Tinker Discussion Thread

[Ielenia]

Technology is only a part of what the Tinker is about and ridding a Shredder for a quest I don't count a class specific ability for I haven't seen the options to abandon your bow and arrow to rid around in Shredder rest of the game and down heroic raid bosses like any other hunter.
Science is a part of the world but no class uses science as a part of there main core ability's.

You completely missed the point. What I'm saying is that fighting with technology is not a new concept at all. Azeroth races have been fighting with technology ever since Warcraft 2.

[Lunkwow]

QUOTE=Ielenia;26465299]You completely missed the point. What I'm saying is that fighting with technology is not a new concept at all. Azeroth races have been fighting with technology ever since Warcraft 2.[/QUOTE]

This why it would be fun to have a class that mostly use on Science as his ability's instead of having a new class that uses magic,divine or psychical (Rogue, Warrior, Hunter).

[Drilnos]

Technology is only a part of what the Tinker is about and ridding a Shredder for a quest I don't count a class specific ability for I haven't seen the options to abandon your bow and arrow to rid around in Shredder rest of the game and down heroic raid bosses like any other hunter.

Science is a part of the world but no class uses science as a part of there main core ability's.

I would just not argue with him if I were you. Tell that guy the sky is blue and he'll disagree and nitpick you to death. Save yourself a headache.

[Teriz]

Monks breathe Fire too.

Shamans use Fire and Magic. Warlocks use Fire and Magic. What kind of nonsense is that?

The main theme of Dragons is fire-breathing beasts. The theme of fire is well covered by several classes.

Here are two abilities based upon Dragonflights;

Blessing of the Bronze Dragonflight
Unlimited range
Instant
Blesses the target with the power of the Bronze Dragonflight. Melee, ranged, and spell casting speed is increased by 40%. Movement speed increased by 40%.

http://www.wowhead.com/spell=102364

That's the Mage's Timewarp ability.

Aura of the Blue Dragon
Instant
2% chance successful spellcast to allow 100% of your Mana regeneration to continue while casting for 15 sec.

http://www.wowhead.com/spell=23684

Which is quite similar to Rune of Power and other Mage abilities.

Dragons are Dragons. Magic is not their dominion, it is one aspect of which the Blues represent. Life, Time and the Emerald Dream are all clearly separate from the domain of Magic, which is controlled by the Blues. Beyond this, a class themed on Dragons does not even have to be held to these standards.

Time magic is magic and is covered by Mages. The Emerald Dream is held together by magic. Life is synonymous with nature magic. Both nature magic and the emerald dream involves Druids, since many Druids are followers of Ysera, and are the only ones who can enter the Dream. They even have a talent named for her.

It could be a Warrior who has a Dragon who keeps itself transformed as a pet, used for calldown abilities and special attacks. It could be a Champion who guarded an ancient dragon until its dying breath, who bestows them with its power, making a Warcraft themed Dovahkin. It could be a Polearm using Dragoon who simply themes his attacks on Dragons, using none of its magic at all. None of these examples have anything to do with Mages.

Yet is a theme thoroughly covered by Warriors, Paladins, and Death Knights. The last thing the game needs is yet another Plate-wearing warrior class. Especially one that has no basis in the Warcraft universe.

[Ielenia]

This why it would be fun to have a class that mostly use on Science as his ability's instead of having a new class that uses magic,divine or psychical (Rogue, Warrior, Hunter).

I agree, it would be fun to add another class that deals mostly physical damage with technology. However, the theme of the tech-user adventurer has already been taken by the engineering profession. The only difference between the two is a power scale in game mechanics. Lore-wise, there is no distinction between them at all.

[Thimagryn]

The main theme of Dragons is fire-breathing beasts. The theme of fire is well covered by several classes.

WoW Dragons aren't all Fire-breathing beasts. D&D Dragons have different breath attacks. WoW Dragons also have different breath attacks, depending on the source. The Green Dragons, for example, have Nature-based breath attacks. Taerar has Noxious Breath.

Here are two abilities based upon Dragonflights;

Strawman. You're addressing specific Dragonflight abilities that are similar to existing class spells. Neither of those spells have any specific relation to a Dragon-themed class. Like I said before, if we got a Dovahkin or Dragoon class, why would they have Mage and Druid abilities? They wouldn't.

