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

[Triceron]

You don't know how it works one way or the other, so please don't pretend that you do.

But you haven't done anything to prove me wrong. I don't have to pretend to know what is ultimately true about class design. It's based on the class fantasy first and foremost, and we have devs saying this in interviews consistently for years.

I don't see how that invalidates the importance of abilities, since both Demon Hunters and Monks arrived with abilities from WC3.

Who said it invalidates their importance?

It's about knowing the priority of importance, not a flat dismissal as you and Ielenia seem so fond of.

Abilities are supplementary to class fantasy. It doesn't drive it, the way you regard them in most of your arguments. Case in point, you believe hunters can can cover for other class concepts, and you use abilities as your primary means of argument.

You did the same arguing against Demon Hunters, and you still do today pointing at Metamorphosis having to be taken away. Well yes it was taken away because it is a core part of the Demon Hunter fantasy, whereas Evasion and Mana Burn weren't taken away because it was just as easy to make new abilities that fulfill the fantasy. Abilities are supplemental to the fantasy.

Without the abilities you have no class fantasy. Look at the situation with Bards for example. No one here can agree exactly what the class fantasy would be because they have no abilities to show what that fantasy is.

You can have plenty of class fantasy without specific abilities from Warcraft 3. Just look at Warlocks, whose class fantasy was more than supported by completely new abilities and only flavoured by legacy WC3 abilities. Or Rogues, whose fantasy is built on Stealth and Combo generators and finishers, not so much the Evasion ability from Demon Hunters and Fan of Knives from Wardens (Added in expansios, no less).

I mean even consider that Runemasters were on the shortlist. What WC3 abilities would define this class fantasy? Brand new ones, that's what.

The thing you're missing here is that Abilities can be invented too. And I think this laser focus on WC3 or HOTS abilities is what most people disagree with you on, jncluding other tinker fans.

[Teriz]

Im sorry I didn’t know WoW lore stopped progressing after WC3

It's not just WC3. There's no Dragon Knight in the TTRPGs, WoW, or HotS either.

I mean it’s not like the dragons have been feeding their power into the HoA
It’s not like Wrathion took mortals as hard personal guard
It’s not like he had the idea of making an army to fight the legion then disappeared to go find the dragon isles (island expedition lore)
I don’t think he would empower mortals to be able to fight the demons and other similar entities and the other aspects wouldn’t go along with it
“I won’t attack other class concepts” lasted half a page eh?

Dragons are a race
Dragon knight is a class

And with the return of galakrond and the inevitable creation of the infinite (galakrond remains missing from the map that was data mined and the fact nozdormu wasn’t found during BfA and chromie was the stand in)

Fight dragon fire with dragon fire

That's great, but there's really no basis for it in Warcraft. The only concept really that we've seen are Dragons disguising themselves as mortals and influencing the story. You can definitely make a class out of that.

- - - Updated - - -

But you haven't done anything to prove me wrong. I don't have to pretend to know what is ultimately true about class design. It's based on the class fantasy first and foremost, and we have devs saying this in interviews consistently for years.

I have multiple times, you just refuse to acknowledge it.

Who said it invalidates their importance?

It's about knowing the priority of importance, not a flat dismissal as you and Ielenia seem so fond of.

Abilities are supplementary to class fantasy. It doesn't drive it, the way you regard them in most of your arguments. Case in point, you believe hunters can can cover for other class concepts, and you use abilities as your primary means of argument.

You did the same arguing against Demon Hunters, and you still do today pointing at Metamorphosis having to be taken away. Well yes it was taken away because it is a core part of the Demon Hunter fantasy, whereas Evasion and Mana Burn weren't taken away because it was just as easy to make new abilities that fulfill the fantasy. Abilities are supplemental to the fantasy.

So why didn't they simply do that with Metamorphosis? Could it be that a class-defining ability like Metamorphosis was harder to substitute than a dodge ability or an ability that attacked mana?

You can have plenty of class fantasy without specific abilities from Warcraft 3. Just look at Warlocks, whose class fantasy was more than supported by completely new abilities and only flavoured by legacy WC3 abilities. Or Rogues, whose fantasy is built on Stealth and Combo generators and finishers, not so much the Evasion ability from Demon Hunters and Fan of Knives from Wardens (Added in expansios, no less).

We had Gul'dan in WC2, so Warlocks weren't exactly an entirely new concept when we got to WoW. Also you could simply pull multiple demonic abilities from various demonic (and demonic-leaning) heroes and just dump them into the Warlock class (Doom, Rain of Fire, Howl of Terror, Immolation, Infernal, Drain Life, Drain Mana, Banish, Soul Fire, etc.). As for Rogues, you got the Stealth and Ambush from Blademasters, Hide and Envenomed Weapon from Rogue/Bandit creeps, and other junk from other heroes.

I mean even consider that Runemasters were on the shortlist. What WC3 abilities would define this class fantasy? Brand new ones, that's what.

Yet amazingly they just happened to be absorbed by a class that had Rune-based lore in WC3 as well. Quite the coincidence.

The thing you're missing here is that Abilities can be invented too. And I think this laser focus on WC3 or HOTS abilities is what most people disagree with you on, jncluding other tinker fans.

I only have a laser focus on WC3 and HotS because that has been the source of 100% of WoW's expansion classes. Why would we be laser focused anywhere else?

Compare the Bard to the Tinker. With the Tinker we have a massive amount of information on how that class potentially looks. With the Bard we have nothing. Why? Because the Tinker has the same pedigree as the previous three class inclusions, and loads of abilities to point us to what their class fantasy entails.

