Class Fantasy vs. Spec Fantasy: A Look at Hunters

[Watermist-skywall (Watermist)]

Introduction

Hello, all. My time on the Community Council is coming to an end, and I wanted to post one final thread. So buckle up, ladies and gentlemen. It’s going to be a bit of a read, but hopefully an enjoyable one! I certainly had fun working on it over the past few weeks.

Edit: Actually, I’ll be sticking around so ignore the part about my time ending with the Community Council!

Before I go on, I want to establish one thing: my approach here is that I will be talking about the fantasy and thematic. I won’t be talking about balancing, the mechanics-based design (example: node placement in the talent trees), nor tuning. What I will be doing is taking a step back and looking at the forest of class identity and thematic design, instead of inspecting each tree of class mechanisms. The reason I am doing this is because, honestly, there is a great amount of excellent feedback on the things that I am not covering throughout the forums — alpha, beta, PTR, Hunter, and even here on Community Council. I don’t want to beat the same drum, especially when others have already stated the issues so much more eloquently than me.

So, with that being said, let’s begin!

(Note: I will use the term “fantasy” and “identity” almost interchangeably, especially when talking about class fantasy/identity and spec fantasy/identity.)

Setting up the Premises: The Problematic Design

There is a clear turning point in Hunter design and class fantasy: Legion. The Legion re-design of Hunter was so drastic, it is accurate to define the Hunter class by two eras — pre-Legion and post-Legion. While Survival (SV) going melee is by far the biggest (and most obvious) change, there was also a few other big changes: the push towards two pets for Beast Mastery (BM) — to the point that BM’s damage profile is now between three-fourths to nearly all based on their pets — and the push towards Lone Wolf for Marksmanship (MM), along with the severe downsizing of traps for the non-SV specs. The key difference between the pre-Legion, Legion, and post-Legion designs can be summed up in one sentence: class fantasy versus spec fantasy.

Prior to Legion, all classes shared a large majority of their toolkit; some players have referred to this as “80% base class kit, 20% spec-only abilities.” Now, the numbers are not exact, nor they are meant to be — the purpose of this specific figurine is to help convey the idea. People can see this design approach (class-based toolkit) right now on the Classic client. In Cataclysm and Mists of Pandaria (MoP), the design started to drift ever-so-slightly toward a heavier emphasis on the spec identity, but even in MoP, the three Hunter specs still shared a rather sizable toolkit. Warlords of Draenor (WoD) took things further, but even still then there were some overlapping offensive abilities between the specs.

And then Legion came. One of the main selling points of Legion was spec fantasy. Some players believe, and will argue, that it was really “class identity” (due to Class Halls), but in truth it was really more “spec fantasy.” The reason I make that argument is because of the artifact weapons; due to how artifact weapons worked in Legion, all classes came with an extremely sparse toolkit (some classes had a much smaller toolkit than others), and they could “fill out” their bars through talent points and by filling out their artifact weapons. Each artifact weapon had their own unique set of spells and passive effects — thereby driving spec identity ahead at the expense of class identity.

Hunters were a good example of this design philosophy in Legion; there were, functionally, three different mini-classes hanging out in the Hunter hall: BM, MM, and MSV (Melee Survival). The differences between the three specs were extremely stark; for example, the only overlapping abilities that MM and MSV both had were defensive and management talents like: Aspect of the Turtle, Disengage, Mend Pet (assuming MM ran a pet), and the such. There was no shared offensive ability between MM and MSV; BM and MSV both had the offensive ability “Kill Command” but it functioned differently with each spec — BM’s Kill Command was for damage output, whereas MSV’s Kill Command was primarily for generating focus.

Blizzard attempted to develop “clear and separate spec fantasy” between the three specs by doing things like: taking away every single trap from BM and MM — which left the two specs entirely trap-less for over a year — or taking away all pet-related things from MM if MM specced into Lone Wolf (and, considering how powerful Lone Wolf was back in Legion, the vast majority of MM Hunters took Lone Wolf. In Legion, Lone Wolf prevented MM from even being able to summon their pets). Blizzard’s goal in Legion was something along the lines of: Pets for BM, ranged attacks for MM, and traps, utility, and melee attacks for MSV.

