Page 3 of 17 FirstFirst
1
2
3
4
5
13
... LastLast
  1. #41
    Banned Teriz's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Soul of Azeroth
    Posts
    30,058
    Quote Originally Posted by username993720 View Post
    We're talking about a class. If you search Dragonborn on WoWpedia, you won't find class information.
    Of course it is Blizzard who decides. And what have they done time and time again?
    Why would you? I created the name of the class idea. Obviously it would be up for Blizzard to name the class. My point is that we have a set of popular lore characters whose abilities fit the parameters of a WoW class, and we have HotS, a possible WC3 stand-in giving us class mechanics.


    Their addition of characters to HotS and Hearthstone is a testament for new classes?
    Where did I say that, and where did I mention Hearthstone?


    Just like Monks. They train.
    And a Hogger class would probably be available to any mongrel race, like Orcs, for example.
    But why would those races seek to learn fighting skills from lesser creatures they easily murder by the truckload?

  2. #42
    I like it! 5 specs is a cool idea too, but this one is more probable as it fits the typical 3 spec class structure.

  3. #43
    Banned Teriz's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Soul of Azeroth
    Posts
    30,058
    Quote Originally Posted by FossilFree View Post
    I like it! 5 specs is a cool idea too, but this one is more probable as it fits the typical 3 spec class structure.
    Thanks! The main reason I went with these three specs is because they’re the flights represented in HotS. I do agree that a three spec class is more likely than five.

  4. #44
    Quote Originally Posted by Triceron View Post
    Where has that claim been made here? It hasn't.
    "Blizzard would do it...", "it makes perfect sense...", etc etc...

    The origin doesn't have to be 1:1. Consider that the original (WC3) Death Knight was specific to still-living, corrupted Knights/Paladins who followed Arthas, whereas the WoW version is a race of any origin raised in service of the Lich King. The WoW class is a collection of all Scourge-based themes into one class, on top of adding cutting-room floor design elements from Runemasters and Necromancers. That's a concept well beyond the original Warcraft 3 Death Knight.
    I guess you're right.

    I've said the exact same thing. You just didn't understand my point for all the times I've made arguments against Night Warriors and Priestess of the Moon and Dark Rangers, when I've always specifically made arguments against them as 'future potential classes for X reasons' rather than simply dismiss them on any merit of being a hypothetical class.

    I'm all for any class being possible and being discussed. And on the basis of a hypothetical, there are many other reasons to consider whether it'd be fitting for Warcraft or not. Cuz someone can come up with a 'Machinist' class that centers on using vehicles if they want, but just because we're discussing hypotheticals doesn't automatically mean it'd be a good class for WoW.
    The difference between me and others is that i don't bring them up based on emotional attachment. It's purely analytic conclusions.

    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    Why would you? I created the name of the class idea. Obviously it would be up for Blizzard to name the class. My point is that we have a set of popular lore characters whose abilities fit the parameters of a WoW class, and we have HotS
    Which, is all great and dandy. But, it's not a class quite yet.

    a possible WC3 stand-in giving us class mechanics.
    What possible WC3 stand-in?

    Where did I say that
    When you said the addition of Wrathion's art is a testament to Blizzard somehow agreeing with you.

    and where did I mention Hearthstone?
    Wrathions art pieces.

    But why would those races seek to learn fighting skills from lesser creatures they easily murder by the truckload?


    They can kill Dragons too.

  5. #45
    Quote Originally Posted by username993720 View Post
    "Blizzard would do it...", "it makes perfect sense...", etc etc...
    Again, no one said this. I have no idea why you're even bringing that up here, since absolutely no one has said this Dragonborne idea would be made into a class
    . No one has implied that it makes perfect sense either.

    Let's not talk about arguments that aren't being made here for the sake of explaining why you're pretending to get triggered.

    The difference between me and others is that i don't bring them up based on emotional attachment. It's purely analytic conclusions.
    Doesn't sound like it to me. Looks like you've got an angle to try and prove this wouldn't be a new class, even though no one has said that it would in the first place.

