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

[Ielenia]

Which is your opinion.

No. That is a fact. It really is needlessly restrictive to confine their creative pool to only Warcraft 3. And what is also a fact is that the only reason you consistently insist on this is because it seemingly gives your beloved fan concept a leg up.

Again, EVERY WoW class having this same quality confirms it.

All you have so far with your claims is a correlation. If you want to establish causation, then you need Blizzard's unambiguous word on it.

So what have you been arguing about for the last several pages?

It's not my fault you either accidentally or intentionally misrepresented your arguments. If it was intentional, it shows how dishonest you are. If it was accidental, then it shows how you don't bother to understand what the other person is arguing for. Which is also dishonest.

If you're talking about professions, I don't need to de-canonize what isn't canon in the first place.

Then prove that professions are not canon. Come on, I'm waiting for the Blizzard statement saying the in-game professions are not canon.

You mean the training where they were taught to throw a shield and have it bounce back to them?

Where is that ability in the warrior repertoire? Are you once again moving goalposts by talking about the paladin all of a sudden?

Looks like this went over your head. Again, an Assassin, a Pirate, and a Thief all works perfectly well within a Rogue thematic, because they're all Rogues.

Doesn't change the fact that the three are wildly different thematics, and "rogue" is a nebulous term.

You just pull stuff out of your butt don't you?

Okay. You're denying canon lore, again. It's funny, though, to hear you accuse me of "pulling stuff out of my ass" when you're sitting there trying to de-canonize parts of the game that go against your narrative.

[Teriz]

No. That is a fact. It really is needlessly restrictive to confine their creative pool to only Warcraft 3. And what is also a fact is that the only reason you consistently insist on this is because it seemingly gives your beloved fan concept a leg up.

All you have so far with your claims is a correlation. If you want to establish causation, then you need Blizzard's unambiguous word on it.

Or we could just use common sense. Obviously there are clear advantages towards basing your classes on popular Warcraft lore characters than random classes that don't have that connection. And no, the reason I insist on this is because there's evidence backing it up, and it makes sense why they would go this route instead of doing something ridiculous like "Riftrunners".

And yes, saying that this practice is "needlessly restrictive" is your opinion.

Then prove that professions are not canon. Come on, I'm waiting for the Blizzard statement saying the in-game professions are not canon.

Again, you're never called by your profession in general questing. You can pick up and drop professions consistently. You can be multiple professions at once, and you don't need to do professions to complete content. Compare that to a class where your class is constantly mentioned in general questing, you're unable to pick up and drop classes at will, and if you delete your class you delete your entire character.

Okay. You're denying canon lore, again. It's funny, though, to hear you accuse me of "pulling stuff out of my ass" when you're sitting there trying to de-canonize parts of the game that go against your narrative.

And you're deflecting because Blizzard blew apart your argument for a second time.

[Ielenia]

Or we could just use common sense.

Common sense dictates all you have is a correlation and zero evidence for causation.

Obviously there are clear advantages towards basing your classes on popular Warcraft lore characters than random classes that don't have that connection.

No. That is not "common sense". Because the average WoW player doesn't care about Warcraft 3 characters.

And no, the reason I insist on this is because there's evidence backing it up and it makes sense why they would go this route instead of doing something ridiculous like "Riftrunners".

No, there is zero evidence for your claim, considering you're claiming it's a fact that new classes REQUIRE a Warcraft 3 hero unit to be based from.

And yes, saying that this practice is "needlessly restrictive" is your opinion.

No, that is an actual fact.

Again, you're never called by your profession in general questing.

Again, this is just you moving goalposts, AND trying to de-canonize parts of the game that don't agree with you.

And you're deflecting because Blizzard blew apart your argument for a second time.

Says the guy who literally ignored canon information, which I'll repeat:

They don't. They use necromancy. "Death magic" requires anima, which we don't have access to:
"Anima is the source that is drawn upon when using death magic. It is comparable to mana."

[Amunrasonther]

You're splitting too many hairs and ignoring everything else. Yes, the DK is weapon based, but it also has a lot of non-weapon based spells. Those spells do in fact coincide with what a Necromancer tends to do in fantasy games; Raise the undead, Spread blight/disease, and use a variety of Shadow Magic. In the case of Warcraft, there's also the Lich which is an ascended type of Necromancer and they use Frost magic. The DK has those powers as well.

