Page 13 of 38 FirstFirst ...
3
11
12
13
14
15
23
... LastLast
  1. #241
    Quote Originally Posted by Aynen View Post
    We already have class skins. They're called specs.
    That has solely mechanical implications.

    Class skins have none. Just as buying a skin in the kinds of games that have them does not impart any mechanical difference or advantage to you.

  2. #242
    Banned Teriz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Undermine
    Posts
    19,283
    Quote Originally Posted by Triceron View Post
    I won't be surprised because I know it's not going to be. There's really no reason for them to suddenly fold Legendary Weapon effects into a class when it's meant to be special.

    Keep in mind Wailing Arrow and Withering Fire aren't even their own spells, they just modify existing Hunter abilities. So why would Hunters suddenly get two variations of spells they already have in the next expansion? It makes no sense.
    I suppose we'll just wait and see then.....

  3. #243
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    Wailing Arrow and Withering Fire are Dark Ranger abilities in HotS and WoW.
    and neither of those is hunter ability... they are effects from items, that drop from DARK RANGER... ofc they are restricted to hunter, as you might notice its the only class using ranged weapon, (wand doesnt count ofc) but using warglaives didnt make rogues/wariors in burning crusade demon hunters either...

    btw, as effects from items, if you count those as hunter abilities then surely you must count all bombs rockets and whatnot from engineering as tinker abilities...

  4. #244
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    I suppose we'll just wait and see then.....
    We don't have to.

    It's a Borrowed Power mechanic tied directly to a Legendary item.
    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.

  5. #245
    Quote Originally Posted by Triceron View Post
    We don't have to.

    It's a Borrowed Power mechanic tied directly to a Legendary item.
    Don't be obtuse! My Rogue is clearly able to sprout dragon wings and glide to this day! ... excuse me a moment.

    Yes? I play a Demon Hunter now? The legendary ability provided by this item did not carry forward? Nor did any other? Oh dear...

  6. #246
    Another class thread spiraling into a war about tinkers

  7. #247
    Quote Originally Posted by AKCephalopod View Post
    This forum and many others have forever been filled with endless discussion over what class should be added next. At any given time, you can find at least one, if not more, thread on a concept for a new class that should be added.

    Adding a full new class takes a lot of time and effort on Blizzard's end as well as commiting to supporting and balancing that class for all future expansions. That's a lot. Add on to that the sheer number of classes that people repeatedly ask for and make concepts for, Tinker, Necromancer, Dragonsworn, and Bard all come to mind instantly, though I'm more than certain there are others.

    So I think the best idea is to add in Class Skins as a system so that Blizzard can add new classes at any time as well as a massive dump of new classes without having to commit to any additional balancing.

    How would this work exactly though?

    The idea of a class skin is that mechanically, you are still playing one of the existing classes, but your abilities have their names and visuals changed to match the theme of a new class as well as the name of the class being changed.

    For example, the Necromancer could be a skin for a Warlock where your "summon demon" spell becomes "raise undead" and your demons become various types of undead. I'd add on to this that, like allied races, each class skin should add a transmog set for the class, thus allowing you to fully immerse yourself in the fantasy of the new skin.

    Some examples of class skins for each class could include:

    Warrior -> Gladiator
    Paladin -> Spellbreaker
    Death Knight -> Mawsworn
    Hunter -> Dark Ranger
    Shaman -> Dragonsworn
    Rogue -> Ninja
    Monk -> Lorewalker
    Druid -> Druid of the Flame
    Demon Hunter -> Warden
    Mage -> Blood Mage
    Warlock -> Necromancer
    Priest -> Cultist

    Building on this idea, class skins can help to loosen the race/class restrictions. For example, Void Elves could be Paladins, but only if they use the Spellbreaker skin. Night Elves and Blood Elves could be Shamans, but only as the Dragonsworn skin. Along with this, race specific class skins could be added, allowing for more specific class fantasy. For example, Orc Warriors could be Blademasters or Night Elf Demon Hunters could be Night Warriors or Kul'Tiran Priests could be Tidesages.

