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

[Triceron]

That's a different timeline and game. It'd be like me using the Warcraft movie as an indicator. No, i'm talking about recent times and cinematics.

WoW is a literal continuation of Warcraft 3's story, including the characters. Same timeline, just a continuation. That is why Arthas and Illidan and Sylvanas are still relevant.

Really, didn't they team up with her?
Besides, Arthas or Illidan training their trainees wasn't expressed at all with their followers having the same abilities. We were just told they were trained under them. So, Dark Ranger NPCs not possessing Sylvanas' abilities is not indicative of anything.

Have you followed the story? They're no longer working with Sylvanas and had their loyalty spurned by her abandoning them all and leaving them with no wherw else to turn.

Had it not been for Calia accepting them back, they could have just as easily been considered war criminals or traitors by the Horde Council, much as was the fate of Nathanos.

You didn't, really answer my question. What moves are they making away from the Dark Ranger? the defeat of Sylvanas? Not introducing Dark Rangers this expansion?

Are you not following the current story? Serious question here.

The Dark Rangers are already a part of the Horde. There is little possibility now for them to suddenly branch off to the Alliance as well. This is just one example of a move away from it being a playable class. They concluded a major potential opportunity for them to be seeded into both factions.

What move do you see there being to allow Dark Rangers on both factions with the way things are right now? Night Elves are going to have a sudden change of heart and leave for the Alliance again just because?

What? How do Tinkers and Shadow Hunters fit Legion?

My point is that Legion could have been a different expansion theme that introduced a different class.

For example, If Zandalar followed up after WoD instead of Broken Isles, then Shadow Hunters could have been introduced as classes. That is a possibility since Blizzard didn't _need_ to follow up WoD with Legion; these expansion concepts are flexible. We know WoD started as Mongrel Horde and Garrosh using a magical horn to raise the Warlords from the dead, and eventually settled on alternate universe Draenor. These are wildly different expansion settings for the same general concept of Garrosh building a new army.

If Mechagon or Undermine were introduced before Broken Isles, then Tinkers could have been added instead of Demon Hunters. Most of these expansion concepts are modular, and we know Blizzard designs them this way. They have multiple concepts planned, and they shift around what they want to approach next based on the narrative they want to tell. Legion happened to focus more on a demon invasion that involved the return of Illidan and an attack on the Vault of the Wardens which was conveniently on the Broken Isles.

Undermine? You just said it was not relevant. You, probably, mean Ka'resh.

Both are in the same situation. They both exist in the lore but we have no indication of going to either in the near future.

PotM have no connections, that i know of, to Light/Void. Shadow Hunters, on the other hand, are described as "walking the line between light and darkness".

Blizzard is indirectly connecting POTM to light and shadow through Elune's newly revealed connections to the Ordering of Light and Shadow.

Priestess of the Moon are servants of Elune. In Legion, X'era confirms that the prime Naaru were created by Elune. POTM channel the power of the light of the moon, and they have a 'Void state' in the form of the Night Warrior, a cycle that Naaru similarly go through. Elune's true origins and true power are still a mystery to us, but we are given more and more connections between her and the ordering of Light and Shadow than ever before, while POTM remain as her devoted servants and representatives.

Your Murloc argument vs the Dark Ranger

Are murlocs relevant to the story? no. Are Dark Rangers? yes.
Can Murloc speak anything but "Mrggglgl". No. Can Dark Ranger be part of WoW classes? yes.
Do Murlocs have a model and skeleton fit to be playable? no. Do Dark Rangers have enough potential abilities and talents to constitute a class/spec? yes.
Nothing that you said really invalidated the concept, except for the seemingly wrap up of Sylvanas' story.

All correct except Dark Rangers being relevant to the story. They do not appear at all in Shadowlands, and they have effectively been benched in Azeroth right now. They play no active role in the story as it stands. Same as Murlocs.

The only Dark Ranger in Shadowlands is Sylvanas, and her story is likely concluding next patch.

So it would appear. But, what's exactly the point of introducing them if you're not going to make Dark Rangers playable?

The obvious answer is surprise and drama. It was a way to show how evil Sylvanas was by not only killing all of the civilians, but forcefully raising dead warriors into her side amd having them hate Tyrande and force her to go Night Warrior.

It's a macguffin. Just like Azerite being the cause for a faction war. Blizzard is great at creating reasons for drama, but have a bad track record for resolving them. I mean, Azerite lost most of its purpose by mid expansion, and was pretty irrelevant to the narrative outside of Island Expeditions. And same goes with how they treated the Dark Rangers in the lore after they served their purpose.

I don't consider this to be a grand plan, I consider it an oversight. Look at how they introduced giant Draenei warships in Legion but you don't see one of em in BFA. What was the point? Surprise and drama. Rule of cool.

They do not?
One thing that can be done is creating a new generation of Dark Rangers, like there were 3 generation of Death Knights. These kinds of technicalities are mute, to be honest, and are in no way disrupting the addition of Dark Rangers. They could fart out whole specs for the Death Knight, Monk and Demon Hunter that weren't there before. Blood and Frost. Mistweaver and Windwalker. Vengeance. So, claiming all of this was, apparently, established before is bullcrap.

Who creates this new generation of Dark Rangers, and how? Valkyr were the single reason why new Dark Ranger Night Elves could be created, and they all left in service with Sylvanas. We're killing them all in the next raid.

It's a narrative dead end.

Who said there is?
You know, Knights of the Ebon Blade was created, purely, for Wrath.

Ebon Blade may have been a new creation, but the second son of Mograine and the redemption of the Ashbringer was hinted at since Vanilla.

Are you saying they just hatchet-chopped the class idea mid-way? And i'm the conspiracy theorist... It, usually, gets scrapped in theory, not in practice, while actually implementing so many Dark Ranger elements, characters and storylines. That's what happened with Necromancers and Runemasters. They didn't heavily implement them and then decided, mid-way, that they don't actually want them. All of this is done when discussing potential classes, not while you're creating expansion narratives. That's just de-legitimates the whole storyline, time and effort put into it. That's like wasting the whole Night Warrior storyline, or Dark Wardens as well. Heck, they devoted outside sources for them, as well, like books. Do you expect them to throw it all away, because they simply decided they don't want it anymore? very unlikely. You don't set up something in game only to abandon it half-way. People work on it, you know.

You realize the Night Warrior plotline for Tyrande is ending next patch right? That is effectively abandoning it, and people are complaining and expressing disappointment already.

As for your examples. Yrel is, definitely, being set up with the Mag'har recruitment scenario, showing her leading the Lightbound. They didn't abandon her storyline.
Same as with Azshara. She escaped through a portal. Do you think they'll just throw it away?
It's not like the Mongrel Horde, for example, that was only in concept art stages. Or even the Emerald Dream, that was in Alpha or Beta stages. Those things are in the game and part of the storyline.

Consider that the Warchief after Garrosh waa a HUGE debate amongst fans. Major big deal. Was it going to be another Orc like Saurfang or Eitrigg? Could they give it to Sylvanas or Lorthemar? They eventually seated Voljin into the role of Warchief, and spent an entire next expansion doing nothing with It. Voljin dies st the beginning of Legion, and practically did nothing of significance during his reign.

This was not abandoned alpha or beta, it was literally written in to prop Sylvanas into the role to set up years of future conflict with the Alliance, and whatwver shenanigans happening now in Shadowlands.

Tinkers as much as Shadow Hunters? I don't think so. There's no apparent technological expansion on the horizon, the same as there isn't an Elf one. We have Light/Void and Dragon Isles.

Tinkers have relevance due to the recent introduction of Mechagnomes, and the appearance of Tinker-like NPCs in Island Expeditions.

But you are otherwise right about there being no apparant technological expansion in the works. I would expect to hear a hint for Undermine in the narrative before I give it stronger consideration.

Weren't there Dark Ranger defectors that still stayed loyal to Sylvanas? i'm pretty sure they were portrayed in the Shadows rising book.

So here is the paradox.

We have 3 groups of known Dark Rangers. Velonara stays loyal to Horde, Summermoon appeals to Calia to be broguht into the Forsaken, and we have stray Loyalists jn the world.

That sets up the ability for Sylvanas to continue her shenanigans through her loyalists, right? Except that they didn't do anything with this plot point

The current narrative does not involve any interactions with other Dark Rangers. If the Loyalists were up to something, they should have done it by now. Instead Sylvanas just uses Mawsworn and Valkyr ss substitutes, and Blizzard has abandoned the Loyalist plotlines completely in Shadowlands. There is no point in continuing the Loyalist narratives if Sylvanas is defeated.

Again, for what purpose? to expand the Calia and Derek racial diversity? They're just night elf models with grey skin and red eyes. Calia and Derek were given unique models with unique hairstyles and could be used as an allied race. What purpose do Night elf Dark Rangers and Dark Wardens serve? Why is there a need to expand upon the Priestess of the Moon with the Night Warrior?

This is a good question to ask, but ultimately the same lines of asking why give players a choice to be loyal to Sylvanas. Or why we had big laser ships in Legion and not use them in BFA.

Once again, i'm begging you: stop writing book-worth of comments. Look at lelenia's: short and simple.

If anything, we should simply take this to Discord and discuss properly. Easier to address an actual conversation than multiple little ones, and easier to communicate intentions rather than lose context over pages of replies with multiple people.

[username993720]

Confirmation bias. You know have the information that DH released with Legion, but the mere suposition of a demon-centric expansion doesn't warrant the it would have a new class and that it would be DH.
"If they publish a new Legion expansion, it would be the best moment to add Demon Hunter" != "The next expansion would have Demon Hunters because it would be demon themed"

What i told lelenia: it doesn't guarantee a new class. But given that there is a class addition, i don't see any other option. Do you?

You are seeing to much into it. She got more time because Blizzard wanted to give more spotlight to the existing women in the WoW universe. That's why they put so much a spotlight on Jaina and Sylvannas, and they killed Rastakhan to put her daughter on the front in BFA.

So, it's all a feminist decision? I don't think so because Jaina, or Talanji for that matter, didn't get as much spotlight as she did. Heck ,even Arthas or Illidan didn't get that much attention.

Not really. It's the best fit? Yes. It's the only fit? No. They could've added tinker and say "This time we won't rely on magic to defeat the Legion, because that's what it brought it to us in the first place. So we'll use now our technological marvels to defeat it again", and create a narrative around how we hijack Legion's technology to bring the battle to them instead of DHs spearheading the charge to steal the portal thingy.
Warcraft lore is pretty loose, so you can fit almost anything any time.

Nice try, but you can use it for every potential class available. "We are adding the Bard to use his musical powers against the Legion". -_- Come on, be realistic. The classes that were added fitted their expansions. Death Knights to WotLK, Monks to MoP and Demon Hunters to Legion.

Confirmation bias. Just look the previous note.

Go ahead. Suggest a class that fits the theme, without creating an imaginary situation.

BFA added:
- Blademaster Lightforged Draenei -> Blademaster on both sides -> Blizzard planting seeds to make it able to be playable in the future, if they want.
- Dark Ranger Nigh Elves -> Dark Ranger on both sides -> Blizzard planting seeds to make it able to be playable in the future, if they want.
- Dark Warden Nigh Elves -> Warden on both sides -> Blizzard planting seeds to make it able to be playable in the future, if they want.
- Tinker groups on Island Expeditions -> Tinkers on both sides -> Blizzard planting seeds to make it able to be playable in the future, if they want.

Oh, you're right. I'm all for it, you know. Blademaster having its races expanded than just Orcs is great. Don't forget the Ankoan, the ultimate Blademaster race .
P.S. - Tinkers were always on both sides (Goblins and Gnomes). You, probably, mean the Island Expedition's abilities.

TFT is not another timeline like WoD. What are you talking about?

I meant that it is from another era. They didn't do back then what they do now with their cinematics.

Nope, just a very small group. The bulk of the group stayed on the Horde or went with Calia.

Can i a get a quote with a source? because in-game that group doesn't seem that large (probably like 10 NPCs).