Eh....not really. Does a Demon Hunter not also have a lot of non-weapon based spells too? Same goes for Ret/Prot Paladins. They're all 'magical' classes, and even though they're melee, most of their abilities are magical in nature. The spells you say coincide with what a Necromancer does in game is simply a part of what necromancy does - which is no different from the Light which heals, resurrects, protects, buffs, and smites, and Chaos magic which.....burns.

As for your Necromancer concept, the DK is already a spell caster.

All 3 specs of the DK class are regarded as melee specs. DKs are not spell casters akin to Mages, Priests, Warlocks in any sense of the word.

You guys giving this Necromancer a healing role is rather irrelevant because it's simply a variation of the DK's tanking spec which uses the exact same magic school.

It's still roles, themes, and specializations that could differentiate them. A healing specialization doesn't make sense and can no longer work in a DK class, while it can in a Necromancer class.

Your concept of Nature magic is merely a variation of the DK's disease concept. Again, Blizzard has no hang ups about the concept of melee Necromancers. Xul in HotS and the Necromancer in Diablo 3 (which is partially based on the Death Knight) confirm this. So while YOU may have problems with this, that doesn't mean that Blizzard shares your view.

Alchemy/Nature magic are themes not found in the DK class, and just about every spec could be seen as a variation of others.

That is entirely your opinion. You do understand that right?

You think it's my opinion that the Necromancer concept and theme is traditionally a light-armored spell caster? Just about every MMO/RPG/D&D/Movie etc would disagree with you. You mention other "Necromancers" from other Blizzard games, but in World of Warcraft, a Necromancer is a light armored spell caster that primarily deals damage through magical ranged attacks through necromancy, while a heavy armored class that uses melee attacks and incorporates necromancy is called a Death Knight. It's a distinction that is missing from WoW.

[Nyel]

There are three classes that I see as possible at the moment:

- Necromancer / Plague Doctor or something like that: all the animations are there, Maldraxxus is proof for that

- Tinker: basically all Azerite-related animations from BfA can be reused as Tinker assets; the question is if Azerite will ever matter again and Tinker makes sense in that way

- Blood Mage or something like that: see Necromancer. Revendreth is full of animations that could be used by a class

[username993720]

Thanks for the clarification. And yeah, Locust Swarm was turned into insect swarm for Druids, while Unholy Blight behaved like the WC3 ability.

Wind Walk is the ancestor of Stealth. Even coming out of stealth and dealing high damage come from it.

Can't say that for sure. after all, every insectoid swarm ability will resemble the Locust Swarm ability.

Wind Walk
Allows the Blademaster to become invisible, and move faster for a set amount of time. When the Blademaster attacks a unit to break invisibility, he will deal bonus damage.

Stealth
Level 5 rogue ability
2 sec cooldown
Instant
Conceals you in the shadows until cancelled, allowing you to stalk enemies without being seen.

By the name, it sounds like a Windwalker Monk ability. by the description, it sounds like the Mage's invisibility.

Looks like this went over your head. Again, an Assassin, a Pirate, and a Thief all works perfectly well within a Rogue thematic, because they're all Rogues.

Rogue: a dishonest or unprincipled man.
Synonyms: scoundrel, villain, reprobate, rascal, good-for-nothing, wretch, picaro, cad, ne'er-do-well, rat, bastard, son of a bitch, SOB, nasty piece of work, dog, cur, louse, crook, scrote, blighter, spalpeen, slicker, scamp, hound, vagabon, drotter, bounder, miscreant, blackguard, dastard, knave, varlet, wastrel, mountebank, picaroon, scamp, rascal, imp, devil, monkey, mischief-maker,
scallywag, monster, horror, terror, holy terror, perisher, tyke, scally, hellion, varmint,
scapegrace, rapscallion.

Assassin: a murderer of an important person in a surprise attack for political or religious reasons.
Synonyms: homicide, murderer, killer, executioner, gunman, butcher, slaughterer, liquidator, exterminator, terminator, hitman, contract man, hired gun, button man, slayer.

Pirate: a person who attacks and robs ships at sea.
Synonyms: corsair, rover, sea rover, picaroon, filibuster, sea thief, sea robber, water thief, sea wolf, sea rat, water rat, marooner, buccaneer, privateer, freebooter, marauder, raider.

Ninja: a person skilled in the Japanese art of ninjutsu.
Ninjutsu: the traditional Japanese art of stealth, camouflage, and sabotage, developed in feudal times for espionage and now practiced as a martial art.

