1. #2981
    Merely a Setback Teriz's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Soul of Azeroth
    Posts
    29,801
    Quote Originally Posted by Spramp View Post
    We definitely need another ranged class and another mail class also. My vote would be for a dragon themed class, dragon master or something.

    Mail armor
    You choose which dragon flight you want to be empowered by:

    Green dragon = ranged physical (dreamer)
    Red dragons = healer (life binder)
    Bronze dragon= caster (time bender)
    Black dragon = tank (earth mancer)
    Blue dragon = caster (spell master)
    The issue with this concept (though I actually support it) is what would make this class unique? If we're being really honest here, pretty much every avenue of magic has been covered by the existing WoW classes. Even if you decided to get cute and come up with some bizarro "dragon based" magic, what exactly would that magic do that couldn't be done by existing class concepts in class lineup?

    As I said before, the ONLY way this concept works is if the player is actually a dragon in the same vein as Wrathion, Nefarian, Chromie, or Kairozdormu simply disguising themselves as a mortal. If that's off the table, then yeah you're looking at a concept that's almost assuredly going to be Covenant 2.0 if its implemented at all.

  2. #2982
    Quote Originally Posted by The Council View Post
    what other one makes sense?
    Dragonsworn is a very strong potential concept. Of course, you may disagree since there's no real tangible concept behind it, but the concepts are definitely rooted in Warcraft, hinted in the game (plenty of Mortal servants of Dragons), presented in the Pen-and-paper RPG and has potential gameplay influences Heroes of the Storm (Alexstrazsa, Chromie).

    We also know Dragons will play a fairly significant role in the future with the potential of the Dragon Isles being explored in future content.

  3. #2983
    Quote Originally Posted by Katchii View Post
    Dark Ranger is about the only one I can come up with off the top of my head, without digging too deeply into the lore (besides Tinker, as I do agree that they're plausible). They already exist, they're shown to be trained specially in the arts of the "Ranger" with Dark powers or whatever by Nathanos and Sylvanas. with Sylvanas and Nathanos both gone and the Dark Ranger, and the other Sylvanas loyalists now fending for themselves it's possible they could be on both sides.

    I won't speculate as to HOW they would be implemented, because Blizzard can do whatever they want to with them, and can easily design abilities and lore around it. I'm just saying that lore wise, them being implemented would make sense.
    then why didnt it get introduced in shadowlands?

    how would you make it different than Hunters? what would the spec be?

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Triceron View Post
    Dragonsworn is a very strong potential concept. Of course, you may disagree since there's no real tangible concept behind it, but the concepts are definitely rooted in Warcraft, hinted in the game (plenty of Mortal servants of Dragons), presented in the Pen-and-paper RPG and has potential gameplay influences Heroes of the Storm (Alexstrazsa, Chromie).

    We also know Dragons will play a fairly significant role in the future with the potential of the Dragon Isles being explored in future content.
    i have said a dragon related class could make sense but how would be introduced(what expansion would it be themed with), what specs would it have, and what gameplay would it have to make it feel unique, are the questions that need answered.
    Anemo: traveler, Sucrose
    Pyro: Yanfei, Amber, diluc, xiangling, thoma, Xinyan, Bennett
    Geo: Noelle, Ningguang, Yun Jin, Gorou
    Hydro: Barbara, Zingqiu, Ayato
    Cyro: Shenhe, Kaeya, Chongyun, Diona, Ayaka, Rosaria
    Electro: Fischl, Lisa, Miko, Kujou, Raiden, Razor

  4. #2984
    Merely a Setback Teriz's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Soul of Azeroth
    Posts
    29,801
    Quote Originally Posted by Ielenia View Post
    They can be the "same" in the sense that they are the WC3's representation in WoW. Fighting in a mech is the same, regardless of name. Launching rockets is the same, regardless of the name.
    But we already have the Tinker's WC3 and HotS' abilities represented in WoW, and they're actually abilities. For example;

    https://www.wowhead.com/spell=148085/healing-spray
    https://www.wowhead.com/spell=261739/xplodium-charge
    https://www.wowhead.com/spell=276851...goblin-defense
    https://www.wowhead.com/spell=261752/deth-lazor
    https://www.wowhead.com/spell=136109/cluster-rocket
    https://www.wowhead.com/spell=261788/grav-o-bomb-3000
    https://www.wowhead.com/spell=261516/rock-it-turret

    And none of those appear in engineering.

    So why would we need to use items from engineering that have nothing to do with the Tinker's abilities when we have actual abilities in WoW currently that properly represent the Tinker concept?

    And none of that media is canon to WoW. That should tell you something.
    Nor does it need to be, because Blizzard still pulls from that material. They even said they did in their non-canon statement;

    Ask Creative Development -- Round II Answers | 2011-06-24 18:42 | Blizzard Entertainment Bashiok

    Q: Are the Warcraft and World of Warcraft RPG books considered canon?
    A: No. The RPG books were created to provide an engaging table-top role-playing experience, which sometimes required diverging from the established video game canon. Blizzard helped generate a great deal of the content within the RPG books, so there will be times when ideas from the RPG will make their way into the game and official lore, but you are much better off considering the RPG books non-canonical unless otherwise stated.
    For example, this occurred with Mogul Razdunk in BFA. Before his appearance in WoW, he had only appeared in the RPG;

    https://wow.gamepedia.com/Mogul_Razdunk

    And of course we've had multiple HotS abilities appear in WoW.

