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

[Teriz]

Are they going to design a class on the off chance it boosts the Gnome/Goblin population?

I think they'd design a class on the off chance that they're missing a significant RPG archetype in their class lineup.

I have no doubt there is an a potential audience for a technology class, artificer has been a D&D class and other fantasy video games have featured such an archetype but how much do you think that audience crosses over with the audience who like wacky gnome/goblin stuff? do they want robot chickens, deth lazors, clockwork midgets, oversized rockets, shrink rays ect or do they want this:
Just because people may desire a technology class doesn't mean they also want the baggage of it also being about wacky gnome/goblin shit

Blizzard tends to like to have their own take on things, so you're not going to see the sort of thing you see in FF or D&D. And yeah, I think there is an appeal for the whacky technology of Goblins and Gnomes. Obviously there's a point that would be too much, but I think that point is pretty far and the WC3 abilities and prominent tech characters haven't crossed that bar yet.

Like i said you're adding way to much additional baggage by saying those all those things have to be expressed in a way that's whimsical and wacky, it would certainly kill my interest in such a class, just because it's not whimsical doesn't automatically make it dark and edgy.

I don't believe it's baggage. If the class is interesting and fun to play people will play it, simple as that. Now if you think something like this is too much for you;



Then yeah, the Tinker class might not be for you.

Druid is also open to Night Elves one of the most popular races in the game in general and Worgen, Zandalari, Trolls, Tauren aren't to shaby in terms of population, it's also a more diverse range of options than just various comic relief midgets so even someone who doesn't like a particular races aesthetic still has potentially something they like.

Yeah but here's the thing; Druid drives the population of all of those races. The top class by far in Worgen, Zandalari, Trolls, and Tauren is the Druid class. So is it the races, or the classes available to them?

If you're going to lift it in to include LF draenei and Nightborne you might as well lift it to include Orcs, Dwarfs, DI dwarves, Mag'har, regular Draenei and Blood elves since all of those have also shown similar tech inclinations (or magitek in the draenei and Belf's case), additionally if you're already including non-goblins/gnomes/vulpera you kind of have to drop the more wacky stuff since that stuff doesn't really fit the more serious takes on technology/magitek we're seen from LF draenei and Nightborne

When I said 10 maximum, I was including Orcs and Dwarves. The other direction this could go is making it straight mechanical with Gnomes, Goblins, Orc, Dwarves, and their allied races. That brings the racial total to 8. Again, it all depends on how Blizzard wants to structure the class. Do they want to go mech? Do they want to make it gun-based? Do they want claw packs? Do they want the OW Trio (Mech, Turret, Bio Guns)? Etc. The thing is, the more races you add, the less individual racial customization you get, and the more generic the class becomes. You limit this to four races and there's a chance you can get individual tech for each race. You expand it to 10-16 races and everyone is going to have the same stuff, and some of the shine is lost.

- - - Updated - - -

Anybody can pick up a fun and pull the trigger. Vulpera, for the most part, have absolutely no idea how technology works so there is no legitimate reason to campaign for vulpera tinkers just because they use the goblin skeleton. You really need to stop insisting gnomes and goblins are the only races that can be tinkers. Making the least popular races into a brand new class would be a horrendous mistake.

Tinkerin' Taji sells an arclight spanner. Arclight Spanners require some decent knowledge of engineering, and Taji is in the middle of nowhere.

As for not knowing what the playerbase is for a race, that's nonsense. We know exactly how many of each race are played. so those very small minority might have fun but literally everyone else would just be pissed that a new class got restricted to shit races.

As I've said before, basing the success of a future class on the current population of a race is silly. Trolls for example had rather abysmal population numbers until they got Druids in Cataclysm. Now I think something like 40% of Troll players are Druids. Take Druids out of the equation, and Trolls would be one of the least played races in WoW. I'm pretty sure the same applies to Worgen, I think about 35-40% of Worgen players are Druids as well.

So instead of looking at the current racial population, consider what a class that has similar benefits that the Druid class offers could do for the populations of Goblins, Gnomes and Mechagnomes. A mech-based Tinker would have the benefits of the Druid class, yet not require any of the Druid class' abilities, and solve the issues that many players supposedly have with Goblins and Gnomes in general.

