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

[Cosmic Janitor]

I don't understand why the title of this thread was about class skins when in reality it's just another Tinker thread. I really would have liked to talk about class skins but mentioning Tinker destroyed the thread because you summoned the resident Tinker fanatic who has spent 7 pages talking in illogical circles.

Because the fetish and obtuse nature of one or two persons, who are utterly disconnected from reality if I might add, have once again derailed an entire thread. People should just put these persons on ignore, sadly every time some of the same and some new people entertain them and another thread goes to shit. Though to be honest the original post was already aimed at exactly that, so doom was already spelled out from the beginning.

[username993720]

Alongside New Class and New Specs, Class Skins are just a concept as to how add more flavor and fantasy to the game. Each of these has pro and cons, and the pro of Class Skins is that it's entirely cosmetic.

My issue is that new Classes on their own are HIGHLY unlikely, specially since they have to be woven deeply into the context of an expansion, and let's be honest, "Kezan" is never going to be the thematic of a whole expansion.

Who knows... they've brought us the Broken Isles, which were nothing more than Night elven ruins in WC3.

I have said myself that the point of this thread is talking about Class Skins, but I *do* believe a Tinker Class is possible, but it would most likely also be merged with Artificer concepts on a Cosmic/Spacefaring expansion. Honestly more likely than a Necromancer Class, cause I feel we passed that window with Shadowlands.

Unlikely. The Tinker isn't a Star Wars/Trek based character. It is more grounded in fantasy tech.

If you want to say it's not usually part of the Tinker Fantasy, then you should first outline what you actually define to be part of and not part of this fantasy, before assuming everyone understand what the fuck you're talking about.

Would you say healing is part of the Tinker fantasy? Because there are zero examples of Tinkers with any capacity to heal in Warcraft 3, Heroes of the Storm or WoW. Yet I don't see you raising any complaints over a Healing spec or how it conflicts with the Tinker fantasy. Cuz you know what? I would argue that if we're talking about a Tinker fantasy, then I would say stealth could be a part of the fantasy just as much as healing would, and none of that currently exists in any Tinker in the game right now. 'Fantasy' literally means made up fictional shit, so if you want to talk about what would fit the fantasy, I would argue that anything goes.

The Tinker isn't actually playable, so it could be anything from a magic-user like Toki the Time-Tinker to a mad scientist like Dr. Boom.

The Alchemist.
You could separate the two, but that would be kind of a waste of a class slot.
Temporary stealth? perhaps. Permanent one? unlikely.

Yes, all as vendors or NPCs of the Engineering profession. Not as a playable class. So if you want to talk about the definition of a Tinker as it exists right now in WoW, then we're talking about Engineering NPCs.

Who the fuck cares how they exist in game? i'm talking about the lore of the class.

No, the whole point is that you would have to make Tinker concept FIT IN to Druid mechanics.

Which is forced, by itself.
You're trying to fit a triangle into a square.

Feral, mechanically, is literally the same gameplay than a rogue, building up combo points and spend it with finishers. "Scratches and Bites" It's literally just the aesthetics.

Which, have nothing to do with Tinker gameplay. The Tinker wouldn't rely on combo points, bleeds, fast attacks, stealth or agility.

Interesting - because a certain someone has said dozens, and dozens, and dozens of time that if such overlap exists, its the best reason NOT to introduce them as a new class - overlap is bad, remember?

You mean the Necromancer and the Death Knight? they, literally, employ the same kind of magic and have the same kind of abilities.
Meanwhile, Druids and Tinkers are as far apart as day and Night. One's a tech master, the other nature.
Everyone shares mechanics. Just because we have BM Hunters, Demonology Warlocks and Unholy Death Knight doesn't mean they're all the same. Overlapness would always exist.

Other specs can use moonfire. And the guardian and feral spec would be "brawler" specs, with the mech throwing punches instead of shooting missiles and stuff.

There's really nothing agile, fast or stealthy about the Tinker.

No. We don't have to.

And what's the problem of giving "druidism" to those races? Plenty of players asking for the removal of race/class combo restrictions, for one.

That would be stupid.

Sure.. But in this case we can because it works pretty well overall.

Only in your mind.