    WC3:R being canon is arguable. It's not a game developed by Blizzard, and it has numerous inconsistencies to the actual lore of the franchise.
    It's considered canon since it's a Blizzard published game. Blizzard has stated that all of its Warcraft games are canon in Warcraft.

  5. #2985
    Quote Originally Posted by The Council View Post
    then why didnt it get introduced in shadowlands?

    how would you make it different than Hunters? what would the spec be?
    I don't know, I don't work for Blizzard. I have no idea why it wasn't introduced in Shadowlands. But just because it wasn't, doesn't mean it can't be introduced at some point in the future.

    I know it's a cop out answer, but....make it different from Hunters by MAKING it different than Hunters. Just because they use a bow doesn't mean they're the same. Fury Warriors, WW Monks, Rogues and DW Frost DKs are different even though they all dual wield. And there are other examples.

    There's enough lore there to provide inspiration for abilities that differ from Hunters, and provide game play differences between them.

    As I said though, I'm not going to speculate exactly HOW that will be done, because that's a lot of ground to cover., and there will be wildly different opinions on it. My point is simply that it CAN be done, if Blizzard wants to.

    I don't think that can really be debated, that if Blizzard wanted to implement a class they absolutely could. What CAN be debated, at least more thoroughly, is whether they should implement them or not, both in terms of what other new class options there are and also whether adding a new class AT ALL is something they want to do.

    Just thought of another one; Necromancer, (the cloth wearing caster kind) but even I have some difficulty seeing how they could without significantly overlapping with other classes and making some changes to them. But again, I feel like if Blizzard really wanted to, they absolutely could.

  6. #2986
    Quote Originally Posted by Katchii View Post
    I don't know, I don't work for Blizzard. I have no idea why it wasn't introduced in Shadowlands. But just because it wasn't, doesn't mean it can't be introduced at some point in the future.

    I know it's a cop out answer, but....make it different from Hunters by MAKING it different than Hunters. Just because they use a bow doesn't mean they're the same. Fury Warriors, WW Monks, Rogues and DW Frost DKs are different even though they all dual wield. And there are other examples.

    There's enough lore there to provide inspiration for abilities that differ from Hunters, and provide game play differences between them.

    As I said though, I'm not going to speculate exactly HOW that will be done, because that's a lot of ground to cover., and there will be wildly different opinions on it. My point is simply that it CAN be done, if Blizzard wants to.

    I don't think that can really be debated, that if Blizzard wanted to implement a class they absolutely could. What CAN be debated, at least more thoroughly, is whether they should implement them or not, both in terms of what other new class options there are and also whether adding a new class AT ALL is something they want to do.

    Just thought of another one; Necromancer, (the cloth wearing caster kind) but even I have some difficulty seeing how they could without significantly overlapping with other classes and making some changes to them. But again, I feel like if Blizzard really wanted to, they absolutely could.
    no offense but to me it seems you just want to complain. you dont want to speculate/theorycraft from the sound of it.

    Necromancer and dark ranger, 2 possible death related class did not get introduced in a death themed expansion. that tells me that they were not on the table.
    Anemo: traveler, Sucrose
    Pyro: Yanfei, Amber, diluc, xiangling, thoma, Xinyan, Bennett
    Geo: Noelle, Ningguang, Yun Jin, Gorou
    Hydro: Barbara, Zingqiu, Ayato
    Cyro: Shenhe, Kaeya, Chongyun, Diona, Ayaka, Rosaria
    Electro: Fischl, Lisa, Miko, Kujou, Raiden, Razor

  7. #2987
    Quote Originally Posted by The Council View Post
    then why didnt it get introduced in shadowlands?

    how would you make it different than Hunters? what would the spec be?
    We didn't get any new class in Shadowlands, so that could be asked of any class across the board. The only answer we got was that the devs may have considered it but felt it didn't fit strong enough with the themes they wanted to explore in Shadowlands; namely that it wasn't just going to be a Necromancy-based expansion and actually have 4 very different themed "Realms" to explore. This is what lead them to focus on Covenants instead, and that's the only official thing they've revealed to us concerning the lack of a New Class.

    How Dark Ranger would work would be whatever Blizzard decides to do. I mean, they gave us Demon Hunters when people thought that they would only be Warlock 4th specs or just a Rogue 2.0; and frankly that's what the Demon Hunter kind of ended up being. Is it really different from a Warlock/Rogue 2.0? Yet here we are. I mean, Druid is Warrior/Rogue/Mage/Priest rolled into one; Paladin is Priest and Warrior; Monk is Rogue and Shaman with a Tanking spec on top. Every class has immediate overlap with another and 'how would you make it different' all depends on how different you think Holy Paladin is to Holy Priest.

    i have said a dragon related class could make sense but how would be introduced(what expansion would it be themed with), what specs would it have, and what gameplay would it have to make it feel unique, are the questions that need answered.
    I think Teriz concept fits the best, with a Dragonsworn literally being a Dragon who disguises themselves as Mortals; and you choose the Mortal race they want to look like and take (racial) attributes from. I personally have a different take on it, with a Dragonsworn being a mortal champion of Wrathion who uses the power Dragon Spirits (ala Tarecgosa's spirit bound to a magical artifact) to use powers of all the dragonflights in one class. I think there's infinite ways for Blizzard to approach this, but I would look to how they designed existing Hero classes to get an idea of what could happen.

