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

[TheFirstOnes]

Some shit like Dragonsworn...

OR EVEN BETTER...

BLIZZARD! GIMME MY FUCKIN BARD CLASS, PLEASE!

[Ielenia]

they literally still said "Though blademasters are masters of stealth and guile,they value personal honor above all else., no trickss, no sneaky rogues(guile means cunning, astuteness, warrior traits, not "deceptive tricksters)

You basically making the argument for us that the blademasters are about stealth and guile. And as for "personal honor", do you know if their personal honor does not include "tricks, sneaky rogue stuff"? Because one can still have their personal honor and still engage in "stealth and guile". A heavy indication of that is the very fact that blademasters are "masters of stealth and guile". Because if "stealth and guile" was against their honor, they wouldn't be masters of that.

Otherwise, that's like saying Khadgar and Jaina are against magic. Despite being masters of magic.

[Daronokk]

To the people that think a Blademaster Class won't work because Warriors and Mages already have some of their iconic abilities, think again...

Just look at what happened to Warlocks, they lost Death Coil to Death Knights and Metamorphosis to Demon Hunters.

If Blizzard wanted to they could take away Invisibility and Mirror Image from Mages, and take away Bladestorm from Warriors. Give them to the new Blademaster Class along with some new abilities like they did with the Demon Hunter.
Meanwhile the Mage and Warrior should get something new that fills their loss. Not that difficult.

[jellmoo]

You are literally "slamming your head" against the Truth, that a Blademaster played and is, something different than what you assumed

Dude, do you honestly not think that maybe, just maybe you're wrong when literally everyone in the thread is telling you the same thing?

[Ielenia]

You are literally "slamming your head" against the Truth, that a Blademaster played and is, something different than what you assumed

Oh wow, and you even felt the need to capitalize the first 't' in 'truth', as if you're speaking some sort of divine statement. Which is doubly amusing since what you call "truth" is nothing but a subjective interpretation. In other words, you're once again dishonestly stating your own personal opinions as fact.

[username993720]

No, that's your take. The demon hunter concept is about turning into a demon, not a specific type and form of demon. It is fully represented in both of the WoW class' specs. By that logic, none of the demon hunter is represented in any of the specs because none of the demons the DH turns into are "full purple faceless demons" like the WC3, and how the warlock's meta was.

That's not my take on it. That's fact. The Vengeance Demon Hunter is, completely, original. Let's not try and be nitpicky about it. Low graphic looks have nothing to do with what they meant. At the end of the day, they were all based on Illidan's demon form looks.

It doesn't change the fact that the WoW class seems to have been inspired WAY more in the HotS DH, than the WC3 DH.

That's because it's a more recent iteration.

Ask him yourself, since you are the one making the claim.

I thought he'd see his name mentioned. Basically, he said something like that a few pages ago, go look for it.

Well, the dark ranger, necromancer and tinker, who are WC3 units, also "lost every time". And the demon hunter also "lost every time" until it finally got its time to shine, two expansions ago.

Also, may I remind you, that the dark ranger, demon hunter and tinker, concepts who do have WC3 heroes, lost to the runemaster, a concept without a WC3 hero, because they weren't one of the top three picks for a new class in Wrath?

You are confusing basic units with Hero units. And, we don't know if they considered them, at all, for a certain expansion (except for the Demon Hunter, who lost not to other concepts but to the fact that they added 9 classes an expansion ago), so they weren't, really, in competition.

Why would the Tinker, Dark Ranger and Demon Hunter be considered for Wrath? The classes added revolve around the theme of the expansion. Necromancers, definitely, fit. I guess, since Death has a connection to runes, a Runemaster fits. A Dark Ranger might have, also, been a proper candidate. We just don't know.

And what doesn't make into the game are also concepts based on WC3 units. Where's the dark ranger, necromancer, tinker, alchemist, etc?

Waiting for a proper expansion (except for the Necromancer, since its not a Hero unit and have been said to be integrated into the Death Knight).
There's a waiting list, you know. They can't add them all at once, especially since they only add one every couple (or more) expansions.

Quote that statement.

BlizzCast Episode 7 (i don't have access to it).

Occam's Razor says it's coincidence, correlation.

Aha...
Until they do otherwise, that's the best we have right now.

Most of the class comes from outside sources, though. And if most of what the class is about comes from outside sources, then it's a tough battle to demonstrate that the monk class had the majority of its design based off one single unit that doesn't even share its name with the class.

It's grounded in Pandaren culture.
I didn't say the majority, i said it served as the basis.
Same as with the Death Knight not using any Blood or Frost abilities in WC3.

How about "not making them playable"? That's like asking murlocs to be made smart as humans to make them playable. Or that nagas suddenly have normal legs so they use mounts and be playable. Also, venthyr need anima to survive, and there is no anima in the living realm.