I don't need to change what they, only the presentation though, because that's the only real difference in the grand scheme of things. Look at it this way:

With the current system we get a new class every what, 5 to 7 years? That leaves a lot of character concepts that just can't be made. Then when we get that new class, we have a slew of unhappy people that don't get the class they want, along with a slew of new balance issues.

Why not work out ways to instead of getting that new class every 5 to 7 years, we get 3 or 4 skins every expansion? That's 3 or 4 character concepts that are suddenly viable. Is it as exciting as a brand new class? Of course not. But it allows a lot more people to have access to the character concept they want and without the perils of a balance nightmare.

Sounds great on paper. Not so much in reality. First of all, they would deplete all of their potential future classes with that kind of a feature. Second of all, they would only be a pale version of the true class. If you want class skins, apply it to "subclasses" just like allied races were (mostly) applied to "subraces. Meaning, you'd get your Sunwalker, Blood Mage and Tidesage. That would be great because class skins are meant to be a cosmetic feature, and these guys only really differ in aesthetic from their "parent class".

I don't know what to tell you if you don't think that stealth is something a tech based class could be able to do. It's pretty much a well regarded staple of the archetype. It fits the concept just fine.

How many Tinker have you seen (perma) stealthing?

So? Why can't it have two DPS specs? What exactly prevents the Tinker concept from having both a melee and ranged DPS spec?

Because there's really no need to separate the two. If the Tank would already employ heavy melee combat, you can't expect a melee dps spec to be fast and agile like a rogue or a feral druid, while another ranged spec would shoot missiles and stuff. It's just unnecessary division, which shows how little thought was given to the concept.

Cool, they're two NPCs. Just like other NPCs that existed in game before the class came out, the playable class need not match them on anything approaching a 1 to 1 basis. All we need to do is cover the archetype of the class, and if we want to follow precedent, what was present in WC3. This class skin concept does exactly that.

Representative NPCs. One's the iconic Goblin Tinker, the other the most known Gnome Tinker. While we wouldn't be exactly doing what they do, you can bet your ass it'd be based on these and not on your weird fantasies.

And what exactly would they like to say, since they prove my point?

A class based on a race's aesthetics and culture.

Nothing is compromised when the alternative is not having Tinker playable at all.

Oh, i'm sorry.
Are you some kind of a fortune teller?

Kul'Tiran druids throw your argument into the trash can. They're not primitive, and it's a simple case of making the midgets' "druid" forms just be mechanical forms, anyways.

They're not tech-savvy either.
That would go against the whole premise of a Druid. suddenly, they're not nature lovers but tech experts? come on....

Nothing about class skins prevents Blizzard from just making it another class entry in the character creation screen that has it's own available races. The idea here is simply to reduce the mechanical design and balance work load after a few visual assets have been made once.

You can't really apply it to any one class. Because a new class would be a mishmash of different classes' and specs' mechanics.

Just switching an existing warlock to necromancer makes little to no sense either, even if they have some overlap in the shadow spells category.

Why not? the affliction spec is already death-based and summoning could be changed to undeads.

lol, all of these comments about "mechs". Go play Go play Mechwarrior or Battletech or something. Either way, there are already these things called "engineers" in WoW that do most of what people are suggesting. Hey, I have an idea for a class! It's called a "stitcher" and you make specialized cloth for your class and fighting handkerchiefs. No, wait...how about "liquider"--they make all of these exploding potion things and construct mini viscous blobs to fight by their side!

How much combat application does an Engineer has?

Even if WoW did create this silly "class", it wouldn't be anything like what people are suggesting in this thread, I guarantee it.

It would be like a Tinker.
Not much complication here.

I just checked again--no tinkers in the game. Just engineers. Everything from the dumb "mech" stuff to individual abilities and other silly crap is all on these forums.

Check Mekattorque in Battle for Dazar'alor, or Gazlowe in Heroes of the Storm.

The core problem is that he is presenting the Tinker "gameplay" from other games as necessary for any Tinker concept to work in WoW

Not necessarily. There's Mekkatorque in game.
The problem with him is he thinks the Tinker would be based on the Goblin approach to Engineering only (Gazlowe).

if i take a duck and dress it up in 4 different ways it doesnt mean i have 5 ducks
i still only have 1

Poetic.

Duh. That's kind of a given. Just like animations and spell effects for warlocks would be changed if they get a necromancer class skin. Your point being?

