Dark Ranger Customizations (Coming in 9.2.5)!!!

[Triceron]

Does her being a dark ranger or not have any relevance to the story? Yes or no?
In other words: would the story change anything if Sylvanas was a priestess, or a fighter, or a mage? Yes or no?

Sylvanas never stopped being a Dark Ranger, did she? So yes, Dark Rangers have relevance to the Shadowlands story literally because Sylvanas is a Dark Ranger.

Sylvanas displayed her Dark Ranger abilities in full in combat against Bolvar, which allowed her to obtain and shatter the Helm of Domination. She then again has her Dark Ranger abilities displayed in full in her raid fight. So yes, I would say the story would change if she were not a Dark Ranger. If she were not a Dark Ranger, then her methods of obtaining the Helm of Domination and her Raid fights and the weapons she drops would be quite different in the story.

Like, Cataclysm wasn't focused on Shamans, but it would be massively different if Thrall lost his Shaman powers like he has now.

Teriz literally said that because Sylvanas was a focus of Shadowlands' story, that means dark rangers are the focus. You are also claiming that, mind you.

You said her being a dark ranger is completely immaterial to the story being told

It is not immaterial, because she literally uses her Dark Ranger skills to obtain the Helm of Domination and shatter it. All the techniques she uses to defeat Bolvar comes from her being a Dark Ranger.

Are you going to honestly tell me that he did not mean that those two were the only options?

Again, just because you didn't agree with the opinion does not mean it was a mistake. And trying to claim this as a factual matter? You're either intentionally lying, or being ignorant. I honestly can't tell which, but that's up to you to decide.

At no point have I ever seen Teriz proclaiming his opinion that those two were the only options as being facts. I want to point out that this is something you are claiming, with absolutely no way to actually prove it is a indeed a fact.

[Teriz]

You were just wrong. Period. Those weren't hints. At all. Because, like I said before and I can say again, I can give you a long, long list of pets and mounts from the cash shop and in-game events that so far haven't been connected to any expansion, like this one and this one.

The Dragon Pack (which the Steamscale was a part of) wasn't a hint for the upcoming dragon expansion?

Wrong. By your logic, MoP was an expansion about warriors, because of Garrosh being a major player in the story.

Garrosh wasn't in the opening cinematic, and wasn't the sole reason the entire expansion was happening. We were in Shadowlands BECAUSE of Sylvanas. She drove the plot completely, whereas Garrosh was merely an antagonist.

Because the expansion was about Sylvanas, not the dark rangers. How is this a concept so hard for you to grasp? Sylvanas being a dark ranger or not is completely immaterial to the Shadowlands' story.

Again, if we had an expansion where Gazlowe transported us to a technologyland, and every class got technology and tinker abilities, and Gazlowe was the main character, would we seriously argue that Tinkers don't fit the setting or story for such an expansion?

Are you really this dense? This is about the story and setting. Dark rangers and necromancers aren't based in the Shadowlands, but on Azeroth, and guess what?The entire expansion did not happen on Azeroth.

Which doesn't matter. The Monk class wasn't based in Pandaria. All the Monk trainers came from the Wandering Isle. The point is that (Pandaren) Monks fit the overall setting of the expansion, which was Pandaria.

Wow, that is objectively not what they said, at all.

Seriously?

Q: The new version has no new [classes] and new races. What is the situation?
A: You may have misunderstood us. Our World of Warcraft project team has no rules to say that odd-numbered versions will have new [classes], or even-numbered versions will have new races. We are choosing to launch based on whether the next version of the story is suitable for a new [class]. The current version of the new version of [Shadowlands] is closely related to our existing death knight, so we chose to [expand] death knight.

Is it really that hard to read between the lines?

Wow, you're so full of junk. Literally, you guess it right by accident and suddenly you're the all-knowing "Blizzard predictor". You've been trying to guess for years. "Broken clock is right twice a day" applies perfectly here.

Except I didn't guess right by accident, I used evidence to reach a conclusion. Evidence that you have a tacit habit of ignoring.

Wrong. We're not learning "necromancer abilities". We're learning abilities from the denizens of the Shadowlands. Unless you're going to say that "necromancy" is also nature magic (because of Ardenweald) and also arcane magic (because of Bastion)? Literally, what kind of necromancer would use "Elysian Decree", or 'Faeline Stomp", or "Blessing of the Seasons", or "Divine Toll", or "Conqueror's Banner", or... well, take your pick.

Death's Due, Adaptive Swarm, Sepsis, Fae Transfusion, and Soul Rot are all Night Fae Covenant abilities from Ardenweald, and they would be right at home in a Necromancer spellbook.

[Triceron]

I found this vid pretty insightful, regarding what we know so far of the 9.2.5 stuff.

Looks like the way he talks about possible Darkfallen, it's actually easier to implement than I originally though. He mentions it literally 'ticking a box' and having modded the files himself for an April Fools thing. That would definitely fall in line with the customization option being literally effortless, if so.

All still speculation, so take with a grain of salt.

[Ielenia]

The Dragon Pack (which the Steamscale was a part of) wasn't a hint for the upcoming dragon expansion?