    Dragon Isles are the best way to introduce them and explore the history; we don't know much about this place except for a definite connection to the Dragons. The Dragons were just primordial beasts (Protodragons) that were imbued with powers by the Titans to become dragons; the Dragon Isles could explain more about the source of these powers or a connection to the Titans.

    Dragons are also directly tied to opposing the Old Gods (and as a result, Void Lords) and there are numerous points in history where they fight against them. War of the Shifting Sands, fighting the corruption of the Nightmare, stopping the Twilights Hammer, etc. My interpretation of lore moving towards a class is that Dragons are dedicated to the protection of Azeroth, to protecting the world. Their power might not extend beyond that due to their ancient charge by the Titans; let's just say for story-sake that their power or their duty is tied to Azeroth alone. So the Dragons are able to directly fight against the Old Gods, but they can't really do anything about taking the fight to the Void Lords (again, for story sake). My idea is this is where the Dragonsworn would come in; these are Mortal Champions who are sworn to upholding the duty of the Dragons to protect Azeroth, but *CAN* take the fight beyond Azeroth because they aren't bound to the same oaths/power connections as Dragons are. And in the lore, we have an example of mortals blessed with great magical powers who have protected Azeroth; the Guardians of Tirisfal.

    How would Dragonsworn be introduced into the future plot? My personal idea is Wrathion, in an effort to protect Azeroth, creates the new 'Guardians of Tirisfal' by bestowing Draconic magic to a mortal champion. In this concept, the Dragonflights (and Medivh) oppose the creation of new Guardians, but Wrathion does so anyways since he's Wrathion. Since he does not have the support of the current living Dragons, he instead searches for other ways to obtain dragon magic; and that leads him to the shards of the Demon Soul artifact from Cataclysm. He also finds the artifacts containing the souls of Dragons. Perhaps the Dragon Isles are a gathering source of Dragon spirits too that he ends up harnessing. Either way, he gets this power, he imbues a Mortal Champion with it, and the champion(s) are sworn to Wrathion and the (still sentient) Spirits of the Dragons to protect Azeroth from any foreign threat. Guardians of Tirisfal 2.0.

    Gameplay-wise, there are many different ways to approach it. Some people have suggested a each Spec is a different Dragonflight power. I think that could work. I personally think a Dragonsworn should be able to use all Dragonflight powers equally, and freely swap between them. It'd be more similar to how Death Knights were originally designed with their Rune system.

    I personally think they should have Melee Tank, Ranged Caster and Ranged Healer specs. Their Tanking spec is heavily magical based, since we don't have a Spellcaster themed tank in the game yet. One gameplay hook for Tanking is that they could use a 2Hander/Shield combo like Crusaders in D3. They can shield-tank using Polearms, which is a throwback to classic dragon-riding 'Dragon Knights' in fantasy. Healer and Ranged DPS would have abilities inspired by Heroes of the Storm Chromie, Deathwing and Alexstrasza (and maybe even Brightwing to represent Ysera).

    I think that more than covers a basis.
    Last edited by Triceron; 2021-01-15 at 08:25 PM.

  8. #2988
    Quote Originally Posted by The Council View Post
    no offense but to me it seems you just want to complain. you dont want to speculate/theorycraft from the sound of it.
    As I said, I'm just sick of seeing THAT guy post and people responding to his obviously bad faith arguments. So yes I was complaining, but not about the thread in general, just the back and forth with THAT guy, because it goes nowhere. But to each their own.

    Necromancer and dark ranger, 2 possible death related class did not get introduced in a death themed expansion. that tells me that they were not on the table.
    The same thing was said about Demon Hunter in TBC, yet they were added years later with Legion. So just because Shadowlands may have been a good point in which to introduce them, and they didn't, doesn't mean they won't ever be introduced.

    Anyone who isn't Blizzard, speculatively closing the door on a class because of XYZ reason, can't really be taken seriously. The discussion is entirely speculative. I'm personally not a fan of it, it's just not my thing and I don't enjoy taking part in it because I find it somewhat a waste of time, because anything and everything can be thrown out the window, or can't be taken as canon or official, because it's not from the official source. That's not to say that some of the stuff discussed won't end up being true, or close to it, but anyone can take a shotgun approach to things and throw anything and everything at the wall and eventually something will stick.

    Not trying to bash those who do take part and find it enjoyable, just expressing my thoughts on the idea of a speculative discussion. I have no interest in taking part in a "what if" speculative discussion, but I do sometimes enjoy observing them.
    Last edited by Katchii; 2021-01-15 at 08:08 PM.

  9. #2989
    Merely a Setback Teriz's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Soul of Azeroth
    Posts
    29,801
    Quote Originally Posted by The Council View Post
    no offense but to me it seems you just want to complain. you dont want to speculate/theorycraft from the sound of it.
    Yep, spot on.

    In terms of Dark Rangers and Necromancers, the core issue with those concepts is rather obvious. One one hand you have no real purpose behind those concepts that couldn't be covered by existing classes in a relatively easy fashion.

    For Dark Rangers give Forsaken an undead elf option and giving Hunters Black Arrow back. Maybe even adding an additional "Dark Ranger" style talent in the MM talent tree.

    For DKs, moving Clawing Shadows down a tier in the talent tree, and maybe another talent that increases the range of their melee abilities to about 30 yds in order to allow Unholy the option to fight from range.

    That's really it. When you consider how simple those changes would be, you immediately realize why there was no Dark Ranger or Necromancer class option when Shadowlands clearly fits the theme of both classes.