[Revamp Man]

It's not just WC3. There's no Dragon Knight in the TTRPGs, WoW, or HotS either.



That's great, but there's really no basis for it in Warcraft. The only concept really that we've seen are Dragons disguising themselves as mortals and influencing the story. You can definitely make a class out of that.

- - - Updated - - -

those are dragons
dragons are a race
mechagnomes arent a class so why would dragons be

omg the ttrpg that is old
hots which is by your own confession non-canon unless of course you want to pull the dragons for your concept
if the ttrpg counts then so would hearthstone and there are cards of races like elves that empower dragon cards

its almost like WoW is an evolving game and they can add stuff from recent lore like wrathion's mortal guards getting dragon magic

its ok though i understand if some of these are a tad beyond your view of creativity since it seems you need to have everything in the game pre 2004 for ideas

but if you could just stop going "if its not my concept then its wrong and has no basis" because nadina the red

[Teriz]

those are dragons
dragons are a race
mechagnomes arent a class so why would dragons be

Because nothing separates draconic magic and abilities from standard magic and abilities.

Also tell players that they can be Wrathion, and players will lose their minds. Plenty of games have you playing as a Dragoon or a "Dragon Knight", I can't think of many games that allow you to play as a dragon.

And no, not this type of dragon;



This type of dragon;



Who usually runs around looking like this;



I honestly think this could easily supplant Druids as the most popular class in the game.

omg the ttrpg that is old
hots which is by your own confession non-canon unless of course you want to pull the dragons for your concept
if the ttrpg counts then so would hearthstone and there are cards of races like elves that empower dragon cards

The TTRPG at one time was canon, just FYI. Hearthstone was never canon.

its almost like WoW is an evolving game and they can add stuff from recent lore like wrathion's mortal guards getting dragon magic

its ok though i understand if some of these are a tad beyond your view of creativity since it seems you need to have everything in the game pre 2004 for ideas

but if you could just stop going "if its not my concept then its wrong and has no basis" because nadina the red

WoW is an evolving game but Blizzard has shown to be highly conservative with their class choices. Again, I can see a class that allows the player to emulate something like Wrathion because Blizzard has given us multiple examples of this character in WoW, and allowed us to play as three of these characters in HotS (Alexstraza, Chromie, and Deathwing). So with that concept we have the elements in place to structure a WoW class along the same lines as the DK, Monk, and Demon Hunter;

- A lore hero (Wrathion, Alexstraza, Kalecgos, Chromie, etc.)
- Unique abilities (Wing Buffet, Dragonqueen, Abundance, Cleansing Flame, Cataclysm, World Breaker, Sands of Time, etc.)
- Cross faction elements (Wrathion appears as a Human, Kairoz appeared as a Blood Elf, etc.)
- Class defining concept (dragons disguising themselves as mortals)


We don't have those elements with a "Dragon Knight".

[Ielenia]

I hate to break it to you, but Blizzard has been tying the Warcraft elements of HotS to baseline Warcraft lore for quite sometime.

Don't worry. You didn't "break" anything. And you're wrong. Blizzard did not make HotS lore into WoW lore.

You do know that applying real world logic to fantasy or video games is textbook head canon right?

My headcanons are based off on logic, and facts within the lore. Yours are based in nothing but your agenda. You literally claimed that characters within the Warcraft universe can instantly and immediately lose all knowledge of their profession the moment they decide to stop practicing said profession. That is an asinine claim that has absolutely zero basis in the lore. You also literally claimed that hero (i.e. player) characters within the Warcraft universe are super-powered mutants who do not need food, water or sleep to survive, who can run for miles upon miles at full speed wearing full plate armor and do not get winded.

Basic logic isn't lore.

You've demonstrated several times over that basic logic isn't your forte, period.

This is more head canon. Please stop.

Actually, every single word that I've wrote in that quote is pure fact. It is an undeniable fact the engineer is capable of creating mechs, missiles and all manners of technological devices. It is also a fact that Mekkatorque has never demonstrated the ability to loot while within his mech. It is also a fact that we have never seen the ones you call "master tinkers" to create everything the engineer profession can. It is a fact we have never seen or heard Blackfuse create an inter-dimensional portal. We have never seen or heard Mekkatorque create a device that can bring people back from the dead.

Not according to Blizzard who keeps pulling from it for baseline WC lore.

As usual, you are wrong: "Heroes of the Storm, much like Hearthstone in many ways, is not canon when it comes to the lore of World of Warcraft."

So now we're going to ignore the source of those abilities? Okay.

Yes, we are. Because the Heroes of the Storm is not canon to the Warcraft franchise.

[Revamp Man]

Because nothing separates draconic magic and abilities from standard magic and abilities.

Also tell players that they can be Wrathion, and players will lose their minds. Plenty of games have you playing as a Dragoon or a "Dragon Knight", I can't think of many games that allow you to play as a dragon.

And no, not this type of dragon;



This type of dragon;



Who usually runs around looking like this;



I honestly think this could easily supplant Druids as the most popular class in the game.



The TTRPG at one time was canon, just FYI. Hearthstone was never canon.