The difference is that the Warlock spells would changed to be more deathly, which is already a part of the class. Druids have nothing Tinkerish about them. Not in abilities, nor in animations.

Except... they're not primitive. At all. Have you set foot in Boralus at all? They're nowhere near the levels of trolls, tauren and nightelves. Not to mention it's a Kul'Tiran that teaches us how to work with advanced technology. And also: the worgen were certainly not "primitive", either.

Harvest-witches and Thornspeakers are definitely primitive. Read up on the lore. And these cultures using pistols are still far away from tech expertise.

"It's like saying "No, Melee Survival can't be Hunter spec because Hunters are a ranged class" when we have literally seen WoW change how the whole gameplay of the spec changed in front of our eyes."

Survival was melee in the first place. They've gone back to the roots.

I mean if you look at the history of Druids and all the abilities added and replaced and taken away and brought back, it covers a huge variety of gameplay. Wild Mushrooms are Land Mines, Treants are Summonable Minions, Starfall is an aerial bombardment style AoE, Hurricane is a movement-inhibiting AoE, Moon spells are Lasers, Nature spells are Projectiles, etc etc. They can use all that as a base to create new talents that would be more Tinker-like, while keeping the full Druid gameplay and aesthetic. When you really break it down, it's just a collection of different mechanics. A Druid in each form effectively plays like another existing class; Guardian plays like Warrior, Feral plays like Rogues, Balance plays like a typical caster like Mage or Warlock. You can consider the Druid itself a reskin of all those classes.

So, you've accounted for the balance spec. How would they be a Feral Druid in gameplay? fast? agile? stealthy? combo points? bleeds? nothing about the Tinker fantasy is remotely close to that of a Rogue.
Restoration - who says the Alchemist's healing abilities are hots? Healing spray is literally more akin to a Monk channeled mist spell than a Druid healing spell. Do Druids augment their allies' combat capabilities? Chemical Rage is more akin to a Shaman's Bloodlust.
Do Druids throw anything like acid bomb? Do they have an execute ability like Transmute?

Entangled Roots -> Steel Trap (More techy version of a Bear Claw trap, like Junkrats)
Bark Skin -> EZ-PZ Dimensional Ripper (HOTS Talent that boosts armor. Not sure why they referenced a teleportation ability...)
Tiger's Bite -> Demolish (reference to WC3 Roboform melee attack modifier)
Starfall -> Orbital Bombardment, call down cannon/rocket shots from an unseen Gunship above
Predatory Swiftness -> Ark Reactor (HOTS Talent that boosts multiple abilities, also Iron Man reference)
Bristling Fur -> Kinetic Absorption (Reference to Black Panther's Vibranium suit)
Tree of Life -> RES-Q Suit (Reference to Pepper Pott's Rescue Armor)
Incarnation -> Mecha-Lord (HOTS Talent, improves your Robot Form)

Steel Trap - a Hunter ability. Entangling roots is applied to a targeted target after a short cast, while Steel Trap is instantly thrown on the ground and applies to the nearest target.

What's this stupid orbital bombardment from a ship? You could have said cluster rockets, which are shot from the Tinker itself.

I can't take the marvel references seriously. Anyone could come up with some whacky shit that does not relate to WoW itself and say he solved the problem.

You're not understanding. Let me dumb it down for you; just because it's in W3 does NOT mean that it HAS to be in WoW. Your argument all along is that it belongs here because it was in W3. Even though there are hundreds of elements of gameplay from that completely different genre that aren't in the game either. The topic also argues that adding this stupid class would bring people back to the game. No. It would make it more enjoyable for you, since you obviously already play. And the game is a shit show right now--playing it with some toy making class isn't going to help people ignore how bland of an experience it is.

You clearly have no idea what a Tinker is.

It "stands to reason" because you want it to be. Not because it makes sense. And the reason for no "tinker" is because we have engineers. Which has been stated a thousand times over now.

We also have enchanting and inscription alongside a mage class. The difference is application.

There is no tinker hero. There are no tinker abilities. There are no tinker attributes. How many of these derp moments are you going to have?

He's called Gazlowe. Search it up.

