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...
Aucald already intervened to get the thread away from the Tinker talk. Let's not get it closed.
You mentioned other classes.
I want to hear your reasons for the divisions between class skins and new classes.
I like your sarcasm.
Spellbreakers are more likely Warriors.
I can't reply to you because Aucald forbids it.
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".
When Malfurion gets a Gazlowe skin (with themed abilities and animations), please notify me.
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.
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.
"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?
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 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.
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.
Funny how you say that now after arguing with Teriz about how these abilities don't really account for a Dark Ranger:
Which leads me to believe you're only here to stir the pot.
You know what happens to rushed things? they turn out bad.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.
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?
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)?
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.
I admit i might have been wrong:
Last edited by username993720; 2021-08-26 at 08:32 PM.
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.Which leads me to believe you're only here to stir 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?You know what happens to rushed things? they turn out bad.
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.
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.
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 - - -
Where the hells my WC2 campaign built in the SC2 engine yo! =(
Please? Like, super please?