View Poll Results: Is the ETC a viable class concept?

Voters
200. This poll is closed
  • Heck Yeah!

    62 31.00%
  • Heck No!

    138 69.00%
Page 19 of 24 FirstFirst ...
9
17
18
19
20
21
... LastLast
  1. #361
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    You can literally play as a red dragon that can fly in combat and heal your allies and damage your enemies with dragon fire. Your ability to heal is also determined on your health or your targets health, you can bind your life to your target, and can also turn into mortal or a dragon. Where’s the difference from Alexstraza?
    Plenty of difference. Let's start with the lack of a dragon form.

    Can Evokers turn into a giant dragon like Alexatrasza? Yes or no?

  2. #362
    The Unstoppable Force Teriz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Dragon Isles
    Posts
    24,100
    Quote Originally Posted by qwerty123456 View Post
    Alexstraza is a NPC. Show me player Draenei that looks like Velen. Funny how now you are trying to say large differences means they are identical when earlier you were trying to say a slightly different shade of blue means it was totally different.
    Alexstraza’s mortal form has huge dragon horns sticking out of her head, yet it’s still considered a mortal form. That’s the point that clearly went over your head.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Triceron View Post
    Plenty of difference. Let's start with the lack of a dragon form.
    They have a dragon form.

    Can Evokers turn into a giant dragon like Alexatrasza? Yes or no?
    Yes.

  3. #363
    The Insane Ielenia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Brazil
    Posts
    18,784
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    Where did I ever say that the class has to share the same name as the hero character's class that it's based on?
    It's about an actual evoker existing before Dragonflight. At least according to your rules. Of which we have none.

    Alexstraza HotS has abilities from the Red and Green Dragonflights.
    False. She has red dragonflight powers. The green color is a gameplay convention because, by gameplay standards, red = enemy.

    Because you're being dishonest.
    ... The irony of that statement is massive. Alright. Point me to an actual evoker that existed in the lore before Dragonflight. And no, the aspects don't count, because they're not evokers.

    The defining characteristic of a Dracthyr Evoker is being and playing a dragon, per Blizzard.
    Irrelevant. Because we're talking about the class concept, not the reason Blizzard wanted to make the class. And the core concept of the class is the ability to use all five of the dragonflights' powers at the same time. Which all the dragons are unable to do.

    I said "in a way", since she uses Red and Green abilities.
    Headcanon. And she doesn't.

    And HotS not being canon is irrelevant
    It is very relevant to your claims that Alexstrasza uses both red and green dragonflight powers in that game.

    I didn't ignore that. I ignored your opinion that that makes them non-dragons.
    It's not an opinion. It's a fact. Because that is the very definition of "hybridization".

    You're avoiding the question.
    Because your question is based on the false premise that concepts arise from abilities, which is wrong, as evidenced by the monk class' mistweaver concept. It's the other way around.

    If the class is derived from that character they should play like them as well.
    Which the dracthyr doesn't. Alexstrasza's gameplay in HotS is much more like a healer version of the demon hunter's meta (using abilities in mortal form, then briefly transforming into a dragon to use empowered abilities) than how evoker plays, especially since the evoker can't turn into an actual dragon, or turn into anything, really, mid-combat, for a boost.

    Now where is the video showing Mages playing like Samuro?
    First you show me the video showing evokers playing like Alexstrasza from HotS.

    And where is the quote where Blizzard says hybrids are not dragons?
    Nah-ah. No flipping the burden of proof here. You are the one claiming Blizzard is using a different definition of the word, then you need to provide Blizzard's quote where they say that they're using a different definition of the term "hybrid".

    Alexstraza's fire magic heals others, and act as healing spells. Where's the Mage's spells that do that?
    You're the one who said that "classes don't have to play 100% like the NPC".

    Also feel free to list the Mage ability that transforms them into a dragon.
    Gladly. But only after you first provide the ability that evokers use to transform into a dragon.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    They have a dragon form.
    They don't.

    Yes.
    Dishonesty at its finest.
    Quote Originally Posted by Varodoc View Post
    Torturing someone is not an evil thing to do if it is done for good reasons and as a last, drastic measure.
    Oof...