I think it's 50/50 on Blizzard adding DRs. On 1 hand, they best fit a Death Theme expansion, and the current one was maybe the best fit. On the other hand. they can just justify it on a later patch, e.g.: "The Jailer's plan went OK and he scaped to Azeroth. And one of the groups best prepared to stop him, along the Death Knights, is the Dark Rangers"

*cringe*
Unlikely.
1. They don't add a class mid expansion.
2. I don't see Dark Rangers countering the Jailer (unless they have his powers, like Sylvanas)

The light and darkness that's quoted there refers to the line between life and death. It would actually be closer to a Death Shaman with the current lore.
And Vol'jin being a SH and a Loa, it's also another thing that Blizzard seed to make it able to be playable.

Yeah, i assumed it doesn't refer to light and shadow abilities (since the Shadow Hunter doesn't use 'em). But, that quote so perfectly lines up with the Light/Void theme. And Shadow Hunter kinda sounds like Demon Hunter (even though it doesn't hunt shadows).

Actually:
- Dark Rangers are currently irrelevant. They didn't even appear on the expansion so far (barring Sylvannas).
- There's at least one who can speak common: Sir Finley Mrrgglton. Yeah, it started as a joke character on HS, but he made his way into WoW, so... anything is possible. They can even make that the playable ones are special mutant ones, made more intelligent by being exposed to some magical artifact, like the Gorlocs in Sholazar Basin.

- That's my point. Why is that? if Dark Rangers have, seemingly, diminished their relevancy in this expansion.
- yeah... not gonna happen. It should stay a joke. You don't want WoW to turn into a childish game like HotS with playable fey dragons and such...

Even if there isn't one, they can make it up, they just need Val'kyr to make them. But we now know that Val'Kyr are just pseudo-kyrian. So:
- Horde: still has the last Val'Kyr that created the DRs in Darkshore, I think. So that ground is covered.
- Alliance: make Uther (or another forsworn, but I think he's probably the best fit) to come back to Azeroth to help raise new DRs for the Alliance.

Hmmm... are Dark Rangers only raised? Because Forsaken have learned how to become one, not raised into one. Yet, i suppose you need to be a former Banshee to justify a playable Dark Ranger with cool-ass Sylvanas abilities.

WoW is a literal continuation of Warcraft 3's story, including the characters. Same timeline, just a continuation. That is why Arthas and Illidan and Sylvanas are still relevant.

Lord have mercy on my soul with the amount you write down

I meant a different era of cinematic creation. They differ quite a lot from the current ones.

Have you followed the story? They're no longer working with Sylvanas and had their loyalty spurned by her abandoning them all and leaving them with no wherw else to turn.

Had it not been for Calia accepting them back, they could have just as easily been considered war criminals or traitors by the Horde Council, much as was the fate of Nathanos.

I'm pretty sure some of her were still working for her and Nathanos during Shadows Rising.

Are you not following the current story? Serious question here.

The Dark Rangers are already a part of the Horde. There is little possibility now for them to suddenly branch off to the Alliance as well. This is just one example of a move away from it being a playable class. They concluded a major potential opportunity for them to be seeded into both factions.

What move do you see there being to allow Dark Rangers on both factions with the way things are right now? Night Elves are going to have a sudden change of heart and leave for the Alliance again just because?

They were, almost, always part of the Horde. Nothing surprising here.

What do i see? Tyrande repenting them and them returning to Night elf society, just like Death Knight characters. It makes the most sense if they add a Dark Ranger class. And, looking at Tyrande and her personal transformation throughout Shadowlands, it might happen.

My point is that Legion could have been a different expansion theme that introduced a different class.

For example, If Zandalar followed up after WoD instead of Broken Isles, then Shadow Hunters could have been introduced as classes. That is a possibility since Blizzard didn't _need_ to follow up WoD with Legion; these expansion concepts are flexible. We know WoD started as Mongrel Horde and Garrosh using a magical horn to raise the Warlords from the dead, and eventually settled on alternate universe Draenor. These are wildly different expansion settings for the same general concept of Garrosh building a new army.

If Mechagon or Undermine were introduced before Broken Isles, then Tinkers could have been added instead of Demon Hunters. Most of these expansion concepts are modular, and we know Blizzard designs them this way. They have multiple concepts planned, and they shift around what they want to approach next based on the narrative they want to tell. Legion happened to focus more on a demon invasion that involved the return of Illidan and an attack on the Vault of the Wardens which was conveniently on the Broken Isles.

Like what? Show me an example of what Legion could have been and could have introduced.

WoD kinda needed to be followed by Legion due to the massive demonic themes from the beginning. They didn't add Mannoroth and Gul'dan in the middle of the expansion or towards the end. Besides, that expansion was so thin due to it being, mostly, a leverage to the Legion expansion.

You are right. They are flexible. Yet, developers don't just abandon something mid-expansion, unless they suffer a heavy subscriber loss (example: WoD). BfA could be seen as a disaster, but they didn't give up on Sylvanas due to it, why would they do so with the Dark Ranger?

Both are in the same situation. They both exist in the lore but we have no indication of going to either in the near future.

-_-
Void confrontation is not a sufficient indication? Heck, we went to Argus when we dealt with the Burning Legion.

Blizzard is indirectly connecting POTM to light and shadow through Elune's newly revealed connections to the Ordering of Light and Shadow.

Priestess of the Moon are servants of Elune. In Legion, X'era confirms that the prime Naaru were created by Elune. POTM channel the power of the light of the moon, and they have a 'Void state' in the form of the Night Warrior, a cycle that Naaru similarly go through. Elune's true origins and true power are still a mystery to us, but we are given more and more connections between her and the ordering of Light and Shadow than ever before, while POTM remain as her devoted servants and representatives.

Wait, wait... what? She was responsible for the ordering of light and shadow? can i get a source for that? i only heard of her being the sister of the Winter Queen (which, doesn't put her in a likely place to be a First one). If that is the case, then Light and Void do not indicate on a Shadow Hunter, but rather on a PotM.

Oh, you're just using some previous data about her. She was all over the place in terms of categorization. Arcane due to the Tears of Elune. Life due to the connection to Druids. Death due to her being the sister of the Winter Queen. You can't just assume she is the patron of Light and Void. Heck, she casts moon-based abilities, not Void nor Light. The same can be seen with the Stonewright.

All correct except Dark Rangers being relevant to the story. They do not appear at all in Shadowlands, and they have effectively been benched in Azeroth right now. They play no active role in the story as it stands. Same as Murlocs.

The only Dark Ranger in Shadowlands is Sylvanas, and her story is likely concluding next patch.

So, why claim Dark Rangers diminished their purpose with this expansion if they didn't feature in it?

The obvious answer is surprise and drama. It was a way to show how evil Sylvanas was by not only killing all of the civilians, but forcefully raising dead warriors into her side amd having them hate Tyrande and force her to go Night Warrior.

It's a macguffin. Just like Azerite being the cause for a faction war. Blizzard is great at creating reasons for drama, but have a bad track record for resolving them. I mean, Azerite lost most of its purpose by mid expansion, and was pretty irrelevant to the narrative outside of Island Expeditions. And same goes with how they treated the Dark Rangers in the lore after they served their purpose.

I don't consider this to be a grand plan, I consider it an oversight. Look at how they introduced giant Draenei warships in Legion but you don't see one of em in BFA. What was the point? Surprise and drama. Rule of cool.

She could have raised Dark Sentinels, Dark Druids, Dark Furbolgs, Dark Faeirie Dragons, Dark Dryads, Dark Ancients, Dark Highborne, Dark Priestesses of the Moon, Dark Demon Hunters or Dark 'whatever' that includes Night elves there. But, they purposefully chose Wardens and Night elf Dark Rangers. Why? i'll tell you why. Because they're planning to do something with that. Not seeing that is a real issue with people, because that's obviously intentional.

Azerite? what could azerite add to any potential future classes? nothing. Are you seeing a class based on azerite power? no. Any races? no. It was there for a feature. It had its purpose, unlike Dark Wardens and Dark Rangers.


Draenei ships were:
1. to get us to Argus.
2. Introduce the Lightforged as a playable race.
I wouldn't say they were just there to be cool. Besides, you can't do much with it in terms of a playable class (though, we got its ability as a lightforged racial).

Who creates this new generation of Dark Rangers, and how? Valkyr were the single reason why new Dark Ranger Night Elves could be created, and they all left in service with Sylvanas. We're killing them all in the next raid.

It's a narrative dead end.

Who? anyone with necromantic abilities, i guess. It can be taught, rather than granted by being raised. By who? any Dark Ranger NPC.
There are plenty of them left to fill that gap.

Ebon Blade may have been a new creation, but the second son of Mograine and the redemption of the Ashbringer was hinted at since Vanilla.

okay...and?
You say nothing is redemptive about Sylvanas or the Dark Rangers?

You realize the Night Warrior plotline for Tyrande is ending next patch right? That is effectively abandoning it, and people are complaining and expressing disappointment already.

Ending? because she went through an "exorcism"?
No, it's not going away... one thing is the discovery of other Night Warrior races, like the Venthyr.

Consider that the Warchief after Garrosh waa a HUGE debate amongst fans. Major big deal. Was it going to be another Orc like Saurfang or Eitrigg? Could they give it to Sylvanas or Lorthemar? They eventually seated Voljin into the role of Warchief, and spent an entire next expansion doing nothing with It. Voljin dies st the beginning of Legion, and practically did nothing of significance during his reign.

This was not abandoned alpha or beta, it was literally written in to prop Sylvanas into the role to set up years of future conflict with the Alliance, and whatwver shenanigans happening now in Shadowlands.

Exactly. Who said they had plans for him that they abandoned? Maybe he just served as a way to crown Sylvanas Warchief. You see, everything has a purpose, even if it doesn't seem like much. Eventually, we discover why they did those things in game.

Tinkers have relevance due to the recent introduction of Mechagnomes, and the appearance of Tinker-like NPCs in Island Expeditions.

But you are otherwise right about there being no apparant technological expansion in the works. I would expect to hear a hint for Undermine in the narrative before I give it stronger consideration.

I agree. These things were totally foreshadowing. as well as Mekkatorque's abilities as a raid boss, the new Mech appearances, Motherlode Dungeon and Chromie's alternate reality mechanical threat.

So here is the paradox.

We have 3 groups of known Dark Rangers. Velonara stays loyal to Horde, Summermoon appeals to Calia to be broguht into the Forsaken, and we have stray Loyalists jn the world.

That sets up the ability for Sylvanas to continue her shenanigans through her loyalists, right? Except that they didn't do anything with this plot point

The current narrative does not involve any interactions with other Dark Rangers. If the Loyalists were up to something, they should have done it by now. Instead Sylvanas just uses Mawsworn and Valkyr ss substitutes, and Blizzard has abandoned the Loyalist plotlines completely in Shadowlands. There is no point in continuing the Loyalist narratives if Sylvanas is defeated.

Those aren't established groups with a name and reputation like the Ebon Blade or the Illidari.

Precisely. Their absence in the Shadowlands means they can be used beyond it. They haven't diminished their relevancy by being overused and they weren't killed off this expansion. They are still out there, on Azeroth.

This is a good question to ask, but ultimately the same lines of asking why give players a choice to be loyal to Sylvanas. Or why we had big laser ships in Legion and not use them in BFA.

They wanted to give us a sense that we're making a choice, either with Sylvanas or N'zoth. It might pay off in the future. The point is, players were probably pissed off they had to be the good guys and go against Sylvanas. This could be expanded to, either, give players more choices in the future (in term of narrative) or letting them have the option to be villains and not just heroes all the time. I talked about it in my proposed changes and features thread.

Why not use them? because those ships would grant a particular side an unfair advantage. The Horde doesn't have these kind of ships.

If anything, we should simply take this to Discord and discuss properly. Easier to address an actual conversation than multiple little ones, and easier to communicate intentions rather than lose context over pages of replies with multiple people.

Which discord?
Anyway, i should get paid for the time i invest in answering these long-ass replies of yours

[Ielenia]

That's because Samuro has a special place in the WoW lore: he helped with the foundation of Orgrimmar (alongside Rexxar, Rokhan and Chen). And it seems Blizzard is saving him for something, because it's clear that they didn't forgot about him (he's on HotS and the new The Barrens expansion in HS), but you can't find him anywhere in WoW.