WoW is an evolving game but Blizzard has shown to be highly conservative with their class choices. Again, I can see a class that allows the player to emulate something like Wrathion because Blizzard has given us multiple examples of this character in WoW, and allowed us to play as three of these characters in HotS (Alexstraza, Chromie, and Deathwing). So with that concept we have the elements in place to structure a WoW class along the same lines as the DK, Monk, and Demon Hunter;

- A lore hero (Wrathion, Alexstraza, Kalecgos, Chromie, etc.)
- Unique abilities (Wing Buffet, Dragonqueen, Abundance, Cleansing Flame, Cataclysm, World Breaker, Sands of Time, etc.)
- Cross faction elements (Wrathion appears as a Human, Kairoz appeared as a Blood Elf, etc.)
- Class defining concept (dragons disguising themselves as mortals)


We don't have those elements with a "Dragon Knight".

it was canon but is no longer canon...holy crap its almost like warcraft changes!!!!

dragons are a race not a class...why is this a difficult concept jesus christ
is it because you need it to have the dragon form??
are the wings from the wrathion trinket not good enough to give you an idea of an ability??
we have dragon abilities yes (many of those are also pet abilities and would easily work in non dragon races)
we have npcs like drakonids which use draconic magic
but for some reason a dragon that looks to make an army and has given mortals access to HIS DRAGON POWER in two expansions via legendaries...yeah no we cant do that because adding new concepts only works if it fits your idea
this is why this thread is a trash fire we try to get it swung around to other classes but you screech NOOO NOO IT CANT HAPPEN!!!!

[Triceron]

I have multiple times, you just refuse to acknowledge it.

You have proven nothing. Of course I refuted your statements, they aren't based on sound logic.

So why didn't they simply do that with Metamorphosis? Could it be that a class-defining ability like Metamorphosis was harder to substitute than a dodge ability or an ability that attacked mana?

Because they were freeing the ability up from the Demon Hunter with the change to the Warlock fantasy to make Demonology into a Summoner spec.

Warlocks had _multiple_ Demon Hunter forms that were all taken away in Legion. Why take away Dark Apotheosis too when it was perfectly usable by either class? Well the answer is it had no place in either since Meta was already freed up and Warlocks were moving away from it altogether.

It's that simple. We have the answers straight from Legion dev interviews and their intentions on Legion adhering to class fantasies and revamping certain specs.

If it were just about Metamorphosis then can you explain where Dark Apotheosis went? You couldn't.

We had Gul'dan in WC2,

Yes and what were Gul'dan's abilities? Keep in mind in he lore he used Necromancy. The WoW warlocks are their own thing, which actually retroactively changed who Gul'dan is today.

Compare the Bard to the Tinker. With the Tinker we have a massive amount of information on how that class potentially looks. With the Bard we have nothing. Why? Because the Tinker has the same pedigree as the previous three class inclusions, and loads of abilities to point us to what their class fantasy entails.

Sure, and I would agree with you. This has nothing to do with abilities though, it is about Class Fantasy as I've been saying takes priority first and foremost. If the Bard had a stronger identity, then we can move on to the next step of deciding what abilities it has. The Bard isn't lacking for having less Warcraft abilities than a Tinker any more than a Tinker is lacking than having less abilities than a Rogue or Warlock.

Why else would a class fantasy based on Warcraft 2 non-playable Guldan take precedent over an actual playable Tinker who had a full playable kit? Think about this.

Tinker wasn't even considered in any Vanilla classes when talked about. Runemasters even had more consideration than a Tinker, so can we point at abilities informing this decision?

The class fantasy of a Runemaster was to fulfill a non-standard magic-user in the game, which the Warlock eventually won over. This is how Blizzard considered the root of their class design, not just picking abilities or basing it on WC2/3 Heroes.

Where the Bard fails is its class fantasy and lack of role in WoW's design. Conversely, where Tinker class fantasy lacks is in it potentially being too whimsical. These aren't things to dismiss just because we have reasons to counter this information, these are what we should be focused on since it is what the devs themselves regard as priority.

Things like tailoring classes to story of the expansion is also important, and we clearly know why classes like Dark Rangers aren't in yet.

[Ielenia]

Hate to break it to you but it has about as much of a chance of happening as the Pirate class does.

We don't know the actual chances of a pirate class coming into the game, so this statement of yours doesn't mean much, if at all.

They're not going to invest literal tens of millions of dollars into building a class that can instead be realized through a spec instead.

Thanks for discrediting yourself with that absurdly nonsensical hyperbole. Really? You think it costs "tens of millions of dollars" to develop a single class? Really? Thanks for the laugh.

Can you imagine any other class being a glaive wielding, fel-fuelled shapeshifter? Definitely not Warlock, as to make an agi-melee-spec for a cloth class would be crazy.

Why? They literally made the hunter's survival spec go from ranged to melee. And considering armor pieces today easily switch main stats (agi <-> int for monks/druids/shamans and str <-> int for paladins), so what would be the problem of making "agi <-> int cloth"?

As for Dark Ranger? In a Venn diagram sense it has way too much thematic overlap with MM Hunter and what Death Knights can do.

Paladins share thematic overlap with warriors and priests. Hell, the class' origin is literally priests learning combat and warriors learning to be pious.

Because when the song's been sung there's no way, with conclusive evidence or not, there will ever be a class that can effectively be boiled down to "its a spooky bowman" when there are already 2 "spooky" classes, and 1 "bowman" class.

Paladin is a holy warrior. Well, we have a "holy" class already, and a "warrior" class already. The warlock is the "demon dude", therefore we don't need demon hunters. Rogue is the quick dual-wielder, therefore we don't need monks. That is the problem when you "boil down" classes so much to their most basic two-word descriptions.

case closed get on with your day bud learn to let go

Sorry, you're not the arbiter here, nor do you speak for Blizzard. Have a good day.

