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

[Ielenia]

I wanna hear what you think is the reason. Not what it actually is.

I don't know. I can't speculate because we literally know nothing about Blizzard's design process. That'd be like me asking you to tell me which side do you think will be face up on a dice... but you don't know how many side the dice has, or if it has numbers, letters or symbols written on its faces.

All 9 classes? matches the story that was going on? Hell, we fought Onyxia, Ragnaros and Kel'thuzad at end game. Nothing really matches them other than the Shaman.

Paladin and priest don't fit against the undead? Warriors and rogues don't fit anywhere there's conflict? Mages don't fit in in an universe of magic? Warlocks don't fit in an universe where demon summoning is a thing? Hunters don't fit in an universe filled with forests and all sorts of beasts?

You think they are oblivious to it?
They know what's going on. You need to prepare for these kind of things if you want to be a top MMO on the market.

I never said that. I just don't believe Blizzard cares anywhere as much as you think they do. And again, you're once again going into conspiracy theory territory if you think it's an actual competition and that gaming companies are spying on one-another for "trade secrets".

-_-

San'layn don't turn into a bat, like some vampire depictions. I guess they're not vampires.

One characteristic missing is not the same as having all but one characteristic missing, which is the case of the venthyr.

Huh?
Would you like to elaborate?

"Worgen" is not an actual race, by Blizzard's own statement, when they said that the child of two worgen parents is a normal human child. "Kul'Tiran" is also not a separate race, but a human. Also, the "fat" kul'tiran is not a separate race from their fellow normal and thin kul'tirans.

Yet, you insist that it is primarily a blood curse.

You do know that the curse has to be created first, right? Which comes through methods different than the ones used to spread the curse, right?

Yet, they made Worgen into a race.

Apples and oranges. You were talking about how vampires are not about being elves, trolls, orcs and dwarves.

You're applying different standards to different cases. "I don't care about trolls, so they don't need to meet the criteria". "But, i don't want Venthyr, so they have to meet my criteria".

No, I'm not. If you want to discuss trolls, go right ahead. I don't care about the trolls. I don't care if they represent the mythological troll, these trolls, the D&D troll, or none at all aside from the name.

Can you give an example? (that is not a holiday joke)

Tauren are not minotaurs. Minotaurs were born out of Poseidon punishing Minos by making his wife fall in love with a bull, which is why the minotaur was born. The minotaur is literally a "bastard child" between a woman and a bull. The tauren are not.

You do, actually. Because we're talking about playable races (and potential ones).

I have never made the claim that "WoW trolls are not real trolls", directly or indirectly.

Again, specific modern depictions you use as a standard to pass as a vampire. When, in reality, Vampires only need to be undead creatures who sustain on vital essence.

I'm pretty sure I've laid out what is required for me to consider them as a vampire. Also, are you saying Blizzard would rather base the venthyr on the obscure, original origins of the 'vampire' concept and not infinitely better known pop culture version of the vampire?

You answered yourself.
General knowledge about vampires does not confirm your outlook on them as the only true iteration.

And now you're confusing the arguments, here. This was about you claiming that I have to give a specific definition for the the venthyr race, to back up my claim that venthyr are not vampires. And I keep telling you and explaining that I don't have to. Just like I don't have to know every language in the world to know that "saudade" is not a word in the english vocabulary.

So, how can you judge the Venthyr, when you don't even know much about other races?

Because they don't fit my criteria for "vampire". I don't have to know what they are, exactly, to know that.

[Syegfryed]

The irony here is hilarious.

My 2 cents: The Blademaster is not a playable class that is represented in WoW. I can RP a class that looks like one, and has SOME of the same abilities, but I cannot play a BLADEMASTER, I can only RP as one.