That's kind of irrelevant, though. Because WoD and the main timeline are separate threads of fate. What happens in one doesn't affect the other. So they could have made Samuro be a fel-corrupted boss in Hellfire Citadel in place of Jubei'thos, and kill him, and nothing at all would change for Samuro in the main timeline. After all, we kill uncorrupted Kargath Bladefist in WoD, and, as far as we know, he's still a fel orc boss in Shattered Halls in Outland. Same thing with Teron Gorefiend.

- - - Updated - - -

-_-

Demon Hunter. What can be more obvious than that?
I can tailor anything if i want to to fit this expansion. Doesn't mean it does. Runemasters are as much a stretch as Naga Sea Witches, because Nagas featured in Aszuna.

I'll repeat what I said: if you're going to claim the demon class fits the expansion's theme the best, I might agree with you. But if you're going to claim it's the ONLY one that fits, then I cannot agree with you.

Nothing is guaranteed in this life. So, just giving up an saying we can't predict things is pessimistic. As of then, it was a class every other expansion. Shadowlands taught us it is not the case anymore.

Apples and oranges. First and foremost, us expecting a new playable class every odd-numbered patch expansion number (3.x, 5.x, 7.x, etc) is not us making predictions. It's us making guesses. Predictions require data to be made, and we didn't have enough data to make predictions. And second, accepting we cannot predict things that we don't have anywhere near enough information for accurate predictions is not being pessimistic.

1. She was named Warchief in Legion. Pretty significant part of Legion. Not to mention the Broken Shore.

And aside from the expansion's intro scenario and seeing her almost never in Stormheim, she appeared nowhere else in the expansion. Azsuna, Val'sharah, Stormpeaks, Suramar, the Broken Shore (second time) and Argus. Nowhere to be seen.

2. No other character that was pivotal to the story got that much screen time. Not Garrosh, Not Arthas, Not Illidan. Why did she, in particular?

Garrosh was introduced in TBC. Was part of the main offensive and appeared a decent amount of times in Wrath. Was made Warchief in Cataclysm. Was the main antagonist in MoP, and kicked off the Iron Horde in WoD. If anything, so far, Garrosh is the one who got the most screen time.

3. Exactly. If you're gonna produce so much fatigue of her featuring in multiple expansion, why not act on it?

And what do you consider "acting on it"? Because if people are sick and tired of a certain character or storyline, in my opinion, the course of action would be to remove the character and/or close the storyline. And bringing a class based on said character and/or storyline is not the way to do it. Again, in my opinion.

You see, it's a waste of character to be used so much yet not introduce a Dark Ranger in the end.

In your opinion. Using a character and not making a playable class out of said character is not "waste" in my opinion.

She would have best stayed in the shadows as the Forsaken leader until Shadowlands. There was no need for her to feature so prominently in other expansions, when there are other, better characters that could have been used.

Not for the storyline Blizzard wanted to tell. None of the other Horde leaders are "MoRaLlY gReY" like Sylvanas was, and would never start an all-out war against the Alliance without the Alliance fucking up royally first. And none of the other Horde leaders have such a connection to the death realm like Sylvanas.

And, if you're gonna say they were trying to set her up as a villain:
1. You don't require that much screen time.

It does if you want to make it properly.

2. She's not the big bad boss, in the end, only a sidekick. Azshara didn't require that much. Neither Gul'dan.

Azshara has been set up as a big bad since WoW's inception, considering she is the leader of the naga, and was described as the most powerful sorceress of her time, if not even today, and one who was greedy for power, causing the Sundering due to her pursuit for power. And in almost every expansion we had to deal with the naga, one way or the other. And Gul'dan? He has been set up as a big bad since the RTS days, too.

Because of the story... That lasts for 3 expansions in a row. Does it seem reasonable to you? to anyone? Garrosh only needed an expansion and a half. So did Gul'dan. Azshara only required a patch or so. So 3 god damn expansion? what's the point in that? Does Danuser went off the rails and is controlling everything that goes on there?

Yeah. I do think it's reasonable. Look how people are complaining about the Jailer's threat having almost no weight to the players because the villain was never set up properly. And Garrosh? Five expansions: TBC, Wrath, Cata, MoP, WoD. We could already see Garrosh potentially becoming a problem during Wrath. Gul'dan? Since the RTS days. Gul'dan wasn't first introduced to Warcraft in WoD, mind you.

That's because he's not that important. They didn't give him much abilities, either. Not to mention that he's a corrupted Blademaster, and not a standard one. Samuro is on the same level as Sylvanas, Illidan, Arthas, Chen are for Dark Ranger, Demon Hunter, Death Knight and Monk. He is the representative of the concept. You can see that by him being picked for HotS, like the rest of them, and not Jubei'thos.

He is a blademaster, though. He has abilities reminscent of the RTS ones. And if Jubei'thos was not important (he is, but still), again, why not pick Samuro? They picked all the major orc figureheads (Kargath Bladefist, Blackhand, Kilrogg Deadeye, Orgrimm Doomhammer, etc) and yet they picked Jubei'thos, someone who is not important (in your opinion) instead of Samuro, someone who is much more important (again, in your opinion)?

Himself, no. But the demonic themes could only mean one thing (if they were to add a class).

No. No, they don't. They don't mean "demon hunter and demon hunter only and not any other class concept at all ever never".

Really?
How many time must i repeat that? If a class is due and so is a demonic expansion, what else can they do? Just put 1+1.

First off: "a class is due" is already fallacious as we never had any guarantee that we would get a class. Second: you can repeat it as much as you want until you're blue in the face, it won't make the statement true. An expansion revolving around demon themes does not mean "demon hunter and demon hunter only and not any other class concept at all ever never".

What's in BfA?

An orc blademaster, who uses fire in his attacks.

Really? you don't?
More archetypes and more playstyles would give your character more options to roleplay. Same as new classes and their specs.

Pressing buttons according to a guide after gearing your character following another guide is not "roleplay". Roleplay is interpretation.

I think what you linked as a Blood-healing spell was that of a Blood Troll priest.

Yes. Proof-of-concept that blood magic can be used for healing. And a character being named "priest" does not necessarily mean "priest player class", mind you.

Hmmm.... i'm more inclined to think of a necromancer using a Scourge blood magic, rather than primitive Blood Trolls or Bleeding Hollow Orcs. But, i guess that if they have necromancers among them, that it is possible.

You know, just because you consider them to be "primitive" does not preclude their magic from being effective, or even refined and improved upon by scholars.

[Triceron]

Lord have mercy on my soul with the amount you write down

Would you rather me answer you with one word replies?

I meant a different era of cinematic creation. They differ quite a lot from the current ones.

Nope.

I'm pretty sure some of her were still working for her and Nathanos during Shadows Rising.

Abandoned.

They were, almost, always part of the Horde. Nothing surprising here.

And?

What do i see? Tyrande repenting them and them returning to Night elf society, just like Death Knight characters. It makes the most sense if they add a Dark Ranger class. And, looking at Tyrande and her personal transformation throughout Shadowlands, it might happen.

"Might"

Like what? Show me an example of what Legion could have been and could have introduced.

Strawman.

WoD kinda needed to be followed by Legion due to the massive demonic themes from the beginning.

False.

You are right. They are flexible. Yet, developers don't just abandon something mid-expansion

Loyalty.

-_-
Void confrontation is not a sufficient indication? Heck, we went to Argus when we dealt with the Burning Legion.

And?

Wait, wait... what? She was responsible for the ordering of light and shadow?[/B]

Naaru.

So, why claim Dark Rangers diminished their purpose with this expansion if they didn't feature in it?

Abandoned.

She could have raised Dark Sentinels, Dark Druids, Dark Furbolgs, Dark Faeirie Dragons, Dark Dryads, Dark Ancients, Dark Highborne, Dark Priestesses of the Moon, Dark Demon Hunters or Dark 'whatever' that includes Night elves there. But, they purposefully chose Wardens and Night elf Dark Rangers. Why? i'll tell you why. Because they're planning to do something with that. Not seeing that is a real issue with people, because that's obviously intentional.

Proof?

Azerite? what could azerite add to any potential future classes? nothing. Are you seeing a class based on azerite power? no. Any races? no. It was there for a feature. It had its purpose, unlike Dark Wardens and Dark Rangers.

Macguffin.

Draenei ships were:
1. to get us to Argus.
2. Introduce the Lightforged as a playable race.
I wouldn't say they were just there to be cool. Besides, you can't do much with it in terms of a playable class (though, we got its ability as a lightforged racial).

LASERS

Who? anyone with necromantic abilities, i guess

Wrong.

It can be taught, rather than granted by being raised.

Abandoned.

By who? any Dark Ranger NPC.

Maybe.

There are plenty of them left to fill that gap.

Abandoned.

okay...and?
You say nothing is redemptive about Sylvanas

Narrative.

or the Dark Rangers?

Abandoned.

Ending? because she went through an "exorcism"?
No, it's not going away... one thing is the discovery of other Night Warrior races, like the Venthyr.

Venthyr?

Exactly. Who said they had plans for him that they abandoned? Maybe he just served as a way to crown Sylvanas Warchief. You see, everything has a purpose, even if it doesn't seem like much. Eventually, we discover why they did those things in game.

True.

Those aren't established groups with a name and reputation like the Ebon Blade or the Illidari.

Irrelevant.

Precisely. Their absence in the Shadowlands means they can be used beyond it. They haven't diminished their relevancy by being overused and they weren't killed off this expansion. They are still out there, on Azeroth.

Abandoned.

They wanted to give us a sense that we're making a choice, either with Sylvanas or N'zoth. It might pay off in the future. The point is, players were probably pissed off they had to be the good guys and go against Sylvanas. This could be expanded to, either, give players more choices in the future (in term of narrative) or letting them have the option to be villains and not just heroes all the time. I talked about it in my proposed changes and features thread.

Delusional.

Why not use them? because those ships would grant a particular side an unfair advantage. The Horde doesn't have these kind of ships.

Abandoned.

Which discord?
Anyway, i should get paid for the time i invest in answering these long-ass replies of yours

Hypocrite?

[username993720]

I'll repeat what I said: if you're going to claim the demon class fits the expansion's theme the best, I might agree with you. But if you're going to claim it's the ONLY one that fits, then I cannot agree with you.

Then, please bring other examples and explain why (and not that runemaster bullshit you made up).

Apples and oranges. First and foremost, us expecting a new playable class every odd-numbered patch expansion number (3.x, 5.x, 7.x, etc) is not us making predictions. It's us making guesses. Predictions require data to be made, and we didn't have enough data to make predictions. And second, accepting we cannot predict things that we don't have anywhere near enough information for accurate predictions is not being pessimistic.

Predictions and guesses are the same thing. They're not always right. Like the weather forecast.
So, let's just all stop debating because we can't be 100% right.

And aside from the expansion's intro scenario and seeing her almost never in Stormheim, she appeared nowhere else in the expansion. Azsuna, Val'sharah, Stormpeaks, Suramar, the Broken Shore (second time) and Argus. Nowhere to be seen.

She doesn't need to. Like she isn't in Revendreth, Ardenweald, Maldraxxus or Bastion. Or how she wasn't in Kul Tiras or in much of Zandalar. No main character features that much. Not Illidan in his expansion, not Arthas in his and not Chen in his.

Garrosh was introduced in TBC. Was part of the main offensive and appeared a decent amount of times in Wrath. Was made Warchief in Cataclysm. Was the main antagonist in MoP, and kicked off the Iron Horde in WoD. If anything, so far, Garrosh is the one who got the most screen time.

Hmmm... You're right, he was a major part through Cataclysm to WoD. There's not really a class associated with him that he can bring to the table. And, he's featuring in Shadowlands even though we were sure he was out of the picture. So *wink* *wink* Triceron.

And what do you consider "acting on it"? Because if people are sick and tired of a certain character or storyline, in my opinion, the course of action would be to remove the character and/or close the storyline. And bringing a class based on said character and/or storyline is not the way to do it. Again, in my opinion.

In everyone's opinion. I don't see a reason to drag it out just to make her a boss that falls at the first patch of an expansion.

In your opinion. Using a character and not making a playable class out of said character is not "waste" in my opinion.

No? If Kel'thuzad, in his human form, featured that much, wouldn't you expect a Necromancer to be introduced?

Not for the storyline Blizzard wanted to tell. None of the other Horde leaders are "MoRaLlY gReY" like Sylvanas was, and would never start an all-out war against the Alliance without the Alliance fucking up royally first. And none of the other Horde leaders have such a connection to the death realm like Sylvanas.