[Teriz]

it was canon but is no longer canon...holy crap its almost like warcraft changes!!!!

And the only reason its no longer canon is because the license ended. Blizzard has pulled from those sources and brought them into WoW.

The point is, there's no history of a Dragon Knight in Warcraft.

dragons are a race not a class...why is this a difficult concept jesus christ
is it because you need it to have the dragon form??
are the wings from the wrathion trinket not good enough to give you an idea of an ability??
we have dragon abilities yes (many of those are also pet abilities and would easily work in non dragon races)
we have npcs like drakonids which use draconic magic
but for some reason a dragon that looks to make an army and has given mortals access to HIS DRAGON POWER in two expansions via legendaries...yeah no we cant do that because adding new concepts only works if it fits your idea
this is why this thread is a trash fire we try to get it swung around to other classes but you screech NOOO NOO IT CANT HAPPEN!!!!

Because we have a group of dragons that can assume mortal form. That concept would be far more popular than a generic class of "dragon knights".

Once again, we have an extremely popular character named Wrathion to base this on. Wrathion is currently searching for the Dragon Isles. This is a no brainer. You tell fans that they can be like Wrathion and its a wrap, you now have the most popular class in WoW.

The only hard part for Blizzard is figuring out which Dragonflights to base specs on.

[Revamp Man]

seriously this has gone to
"HotS, the ttrpg, and WC3 are viable candidates for blizz to pull stuff from because they have before"

so HS is also viable??

"no HS doesnt work"

why not??

"because it isnt canon"

neither are the other games

"yeah but the ttrpg was and blizzard used the others in the past"

ok so why cant they use HS?

"because they havent yet"

so they cant in the future??

"no because they havent yet"

you said "oh discuss other concepts its ok" yet bitch about any concept that isnt yours WITH THIS AS A REAL EXAMPLE!!!

this isnt a thread discussing the guaranteed new class but new classes that are possible

- - - Updated - - -

And the only reason its no longer canon is because the license ended. Blizzard has pulled from those sources and brought them into WoW.

The point is, there's no history of a Dragon Knight in Warcraft.



Because we have a group of dragons that can assume mortal form. That concept would be far more popular than a generic class of "dragon knights".

Once again, we have an extremely popular character named Wrathion to base this on. Wrathion is currently searching for the Dragon Isles. This is a no brainer. You tell fans that they can be like Wrathion and its a wrap, you now have the most popular class in WoW.

The only hard part for Blizzard is figuring out which Dragonflights to base specs on.

HES A DRAGON!!!!!!!!!
just alike a class isnt a profession a race isnt a class

last i checked each flight has the power of 1 aspect
its ok though they will empower random dragons they find over mortals they have trained and trusted because it fits your idea "well if you tell players they can transform into dragons it will be super popular" in your opinion...from the same person who believed the most likely class in shadowlands was a ghostbuster tinker

make it a mortal make them gain the power of the aspects
every aspect but bronze because their leader is MIA and a good storyline for the expansion while the other aspects have at least an accepted stand in

[ForrestAnthony]

We don't know the actual chances of a pirate class coming into the game, so this statement of yours doesn't mean much, if at all.

Do you even play WoW? Have you heard of Outlaw?

[Teriz]

You have proven nothing. Of course I refuted your statements, they aren't based on sound logic.

Which of my statements did you refute? That NPC abilities don't go to professions? That NPC abilities don't have level requirements? That Blingtrons aren't the same thing a Clockwork Gnomes? That building a Blingtron that hands out party gifts isn't the same thing as building a factory that mass produces kamikaze bots?

Help me out, I've lost track.

Because they were freeing the ability up from the Demon Hunter with the change to the Warlock fantasy to make Demonology into a Summoner spec.

Warlocks had _multiple_ Demon Hunter forms that were all taken away in Legion. Why take away Dark Apotheosis too when it was perfectly usable by either class? Well the answer is it had no place in either since Meta was already freed up and Warlocks were moving away from it altogether.

It's that simple. We have the answers straight from Legion dev interviews and their intentions on Legion adhering to class fantasies and revamping certain specs.

If it were just about Metamorphosis then can you explain where Dark Apotheosis went? You couldn't.

Yeah, here's the problem; Warlock metamorphosis was mechanically different than DH metamorphosis, so it could have remained in place as well. Despite Blizzard's official statements, their goal was to completely purge all aspects of metamorphosis from the Warlock class. We know this because they nuked Demonology from orbit in 6.2 and literally told players not to play the spec. And when I say nuked, I'm talking about nerfing it to the point where it was nearly unplayable. If you have any example of something like that happening in the history of WoW, please show me.

So yeah, it was entirely about metamorphosis. Blizzard knew that there was no way they were bringing in a Demon Hunter class as long as Warlocks had that ability, whether it was the Demonology version, or the Glyphed version.

Yes and what were Gul'dan's abilities? Keep in mind in he lore he used Necromancy. The WoW warlocks are their own thing, which actually retroactively changed who Gul'dan is today.

Well no, there were Orc Warlocks in WC3 as well. Their abilities were fire bolts, Frenzy, and Cripple.

So it's apparent that that change had already occurred by the time we got to WC3. Keep in mind, they had altered Death Knights as well.

Sure, and I would agree with you. This has nothing to do with abilities though, it is about Class Fantasy as I've been saying takes priority first and foremost. If the Bard had a stronger identity, then we can move on to the next step of deciding what abilities it has. The Bard isn't lacking for having less Warcraft abilities than a Tinker any more than a Tinker is lacking than having less abilities than a Rogue or Warlock.

