Blademaster Class Concept Updated

[pacotaco]

That's a Rogue, not a Blademaster. You've literally described someone out of SI-7.
https://wowpedia.fandom.com/wiki/Bla...and%20polearms.

If you scroll a bit on that same link:

Though their numbers are few, the seasoned blademasters represent an elite fighting force within the Horde.[...] Though blademasters are masters of stealth and guile, they value personal honor above all else.

The thing is that the concept of the Blademaster is a mix of warrior, spy/ninja and martial artist. That's why no matter what description we say, you could always say "that's a warrior with magic / 2-handed rogue / monk with stealth.

Yeah, this is a false equivalence. Mages and Priests don't use demonic magic, so they could never house the Warlock concept. On the other hand, there's plenty of room in the Warrior class for warriors who move so quickly that they appear to be in multiple places at once, or invisible.

False equivalence? How so?
Blademasters are warriors with stealth and mirror image-> OK
Priests are mages with holy magic -> Wrong
Warlocks are mages with fel magic and pets -> Wrong

See what I said about being biased?

[Teriz]

If you scroll a bit on that same link:

And even if I buy your interpretation of that passage (I don’t), in class terms, stealth and assassination concepts are thoroughly covered by the Rogue class.

The thing is that the concept of the Blademaster is a mix of warrior, spy/ninja and martial artist. That's why no matter what description we say, you could always say "that's a warrior with magic / 2-handed rogue / monk with stealth.

Again, even if we buy your interpretation, it’s a concept thoroughly covered by Rogues. Bringing in another melee class that is doing the exact same thing would be redundant.

False equivalence? How so?

Because what you said above is thoroughly inaccurate. Mages don’t use demons or demonic magic. Once they do that, they cease to be Mages.

What you’re describing as a Blademaster is pretty much a Rogue. The only thing we’re missing is a 2h option.

See what I said about being biased?

You being wrong doesn’t make me biased.

[Teriz]

Fair point, wont disagree, I think arms is a horrible spec and it puts me off playing warrior, but I feel like maybe it could simply be re-envisioned, with blademaster a 4th myself.

But why would we need to create an entirely new spec when we can just overhaul an existing one? You could even rename the spec “ Blademaster”.

[Syegfryed]

Impossible things? like what? cosmetic skins?

that too, and skins

How are they different in games and thematic when both of them use necromantic magic?

i dunno man, i think not even drawing would make sense to you, this is a matter of you, not understanding things, rather than how things rly are

And 85, 90, 100, 110 and 120 are higher. Why 80, in particular?

Because it was towards endgame wow, as the lich king being the "epic boss" that came from wc3, seems like a perfect fit for a ultimate skill

I know what Warlocks are in lore. But, if you consider Blademasters to be Warrior based on their abilities and gameplay, so were Demon Hunters considered Warlocks, for a very long time, by the playerbase, because of that.

Blademasters are wariors IN LORE, I don't consider then on abilities and gameplay alone.

Demon hunters were not considered warlocks "for a very long time" that is a defacto LIE, they were fundamental different races in both skills, abilities theme, fantasy and how they play, even mentality and how they were born are different with demon hunters blinding themselves and eating a demon soul

2 skills (one by name: Immolate). Amazingly, like how you consider the Blademaster a Warrior based on 2 abilities (one's general, not even specific, that is encompassed by other classes: Critical Strike).

Thatts because im not using ONLY this as a argument, you are, you are nitpicking, you ahve to see the whole picutre, everything.

You are dumbing down the classes to fit your narrative, "hey warlocks and DH both have control over demons, so they clearly are the same as blademasters and warrior who have mastery of blades, therefore, blademaster and warriors are different classes because warlocks and DH are different.''

You are using a fallacy, plain and simple, not just one, youa re going to false equivalence, to circular logic, affirming consequent and many others, which is pointless to discuss any firther knowing you will bend and disrtor anything to fit your idea.

Again, going off by appearances rather than abilities. The necromancer, affliction Warlock and Death Knight all use necromancy

Not going to pointless tell you how you are doing false equivalence of things already debumked, but i would like to say to you that aflic warlock does not use necromancy they sue fel and shadow magic. procced.

Of course it is.
You can see how important Arthas, Illidan and Chen are to the Death Knight, Demon Hunter and Monk classes.
Jubei'thos is not the representative of the class, like Samuro is. That would be like saying Mojo Stormstout is enough for the Monk class.

Samuro barely appear in the game son, you want to comapre a minor appearence of a quest in the expansion to Arthas and illdain? youa re joking.

Oh, so now we're looking for Warrior abilities in Blademaster NPCs? because i can find you Warrior and Warlock abilities in Death Knight NPCs.

Lmao, dude, youa re just trying to hard.

I'm not looking for a weak version of Bladestorm. Whirlwind, already, kinda does that. I'm looking for Bladestorm, exclusively.

And i show you how blademasters used bladestorm and other abilities

No, they don't.
How is this manifested in-game?

They do yes, you know, even spell reflect is a wonderful way to show you how to plain a trick and deceptive guy, making the paladin stun himself, reflrect the chaos bolt or make the amge look like a joke with polymorph

they don't even need those skills and they can be tricksy, is the warriro anture, do everything to win

That is all the lore about Blademasters, really. That's what happen when the class isn't in game yet.

