Here's an idea, give warriors lust

Classes Warrior
61

Im not

What else would they be if not warriors? rogues? shamans? monks? no they are straight up the pinnacle of the orcish warriors, they literally are warrior trainners and in game they are labelled as arms warriors with blademaster being their tittle, they even use plate armor yo shut that argument they don’t, lik ju’beithos and Akhinos, so full stop

They also were the advancement for warrior in the tabletopRPG warcraft had for the horde side.

Again, not all warriors ar blademasters, but all blademasters are warriors

Is literally the same as far seer, not all shamans are far seers, but all far seers are shamans, you are just stubborn to accept that fact

When did i say they isolate themselves? what that even matters here?

I want to know where in lore state what you are saying, that they are not warriors and distance themselves from then, when they straight up act as commanding generals in the war and fight alongside other warriors

key word: REWORKED

Reworked to fit modern wow

Its straight up is, together with other fantasies from other races

Fury → Mountain king
Arms → Blademaster
Prot - > a combination of footman with their shieldblock and tauren chieftain shockwave

The thing i, in wow all the pecs got muddled at some point and their identity got tangled up

Hence: why the rework of the class is necessary.

Arms should have the option to lean further into the blademaster fantasy, thats why the spec tree is there for. there should be an entire line of nodes dedicated to that, period.

62

The majority of that “tangled up” you’re referring to… is called a cohesive class, instead of a car wreck.

I already agreed to that. Just not in the sense of, as you explicitly suggested, giving them stealth, super-speed, and mirror images.

There’s what part of Blademaster fits a Warrior as it exists in WoW as a class with at least as much relative cohesion and distinction as any other class, and then the rest. Take the parts that fit, and not the rest.

Again, already agreed. I’ve literally made talent tree mock ups doing so. They just don’t allow one to steal away other class’s mechanics on the basis that “erm, Warrior should have had it first!”

Actual use of Fury is about the least part of a Mountain King.
And a footman and a Tauren Chieftain are hardly cohesive if approached from a “let’s mash WC3 units into a bucket” standpoint.

63

Yeah blizzard doing a cohesive class and cohesive specs, what a joke

You are free to disagree on that, doesn’t change the fact that it should as blademasters are warriors

Since it is an OPTION you can chose to not go for it and lean in other fantasies, that is what the spec three and capstones are there for.

You are pointing failures on blizzard design, not on my argument

64

“X doesn’t quite manage its intent (in the way I’d like to see it do so). Let’s nuke it from orbit so hard we can’t even remember what intent is” by taking just 3 mostly unrelated hero units and a cannon fodder unit to shove into 3 specs. Fcs…

Look, I’d be all for your take if every race had its own set of classes irrelevant to whatever any race may offer or any overlaps in names among those other race’s offerings. If NE Warriors were stealth-or guerilla-focused because ALL night elf martial tradition is at least partly stealth- or guerilla-focused, all orcish warriors forwent armor because “that’s just how orcs do things”, then sure.

In that case, fine: screw cohesion and we’ll just have racially segregated fantasy that can lean into Thane, Gryphon-kin, Rifleman, Scrapper, Stormsung, Delver; Warbreaker, Earthwarden, Spiritwalker, Chieftain, Packblade; Blademaster, Ravager, Blackguard, Necrolyte, Warlock, Berserker, Raider, Windcaller, Farseer; Soldier, Ranger, Warder, Cleric, Mage, Sorcerer, Paladin; Hexxer, Grenadier, Headhunter, Berserker, Spiritbound, Wildshaped; etc., etc.

Then, by all means, continue not to contextualize source cultures as it’d apply differing shades of focus against otherwise shared archetypes or account for what remains distinct in that culture relative to its varying forms or extremes.

