So… Tinkers

[Teriz]

That's not how it works. If something has a "very high chance" of happening then its occurrence is almost guaranteed, and "very high" implies a chance above 50% of happening. Getting a number above 5 in a 20-sided dice is a "very high chance". And the dice so far has been tossed a total of nine times. So it's either not a "very high chance" as you're claiming, or you have one of the worst luck in the world.

Except the fact that we’re on the 9th expansion has zero relevance on what the chances of an expansion’s theme can be.

We got Demon Hunters, one of the most demanded classes in WoW in the Sixth expansion. We got Kul’Tirans, perhaps the most demanded race in WoW’s seventh expansion. A concept’s chances of showing up in WoW doesn’t dwindle because we’re on expansion whatever.

[Ielenia]

I'm not talking about possibliities. I'm talking about whether you think Dark Rangers have a future as a standalone class and if you think Blizzard would do it.

I don't have a horse in the DR race. If it's added, cool. If it's not added, cool. In other words, I don't really care. But I believe Blizzard can do it, if they want to make the concept realized into its own class. Will they do it? Don't know. Don't care.

- - - Updated - - -

Except the fact that we’re on the 9th expansion has zero relevance on what the chances of an expansion’s theme can be.

It has relevance. Again, if you want to claim something has a VERY HIGH chance of happening, the fact it hasn't happened yet after nine expansions puts in question that claim.

We got Demon Hunters, one of the most demanded classes in WoW in the Sixth expansion. We got Kul’Tirans, perhaps the most demanded race in WoW’s seventh expansion. A concept’s chances of showing up in WoW doesn’t dwindle because we’re on expansion whatever.

Irrelevant. Because we're talking about your claim that an Undermine expansion has a VERY HIGH chance of happening. Your examples are irrelevant because we're not discussing how long it took for them to be realized into playable form, but their chances of being realized.

[Teriz]

It has relevance. Again, if you want to claim something has a VERY HIGH chance of happening, the fact it hasn't happened yet after nine expansions puts in question that claim.

Again, that only works if we know how many WoW expansions there will be. Without knowing that, there could be 20 more expansions and again an expansion based on Undermine would have a high chance of happening.

Irrelevant.

It’s very relevant, because Demon Hunters were always wanted by the developers (had a very high chance of happening), but they waited until the 6th expansion to release them.

And Btw, Demon Hunters are another example of something shown in vanilla that was held back for future release. Just like Dragon Isles, and potentially just like Undermine.

[Ielenia]

Again, that only works if we know how many WoW expansions there will be. Without knowing that, there could be 20 more expansions and again an expansion based on Undermine would have a high chance of happening.

That is not how "chances" work, Teriz.

It’s very relevant, because Demon Hunters were always wanted by the developers (had a very high chance of happening), but they waited until the 6th expansion to release them.

That doesn't mean "very high chance of happening". But for the sake of argument and assuming that it does mean that, can you show me where the developers have stated they want to add tinkers or use undermine as an expansion setting?

And Btw, Demon Hunters are another example of something shown in vanilla that was held back for future release. Just like Dragon Isles, and potentially just like Undermine.

When has Blizzard ever advertised the dragon isles or undermine as a feature then go back on it, like the demon hunter? Because DHs showed up on the vanilla box.

[Triceron]

It has relevance. Again, if you want to claim something has a VERY HIGH chance of happening, the fact it hasn't happened yet after nine expansions puts in question that claim.


Irrelevant. Because we're talking about your claim that an Undermine expansion has a VERY HIGH chance of happening. Your examples are irrelevant because we're not discussing how long it took for them to be realized into playable form, but their chances of being realized.

Actually, probability works in Undermine's favour because of process of elimination.

Like for example, let's say there were 5 known likely possible future expansions; Shadowlands, Dragon Isles, K'aresh, Nazjatar and Undermine. Each expansion that we got that wasn't Undermine doesn't diminish the future probability of Undermine becoming the feature of the next expansion; it increases it by process of elimination. Instead of a 1-in-5 chance, BFA having Nazjatar made it a 1-in-4 chance, Shadowlands made it a 1-in-3 chance, and now Dragonflight makes it a 1-in-2 chance as far as potentially known places we have left to explore.