Yet is a theme thoroughly covered by Warriors, Paladins, and Death Knights. The last thing the game needs is yet another Plate-wearing warrior class. Especially one that has no basis in the Warcraft universe.

No, you're talking about Roles. Dragon-themed fighters would have nothing to do with Warriors, Paladins and Death Knights. The only similarity? Role of being a potential Melee Fighter. Again, it's strawman argument, because you're assuming this class wears plate.

[Lunkwow]

I agree, it would be fun to add another class that deals mostly physical damage with technology. However, the theme of the tech-user adventurer has already been taken by the engineering profession. The only difference between the two is a power scale in game mechanics. Lore-wise, there is no distinction between them at all.

Well that's your opinion so ain't much I can do about that, but I still think a form of Tinker class could be the next class World of Warcraft and it would benefit if the Expansions was then technology themed.

[fixx]

Well that's your opinion so ain't much I can do about that

It's not an opinion but a fact. Currently in game tinker and engineer are synonyms, and the only difference between engineering profession and tinker class is three zeroes in dps potential. Most of the mobs that Teriz & co use as example tinkers like for example Siegecrafter Blackfuse is 100% undeniably engineer because that's what it says in the ingame dungeon journal.

but I still think a form of Tinker class could be the next class World of Warcraft and it would benefit if the Expansions was then technology themed.

It could, but odds are very slim that there will ever be a tech themed expansion in fantasy RPG.

[Teriz]

WoW Dragons aren't all Fire-breathing beasts. D&D Dragons have different breath attacks. WoW Dragons also have different breath attacks, depending on the source. The Green Dragons, for example, have Nature-based breath attacks. Taerar has Noxious Breath.

And Mages already have Dragons Breath, and DKs are getting Breath of Sindrossa. There's little need to structure an entire class around breath abilities, because they'll just end up being a channeled version of a spellcaster's ability. If you're talking about people turning into Dragons, that's going to step all over the theme of Druids.

It would also be pretty lame.

Strawman. You're addressing specific Dragonflight abilities that are similar to existing class spells. Neither of those spells have any specific relation to a Dragon-themed class. Like I said before, if we got a Dovahkin or Dragoon class, why would they have Mage and Druid abilities? They wouldn't.

They would, because the dragons are highly magical creatures in Azeroth, and their themes are heavily wrapped up in the magic class. If you want to create a Dragon riding class, you're pretty much just creating a Warrior-that can ride a dragon.

No, you're talking about Roles. Dragon-themed fighters would have nothing to do with Warriors, Paladins and Death Knights. The only similarity? Role of being a potential Melee Fighter. Again, it's strawman argument, because you're assuming this class wears plate.

An existing NPC or hero from WC3 from which you're basing this concept on would be appreciated. As it stands it appears that what you're talking about has no basis in the game.

- - - Updated - - -

It's not an opinion but a fact. Currently in game tinker and engineer are synonyms, and the only difference between engineering profession and tinker class is three zeroes in dps potential.

And hundreds of abilities and attributes not found in the profession.

I'd just like to point out that it's the abilities that separate Mage, Priest, and Warlock spell casters from each other.

[Ielenia]

Well that's your opinion so ain't much I can do about that,

It's not opinion, man. It's a fact. There is no distinction at all between tinkers and engineers in the lore. I repeat, none at all.

- - - Updated - - -

I'd just like to point out that it's the abilities that separate Mage, Priest, and Warlock spell casters from each other.

And that argument falls flat right on its face on the first step when confronted by the fact that there are not only eight different schools of magic, but also various types of magic: nature, elemental, arcane, holy, shadow, etc, while technology is just one 'school' and one 'type'.

[Monstercloud]

You seem to be missing the point. Tony Stark is a Tinker. And while he is a billionaire super genius, that model doesn't hold for all Tinkers. MacGyver isn't a billionaire. The A-Team aren't geniuses. The profession is not mutually exclusive with financial success.

Tony Stark is an engineer, MacGyver was a Secret Agent, the A-Team is a mishmash of talent. Being resourceful does not a Tinker make. If they aren't models, then your "camp" (which you silently omitted) should stop bringing them up.

What more needs be said

Alot of things need to be said, I just can't say them.