  4. #364
    The Unstoppable Force Teriz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Dragon Isles
    Posts
    24,100
    Quote Originally Posted by Ielenia View Post
    It's about an actual evoker existing before Dragonflight. At least according to your rules. Of which we have none.
    At this point its fair to say that those are your rules, not mine.

    False. She has red dragonflight powers. The green color is a gameplay convention because, by gameplay standards, red = enemy.
    Those same green color abilities went to the green dragonflight power set in the Evoker class.

    ... The irony of that statement is massive. Alright. Point me to an actual evoker that existed in the lore before Dragonflight. And no, the aspects don't count, because they're not evokers.
    I've mentioned them several times.

    Irrelevant. Because we're talking about the class concept, not the reason Blizzard wanted to make the class. And the core concept of the class is the ability to use all five of the dragonflights' powers at the same time. Which all the dragons are unable to do.
    Uh, the class concept is literally playing as a dragon and using the power of the dragonflights. This is why you can roll a blue dragon and heavily tailor your abilities towards the blue dragonflight's abilities. Likewise, you can roll a red dragon and create a healer that uses red and green dragon magic just like Alexstraza did in HotS. Again, you're ignoring the expansion of concepts that takes place in ALL of the classes.

    Headcanon. And she doesn't.


    It is very relevant to your claims that Alexstrasza uses both red and green dragonflight powers in that game.
    Yeah, it's not headcanon. She has abilities where she's sprouting seeds and magically growing flowers and those abilities are green in color.

    And before you say its because Blizzard doesn't view red magic as healing magic, she had fire spells that healed allies too, as does the Evoker class.


    It's not an opinion. It's a fact. Because that is the very definition of "hybridization".


    Nah-ah. No flipping the burden of proof here. You are the one claiming Blizzard is using a different definition of the word, then you need to provide Blizzard's quote where they say that they're using a different definition of the term "hybrid".
    1. Blizzard has never said that dragons can't be hybrids.
    2. Blizzard has literally called Dracthyr dragons on multiple occassions.

    That makes your belief that hybrids can't be dragons completely your opinion.

    Because your question is based on the false premise that concepts arise from abilities, which is wrong, as evidenced by the monk class' mistweaver concept. It's the other way around.
    Except it's not. We already had the concept and the abilities (Bronze dragons with Time magic, Blue Dragons using arcane/frost magic, Red dragons using healing fire magic, etc). What we didn't have is the name of the concept and its set of abilities. I'm asking you what do we call that concept and set of abilities since you don't think Evoker fits. You can't say its dragon because there are dragons who are not part of the 5 flights. You can't call it Aspects because there are prominent dragons (Wrathion, Ebyssian, Chromie) who can also use those abilities but aren't aspects.

    So again, what is the name of that concept and set of abilities?

    Which the dracthyr doesn't. Alexstrasza's gameplay in HotS is much more like a healer version of the demon hunter's meta (using abilities in mortal form, then briefly transforming into a dragon to use empowered abilities) than how evoker plays, especially since the evoker can't turn into an actual dragon, or turn into anything, really, mid-combat, for a boost.
    You can do the same thing as an Evoker. You can toggle the visage form to activate as soon as you leave combat, or you can keep the dragon form up at all times.

    First you show me the video showing evokers playing like Alexstrasza from HotS.

    You're the one who said that "classes don't have to play 100% like the NPC"


    Gladly. But only after you first provide the ability that evokers use to transform into a dragon.

    So now we've entered the trolling phase of the discussion. You made the ludicrous claim that Mages play like Blademasters and instead of backing that claim up you're pulling up red herrings and straw-mans all over the place. Truly sad to see.

