Class Skins would add many new classes and be a major draw for a new expansion

[Triceron]

Where the hells my WC2 campaign built in the SC2 engine yo! =(

Please? Like, super please?

I'm working with a team that is making it a reality in Reforged, and they're doing 100X more than whatever I could do alone in SC2.

Check out Hiveworkshop for Chronicles of the Second War. I'd link but I think advertisement is against forum rules.

[AcidicSyn]

That's the wife, when she played WoW. Warlock and Death Knight were the classes that would have been the most appealing mechanically, but that aesthetic just does not jive at all with her.

Wonder what a DK could be skinned as. Feels like most of the plate wearing magical melee skins would be pally based.

Maybe something new, ethereal or void themed? is Void Knight a thing? =\

[username993720]

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.

So, if Dark Rangers aren't accounted for with this legendary, then what's the point of:

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.

...other than for the sake of arguing?

You're, literally, selling different answers to different people.

You purposely clicked it, knowing that you don't like Class Skins, for the purpose of arguing against them.

Of course i like it. For what it makes sense - class/race combination representations.

Ask yourself this: if Allied races were purely cosmetic, why were they given different racials (excluding Fireblood)? why not just apply a 'skin' to existing racials, so they wouldn't have to balance them?

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

Call it half-assed. call it whatever you want. introducing a lot of classes that way just to satisfy the community would result in a bad outcome.

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.

This guy gets the idea of race/class combination skins.

[AcidicSyn]

I'm working with a team that is making it a reality in Reforged, and they're doing 100X more than whatever I could do alone in SC2.

prefer sc2 but I'll take reforged, though I'm beginning to doubt Blizzards ever going to fix custom campaigns in there. tbh I wanted them to reforge WC2 before doing 3, man I wanna play a remaster/remake of that so much.

Will check out chronicles on hive, tyty!

[Triceron]

Call it half-assed. call it whatever you want. introducing a lot of classes that way just to satisfy the community would result in a bad outcome.

Would you consider Allied Races to be half-assed and rushed?

...other than for the sake of arguing?

You're, literally, selling different answers to different people.

Because I'm talking to two different people?

Teriz is not talking about a standalone Dark Ranger class. He was talking about Hunters gaining the Legendary Bow abilities as Class abilties in a future expansion.

If he's talking about Borrowed Power mechanics becoming part of a class, why would I respond to say Dark Rangers wouldn't be playable? We weren't talking about Dark Rangers as their own class. So it's a different context completely to how I am responding to you. You're not regarding Hunters gaining Dark Ranger abilities as a class mechanic, right?

Dark Rangers aren't accounted for by the Legendary Bow, and I never said they would be. I'm saying Dark Rangers aren't accounted for _period_. They are not a playable class, and Blizzard has indicated *zero intention* to maintain their exclusivity in order to create a class for them.

It would be like if they started adding Tinker abilities into Engineering. Does this suddenly make it more likely that a Tinker class is playable if its abilities were all being given to Engineering? No, it makes it less likely since they're not being reserved.

[Neverafter]

So if there are no mechanical changes, it's just transmog + cosmetic glyphs

Pretty much. I liken it to the warlock green fire quest chain. Its purely cosmetic, but it adds a cool factor that a lot of people had been requesting.

Class skins would take the cosmetic only approach of green fire and add in the Race/Allied Race relationship. High Mountain Tauren and Tauren (Mulgore) look very similar, even have somewhat similar racials, but they are different races.

The same would be said for class skins. The rotations, the damage modifiers, stats, everything would remain the same. The difference would be, for example, instead of playing a bear druid, you would play a Tankatron Mech. Instead of spamming swipe and maul, you would spam a melee AoE attack (Call it Gyro Arm) and then a single target melee attack (call it crush for now). The animations would need updated, Gyro Arm would have the mech dealing aoe in a cone in front of him, while Crush would look like the mech bringing both hands down on the enemy.

The point being, the damage, the way abilities string together to form combos, etc, all of that would remain the same. If you set up your macros and action bars the same, you could blindfold a druid player and they could execute a Tinker perfectly and achieve the same exact dps.

[username993720]

Would you consider Allied Races to be half-assed and rushed?

They're not supposed to be new races per se (except for Vulpera).
They are exactly what race/class combination skins are - sub.

[jellmoo]

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)?

I literally answered that question though...

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.