Hey - you want to argue Engineering has no specialisations and that a Tinker has to know everything about Engineering?

First, "specializations", if you're going to drone on and on about it, spell it right

Second, I'm arguing with you that there is no Tinker, Software, or any other specializations that only deal with one field of engineering. Gnome and Goblin engineering never came up in your arguments. You're not going to start using them now as if that's what you've been talking about this entire time.

Seriously....a Clawpack would be equipment. Either it'd be treated like a MecahnoHog - no maintenance - or it'd have a durability. That doesn't make it indestructible.

I'd say it's big of you for conceding a point, but you didn't actually concede, you just made it sound like that's what you were saying the entire time.

Also, it wouldn't be like a mechanical mount - they're mounts. Clawpack would be equipment.

Gameplay. Learn what it is and what it means for the game. It's more important than lore.

To a certain point.

And how they don't have specialisations. Which they do.

You still have yet to link a "Software Engineer" unit. Until you do, I'm adding "Engineers have specializations" to the list.

When it would - in game terms -lose durability out of combat.

You're bringing items into combat. Never did I say, "Items lose durability out of combat" I said "Out of combat, you need to make sure your equipment is maintained". You really don't have anything better to do than make up words and arguments that never were said, and then argue those points, do you?

You seem to miss the point. We are NOT talking about repair costs for in combat activity. The costs being talked about about for normal wear and tear,. Upkeep. The player just walking around is supposed to cause durability damage.

No, I was talking about it, YOU were saying "Nope" to the very thing you're including "We" were arguing about.

The Tinker is argeud to not be possible because THESE costs would be too high for a player.

No, YOUR Tinker is argued, there is no evidence that your version is the way Blizzard would introduce the Tinker, if at all. You're speculating that it wouldn't. You're saying your speculation is solid. Again, "Infallible Imagination" is a perfect term for you.

Do you think any class should pay for repairs caused by walking?

Hold on, I'm thinking if a 2560x1440 facepalm meme would be worth the ban...

Yes...but

No, there is no "but", you said it was the anti-tinker crowd that started bringing up geniuses and Tony Stark. You've been proven wrong, and you're not going to make a new argument out of the fiery crash that was your previous one. "But you guys are saying this!" "Only because your brought up this!" "We did bring that up! But still you shouldn't of said the stuff based on the stuff we brought up, just because we brought it up!" HOW OLD ARE YOU?!

Why can a Zen Master Enchanter not cast Remove Curse unless he is a mage?

Because Remove Curse isn't an enchantment spell? Curses aren't magic, if they were, they could be dispelled by "Dispel Magic", but they aren't... they're CURSES. Mages also don't use curses, but you're free to point me to a mage spell in my book that does, because apparently I don't know my own class.

Your assumption of complexity is in error because the reality is, an Engineer won't get the recipe for gameplay purposes. The same reason an Enchnater can't cast Enchanting spells known only by a Mage.

And your assumption that an Enchanter should be able to do the same things a mage specializing in Enchanting does is wrong. There's absolutely no proof that an Enchanter should have the full array of abilities of a specialized enchanting mage.

The entire notion of special treatment is based solely upon YOUR camps wrong ideas about the complexity of a ClawPack. We can brainstorm about billions being needed and so on, but ultimately? A Level 1 Clawpack would be a very simple, very cheap piece of equipment.

The fact that you keep referring to the two sides as "camps" makes me believe that you have this greater calling to fight against the tyranny of the anti-tinker.

Also, speculation that a "Level 1 Clawpack" would even work.

You are arguing there is only one junkyard in the world.

And you're arguing that they're all over the place, when they aren't. Name me one other Junkyard that isn't inhabited by hostiles that can be reached by level ones.

A Tinker **class** would be, by definition, very different from an Engineer via the Engineering profession.

Adding "Class" doesn't change the fact that it still has deep roots in the profession.

The fact that he would be a class gives him a different focus, role, objectives, knoweldge and capabilities.

Conjecture.

If it is wrong, then it doesn't require a large degree of skill, or huge resources to build or construct.

Which is why it makes no sense that a Zen Engineer can't build a Clawpack at all, of any quality, at any point. An Engineer isn't going to see a Clawpack and go, "Well that's cool, seems like it works with all the stuff I use.. but I'm not going to reverse engineer it and see how it works, because that's just not how us engineers do things."