There are three classes that I see as possible at the moment:

- Necromancer / Plague Doctor or something like that: all the animations are there, Maldraxxus is proof for that

- Tinker: basically all Azerite-related animations from BfA can be reused as Tinker assets; the question is if Azerite will ever matter again and Tinker makes sense in that way

- Blood Mage or something like that: see Necromancer. Revendreth is full of animations that could be used by a class

Blood Mages are, actually, not blood-users, but fire-users:
"Mystical heroes, blood mages (a.k.a. bloodmages, sometimes blood magi or bloodmagi are blood elves adept at controlling magic and ranged assault. While they were still members of the Alliance, the blood elves began to turn to the darkest parts of magic, abandoning the water and frost spells of the Kirin Tor for the fire and heat of what some people fear to be demonic magic."

[Teriz]

Common sense dictates all you have is a correlation and zero evidence for causation.

So we need Blizzard to come out and tell us WHY they're doing it for us to recognize that they are doing it?

That makes zero sense.

No. That is not "common sense". Because the average WoW player doesn't care about Warcraft 3 characters.

Really? Did you take a poll of the average WoW player to reach this conclusion, or are you just giving your opinion and trying to pass it off as a fact again?

No, there is zero evidence for your claim, considering you're claiming it's a fact that new classes REQUIRE a Warcraft 3 hero unit to be based from.

Every new expansion class has been based on a WC3 hero. That's called evidence, and it points to the likelihood that the next expansion class is also going to be based on a WC3 hero.

No, that is an actual fact.

No, that's complete opinion.

Again, this is just you moving goalposts, AND trying to de-canonize parts of the game that don't agree with you.

Yeah, the goalposts were never moved. You attempted to argue that Drustvar was just as optional as professions and got stomped, and now we're back to you deflecting again.

Says the guy who literally ignored canon information, which I'll repeat:

Except your own source states that Necromancy is death magic, and Blizzard states that Death Knights use Necromancy, which again is death magic. Oh and your own source also reaffirms that Shadowlands is the realm of death from which Necromancy draws its powers.

Oops.

[TheRevenantHero]

So we need Blizzard to come out and tell us WHY they're doing it for us to recognize that they are doing it?

That makes zero sense.



Really? Did you take a poll of the average WoW player to reach this conclusion, or are you just giving your opinion and trying to pass it off as a fact again?



Every new expansion class has been based on a WC3 hero. That's called evidence, and it points to the likelihood that the next expansion class is also going to be based on a WC3 hero.



No, that's complete opinion.



Yeah, the goalposts were never moved. You attempted to argue that Drustvar was just as optional as professions and got stomped, and now we're back to you deflecting again.




Except your own source states that Necromancy is death magic, and Blizzard states that Death Knights use Necromancy, which again is death magic. Oh and your own source also reaffirms that Shadowlands is the realm of death from which Necromancy draws its powers.

Oops.

Yeah so you're incredibly wrong. Everything I've been able to find says they just use "dark magic" and not expressed said to be using necromancy. The only death knights that used necromancy were the first ones but that was because they were orc necromancers souls shoved into corpses. I can't find ANY lore that expressly states that second generation and up DKs use necromancy.

[Teriz]

Eh....not really. Does a Demon Hunter not also have a lot of non-weapon based spells too? Same goes for Ret/Prot Paladins. They're all 'magical' classes, and even though they're melee, most of their abilities are magical in nature. The spells you say coincide with what a Necromancer does in game is simply a part of what necromancy does - which is no different from the Light which heals, resurrects, protects, buffs, and smites, and Chaos magic which.....burns.

Yes, and the majority of the Demon Hunter and Paladin's abilities are tied to weapons. The DK is fairly even in terms of weapon-based and non-weapon based spells.

All 3 specs of the DK class are regarded as melee specs. DKs are not spell casters akin to Mages, Priests, Warlocks in any sense of the word.

Other than the fact that they cast spells. Death Knights are the typical "magical knight" or "Battle Mage" found in many fantasy games. That doesn't mean that we HAVE to have a fully ranged class that is doing pretty much exactly what the DK is doing, especially given Blizzard's affection for melee-based Necromancers.

It's still roles, themes, and specializations that could differentiate them. A healing specialization doesn't make sense and can no longer work in a DK class, while it can in a Necromancer class.

It honestly doesn't make sense in a Necromancer class either. Especially in WoW where the use of Blood magic really isn't used to restore others, it's used to drain others and enhance only the spell caster. In the case of Death Knights, they use Blood Magic for precisely that purpose.

Alchemy/Nature magic are themes not found in the DK class, and just about every spec could be seen as a variation of others.