The chances would only really diminish if Blizzard started seeding strong hints towards other (new) places to explore in the future, giving Undermine more competition; or they take Undermine off the table completely, like adding it as a major patch subzone or outright destroying the place in some lore mention questline. Any new location that is completely unknown to us (like AU Draenor) wouldn't factor into this probability, since there's no way to predict it. We can only attach a likelyhood to things that are known, otherwise it'd be in the realm of baseless speculation.

As far as we know, Undermine is very much still on the table. Blizzard has seeded lore pointing at it still being relevant in the future.

[Teriz]

But for the sake of argument and assuming that it does mean that, can you show me where the developers have stated they want to add tinkers or use undermine as an expansion setting?


When has Blizzard ever advertised the dragon isles or undermine as a feature then go back on it, like the demon hunter? Because DHs showed up on the vanilla box.

1.

Blizzard originally wanted to include Undermine in the original World of Warcraft along with goblins as a playable race, with Johnathan Staats describing it as "tinker town" and "crazy". However, as the team did not have a lot of goblin art assets, building the goblin homeland would have required "a ton" of work, leading to both Undermine and playable goblins being cut from classic WoW.[15]
Note that the Undermine was already concepted in the early World of Warcraft beta not as a city on an island, but as a continent southeast of Kalimdor.

https://wowpedia.fandom.com/wiki/Undermine

2.

At BlizzCon 2010, Alex Afrasiabi said that the goblin starting zone was only "a small segment of the actual whole' of Kezan", and that the goblins "did want to go back to Undermine and the other goblin land holdings, just a question of when."[30]

https://wowpedia.fandom.com/wiki/Kezan#cite_note-30

[Rocksteady 87]

These threads amuse me so much.

The same whiny people screaming "omg no tinkarz evar!!!" sound just like the nincompoops who were crying about Pandarens and Pandaria back before it was announced and later before it was released (and during its release as well). Throw in a few years and the same people scream and holler about how Mists of Pandaria was one of the best expansions of all time. XD

That aside, something tells me most of the people losing their collective shit over the mere idea of a Tinker class (nevermind that Blizzard has already toyed around with some prototypical ideas with Gnomeregan, Tinkertown, Toshley's Station, Area 52, Kezan, Island Expeditions, Mechagon Island, and etc.), are the same people with an irrational hatred of gnomes.

The overcompensation would be absolutely amusing if it wasn't quite as sad as it is.

[Polybius]

No, "anything" isn't really possible. Unless you're just admitting that you're delusional, then sure. I'm not advocating for the Tinker class, or any other class, I'm following the pattern Blizzard has laid out so far with each of their new classes. They're not going to create an entire expansion, where a Tinker class is at the center of it. If you disagree that's fine, but the logic tracks.

?

So you're saying they're limited to the confines of your imagination?

Last I checked they threw curveballs in the form of MoP, Warlords, and Evoker. They haven't even finished touching on all classic RPG themes.

[Ielenia]

As far as we know, Undermine is very much still on the table. Blizzard has seeded lore pointing at it still being relevant in the future.

"Still on the table"? Sure. I never denied that. I just don't agree when people say it has a "very high chance" or is "very probable".

BTW, one con against Undermine is that I doubt that Blizzard is going to make an entire expansion's main hub be entirely goblin-based, or, in other words, Horde-centric. Blizzard always kept the expansion hubs 'faction neutral'. Even Dalaran, a former Alliance-city, became neutral with a wide addition of blood elves around.

And I believe Undermine would be very 'Horde-centric', so we would need something similar for the Alliance and I can't think of anyplace other than Mechagon, but it's already been used, and I don't know if it's current state would allow to be a faction hub.

- - - Updated - - -

1.
https://wowpedia.fandom.com/wiki/Undermine

2.
https://wowpedia.fandom.com/wiki/Kezan#cite_note-30

Okay. Now show me where they said they want tinkers as a class?

[Swnem]

I mean, i still think it makes the most sense and i would love to see it.
But, knowing how stubborn the WoW devs are, they might really think that Engineering, mechagnomes and mechanical pets for hunters is enough. I mean... they have brushed Dark ranger aside with red eyes and a transmog, so it's not beyond them. They tend to not want to do what the community at large wants and look for a compromise on it. Much like High elves into Void elves as well.

So, do i think it's possible? Absolutely. An underground goblin/gnome expansion would lend itself to it.
Do i think they will do it? Likely not. Though it would be great for the game if they did, since it's the most requested class and has a legacy dating all the way to warcraft 3.

[Teriz]

Okay. Now show me where they said they want tinkers as a class?

