If they made a new class in the future, what would it be?

[Teriz]

Because he trains hunters, not dark rangers.

What’s the difference?

And none of that changes the fact that the dark ranger class is not available to the players.

You’re free to believe that.

Doesn't matter. That's completely irrelevant. Because, just like you point out that Gizlock does not pilot mechs, or has no HotS abilities, I can do the same to Nathanos: he does not have any of Sylvanas' HotS abilities, nor can he do a banshee scream like Sylvanas.

You could, but you said that abilities don’t matter. If the abilities don’t matter for you, then just being the Nathanos version of Dark Ranger shouldn’t be a problem.

[leggomydairy]

They’re going to do like they did with other WC game classes and mesh a few into a new one.

It’s a broken record but Tinker is the most original class. It can get a tanking and DPS spec. They could add an alchemist twist for healing. It’s been talked to death. Mail armor, maybe mech suit forms similar to Druid forms or mech pets. Gnomes and goblins as masters, maybe other races too.

Runemaster never became it’s own class and instead some of the basic ideas (runes) were rolled into DKs. I could see something similar with spellbreakers and tinkers. Unrelated but borrowing the WC unit moves for a WOW class.

- - - Updated - - -

Dark rangers are going to either be a “class skin” or a spec for hunters, not sure how anyone can see it as its own class?? If they did “class skins” for each class dark rangers would be #1 for hunters.

[Revamp Man]

Mechagon wasn't an expansion.



No, Warlocks pulled metamorphosis from the Demon Hunter class. Dark Rangers are a clear derivative (undead version) of the Hunter class. There’s a difference.



Doubtful, since my concept is based almost entirely on Blizzard’s own design.

- - - Updated - - -



Nice! I like that you made the claw pack the focus of spec difference. That’s actually a quite possible outcome if a Tinker class is implemented, and if I were going to do another Tinker class write-up, I’d be going in a similar direction as your concept.

"dragon sworn are unlikely to happen because dragon isles is just gonna be patch content"
yet when mechagon which gave us things called "tinkering" is a patch "nah tinkers will still happen because mechagon wasnt an expansion"

this is why nobody can actually hold a discussion with you because you refuse 100% to accept anything beyond what youve stated especially because "i use WC3 and thus its superior to dark ranger because dark ranger is too much like hunter" because its sooooo out of teh realm of possibility that they add a class like dark ranger when at the end of bfa we see theres a group of "dark rangers" but tinkerers are so much more likely because a WC3 unit that had abilities that you find in items throughout the game in things like engineering.


Shadowlands speculation happened and you shot down necromancer because "ghostbusting tinkers" which definitely didnt fit the WC3 concept but fit your need to make the class exist.

This is why class speculation is fun up until the point the word "tinker" appears because you are micheal scott in the improv group. Someone sets up a scene and you come in as the gun toting detective every time.

- - - Updated - - -

Because he trains hunters, not dark rangers.


And none of that changes the fact that the dark ranger class is not available to the players.


Doesn't matter. That's completely irrelevant. Because, just like you point out that Gizlock does not pilot mechs, or has no HotS abilities, I can do the same to Nathanos: he does not have any of Sylvanas' HotS abilities, nor can he do a banshee scream like Sylvanas.

"hunters are the same as dark rangers because they use hunter abilities"
but tinkers use abilities that are the same as some engineering items
"not all of them though"
well not every dark ranger ability is a hunter ability
"tinkers were in the RTS"
Dark rangers didnt exist in the RTS
"dark rangers didnt come in during shadowlands with a sylvanas focus so they wont come in"
tinkers didnt come in during the war expansion focusing on machines
"the main characters werent tinkers"



i could go further but this is essentially how the conversation has/will go with him


dark rangers are an interesting concept because we have seen them in BfA i think the warfront boss became a dark ranger and while it is a ranged class similar to a hutner there is no pet focus and a use of shadow magic that "black arrow" didnt cover. Hunters use nature and dark rangers use shadow.

[Teriz]

They’re going to do like they did with other WC game classes and mesh a few into a new one.

It’s a broken record but Tinker is the most original class. It can get a tanking and DPS spec. They could add an alchemist twist for healing. It’s been talked to death. Mail armor, maybe mech suit forms similar to Druid forms or mech pets. Gnomes and goblins as masters, maybe other races too.

Runemaster never became it’s own class and instead some of the basic ideas (runes) were rolled into DKs. I could see something similar with spellbreakers and tinkers. Unrelated but borrowing the WC unit moves for a WOW class.

