Page 4 of 14 FirstFirst ...
2
3
4
5
6
... LastLast
  1. #61
    Quote Originally Posted by Syegfryed View Post
    *looking at DH and DK
    Let's look at their HotS abilities, shall we?:

    Illidan
    Sweeping Strike = Fel Rush
    Evasion = Blur
    Metamorphosis
    The Hunt = Night Fae Covenant
    Immolation = Immolation Aura
    Unending Hatred
    Marked for Death (a Rogue/former Hunter ability)
    Fiery Brand

    Arthas
    Death Coil
    Howling Blast
    Frozen Tempest = Azerite trait
    Army of the Dead
    Summon Sindragosa = Frostwyrm's Fury
    Frost Presence
    Rime
    Icy Talons
    Rune Tap
    Icebound Fortitude
    Frost Strike
    Remorseless Winter
    Death's Advance
    Anti-Magic Shell

    I don't see a reason why not to draw inspiration from HotS for the Blademaster. It, literally, expand upon the class concept.

    you can just be wrong, but that is your chosing.

    Blademaster are literally elite orc warriors
    And Demon Hunters are Night elf Warriors, according to Warcraft 3:
    "These mysterious warriors ritually blind themselves so that they develop 'spectral sight' that enables them to see demons and undead with greater clarity."
    "Although they are counted as some of the mightiest warriors within the Night Elves' society, the Demon Hunters are always maligned and misunderstood for making their selfless pact with darkness."

    And so are Monks, for that matter:
    "These affable warriors rarely seek out danger or trouble, preferring instead to spend their time concocting new and tasty beverages for any brave enough to imbibe them."

    "They are peerless warriors and world class drinkers all in one!"

    "A warrior Hero, the brewmasters of Pandaria have emerged from the bamboo forests of their ancestors to bring their unique fighting style (and robust ales) to the highest bidder."

    half right half- wrong.
    Could you elaborate, please?
    Would like to know who you are in favor of...

    and we already know beastmaster is a ranger and enhancement is a shaman

    you are just confusing a broad term with the real thing.

    is like saying a far seer is not a shaman, but a far seer, is dumb
    I'm not confusing anything. That is their official descritption. In-game, Beastmaster may be a ranged class. In lore, it dual-wields axes. Thrall, an Enhancement Shaman, is also considered a Warrior in lore.
    So, yeah, the terms are blurry and not strongly defined.
    A Far Seer does not pretend to be anything else but a Shaman. It has all of its abilities in the Shaman class.

    except you know you are completely ignoring how they can transform themselves into avatars, scream so loud that can burst into a dragon roar and other mystical prowess

    and you know what ability warriros ahve now that was also magical in nature?
    As i said, Mountain Kings, in my eyes, are Warriors. Therefore, i view its abilities as relevant to the class.

    I can't associate Dragon Roar to anything lore-wise, but Warriors' screams are known to be legendary (Hellscream and the Warsong Clan - "Relying on shock and awe to overwhelm their enemies, the Warsong earned their name from their fearsome battle cries and thunderous drum marches").

    they definitely are, they ahve charge, heroic leap, mobility and even get great benefit sfor getting HASTE
    They possess mobility, yes. But, that doesn't make them agile and quick. That is the domain of the Rogue or the Demon Hunter. A warrior's charge is the equivalent of a Highmountain Tauren's Bull Rush. Heroic Leap is the equivalent of Muradin's Dwarf Toss ability (HotS). and as heavy-melee fighters, i don't consider them nimble and agile.

    And that is completely retarded, cause bladestorm is a warrior ability since wc3, cause blademaster are warriors
    Well, so are Metamorphosis and Death Coil. and they have been transferred from the Warlock to the Death Knight and Demon Hunter, respectively.

    just like blademaster are
    Blademasters are fully represented? Please do tell me where in the Warrior class i can find Windwalk, Mirror Image, Image Transmission, Advancing Strikes and Illusion Master?

    no
    Well, yes. If that is the description Blizzard chose to give them. For example:

    "Some blood elves become warriors (or scouts or hunters) — especially those seeking to be spell breakers, demon hunters, and rangers."

    exactly, you can't make up an entire class just because they can use 2 weapons, or because you don't feel like they are already represented in the game
    I suggested it as a separate specialization, not as a legitimacy for the Blademaster to be a class. It's not my subjective feelings. Blademasters are underrepresented in game. Other than Bladestorm, they have nothing. Saying you can wield a two handed sword would be like to say Rogues could wield Illidan Glaives, wear a Blindfold and they had the Demon Hunter's Evasion ability, therefore making them Demon Hunters.

    and the only thing it needs to be fully represented is mirror image and wind walk like abilities, and they can add that as talents just fine, we don't need an entire new class that will rip off the warrior class, steal and delute their fantasy.
    No, they can't. Because stealth and illusion aren't part of the Warrior fantasy.
    The Blademaster will not rip off anything. Warriors will be more akin to the Mountain King and Tauren Chieftain, which have nothing in common with the Blademaster.
    You argument is like those that were against the Demon Hunter: "We, already, have Warlock with Metamorphosis. Rogues can wield Illidan's Glaives. We don't need another class like them that will rip them off." But, as history would record. The Demon Hunter was added, eventually. And it made me think - if that class was added, despite all the things against it, others will too.

    Quote Originally Posted by Better View Post
    Grom Hellscream was a Blademaster. WC3 he had every Blademaster ability.
    "Even though Grom appeared in Warcraft III as a blademaster, he was probably not one lorewise."

    Quote Originally Posted by Better View Post
    I don't think every hero in WC3 needs to be a class, but they were arguing that Blademasters aren't Orc Warriors, and then listed notable Orc Warriors starting with Grom, who was literally a Blademaster class-wise in WC3
    They needed to match him with a class. He is by no means a Blademaster. He's more of a Raider than anything else. Just like Malfurion was categorized as a Keeper of the Grove, despite not being a son of Cenarius.
    Last edited by username993720; 2021-03-28 at 11:46 AM.
    Read First! (Very Important)
    Dear Scrapbot or Moderator:
    Before you, recklessly, hand out an infraction - if i, accidently, broke the rules without being aware, i would very much appreciate a warning first, in the manner of a green text/edit or a private message.
    Thank you in advance.

  2. #62
    Nice but too many melees on the bench already.