Where is the mage's Brilliance Aura? Or summon a phoenix? Why can't the paladin's Holy Light ability damage undead? Where's the warrior's Endurance Aura, and Reincarnation? Shamans don't have Big Bad Voodoo. The druid's thorn aura, where is it? Where's the death knight's Unholy Aura, or the ability to temporarily resurrect units as they were, not as ghouls?

The Mage's Arcane intellect (Brilliance) and Phoenix Flames.
There were other undead-damaging Paladin abilities.
Endurance Aura was most likely translated into the Tauren's Endurance. Reincarnation was too Shamanistic for the Warrior, i guess.
Shamans aren't Shadow Hunters.
Druids had Thorns.
Unholy Aura was a Death Knight ability.
Death Knights have Raise Ally.

i mean ofc it have to! after all we already have sea witch, dark ranger, beastmaster, pit lord, firelord, and alchemist as playable classes in wow as they were neutral heroes same as tinker...
and boy, how the orgrimmar is swarming with shadow hunters, wardens, dreadlords and crypt lords...

You've got a point.
We are missing Shadow Hunters, Wardens, Blademasters, Dark Rangers, Priestess of the Moon, Tinker and Alchemist.

You are claiming game mechanics would be changed. That would not happen. A class' game mechanics would remain unchanged. Same rotation, buffs, healing and damage regardless if you're playing as the base class or as a class skin.

It would need to be tweaked because the Druids abilities don't exactly fit those of the Tinker 100%. That tweaking is called (and would require) balancing.

What I do like, and think that can work, from an immersion Point of View, is that Class Skins would really be for those people that are more into the lore and not new players.

If you knew anything about lore, you'd know it contradicts it.

I don't think it would be particularly difficult to understand that the idea of Class Skins is not compatible with the Class Order Halls.

That's one problem.
Saying to someone "don't do that content" is unrealistic.

As an aside, I do think Blood Mages should also be Warlocks, both Destruction and Affliction really fit the fantasy (Banish, Drain Life, Blood Curses?) And even demonology could be made to work! Like you could call it something like "Summoning" and have the range of demons be blood constructs to a Phoenix. I just think Blood Mages have too much life sucking thematic which just makes them more fitting as Warlocks than Mages, but that's just me.

Kael'thas in Heroes of the Storm is more of a Fire Mage.

Rare: Visual Changes only, this is where Warlock Fel Fire, Dark Shamans or Elune Priests would fall. Only the color of the effects and perhaps animations change.

That's what class skins should be.

Epic: More deep visual and identity changes, but some spells may remain unchanged. Examples would be Dark Ranger for Hunter, where not only spell visuals would be changed, but also the names of abilities and talents (For Example, Explosive Shot into Whithering Fire, as well as reskin the animal aspects into a new theme, "Eyes of the Beast" into "Possession/Charm" etc.) This would mostly serve classes where there is a thematic overlap, some specs may change names. You could get a new Class Tooltip.

These abilities don't work the same way.

Legendary: A full thematic and visual Reskin of most if not every ability to fit a completely new fantasy. Things like Warlock to Necromancer, Druid to Artificer Demon Hunter to Night Warrior and Paladin to Dark Knight. These may even open new class/race combos. These take the gameplay of a class and completely change it's visuals to look completely different. I think this would be the most interesting because also offers more player choice. If I would add one mechanical change, it would be to change the type of damage some skills do for immersion's sake and since type resistance is less of a thing nowadays, but it's not necessary.

A Warlock and a Necromancer are compatible, since the Warlock does possess deathly themes. a Druid and an Artificer have nothing in common and it's a just a random as hell pick.

Night Warriors are not Demon Hunters. Glaives are a common Night elf weapon. You people don't account for Tyrande's healing and ranged capabilities. You just see glaives and think "Oh, hey! a Demon Hunter!".

Dark Knight is already a Death Knight. You could have said a zealot Scarlet Crusade knight or something.

Because the fetish and obtuse nature of one or two persons, who are utterly disconnected from reality if I might add, have once again derailed an entire thread. People should just put these persons on ignore, sadly every time some of the same and some new people entertain them and another thread goes to shit. Though to be honest the original post was already aimed at exactly that, so doom was already spelled out from the beginning.

How am i disconnected? you guys are randomly applying class skins to existing classes without thinking first.
Would class skins be a thing? probably. Because Blizzard prefers the lazy route over the hard work one.
Should it be about copying an existing classes gameplay to create a new one? hell no. It should be to accommodate for the lack class/race representations in the game.