    Dishonesty at its finest.
    Projection at its finest.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Mechagnome View Post
    Oh Look... it's a fight between the same two people for the last 10 years. I am pretty sure the OP made this outrageous suggestion simply to illustrate even TINKERS would be preferred to this hot garbage. And this thread will devolve the same way the last 15-20 have. Teriz and Ielenia having a go at one another.
    Well look at what the Tinker gains from its hero units/characters. We have the concept of mech suits, upgradeable turrets, pocket factories, Claw packs, etc. which makes the concept unique, and distinctly Blizzard. At the very least, it gives us a direction and a base from which to consider how a Tinker class would operate in WoW. The same occurred with the eventual Dracthyr Evoker class. We had multiple draconic heroes (Primarily Alexstraza, but also Chromie and Deathwing) who had original and unique abilities. From that, we could develop a unique and interesting class that merged race and class together.

    The issue with the Bard is that we have no such base to work with. People are talking about merging Lorewalkers with a random sub-boss in Stratholme that used a bow, or combining a Kyrian with a Kodorider. There's no cohesion there. Cohersion comes with a hero character that can give the concept a definitive direction.

  5. #365
    holy shit go outside you two lmao

  6. #366
    The Unstoppable Force Teriz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Dragon Isles
    Posts
    24,100
    Quote Originally Posted by haediff View Post
    holy shit go outside you two lmao
    I'm actually done with that back and forth. Ielenia is clearly trolling at this point, and there's no point in responding to them.

  7. #367
    The Insane Ielenia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Brazil
    Posts
    18,784
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    At this point its fair to say that those are your rules, not mine.
    You're the one who says we need a "BARD npc" to allow for a bard class. So by your rules, since we don't have any EVOKER npc, that means the class cannot exist.

    This is your biggest dishonesty: you bend and twist and move goalposts even with your own "rules" to ensure you're always right.

    I've mentioned them several times.
    Again, your picks are neither dracthyr, nor evokers, as explained several times. What you're doing is saying you believe Samuro is a mage because the mage class got abilities from the WC3 Blademaster unit.

    Uh, the class concept is literally playing as a dragon and using the power of the dragonflights.
    The class' core definition is using all five of the dragonflight powers at the same time. It's literally in their lore as well.

    Yeah, it's not headcanon.
    Yes, it is.

    And before you say its because Blizzard doesn't view red magic as healing magic, she had fire spells that healed allies too, as does the Evoker class.
    Because her dragon breath is clearly coming from her, and Cleansing Flame has an unique graphic of fireballs coming from the sky..

    1. Blizzard has never said that dragons can't be hybrids.
    That is not how this works. Again: if Blizzard wants to apply a different definition to a word that is already well-defined in the lexicon, then they must make it clear.

    2. Blizzard has literally called Dracthyr dragons on multiple occassions.
    On PR talks and hype speech. Something I know you can differentiate, as you've done so in the past.

    That makes your belief that hybrids can't be dragons completely your opinion.
    Are gryphons lions?

    Except it's not.
    Deny reality all you want. It won't change the fact that it's concepts that bring forth abilities.

    You can do the same thing as an Evoker. You can toggle the visage form to activate as soon as you leave combat, or you can keep the dragon form up at all times.
    False on numerous levels. First, you can't activate your visage form in combat. That's a strike against your claim that we can "play like Alexstrasza". Second, dracthyr don't turn into dragons at all. Which, again, is another point against your claim.

    So now we've entered the trolling phase of the discussion. You made the ludicrous claim that Mages play like Blademasters
    Speaking of "trolling", that's hillarios. Also: nope. I never said that.

    Projection at its finest.
    If it's not dishonesty, then feel free to show the ability where the dracthyr can turn into an actual dragon, the size of Alexstrasza. And despite Triceron specifying a giant dragon, I'll accept a dragon the size of what we see in HotS. Come on, I'm waiting.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    I'm actually done with that back and forth. Ielenia is clearly trolling at this point, and there's no point in responding to them.
    Says the guy that is apparently so against bards he makes a thread with the intention of shutting down all bard talk. And claims Chen Stormstout was a "major lore character" even before MoP.
    Quote Originally Posted by Varodoc View Post
    Torturing someone is not an evil thing to do if it is done for good reasons and as a last, drastic measure.
    Oof...

  8. #368
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    They have a dragon form.
    Can you link a picture side by side with Alexstrazsa's dragonform?

