1. #1681
    The Insane Teriz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Undermine
    Posts
    18,129
    Quote Originally Posted by draugril View Post
    This is true.

    But I hold that stance that if they can't do a wholesale implementation, they shouldn't bother. It's a compromise, otherwise, and there are classes out they that could be fully conceptualized in both fantasy and gameplay. In a word with unlimited resources, sure get your "bard" in WoW. But we don't have unlimited resources, so give the class slot to something that can make full usage of it.
    Well the Bard concept is really just for fun, so I wouldn’t worry too much about it. It’s not a serious contender for class implementation because Blizzard has never pushed the concept of a Bard hero. Not in WC3, not in WoW, and they didn’t even have a Bard class in the tabletop RPG. So the chance of a Bard class is pretty close to zero.

  2. #1682
    Mechagnome Molvonos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Everywhere, Nowhere, Anywhere
    Posts
    738
    If they made a 'weaver's class, like EQs Badd or Warhammers Chaos Knight aura tank, I'd switch in a heartbeat. I loved all the utility bards brought, even if they weren't the best healers, dps, tanks or anything. I was proud of myself of having 3 mobs mezzed and on standby for slaughter in karnors for my group to kill while buffing and mana batterying
    Just because I advocate your ability to play and enjoy WoW Classic doesn't mean I think it'll be successful.

    "Being racist is not wrong. It is a lifestyle that you don't approve of. Being racist isn't even illegal, and it never will be." ~Jonnusthegreat

  3. #1683
    Quick action melee with all the utility possible and easy to play.

  4. #1684
    The Insane Ielenia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Brazil
    Posts
    15,686
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    None of that description really demonstrates a difference between a Dark Ranger or a Hunter. Much like what Nathanos does isn’t much different than your standard Forsaken Hunter.
    "Dark rangers are undead archers in service of the Forsaken or Sylvanas Windrunner. These cunning individuals, adept at manipulating opponents, are mainly composed of forcibly raised Farstrider rangers of Quel'Thalas. They now enjoy nothing more than sowing dissension and hatred within the enemy ranks."

    The aforementioned text does not represent the hunter concept. It does represent the dark ranger concept.

    You mean like Nathanos being a Dark Ranger and a Hunter trainer?
    Again, none of that changes the fact we do not have a "dark ranger" option in the character creation skin. The hunter class is not a dark ranger class.

    Incorrect. The reason I don’t dismiss Nathanos is because Blizzard made it obvious that Sylvanas was not a typical Dark Ranger.
    And Anduin is not a typical priest. Velen is not a typical priest. Varian was not your typical warrior. Malfurion is not your typical druid. Tyrande is not your typical priest. Not to mention that Sylvanas getting more powers and abilities that just so happen to coincide the dark ranger concept and how she is portrayed in HotS.

    The Lich King is a Necromancer whether you wish to believe it or not.
    The Lich King is a death knight. He wears heavy plate and swings a two-handed mace while standing in melee range. A necromancer wears light cloth armor, wields a staff or a dagger, and stands at range.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Amunrasonther View Post
    Has this image been brought up at all in this thread? It's over on the main forums.



    People are speculating obviously that they're laying the foundations for a Bard class.
    Hell yeah! More bard stuff! I love it. I honestly hope this is Blizzard putting the foundations for a future bard class.

    Any idea which NPC says that when you talk to them?

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by draugril View Post
    Which I truly hope is not what they do. WarCraft does not have the proper environment for a Bard. They got rid of the Support role, and a Bard that cannot Support is not a Bard at all.
    This notion that bards can only be support classes need to die, really. It's completely not based in reality, considering that a bard class can easily fit in WoW's class system with two DPS and one healing spec, for example.
    I did a Necromancer thing. Check it out! All feedback welcome!
    I also did a Bard thing! Questions, comments and ideas, all welcome!

  5. #1685
    Quote Originally Posted by Ielenia View Post
    This notion that bards can only be support classes need to die, really. It's completely not based in reality, considering that a bard class can easily fit in WoW's class system with two DPS and one healing spec, for example.
    May as well add a Priest that can't heal while we're at it.

  6. #1686
    They had a chance to Make necromancer with Shadowlands but they didn't. Also would be great to see another class that can use mail armor so it can even out more with armor to class diversity. Mail is the only armor that doesn't have a third class to use it.
    Last edited by Hyeonh; 2020-12-21 at 08:59 PM.