    Having just read the entire thread looking for any reply on this being made into a class... You are the closest one bringing that to the conversation. The response you got from Teriz was that Blizzard _could_ make it into a class, not that they ever _would_.

    Like I said previously, no one has made that claim in this thread, so I'm not sure what your response even means here.
    Last edited by Triceron; 2022-02-20 at 02:58 PM.

  6. #46
    Banned Teriz's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Soul of Azeroth
    Posts
    30,058
    Quote Originally Posted by username993720 View Post
    Which, is all great and dandy. But, it's not a class quite yet.
    Well no, hence why this thread has “concept” in the title.

    What possible WC3 stand-in?
    HotS

    When you said the addition of Wrathion's art is a testament to Blizzard somehow agreeing with you.

    Wrathions art pieces.
    No, I said that the art indicates that Blizzard themselves are the originators of the base concept of this class idea; Dragons being able to shapeshift into mortals, similar to how the Druid class or old demonology works. Again, that mechanic similarity existed in the HotS heroes too.


    They can kill Dragons too.
    Please stop being facetious. There are no Gnolls on the level of Wrathion or Alexstraza, and you know it.

  7. #47
    Those warthion art pieces are from hearthstone mercenaries actually. They are just artwork were every merc has 3 portraits that were intended to be used kinda like Pokémon evolutions. They gave up on the concept pretty fast tho and now they are just comsetics. Mind you that those 3 are not the 3 wrathion portraits. There is a kid version ala mop and the first two you posted. The dragon form is an ability artwork so it's not exactly how you are trying to present them as a transformation process.

  8. #48
    Banned Teriz's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Soul of Azeroth
    Posts
    30,058
    Quote Originally Posted by dread05 View Post
    Those warthion art pieces are from hearthstone mercenaries actually. They are just artwork were every merc has 3 portraits that were intended to be used kinda like Pokémon evolutions. They gave up on the concept pretty fast tho and now they are just comsetics. Mind you that those 3 are not the 3 wrathion portraits. There is a kid version ala mop and the first two you posted. The dragon form is an ability artwork so it's not exactly how you are trying to present them as a transformation process.
    He does the exact same thing in WoW. This is Wrathion’s dragon form;



    Btw, I love posting that pic…

  9. #49
    You are wrong there aswell. Thats the corrupted form of Wrathion in Nyalotha and its not even Wrathion himself.

    "The boss fight is not truly against Wrathion himself, but rather a faceless one named Ki'merax disguised as a corrupted version of the Black Prince. Ki'merax's true form is revealed upon "Wrathion's" defeat."

    This form is a would be from a faceless one.

  10. #50
    Banned Teriz's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Soul of Azeroth
    Posts
    30,058
    Quote Originally Posted by dread05 View Post
    You are wrong there aswell. Thats the corrupted form of Wrathion in Nyalotha and its not even Wrathion himself.

    "The boss fight is not truly against Wrathion himself, but rather a faceless one named Ki'merax disguised as a corrupted version of the Black Prince. Ki'merax's true form is revealed upon "Wrathion's" defeat."

    This form is a would be from a faceless one.
    Okay, but the point is that Wrathion can turn from a mortal to a dragon in WoW. That’s what those pics in Hearthstone conveyed.

  11. #51
    Most adult dragons can shapeshift, thats not a new concept tho.

  12. #52
    Banned Teriz's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Soul of Azeroth
    Posts
    30,058
    Quote Originally Posted by dread05 View Post
    Most adult dragons can shapeshift, thats not a new concept tho.
    I know, it’s a well established feature in WoW lore, and that’s the basis of this concept.

  13. #53
    I have nothing against your concept, Im just pointing out that those 3 pieces of artwrok were just misleading

  14. #54
    I think my biggest issue with all the arguments over new classes and dragon vs tinker etc........ is that people are ignoring a giant problem.

    WoW is fading to a ridiculous degree in its playerbase. After the last few xpacs, so many people have left that WoW, especially retail, is at a critical tipping point. Unless it can draw players back, the game will slowly fold in on itself and end (either go F2P or stop getting supported as much). Other Blizzard/MS games will take precedence and WoW will been seen as not worth spending time and money on.