And again, Alchemy/Nature themes wouldn't be found in a Necromancer class either. Alchemy themes tend to go to science/technology classes in fantasy games.

You think it's my opinion that the Necromancer concept and theme is traditionally a light-armored spell caster? Just about every MMO/RPG/D&D/Movie etc would disagree with you. You mention other "Necromancers" from other Blizzard games, but in World of Warcraft, a Necromancer is a light armored spell caster that primarily deals damage through magical ranged attacks through necromancy, while a heavy armored class that uses melee attacks and incorporates necromancy is called a Death Knight. It's a distinction that is missing from WoW.

In World of Warcraft, Necromancers are also Death Knights. Death Knights were the Necromancer hero unit in WC3, and Blizzard purposely put Necromancer class concepts into the Death Knight class.

I mean in all seriousness, why do you think they didn't introduce a Necromancer class in this expansion? Are you going to follow @Ielenia's BS and think that Shadowlands somehow doesn't fit the theme of a Necromancer class, or are you going to simply admit that Blizzard didn't introduce a Necromancer class into WoW because there's already a Necromancer class in WoW?

- - - Updated - - -

Yeah so you're incredibly wrong. Everything I've been able to find says they just use "dark magic" and not expressed said to be using necromancy. The only death knights that used necromancy were the first ones but that was because they were orc necromancers souls shoved into corpses. I can't find ANY lore that expressly states that second generation and up DKs use necromancy.

Uh, did you miss this?

While all Death Knights have some ability to control and reanimate undead minions, an Unholy Death Knight has chosen to specialize in necromantic magic, and their abilities should reflect that.

https://worldofwarcraft.com/en-gb/ne...-class-updates

[Imperator4321]

Rogue: a dishonest or unprincipled man.
Synonyms: scoundrel, villain, reprobate, rascal, good-for-nothing, wretch, picaro, cad, ne'er-do-well, rat, bastard, son of a bitch, SOB, nasty piece of work, dog, cur, louse, crook, scrote, blighter, spalpeen, slicker, scamp, hound, vagabon, drotter, bounder, miscreant, blackguard, dastard, knave, varlet, wastrel, mountebank, picaroon, scamp, rascal, imp, devil, monkey, mischief-maker,
scallywag, monster, horror, terror, holy terror, perisher, tyke, scally, hellion, varmint,
scapegrace, rapscallion.

Assassin: a murderer of an important person in a surprise attack for political or religious reasons.
Synonyms: homicide, murderer, killer, executioner, gunman, butcher, slaughterer, liquidator, exterminator, terminator,
hitman, contract man, hired gun, button man,
slayer.

Pirate: a person who attacks and robs ships at sea.
Synonyms: corsair, rover, sea rover, picaroon, filibuster, sea thief, sea robber, water thief, sea wolf, sea rat, water rat, marooner, buccaneer, privateer, freebooter, marauder, raider.

Ninja: a person skilled in the Japanese art of ninjutsu.
Ninjutsu: the traditional Japanese art of stealth, camouflage, and sabotage, developed in feudal times for espionage and now practiced as a martial art.

I'm not sure you're understanding the use of 'rogue' here, in an RPG/MMO context the 'rogue' refers to the character class/archetype of an stealthy and dextrous character who uses guile, tricks and underhanded tactics to gain an advantage, Outlaw uses a concealed firearm (and are themed as swashbucklers/pirates), Assassination focuses on poisons (a common assassination trope), Subtlety uses shadow magic (and are themed as shinobi/ninja), all Rogues also ulilitze evasion, poison and stealth (to different extents, Outlaw uses stealth the least, Assassination uses poison the most, Subtlety uses stealth the most.) and all of those fit under the concept of someone who relys on underhanded techniques to fight. almost every WoW class owns some parts of it's identity to archetypes/classes codified in Dungeons and Dragons (Hunters are the Ranger analogue, Mages are wizards, Priests are clerics, paladins are paladins, Death Knights are blackguards/antipaladins).

Note: By Subtlety being "Shinobi/Ninja" i mean in regards to them using traits and abilities often associated with Ninja's in popular culture/folk tales where Ninja abilities/techniques are depicted as supernatural (which in the context of WoW's universe becomes using shadow magic) not as them literally being Shinobi/Ninja in the historical sense.

[Ielenia]

So we need Blizzard to come out and tell us WHY they're doing it for us to recognize that they are doing it?

That makes zero sense.

No. We need Blizzard to "come out and tell us" that this is the way they do things. I.e., that a Warcraft 3 hero unit is a requirement to create a new playable class for WoW.