    Along with this whole system, I'd also advocate that one final class be added: the Tinker. This class is the most requested one I've seen and I think people would rejoice at its introduction. And with the class skin system, I'd add that Bard be a generic skin for Tinker and Apothecary as a race specific Tinker skin for Undead.

    Overall, I think a system like this would make it much easier for Blizzard to add new classes at any time and to add a great deal more character customization to the game. Plus how big of a draw would it be if blizzard announced so many new and fan requested classes getting added to the game? I think it is a solution that can satisfy a lot of people.
    Don't confuse "Most highly requested" with the SAME people keep requesting it over and over. Most people do not in fact want a Tinker class.

  8. #248
    Aucald already intervened to get the thread away from the Tinker talk. Let's not get it closed.

  9. #249
    Quote Originally Posted by jellmoo View Post
    [/I]I had originally put together a full reply, but saw Aucald's message after posting. So, for the sake of keeping the thread on target, I suggest we simply agree to disagree and move on witin the larger framework of class skins as a whole.
    You mentioned other classes.
    I want to hear your reasons for the divisions between class skins and new classes.

    Quote Originally Posted by Edoll View Post
    I want a necromancer skin for druids! The forms could be different bone armors or bone mechs and all the balance spells could be bone themed! Imagine Wrath casting animation summoning a little bird skeleton that explodes on the target! Moonfire could be a bonespike! Roots would be skeletal arms!


    I like your sarcasm.

    Quote Originally Posted by Neverafter View Post
    I also think making the Paladin into a Spellbreaker/Spellblade skin would be great. Retribution would essentially remain the same with arcane sparkles instead of yellow light sparkles.
    Spellbreakers are more likely Warriors.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ielenia View Post
    Engineers can make devices that make you invisible. Why couldn't the tinker also develop something like that?


    Thank you for your unhelpful opinion.


    And? You do know that "primitive" and "tech-savvy" are extreme ends of a spectrum and there are in-betweens, right?


    Except the class skin tinker would not be druids, just use the class' underlying mechanics with a new coat of paint. "Class skins" would not be transmogs you can change at a moment's notice by talking to an NPC. Class skins and base classes would be separate and have different race/class combos. Just like draenei can be shamans, but lightforged draenei can't. Just like blood elves can be paladins, but void elves cannot.

    EDIT: Kul'tiran druids are not exactly "nature lovers" as they deal with the "death" side of the cycle. Their forms are even wicker constructs, too. Also, the zandalari druids aren't "nature lovers" either.


    Read what the original poster said. He said abilities have been directly


    No. No, it would not. The game mechanics would remain exactly as they are. At worst, what might need tweaking are the animations. Those are not game mechanics.
    I can't reply to you because Aucald forbids it.

    Quote Originally Posted by dewd View Post
    sounds about right that people care about visuals and not how fun the actual game is to play via good class design, systems, raids and dungeons.
    True.
    That's why Blizzard is "buying" their playerbase back with new customization options in 9.1.5.
    And you guys just support it with all this "gameplay doesn't matter, only visuals".

    Quote Originally Posted by Triceron View Post
    This happens to Heroes of the Storm too if you consider these games have skins that change animations and effects, and regularly goes through massive reworks. New talents are added and shuffled all the time, and the skins sometimes have to adapt to the new changes. Thats all part of the price of a rework.
    When Malfurion gets a Gazlowe skin (with themed abilities and animations), please notify me.

    Quote Originally Posted by Triceron View Post
    There's also the possibility that certain Class Skins might not even need to have all the specs of the original class.

    I could see a 2-spec Spellbreaker based on Protection and Retribution and without healing spec could work out. Or a Dark Ranger that uses Survival and Marksmanship and leaves out Beastmastery. Since we're talking about more niche concepts for classes, there's no real need to have all 3 specs playable, and that leaves room for the original classes to continue to be unique.
    Good to see you're finally realizing...

    By the way, spellbreaker would most likely be a Warrior skin, since Blood elf Paladins are Blood Knights.

    Don't even get me started on Dark Rangers, which deserve their own class.
    I'm tempted to apply for a moderator position, just so i can go moderator on your asses.

