The apparent formula for new classes in WoW

[Teriz]

So after the Evoker, it appears that this is required for new WoW expansion classes;

1. A major lore figure to tie into. Death Knights have Arthas, Monks have Chen, Demon Hunters have Illidan, and it appears that Evokers have Alexstraza.

2. A playable version in MOBA/RTS format. Blizzard seems to favor players getting a preview of future class mechanics via their MOBA/RTS games. When the new class releases, the pull abilities and mechanics from those games.

3. A landmass that thematically connects to the new class. DKs had Northrend, Monks had Pandaria, Demon Hunters had Broken Isles, Evokers have Dragon Isles. The next class will likely also have a landmass that matches its theme.

4. Abilities that don't fit in existing classes. The expansion classes house abilities that simply wouldn't work with classes that existed at the time.

Obviously, none of this is set in stone, and Blizzard can do whatever they want, but at this point this appears to be the keys for future class implementation. If you look at the recent DR implementation, they seem to fail at #3 and 4, which partially explains why they weren't implemented.

[Berkilak]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pareidolia

[Throwme]

this is required

none of this is set in stone

Blizzard can do whatever they want

This sums up the flaws in your post quite nicely.

[Teriz]

This sums up the flaws in your post quite nicely.

The apparent formula for new classes in WoW

So after the Evoker, it appears that this is required for new WoW expansion classes;

Obviously, none of this is set in stone, and Blizzard can do whatever they want, but at this point this appears to be the keys for future class implementation.

Context is important.

[Unlimited Power]

Let me guess - Tinker do or will somehow fulfill all the supposed requirements.

[Stickiler]

Let me guess - Tinker somehow fulfills all the supposed requirements somehow.

I was trying to avoid bumping such an obvious bait thread, but hot damn if this wasn't my very first thought when I saw the absolute Pareidolia of his original post.

[Teriz]

Let me guess - Tinker do or will somehow fulfill all the supposed requirements.

It has nothing to do with one specific concept. The point is that we can pick out the more likely future class concepts by utilizing this formula.

[Beuargh]

It has nothing to do with one specific concept. The point is that we can pick out the more likely future class concepts by utilizing this formula.

they give you the elements of your "formula" at the same time they tell you what the next class is, so you never had the time to use your "formula" to guess what the next class will be.....

we learned about DK class at the same time we learned about the northrend landmass. we learned about monk class at the same time we learned about the pandaria landmass. etc .... how do you guess the invoker class before they tell you about DF and the invoker class that comes with it??

[Surfd]

Item 1 and 3 are literally just pointing out that Major Expansions tend to have a coherent theme. Kind of silly to do this much mental gymnastics to try to explain why a special class released with an expansion might, you know, fit the theme of the expansion. It would be WAY more weird, for example, if you had an expansion themed around Asian Mysticism and Martial Arts and then introduced the new class: The completely unrelated Necromancer who in no way fits anything to do with the theme of the expansion.

[Teriz]

they give you the elements of your "formula" at the same time they tell you what the next class is, so you never had the time to use your "formula" to guess what the next class will be.....

we learned about DK class at the same time we learned about the northrend landmass. we learned about monk class at the same time we learned about the pandaria landmass. etc .... how do you guess the invoker class before they tell you about DF and the invoker class that comes with it??

https://www.mmo-champion.com/threads...-(Speculation)

- - - Updated - - -

Item 1 and 3 are literally just pointing out that Major Expansions tend to have a coherent theme. Kind of silly to do this much mental gymnastics to try to explain why a special class released with an expansion might, you know, fit the theme of the expansion. It would be WAY more weird, for example, if you had an expansion themed around Asian Mysticism and Martial Arts and then introduced the new class: The completely unrelated Necromancer who in no way fits anything to do with the theme of the expansion.

No, 1 and 3 point out that new classes are tied to established WC heroes and landmasses. You can have a coherent theme, and still not get a new class if that new class isn't innately tied to a new landmass (see Dark Rangers). Again, all 4 expansion classes have had all 4 of characteristics in common.

[bullseyed]

they give you the elements of your "formula" at the same time they tell you what the next class is, so you never had the time to use your "formula" to guess what the next class will be.....

we learned about DK class at the same time we learned about the northrend landmass. we learned about monk class at the same time we learned about the pandaria landmass. etc .... how do you guess the invoker class before they tell you about DF and the invoker class that comes with it??

Because Dragon Isles has been a known place in game since before vanilla released?

[Iain]

I like it. Since Legion (but arguably further back), classes have become too broad and have started overlapping too much. At the same time BfA simplified the classes while keeping their generalisation, which made them even more bland.

Instead it would be way cooler if classes kept their simplicity but also their specificity. Like more elaborate MOBA characters. Surgical tools rathers than swiss army knives.

This can be achieved by giving existing classes further paths to specialise in, giving the player the option to forfeit a large amount of skills in exchange for new abilities. This should be a heavy decision, like something that can only be chosen once a week and requires effort to sustain.

[Beuargh]

https://www.mmo-champion.com/threads...-(Speculation)

at what point in the thread you linked you find the 4 characteristics to use your formula?? it starts with "most accept it will be about dragon" and that was all speculation onward just based on this....

you don't know if all 4 characteristics are there before they tell about the xpac and when they do, you know if there is a new class/what the new class is. so yea at this point it's easy to connect the points ....

fact is I don't remember anybody guessing anything close to the invoker class or it's abilities. but maybe I missed your speculation thread where you apply your formula and find out about the invoker class before the reveal

if it's just: "oh they copyrighted the dragonflight name!! I reckon it's gonna be about dragons and if there is a new class, it will most likely fit the theme" then good job!!
I guess....

