Next expansion

[QQmoore]

more race/class combinations and more playable races, no more stupid hero classes... tauren paladins, troll druids, goblin shamans, and gnome priests are among the examples of things which make no sense and serve as nothing more than balancing issues.

[Deleted]

more race/class combinations and more playable races, no more stupid hero classes... tauren paladins, troll druids, goblin shamans, and gnome priests are among the examples of things which make no sense and serve as nothing more than balancing issues.

I get the impression, that your opinion is based on classic wow and kind of a bit engraved in stone and you are not willing to accept changes. WoW and espescially its lore is evolving since that and will be since the end.
I also don't understand where you see balancing issues with race combinations. Balance issues because a tauren can be a pally? I don't see balacing issues there.

[Deleted]

more race/class combinations and more playable races, no more stupid hero classes... tauren paladins, troll druids, goblin shamans, and gnome priests are among the examples of things which make no sense and serve as nothing more than balancing issues.

Yet you want more race/class combinations?

Here's the thing with race/class combos:

The reason not all classes are available to every race is because it is unlikely to see for example a human trained in the arts of druidism. It's not impossible. There is nothing that prevents a human from being taught druidic skills. It is just highly unlikely, that you would find one. And if those race/class combos are available you would find them all over the place, which would be weird.

Another presumption you are making is, that a human paladin is the same as a tauren paladin. Which is not the case. Tauren paladins, the sunwalkers, have nothing to do with the knights of the silver hand (for example). They just all fall under same category "paladin", because of gameplay reasons. Just look at the priest class. Normally you would have to have a different priest class for almost every race, because a troll priest of the loa isn't the same as a night elf priest(ess) of elune. Those things, and things like gender (female night elf druids and male night elf priests) are simplified for gameplay purposes. Otherwise we could just as well have like 50 different classes.

[Aedeus]

Demon hunters are probably going to be the next hero class.

That's if they don't mulligan on that first.

But I am definitely feeling like it's time to start fighting the Burning Legion again. Hopefully not in a "re-done" Outlands.

[Deleted]

The problem with some hero class ideas is, part of their mechanics and abilities have become part of other classes. Felhound pet and Metamorphosis are warlock abilities, Bladestorm is a warrior ability and Mirror Image is a mage ability.

[ro9ue]

Tinker - need another physical ranged dps. I have no idea how they hell they would make it work but everything else is too close to something else. Demon hunter - rogue/lock. Blademaster - warrior/rogue. Etc

Instead of a pet, you have a mech suit. lol I dunno

[Deleted]

I agree with you, the Demon Hunter is going to be a new hero class, but I disagree that this class is the next hero class.
The next expansion wont be about the burning legion, so it will take a little longer for the Demon Hunter to appear in the game as playable class. Of course that is my speculation and it could be wrong, but really doubt that the next expansion is about the legion

[Deleted]

A tinker is basicly an engineer.
I dont want a demon hunter evil class ¬.¬ just look at illidan.
I want a brewmaster and mayb pandaria can be a zone :P its annoying that it hasn't been mentioned but hey XD
Also there is another continent in the forbiding sea so yeh something to look into there.

mostly i agree with the dudes who said about a new burning legion fight, its ben way to long Kil' Jaden must have recovered by now (Mearly a set back :P)

[Deleted]

yes many abilities are part of other classes, great examples, but that does not mean, that this abilities wont make an appearance in the spellbook of the hero class.
There is no need to copy the ability, but it is totally possible, that they revamp the abilities. Two examples.
Bladestorm ist clearly an abillity of the Blademaster in Warcraft 3 and now one of the Warrior in WoW. Still you can create a Bladestorm for the Blademaster: Call it Bladestorm if you want, another symbol and look. Like 4-5 Blades swirling around the BM.
As for the Demon Hunter. What makes you think, that just because the Warlock can turn into a Demon, makes it impossible for the DH to turn into a demon? It is totally possible to turn into a demon, it could be another form another demon. The DK hast Death Coil, as the Warlock for example.
The rogue has eviscerate and the druid has the same attack. They can totally take this ability and create a new form of it.
Mirror Image was a stealth, where a copy of the BM was visible while the BM stealthed next to it. When it was attacked it died immidiatly and the BM Stealth was cancelled. Correct me if I am wrong.
So you see, yes there are abillities of this hero classes in the spellbooks of the "normal" classes. But that does really not mean they can't use similar abilities.