  3. #63
    Quote Originally Posted by mickybrighteyes View Post
    ranged classes tend to not be as cluttered in the battle field unless something forces them to.... like chains or the field being heavily restricted because it's falling into a void... or is a ridiculously small area to begin with because fuck us.
    Quote Originally Posted by oplawlz View Post
    True, but adding 3-4 copies of perhaps multiple melee characters to the mix sounds really painful. Already hard to see stuff on the ground if your raid is melee heavy and the boss has a smaller model. Artificer comes to mind.
    I would say that any new class should at the very least be less guilty of screen clutter than current classes. Right now, I'd say that the current champ for screen clutter is probably BM Hunters on the regular, with two giant pets dancing around the screen, and maybe DKs wuth a cooldown when they fire off Army of the Dead.

    If we were to suppose that a theoretical Blademaster based shadowy style projections (think something like either a creature in stealth (but when visible to you) or possibly like a Shadow Priest and that on the regular you would only have two projections up, would that be too much clutter? Maybe more on a cooldown?

  4. #64
    Quote Originally Posted by Better View Post
    I don't think every hero in WC3 needs to be a class, but they were arguing that Blademasters aren't Orc Warriors, and then listed notable Orc Warriors starting with Grom, who was literally a Blademaster class-wise in WC3
    Because they needed to make him a hero unit and weren't going to make a whole new set of hero unit abilities for one character, just like I said. Some folks need to understand the difference between gameplay limitations and lore. Thrall was a Far Seer in WC3, but he isn't glued to the back of a wolf in combat in WoW.

  5. #65
    Titan Syegfryed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    Darkshore, Killing Living and Dead elves
    Posts
    12,058
    Quote Originally Posted by Triceron View Post
    I completely disagree.

    I don't think Arms Warrior is anything like a Blademaster in its concept or themes.
    hey now, thats entirelly your problem.

    is like saying current beastmaster does not feel like a beastmaster because no dual hand, therefore, they need another entirelly different class, is nonsensical

    Saying this subject for you is just personal, subjective and feeling/gut based, there is not much reason to keep going on that. Because again, warrior arms is blademaster without windwalk and mirror image

    My point is that Windwalk should be Windwalk, and not just dumbed down in mechanics to suit a Warrior class gameplay.
    come on now, tons of abilities were dumbed down and changed to fit the MMO style of gameplay, why they would not do this now?

    hell, avatar you were completely immune to damage, and they dumb down, why they would not do that with windwalk? because you don't feel like it?
    Warlocks had Metamorphosis tailored to a Warlock style of gameplay.
    and it was never a warlock ability in wc3, and they lost, end.

    you are making like warriors would lose bladestorm and their critical strike, in prol of a new class, and this is completely bananas, because blademasters are already warriors, we already saw countless of Blademasters as warriors and warrior trainers, and that is not like the warlock-dh dillema.

  6. #66
    Looks cool, don't want another melee in the game though.

  7. #67
    Titan Syegfryed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    Darkshore, Killing Living and Dead elves
    Posts
    12,058
    Quote Originally Posted by username993720 View Post
    Let's look at their HotS abilities, shall we?:


    And Demon Hunters are Night elf Warriors, according to Warcraft 3:
    yeah, warriors who blinded thenselves and had demonic magic going on, tottally different

    again, you are just, on purpose, confusing the broad terms to fit your narrative.

    show me a Demon hunter in wow that is also, a warrior trainner.


    Could you elaborate, please?
    Would like to know who you are in favor of...
    no need, since is not the point of the topic


    A Far Seer does not pretend to be anything else but a Shaman. It has all of its abilities in the Shaman class.
    and blademaster does not pretend to be anything else but a warrior, it has al of its abilities in the warrior class, except two

    See how many beastmasters, demon hunters or enchancements are WARRIOR TRAINNERS, you will find NONE

    but you will find a lot of blademasters being warrior trainners,

    As i said, Mountain Kings, in my eyes, are Warriors. Therefore, i view its abilities as relevant to the class.
    so, in ffact, you are just cherrypicking evidence, and only using things that YOU see fit, thats rly convenient isn't?


    I can't associate Dragon Roar to anything lore-wise, but Warriors' screams are known to be legendary (Hellscream and the Warsong Clan - "Relying on shock and awe to overwhelm their enemies, the Warsong earned their name from their fearsome battle cries and thunderous drum marches").

    once again, orc warriors, showing legendary and, someow mystical abilities, just like the blademasters


    They possess mobility, yes. But, that doesn't make them agile and quick.
    that is definitely what it means, they can charge and heroic leap, closing gaps and murdering people before they run.


    That is the domain of the Rogue or the Demon Hunter. A warrior's charge is the equivalent of a Highmountain Tauren's Bull Rush. Heroic Leap is the equivalent of Muradin's Dwarf Toss ability (HotS). and as heavy-melee fighters, i don't consider them nimble and agile.
    That is because you have a small vision of what a warrior is, and, instead of asking for then to expand the class fantasy, which is already supported, you are asking a completely different class, and that, is preposterous.
    Well, so are Metamorphosis and Death Coil. and they have been transferred from the Warlock to the Death Knight and Demon Hunter, respectively.
    the difference is there is no DH being warlock trainners, neither vice versa, so, this is not a fair equivalence.


    Blademasters are fully represented? Please do tell me where in the Warrior class i can find Windwalk, Mirror Image, Image Transmission, Advancing Strikes and Illusion Master?
    fully represented and missing just 2 skills, the rest you find in the moba game.

    Well, yes. If that is the description Blizzard chose to give them. For example:
    find me a demon hunter that is a warrior trainner.


    I suggested it as a separate specialization, not as a legitimacy for the Blademaster to be a class. It's not my subjective feelings. Blademasters are underrepresented in game. Other than Bladestorm, they have nothing.
    there is no need to make a separate specialization to just get two skills, just put then to the normal warrior as talents and its done. if they ever make a 4 specialization is gladiador/sword and board style that is indeed missing.

    stop fantasying with hots and thinking that is the real deal, is a moba that focus on one character, is not canon and just for the giggles.

    Saying you can wield a two handed sword would be like to say Rogues could wield Illidan Glaives, wear a Blindfold and they had the Demon Hunter's Evasion ability, therefore making them Demon Hunters.
    again, false equivalence

    No, they can't. Because stealth and illusion aren't part of the Warrior fantasy.
    it can be if they desire so, just modify then to not deviate entirelly and we are done.

    in fact, stealth and illusion would be dope mechanics to spice a bit the warrior mechanic, it does not need to be OP.

