Originally Posted by
jellmoo
When it comes to Demon Hunters though, imagine if Blizzard had added a different class altogether. The same basic narrative as Legion was, Illidan and all that, just no playable Demon Hunters, and instead we had a different class. Tinkers, Necromancers, it doesn't terribly matter. What would the result have been? All we can do is guess, for sure, but I have to wonder. Were Demon Hunters popular because they were integrated into the Legion expansion pretty heabily, or were they popular because they let you start a new character at high level and play a badass elf with ridiculously large weapons?
I don't think there is one right or wrong answer to any of the questions to be honest. In one expansion it might make perfect sense to tie the narrative of the expansion to that of a new class being added. In another, it might make more sense to decouple them. My concern here is that often times people (not saaying you are doing this, mind you) look for an absolute answer and right it to the point of ludicrous rigidity. I find that things are often wayyy more nuanced than just things like:
- Well that's how they did it before so that's how they'll do it again
- They said that nothing matched the theme, so that means a class added in an expansion needs to match the theme
- If it wasn't in Blizzard game X, Y, or Z it can't be a viable class
All of those can absolutely be conversation starters, but time and time again in these class discussion threads I see them used as conversation enders, and it honestly makes me sad. Instead of talking about possibilities, too many shift into talking about absolutes, and that just stifles honest conversation.