April 19 Tinker Reveal

[Cosmic Janitor]

I already said this, but I find useful to bind the necromancer and the dark rangers "class" together in the same way we have elemental and enhance chamans, so the necromancer class could have a bow spec, a caster spec, and a permanent multi pets spec

You'd be pretty much treading the same ground as deathknights by then, even more so than it would already do from the onset. Unless you want the dark ranger part to be only wearing cloth or the caster to wear only leather or higher - both of which would be a betrayal of the underlying fantasy of the specs - you'd essentially just end up with another weird hybrid that is lacking the full fantasy of either. Which is pretty much the only argument why unholy DKs don't fullfill the necromancer niche sufficiently, because besides the armor and range they already heavily deal in dots and minion gameplay.

Incorporating some dark arts into the hunter class wouldn't be much of an issue as well. There is really no hard lore that says hunters need to be pro life, heck we have mechanical pets already and dark rangers aren't required to be undead either, since the living can channel necormantic magic as well. Not to mentioned the half rotten beasts that frosaken (and other) hunters can tame. In essence dark rangers are just fallen rangers (so the good parts of hunters) anyway. Heck you could even make a little quest where the dark ranger from the legion order hall is looking for sylvanas in the maw or some shit and you unlock it that way; it practically writes itself. I see no reason why you'd need to make a whole class about it whose only commong ground is some use of necromantic magic. Dark Rangers are not necromancers and necromancers are usually not trained in archery.

Necromancer on the other hand has quite a few more issues to make it into the game. While a similar logic to unlocking it could be applied to warlocks and worst case even mages, warlocks and necromancer have really nothing in common other than dealing with life forces and souls occasionally. Warlocks have nothing to do with the dead though, and necromancers usually don't deal in demons either. It's always weird when combining classes and suddenly core features no longer work in certain specs, which is definitely the case with the 4 warlock summons. But the bigger issue rather than the core fantasy is the origin of WoW's warlock class in itself. Warlocks are the "more acceptable alternative" to necromancers in WoW's lore because necromancers were wholsale connected to the scourge. Warlocks are just power hungry, necromancers are flat out the enemy of life. That is also why warlocks have the classicial gameplay tropes of debuffer/DoT gameplay as well as minion summoning in WoW associated with them, when other franchises don't use them like that. In the RTS games they were also the "evil orc" stand in for mages, which mostly explains the destruction tree. In WoW necromancers are practically already existant as warlocks when it comes to gameplay, at least if we talk classical necromancer gameplay. A different take on necromancer like in ESO may be an option, but that is really not what people are usually asking for when the clamor for a necromancer class.

While I think after Drakthyr everything is possible given enough desperation on Blizzard's end, it also stands to reason that the time for another necromantic class has simply passed for now. I'd argue that we won't be seeing them any time soon, until we retread the undead theme again, which is probably off another 5-8 years at least.

[huth]

"Animate Dead". There, a different ability. Unholy Frenzy, an ablity DKs no longer have. Corpse explosion? Not needed, and was never a necromancer ability in WoW. Death and Decay also was never a necromancer ability, but a lich one. Sacrificial Pact was never a necromancer ability.

So like I said: in the end, you got nothing for your argument of "a necromancer hAs To DiSmAnTlE a DeAtH kNiGhT to exist".

No, no, you're misunderstanding. Dismantling and dissecting a Death Knight is now a required part of Necromancer education, and any Necrolytes calling themselves Necromancers without having gone through that course are just posers.

[Dakhath]

I don't really have any interest in Tinkers, but I hope some day they are added to the game just to see how Teriz absolutely shits on all of you, justified or not. That will be quality entertainment.

[Kiriastrasza]

I don't really have any interest in Tinkers, but I hope some day they are added to the game just to see how Teriz absolutely shits on all of you, justified or not. That will be quality entertainment.

I don't think he would, Teriz is actually quite respectable to others.. Although he can be abit over zealous he has never stepped foot out of line and reduced himself to mocking others.

[Teriz]

I don't really have any interest in Tinkers, but I hope some day they are added to the game just to see how Teriz absolutely shits on all of you, justified or not. That will be quality entertainment.

Honestly, I probably wouldn't respond at all.

For the last couple of years, I've grown to be passionate about two concepts; Tinkers and Dragons. I got one of my concepts realized, and I'm content with that. We got a unique class that offers new gameplay options, and we got a new class that fills the third Mail armor slot. That's all I've ever really wanted whether it was Tinker or Dragon, so I'm satisfied.

I will certainly miss some aspects of the great class debates, but at this point, I don't care about them anymore. Hopefully, the people wanting Necromancers, Dark Rangers, and whatever else get what they're pining for. Hopefully the people still desperately wanting Tinkers get them someday as well.

[Deventh]

And..........................................................?

And stop leaking something that will not happen.