  8. #68
    Ultimately, all the classes that have been added fit closely with the theme of the expansion they debuted in. Aside from gameplay and balance concerns (I have to think the dev team knows we absolutely don't need more melee classes), you'd need an expansion where blademasters would be a core part of the lore. Wrath had an entire faction of death knights tied in to the entire story. The entire continent of Pandaria and the pandaren race are inextricably linked with monks. With Illidan and his followers being the entire focus of an expansion, it made sense to introduce DHs.

    I cannot envision the devs taking a turn where Blademasters or the culture they're linked to would feature as prominently as any of those. If there was one, it would've been WoD, and that time has passed.

  9. #69
    Quote Originally Posted by Syegfryed View Post
    Nice use of meme. But, it shows how you like to ignore things that damage your agenda.

    yeah, warriors who blinded thenselves and had demonic magic going on, tottally different

    again, you are just, on purpose, confusing the broad terms to fit your narrative.

    show me a Demon hunter in wow that is also, a warrior trainner.
    I'm not confusing anything. Blizzard wrote that. Not me.
    If Demon Hunters were, essentially, Warlocks with Metamorphosis, why add them in the first place? You could say they are fully represented.
    As for the links you provided, Akinos is not labeled as a Warrior https://wowpedia.fandom.com/wiki/Akinos
    and Blademaster Ronakada does not use any Blademaster abilities:
    Battle Shout
    Bloodthirst
    Rend
    Shattering Throw
    Slam
    https://wowpedia.fandom.com/wiki/Blademaster_Ronakada
    Plus, He may be a reference to Ron Nakada, former Blizzard Senior Engineer. Nothing less, nothing more.

    no need, since is not the point of the topic
    Fair enough. Just wanted to know your stance on the subject.

    and blademaster does not pretend to be anything else but a warrior, it has al of its abilities in the warrior class, except two

    See how many beastmasters, demon hunters or enchancements are WARRIOR TRAINNERS, you will find NONE

    but you will find a lot of blademasters being warrior trainners,
    Of course it does. It has Mirror Image, an Illusion ability of the Mage. It has Windwalk, an invisibility with a name like the Monk spec.
    "All of its abilities" is merely 1 ability: Bladestorm. That is 1/4 of a hero unit.

    "A lot" - found only Ronakada.

    so, in ffact, you are just cherrypicking evidence, and only using things that YOU see fit, thats rly convenient isn't?
    No. I did a research into Warcraft 3 heroes and found which are likely to come next and which aren't.

    once again, orc warriors, showing legendary and, someow mystical abilities, just like the blademasters
    There's nothing mystical about a war cry. -_-
    Meanwhile, the Blademaster's mysticism is close to that of the Monk. and you wouldn't consider it a Warrior, even though it can/could wield weapons.

    that is definitely what it means, they can charge and heroic leap, closing gaps and murdering people before they run.
    That is not what the Blademaster is about.
    Again, you might dismiss HotS, but that is how it plays:


    That is because you have a small vision of what a warrior is, and, instead of asking for then to expand the class fantasy, which is already supported, you are asking a completely different class, and that, is preposterous.
    No, i don't. I just don't want it to encompass everything that holds a blade. I would like it to expand its fantasy (personally, on the Mountain King and Chieftain aspects).
    Not, necessarily, a new class. Perhaps, as a specialization (of the Monk, for example).

    the difference is there is no DH being warlock trainners, neither vice versa, so, this is not a fair equivalence.
    There doesn't need to be. You gotta let go of that class trainer obsession. a class trainer doesn't, immediately, rule out any potential new classes.

    fully represented and missing just 2 skills, the rest you find in the moba game.
    Which are, also, not in the Warrior class. How is it fully represented with only Bladestorm? because you can wield a two-handed sword and don a Burning Blade banner on your back? That's just playing 'Imagine'.

    find me a demon hunter that is a warrior trainner.
    Drop that class trainer card. It doesn't, necessarily, mean much - especially considering Ronakada is an in-game reference.

    there is no need to make a separate specialization to just get two skills, just put then to the normal warrior as talents and its done. if they ever make a 4 specialization is gladiador/sword and board style that is indeed missing.

    stop fantasying with hots and thinking that is the real deal, is a moba that focus on one character, is not canon and just for the giggles.
    Saying 2 talents would solve the problem is like saying Blizzard could have given the Warlock Evasion and Mana Burn and be done with the Demon Hunter (since it had Metamorphosis - and, apparently, you believe one ability is enough to represent a whole class) or give it raise dead and Unholy Aura and be done with the Death Knight (since it had Death Coil). This is not a fix. This is a bandaid.

    I agree with you on the Gladiator specialization. There's a two-handed spec (Arms), Dual-wielding 1/2 handed weapons (Fury) and a one handed with a shield spec (Protection). But, there is no 2 handed and a shield aspect to the Warrior.

    One character that represents the entire class/spec, as it is an expansion of the Warcraft 3 unit.

    again, false equivalence
    Not a false equivalence, actually. Because you expect a Warrior to have only Bladestorm, use a two handed sword and have that Burning Blade toy and call it a day. That's playing "wannabe".

    it can be if they desire so, just modify then to not deviate entirelly and we are done.

    in fact, stealth and illusion would be dope mechanics to spice a bit the warrior mechanic, it does not need to be OP.
    If they desired so they could have made the Warlock a Demon Hunter and a Death Knight, but that doesn't sit well, does it?

    Stealth and Illusion would, most likely, interfere with the Warrior playstyle.

    Quote Originally Posted by bash the fash View Post
    Ultimately, all the classes that have been added fit closely with the theme of the expansion they debuted in. Aside from gameplay and balance concerns (I have to think the dev team knows we absolutely don't need more melee classes), you'd need an expansion where blademasters would be a core part of the lore. Wrath had an entire faction of death knights tied in to the entire story. The entire continent of Pandaria and the pandaren race are inextricably linked with monks. With Illidan and his followers being the entire focus of an expansion, it made sense to introduce DHs.

    I cannot envision the devs taking a turn where Blademasters or the culture they're linked to would feature as prominently as any of those. If there was one, it would've been WoD, and that time has passed.
    Well, they came up with Mists of Pandaria out of nowhere and introduced the Monk class. So, it's not, completely, unimaginable. Just needs an asian-thematic expansion again.
    Or, if they introduce "Allied classes" sort of feature.
    Read First! (Very Important)
    Dear Scrapbot or Moderator:
    Before you, recklessly, hand out an infraction - if i, accidently, broke the rules without being aware, i would very much appreciate a warning first, in the manner of a green text/edit or a private message.
    Thank you in advance.