The class is already in the game

your entire argument is based around the lie of how they aren't

I never said they were magic users. Mystical abilities is the word being used. And, even then, it won't be Arcane like it is categorized now in the Mage class.

therefore, warriors can use that, like they already do

Now we know that, because we have the Demon Hunter class.
You can be proven wrong in the future, too, you know...

ah yes, the glambler's fallacy, of course seotmhing totally totally different with to relation is a proof of something not related will happen

Same can be said on Blademasters and Warriors.

no it can't, false equivalence

They are missing more than that

Theya re not, because meme skilsl from a non canon game are not relevant

Anything asian themed? I, only, suggested Pandaren and Night Elves. Anyone who use Mirror Image? No, just an NPC called a Blademaster. Mages are not included.

pandarens, night elves and draeneis do not use wind walk, they do not use mirror iamge(only the one lightforged guy) , neither they ahve the meme skills from hots, therefore they can't be blademasters either

In WoW they did.

not in the warcraft 3 game, which is the point of the discussion.

Considering there are numerous Blademaster references, i don't see why it couldn't be.

there is no "blademasters references" blademasters are already in the game, playable, lmao

The only false equivalence is brushing off the Demon Hunter and Warlock situation while accepting the Blademaster and Warrior one. That is a double standard.

false equivalence is you thinking is the same scenario.

Well, it is debatable, as some sources claim it is Shamanistic element manipulation while others say it is manually applied.

none it clam is shamanistic manpualtion, they said they put oil and burn it, plain and simple

Telaamon is, literally, called a Blademaster in name. How more precise do you want them to be?

Others are as well, one is literally a warrior trainner

this is the true double standarts, cherry picking things to fit your narrative

i guess they are not Blademasters by your own standards.

they ar enot by tour standarts, apaprently if they don't ahve hots meme abilities they aren't

Where?

in the game called World of warcraft

Stop categorizing everything as mystical and magical. That would not get us anywhere. In reality, none of the Warrior abilities are similar to that of the Mirror Image.

The thing is one thing or another thing friend, is either magic or isn't magic, its how wow works

The Samurai is fast. The Ninja is fast. The Martial Artist is fast. The Barbarian, Knight or Warlord are not.

ninja is not a samurai, period.

Barbarians, and warriors are fast, their life depend on it, if you think theya re slow, or mroe slow than a samurai for reasons, then again, you show your perspective is compltely different from reality and more clsoe to anime and movies

Solid argument? when there's transmogrification in game and a lot of armor sets and weapons, already, pass in visuals as something else?
No, it isn't. Saying it is shows how little you know about class additions.

So youa re saying this don't make sense because the transmog tool evolved along the eyars? HAHA regarldess of how people cahnge what their characters look like the main thing still there, Warlocks don't use mail, plate or leather, period, they don't attack with glaies, theya re not melesse combatants, simple as that. no amtter how you try to make then as Demon hutners wannabe

*Facepalm*.
They need something to draw from. Even if it was for the Warrior.

Hey guys what about create the "elemenalist class that daw upon the smaan elemental" yeah what a dumb idea

More like our assumption, combined with the closest thing possible.

no

Are you, really, going to give me a real life example?
News flash, kiddo, there is no such thing as magic in real-life.
There are magic tricks, associated with magicians.

yes, and in wow is either magic or not magic, simple

Because it didn't produce them as much money as they expected it, in competition with LoL and DotA.

Because is shit, ayyy

Well, Blademasters can dual-wield, as can be seen by the Ankoan.

yes, the guys who can't mirror image, wind walk neither other meme abilities from hots

you know, get a fancy transmog, play fury and you are also a dual-wield blademaster just like him

I could say the same. Just give Warlocks the skills of the Demon Hunter/Death Knight, some transmogs and call it a day.

you would ahve to give warlocks the ability to attack in melee, with glaives, use leather, use plate, use big heavy weapons, become a full melee combatant instead of a spellcaster they are.

wush, see how your false equivalence does not work?

- - - Updated - - -

But why would we need to create an entirely new spec when we can just overhaul an existing one? You could even rename the spec “ Blademaster”.

Because those guys are living in an anime fantasy or something

- - - Updated - - -

The thing is that the concept of the Blademaster is a mix of warrior, spy/ninja and martial artist. That's why no matter what description we say, you could always say "that's a warrior with magic / 2-handed rogue / monk with stealth.

nowhere is said the blademaster is a spy/ninja and martial artist.

Blademasters are not ninjas, they are not spies, neither martial artists, you are confusing then with monks(artial artists/ninjas) and rogues(ninjas/spies), they do not use magic.

They are, legendary warriors who mastered the use of the sword and other techniques, theya re warriors, who are in the center of the battle shredding blood, they are not hiding, they are not sneaking or using roguish/coward tactics.

they confuse the enemy , they do not hide from then, they do not attack then while they sleep, they do not fight barehand etc etc

They are a warrior with samurai vibes, period.

[Teriz]

Because those guys are living in an anime fantasy or something

It’s such a bizarre argument. We have a spec that badly needs an identity, that was obviously created with the Blademaster in mind, and only requires 2-3 new abilities to fulfill the Blademaster fantasy, yet they want an entirely new class. A new class that at best would be a 2H Rogue that would upset the community because it would be yet another high agility melee class after Monks and Demon Hunters.