[Imperator4321]

When I said 10 maximum, I was including Orcs and Dwarves. The other direction this could go is making it straight mechanical with Gnomes, Goblins, Orc, Dwarves, and their allied races. That brings the racial total to 8. Again, it all depends on how Blizzard wants to structure the class. Do they want to go mech? Do they want to make it gun-based? Do they want claw packs? Do they want the OW Trio (Mech, Turret, Bio Guns)? Etc. The thing is, the more races you add, the less individual racial customization you get, and the more generic the class becomes. You limit this to four races and there's a chance you can get individual tech for each race. You expand it to 10-16 races and everyone is going to have the same stuff, and some of the shine is lost.

I don't see the problem with it being more than 10 races
Alliance: Gnome, Mechagnome, Dwarf, Dark Iron, Draenei, Lightforged
Horde: Goblin, Vulpera, Orc, Mag'har, Blood Elf, Nightborne

Thats 12 races, equally distributed faction wise and can work with 3 animation sets for alliance races (gnome tech), horde races (goblin tech) and magitek races (draenei, blood elves, nightborne, lightforged) and an individual mech design (which would be a single design so it's a one third of the work that goes into a druid race). distribution is on par with Shaman and Warlock.

No one is suggesting a Tinker class should be like warriors, rogues, hunters or monks in that practically everyone can be one, a number of races don't fit a technology themed class like Night Elves, Tauren, Trolls, Pandaren or Worgen.

As for the argument about adding more races causing it to lose shine, this is the same argument people made when Paladins got expanded beyond their initial far more specific original concept (holy light worshipping knights) with the addition of Tauren and later Zandalari paladins, it's bad argument when it was made there and it's a bad argument here, nothing about a more diverse range of options sullies or ruins any particular version, Human paladins weren't ruined by the addition of Tauren Paladins, Blood Elf paladins weren't ruined by the addition of Zandalari paladins, its a different conception of what a "Paladin" is but still holds true to the basic concept (holy warrior) the addition of Draenei Tinkers doesn't damage the purity of the original Goblin Tinker concept, it just gives a different depiction of what being a "Tinker" is while still being about the basic concept (technology)

[TheFirstOnes]

Not the classes, the characters they’re based on; Arthas, Chen, and Illidan. All lore characters from WC3.

Ohhh, you're saying the characters and their classes need to be represented in lore before being a possibility in game? Cause, that's a mix between true and untrue tbh.

[Teriz]

I don't see the problem with it being more than 10 races
Alliance: Gnome, Mechagnome, Dwarf, Dark Iron, Draenei, Lightforged
Horde: Goblin, Vulpera, Orc, Mag'har, Blood Elf, Nightborne

Thats 12 races, equally distributed faction wise and can work with 3 animation sets for alliance races (gnome tech), horde races (goblin tech) and magitek races (draenei, blood elves, nightborne, lightforged) and individual mech design (which would be a single design so it's a quarter of the work that goes into a druid race). distribution is on par with Shaman and Warlock.

As for the argument about adding more races causing it to lose shine, this is the same argument people made when Paladins got expanded beyond their initial far more specific original concept (holy light worshipping knights) with the addition of Tauren and later Zandalari paladins, it's bad argument when it was made there and it's a bad argument here, nothing about a more diverse range of options sullies or ruins any particular version, Human paladins weren't ruined by the addition of Tauren Paladins, Blood Elf paladins weren't ruined by the addition of Zandalari paladins, its a different conception of what a "Paladin" is but still holds true to the basic concept (holy warrior) the addition of Draenei Tinkers doesn't damage the purity of the original Goblin Tinker concept, it just gives a different depiction of what being a "Tinker" is while still being about the basic concept (technology)

Yeah, but Paladins are only available to 8 races, 3 of which are Allied races.

You're pushing for 12 races for a Tinker class, a class that honestly should have less races available to it than Paladin since more races in WoW utilize the light than technology.

Draenei aren't really Tinkers though, they're artificers. Artificers don't use mechanical technology, they use Naaru technology which is crystal based. So if a player rolls a Draenei Tinker hoping to use technology more akin to the Draenei and they end up seeing all this Goblin-style tech everywhere, they're going to be disappointed.

People like to bring up Monks, but people really should remember that Blizzard pretty much forced every race into a Pandaren-style class. Would that work for Goblin tech? I'm not so sure. I mean stuff like this;



is something I can't see on many races outside of Goblins and Gnomes.

[jellmoo]

And the pattern would have held if we didn’t already have a death class in WoW.

Not necessarily true. This really assumes that they would not create another Death themed class when we already have examples of classes with similar themes. It assumes that the class itself would have to be death themed, when it could be something that would be great at combating death instead (a life themed class, for example). It also assumes that even if they had used a different theme for the expansion that it would have opened up the possibility of a new class. It's entirely possible we weren't gonna get a class regardless of the theme.