Yeah, it’s pretty hard to look at the evidence and not accept that the Tinker really does make the most sense for class inclusion. Especially after us not getting a death themed class for Shadowlands.

Dark rangers are going to either be a “class skin” or a spec for hunters, not sure how anyone can see it as its own class?? If they did “class skins” for each class dark rangers would be #1 for hunters.

Agreed. The differences that people want for a Dark Ranger class is purely a cosmetic difference. A glyph could honestly take care of it.

- - - Updated - - -

"dragon sworn are unlikely to happen because dragon isles is just gonna be patch content"
yet when mechagon which gave us things called "tinkering" is a patch "nah tinkers will still happen because mechagon wasnt an expansion"

You do understand the difference between a patch and an expansion right? Northrend, Pandaria, and Legion were expansion themes. Mechagon popped up almost a year into BFA in patch 8.2.

this is why nobody can actually hold a discussion with you because you refuse 100% to accept anything beyond what youve stated especially because "i use WC3 and thus its superior to dark ranger because dark ranger is too much like hunter" because its sooooo out of teh realm of possibility that they add a class like dark ranger when at the end of bfa we see theres a group of "dark rangers" but tinkerers are so much more likely because a WC3 unit that had abilities that you find in items throughout the game in things like engineering.

Considering that the preeminent Dark Ranger in WoW is the focal point and catalyst of this expansion, and still didn’t prompt Blizzard to create a class emulating what she is, that would be a rather big indicator that they have no intention of bringing in a separate Dark Ranger class.

Blizzard literally said that no class jumped out at them for potential class inclusion while they’re rendering a Dark Ranger and a Necromancer in a battle in full CGI. People really need to think about that.

I mean if we had Gazlowe in a CGI cinematic in his robot suit destroying a horde of robots, and the expansion took place in a realm of technology, I would expect a Tinker class. If that didn’t happen, then I would seriously question Blizzard’s intention of ever bringing that class in the game.

That’s what we should be doing with Necromancers and Dark Rangers now, instead of denying the reality before us.

[Ielenia]

What’s the difference?

It has been demonstrated to you several times. Hell, the very first paragraph in the dark ranger entry in WoWPedia is enough to separate the dark ranger concept from the hunter concept.

You having to ask "what's the difference" heavily implies you don't care to read and understand what people post.

You’re free to believe that.

It's not a matter of belief. It's a demonstrable fact.

You could, but you said that abilities don’t matter. If the abilities don’t matter for you, then just being the Nathanos version of Dark Ranger shouldn’t be a problem.

Yes, but they matter to you. I'm just turning your own argument around against you. You dismissed Gizlock because he doesn't have HotS abilities, and your own argument dismisses Nathanos for the exact same reasons.

- - - Updated - - -

Considering that the preeminent Dark Ranger in WoW is the focal point and catalyst of this expansion, and still didn’t prompt Blizzard to create a class emulating what she is, that would be a rather big indicator that they have no intention of bringing in a separate Dark Ranger class.

Teriz, for the love of whatever you hold sacred, please read and understand what "confirmation bias" means.

Blizzard literally said that no class jumped out at them for potential class inclusion while they’re rendering a Dark Ranger and a Necromancer in a battle in full CGI. People really need to think about that.

There is no necromancer in the Shadowlands intro cinematic. Just a dark ranger and a death knight. Also, they said that no class jumped at them like the demon hunter did for Legion. It's a very important distinction.

[Teriz]

It has been demonstrated to you several times. Hell, the very first paragraph in the dark ranger entry in WoWPedia is enough to separate the dark ranger concept from the hunter concept.

None of that description really demonstrates a difference between a Dark Ranger or a Hunter. Much like what Nathanos does isn’t much different than your standard Forsaken Hunter.

It's not a matter of belief. It's a demonstrable fact.

You mean like Nathanos being a Dark Ranger and a Hunter trainer?

Yes, but they matter to you. I'm just turning your own argument around against you. You dismissed Gizlock because he doesn't have HotS abilities, and your own argument dismisses Nathanos for the exact same reasons.

Incorrect. The reason I don’t dismiss Nathanos is because Blizzard made it obvious that Sylvanas was not a typical Dark Ranger. Nathanos on the other hand, was your typical Dark Ranger, hence why he became a trainer and his abilities pretty much matched every other Dark Ranger in the game except for Sylvanas. Again, you need to make a separation point here; There are Dark Rangers, and there is Sylvanas. They’re really not the same thing, and probably haven’t been the same since the end of WotLK....

