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

[draugril]

I don't know, Bard as a healer seems to be plenty of support?
It's also the theme around it that is appealing, not the "buffs your damage by 5% for the next 3 attacks" tooltip on your skills.

Healers are no more support than tanks or DPS.

Granted, most WoW players don't have anything else to base their perception of a "support" class on, so I can't fault anyone for this misperception.

[KrayZ33]

Healers are no more support than tanks or DPS.

Granted, most WoW players don't have anything else to base their perception of a "support" class on, so I can't fault anyone for this misperception.

It's not a misperception, healers have plenty of ways to support.

Leech buffs, stat buffs, dmg reduce buffs, damage increase buffs.

All of these are currently in the game. You don't need a "dedicated support role" to have a bard as a class.
Just like you don't need an elemental system to have fire/frost/arcane specs.

Your idea of a bard is limited to one version - a D&D bard or something
But most of that stuff can be portrayed in a normal cookie cutter healer build.

[draugril]

It's not a misperception, healers have plenty of ways to support.

Leech buffs, stat buffs, dmg reduce buffs, damage increase buffs.

All of these are currently in the game. You don't need a "dedicated support role" to have a bard as a class.

Every single class has secondary support functions. There's a huge difference between that diluted smattering of support-like abilities and having a dedicated, primary support role.

[Teriz]

It's not a misperception, healers have plenty of ways to support.

Leech buffs, stat buffs, dmg reduce buffs, damage increase buffs.

All of these are currently in the game. You don't need a "dedicated support role" to have a bard as a class.
Just like you don't need an elemental system to have fire/frost/arcane specs.

Yeah, but in WoW you need more than one spec, so you need multiple avenues for this class to work.

I think an aura-type healer is doable, but then you’re going to need 2 more specs that also feel like a Bard.

[KrayZ33]

Every single class has secondary support functions. There's a huge difference between that diluted smattering of support-like abilities and having a dedicated, primary support role.

Yeah and bard doesn't have to be a dedicated "primary support role". That's a limitation you put up with no real basis.

[quote]

Yeah, but in WoW you need more than one spec, so you need multiple avenues for this class to work.

I think an aura-type healer is doable, but then you’re going to need 2 more specs that also feel like a Bard.

well, actually you only need 1 more.

And did you ever play the Bard in Dragon Age for example?
Uses a "combo system" that does a finisher depending on which skills (tunes) you used as your combos.

Just an idea - it was really fun to play, even though it was quite OP to just spam the same 2 tunes over and over but that's a balance/skill design issue more than anything else.

Didn't play Dancer in FFXIV yet, but they have so called "steps" that they have to cast/complete so they can deal their finishers.

The idea is basically that you have to commit to a "combo"-variation or lose DPS.

[draugril]

Yeah and bard doesn't have to be a dedicated "primary support role". That's a limitation you put up with no real basis.

No real basis, aside from literal decades of the history of role-playing games and the expectations that come from that. And yes, there are a few modern exceptions to the rule.

[Triceron]

Bard would work best if they can bring back the 'DPS Heal' gameplay that Disc and Fistweaver Monk used. That's the best way to implement a healing spec and be able to give it high utility while also incorporating DPS elements in it to string combos and build resource (ie 'Musical Combo Points')

Support could easily be through lots of CC, and plenty of short-duration AoE buffs. Stuff like increasing a ally's armor or health regen, increasing their dodge/parry for a duration, temporary health boost... there are plenty of ways to incorporate new spell effects that other healers simply don't use without breaking the game. As long as they're low-duration and meant to be used in 'oh shit' moments, it should be fairly balanceable.

I see people mention ETC, but there's also Lucio, Deckard (Stay Awhile and Listen), Alexstrasza (heals that grant Armor or Health bonus) and Tyrande (Bow DPS heals) who have abilities that would fit a phys-ranged DPS/healer who uses music/song/sound to CC, Support and heal.

[KrayZ33]

No real basis, aside from literal decades of the history of role-playing games and the expectations that come from that. And yes, there are a few modern exceptions to the rule.

Again, what's the basis when there are exceptions all over the place.
Even DnD Bard has a healer subclass.

Bard is not only about the "support"-role you are looking for, it's the whole theme about singing songs, being the cool guy to sing songs about your heroics, to be the heart of the party.

[draugril]

Again, what's the basis when there are exceptions all over the place.
Even DnD Bard has a healer subclass.

Bard is not only about the "support"-role you are looking for, it's the whole theme about singing songs, being the cool guy to sing songs about your heroics, to be the heart of the party.

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.

[KrayZ33]

This is true.

But I hold that stance that if they can't do a wholesale implementation, they shouldn't bother. It's a mockery, 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.

For all I care, they could name it "Spirit Mender" or "Fae Chanter" - but the idea to use instruments and songs to summon mischief or heal allies would actually fit WoW pretty well. Especially since Fae-like pests and boons alike have been featured so often by now.
It's also far enough "away" from druids - or at least can be made so if they interact with formless spirits instead of spirits in form of beasts and nature - they could even add different elements to it with wisps and fire sprites etc.

[Triceron]

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.

At the end of the day, it comes down to what will push units of the new expansion.

Whether a Bard will be able to do this or not will be heavily based on how well Blizzard will be able to market a concept.

They've been able to make untested concepts like blue skinned holy goat Draenei become a staple Warcraft fantasy race. They've been able to take a formerly boring concept of Dark Iron Dwarves and make them into one of the best Allied Race concepts through simple cosmetic effects like glowing beards or really cool heritage armor and mount options. But they've also made big mistakes like Pandaria and Mechagnomes. It will be hit or miss with a Bard concept, and it will really depend on how they would be able to conceptualize this into playable format.

When it comes to other classes, the list is getting pretty short and it's all starting to tap into B-tier concepts, so honestly the best way I see rolling out any new class is purely through cosmetics. Class skins might be the best way to implement a Bard, and simply use the new expansion to retool some existing class gameplay (ei Disc Priest Atonement) to allow for a Bard skin that uses instruments/ranged weapons to heal, and maybe allow some key talent picks to differentiate the class skin without heavily impacting the gameplay (balanced similar to Covenants).

[Teriz]

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.

[Molvonos]

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

[Morgaith]

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

[Ielenia]

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 - - -

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 - - -

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.

[draugril]

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.

[Hyeonh]

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.

[Teriz]

"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 - - -

They had a chance to Make necromancer with Shadowlands but they didn't.

And a Dark Ranger, considering that Sylvanas initiated this entire expansion.

[Hyeonh]

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.

[Teriz]

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.