After the Tinker I think you’re looking at prestige classes based on the current classes, or possibly even class skins. Consider that after the Tinker, pretty much every RPG archetype will have been filled.

I'm a big proponent of Class Skins, so I can't really argue there. Though, to be fair, I think that a class skin would cover the Tinker perfectly fine, so I could see that being their next go to step when it comes to covering the bases.

I really have no idea why Blizzard does it that way. However based on the precedent set, it’s rather obvious that they’re doing it that way.

Nothing says that they do it this way though. Just noticing a pattern with a sample size of three doesn't mean much, especially when one of those three is a nebulous connection at best. It's not so much that "Blizzard does it that way" as it is that "you see a pattern and assume that Blizzard does it that way".

[Imperator4321]

Yeah, but Paladins are only available to 8 races, 3 of which are Allied races.

You're pushing for 12 races for a Tinker class, a class that honestly should have less races available to it than Paladin since more races in WoW utilize the light than technology.

And my list there was 6 core races and 6 allied races many of which are just their counterparts.

Shaman was also initially available 4 races in single faction because it's original concept was based on the various horde spellcaster units in WC3 and now includes dwarves, chime worshipping space goats and naval themed humans, that didn't ruin the original concept, the Orc shaman is still there for those that like that specific vision of what a "Shaman" is.

Draenei aren't really Tinkers though, they're artificers. Artificers don't use mechanical technology, they use Naaru technology which is crystal based. So if a player rolls a Draenei Tinker hoping to use technology more akin to the Draenei and they end up seeing all this Goblin-style tech everywhere, they're going to be disappointed.

This is just semantics, it's still technology just using a different power source, they still design and build it (they got the Exodar from the Naaru, the Draenei have had cystal technology from before they left Argus). This argument also doesn't apply to Dwarves or Orcs since they use literally the same technology as Gnomes and Goblins, just less wacky.

This is also assuming it's based purely on the idea of wacky Gnome/Goblin shit instead of something more general or even having different visuals based on race (class skins are a fairly popular concept and distinct visuals for different Tinker races could be a good way to show off the concept)

People like to bring up Monks, but people really should remember that Blizzard pretty much forced every race into a Pandaren-style class. Would that work for Goblin tech? I'm not so sure. I mean stuff like this

Difference is that the Monk is based on fairly stock martial arts/wuxia concepts. The Drunken Boxer (brewmaster), The shaolin/bare handed martial artist (Windwalker) and Mysticism (Mistweaver) the most Pandaren specific it gets is the Mists and August Celestials (who are also based on the cardinal guardians so not even that wow specific) otherwise it's a fairly stock martial artist, it's just pandaren in the context of WoW's universe, it has some baggage of being the "pandaren class" but i could show it to someone who doesn't know about the pandaren whos just a fan of Wuxia or Kung Fu movies and they'd think it's cool and recognizable the fact that it's attached to fat panda people doesn't impact them because they can be other races and be 90% divorced from anything to do with the Pandaren.

What if i tell someone who likes say the artificer from D&D or the engineer from guild wars "WoW has an engineer/artificer class" I show them it and it's about wacky chicken bombs, clockwork midgets, shrink rays and is exlcusive to comic relief midget races? there is a significant difference is the degree of baggage your attaching to each class in terms of visuals/aesthetic since your also attaching a very specific tone to it.

[shoc]

I can't even take you seriously anymore. It's a fucking race, dude. That'd be like making murloc into a class. Do you really not see how fucking asinine your comments about making dragons a class is? BLIZZARD HASN'T MADE DRAGONS A CLASS.

Malkorok and Nefarian. They created Chromatus and they're both dead. Do you even fucking read the lore or do you just read bits and pieces before making your ignorant comments? What you're proposing is fucking stupid through and through. I feel like you're just posting satire now. There is no way you can actually be serious about making dragons a class when they're ALREADY a race. A race that is going extinct because they're all sterile, mind you.

- - - Updated - - -



I'll answer the question for him. No, he does not actually read the lore. He reads small snippets then makes his asinine comments based on fractions of lore. The lore isn't obscure in the slightest when it comes to Chromatus. It's pretty well documented in Twilight of the Aspects. But the more he talks about making a race into a class, the more we really need to start disregarding all of his posts from here on out.

I think you're not being creative enough with how Dragons could be both a race AND a class.

In WoW, Dragons have humanoid disguises based on the Mortal races.

So, in a Dragon-based Class - Race-choice is merely the disguise chosen by the player Dragon.