  • …Never mind, of course that there are Night Elf warriors who included greatsword- or lance-wielding shocktroopers that operate in pair with or atop nightsabers —who were mayhem-wrecking machines in their own right— (before being replaced almost entirely with users of bows and throwable glaives when they stopped fighting larger scale wars), that Trolls’ typical warriors built their tactics around throwable weapons and stealth, that even gnomes had —relative to their other clusters of skills— unique warriors of their own, and all of those would be equally interesting takes that are no less clashing than your suggestion to shove a Human Footman and Tauren Chieftain in the same spec…

But we don’t have that.

Instead, we have common cores across the games’ cultures that take cohesive clusters which can then reach in various directions in ways that are nonetheless far more tightly related to that cluster’s center than to any other core/center. But that means some reference points will not fit any particular core tightly enough to belong wholesale to one core over another.

Such is the case here.

You’re looking at a haphazard “ehh, in the eyes of anyone ignorant of the lore, it’ll maybe slightly less ill-fit than the other choices” association between several clans orcish ascetics obsessed with cultivating their killing instinct (or, “inner ki”, as you put it, as if that didn’t make the Monk overlap even more obvious) and their clans’ warriors (which =/= WoW Warriors) and taking it as gospel that Blademasters are already a sure fit for Warriors. They’re not.

1 Like
65

There’s a reason I put him on ignore. I’d advise you do the same.

66

Let me dual wield shotguns, bam bam bam!

1 Like
67

haha, what? it have nothing to do with what i said, if you think blizzard did a cohesive class, and that is what we have right now, jokes on you.

But that is how it is, thats the part of the ROLEPLAY of the game

You have game mechanics that support your roleplay

If you have a talent tree for a spec and that is suppoed to have 2 to 3 different paths with your capstones, it just makes sense to have one of then focused on the blademaster, and the player decide which route he will take for roleplay. A NE warrior might pick the blademaster talents and roleplay as a sentinel fighter just fine.

WE can already lean into almost all of those already :smiley:

Not with that attitude.

Because they are, and the game did nothing but to prove that fact to us.

With blademasters being warrior trainers and blademasters being tagged as arms warriors in the game. What did YOU brought to prove they aren’t? your feelings? what you think? your opinion?

Do you also know other races can have blademasters as well right? there are draeneis and pandarens, saberons, jinyu, same way other races had shamans, and end up being able to be far seer, when it was orcish exclusive

Get it straight: Far seers are shamans, Blademasters are warriors, period.

I think you just are arguing because i said blademasters would be arms only, and that somehow got you pissed? because you were perfectly fine with slayer becoming more blademasters, as long fury got it as well, so it has a personal thing going on.

68

That’s not how it’s seen from people reading the exchange at all, what I see is your unhinged obsession with everything Arms being Blademaster (it’s not) just because some NPCs were classified as “Arms” because they had to pick the closest possible link for thematic trainers or followers.

1 Like
69

They could just add a party wide +25% damage reduction for 10 seconds to Rally and i think that alone would be enough.

70

Maybe you are not paying attention, cause that is what looks like with comments like this:

Seems like the line was drawn when i said how blademasters are arms warriors - or better, how arms actually embodies the bloademaster thematic more - instead of fury, then suddenly, blademasters are not warriors at all anymore, they are… something elkse?? despite the game and the lore confirming that indeed they are warriors.

Because they literally are, and if someone mistakenly say they aren’t, for personal reaons - i would correct, there is nothing unhinged in proving with the game actual canon sources.

And that is far more than what you have to offer to counter that point, 1.Blademasters as warrior trainers, 2.blademasters being labelled as arms in the game and 3.Lore saying they are warriors…so why not stick yourself out of the discussion if one, you don’t know what you are talking about, two you are not wanting to discuss in good faith?

You are not required to discuss about this, and if you do not care about lore or thematic or the game is fine, to each their own.

71

No, the line there which you cherry picked was in a paragraph regarding how ill fit your suggestion for adding a stealth component to slayer’s charge speed increase was for both specialisations sharing the hero tree, just because “you want” more similarities to Blademaster in the hero tree outside what was already given.

Please go and re-read the whole conversation objectively, you can’t be that dense surely.