Nope. Because I can cite many other mounts, including the cat pack, that aren't linked to any expansion. By your logic, this expansion should've been about cats since the 'cat pack' was the latest pack released.

Garrosh wasn't in the opening cinematic, and wasn't the sole reason the entire expansion was happening.

He was literally the sole reason the expansion was happening: the Alliance ran aground on Pandaria's shores literally because they were escaping the Horde ships that were pursuing them on Garrosh's orders. Garrosh then initiates an invasion of Pandaria with the intention of conquering it. Garrosh then disregards all pandaren rules and customs and starts mining artifacts for himself. Garrosh is the one that commands the unearthing the Heart of Y'shaarj. He is the one that brings it to the Valley of Eternal Blossoms' magical water to empower the heart. Garrosh is the one that splinters and nearly destroys the Horde from the inside. Garrosh is literally the driving force of the Mists of Pandria expansion.

Again, if we had an expansion where Gazlowe transported us to a technologyland, and every class got technology and tinker abilities, and Gazlowe was the main character, would we seriously argue that Tinkers don't fit the setting or story for such an expansion?

Blizzard heavily implied necromancers and dark rangers did not fit the setting and story being told in Shadowlands.

Which doesn't matter. The Monk class wasn't based in Pandaria. All the Monk trainers came from the Wandering Isle. The point is that (Pandaren) Monks fit the overall setting of the expansion, which was Pandaria.

I take it you never played a monk, then? Because, during leveling, you teleport to PANDARIA to continue your training:
That takes you to Pandaria. More specifically, to the temple in the Kun-Lai Summit.

Seriously?

Is it really that hard to read between the lines?

"Reading between the lines" is bullshit because it's all vague and wholly open to interpretation. I can look at that and "read between the lines" to say that they simply decided the expansion fits the DK more because it was the Helm of Domination and it's Bolvar who leads the charge.

Except I didn't guess right by accident, I used evidence to reach a conclusion. Evidence that you have a tacit habit of ignoring.

You just guessed, and happened to be right. You always claim to "use evidence to reach a conclusion" every time you claim tinkers are most likely, or the next class, or Undermine would be the next expansion, etc. Again: broken clocks are right twice a day, but that doesn't mean they're suddenly not broken when they get the time right.

Death's Due, Adaptive Swarm, Sepsis, Fae Transfusion, and Soul Rot are all Night Fae Covenant abilities from Ardenweald, and they would be right at home in a Necromancer spellbook.

Are you ignoring the butt-load of "non-necromancer abilities"? Not to mention those are not "necromancer abilities". They are covenant abilities granted by-- big surprise-- the covenants. Bastion is not about necromancers. Neither is Ardenweald. And arguably also neither is Revendreth.

- - - Updated - - -

Sylvanas never stopped being a Dark Ranger, did she? So yes, Dark Rangers have relevance to the Shadowlands story literally because Sylvanas is a Dark Ranger.

False. Objectively wrong. The story might focus on Sylvanas and she may be a dark ranger, but is not acting as a representative of the dark rangers in the story. Her being a "dark ranger" has zero impact in the story being told.

Like, Cataclysm wasn't focused on Shamans,

According to you, yes, Cataclysm was focused on shamans because of Thrall, just like MoP was focused on warriors because of Garrosh. You can't eat your cake and still have it too.

You said her being a dark ranger is completely immaterial to the story being told

It is not immaterial, because she literally uses her Dark Ranger skills to obtain the Helm of Domination and shatter it. All the techniques she uses to defeat Bolvar comes from her being a Dark Ranger.

Yes, I did. And I stand by that because that's a fact. The story being told would not be changed at all if Sylvanas was a mage, or a warrior, or a death knight. She might use different abilities in the cinematic fight and she would break Bolvar's helm using a different power source. Her own strength, her own magic, etc, all boosted by the deal she made with the Jailer, but the story itself would remain the exact same: she would beat Bolvar, break the helm, Shadowlands breaks, etc. Everything progresses the exact same. At no point whatsoever her being a 'dark ranger' even comes close to being a plot point. And I'll point out: you don't know what she used to break the helm. It's a fucking artifact crafted in the Shadowlands. We can easily argue that it was the power the Jailer imbued on her that allowed her to break the helm.

Again, just because you didn't agree with the opinion does not mean it was a mistake.

And you refusing to admit your mistake doesn't make it not a mistake.

[Triceron]

False. Objectively wrong. The story might focus on Sylvanas and she may be a dark ranger, but is not acting as a representative of the dark rangers in the story. Her being a "dark ranger" has zero impact in the story being told.

Can you then explain how MoP focsed on Monks in the story, and whatever representative of Monks there were? Can you explain how Legion focused on Demon Hunters any more than any other class that featured in that expansion?

If not, you're just riding more technicalities, because nothing about our (between me and you) conversation was about any expansions focusing on new classes.

You were the one who brought up this whole Focus argument. I did not. You falsely assumed that I would be defending Teriz's statements about Dark Rangers being the focus of the expansion. I will refute both you and Teriz' statements about there being any focus on new classes and reiterate my point that Blizzard themselves did not make any statements about new classes being focused on, only that a new class should have a strong connection to the story and setting.

I think I'm being pretty clear here.