So a Gnome Dragonsworn is how you get something like Chromie, Night Elf Dragonsworn for something like Ysera, etc.

[Teriz]

Not necessarily true. This really assumes that they would not create another Death themed class when we already have examples of classes with similar themes. It assumes that the class itself would have to be death themed, when it could be something that would be great at combating death instead (a life themed class, for example). It also assumes that even if they had used a different theme for the expansion that it would have opened up the possibility of a new class. It's entirely possible we weren't gonna get a class regardless of the theme.

I really don't see them creating another death/shadow class. Consider that pretty much the entire spectrum of death is pretty much covered by existing classes to the point that we're even seeing overlap of shadow-based themes in our current class lineup. Despite what some argue here, necromantic themes are covered quite well by DKs and Warlocks. Other aspects of death are covered by Shadow Priests (Madness, Insanity, darkness) and Demon Hunters (Sacrifice, Vengeance, hatred). We have 9.5 shadow based specs compared to 7 nature specs, 1.5 Arcane specs, 1.5 fire specs, 1.5 Frost specs, 4.5 Holy specs, etc. I don't think we really need more.

I'm a big proponent of Class Skins, so I can't really argue there. Though, to be fair, I think that a class skin would cover the Tinker perfectly fine, so I could see that being their next go to step when it comes to covering the bases.

What class would be able to cover a Tinker as a class skin and handle its WC3 and HotS abilities?

Nothing says that they do it this way though. Just noticing a pattern with a sample size of three doesn't mean much, especially when one of those three is a nebulous connection at best. It's not so much that "Blizzard does it that way" as it is that "you see a pattern and assume that Blizzard does it that way".

Well to be fair, all classes contain WC3 abilities, and the majority (if not all) WoW classes have their roots in WC3.

[Ielenia]

Come on, @Teriz. I'm still waiting for the answers to my questions:
• Which character in WoW uses "robo goblin defense"?
• Why do you say there are no human and night elf tinkers in the lore when we see them in the Alliance Mechagon intro cinematic?
• Why do you say you "trust the game" when you go against what the game shows us with fire magic creating soul shards?

And more, which you can see here.

[RobertMugabe]

How much of an audience do you think exists for this kind of zany/whimsical Gnome and Goblin centric Tinker class? do you think Blizzard would design an entire class (and by extension an expansion) for the very small subset of the fanbase that likes Gnomes & Goblins?

Demon Hunter worked because it's the "illidan class" Illidan is up there with Arthas and Sylvanas in terms of popularity, hes an S tier character. Gazlowe and Mekkatoque are D tier at best, people would not get excited over a "Mekkatoque class" or a "Gazlowe class" especially if it was Gnome/Goblin exclusive, it would be met with derision and mockery at best or utter disdain at worst.

If such a class would exist it would need to be more open to other races the same way Monk was open despite being so pandaren themed (even then i'd argue Monk can be more divorced since it's concepts are based on martial arts archetypes and asian style monasticism/mysticism which are fairly standard concepts for fantasy monks so it has appeal to those who like those concepts not just liking the pandaren) , Gnome/Goblin exclusivity just would not work as a concept even if you expanded it to include Vulpera.

History has shown us that classes are popular based on their performance and aesthetics are just of secondary nature. We see the same shit with covenants right now.
Monks weren't initially popular, because they were quite weak and only later on in MoP they became really good. It was actually WoD were they were actually truly an OP class. DH and DK were op af in their beginnings (and easy to master).

So if Tinkers were exclusive to Gnomes/Goblins they would still be a popular choice if they were similarly like DH's an OP and easy to master class early on.

That being said, I think that Tinkers should be available to more races overall, though I do agree that their "culture" and aesthetics should be gnomish/goblin in nature (just like monks are tied to pandaria) and not just a "generic" engineer type class. So let's say a human tinker would be someone who learned it from gnomes and was probably part of some gnomish tinker faction.

Vulpera as a tinker candidate makes absolutely no sense and I am not quite sure why people keep suggesting them. Just because they are a small race, doesn't mean that they are any similar to gnomes and goblins or that they're technologically advanced.
Quite ironically, Vulpera Tinkers are most likely the main reason why some people want tinkers to be Gnome/Goblin exclusive as if even a "dumb" race like Vulpera could be one, then every race can and then the whole concept of that class would just be boring and generic.
If I were to play a generic class, then I'd pick a hunter.

Also regarding monks: My main is one and even though I am not a fan of eastern asian culture at all, I still very much like their pandaria aesthetics and their lore being rooted to the pandaren history. If they were just a martial arts class, then it would be extremely boring.