  7. #1687
    The Insane Teriz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Undermine
    Posts
    18,129
    Quote Originally Posted by Ielenia View Post
    "Dark rangers are undead archers in service of the Forsaken or Sylvanas Windrunner. These cunning individuals, adept at manipulating opponents, are mainly composed of forcibly raised Farstrider rangers of Quel'Thalas. They now enjoy nothing more than sowing dissension and hatred within the enemy ranks."

    The aforementioned text does not represent the hunter concept. It does represent the dark ranger concept.
    It actually sounds like a Shadow Priest.

    Have fun with that.


    Again, none of that changes the fact we do not have a "dark ranger" option in the character creation skin. The hunter class is not a dark ranger class.
    So just add an undead Elf option and we’re done?


    And Anduin is not a typical priest. Velen is not a typical priest. Varian was not your typical warrior. Malfurion is not your typical druid. Tyrande is not your typical priest. Not to mention that Sylvanas getting more powers and abilities that just so happen to coincide the dark ranger concept and how she is portrayed in HotS.
    Where’s the threads where people are asking/begging to play as any of those characters?


    The Lich King is a death knight. He wears heavy plate and swings a two-handed mace while standing in melee range. A necromancer wears light cloth armor, wields a staff or a dagger, and stands at range.
    Where does it say that a Necromancer must wear cloth armor, fight in range, and use staves and daggers?

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Hyeonh View Post
    They had a chance to Make necromancer with Shadowlands but they didn't.
    And a Dark Ranger, considering that Sylvanas initiated this entire expansion.

  8. #1688
    Quote Originally Posted by Ielenia View Post
    "Dark rangers are undead archers in service of the Forsaken or Sylvanas Windrunner. These cunning individuals, adept at manipulating opponents, are mainly composed of forcibly raised Farstrider rangers of Quel'Thalas. They now enjoy nothing more than sowing dissension and hatred within the enemy ranks."

    The aforementioned text does not represent the hunter concept. It does represent the dark ranger concept.
    This also wouldn't really work as any class description though. "Good at manipulating" applies to just about every class. This description doesn't tell us anything about what a Dark Ranger does, just how they feel.

    Let's do a thought experiment. All I'm going to do is remove the first line, and references to Quel'thalas. (Because if it became a class, they would have to be on both Horde and Alliance, so references to Quel'thalas would lock the class only to Blood/Void Elf, which no one wants.)

    "These cunning individuals are adept at manipulating opponents. They now enjoy nothing more than sowing dissension and hatred within the enemy ranks."

    Using only these words, prove to me that this is ONLY talking about Dark Rangers. Cause right now, it sounds like:
    1) Warlock
    2) Shadow Priest
    3) Any evil character ever.
    4) A bad guy Hunter (Hunters need to manipulate beasts, dude... your description ABSOLUTELY could be about hunters, considering the Farstriders were Hunters...)
    Last edited by Fleugen; 2020-12-21 at 09:14 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by smrund View Post
    I'm sorry sir, but we do not serve complimentary cheese when you bring your own whine.

  9. #1689
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post

    Where does it say that a Necromancer must wear cloth armor, fight in range, and use staves and daggers?

    It's an RPG thing to honest. In DnD Necromancers were typically put with light armor which is either padded(Cloth) or Leather armor, and weapons were classes as simple which included Daggers, Staves, Mace, Spear, Sickle/Scythe, Hand-Axes, Clubs and Great Clubs, basically every day tool or basic weapons. But with how classes currently are I rather them add another cloth class into the game and make Necromancers one of the few cloth classes that equip something the current cloth class can't use like 2 handed maces, one handed axes, and pole arms, even make a new weapon class for them to share with warlock like scythes.

  10. #1690
    The Insane Teriz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Undermine
    Posts
    18,129
    Quote Originally Posted by Hyeonh View Post
    It's an RPG thing to honest. In DnD Necromancers were typically put with light armor which is either padded(Cloth) or Leather armor, and weapons were classes as simple which included Daggers, Staves, Mace, Spear, Sickle/Scythe, Hand-Axes, Clubs and Great Clubs, basically every day tool or basic weapons. But with how classes currently are I rather them add another cloth class into the game and make Necromancers one of the few cloth classes that equip something the current cloth class can't use like 2 handed maces, one handed axes, and pole arms, even make a new weapon class for them to share with warlock like scythes.
    That’s all fine and dandy, but Blizzard has shown in multiple occasions that they’re willing to create an armored melee Necromancer.

  11. #1691
    Classes are a lot of fun and we most definitely need a new type of range class.