Lets assume that I am right. The Clawpack is relatively simple and cheap to build to build. At least, a basic version.

What are the ramifications?

You've been assuming you're right this entire time, you've made your arguments. Counter-points have been made, you've ignored them and choose not to accept them. The cycle continues

I don't have to.

If you're saying, "These solutions work perfectly" then, yes, you do kiddo. Otherwise you're speculating that it's exactly how it would work.

Blizzard has an answer to the skill/class thematic overlap issue. It an ignores it just as it did for Enchanting. But that fact isn't good enough.

You're making up the Enchanter/Enchanting overlap issue, you're blowing it up so it is an issue. It wasn't, never has been, that's why the profession and mage class has been in the game since inception, and it's been fine without the "Schools of Magic" fluff for 3+ years.

Blizzard isn't going to worry about minor technicalities.

Again, you don't work for Blizzard, what you view as "Minor technicalities" is based on what you think, no one else. That's not a debatable point.

And hundreds of abilities and attributes not found in the profession.

And there's plenty of abilities that NPCs have that PCs don't. The game would be pretty boring if all bosses and trash had the same abilities that PCs do, and vise versa.

[Thimagryn]

And Mages already have Dragons Breath, and DKs are getting Breath of Sindrossa. There's little need to structure an entire class around breath abilities, because they'll just end up being a channeled version of a spellcaster's ability. If you're talking about people turning into Dragons, that's going to step all over the theme of Druids.

So you bring up Breath attacks, then you say there's no need to structure a class around them. Can I say that Tinkers use Wrenches, and we don't need to structure a class around using Wrenches?

Of course it would be a flawed argument, because it's strawmanning the entire Technology theme into one tool. No class is designed around one ability, right? So why do you feel you have to use inane arguments like these to support your claims?

Also turning into Dragons is already a thing. Any Alchemist with the Vial of the Sands can.

[Teriz]

And that argument falls flat right on its face on the first step when confronted by the fact that there are not only eight different schools of magic, but also various types of magic: nature, elemental, arcane, holy, shadow, etc, while technology is just one 'school' and one 'type'.

Explosives, Chemicals, Robotics, Electric, Gravity/Magnetic, Rocketry, Lasers, Ballistics

The 8 schools of technology.

- - - Updated - - -

So you bring up Breath attacks, then you say there's no need to structure a class around them. Can I say that Tinkers use Wrenches, and we don't need to structure a class around using Wrenches?

Of course it would be a flawed argument, because it's strawmanning the entire Technology theme into one tool. No class is designed around one ability, right? So why do you feel you have to use inane arguments like these to support your claims?

Also turning into Dragons is already a thing. Any Alchemist with the Vial of the Sands can.

I brought up breath attacks because that's a central theme of dragons. Beyond that, there isn't much there from which you can base a class upon.

If you disagree, find an NPC in WoW in which you're pulling this concept from. It would help this discussion quite a bit, and show you that technology is truly one of the few class themes available for a class.

Its certainly the most abundant and flexible theme left.

- - - Updated - - -

And there's plenty of abilities that NPCs have that PCs don't. The game would be pretty boring if all bosses and trash had the same abilities that PCs do, and vise versa.

Merely pointing out that technology NPCs have far different abilities than the items you can craft in the profession. Indicating that the profession is not a good representation of WoW technology.

- - - Updated - - -

Do you think it would make a good class if it would simply include fifty most used tech based abilities NPCs and bosses have considering more than half of those are various AOE bombs? That is a yes/no question, and dont change the subject.

How could I answer yes or no to a question that is 100% false?

[Sukhoi]

Explosives, Chemicals, Robotics, Electric, Gravity/Magnetic, Rocketry, Lasers, Ballistics

The 8 schools of technology.

I really hope youre not any kind of engineer to believe that. Magnets are in no way related to gravity lol. If anything theyre related to electricity. Ballistics apply to rockets and explosives.

[Ielenia]

Explosives, Chemicals, Robotics, Electric, Gravity/Magnetic, Rocketry, Lasers, Ballistics

That are all wrapped within a single school of engineering.[/quote]
Try as you might, the canon story says there's only one school of engineering. No amount of conjecture from you will change that.