[Deleted]

It's just that, in some cases it feels like it's unnecessary to have similar abilities. When you look at Demon Hunter and Warlock for example, it feels like the "demon-transformation-niche" has been filled already.
Like, demons and transformation are the big things about a Demon Hunter. But if you give a Demon Hunter Metamorphosis and all demon pets... it would basically just be a melee Warlock. As much as I'd love to play a Demon Hunter - doesn't it feel kind of redundant?

[Deleted]

Actually, though I really feel your arguemnts, I am not that affected by the point that some classes have similar abillities. Really, you just can't create the wheel again. I am ok with similar ways of attacking. Every melee fights the same way. Behind the Boss, with attacks that make his or her weapons smack the back of the enemy. It's a quit simple example, yes. But as said, I am not that affected, as long as it is not exactly the same attack in every spellbook of a caster or a melee. Some, yes, but I agree, with mulitple abilities it would be redundant. I agree-

For the Demon Hunter. Yes the Warlock can turn into a demon. The druid can stealth as the rogue is able to. If every class could be able to stelth or to sprint or to blink, that would be redundant.
Let the Demon Hunter turn into another demon. Yes it would be similar to the druid and his shiftings. But the difference is, that he does turn into demons, other than animals. With very unique abilities, not nearly related to the abilities the warlock uses.

Just because there is one ability similar to the one of a nother class, that does not mean, that the new class can't have unique abilities.

[Verdris]

While a "Pirate" or "Swashbuckler" class is probably the LEAST exciting thing I've literally ever heard, there's lore in-game to support it.

[Deleted]

It's just that, Metamorphosis was THE trademark ability of the Demon Hunter. Basically Fel Hunter and Metamorphosis scream Demon Hunter, but now, if you would implement the class with those things - it would feel and look very much like a Warlock, even if the whole playstyle would focus on melee. And if you change things about the class - maybe give the Demon Hunter different pets or different transformation spells (which in itself is a cool idea) - if it would differ a lot from the original Demon Hunter in WC3 - would it still feel like the Demon Hunter?

Another point is - does Blizzard want to implement a class, that is so close to a class that is already in the game? Or would it be better to implement something completely new. Best example is the Archdruid hero class idea. It would basically just be a different version of a druid - and we already have the druid class. Basically you could say, that Demon Hunter would just be a variation of the Warlock class - and a Blademaster would be a variation of the Warrior class (or the other way round, whichever you prefer). Sure, they are still different in a lot of ways, and I'd love to play each of them - but if you only implement another class every 4-5 years, I guess you want to pick something completely new, instead of a variation of another class.

Another idea would be a kind of specialization training. As a Warrior you can be trained to be a Blademaster, as a Warlock you can specialize to be a Demon Hunter (gain melee abilities, lose some casting abilities). You could have trainers for that, who train you once you reach a certain level. You can even create an interesting story around that. The problem, however, would be, that this can cause major balancing issues, so I don't see them implementing something like this. But basically, you could find a "specialization" for every class.

[Deleted]

It's just that, Metamorphosis was THE trademark ability of the Demon Hunter. Basically Fel Hunter and Metamorphosis scream Demon Hunter, but now, if you would implement the class with those things - it would feel and look very much like a Warlock, even if the whole playstyle would focus on melee. And if you change things about the class - maybe give the Demon Hunter different pets or different transformation spells (which in itself is a cool idea) - if it would differ a lot from the original Demon Hunter in WC3 - would it still feel like the Demon Hunter?

Agreed, if you would give the Demon Hunter the exact same Metarmorphosis, the same form, that would be bad. Felhunter for the Warlock is something that they can't take away from the Warlock. (They can't?...well let's pretend^^) At least they should not.
But what about give him a totally different form? Yes, he would transform into a demon, as does the Warlock, but it would not be the same.
Very simple example: Mage can cast Fireball and the Warlock can cast Shadwobolt. Same thing, different effect, different name. Yet, quite the same.
Or do you see a problem in when they would have something like the transformation in common?