[A Chozo]

In your very post you say that it is an apparent formula, not set in stone and that Blizzard can do whatever

That's no formula, that's you seeing shit where there ain't none

People also thought that every expansion came with new race or new class, the Foooourmula. There's no recipe.

[Porcos Voadores]

so if we think about it, we have:

Tinker - 1: high tinker mecatorque / galliwix
2: Gazlowe in hots
3: underground xp should do the job
4: they have unique abillities like rockets and bots

Bard - 1: L70ETC
2: E.T.C in hots
3: A Bard is a kind or travelling guy so, anyting will do.
4: they have unique music powers

Shadow Hunters - 1: Vol'jin or Rokhan
2: Zul'jin ? (maybe not)
3: a light x void xp will make it
4: mix of shadow and hunter abillites that could be explored.

i mean, thats obviously not set in stone but anything can be done to fit in this categories just as an exemple.

[Teriz]

at what point in the thread you linked you find the 4 characteristics to use your formula?? it starts with "most accept it will be about dragon" and that was all speculation onward just based on this....

I did it in the first paragraph;

1. Hero link: Alexstraza, Chromie, Deathwing
2. Playable in MOBA/RTS format: HotS versions of said heroes
3. Landmass: Dragon Isles as proposed landmass (hence why people were talking about a dragon expansion)
4. Unique abilities: from HotS, which are being implemented into the Evoker class.

The only hang ups in predicting the Evoker was that there was no established name for a dragon class like there was for Demon Hunters or Death Knights.

- - - Updated - - -

In your very post you say that it is an apparent formula, not set in stone and that Blizzard can do whatever

That's no formula, that's you seeing shit where there ain't none

People also thought that every expansion came with new race or new class, the Foooourmula. There's no recipe.

No, that’s a pattern. What I listed here are the ingredients that all the expansion classes have shared. I would appreciate it if people who disagree with this come up with some actual counter arguments beyond “nuh-uh”.

- - - Updated - - -

i mean, thats obviously not set in stone but anything can be done to fit in this categories just as an exemple.

Yeah, it’s slim pickings indeed.

Shadow Hunter is an interesting one. The main issue with that is coming up with an Alliance equivalent, and finding some distance from Shaman. If you can do that without absurdly bending lore, you might have something.

[Triceron]

The only formula to consider is that there is no formula. A Formula is a rule, a set of ingredients or variables when combined result in a recipe or equation. There is no rule to follow when considering how Blizzard designs any new class.

All we have to go on is a chance of Blizzard considering making a new playable class when they see fit to. That's it. Everything else is merely causation of that decision.

Whether it has abilities that overlap with an existing class or whether it fits into the story and setting doesn't really matter. They can say how X and Y inform their decisions, but it doesn't make it a formula or a rule that they abide to, because their design decisions can change at any moment.

Any 'apparant formula' only works in retrospect, and will always be a product of correlation more than any tangible reasoning derived through internal development.

[bruxx]

I thought that it was an absolute universal unbreakable rule that all new classes had to come from a wc3 hero specifically, I see that we have to change our absolute universal rules thanks to the Evoker.

Rules like this have no place in the creative process, people that desperately try to stick to these imaginary patterns and rules need to understand that correlation does not imply causation and that the people in charge of creative jobs do not stick to such rules and patterns willingly, as they stifle any potential for originality and variety. You just can't approach these things mathematically.

[micwini]

So after the Evoker, it appears that this is required for new WoW expansion classes;

1. A major lore figure to tie into. Death Knights have Arthas, Monks have Chen, Demon Hunters have Illidan, and it appears that Evokers have Alexstraza.

2. A playable version in MOBA/RTS format. Blizzard seems to favor players getting a preview of future class mechanics via their MOBA/RTS games. When the new class releases, the pull abilities and mechanics from those games.

3. A landmass that thematically connects to the new class. DKs had Northrend, Monks had Pandaria, Demon Hunters had Broken Isles, Evokers have Dragon Isles. The next class will likely also have a landmass that matches its theme.

4. Abilities that don't fit in existing classes. The expansion classes house abilities that simply wouldn't work with classes that existed at the time.

Obviously, none of this is set in stone, and Blizzard can do whatever they want, but at this point this appears to be the keys for future class implementation. If you look at the recent DR implementation, they seem to fail at #3 and 4, which partially explains why they weren't implemented.

hmm yes the broken isles theme fits demon hunters nicely. Also I cant remember there being dragon abilities in the RTS.
The first comment in the thread nails it on its head.

[Teriz]

hmm yes the broken isles theme fits demon hunters nicely. Also I cant remember there being dragon abilities in the RTS.
The first comment in the thread nails it on its head.

The Broken Isles was the location of the Tomb of Sagaras, and Maiev and Illidan’s forces battled there in WC3 as Illidan was searching for an artifact on the isles. So yes, it made sense for that to be a central location for a an expansion introducing DHs.

And while there were no dragon heroes or abilities in WC3, there were in HotS. HotS abilities began appearing in WoW classes in Legion, including the new Demon Hunter class.

- - - Updated - - -

I thought that it was an absolute universal unbreakable rule that all new classes had to come from a wc3 hero specifically, I see that we have to change our absolute universal rules thanks to the Evoker.

No, just a hero prominent enough to appear in something like WC3. HotS is a logical successor to it, shown by the Demon Hunter class pulling abilities from both games in Legion.