1. #65121
    Quote Originally Posted by Sondrelk View Post
    Going by what happened to MM who is similarly bare bones, they will scrounge for any old ability that even remotely fits the playstyle, and possible focus on a single secondary stat like haste to gives buffs for.
    DH doesn't have MM's decade and a half backlog of other abilities, mechanics and talents though. Feels like on the class tree side in particular they're going to have to add a bunch of new stuff.

  2. #65122
    Scarab Lord The-Shan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Somewhere in the Badlands
    Posts
    4,316
    Quote Originally Posted by Hitei View Post
    You are trying to glyph the class into being a glorified demon hunter. Just regular people that have a dragon (read: demon) inside them and switch into a hybrid form for CDs. How is copying another classes' gimmick 1:1 not eroding class identity?
    Demon hunter doesn't have the option to always be in metamorphosis form, so its not the same thing, its just opening up the other half of your character customization.
    thinly veiled high elf thread

  3. #65123
    They're never going to let you fight in visage form because then 99% of the players will just be discount blood elf mages who never use dracthyr form.

  4. #65124
    Quote Originally Posted by Sondrelk View Post
    As iconic as Hogger is, it still feels weird to give a unique model to what amounts to a deprecated dungeon boss.
    I think it could be a general update for all gnolls. Obviously hogger sees spotlight first since it's the first thing to check. But yeah we need to see it in an animated stance, Tpose always looks weird.

  5. #65125
    Quote Originally Posted by Sondrelk View Post
    Going by what happened to MM who is similarly bare bones, they will scrounge for any old ability that even remotely fits the playstyle, and possible focus on a single secondary stat like haste to gives buffs for.
    I wouldn't mind if they implement a lot of legendary effects and Covenant skills because the spec feels very boring on a basic level. Unfortunately they said they won't bring forth the Sinful Brand -> Eye Beam playstyle which was fun (for me). I think Havoc could be so much more than what it is now, I hope they really put some work into the talent trees.
    MAGA - Make Alliance Great Again

  6. #65126
    Quote Originally Posted by The-Shan View Post
    Demon hunter doesn't have the option to always be in metamorphosis form
    Yes. Exactly. Because DH is not playing a demon, it's playing someone who makes use of a specific non-human power, which influences them and allows them to sometimes turn into a demon form. A thing that is really nothing like Evokers.

    But what YOU are asking for is for them to add an option so that Evoker can have that exact same design of not being a dragon, but instead being a person who makes use of dragon powers and sometimes turns into a dragon form for specific attacks or CDs.

    Hence the original statement: That you are eroding the identity and uniqueness of the class (two classes, really), and option choices for the sake of options is now always good.

  7. #65127
    I think DH and Monk can really benefit from these new trees as they never were created with these in mind unlike other classes. Hopefully Demon Hunter gets a bunch of brand new stuff.

  8. #65128
    Scarab Lord The-Shan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Somewhere in the Badlands
    Posts
    4,316
    Quote Originally Posted by Hitei View Post
    Yes. Exactly. Because DH is not playing a demon, it's playing someone who makes use of a specific non-human power, which influences them and allows them to sometimes turn into a demon form. A thing that is really nothing like Evokers.

    But what YOU are asking for is for them to add an option so that Evoker can have that exact same design of not being a dragon, but instead being a person who makes use of dragon powers and sometimes turns into a dragon form for specific attacks or CDs.

    Hence the original statement: That you are eroding the identity and uniqueness of the class (two classes, really), and option choices for the sake of options is now always good.
    Demon hunters are not demons, and Dracthyr are their visage form as well as their dragon form. It's part of their identity. You aren't a person that makes use of your dragon powers as a Dracthyr in their visage form, you are a dracthyr who identifies more with their visage form. Its a choice a Dracthyr could easily make in-character.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Gifdwarf View Post
    I think DH and Monk can really benefit from these new trees as they never were created with these in mind unlike other classes. Hopefully Demon Hunter gets a bunch of brand new stuff.
    I didn't even consider that, thats a really cool thought.
    thinly veiled high elf thread

  9. #65129
    The Lightbringer Highlord Hanibuhl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    The Netherlands
    Posts
    3,205
    I'm still very much anxious to hear the Dracthyr voices.. both male and female ... if there even is a difference.