[Triceron]

They're not supposed to be new races per se (except for Vulpera).
They are exactly what race/class combination skins are - sub.

Yet you can't fathom the same happening for classes because of your own bias that any class should have its own gameplay.

So really it comes down to your own bias. Your own lack of acceptance over a Class that looks different but plays the same as another.

Cuz in reality, Allied Races are not Sub races. Vulpera are not a Sub-race of Goblins. You simply want to regard them as Sub-races, because that's what makes sense for you to accept this 'half-assed and rushed' approach to adding new Races. Yet when it comes to Classes, you're unwilling to accept it because deep down you think any newly regarded class should have its own gameplay.

So it's not a problem of the concept, it's a problem of your inability to accept it.

[username993720]

I literally answered that question though...

Not what Blizzard would use. What you used.

Yet you can't fathom the same happening for classes because of your own bias that any class should have its own gameplay.

Not any class.

Cuz in reality, Allied Races are not Sub races. Vulpera are not a Sub-race of Goblins. You simply want to regard them as Sub-races, because that's what makes sense for you to accept this 'half-assed and rushed' approach to adding new Races. Yet when it comes to Classes, you're unwilling to accept it because deep down you think any newly regarded class should have its own gameplay.

Except for Vulpera, they all are.

[Triceron]

Not any class.

Well you cherry pick. The ones you don't care much about are allowed to be class skins, the ones you personally care about and want to see as new classes you argue against being a class skin


If you said *you want to see* Dark Rangers as their own playable class instead of a Class skin, then I'd be fine to agree with you. If you are going to outright say they *deserve* to be their own class, then I'm going to bombard you with paragraphs of explanation to show you exactly why you're using the wrong words to convey your intended meaning. No class in the game is put on a pedestal higher than any other in this regard. It all just comes down to Blizzard's internal reasons for satisfying certain demands of the fans, or choosing to follow their own path and present something unexpected.

Same if you applied this to races. Do Naga and Ogres deserve to be playable? No, not at all. No race *deserves* to be playable any more than any other, and the reason why anyone would suggest it is based on their own desire for it to become playable. And personal desires really have no bearing on what Blizzard adds to the game.

[jellmoo]

Not what Blizzard would use. What you used.

I don't *use* anything, since I don't add things to the game. All I'm doing is advocating for a potential new system that could add concepts/archetypes to the game. I'm not saying whether Blizzard should use one system or the other.

[MyWholeLifeIsThunder]

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.

Oh yes! We know that the technology exists through the Artifact Weapons being able to be mogged over pretty much anything, so it would be perfect if a Class Skin came with its own "Artifact Weapon" cosmetic.

Glaive for Spellbreakes, Crescent Glaive for Wardens, so on and so forth.

- - - Updated - - -

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?

Never.

Also don't say "your whole premise..." when you have yet to grasp what the premise is on the first place.

-Out of WoW gameplay is not prescriptive of how a concept would be playable in WoW.

-Class Gameplay has and will change within WoW's lifespan

-My Whole premise is based on the fact that whatever "Tinker Gameplay" that exists outsides WoW matters less than one single fuck. That's what "moot" means. It doesn't matter.

Will you stop being dense now?

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.

"But you see MY bias makes sense"

- - - Updated - - -

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.

And we have actually seen the mechanics of it all play in game through the "Fel Fire" Warlock ability that replaces your spells with green versions of them.

[ravenmoon]

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.

Druids should be Valewalkers -- much cooler name, and a more defined concept that's also more in line and a bit exciting and mysterious.

[Ielenia]

Wailing Arrow and Withering Fire are Dark Ranger abilities in HotS and WoW.

Borrowed powers. Nothing more, nothing less. They're just abilities granted by wielding an item, just like Atiesh allowed you to create a portal to Karazhan.

Also, what's your response to me showing how much you like to make stuff up on the fly?

[Triceron]

I admit i might have been wrong:
*Quinthalan-Sunfire-Action-Figure

Exactly that!

That figure sits above my desk and is the reason why I yearn for a fully-realized Spellbreaker as good as this figure in WoW. I'd love to see them playable, though I know a full new class would probably be too much to ask for. Same with any '4th spec' for any existing class. Class skin would be an ideal alternative.

Also that Johanna Spellbreaker skin is the permanently default I use for her. There's no competition for me, it's hands down my favourite skin for her, and one of my favourite skins in the game overall. Easily top 10.

