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

[ro9ue]

My top three wanted classes ranked by likelihood:

1. Tinker
2. Bard
3. Shadow Hunter

Tinker has the most potential. One can easily see how a tank, healer, ranged dps and melee dps role would look. It has the most wide open design space thematically. The only odd overlap would be Engineering, but even then it would still have a lot of room. In terms of fun, I could see this being crazy good - little medic bots, sending explosive sheep, drones, etc.. all of the machines can visually change based on race choice, big mech suits, hitting shit with shredder blades.... lazers, rockets.... all you have to do is look at Mechagon, Motherlode and the Hearthstone expansions like Goblins vs Gnomes for a ton of ideas. After the Island Expedition guys and the random Tinker follower I thought for sure they were coming in 9.0.

Bard is such a cool RPG class that I really want to have one in Warcraft. Warcraft has some goofy bard stuff like the DMF bands, but nothing solid. We see a few NPCs playing harps, a couple flutes, but the foundation really isn't formed yet for a class like this... that makes me really interested to see how WoW would handle it. They exist in the MMORPG that WoW was mostly built off of - EverQuest, and they exist in many other MMOs like Final Fantasy and Rift. For all the problems with Rift... their Bard was actually pretty fun for it's era.

Shadow Hunter is a personal wish for me. It would be a little more challenging to fit this in between Shaman, Hunter and Warlock, but I always liked Vol'jin, Troll lore and that mix of hunter + voodoo + shadow magic + archery and daggers. I'm more and more convinced my wishlist of the other WC3 units I want like Dark Ranger, Blademaster, Necromancer, etc would be closer to a class skin or something... but it's possible we can see something special for Shadow Hunter.

- - - Updated - - -

Everquest related classes:

Bard, Necromancer, Enchanter

Enchanter is an interesting one. There are other MMOs that have something similar, like Mesmer in GW2, but mechanically I'm not sure how well something like this fits into modern WoW. Enchanter was all about CC and control, and you could throw some damage spells but really all of your power was in making sure your group didn't die from too many mobs.

In 2020 World of Warcraft where its all round them up and AOE them down, with boss fights where it's just minimal adds, I'm not sure how this translates.

Maybe if they brought back more CC mechanics or allowed them to play a buffer / support role where they would mana battery for people or get some really good single haste buffs they needed to refresh throughout fights.

[Ielenia]

We've been thru this already, no matter how you spin it, tinker will be unique because there isn't a single class that deals with "mechanisms". And it does exists on island expeditions.

None of that even comes close to proving that the class is guaranteed to have "unique gameplay". The class could be entirely focused on "mechanisms", as you put it, but play the exact same as a druid. Or a hunter. Or whatever other class.

Themes are nothing more than "coats of paint" for the classes. If we took the warlock class, and reskinned all the minions from demons to undead, renamed all the abilities and changed the graphics and names of many if not all of their abilities, but kept the gameplay the exact same, would it not be a "necromancer" class despite it being the exact same gameplay as the warlock? If we took the paladin class, and reskinned and renamed all of their abilities to look like fire, frost and arcane magic, but kept the gameplay the exact same... would it not be a "warrior mage" class? That has been my whole point all around: a theme, by itself, does not grant or guarantee any "unique gameplay" whatsoever, as everything you call "unique gameplay" could be given to almost any other class concept in the game by adapting it to the class' theme.

Like I said: it's fine if you prefer tinker over any and all the others class ideas, but let's not make up falsehoods, especially about "unique gameplay".

[Gaidax]

I'd like Warden or some sort of Warmage.

Some sort of semi-ranged class most effective at 20-30yd window using built-in moderate range autoattacks with chakrams that hit at 20-30yd range and arcane/elemental spellcasing in-between.

Certainly - a new class should be ranged, IMO. It's LONG overdue.

[Scathan]

https://screenrant.com/world-warcraf...%20Shadowlands.

Wut the...?

World of Warcraft's eighth expansion, Shadowlands, is still available for pre-purchase, and comes in three different packages that each include early access to the new class Hell Knight and an exclusive wandering ancient mount, with the other versions including a flying mount, new quest, and cosmetic items exclusive to pre-purchasers.
----

Umm...bemused and confused.

Fairly sure they mean allied race dks

[Aggressive]

You are totally right, we should just keep going until we run out of ideas as well as subs

Ever heard of the saying "kiss"?

Yep. Go back to classic style cause everyone wants that too

[Mosha]

Yep. Go back to classic style cause everyone wants that too

Meh not saying we go back to classic style in terms of every little system, there are a lot of systems I think retail has done great with. Bloat of abilities, levels, power, systems and many other things have already needed squished because the game becomes too much. I personally believe that they are just doing the exact same thing with classes and races.