According to you, yes, Cataclysm was focused on shamans because of Thrall, just like MoP was focused on warriors because of Garrosh. You can't eat your cake and still have it too.

According to me? No, I'm not twisting my own statements to fit other questions you asked, so this wouldn't be according to me. This would be according to you since you clearly asked me if Sylvanas not being a Dark Ranger would change anything, and I said yes, it would change things, and made an example that if Thrall did not have Shaman powers in Cataclysm, the story would have been very different.

At no point did I say Cataclysm focused on Shamans, nor do I even partake in your fallacious argument that it even matters to defining a new class. Blizzard themselves never made any statements about expansions needing to focus on new classes, so whatever bullshit you're shovelling stays squarely on your side of the fence.

According to me, your argument about focus, and to that extent, Teriz' arguments about focus as well, are all bullshit.

Yes, I did. And I stand by that because that's a fact.

Then you're delusional.

I think I'm done with this conversation since you've proven to me enough that you're not willing to have an honest conversation. I am not interested in carrying on any conversation with anyone who regards their own opinions as facts.

[Ielenia]

Can you then explain how MoP focsed on Monks in the story, and whatever representative of Monks there were? Can you explain how Legion focused on Demon Hunters any more than any other class that featured in that expansion?

This has nothing to do with what is being talked about. You're the one claiming that Shadowlands is about dark rangers because Sylvanas is a centerpiece, even though she never acts in behalf of the dark rangers or her "dark-rangerness" ever comes close to being a plot point, much less an important one.

If not, you're just riding more technicalities,

Dude, you're the one "riding technicalities", and being wrong at that. Just because the expansion's story centers around Sylvanas, in no way, shape or form means that the dark rangers are part of the story. Just like the Kirin Tor was not part of the BfA story because of Jaina.

According to me? No, I'm not twisting my own statements to fit other questions you asked, so this wouldn't be according to me.

Yes, it would. Because you're the one saying "Sylvanas is center of Shadowlands. Sylvanas is dark ranger. Therefore Shadowlands is about dark ranger".

Then you're delusional.

Says the delusional one. See? I can do that doo.

I think I'm done with this conversation since you've proven to me enough that you're not willing to have an honest conversation.

Says the guy who won't admit to his mistake, and thinks that Shadowlands is about dark rangers because its story focuses on Sylvanas.

[Teriz]

Nope. Because I can cite many other mounts, including the cat pack, that aren't linked to any expansion. By your logic, this expansion should've been about cats since the 'cat pack' was the latest pack released.

My logic is based around multiple hints in game and within the mounts that hinted at a dragon expansion. You had the Dragon pack alongside direct mentions of the dragon isles in BFA, Wrathion, Alexstraza, Voidwings, and others that all pointed towards that theme. The Steamscale was just another hint along the way.

He was literally the sole reason the expansion was happening: the Alliance ran aground on Pandaria's shores literally because they were escaping the Horde ships that were pursuing them on Garrosh's orders. Garrosh then initiates an invasion of Pandaria with the intention of conquering it. Garrosh then disregards all pandaren rules and customs and starts mining artifacts for himself. Garrosh is the one that commands the unearthing the Heart of Y'shaarj. He is the one that brings it to the Valley of Eternal Blossoms' magical water to empower the heart. Garrosh is the one that splinters and nearly destroys the Horde from the inside. Garrosh is literally the driving force of the Mists of Pandria expansion.

So once again, what's the setting of Mists of Pandaria? The setting is an Asian-inspired continent inhabited by Pandaren who practice martial arts.

What's the setting of the Shadowlands? The realm of the dead inhabited by various spirits and dead people who utilize various forms of necromancy.

Blizzard heavily implied necromancers and dark rangers did not fit the setting and story being told in Shadowlands.

Which is why all classes learned necromantic abilities, and the plot was driven by a Dark Ranger.

You just guessed, and happened to be right. You always claim to "use evidence to reach a conclusion" every time you claim tinkers are most likely, or the next class, or Undermine would be the next expansion, etc. Again: broken clocks are right twice a day, but that doesn't mean they're suddenly not broken when they get the time right.

Again, Tinkers were the most likely, until Blizzard created a draconic concept that followed the same rules as previous class implementations. After Evokers, Tinkers remain the most likely next class. However, once again the chances of ANY new class is greatly diminished because Evokers ate up a lot of what the Tinker and other concepts potentially offered.

Not to mention those are not "necromancer abilities".

So now you're going to be so dishonest that you're going to say that abilities like Sepsis, Adaptive Swarm or Soul Rot wouldn't fit in a Necromancer class?

Yep, we're done here.

[Ielenia]

My logic is based around multiple hints in game and within the mounts that hinted at a dragon expansion.

And your "logic" failed over and over and over and over, every single time. This time you just happened to have guessed it right. Again, broken clocks, twice a day, etc.

So once again, what's the setting of Mists of Pandaria? The setting is an Asian-inspired continent inhabited by Pandaren who practice martial arts.

What's the setting of the Shadowlands? The realm of the dead inhabited by various spirits and dead people who utilize various forms of necromancy.

You're moving the goalposts, here. Here is your initial claim:

Garrosh wasn't in the opening cinematic, and wasn't the sole reason the entire expansion was happening.