Classes follow expansions. We got Death Knights with Northrend. We got Monks with Pandaria. We got Demon Hunters with a Burning Legion expansion, and we got a dragon class with Dragon Isles.

If they're willing to do an expansion about Undermine, a Tinker class would almost certainly come with it. Undermine is a Goblin-centric city, and Tinker is a Goblin-centric class concept.

[Jinpachi]

After all that debate and discussion on the forum, it never happened. Given how WoW tends to not release classes very often, have people given up hope of ever seeing the Tinker class in game yet?

Me personally I would love a Bard/Musical class. Dark Age of Camelot had 3! One for each faction. They were:
Bard - healers with great CC and pulsing group buffs (could choose 1, like auras)
Minstrel - think a musical rogue fighter. Could stealth and climb walls. Could crowd control and temporarily ‘charm’ high level mobs to fight with them.
Skald - Warrior musician. Would fight toe to toe and offer combat support.

Some of these would be great for WoW. But I guess it will be years before we see another class after Evoker?

Ultima Online had THE best bard in any game, period. Provocation, Peacemaking, Debuffs. Imagine an add phase where you can provoke the adds onto the boss or each other, or peacemake the area and remove aggro from every mob. using disorienting music to lower stats for faster kills, buffing music for your teammates. Piercing chords to deal DOTs, and maybe swing the instrument in melee range as a last resort?

[Triceron]

BTW, one con against Undermine is that I doubt that Blizzard is going to make an entire expansion's main hub be entirely goblin-based, or, in other words, Horde-centric. Blizzard always kept the expansion hubs 'faction neutral'. Even Dalaran, a former Alliance-city, became neutral with a wide addition of blood elves around.

To be fair, I don't think many people would have expected a Gnoll or Centaur heavy presence in Dragon Isles, yet here we are.

If we're talking about most of Undermine being explored as a full continent, then there'd obviously be more than just Goblins at play. There'd be plenty of other creatures and subfactions to deal with.

And no, it doesn't have to be Horde heavy at all. We literally went to places like Highmountain and Mechagon which would have been Horde or Alliance heavy, and yet it was as neutral. Blizzard doesn't really deal in black and white unless these places are intentionally meant to be Horde or Alliance zones.

And I believe Undermine would be very 'Horde-centric', so we would need something similar for the Alliance and I can't think of anyplace other than Mechagon, but it's already been used, and I don't know if it's current state would allow to be a faction hub.

Practically every Goblin city in the game is neutral, and even your example of Mechagon was a neutral questing hub. Not quite sure why you're making these arguments.

[catalystical]

Nobody wanted lizzard ppl. Biggest L in Dragonflight is the dracthyr, and I would gladly swap them (and Evoker) for tinker. Or anything else that automatically would be better.

The problem with Tinkers is that the Engineering profession exists. It makes everyone a Tinker. I like throwing bombs and my DK really appreciates the nitro boost belt.. tinker.

The only realistic way we're getting Tinkers is if they decide to remove Engineering altogether and make Engineering not a profession but a class.

[Rocksteady 87]

The problem with Tinkers is that the Engineering profession exists. It makes everyone a Tinker. I like throwing bombs and my DK really appreciates the nitro boost belt.. tinker.

The only realistic way we're getting Tinkers is if they decide to remove Engineering altogether and make Engineering not a profession but a class.

Oh cool, so I guess we'll never get Death Knights since Enchanting is already a profession.
Ditto for any class with ranged spells since Enchanters could make wands as part of their profession.
And Priests, Holy Paladins, Restoration Druids/Shaman, etc. never existed in previous expansions because we had First Aid as a profession.
And Brewmaster Monks since Cooking/Alchemy is a profession.
And so on and so forth.

Thanks for clearing that up. Flawless logic. Flawless.

[Ielenia]

To be fair, I don't think many people would have expected a Gnoll or Centaur heavy presence in Dragon Isles, yet here we are.

I'd say there's some difference between "they're present here and there" and "they are the expansion's main hub AND storyline".

If we're talking about most of Undermine being explored as a full continent, then there'd obviously be more than just Goblins at play. There'd be plenty of other creatures and subfactions to deal with.

Goblin-centric does not mean goblin-exclusive. Of course there would be other groups there. But the story itself would center mostly on the goblins.

And no, it doesn't have to be Horde heavy at all. We literally went to places like Highmountain and Mechagon which would have been Horde or Alliance heavy, and yet it was as neutral. Blizzard doesn't really deal in black and white unless these places are intentionally meant to be Horde or Alliance zones.