That's not the same thing.

you said the irony is hilarious and immediately process to do exactly what i said, in defining what is what is not, and saying they are not represented

You repeat your claims to me with other people.

you are making up those claims

I know the Vrykul are supposed to be the vikings of WoW, but they share many similarities with the dwarves.

yes, but dwarves are not "barbarians", barbarians by etymology is a term used for a people that are "uncivilized" or primitive, more or less related to tribes or people who are nomads, it is used for outsiders regardless, in media, the "achertype" of barbarian is not a civilized and fully armored dwarf, sorry to burst your ball

It is the focus of the ability as much as the speed. Not more nor less.

If the ability only let you be invisible it would be shit, if the ability only let you move fast it would still be good, thats the thing

Why do you think it says Wind Walk? It isn't called "speed", either, like you want it to be called "invisibility" to justify what it does.

walking trough the wind is to show how fast they are, not how invisible they are.

Again, twisting my things. Never said it was more important. It is as important as the speed buff. Otherwise, it wouldn't appear in lore, description, animation and HotS.

hots is not canon therefore is not an argument in this aspect, in the lore is explained, they are fast, not invisible

Oh, really? tell me of their cunningness (using lore quotes only).

Already show you tons, from then being ELITE GUARDS of the warchief, from then being ELITE COMMANDERS in the magtherion army, they being LEGENDARY WARRIORS and value personal HONOR above all else. Yet, nothing say they are deceptive tricksters who primal fight is based on stealth or using tricks, but you and others are sure they are like that and more like rogues than warriors, like rogues are elite guards and commanders who fight in the heat of the batle

Unlike Heroic Leap, which has no lore to rely upon, Wind Walk has lore that does not mention a damage bonus. Therefore, it is replaceable.

So, since the invisibility part is not mentioned in the lore of wind walk it is replaceable, you refuted yourself again, look at that.

And since heroi leap have no lore on heaving damage too, i guess we are even? don't know your point rly.

[Ielenia]

Already show you tons, from then being ELITE GUARDS of the warchief,

Being an elite guard does not preclude them being stealthy and deceitful. In fact, being able to sneak up on a potential attacker who thinks they have the upper hand against the warchief would be quite the boon. As well as being able to predict what kind of trickery one could use against the warchief since they are trained in such deceit.

from then being ELITE COMMANDERS in the magtherion army,

The fel Horde who didn't exactly fight "honorably" in the way we players perceive "honor"?

they being LEGENDARY WARRIORS

Being "legendary fighters" does not preclude them from using trickery and deceit.

and value personal HONOR above all else.

Please elaborate on what the blademasters consider as honorable. Lore sources, please.

Yet, nothing say they are deceptive tricksters who primal fight is based on stealth or using tricks,

Other than actual lore description, of course. Which you're constantly ignoring. "Guile" is not just cunning. It's insidious, deceptive cunning. I've linked you the definitions of "guile" several times and you ignored them over and over, thinking if you don't address them, they'll somehow go away.

but you and others are sure they are like that and more like rogues than warriors, like rogues are elite guards and commanders who fight in the heat of the batle

Except we're not saying "they are rogues". We're saying their gameplay, based on Warcraft 3 and their WoW lore definition, is more akin to the rogue class than the warrior class. Either way, it doesn't preclude them from being elite guards and commanders.

[Syegfryed]

snip.

you just can't keep to yourself your opinions about this right? cause everything here is your opinion, thinking elite guards are sneaky and WARRIORS fight with deceit and tricks. I though we already had set that out that your knowledge about warriors and blademasters are pure your opinion, why keep pushing?

We're saying their gameplay, based on Warcraft 3 and their WoW lore definition, is more akin to the rogue class than the warrior class.

and we already know that is false and pure opinion of yours, since you didn't play Wc3 and don't know how warriors play, you think this way

[username993720]

Oh I don't disagree. I'd be pretty surprised if they made a playable Necromancer class. I fully believe they can, I just don't think it's terribly likely. Personally I'd use the idea of a Class Skin to make the concept work, but that's also a whole other debate.

Agreed.
To be honest, i'd go with either an apothecary or a first generation Death Knight.