It is subjective as to whether this design approach was a success or a failure, but what we can see is that since Legion ended, Blizzard has been steadily moving away from the spec-trumps-class fantasy focus. (In fact, we could see how Blizzard started to reconsider their design approach halfway through Legion, when Blizzard returned two traps to BM and MM in patch 7.1.5.) The class design in Battle for Azeroth (BFA) was not a far departure from Legion’s, although it must be pointed out that MSV received a redesign in BFA in order to put less emphasis on melee — to the point that nowadays, people argue whether MSV is considered a “hybrid” or a “mid-range melee,” or just plain “melee with lots of ranged attacks.” MM received some reworking as well, mainly in the removal of the Vulnerable/Marked Shot mechanic. BM, in comparison to the other two specs, remained largely the same.

In Shadowlands (SL), Blizzard moved even further away from spec fantasy and slightly towards class fantasy — and we can see how Blizzard was actually laying down the foundation for the Dragonflight (DF) talent tree redesign, via the abilities they returned to classes and specs. When DF was announced, Blizzard released a number of “interviews with the devs” videos, and in them, the developers explained that they wanted to move onto a more class-based identity, instead of the spec-heavy identity that started in Legion. However, in these interviews, the devs explicitly mentioned that they meant all the classes/specs “except Survival. Survival will stay melee.” Right from the start, the devs have singled out the Hunter class for reasons yet to be clarified… and I believe that this is a very large factor contributing to the challenge, difficulty, and frustration that the devs has had in designing the Hunter class for DF.

People have been lamenting the woes of the DF Hunter class on the forums ever since alpha and beta; I am not talking about the numbers and tuning, nor the placement of nodes in the talent trees, nor the other issues that many have brought up. But I will talk about the talent trees and the choices that they present according to class identity and spec fantasy. I wanted to mention briefly the number of adjustments that Blizzard has made to the Hunter class since DF’s launch; it is clear from the small and cautious (sometimes overly so) changes that the devs make that they are uncertain — or perhaps unwilling — as how to make changes for the Hunter class.

As an aside, it must be pointed out that the devs said back in the beginning of alpha (when DF was announced) that they don’t want players to experience a significant redesign of their class/spec while the expansion was underway; the upheaval would be unfair to the players. This was what the devs explained, and I found their logic to be perfectly reasonable. This is why I find it odd that Blizzard has, repeatedly, done significant redesigning of the Hunter class while the expansion was still current — the most recent example being the removal of Double Tap from MM. This resulted in Blizzard having to create new talents and adjust various abilities to the point that MM’s damage profile has changed somewhat, particularly in PvP.

This is the premises of the challenge that I have laid out: The difficulty in designing the Hunter class. I will now get into the current existing themes found in the Hunter class and spec trees, and then I will propose what I consider to be the most straightforward and elegantly simple solution: reconsidering the question of Hunters’ class identity versus spec identity — and how it applies to design.

[Watermist-skywall (Watermist)]

It’s All About the Identity – Who are the Hunters?

As mentioned earlier in the thread, one of the main selling points of DF is the return to a more united class identity for the classes; this was one of the reasons why Blizzard decided to spilt the talent trees into two separate trees — one for class, and another for spec. This is something that really shows us what Blizzard’s philosophy is, currently: class fantasy is what builds up the foundation of your character, and then choosing spec is what gives you that “flavor.”

As a matter of fact, one of the things that Blizzard asked for in alpha was feedback on the talent trees — not just the node placement, not just the talents and passive effects, but also whether the tree feels authentic (and reflects) to the class or spec. Now that I’ve established the fact, let’s look at the Hunter talent trees. Again, a reminder: I am not discussing node placement, balancing, tuning, nor mechanism. What I am discussing is the theme(s).