    I'm more interested in making a new race
    . A race that actually competes with Druids. One that has instant flight forms. So we could play any class we like and have racial abilities that give us the same advantage. I know some people might not be fond of it, but for real. Imagine a warrior that has instant flight form? Or any other class for that matter? Ikr? Let us put Druids to rest and give all classes the same advantage.

    What type of race would do this? Well dragons of course. Instant dragon flight forms. Some people don't like the idea of Dragoons tho. . .

    I also been pressing a new hot alien race. I kinda wanted it specifically for the Horde, so they weren't limping so hard behind the Alliance. (space race!) If it has instant flight form seems a bit unfair.. or maybe just both of the new hot races have these capabilities. I been pressuring for two new hot races for each faction. (Throwback to TBC <3) Or having one that gets to pick their own faction like the pandas. (See dragoons again uptop)

    I bet it would be a lot of fun. I did enjoy DH quite a bit. I honestly believe this is due to it being fast paced and agile. It made them a pretty fun class. (Or another case of fast combat being really fun, think of Ciri in Witcher 3) It was my favorite mage tower challenge the DPS one for DH.

    Derailing like usual. Still I would like a new ranged class period. . .

  12. #1692

  13. #1693
    Quote Originally Posted by Hyeonh View Post
    It's an RPG thing to honest. In DnD Necromancers were typically put with light armor which is either padded(Cloth) or Leather armor, and weapons were classes as simple which included Daggers, Staves, Mace, Spear, Sickle/Scythe, Hand-Axes, Clubs and Great Clubs, basically every day tool or basic weapons. But with how classes currently are I rather them add another cloth class into the game and make Necromancers one of the few cloth classes that equip something the current cloth class can't use like 2 handed maces, one handed axes, and pole arms, even make a new weapon class for them to share with warlock like scythes.
    Warcraft while it does use the basic DnD RPG class archetypes doesn't follow them 100% or even use them at all in some cases.

    For instance Priests are the cleric analogue (divine full spellcaster) yet they are terrible in melee (DnD clerics are typically at least somewhat competent in melee), wear cloth armor (Dnd Clerics typically wear medium-heavy armor) and utilize mind (shadow) based powers (which are in DnD terms typically the domain of Psionics or Bards). DnD druids have a ton of elemental spells yet Warcraft druids only use sun, moon, astral and plant based spells with only a few wind based. Warriors take traits from Fighters and Barbarians (Rage as a resource and Fury is clearly styled after the DnD Barbarian enrage type mechanics).

    Warlock, Demon Hunter and Shaman have no direct analogue (DnD Warlocks aren't typically summoners like Warcraft Warlocks and Shamans could be comparable to spellcasting focused DnD druid).
    Last edited by Imperator4321; 2020-12-21 at 10:00 PM.

  14. #1694
    I'd like a tech based class but not neccisarily 'tinker.' I think it'd be neat to potentially have the different specs specialize in different things.

    Maybe a draenei crystal tech spec for tanking, a ranged dps spec based on tinker, a spec based on forsaken dark science etc.

    I suppose that would run the risk of feeling like three classes crammed into one though instead of feeling truly unifed behind one identity.

  15. #1695
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    Except you don’t get to play as those characters, so Blizzard allows you to play a lesser derivative. In the case of Dark Rangers Blizzard did something different, they created a derivative of Sylvanas that lacked her Banshee powers. Then they went further and created a Dark Ranger that wasn’t an undead elf. These derivatives were still considered Dark Rangers in lore.

    I think they went that route because you really can’t make a workable class that operates like Sylvanas. I mean if you REALLY think about it even if you apply the HotS abilities, there really isn’t much there. So it makes sense to just make the concept a derivative of the Hunter class instead.
    Most NPC classes have, with the exception of them being depicted as bosses, rather generic abilities and skillsets and traditionally, they would use just a mix of different class abilities. Most of Baron Rivendares abilities where taken from Warriors plus Shadowbolt from Warlocks. So far, when they translated classes like this into playable classes, most of the time they based them stronger on the fantasies of the heroes. DKs got frost magic because most people associate Arthas with frost, due to frostmourne and their design shifted more closer towards resembling Arthas, with blue glowing eyes and many sets which are designed to resemble Arthas iconic look. Demon Hunters got many features which were originally unique to Illidan, like horns, glowing eyesockets, demonic skintones and the ability to, though temporarily, have wings. Before that, Demon Hunters looked like normal elves with tattoos and blindfolds. Their metamorphosis was also changed to stronger resemble Illidan while before, they used to look closer to Dreadlords.