I don't know. I can't speculate because we literally know nothing about Blizzard's design process. That'd be like me asking you to tell me which side do you think will be face up on a dice... but you don't know how many side the dice has, or if it has numbers, letters or symbols written on its faces.

Well.. it was worth a shot.

Paladin and priest don't fit against the undead? Warriors and rogues don't fit anywhere there's conflict? Mages don't fit in in an universe of magic? Warlocks don't fit in an universe where demon summoning is a thing? Hunters don't fit in an universe filled with forests and all sorts of beasts?

You're describing the game in general. I meant Vanilla's storyline in particular.

I never said that. I just don't believe Blizzard cares anywhere as much as you think they do. And again, you're once again going into conspiracy theory territory if you think it's an actual competition and that gaming companies are spying on one-another for "trade secrets".

Oh, lelenia... you have no idea.
I'd ask Triceron again, but he didn't reply to me last time.

One characteristic missing is not the same as having all but one characteristic missing, which is the case of the venthyr.

Which, you decided what's important or not.
Vampires didn't, always, have those traits.

"Worgen" is not an actual race, by Blizzard's own statement, when they said that the child of two worgen parents is a normal human child. "Kul'Tiran" is also not a separate race, but a human. Also, the "fat" kul'tiran is not a separate race from their fellow normal and thin kul'tirans.

Yet, they are separate playable races, aren't they?
As for the matter of reproduction among the Venthyr, it is artificial, not an affliction.
Thin Kul Tirans will, probably, be used for another allied race.

You do know that the curse has to be created first, right? Which comes through methods different than the ones used to spread the curse, right?

Exactly. So, the first ones to be vampires can be the true vampires, and the affliction aspect can be discarded since it's not crucial to their existence in the first place.

Apples and oranges. You were talking about how vampires are not about being elves, trolls, orcs and dwarves.

You, really, think they would implement a werewolf race, but won't put a vampire race in the game because you don't want them?

No, I'm not. If you want to discuss trolls, go right ahead. I don't care about the trolls. I don't care if they represent the mythological troll, these trolls, the D&D troll, or none at all aside from the name.

If you don't care, why do you argue about vampires?
That's a double-standard. Clearly, coming from your lack of desire to have ones.

Tauren are not minotaurs. Minotaurs were born out of Poseidon punishing Minos by making his wife fall in love with a bull, which is why the minotaur was born. The minotaur is literally a "bastard child" between a woman and a bull. The tauren are not.

Once again, applying a standard to some races, but not the others.
"The tauren are based upon the Minotaur, a part man, part bull monster from Greek mythology, and the tauren were originally referred to as minotaurs during the early stages of development for Warcraft III: Reign of Chaos. The name "Minotaur" is either derived from Ancient Greek ταῦρος/taûros or Latin taurus, both meaning "bull".
Do Orcs have the same background as in mythology? do Gnomes, Dwarves, Trolls, Elves, Goblins and Worgen? No. Blizzard can take a creative direction with those mythological creatures to fit their own game.

I have never made the claim that "WoW trolls are not real trolls", directly or indirectly.

Using a certain standard for a certain race, but not for the others is being biased. You can't just dismiss the ones you don't care about, yet use a strict set of rules to define the others you distaste. It's a recurring theme with you. Avoiding answering certain questions, and claiming you're not wrong because you refuse to do so.

I'm pretty sure I've laid out what is required for me to consider them as a vampire. Also, are you saying Blizzard would rather base the venthyr on the obscure, original origins of the 'vampire' concept and not infinitely better known pop culture version of the vampire?

Again, for you.
Who are you to decide what they should or shouldn't base their races on?
For me, it's good enough. Is your opinion better than mine?
If you ask me, they can't retread the San'layns, otherwise they would be considered rip-offs of them.

And now you're confusing the arguments, here. This was about you claiming that I have to give a specific definition for the the venthyr race, to back up my claim that venthyr are not vampires. And I keep telling you and explaining that I don't have to. Just like I don't have to know every language in the world to know that "saudade" is not a word in the english vocabulary.