Immediately off the bat, we can identify three clear themes in the Hunter class tree — pets, ranged weapons, and utility (mainly crowd control). This makes sense; these three things are what the Hunter class has long been known for, since Vanilla. Right now, you could go play the Classic client, where you need to master “chain-trapping” on your Hunter over there, along with pet management (happiness and unhappiness, for example), all while staying in range (due to the dead zone). These three things formed and cemented the Hunter identity in Vanilla, and it is clear that in DF, Blizzard is moving the retail Hunter back to its roots.

So far, all of this makes sense and is reasonable. However, when we look at the spec talent trees… this is where things begin to fall apart, and cracks show in the foundation. I will make a statement that might seem rash or ridiculous, but I stand by this statement and I will clarify in a moment:

The classic Hunter does not exist anymore in retail WoW.

The classic WoW Hunter — the pre-Legion era Hunter — is this: A ranged weapon user with a single pet.

Let’s look at the DF version of BM. BM hunters could, theoretically, run with one pet but most run with 2 pets because the BM tree is designed to heavily favor and support the 2-pet option, along with summoning multiple wild beasts (the “zookeeper” build). Furthermore, the majority — almost vast majority — of BM’s damage comes from the pets. Blizzard is currently working on slowly changing BM’s damage profile from being so pet-heavy to move a little bit more damage to the Hunter itself. But currently, as things stands, BM is a ranged “commander” (ordering pets to attack) with multiple pets.

Now, let’s move onto the DF version of MM. Like BM, MM could theoretically run with one pet as well, but once again, many MM hunters go with Lone Wolf due to both the talent itself and the fact that a significant node is locked behind Lone Wolf. So there is literally a cost to using pets on MM hunters (so MM hunters must decide whether the gain in utility is worth the damage loss, especially in AoE situations). This means that, currently and for the most part, MM is a ranged weapon user with no pet.

Lastly, there is MSV, which is (as the term I use implies) melee. MSV hunters always run with one pet, since pets are important for helping generate focus with MSV hunters, but they do not use a true ranged weapon. (Some players will point out that MSV is capable of many ranged attacks, but MSV hunters do not carry a ranged weapon. They literally pull a crossbow out of thin air, and MSV hunters need to be in melee for maximum damage.) In comparison to BM and MM hunters, MSV hunters have access to considerably more better traps (which does harken back to the days of Ranged Survival, or RSV). So, right now in retail, MSV is a melee weapon user with a single pet.

Once again, I refer back to the original, classic Hunter: a ranged weapon user that uses a single pet. This is the pre-Legion era of Hunters; BM didn’t get a second pet until Legion (when they got Hati/Titanstrike as their artificial weapon), whereas MSV didn’t exist until RSV was removed in the Legion pre-patch. MM first gained Lone Wolf in WoD, and in retrospective, one could argue that MM getting Lone Wolf in WoD was either the first sign of Blizzard’s planned redesign of the Hunter class, or that it helped pave the way for the radical changes that would come in Legion.

Some of you might disagree with me regarding my claim that the classic Hunter no longer exists in the post-Legion era; you will, rightly, point at Blizzard’s recent actions in making Lone Wolf optional for MM, and Animal Companion optional for BM. However, as I have said, sticking with a single pet has a cost for BM and MM hunters — and this is a price that not many players are willing to pay. This is why you often see threads in the Hunter forum, PTR forum, and occasionally the General forum asking for Lone Wolf MM hunters to be able to cast Bloodlust — because running a pet on MM is a damage penalty, especially in AoE situations (since MM pets are incapable of AoE attacks). You do see threads less frequently about BM’s Animal Companion talent, although a comment does pop up fairly regularly from a BM hunter lamenting the fact that they “cannot” specialize in a single pet without being penalized.

I needn’t get into the SV debacle — it is clear that the pre-Legion RSV does not exist anymore in any form in retail WoW. A quick look at RSV in the Classic client will show, rather quickly, that the “elements” of RSV “preserved” in MM is not actually accurate (let alone properly done). As far as this discussion is concerned, RSV and MSV are two entirely different specs with different playstyles and different identities. They just happened to share the same name, “Survival.” They have some minor themes in common (fire and explosions, poisons, and utility).