Merely pointing out that technology NPCs have far different abilities than the items you can craft in the profession. Indicating that the profession is not a good representation of WoW technology.

It is a good representation of WoW technology. You can make from a simple firecracker to a flying mech. If it's not enough for you because you're enamored with the tinker idea, that's another thing.

How could I answer yes or no to a question that is 100% false?

It's a valid question. Most 'tech' attacks you claim are simply 'throw bomb' attacks.

[seleri]

I'm neither for or against adding Tinkers, but one of the main arguments I see is that Tinkers can't exist because of the engineering profession which I don't really agree with. The Engineering profession, to me, is more akin to James Bond using gadgets every now and then to enhance his skills. While a Tinker would be more like Gizmo from DC comics or, as other folks have said, Iron Man from Marvel.

[Teriz]

I really hope youre not any kind of engineer to believe that. Magnets are in no way related to gravity lol. If anything theyre related to electricity. Ballistics apply to rockets and explosives.

We're talking in game terms.

Explosives= Grenades, Bombs ex. Fragmentation Bomb, Proximity Mines, Molotav Barrage
Rocketry= Missiles, Rockets ex. Cluster Rockets, Rocket Boost, Shockwave Missile
Ballistics= Non-explosive projectiles and their weapons ex. Sawblades, Guns, Crossbows
Gravity/Magnetics= Any energy source that pulls you in ex. Gravity Bomb, Magnetic Pull, Magnetic Crush

Oh, and BTW, those are all actual abilities in the game.

[Thimagryn]

I brought up breath attacks because that's a central theme of dragons. Beyond that, there isn't much there from which you can base a class upon.

No it isn't.

When you talk about any of the Dragons in WoW, Breath Weapons are not the central or only aspect of them. They are primal, magical beings, designated to be guardians of Azeroth. They are given gifts of the Titans, which is another connection that can be used since a 'Dragonsworn' character would be devoted to not only protecting the people, but the world itself.

Dragon Breath? It's about as important as a Wrench is to a Tinker. You will need tools to work mechanics, but it's not like the entire Tech theme can be generalized down to just being a 'Wrench user'.

If you disagree, find an NPC in WoW in which you're pulling this concept from. It would help this discussion quite a bit, and show you that technology is truly one of the few class themes available for a class.

Monks weren't pulled from any NPC in WoW. It's very disconcerting that you feel that any class needs to be a derivative of what we've already seen, rather than being something new.

We have many familiar Draconic characters to draw inspiration from, but none reflect a Dragonsworn class any more than any Clockwork Gnome or Goblin Engineer represents 'Tinkers'. Keep in mind, Blackfuse is specifically named an Engineer.

[Teriz]

No it isn't.

When you talk about any of the Dragons in WoW, Breath Weapons are not the central or only aspect of them. They are primal, magical beings, designated to be guardians of Azeroth. They are given gifts of the Titans, which is another connection that can be used since a 'Dragonsworn' character would be devoted to not only protecting the people, but the world itself.

Breath is the central theme of Dragons in general. If you wish to construct a dragon-based class, Breath will be a core theme within it. The other aspect in terms of WoW dragons is magic, which is thoroughly represented by 6 classes, so much so that another magic class would be redundant.

Dragon Breath? It's about as important as a Wrench is to a Tinker. You will need tools to work mechanics, but it's not like the entire Tech theme can be generalized down to just being a 'Wrench user'.

Again, its a core aspect of the theme. You can create a technology class without "Throw Wrench". You can't create a dragon class without the Breaths.

Monks weren't pulled from any NPC in WoW. It's very disconcerting that you feel that any class needs to be a derivative of what we've already seen, rather than being something new.

http://wod.wowhead.com/npc=18497#abilities
http://wod.wowhead.com/npc=35305#abilities
http://wod.wowhead.com/npc=11043#abilities
http://wod.wowhead.com/npc=11043#abilities
http://www.wowhead.com/npc=24554/eramas-brightblaze

[Thimagryn]

Wow, you thought long and hard about the concept.

It's just a damned shame you're strawmaning the hell out of it. Would have liked to hear your actual thoughts on a Draconic class, but I guess you're just going to resort to nitpicking one thing and sticking to it. I mean player characters don't have Tails too, and Dragons have Tail Sweep, so I guess there's that too, right?