You do have to. That's the whole part of arguing. Those who don't provide them, like Sygfreyd, end up on the losing side.

Because they don't fit my criteria for "vampire". I don't have to know what they are, exactly, to know that.

"My criteria", "in my eyes". Don't you see the bias in your arguments? You're acting the same way Sygfeyed does when he evaluates the Blademaster.
Once again, you're declaring yourself as right while admitting you lack knowledge. I hope you sober up...

you are making up those claims

Aren't you arguing about the same things with other people? Wind Walk? Mirror Image?

yes, but dwarves are not "barbarians", barbarians by etymology is a term used for a people that are "uncivilized" or primitive, more or less related to tribes or people who are nomads, it is used for outsiders regardless, in media, the "achertype" of barbarian is not a civilized and fully armored dwarf, sorry to burst your ball

You are correct. The Bronzebeard Dwarves aren't your typical Barbarian. Wildhammer Dwarves, though, are:
"Wildhammer dwarves are renowned for wild behavior and deadly skill at arms. They have a tendency to enter a fray armored with little more than a loincloth and body paint, and still come out covered only with the blood of their foes. They are fierce charging across the ground or when soaring atop gryphons; barbarians of other races seek to emulate Wildhammer dwarves' reckless ability to stay alive through sheer pluck while laying waste to their enemies. The iconic Wildhammer barbarian clutches his hammer and grins, showing gaps in his teeth. Feathers and beads are stuck in his sweaty hair and beard. "Come get some!" he shouts, before letting out a howl and charging forward".
And you can play those as a customization option.
The Diablo 3 Barbarian can be fully-armored:

And so are the Vrykul:

You see, there are so many overlapping themes between them, like the love for battle:
"Wielding both enchanted warhammers and hand axes, these fierce fighters live to test themselves against worthy opponents."
The Vrykul's Halls of Valor "Valhalla", where those who were fierce in battle, during their lives, get to ascend there.
Love for drinking:
"Contrary to popular belief, vrykul drinking horns were not common drinking vessels. While most drank mead or ale from bowls or cups, only those of great prestige quaffed wine from elaborate horns such as this. Indeed, even the passing of such a vessel to the vrykul in question was a matter of ceremony, usually performed by the highest-ranking female present along with formal declarations of rank and deed."
"An old ascension ceremony for dwarven kings involved drinking from the Trade archaeology chalice of mountainkings.png [Chalice of the Mountain Kings] and a "sword dance" done by female dwarven warriors. This performance, part ritual and part mock battle, apparently evolved from bloody duels fought during less sophisticated times in dwarven history."
And forging:


In some cases, they both have horned helmets, fur coats and big braided beards:


And, of course, blue markings and red hair:


How would you call these? norse warriors?

If the ability only let you be invisible it would be shit, if the ability only let you move fast it would still be good, thats the thing

Personal opinion, again. No one cares what you think should be or shouldn't be. What matters is the lore, description and animation of the ability.

walking trough the wind is to show how fast they are, not how invisible they are.

Like i said: "so light on your feet that you, practically, appear to be walking on wind." And, in this case, they are so fast that they appear invisible to the naked eye.

hots is not canon therefore is not an argument in this aspect, in the lore is explained, they are fast, not invisible

Why do you think they translated the same aspect to HotS? you know, being a "secondary trait" and all...

And invisible. You are trying, really, hard to contort the lore for your own outlook. The function of the ability even says "turn invisible". The animation even shows you as being transparent. How blind can you be to those things?

Already show you tons, from then being ELITE GUARDS of the warchief, from then being ELITE COMMANDERS in the magtherion army, they being LEGENDARY WARRIORS and value personal HONOR above all else. Yet, nothing say they are deceptive tricksters who primal fight is based on stealth or using tricks, but you and others are sure they are like that and more like rogues than warriors, like rogues are elite guards and commanders who fight in the heat of the batle

That's not cunningness -_-.
I told you to quote the exact lore that shows their cunningness (and no, not the guile quote. We're debating about it).