Garrosh.

It does if you want to make it properly.

Well, i guess you're right if we're comparing her to Garrosh.

Azshara has been set up as a big bad since WoW's inception, considering she is the leader of the naga, and was described as the most powerful sorceress of her time, if not even today, and one who was greedy for power, causing the Sundering due to her pursuit for power. And in almost every expansion we had to deal with the naga, one way or the other. And Gul'dan? He has been set up as a big bad since the RTS days, too.

She only featured in a quest in Darkshore during Cataclysm.
Gul'dan was dead. We didn't expect the whole alternate universe shenanigans.

Yeah. I do think it's reasonable. Look how people are complaining about the Jailer's threat having almost no weight to the players because the villain was never set up properly. And Garrosh? Five expansions: TBC, Wrath, Cata, MoP, WoD. We could already see Garrosh potentially becoming a problem during Wrath. Gul'dan? Since the RTS days. Gul'dan wasn't first introduced to Warcraft in WoD, mind you.

I guess you're right. yet, her downfall is the first patch of the expansion. Seems kinda anti-climatic, don't you think?

He is a blademaster, though. He has abilities reminscent of the RTS ones. And if Jubei'thos was not important (he is, but still), again, why not pick Samuro? They picked all the major orc figureheads (Kargath Bladefist, Blackhand, Kilrogg Deadeye, Orgrimm Doomhammer, etc) and yet they picked Jubei'thos, someone who is not important (in your opinion) instead of Samuro, someone who is much more important (again, in your opinion)?

Yes. because they're saving him for something important, like introducing the Blademaster. Why do you think he features in HotS and Hearthstone, as the Blademaster representative, if he's not that important?

No. No, they don't. They don't mean "demon hunter and demon hunter only and not any other class concept at all ever never".

Really? then, what other class could it mean?

First off: "a class is due" is already fallacious as we never had any guarantee that we would get a class. Second: you can repeat it as much as you want until you're blue in the face, it won't make the statement true. An expansion revolving around demon themes does not mean "demon hunter and demon hunter only and not any other class concept at all ever never".

It was, pretty much, a guarantee before Shadowlands. Like 2 races until MoP.
And, Again i'm asking, what other class could it mean?

An orc blademaster, who uses fire in his attacks.

Name, please?
WoD Blademasters, also, used fire in their attacks. It was an expansion of the Blademaster concept, based on the Burning Blade clan.

Pressing buttons according to a guide after gearing your character following another guide is not "roleplay". Roleplay is interpretation.

What?
What are you talking about?

Yes. Proof-of-concept that blood magic can be used for healing. And a character being named "priest" does not necessarily mean "priest player class", mind you.

Like a Rathma Priests of D3?
Can i have examples of WoW ones?

You know, just because you consider them to be "primitive" does not preclude their magic from being effective, or even refined and improved upon by scholars.

No, because that's not what i imagine when i picture a necromancer. That's what i imagine when thinking of primitive, tribal witch doctors with mysticism and voodoo. That's why i don't see Trolls and such as fitting the Death Knight, despite their death aspects. It seems much more fitting of a Knightly race.

Would you rather me answer you with one word replies?

No. Come on, You know what i mean. a sentence or two, or even a paragraph, like lelenia. Not 3 or 4 paragraphs per comment.

Now, you can reply to my previous comment seriously. Just don't take it too far because i have to answer lelenia, and sometimes potacaco, too.

[Triceron]

No. Come on, You know what i mean. a sentence or two, or even a paragraph, like lelenia. Not 3 or 4 paragraphs per comment.

Now, you can reply to my previous comment seriously. Just don't take it too far because i have to answer lelenia, and sometimes potacaco, too.

https://www.mmo-champion.com/threads...st-Shadowlands

A few months ago, before Shadowlands came, I posed a question asking about the lore for the Loyalist Dark Rangers. People theorized that loyalist plot would continue in Shadowlands.

The Loyalist plot does not carry into Shadowlands at all, and will not even be addressed by the next raid. There is nothing we can point at as a _hint_ towards a playable Dark Ranger class.


Gul'dan was a macguffin for Legion and Sargeras, Sylvanas is the macguffin for Shadowlands and the Jailer. Gul'dan was important to WoD and Legion, and his story ended with his raid. Same appears to be happening to Sylvanas, with no Loyalist plot being addressed or resolved, only completely absent from the current plot.

Abandoned.


If you say Loyalists will come back into the plot, then you are talking about a theory. My position here is not to dismiss Loyalists as a plot point, it's to point out the fact that there aren't actually in the current plot and can not be regarded as a hint towards a Dark Ranger class. We can only regard possibilities through theories, not hints from the game.

We need to clarify that a theory is not a hint, and that it is not actually part of the plot. Classes featured in Cinematics and Warcraft 3 are also not hints, just observations. Things that are absent from the current plot should not be regarded as hints of the future.

My argument is focused on debunking Cinematics being hints by pointing out a lack of context to the current narrative. Fantazma implied Blizzard hints at new classes in cinematics. I am debunking by pointing out that it's not a hint due to their absence in the current plot.

Illidan in TBC cinematics was not a hint of a DH class because we know Blizzard had no plans to develop one until after MOP. We can't take that context away and pretend DH were always waiting to be made. Blizzard never hinted at playable Demon Hunters prior to its announcement in Legion, they just made it happen. Anyone right about Demon Hunters being playable would be a guess or theory, as there are no hints from the cinematics or game. TBC cinematics were not a hint at Illidan's/Illidaris return in Legion.

[Ielenia]

Then, please bring other examples and explain why (and not that runemaster bullshit you made up).

So you want me to make up examples... but you don't want me to make up examples?

She doesn't need to. Like she isn't in Revendreth, Ardenweald, Maldraxxus or Bastion. Or how she wasn't in Kul Tiras or in much of Zandalar. No main character features that much. Not Illidan in his expansion, not Arthas in his and not Chen in his.

You do know the nagas were doing constant raids into both Kul'tiras and Zandalar, right? By Azshara's orders? And as for Arthas? Are you kidding? As an Alliance player, we found Arthas for the first time in the first three levels in Howling Fjord. We also found him in Drak'tharon Keep. We also saw him in Zul'Drak. And I think in Icecrown, as well.

I don't see a reason to drag it out just to make her a boss that falls at the first patch of an expansion.

That's entirely on you. One reason could be that she already played her part in the major storyline, and now it's time to remove her from the chessboard. And by the way? I believe there are rumors that Sylvanas won't die in the raid.

No? If Kel'thuzad, in his human form, featured that much, wouldn't you expect a Necromancer to be introduced?

No. I would want one (still do, btw), but that doesn't mean I would expect one.

Garrosh.

I'm talking about in context of the story being told that led up to Shadowlands. None of the leaders of the Horde have a connection to death and the Shadowlands like Sylvanas.

Well, i guess you're right if we're comparing her to Garrosh.

It's about storytelling. Not "sylvanas vs garrosh". For example: how impactful do you think the fight between Harry Potter and Voldemort would be if Voldemort was never even alluded to exist in the entire story, until a few pages before the final confrontation?

She only featured in a quest in Darkshore during Cataclysm.
Gul'dan was dead. We didn't expect the whole alternate universe shenanigans.

It doesn't matter. She was still getting development by way of her plans slowly coming to fruition and to light. As for Gul'dan, it also doesn't matter, because we already knew of the character, from our RTS days.

I guess you're right. yet, her downfall is the first patch of the expansion. Seems kinda anti-climatic, don't you think?

So was Gul'dan's. His downfall was on the "first patch of the expansion". As for 'anti-climatic'? I don't know. I haven't seen her fight, or the in-game cinematic that is supposed to play out after her defeat.

Yes. because they're saving him for something important, like introducing the Blademaster.

Careful. You're stating your own opinion as fact, there. You don't know what Blizzard is planning for Samuro in the Warcraft franchise, or even IF they have any plans, at all.

Why do you think he features in HotS and Hearthstone, as the Blademaster representative, if he's not that important?

"Blademaster representative"? I wouldn't exactly call him a "representative" as he's just representing himself, but I also must remind you that in Hearthstone, Rexxar wields a bow, Tyrande is a priest class, and Garrosh uses mana. And Ragnaros is a Light lord, now.

Really? then, what other class could it mean?

Why should I bother responding to this if your very first line in your post was you basically saying you'll dismiss all of my ideas you don't agree with?

It was, pretty much, a guarantee before Shadowlands. Like 2 races until MoP.
And, Again i'm asking, what other class could it mean?

Except it was not. There was absolutely zero guarantees. Blizzard has never outright said "we are releasing new classes every two expansions". Any "guarantee" you think existed was just in your own mind.

Name, please?
WoD Blademasters, also, used fire in their attacks. It was an expansion of the Blademaster concept, based on the Burning Blade clan.

This guy.

What?
What are you talking about?

Let me make a D&D analogy: rolling the dice for an attack roll is not roleplaying. Deciding whether or not attacking is something your character would do is roleplaying.

Like a Rathma Priests of D3?
Can i have examples of WoW ones?

You literally have Tyrande, a priestess, who does not behave at all like the priest player class. The name "priest" is just a position, not an indication of player class.

No, because that's not what i imagine when i picture a necromancer. That's what i imagine when thinking of primitive, tribal witch doctors with mysticism and voodoo. That's why i don't see Trolls and such as fitting the Death Knight, despite their death aspects. It seems much more fitting of a Knightly race.

Except I never said the blood magic the necromancers would be using would be "primitive". I literally pointed out how scholars could have studied and either improved or refined their blood magic.

[LemonDemonGirl]

No, because that's not what i imagine when i picture a necromancer. That's what i imagine when thinking of primitive, tribal witch doctors with mysticism and voodoo. That's why i don't see Trolls and such as fitting the Death Knight, despite their death aspects. It seems much more fitting of a Knightly race.

I guess Zandalari have 'knights', but regular trolls? Nah

[username993720]

Nope.

You wanna tell me they're the same kind of cinematics? you, clearly, haven't delved into analyzing them...

Abandoned

All of them? can you quote the book? or have they all been killed?

And?

So, saying they are now part of the Horde, and therefore irrelevant isn't an argument.

"Might"

Yes, might. What purpose do you think they serve there?

Strawman

You can't.

If it was so easy, you'd name one.

False.

It didn't? tell me what could followed up after they introduced Gul'dan and Mannoroth. Let me remind you that we freed Gul'dan, instead of killing him, in the starting experience. That was kind of a tool for future storytelling.

Loyalty.

I meant something on the scale of, suddenly, getting rid of Sylvanas as the main character, mid-expansion, through a patch or something, due to the distaste of players or something like that. And i don't mean features like azerite being replaced several times. More like narrative plots.

And?

There's sufficient evidence Ka'resh would, probably, feature.

Naaru.

-_-

Just because they said she created Xe'ra, she now, suddenly, responsible for the ordering of Light and Shadow? You know that would make her a First One, right?

Abandoned.

You say abandoned, i say "saved for a later time". If they squeezed the juice out of them i might have agreed with you.

Proof?

I just did. Why raise Night elf Dark Rangers and Dark Wardens and not anything else? you tell me.

Macguffin.

The Azerite or Dark Rangers/Wardens?
Because they could have used anything else for the storyline other than these two archetypes. It doesn't have to be night elf Dark Rangers and Wardens to piss off Tyrande. Heck, they could have used her surrogate daughter, Shandris, for that.

LASERS

Yes. Lasers. Were used in Legion. Was given to the Lightforged. And, probably, was not used to keep the balance between the factions, power-wise.

Wrong.

Only Val'kyr can raise them?
Arthas raised Sylvanas.
Nathanos was raised by the Scourge.
Delaryn was raised by Val'kyr.
Some Dark Rangers were raised by Sylvanas (don't know if through Val'kyr).
All sort of necromancy users. Powerful ones, yes, but diverse.

Abandoned.

When? Nathanos was training Forsaken in Cataclysm.

Abandoned.

Are they not out there?
Can they not step up and lead the Dark Rangers instead of Sylvanas/Nathanos?

Narrative.

Yea... the same narrative that points to redemptive qualities in Sylvanas. Like Illidan and, probably, Arthas.