Welcome to an open forum, people will chime in with opposing views, realistically the conversation doesn’t have to drag on for over half the thread. You’ve both said your piece, both have some points that are valid, and some invalid (I won’t be tallying the scores for you). But you’re both not going to come to the same conclusion at all or a point of agreement so pointlessly wasting your time arguing against the lack of Arms being a Blademaster carbon copy.

The legion blogs specifically outlined the intent design behind the class fantasy of the “Warrior”

Specifically regarding Arms.

Across culture and kingdom, men and women who demonstrate great physical aptitude are transformed into mighty warriors through tests of strength, endurance, and fighting capability. Their friendships are forged not in the classroom, tavern, or workshop, but in the dueling pits and on the arena floor. As a childhood of sparring defines a warrior’s destiny, so too does one’s choice of weapon determine their role on the battlefield. Arms warriors gravitate toward two-handed weapons instinctively. It’s more than a matter of preference—it speaks to the character of the wielder. Arms warriors are patient in a fight, waiting to capitalize on moments when an opponent is left exposed. Two-handed weapons allow them to deliver devastating, overpowering blows, fully exploiting their enemies’ weaknesses.

2 Likes
72

And so the other person was fine with slayer being the blademaster because it adds stuff for both fury and arms

Once i said Arms is the spec that should be reworked to be more like blademasters(cause blademasters are warriors) its where the problems started and it started the discussion of Blademasters NOT being warriors, DESPITE the conversation before being completely fine with slayer being the blademasters

I literally proved trough canon means that they are

If people are still refusing to acknowledge the fact and still argue about it, then im not the one being dense :smiley:

Well, welcome to an open forum, the conversation can drag for the entire thread if the people discussing wish to be.

In fact, you are helping to drag this out further with snarky commentaries trying to claim moral highground here, something that was smaller, became bigger because you wanted to chime in - despite you already acknowledging we both said our piece -

So, what is your reason to chime in if not to drag this out further knowing we said our piece and knowing we are not going to come to the same conclusion? just throw a veiled jab at me? isn’t that a little petty?

Again, you can ignore if you want the discussion, you are not required to read nor participate, do like the other lame pandaren who put me on ignore, and was also felt the need to announce to everyone to know, like someone gives a crap about what he does.

Good thing im not doing that, nice strawman, like i said, if you are not going to discuss with good faith tis better to not discuss at all.

Right the same design and philosophy who refuse to give Arms the axe of cenarius as artifact, because they didn’t though it would fit, and instead decided to use a crap looking sword, with lame lore that have void shenanigans

Yeah, sure i give two craps about then

But even then, nothing rly that says there goes against what Blademasters are, instead actually match with their patient fight style, matching the blademaster thematic of samurais and the bushido code

73

I said I was fine with Slayer taking sensible elements from Blademaster. Just as I would be fine with elements of DotA’s Juggernaut or Axe at an intersection of Fury and Arms. That said…

Sensible. Elements.

Sensible.

Stealth sprint and mirror images are not that.

Trying to excuse it through active choice of blinders towards cultural contexts and how classes must work when shared across them does not make them more sensible fits for Warrior.

1 Like
74

we’re great… currently.

75

Thats literally the pitch i made for reworking slayer abilities visually to be the blademaster

  • Slayer strikes → summon a copy that strikes your target and auto attack for like 3sec

  • Relentless pursuit → give warrior stealth while charging or during the 3 secs of bonus speed

Done, you have both mirror image and wind walk ingrained into the spec into modern wow.

After they move away from the hero specs(like they did with covenant and artifact abilities) they can just add those skills into the arms spec tree

76

I’m beginning to think you’re not reading what you’re responding to —or even what you’re quoting— or don’t understand how the word “not” works…

Mate, the ease of doing something is irrelevant when the effect of that something is likely to seem detrimental, unfit, or for whatever other reason undesirable to most players.