    Nothing in the current build right now right?

  10. #65130
    If there are any other abilities from WC3 and HOTS they haven't yet used, I bet they will implement them now for their respective classes.

  11. #65131
    Quote Originally Posted by The-Shan View Post
    Demon hunters are not demons, and Dracthyr are their visage form as well as their dragon form.
    They aren't. That is why it's called a visage. It is a surface presentation, not real. It's body transmog.

    Demon Hunters are people infused with Demons.
    Dracthyr are Dragonking.
    You are trying to make Dracthyr people infused with Dragons.

    It's part of their identity. You aren't a person that makes use of your dragon powers as a Dracthyr in their visage form, you are a dracthyr who identifies more with their visage form. Its a choice a Dracthyr could easily make in-character.
    It's a mask. A person who identifies more with their visage form wouldn't be an Evoker to begin with, because why would you go off and fight people constantly turning into a dragon if you were some dumb hypothetical Dracthyr having a massive identity crisis where you were wishing you were a blood elf or human? It's not a choice a Dracthyr could easily make in-character, because they'd just stay in visage form and be a regular mage instead of choosing to fight in a way that has them constantly in and out of a form they """"don't identify with"""".

  12. #65132
    Quote Originally Posted by Highlord Hanibuhl View Post
    I'm still very much anxious to hear the Dracthyr voices.. both male and female ... if there even is a difference.

    Nothing in the current build right now right?
    I don't believe any voices have been added yet. Since voices are unlinked from body type now, I think they'll be given 2 distinct voices you can choose from. This opens up a lot of potential for other races too, I'd love to see Gilnean human voices for regular humans for example.

  13. #65133
    Quote Originally Posted by Gorsameth View Post
    Its the logical result of turning M+ into an e-sport.
    ... which was hapening before M+ even existed...
    M+ didnt cause go go go mentality, it was created to cater to it as it was very much present before

  14. #65134
    Scarab Lord The-Shan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Somewhere in the Badlands
    Posts
    4,316
    Quote Originally Posted by Hitei View Post
    They aren't. That is why it's called a visage. It is a surface presentation, not real. It's body transmog.

    Demon Hunters are people infused with Demons.
    Dracthyr are Dragonking.
    You are trying to make Dracthyr people infused with Dragons.


    It's a mask. A person who identifies more with their visage form wouldn't be an Evoker to begin with, because why would you go off and fight people constantly turning into a dragon if you were some dumb hypothetical Dracthyr having a massive identity crisis where you were wishing you were a blood elf or human? It's not a choice a Dracthyr could easily make in-character, because they'd just stay in visage form and be a regular mage instead of choosing to fight in a way that has them constantly in and out of a form they """"don't identify with"""".
    It's not an illusion, though. It's a transformation, that's how it's always been portrayed, otherwise dragons wouldn't be able to enter indoors. It's part of their identity that they choose. Wrathion is recognizable for his visage form, Alexstrasza is recognizable for her visage form. It's part of who they are.

    It's definitely not a mask, because they aren't hiding anything, they literally don't even look like humans or elves, they have horns and scales.

    A Dracthyr could easily say "Hey, I feel more at home in this body" than their big bulky dragon one. Maybe they are vain and want to look pretty by mortal standards, or maybe they simply just find it more comfortable. Let's not be reductive here, that's a cheap way to discuss things and kind of disrespectful and weird.

    They aren't mages either, because mages don't channel the power of the aspects. They are still evokers because they are using the power of the evoker. Warlocks aren't just fel mages, and priests aren't just holy mages.
    thinly veiled high elf thread

  15. #65135
    Scarab Lord Nymrohd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2022
    Location
    Greece
    Posts
    4,092
    Imo it only makes sense for Evokers to be Drac'thyr. The only thing that would make sense otherwise is something BUILT to be an evoker; a Chromatic drake or someone Dragonsworn to all five flights. Neither is really likely.
    Expanding Visage options for Evokers by itself would allow you to play Evoker as any race though, especially if they give the option to stay in Visage form in combat with quick shifts in and out of form when you use specific abilities; the problem is that however quick they may be, shifts still eat into animation time so it would mean that letting you stay in visage form would change how the class looks animated completely (probably by speeding up those skills so they can squeeze in the quick shifts).