[Teriz]

Borrowed powers. Nothing more, nothing less. They're just abilities granted by wielding an item, just like Atiesh allowed you to create a portal to Karazhan.

Atiesh didn’t give abilities to one class exclusively.

Also, what's your response to me showing how much you like to make stuff up on the fly?

I didn’t make anything up. Additionally you’ve been consistently ignoring the myriad of necromancer abilities in the Warlock class.

[Triceron]

Just going to throw out an idea here while I'm at it-

So how do people actually feel about Class Skins that include some form of gameplay changes.

Class skins have the huge advantage of being a quick and easy way to implement a new class, because it piggybacks on existing balance and gameplay. But that also becomes a drawback for some players who expect some level of fresh gameplay. So let's open this up a bit to discuss hypothetical New Gameplay scenarios.

So here's a few options I came up as jumping points. For the sake of ease, I'll refer to the new Class Skin classes as 'Echos'. This is terminology I'm borrowing from Smash Bros' character skins.

A- No Gameplay Changes - just straight up Graphics and Ability swaps. New names, new lore, new coat of paint.
B- New Talents - Same core gameplay, with some divergence in Talents. Most talents will be used for both classes, with some room to diverge with unique Talents for between Core and Echo classes. Talents tend to be weighed equally, so ideally they would be tuned to the same level of effectiveness.
C- New Specs - This one is a new idea I've come up with. Basically we treat the Echo as a new class and throw in all of the good stuff into one new Spec. Then we pair the Echo class to a Core class or spec as a means of filling in the gaps. It shares the same gameplay of a Core class for 1-2 specs, while the new spec offers something completely fresh.



With Option A, it would be the most straight forward method. No gameplay or balance to consider, only a graphics update. Echos live-and-die with the gameplay of its Core class. If Druids happen to suck the next expansion, then so would the Echo class that follows. Tanking, Melee DPS, Healing would all be adapted straight to an Arcane theme.

With Option B, we have to consider that there will be min-maxing between Core and Echo classes, and that it would simply be the way things roll. Min Maxing and Fad of the Month classes will still be a thing, but there could be a bit more deviation and variance that allows Cores to outperform in some aspects, Echos in another. It's the Covenant balance conundrum - do we allow the gameplay diversity to open up customization at the sake of class balance? The gameplay remains the same as the Core class with a new theme, same as Option A. Talents would be the only thing adding variety to the class.

With Option C, we can fulfill the Echo's unique themes through a new spec. Whatever Core specs are used to fill in the gameplay would simply be there to help round out the class fantasy.

Eg,
- Core class Paladins have Protection, Retribution and Holy specs. Tank, Melee, Healer.
- Echo class Spellbreaker gets Protection, Retribution (Sunblade) and a completely new Arcane caster spec, Spellstealer. Tank, Melee, Caster; complete with weak-ass healing utility that already exists in Tank and Melee specs.

The Spellstealer spec would be all new, and showcase all the abilities that you might expect from a Spellbreaker as a standalone class. Control Magic, Spell Stealing, Feedback and other Arcane abilities that would help define the Spellbreaker as its own unique identity and not just a literal 'Class skin', and without having to alter the Core class with new abilities to do so. Spellbreakers would be a Tank/Melee DPS/Spellcaster class that carries over healing utility in its melee specs and still carries the same buffs and ressurection as a Paladin. It would not have any Healing spec whatsoever. Spellstealer is effectively a '4th spec', but adapted to a new class theme.


Thoughts?
.

[jellmoo]

Just going to throw out an idea here while I'm at it-

So how do people actually feel about Class Skins that include some form of gameplay changes.

Class skins have the huge advantage of being a quick and easy way to implement a new class, because it piggybacks on existing balance and gameplay. But that also becomes a drawback for some players who expect some level of fresh gameplay. So let's open this up a bit to discuss hypothetical New Gameplay scenarios.

So here's a few options I came up as jumping points. For the sake of ease, I'll refer to the new Class Skin classes as 'Echos'. This is terminology I'm borrowing from Smash Bros' character skins.

