accounted for.

    No they aren't, again, go play with a blademaster in the RTS and try to win the game by going for trickery and "stealth", you will lose hard
    And you can with Bladestorm only?

    Ask yourself this: can a Demon Hunter get along with Metamorphosis only? Can a Dark Ranger get along with Black Arrow only? can a Brewmaster be one with Storm, Earth and Fire only?

    They are not, rly, stop, Blizzard already made sure of that but not giving much shit about it with tons of blademasters in wow not having that nither being part of their lore across the years
    There are tons without Bladestorm, either. Yet, you keep forgetting to mention them, on purpose.

    Quote Originally Posted by Syegfryed View Post
    Nope, they don't to do that, because blademasters are still blademaster even if they lack those two skills, something you can get away with it
    They can't, really. You're just playing "imagine" with your character. That's like RPing a Warlock with Metamorphosis as a Demon Hunter. Heck, people used to wear the Dreadgear armor in vanilla, as Warriors, and pretend that they are Death Knights.

    Because that would imply a warrior/blademaster is only a blademaster if it have those two skills, in this case, if blizzard give then windwalk/mirror image in someway, and that is false, because a blademaster/warrior still is a blademaster even without those skils.
    A Blademaster is a Blademaster no matter the abilities. That comes to show you how irrelevant in-game NPCs are, because there is no consistency.

    For someone who entire basis of argument is false equivalence, you don't get to say that, even because NPCS are direct representation the blademasters we have, we are not talking about one, particular NPC, one who run from the rule, like shaman thrall and anduin priest using plate armor, we are talking about several npcs, several appearances and mentions in the game and lore, we spend months in old draenor, learning about the clan and no focus on mirror image neither windwalk,
    The problem with you is you're taking examples from non-representative NPCs. If any of them were important to the class, they'd get a Hero representation in HotS. But, it is not the case. Samuro is. Thrall and Anduin are, actually, representatives of their classes. Armor and weapons don't, really, matter. That's a matter of transmog. But, when it comes to abilities and gameplay, you can clearly see that Anduin is a Priest and Thrall is a Shaman.
    Last edited by username993720; 2021-05-04 at 11:42 AM.
    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.

  19. #6359
    Quote Originally Posted by sam86 View Post
    Well if u want some optimistic thoughts we have a LOT of spells from the rpg books we still didn't see in wow, some are flat out broken OP
    Berseker charge for example is one that just cross my mind that still doesn't exist in wow
    Implementing RPG spells and abilities into an MMORPG will always meet limitations sooner than later. Alot of it comes from the basic difference that in RPGs you usually have character mechanics that aim to deal decisive blows because combat is already rather prolonged, wheres in a multiplayer videogame you need to keep the gameplay loop running while also making an epic prolonged fight - especially in games like wow that focus way too much on raiding. That is why in a TTRPG a meteor spell levels a mountain top/village and in WoW it can't even kill a bunch of minion mobs reliably.

    I don't really see many cool spells from the old books making it into the game tbh, so I'm not sure how we could be optimistic here. If I wanted to be optimistic, I would argue that once the game plummets beneath a certain popularity threshold, Blizzard will open the flood gates and might rethink their current bare-bones design approach and come up with a few more class/spec concepts - or you know, finally give us another fucking talent row instead of lame barely related borrowed powers .
    Last edited by Haidaes; 2021-05-04 at 12:44 PM.
    /tar Tinker-zealot /point /lol
    WoW:Shadowlands - Danuser's Divina Commedia?

  20. #6360
    Quote Originally Posted by Syegfryed View Post
    ah yes, look, totally the same aesthetic
    Sure, let's play a game of cherry picked pictures. Why not. Only mine aren't transmogged. Mine are literally what you see when you decide to create a brand new character.

    Let's look at an Orc Warrior shall we?




    How weird, neither one looks anything like a Blademaster. Why don't we look at two Demon Hunters now? Again, no transmog, just two characters freshly made.