    It absolutely makes sense to giver Drac'thyr other classes. I think it will happen and imo it may well happen DURING 10.0 especially for any class that is less animation intensive.

  16. #65136
    Quote Originally Posted by Gifdwarf View Post
    They're never going to let you fight in visage form because then 99% of the players will just be discount blood elf mages who never use dracthyr form.
    Man they should have just changed the stance of these models.. the silliouette is to well known, to not say.. hey thats the blood elf model.

  17. #65137
    Scarab Lord The-Shan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Somewhere in the Badlands
    Posts
    4,316
    Quote Originally Posted by Nymrohd View Post
    Imo it only makes sense for Evokers to be Drac'thyr. The only thing that would make sense otherwise is something BUILT to be an evoker; a Chromatic drake or someone Dragonsworn to all five flights. Neither is really likely.
    Expanding Visage options for Evokers by itself would allow you to play Evoker as any race though, especially if they give the option to stay in Visage form in combat with quick shifts in and out of form when you use specific abilities; the problem is that however quick they may be, shifts still eat into animation time so it would mean that letting you stay in visage form would change how the class looks animated completely (probably by speeding up those skills so they can squeeze in the quick shifts).

    It absolutely makes sense to giver Drac'thyr other classes. I think it will happen and imo it may well happen DURING 10.0 especially for any class that is less animation intensive.
    It wouldn't be too hard to overcome. Eyebeam for the DH for example transforms them into their metamorphosis form. Deep breath could transform you into the dragon for that duration, it would require an altered animation and a bit more work, but I don't see why it couldn't fit with a puff of smoke like the dracthyr-to-visage transformation.
    thinly veiled high elf thread

  18. #65138
    Scarab Lord Nymrohd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2022
    Location
    Greece
    Posts
    4,092
    Quote Originally Posted by Gifdwarf View Post
    They're never going to let you fight in visage form because then 99% of the players will just be discount blood elf mages who never use dracthyr form.
    And so many abilities depend on Drac'thyr anatomy. I could see breaths being useable in Visage form but anything that references tails, wings (or flying), talons? You'd have to shift

  19. #65139
    Scarab Lord The-Shan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Somewhere in the Badlands
    Posts
    4,316
    Quote Originally Posted by Gifdwarf View Post
    They're never going to let you fight in visage form because then 99% of the players will just be discount blood elf mages who never use dracthyr form.
    Locking an entire class behind a controversial appearance is super weird, honestly. Some people feel uncomfortable with the Dracthyr's appearance, or don't feel like they could identify with it. Expanding it to their other form makes sense, because it broadens the accessibility of the class, and people who can accept it as a core fantasy. Character customization and appearance is a huge topic of interest for a lot of players.

    If it means 2x the people try Dracthyr and enjoy it, and it fulfills their warcraft dragon fantasy, then that's great. That's what the class was meant to do in the first place. Part of the warcraft dragon fantasy is being a pretty elf-adjacent character to some people, given our greatest impressions of dragons are often times their visage forms. Providing that choice makes more people happy.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Nymrohd View Post
    And so many abilities depend on Drac'thyr anatomy. I could see breaths being useable in Visage form but anything that references tails, wings (or flying), talons? You'd have to shift
    actually ingame a good portion of the rotation wouldn't require the Dracthyr anatomy.
    thinly veiled high elf thread

  20. #65140
    Quote Originally Posted by Knight of the Astral Star View Post
    So... anyone catch these under string changes yet?

    Why would they separate Drac'thyr and Evoker if they're the same thing? Why would one get the Evoker popup as opposed to the Drac'thyr popup and vice versa? Am I looking too far into this or am I being an idiot?

    maybe bcs in future if they make other evokers or other dracthyrs they wont have to rework and separate it then, better to have it done on first time

Posting Permissions

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