  10. #250
    Quote Originally Posted by username993720 View Post
    By the way, spellbreaker would most likely be a Warrior skin, since Blood elf Paladins are Blood Knights.

    Don't even get me started on Dark Rangers, which deserve their own class.
    Warriors don't use magic. And Spellbreakers aren't actually Paladins if we're talking about Class Skins. It's the Vulpera = Goblin skin concept we're talking about, not the way you're regarding here that Vulpera Are-a-type-of Goblin.

    Spellbreaker class skin is a class within itself, using Paladin gameplay. Ret and Prot would be adapted with Arcane magic, given their own ability names and not be bound to the use of 'Blessings', 'Seals', 'Judgements', 'Holy Power' etc. It would be through its own theme and lore. Spellbreakers would not be regarded 'As-a-type-of Paladin'.


    ---

    Blizzard has added Dark Ranger abilities to a Legendary weapon for Hunters. If Dark Rangers really deserved to be their own class, Blizzard wouldn't have pawned their abilities off to Hunter. It shows that they have no intention of making a new class for them in the near future.

    And lets face it - what happens if Blizzard doesn't make a Dark Ranger class? What happens if by next expansion, they create a new Dragonsworn class which you don't even care for or expected to exist? You're going to pine for a Dark Ranger class for another 6+ years when they get to the point of possibly adding the next new class. Then they add a Tinker. So where does that leave you? Absolutely without a Dark Ranger playable.

    With Class skins, you could have Dark Ranger playable immediately, alongside Tinkers and Necromancers and other potential fan favourites that people have been asking for.
    Last edited by Triceron; 2021-08-26 at 08:11 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.

  11. #251
    Quote Originally Posted by username993720 View Post
    So, you want them to rework the Druid to fit the Tinker? that's the extra work your class skins are trying to avoid.
    "So.. (proceeds to completely and utterly miss the point)

    Hey, hey, look at me. What part of NO ABILITY MECHANICS WOULD BE CHANGED DO YOU NOT UNDERSTAND.?

    Dude, don't be dense, the point I am making is that You can't be beholden to an hypothetical mechanic that exists outside of WoW when even INSIDE OF WOW class mechanics have completely changed in the course of its life span.

    The argument of "You can't make the Tinker abilities work in a Druid because they are different" is worthless, because there isn't any sort of permanent standarization in WoW of how a conceptual class mechanic plays.

    Can you understand that, or are you going to continue to fail to grasp the point?

  12. #252
    Quote Originally Posted by username993720 View Post
    You mentioned other classes.
    I want to hear your reasons for the divisions between class skins and new classes.
    For my money, Blizzard can and should use the best tool for the job. Creating a new class is a massive undertaking and generally speaking, a hot button issue. Balance is so tenuous in this game, that any change to the class lineup has massive ripple effects in all sections of the game. I think this is a large reason why we get no classes so infrequently.

    The Class Skin concept gives Blizzard another tool to use in order to allow players to create characters that fulfill their concept. That allow them to play a version of an archetype that they normally can't play. The benefit being that they don't need to worry about balance or any of the issues that come with creating new mechanics.

    Blizzard could, on a case by case basis, decide what they best think works at allowing for an archetype to exist. Do they think that Class Skin could be implemented in order to make that character concept playable? If so, then that is an option. Maybe they feel it really needs to be a unique class. Or maybe they don't want to add it at all.

    When it comes to adding new features or playable options, I think that Blizzard should go with the route that makes the most sense for them in order to maximize what the playerbase will enjoy. What I personally like Class Skin idea, is that it could allow for multiple potential character concepts to become viable within a single expansion. As it is right now, there's this... battle... when it comes to what a new class will be, and there's always people left disappointed that what they want to play just isn't achievable in game. So as the next expansion approaches, we have different groups hoping that their pet class gets made. The Class Skin system lets a greater number of people have some ability to play their concept. Is it perfect? Of course not. But if we have people wanting to play a Tinker, Necromancer, or Dark Ranger all lined up, we actually have the ability to give each of them the option to play something that can help fulfill that class fantasy.