[kaminaris]

None of that even comes close to proving that the class is guaranteed to have "unique gameplay". The class could be entirely focused on "mechanisms", as you put it, but play the exact same as a druid. Or a hunter. Or whatever other class.

No, you are wrong.

[Katchii]

No, you are wrong.

How is he wrong though?

A theme is just that, a theme, it doesn't necessarily have a direct impact on game play, at all. It can influence the direction you might take, but theme doesn't dictate game play.

[kaminaris]

How is he wrong though?

A theme is just that, a theme, it doesn't necessarily have a direct impact on game play, at all. It can influence the direction you might take, but theme doesn't dictate game play.

We have been thru this topic numerous times, no matter how you spin it, there is just no way to design tinker in a way it WOULDN'T be unique. Even the most uninspired garbage ideas will be unique as a whole class. And this is what makes it special. You can see example in islands expeditions.

Imagine if you had only two classes: warrior and rogue. Then you would design a mage. You literally cannot fuck this up so badly that somehow mage would be similar to either warrior or rogue.

[Ielenia]

No, you are wrong.

Top not rebuttal. Are you a professional debater? I am blown away by the eloquence of such retort! (that was sarcasm, by the way)

Okay. Am I, really? Because in the next paragraph of that very same post you quoted, I detailed two examples of themes being applied to existing classes (warlocks into necromancers, paladins into 'warrior mage').

But, hey, if you truly think I'm wrong, feel free to show any example of a "mechanical theme" gameplay that cannot be used for any other theme to show me I'm wrong. Turrets? Totems. Collecting scrap? Soul fragments. Mechs? Druid shapeshifting. Rockets? Fireball. Etc, etc.

I bet there is no "tech theme exclusive gameplay" I cannot apply to any other class theme in existence.

[Lodreh]

I would prefer 4th spec over a new class. Dark ranger, necromancer, bard, warden. They already fit onto classes.

I too would prefer 4th specs to a new class... but if Demon Hunters are any indication Blizzard would rather break classes into two than give 4th specs.

[Ielenia]

We have been thru this topic numerous times, no matter how you spin it, there is just no way to design tinker in a way it WOULDN'T be unique. Even the most uninspired garbage ideas will be unique as a whole class. And this is what makes it special. You can see example in islands expeditions.

And even the most inspired are not gameplay unique. They may look unique, but looks do not make gameplay. Painting the warlock's fire green did not make the class' gameplay any different or "unique".

Imagine if you had only two classes: warrior and rogue. Then you would design a mage. You literally cannot fuck this up so badly that somehow mage would be similar to either warrior or rogue.

That's irrelevant, because we don't have "only two classes". We have twelve classes.

[Lodreh]

…That's irrelevant, because we don't have "only two classes". We have twelve classes.

To my knowledge we do not have a pilot type class... nor an alchemist type class... nor a builder type class. Using Overwatch as an example imagine:

Tank - D.Va/ Hammond
Healing - Ana/ Baptiste
DPS - Torbjörn/ Symmetra

None of the above play like current WoW classes... that's the point.

EDIT: Furthermore, these types would thematically all fit in a Tinkerer class: Shredder (Pilot) / Apothecary (Alchemist) / Sapper (Demolitionist)

[Katchii]

We have been thru this topic numerous times, no matter how you spin it, there is just no way to design tinker in a way it WOULDN'T be unique. Even the most uninspired garbage ideas will be unique as a whole class. And this is what makes it special. You can see example in islands expeditions.

Imagine if you had only two classes: warrior and rogue. Then you would design a mage. You literally cannot fuck this up so badly that somehow mage would be similar to either warrior or rogue.

So it's going to be unique because you say there's no way to mess it up?

All you're saying is that the THEME would be unique, which again, does not translate to unique game play. Game play requires a LOT of mechanics and ability synergy to be functional, and functionally different than existing classes.

So....if they made it a class with a gun, gave each main attack a charge time, added little mechanical minions that spawned from your attacks, or a mechanical minion or device you could call on demand, that would be unique...even though that's exactly how the Demonology Warlock plays?

If they, made a melee spec where you used a mech suit to tank, that also had a ranged attack and could repair itself as the battle goes on, that would be unique, even though that's basically Guardian Druid?

If it was a melee DPS class with a builder spender kind of game play, where you had to use certain abilities to generate "technological power" so you could then spend it on abilities that created mechanical minions or gadgets like a mini mech, a walking bomb, a mechanical turret or whatever that did damage over time, or direct damage, or provided a buff or debuff that would be unique...even though that's pretty much exactly how Rogue plays?

Just because it has a gadget and technology coat of paint does not directly translate to the class itself having game play that makes it functionally different than classes we already have. It just means it would LOOK different.