So, since the invisibility part is not mentioned in the lore of wind walk it is replaceable, you refuted yourself again, look at that.

Read it again. It, specifically, says the word "invisible". Don't try to be a wise-guy with me. -_-

And since heroi leap have no lore on heaving damage too, i guess we are even? don't know your point rly.

My point is that the different iterations of a leap ability are, clearly, meant to inflict damage on a group of mobs. Whether it is the Barbarian's leap ability, Muradin's Dwarf toss ability or the Warrior's Heroic Leap ability. Your own interpretation of it, using some PvP guides, is nothing but subjective projection.

[Ielenia]

You're describing the game in general. I meant Vanilla's storyline in particular.

The incursion of the undead of Naxxramas is not a good fit for the paladin and priest?

Oh, lelenia... you have no idea.
I'd ask Triceron again, but he didn't reply to me last time.

If he didn't answer you the first time, I suppose that should tell you something. Anyways. There is no "secret competition". This nothing but pure conspiracy theory.

Which, you decided what's important or not.
Vampires didn't, always, have those traits.

But the vampire of the popular myths do. And as for your accusation of "deciding what's important or not", it also goes equally for you. You're deciding which traits are important to be fully represented and which aren't.

Yet, they are separate playable races, aren't they?
As for the matter of reproduction among the Venthyr, it is artificial, not an affliction.
Thin Kul Tirans will, probably, be used for another allied race.

Hence me saying "race" and "playable race" are different terms. And the venthyr's "reproduction" not being an affliction, that further separates them from the popular mythos they represent.

Exactly. So, the first ones to be vampires can be the true vampires, and the affliction aspect can be discarded since it's not crucial to their existence in the first place.

Those that come after, "born" out of a vampire bite, are also "true vampires".

You, really, think they would implement a werewolf race, but won't put a vampire race in the game because you don't want them?

One: who said I don't want a vampire race? Two: this is completely irrelevant about the discussion about them being an actual race or not.

If you don't care, why do you argue about vampires?
That's a double-standard. Clearly, coming from your lack of desire to have ones.

First: if you want to talk fallacies, start by looking at your own post, considering you took my response toward trolls and applied it to our discussion about vampires. And second, I can still engage in the discussion of ideas, can I not?

Once again, applying a standard to some races, but not the others.
"The tauren are based upon the Minotaur, a part man, part bull monster from Greek mythology, and the tauren were originally referred to as minotaurs during the early stages of development for Warcraft III: Reign of Chaos. The name "Minotaur" is either derived from Ancient Greek ταῦρος/taûros or Latin taurus, both meaning "bull".
Do Orcs have the same background as in mythology? do Gnomes, Dwarves, Trolls, Elves, Goblins and Worgen? No. Blizzard can take a creative direction with those mythological creatures to fit their own game.

Using a certain standard for a certain race, but not for the others is being biased. You can't just dismiss the ones you don't care about, yet use a strict set of rules to define the others you distaste. It's a recurring theme with you. Avoiding answering certain questions, and claiming you're not wrong because you refuse to do so.

I'm not using "different standards". I simply said I don't care about discussing those other races. I never claimed that the tauren were not inspired on the minotaur mythos. I simply said they're not minotaurs, in my eyes.

Again, for you.
Who are you to decide what they should or shouldn't base their races on?
For me, it's good enough. Is your opinion better than mine?
If you ask me, they can't retread the San'layns, otherwise they would be considered rip-offs of them.

I'll repeat, again, for the umpteenth time: I never said venthyr weren't inspired or based on the vampire. I simply said the venthyr are not vampires. Saying "they are not X" is not the same thing as saying "they were not based on X".

You do have to. That's the whole part of arguing. Those who don't provide them, like Sygfreyd, end up on the losing side.