[Cosmic Janitor]

How am i disconnected? you guys are randomly applying class skins to existing classes without thinking first.
Would class skins be a thing? probably. Because Blizzard prefers the lazy route over the hard work one.
Should it be about copying an existing classes gameplay to create a new one? hell no. It should be to accommodate for the lack class/race representations in the game.

You are simply incapable of basic abstraction, a very usefull skill. There is really no way to put this nicely. So let me just put it this way: If you are on a road and everyone keeps talking about a wrong-way-driver and your reaction is "one? hundrets!", the probelm is you.

[Teriz]

There is no tinker hero.

http://classic.battle.net/war3/neutr...intinker.shtml

There are no tinker abilities.

http://classic.battle.net/war3/neutr...intinker.shtml
https://heroesofthestorm.fandom.com/wiki/Gazlowe

There are no tinker attributes.

Claw packs, Mechs, Gravity weapons, lasers, robotic turrets, upgradeable technology, etc.

This is a shit analogy. The sport in question here is WoW. Not the classes you play it with.

No, you stated that a Tinker class wouldn't draw players. Blizzard bringing in a class with a theme currently absent from the class lineup would certainly draw new players. That was the point that clearly flew over your head.

- - - Updated - - -

Ya the implementations would be well rather stupid and would need a slight adjustment. Really tinker Druid is just not a great idea even if you could technically fit it most ability’s in with just a smidge of change to mechanic.

If I had to force tinkers into a class skin I think I’d make them hunters and make things like murder of crows and stampede all robots and lock them to robot pets but even that would be quite the stretch I’d think.

Yes, but again if we're going that far that we're changing abilities into new abilities that have nothing to do with base ability it was based on, why aren't we simply creating a new class?

[Kumorii]

Permanent stealth? Come on... with that attitude they can do whatever comes to your mind.

Is like to add that tech in wow is basically just magic with a tech theme. That's it. Since magic allows for anything you can come up with, so you can with Tinker stuff.

So you saying you can just make up anything is true... And it is so by design. Which is why so many toys and engineering stuff do all sorts of crazy shit with a tech theme. It's magic reskinned.

[Teriz]

All of which is done once.

Let's face it, even with a rework every expansion, 90% of the abilities a Druid has is carried over. I'd say 70% of those spells have been carried over since Vanilla. A Class skin has a lot of long-term value.

Well that's false. Vanilla Balance Druid for example had Insect Swarm, Cyclone, Mark of the Wild, OG Entangled Roots, OG Thorns, Rebirth, and Fairie Fire.

Modern Balance Druid has Solar Beam, Starsurge, Starfall, Sunfire, Stellar Fire, New Moon, Force of Nature, etc. Then you have PvP talents, the adjusted Talent system we've had since MoP, and the end game systems we've had since Legion.

The only things that carried over was moonkin form, wrath, moonfire, starfire, and innervate.

That's not even getting into the crazy abilities Blizzard has attempted like the original Eclipse Bar, Symbiosis, Mushrooms, and the Legion version of Full/New/Half Moon. And this is just one spec. Druids have four specs.

I simply don't see Blizzard dragging along a class skin that requires its own ability changes every time they update the Druid class.

Then look at Covenants. They had to add dozens of new abilities for each class/Covenant combination. Thats a lot of work too. And we know 90% of Covenant abilities will not return in the next expansion, while 90% of the Class skin effects will carry over _every_ expansion. Think about that.

Yeah, but that's for an expansion feature, which is an expected task. In this case you're talking about a supplemental task for an existing class that doesn't need to exist, and its entire goal is to supposedly reduce the labor it takes to create a class. Instead we have a situation where Blizzard has to come up with mechanical equivalents for every new ability it comes up with for the Druid class because it has this tech-based skin attached to it for "reasons".

[8bithamster]

LOL, WAAAAY more lorewise important necromancers than tinkers... some of them from w3 some from wow itself...



and DH abilities were given to warlock, yet we did get DH...



perhaps, if you ignore that whole story about shadowlands is the machinery of death was fucked up, getting necromancers when the whole source of their power is not working properly makes less sense than getting it AFTER shadowlands, when its repaired...



sure, in the same way best way to implement tinker is engineering profesion that is already in game...

sorry, but there is ABSOLUTELY NOTHING making tinker more likely than necromancer, only reason why you think so is clearly your bias...