[Syegfryed]

OK I wasn't going to reply, but seeing someone on an internet forum thinking they know about history and talking out of their rear end just, I just cant stand for that.

dude, i just read some articles, im not talking like i am an expert, you know like you tried, i even brought you their definitions to say they look alike, you are the one pulling your hairs to say they are not exactly the same

Samurai were not nobles

they were part of the military nobility

it would be better for you to not have replied, if it was just to make this gag

but hey, ima kid with a raging orc, you are a guy named javelin joe, very mature.

[pacotaco]

And even if I buy your interpretation of that passage (I don’t), in class terms, stealth and assassination concepts are thoroughly covered by the Rogue class.

Samuro is not tanky like Varian, Garrosh, ETC, Muradin (warriors) nor like Valeera (rogue). It works more like something inbetween.
In the TTRPG is similar to Kensais (a thing between monk and warrior/fighter).

While these sources are not canon, they show that Blizzards idea of the Blademaster is not the same as the typical warrior., but more like the concept of the samurai from the films.

Again, even if we buy your interpretation, it’s a concept thoroughly covered by Rogues. Bringing in another melee class that is doing the exact same thing would be redundant.

Again you compare them with rogues.
It's interesting how some detractors say they are warriors, others say they are rogues. When even them can't agree on the disagreement...

Because what you said above is thoroughly inaccurate. Mages don’t use demons or demonic magic. Once they do that, they cease to be Mages.
What you’re describing as a Blademaster is pretty much a Rogue. The only thing we’re missing is a 2h option.

So, let me understand what you're saying there:
- You can differentiate a spellcaster by the school of magic they cast (arcane/frost/fire for mages, holy for priest, fel for warlock)
- You can differentiate a fighter by the school of magic they use (none for warrior, holy for paladin, unholy for death knight)
- You can't differentiate a rogue that uses shadow, from another that uses elemental magic?

Am I getting it right? That's even agreeing on blademasters playing like rogues, which is totally wrong.

- - - Updated - - -

It’s such a bizarre argument. We have a spec that badly needs an identity, that was obviously created with the Blademaster in mind, and only requires 2-3 new abilities to fulfill the Blademaster fantasy, yet they want an entirely new class. A new class that at best would be a 2H Rogue that would upset the community because it would be yet another high agility melee class after Monks and Demon Hunters.

The problem with the warrior is that it tries to encompass too many types of warriors in just 3 specs:
- The human soldier
- The night elf sentinel
- The orc grunt and berserker
- The tauren chieftain
- The dwarven mountain king
- Etc

It's the same problem that the hunter has, the concept is too broad.

[Teriz]

Samuro is not tanky like Varian, Garrosh, ETC, Muradin (warriors) nor like Valeera (rogue). It works more like something inbetween.
In the TTRPG is similar to Kensais (a thing between monk and warrior/fighter).

While these sources are not canon, they show that Blizzards idea of the Blademaster is not the same as the typical warrior., but more like the concept of the samurai from the films.

Samurais don’t disappear into thin air, or create shadow clones of themselves. If you’re talking about a standard Samurai concept who is a master of blades, then you’re talking about an Arms warrior. You need to make up your mind here, because it’s leading to confusion.

Again you compare them with rogues.
It's interesting how some detractors say they are warriors, others say they are rogues. When even them can't agree on the disagreement...

No, I’m comparing your class concept to a Rogue, because in terms of classes you’re describing the design space of a Rogue. Blademasters as lore figures are Warriors. In short, you’re talking about two different things.

So, let me understand what you're saying there:
- You can differentiate a spellcaster by the school of magic they cast (arcane/frost/fire for mages, holy for priest, fel for warlock)
- You can differentiate a fighter by the school of magic they use (none for warrior, holy for paladin, unholy for death knight)
- You can't differentiate a rogue that uses shadow, from another that uses elemental magic?

Am I getting it right? That's even agreeing on blademasters playing like rogues, which is totally wrong.

Your description of a Blademaster throughout our back and forth;

The thing is that the concept of the Blademaster is a mix of warrior, spy/ninja and martial artist

Blademasters are warriors with stealth and mirror image

Blademaster is the commando that infiltrates the enemy, take swiftly the target and gets out.

You’re describing a Rogue.

[Imperator4321]

Not rly "ill defined", they are already explained very well, the thing is sometimes, NPCs just have more juice and tools than us, simple as that

When i call them "ill defined" i was meaning more their place in the setting/universe and what exactly they are supposed to be is somewhat muddled, depending on what you look at their skills are described as either mystical or mundane, they are described as an honor guard yet in gameplay they act more as assassins with stealth and deceptive skills, aesthetically they draw from samurai/ronin yet also carry mala beads which evoke more a shaman/monk.

I think this ambiguity is how you can get people who see them as some kind of elemental spiritual warrior while something like the RPG just defines them as Orcs who take the gladiator prestige class. They're conception was based on rule of cool (orc samurai with a katana) and gameplay needs (Horde needed a duelist/hero killer hero unit) and they've kind of just been left as a relic with times where they show up again like in WoW with the Blind Blademasters in Siege of Orgrimmar or the Burning Blade in WoD and Samuro in HoTS unlike something like the Death Knight which initially was just a straight up anti-paladin but later down the line evolved into something more expansive.