    We will be able to see differences easier this way

  9. #369
    The Unstoppable Force Teriz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Dragon Isles
    Posts
    24,100
    Quote Originally Posted by Triceron View Post
    Can you link a picture side by side with Alexstrazsa's dragonform?

    We will be able to see differences easier this way
    No need to link a picture. Alexstraza's form in HotS is massive and on all fours. The Dracthyr's dragon form is bipedal and designed for player use. Like the sacrfice-style healing, altered for balance purpose. Functionally, they're utilized for the same purpose, and they're both still dragon forms.

  10. #370
    The Insane Ielenia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Brazil
    Posts
    18,784
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    The Dracthyr's dragon form
    It's not a dragon form. It's a dracthyr form.

    Because dracthyr aren't dragons. They're dracthyr. The result of mixing dragons and mortals. Evidence of that is how the dracthyr's stance and build in nothing resembles the dragons, but have a lot in common with the mortals' stances and builds.
    Quote Originally Posted by Varodoc View Post
    Torturing someone is not an evil thing to do if it is done for good reasons and as a last, drastic measure.
    Oof...

  11. #371
    The Unstoppable Force Teriz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Dragon Isles
    Posts
    24,100
    Quote Originally Posted by Ielenia View Post
    It's not a dragon form. It's a dracthyr form.

    Because dracthyr aren't dragons. They're dracthyr. The result of mixing dragons and mortals. Evidence of that is how the dracthyr's stance and build in nothing resembles the dragons, but have a lot in common with the mortals' stances and builds.
    Define what a dragon is in World of Warcraft.

  12. #372
    The Insane Ielenia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Brazil
    Posts
    18,784
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    Define what a dragon is in World of Warcraft.
    Dragons are quadrupeds. Dracthyr are bipedal.
    Dragons' body proportions are different than a humanoid. Dracthyr's body proportions are of a humanoid.
    Dragons are huge. They are at least twice as tall as a humanoid while on all fours. Dracthyrs are slightly bigger than the tallest playable races, while standing on two feet.
    Dragons are pure dragons. Dracthyr are hybrids of dragons and mortals.
    Quote Originally Posted by Varodoc View Post
    Torturing someone is not an evil thing to do if it is done for good reasons and as a last, drastic measure.
    Oof...

  13. #373
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    No need to link a picture. Alexstraza's form in HotS is massive and on all fours. The Dracthyr's dragon form is bipedal and designed for player use.
    Ah, so nothing like Alexstrasza's dragon form at all.

    Sob yeah, if we're talking about just looking like her Elf form then Blood Elf Mage can already do that with transmogs and still use fire spells like her too.

  14. #374
    The Unstoppable Force Teriz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Dragon Isles
    Posts
    24,100
    Quote Originally Posted by Ielenia View Post
    Dragons are quadrupeds. Dracthyr are bipedal.
    Dragons' body proportions are different than a humanoid. Dracthyr's body proportions are of a humanoid.
    Dragons are huge. They are at least twice as tall as a humanoid while on all fours. Dracthyrs are slightly bigger than the tallest playable races, while standing on two feet.
    Dragons are pure dragons. Dracthyr are hybrids of dragons and mortals.
    So in your opinion, Dracthyr aren’t dragons because of Blizzard’s design changes that were required to make them a playable race/class.

    Hilarious.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Triceron View Post
    Ah, so nothing like Alexstrasza's dragon form at all.

    Sob yeah, if we're talking about just looking like her Elf form then Blood Elf Mage can already do that with transmogs and still use fire spells like her too.

    Which is a conclusion one reaches when they completely ignore reality.

    How about Alexstraza’s healing spells Abundance/Emerald Blossom and the Lifebinder abilities? The Dracthyr Evoker can use those abilities in Visage form as well. I’m not aware of Mages having that ability.

  15. #375
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    Alexstraza’s mortal form has huge dragon horns sticking out of her head, yet it’s still considered a mortal form. That’s the point that clearly went over your head.
    No what clearly went over your head is you moving goalposts. Alexstraza mortal form is a blood/high elf with potentially horns which also could be part of her crown/tiara. Yesera who also has a head piece and horns uses a night elf form. The dracthyr don't use a mortal race as their visage form.