How about we do? because Vampires, Angels and Fauns are missing from the playable races (and, apparently, Gladiators i guess).
I'm not asking for Murlocs, and Nagas were considered for addition by the devs. I'm, merely, pointing out their obvious playability levels (2 genders, customization options, up-to-date textures and animations). You'd have to be blind to ignore the signs given by Blizzard (especially considering we are helping their covenants and gaining reputation with them). They have the same case as Vulperas (special sleeping animation, like Sylvar having special running animation).

Venthyr needing anima (real-life comparison to vampire's blood consumption) is like zombies needing flesh (Cannibalize). It's a nice flavor to the lore, but doesn't really affect gameplay. Anima is, essentially, soul essence. And that can be harvested in the mortal realm. Much like Blood elves and Nightborne relying on Arcane sources, they can find other sources for sustenance (like Twilight's vampires).

By the way, are you familiar with the "angel giving up his wings to live among mortals" theme? it is, quite, a common story in many platforms:

[Ielenia]

That's not my take on it. That's fact. The Vengeance Demon Hunter is, completely, original. Let's not try and be nitpicky about it.

You're the one being "nitpicky" about it, since you consider the Vengeance demon hunter "not being inspired in the original WC3/HotS demon hunter" because the vengeance DH's demon form doesn't look exactly like WC3's demon form.

Low graphic looks have nothing to do with what they meant.

The warlock meta form looked exactly like the WC3 demon form. It has nothing to do with "low graphics".

That's because it's a more recent iteration.

Which plays differently than the Warcraft 3 demon hunter.

I thought he'd see his name mentioned. Basically, he said something like that a few pages ago, go look for it.

I didn't "/mention" him. Neither did you. And if you think he "said something like that a few pages ago", then it's your job to look for it. Not mine. After all, you were the one who made the claim.

You are confusing basic units with Hero units. And, we don't know if they considered them, at all, for a certain expansion (except for the Demon Hunter, who lost not to other concepts but to the fact that they added 9 classes an expansion ago), so they weren't, really, in competition.

The demon hunter concept also lost the battle in Wrath. And again in Mists of Pandaria. And your distinction between "basic units and hero units" is meaningless. After all, WoW's priest class has no hero unit equivalent in WC3. Or the rogue class. Or the warlock class.

Why would the Tinker, Dark Ranger and Demon Hunter be considered for Wrath? The classes added revolve around the theme of the expansion.

Did you forget that one of the most iconic moments in Warcraft 3 is the fight between Illidan and Arthas in Icecrown?

I guess, since Death has a connection to runes, a Runemaster fits.

Wrong. Death never had any connection to runes, at least not any more than any type of magic, until Shadowlands in which Blizzard implemented this "Maw runes" and stuff like that. Runemasters had zero connections to the story or characters of Wrath of the Lich King. Hell, at that point it was a character concept that simply did not exist in Warcraft. No units in Warcraft 3, either, basic or hero.

Waiting for a proper expansion

Oh, so when it's a class concept that fits your narrative, it's "waiting for its expansion". But when it's a class concept that doesn't fit your narrative, it's "an invalid concept"?

(except for the Necromancer, since its not a Hero unit and have been said to be integrated into the Death Knight).

First: this "not a hero unit" is nonsensical. The runemaster debunks that claim of yours. Second: Blizzard did not merge the "necromancer" and "death knight" concepts into one. They just took the ideas they had for the class and put it in the DK class. Otherwise we wouldn't have actual necromancer characters in the franchise.

There's a waiting list, you know.

I'm waiting to see any sort of evidence for this "waiting list".

BlizzCast Episode 7 (i don't have access to it).

Yeah. Find a transcript or any other way. I'm not going to take your word for it, nor will I go around looking for evidence for your claims.

How about we do? because Vampires, Angels and Fauns are missing from the playable races (and, apparently, Gladiators i guess).
I'm not asking for Murlocs, and Nagas were considered for addition by the devs. I'm, merely, pointing out their obvious playability levels (2 genders, customization options, up-to-date textures and animations). You'd have to be blind to ignore the signs given by Blizzard (especially considering we are helping their covenants and gaining reputation with them). They have the same case as Vulperas (special sleeping animation, like Sylvar having special running animation).

Just because something is "missing" doesn't mean it's a necessity it should be added. Again: venthyr literally go mad under the light. On top of that, they require anima to survive, which is something that does exist in the mortal realm.

Venthyr needing anima (real-life comparison to vampire's blood consumption) is like zombies needing flesh (Cannibalize).

No, it's not. Zombies don't need flesh. But venthyr do need anima.

By the way, are you familiar with the "angel giving up his wings to live among mortals" theme? it is, quite, a common story in many platforms:

Soooo... a human. Those exist in WoW, already.