Really? Did you take a poll of the average WoW player to reach this conclusion, or are you just giving your opinion and trying to pass it off as a fact again?

I think it's safe to assume that, considering the overwhelming majority of players nowadays are new players, some of them not even born yet by the time Warcraft 3 came out.

Every new expansion class has been based on a WC3 hero. That's called evidence, and it points to the likelihood that the next expansion class is also going to be based on a WC3 hero.

But it is not conclusive evidence, because that exact same evidence also points at the idea that this is just a correlation.

No, that's complete opinion.

No, that's a fact. It really is needlessly restrictive to their creativity by limiting their inspiration source to only Warcraft 3. Just like it's needlessly restrictive to ride a bike using just one leg instead of two. Or climb the stairs using just your arms.

Yeah, the goalposts were never moved.

Yes, you moved the goalpost, and here's irrefutable evidence of that:

Because the player's profession choice is never mentioned in lore. You're never referred to as [screen name] "Shaman Engineer" More than likely because it's optional for players.

This is you making your initial claim. Notice the complete lack of caveats aside from "in lore".

Yes, during an Engineering quest line given by the profession, you're likely to get something like that. Let me know when Anduin, Jaina, Thrall, or some other lore figure calls you by your profession.

And then this is literally you moving the goalposts by adding more caveats after the fact.

It's contained within the profession, so I would say it isn't lore

And this is literally you trying to de-canonize the engineering quests.

Oops.

Death knights and necromancer don't use Shadowlands magic.

- - - Updated - - -

You guys giving this Necromancer a healing role is rather irrelevant because it's simply a variation of the DK's tanking spec which uses the exact same magic school.

And yet paladins still have a tanking spec using the exact same magic school as the priest's holy spec. And vice-versa.

- - - Updated - - -

Yes, and the majority of the Demon Hunter and Paladin's abilities are tied to weapons. The DK is fairly even in terms of weapon-based and non-weapon based spells.

It doesn't matter. The focus of the class is to stay within melee range and strike with their weapons.

Other than the fact that they cast spells. Death Knights are the typical "magical knight" or "Battle Mage" found in many fantasy games. That doesn't mean that we HAVE to have a fully ranged class that is doing pretty much exactly what the DK is doing, especially given Blizzard's affection for melee-based Necromancers.

In other words, you're calling the priest class "unnecessary", considering that the paladin fits the "magical knight" or "battle mage", as well, so that negates the need for a ranged spellcaster class that uses holy magic.

It honestly doesn't make sense in a Necromancer class either. Especially in WoW where the use of Blood magic really isn't used to restore others, it's used to drain others and enhance only the spell caster. In the case of Death Knights, they use Blood Magic for precisely that purpose.

It does make sense considering that blood is, well, "the lifeblood of life". Also, shadow magic is also used to restore life, despite being used to drain others and enhance only the spellcaster.

And again, Alchemy/Nature themes wouldn't be found in a Necromancer class either. Alchemy themes tend to go to science/technology classes in fantasy games.

We're not advocating for a "nature" theme in a necromancer class. That's the purview of the druid theme. The only "nature" we're speaking of is the damage type, since poisons, in the overwhelming majority of the time, deal nature damage.

In World of Warcraft, Necromancers are also Death Knights.

No, they're not. These:


Are not these:

[Teriz]

No. We need Blizzard to "come out and tell us" that this is the way they do things. I.e., that a Warcraft 3 hero unit is a requirement to create a new playable class for WoW.

Again, we don't because we can rub two brain cells together and see that's exactly what they've been doing.

I think it's safe to assume that, considering the overwhelming majority of players nowadays are new players, some of them not even born yet by the time Warcraft 3 came out.

Which doesn't mean much because Blizzard reiterates the heroes from WC3 throughout modern WoW and other games. Sylvanas, Thrall, Jaina, Tyrande, The Lich King, etc. Are all characters from WC3 and they all have major roles in the current WoW expansion. Chen, Illidan, and Arthas are all WC3 characters and they were on the covers of WoW expansions in 2008, 2012, and 2016.

On top of that, you have games like Hearthstone which uses WC3 heroes as the avatars for classes, and you have Heroes of the Storm where major lore characters (mostly from WC3) are used as the heroes of the game. So even if you never played WC3, you're constantly bombarded by those characters by Blizzard.

Which once again demonstrates how important those lore characters are to Blizzard which enhances the case that they would use those characters as models for their class system in WoW.

But it is not conclusive evidence, because that exact same evidence also points at the idea that this is just a correlation.