Now that I’ve made my case that the classic Hunter does not exist in DF, let’s take a quick glance at the spec trees. This is why I say that things fall apart with the spec trees. When we look at the class tree, one would expect the classic Hunter — a ranged weapon user with a pet and utility. This is how Blizzard designed the class tree, after all! It is very “Vanilla” flavored, and does bring the pre-Legion era to mind.

But due to how the specs are designed, each spec end up avoiding a large portion of the class tree. A Lone Wolf MM hunter, for example, would take no pet points — because why would they? Likewise, a BM hunter has less of an incentive to take offensive ranged abilities, due to the fact that the BM pet does the majority of the damage and the Hunter is more of a “commander” (or, as some players put it, a “cheerleader”). Lastly, a MSV hunter actually finds itself in a sticky position! Many of the ranged abilities on the class tree also offer useful utility, so the MSV hunter takes them… but they must be in melee for optimal damage output.

One final note: consider this from a new player’s perspective. The BM spec tree is the least confusing, in my opinion. Having two pets is cool! It’s fun! The BM spec tree meshes the best with the class tree. But if the new player chooses MM, and takes Lone Wolf… then why are there so many pet-related points in the class tree? Why do they exist? Likewise, if the new player chooses MSV, they would experience the double-whammy of confusion over the class tree emphasizing ranged and starting out as a ranged weapon user from level 1 to 10… and then suddenly losing a considerable amount of firepower! (MSV hunters could, technically, run a ranged weapon but they receive a 50% damage penalty their auto shoot the last I checked.) Plus, the MSV spec tree is very heavy on melee abilities — the complete opposite of the class tree. We can just imagine the new player going, Huh!?

Now that I’ve analyzed the themes of the Hunter class and specs, pointed out the conflicts between them — I will hammer this point home: the classic Hunter no longer exists in retail WoW — I will now make a modest proposal. I am not saying that Blizzard must accept my proposed solution, nor am I saying that it’s the only solution. But what I am asking is that Blizzard read the intentions behind my proposal, understand my concerns, and take the serious issue of Hunter class identity into consideration.

The Solution: Going Back to the Roots

I have mentioned earlier that Blizzard, when announcing DF, explained that they want to go back to the roots for the classes. It is my humble opinion that the devs did not go far enough with the Hunters. As I have stated, repeatedly, the “original” Hunter design does not truly exist in retail WoW.

You might be tired of me harping on this point, but there is a reason I am bringing this up.

I believe that the most straightforward, simplest, and effective solution would be to make the ranged weapon user with one pet Hunter — the classic version — the base design for all three specs. Yes, this includes SV. I believe that all three specs — BM, MM, and SV — should share the same core identity. Then, Blizzard could preserve all of their experiments and changes from the post-Legion era: give the specs a variety of toggles for pets and melee. I’ll briefly list out what I am envisioning:

For BM hunters, give them two toggles — choosing a single pet (as the Hunter’s “best friend”) or two pets (Animal Companion), and give them viable builds for both. I will go further and say that the BM spec has room for a melee toggle, too. There are two reasons I am proposing this: Firstly, because Rexxar is the original Beastmaster. Rexxar has been known as the Beastmaster ever since Warcraft 3. Rexxar was literally retconned into a melee SV hunter for Legion… despite still toting the title “the Beastmaster.” And secondly, as I have mentioned before, the majority of BM’s damage comes from pets. In the post-Legion era, for the most part, BM had between 1 to 3 shots for damage; it really is the pet doing all the heavy lifting. This is why I believe it would be a relatively simple matter for Blizzard to create a melee version of BM’s few ranged attacks, and that going melee really wouldn’t change BM’s rotation, nor damage profile by much.