[username993720]

You're the one being "nitpicky" about it, since you consider the Vengeance demon hunter "not being inspired in the original WC3/HotS demon hunter" because the vengeance DH's demon form doesn't look exactly like WC3's demon form.

That form was given to the Havoc Demon Hunter.

The warlock meta form looked exactly like the WC3 demon form. It has nothing to do with "low graphics".

I wouldn't say exactly. Look at the pictures. But, it is, definitely, inspired by Illidan. People used to complain about the "elven look" being applied to other warlock races.

Which plays differently than the Warcraft 3 demon hunter.

*sigh*

Which, is an upgrade of the WC3 one. You're using the same argument Sygfreyd does.

I didn't "/mention" him. Neither did you. And if you think he "said something like that a few pages ago", then it's your job to look for it. Not mine. After all, you were the one who made the claim.

I'm too lazy for that
How do you /mention someone?

The demon hunter concept also lost the battle in Wrath. And again in Mists of Pandaria. And your distinction between "basic units and hero units" is meaningless. After all, WoW's priest class has no hero unit equivalent in WC3. Or the rogue class. Or the warlock class.

I'm referring to expansion classes.
You say it lost the battle in Wrath and MoP, but it was never considered because the themes of the expansions do not match the class. It was only considered for TBC.

Did you forget that one of the most iconic moments in Warcraft 3 is the fight between Illidan and Arthas in Icecrown?

That doesn't make it eligible for the expansion. It has to revolve around Demon Hunters. And Demon Hunters hunt demons, not undead.

Wrong. Death never had any connection to runes, at least not any more than any type of magic, until Shadowlands in which Blizzard implemented this "Maw runes" and stuff like that. Runemasters had zero connections to the story or characters of Wrath of the Lich King. Hell, at that point it was a character concept that simply did not exist in Warcraft. No units in Warcraft 3, either, basic or hero.

Then, i wonder why they would consider that. A class has to match the theme of the expansion.

Oh, so when it's a class concept that fits your narrative, it's "waiting for its expansion". But when it's a class concept that doesn't fit your narrative, it's "an invalid concept"?

Every class concept is, basically, on the waiting list. We just have to figure out which ones are legitimate and which are not.

First: this "not a hero unit" is nonsensical. The runemaster debunks that claim of yours. Second: Blizzard did not merge the "necromancer" and "death knight" concepts into one. They just took the ideas they had for the class and put it in the DK class. Otherwise we wouldn't have actual necromancer characters in the franchise.

Huh?
That's like saying there won't be lich characters because it was, partially, integrated into the Death Knight.

I'm waiting to see any sort of evidence for this "waiting list".

What do you think happens to class concepts that are considered and are not implemented (i.e - the Demon Hunter)?

Yeah. Find a transcript or any other way. I'm not going to take your word for it, nor will I go around looking for evidence for your claims.

Do i have to? the WoWpedia page says that (and provides a reference).

Just because something is "missing" doesn't mean it's a necessity it should be added. Again: venthyr literally go mad under the light. On top of that, they require anima to survive, which is something that does exist in the mortal realm.

Come on...
Dwarves, Gnomes, Elves, Werewolves, Orcs, Trolls, Minotaurs, Zombies and Goblins all exist in mythology. There is no reason why the other, prominent ones, won't be added as well.

And Undeads, literally, burn to ashes by the light (Wake of Ashes).
Blood elves and Nightborne needed arcane sources, and they found alternative ones.

No, it's not. Zombies don't need flesh. But venthyr do need anima.

They do, to replenish themselves.

Soooo... a human. Those exist in WoW, already.

No, a Kyrian. Different model, different culture. That's like saying we don't need Kul Tirans and Gilneans. Besides, they would most likely have some sort of angelic wings racial, cosmetic armor piece or aesthetic.

[jellmoo]

They do, to replenish themselves.

Just gonna quickly jump in as a zombie fan. This largely depends on the type of zombie we're talking about.

• Old School Haitian Zombie: Would still need food since they are technically still alive. Wouldn't need to be flesh specifically though.
• Classic Romero Zombies (like Night of the Living Dead or even The Walking Dead): Don't need to eat, they simply do it out of instinct.
• "Infected" style Zombies (like 28 Days Later): Would need to eat flesh since they are still alive.
• Return of the Living Dead Zombies: A special category as they are only interested in eating brains to dull the pain of being dead.

[Ielenia]

That form was given to the Havoc Demon Hunter.

Not really. The WC3 form was given to the warlock. The havoc demon hunter form is a completely new one.

I wouldn't say exactly. Look at the pictures. But, it is, definitely, inspired by Illidan. People used to complain about the "elven look" being applied to other warlock races.

And the vengeance DH was also inspired on Illidan. Blizzard just decided to make the two demon forms look different to visually distinguish both specs.