Hell the blademaster in the WC3 campaign Grom canonically isn't even actually a Blademaster so the closest thing they have to a character is Samuro.

But grant it, burning blade in wod have flame/fire shenanigans prob because the new team barely knew shit about their lore, and think "hey burning blade clan, they obviously have blades on fire!!!!"

Well honestly there isn't actually that much to the Blademasters in lore so the whole elemental fire magic stuff isn't too egregious for me.

For the longest time most people figured the Rogue's stealth was non-magical yet Sub Rogues in Legion & the safe haven cinematic pretty much confirmed that rogues to an extent use shadow magic

It can totally be expand on, never said it could not, but on the warrior class, like they are.

Not disagreeing overall, I just think it's fair for the people who like the Blademaster thematic/archetype to desire something closer to what they envision that archetype to be in a aesthetic or gameplay sense, current Arms Warrior as close as it may be to the Blademaster doesn't fully encapsulate what people who like that archetype see a "Blademaster" as, same way Unholy DK doesn't fully encapture what people expect/want out of a "Necromancer" or Marksman Hunter to Dark Ranger, or Sub/Assassin rogue to the Warden, while i don't personally think all of those options are viable as a full class. I think it could be an interesting route, expanding the talent system to include more abilties remenicient of these npc-exclusive variants of certain classes like Wardens, Dark Rangers, Blademasters, Witch Doctors/Shadow Hunters, Priestess of the Moon.

Samurai in D&D is literally a spec/subclass of the fighter in 5th edition.

It's a bit more complicated, you have the Samurai as a fighter archetype which has "fighting spirit" discipline warrior style and a few proficiency/social skills, but you also have the Monks Way of the Kensei tradition which is based more on the graceful anime swordmaster type of depiction akin to something like the FFXIV samurai

If i were to compared them the Warcraft Blademaster draws more from the "wandering ronin/swordmaster" fantasy similiar to what the Way of the Kensei Monk offers (in addition to stuff the 5e Monk class already offers like Ki abilities, unarmored defense, mobility) than it does to version the fighter subclass does

[pacotaco]

Samurais don’t disappear into thin air, or create shadow clones of themselves. If you’re talking about a standard Samurai concept who is a master of blades, then you’re talking about an Arms warrior. You need to make up your mind here, because it’s leading to confusion.

To clarify, Blizzard's concept of Blademaster is a mystical samurai. You can see that concept on plenty of media, it's nothing new nor original.
I have a hard time believing that you can't grasp the idea. I's like what you can see with ninjas. The real ninja was just a common, normal spy. But the mystified idea is something with magical powers that leaps on the roofs/trees and has magical powers (Naruto is the most modern example).
You want another example? Paladin. They were just normal knights. They didn't shoot light. But the fantasy trope is of a holy magic warrior.

No, I’m comparing your class concept to a Rogue, because in terms of classes you’re describing the design space of a Rogue. Blademasters as lore figures are Warriors. In short, you’re talking about two different things.

My concept is actually closer to monk and paladin in terms of gameplay, than to warrior or rogue. Or at least that was the intention.

Your description of a Blademaster throughout our back and forth;
You’re describing a Rogue.

You evaded my question. I'll post it again:

- You can sudifferentiate a spellcaster by the school of magic they cast (arcane/frost/fire for mages, holy for priest, fel for warlock)
- You can differentiate a fighter by the school of magic they use (none for warrior, holy for paladin, unholy for death knight)
- You can't differentiate blademasters (that they use elemental magic, melee combat and stealth/illusions) from a warrior or a rogue.

Is that correct?

[shoc]

I think they should just let Wind Walker Monks use 2H weapons and it will be just as good as a Blademaster. Blademaster is not remotely interesting enough to be a whole Spec let alone an entire Class.

[Teriz]

To clarify, Blizzard's concept of Blademaster is a mystical samurai. You can see that concept on plenty of media, it's nothing new nor original.
I have a hard time believing that you can't grasp the idea. I's like what you can see with ninjas. The real ninja was just a common, normal spy. But the mystified idea is something with magical powers that leaps on the roofs/trees and has magical powers (Naruto is the most modern example).
You want another example? Paladin. They were just normal knights. They didn't shoot light. But the fantasy trope is of a holy magic warrior.

You're getting lost in the weeds here. When you lose all of the colorful terms and descriptors, the only thing separating your Blademaster from an arms warrior is Stealth and Mirror image, two things that are provided for by the Rogue class, which is why they're NOT in the Warrior class. You use these descriptors as your selling points for why this class is interesting and special on a consistent basis, seemingly ignoring that they're already present in an existing class.

My concept is actually closer to monk and paladin in terms of gameplay, than to warrior or rogue. Or at least that was the intention.

Uh how exactly? Your main descriptors of this class concept revolve completely around Stealth and Mirror Image/trickery. Those are hallmarks of the Rogue class, not the Monk or Paladin class.

You evaded my question. I'll post it again:

- You can sudifferentiate a spellcaster by the school of magic they cast (arcane/frost/fire for mages, holy for priest, fel for warlock)
- You can differentiate a fighter by the school of magic they use (none for warrior, holy for paladin, unholy for death knight)
- You can't differentiate blademasters (that they use elemental magic, melee combat and stealth/illusions) from a warrior or a rogue.