    So yeah, when they ever creat a Dark Ranger class, do you have any argument why it would be unlikely that Blizz retcons Dark Rangers into stronger resembling Sylvanas, with a banshee forms, Black Arrow and CC abilities based on shadow Chains? And again, I don't ask you whether or not Dark Rangers will ever become a class. I ask you how likely to you find it, that Blizz will make changes to the Dark Ranger class IF it ever becomes playable, including broadening their set of abilities to allow for multiple specs as well as making the class closer to Sylvanas?

    Because lets be frank here, argueing what will be a playable class is just bullshit at this point. I know, you love to sprew your entitled wishes as facts, but lets be really honest here: Any claim to know what will be a playable class outside of it being likely something out of WC3 as long as there are still a few options out for that is at best delusional. Monks and Demon Hunters have proven, that Blizz creat something out of thin air because a lead dev just feels like it and likes the idea or that they will go as far as fundamentally changing existing classes, to make a class possible. Demon Hunters were basically out of every reasonable discussion after Wrath, it seemed like Blizz settled on giving their most important ability to Warlocks and even centered the entire spec around it. They even created a challenge mode set to resemble Illidan and continued the story of the Black Temple in the Warlock Green Fire chain. And then another lead dev suddenly decided that he wants Demon Hunters and created them.

    The best guess we can make when it comes to new classes are not based on existing Lore or anything like that, it would be to analyze what the current lead devs seem to be into. I mean, Mechagon could be a hint that there is somebody in an executive position at Blizz who is into the whole tech stuff, we know that Danuser is a massive fan of Sylvanas and Nathanos. That is as far as we can guess in terms of what could be a new class. Especially since at any moment, they could just decide they want to creat something entirely new which is not based on existing lore. Or something incredibly niche we haven't considered yet. The Brewmaster hero was a rather niche aprils fools joke hero, then Blizz decided to make a new class, race and entire expansion centered around that. We just can't know what they do next.

    Where does it say that Necromancers can’t fight in melee or use ice magic?
    So you aggree that Mekkatorque is basically just a Warrior who utilizes vehicle combat, a mechanic accessible to players ingame too? I mean, he has so far demonstrated no special flashy class skins and his ingame look is that of a gnome in heavy plate armor with a mace and a shield.

    Plus, the Lich King since Arthas is always strongly coded as a Death Knights? They use Death Knight abilities, they use melee combats and Bolvar is the current leader of the Knights of the Ebon Blade the Death Knight class order? in Warcraft, Necromancers are depicted as casters in cloth armor fighting with magic. I mean, the only case you could make is that Bolvar is the equivalent of Anduin Wrynn, being a Necromancer who just looks like a Death Knight in every regard, but there is no hint in the lore on that and it would mean that you would need to acknowledge Paladins and Priests existing in the same game.

  16. #1696
    Not idea for new class really, perhaps a Hero Spec for existing classes. My dream spec/class was always to have a true Beastmaster hunter/class. Control of three pets, wears leather and can use two handed swords/staves/any one handed weapon dual wield. Can be melee based or ranged based depending on chosen talents. Just the basic idea. The pets would do just out of my backside 80% of your abilities.

  17. #1697
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    Well the Bard concept is really just for fun, so I wouldn’t worry too much about it. It’s not a serious contender for class implementation because Blizzard has never pushed the concept of a Bard hero. Not in WC3, not in WoW, and they didn’t even have a Bard class in the tabletop RPG. So the chance of a Bard class is pretty close to zero.
    Blizzard is kind of infamous for basically making whatever they want. Nobody ever considered the Brewmaster a serious contenter for a new class, but we got it. They killed the possibility of Demon Hunters in wrath and just made it anyways, killing Demonology Warlocks on the way.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    Thing is, the support aspect is what makes the Bard a unique concept, because music is portrayed as a constant force influencing the fight. You take that away, and you’re going to need another way to make music a unique magic type.

    I’d strongly recommend checking out Hunter Survival talent Lone Wolf, and Dekard from HotS for some ideas.
    They basically could take inspiration from the Bard in FF14 tbh. Square Enix really managed to make the whole Bard Support Class work. I mean, a pure support class is just not really an option, because it doesn't fit the pace of the game anymore. We live in a time and age where even Healers and Tanks are expected to optimize their damage during combat. I think the best option to go would be to make them a DPS or Heal Class who has abilities which boost their parties capabilities which is offset by them being tuned around making less personal damage.