- - - Updated - - -

To my knowledge we do not have a pilot type class... nor an alchemist type class... nor a builder type class. Using Overwatch as an example imagine:

Tank - D.Va/ Hammond
Healing - Ana/ Baptiste
DPS - Torbjörn/ Symmetra

None of the above play like current WoW classes... that's the point.

Depending on how they're implemented though, a pilot class could have game play similar to a Feral or Guardian Druid, because mechanically, all that's happening is you're "changing form" by putting on a mech suit and then using abilities in that new form.

An alchemist type class could play similar to a Balance or Resto Druid depending if you wanted it to be DPS or Heals, with DOT effects or HoT effects and buffs and what not, the difference would be instead of throwing around nature themed spells you're using flasks, or syringes or globs of slime or whatever to accomplish the same thing.

A builder class could play functionally similar to Demonology Warlock, where you have basic abilities that generate a resource that you then use to "build" a minion that then gets consumed or turns into a turret.

It's like putting a different shell on top of a car chassis. Yeah it looked like a truck yesterday, looks like an SUV tomorrow, and could look like a sports car the next day, but everything underneath is exactly the same so it feels exactly the same driving it.

That doesn't mean it WILL be identical, all me and @Ielenia are saying is that it can't just LOOK different for it to have different game play. The fundamental mechanics and game play of the class have to be different for it to be unique from the other classes that already exist.

[Ielenia]

To my knowledge we do not have a pilot type class... nor an alchemist type class... nor a builder type class.

I'll say to you what I said to Kaminari: show me an example of gameplay that is "unique" to those "types" that cannot be applied to the other concepts.

Keep in mind that different looks do not really equate to different gameplay. For example, "piloting" is not really any different, mechanic-wise, than the druid's shapeshifting.

[Unholyground]

They could grow some balls and introduce both Dark Ranger and Tinker at the same time and limit them both to having 2 specs which is only one more spec than a traditional class. They have tons of lore to pull from for both, and since titan tech is scattered everywhere it is not unreasonable to think Tinkers would manage to salvage and create some unique stuff from it combined with azerothian tech. Dark rangers have Sylavanas, Nathanos and a Banshees to pull their abilities from.

[Lodreh]

…That doesn't mean it WILL be identical, all me and @Ielenia are saying is that it can't just LOOK different for it to have different game play. The fundamental mechanics and game play of the class have to be different for it to be unique from the other classes that already exist.

I'll say to you what I said to Kaminari: show me an example of gameplay that is "unique" to those "types" that cannot be applied to the other concepts.

Keep in mind that different looks do not really equate to different gameplay. For example, "piloting" is not really any different, mechanic-wise, than the druid's shapeshifting.

True it needs some consideration in how it functions mechanically... however, unlike a Druid I see a pilot being able to detonate the suit becoming a bit more vulnerable for a limited time before being able to call down a new one. Maybe even a talent that throws a AoE stun on detonation to allow a bit more survivability. I see an alchemist firing off a series of different injections... one to increase overall health, a direct heal, damage reduction, boost healing from all effects... very rapid fire without stacking multiple HoTs. I see a builder creating turrets that are immobile with set ranges and beefy hitpoints. Setup/ ramp up takes a bit but you are not reconstructing them every other cast. They can feel familiar yet different.

[Calfredd]

Blizzard can't make all current specs and classes balanced AND fun, surv hunter as an example so before we get a new class, let's fix the ones we have.

So how many expansions until that happens?

[callipygoustp]

Bard
{10char}

[Ielenia]

True it needs some consideration in how it functions mechanically... however, unlike a Druid I see a pilot being able to detonate the suit becoming a bit more vulnerable for a limited time before being able to call down a new one. Maybe even a talent that throws a AoE stun on detonation to allow a bit more survivability.

And I can see a druid saturating their shapeshifted forms with magic and "detonate", perhaps stunning those around them, sending the druid out of shapeshift form and leaving them unable to transform again for a limited time. :/

I see an alchemist firing off a series of different injections... one to increase overall health, a direct heal, damage reduction, boost healing from all effects... very rapid fire without stacking multiple HoTs.

And I can see a healer spec casting off a series of different spells, to increase health, direct heal, damage reduction, increased healing, etc... in very rapid-fire without stacking multiple dots.

I see a builder creating turrets that are immobile with set ranges and beefy hitpoints.

And I see shamans dropping turrets with increased health.

They can feel familiar yet different.

And, as I explained several times, none of that is unique to the "mechanical theme" and every single one of your ideas can be applied to the present class themes. None of it is "unique and exclusive" to the mechanical theme. You can't say that a class with a mechanical theme has "unique gameplay" because it has a mechanical theme. That's the point.