    That's also why the Tinker is typically the front runner in these types of discussions; because people look at the actual facts surrounding these concepts and quickly realize that the Tinker is the most sensible choice on multiple levels.

    Dragonsworn, while a nice concept has no concrete direction (though that's easy to fix thanks to HotS).

    Bard, while something new for warcraft has absolutely no direction period, and if we're being perfectly honest with ourselves, there's a good chance that Blizzard despises the concept.

    Dark Rangers and Necromancers have already been spoken for.

  10. #2990
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    In terms of Dark Rangers and Necromancers, the core issue with those concepts is rather obvious. One one hand you have no real purpose behind those concepts that couldn't be covered by existing classes in a relatively easy fashion.
    There's only ever one purpose for adding classes to the game, and it's to help Blizzard sell copies of the game.

    With Shadowlands, I think they're starting to prove that you don't need a new class as a mainline feature to move copies. That's going to be damning to all potential classes in the future.

  11. #2991
    Merely a Setback Teriz's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Soul of Azeroth
    Posts
    29,801
    Quote Originally Posted by Triceron View Post
    There's only ever one purpose for adding classes to the game, and it's to help Blizzard sell copies of the game.

    With Shadowlands, I think they're starting to prove that you don't need a new class as a mainline feature to move copies. That's going to be damning to all potential classes in the future.
    That's initial sales. There's also retention and adoption rates. Consider that there's a very real possibility that people currently playing DK, Monk, and DH mains might not be currently playing WoW if those classes weren't available.

  12. #2992
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    Actually it does, because the HotS version is Blizzard's most recent iteration of the ability. If you look at Demon Hunters for example, Blizzard went with the HotS iteration over the WC3 iteration, mainly because many of its WC3 abilities had been eaten up by other classes. The Dark Ranger is no different. Black Arrow went to Hunters, Drain Life went to Warlocks, Silence went to Priests, and Charm is pretty much the control spells that many classes have (control undead, control demon, Mind Control, control elemental, etc.).

    It would actually be better for the concept to go with the HotS version, since it actually offers some unique abilities and concepts. Black Arrow WC3 runs too much into Death Knight territory, and really doesn't gel well with the concept.



    The problem is that what you want is essentially cosmetic. The gameplay for that already exists within the class lineup, and honestly all it would take is adding 2 talents into the MM Hunter spec tree. So in all seriousness what do you think Blizzard would do? Go through the trouble of creating an entirely new class with balance, design, and conceptual issues, or just bring back Black Arrow as a DoT, add a Dark Ranger-style talent, and give Forsaken the option to be undead elves?



    No, because Goblin Mortar entered WoW before XPlodium Charge (Vanilla WoW). Hell, Goblin Mortar predates Heroes of the Storm where Xplodium Charge first appeared.



    Your argument was that Tinker and Engineering are the same because of Technology.

    So why wouldn't Mage and Enchanting be the same because of Magic?



    See, that's semantics right there. We're not differentiating Tinker from Engineer, we're differentiating Tinker from engineering the profession. When your character takes up engineering, do they become an engineer, or are they just a Warrior, Rogue, Shaman, etc. doing engineering? It's clearly the latter, because your character is never objectively called an engineer, blacksmith, enchanter, etc. ever in the game. However, your class is mentioned multiple times by multiple NPCs, because that is what you are. No matter what profession you take up, you will always be one of the 12 classes, which is why you can drop a profession at any time and take up another one, or not take one up at all. There's no way for you to play WoW without choosing one of the 12 classes though.



    Abilities are part of the lore of a class.



    Uh huh. And what would be some base abilities of your 3-flavored Ranger? Base abilities would be something like Judgement, Holy Words, Divine Shield, Crusader Strike in the Paladin class, in other words, abilities that would be standard for all three specs.

    Shaman don't go full Witch Doctor because it would run too much into the Warlock class.
    Samurai make zero sense in WoW since Japan doesn't exist in Azeroth. If you want to be a Warrior that uses a two-handed sword, just go Arms.
    Just FYI, the Warden was originally the Assassin in WC3. All of its abilities are designed around the concept of assassination, not jailing, which is why the Rogue class makes sense.



    Yeah, because someone would get Goblin Mortar mixed up with Xplodium Charge right?
    Oh, i wouldn't say it's the latest:
    Sylvanas (HotS) - Release Date March 24, 2015.
    Black Arrow (WoW) - Patch 7.0.3 (2016-07-19): Redesigned into a Marksmanship hunter talent (was Survival). Damage increased from 567% to 640%, duration reduced from 20 to 8 sec. Now only resets when an enemy is killed, and summons a minion to taunt the target.

    "The Dark Ranger is no different" - glad to see you agree on that. And, if the Dark Ranger is no different, then there's no reason it won't meet the same fate.

    Suddenly, it's a good idea to go with the HotS iteration? what happened to "it's too OP"?

    What do i think would happen? the same as with Demon Hunters. It would have been easier to just keep Metamorphosis in the Warlock, with glyph of Demon Hunting than add a whole new class that requires balance, design and have conceptual issues.

    How does Goblin Mortar being older a problem?

    I, literally, posted the lore differences between an Enchanter and a Mage. While an enchanter only enchants items, a Mage also uses other forms of arcane, alongside fire and frost. Much like how a Pandaren Brewmaster is not just about brewing but, martial arts as well. For the Tinker, lore-wise, there's nothing to differentiate it from the Engineer. using explosives and technological devices? both use. have an occasional misfire and explosion? both have. being inventive and mechanically expertised? both are.