  10. #70
    Quote Originally Posted by Syegfryed View Post
    hey now, thats entirelly your problem.

    is like saying current beastmaster does not feel like a beastmaster because no dual hand, therefore, they need another entirelly different class, is nonsensical
    No one is asking for a separate Beastmaster class though. The argument isn't the same if people aren't regarding a necessity for a separate class. Same with Farseers.

    Dark Rangers, Necromancers, Demon Hunters, Blademasters are all being widely considered as their own class identities despite what similarities may exist with existing playable ones.

    We've never had a real situation where existing classes take up actual different class identities. And Hunters aren't actually "Beastmasters", they are Beastmastery Hunters. The difference is subtle, but it doesn't mean we need a Beasmaster class either, its just important to make a distinction when it comes to lore and class identity.

    The difference here is exemplified by the Brewmaster, which is an actual Brewmaster and not just a 'Brewmastery Monk'. The names and titles are important. We know a Demonology Warlock with Glyph of Demon Hunting doesn't make them Demon Hunters. We know Hunters who specialize in killing Demons doesn't make them Demon Hunters. We know anyone taking Necrolord covenant doesn't classify them as a 'Necromancer'. The name distinctions are important to specific identities.

    Saying this subject for you is just personal, subjective and feeling/gut based, there is not much reason to keep going on that. Because again, warrior arms is blademaster without windwalk and mirror image
    Sure, if you feel that way. I'm fine with agreeing to disagree here, since we're both regarding the concepts on the basis of belief here

    come on now, tons of abilities were dumbed down and changed to fit the MMO style of gameplay, why they would not do this now?
    Blademaster is a separate hero identity. No existing classes getting new abilities ends up taking more identity than they are originally based on.

    Did Rogues become Wardens for having shadowstep and Fan of Knives? No. Its still a separate identity.

    hell, avatar you were completely immune to damage, and they dumb down, why they would not do that with windwalk? because you don't feel like it?
    Avatar never granted damage immunity. I think you need to check how it worked again.

    and it was never a warlock ability in wc3, and they lost, end.
    That's my point. Windwalk and Mirror Image aren't warrior Abilities either, and even if they are given them they aren't going to be Blademasters.


    you are making like warriors would lose bladestorm and their critical strike, in prol of a new class, and this is completely bananas, because blademasters are already warriors, we already saw countless of Blademasters as warriors and warrior trainers, and that is not like the warlock-dh dillema.
    No, not true. Rogues kept Evasion while DH get Blur. Frost Mage kept Frost Nova and Frost Armor while DK got Howling Blast and Icebound Fortitude. No reason to lose any abilities.

    As I said, Necrolord covenant shows us Warrior can use unholy abilities, yet that isn't the same as being a Death Knight even though a DK is literally called an Unholy Warrior in its WC3 description.

    You can believe that they are the same, but there's no concrete proof behind it either. It is all ambiguous and up to interpretation. All we can do is agree to disagree.

    Blizzard doesn't have to make a Blademaster class, nor do they have to fold Blademaster abilities into the Warrior. For years we had no answer to Demon Hunters, we still have no answer to Dark Ranger. My reasoning for keeping them separate is based on knowing Blizzard can and will separate concepts even if they imply that a race or class is already playable.

    Just look at how Dark Irons ended up being separated despite us having dark skinned Dwarf Warlocks available since Cataclysm, the same time when Dark Irons joined the Council of Three Hammers. We all thought we already had Dark Irons represented, but that changed when Allied Races made a clear separation between a dark skinned Dwarf and an actual Dark Iron.

    Also, NPCs of different titles, classes or identities can train our own class. Dark Ranger Nathanos trained Hunters, but it's arguable if Hunters actually are Dark Rangers. Tinkers train in Engineering, but it doesn't make your Engineer character a Tinker. There's a Lich that trains DKs in the use of Frost magic, but DKs aren't Liches. Blizzard can do what they want with NPCs.
    Last edited by Triceron; 2021-03-29 at 12:32 AM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    Since Arthas used Frostmourne, which is a Runeblade, and Frostmourne's power eminates from those runes, that made him a Runemaster by default.

  11. #71
    Quote Originally Posted by bash the fash View Post
    Because they needed to make him a hero unit and weren't going to make a whole new set of hero unit abilities for one character, just like I said. Some folks need to understand the difference between gameplay limitations and lore. Thrall was a Far Seer in WC3, but he isn't glued to the back of a wolf in combat in WoW.
    Farseers aren't glued to wolves, but Grom SHOULD have those abilities lore-wise. It's not like thrall doesn't have Ghost Wolves, Chain Lightning, and Earthquake. We never get to see Grom fight in WoW sadly.

  12. #72
    Quote Originally Posted by Better View Post
    Farseers aren't glued to wolves, but Grom SHOULD have those abilities lore-wise. It's not like thrall doesn't have Ghost Wolves, Chain Lightning, and Earthquake. We never get to see Grom fight in WoW sadly.
    Grom was made into a Blademaster because they cut out the Warlord hero from WC3 which actually had abilities like Command Aura, Raging Scream and Death Scream. That would be more along the lines of what a Warsong Chieftain would have had.
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    Since Arthas used Frostmourne, which is a Runeblade, and Frostmourne's power eminates from those runes, that made him a Runemaster by default.

  13. #73
    The Lightbringer Maljinwo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Location
    Buenos Aires, Argentina
    Posts
    3,723
    Blademaster is a class id like to see but difficult to implement

    Is it a warrior? A stealth based class with mirror image? How do you make it distinct enough from a warrior or a rogue as a rotation?


    The samurai fantasy is great though. Id like to see it in game with orcs and draenei
    This world don't give us nothing. It be our lot to suffer... and our duty to fight back.

  14. #74
    Quote Originally Posted by Better View Post
    Farseers aren't glued to wolves, but Grom SHOULD have those abilities lore-wise. It's not like thrall doesn't have Ghost Wolves, Chain Lightning, and Earthquake. We never get to see Grom fight in WoW sadly.
    No. Grom isn't a Blademaster lore-wise.
    He doesn't give any Blademaster vibe. He's not samurai looking and he's not of the Burning Blade clan. He was given that role in WC3 because Blizzard decided to stick him with the closest thing to a Warrior they could find.
    He is, if you've seen Lords of War, a Wolf rider of the Warsong clan or, in essence, a Raider.
    If you are seeking for a Blademaster representation in the Orc race, Samuro is the best choice.
    Read First! (Very Important)
    Dear Scrapbot or Moderator:
    Before you, recklessly, hand out an infraction - if i, accidently, broke the rules without being aware, i would very much appreciate a warning first, in the manner of a green text/edit or a private message.
    Thank you in advance.