[Teriz]

And my list there was 6 core races and 6 allied races many of which are just their counterparts.

Yeah, Paladin have 5 core races and 3 allied races. So you're saying a Tinker class should be more widespread than Paladin when less races are shown to use technology.

Shaman was also initially available 4 races in single faction because it's original concept was based on the various horde spellcaster units in WC3 and now includes dwarves, chime worshipping space goats and naval themed humans, that didn't ruin the original concept, the Orc shaman is still there for those that like that specific vision of what a "Shaman" is.

Actually Shaman were only available to 3 races, Orc, Tauren, and Trolls. Yes it was eventually expanded, but it was expanded over multiple expansions, not all at first. In TBC Draenei became Shaman so at that point there were only 4 Shaman races. Then in Cataclysm Dwarves and Goblins could be Shaman, brining the total to 6. So again, a very gradual increases over time as the lore expanded.

Again it should be noted that Druids only have 4 core races and 3 allied races, yet it is the most popular class in the game.

This is just semantics, it's still technology just using a different power source, they still design and build it (they got the Exodar from the Naaru, the Draenei have had cystal technology from before they left Argus). This argument also doesn't apply to Dwarves or Orcs since they use literally the same technology as Gnomes and Goblins, just less wacky.

It's not just semantics, it's look and style as well;



That's not something that Gnomes and Goblins build.

This is also assuming it's based purely on the idea of wacky Gnome/Goblin shit instead of something more general or even having different visuals based on race (class skins are a fairly popular concept and distinct visuals for different Tinker races could be a good way to show off the concept)

Well to be fair, the Tinker concept in of itself is based on the Goblin Tinker hero. So yes it will be based on Goblin shit, with some Gnome icing on top.

Difference is that the Monk is based on fairly stock martial arts/wuxia concepts. The Drunken Boxer (brewmaster), The shaolin/bare handed martial artist (Windwalker) and Mysticism (Mistweaver) the most Pandaren specific it gets is the Mists and August Celestials (who are also based on the cardinal guardians so not even that wow specific) otherwise it's a fairly stock martial artist, it's just pandaren in the context of WoW's universe, it has some baggage of being the "pandaren class" but i could show it to someone who doesn't know about the pandaren whos just a fan of Wuxia or Kung Fu movies and they'd think it's cool and recognizable the fact that it's attached to fat panda people doesn't impact them because they can be other races and be 90% divorced from anything to do with the Pandaren.

What if i tell someone who likes say the artificer from D&D or the engineer from guild wars "WoW has an engineer/artificer class" I show them it and it's about wacky chicken bombs, clockwork midgets, shrink rays and is exlcusive to comic relief midget races? there is a significant difference is the degree of baggage your attaching to each class in terms of visuals/aesthetic since your also attaching a very specific tone to it.

Again, Blizzard likes to put their own spin on their concepts, and this has especially been true with the expansion classes. It is highly unlikely you're going to get a generic D&D class, and it's highly more likely you're going to get a Gnome/Goblin themed class. As it should be, since it is those two races that are the most technology influenced races in the game and always have been. I think your friend would be just fine.

[Dagul]

First post on mmo just to show support to . . . TINKER TEAM !

Goblin and gnome are funny class concept that lighten all the dark, mature and edgyness of our loved warcraft universe

Warcraft technology is unpredicatble and fun, dethlaser and chicken ray ? Totally need it !

Tinker have legitimate place as a class egual to all other idea, even dark ranger or necromancer

But the tinker has that fresh feeling and potential for many new mechanic (turret, mobile and immobile bomb, utility and form ala druid)

If we follow class release order (let's suppose it exist), we had dark class, then "out of place" and back to dark with DH, soooo why not the Tinker as next one !

I would love it to be gnome and goblin only, as to have more customisation, and to build new lore more solidly (let's imagine big concurrence between gnome and goblin after what happen in BfA events with their racial leaders, experiences on azerite, island expedition test for tinker squad)

But we seen many other races have uses of tech devise, making mech and automate, be itmagic or techno powered

So i hope next expansion we go back to a transformed azeroth that we have te reconquer from -insert next invader here- and that our smart-ass races have created reliable tech to use on battlefield thanks to ressources not spend in shadowland and all that azertite left on azeroth

Love to all <3

[RobertMugabe]

First post on mmo just to show support to . . . TINKER TEAM !

Goblin and gnome are funny class concept that lighten all the dark, mature and edgyness of our loved warcraft universe

Warcraft technology is unpredicatble and fun, dethlaser and chicken ray ? Totally need it !