I'm too lazy for that

If you're not willing to do the legwork for your own claims, then don't demand others to do it for you, and don't blame them for not believing you.

How do you /mention someone?

[mention="Profile ID number"]"Profile name"[/mention]

You'll find your profile ID number on the profile's link. It's the number before the name.

I'm referring to expansion classes.

Which have not been demonstrated to be any different than vanilla classes in terms of choosing what goes in, what goes out, and design-wise. Because Blizzard has revealed next to nothing about how they pick and design classes to make any sort of informed decision.

You say it lost the battle in Wrath and MoP, but it was never considered because the themes of the expansions do not match the class. It was only considered for TBC.

How do you know it was never considered? Do you have special insight to Blizzard's class design processes that no one else has?

That doesn't make it eligible for the expansion. It has to revolve around Demon Hunters. And Demon Hunters hunt demons, not undead.

How do you know it doesn't make it eligible? I'll remind you that the runemaster concept almost became the class of choice for Wrath of the Lich king, and has even less to do with the expansion theme than demon hunters. And Runemasters don't have Warcraft 3 units, basic or otherwise.

Then, i wonder why they would consider that. A class has to match the theme of the expansion.

Maybe because what you guys say are requirements for class creation (match expansion theme, WC3 unit required, etc etc) are just your own guesses and not actual fact?

Every class concept is, basically, on the waiting list.

Why don't you first prove there is a list, in the first place? Then we'll talk.

We just have to figure out which ones are legitimate and which are not.

And how do you plan on "figuring out which are """legitimate""" and which are not", considering we have next to zero insight on what Blizzard really requires for a class concept to be accepted as viable? We know for sure it's not "warcraft 3 unit" or "match expansion theme" thanks to the runemaster.

Huh?
That's like saying there won't be lich characters because it was, partially, integrated into the Death Knight.

Nah. If Blizzard ever adds necromancer, they could give them an ability to temporarily turn into liches. Other than that, mages have the ability to turn into skeletal mages with the Necrolord covenant.

What do you think happens to class concepts that are considered and are not implemented (i.e - the Demon Hunter)?

Here's a mind-blower: I don't know. But I don't go around making a claim that cannot be proven, like this idea of "there is a list".

Do i have to? the WoWpedia page says that (and provides a reference).

... And where is the link to this so-called "WoWpedia page"?

Come on...
Dwarves, Gnomes, Elves, Werewolves, Orcs, Trolls, Minotaurs, Zombies and Goblins all exist in mythology. There is no reason why the other, prominent ones, won't be added as well.

And on that same token, there is no real reason why they should. "Just because other mythological races already exist as playable races" is not exactly a compelling argument.

And Undeads, literally, burn to ashes by the light (Wake of Ashes).
Blood elves and Nightborne needed arcane sources, and they found alternative ones.

And do you see this thing about the undead being made important in their description? No, it's just a side note. Whereas for the venthyr, it's front and center, to the point that it's used as a punishment for those who went against Sire Denathrius' rule.

They do, to replenish themselves.

Point me to the quote where that is stated, please?

No, a Kyrian. Different model, different culture. That's like saying we don't need Kul Tirans and Gilneans. Besides, they would most likely have some sort of angelic wings racial, cosmetic armor piece or aesthetic.

Except the video links you showed me, of Diablo 3, show that Tyrael lost all his angelic powers and became just a simple human. Hence me saying "oh, just a human?" because he lost all that made him different from a human.

[Syegfryed]

Oh wow, and you even felt the need to capitalize the first 't' in 'truth', as if you're speaking some sort of divine statement. Which is doubly amusing since what you call "truth" is nothing but a subjective interpretation. In other words, you're once again dishonestly stating your own personal opinions as fact.

"the truth" is what we see in the game, in wow and in the lore, nothing subjective on that

I BEG the mods to add a laughing emoji to this forum.

Heroes in WC3 had 4 abilities, heroes in HOTS have 5.

All 4 of the skills are in HOTS. You're on something, what the hell are you even talking about.

they have more skills that do not appear in the RTS, like image tranmission and other talents such Way of Illusion and Kawarimi, oh wait, i forgot you said yourself you didn't play hots

Except the warrior class concept is not of an agile character that "gets out of the way".

that is not the class concept of the blademaster either, so everything works out

The warrior class concept is the slower, tough colossus

That is, of course, your opinion on that matter, and rly far from the truth

Except it's not "two minor illusions for giggles". You're purposely downplaying the ability's concept to try to make a point, which tells a lot about your arguments.

No, im downplaying the ability to fit the mmo style.

Except... it has to have an invisibility, otherwise it's not the same concept. That's like saying WC3's metamorphosis ability doesn't have to turn the demon hunter into a demon as long as it gave the class bonus armor/damage.