Abandoned.

They are, already, part of the Horde, so they're redeemed, already. Even after all the things their kin did.

Venthyr?

Yes. The Stonewright is a Night Warrior in the PTR.

Irrelevant.

How is this irrelevant if we're comparing an unestablished group of Dark Rangers to the established Knights of the Ebon Blade and the Illidari?

Abandoned.

Oh yea, right. Forgot you worked for Blizzard. They could, definitely, not use them again in the future -_-

Delusional.

Okay. So, it probably was just a fun little thing.

Abandoned.

No, they weren't. Lightforged home-base is still the Vindicaar.

Hypocrite?

Try to reply to someone who writes as much as you do, while replying to other users. Let's see if you don't get fatigued...

https://www.mmo-champion.com/threads...st-Shadowlands

A few months ago, before Shadowlands came, I posed a question asking about the lore for the Loyalist Dark Rangers. People theorized that loyalist plot would continue in Shadowlands.

The Loyalist plot does not carry into Shadowlands at all, and will not even be addressed by the next raid. There is nothing we can point at as a _hint_ towards a playable Dark Ranger class.


Gul'dan was a macguffin for Legion and Sargeras, Sylvanas is the macguffin for Shadowlands and the Jailer. Gul'dan was important to WoD and Legion, and his story ended with his raid. Same appears to be happening to Sylvanas, with no Loyalist plot being addressed or resolved, only completely absent from the current plot.

Abandoned.


If you say Loyalists will come back into the plot, then you are talking about a theory. My position here is not to dismiss Loyalists as a plot point, it's to point out the fact that there aren't actually in the current plot and can not be regarded as a hint towards a Dark Ranger class. We can only regard possibilities through theories, not hints from the game.

We need to clarify that a theory is not a hint, and that it is not actually part of the plot. Classes featured in Cinematics and Warcraft 3 are also not hints, just observations. Things that are absent from the current plot should not be regarded as hints of the future.

My argument is focused on debunking Cinematics being hints by pointing out a lack of context to the current narrative. Fantazma implied Blizzard hints at new classes in cinematics. I am debunking by pointing out that it's not a hint due to their absence in the current plot.

Illidan in TBC cinematics was not a hint of a DH class because we know Blizzard had no plans to develop one until after MOP. We can't take that context away and pretend DH were always waiting to be made. Blizzard never hinted at playable Demon Hunters prior to its announcement in Legion, they just made it happen. Anyone right about Demon Hunters being playable would be a guess or theory, as there are no hints from the cinematics or game. TBC cinematics were not a hint at Illidan's/Illidaris return in Legion.

And N'zoth's gift? abandoned, as well?
I don't think you give them enough credit or can picture what will happen in the future because, while we dealt with N'zoth in a raid, it was so unsatisfying that he's probably bound to return at some point.

As for the cinematics, while i couldn't find anything in vanilla, TBC and Cataclysm ones, WotLK, MoP, WoD, Legion, BfA and Shadowlands are, definitely, hinting. Not at a particular class, but at a particular theme. We just have to associate a class with it in case they do add one.

So you want me to make up examples... but you don't want me to make up examples?

Not wild ones. Because Runemasters have nothing to do with the Legion.

You do know the nagas were doing constant raids into both Kul'tiras and Zandalar, right? By Azshara's orders? And as for Arthas? Are you kidding? As an Alliance player, we found Arthas for the first time in the first three levels in Howling Fjord. We also found him in Drak'tharon Keep. We also saw him in Zul'Drak. And I think in Icecrown, as well.

But she, herself, didn't feature. That's like using Dark Rangers as examples of Sylvanas showing up.
Yes, to provoke the player and laugh a villain's laugh. He didn't push the narratives of these zones forward.

That's entirely on you. One reason could be that she already played her part in the major storyline, and now it's time to remove her from the chessboard. And by the way? I believe there are rumors that Sylvanas won't die in the raid.

Garrosh got to be the last boss of MoP. So, if she was set up like him, why not treat her the same?
And, yeah, i believe so too. no need to show her having redemptive qualities, yet finishing her off for good this expansion (because everything that dies in the Shadowlands dies for good).

No. I would want one (still do, btw), but that doesn't mean I would expect one.

I bet my money you'd open threads here about his prominence these last few expansions and would argue with Teriz about that
Don't try to act like you won't.

I'm talking about in context of the story being told that led up to Shadowlands. None of the leaders of the Horde have a connection to death and the Shadowlands like Sylvanas.

Trolls have. Vol'jin and Talanji, through Bwonsamdi.

It's about storytelling. Not "sylvanas vs garrosh". For example: how impactful do you think the fight between Harry Potter and Voldemort would be if Voldemort was never even alluded to exist in the entire story, until a few pages before the final confrontation?

Lame. It would be lame.
Personally, i don't see the hype in taking out Sylvanas being expressed here.

It doesn't matter. She was still getting development by way of her plans slowly coming to fruition and to light. As for Gul'dan, it also doesn't matter, because we already knew of the character, from our RTS days.

I guess you could say they were bad before.

So was Gul'dan's. His downfall was on the "first patch of the expansion". As for 'anti-climatic'? I don't know. I haven't seen her fight, or the in-game cinematic that is supposed to play out after her defeat.

Gul'dan wasn't hyped for 3 expansions straight.
Regardless of the fight. Her being a sidekick of the Jailer, instead of the big bad boss. That wasn't the treatment Garrosh got. Doesn't it kinda defeat the purpose of focusing so much on her? She could have been used for an expansion and a half, at most, like Gul'dan to end up being a pawn of a bigger threat.

Careful. You're stating your own opinion as fact, there. You don't know what Blizzard is planning for Samuro in the Warcraft franchise, or even IF they have any plans, at all.

-_-

Why would any of the WC3 Heroes feature in WoW, except for him?

"Blademaster representative"? I wouldn't exactly call him a "representative" as he's just representing himself, but I also must remind you that in Hearthstone, Rexxar wields a bow, Tyrande is a priest class, and Garrosh uses mana. And Ragnaros is a Light lord, now.

These major characters are still being used. Rexxar, and not his dad; Tyrande, and not some unnamed priestess; Garrosh and not a general grunt or something; Ragnaros and not that new Firelord we put instead of him. You see, these are the major, representative, characters. Not Jubei'thos. That's like putting Velonara instead of Sylvanas, or that Dark Warden instead of Maiev.

Why should I bother responding to this if your very first line in your post was you basically saying you'll dismiss all of my ideas you don't agree with?

Because you don't provide a good explanation. "Runemasters featured in Vrykul culture in Legion" is like saying Nagas, Druids or Tauren should have added a class based on them that expansion (Sea Witch, Keeper of the Grove, Chieftain).

Except it was not. There was absolutely zero guarantees. Blizzard has never outright said "we are releasing new classes every two expansions". Any "guarantee" you think existed was just in your own mind.

They didn't. But, they acted so. Everyone and their mothers expected a new class every other expansion. That wasn't just me.

This guy.

Yes. Like i said, like those in WoD.
Nonetheless, these definitely could be hints.

Let me make a D&D analogy: rolling the dice for an attack roll is not roleplaying. Deciding whether or not attacking is something your character would do is roleplaying.

If it's just your decision-making, why add more classes in the first place? Just use your imagination.

You literally have Tyrande, a priestess, who does not behave at all like the priest player class. The name "priest" is just a position, not an indication of player class.

I guess you could say so. A Priestess of G'huun.

Except I never said the blood magic the necromancers would be using would be "primitive". I literally pointed out how scholars could have studied and either improved or refined their blood magic.

Specifically theirs? or Blood magic, in general? because that seems awfully specific.

I guess Zandalari have 'knights', but regular trolls? Nah

Zanadalri prelates? I wouldn't say so. That's like saying Sunwalkers are.
And, check out Hearthstone. Jungle trolls there have access to Paladins, as well.

[Triceron]

Are they not out there?
Can they not step up and lead the Dark Rangers instead of Sylvanas/Nathanos?

Until we hear about them, Blizzard has done nothing with that plot in Shadowlands.

And as I pointed out, all Dark Rangers other than the unnamed Loyalists are joining the Horde. Alliance has no access to Dark Rangers. This is a narrative dead end. Doesn't matter if Summermoon and Velonara train a new generation of Forsaken, this is still a Horde only class concept in practice, because the Alliance has no reason to accept the Fordaken or the Loyalists at all.

They had a chance to have Night Elf Dark Rangers join the Night Elves, but Shadows Rising makes it clear they do not want to, and openly blame Elune for forsaking them. You suggest Tyrande would accept them back, but that's an unlikely theory because they don't want to be part of the Alliance. They consider themselves Forsaken.

As for the cinematics, while i couldn't find anything in vanilla, TBC and Cataclysm ones, WotLK, MoP, WoD, Legion, BfA and Shadowlands are, definitely, hinting. Not at a particular class, but at a particular theme. We just have to associate a class with it in case they do add one.

Er, that's not how Blizzard plans new classes. Again, we have literal blogs by developers showing us how they design new classes, and even they don't know what will be made into a class because everything has to be collectively decided on, not planned decades in advance.

It makes no sense that a hint exists years in advance when they actively haven't planned it until the time comes to develop a new class. This isn't the MCU we are talking about.

[KFPE]

Either a tinkerer or mesmer.
Would've said a necromancer, but we have the demo lock.

[Ielenia]

Not wild ones. Because Runemasters have nothing to do with the Legion.

So what? That doesn't deny their possibility. Runemasters had nothing to do with the Scourge and the Lich King, yet they were one of the three possibilities for an expansion class.

But she, herself, didn't feature. That's like using Dark Rangers as examples of Sylvanas showing up.
Yes, to provoke the player and laugh a villain's laugh. He didn't push the narratives of these zones forward.

I take it you didn't play Azsuna's main questline? The Court of Farondis' fate as ghosts was entirely done by Azsuna, and the Queen herself makes an appearance.

Garrosh got to be the last boss of MoP. So, if she was set up like him, why not treat her the same?

One: she was not set up like him. Second: Garrosh was the "big bad". Sylvanas was not supposed to be the "big bad". She's just a cog in the machine of the Jailer's plans.

I bet my money you'd open threads here about his prominence these last few expansions and would argue with Teriz about that
Don't try to act like you won't.

Considering I haven't done that, at all, for all these 10+ years I've been in this site, aside from making a fan concept for a necromancer class, I'll ask you to refrain from pretending you know what I'd do.

Trolls have. Vol'jin and Talanji, through Bwonsamdi.

Vol'jin is no longer a leader of the Horde, and hasn't been for two expansions' worth of time, now. As for Talanji, she doesn't like Bwonsamdi. Not to mention that she, along with the leaders of the allied races, have basically been forgotten past BfA, so far. Did you notice none of them were present in Icecrown for the quest-chain that takes you to Shadowlands for the first time?

Lame. It would be lame.
Personally, i don't see the hype in taking out Sylvanas being expressed here.

Because Sylvanas, up to this point, has been nothing but a PoS with zero redeemable qualities. And to make things worse, now Blizzard seemingly has decided to give her a semblance of consciousness and guilt over what happened to Anduin. By her own hand, no less.

Gul'dan wasn't hyped for 3 expansions straight.

Because he didn't need to. Gul'dan was an already well-established character with well-established motivations, and the consequences of his doings still lingered in WoW: Felwood, for example, was corrupted because of the demonic power of his skull. The tomb of Sargeras was first opened by him. He created the first death knights, one we meet in the Black Temple. Etc, etc.

Regardless of the fight. Her being a sidekick of the Jailer, instead of the big bad boss. That wasn't the treatment Garrosh got. Doesn't it kinda defeat the purpose of focusing so much on her? She could have been used for an expansion and a half, at most, like Gul'dan to end up being a pawn of a bigger threat.

Apples and oranges. Sylvanas, much like Garrosh, had to be properly set up to become a villain (the success of each of their setups notwithstanding). They couldn't just simply make Sylvanas evil out of the blue.

-_-

Why would any of the WC3 Heroes feature in WoW, except for him?

The answer for that question is very simple: we don't know.

These major characters are still being used. Rexxar, and not his dad; Tyrande, and not some unnamed priestess; Garrosh and not a general grunt or something; Ragnaros and not that new Firelord we put instead of him. You see, these are the major, representative, characters. Not Jubei'thos. That's like putting Velonara instead of Sylvanas, or that Dark Warden instead of Maiev.