    10.0 NEEDS to draw players back. It needs to get new players who are willing to pick up a game like this and explore. There are a lot of things they should change in the game to improve the experience and get people excited again, but the biggest thing is to GET PEOPLE INTERESTED.

    No new class? Nobody coming back. No reason to believe the next xpac will be anything but more of the same.

    New class but its something like Tinkers? A few people who REALLY like that concept will come back, but nobody new and most of the old players will not re-sub.

    YOU CAN TURN INTO A MOTHER F-ING DRAGON! Yea, people will be back in droves and new players (since there aren't that many games that have playable dragons) will be tempted to pick it up and try it just for that.



    Argue over what else you'd like added to the game, but without player dragons, WoW is not going to survive the hits it has taken over the past few years and will continue the downhill slide its on into irrelevance.

  15. #55
    You're acting like a new class is the sole reason someone will play the next expansion or not. It is not.

  16. #56
    Banned Teriz's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Soul of Azeroth
    Posts
    30,058
    Quote Originally Posted by dread05 View Post
    I have nothing against your concept, Im just pointing out that those 3 pieces of artwrok were just misleading
    They were merely a visual representation of a dragon changing form. Nothing more, nothing less.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Gumble View Post
    I think my biggest issue with all the arguments over new classes and dragon vs tinker etc........ is that people are ignoring a giant problem.

    WoW is fading to a ridiculous degree in its playerbase. After the last few xpacs, so many people have left that WoW, especially retail, is at a critical tipping point. Unless it can draw players back, the game will slowly fold in on itself and end (either go F2P or stop getting supported as much). Other Blizzard/MS games will take precedence and WoW will been seen as not worth spending time and money on.

    10.0 NEEDS to draw players back. It needs to get new players who are willing to pick up a game like this and explore. There are a lot of things they should change in the game to improve the experience and get people excited again, but the biggest thing is to GET PEOPLE INTERESTED.

    No new class? Nobody coming back. No reason to believe the next xpac will be anything but more of the same.

    New class but its something like Tinkers? A few people who REALLY like that concept will come back, but nobody new and most of the old players will not re-sub.

    YOU CAN TURN INTO A MOTHER F-ING DRAGON! Yea, people will be back in droves and new players (since there aren't that many games that have playable dragons) will be tempted to pick it up and try it just for that.



    Argue over what else you'd like added to the game, but without player dragons, WoW is not going to survive the hits it has taken over the past few years and will continue the downhill slide its on into irrelevance.
    I agree to some extent. WoW could definitely use a new class to draw players back in, and a Dragonborne class could definitely do that, since the characters it is based on are very popular, and (as you stated) who the hell wouldn't want to play as a dragon? The very concept definitely fits under the definition of "rule of cool".

    As I said, if there's no new class in 10.0, I may have to begin to agree with @Triceron's argument that Blizzard is done with adding new classes to the game.

  17. #57
    Quote Originally Posted by dread05 View Post
    You're acting like a new class is the sole reason someone will play the next expansion or not. It is not.
    It is not the SOLE reason someone will play, but it is likely the SOLE reason anyone would come back or start playing if they never have before. There is nothing else they can add that is exciting enough to people that are not currently playing to get them to play.

    Other possible additions or changes really only appeal to people who are already playing.

    You need something big as a selling point to get players back/new players. Tinkers won't do that. Revamped worlds or better systems, etc won't do that. You need something where someone goes

    "hmmmm I haven't played WoW, or haven't played since Legion because BFA and Shadowlands sucked..... but play as a dragon? Ok I will sub to try that out"


    THEN all the other changes people want could maybe keep them. But you need that hook to get people who aren't planning to buy the next xpac of WoW to change their minds.

    Name me one other thing that would convince those types of players to come back/start anew? Does Blizzard have anything else that could *ahem* WOW people enough to overcome the apathy associated with warcraft at this point? Catering to the people that will buy the new xpac no matter what (and frankly I fall into that category.... foolish me) isn't going to turn this ship around. You need to get the people who aren't subbed to come back.


    Dragon playable race announced for Nov 2022.

    6 month sub lets you level one early.

    Blizzard records earning call for 2022.