No, it dos not have, since Avatar does not grant spell immunity, neither metamorphosis is a ranged spell, if invisibility is not the core concept of the ability, and it was the movement sprint like ability, that is what should be focused

Oh yeah. Mobility as in "charge". Re-read your quote, and tell me where it says that said mobility is used to get out of danger.

Heroic leap and charging back in your ally, try to play the class before

It doesn't. Because those who want to play as a blademaster want to play as a blademaster, not "pretend" to be a blademaster. The warrior class does not represent the blademaster concept because it doesn't have the gameplay style one would expect out of a concept based on the Warcraft 3 unit of the same name.

People apaprently want to play heroes of the storm or another game, the blademaster concept and playstyle is the same as of the current warrior, already showed with a video of a guy playing blademaster in RTS, by putting the two skills into the game would simple kill out this argument that it don't

Except they do. The concept of two abilities indicate that the blademaster concept is at odds with the warrior class concept.

That is, again, your opinion, since is completely untrue, saying they have different concepts is showing you literally, don't know both concepts, and assume withe the little you know

The warriors are the "in-your-face-and-stay-in-your-face" kind of gameplay style,

Exactly like blademasters

but if we were to equate the blademaster concept's idealized gameplay to one of the existing classes in WoW, it would fit way more to the rogue playstyle, than the warrior playstyle.

More of the rogue playstyle? who said that? ah yes, that is your assumption based on nothing but your bias, since you know, we already saw their playstyle in the RTS and their lore across wow, and ahve nothing to do with rogues but with warriors.

Or it's a warrior player fighting a Burning Blade blademaster NPC, like you do in the actual expansion?

?? you do not do that in Legion and the toy is player only, and it is the toy with the little banner on his side using armor that npcs in wod do not use

ALSO, OH NO, THAT WEAPON SEEMS TO BE ON FIRE!? BUT HOW IF BLADEMASTERS CANNOT MANIPULATE FIRE!?

It is the weapon effect, and Already explained, by putting oil in their weapons

[bloodkin]

Dude, do you honestly not think that maybe, just maybe you're wrong when literally everyone in the thread is telling you the same thing?

Syegfryed isn't just wrong mate.

In fact, this isn't your average everday wrong. This is Advanced Wrong.

[Syegfryed]

Which do nothing more than expand on the original skills of the RTS.

in a MOBA, who does nto work in a mmo

They don't view Bladestorm and Critical Strike more than the other two

They clearly do, since they put bladestorm as their MAIN ability, as their ULTIMATE, and it was THAT that has became playable, just like avatar from mountain king.

I don't believe they can add these, just like a Tauren Chieftain's Reincarnation would look out of place.

You beliving or not is pointless, because your reasons si compltely based around bias

Never have we made stuff up. It's all there. You're just choosing to ignore some of it to suit your own perception.

Literally making stuff up and running away when confronted.

You are.

Blademaster are not a different class, they are warrior, like far seers are just shamans, wanting to make a new class for every unit from wc3 is just delusional

I don't care what people do. At then end of the day, we expect an invisibility animation, not a sprint one.

you expect that, but is not how things work, things need and ahve to, be adapted to fit a mmo playstyle and balance, just like avatar don't grant spell immunity wind walk can no longer provide invisibility.

Said who?

Blizzard

Neither are Bladestorm and Critical, if you follow the amount of description available.

Those are much more important, since in the lore, the blademaster is the guy who master the sword(bladestom) and deal strong strikes killing people with precise blows(critical strike) this is something is constant hammered down in their lore, and in game play by making bladestorm their ultimate and strongest ability, and critical strike being the main tool to kill enemies. Like i showed, Mirror image is barely leveled up and wind walk is a scout and sprint tool.

Then, why design them like it in the first place?

they didn't design then like that, you are assuming they are

Human Knights use a sword (or a flail) and a shield. -_-

Ah yes, Varian, used a shield, trollbane? a shield

Not at all. But, you have an indication where they belong to. It comes from their undead natures (necromancy), which the affliction Warlock embodies (necrolyte).

thats you making that up

How did you get to that conclusion?

The same way you did in the previous one

Oh, so they nailed it like you want to with the Arms Warrior, depicting a very specific archetype, but not with the other ones? Tauren Warriors are, either, Chieftains or Tauren Warrior unit (totem-bearers), Bronzebeard Dwarf Warriors are Mountain Kings (and to a lesser extent Riflemen).

You have no diea what you are talking about right?

- - - Updated - - -

Syegfryed isn't just wrong mate.

In fact, this isn't your average everday wrong. This is Advanced Wrong.