Why use Tyrande at all, if she is not a representative of the player priest class at all, though? Considering the original priest 'class' in Hearthstone is Anduin? But my point is: in my opinion, Samuro is not really more important than Jubei'thos.

Because you don't provide a good explanation. "Runemasters featured in Vrykul culture in Legion" is like saying Nagas, Druids or Tauren should have added a class based on them that expansion (Sea Witch, Keeper of the Grove, Chieftain).

"Runemasters featured in Vrykul culture in Legion" was not my argument. I said that the concept fits because runes and runic magic is a prevalent type of magic often found, and, in Legion, the vrykul culture exemplifies that the most. I must also remind you that the Tomb of Sargeras was sealed using two elven runestones.

They didn't. But, they acted so. Everyone and their mothers expected a new class every other expansion. That wasn't just me.

So what? None of that means there was a "guarantee" of a class being added every two expansions. Thousands upon thousands of people expecting so does not mean there was a "guarantee".

If it's just your decision-making, why add more classes in the first place? Just use your imagination.

Because Blizzard doesn't add classes for "roleplay purposes". They add classes to diversify the play style options. "Play" is not the same as "roleplay".

I guess you could say so. A Priestess of G'huun.

It's a position, not an indicative of player class.

Specifically theirs? or Blood magic, in general? because that seems awfully specific.

Specifically theirs, considering they're the only iteration of actual blood magic being functionally on its own in Warcraft, so far.

[pacotaco]

The Dark Rangers are already a part of the Horde. There is little possibility now for them to suddenly branch off to the Alliance as well. This is just one example of a move away from it being a playable class. They concluded a major potential opportunity for them to be seeded into both factions.

What move do you see there being to allow Dark Rangers on both factions with the way things are right now? Night Elves are going to have a sudden change of heart and leave for the Alliance again just because?

Well, at the end of the BFA campaign we see the NE Dark Rangers and Dark Wardens leave with Calia and Derek. It's implied that they're not joining the Horde.
We also know that Velonara (that is currently missing) and most of the BE Dark Rangers felt betrayed by Sylvanas.

It seems like they're planting the seed to create a group that encompasses both sides, like DKs and DHs.

Blizzard is indirectly connecting POTM to light and shadow through Elune's newly revealed connections to the Ordering of Light and Shadow.

Priestess of the Moon are servants of Elune. In Legion, X'era confirms that the prime Naaru were created by Elune. POTM channel the power of the light of the moon, and they have a 'Void state' in the form of the , a cycle that Naaru similarly go through. Elune's true origins and true power are still a mystery to us, but we are given more and more connections between her and the ordering of Light and Shadow than ever before, while POTM remain as her devoted servants and representatives.

What if the Night Warrior is the way to tie into the same class the PotM and the Wardens? Each spec representing one aspect of the moon:
- Full moon: the PotM, arcane archer healer
- New moon: Wardens, avatars of justice
It would explain too where the hell does the Wardens' shadowy magic comes from.

Who creates this new generation of Dark Rangers, and how? Valkyr were the single reason why new Dark Ranger Night Elves could be created, and they all left in service with Sylvanas. We're killing them all in the next raid.

It's a narrative dead end.

Aren't Val'kyr just copies of the Kyrian made by Odyn?
Blizzard could make that some Forsworn help create new Dark Rangers.

Ebon Blade may have been a new creation, but the second son of Mograine and the redemption of the Ashbringer was hinted at since Vanilla.

Just like we currently have all DRs missing, after the 2nd at command says that Sylvanas betrayed them.

[Triceron]

Well, at the end of the BFA campaign we see the NE Dark Rangers and Dark Wardens leave with Calia and Derek. It's implied that they're not joining the Horde.
We also know that Velonara (that is currently missing) and most of the BE Dark Rangers felt betrayed by Sylvanas.

It seems like they're planting the seed to create a group that encompasses both sides, like DKs and DHs.

Okay, now this one is an interesting theory that I can see happening. It's true that the Night Elves have not openly joined the Horde yet.

However, Calia is currently a part of the Horde council, so the Dark Ranger who join Calia are implied to be joining the Horde. She is a Horde-aligned diplomat and a Councilor of the Forsaken. Also, we have direct information from Shadows Rising telling us how the NE DR's felt betrayed by Elune, and do not wish to return to the Night Elves.

Even if we're not talking about the NE Dark Rangers and Dark Wardens joining the Horde, we're still not talking about them joining the Alliance either, they'd just be indirectly working under Calia, who's goal is to integrate them back into the Forsaken, since she is their intermediary.

I can see there being an independent group being formed, but narratively it leans towards being exclusive to the Horde.

What if the Night Warrior is the way to tie into the same class the PotM and the Wardens? Each spec representing one aspect of the moon:
- Full moon: the PotM, arcane archer healer
- New moon: Wardens, avatars of justice
It would explain too where the hell does the Wardens' shadowy magic comes from.

At the end of the day, POTM and Wardens aren't Dark Rangers.

Teriz for example suggested Tinkers could be tied to a Titan themed expansion by using Titan tech. This is a possibility, but let's recognize that a Tinker that uses Titan tech is a very different theme from a classic Tinker hero that simply uses scrappy Goblin and Gnome tech without other 'supernatural' themes being mixed in. It's a different class we're talking about.

The problem I see with this idea is that no one is asking for it.

Players expect a Warcraft 3 styled Dark Ranger, and not Dark Ranger that has Elune healing abilities and Moon themes of Justice. If we're talking about incorporating some Maw and Jailer themes, sure I can see that being expanded on. We can even add some elements from other games like Demon Hunters of D3 for that. But the truth is there are no Moon and Night Warrior connections to a Dark Ranger class, and even the Night Elf Dark Rangers have forsaken Elune completely.

This is a very big 'what if', and one that I'm not wholly convinced is a good direction for Dark Rangers.

Aren't Val'kyr just copies of the Kyrian made by Odyn?
Blizzard could make that some Forsworn help create new Dark Rangers.

Why would Forsworn want to create more 'Sylvanases' after seeing what she's been capable of?

Just like we currently have all DRs missing, after the 2nd at command says that Sylvanas betrayed them.

And that's already happened with nothing in effect.

Imagine if Wrath of the Lich King happened, we had Darion Mograine split away from the Scourge at the end of TBC, and then Blizzard omits them completely from Wrath's storyline.

We'd literally be waiting for the next relevant story and setting (like Shadowlands) for Death Knights to be introduced as a playable class. It's the same situation that the Demon Hunters faced where the Illidari were introduced back into the plot, but were given no chance to actually join. They had to wait to the next-relevant expansion for them to get that opportunity. And in the mean time, Blizzard looked towards adding a different class; Monks.


My personal theory is that Dark Rangers are currently shelved because of similar reasons to why Demon Hunters weren't created back in TBC. I believe they decided they were not ready to make and release a new class and would rather devote resources to better balancing the existing classes the way they focused on that in TBC. So instead of adding a new class, they devised a way to spread abilities out to all other classes (Covenants), and using these mechanics to explore the different realms they've planned for Shadowlands. This means Dark Rangers (and Necromancers) would be missing a current window of opportunity at this point in time.

Blizzard doesn't sweat it, since they have a whole list of potential Class concepts to work with, and a Dark Ranger still has the chance of seeing the light in the future. I just don't think it would be anytime in the near future.

As a developer, they are not singular in deciding what new class to make next. It's a collaborative decision. If not Dark Ranger now, then maybe Tinker or Dragonsworn or Bard or Shadow Hunter down the line. They aren't playing favourites here, otherwise they wouldn't come to a decision to omit a new class entirely in this expansion.

[draugril]

Yeah, given the status of the Legion, and Illidan's current role, I could definitely see a "Warden" spec being added for Demon Hunters. An expression of them finding their way in a universe left in the wake of the Burning Legion, but now absent of that threat.

[username993720]

Until we hear about them, Blizzard has done nothing with that plot in Shadowlands.

And as I pointed out, all Dark Rangers other than the unnamed Loyalists are joining the Horde. Alliance has no access to Dark Rangers. This is a narrative dead end. Doesn't matter if Summermoon and Velonara train a new generation of Forsaken, this is still a Horde only class concept in practice, because the Alliance has no reason to accept the Fordaken or the Loyalists at all.

They had a chance to have Night Elf Dark Rangers join the Night Elves, but Shadows Rising makes it clear they do not want to, and openly blame Elune for forsaking them. You suggest Tyrande would accept them back, but that's an unlikely theory because they don't want to be part of the Alliance. They consider themselves Forsaken.

Does it have to be current to be an option? Lilian stepped up out of the blue after Sylvanas' departure, Rokhan after Vol'jin's and Gazlowe after Gallywix's. They weren't so much set up.

Saying it is a dead end is like claiming Blademasters would be Horde only because they are primarily Orcs, Shadow Hunters as well because they are primarily Trolls, Wardens and Priestesses of the Moon Alliance only because they are primarily Night elves. Monk is primarily associated with the Pandaren, yet everyone is able to learn it. The thing is, if you really believe it will remain a Horde thing only, you are truly delusional.

Then, i ask again: what purpose do they serve? Why do we need Night elf Dark Rangers and Dark Wardens, specifically, and not any other [race] Dark Ranger or dark [class]?

Er, that's not how Blizzard plans new classes. Again, we have literal blogs by developers showing us how they design new classes, and even they don't know what will be made into a class because everything has to be collectively decided on, not planned decades in advance.

It makes no sense that a hint exists years in advance when they actively haven't planned it until the time comes to develop a new class. This isn't the MCU we are talking about.

Is that so?
Draconic themes in WotlK led to Cataclysm.
Human and Orcish themes in MoP led to WoD.
Demonic themes in WoD led to Legion.
Faction and titanic themes in Legion led to BfA.
BfA's Light and Void themes have yet to lead us to an appropriate expansion, but it is due.
Shadowlands' Cataclysm themes will lead us to a Dragon Isles expansion at some point.

So what? That doesn't deny their possibility. Runemasters had nothing to do with the Scourge and the Lich King, yet they were one of the three possibilities for an expansion class.

So, basically, we can consider every class concept and their mother as possible, but only the ones that match, actually, get implemented. So, Demon Hunter it is

I take it you didn't play Azsuna's main questline? The Court of Farondis' fate as ghosts was entirely done by Azsuna, and the Queen herself makes an appearance.

Oh, yeah, i remember that... as a shadowy figure. Nothing major.

One: she was not set up like him. Second: Garrosh was the "big bad". Sylvanas was not supposed to be the "big bad". She's just a cog in the machine of the Jailer's plans.

No? you just established that he featured, prominently, for 3 expansions in a row:
Elected as Warchief in Cataclysm.
Caused a faction war in MoP.
Led us through a portal to another reality.
Basically, a corrupted faction leader.
Now, let's look at Sylvanas:
Features, prominently, for 3 expansions in a row.
Appointed warchief in Legion.
Caused a faction war in BfA.
Led us through a rift to another dimension.
Basically, a corrupted faction leader.

So, not giving her the same "end boss" treatment as Garrosh seems quite wasteful.

Considering I haven't done that, at all, for all these 10+ years I've been in this site, aside from making a fan concept for a necromancer class, I'll ask you to refrain from pretending you know what I'd do.

Jeez... 10 years? I can't imagine how much of Teriz you had to put up with.

I guess you're not a necromancer fanatic as you seem to be.

Vol'jin is no longer a leader of the Horde, and hasn't been for two expansions' worth of time, now. As for Talanji, she doesn't like Bwonsamdi. Not to mention that she, along with the leaders of the allied races, have basically been forgotten past BfA, so far. Did you notice none of them were present in Icecrown for the quest-chain that takes you to Shadowlands for the first time?

Yet, we still communicated with him as a spirit.
Yet, the question was who could have led us. Not what happened in the end. So, she's still a possible option.

Because Sylvanas, up to this point, has been nothing but a PoS with zero redeemable qualities. And to make things worse, now Blizzard seemingly has decided to give her a semblance of consciousness and guilt over what happened to Anduin. By her own hand, no less.

Further increasing the resemblance to Garrosh, who had some humanity in Cataclysm.