I still think teriz is a troll tbh. Nobody can be that over the top confident with nothing but disappointments in the past (all the promised times tinker would be added).


As for the abilities.. Tinkers would need to get bombs etc from engineering. So the ability logic bites him in the arse

[Teriz]

The "problem" here is that you're being dishonest as your original claim was that "it's fine for necromancer to summon imps and succubi because some other games completely unrelated to World of Warcraft consider imps and succubi as undead creatures":

Where's the dishonesty? Imps and succubi being considered undead minions in some games is a fact. The main point is that there are loads of Necromancer abilities in the Warlock class, so a class skin there makes sense.

And how many times did he use this canon in the fight in Dazar'alor? How many times did he just melee the party with punches? Come on, Teriz. Answer me.

Well that's irrelevant. There are arm cannons on the mech, so it stands to reason that such a mech form should be able to utilize such weapons.

Except they would because that is the whole point behind class skins. If abilities are not getting changed, that defeats the whole point of class skins and might as well just add a transmog option for gear and make necromancers summon imps and succubi and tinkers become stone bears and fire cats.

And that's the whole point of how a class skin simply wouldn't work for a Tinker.

But the race as a whole is not primitive in the slightest.

Humans as a whole aren't primitive, but we still have people who live primitive lifestyles throughout the world.

Except we're not talking about "adding new mechanics". At no point I said to "add new mechanics". The class' mechanics remain as they are, just get a new model/skin. Nothing more.

Except you have to talk new mechanics or you're simply being dishonest. There's no way you can alter abilities to that point without mechanics coming into play.

Where is the mage's Brilliance Aura? Or summon a phoenix? Why can't the paladin's Holy Light ability damage undead? Where's the warrior's Endurance Aura, and Reincarnation? Shamans don't have Big Bad Voodoo. The druid's thorn aura, where is it? Where's the death knight's Unholy Aura, or the ability to temporarily resurrect units as they were, not as ghouls?

Is WoW dead? Is Blizzard not intending to ever add abilities to the game ever again? Those are all abilities that the classes can (and will likely) get in the future.

[Lolites]

I still think teriz is a troll tbh. Nobody can be that over the top confident with nothing but disappointments in the past (all the promised times tinker would be added).


As for the abilities.. Tinkers would need to get bombs etc from engineering. So the ability logic bites him in the arse

i mean, if you go right down to it, his whole logic is "i want it so it will happen"

[Teriz]

You are claiming game mechanics would be changed. That would not happen. A class' game mechanics would remain unchanged. Same rotation, buffs, healing and damage regardless if you're playing as the base class or as a class skin.

If you actually believe that you can change the animations and purpose of an entire class' abilities and talents without altering the mechanics you're being completely delusional.

- - - Updated - - -

i mean, if you go right down to it, his whole logic is "i want it so it will happen"

No, the logic is that the Tinker has the same pedigree as the previous expansion class entries, so it makes sense for it to be implemented as a future class.

[8bithamster]

If you actually believe that you can change the animations and purpose of an entire class' abilities and talents without altering the mechanics you're being completely delusional.

- - - Updated - - -



No, the logic is that the Tinker has the same pedigree as the previous expansion class entries, so it makes sense for it to be implemented as a future class.

Yikes.. calling someone delusional and then contuining with that. That hurts

[Teriz]

Yikes.. calling someone delusional and then contuining with that. That hurts

@Lolites: This quote above would be an example of someone's whole logic being "I don't want it so it won't happen".

[Lolites]

Yikes.. calling someone delusional and then contuining with that. That hurts

"tinker will be added bcs it was hero in w3"
so was sea witch, dark ranger, alchymist... and monk WASNT
but definitely, tinker is the next class to be added, bcs... reasons
i think ignore is the only way to deal with people like that...

[Teriz]

"tinker will be added bcs it was hero in w3"
so was sea witch, dark ranger, alchymist...and monk WASNT

Sea Witch's abilities were placed in the Hunter, Mage, and Shaman classes.
Dark Ranger's abilities were placed in the Hunter, Warlock and Priest classes.