Is that correct?

Again you're missing the point.

Priests, Mages, and Warlocks are all different from each other because they're using different types of magic. Mages can't use demonic pets. Warlocks don't use Holy or Frost magic, Priests don't use the type of magic that Mages and Warlocks use, so those differentiations are obvious.

You have yet to offer a real differentiation between what you're bringing to the table here and the existing Rogue class. I even provided your own quotes to show you what I'm talking about. You can't continuously bring up stealth and illusion as a selling point and then act confused as to why someone is instantly equating this to the Rogue class.

[pacotaco]

You're getting lost in the weeds here. When you lose all of the colorful terms and descriptors, the only thing separating your Blademaster from an arms warrior is Stealth and Mirror image, two things that are provided for by the Rogue class, which is why they're NOT in the Warrior class. You use these descriptors as your selling points for why this class is interesting and special on a consistent basis, seemingly ignoring that they're already present in an existing class.

The same can be said of the paladin, the only thing they provide that separates them from warrior is the light magic that the priests have.
Are they priest? Are they warriors?

Again you're missing the point.

Priests, Mages, and Warlocks are all different from each other because they're using different types of magic. Mages can't use demonic pets. Warlocks don't use Holy or Frost magic, Priests don't use the type of magic that Mages and Warlocks use, so those differentiations are obvious.

You have yet to offer a real differentiation between what you're bringing to the table here and the existing Rogue class. I even provided your own quotes to show you what I'm talking about. You can't continuously bring up stealth and illusion as a selling point and then act confused as to why someone is instantly equating this to the Rogue class.

2-Handed combat, elemental magic, mirror images. It's more than what differentiates fire mage from destro warlock, feral druid from rogues, or warrior from paladin.

[cocomen2]

Because those guys are living in an anime fantasy or something

LMAO, you say so much staff about Anime, but fail to realize that WOW cartoonish world is more Anime than any other anime.

Or you some clown that thinks that wow is serious medieval fantasy, let it go grow up.

1) all wars ends with hugs and licking Anduin boots.

2) all omnipotent gods or demigods , beaten by random cosplay kids 20vs1

3) any deepshit given title of THE chosen one , CCChampion.

4) almost all important NPC in any life threatening situation can't get hurt , plot armor very thick.

5) furry-animals and half-breed aliens easy peasy join main story , lapadifloopa and hop Void elf come to existance.

[Teriz]

The same can be said of the paladin, the only thing they provide that separates them from warrior is the light magic that the priests have.
Are they priest? Are they warriors?

Except when its all said and done, the Paladin is offering something that neither the Warrior or the Priest offers; A heavily armored holy warrior that uses pure Holy magic.

Your Blademaster concept is NO different than a Rogue.

2-Handed combat, elemental magic, mirror images. feral druid from rogues,

Again, buzzwords. Break all of that down and you're talking about a melee class that imbues their weapon and uses trickery and stealth. That is a Rogue.

It's more than what differentiates fire mage from destro warlock,

These are specs, not classes.

or warrior from paladin.

Warriors can't use holy magic at all. A Rogue can use bladed weapons, imbue their weapons with nature magic, and use mirror image and stealh.

Are we missing anything here?

[pacotaco]

Except when its all said and done, the Paladin is offering something that neither the Warrior or the Priest offers; A heavily armored holy warrior that uses pure Holy magic.

So a warrior that uses holy magic is not "A heavily armored holy warrior that uses pure Holy magic." OK

Your Blademaster concept is NO different than a Rogue.

Yeah, they're exactly the same.

Again, buzzwords. Break all of that down and you're talking about a melee class that imbues their weapon and uses trickery and stealth. That is a Rogue.

Why stop there? Rogues are a melee class, they're like warriors but they just imbue their weapon and use trickery and stealth. Make them a spec of warrior.

These are specs, not classes.

OK, so if the overlap is just one entire spec of one class with one entire spec of another there's no problem?

Warriors can't use holy magic at all. A Rogue can use bladed weapons, imbue their weapons with nature magic, and use mirror image and stealh.

The only "nature" thing rogues use are venoms. All of their magic is Shadow Magic. And they don't use mirror image.
Or are you saying that rogues could use that and still be rogues, but if warriors do they use holy magic they stop being warriors?

Are we missing anything here?

Yeah, I think I've lost your train of thought.

[Syegfryed]

When i call them "ill defined" i was meaning more their place in the setting/universe and what exactly they are supposed to be is somewhat muddled, depending on what you look at their skills are described as either mystical or mundane, they are described as an honor guard yet in gameplay they act more as assassins with stealth and deceptive skills, aesthetically they draw from samurai/ronin yet also carry mala beads which evoke more a shaman/monk.

Thats because they were not meant to be carbon copies of the samurai of the real world, these skills are mundane, and mystical as long as a warrior can be, like other fantastical skills they can use, a mirror image to me is as much "mystical" or supernatural as becoming an avatar, screaming like a dragons and so on.