I also think, that they implemented some of the skills of the units from Warcraft 3, (Bladestorm, Deathcoil, Fel Hunter) because they where cool spells. But that was before they thought about the hero class, or at least before they decided (and not thought about) to implent a hero class.
So they took away some spells. But, in an expanding universe like the WoW universe, they can also create new spells. Who does say, that they can't create a new way of a demon hunter? (A meleetree, a druidlike tree with a heal and a tank demon? and a castertree? random ideas btw, not really serious.)
So would it be bad, if they create that hero class, built it up with the cool lore, and the cool unique appearance, and new spells which have not been in Warcraft 3? That is a big question.
Of course it should feel and be played like the unit in Warcraft 3 (That is a must)

Another point is - does Blizzard want to implement a class, that is so close to a class that is already in the game? Or would it be better to implement something completely new. Best example is the Archdruid hero class idea. It would basically just be a different version of a druid - and we already have the druid class. Basically you could say, that Demon Hunter would just be a derivation of the Warlock class - and a Blademaster would be a derivation of the Warrior class (or the other way round, whichever you prefer). Sure, they are still different in a lot of ways, and I'd love to play each of them - but if you only implement another class every 4-5 years, I guess you want to pick something completely new, instead of a derivation of another class.

To the Archdruid. Of course, they should never ever copy the Druid. What about a Archdruid purely based on damage without any way of formshifting? Different to the Druid? Yes, enough? Discussable. (again, just a random argument, not serious the idea)
I agree, the hero class should be different in some ways, but it can't be different in every way.
Example: Death Knight, Warrior, Cat and Rogue have an ability to close the gap between an enemy and them in a very short time. (Death Grip, Charge, Cat jump, Shadowstep) Quite the same thing, but still different. Would that be a problem? In my opinion it is not. Do you see a problem in that?

Another idea would be a kind of specialization training. As a Warrior you can be trained to be a Blademaster, as a Warlock you can specialize to be a Demon Hunter (gain melee abilities, lose some casting abilities). You could have trainers for that, who train you once you reach a certain level. You can even create an interesting story around that. The problem, however, would be, that this can cause major balancing issues, so I don't see them implementing something like this. But basically, you could find a "specialization" for every class.

You sir, made my day!
I just talked with a guild mate about the exact same thing just some hours ago.
I did not think about the idea of turning into this new class. That is an awesome idea btw.
But, than they also have to design another set of amor, to the ten existing classes, they have to create another 10. That would be to expensive (in terms of time of course). Because when I get to play a Blademaster or a Demon Hunter, I god damn want to have their unique appearance. That would be a big problem for me, because to me that would be like playing a Warrior. (Its the orbs and the flag...chicks like the flag)
Balancing is, and will always be an issue. They will never really be able to balance every class. And as long as they wont seperate pve from pvp, this will be much harder. (Do it Blizz, do it, do it nao!)

[klaps_05]

the pirates of the caribbean references would be too much, otherwise pirate sounds a bit too much like rogue? the specialization would take an obscene amount of time to balance for pvp/pve and to implement it in the game as a whole unless it gives some very minor changes

[Deleted]

Again on the topic of implimenting a class that is to close to another. Every class has some things in common with the other. Let me explain with the melees:
They have, let's say a primory attack:
Warrior: Mortal Strike
Shaman: Storm Strike
Rogue: Mutilate / Sinister Strike
Paladin: Crusader Strike
Death Knight Heart Strike (is it the name? I am still leveling)
Druid: Magle (strike...^^)
Blademaster: Spirit Strike (could't resist mate^^)
Demon Hunter: Glaive Strike (Should Demon Hunter only be able to wear Glaives?)

You see, there already are similarities. Very simple ones, but they are, quite the same in some way.
I guess that really is a personal preferens, and can't be solved through arguemts from me to you or the other way round. That is not a bad thing, I honestly like that, because that creates great discussions.

BTW Nindoriel, please take a look at my Suggestion of the Blademaster, I would like to hear your opinion about it.