He was the sole reason the expansion was happening. Also, the Shadowlands is not a setting to where dark rangers and necromancers are native, therefore why they don't fit.

Which is why all classes learned necromantic abilities,

No, they learned covenant abilities. Half of those aren't even necromancy, if not more so.

and the plot was driven by a Dark Ranger.

And Sylvanas being a dark ranger has zero impact on the plot, setting and story being told. Her being a dark ranger is completely immaterial. Shadowlands was not a "dark ranger expansion" just because Sylvanas was the 'main character'.

Again, Tinkers were the most likely,

Oh, it's always the most likely, isn't it? It was the most likely around the end of Cata. It was the most likely at the end of WoD. It was the most likely at the end of BfA. It was the most likely at the end of Shadowlands. It's almost like your claims of "it's the most likely" are nothing but bunk. Kinda makes you think, huh?

So now you're going to be so dishonest that you're going to say that abilities like Sepsis, Adaptive Swarm or Soul Rot wouldn't fit in a Necromancer class?

Dishonesty is what you're doing here. First you say "necromancer abilities", but now you say "abilities that would fit a necromancer class". Those two sentences are not the same, and here's a few examples to illustrate:
• Howling Blast is a death knight class ability, but it is also an ability that would fit the mage class.
• Rain of Fire is a warlock class ability, but it's also an ability that would fit the mage class.
• Holy Light is a paladin class ability, but it is also an ability that would fit in the priest class.
• Fear is a warlock class ability, but it is also an ability that would fit the priest class.

There is no such thing as "necromancer abilities" because the necromancer class does not exist. Just like there is no such thing as "tinker abilities".

[username993720]

I was more talking about the lore of the Troll Shadow Hunters as well, since their Shadow Magic is different (lore wise) than the Void based Shadow Magic others use (technically, this also applies to Troll Shadow Priests, but gameplay wise that would be hard to implement). It is also not the same as Drust magic. And Harvest Witches are pseudo-Druids (though most have become full fledged Druids). I guess the lore for Alliance Shadow Hunters could be learning it from Tyrathan Khort.

Again, they're not Hunters.
Their magic is Voodoo. Which, would likely be Life\Death one as it is based on Loa, who are Wild Gods.
The Drust use witchcraft that resemble that of Trolls. They're the perfect counterpart.

Uhm.. I guess thats what I said ye.

Since dark rangers are just an organisation according to this logic.. you are playing a darkfallen hunter. Dark ranger is not a class in this format.

An organization is not a race either. It is commonly associated with a class (Illidari, Knights of the Ebon Blade).

Spells using the same name doesn’t make them the same spell or from the same powers source again see a lich’s frost bolt and a mages frost bolt they both use the same name while one is arcane and the other is death magic.

What Lich Frost Bolt?

"Since the Liches showed unswerving loyalty to their master, Ner'zhul granted them control over the furious elements of the cold north. Now, Liches wield frost magic along with their own considerable necromantic spells."

Seems like it is Elemental magic, set apart from their necromantic spells.

and mages have secrets from necromancers there is even a book about it in dalaran that does not make them necromancers.

Mages don't use anything necromantic.
Warlocks do.

Necrolytes‘s And warlocks are not the same thing as distinguished by blizzard them selfs in chronicles.

You are a Necrolyte in Legion.
Can you post the quote from Chronicles?

void is also as old as time but it wasn’t introduced to Azeroth until the old gods landed there, the magic just existing is irrelevant to when it was introduced to Azeroth.

Why does it need to be introduced to Azeroth?

And no fel doesn’t haven’t necromantic propriety’s, necromancy is a specific school of magic powered by death magic it’s not just brining people back to life or any thing else of the sort.

https://i.imgur.com/4jPcW6P_d.webp?m...idelity=medium
https://p1-tt.byteimg.com/origin/tos...d6e9d8db7f.jpg

Just because you don't find the evidence worthwhile, doesn't change the fact that it is evidence.

It's a fansite poll. MMO-Champion might be a known forum, but it is still just a fan site. You think this place is the center of all things Warcraft just like Americans believe they are the center of the world.

And yeah, standard Blizzard practice is to come up with the expansion concept first, then the class.

So, the Evoker was created for Dragonflight and not the other way around. Meaning, it didn't compete with anything else. They had to introduce a Dragon class because they came up with a Dragon expansion.

A melee DPS would be improbable. A tanking spec and a ranged spec would be far more likely.

Agreed. But, nothing about Sylvanas looks like tanking. Wardens look like one.

Except it isn't a clear pattern. You skipped BFA.

WoD+Legion = TBC
BfA+Shadowlands = WotlK
Dragonflight + 11.0 = Cataclysm
12.0+13.0 = MoP

It was speculated by someone who predicted Shadowlands right.

I'm not sure what this has to do with anything since Blizzard hasn't done anything with the Warden.

I've literally been explaining how Races represent aspects of classes like you asked the specific question of. You never implied the question to be about replacing a ln entire class with a race, you asked how they are represented by races.