The Bard has NO warcraft abilities. That's the point. Without those abilities we have no direction to take the concept.

Why else would a class fantasy based on Warcraft 2 non-playable Guldan take precedent over an actual playable Tinker who had a full playable kit? Think about this.

Tinker wasn't even considered in any Vanilla classes when talked about. Runemasters even had more consideration than a Tinker, so can we point at abilities informing this decision?

The class fantasy of a Runemaster was to fulfill a non-standard magic-user in the game, which the Warlock eventually won over. This is how Blizzard considered the root of their class design, not just picking abilities or basing it on WC2/3 Heroes.

Which would also mean that those concepts took precedence and had higher consideration than Monks and Demon Hunters.

Does that matter?

Nope.

- - - Updated - - -

you said "oh discuss other concepts its ok" yet bitch about any concept that isnt yours WITH THIS AS A REAL EXAMPLE!!!

this isnt a thread discussing the guaranteed new class but new classes that are possible

- - - Updated - - -

I'm just trying to keep this discussion focused. Vague concepts like "Dragon Knights" don't really stack up to more established concepts like a class that emulates Wrathion, Chromie, and Alexstraza. Thanks to HotS we have a functioning method of how such a class would work, and as I pointed out before, this concept has all the necessary ingredients of a future class.

HES A DRAGON!!!!!!!!!
just alike a class isnt a profession a race isnt a class

I would argue that it's a class of dragon.

And like I said, players want to be Wrathion or Kalecgos, they don't want to be some mortal who runs around and kisses dragon butt for power.

last i checked each flight has the power of 1 aspect
its ok though they will empower random dragons they find over mortals they have trained and trusted because it fits your idea "well if you tell players they can transform into dragons it will be super popular" in your opinion...from the same person who believed the most likely class in shadowlands was a ghostbuster tinker

I've already taken care of that; Your character is a chromatic dragon that can take on the powers of a different aspect as needed. That can act as your specialization switch. Simple.

make it a mortal make them gain the power of the aspects
every aspect but bronze because their leader is MIA and a good storyline for the expansion while the other aspects have at least an accepted stand in

How would a mortal be able to jump from aspect to aspect and gain their powers? Further, if a mortal's powers are based on a dragon flight, what would their base abilities be?

With the dragon-based concept for example, the base abilities would your dragon abilities, like Dragon Fire or Dragon Form.

[Revamp Man]

dragon knight
mail wearer
int based for all specs
4 specs
hero class starts at 58

intro experience being a mortal guard of wrathion who throughout multiple points in a time skipping story you see the hero of azeroth and interact including but not limited to the MoP story and the storyline with abyssion needing a potion. After the old gods defeat Wrathion convinces the other flights to join him in finding the dragon isles which in order to locate requires the power of all flights. You must earn the blessing of each flight except the bronze due to their leader missing however chromie givews you some basic skills including time warp and a battle rez.

specs are

blue: ranged spell caster using any and all weapons with int
red: melee using all weapons except staves and wands
black: tank using shields
green: healer using any and all weapons with int

for those of you needing something to have a basis for this we have
yseras gift for healing druids
nelfarions scales being a tank artifact
the spellweavers of the blue flight
the fact red dragons in most of warcraft media and lore being destructive

red spec will focus on dealing damage via dots including a ST strike that refreshes them
a breath that adds a stack
a wing flap that adds a stack
you have abilities that treat these DoTs as a kind of combo point for damage so for example using the ability when you have 1 stack on the enemy you do 10 damage where using it when you have 2 stacks its 20 damage. The trade off being the possibility of the DoTs falling off and killing your damage

blue plays almost the opposite where you use abilities to buff yourself then burn the buffs so a similar way to arcane but not using mana as a resource

green is about HoTs and AoE spells like dream seeds that pop and release healing. Like a monk statue in a way where you can target it and the healing is copied to allies within range until so much healing is done and it pops

black is straight up armor and badass tanking with retaliation damage.

- - - Updated - - -

Which of my statements did you refute? That NPC abilities don't go to professions? That NPC abilities don't have level requirements? That Blingtrons aren't the same thing a Clockwork Gnomes? That building a Blingtron that hands out party gifts isn't the same thing as building a factory that mass produces kamikaze bots?

Help me out, I've lost track.



Yeah, here's the problem; Warlock metamorphosis was mechanically different than DH metamorphosis, so it could have remained in place as well. Despite Blizzard's official statements, their goal was to completely purge all aspects of metamorphosis from the Warlock class. We know this because they nuked Demonology from orbit in 6.2 and literally told players not to play the spec. And when I say nuked, I'm talking about nerfing it to the point where it was nearly unplayable. If you have any example of something like that happening in the history of WoW, please show me.

So yeah, it was entirely about metamorphosis. Blizzard knew that there was no way they were bringing in a Demon Hunter class as long as Warlocks had that ability, whether it was the Demonology version, or the Glyphed version.




Well no, there were Orc Warlocks in WC3 as well. Their abilities were fire bolts, Frenzy, and Cripple.

So it's apparent that that change had already occurred by the time we got to WC3. Keep in mind, they had altered Death Knights as well.



The Bard has NO warcraft abilities. That's the point. Without those abilities we have no direction to take the concept.



Which would also mean that those concepts took precedence and had higher consideration than Monks and Demon Hunters.

Does that matter?

Nope.