The only part that is inconclusive is if the next class will also be a lore character from WC3. Again, given that the last three expansion classes were based on WC3 heroes, it stands to reason that the next one will be too.

No, that's a fact. It really is needlessly restrictive to their creativity by limiting their inspiration source to only Warcraft 3. Just like it's needlessly restrictive to ride a bike using just one leg instead of two. Or climb the stairs using just your arms.

Like I said, this is just your opinion. It's stunning you can't tell the difference between a fact or an opinion.

Yes, you moved the goalpost, and here's irrefutable evidence of that:

This is you making your initial claim. Notice the complete lack of caveats aside from "in lore".

And then this is literally you moving the goalposts by adding more caveats after the fact.

And this is literally you trying to de-canonize the engineering quests.

Like I said, you can't use a quest from engineering as an example that engineering is lore based.

Death knights and necromancer don't use Shadowlands magic.

Here's you playing semantics again. No, they use Death magic powered by the Shadowlands, since Shadowlands is the realm of death. For example, Necromancers and Death Knights use the undead from Maldraxxus to power their armies.

- - - Updated - - -


And yet paladins still have a tanking spec using the exact same magic school as the priest's holy spec. And vice-versa.

Yes, Paladins wear heavy armor infused with holy magic. Tanking makes sense. Necromancers use magic to empower themselves, so healing doesn't make much sense.

It doesn't matter. The focus of the class is to stay within melee range and strike with their weapons.

It does matter, because if the DK has a lot of ranged necromantic spells, that gives less space to a Necromancer using those same spells in the same way.

In other words, you're calling the priest class "unnecessary", considering that the paladin fits the "magical knight" or "battle mage", as well, so that negates the need for a ranged spellcaster class that uses holy magic.

Again, Priests blend holy and shadow magic. A paladin does not.

No, they're not. These:


Are not these:

Both groups use Necromantic magic. That makes both groups Necromancers.

[Clockwork Pinkie]

I feel like we need another classes that actually uses ranged weapons. (Guns, bow, crossbows). It's wild to me 3 of the weapons in the game are only used by one class.

[cocomen2]

Both groups use Necromantic magic. That makes both groups Necromancers.

In World of Warcraft, Necromancers are also Death Knights.

Its legit boys , if you gonna read Teriz posts long enough you have a chance to go insane , for real , amount of lies and dodging questions just over 9000.

Feels like if there some gnome gonna find ring that rises skeleton once a year , Teriz gonna appear behind this back and say :

"Sorry dude you are no longer a Tinker (any class) , now you used necromantic magic so from this moment you are THE NECROMANCER"

Or he has long mustache and after trolling people just twirling it like cartoon villain.

[Teriz]

I feel like we need another classes that actually uses ranged weapons. (Guns, bow, crossbows). It's wild to me 3 of the weapons in the game are only used by one class.

I do agree with that. Dark Ranger and a Tinker would both fill that need, with the Tinker having the added benefit of being able to tank and heal as well.

- - - Updated - - -

Its legit boys , if you gonna read Teriz posts long enough you have a chance to go insane , for real , amount of lies and dodging questions just over 9000.

Feels like if there some gnome gonna find ring that rises skeleton once a year , Teriz gonna appear behind this back and say :

"Sorry dude you are no longer a Tinker (any class) , now you used necromantic magic so from this moment you are THE NECROMANCER"

Or he has long mustache and after trolling people just twirling it like cartoon villain.

Yeah, those quotes don’t contradict each other.

[Ielenia]

Again, we don't because we can rub two brain cells together and see that's exactly what they've been doing.

Well, if "rubbing two brain cells together" is what is needed to see logic, then your two brain cells must live miles apart from each other. Because, again, there is a huge difference between a trend, and a rule.

Which doesn't mean much because Blizzard reiterates the heroes from WC3 throughout modern WoW and other games. Sylvanas, Thrall, Jaina, Tyrande, The Lich King, etc. Are all characters from WC3 and they all have major roles in the current WoW expansion. Chen, Illidan, and Arthas are all WC3 characters and they were on the covers of WoW expansions in 2008, 2012, and 2016.

And characters like Runetotem, Anduin, Varian, Baine, Thalyssra, Lor'Themar Theron, Bolvar, Mekkatorque, Blackfuse, Gallywix, Tirion Fordring, Mograine, Magni Bronzebeard, and many others did not come from Warcraft 3.