For the last pages, all i've been talking about is the replacement of classes by races. Do you suffer from amnesia?
You claim a character class like the Dark Ranger can be represented by the Darkfallen. Therefore, i'm wondering if this is the case for other classes as well, such as the Night elf race covering the Warden conpletely (as Rogues) or the Evoker being covered by something like a Dracthyr Mage (hypothetically). I'm not contesting the fact that races are complementary to classes, and are essential for fulfilling the fantasy. But, in no way, shape or form do they stand in for an entire class. Even if we try to replicate the fantasy through existing classes.

And Evokers and Dracthyr being mutually exclusive to each other absolutely represent each other completely. Dracthyr is Evoker, Evoker is Dracthyr, because this is how Blizzard has chosen to represent this specific Class/Race combination. And the situation would be no different if we had a Annhilan Pit Lord exclusive race and class available to us. They would absolutely be a race representing a class if Blizzard made them exclusive to each other, as they already do with the NPCs. If you say 'Pit Lord', everyone knows you're not just talking about a class, you are talking about the Annhilan race as well. Like it would be absolutely normal for me to say 'Pit Lords have wings' without it implying that I'm just talking about a class that has wings.

Exactly. You need one with the other. Not just the Dracthyr or just the Evoker. Therefore, you can't claim a Darkfallen Hunter replaces a Dark Ranger. That would be like claiming a Dracthyr Mage replaces the Evoker.

Know? No, there is no way to know. We simply have it in good faith that they will, otherwise it is entirely speculative. Only Blizzard knows, the rest of us merely hope they continue to.

I'm wondering if you are trying to bait a bad faith answer out of me or something here. If so I'm not biting this one.

They didn't stop at allied races, just like they didn't stop at Demon Hunter or level 100. It's just a forum rumor that there is some kind of an imaginary limit.

I wouldn't expect it unless Blizzard themselves were doing it.

Beastmaster was diminished by a mere Hunter spec. Think about this, hard. Beastmaster is not its own class. Neither is a Mountain King or Chieftain.

If Blizzard chooses to fold WC3 Hero concepts into existing playable classes, then that is their decision to do so.

Nothing about this is my personal expectation for them to have diminished the Dark Ranger identity into what it is today. Is this fair and understandable to you?

Like, I never expected Nathanos to ever officially become a Dark Ranger. That was a can of worms that I wish they never opened. Or having all Dark Rangers retconned to being Darkfallen. That is not my expectation or decision either.

Unlike the Dark Ranger, the Beastmaster was already folded into the Hunter when it was first introduced, with the Beast Mastery spec. Mountain King and Tauren Chieftain were, as well, into the Arms and Fury Warrior. Or, at least, that was the intention. That's why i delved deep into the Racial Traits of the playable races and into the Hero Units of Warcraft 3. To determine which ones Blizzard has already put (or intended to) into the classes and which ones they didn't. And Dark Ranger isn't one of them. That's why we don't have a dedicated Dark Ranger Hunter spec. Tell me: which Hunter spec is supposed to be the Dark Ranger? Is it BM? Is it MM? Is it Surv? It's none of these options. They're already taken by existing races and fantasies (Beastmaster, Sapper, Headhunter). The reason why you can't have a Darkfallen race without a Dark Ranger spec is because Blizzard adds races to fill in missing specs that do not have a matching race.

That isn't what the new questlines are indicating at all.

If you want to have a conversation you need to actually talk about the same thing that people are talking about. I am not talking about Calia being a new allied race when I bring up the 9.2.5 datamine.

What are the questlines indicating at?
And why did Blizzard add Calia alongside Derek with identical visuals?

You're misunderstanding my point.

I didn't say their story doesn't allow for a new class, I said we have no indication that they are planning one with the story we have now.

Of course. Like you couldn't predict Evokers 3 expansions ago.

If you have a theory for an alternative, then present one. Otherwise there is nothing to discuss. Cuz as you say, Blizzard could do anything, including making Dark Rangers suddenly become nature lovers who use nature magic and are now exclusive to Tuskarr. It's within Blizzard's power to do it. And if we want to legitimately talk about Tuskarr nature using Dark Rangers, someone has to actually present it as a theory, otherwise there's nothing to discuss about this 'what if' concept. It's just baseless speculation that Blizzard would make Tuskarr nature loving Dark Rangers.

I've already presented my alternative theory countless times. They've been developing the Dark Ranger with Sylvanas by introducing numerous new capabilities. They've linked Dark Rangers to Wardens through Dark Wardens. As for the timeline they're expected to show up? I have no idea.

Just because someone has the idea that it could happen doesn't nake it legitimate to discuss, make sense? Just like all your concepts regarding a Ranger class with Dark Ranger and Dark Warden themes has never actually been legitimately plausible, because you have never been able to present a concept of how it actually would be presented as a class. You merely assume that it could exist through sheer will of belief, which is no different if I said Dark Rangers will be retconned as Tuskarr nature magic users and I say this is happening because you can't prove to me it can't happen.

Do i need to link my concept thread again?

Understand the argument here? Because this is how you have always regarded Dark Rangers so far im this thread. Purely through absence of evidence arguments.

Absence? Your dismissal of what i put forth about Blizzard's doings isn't absence. It's denial.

Yet your explanations and examples are myopic and naive. They ignore all the relevant information that has helps us narrow down the speculative possibilities through a process of elimination. All we can do is speculate what will happen.