  15. #75
    Quote Originally Posted by username993720 View Post
    No. Grom isn't a Blademaster lore-wise.
    He doesn't give any Blademaster vibe. He's not samurai looking and he's not of the Burning Blade clan. He was given that role in WC3 because Blizzard decided to stick him with the closest thing to a Warrior they could find.
    He is, if you've seen Lords of War, a Wolf rider of the Warsong clan or, in essence, a Raider.
    If you are seeking for a Blademaster representation in the Orc race, Samuro is the best choice.

    Why are you so stuck on mounts? Jaina isn't riding around on a horse everywhere, does that mean she's not an archmage anymore? Look at Garrithos, the man had a completely unique ability set with a mount, 2 pally skills, a tauren chieftan skill, and a mountain king skill. They could have very simply done the same thing for Grom, it's literally the same game, but they didn't. They gave him every single Blademaster ability, slapped the Str tag on him, and called it a day.

  16. #76
    Quote Originally Posted by Better View Post
    Why are you so stuck on mounts? Jaina isn't riding around on a horse everywhere, does that mean she's not an archmage anymore? Look at Garrithos, the man had a completely unique ability set with a mount, 2 pally skills, a tauren chieftan skill, and a mountain king skill. They could have very simply done the same thing for Grom, it's literally the same game, but they didn't. They gave him every single Blademaster ability, slapped the Str tag on him, and called it a day.
    Showing you how lazy they were.
    A "Dark Knight", an exclusive title for Garithos is made up of Paladin, Mountain King and Tauren Chieftain abilities.

    It's not about mounts. He doesn't ride on a wolf in WC3. But, Blizzard couldn't just give him Pillage and Ensnare (which, they did in Reforged).

    Daelin, for example, is categorized as a Paladin with abilities like Monsoon, Cyclone, Forked Lightning, Summon Sea Elementals and Howl of Terror. Probably, to emphasize his Kul Tiran nature. The abilities are taken from various units. It says he's a Hydromancer, but he probably was the equivalent of an Outlaw Rogue in game.
    Read First! (Very Important)
    Dear Scrapbot or Moderator:
    Before you, recklessly, hand out an infraction - if i, accidently, broke the rules without being aware, i would very much appreciate a warning first, in the manner of a green text/edit or a private message.
    Thank you in advance.

  17. #77
    Titan Syegfryed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    Darkshore, Killing Living and Dead elves
    Posts
    12,058
    Quote Originally Posted by username993720 View Post
    Nice use of meme. But, it shows how you like to ignore things that damage your agenda.
    Hots.is.not.canon.

    If Demon Hunters were, essentially, Warlocks with Metamorphosis, why add them in the first place? You could say they are fully represented.
    youa re saying they are essentially warlocks with methamorphosis, not me, not anyone with their right mind, warlocks and DH are completely different in every shape and form, clotch caster vs leather dual blade user
    As for the links you provided, Akinos is not labeled as a Warrior https://wowpedia.fandom.com/wiki/Akinos
    ~~master of arms~~

    and Blademaster Ronakada does not use any Blademaster abilities:
    He still is a Blademaster and a warrior trainner, blizzard said so

    Plus, He may be a reference to Ron Nakada, former Blizzard Senior Engineer. Nothing less, nothing more.
    his name does not matter, but his class and role.

    Of course it does. It has Mirror Image, an Illusion ability of the Mage. It has Windwalk, an invisibility with a name like the Monk spec.
    it is on the mage because they put there, like they did with methaporphosis, to fix the problem is just to make mirror image a talent for warrior, or even an covenant/arffact ability, related to race.

    "All of its abilities" is merely 1 ability: Bladestorm. That is 1/4 of a hero unit.
    2, the critic is something warriors have.
    "A lot" - found only Ronakada.
    every warrior with that look is a blademaster buddy

    No. I did a research into Warcraft 3 heroes and found which are likely to come next and which aren't.
    and that is rlly pointless because "heroes" don't become classes, but the classes those heroes are, and blademasters are already in the game as warrior, their likelihood is zero to one, in a hundred scale
    There's nothing mystical about a war cry. -_-
    You say so, but, again, you are ignoring evidence of abilities changing, stormbolt as ltierally a magical hammer before, now isn't
    Meanwhile, the Blademaster's mysticism is close to that of the Monk. and you wouldn't consider it a Warrior, even though it can/could wield weapons.
    blademaster mysticism is aesthetic is a orcish thing, and just that, you are not getting that otherwise, so, unless you want the same class tob e intruduced again, but in myshjticism for one race, that still seems pointless.
    That is not what the Blademaster is about.
    What a blademaster is about is the pike of orcish warriors,not some hots nonsense

    No, i don't. I just don't want it to encompass everything that holds a blade. I would like it to expand its fantasy (personally, on the Mountain King and Chieftain aspects).
    Not, necessarily, a new class. Perhaps, as a specialization (of the Monk, for example).
    ah yes, put the BLADEMASTER, the guys who hold their blades and weapons as most sacred thing, into the class of "Masters of bare-handed combat, who "never rely solely on the need to have a weapon in their hands to defend against their enemies." very clever.

    Again, face it, blademasters are legendary orc warriors, who mastered the use of the sword, the arms warrior is literally a master of of weapons, including blades.

    you don't need to break your brain to see the pattern here, and how they can just expand the warrior fantasy giving then neww tools/toys.
    There doesn't need to be. You gotta let go of that class trainer obsession. a class trainer doesn't, immediately, rule out any potential new classes.
    there is no potential new class in a class that is already in the game, a blademaster, is not, a different class, is just a orcish warrior juiced up.

    Is like sayign you want a NPC class, just because npcs can do different things than us, "i want a Thrall-like class that use heavy armor, because thrall does it"shaman? no, iwant the Thralll class!!!"

    How is it fully represented with only Bladestorm?
    because blademaster are orc warriors, good ones, we already ahve that in the game, we don't necessary need windwalk or mirror image for a player to RP a blademaster, it would be good to have the tools as talents, but is not something entirelly necessary

    even because, that is something EXCLUSIVE, to Orcs, especially samuro if you bring the moba shit, no other race would ever have that., is not a fantasy who belongs to other races, period.

    Drop that class trainer card. It doesn't, necessarily, mean much - especially considering Ronakada is an in-game reference.
    it does mean, blademasters are warriors, who train other warriors

    Blademaster is just like a far seer.