I meant 'Horde-centric' in the sense that we would have a focus on a Horde race, i.e. the goblins, whereas I don't see why any Alliance race should get any focus on that.

- - - Updated - - -

Classes follow expansions. We got Death Knights with Northrend. We got Monks with Pandaria. We got Demon Hunters with a Burning Legion expansion, and we got a dragon class with Dragon Isles.

They fit expansion stories, not expansion hubs. And Undermine would just be an expansion hub, much like Dalaran for Wrath/Legion, Shatrath for TBC, etc.

And Undermine existing as a hub does not equate tinkers being playable.

[Triceron]

I'd say there's some difference between "they're present here and there" and "they are the expansion's main hub AND storyline".

To be honest, what is the difference?

Dragons are supposed to be the expansion's main focus, but even then they're just present here and there. Even in Legion, with such a strong Burning Legion focus to the game, a majority of the questing and exploration had almost nothing to do with Demons. Blizzard doesn't exactly operate on black and white when bringing out the themes of expansions. It's almost always many shades of the rainbow.

Goblin-centric does not mean goblin-exclusive. Of course there would be other groups there. But the story itself would center mostly on the goblins.

Yeah but the majority of Goblins in the world are faction-neutral.

Only the Bilgewater Goblins are Horde aligned. Every other faction has remained faction neutral.

I meant 'Horde-centric' in the sense that we would have a focus on a Horde race, i.e. the goblins, whereas I don't see why any Alliance race should get any focus on that.

Sounds like a non-issue to me. Like I said, every major Goblin city we've been to is faction neutral, there's nothing 'Horde-centric' about Gadgetzan, Everlook or Area-52. I don't see that applying to Undermine either. Perhaps this is just a personal hangup?

[WowIsDead64]

After all that debate and discussion on the forum, it never happened. Given how WoW tends to not release classes very often, have people given up hope of ever seeing the Tinker class in game yet?

Me personally I would love a Bard/Musical class. Dark Age of Camelot had 3! One for each faction. They were:
Bard - healers with great CC and pulsing group buffs (could choose 1, like auras)
Minstrel - think a musical rogue fighter. Could stealth and climb walls. Could crowd control and temporarily ‘charm’ high level mobs to fight with them.
Skald - Warrior musician. Would fight toe to toe and offer combat support.

Some of these would be great for WoW. But I guess it will be years before we see another class after Evoker?

Blizzard do things wrong. They tie classes to so called lore. Who cares about lore? We play game, not read book. And in games gameplay >> lore. It's one of reasons, why this game dies. Things should be done, when it's good time for them, not according to some sort of long term plan. It happens way too often, that Blizzard do needed changes, when it's already way too late for them, as players have already lost interest. Mechagon was good enough reason for releasing Tinkers in SL.

[Ielenia]

To be honest, what is the difference?

... Are you serious? Are you seriously asking "what is the difference between focus and presence in a story"? What, do you somehow think the gnolls are the focus of the Dragonflight expansion's story since they're present in the expansion's continent, or what?

Yeah but the majority of Goblins in the world are faction-neutral.

Only the Bilgewater Goblins are Horde aligned. Every other faction has remained faction neutral.

It would still be "Horde story development" since it's lore development for the goblins, who are a Horde race, even if it's just the Bilgewater Cartel because it's racial development.

Sounds like a non-issue to me.

Cool. It sounds like an issue to me. Now what?

[Triceron]

... Are you serious? Are you seriously asking "what is the difference between focus and presence in a story"? What, do you somehow think the gnolls are the focus of the Dragonflight expansion's story since they're present in the expansion's continent, or what?

We're splitting hairs here.

One could argue that Illidan was the focus of TBC, but it doesn't mean TBC was all about Illidan. Illidan's story and presence was less than 5% of the entire expansion.

What's important is that an expansion is more than just its primary theme. We'd only run into a problem if expansions were built to be all about one theme and only one theme, and that's never been the case with any expansion in WoW. Every expansion explores a wide variety of locations and cultures.

It would still be "Horde story development" since it's lore development for the goblins, who are a Horde race, even if it's just the Bilgewater Cartel because it's racial development.

Let's not forget Mekkatorque still has a bone to pick with Gallywix, who still has connections to Undermine.

Cool. It sounds like an issue to me. Now what?

Try fixing them? Dunno what you're asking here.