I don't have to. I don't have to have a detailed map of every single country in the entire world to know that the name São Paulo and Buenos Aires are not the name of cities of the United States.

"My criteria", "in my eyes". Don't you see the bias in your arguments? You're acting the same way Sygfeyed does when he evaluates the Blademaster.

Suuuuuuuper wrong, there. Me saying that these are "my criteria" and "in my eyes" is me admitting I'm using my own opinions, and that alone already puts me leagues above Syegryed, considering he has yet to admit, in these 100+ pages of discussion, that what is he is spouting is his opinion, and continues to put forth his opinions as objective fact.

In fact, I consider equating myself to Syegfryed to be a huge insult against my person, and I ask you to refrain from doing so in the future.

Once again, you're declaring yourself as right while admitting you lack knowledge. I hope you sober up...

And now you're attacking me again. I never "declared myself as right".

- - - Updated - - -

you just can't keep to yourself your opinions about this right? cause everything here is your opinion, thinking elite guards are sneaky and WARRIORS fight with deceit and tricks. I though we already had set that out that your knowledge about warriors and blademasters are pure your opinion, why keep pushing?

You can put that word in bold, italic, different size, different font, or in any combination of those that you want, and you can shout that word out as loud and as many times as you want, until you're blue in the face. Saying my opinion is just an opinion does not debunk, counter, or even address my arguments. Worse: it's a gigantic, dishonest cop-out because everything you wrote here is also an opinion. Your opinion.

and we already know that is false and pure opinion of yours,

And one that is shared by others in this thread. But hey, our opinions are just opinions, but your opinions are divinely inspired, objective, uncontestable facts, right? The big, almighty Syegfryed is never wrong, even when he is shown to be wrong, it's the world that is wrong, not him, right?

since you didn't play Wc3 and don't know how warriors play

This is just not only false, but also a "poisoning the well" fallacy.

[Katchii]

you said the irony is hilarious and immediately process to do exactly what i said, in defining what is what is not, and saying they are not represented

But they aren't.

You've spent the last I don't even know how many pages essentially agreeing with my sentiment. Except you're saying they ARE represented because the warrior is close enough to RP as one.

I'm saying being close enough to RP as one is NOT the same as being represented.

[Aucald]

This rolling back and forth argument about what is or isn't a Blademaster and whether or not Venthyr are vampires is having the effect of sucking all the proverbial air out of the room. Let's pivot away from the giant argumentative posts and give some room for some other ideas and/or conversations to occur.

[username993720]

The incursion of the undead of Naxxramas is not a good fit for the paladin and priest?

That only accounts for 2 classes out of the 9.

If he didn't answer you the first time, I suppose that should tell you something. Anyways. There is no "secret competition". This nothing but pure conspiracy theory.

What is that supposed to mean?
Who said it was "secret"? Everyone and their mother knows gaming companies compete with each other for subscribers, just like any other business.

Since Aucald said we can no longer discuss vampires, i can't answer the rest of your replies to me.

(Aucald - if you view this comment as a breaking of the rules, delete it instead of infracting. Your warning is kinda vague as to what is allowed or not).

[Cosmic Janitor]

This rolling back and forth argument about what is or isn't a Blademaster and whether or not Venthyr are vampires is having the effect of sucking all the proverbial air out of the room. Let's pivot away from the giant argumentative posts and give some room for some other ideas and/or conversations to occur.

I have the feeling that everything that could be said alreay has been said. The other 300 pages are the same 5-10 people arguing in circles for the sake of arguing in circles. The only reason the thread isn't already burried is because of these circular arguments. You forcefully changing the topic from class A vs B to C vs D doesn't really change the way of the thread though, you just change the battleground .

[Aucald]

I have the feeling that everything that could be said alreay has been said. The other 300 pages are the same 5-10 people arguing in circles for the sake of arguing in circles. The only reason the thread isn't already burried is because of these circular arguments. You forcefully changing the topic from class A vs B to C vs D doesn't really change the way of the thread though, you just change the battleground .