    You are an Engineer. Especially if you play a Gnome, which has Engineering specialization, and you specialize in one of the two Engineering specializations.

    Well, then abilities would be mentioned in lore to differentiate between the Tinker and the Engineer.

    I guess abilities all 3 share - archery:
    Hungering Arrow, Rapid Fire, Evasive Fire, Strafe, Multi-Shot, Volley, Aimed Shot.

    And the Priest (with shadowy magic, ritualistic chants and spiritual guidance). The point is that the Witch Doctor thematic is all over the place, like how Demon Hunters had his in 3 different classes. Ask yourself this: How much of the Diablo Witch doctor can you play in the Shaman class? that should answer your doubts.

    Really? are you blind?:



    "The architecture of the night elves, according to an interview with Chris Metzen, draws its influences from Japanese building style. This is most obviously apparent in the night elf city of Darnassus, which includes several tower buildings in the style of the Pagoda at Yakushi-ji (薬師寺)."

    "Subtlety rogues are mainly themed around ninjas: Subtlety rogues are the masters of the shadows, and they strike unseen." (Legion spec description)

    Shuriken Toss
    40 Energy 30 yd range
    Instant
    Requires Rogue (Subtlety)
    Requires level 16
    Throws a shuriken at an enemy target for [(19.656% of Attack power) * [(Attack power * 0.98)][((Attack power + Offhand attack power) * 2 / 3)] -- 2H, DW / Attack power] Physical damage.

    Awards 1 combo point.

    Shuriken Storm
    35 Energy
    Instant
    Requires Rogue (Subtlety)
    Requires level 19
    Sprays shurikens at up to 8 targets within 10 yards, dealing [(24.3% of Attack power) * [(Attack power * 0.98)][((Attack power + Offhand attack power) * 2 / 3)] -- 2H, DW / Attack power] Physical damage.

    Shuriken Tornado
    Talent
    60 Energy
    Instant 1 min cooldown
    Requires Rogue (Subtlety)
    Requires level 50
    Focus intently, then release a Shuriken Storm every sec for the next 4 sec.

    Many blademasters have very Japanese-sounding names, some wield katana-like swords and their distinctive banners are seemingly inspired by sashimono, small banners carried on the backs of soldiers in feudal Japan."

    Burning Blade
    Toy
    Use: Adds this toy to your Toy Box.
    Don the banner and weaponry of the Burning Blade. (1 Hour Cooldown)
    "Banner and weaponry carried by masters of the blade."

    Its not about wielding a two-handed sword. Paladins, Death Knights and Hunters can, already, do it too. It's about being a Samurai. Swift and deadly.

    Warden's Cage
    80 Mana Cooldown: 100 seconds
    Summon 8 Warden Avatars as a cage around Maiev. After 1.5 seconds, enemy Heroes that come in contact with an Avatar consume it and are knocked to the center of the cage.
    Warden Avatars last 5 seconds.

    No. Because someone would get mixed up with Rocket Boots, Dimensional Ripper, Overcharged Capacitors, Wormhole Generator, Discombobulator, World Enlarger, Explosive Sheep.

    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    That would be a Blademaster, not a Samurai.



    Except engineering isn't a class and has none of the Tinker's abilities. I can't DPS, Tank, or Heal using the engineering profession.

    Meanwhile Warrior is a class, and it contains Bladestorm, the Blademaster's ultimate ability, and has the attribute of being a spec that specializes in wielding 2H swords. You can definitely perform a DPS role and be a Blademaster your heart's content.
    This has got to be the dumbest thing i've ever read.
    "Blademasters draw clear inspiration from Japanese and Asian culture, PARTICULARLY THE SAMURAI. Many blademasters have very Japanese-sounding names, some wield katana-like swords, many wear oversized mala beads around their necks (similar to the larger version of the prayer beads worn by Shaolin monks), and their distinctive banners are seemingly inspired by sashimono, small banners carried on the backs of soldiers in feudal Japan (the banners are even outright called "sashimono" in the non-canon RPG). Japanese influence can also be seen in the fact that blademasters, and the Burning Blade clan in general, are said to value honor above all else."

    No, you can't. Because the Warrior doesn't have the the following abilities:
    Wind Walk, Mirror Image, Image Transmission, Advancing Strikes, Critical Strike, Illusion Master, Deflection, Burning Blade, Phantom Pain, Harsh Winds, agility, Shuriken, Swift Strike, Dragonblade, X-strike, Swift as the Wind, Dragon Claw, Dodge, Reflect.

    Quote Originally Posted by The Council View Post
    I cant believe i have to say this again.

    Even if Tinkers became a class, Engineers would still be making Guns, toys, companion pets, trinkers(maybe), mounts, scopes, and sometimes like BFA mace weapons.
    so i dont see how it would unravel anything
    The Tinker has Engineering items as abilities and talents.

    Quote Originally Posted by The Council View Post
    then why didnt it get introduced in shadowlands?

    how would you make it different than Hunters? what would the spec be?
    You can have a look at my Ranger class concept:
    https://www.mmo-champion.com/threads...e/page108#2154

    The reason it might not have been added is because it's not just about Sylvanas and the Dark Ranger.

    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    Yep, spot on.

    In terms of Dark Rangers and Necromancers, the core issue with those concepts is rather obvious. One one hand you have no real purpose behind those concepts that couldn't be covered by existing classes in a relatively easy fashion.