- - - Updated - - -



I'm just trying to keep this discussion focused. Vague concepts like "Dragon Knights" don't really stack up to more established concepts like a class that emulates Wrathion, Chromie, and Alexstraza. Thanks to HotS we have a functioning method of how such a class would work, and as I pointed out before, this concept has all the necessary ingredients of a future class.



I would argue that it's a class of dragon.

And like I said, players want to be Wrathion or Kalecgos, they don't want to be some mortal who runs around and kisses dragon butt for power.



I've already taken care of that; Your character is a chromatic dragon that can take on the powers of a different aspect as needed. That can act as your specialization switch. Simple.



How would a mortal be able to jump from aspect to aspect and gain their powers? Further, if a mortal's powers are based on a dragon flight, what would their base abilities be?

With the dragon-based concept for example, the base abilities would your dragon abilities, like Dragon Fire or Dragon Form.

you did play BfA right??
they empowered the heart of azeroth they would empower the mortal in the same way....like multiple npcs have done to players and other npcs throughout the game...do you even play WoW??

[Triceron]

Which of my statements did you refute? That NPC abilities don't go to professions? That NPC abilities don't have level requirements? That Blingtrons aren't the same thing a Clockwork Gnomes? That building a Blingtron that hands out party gifts isn't the same thing as building a factory that mass produces kamikaze bots?

All of the above on the basis that Blizzard doesn't base any of their class design on those criteria.

There is no consistency between NPCs and classes, that is the issue with your argument. It's based on confirmation bias, nit on what the devs actually have stated in interviews and postmortems.

As for Blingtron not being like Clockwork Goblin, they're both constructs based on races. How is that not similar? Blingtron is literally a clockwork gnome. Do Blingtrons fight? Yes they do.

Yeah, here's the problem; Warlock metamorphosis was mechanically different than DH metamorphosis, so it could have remained in place as well. Despite Blizzard's official statements, their goal was to completely purge all aspects of metamorphosis from the Warlock class. We know this because they nuked Demonology from orbit in 6.2 and literally told players not to play the spec. And when I say nuked, I'm talking about nerfing it to the point where it was nearly unplayable. If you have any example of something like that happening in the history of WoW, please show me.

So yeah, it was entirely about metamorphosis. Blizzard knew that there was no way they were bringing in a Demon Hunter class as long as Warlocks had that ability, whether it was the Demonology version, or the Glyphed version.

The Warlock fantsay was never about Metamorphosis. It's that simple. Does Gul'dan in WC2 turn into a giant winged shadow demon that looks like Illidan? Or would he rather summon an army of minions like the WC1 Warlock class fantasy? It's clear why it changed.

Well no, there were Orc Warlocks in WC3 as well. Their abilities were fire bolts, Frenzy, and Cripple.

They also had monsoon and raise skeleton :/

Abilities don't mean much if the class fantasy isn't covering Warlock NPCs in War3 which had Necro abilities.

The Bard has NO warcraft abilities. That's the point. Without those abilities we have no direction to take the concept.

Well that's correlation. They obviously made new ones for the April Fools, and consider that all of the Tinker abilities you are so fond of are also April Fools abilities.

Which would also mean that those concepts took precedence and had higher consideration than Monks and Demon Hunters.

Does that matter?

Nope.

Right. So why discount the Bard any more than Tinkers on the basis of abilities when both concepts are rooted in April Fools and both have characters representing them in HOTS with full list of abilities? ETC and Gazlowe are your Bard and Tinker, both based on April Fools.

The only difference is the Bard does not have a rooted concept in WC3 whereas the Tinker does, simple as that.

[Kithelle]

Im sorry I didn’t know WoW lore stopped progressing after WC3

I mean it’s not like the dragons have been feeding their power into the HoA
It’s not like Wrathion took mortals as hard personal guard
It’s not like he had the idea of making an army to fight the legion then disappeared to go find the dragon isles (island expedition lore)
I don’t think he would empower mortals to be able to fight the demons and other similar entities and the other aspects wouldn’t go along with it
“I won’t attack other class concepts” lasted half a page eh?

Dragons are a race
Dragon knight is a class

And with the return of galakrond and the inevitable creation of the infinite (galakrond remains missing from the map that was data mined and the fact nozdormu wasn’t found during BfA and chromie was the stand in)

Fight dragon fire with dragon fire

It's not like Dragons have been severely weakened and depleted to the point they lost their immortality
It's not like every Dragon that has used and empowered mortals were evil
It's not like other than a select few individuals most Dragons have been keeping to themselves
It's not like we had to help a Dragon flight fight off simple withered

[Revamp Man]

It's not like Dragons have been severely weakened and depleted to the point they lost their immortality
It's not like every Dragon that has used and empowered mortals were evil
It's not like other than a select few individuals most Dragons have been keeping to themselves
It's not like we had to help a Dragon flight fight off simple withered

1. lost immortality but still have the blessings of titans...bfa questline
2. so when the dragons helped us in boss fights they were evil?? the dragons empowering the heart were evil??
3. that kinda helps against the idea of dragons being a class (they are a race anyways but hey cant have classes that go against tinker boys thoughts)
4. its almost as though that flight was a small part of a bigger flight and their leader was weakened while they were over run by large amounts of enemies...again why do ppl act like they havent played this game

[Triceron]

It's not like Dragons have been severely weakened and depleted to the point they lost their immortality
It's not like every Dragon that has used and empowered mortals were evil
It's not like other than a select few individuals most Dragons have been keeping to themselves
It's not like we had to help a Dragon flight fight off simple withered

Dragons are still super important in the story, otherwise Yseras death and rebirth would have been pointless.