[Deleted]

Agreed, if you would give the Demon Hunter the exact same Metarmorphosis, the same form, that would be bad. Felhunter for the Warlock is something that they can't take away from the Warlock. (They can't?...well let's pretend^^) At least they should not.
But what about give him a totally different form? Yes, he would transform into a demon, as does the Warlock, but it would not be the same.
Very simple example: Mage can cast Fireball and the Warlock can cast Shadwobolt. Same thing, different effect, different name. Yet, quite the same.
Or do you see a problem in when they would have something like the transformation in common?

I also think, that they implemented some of the skills of the units from Warcraft 3, (Bladestorm, Deathcoil, Fel Hunter) because they where cool spells. But that was before they thought about the hero class, or at least before they decided (and not thought about) to implent a hero class.
So they took away some spells. But, in an expanding universe like the WoW universe, they can also create new spells. Who does say, that they can't create a new way of a demon hunter? (A meleetree, a druidlike tree with a heal and a tank demon? and a castertree? random ideas btw, not really serious.)
So would it be bad, if they create that hero class, built it up with the cool lore, and the cool unique appearance, and new spells which have not been in Warcraft 3? That is a big question.
Of course it should feel and be played like the unit in Warcraft 3 (That is a must)

I don't know if a different form would feel right. But even if, just the fact that it transforms you into a demon makes it look so much like the Warlock transformation.

To the Archdruid. Of course, they should never ever copy the Druid. What about a Archdruid purely based on damage without any way of formshifting? Different to the Druid? Yes, enough? Discussable. (again, just a random argument, not serious the idea)
I agree, the hero class should be different in some ways, but it can't be different in every way.
Example: Death Knight, Warrior, Cat and Rogue have an ability to close the gap between an enemy and them in a very short time. (Death Grip, Charge, Cat jump, Shadowstep) Quite the same thing, but still different. Would that be a problem? In my opinion it is not. Do you see a problem in that?

I guess my main concern is - why have two classes that are so much alike. Not only ability-wise, but also regarding style. Why have two druid classes? Why have two demon-based classes?

Again on the topic of implimenting a class that is to close to another. Every class has some things in common with the other. Let me explain with the melees:
They have, let's say a primory attack:
Warrior: Mortal Strike
Shaman: Storm Strike
Rogue: Mutilate / Sinister Strike
Paladin: Crusader Strike
Death Knight Heart Strike (is it the name? I am still leveling)
Druid: Magle (strike...^^)
Blademaster: Spirit Strike (could't resist mate^^)
Demon Hunter: Glaive Strike (Should Demon Hunter only be able to wear Glaives?)


You see, there already are similarities. Very simple ones, but they are, quite the same in some way.
I guess that really is a personal preferens, and can't be solved through arguemts from me to you or the other way round. That is not a bad thing, I honestly like that, because that creates great discussions.

It's not really the effect of the ability that is my problem. It's the way it feels. I know there are lots of abilites that mirror others, but Metamorphosis is a core Demon Hunter skill. If it wasn't there, it wouldn't really be a Demon Hunter. If it would look different, well, how much different can you make a demon-transformation look, but even if, it would still always feel so much like the Warlock talent.

BTW Nindoriel, please take a look at my Suggestion of the Blademaster, I would like to hear your opinion about it.

Alright I will. ^^

otherwise pirate sounds a bit too much like rogue?

Dammit, hadn't thought of that.

[Angarin]

Pirate class....






Thats new

[Deleted]

It's not really the effect of the ability that is my problem. It's the way it feels. I know there are lots of abilites that mirror others, but Metamorphosis is a core Demon Hunter skill. If it wasn't there, it wouldn't really be a Demon Hunter. If it would look different, well, how much different can you make a demon-transformation look, but even if, it would still always feel so much like the Warlock talent.

Well in that case I totally understand your problem with that.

Maybe they can make the compromise of using the old features of the hero class from Warcraft 3 and create new modern stuff, and mix that into a hero class.
Hopefully they are able to make it feel less like that already existing ability given to another class.

At least we can hope for the appearance tab, so we can at least try to look like our favorite class...still, not the same. My Warrior does not feel like a BM, although he has bladestorm. =(

[Deleted]

Appearance tab would really be a cool thing.