  16. #376
    The Insane Ielenia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Brazil
    Posts
    18,784
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    So in your opinion, Dracthyr aren’t dragons because of Blizzard’s design changes that were required to make them a playable race/class.

    Hilarious.
    Nope.

    My argument is that dracthyr aren't dragons, because Blizzard described them as such by calling them hybrids of mortals and dragons, which explains why the dracthyr look so much more different than dragons. Again, saying "dracthyr are dragons" is in the same vein as saying "gyphons are lions".

    All dragons look basically the same, with minor differences like color and/or some details like fin and/or spikes. But they all share the same silhouette. Dracthyr are vastly different. And that is because they're not pure dragons, but a hybrid entity.
    Quote Originally Posted by Varodoc View Post
    Torturing someone is not an evil thing to do if it is done for good reasons and as a last, drastic measure.
    Oof...

  17. #377
    Bloodsail Admiral bloodkin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    in your mind
    Posts
    1,162
    Quote Originally Posted by qwerty123456 View Post
    No what clearly went over your head is you moving goalposts. Alexstraza mortal form is a blood/high elf with potentially horns which also could be part of her crown/tiara. Yesera who also has a head piece and horns uses a night elf form. The dracthyr don't use a mortal race as their visage form.
    The constant moving of goalposts, the endless stream of shitposting and arguing is probably nothing more than a cry of frustration, because he knows that whatever he does or says means nothing but can't accept it. It's an endless scream in the void, he can't handle criticism as he believes himself to be some form of authority on the subject yet lives his life out in obscurity, as blizz probably doesn't even knows he exists. He's constantly being ridiculed and being seen as the clown of this forum because of his obsessive posting and ridiculous behaviour.

    Atleast, that's what I think.
    'Something's awry.' -Duhgan 'Bel' beltayn

    'A Man choses, a Slave obeys.' -Andrew Rayn

  18. #378
    The Unstoppable Force Teriz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Dragon Isles
    Posts
    24,100
    Quote Originally Posted by qwerty123456 View Post
    No what clearly went over your head is you moving goalposts. Alexstraza mortal form is a blood/high elf with potentially horns which also could be part of her crown/tiara. Yesera who also has a head piece and horns uses a night elf form. The dracthyr don't use a mortal race as their visage form.
    Uh where’s the goalpost move? There are no mortal races that resemble elves with huge horns sticking out of their heads. Thus, Alexstraza and Ysera aren’t identical to any mortal races. Just like the Dracthyr mortal form doesn’t fully resemble mortal races either. That’s the point of their design, or are you somehow unaware that it’s also called Visage Form just like Alexstraza's, Kalecgos’, Wrathion's, etc. forms?

    Your conspiracy theory about horns being actually headdresses is so silly that it isn’t worth discussing.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Ielenia View Post
    Nope.

    My argument is that dracthyr aren't dragons, because Blizzard described them as such by calling them hybrids of mortals and dragons, which explains why the dracthyr look so much more different than dragons. Again, saying "dracthyr are dragons" is in the same vein as saying "gyphons are lions".
    Thank you for sharing your opinion on the matter.

  19. #379
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    The Dracthyr Evoker can use those abilities in Visage form as well. I’m not aware of Mages having that ability.
    The mage doesn't need one to play like Alexstrasza.

    All you need is to look like her and be able to use fire spells, and that's what a Blood Elf Mage could also do.

    So saying Evokers exist because Blizzard wants to let people be like Alexstrasza is a confusing statement to make when we already had that since TBC, with better transmogs over the years to make it even closer.

    What's the difference?

  20. #380
    The Insane Ielenia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Brazil
    Posts
    18,784
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    Thank you for sharing your opinion on the matter.
    This showcases your dishonesty for all to see, considering Blizzard does the part in bold in the deep-dive video during Dragonflight's annoucement.

    Glad to see you like to dismiss Blizzard's words as "opinions" when they disagree with you.
    Quote Originally Posted by Varodoc View Post
    Torturing someone is not an evil thing to do if it is done for good reasons and as a last, drastic measure.
    Oof...

Posting Permissions

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