[Ielenia]

If HoTs is enough basement for new class, then Tinker should be even higher on the list, because Tinkers are both in lore, in WoW game, and in Hots (Gazlow)

First: there is no such list, really. There is no "priority list" for classes to be added.
Second: if such a list even exists, the tinker is not anywhere the top of the list, considering all the classes we got added so far.

[Echo of Soul]

And stop leaking something that will not happen.

If you leak something and it doesn't happen you're spreading misinformation. That shouldn't be allowed in my opinion.

[Ardenaso]

turning into a giant robo-tank is definitely not engineering either

[Velerios]

turning into a giant robo-tank is definitely not engineering either

For this we would need a Power Ranger Class!

[Nightshade711]

For this we would need a Power Ranger Class!

Blizzard already broke their old rule of needing to base classes off of WC3 so why not

[Varx]

Honestly, I probably wouldn't respond at all.

For the last couple of years, I've grown to be passionate about two concepts; Tinkers and Dragons. I got one of my concepts realized, and I'm content with that. We got a unique class that offers new gameplay options, and we got a new class that fills the third Mail armor slot. That's all I've ever really wanted whether it was Tinker or Dragon, so I'm satisfied.

I will certainly miss some aspects of the great class debates, but at this point, I don't care about them anymore. Hopefully, the people wanting Necromancers, Dark Rangers, and whatever else get what they're pining for. Hopefully the people still desperately wanting Tinkers get them someday as well.

I'm on your boat. At first I was all about dragons then
jekyll and hyde 'ed into tinkers so I'm cool with it too.

Perhaps they should do something very special with engineering to make it happen somehow so the tinker fantasy could somehow be realized in combat.

Engineering always feels like the oddball professions since you can't really make decent gold with it as well as the other professions and instead focuses on quality of life items and enchants.


Maybe make engineering spell glyphs that turn various class abilities to have mech themed animations.

Like for paladins an avenging wrath engineering glyph turns your wings to look like Mercy's.

Maybe, a mech suit toy that allows you fight in a mech?

Maybe, more engineering enchants across more armor slots?

Engineering cosmetic back slot for the classic tinker look.

Idk, just some ideas off the top of my head that could satisfy that tinker itch without actually making them a class.

Honestly, after evokers, I'd rather have 4th specs over tinker.

[Polybius]

Blizzard already broke their old rule of needing to base classes off of WC3 so why not

Man, Evoker still sounds weird. I can't help but think they could've had a better name. Tinker, potentially, has 'Artificer'.

[Alydael]

24 days until Tinker reveal by Blizzard. They have been investing an enormous amount of time from their animation and art teams into creating unique racial animations for the class. They see this as a love letter to the most wildly popular new class request.

Edit: 23 days!

They have them in Guild Wars 2 right now and they are fun to play. I think WoW missed the boat on this one. They should have implemented it with Mecha Gnomes the same way they are doing the evoker with the dragons.

I also think if they want to do this class made for a race type of specific combo- the class should be able to do all three roles (tank, heals, deeps) so that you don't miss out on a role you like just because you liked a certain race. The black drakonids that are already in game would make a mean tank. The black dragonflight is a very "tanky" flight in general.

[Teriz]

Blizzard already broke their old rule of needing to base classes off of WC3 so why not

Not really. They just expanded it to include HotS. Honestly they were using HotS concepts when the created the DH class too.

[Zolaris192]

you guys put up that poster on your wall yet saying tinkers will never happen - zolaris192?

[Nightshade711]

Not really. They just expanded it to include HotS. Honestly they were using HotS concepts when the created the DH class too.

It still means them breaking away from WC3 for classes.

Though from what it looks, it seems like they aren't using HotS much at all for concepts and moreso just what we've seen in WoW from the dragons.
Such as Red being DPS instead of healer, Bronze being healer instead of DPS, and Black not existing outside of (what I assume to be) base class abilities.

[Teriz]

It still means them breaking away from WC3 for classes.

Though from what it looks, it seems like they aren't using HotS much at all for concepts and moreso just what we've seen in WoW from the dragons.
Such as Red being DPS instead of healer, Bronze being healer instead of DPS, and Black not existing outside of (what I assume to be) base class abilities.

Eh, you’re still getting Alexstraza and Chromie’s HotS abilities in that class. The very name of the healing spec comes from one of Alexstraza’s abilities. Also I wouldn’t be surprised to see Deathwing’s HotS abilities popping up as well.

[huth]

Blizzard already broke their old rule of needing to base classes off of WC3 so why not

I find it more likely that rule never existed. Not every pattern was created on purpose.

[Teriz]

I find it more likely that rule never existed. Not every pattern was created on purpose.

Every expansion class has come from WC3 and HotS. HotS is pretty much a mechanical successor/revamp of WC3. They used HotS concepts and designs in WC3:R for example.