Thats cute, especial

>the guy said blademasters "use light armor and have few armor", - literally proved blademaster have the same armor rating as the knights with heavy armor
>he claimed how the blademaster is supposed to be played as a sneaky trickster in the RTS, literally provided a video of an orc player showing how to play a blademaster, and is not like that
>claim "asian theme" as something important when is just transmog

Plus other shenanigans, and "i am the advanced wrong", the amount of hubris and vanity from people is hilarious

[bloodkin]

in a MOBA, who does nto work in a mmo


They clearly do, since they put bladestorm as their MAIN ability, as their ULTIMATE, and it was THAT that has became playable, just like avatar from mountain king.


You beliving or not is pointless, because your reasons si compltely based around bias


Literally making stuff up and running away when confronted.



Blademaster are not a different class, they are warrior, like far seers are just shamans, wanting to make a new class for every unit from wc3 is just delusional




you expect that, but is not how things work, things need and ahve to, be adapted to fit a mmo playstyle and balance, just like avatar don't grant spell immunity wind walk can no longer provide invisibility.




Blizzard


Those are much more important, since in the lore, the blademaster is the guy who master the sword(bladestom) and deal strong strikes killing people with precise blows(critical strike) this is something is constant hammered down in their lore, and in game play by making bladestorm their ultimate and strongest ability, and critical strike being the main tool to kill enemies. Like i showed, Mirror image is barely leveled up and wind walk is a scout and sprint tool.



they didn't design then like that, you are assuming they are



Ah yes, Varian, used a shield, trollbane? a shield


thats you making that up




The same way you did in the previous one



You have no diea what you are talking about right?

- - - Updated - - -



Thats cute, especial

>the guy said blademasters "use light armor and have few armor", - literally proved blademaster have the same armor rating as the knights with heavy armor
>he claimed how the blademaster is supposed to be played as a sneaky trickster in the RTS, literally provided a video of an orc player showing how to play a blademaster, and is not like that
>claim "asian theme" as something important when is just transmog

Plus other shenanigans, and "i am the advanced wrong", the amount of hubris and vanity from people is hilarious

I'll reduce you to a meme, because that is exactly what you are in this thread. Call it whatever you like, but not only is nobody ever agreeing with you here, almost all of your arguments are little more than speculation and your own opinions. Posters like you and teriz have little to add other than that everyone else is wrong, and that only you are right, and those type of posters aren't worth anyone's time to discuss with.

also, it's funny how someone who's posted over 12000 times still falls for a stupid meme, gratz I guess.

[Syegfryed]

I'll reduce you to a meme, because that is exactly what you are in this thread. Call it whatever you like, but not only is nobody ever agreeing with you here, almost all of your arguments are little more than speculation and your own opinions. Posters like you and teriz have little to add other than that everyone else is wrong, and that only you are right, and those type of posters aren't worth anyone's time to discuss with.

I don't make posts looking for approval or a echo chamber buddy, i don't care if everyone else disagree with the facts presented. And it is rly funny when you said i have Little to add other than everyone else is wrong" when most of the threads is people saying i am wrong, so yeah, funnier than your "meme"

also, it's funny how someone who's posted over 12000 times still falls for a stupid meme, gratz I guess.

epic trollface omegaLUL

[bloodkin]

I don't make posts looking for approval or a echo chamber buddy, i don't care if everyone else disagree with the facts presented. And it is rly funny when you said i have Little to add other than everyone else is wrong" when most of the threads is people saying i am wrong, so yeah, funnier than your "meme"



epic trollface omegaLUL

Doesn't have to be an echochamber, there's been enough discussions here that ended with 'agree to disagree', but some posters just aren't capable of doing that, and just admitting that you won't change your mind, and neither will other posters. It's interesting that you feel that it's wrong for others to disagree with you.

But, you keep doing you, looking forward to the sitposts.

[Ielenia]

"the truth" is what we see in the game, in wow and in the lore, nothing subjective on that

What is personal, subjective and undeniably not a fact is your undeniably personal and subjective interpretation of said facts. Again, the WoD table argument is flawed. The NPC tag argument is flawed. Every single piece of argument that you have brought to the table has been shown to be flawed, that they're not conclusive evidence to your claims.

that is not the class concept of the blademaster either, so everything works out

Except it is. And even your own quote that confirms that blademasters are the master of stealth and deception point to that.

That is, of course, your opinion on that matter, and rly far from the truth

You saying "that is just our opinion" is one of the most laughably dumb statements in this thread, considering you constantly state your own opinion as facts here, despite almost every single other poster in this thread pointing that out to you.

No, im downplaying the ability to fit the mmo style.

No, you're actually just mocking it. The way the ability works in the WC3 (images that deal no damage and take double damage) work perfectly as-is in WoW. If anything, it could use a buff, not a nerf.

No, it dos not have, since Avatar does not grant spell immunity, neither metamorphosis is a ranged spell, if invisibility is not the core concept of the ability, and it was the movement sprint like ability, that is what should be focused

Except invisibility is the defining trait of the ability. That's like saying metamorphosis doesn't have to transform the demon hunter into a demon.