That's, perhaps, what you'd like it to be.

Expectation is an individual's subjective opinion. Wise words from film critic John Campea - Don't let your speculation become expectation. You will just set yourself up for disappointment.

That's all we do here. Speculation.

Classes are never presented to us on a basis of necessity. They are created at the will of the devs.

Honest question, did we Need to have an Evoker class? Because a month ago, you were literally arguing that this class couldn't even properly exist because it wasn't based on Warcraft 3. So no, I wouldn't say we need any new class. The game certainly doesn't need it either.

All new class discussion is a topic of speculation of what we think Blizzard _could_ add to the game, whether it is a personal wish or if it's a logical analysis of what is to come or a cynical disposition of there never being any more new classes. It's all merely speculation, and nothing based on _needs_. Blizzard doesn't need to make any new class, they merely choose to do so.

So, you agree that this isn't the end of new classes?

How does that relate to a plausible Dark Ranger class in the future? Present a theory and we can discuss it.

Really? I need to explain it?
We know Anduin will make a return, if you don't believe Sylvanas will, as he's supposed to be alongside Velen, as an old man, for the final confrontation against darkness (Legion comic).
We know he's too much of a major character to be desposed of for all eternity.
Now, why would he return from the Maw, but not her? She's on a path to redemption.
Her return might signal the introduction of Dark Rangers.

[Triceron]

For the last pages, all i've been talking about is the replacement of classes by races.

Why? There's no point in that since no one is arguing that a race replaces classes.

Darkfallen aren't replacing Dark Hunters. But Darkfallen Hunter would be a fine representative for Dark Rangers. If Blizzard wanted to make a Dark Ranger class down the line, they could do that as well. We've been through this before, and all you're doing is riding technicalities to illustrate points that don't really get in the way of any future class.

Exactly. You need one with the other. Not just the Dracthyr or just the Evoker. Therefore, you can't claim a Darkfallen Hunter replaces a Dark Ranger. That would be like claiming a Dracthyr Mage replaces the Evoker.

I never claimed it would replace it?

I said Blizzard had no interest in making a Dark Ranger class. This is supported by the fact that we had a Shadowlands expansion, and no Dark Ranger class, all while they have an Evoker class planned for 10.0 which shows that they aren't secretly planning some Dark Ranger Class within the near future. I didn't say they will never have an interest in making a Dark Ranger Class in the future.

Concerning Darkfallen Hunter, all I can say is if they plan on making Dark Ranger customization options, it would greatly diminish the future chances of a standalone Dark Ranger class.

Do I consider a Beastmastery Hunter, Fire spec Mage and Fury Warrior a replacement for Beastmaster, Blood Mage and Mountain King standalone class? No, I do not. But the chances of Blizzard making them into standalone classes would be quite low considering the amount of representation that already exists. If Blizzard intends to complete their identities, then customizations are the most sensible option.

I said Blizzard showed no intention of a Dark Ranger class with what we know of the story so far. I never said Blizzard will never add new Dark Ranger story to allow a new class in the future. Just like I don't discount Blizzard making any class in the future; literally anything is possible. Even if I think a Fire and Arcane spellcaster would be unlikely since we already have a Mage, I would still leave room open to consider the possibility, which is exactly I never dismissed any of the rumors of the Evoker and remained open to its speculation. I don't discount possibilities.

They didn't stop at allied races, just like they didn't stop at Demon Hunter or level 100. It's just a forum rumor that there is some kind of an imaginary limit.

But you asked me if I know.

Would it be honest of me to say "I know because they didn't stop at allied Races"? No, because there's no way I would actually know what Blizzard plans for the future. For all I know, BFA could be the only time Allied Races ever got added to the game. I really have no insight into the situation other than speculating that we are very likely getting a pre-Dragon Isles Allied Race in the near future, because we literally have leaks indicating this happening. And it seems to be a singular Allied Race, so no one really knows what it would be yet.

Unlike the Dark Ranger, the Beastmaster was already folded into the Hunter when it was first introduced, with the Beast Mastery spec. Mountain King and Tauren Chieftain were, as well, into the Arms and Fury Warrior.

Would you agree if I said they could fold more class concepts into existing Classes in the future?

Because that's all that you're pointing out here. I cut out the last bits because you purely speculated on why it wouldn't happen for Dark Ranger, but I want to illustrate the point that it still could happen despite all your personal concerns.

Again, I'm not the one designing Dark Rangers or controlling their gameplay representation or lore. We're talking about Blizzard doing this. Blizzard are the ones handing out Sylvanas' unique abilities to Hunters through a Legendary weapon, providing Dark Ranger transmog gear (Hood from BFA quest), blatantly addressing Dark Rangers customizations as being possible in an interview, and have datamined 9.2.5 content that relates to Darkfallen and a Dark Ranger Hunter questline. The speculation is only regarding it *could* be customizations, while the rest of what we have here already shows you that Blizzard isn't only intent on representing Dark Ranger through a single Hunter spec; they regard the Hunter as a whole as being capable of adopting Dark Ranger looks, abilities and lore.

What are the questlines indicating at?
And why did Blizzard add Calia alongside Derek with identical visuals?