Which btw coincides when Nathanos begins training Forsaken Rangers.

Teriz, for the love of whatever you hold sacred, please read and understand what "confirmation bias" means.

There is no necromancer in the Shadowlands intro cinematic. Just a dark ranger and a death knight. Also, they said that no class jumped at them like the demon hunter did for Legion. It's a very important distinction.

The Lich King is a Necromancer whether you wish to believe it or not.

[Diaphin]

But Nathanos IS a Dark Ranger.

So here’s the real question; do people want to play as a Dark Ranger, or do they want to play as Sylvanas? Because if you want to be a Dark Ranger, being a Forsaken Hunter like Nathanos accomplishes that goal.

People want to play as Sylvanas, obviously. Just as DK Players want to play as Arthas and Blizzard really styled the class after Arthas, including them having the Lichking Eyes when DKs originally had black eyes. Or like DH Players will want to play as Illidan. And Blizz seems to be aware of that. Their popular hero classes where all made with the role playing fantasy of being your classes iconic hero in mind.

- - - Updated - - -

The Lich King is a Necromancer whether you wish to believe it or not.

This is why he fights in melee combat and uses DK abilities like remorseless winter?

[Amunrasonther]

Has this image been brought up at all in this thread? It's over on the main forums.



People are speculating obviously that they're laying the foundations for a Bard class.

[draugril]

Has this image been brought up at all in this thread? It's over on the main forums.



People are speculating obviously that they're laying the foundations for a Bard class.

Which I truly hope is not what they do. WarCraft does not have the proper environment for a Bard. They got rid of the Support role, and a Bard that cannot Support is not a Bard at all.

There are guitar transmog options. If all a Bard will do is smash stuff with a musical instrument or heal while wielding a musical instrument... there are options available for that already.

[Amunrasonther]

Which I truly hope is not what they do. WarCraft does not have the proper environment for a Bard. They got rid of the Support role, and a Bard that cannot Support is not a Bard at all.

There are guitar transmog options. If all a Bard will do is smash stuff with a musical instrument or heal while wielding a musical instrument... there are options available for that already.

I find this notion that the Bard must have a support spec where they neither DPS or heal to be very narrow minded. A Bard class in WoW would obviously have the capability to heal and damage and the ability to also support their allies (much like a Paladin and Shaman), within their respective healing and DPS specs.

[Traveler Voltin]

People want to play as Sylvanas, obviously. Just as DK Players want to play as Arthas and Blizzard really styled the class after Arthas, including them having the Lichking Eyes when DKs originally had black eyes. Or like DH Players will want to play as Illidan. And Blizz seems to be aware of that. Their popular hero classes where all made with the role playing fantasy of being your classes iconic hero in mind.

- - - Updated - - -



This is why he fights in melee combat and uses DK abilities like remorseless winter?

anyone who raises the dead in WoW is a necromancer in some form.

[draugril]

I find this notion that the Bard must have a support spec where they neither DPS or heal to be very narrow minded. A Bard class in WoW would obviously have the capability to heal and damage and the ability to also support their allies (much like a Paladin and Shaman), within their respective healing and DPS specs.

Shaman and Paladin were support classes. They haven't been since WotLK launched, at the latest. They were both gutted - everything that was to remain in the game was diluted among other classes, and all functions that made them unique (and effective) in the support role that weren't doled out were removed entirely.

Yeah, I like having things like Windfury Totem and Auras back... but it is still disingenuous to call them "support" classes anymore.

[Triceron]

anyone who raises the dead in WoW is a necromancer in some form.

Anyone who hunts is a hunter in some form

Anyone who fights in a war is a warrior in some form

Anyone who uses magic is a mage in some form


Just saying

[Amunrasonther]

Shaman and Paladin were support classes. They haven't been since WotLK launched, at the latest. They were both gutted - everything that was to remain in the game was diluted among other classes, and all functions that made them unique (and effective) in the support role that weren't doled out were removed entirely.

Yeah, I like having things like Windfury Totem and Auras back... but it is still disingenuous to call them "support" classes anymore.

I think it's not accurate to call them support classes even back in Vanilla/pre-Wolk. Yes, they had lots of buffs that benefited their allies, but they still fit in the Tank/Healer/DPS roles.