On top of that, you have games like Hearthstone which uses WC3 heroes as the avatars for classes,

Pfft. I'd argue that it's much more likely they use World of Warcraft heroes, considering WoW is much more famous than Warcraft 3,

and you have Heroes of the Storm where major lore characters (mostly from WC3) are used as the heroes of the game.

The simple fact you have to add the caveat "mostly from WC3" proves that argument is nonsense, considering all those heroes come from the World of Warcraft game, meaning the fact some exist in WC3 is merely a tangential trivia than the origin source for them.

The only part that is inconclusive is if the next class will also be a lore character from WC3. Again, given that the last three expansion classes were based on WC3 heroes, it stands to reason that the next one will be too.

Which.
Is.
The.
Whole.
POINT!

Which is why you saying that someone else's fan class concept does not have a WC3 hero is irrelevant.

Like I said, this is just your opinion. It's stunning you can't tell the difference between a fact or an opinion.

Movie theater projectors around the world are jealous of how hard you're project, here.

Like I said, you can't use a quest from engineering as an example that engineering is lore based.

I can, because it's a quest in the game, and if it's a quest in the game, it's lore. And if you want to say it's not canon, then it's your burden of proof to show that those quests and in-game professions are not canon.

Here's you playing semantics again. No, they use Death magic powered by the Shadowlands, since Shadowlands is the realm of death. For example, Necromancers and Death Knights use the undead from Maldraxxus to power their armies.

They don't. They use undead risen from Azeroth itself. Corpses in the mortal plane. They do not pull people from Maldraxxus into Azeroth when they rise a dead person into undeath.

Yes, Paladins wear heavy armor infused with holy magic. Tanking makes sense. Necromancers use magic to empower themselves, so healing doesn't make much sense.

That's not what is being argued. You said that we cannot give a hypothetical necromancer fan concept a healing spec with blood magic because the dk already tanks with blood magic, as you said it:

You guys giving this Necromancer a healing role is rather irrelevant because it's simply a variation of the DK's tanking spec which uses the exact same magic school.

In other words: you're dodging.

It does matter, because if the DK has a lot of ranged necromantic spells, that gives less space to a Necromancer using those same spells in the same way.

No, it does not. Because, again, the death knight's focus is melee combat. The DK does not have a "ranged spec". By that reasoning priests couldn't have any access to holy magic because the paladin already heals, deals damage, and tanks with holy magic.

Again, Priests blend holy and shadow magic. A paladin does not.

It doesn't matter, because you're still discarding hypothetical necromancer fan concepts that use a type of magic that the death knight has no access to. In my case: poison. So it doesn't matter that priests use shadow but the paladin does not. This is another example of your double-standards.

Both groups use Necromantic magic. That makes both groups Necromancers.

And both these:


And these:


Use demonic magic. And both these:


And these:


Use holy magic. And yet they're all their own separate thing. Fancy that.

[cocomen2]

I do agree with that. Dark Ranger and a Tinker would both fill that need, with the Tinker having the added benefit of being able to tank and heal as well.

- - - Updated - - -



Yeah, those quotes don’t contradict each other.

Since you such big fan of Tony Stark , let me use him as example for you flaw logic.

You say:

Both groups use Necromantic magic. That makes both groups Necromancers.

In World of Warcraft, Necromancers are also Death Knights.

THEN

1) Necromancer (user of necromantic magic) is same as Death Knight (undead creature so happen to wield similar powers)?

Then what about

2) Tony Stark ( user of mechsuit tech ) is same as Ultron ( mechanic ceature so happen to wield similar powers)?


Now you gonna cry that Tony is genius ... and this is not similar ?

(on one side we have Humans that was learned their JOB, on other side just creatures that was made already with set of powers)

[Teriz]

Well, if "rubbing two brain cells together" is what is needed to see logic, then your two brain cells must live miles apart from each other. Because, again, there is a huge difference between a trend, and a rule.

Says the guy who believes that every class in WoW having ties to WC3 heroes and units is totally based on chance....

And characters like Runetotem, Anduin, Varian, Baine, Thalyssra, Lor'Themar Theron, Bolvar, Mekkatorque, Blackfuse, Gallywix, Tirion Fordring, Mograine, Magni Bronzebeard, and many others did not come from Warcraft 3.

That really doesn't contradict the point I made. Further, many of those newer heroes are simply replacements for earlier heroes who died in lore.

Pfft. I'd argue that it's much more likely they use World of Warcraft heroes, considering WoW is much more famous than Warcraft 3

Not really, since the biggest characters in WoW are the WC3 characters. Again, it's the WC3 characters that have ended up on the covers of WoW.