Even when 'nerfed', they still hold over powers that mere mortals don't possess, like thr emerald dream connections, life-giving fire and sands of time.

[Revamp Man]

Dragons are still super important in the story, otherwise Yseras death and rebirth would have been pointless.

Even when 'nerfed', they still hold over powers that mere mortals don't possess, like thr emerald dream connections, life-giving fire and sands of time.

no no no you dont get it

time travel isnt super powerful
obviously wrathion is super duper evil which is why he has empowered mortals twice

and the old blue dragon dying due to lack of mana and his clutch being used as batteries by crack addicts means the dragons as a whole are super weak

[Orby]

I hope to god they don't pull the same 2-race class bullshit like they did with Demon Hunter.

Mag'har (Iron Horde), Orcs, Goblins, Blood Elves, Undead, Humans, Dwarves, Dark Irons, Void Elves (literally former Blood Elves), Draenei, Gnomes, and Mechagnomes ALL have backgrounds in machinery. I'd be willing to admit that Mechagnomes, Goblins, and Gnomes would likely be the lore-forefathers of the class, just like Belves and Nelves are for Demon Hunters, but yeah we're so deep into Azeroth lore now that we've all seen these races display some form or another of ingenuity when it comes to machinery.

Oh and also- I'd absolutely love it if the Exo-suit tank spec and Torbjorn ranged DPS spec (assuming there are) had turrets/suits themed after their races art style. The Dwarven exo suit could look like Ulduar tech. The Dark Iron's like Dark Iron Golems, the Mag'har's like Iron Horde, Goblin's like Shredders, etc. None of this would be stuff we haven't already seen exist in azeroth already.

Oh I do think there are more than just gnomes and goblins who can be Tinker in lore, but its more for me personally as I do not currently have a gnome alt and I will only accept Tinker:P

[Unbelievable]

I'm convinced anyone who thinks tinker couldn't be a class just lacks imagination.

I wouldn't say i'm against the Tinker.
I'm against Teriz.

That item has a 30 minute cool down.

And....?

You said it can't be translated into an item. It, definitely, can. Visuals, functionality and all. It just won't be on the scale of a class ability, like you want it to.

The difference being that we have engineers in mech suits as raid bosses. I don’t recall a baker ever being a raid boss in WoW.

Warlocks have a talent where they summon a Fel lord that blocks the path of anyone or anything that crosses it. So that would be incorrect. Alternatively, the factory could simply not block anyone.

You mean this?:

Call Fel Lord PvP Talent
Tank Specs – Row 1 PvP Talent
2 Soul Shards 40 yd range
Instant cast 1.5 min cooldown
Requires Warlock (Demonology)
Requires level 20
Summon a fel lord to guard the location for 15 sec. Any enemy that comes within 6 yards will suffer up to 5% of their maximum health in damage, and players struck will be stunned for 1 sec.

Nothing about blocking.

As I just said, pocket factory doesn't exist in canon anymore. And DKs and necromancers are different because unlike tinker, they both exist separate from each other in the game. Meanwhile, there is literally zero separation between tinker and engineer.

Yet, Dark Rangers are just like Hunters?
You and Teriz are both comedians.
You, guys, dismiss everyone else's class concepts yet, you push for your own Necromancer/Tinker classes.

I argue against tinker because people like Teriz want it to remain restricted to gnomes and goblins. Which makes me prefer that the class just never becomes playable.

There's nothing wrong with limiting it to Gnomes and Goblins. The problem arises when he asks for Vulpera Tinkers, which nothing in lore supports it yet, he dismisses Dwarves which are, literally, Tinkers in lore.

So do you think Blizzard is done bringing classes into WoW?

Same question to you.
You think that Blizzard is gonna add Tinkers next expansion and just stop adding other classes just because you don't want them.

It has nothing to do with the aesthetics. The races themselves look like utter dogshit and their voicelines are grating. I don't care if the look of the abilities would maybe look like goblin stuff. I just don't want to play the two worst races in the game.

- - - Updated - - -



Yes. I really do. And I hope that I'm right. Because they can't even balance the ones that are already in the game.

So, don't play them. Problem solved.
You and Teriz are delusional if you think that Blizzard is never going to add new classes into the game. Or, add the classes you, guys, want and then stop, completely.

This is purely head canon. You have no idea if they retain any knowledge or not. You're applying real world logic to a video game. A video game where we have talking trees and elves who can turn into birds.

A mech that is absurd to gather mats for, can't leave Broken Isles, and can't loot anything. Quite the engineering feat.

But other races simply don't fit the class. Just like other races simply don't fit Demon Hunter except Blood and Night Elves.

Said the guy who gave karate friends, as an example.

That is the gameplay of the mech. Not the lore.

Wrong. Dwarves fit the class. They are Tinkers in lore. Kind of a hypocritic thing to say, for a guy who offers Vulpera as Tinker, with no real reason.

.Also, necromancers and death knights are linked but not the same. Are you going to say that priests and paladins are the same because they both wield the Light?

Are you going to say that Dark Rangers and Hunters are the same because they both use bows and arrows?

Trolls aren't fans of technology. Vulpera seems curious and resourceful enough. Plus who doesn't like little tech fox people?