    Saying 2 talents would solve the problem is like saying Blizzard could have given the Warlock Evasion and Mana Burn and be done with the Demon Hunter
    Again, false equivalence, they would need to give Warlocs leather, and the ability to fight in melee with 2 glaives

    Youa re trying to comapre blademaster- warrior with warlock-DH, when it is totally wrong.

    Blademaster are to warriors what far seers are to shamans.

    Not a false equivalence, actually. Because you expect a Warrior to have only Bladestorm, use a two handed sword and have that Burning Blade toy and call it a day. That's playing "wannabe".
    dude, you want then to make a moba hero into wow and thinking that is not a "playing wannabe"

    Stealth and Illusion would, most likely, interfere with the Warrior playstyle.
    not me, for sure, it would be a blast to just mirro image the fucking rogue

    - - - Updated - - -

    [QUOTE=Triceron;53100976]No one is asking for a separate Beastmaster class though. [/quuote]

    they aren't, but they are asking for blademaste,r which is nonsensical.

    Dark Rangers, Necromancers, Demon Hunters, Blademasters are all being widely considered as their own class identities despite what similarities may exist with existing playable ones.
    Necroamncers and demon hunters had none similarities in what it existed before.

    Warlocks having H is not they being literally DH, there was fundamentally and completely differences ebtween a warlock and a demon hunter in warcraft 3

    Again, this is a false equivalence, warlocks were never leather glaive fighters, they were frail magic users/spellcasters

    Blademasters were always, legendary orc warriors, they were always 2h users, they were always plate-ish users(as long orcs use tidbits of plate) they were always, heavy hitters and fast strikers, the warrior in wow is just that

    Literally, the only thing missing is 2 abilities, that can just be made talents/artifacts/covenant like abilities.

    You guys seem to think the entire base and fantasy of the blademaster is stealth like a rogue and mirror image when those are jsut tools for the warrior to wreack havoc, fighting on melee and destroying multiple enemies with their blademaster, regardless of the stealth abilities they were always front-line fighter, regarldess of this tricks, they were always honorable in the lore

    Again, giving too much credit for 2 skills and a style of play from a RTS.

    We've never had a real situation where existing classes take up actual different class identities. And Hunters aren't actually "Beastmasters", they are Beastmastery Hunters. The difference is subtle, but it doesn't mean we need a Beasmaster class either, its just important to make a distinction when it comes to lore and class identity.
    Beasmaster is just a fancy name, is not a different class, and their identity is already in the game, in the hunter class, period. just liekb lademasters are.

    Blademaster is a separate hero identity.
    no, no isn't.

    The identity of a blademaster is a legendary orc warrior. period.
    Did Rogues become Wardens for having shadowstep and Fan of Knives? No. Its still a separate identity.
    A night elf can emulate the warden by being a rogue.

    This is also one fo the serious point people are just missing, you guys are taking, particular and specific things, and wanting then to be broady

    Those things are just culture and race specifics for the same class.

    Just like the tauren chieftain, the mountain king and the blademaster are different faces of the same class(the warrior) for different races(dwarves, taurens, orcs)

    like far seers, witch doctor and spirit walker are different faces of the shaman to orcs, trolls and taurens.


    You can't get a completely specific thing, specific to a race, and not just to a race, but the best of the best of that race, rip from then, and think they need to be a different class for everyone else, when its simple it don't work.

    the warrior class is already broad enough to fit different cultures,, a windwalk/mirror image ability would be exclusive to orcs, logically, then they didn't put then in the class, but, i would not see much of a problem to add as a talent, as different races of warriros sharing strategices and techniques, like they do with other classes.


    Avatar never granted damage immunity. I think you need to check how it worked again.
    it did granded spell damange immunity, i missed that part, but see:

    Activate Avatar to temporarily give the Mountain King 5 bonus armor, 500 bonus hit points, 20 bonus damage and spell immunity.
    By focusing the energies of the dwarves’ “newly discovered enchanted heritage”, the mountain kings can grow in size and strength – and take on the physical characteristics of carved stone. In this form, they are impervious to magical attacks and have greatly increased durability
    but now everyoen can do that.

    That's my point. Windwalk and Mirror Image aren't warrior Abilities either, and even if they are given them they aren't going to be Blademasters.
    every high lv warrior orc, is a blademaster by default, because that is the lore of the blademaster, legendary orc warriors, it is sad that they do not have the 2 skills, but is how things are, gameplay over that.

    You can believe that they are the same, but there's no concrete proof behind it either.
    hoho, there is tons of concrete proof of that, from a blademaster being a warrior trainner to blademasters in the missions tables being tagged as arms warrior, that plus everything else but two skills


    Again, blademaster are to warriors what far seers are to shamans, don't dive too deep in the rabbit hole

    - - - Updated - - -

    one day, when covenants and legendary shenanigans are switched focus, and instead of focusing on "class fantasy", they focus on "race fantasy" they can give more blademaster things to the orcs, or even add more samurai shenanigans to the warrior in general.

  18. #78
    Quote Originally Posted by Syegfryed View Post
    hoho, there is tons of concrete proof of that, from a blademaster being a warrior trainner to blademasters in the missions tables being tagged as arms warrior, that plus everything else but two skills


    Again, blademaster are to warriors what far seers are to shamans, don't dive too deep in the rabbit hole
    They are what Priests are to Paladins.

    Paladins were just priests who took up martial training, and their lore roots are one and the same. Blizzard simply decided to split the concepts into two different classes, rather than have one remain a 'Hero' version of the other, which it was pretty much treated as in the RTS. It's the same Farseer and Shaman connection.

    Blademasters have connections to the Warrior class because there is no formal Blademaster class playable. You see the same happening with Dark Rangers and Beastmasters applied to the Hunter class, but they can still be identified as their own identities especially when factoring in sources outside of WoW.

    As for lore, the wording is ambiguous. 'Warrior' is used as both a description of a general melee fighter just as it is to the specific WoW class. As I've said, Death Knight and Demon Hunters are also described as Warriors in Warcraft 3. That doesn't automatically equate them as Warriors.

    The connections in WoW are also superfluous because WoW does not treat classes that aren't formally in the game by their approriate identity. They lump them in with whatever fits closest.

    Just like you say, Rogues can emulate Wardens. So are Night Elf Rogues actually Wardens? Will they ever be able to take up that full identity? No. Period.

    I'm not talking about Warriors emulating Blademasters. That can absolutely happen, because emulation involves a hefty dose of roleplay and headcanon. I am talking about actual Blademasters in the game, which we don't have playable whatsoever. You might think we do, but we don't actually have any playable Blademaster in the game, just as we don't have actual Dark Rangers or Wardens.