Like i said to the other guys, they didn't play as much as "assassins and deceptive" as people think they were, at least not in the rogue style, they use hit and run tactics, they kill as much they can before dying so they run, that was their game

I think this ambiguity is how you can get people who see them as some kind of elemental spiritual warrior while something like the RPG just defines them as Orcs who take the gladiator prestige class. They're conception was based on rule of cool (orc samurai with a katana) and gameplay needs (Horde needed a duelist/hero killer hero unit) and they've kind of just been left as a relic with times where they show up again like in WoW with the Blind Blademasters in Siege of Orgrimmar or the Burning Blade in WoD and Samuro in HoTS unlike something like the Death Knight which initially was just a straight up anti-paladin but later down the line evolved into something more expansive.

...Thats because is what they are, fancy warriors with rule of cool, like dwarves with their mountain kings, tauren with their chieftains, humans with the knights, people are just reading too much on their title and creating something entirely different.

Well honestly there isn't actually that much to the Blademasters in lore so the whole elemental fire magic stuff isn't too egregious for me.

either i, i just think its dumb to make then have fireblades just because "burning blade" is derp, and again, they didn't use elemental magic, they jsut set the blades on fire, point still stands of how this depiction, was different from what we had

grant it, almost everything in wod was different from the main universe due to the new team lack of knowledge, i mean, even the orcs who drank demon blood became gray instead of red or green, totally nonsensical

Not disagreeing overall, I just think it's fair for the people who like the Blademaster thematic/archetype to desire something closer to what they envision that archetype to be in a aesthetic or gameplay sense,

im not saying isn't fair to want that, it can be done without the nonsensical idea of wanting a completely different clas, who will be redundant, with 2 skills different from the warrior.

Like i said, blademaster-warrior is not, like unholy DK and necromancer, they are more akin to wardens and rogues, but those, and the others can be simple fixed by expanding the lore and gameplay of the current classes.

The problem with rogues not playing like wardens is because wardens like blademasters, are racial and thematical specific, and the classes need to be generalists, imagine if the sub rogue was not subterfuge, but warden, why other races would be able to be warden? it would make no sense, just like it don't other races being blademasters, other shamans would not make sense to be witch doctors like trolls, see how deep goes the rabbit role? they will not create a class every time a race have a different name or theme for their class

At least, that is how blizzard things, but by now, after the class halls, we know the races/organizations can share their knowledges a bit, so again, designing the classes to look more like those archetypes would not be a bad idea, specially with arms.

Arms is in a bad spot, re-design the spec, into a more fast pace class, and ading some talent options to be more more blademaster style would fix it and give then more uniqueness

It's a bit more complicated, you have the Samurai as a fighter archetype which has "fighting spirit" discipline warrior style and a few proficiency/social skills, but you also have the Monks Way of the Kensei tradition which is based more on the graceful anime swordmaster type of depiction akin to something like the FFXIV samurai

If i were to compared them the Warcraft Blademaster draws more from the "wandering ronin/swordmaster" fantasy similiar to what the Way of the Kensei Monk offers (in addition to stuff the 5e Monk class already offers like Ki abilities, unarmored defense, mobility) than it does to version the fighter subclass does

nah, the kensei is a lot different from the blademaster, some feats or a dip into another classand you can literally be a carbon copy of the blademaster, i even did once, grab shadow touched or 3 levels in warlock, you have invisibility, mirror image or a teleport.

- - - Updated - - -

- snip -

Again, you can't se their resemblances, that is entirely your problem mate, keep raging on how they are not 'exactly the same"

I mean just experience removing specs that a lot of people do already love and making large sweeping changes, Im not sure removing arms would be a good idea, id prefer if blademaster was much more fleshed out than just adding 3 abilities to arms.

they just reworked the beastmaster class entirely and more drastically from range to melee, there would be no problem.

yeah, making the class, who already play like a blademaster, into more blademaster-ish, since you know, they are the same, is better than add a meme class based on a dead game and cripple even more the spec currently in the game

[Shedaar]

2-Handed combat, elemental magic, mirror images. It's more than what differentiates fire mage from destro warlock, feral druid from rogues, or warrior from paladin.

This is so true it made me chuckle xDDDDDD +10

+ More than what differentiates unh dk from a potential necro class, or engineering from tinker too : )))

[username993720]

The problem I see in this discussion is that some people are not seeing that they're not using the same standard for all, and makes other people think they're just cherry-picking arguments instead of being unbiased.

Exactly. If an ability and a spec description make one a Blademaster, then the same applied to Demon Hunters and Warlocks.

By the way, it would be wise to avoid T eriz. This thread will turn into a Tinker one.

that too, and skins

Who the hell cares about skins? I'm talking about abilities. There's nothing crazy about them. You're just generalizing the entire game.

i dunno man, i think not even drawing would make sense to you, this is a matter of you, not understanding things, rather than how things rly are

They aren't.
You're using your eyes, instead of your brain.
Armor type and weapons alone should never be the main factor for making a new class.

Because it was towards endgame wow, as the lich king being the "epic boss" that came from wc3, seems like a perfect fit for a ultimate skill

What a bullshit excuse.
But, who cares anyway...

Blademasters are wariors IN LORE, I don't consider then on abilities and gameplay alone.