Because he didn't need to. Gul'dan was an already well-established character with well-established motivations, and the consequences of his doings still lingered in WoW: Felwood, for example, was corrupted because of the demonic power of his skull. The tomb of Sargeras was first opened by him. He created the first death knights, one we meet in the Black Temple. Etc, etc.

I guess you're right.
But, it's not like Garrosh or Sylvanas were these gentle and kind characters that require so much in order to turn evil. They were assholes from the beginning. Unlike Arthas, for example, who only had vindictive tendencies, but was mostly good. So, the question still remains: does it require that much to make them into villains?

Apples and oranges. Sylvanas, much like Garrosh, had to be properly set up to become a villain (the success of each of their setups notwithstanding). They couldn't just simply make Sylvanas evil out of the blue.

They could, though. She was evil from the very beginning. Garrosh was a warmongerer for most of his life. And, even Gallywix have potential-villain qualities. Heck, most of the Horde does, if we think about that.
Mag'har Orcs were the villains of WoD (with Grommash as their leader), Zandalari Trolls were the villains of Cata and MoP (with Zul as their leader), half of the Nightborne were villainous in Legion (with Elisande as their leader). It doesn't take much to make them into ones
Granted, Alliance have that much potential, with us dealing with Kul Tirans under Lady Ashvane, Dark Iron being villainous for most of WoW's lifetime, Mechagnomes under King Mechagon, Void elves could, potentially, fall to Void whispers and the Lightbound being a potential threat. Yet, none of them seem to require as much set up as Sylvanas and Garrosh. Why?

The answer for that question is very simple: we don't know.

No, we don't. But, we can speculate since he's, obviously, more prominent than Jubei'thos.

Why use Tyrande at all, if she is not a representative of the player priest class at all, though? Considering the original priest 'class' in Hearthstone is Anduin? But my point is: in my opinion, Samuro is not really more important than Jubei'thos.

Both feature in Hearthstone and HotS. Because they are major characters, priest or not. Jubei'thos doesn't. You know why? because he's not nearly as important as Samuro. Heck, when you think about the Blademaster, what do you picture? that corrupted orc in Hellfire or Samuro? i'll tell you what most do: Samuro.

"Runemasters featured in Vrykul culture in Legion" was not my argument. I said that the concept fits because runes and runic magic is a prevalent type of magic often found, and, in Legion, the vrykul culture exemplifies that the most. I must also remind you that the Tomb of Sargeras was sealed using two elven runestones.

Every type of magic can be used against the Legion. Heck, light seems to be the most effective. Why not introduce a third light-based class? i'll tell you. Because it doesn't match as much as the Demon Hunter (and the fact that we have 2 light-based classes, already).
The thing is, not only runes are useful against Demons. Arcane too. Demon Hunters use them as tattoos, to seal the demon within them; the Arcane vaults in Dalaran; and the powers of the Guardian against the Legion. So, was an Arcanist class bound to feature in Legion? no. Let's sober up and realize that.

So what? None of that means there was a "guarantee" of a class being added every two expansions. Thousands upon thousands of people expecting so does not mean there was a "guarantee".

Nothing is guaranteed. But, that was their way of conduct back then.

Because Blizzard doesn't add classes for "roleplay purposes". They add classes to diversify the play style options. "Play" is not the same as "roleplay".

You're playing a roleplaying game. You roleplay as the class you play. Some more than others (with RP servers). But, nonetheless, classes and races are there for us to play pretend as fantasy races and professions. Otherwise, you can play any other game for that matter.

It's a position, not an indicative of player class.

I was trying to help you...

Specifically theirs, considering they're the only iteration of actual blood magic being functionally on its own in Warcraft, so far.

What do you mean functionally on its own?
Do they not use the powers of G'huun?
Aren't there other types of blood casters?

At the end of the day, POTM and Wardens aren't Dark Rangers.

Dark Wardens mean nothing to you?
And, i don't think adding 1 ranged Hero unit, without the other (to be added separately) is likely. Wardens, already, have similarities to PotM with both of them drawing on Elune, and the Night Warrior providing the PotM with glaives.

Yeah, given the status of the Legion, and Illidan's current role, I could definitely see a "Warden" spec being added for Demon Hunters. An expression of them finding their way in a universe left in the wake of the Burning Legion, but now absent of that threat.

Wardens hunt Demon Hunters.
Do you not see the oxymoron in that?

[pacotaco]

What i told lelenia: it doesn't guarantee a new class. But given that there is a class addition, i don't see any other option. Do you?

As Blizzard said several times: they add classes as they fit in the expansion. So it depends on what the next expansion is.
As far as we know right now, next expansion could be anything, from going back to more mundane adventures (Dragon Isles) to going more comic conflict (Void vs Ligh).
They could make it more mystical, like Pandaria (so a class like Blademaster could fit) or they could make it more technomagic/high fantasy like Titan themed patches (o a clas like tinkere could fit).

In therm of technology and showcase, we have a lot of ground done for all of them, like player abilites, NPCs, lore, etc.

So, to me, the most probable are Blademaster and Tinker, with DRs being improbable but still possible.

So, it's all a feminist decision?

Yes.

I don't think so because Jaina, or Talanji for that matter, didn't get as much spotlight as she did. Heck ,even Arthas or Illidan didn't get that much attention.

Because their roles were minor and reactionary, Sylvanas was the engine of the BFA narrative.
Arthas and Illidan conflicts were already set on the narrative by the time we came to resolve it, while Sylvanas was always a secondary in the general narrative of the Warcraft Universe.
You can't go suddenly like "You now that undead lady in the background? Yeah, she's now bad, she went Hell and she's bringing back Satan with her".

Nice try, but you can use it for every potential class available. "We are adding the Bard to use his musical powers against the Legion". -_- Come on, be realistic. The classes that were added fitted their expansions. Death Knights to WotLK, Monks to MoP and Demon Hunters to Legion.

Lack of reading comprehension? You're agreeing with me! They're the best fit? Yes. Could they fit another class? Sure. That's why they were juggling with DKs, Necromancers and Runemasters for WotLK.

Go ahead. Suggest a class that fits the theme, without creating an imaginary situation.

Legion invasion theme? Tinker: use technological marvels that match the Legion's inventions. They also help with their teleportation knowledge to close Legion portals, and construct a ship to go to Argus.
See? You don't NEED Demon Hunters on Legion.
Heck, even the DH inclusion was more shoehorned than that, with all the DHs, that noone knew about, jailed at (what are the chances?) the "ground zero" of the Legion invasion.

Can i a get a quote with a source? because in-game that group doesn't seem that large (probably like 10 NPCs).

If you talked with Velonara at the end of the BFA campaign, when she was at the Orgrimmar Embassy, she said that. She's now gone, so amybe look up some videos or anything on internet. Can't help with that.
Still, DRs never were a big group. They may be counted by the dozens.

*cringe*
Unlikely.
1. They don't add a class mid expansion.
2. I don't see Dark Rangers countering the Jailer (unless they have his powers, like Sylvanas)

You cringe, but that's exactly what the DKs were.
I'm not sayingmaking them playable mid expansion, but making ground to make them playable in the pre-patch of the next one, although highly unlikly because Blizzard link classes with current expansions not with previous ones.

- That's my point. Why is that? if Dark Rangers have, seemingly, diminished their relevancy in this expansion.

It could be 2 things:
- Blizzard doesn't have anything to do with them for the moment.
- Or https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/ChekhovMIA

- yeah... not gonna happen. It should stay a joke. You don't want WoW to turn into a childish game like HotS with playable fey dragons and such...

Well, Pandaren Brewmaster was a joke, and here we're with a race and a class based on it. Never say "never".

Hmmm... are Dark Rangers only raised? Because Forsaken have learned how to become one, not raised into one. Yet, i suppose you need to be a former Banshee to justify a playable Dark Ranger with cool-ass Sylvanas abilities.

As far as we know, DR are special undead raised with the power of the Maw. Only the LK and the Val'kyr could make them.
Nathanos, while presented as one, it was never truly it (although maybe after the thing the Val'kyr did to change his form he became one).

I meant a different era of cinematic creation. They differ quite a lot from the current ones.

You worded it on a weird way (maybe you're not a native english speaker? I sometimes have that problem). That's why we both misunderstood you.

Wait, wait... what? She was responsible for the ordering of light and shadow? can i get a source for that? i only heard of her being the sister of the Winter Queen (which, doesn't put her in a likely place to be a First one). If that is the case, then Light and Void do not indicate on a Shadow Hunter, but rather on a PotM.

Oh, you're just using some previous data about her. She was all over the place in terms of categorization. Arcane due to the Tears of Elune. Life due to the connection to Druids. Death due to her being the sister of the Winter Queen. You can't just assume she is the patron of Light and Void. Heck, she casts moon-based abilities, not Void nor Light. The same can be seen with the Stonewright.

Khadgar in Legion finds a book from Medhiv that theorizes that maybe Elune created X'era. That would explain why the Tears of Elune would restore X'era (the First N'aaru) when only another Naaru could do it.

She could have raised Dark Sentinels, Dark Druids, Dark Furbolgs, Dark Faeirie Dragons, Dark Dryads, Dark Ancients, Dark Highborne, Dark Priestesses of the Moon, Dark Demon Hunters or Dark 'whatever' that includes Night elves there. But, they purposefully chose Wardens and Night elf Dark Rangers. Why? i'll tell you why. Because they're planning to do something with that. Not seeing that is a real issue with people, because that's obviously intentional.

Azerite? what could azerite add to any potential future classes? nothing. Are you seeing a class based on azerite power? no. Any races? no. It was there for a feature. It had its purpose, unlike Dark Wardens and Dark Rangers.

I agree. It looks very suspicious.

Who? anyone with necromantic abilities, i guess. It can be taught, rather than granted by being raised. By who? any Dark Ranger NPC.
There are plenty of them left to fill that gap.

Unless they change it, it's implied that DRs are created, not trained. I'd even say that only elves can be it.
But if I'd make them playable I'd make them available to other races that can be banshee/spectres: Human, Kul Tiran, Void Elves and Night Elves on Alliance; Blood Elves, Nighborne, Forsaken, Troll and Zandalari on Horde.

- - - Updated - - -

That's kind of irrelevant, though. Because WoD and the main timeline are separate threads of fate. What happens in one doesn't affect the other. So they could have made Samuro be a fel-corrupted boss in Hellfire Citadel in place of Jubei'thos, and kill him, and nothing at all would change for Samuro in the main timeline. After all, we kill uncorrupted Kargath Bladefist in WoD, and, as far as we know, he's still a fel orc boss in Shattered Halls in Outland. Same thing with Teron Gorefiend.

Different timeline, but they didn't completly change the personality of the characters. Putting Samuro in the place of Jubei'thos makes no sense, because Samuro despises exactly that.

[Ielenia]

So, basically, we can consider every class concept and their mother as possible, but only the ones that match, actually, get implemented. So, Demon Hunter it is

Don't you see how contradictory that statement is? If "only the class concepts that match the expansion get implemented" was an actual thing, why bother considering other concepts that, according to you, "don't match the expansion"? Why waste time on that?

Oh, yeah, i remember that... as a shadowy figure. Nothing major.

"Nothing major"? You're moving goalposts, here. And it wasn't a "ghostly figure". It was her. Blizzard didn't just wanted ot keep her naga form a secret. She fully appears as a night elf.

No? you just established that he featured, prominently, for 3 expansions in a row:
Elected as Warchief in Cataclysm.
Caused a faction war in MoP.
Led us through a portal to another reality.
Basically, a corrupted faction leader.
Now, let's look at Sylvanas:
Features, prominently, for 3 expansions in a row.
Appointed warchief in Legion.
Caused a faction war in BfA.
Led us through a rift to another dimension.
Basically, a corrupted faction leader.

So, not giving her the same "end boss" treatment as Garrosh seems quite wasteful.

No. "Wasteful", in my opinion, would be giving her the "same treatment" as Garrosh. Don't you remember how the players keep complaining that Sylvanas was "just Garrosh 2.0"?

Further increasing the resemblance to Garrosh, who had some humanity in Cataclysm.

Actually, it further separates him from Garrosh. Because Garrosh had a semblance of honor in Cataclysm, which was completely thrown out the window in MoP and WoD, with Garrosh's only regret during his trial being, and I quote, "not having done enough".