    Huh. What do you know. looks pretty much just like the Demon Hunter from Warcraft 3. Weird.

    the "same armor" *look at the dude shirtless*, hum yes we defintly can say what armor he is using
    And yet your character is wearing plate. The actual armor you are wearing is heavy plate armor.

    Same stat, humm yes *Look at the Demon hunter with much higher Strenght than agility*


    And what is the Demon Hunter's primary ability? What is it? Go on, I'll wait while you check.

    2/3 abilities represented, yes, no ranged metamorphosis, no mana burn.
    Read what I've written countless times. All we need is a representation of the abilities. We don't Mirror Image exactly like in WC3. We don't need Wind Walk exactly like it was in WC3. We need abilities that represent those functionalities. The Demon Hunter has exactly that.

    Ah yes, totally different Aesthetic, they don't look alike at all, you are right
    It's almost like aesthetic means moire than just appearance and skin deep looks. Weird.

    different? Armor? ah yes, the guy who have the same armor rate as the Knights who use Heavy armor, more armor than death knights and Mountain kings.
    Shirtless guy vs guy with full plate. Huh, it's almost like these things aren't the same.

    Different stat? yep, their stat gain is different, their Strength score still is as much as their agility.
    Please tell me what the primary stat of the Blademaster is. And then, so you can have some understanding of WC3, read the following to get an idea of how stats work in the game.

    http://classic.battle.net/war3/basics/heroes.shtml

    Different function? they have the same function, they are warriors that go head on into the fray, showed countless of times, they are not sneaky rogues.
    Blademaster role: Sneak and trick the enemy.
    Warrior role: Smash the enemy.

    Pretty fucking different.

    And yes, they don't have two skills, already mentioned.
    Meaning that two thirds of their kit is missing.

    They aren't, because you are making shit up
    What exactly did I make up?

    No they aren't, again, go play with a blademaster in the RTS and try to win the game by going for trickery and "stealth", you will lose hard

    The "closest" thing they can do like that is go invisible to the enemy base, because wind walk give then bonus to speed and kill their workers, then get out, because the bonus to movement without being caught, not because "sneaky rogues" and this only work at early low leves and stop being a thing after the enemy create brains and do towers, later they only walk with the army and destroy the enemy focusing on targets like spell casting and heroes, such thing warriors do with their mobility and power.]
    Did you read the fucking link I gave you? The one that describes the playstyle of the unit? How the abilities are used? How they are countered?

    Because all you have is your bullshit anecdotal evidence.

    Im leading to believe you only played with easy bots and cheats, or not played the game at all, to think a blademaster role in the RTS was that "trick creeps into attack the enemy"
    If you used only 1/3 of their toolkit and didn't actually play them the way they're designed, I think I might have found the guy that doesn't know how to play the damn game.

    They are not, rly, stop, Blizzard already made sure of that but not giving much shit about it with tons of blademasters in wow not having that nither being part of their lore across the years

    This is the whole point of the problem, you are made that up and can't accept another thing
    Yes they fucking are. This isn't hard. Two thirds of their toolkit involve surprise and trickery. You are simply pretending it doesn't or it magically doesn't matter because it wrecks your moronic theory that Blademasters are Warriors and fully playable in the game. That's the only reason you're slamming your head into the keyboard and fighting this when person after person after person is telling you that you are wrong.

    You are trying to tell me that a unit that is based on sneaking past the enemy and then tricking them with an ability that makes duplicates forcing the enemy to hunt down the real Blademaster is represented by the HULK SMASH aesthetic of an Arms Warrior. Again and again and again you hand waive away the differences. You lie about what the focus of the WC3 unit was. You try and tell me that two things that are more different than they are the same are identical.

    Everyone in this thread has continually proven you wrong and yet somehow you sit in your corner and pretend you're right. Everyone else must be wrong. It's getting embarrassing dude.

Posting Permissions

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