Tinker have legitimate place as a class egual to all other idea, even dark ranger or necromancer

But the tinker has that fresh feeling and potential for many new mechanic (turret, mobile and immobile bomb, utility and form ala druid)

If we follow class release order (let's suppose it exist), we had dark class, then "out of place" and back to dark with DH, soooo why not the Tinker as next one !

I would love it to be gnome and goblin only, as to have more customisation, and to build new lore more solidly (let's imagine big concurrence between gnome and goblin after what happen in BfA events with their racial leaders, experiences on azerite, island expedition test for tinker squad)

But we seen many other races have uses of tech devise, making mech and automate, be itmagic or techno powered

So i hope next expansion we go back to a transformed azeroth that we have te reconquer from -insert next invader here- and that our smart-ass races have created reliable tech to use on battlefield thanks to ressources not spend in shadowland and all that azertite left on azeroth

Love to all <3

Yeah the primary reason that I also want to see Tinkers is mainly because we they're quite different than any other playable class right now. Even if I might not even play one after all if they get released, I'd still much rather see Tinkers than the other ideas floating around, like dark rangers and necromancers... as if we don't already have edgy classes and hunters.

[lolmmofuture]

Also, lastly, in regards to Chromatus, I would LOVE to face him as a raid boss. He would be fuckin' perfect!!!

- - - Updated - - -



Okay, I want a Bard, but unironically. Think about it.

Bard Specs:

Tank Spec- Play tunes to protect your allies from harm, and play some war tunes to annoy the enemy, giving you immense threat, protection, and damage potential. Ya know, the usual tank stuff, but with tunes. Weapon options: String instruments with the stick as a 1 handed weapon and the violin or cello as the shield, or a guitar, etc.

DPS spec 1- Play heavy metal and harm your opponents ears with bass boosting damage and insane guitar or drum solos. Weapon options: 2 handed guitars, drums, etc.

DPS spec 2- Play some rap or hip hop, and use all types of gig such as jazz, or funk to groove your enemies to a hasty grave. Weapon options: Trumpets and other jazz instruments, disco ball, Microphone (for ranged rap attacks) or even a ranged Vinyl disk.

Healing spec- Play harmonious, Celtic tunes that can sooth the souls and mindsets of your allies, providing them with immense single target and AOE healing abilities. Weapon options: A harp, or some other nice instrument like that.

I know this sounds like the dumbest fucking thing ever, and may make zero sense whatsoever, but it's fucking Warcraft. We're already down the rabbit hole as it is regarding what makes sense and what doesn't anymore. Why can't Bards be a fucking class? ;P

nah it works, just look at lucio from overwatch, or sona and seraphine etc.. from league of legends, there are bards everywheere, its the only traditonal rpg class wow doesnt cover atm

[Eapoe]

Call me cynical then but I just don't buy it. Story wise, SL was the perfect expansion to introduce DRs. Outside of it I only see DRs as a hunter skin which is why I think they're not a class. If this is the plan then blizzard wouldn't wanna spoil it in said interview.

As for DH and panda, at least the legion still being a threat post TBC and pandaria existing at least made it still possible for their introduction. How the hell can a DR or necro be introduced post SL, the ULTIMATE death/sylv centric expansion.

So, the expansion where Sylvanas is one of the main enemies is a great time to introduce a class that is specifically her specially trained personal special forces that answer to her and Nathanos as a loyal Alliance/Horde class type?

[jellmoo]

I really don't see them creating another death/shadow class. Consider that pretty much the entire spectrum of death is pretty much covered by existing classes to the point that we're even seeing overlap of shadow-based themes in our current class lineup. Despite what some argue here, necromantic themes are covered quite well by DKs and Warlocks. Other aspects of death are covered by Shadow Priests (Madness, Insanity, darkness) and Demon Hunters (Sacrifice, Vengeance, hatred). We have 9.5 shadow based specs compared to 7 nature specs, 1.5 Arcane specs, 1.5 fire specs, 1.5 Frost specs, 4.5 Holy specs, etc. I don't think we really need more.

You're conflating Shadow with Death, when they aren't the same thing though. Now, I'm not saying that they should add a Death based class, it holds zero interest for me, but I do think there's room for it. Sure, Death Knights exist, but there's nothing that says that only 1 class can exist per cosmic force.

What class would be able to cover a Tinker as a class skin and handle its WC3 and HotS abilities?

To start with, my concept for a class skin is that the skin takes a class and simply replaces the art and animation with something new. The actual mechanics, the meat of the class, remains the same. So even if an ability is visually different, it still functions on a numerical level exactly the same as the original ability the base class has.