I guess you're right.
But, it's not like Garrosh or Sylvanas were these gentle and kind characters that require so much in order to turn evil. They were assholes from the beginning. Unlike Arthas, for example, who only had vindictive tendencies, but was mostly good. So, the question still remains: does it require that much to make them into villains?

Sylvanas was seen as a pragmatic, end-justifies-the-means type of character, but was also being portrayed as actually caring for the Forsaken under her rule.

They could, though. She was evil from the very beginning. Garrosh was a warmongerer for most of his life. And, even Gallywix have potential-villain qualities. Heck, most of the Horde does, if we think about that.
Mag'har Orcs were the villains of WoD (with Grommash as their leader), Zandalari Trolls were the villains of Cata and MoP (with Zul as their leader), half of the Nightborne were villainous in Legion (with Elisande as their leader). It doesn't take much to make them into ones
Granted, Alliance have that much potential, with us dealing with Kul Tirans under Lady Ashvane, Dark Iron being villainous for most of WoW's lifetime, Mechagnomes under King Mechagon, Void elves could, potentially, fall to Void whispers and the Lightbound being a potential threat. Yet, none of them seem to require as much set up as Sylvanas and Garrosh. Why?

You don't seem to know how narratives work. Could they just make them instantly "big bad evil guys"? Yes, Blizzard could do it. Just like J.K.Rowling could have introduced Voldemort only last minute for the big climax of the book's story. Of which you agreed would make the thing lame. Villains need time to be introduced and developed. Garrosh and Sylvanas were already introduced, yes, but they were introduced as villains.

No, we don't. But, we can speculate since he's, obviously, more prominent than Jubei'thos.

Both feature in Hearthstone and HotS. Because they are major characters, priest or not. Jubei'thos doesn't. You know why? because he's not nearly as important as Samuro. Heck, when you think about the Blademaster, what do you picture? that corrupted orc in Hellfire or Samuro? i'll tell you what most do: Samuro.

And that is your opinion. My opinion is that Samuro is not more important than Jubei'thos.

Every type of magic can be used against the Legion. Heck, light seems to be the most effective. Why not introduce a third light-based class? i'll tell you. Because it doesn't match as much as the Demon Hunter (and the fact that we have 2 light-based classes, already).
The thing is, not only runes are useful against Demons. Arcane too. Demon Hunters use them as tattoos, to seal the demon within them; the Arcane vaults in Dalaran; and the powers of the Guardian against the Legion. So, was an Arcanist class bound to feature in Legion? no. Let's sober up and realize that.

How do you know that? How do you know that an "arcanist" class concept was not among the class ideas being bounced around during the Legion development? You're taking your own opinion, your own bias, and stating those as facts, here. Which is very hypocritical of you considering you kept accusing me of bias.

Nothing is guaranteed. But, that was their way of conduct back then.

Again, that's no guarantee, so please stop acting like it was. Expectations are not guarantees.

You're playing a roleplaying game. You roleplay as the class you play. Some more than others (with RP servers). But, nonetheless, classes and races are there for us to play pretend as fantasy races and professions. Otherwise, you can play any other game for that matter.

... You really don't know what "roleplaying" is, if that is your definition. Roleplay requires interpretation. An online roleplaying game is not actually roleplay just because you're picking a race and class and pressing buttons. To roleplay-- actually roleplay-- means to give the character a personality, motivations, aspirations, wants and needs, etc, which simply does not happen in the game, and Blizzard even added servers specifically for roleplay, separated from the rest. Just don't go to the Moonguard server

What do you mean functionally on its own?
Do they not use the powers of G'huun?
Aren't there other types of blood casters?

"Functional on its own" by the fact they're their own power. For example, the blood magic aspect of anima (the one that the Mogu used, no the Shadowlands version) or the blood magic of the Scourge. The blood magic of the blood trolls is separate from those.

- - - Updated - - -

Different timeline, but they didn't completly change the personality of the characters. Putting Samuro in the place of Jubei'thos makes no sense, because Samuro despises exactly that.

Perhaps. And I agree with you on the 'they kept their personalities intact', but there was the possibility that Samuro could have been forced to drink the blood, which could make him more aggressive.

[Triceron]

Does it have to be current to be an option? Lilian stepped up out of the blue after Sylvanas' departure, Rokhan after Vol'jin's and Gazlowe after Gallywix's. They weren't so much set up.

And none of these hint at any other new classes in the game.

I don't consider any of these to be hints towards a Tinker, Shadow Hunter or Dark Ranger, because they don't actually indicate that any of these classes will actually be playable in the future.

A playable Tinker isn't dependent on Gazlowe being race leader. Shadow Hunters weren't dependent on Vol'jin being Warchief. None of these are actually hints towards a playable class, since they don't actually indicate they will actually be explored in the future. Wrathion mentioning Dragon Isles is a hint, because there is an intent for him to explore. NPCs stepping up in leadership display no intent in making their own unique class be playable.

If we want to talk about the development set up for a class, then we shouldn't be applying NPCs that can be written in and out of the story in any given way Blizzard chooses. There are many more factors that affect the decision for a class

Saying it is a dead end is like claiming Blademasters would be Horde only because they are primarily Orcs, Shadow Hunters as well because they are primarily Trolls, Wardens and Priestesses of the Moon Alliance only because they are primarily Night elves. Monk is primarily associated with the Pandaren, yet everyone is able to learn it. The thing is, if you really believe it will remain a Horde thing only, you are truly delusional.

It's a dead end because they *chose* not to expand it to the Alliance.

We actually can't say this about Blademaster because they DID provide an example of a Lightforged Blademaster. This is only comparable to the Dark Ranger situation if they had the Telamon with other Lightforged Blademaster followers all choose to be aligned with the Horde. I hope you can see the problems here.

Then, i ask again: what purpose do they serve? Why do we need Night elf Dark Rangers and Dark Wardens, specifically, and not any other [race] Dark Ranger or dark [class]?

I explained and you ignored.

My personal interpretation is they had plans for it, and abandoned it because of an internal decision to *NOT ADD ANY CLASS* in Shadowlands.

Is that so?
Draconic themes in WotlK led to Cataclysm.
Human and Orcish themes in MoP led to WoD.
Demonic themes in WoD led to Legion.
Faction and titanic themes in Legion led to BfA.
BfA's Light and Void themes have yet to lead us to an appropriate expansion, but it is due.
Shadowlands' Cataclysm themes will lead us to a Dragon Isles expansion at some point.

What Cata themes let to MOP? The Shattering was such a broad concept that we could have just as easily been lead to Undermine and the South Seas, or the Broken Isles, instead of to Pandaria. And if we're talking about expansion themes, then you've absolutely cherry picked these connections, because I can give you examples of plenty of themes from Cata that could have lead to any number of expansions that were not Pandaria related.

- Strong themes with dealing with Timetravel, which could have just as easily lead us into Alt Universe Draenor or another Time Travel setting
- Brought back the Zandalari into the story, making it possible for the next expansion to be in Zandalar
- Vash'jr and the Naga, which could have lead into an Azshara based expansion in Zin Azshari and Nazjatar
- Strong ties to Hyjal, which could have lead us into an Emerald Dream/Emerald Nightmare expansion.
- Old God Shenanigans, which could have lead us straight to the Black Empire and N'zoth.
- Goblin intro had us explore parts of Kezan, giving us a brief look. This could have lead us to Undermine and the South Seas
- Shattering could have raised Broken Isles from the sea and caused instability in the Vault of the Wardens

These are all story seeds. Some were even more suggestive than others of future expansion content, such as Azshara using Ozumat to take away Neptulon. This plot was abandoned since Neptulon was perfectly fine in Legion. Azshara still made her way into the game eventually, but not through the story seed that was planted in Cataclysm.


The Dark Ranger situation is more nuanced because they never announced any intentions for a new class. This leaves us guessing why Night Elf Dark Rangers exist in the plot without having been used at all since. We are left to assume. But from a narrative standpoint, the Loyalist plotline is absent, and Sylvanas' story seems to be concluding. This will not likely be a hint towards playable Dark Rangers.

Dark Wardens mean nothing to you?

They're Dark Wardens. They didn't learn to be Dark Rangers or anything, they're still Wardens. Am I missing something here?

And, i don't think adding 1 ranged Hero unit, without the other (to be added separately) is likely. Wardens, already, have similarities to PotM with both of them drawing on Elune, and the Night Warrior providing the PotM with glaives.

Or it could be the more likely scenario of not adding Dark Ranger/Dark Warden/Dark POTM as a new class, and they're moving forward with other plans for the time being.

I'm curious why are you so adamant that Dark Ranger needs to follow up on the BFA's narrative when we're at a point in time that shows us it's gone nowhere? Do you not acknowledge that this concept will be a hard sell following up with future Expansion settings? I mean, Zin Ashari with a Dark Ranger class? It doesn't really make much sense, kind of like when Teriz proposed his Titan expansion with Tinkers.

It's not a matter of whether Blizzard *could* do it or not, it's a matter of Blizzard showing us they aren't wholly interested at this moment in time. Same with what happened with Azshara being 'hinted' at in Cataclysm and only appearing a decade later in BFA, with no follow up to the Cata plot at all. That's what I'm seeing as the future for Dark Rangers - we have Velonara and Summermoon set up as a story seed, but they're not being hinted at being used or even relevant to the current plot.

Just because they said she created Xe'ra, she now, suddenly, responsible for the ordering of Light and Shadow? You know that would make her a First One, right?

You need to read more clearly, because I had said Elune had a connection to the Ordering of Light and Shadow, not that she was responsible for it.

"Archmage Khadgar found in an ancient cosmology tome a passage indicating that the prime naaru may have been created by Elune during the great ordering of Light and Shadow."

I'm a bit surprised you assumed so much out of a one word response, too.

Like what? Show me an example of what Legion could have been and could have introduced.

Gul'dan was the only link between WoD and Legion. Without Gul'dan, no return of Illidan, no demon invasion, no return of Sargeras.

The story for Legion isn't completely centered around demons - it's about exploring the Broken Isles, exploring the Artifacts, and gathering the Pillars of Creation. And who would be the big bad we have to face? What about N'zoth?

- N'zoth's forces invade Broken Shore, same characters die. Vol'jin, Varian, Tirion, all victims of the agents of N'zoth.
- N'zoth's agents seek the Pillars of Creation. We are there to claim them.
- Emerald Nightmare - This could be expanded into a larger part of the expansion. This raid was already connected to N'zoth.
- Suramar plotline swaps out Sargeras for N'zoth. Deals with a different devil.
- Azshara and the Tidestone is already featured in Legion, expand her influence. She is already an agent of N'zoth.
- Tomb of Sargeras swapped out, Nazjatar swapped in.
- Black Empire is the end raid setting instead of Argus. Just switch up BFA's ending into Legion.

All of the same beats of the Legion expansion. It's basically the same setting and story with a different theme. Instead of demons, we have old god shenanigans.

Wrathion becomes the stand-in for Illidan. Illidan was the key to defeating Sargeras, Wrathion was the key to defeating N'zoth. You see the parallels here, right? Instead of Demon Hunters, Wrathion creates the Dragonsworn, mortals blessed with Draconic powers.

BFA already showed us N'zoth, and Legion was already strongly hinting his return. Legion's theme was centered around the Pillars of Creation, and it wasn't all about Demons considering two of the biggest enemies in Legion were agents of N'zoth to begin with. It's not hard to change Legion from a Demon Expansion to an Old God expansion, because Blizzard already had Old God agents and themes all throughout the Broken Isles.

[draugril]

The point is, both of their roles have evolved. You're obviously not going to get a 1:1 Warden, just as no class is a 1:1 copy of their RTS predecessor.

The Legion is defeated. The Hunters have become the Wardens of the jailed. I could easily see them co-opting the ways of their former pursuers to ensure the Legion threat remains contained. Would you be able to be Maiev along with the lore and such? Nope. But that's not what is being pitched, here.

Think of it like Alliance High Elves. The version that is actually playable with Void Elves is technically from the opposite faction and is wrapped up with powers that are the antithesis of what their faction generally associates itself with. So too could it be with Wardens. Blizzard doesn't implement anything straight anymore. It all has to have a "clever" angle.