Let me guess. You're a Ratchet and Clank fan. That's why you want them, right?

https://www.wowhead.com/npc=138151/tinkerin-taji

That's, actually, quite interesting.
I'm gonna up it, by two:
https://www.wowhead.com/npc=20890/siflaed-coldhammer
https://www.wowhead.com/npc=74688/mad-tinker

We, basically, solved the problem of faction balance:
Gnomes - Goblins
Mechagnomes - Vulpera
Dwarves - Forsaken.

Sure, if they were the right size.....

According to who, besides you?

Actually it matters quite a bit. Lore wise there’s no reason for physically strong races to build mechs. Gameplay-wise an Orc mechs would have to be significantly larger than an Orc to have an effect and not look silly. That can cause clipping and visibility issues. Smaller races match the lore, and prevent visibility problems.

Then, they don't need magic either. Yet, they do use it. Your logic is flawed from the base.
We, already, have Orcs in mechs in game. So, everything about silliness and size is irrelevant.

Dark Ranger: Hunters had Black Arrow for years.

Demon Hunters: Warlocks had Metamorphosis for years.

At most I could see it break down as Horde: Goblin, Vulpera, Orc, Maghar
Alliance: Gnome, Mechgnome, Dwarf, Dark Iron.

Nightborne and L Draenei are more of a long shot, but possible.

Personally I’d be surprised if they went beyond Goblins, Gnomes and their allied races.

I definitely think you’re going to see some elements of D.va and Torb within the class.

You forgot forsaken.

I thought you disliked my Torbjorn spec concept.

Hate to break it to you but it has about as much of a chance of happening as the Pirate class does. They're not going to invest literal tens of millions of dollars into building a class that can instead be realized through a spec instead.

Even Demon Hunter was unique enough to stand on its own. Can you imagine any other class being a glaive wielding, fel-fuelled shapeshifter? Definitely not Warlock, as to make an agi-melee-spec for a cloth class would be crazy.

As for Dark Ranger? In a Venn diagram sense it has way too much thematic overlap with MM Hunter and what Death Knights can do. Honestly it's more likely that Unholy get reworked to be a bow-wielding ranged plate spec OR sword-caster that can fight from a distance like SV hunter OR Marksmanship finds itself more dark ranger themed abilities.

Because when the song's been sung there's no way, with conclusive evidence or not, there will ever be a class that can effectively be boiled down to "its a spooky bowman" when there are already 2 "spooky" classes, and 1 "bowman" class.

case closed get on with your day bud learn to let go

What? Blizzard is never going to redesign the Death Knight as a bow-wielding class.

You forget that the Dark Ranger could include the Priestess of the Moon and Sea Witch, as well, which are not spooky.

And you forget that we, already, have 2 holy light wielding classes. So, having another bow class is not a problem. Especially, if they redesign the Hunter to be more of an Axes, Gun and Spear wielding class.

You do know that applying real world logic to fantasy or video games is textbook head canon right?

Yes. Like saying a Tinker's explosives are stronger than Hunter's explosives, based on real-life.

Yes to both.



Blizzard shared it, since we didn't get a DH class until Metamorphosis was completely purged from Warlocks. I'm still shocked there was no Dark Ranger class in Shadowlands. I guess despite the loss of Black Arrow, Hunters still cover it.

Wrong. Otherwise, they wouldn't have added the Demon Hunter.

You argued that black arrow covers it. Now, it is covered without it? stay consistent....

Without the abilities you have no class fantasy. Look at the situation with Bards for example. No one here can agree exactly what the class fantasy would be because they have no abilities to show what that fantasy is.

Actually, there are E.T.C and Lucio gameplay in HotS to rely on.

That's great, but there's really no basis for it in Warcraft. The only concept really that we've seen are Dragons disguising themselves as mortals and influencing the story. You can definitely make a class out of that.

As for Rogues, you got the Stealth and Ambush from Blademasters, Hide and Envenomed Weapon from Rogue/Bandit creeps, and other junk from other heroes.

I only have a laser focus on WC3 and HotS because that has been the source of 100% of WoW's expansion classes. Why would we be laser focused anywhere else?

There's no such class, either. Do you see the hypocrisy in that? You're dismissing his idea, saying it's not based on lore and then, you shove your own idea which, is also not based on lore. The only lore class is the Dragonsworn.

Rogues didn't take Stealth and Ambush from the Blademaster. Ambush wasn't a Blademaster ability, and Stealth isn't called Windwalk. In WC3, it was an invisibility.

The only reason you're focused on WC3 and HotS is because of me. I pointed it out for you.

.The only hard part for Blizzard is figuring out which Dragonflights to base specs on.

It's easy:
Blue and Bronze Dragonflight = Arcane and Time magic DPS spec.
Red and Green dragonflights = Nature and Fire healing spec.
Black Dragonflight = Earth and Fire tanking spec.

And like I said, players want to be Wrathion or Kalecgos, they don't want to be some mortal who runs around and kisses dragon butt for power.

It's like saying Death Knights kiss the ass of the Lich King, Demon Hunters kiss the ass of Illidan and Monks kiss the ass of their Monk trainers.
They are their disciples. They gain their masters' abilities. That's why Arthas says: "I bestow upon you, my chosen knight, my powers". That's why you can turn into an Undead using Lichborne, and into a Demon using Metamorphosis. A Dragonswon would be no different. The Dragonflights will bestow their powers upon us, which would include transforming into a Dragon. Plus, they might add a Dragonman race.

Oh I do think there are more than just gnomes and goblins who can be Tinker in lore, but its more for me personally as I do not currently have a gnome alt and I will only accept Tinker:P

You do know the Gnome racials point towards Arcane Mage, right?