    Emulating is just emulating. You can emulate a Demon Hunter with s Rogue too, and you still can. In Shadowlands you can emulate a DK or Necromancer. That doesn't really mean anything. It's headcanon, and you don't need windwalk or mirror image for that.

    It'd be like asking Rogues to get Spirit of Vengeance and Umbral Bind or Hunters to get Life Drain and Haunting Wave. As I said, the ability connections of Fan of Knives, Bladestorm and Black Arrow are used because they support the Warrior and Hunter class identities. We're now talking about abilities that do not support those class identities such as Mirror Image and Windwalk, and it wouldn't make sense to apply them now because Blizzard isn't interested in sub-classing out the Warrior or Hunter class beyond what we already have in specs. We don't have Wardens or Dark Rangers or Blademasters formally playable, and it's not going to happen just with a couple added talents and 'emulated' gameplay.

    As I've said, this is now a matter of belief. You believe the Blademaster is already the Warrior class, and to you it doesn't even matter if they get Windwalk or Mirror Image because it doesn't affect your belief that Blademaster is already a playable identity in the game. As long as any of its gameplay can be emulated, you consider the identity satisfied. I'm fine that you have this perspective, but I don't consider it factual to having those classes actually playable in any official capacity. As I've said, there's a big difference between Rogues or Warlocks having emulated Demon Hunter gameplay, and an actual Demon Hunter class. I'm fine with us never getting a Dark Ranger, Warden or Blademaster class, and my point is strictly on what I regard as separate identities that are not actually playable in the game. I disagree with the idea that this would be satisfied through emulation. I mean, if this were true, no one would be asking for Necromancers or Blademasters or Dark Rangers since all of that gameplay can be emulated already. Yet here we are.

    Again, blademaster are to warriors what far seers are to shamans, don't dive too deep in the rabbit hole
    The difference being that no one actually asks for playable Farseers knowing that a Shaman covers every aspect of its gameplay and identity. Beastmaster is considered in a similar way. Same with Mountain Kings and Chieftains to an extent. There is more than just gameplay emulation involved here, there is a direct association with the class identity itself and having that identity represented by the core class in full. There's no real aspect left untouched in this regard. Blademaster has aspects which aren't covered by the Warrior class, even if its identity is related to the core class.

    Wardens, Blademasters, Dark Rangers, Shadow Hunters and Necromancers all exist in a niche while having connections to existing classes. They're niche enough to be on their own, but not popular or substantial enough to warrant a full class the way Demon Hunters did. These are B and C-tier class concepts, so they will likely never get the full regard they once did in the RTS and MOBA scene. I'm personally still holding out that Blizzard will do a Prestige class or Class skins implementation that allows deviations, but it's hard to say considering all of their class balance has traditionally hinged on homogenization rather than diversity, and giving these classes their own identities would involve diversifying on a much higher level than Covenants or Allied Races.

    Warlocks having H is not they being literally DH, there was fundamentally and completely differences ebtween a warlock and a demon hunter in warcraft 3

    Blademasters were always, legendary orc warriors, they were always 2h users, they were always plate-ish users(as long orcs use tidbits of plate) they were always, heavy hitters and fast strikers
    The difference is that you're completely glazing over the fundamental and complete difference between Blademasters and the current Warrior class though. Blademasters are themed around a fantasy Samurai/Feudal Japanese Swordsman. They use mystical abilities to travel unseen and create illusions of themselves, which is more of a Rogue-like trait. Warriors do not employ stealth or deception in their tactics on the level that a Blademaster uses them. Blademasters hinge on this concept, and their entire kit is built around the use of Windwalk to get in and out of battle quickly to do the devastating strikes they need.

    They aren't armor-bound with heavy shields, they aren't charging into the fray. They're weaving in and out of battle with a stealth mechanic and using mirror image to misdirect attacks to clones. That's very contrary to the Warrior style of gameplay, and you're overlooking these fundamental differences as simply talents that can be covered. And that's very little different than suggesting something like Rogues getting Metamorphosis or Warlocks getting Glaives and calling it a day. It's something that the Warrior class will never get because it's not in their domain to have Windwalk or Mirror Image any more than a Warlock or Rogue would completely absorb the entire Demon Hunter identity.

    And as I said, if you already think Blademasters are Warriors, then I see no reason for you needing to make an argument that they need Windwalk or Mirror Image at all. What difference would this make since you already consider them as Blademasters without these abilities?
    Last edited by Triceron; 2021-03-29 at 06:10 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    Since Arthas used Frostmourne, which is a Runeblade, and Frostmourne's power eminates from those runes, that made him a Runemaster by default.

  19. #79
    Quote Originally Posted by Syegfryed View Post
    Hots.is.not.canon
    It.doesn't.have.to.be.
    Anyone with two eyes can see that it is an elaboration of the Warcraft 3 hero unit.
    Its basic abilities are, literally, those of the Warcraft 3 unit (Mirror Image, Critical Strike, Windwalk & Bladestorm) with the addition of Image transmission and advancing Strikes. The talents expand upon that fantasy and playastyle. So, drawing from it is the most logical and obvious thing to do.

    youa re saying they are essentially warlocks with methamorphosis, not me, not anyone with their right mind, warlocks and DH are completely different in every shape and form, clotch caster vs leather dual blade user
    I'm not saying anything. This was the argument against the addition of Demon Hunters before they were added in Legion (same as you do now with Blademaster). Since Metamorphosis and Immolate were Warlock abilities, Mana Burn was a Priest ability and Evasion is a Rogue ability, no one believed they would be added. They'd claim it is, already, within the Demonology Warlock gameplay or that of the agile Rogue. I thought so, too, back then. Because all of its abilities, especially its Ultimate ability, were in existing classes. Saying one is melee and one is caster is the same argument for Death Knights and Necromancers. But, you wouldn't consider them different, would you? if Blizzard stated that the Necromancer was integrated into the Death Knight, one could assume that the Demon Hunter was integrated into the Warlock, since it had the Metamorphosis gameplay.

    ~~master of arms~~
    Blademaster (presumed)

    He still is a Blademaster and a warrior trainner, blizzard said so
    Then, you don't get the point of references.
    By the way:
    Patch 9.0.1 (2020-10-13): The <Warrior Trainer> title removed. Position moved to the second floor.

    his name does not matter, but his class and role.
    It does matter. It makes the difference between a tribute character to a lore character.

    it is on the mage because they put there, like they did with methaporphosis, to fix the problem is just to make mirror image a talent for warrior, or even an covenant/arffact ability, related to race.
    Metamorphosis was not relocated into an existing class. It was relocated into a new class, If you know where i'm getting at...
    Point is, you won't see it in the Warrior class.