For a Tinker I'd just use the Druid kit. Bear Form is replaced by a Mech form. Cat Form is replaced by the claw pack whipping out a pair of chainsaws. Travel Form is a pair of rocket skates of something amusing. Boomkin form is the claw pack holding a giant honking gun.

For ability equivalencies, we have Force of Nature taking on the Pocket Factory ability. The afore mentioned Bear Form taking on the Robo Goblin. Starfire takes on the role of Cluster Rockets.

Every other ability then gets themed to something appropriate for a tech based class. Lasers, rockets and the like take over the bulk of Balance spells. Saws and the like take over Cat abilities. Mech strikes and short range blasts take over Bear abilities. Resto abilities get themed like alchemical infusions and sprays. Everything functions identically on a mechanical level, but is simply replaced by appropriate art and animation.

Well to be fair, all classes contain WC3 abilities, and the majority (if not all) WoW classes have their roots in WC3.

Okay. But game design doesn't come with a manual that says "Everything in this game must come from a game we released almost 20 years ago". At one point or another you have to move away from something designed by people that left the company long before you started.

[Teriz]

First post on mmo just to show support to . . . TINKER TEAM !

Goblin and gnome are funny class concept that lighten all the dark, mature and edgyness of our loved warcraft universe

Warcraft technology is unpredicatble and fun, dethlaser and chicken ray ? Totally need it !

Tinker have legitimate place as a class egual to all other idea, even dark ranger or necromancer

But the tinker has that fresh feeling and potential for many new mechanic (turret, mobile and immobile bomb, utility and form ala druid)

If we follow class release order (let's suppose it exist), we had dark class, then "out of place" and back to dark with DH, soooo why not the Tinker as next one !

I would love it to be gnome and goblin only, as to have more customisation, and to build new lore more solidly (let's imagine big concurrence between gnome and goblin after what happen in BfA events with their racial leaders, experiences on azerite, island expedition test for tinker squad)

But we seen many other races have uses of tech devise, making mech and automate, be itmagic or techno powered

So i hope next expansion we go back to a transformed azeroth that we have te reconquer from -insert next invader here- and that our smart-ass races have created reliable tech to use on battlefield thanks to ressources not spend in shadowland and all that azertite left on azeroth

Love to all <3

Yeah, I really don't think folks understand that not everyone likes dark, serious stuff all the time. I think that's why people look back so fondly on Mists of Pandaria, because it was a nice break from the dark themes of TBC, WotLK, and Cataclysm. It shocked people at first, and a lot of people derided the expansion when it was released, but now pretty much everyone views it as one of the best WoW expansions. I'm also starting to see players warm up to the Monk class, mainly because Demon Hunter is hurting right now and Monks are a close equivalent.

I think the game could use a lighthearted class. Obviously they don't have to make it insanely over top, but definitely keep some of the wackiness and light-heartedness of Goblin and Gnome technology. Keep the same vibe as the Goblin and Gnome characters you encounter in Exile's Reach, whom are humorous, crazy, and unpredictable.

- - - Updated - - -

You're conflating Shadow with Death, when they aren't the same thing though. Now, I'm not saying that they should add a Death based class, it holds zero interest for me, but I do think there's room for it. Sure, Death Knights exist, but there's nothing that says that only 1 class can exist per cosmic force.

Eh, gameplay-wise it's all shadow magic. Warlocks, Death Knights, Shadow Priests, Rogues, and Demon Hunters all use shadow magic.

We even had Void Elves and Forsaken who have shadow-based racial abilities.

To start with, my concept for a class skin is that the skin takes a class and simply replaces the art and animation with something new. The actual mechanics, the meat of the class, remains the same. So even if an ability is visually different, it still functions on a numerical level exactly the same as the original ability the base class has.

For a Tinker I'd just use the Druid kit. Bear Form is replaced by a Mech form. Cat Form is replaced by the claw pack whipping out a pair of chainsaws. Travel Form is a pair of rocket skates of something amusing. Boomkin form is the claw pack holding a giant honking gun.

For ability equivalencies, we have Force of Nature taking on the Pocket Factory ability. The afore mentioned Bear Form taking on the Robo Goblin. Starfire takes on the role of Cluster Rockets.

Every other ability then gets themed to something appropriate for a tech based class. Lasers, rockets and the like take over the bulk of Balance spells. Saws and the like take over Cat abilities. Mech strikes and short range blasts take over Bear abilities. Resto abilities get themed like alchemical infusions and sprays. Everything functions identically on a mechanical level, but is simply replaced by appropriate art and animation.