  13. #253
    Quote Originally Posted by Aucald View Post
    While a Tinker class was mentioned by the OP, this thread isn't really solely about the potential of the Tinker class. Let's shelf the rolling back-and-forth about Tinkers for now and instead focus on the idea of class-based "skins" for the existing classes.
    *Cough* *Cough*

  14. #254
    Quote Originally Posted by Triceron View Post
    Warriors don't use magic.


    Blizzard has added Dark Ranger abilities to a Legendary weapon for Hunters. If Dark Rangers really deserved to be their own class, Blizzard wouldn't have pawned their abilities off to Hunter. It shows that they have no intention of making a new class for them in the near future.
    That's the thing with Class Skins. Of course Spellbreaker would be cooler as a Mage 4th Spec, of course Tinker would be cooler as a class of its own, but is the whole issue of how likely something is to happen, how much work would it take.

    At the end of the day I think Warcraft has just so many fantasies that would never make the cut as classes; perhaps we are never going to see a new class, it's just too much of a hassle to rebalance all their abilities. It's just diminishing returns.

    Perhaps Tinker will be a class someday, and people will rejoice! But it can also go the way of the High Elf and y'all know how that went.

    Also yeah, Protection Paladin just fits Spellbreaker better; you have the shields that you can reskin as mana shields or negation zones, First Avenger and Blessed Hammer as thrown glaives, and Consecration as an "Essence Burn" would be cool.

  15. #255
    Quote Originally Posted by MyWholeLifeIsThunder View Post
    Also yeah, Protection Paladin just fits Spellbreaker better; you have the shields that you can reskin as mana shields or negation zones, First Avenger and Blessed Hammer as thrown glaives, and Consecration as an "Essence Burn" would be cool.
    Completely agree.

    Warriors have a lot of mobility like Charge and Heroic Leap that just doesn't fit the Spellbreaker style of gameplay. Paladins would be more appropriate as an armored, magic-using front-line fighter who stands his ground and has immunity to movement impairing effects. Even Death Knights would be more fitting to that style, though they don't use Shields so they don't really fit the rest of the fantasy.

    I can even see Spellbreakers be given their own Spellsword weapons (maybe Heirloom transmog?) and allow them to be thrown short-ranged for auto-attacks, giving them just a slight edge against Paladins but not in a way that it affects the actual Stat balance of the class. Just enough to really nail down the fantasy of this class being different, while the rest of the mechanics and balance would be the same.
    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.

  16. #256
    Quote Originally Posted by Triceron View Post
    Blizzard has added Dark Ranger abilities to a Legendary weapon for Hunters. If Dark Rangers really deserved to be their own class, Blizzard wouldn't have pawned their abilities off to Hunter. It shows that they have no intention of making a new class for them in the near future.
    Funny how you say that now after arguing with Teriz about how these abilities don't really account for a Dark Ranger:

    Quote Originally Posted by Triceron View Post
    Yep. Hunters with Borrowed Power, exactly what it is.
    Quote Originally Posted by Triceron View Post
    I won't be surprised because I know it's not going to be. There's really no reason for them to suddenly fold Legendary Weapon effects into a class when it's meant to be special.

    Keep in mind Wailing Arrow and Withering Fire aren't even their own spells, they just modify existing Hunter abilities. So why would Hunters suddenly get two variations of spells they already have in the next expansion? It makes no sense.
    Quote Originally Posted by Triceron View Post
    We don't have to.

    It's a Borrowed Power mechanic tied directly to a Legendary item.
    Which leads me to believe you're only here to stir the pot.

    With Class skins, you could have Dark Ranger playable immediately, alongside Tinkers and Necromancers and other potential fan favourites that people have been asking for.
    You know what happens to rushed things? they turn out bad.

    Quote Originally Posted by MyWholeLifeIsThunder View Post
    Dude, don't be dense, the point I am making is that You can't be beholden to an hypothetical mechanic that exists outside of WoW when even INSIDE OF WOW class mechanics have completely changed in the course of its life span.