    For Dark Rangers give Forsaken an undead elf option and giving Hunters Black Arrow back. Maybe even adding an additional "Dark Ranger" style talent in the MM talent tree.

    For DKs, moving Clawing Shadows down a tier in the talent tree, and maybe another talent that increases the range of their melee abilities to about 30 yds in order to allow Unholy the option to fight from range.

    That's really it. When you consider how simple those changes would be, you immediately realize why there was no Dark Ranger or Necromancer class option when Shadowlands clearly fits the theme of both classes.

    That's also why the Tinker is typically the front runner in these types of discussions; because people look at the actual facts surrounding these concepts and quickly realize that the Tinker is the most sensible choice on multiple levels.

    Dragonsworn, while a nice concept has no concrete direction (though that's easy to fix thanks to HotS).

    Bard, while something new for warcraft has absolutely no direction period, and if we're being perfectly honest with ourselves, there's a good chance that Blizzard despises the concept.

    Dark Rangers and Necromancers have already been spoken for.
    Is it one of your other accounts? because his writing style is, suspiciously, like you.

    "With the Tinker, just add some abilities Teriz wants as items in the Engineering profession. It's really quite that easy."

    How, exactly, a Tinker is a frontrunner? They are, literally, in the back seat of the lore and story of WoW.

    You, actually, spit on your own class concept (dragonsworn)? i knew something was wrong with you from the beginning but, that's a new height.

    "Blizzard despises the concept of a Bard" Sounds like you talking. You despise everything that is not the Tinker. And, to be honest, you should just go have a wank over it and get it over with.

    At the moment, as long as you don't posses a Blizzard employee card, your declarations are worth nothing.
    Last edited by Unbelievable; 2021-01-15 at 08:47 PM.

  13. #2993
    Merely a Setback Teriz's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Soul of Azeroth
    Posts
    29,801
    Quote Originally Posted by Unbelievable View Post
    Oh, i wouldn't say it's the latest:
    Sylvanas (HotS) - Release Date March 24, 2015.
    Black Arrow (WoW) - Patch 7.0.3 (2016-07-19): Redesigned into a Marksmanship hunter talent (was Survival). Damage increased from 567% to 640%, duration reduced from 20 to 8 sec. Now only resets when an enemy is killed, and summons a minion to taunt the target.

    "The Dark Ranger is no different" - glad to see you agree on that. And, if the Dark Ranger is no different, then there's no reason it won't meet the same fate.
    And that would be the iteration of Black Arrow would be the one that summons undead beasts.

    Suddenly, it's a good idea to go with the HotS iteration? what happened to "it's too OP"?
    I said "better", I never said it was a good idea. And yes, an ability that stuns on auto-attack is too powerful for WoW.

    What do i think would happen? the same as with Demon Hunters. It would have been easier to just keep Metamorphosis in the Warlock, with glyph of Demon Hunting than add a whole new class that requires balance, design and have conceptual issues.
    It would certainly have been easier. However, the difference is that Warlock would never be a melee-based agility character, and Night Elves couldn't be Warlocks, so yeah, there were some barriers there. With Dark Rangers and Hunters, the play style for the Dark Ranger already exists in the Hunter class. The only thing the Hunter class is missing nowadays is a few shadow arrow abilities.

    How does Goblin Mortar being older a problem?
    You can't say that Goblin Mortar was put in as a replacement for an ability that didn't exist yet.

    Also it's a rather dumb thing to say when the ability exists in WoW anyway.

    I, literally, posted the lore differences between an Enchanter and a Mage. While an enchanter only enchants items, a Mage also uses other forms of arcane, alongside fire and frost. Much like how a Pandaren Brewmaster is not just about brewing but, martial arts as well. For the Tinker, lore-wise, there's nothing to differentiate it from the Engineer. using explosives and technological devices? both use. have an occasional misfire and explosion? both have. being inventive and mechanically expertised? both are.
    Uh, Enchanters can enchant weapons with frost, arcane, and fire as well.

    What's the difference for the Tinker lore wise? They build different types/more advanced forms of technology than the profession does.

    You are an Engineer. Especially if you play a Gnome, which has Engineering specialization, and you specialize in one of the two Engineering specializations.
    So all Gnomes are engineers? I don't think so. That racial only implies that their race is super intelligent so they have a bit easier time with engineering than other races would.

    Well, then abilities would be mentioned in lore to differentiate between the Tinker and the Engineer.
    https://www.wowhead.com/spell=148085/healing-spray
    https://www.wowhead.com/spell=261739/xplodium-charge
    https://www.wowhead.com/spell=276851...goblin-defense
    https://www.wowhead.com/spell=261752/deth-lazor
    https://www.wowhead.com/spell=136109/cluster-rocket
    https://www.wowhead.com/spell=261788/grav-o-bomb-3000
    https://www.wowhead.com/spell=261516/rock-it-turret


    And the Priest (with shadowy magic, ritualistic chants and spiritual guidance). The point is that the Witch Doctor thematic is all over the place, like how Demon Hunters had his in 3 different classes. Ask yourself this: How much of the Diablo Witch doctor can you play in the Shaman class? that should answer your doubts.
    The point is that a Witch Doctor adds nothing to the class lineup not covered by a Warlock, a Shaman, or a Shadow Priest.