Check yourself. You know how to use google right? WoWhead has all the datamine information you need.

If you even want a synopsis, I linked a video by MrGM just yesterday. He covers a lot of the speculation I've been talking about.

Right now, all we know is 'The Forsaken are mustering in Tirsfal Glades and Calia is up to something. Take this disguise and spy on her'.

Of course. Like you couldn't predict Evokers 3 expansions ago.

Nor would anyone being realistic. There's no way to predict anything 3 expansions away, the direction of the game changes significantly from expansion to expansion and there's no way to realistically predict anything 3 expansions away. What happens in 3 expansions down the line is really anyone's guess, if we even make it that far. I mean, by then Microsoft would have taken complete ownership so who knows what's gonna happen.

All we could do is wildly guess. And a wild guess is not an accurate way to predict anything. We might as well slap Class names on a D20 and roll to see what comes up in the future. So I think it's fair to say predicting something that far into the future isn't going to be fruitful discussion.

I've already presented my alternative theory countless times. They've been developing the Dark Ranger with Sylvanas by introducing numerous new capabilities. They've linked Dark Rangers to Wardens through Dark Wardens. As for the timeline they're expected to show up? I have no idea.

Just saying 'They linked X to Y' is not a theory. As I said, there's nothing to discuss.

You haven't framed how any of this is possible, how it ties to a potential future expansion story and setting, how it all works out.

Like are we talking about Dark Rangers in another Death expansion? Well that's unlikely. Are you fitting them into Shadow vs Light? Well, for what reasons then? Are we fitting Dark Rangers into a Void expansion and implying their powers are Void now? That's what I'm looking for. Tangible reasons for how and why they would be playable.

Because otherwise, just saying 'They would have Mind Control' is not a convincing theory for how the class would realistically become playable.

So, you agree that this isn't the end of new classes?

I never said it was.

That you think 'unlikely' means 'the end' is your problem, not mine. In English, these two words are not synonymous.

Really? I need to explain it?
We know Anduin will make a return, if you don't believe Sylvanas will, as he's supposed to be alongside Velen, as an old man, for the final confrontation against darkness (Legion comic).
We know he's too much of a major character to be desposed of for all eternity.
Now, why would he return from the Maw, but not her? She's on a path to redemption.
Her return might signal the introduction of Dark Rangers.

This is much closer to what I'm looking for.

Yes, we can expect Anduin and Sylvanas to both return to the story. So how and why would she suddenly introduce Dark Rangers? Are you implying then that all the Dark Rangers we have playable are going to be directly be lost souls of the Maw? Are her loyalists going to pop out of hiding and suddenly embrace her as a new leader even though she's a changed person? And how does Sira Moonwarden fit into this, do you expect her to somehow be redeemed too?

Let's discuss. We can start with the questions I have here for now.

[Alanar]

An organization is not a race either. It is commonly associated with a class (Illidari, Knights of the Ebon Blade).

Uhm.. I dont think you get it.

Darkfallen is the race and they are split into two groups.
Dark rangers and san layn. They are both organisations in that sense. Nothing is being said of the dark ranger class as they are NOT a class in this context.

A Dark ranger is also not a playable class at this point and will likely not happen either in 9.2.5. No, It doesnt have to be like you said the san 'layn are also not associated with one class either. If we understand blizz right then, the dark rangers are just how they call this group of elite undead rangers. Do I think it could be expanded to an actuall class? Yes, do I see it happening? No, not anymore after this.

[Teriz]

It's a fansite poll. MMO-Champion might be a known forum, but it is still just a fan site. You think this place is the center of all things Warcraft just like Americans believe they are the center of the world.

You're straw-manning. I never said that MMO champion was the center of all things WC, I simply said that the poll was evidence of players believing that Tinkers and Dragon-class were the most likely next classes.

So, the Evoker was created for Dragonflight and not the other way around. Meaning, it didn't compete with anything else. They had to introduce a Dragon class because they came up with a Dragon expansion.

That would appear to be the case.

Agreed. But, nothing about Sylvanas looks like tanking. Wardens look like one.

I would consider her easily taking down a much larger and powerful Orc (Saurfang) with agility and precision to be a version of tanking. You could also say her wiping out several Alliance soldiers in the Battle of Lordaeran cinematic to be another example of Dark Ranger tanking.

And of course her cinematic fights with Bolvar and Tyrande.

The point is that Blizzard had a potential layup for a Dark Ranger class, and they didn't take it, choosing instead to give those abilities to Hunters. That makes Dark Ranger customization option (also limited to Hunters) a high possibility. They're almost assuredly not doing a Dark Ranger class.

WoD+Legion = TBC
BfA+Shadowlands = WotlK
Dragonflight + 11.0 = Cataclysm
12.0+13.0 = MoP

It was speculated by someone who predicted Shadowlands right.

Leakers predicted Shadowlands back in July 2019. We here at MMOC predicted a Dragon Isles-based expansion for several months. There's nothing special about this guy predicting expansions.

[Lorgar Aurelian]

What Lich Frost Bolt?

"Since the Liches showed unswerving loyalty to their master, Ner'zhul granted them control over the furious elements of the cold north. Now, Liches wield frost magic along with their own considerable necromantic spells."