The Alchemist is a technology based hero (and a Goblin) so there's speculation that it's abilities would be utilized for a Tinker healing spec. Like the Tinker, the Alchemist's abilities have never appeared in the class lineup.

Monks were originally the Brewmaster class. Blizzard changed the class to Monks early in development. Which is why the Monk class is Pandaren based, and is largely based on the Brewmaster hero from WC3.

I mean, this was the cover to the expansion where the Monk class was introduced;

but definitely, tinker is the next class to be added, bcs... reasons
i think ignore is the only way to deal with people like that...

See above. But yes, feel free to place me on ignore. It doesn't change the facts.

[Alexeht]

All this work just to make a tinker thread? I don't know if I should be impressed or pity you.

Agree lol, tinkers wannabees are a cancer

- - - Updated - - -

"tinker will be added bcs it was hero in w3"
so was sea witch, dark ranger, alchymist... and monk WASNT
but definitely, tinker is the next class to be added, bcs... reasons
i think ignore is the only way to deal with people like that...

Don't forget firelord hero xD

[TheRevenantHero]

"tinker will be added bcs it was hero in w3"
so was sea witch, dark ranger, alchymist... and monk WASNT
but definitely, tinker is the next class to be added, bcs... reasons
i think ignore is the only way to deal with people like that...

He also says Spellbreaker can never happen because it's too racial focused yet insists that Tinker be a gnome and goblin class only. All of his arguments involve bad faith, double standards, and utterly illogical points. Spellbreaker could EASILY be a new class because the identity and lore of it is super unique. But I could also see it being a class skin for Warriors if Blizzard went the class skin route instead of adding a new class.

[MyWholeLifeIsThunder]

SNIP

Honestly Haidades is 100% right, you are unable of using abstraction. Also you used the "wah, you are not agreeing with me so you don't know the lore" So your opinion is kinda worthless?

What's really strange that you can totally just say that a Class Skin wouldn't do justice to the Tinker fantasy and concept, that's a rational if subjective opinion. It's fine. But the nonsense that "It just would be impossible for it to be a Class Skin!" because you can't make abilities work the way Tinker abilities work in other games, despite the fact that not only do abilities work differently in different games across the board, but that specs themselves have been reworked in WoW, is just irrational.

And then is the simple lack of imagination of being unable how the same gameplay could be reframed to represent a whole different fantasy in a visual level. It's very telling that you just can't seem to get that possibility, which is just... sad.

[Teriz]

Don't forget firelord hero xD

Whose abilities were split between the Warlock and Mages classes....

- - - Updated - - -

He also says Spellbreaker can never happen because it's too racial focused yet insists that Tinker be a gnome and goblin class only. All of his arguments involve bad faith, double standards, and utterly illogical points. Spellbreaker could EASILY be a new class because the identity and lore of it is super unique. But I could also see it being a class skin for Warriors if Blizzard went the class skin route instead of adding a new class.

There's a difference between something being Blood Elf specific, and something being split between factions. The Tinker is as race centric as the Demon Hunter class was.

[draugril]

Thats the whole point of a Class skin. New visuals, new aesthetics, same gameplay with zero balance issues to worry about.

Nothing is compromised when the alternative is not having Tinker playable at all.

This right here.

If we lived in a world where Time and Resources were not concepts that people had to worry about, this idea of "class skins" would be asinine. We don't live that in world, however. Time and resources are factors that need to be considered. One might make the argument that Blizzard has reached their operating capacity for classes and there is a very real possibility that we'll never see another addition. In this world, class skins make sense. Because the alternative very may well be never getting the desired thematics playable in any form.

[Teriz]

This right here.

If we lived in a world where Time and Resources were not concepts that people had to worry about, this idea of "class skins" would be asinine. We don't live that in world, however. Time and resources are factors that need to be considered. One might make the argument that Blizzard has reached their operating capacity for classes and there is a very real possibility that we'll never see another addition. In this world, class skins make sense. Because the alternative very may well be never getting the desired thematics playable in any form.

You would first need to make a valid argument that such a situation exists. Thus far, nothing indicates that scenario is currently playing out.

We should also point out that there's no indication that Blizzard would even do class skins in the first place. However, there are indications that Blizzard is planning a Tinker class.