That's fine, really. If the thread stops churning and falls off the front page then that's the nature of the beast. If a new argument starts up at least it will be a change of scenery with hopefully new participants.

[Clucky2988]

+1 for tinker

[FossilFree]

I think we could get dragonsworn as a class, and it would certainly be cool. I don't see them making it a 5 (or even 4) spec class though, that is way more effort than they would put in imo. So instead of one spec per dragonflight, I think we would see dragonflights being combined into 3 specs. Blue and bronze are natural pairings, one is arcane the other time. That would be a ranged dps spec. Green and red both have strong healing aspects, red has the healing fire and green the power of life, so they would combine to form the healer spec. Since there is an odd number of dragonflights, black can be by itself as a dragonknight tank that uses earth and fire.

[RemasteredClassic]

Tinker, what else!

[Revamp Man]

So we are about 6 months from a 9.2 reveal
If they burn galakrond and dragon isles then dragon knight is off the table otherwise with the ties to titans I think it’s likely

Assuming it’s not then I would love the warden from Runes of Magic style class
Think kinda like BM but with a cd that allows you to merge with the pet and based on which one you get different bonuses (yes it’s a sac lock but it has more than one ability)

- - - Updated - - -

Now if we wanna get really crazy
New class: maw walker
4 specs based on the covenants
Kyrian: healer
Divine toll and some shielding abilities with weapons of order being the big CD

NecroLord: tank
Flesh craft and bone shield stuff

Night fae: dps
Ranged support designed around lowering allies CDs

Venthyr: dps
Melee with an execute rotation

[Cosmic Janitor]

I think we could get dragonsworn as a class, and it would certainly be cool. I don't see them making it a 5 (or even 4) spec class though, that is way more effort than they would put in imo. So instead of one spec per dragonflight, I think we would see dragonflights being combined into 3 specs. Blue and bronze are natural pairings, one is arcane the other time. That would be a ranged dps spec. Green and red both have strong healing aspects, red has the healing fire and green the power of life, so they would combine to form the healer spec. Since there is an odd number of dragonflights, black can be by itself as a dragonknight tank that uses earth and fire.

The problem with that approach is that you essentially just create another arcane/frost mage, restro druid and glyphed prot warrior that way. While I agree that the pairings make sense and I would do them the same way, at the end of the day some classes already have thematic connections to the dragon flights. You only have the red and black dragon flights not used tbh. The green and blue flights have a very strong connection to 2 classes already (especially the greens to druids) and arguably mages also have a less strong connection with the bronze.

If they still reeealy wanted to make them, then I have to say it would probably make more sense to base them on the red, bronze and black instead, that way you don't have to water down the theme as much (healing fire, no nature/dream - decay/stasis spells, no arcane/frost magic).

[Revamp Man]

The problem with that approach is that you essentially just create another arcane/frost mage, restro druid and glyphed prot warrior that way. While I agree that the pairings make sense and I would do them the same way, at the end of the day some classes already have thematic connections to the dragon flights. You only have the red and black dragon flights not used tbh. The green and blue flights have a very strong connection to 2 classes already (especially the greens to druids) and arguably mages also have a less strong connection with the bronze.

If they still reeealy wanted to make them, then I have to say it would probably make more sense to base them on the red, bronze and black instead, that way you don't have to water down the theme as much (healing fire, no nature/dream - decay/stasis spells, no arcane/frost magic).

you see personally other than one mage spell and a few druid spells i dont see much in terms of them being tied to classes

yeah lorewise they are but you dont really see anything when you play a mage that makes you think "woot bronze dragons"

i believe they can use black as a base and the others as specs with things similar to what you would expect
blue as a spell caster
green as a healer
red as melee
bronze as a kind of tank (only due to the fact we have seen chromie act as a tank)

they could also just make black the tank and use the "missing bronze aspect" as the main story for the class intro

[Triceron]

The problem with that approach is that you essentially just create another arcane/frost mage, restro druid and glyphed prot warrior that way. While I agree that the pairings make sense and I would do them the same way, at the end of the day some classes already have thematic connections to the dragon flights. You only have the red and black dragon flights not used tbh. The green and blue flights have a very strong connection to 2 classes already (especially the greens to druids) and arguably mages also have a less strong connection with the bronze.