  18. #1698
    Quote Originally Posted by shoc View Post
    I think people are way off about how Dark Rangers could be implemented in-game. I propose that Rogues get the Survival Hunter treatment and either Sub or Assassination is turned into a ranged Dark Ranger spec. Sure Dark Ranger abilities are part of the Hunter kit but Metamorphosis was once a Warlock ability too.

    Problem 1: The Hunter theme is all about beasts and nature and is totally misaligned with the Dark Ranger theme. Dark Rangers don't have pets. Nathanos has his hounds but only in Vanilla and then very recently, but no other Dark Rangers have pets. MM Hunter is closest to High Elf Farstriders but even they are not the same as Dark Rangers. Sabotage and subterfuge is a big part of the Dark Ranger identity, which is spot-on if Dark Rangers were a Rogue spec.

    Problem 2: Dark Rangers would look dumb as hell in Mail armour. There are very, very few sets that are going to be viable for Dark Ranger transmogs as a Hunter. Most of the gear is either covered in beasts or elemental magic because it's Shaman gear. It would suck to run around as a Dark Ranger but look like a Resto Shaman. Leather armour on the other hand, and basically all Rogue gear, is going to look great and consistent with the Dark Ranger theme.

    But I don't think Dark Ranger is rich enough of a concept to be a whole class in and of itself.

    Plus, as a Rogue spec, Dark Rangers would get stealth as a baseline, and it's hard to imagine Dark Rangers without stealth.

    Marksman Hunters have the lone wolf passive so they can be completely divorced from the pet aspects of the Hunter class

    The Mythic Tier 19/Nighthold Hunter set is based on on Dark Rangers/Sylvanas

    I disagree with turning subtlety into the Dark Ranger spec because Sub rogues have their own theme and archetype of being a ninja/nightblade, as much as it sucked for people that liked the pre-legion demonology at the very least blizard didn't completely erase the concept from the game and just transferred it onto the Demon Hunter class, erasing one archetype to bring in another would just be bad for the people that liked what was erased (like what happened with survival hunters becoming a melee spec)

    Quote Originally Posted by Diaphin View Post
    They basically could take inspiration from the Bard in FF14 tbh. Square Enix really managed to make the whole Bard Support Class work. I mean, a pure support class is just not really an option, because it doesn't fit the pace of the game anymore. We live in a time and age where even Healers and Tanks are expected to optimize their damage during combat. I think the best option to go would be to make them a DPS or Heal Class who has abilities which boost their parties capabilities which is offset by them being tuned around making less personal damage.
    We see a bit of the kind of support/buffing based gameplay in a few of the covenant abilities, the Night Fae paladin ability is a changing set of buffs (extra damage on hit, extra healing done/recieved, debuff on hit and cooldown reduction), could be an interesting idea for a class with middling damage/healing but a variety of buffs to grant allies. Although balance could be a question since buffs have a lot of hidden power to them and might be too strong without being very satisfying to play

  19. #1699
    The Insane Teriz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Undermine
    Posts
    18,129
    Quote Originally Posted by Florena View Post
    I'd like a tech based class but not neccisarily 'tinker.' I think it'd be neat to potentially have the different specs specialize in different things.

    Maybe a draenei crystal tech spec for tanking, a ranged dps spec based on tinker, a spec based on forsaken dark science etc.

    I suppose that would run the risk of feeling like three classes crammed into one though instead of feeling truly unifed behind one identity.
    Pretty much. You also have the fact that Blizzard has stuck pretty closely to the aesthetics of the original WC3 (or HotS) hero they’re basing the class on. So if we’re getting a Tinker class, it’s going to have the claw pack, and I really don’t see a Draenei running around with a crsystal-tech claw pack.

    However, the claw pack works with Goblins, Gnomes, Mechagnomes, and Vulpera.

  20. #1700
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    Pretty much. You also have the fact that Blizzard has stuck pretty closely to the aesthetics of the original WC3 (or HotS) hero they’re basing the class on. So if we’re getting a Tinker class, it’s going to have the claw pack, and I really don’t see a Draenei running around with a crsystal-tech claw pack.

    However, the claw pack works with Goblins, Gnomes, Mechagnomes, and Vulpera.
    If they add tinker I don't think they're going to be that restrictive.

    Sure, they did demon hunters for elves only...but blood and night elves are two of the most played races in the game. Even taking allied races into account, I would be shocked to see them add a new class that was gnome/goblin only.

Posting Permissions

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