[draugril]

I think it's not accurate to call them support classes even back in Vanilla/pre-Wolk. Yes, they had lots of buffs that benefited their allies, but they still fit in the Tank/Healer/DPS roles.

That's fair.

There's an argument to be made for it, but you could just as easily make the argument that WoW has never had dedicated support classes.

Regardless, though, all the more evidence that WoW could never actually implement an actual Bard in WoW. I would like nothing more than to have an actual Bard in-game... but if it's not going to be a support class, what's the point? Are people really just that attached to the name and don't care one iota about the gameplay implications?

[Amunrasonther]

That's fair.

There's an argument to be made for it, but you could just as easily make the argument that WoW has never had dedicated support classes.

Regardless, though, all the more evidence that WoW could never actually implement an actual Bard in WoW. I would like nothing more than to have an actual Bard in-game... but if it's not going to be a support class, what's the point? Are people really just that attached to the name and don't care one iota about the gameplay implications?

I think people are more interested in healing or dealing damage through music and sound over just being strictly a support class. In WoW lore, it suggests that sound magic is one of the main elements found within the WoW universe (like fire, wind, earth), and there currently is no class that heavily utilizes this element.

Edit: I'm currently in the works of making a WoW Bard class concept that has 1 healer role and 2 ranged DPS specs. In all 3 specs, there are elements of support.

[Teriz]

People want to play as Sylvanas, obviously. Just as DK Players want to play as Arthas and Blizzard really styled the class after Arthas, including them having the Lichking Eyes when DKs originally had black eyes. Or like DH Players will want to play as Illidan. And Blizz seems to be aware of that. Their popular hero classes where all made with the role playing fantasy of being your classes iconic hero in mind.

Except you don’t get to play as those characters, so Blizzard allows you to play a lesser derivative. In the case of Dark Rangers Blizzard did something different, they created a derivative of Sylvanas that lacked her Banshee powers. Then they went further and created a Dark Ranger that wasn’t an undead elf. These derivatives were still considered Dark Rangers in lore.

I think they went that route because you really can’t make a workable class that operates like Sylvanas. I mean if you REALLY think about it even if you apply the HotS abilities, there really isn’t much there. So it makes sense to just make the concept a derivative of the Hunter class instead.

This is why he fights in melee combat and uses DK abilities like remorseless winter?

Where does it say that Necromancers can’t fight in melee or use ice magic?

[KrayZ33]

That's fair.

There's an argument to be made for it, but you could just as easily make the argument that WoW has never had dedicated support classes.

Regardless, though, all the more evidence that WoW could never actually implement an actual Bard in WoW. I would like nothing more than to have an actual Bard in-game... but if it's not going to be a support class, what's the point? Are people really just that attached to the name and don't care one iota about the gameplay implications?

I don't know, Bard as a healer seems to be plenty of support?
It's also the theme around it that is appealing, not the "buffs your damage by 5% for the next 3 attacks" tooltip on your skills.

[draugril]

I think people are more interested in healing or dealing damage through music and sound over just being strictly a support class. In WoW lore, it suggests that sound magic is one of the main elements found within the WoW universe (like fire, wind, earth), and there currently is no class that heavily utilizes this element.

You need more than Murmur and ETC to build a class around, though.

And personally, I believe you'd be wasting the effort needed to create an entirely new class if you're not introducing new avenues of gameplay. "Warrior, but with a Guitar," "Mage, but with Microphone," and "Priest, but with a Flute" seem like better candidates for expanded transmog options rather than a class unto itself.

Then again, I might just be too old school. The term "Bard" is incredibly loaded for me, carrying a lot of expectations. But if your expectations are limited to the literal dictionary definition of the word, you might be more amenable to getting the class in WoW. But unless they completely revamp the entire trinity balance construct to add a support role, I'll pass.

[Teriz]

I think people are more interested in healing or dealing damage through music and sound over just being strictly a support class. In WoW lore, it suggests that sound magic is one of the main elements found within the WoW universe (like fire, wind, earth), and there currently is no class that heavily utilizes this element.

Edit: I'm currently in the works of making a WoW Bard class concept that has 1 healer role and 2 ranged DPS specs. In all 3 specs, there are elements of support.

Thing is, the support aspect is what makes the Bard a unique concept, because music is portrayed as a constant force influencing the fight. You take that away, and you’re going to need another way to make music a unique magic type.

I’d strongly recommend checking out Hunter Survival talent Lone Wolf, and Dekard from HotS for some ideas.