    The argument of "You can't make the Tinker abilities work in a Druid because they are different" is worthless, because there isn't any sort of permanent standarization in WoW of how a conceptual class mechanic plays.
    So, at what point are you expecting them to change the class to fit the class skin?
    You whole premise is relied on the chance that they might make changes that might fit your idea?

    Quote Originally Posted by jellmoo View Post
    For my money, Blizzard can and should use the best tool for the job. Creating a new class is a massive undertaking and generally speaking, a hot button issue. Balance is so tenuous in this game, that any change to the class lineup has massive ripple effects in all sections of the game. I think this is a large reason why we get no classes so infrequently.

    The Class Skin concept gives Blizzard another tool to use in order to allow players to create characters that fulfill their concept. That allow them to play a version of an archetype that they normally can't play. The benefit being that they don't need to worry about balance or any of the issues that come with creating new mechanics.

    Blizzard could, on a case by case basis, decide what they best think works at allowing for an archetype to exist. Do they think that Class Skin could be implemented in order to make that character concept playable? If so, then that is an option. Maybe they feel it really needs to be a unique class. Or maybe they don't want to add it at all.

    When it comes to adding new features or playable options, I think that Blizzard should go with the route that makes the most sense for them in order to maximize what the playerbase will enjoy. What I personally like Class Skin idea, is that it could allow for multiple potential character concepts to become viable within a single expansion. As it is right now, there's this... battle... when it comes to what a new class will be, and there's always people left disappointed that what they want to play just isn't achievable in game. So as the next expansion approaches, we have different groups hoping that their pet class gets made. The Class Skin system lets a greater number of people have some ability to play their concept. Is it perfect? Of course not. But if we have people wanting to play a Tinker, Necromancer, or Dark Ranger all lined up, we actually have the ability to give each of them the option to play something that can help fulfill that class fantasy.
    That's not what i asked.

    What criteria do you use for the division you used between class skins and new classes (that you mentioned in a previous post)?

    Quote Originally Posted by MyWholeLifeIsThunder View Post
    Perhaps Tinker will be a class someday, and people will rejoice! But it can also go the way of the High Elf and y'all know how that went.
    You know what's the difference between a high elf and the you-know-who class?
    A high elf is no different than a Blood elf.

    Quote Originally Posted by Triceron View Post
    Completely agree.

    Warriors have a lot of mobility like Charge and Heroic Leap that just doesn't fit the Spellbreaker style of gameplay. Paladins would be more appropriate as an armored, magic-using front-line fighter who stands his ground. Even Death Knights would be more fitting to that style, though they don't use Shields so they don't really fit the rest of the fantasy.
    I admit i might have been wrong:

    Last edited by username993720; 2021-08-26 at 08:32 PM.
    I'm tempted to apply for a moderator position, just so i can go moderator on your asses.

  17. #257
    Field Marshal Aynen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    The Netherlands
    Posts
    72
    Quote Originally Posted by draugril View Post
    That has solely mechanical implications.

    Class skins have none. Just as buying a skin in the kinds of games that have them does not impart any mechanical difference or advantage to you.
    So if there are no mechanical changes, it's just transmog + cosmetic glyphs

  18. #258
    Quote Originally Posted by username993720 View Post
    Funny how you say that now after arguing with Teriz about how these abilities don't really account for a Dark Ranger:
    The legendary weapon does not support a standalone Dark Ranger, nor the Hunter gaining Dark Ranger abilities in a future expansion. It's purely Borrowed Power.

    So no, it doesn't account for a Dark Ranger at all. Teriz wasn't talking about a standalone Dark Ranger class, he was suggesting those abilities appear on the Hunter; and that wouldn't happen since we're referring specifically to Borrowed Power mechanics on a Legendary.

    Which leads me to believe you're only here to stir the pot.
    This topic is about Class skins, and I'm here to talk about Class skins. If I were being a contrarian to the topic, then that'd be stirring the pot.