If they still reeealy wanted to make them, then I have to say it would probably make more sense to base them on the red, bronze and black instead, that way you don't have to water down the theme as much (healing fire, no nature/dream - decay/stasis spells, no arcane/frost magic).

The real problem is they created self imposed limits by associating different schools of magic with classes.

The lore has written itself into a hole by defining Arcane magic covering for practically everything magical, elemental and including time shenanigans. Then you have Druidic lore covering everything natural and dream-like. Shamanism covers fire and earth on top, and those three cover all the themes of Dragons.

I am not a big fan of the Aspects per Role design because it's almost too obvious, and becomes quickly uninteresting when you realize you're just gonna end up playing a class that has Mage DPS, Druid Heal and Shaman tanking specs.

I'd rather see a class that uses all aspect powers in each role, using them together like how Thanos uses the infinity glove or the Avatar in the last Airbender uses all elements to fight. It'd be far more interesting to master all the Dragon powers together rather than just a couple per spec.

[Revamp Man]

The real problem is they created self imposed limits by associating different schools of magic with classes.

The lore has written itself into a hole by defining Arcane magic covering for practically everything magical, elemental and including time shenanigans. Then you have Druidic lore covering everything natural and dream-like. Shamanism covers fire and earth on top, and those three cover all the themes of Dragons.

I am not a big fan of the Aspects per Role design because it's almost too obvious, and becomes quickly uninteresting when you realize you're just gonna end up playing a class that has Mage DPS, Druid Heal and Shaman tanking specs.

I'd rather see a class that uses all aspect powers in each role, using them together like how Thanos uses the infinity glove or the Avatar in the last Airbender uses all elements to fight. It'd be far more interesting to master all the Dragon powers together rather than just a couple per spec.

i only see the spec separation due to how the flights all work differently
yeah you could have the blue spec be "oh thats just a mage" if you have it use similar spells but depending on what they do it can be completely different.

the main thing taht most can agree on i think is when blizz goes crazy with class design
outlaw rogue was super cool and crazy
demon hunters were flashy af
shadow rework was legit the first time i even thought about going ranged....until they gutted surrender to madness

[Ielenia]

The problem with that approach is that you essentially just create another arcane/frost mage, restro druid and glyphed prot warrior that way. While I agree that the pairings make sense and I would do them the same way, at the end of the day some classes already have thematic connections to the dragon flights. You only have the red and black dragon flights not used tbh. The green and blue flights have a very strong connection to 2 classes already (especially the greens to druids) and arguably mages also have a less strong connection with the bronze.

If they still reeealy wanted to make them, then I have to say it would probably make more sense to base them on the red, bronze and black instead, that way you don't have to water down the theme as much (healing fire, no nature/dream - decay/stasis spells, no arcane/frost magic).

My problem with what you said is that this is an incredibly reductive way of seeing things. By that logic, the paladin is "just a shinier arms and prot warrior and the holy priest" class. The death knight is just a "melee frost mage and demonology/affliction warlock".

What you are doing here is making a fallacious equivalence. You're seeing that a fan class concept shares a theme with an existing class, and immediately assuming that both classes (or specs) are the exact same.

A class currently in existence uses frost magic. Does that mean no future classes can use frost magic? If an existing class uses holy magic, does that mean no other class in the future can use holy magic? Themes and concepts can be shared. If you focus too much on the similarities, you miss the differences. That's like saying a kitchen knife and a katana are the same thing, because both are blades, both have their edge on only one side of the blade, both have a handle, both blades are made of metal, etc.