A- No Gameplay Changes - just straight up Graphics and Ability swaps. New names, new lore, new coat of paint.
B- New Talents - Same core gameplay, with some divergence in Talents. Most talents will be used for both classes, with some room to diverge with unique Talents for between Core and Echo classes. Talents tend to be weighed equally, so ideally they would be tuned to the same level of effectiveness.
C- New Specs - This one is a new idea I've come up with. Basically we treat the Echo as a new class and throw in all of the good stuff into one new Spec. Then we pair the Echo class to a Core class or spec as a means of filling in the gaps. It shares the same gameplay of a Core class for 1-2 specs, and you can consider the new spec as a '4th spec' that is designed for a new class and theme.

For my money you more or less have to go with Option A. As soon as you introduce mechanical changes, really of any kind, you are hitting balance checks and that really invalidates the point behind the Class Skin. Making mechanical changes really starts to create the core issue of one version of a class mechanic being better than another. If you have Mages and introduce an Echo class skin that uses the Mage toolkit, but unique talents or custom options make the Echo mathematically better, it flat out decimates the Mage class.

The real draws for the Class Skin are the facts that you can introduce new character concepts without affecting balance at all, and that they require far less effort to pull off. Doing anything that deviates from that kind approach kind of nullifies the benefit, to the point that you may as well introduce a brand new class.

[Teriz]

Just going to throw out an idea here while I'm at it-

So how do people actually feel about Class Skins that include some form of gameplay changes.

Class skins have the huge advantage of being a quick and easy way to implement a new class, because it piggybacks on existing balance and gameplay. But that also becomes a drawback for some players who expect some level of fresh gameplay. So let's open this up a bit to discuss hypothetical New Gameplay scenarios.

So here's a few options I came up as jumping points. For the sake of ease, I'll refer to the new Class Skin classes as 'Echos'. This is terminology I'm borrowing from Smash Bros' character skins.

A- No Gameplay Changes - just straight up Graphics and Ability swaps. New names, new lore, new coat of paint.
B- New Talents - Same core gameplay, with some divergence in Talents. Most talents will be used for both classes, with some room to diverge with unique Talents for between Core and Echo classes. Talents tend to be weighed equally, so ideally they would be tuned to the same level of effectiveness.
C- New Specs - This one is a new idea I've come up with. Basically we treat the Echo as a new class and throw in all of the good stuff into one new Spec. Then we pair the Echo class to a Core class or spec as a means of filling in the gaps. It shares the same gameplay of a Core class for 1-2 specs, while the new spec offers something completely fresh.



With Option A, it would be the most straight forward method. No gameplay or balance to consider, only a graphics update. Echos live-and-die with the gameplay of its Core class. If Druids happen to suck the next expansion, then so would the Echo class that follows. Tanking, Melee DPS, Healing would all be adapted straight to an Arcane theme.

With Option B, we have to consider that there will be min-maxing between Core and Echo classes, and that it would simply be the way things roll. Min Maxing and Fad of the Month classes will still be a thing, but there could be a bit more deviation and variance that allows Cores to outperform in some aspects, Echos in another. It's the Covenant balance conundrum - do we allow the gameplay diversity to open up customization at the sake of class balance? The gameplay remains the same as the Core class with a new theme, same as Option A. Talents would be the only thing adding variety to the class.

With Option C, we can fulfill the Echo's unique themes through a new spec. Whatever Core specs are used to fill in the gameplay would simply be there to help round out the class fantasy.

Eg,
- Core class Paladins have Protection, Retribution and Holy specs. Tank, Melee, Healer.
- Echo class Spellbreaker gets Protection, Retribution (Sunblade) and a completely new Arcane caster spec, Spellstealer. Tank, Melee, Caster; complete with weak-ass healing utility that already exists in Tank and Melee specs.

The Spellstealer spec would be all new, and showcase all the abilities that you might expect from a Spellbreaker as a standalone class. Control Magic, Spell Stealing, Feedback and other Arcane abilities that would help define the Spellbreaker as its own unique identity and not just a literal 'Class skin', and without having to alter the Core class with new abilities to do so. Spellbreakers would be a Tank/Melee DPS/Spellcaster class that carries over healing utility in its melee specs and still carries the same buffs and ressurection as a Paladin. It would not have any Healing spec whatsoever. Spellstealer is effectively a '4th spec', but adapted to a new class theme.


Thoughts?
.

Option A is how I always viewed this. However, that option only works if you’re talking about similarly themed concepts, like a Dark Ranger/Hunter, Dark Shaman/Shaman, Druid/Druid of the Fang/Flame/Nightmare, Sunwalker/Paladin.

Anything beyond that is unworkable with that option.