    If they were..... smart.....

  18. #58
    Banned Teriz's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Soul of Azeroth
    Posts
    30,058
    Quote Originally Posted by Gumble View Post
    You need something big as a selling point to get players back/new players. Tinkers won't do that.
    Eh... Let's not get crazy now. There are a lot of people who like technology-based classes.

    I do agree that a Dragon class may be a bit more popular, but we shouldn't pretend that a technology-based class that has been heavily requested for several years wouldn't also draw old players back to the game. The concept of piloting a mech is VERY attractive. People LOVED Mekkatorque in a mech during the Battle of Broken Shore.

    That said, if I were in control, I would use Dragonborne for a class in the Dragon Expansion, and reserve Tinkers for a more tech-based expansion.

  19. #59
    Quote Originally Posted by Triceron View Post
    Again, no one said this. I have no idea why you're even bringing that up here, since absolutely no one has said this Dragonborne idea would be made into a class
    . No one has implied that it makes perfect sense either.

    Let's not talk about arguments that aren't being made here for the sake of explaining why you're pretending to get triggered.
    I'm not making this up.

    Doesn't sound like it to me. Looks like you've got an angle to try and prove this wouldn't be a new class, even though no one has said that it would in the first place.

    Having just read the entire thread looking for any reply on this being made into a class... You are the closest one bringing that to the conversation. The response you got from Teriz was that Blizzard _could_ make it into a class, not that they ever _would_.

    Like I said previously, no one has made that claim in this thread, so I'm not sure what your response even means here.
    I guess i'm mixing it up with the 10.00 speculation thread.

    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    Well no, hence why this thread has “concept” in the title.
    You sometime forget that.

    HotS
    HotS is WC3?

    No, I said that the art indicates that Blizzard themselves are the originators of the base concept of this class idea;
    Obviously. You didn't invent it from scratch.

    Dragons being able to shapeshift into mortals, similar to how the Druid class or old demonology works. Again, that mechanic similarity existed in the HotS heroes too.
    They have always been able to. I don't get it. Are you not updated?

    Please stop being facetious. There are no Gnolls on the level of Wrathion or Alexstraza, and you know it.


    The fact that they fight as equals on HotS says otherwise.

    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    I know, it’s a well established feature in WoW lore, and that’s the basis of this concept.
    So, why do you keep bringing up the pictures like it's something new?

  20. #60
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    Eh... Let's not get crazy now. There are a lot of people who like technology-based classes.
    There are, but I'm betting most of them are still playing WoW. A tech based class would have been a very cool addition in BFA to go with a greatly expanded Mechagon, but we didn't get that (and it would have been a weird timing). However while I'm sure there would be a bunch of people who would try out Tinkers and maybe even really like them, I don't think they raise to the level of "getting people back".

    Lots of people do like tech classes, but a TON of other games have those and if people would play a game for that, then they already have. Not to say it wouldn't be a decent choice during an upswing in Blizzard subs/WoW pop, but at the point they are at, they need something that is A) more widely desired and B) strangely not that common amongst other games of its type

    Dragons fits that need.

    The only other popular game with something approaching that concept is ESO, and Dragonknight is a very popular class there (and its not a DRAGON, but just more a dragon-themed class). If ESO made Dragonknights able to become dragons I bet they would be insanely popular. They are just something that is hard to balance in other games.

    Dragons in WoW would work fine though, since we already have characters that are retard level of power brought down to player levels. Deathknights and Demon Hunters that are killable by a Hunter with a bow and a kitty.... dragons would fit fine.


    Draw people back with dragons, get the story under control (assuming they weren't just lying about it sucking because of Alex) and get the game in a state where people want to play it again..... then you can add tinkers or whatever else.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by username993720 View Post
    HotS is WC3?
    I wonder why people keep making this assumption that "if it wasn't a hero class in WC3, it cannot be a new class in WoW"?

    I've looked and I don't see anywhere Blizzard has said they are restricted by this. It certainly is an easy place to pull from, but its a logical fallacy people fall into assuming that "because new classes were WC3 heroes, all new classes must come from WC3 heroes".

Posting Permissions

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