    Really? are you blind?:

    "The architecture of the night elves, according to an interview with Chris Metzen, draws its influences from Japanese building style. This is most obviously apparent in the night elf city of Darnassus, which includes several tower buildings in the style of the Pagoda at Yakushi-ji (薬師寺)."
    That doesn't make the Night Elves Japanese dude.....

    "Subtlety rogues are mainly themed around ninjas: Subtlety rogues are the masters of the shadows, and they strike unseen." (Legion spec description)
    So what.


    No, you can't. Because the Warrior doesn't have the the following abilities:
    Wind Walk, Mirror Image, Image Transmission, Advancing Strikes, Critical Strike, Illusion Master, Deflection, Burning Blade, Phantom Pain, Harsh Winds, agility, Shuriken, Swift Strike, Dragonblade, X-strike, Swift as the Wind, Dragon Claw, Dodge, Reflect.
    Nor does it need to. The entire point of the Blademaster is a master of the blades. You don't really need Mirror Image for that. Besides you couldn't have it anyway, because it's a Mage ability, and Stealth is a Rogue ability, and having those abilities would cause issues within the Warrior class.

    The Tinker has Engineering items as abilities and talents.
    https://www.wowhead.com/spell=148085/healing-spray
    https://www.wowhead.com/spell=261739/xplodium-charge
    https://www.wowhead.com/spell=276851...goblin-defense
    https://www.wowhead.com/spell=261752/deth-lazor
    https://www.wowhead.com/spell=136109/cluster-rocket
    https://www.wowhead.com/spell=261788/grav-o-bomb-3000
    https://www.wowhead.com/spell=261516/rock-it-turret


    No it doesn't.

  14. #2994
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    That's initial sales. There's also retention and adoption rates. Consider that there's a very real possibility that people currently playing DK, Monk, and DH mains might not be currently playing WoW if those classes weren't available.
    Doubt it. They'd just be playing a different class instead. Case in point, as such an adamant fan of Tinkers as you are, would you stop playing the game because Tinkers haven't been added yet? Chances are, that isn't one of the top reasons you'd stop playing the game.

    There are plenty of reasons to not play WoW, but lacking a class choice isn't one of them. And if we use this line of argument then would you be considering the real possibility of people who aren't playing because of the lack of a Runemaster, Dragonsworn or Bard class? I wouldn't hedge my bets on any of that.

    We could just as easily apply this and say there's a possibility that people aren't playing WoW because it doesn't have housing, but it doesn't legitimize the devs diverting resources into creating a housing system just to address that demographic. WoW already has plenty going on to not need it; especially if sales numbers are any indication. Dropoff will happen regardless of what new class is added or housing or anything
    Last edited by Triceron; 2021-01-15 at 09:13 PM.

  15. #2995
    Merely a Setback Teriz's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Soul of Azeroth
    Posts
    29,801
    Quote Originally Posted by Triceron View Post
    Doubt it. They'd just be playing a different class instead.

    There are plenty of reasons to not play WoW, but lacking a class choice isn't one of them. And if we use this line of argument then would you be considering the real possibility of people who aren't playing because of the lack of a Runemaster, Dragonsworn or Bard class? I wouldn't hedge my bets on any of that.
    You're simply being argumentative here. I leveled from 1-90 as a Monk in MoP because the Brewmaster was one of my favorite heroes from WC3, and I loved the theme. That simply wouldn't have happened if I was still on my Shaman. I took that Monk through WoD as well, and loved every second of it. However, I didn't play Legion or BFA on that level because they nuked Monks from orbit and made them less enjoyable to play. While I purchased Shadowlands, I've already cancelled my subscription. If there were a Tinker class or even a Dark Ranger class that might not be the case, but since there's no new class, I'm less interested in playing right now.

    I highly doubt I'm alone in feeling this way. There's plenty of reasons to play WoW, but there's only one way to actually play it, and that's through a class. If the class' play style or theme doesn't appeal to you, you're not playing WoW for very long, no matter how great it is.

    Are there people currently not playing WoW who would be playing if there were a Runemaster, Dragonsworn, and Bard class? Of course there would be. You can add the Tinker to that list as well, probably moreso. There is a section of gamers who enjoy playing tech-based classes in Sword and Sorcery RPGs. Guess what? They have no way of scratching that itch in WoW currently.

  16. #2996
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    You're simply being argumentative here. I leveled from 1-90 as a Monk in MoP because the Brewmaster was one of my favorite heroes from WC3, and I loved the theme. That simply wouldn't have happened if I was still on my Shaman. I took that Monk through WoD as well, and loved every second of it. However, I didn't play Legion or BFA on that level because they nuked Monks from orbit and made them less enjoyable to play. While I purchased Shadowlands, I've already cancelled my subscription. If there were a Tinker class or even a Dark Ranger class that might not be the case, but since there's no new class, I'm less interested in playing right now.
    Then you're the exception, not the rule.

    Your particular case is 'If there was a Tinker class I'd still be playing' but what about considering Bard, Necromancer, Dark Ranger or any other class being asked for? Do you think there are zero people in the same position as you but regarding some other class being asked for?

    If you just say 'Well you can play X class and it's the same' then you already know that's as irrelevant as me saying 'You can level Engineering and still keep playing the game'. It's not a solution to the issue you're presenting; that people want to play as a specific class for specific reasons.

    Tinkers are already Engineers, and they're in the game. We all know you specifically want the Tinker gameplay from Warcraft 3 and Heroes of the Storm, and that would be no different than a Dark Ranger fan wanting the gameplay from Warcraft 3 and Heroes of the Storm in one unified class that isn't simply a Hunter Transmog.