For MM hunters, give them one toggle — choosing a single pet or none (Lone Wolf). I see greater potential in Blizzard developing viable builds for AoE and for single target — and the removal of RSV from the MM tree. This serves multiple purposes: one, ever since Legion, the existence of RSV has plagued MM; prior to Legion, RSV was the spec with the RNG, DoTs, high focus on AoE attacks, and a fairly steady damage output, whereas MM was the spec with practically no RNG, insane burst, lower movement compared to the other Hunter specs, and high focus on single target. The post-Legion MM has bounced back and forth between AoE and single target with Blizzard tending to favor the AoE builds for MM, struggled with RNG (the Vulnerable mechanism is the most infamous example), struggled with burst — which frequently led to nerfs due to high burst in PvP, but then ended up hamstringing MM in PvE… the removal of Double Tap is prime example of this — and struggled with movement. By removing all traces of RSV from MM, Blizzard could fully dedicate the tree to MM, and bring back the old pre-Legion MM (minimal RNG, insane burst, high single target).

For SV hunters, give them one toggle as well — choosing between melee and ranged. Ranged would be the default option, since it would be the base identity (as the classic Hunter), but Blizzard has put in a lot of work into MSV ever since Legion, so Blizzard has a lot of inspiration and past examples to draw on for both RSV and MSV. And, ironically, despite my earlier statement that RSV and MSV are truly two different specs, they actually do have just enough themes in common — explosions, fire, poison, and traps — that Blizzard could develop melee attacks mirroring ranged attacks, and vice versa. I will give an example: RSV’s Explosive Shot and MSV’s Wildfire Bomb. They are both fire-based DoTs that, as the names imply, explode. That is just one example of a melee attack and a ranged attack mirroring each other.

Furthermore, with SV hunters, by moving RSV out of the MM tree and into the SV tree (as the base identity and making MSV the toggle-able option), Blizzard would have a golden opportunity to bring the spec’s identity much closer to the classic Hunter identity. Currently, MSV has a few abilities with names that revokes the identity of a Warrior much more than a Hunter (namely, “Carve” and “Butchery”). But by redesigning RSV and MSV to mirror each other — poisons, fire and explosions, along with utility-inspired attacks — Blizzard could discard the Warrior-esque abilities currently found in the MSV talent tree. It really is a win-win solution as far as I’m concerned, for both RSV and MSV hunters (and indirectly for MM hunters as well).

Is this easily doable? No, this requires a lot work. But, I think that by establishing a clear and strongly united identity for the Hunter class — the original, classic Hunter: a ranged weapon user with a single pet — Blizzard would finally have a strong foundation to build on for the three specs, especially SV. Currently, Blizzard has been struggling with establishing a clear Hunter identity (look at the class talent tree) while maintaining the uniqueness of the specs (MSV is the most obvious example — many players see this situation as “the ranged specs BM/MM versus the melee spec SV,” and the design does certainly reflect this).

Ultimately, I truly believe that a majority of the difficulty regarding Hunter design stems down to the fact that the “base Hunter” does not really exist where the specs are concerned. There is still relatively little overlap between the specs for the most part (especially with MSV), which goes against the stated goal of DF to bring class design back to class fantasy over spec fantasy. Blizzard has done exactly this with the other classes — so why is Hunter the odd one out? Why does the classic version of Hunter no longer exist in retail WoW? Why does Hunter still feel like three mini-classes instead of a whole, united class?

Conclusion

To sum my thoughts up into brief points: we need the return of the original Hunter — ranged weapon user with a single pet — which would benefit the class as a whole. This original Hunter needs to be the base state for all three specs, including SV. Give BM and SV a toggle between melee and ranged. Give BM a toggle between one and two pets. Give MM a toggle between one pet and no pet. By establishing a core identity, Blizzard can easily build up from the shared foundation, instead of creating three fractured, separate foundations. The spec-first approach of Legion has really hurt the Hunter class, and Blizzard hasn’t quite managed to fix all the damage that Legion did, in my opinion.

And with that, this is my final post on Community Council. I want to thank you all for the opportunity to geek out about various things; I am sorry that I was unable to post as often as I would’ve liked, especially over the past few months, but I still enjoyed this experience. Thank you, Blizzard.

And have fun, fellow WoW players! I’ll show up occasionally around the “regular” forums.

Edit: Guess I’ll be sticking around for a bit more! Expect more posts from me in the future.