    What you're here doing? That is stirring the pot. You are participating in a topic about Class skins with the intent to dismiss the idea of them being viable at all. Honestly, what do you really think you're doing here if you're not stirring the pot? You didn't accidentally jump into the Class Skin topic. You purposely clicked it, knowing that you don't like Class Skins, for the purpose of arguing against them.


    You know what happens to rushed things? they turn out bad.
    Why would it be rushed? Because it's easy to do?

    I'm a modder for Blizzard's RTS games. Adding new graphics to existing models is what I do all the time.



    You can check out the project I helped work on. I created the Ballista you see in the trailer. This also shows some of the work our team has done with reskinning the Footmen and Knights to fit each human Kingdom. The Orc clans all get their own unique skins too. All of this is easy stuff, and not rushed at all. And we're all just amateur modders doing this stuff using mostly the assets provided in the game already.

    If WoW were actually moddable, I could literally mock up the Tinker class skin out of a Druid in a week. All of WoW's model files are compatible in SC2 and Reforged, and it only takes some tuning to get em working. We just can't take the work back into WoW since it's all server-based, and would be breaking the EULA anyways.
    Last edited by Triceron; 2021-08-26 at 08:49 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. #259
    Quote Originally Posted by Aynen View Post
    So if there are no mechanical changes, it's just transmog + cosmetic glyphs
    In a world with enough transmog options and developers that remember that glyphs exist and go nuts with them, yes. That's precisely it. In fact, you don't even need the transmog options - the idea is a glorified glyph that rethemes the entire class and slaps a new name on the mouseover. It's not asking for much, relative to an entirely new class.

  20. #260
    I could also see class skins getting people to play a class they would otherwise never touch.

    Purely for examples sake: Someone who just will never play Warlock, because they hate the demonic theme. They simply do not care to play a class with a fantasy centered around demons, they hate it. But the love the idea of a class that summons a bunch of minions to fight for them. If demo lock had a necromancer class (spec) skin; maybe now that player would give that class a try?

    Maybe someone would love nothing more than to play a jungle troll, throwing axes instead of using bows because they just love the old WC2 trolls to bits. If there's a skin for hunters to use throwing axes and have those kinds of abilities rather than bow skills; that's another happy player.

    Wonder what skins a mage could get though. Blood mage is just a fire mage more or less and the specs already cover the flavor for them. Tidesages maybe but that would have to (imo) be an alliance only skin.




    Though I'm sure blizzard would forget to change NPC dialog to refer to the new skin. But I could ignore that.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Triceron View Post
    The legendary weapon does not support a standalone Dark Ranger, nor the Hunter gaining Dark Ranger abilities in a future expansion. It's purely Borrowed Power.

    So no, it doesn't account for a Dark Ranger at all. Teriz wasn't talking about a standalone Dark Ranger class, he was suggesting those abilities appear on the Hunter; and that wouldn't happen since we're referring specifically to Borrowed Power mechanics on a Legendary.



    This topic is about Class skins, and I'm here to talk about Class skins. If I were being a contrarian to the topic, then that'd be stirring the pot.

    What you're here doing? That is stirring the pot. You are participating in a topic about Class skins with the intent to dismiss the idea of them being viable at all. Honestly, what do you really think you're doing here if you're not stirring the pot? You didn't accidentally jump into the Class Skin topic. You purposely clicked it, knowing that you don't like Class Skins, for the purpose of arguing against them.




    Why would it be rushed? Because it's easy to do?

    I'm a modder for Blizzard's RTS games. Adding new graphics to existing models is what I do all the time. It doesn't take very long to make a model or spell effect and replace it in their game. If Blizzard allowed WoW to be moddable, we could literally do everything we're talking about in the game and have Tinkers with Tinker abiltiies that all use the same stats and gameplay of a Druid. I can do all of that in Warcraft 3 Reforged or Starcraft 2, including porting all of the WoW graphics to do so. It's much easier than say designing a completely new ability and having it be balanced to the exact specifications of Warcraft 3's multiplayer gameplay.
    Where the hells my WC2 campaign built in the SC2 engine yo! =(

    Please? Like, super please?
    Quote Originally Posted by Minikin View Post
    "Sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never....BURN IT"

Posting Permissions

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