Seems like it is Elemental magic, set apart from their necromantic spells.

the frost magic from the lich king isn’t naturally occurring like elemental magic is.

From the frost Dk page, we already eablished earlier that they use the same magic as lich’s.

Combining martial prowess with supernatural cold, frost death knights leave their enemies chilled to the bone—and broken of the will to fight. Unlike mages who learn to harness frost magic to great effect, these death knights are born of it, rime gripping their decaying hearts. These frozen undead warriors wield dual blades to strike with ferocity and inflict deathly cold upon anyone who would stand against them.

Mages don't use anything necromantic.
Warlocks do.

mages turn into skeletons in shadowlands so they do have necromantic abilities, but that’s besides the point you pointed to warlocks having secrets from necromancers and so do the mages.

You are a Necrolyte in Legion.
Can you post the quote from Chronicles?

nothing supports warlocks becoming Necrolyte’s all they do is use a weapon of a dead one and using some one else’s weapon doesn’t change a characters class/magic type, see Dorian, Baine, warglaives of azzinoth ect, for other examples.

The founding to the Necrolyte’s https://2.bp.blogspot.com/Ppi6CQrMnH...W3b7sdpA=s1600

A page after warlocks founding the shadow council, they are a separate group from the warlocks.

Why does it need to be introduced to Azeroth?

Because The demons were using Fel on Azeroth thousands of years before they brought over necromancy and they were still draining life from people/things using Fel.

https://i.imgur.com/4jPcW6P_d.webp?m...idelity=medium
https://p1-tt.byteimg.com/origin/tos...d6e9d8db7f.jpg

Demons know how to use necromancy, they taught the orcs it, infused the lichking with it, and so on, they don’t Fel to raise the dead.

[Ielenia]

the frost magic from the lich king isn’t naturally occurring like elemental magic is.

From the frost Dk page, we already eablished earlier that they use the same magic as lich’s.

I would imagine elemental magic would count as 'supernatural'.

[Triceron]

I would imagine elemental magic would count as 'supernatural'.

Hmm...

That's actually kinda interesting to point out.

I mean, in a world filled with magic, where even the basic elements of Life and Death are explained to be cosmic powers that were somehow manifested or controlled by greater, ancient beings.... can anything actually be considered natural? Cuz we're talking about things we deem natural about Azeroth actually sourcing their very essence from Titans or Old Gods causing Curse of Flesh or being the children of Loa etc etc.

[Lorgar Aurelian]

I would imagine elemental magic would count as 'supernatural'.

The universe it self is made by magic Nature, Elemental, and arguably arcane are all naturally occurring on Azeroth and have been around before even the mortal races or any titan meddling. Fel, Blood, Necromantic, and even arguably light and void are not naturally occurring.

The lichking and his magic in practically is from a totally different alien race using artifacts from a totally different realm of existence.

[Ielenia]

The universe it self is made by magic Nature, Elemental, and arguably arcane are all naturally occurring on Azeroth and have been around before even the mortal races or any titan meddling. Fel, Blood, Necromantic, and even arguably light and void are not naturally occurring.

The lichking and his magic in practically is from a totally different alien race using artifacts from a totally different realm of existence.

That doesn't stop magic from being supernatural. 'Death' and necromancy are just as 'supernatural' as elemental magic. Remember that "elemental magic' comes from the elemental planes, or, in your own words, "totally different alien race from a totally different realm of existence". And arcane magic was brought to Azeroth by the Titans.

So they're not "natural" as in "naturally occurring."

[Lorgar Aurelian]

That doesn't stop magic from being supernatural. 'Death' and necromancy are just as 'supernatural' as elemental magic. Remember that "elemental magic' comes from the elemental planes, or, in your own words, "totally different alien race from a totally different realm of existence". And arcane magic was brought to Azeroth by the Titans.

So they're not "natural" as in "naturally occurring."

The elemental plane's were made by the Titan keepers because they couldn't destroy the elemental lords because they were innate to Azeroth they aren't A alien race and they aren't form a different realm of existence they Were just jailed.

Arcane is a Byproduct of Azeroth's world soul which was also there before the Titans ever showed up.

Both predate the arrival of the Titans both came about Naturally on Azeroth unlike the other Magics.

[Ielenia]

The elemental plane's were made by the Titan keepers because they couldn't destroy the elemental lords because they were innate to Azeroth they aren't A alien race and they aren't form a different realm of existence they Were just jailed.

Arcane is a Byproduct of Azeroth's world soul which was also there before the Titans ever showed up.

Both predate the arrival of the Titans both came about Naturally on Azeroth unlike unlike Necromancy.

Necromancy already existed in Azeroth. When human Kel'thuzad, who was still part of the Kirin Tor at the time, started to research into necromancy, it was already a banned practice within the Kirin Tor.

[Lorgar Aurelian]

Necromancy already existed in Azeroth. When human Kel'thuzad, who was still part of the Kirin Tor at the time, started to research into necromancy, it was already a banned practice within the Kirin Tor.

Indeed it did as it was brought by the legion, orcs, and even the Titans, It how ever did not come about the same way Nature arcane and Elemental magic's did being Azeroth's own Natural development.