Demon hunters were not considered warlocks "for a very long time" that is a defacto LIE, they were fundamental different races in both skills, abilities theme, fantasy and how they play, even mentality and how they were born are different with demon hunters blinding themselves and eating a demon soul

Well, so are Beastmasters, Headhunters, Brewmasters, Demon Hunters and Paladins. You're just used to seeing them in different classes.

Race? Blood elf.
Skills? Metamorphosis and Immolate (in name).
Theme? Fel and demonic.
Blind? Blindfold head piece.
Demon soul? Troll Demoniacs consume a demon.
So, basically, you could roleplay as one pretty good.

Thatts because im not using ONLY this as a argument, you are, you are nitpicking, you ahve to see the whole picutre, everything.

You are dumbing down the classes to fit your narrative, "hey warlocks and DH both have control over demons, so they clearly are the same as blademasters and warrior who have mastery of blades, therefore, blademaster and warriors are different classes because warlocks and DH are different.''

You are using a fallacy, plain and simple, not just one, youa re going to false equivalence, to circular logic, affirming consequent and many others, which is pointless to discuss any firther knowing you will bend and disrtor anything to fit your idea.

*They do not both control demons. They both transformed into one.

I'm, merely, using this as an example to show you a similar case. They're both kinda crammed, "half-assed", into a class in terms of abilities and themes.

Not going to pointless tell you how you are doing false equivalence of things already debumked, but i would like to say to you that aflic warlock does not use necromancy they sue fel and shadow magic. procced.

Drain Soul, Siphon Life, Dark Pact, Phantom Singularity, Vile Taint, Mortal Coil (once, Death Coil), Haunt, Creeping Death, Dark Soul: Misery, Deathbolt, Essence Drain, Rampant Afflictions, Rapid Contagion, Rot and Decay, Shadow Bolt, Drain Life.

Samuro barely appear in the game son, you want to comapre a minor appearence of a quest in the expansion to Arthas and illdain? youa re joking.

No. To Chen, actually.
Saying Jubei'thos is good enough is like saying Mojo Stormstout could have ushered in the Monk class. They're both not as important as the main characters of their classes.

Lmao, dude, youa re just trying to hard.

Because that came out of nowhere. We were discussing Blademaster abilities. And, all of the sudden you drop Warrior abilities into it.

And i show you how blademasters used bladestorm and other abilities

I'm not looking for other abilities that are not part of the Blademaster.

They do yes, you know, even spell reflect is a wonderful way to show you how to plain a trick and deceptive guy, making the paladin stun himself, reflrect the chaos bolt or make the amge look like a joke with polymorph

they don't even need those skills and they can be tricksy, is the warriro anture, do everything to win

Jesus christ... and i'm the one trying too hard...
Spell Reflect? Really? That's the best you could come up with? I'm talking about Illusion here, not a defensive capability.

The class is already in the game

your entire argument is based around the lie of how they aren't

Go ahead. You have the courtesy of expanding about Blademaster lore mentioning Bladestorm and Critical Strike.

therefore, warriors can use that, like they already do

Nice try.
I'm still waiting for an example of Warriors using some sort of duplicates (not Mirror Image).

ah yes, the glambler's fallacy, of course seotmhing totally totally different with to relation is a proof of something not related will happen

You can bet your ass they are related.
Same case, same precedents.

no it can't, false equivalence

Can too.

Theya re not, because meme skilsl from a non canon game are not relevant

Is that so?
Does the Demon Hunter only use Metamorphosis, Blur, Immolate Aura and Mana Rift?

pandarens, night elves and draeneis do not use wind walk, they do not use mirror iamge(only the one lightforged guy) , neither they ahve the meme skills from hots, therefore they can't be blademasters either

Is this some kind of a joke?
Are you not aware that many of your precious Orc Blademasters, in game, do not use any of these?
Lightforged Draenei are, literally, listed as Blademasters in the Blademaster page.
Telaamon's own name contains the word Blademaster. You're turning a blind eye on purpose...

not in the warcraft 3 game, which is the point of the discussion.

Then, why give it to Warlocks in the first place? hmm?

there is no "blademasters references" blademasters are already in the game, playable, lmao

We haven't seen Samuro in game, the same as we haven't seen Chen up until MoP.
Yet, we had Monk NPCs for years.

false equivalence is you thinking is the same scenario.

The only false thing is not realizing it is.

none it clam is shamanistic manpualtion, they said they put oil and burn it, plain and simple

"In Warlords of Draenor, blademasters are shown to be capable of manipulating fire, with many of them using abilities such as "Blazing Coil".

"Given that some blademasters possess elemental (Blazing Coil, Molten Weapon) abilities, it is possible that they also utilize their spirit to empower themselves or draw from the elemental spirits either by command or request."

From the Blademaster page.

Others are as well, one is literally a warrior trainner

this is the true double standarts, cherry picking things to fit your narrative

Never claimed they weren't.
You're the only one to claim no other race have Blademasters.

they ar enot by tour standarts, apaprently if they don't ahve hots meme abilities they aren't

Again, never said it.
Stop putting words in my mouth.
You are the one to believe Bladestorm is good enough for a Warrior to be considered a Blademaster.
I don't agree with Warriors embodying them well. Not that there aren't any.

in the game called World of warcraft

Then, go ahead. Show me a quote or a source that states that Stealth (Wind Walk) and guile (Mirror Image) are secondary traits. I'll wait...