Heroic leap and charging back in your ally, try to play the class before

You're making my point for me: the warrior is moving back into the fray and only jumped back to use charge to get rage.

People apaprently want to play heroes of the storm or another game,

No, they want to play the blademaster concept that is shown in those games. Especially the one in Warcraft 3, which is the canon one. The agile fighter who uses speed and trickery fight his enemies.

That is, again, your opinion, since is completely untrue, saying they have different concepts is showing you literally, don't know both concepts, and assume withe the little you know

I've literally explained, several times, how the two concepts don't fit the warrior concepts, and all you do is say "you're wrong". You have never explained how stealth/invisibility and creating illusory images of themselves would fit the warrior class.

Exactly like blademasters

Wrong. Blademasters are more "guerrilla" style of fighting. They're way more akin to rogues than warriors in terms of playstyle.

More of the rogue playstyle? who said that? ah yes, that is your assumption based on nothing but your bias,

No, based on their lore, especially on a quote that you linked.

?? you do not do that in Legion and the toy is player only, and it is the toy with the little banner on his side using armor that npcs in wod do not use

You do know that you fight loads of blademasters in Nagrand in WoD, right? Hell, the scenery on that screenshot? It is Nagrand.

- - - Updated - - -

Thats cute, especial

>the guy said blademasters "use light armor and have few armor", - literally proved blademaster have the same armor rating as the knights with heavy armor

The demon hunter has one less point of armor than the blademaster in the RTS... and they're shown to be armorless. In WoW, they wear leather armor. The demon hunter also has much greater strength than agility, more so than the blademaster. And the DH is an agility class in WoW

>he claimed how the blademaster is supposed to be played as a sneaky trickster in the RTS, literally provided a video of an orc player showing how to play a blademaster, and is not like that

The blademaster is literally described as a "sneaky trickster" in the lore, though. I mean, you were literally the one who quoted this: "Though blademasters are masters of stealth and guile, they value personal honor above all else."

>claim "asian theme" as something important when is just transmog

It doesn't have to be "just a transmog". It allows for cultural references and sources for further inspiration for the class.

Plus other shenanigans, and "i am the advanced wrong", the amount of hubris and vanity from people is hilarious

The amount of projection here is actually hilarious. And yes, you are, and always will be "advanced wrong" as long as you continue to post your own personal opinions and subjective interpretations as facts.

[Cosmic Janitor]

They do, to replenish themselves.

At the end it doesn't really matter. All of the SL denizens consume anima to sustain themselves. Anima is pretty much what gives them their physical form. Kyrians and many natural beings like the wildlife simply eat stuff made out of anima, venthyr drain and channel it, necrolords weave it or take parts others have woven to make their own bodies and shytefay probably do something as well. Without their anima they are at best a disembodied soul and if you starve that even further you get the thing that happens when you drain them too much, as seen in Revendreth.

As you said before though, all of those could just eat/suck living beings with souls to sustain themselves outside of the shadowlands. The whole zombie discussion is a bit besides the point.

[Syegfryed]

What is personal, subjective and undeniably not a fact is your undeniably personal and subjective interpretation of said facts. Again, the WoD table argument is flawed. The NPC tag argument is flawed. Every single piece of argument that you have brought to the table has been shown to be flawed, that they're not conclusive evidence to your claims.

you mean is showed to be flawed by your undeniably personal and subjective interpretation of said facts?

You not liking the arguments, don't mean they are not relevant or conclusive, you just are adept of the absolutist fallacy, not even by bliz showing a blademaster as arms warrior in their warrior class preview is enough and you always keep finding a way to dismiss those things, while, going the other way around for tinker, is imensely funny the double standarts that you use

Except it is. And even your own quote that confirms that blademasters are the master of stealth and deception point to that.

Nope, there is no deception on it, they are master of "stealth and guile" wich is translated to cunning, not deception, and "stealth" is again confronted by their own description as honorable warriots and by their, confronted by their role in the lore and by the skill itself saying is not real invisibility just going too fast

You saying "that is just our opinion" is one of the most laughably dumb statements in this thread, considering you constantly state your own opinion as facts here, despite almost every single other poster in this thread pointing that out to you.

every time i said something i bring a canon piece of evidence, and you see that, form your own opinion and try to confront the piece of evidence by your interpretation and assumption, often relying onf fallacies, we are being backing forth with you doing that all the time

No, you're actually just mocking it. The way the ability works in the WC3 (images that deal no damage and take double damage) work perfectly as-is in WoW. If anything, it could use a buff, not a nerf.