    2, the critic is something warriors have.
    Critical Strike is not class-specific.

    every warrior with that look is a blademaster buddy
    What, a sword?

    and that is rlly pointless because "heroes" don't become classes, but the classes those heroes are, and blademasters are already in the game as warrior, their likelihood is zero to one, in a hundred scale
    *Looks at Arthas, Chen and Illidan ushering in the Death Knight, Monk and Demon Hunter classes.*
    If you haven't noticed yet, Blizzard picks their classes from the Warcraft 3 heroes. And no, Blademasters are not in the game as Warriors. Much like how the Demon Hunter wasn't, despite having all of its abilities in existing classes.

    You say so, but, again, you are ignoring evidence of abilities changing, stormbolt as ltierally a magical hammer before, now isn't
    It, always, did physical damage and its animation has, always, been that of lightning.
    Lightning infused weaponry is part of the dwarven fantasy, like the Blademaster's fiery blade. That is not the mystical part.

    blademaster mysticism is aesthetic is a orcish thing, and just that, you are not getting that otherwise, so, unless you want the same class tob e intruduced again, but in myshjticism for one race, that still seems pointless.
    Then, you don't realize that it is based on the Samurai. The mysticism is related to asian themes, since it originates in Japan. And you know who else is asiatic? the Monk.

    What a blademaster is about is the pike of orcish warriors,not some hots nonsense
    Peak of Orcish Warriors that are, barely, in the game. Its most famous character (Samuro) is not even present. Sorry, but i can't relate a Japanese profession to a, mostly, Monoglian/Turkic race. I'd say the Raider is the representative unit, alongside the Grunt, just like the Human Footman and Knight.

    ah yes, put the BLADEMASTER, the guys who hold their blades and weapons as most sacred thing, into the class of "Masters of bare-handed combat, who "never rely solely on the need to have a weapon in their hands to defend against their enemies." very clever.

    Again, face it, blademasters are legendary orc warriors, who mastered the use of the sword, the arms warrior is literally a master of of weapons, including blades.

    you don't need to break your brain to see the pattern here, and how they can just expand the warrior fantasy giving then neww tools/toys.
    The Monk has a Windwalk specialization that is similar in name to the Windwalk ability of Blademasters. Both are of asiatic origins: one's Chinese, the other Japanese (There was even a Japanese Pandaren Brewmaster in Warcraft III). It does use weapons. It can wield Staves, Fist Weapons, Polearms and one handed Swords, Axes and Maces. The Monk's unique animations and fluidity of movement fits more with the agility and quickness of the Blademaster, than the rugged and brutish Warrior. Besides, it was just a suggestion.

    I can see the resemblance, i'm not blind. The use of a two-handed weapon, mobility and overpowering attacks could be attributed to the Tauren Chieftain, as well, for example.

    Toys are not a solution. Neither are "talents" that would never happen.

    there is no potential new class in a class that is already in the game, a blademaster, is not, a different class, is just a orcish warrior juiced up.

    Is like sayign you want a NPC class, just because npcs can do different things than us, "i want a Thrall-like class that use heavy armor, because thrall does it"shaman? no, iwant the Thralll class!!!"
    There is potential, because it severely lacks in representation within the game. Saying it is, merely, an Orc Warrior was like saying Demon Hunters were, merely, Warlocks using Metamorphosis.

    It's not just pointing at NPC and saying "I wanna be that!". It is careful examination of Blizzard patterns and through analysation, coming to the conclusion that it might be a potential future class/spec.
    Unlike Thrall, who is a representation of the Far Seer and Shaman units, the Samurai trope does not exist as it should be in the game's classes.

    because blademaster are orc warriors, good ones, we already ahve that in the game, we don't necessary need windwalk or mirror image for a player to RP a blademaster, it would be good to have the tools as talents, but is not something entirelly necessary

    even because, that is something EXCLUSIVE, to Orcs, especially samuro if you bring the moba shit, no other race would ever have that., is not a fantasy who belongs to other races, period.
    It's not necessary, it's essential. Again, that's like saying a Death Coil or Metamorphosis is enough to RP as a Death Knight/Demon Hunter.

    Actually, Blademasters are found among Saurok, Lightforged Draenei, Ankoan, Saberon and Mantid.
    I could see them being Pandaren and Night elves, as well, due to its asian origins and fantasy.

    it does mean, blademasters are warriors, who train other warriors

    Blademaster is just like a far seer.
    Far Seers are fully represented by the Shaman class. whether it is Chain Lightning, Far Sight, Feral Spirit or Earthquake. Thrall, for example, fits the Enhancement Shaman quite well.

    Again, false equivalence, they would need to give Warlocs leather, and the ability to fight in melee with 2 glaives

    Youa re trying to comapre blademaster- warrior with warlock-DH, when it is totally wrong.

    Blademaster are to warriors what far seers are to shamans.
    No, actually. They would be required to wear the Betrayer's regalia and wield one handed swords that resemble glaives.

    Yea, yea...the "elite" of that class. The problem is that unlike the Far Seer, it is not in the Warrior as the Far Seer is in the Shaman. The reason i compare to Warlocks is because they were said to contain the Demon Hunter fantasy and gameplay, like you claim for the Blademaster.

    dude, you want then to make a moba hero into wow and thinking that is not a "playing wannabe"
    No, because it expands upon the class. A great source for inspiration. Unlike what we have now, when you are expected to wield a two-handed sword and call it a day. That is playing "I wish".

    not me, for sure, it would be a blast to just mirro image the fucking rogue
    Well, you aren't, exactly, objective. I'm sure it would be fun, but it would, also, be out of place. And you know why that is? Because it doesn't belong in the Warrior class.
    Last edited by username993720; 2021-03-30 at 08:05 AM.
    Read First! (Very Important)
    Dear Scrapbot or Moderator:
    Before you, recklessly, hand out an infraction - if i, accidently, broke the rules without being aware, i would very much appreciate a warning first, in the manner of a green text/edit or a private message.
    Thank you in advance.

  20. #80
    Love this idea.

    Blizzard also stated this is one of the classes that they had in mind when considering more classes in the future. Really hoping they would do something like this, as I think a leather/chain, 2handed melee class would be an amazing option thrown into the game.

    Plus the class is unique enough to not look/feel like any of the other classes.


    Great work.

Posting Permissions

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