The thing is one thing or another thing friend, is either magic or isn't magic, its how wow works

That is a narrow, general categorization.
But, i guess it works for your kind of agenda.
You'd need more than just calling something magic to consider the Warrior eligible for Mirror Image. Find me something similar - Illusion.

ninja is not a samurai, period.

I don't know if you've seen Genji or not, but he is, pretty much, a combination of a Samurai and a Ninja.

Barbarians, and warriors are fast, their life depend on it, if you think theya re slow, or mroe slow than a samurai for reasons, then again, you show your perspective is compltely different from reality and more clsoe to anime and movies

Popular depictions, yeah.
I don't watch anime.
Haven't seen a movie with a Samurai, lately.
But, in fantasy depictions the Samurai is depicted as extremely fast in movement and attacks.
Do you, really, think Samurais in real-life used duplicates or stealth? it is a fantasy trait.

So youa re saying this don't make sense because the transmog tool evolved along the eyars? HAHA regarldess of how people cahnge what their characters look like the main thing still there, Warlocks don't use mail, plate or leather, period, they don't attack with glaies, theya re not melesse combatants, simple as that. no amtter how you try to make then as Demon hutners wannabe

I meant your argument for the necromancer. Don't know how you reached the conclusion of Demon Hunters.
You claim that they deserve their own class, based, merely, on the fact that they wear cloth and wield a staff.

Hey guys what about create the "elemenalist class that daw upon the smaan elemental" yeah what a dumb idea

What? what are you talking about?
Are you even following the discussion?
I meant they need more than 4 abilities, even if you think the Warrior class is the place for them. And HotS abilities are a great source for that.

no

Yep.

yes, and in wow is either magic or not magic, simple

Sheesh, you express like a caveman: "You, woman, come, here".

It's not that simple.
There are different types of magics.

Because is shit, ayyy

Don't care in the slightest.
If it has abilities to draw from, then it's good for me.

yes, the guys who can't mirror image, wind walk neither other meme abilities from hots

you know, get a fancy transmog, play fury and you are also a dual-wield blademaster just like him

They are a Blademaster race with a Blademaster culture. How can you, even, deny that?

you would ahve to give warlocks the ability to attack in melee, with glaives, use leather, use plate, use big heavy weapons, become a full melee combatant instead of a spellcaster they are.

wush, see how your false equivalence does not work?

Easy. It's called Metamorphosis.
As for Death Knights, just equip them with a sword or something, i don't care.
It's easier to just be lazy and not give them a class, at all.

Because those guys are living in an anime fantasy or something

You can't really expect it to be grounded, entirely, in reality. It is a fantasy game. The Blademaster uses fantasy skills.

nowhere is said the blademaster is a spy/ninja and martial artist.

Blademasters are not ninjas, they are not spies, neither martial artists, you are confusing then with monks(artial artists/ninjas) and rogues(ninjas/spies), they do not use magic.

You'd wanna have a look at Genji.

I think they should just let Wind Walker Monks use 2H weapons and it will be just as good as a Blademaster. Blademaster is not remotely interesting enough to be a whole Spec let alone an entire Class.

At least you see the similarities to the Monk.
While, at the same time, not agreeing with you on the possibility of addition.
People thought Demon Hunters are just glorified Demonology Warlocks.

Not disagreeing overall, I just think it's fair for the people who like the Blademaster thematic/archetype to desire something closer to what they envision that archetype to be in a aesthetic or gameplay sense, current Arms Warrior as close as it may be to the Blademaster doesn't fully encapsulate what people who like that archetype see a "Blademaster" as, same way Unholy DK doesn't fully encapture what people expect/want out of a "Necromancer" or Marksman Hunter to Dark Ranger, or Sub/Assassin rogue to the Warden, while i don't personally think all of those options are viable as a full class. I think it could be an interesting route, expanding the talent system to include more abilties remenicient of these npc-exclusive variants of certain classes like Wardens, Dark Rangers, Blademasters, Witch Doctors/Shadow Hunters, Priestess of the Moon.

You could have saved me an ulcer on that other thread.

[Teriz]

So a warrior that uses holy magic is not "A heavily armored holy warrior that uses pure Holy magic." OK

Semantics. Warriors as in the class don't use Holy magic. Thus a Paladin using Holy magic makes it fundamentally different than the Warrior class.

Why stop there? Rogues are a melee class, they're like warriors but they just imbue their weapon and use trickery and stealth. Make them a spec of warrior.

Semantics #2. Warriors as in the class don't use stealth, thus Rogues are fundamentally different than Warriors as well.

OK, so if the overlap is just one entire spec of one class with one entire spec of another there's no problem?

So are you confining Stealth and Mirror Image to one spec of this Blademaster class? Then what would the rest of the class do?

The only "nature" thing rogues use are venoms. All of their magic is Shadow Magic. And they don't use mirror image.
Or are you saying that rogues could use that and still be rogues, but if warriors do they use holy magic they stop being warriors?

They imbue their weapons with poisons, which do nature damage. As for mirror image;

https://www.wowhead.com/spell=280719/secret-technique

To recap, your Blademaster would produce mirror images, perform stealth, be an assassin and imbue their weapons with magic.

It's a Rogue.