there is no mocking, this is again, another of your own assumptions based on a strawman because is aid "for giggles", i said it could be 2 isntead of 3 for a better balance standpoint and not get too much OP in what i believe would be enough, and that is indeed my opinion, 2 rather than 3

Except invisibility is the defining trait of the ability. That's like saying metamorphosis doesn't have to transform the demon hunter into a demon

.
First of all Once again, this is your own assumption, invisibility was not the defining trait, the mobility and bonus movement was, if the ability didn't make then invisible it would still be used in the same playstyle like showed in the video, as a scout, escape and mobiltiy tool, again, the video ltierally showed the blademaster playstyle, yet people are ignoring and youa re saying is flawled because you don't like it

Second, Avatardefinint trait is the spell immunity, see how it is in wow, so once again, you are wrong by thinking they cannot adapt things tot he mmo for a balance standpoint, spell immunity on a warrior would be OP, they nerfed, they can do the same with wind walk, saying they can't is being obtusely wrong. Hell even metamorphosis was changed an the defining trait it was own you gained a ranged property and it don't doa nymore, so please, save tis purist talk of how they can't change abilities for someone else

You're making my point for me: the warrior is moving back into the fray and only jumped back to use charge to get rage.

Exactly like blademasters do? run away from the fight->heal, come back, this is ltierally what a blademaster did in the RTS with potions and is how warriros do in wow with second wind LMAO, try to play then for once.

No, they want to play the blademaster concept that is shown in those games. Especially the one in Warcraft 3, which is the canon one. The agile fighter who uses speed and trickery fight his enemies.

Nope, they do not want that, since blademasters are not "trickery" based, they want a caricature of a blademaster, especially from other games, into wow

I've literally explained, several times, how the two concepts don't fit the warrior concepts, and all you do is say "you're wrong". You have never explained how stealth/invisibility and creating illusory images of themselves would fit the warrior class.

You do not know the warrior concept buddy, you do not even play warrior, you literally ahve being wrong about the class back in forth just like the other guys aying warriors are the slowst class in the game, Blademaster are leirally one of the concepts of warriors, master of 2h weapons who sue mobility, pricse anddevastating atacks, that is the definition of a blademaster and of a arms warrior. Ivisiblity and ilussory iamges are not "concepts" theya re tools, and skills, of the blademaster, who can be added to warrior, because theya re tools, not definint traits that will amke warriros something else.

Wrong. Blademasters are more "guerrilla" style of fighting. They're way more akin to rogues than warriors in terms of playstyle.

Blademaster are not akin tor ogues, stop saying that, their entire thing is based around being honorable fighters, and guerrilla style of fighting is literally a style played by warriors, is literally something used in BGs as well warfare inr eal world, lol, do you even played a BG as warrior in your life?

You do know that you fight loads of blademasters in Nagrand in WoD, right? Hell, the scenery on that screenshot? It is Nagrand.

And they showed how blademasters are arms warriors, since they are talking about the arms spec in legion.

The armor used is player set, the banner? a toy.

- - - Updated - - -

The demon hunter has one less point of armor than the blademaster in the RTS... and they're shown to be armorless.

we should demand a new class in wow just like the demon hunter from the RTS using heavy armor and metamorphosis, attacking in raged and not having a tank spec, you are right, because things don't and can't change we need a complete print of the RTS

Sounds stupid? so it is to demand a new class because in the RTS they didn't use shirt.

The blademaster is literally described as a "sneaky trickster" in the lore,

you ahve to check what "literally" means, cause "guile" does not, literally, mean "trickster" and having stealth does not, literally, mean "sneaky", and once again cherrypicking things fogeting everything else said

It doesn't have to be "just a transmog". It allows for cultural references and sources for further inspiration for the class.

Which is not from the class but from the race, orcish, therefore, it can be used with transmog

The amount of projection here is actually hilarious. And yes, you are, and always will be "advanced wrong" as long as you continue to post your own personal opinions and subjective interpretations as facts.

Like i said hubris and vanity

[shoc]

Hot take but playable classes aren't canon, so whether or not we 'already have' Blademasters or Necromancers or whatever is a pointless comparison because the gameplay classes aren't canon. They are just gameplay mechanics, and deliberately generic due to the fact that there's like 22 race options in the game. Whether an ability belongs to one class or another is as malleable as the lore in this game is, and you have to account for the fact that Mechagnomes and Vulpera are going to be those characters too.

Instead of adding new classes to fail to balance, they should just rename Arms Warrior into Blademaster and give them some Samuro abilities from HOTS. Arms Warrior is a thematic void as it stands now, it has zero character. At least as a de-facto Samurai Swordsman class it will be interesting.

If we still had Combat Rogue we'd have threads today begging for a Swashbuckler/Pirate class and people would be like 'but we already have Combat Rogue' and others would be like 'nuh uh Combat and Swashbuckler are completely different!!!'