    I don't think this is reason to add any class; for the sake of satisfying people's pipedreams. Blizzard's ultimate goal is to move sales.

  17. #2997
    Merely a Setback Teriz's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Soul of Azeroth
    Posts
    29,801
    Quote Originally Posted by Triceron View Post
    Then you're the exception, not the rule.

    Your particular case is 'If there was a Tinker class I'd still be playing' but what about considering Bard, Necromancer, Dark Ranger or any other class being asked for? Do you think there are zero people in the same position as you but regarding some other class being asked for?

    If you just say 'Well you can play X class and it's the same' then you already know that's as irrelevant as me saying 'You can level Engineering and still keep playing the game'. It's not a solution to the issue you're presenting; that people want to play as a specific class for specific reasons.
    If you read my post, I said plainly that any of those class options would improve retention, because it gives current players something new to experience, and it brings in former players and new players who might be looking to get into WoW but haven't found a class they can get attached to.

    Tinkers are already Engineers, and they're in the game. We all know you specifically want the Tinker gameplay from Warcraft 3 and Heroes of the Storm, and that would be no different than a Dark Ranger fan wanting the gameplay from Warcraft 3 and Heroes of the Storm in one unified class that isn't simply a Hunter Transmog.
    Not even what I'm talking about here. Once again, you're simply being argumentative. However since you brought it up, if someone is looking for a tech class in WoW, the engineering profession wouldn't accomplish that goal for them. On the other hand, if they want a magical archer class, there is the Hunter class. If they want a shadowy assassin who can fight from range, Rogues might be right up their alley.

    I don't think this is reason to add any class; for the sake of satisfying people's pipedreams. Blizzard's ultimate goal is to move sales.
    Their ultimate goal is to move sales AND keep those subscription payments and money from micro-transactions rolling in each month. You help keep that money stream rolling in by offering people new ways to play the game. The most dramatic way to do that is to add new classes.

  18. #2998
    Dreadlord Sagenod's Avatar
    3+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Location
    The Upside Down
    Posts
    847
    The canon clearly states that Tinkers are primarily composed of Gnomes and Goblins, not exclusively. Just as Arthas's Death Knights (the ones we play as) are primarily human, Demon Hunters are mostly Night Elves (the Blood Elven ones were nearly wiped out), Cenarion Circle Druids are mostly Night Elves and Tauren, Pandaren martial arts-using Monks are mostly Pandaren, etc. It's quite clear that some races are more inclined towards a class and/or profession than others. Majority does not equal exclusivity.

    Why don't we discuss the gameplay implications of a Tinker class, rather the canonical? That's more fun.

    Mech suit: Cooldown or toggleable?

    Mechanized utility pack (like the one Gazlowe uses from Heroes of the Storm and so on): More or less an aesthetic option for the class, right? Or should it be an ability as well?

    WC3 Tinker abilities:
    - Pocket Factory, the cornerstone ability for a mech-summoner spec
    - Cluster Rockets, ranged AOE nuke that may inspire an artillery spec
    - Robo-Goblin[Form], this is where we put the mech suit, yeah?

  19. #2999
    Pandaren Monk AngerFork's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Right behind you!
    Posts
    1,759
    Quote Originally Posted by Sagenod View Post
    Why don't we discuss the gameplay implications of a Tinker class, rather the canonical? That's more fun.

    Mech suit: Cooldown or toggleable?

    Mechanized utility pack (like the one Gazlowe uses from Heroes of the Storm and so on): More or less an aesthetic option for the class, right? Or should it be an ability as well?

    WC3 Tinker abilities:
    - Pocket Factory, the cornerstone ability for a mech-summoner spec
    - Cluster Rockets, ranged AOE nuke that may inspire an artillery spec
    - Robo-Goblin[Form], this is where we put the mech suit, yeah?
    IMO, Mech Suit should be a toggleable thing like Druid forms are. The Tinker teams we saw in BfA using mech suits didn't wind up only using them for 10 seconds at a time, they had them on at all times. I could totally see it as a setup that is best used for certain specs, perhaps tanking or DPS.

    Mechanized Utility Pack seems more like a cooldown and perhaps could even come out of whatever mech suit you have, or perhaps that's just one form of mech suit. Either way could work.

  20. #3000
    Quote Originally Posted by AngerFork View Post
    IMO, Mech Suit should be a toggleable thing like Druid forms are. The Tinker teams we saw in BfA using mech suits didn't wind up only using them for 10 seconds at a time, they had them on at all times. I could totally see it as a setup that is best used for certain specs, perhaps tanking or DPS.

    Mechanized Utility Pack seems more like a cooldown and perhaps could even come out of whatever mech suit you have, or perhaps that's just one form of mech suit. Either way could work.
    I for one think the mech would be powerfull and need to be a cooldown.
    if your char is never seen much under the mech, then what armor class are you going to be ? a robe ? leather? what's the use of mail if you're never outside ?

    as far as Dark Ranger & Necromancer, I find them unsuffisent as full class, and usefull to combine the 2 into a death dealer ranged class with ranger weapons, agi build, as a Dark Ranger; or a magic user, many summon controller, as a Necromancer. and as such there are many artworks of mail wearing necromancers, it'd fit well. hell even diablo 2& 3 necromancer have mail looking armors.

Posting Permissions

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