Yeah but wouldn't that require a lot of art assets? Gnomes and Goblins can't be Druids currently, and if you're jumping that far off the Druid theme, you're going to need new ability icons, names, and talent changes.

When someone says class skin, I think of something like Druid of the Nightmare, where you just get a color-swapped ability and a different looking form. Like Bear Form is a giant spider, and swipe, thrash, and other stuff remains pretty much the same. Or Hunter and Dark Ranger where you can just turn your Hunter into a Dark Ranger and Serpent Sting turns into Shadow Sting and is purple instead of green. I think when you start having to add races to classes, turn Bears into Mechs with Gnomes inside, etc. you might as well start considering adding a new class.

Okay. But game design doesn't come with a manual that says "Everything in this game must come from a game we released almost 20 years ago". At one point or another you have to move away from something designed by people that left the company long before you started.

Well that actually might not be far from the truth. Development studios do have certain philosophies and guidelines in place for how their games are to be designed. It could simply be a rule that WoW classes are only to come from that one particular source. It's definitely a possibility given how often Blizzard releases new classes for WoW (which isn't very often at all).

[Stardrift]

How much of an audience do you think exists for this kind of zany/whimsical Gnome and Goblin centric Tinker class? do you think Blizzard would design an entire class (and by extension an expansion) for the very small subset of the fanbase that likes Gnomes & Goblins?

Demon Hunter worked because it's the "illidan class" Illidan is up there with Arthas and Sylvanas in terms of popularity, hes an S tier character. Gazlowe and Mekkatoque are D tier at best, people would not get excited over a "Mekkatoque class" or a "Gazlowe class" especially if it was Gnome/Goblin exclusive, it would be met with derision and mockery at best or utter disdain at worst.

If such a class would exist it would need to be more open to other races the same way Monk was open despite being so pandaren themed (even then i'd argue Monk can be more divorced since it's concepts are based on martial arts archetypes and asian style monasticism/mysticism which are fairly standard concepts for fantasy monks so it has appeal to those who like those concepts not just liking the pandaren) , Gnome/Goblin exclusivity just would not work as a concept even if you expanded it to include Vulpera.

Many.

You're comparing what would be a regular class (ie monk, who also had very little background until MoP) to hero classes, classes based off of, well, heroes from WCIII.

DHs worked being exclusive to NE/BEs. You have no argument other than "I really don't like tinkers and think nobody else should either".

...As is with all arguments against classes, nobody truly has any proper argument against them other than "I just don't like it and think you shouldn't either". This whole "butbutbut compare to the hero classes!" "Bbbbubtbutbut racial exclusivity!" "Bbbbbbbbbbb the WCIII bible doesn't say much about it!" "Bbbutbutbutbut X is too similar to Y therefore we can't have a class that shares the same aesthetics and ideas!"

When we once had paladins and shamans, who were both bound to one race and one race only until TBC. When we have had monks, who weren't much of a thing until MoP, even having to borrow from Pandaren Brewmasters from WCIII. When we have DHs who are bound to two races and two races only. When we have priests and paladins, warlocks and DHs being classes thematically tied to one another but still being different enough.

What's next? Necromancers can't be a thing because of DKs and shadowpriests? LOL c'mon

[Teriz]

So, the expansion where Sylvanas is one of the main enemies is a great time to introduce a class that is specifically her specially trained personal special forces that answer to her and Nathanos as a loyal Alliance/Horde class type?

Sounds analogous with Death Knights. They were the Lich King's personal special forces, and he pretty much betrayed them. Same could happen for Sylvanas' forces; She could betray your character as she heads off to fight the Lich King, prompting you to rejoin the Forsaken or whatever Alliance race would be a DR. You realize the error in following Sylvanas and join the rest of the heroes in an attempt to stop her.

I think the problem with DRs was twofold; They're pretty much just undead elves, and when you get down to it, they're not much different from Hunters. I really don't think Blizzard is keen on making another elf-based class after Demon Hunters.

[Ielenia]

When we once had paladins and shamans, who were both bound to one race and one race only until TBC.

Actually... not true. Paladins were bound to two races (humans and dwarves) and shamans were bound to three races (orcs, trolls and tauren) back in vanilla WoW. You can see it here.

What's next? Necromancers can't be a thing because of DKs and shadowpriests? LOL c'mon

That's been the narrative of the anti-necromancer crowd. Well, if you replace "shadow priests" with "warlocks", that is.