The simple fact you have to add the caveat "mostly from WC3" proves that argument is nonsense, considering all those heroes come from the World of Warcraft game, meaning the fact some exist in WC3 is merely a tangential trivia than the origin source for them.

How is the fact that the majority of the Warcraft characters in HotS come from WC3 make my argument "nonsense" when my argument is that WC3 characters are pushed heavily by Blizzard throughout their WC games?

Which.
Is.
The.
Whole.
POINT!

Which is why you saying that someone else's fan class concept does not have a WC3 hero is irrelevant.

Except it isn't irrelevant because the evidence and the facts back up the notion of the next class being yet another WC3 hero based class.

I can, because it's a quest in the game, and if it's a quest in the game, it's lore. And if you want to say it's not canon, then it's your burden of proof to show that those quests and in-game professions are not canon.

So you also think the quest where you throw mohawk grenades is canon as well?

They don't. They use undead risen from Azeroth itself. Corpses in the mortal plane. They do not pull people from Maldraxxus into Azeroth when they rise a dead person into undeath.

Maldraxxus is the birthplace of necromantic magic[5] and home to the forces that were called upon by the Lich King and the Scourge on Azeroth.[2]

https://wow.gamepedia.com/Maldraxxus

BTW, us visiting the birthplace of Necromantic magic didn't trigger a new Necromancer class. That should tell us something.

It doesn't matter, because you're still discarding hypothetical necromancer fan concepts that use a type of magic that the death knight has no access to. In my case: poison. So it doesn't matter that priests use shadow but the paladin does not. This is another example of your double-standards.

I discard it because it's a cheap way to get around the use of diseases, which is the purpose of poison within the scourge ranks. Ironically, you're arguing for a weaker version of what the DK already does. Hence why it's discarded.

It should also be mentioned that the selling point of a Necromancer isn't poison, the selling point is already in use by another class. Yet another reason to discard the concept.

And both these:

And these:

Use demonic magic. And both these:

And these:

Use holy magic. And yet they're all their own separate thing. Fancy that.

What's your point? A Necromancer uses Necromancy, which is what both Death Knights and those spell casters do.

[Triceron]

2) Tony Stark ( user of mechsuit tech ) is same as Ultron ( mechanic ceature so happen to wield similar powers)?


Now you gonna cry that Tony is genius ... and this is not similar ?

In b4 'Ultron didn't discover a new element'

[Teriz]

Just so everyone knows what we're talking about here;

Death Knights
Lore Hero: Arthas (WC3)
Hero unit based on: Death Knight (WC3)
WC3 Hero unit abilities translated to WoW: Death Coil, Unholy Aura, Death Pact, Animate Dead (entire kit)
Other hero abilities: Death and Decay (Lich), Vampiric Aura (Dreadlord), Unholy Blight: Cryptlord
Other WC3 abilities: Raise Dead, Unholy Frenzy (Necromancer), Anti-Magic Shield (Banshee), Disease Cloud (Abomination)
Can summon the following WC3 units: Abomination, Frost Wyrm, Ghoul, Gargoyle

Monk
Lore Hero: Chen Stormstout (WC3)
Hero Unite based on: Pandaren Brewmaster
WC3 Hero unit abilities translated to WoW: Breath of Fire, Drunken Haze, Drunken Brawler, Storm Earth Fire (entire kit)
Other hero abilities: The production/use of brews expanded to every specialization (Brewmaster).
Other: Pandaren theme present throughout entire class.

Demon Hunter
Lore Hero: Illidan Stormrage
Hero Unit based on: Demon Hunter
WC3 Hero unit abilities translated to WoW: Mana Burn, Immolation, Evasion, Metamorphosis (entire kit)
Other hero abilities: Warglaives made exclusive to class. Lore hero concepts like blindness and tattoos upheld into WoW
Other: Mana Burn removed due to balance concerns, given Mana Rift instead. Rogues took Evasion ability, replaced with Blur. Took Metamorphosis and Immolation Aura from Warlock class.


Appearance in WC3:


Expansion released:


Remaining WC3 heroes:



Likely Class:
Tinker
Lore Hero: Gazlowe
Hero Unit based on:Tinker
WC3 hero abilities translated to WoW: Pocket Factory, Cluster Rockets, Engineering Upgrade, Robo-Goblin
Other abilities: Healing Spray (Alchemist), Acid Bomb (Alchemist), Chemical Rage (Alchemist)
Other: Claw Pack, HotS Abilities

But hey, it's all a coincidence.