77

Maybe you are not reading? cause that was literally my first pitch, from posts ages ago, literally the same suggestion i did before i did now

So you either were fine and now you are not or you just didn’t read it right

Thats sounds a lot like your opinion, since 1.Blademasters are literally warriors, there is no other class that fits then more, 2.Nothing presented is detrimental, in fact gives Warriors more fantasies to lean on instead of just brute me smash with zero supernatural abilities

Finally, how can you shamelessly claim making arms more into the blademaster spec something UNDESIRBLE to most players? who are you to make a statement like that? which are your sources? You must be tripping thinking people would not want that with how the warrior fanbase enjoy anime and fighting cartoons lol

78

Again…

I am fine with:

Sensible elements taken from Blademaster, such as increased mobility, Execute and Mortal Strike functional flair, unique defensive opportunities, and visuals as within reason for a Warrior.

I am NOT fine with:

Actual Mirror Image summons, actual Stealth, or any other ability or capacity ill-fit for a Warrior and/or already given to other classes.

There are distinct differences in characteristics between what I am fine with and what I am not fine with.

I’m not sure how much clear one can be while still speaking in a human language instead of, say, electrodes to one’s brain.

For a guy who complains so often about being strawmanned the moment he’s quoted back to himself (say, in asking for 20s of CC immunity on Avatar), you sure know how to pretend that what’s in contention is anything but the points actually under critique…

79

That’s where you’re wrong, though. They’re not 1:1 at all.

Warriors in general when they’re 2h wielding greatsword/greataxe archetypes with slower more precise and direct hits in openings aren’t exactly Samurais, they’re generally earth upheaving juggernauts who leave a path of destruction in their wake.

I can see the appeal of a Swordmaster/Samurai concept but what you’re proposing and insisting on doesn’t cut the bill at all and you fail to recognise what people have said in opposition and just repeat the same things over and over again.

Warrior Archetypes in JRPGs are always different to Samurai/Swordmaster, they have entirely different themes that they lean into.

The Warrior generally has more heavier swings and has earth shattering animations within their kit, something that WoW is sorely missing, we had that in Warbreaker’s original animation which was a purple earthquake, they could’ve easily make it brown and earthy instead and gave it a better more thematic animation than the cracks on the ground we get right now.

Demolish’s final hit should lift up the earth where it strikes to show the power of the attack in it’s animation.

Now the Samurai/Swordmaster archetype generally ends up being a little less armoured than full plate armour, and tends to have a lot more faster cuts and flourishes in it’s gameplay. Usually accompanied by the use of the blade’s sheath in the animation which doesn’t exactly fit the bill of WoW’s variant of warrior.

Slayer isn’t exactly going full blademaster they’re going more as a relentless warrior set on their target. Making concessions to bring in components from the RTS that will not work in the main game or cause unwarranted gameplay elements of forcing mobility into the regular rotation which is disliked by many.

1 Like
80

Thats great, your opinion was noted, good think wow doesn’t require you to be fine with.

They do fir for a warrior, YOU just don’t like it, that a you problem

Thats literally what you said

You claim that, that have zero basis.

Thats not rly what i got wrong, i already said it: if you are not looking to discuss this with good faith, don’t discuss, it will save us both time

I already stated that all blademasters are warriors but not all warriors are blademaster, that is a fact.

No class is a 1:1 from the RTs units, literally no one, never claimed to be, they always have changes to fit modern wow, even if the skill name is the same is heavily different, i dunno why you and the other keep bringing this asinine point over and over again

That’s what exact what amurais are show in media, one strike one kill, a fast and a precise strike

It fit the wow warriros JUST FINE, you just don’t like it, thats a you problem, YOU, the point here is having OPTIONS, to for this fantasy, or for the more classic one.

Are you seriously saying JRPGS are different from samurai swordmaster?

JAPENESE rpgs will not lean into the JAPANESE samurai style? buzz off mate, you are tripping, just a quick search give me a few names that fit into that, there is even final fantasy that some playable character fit into that aspect

There is even other games that lean heavily on the aesthetic and playstile of a a samurai or Ronin, Ghost of Tsushima was very popular

But here i have to hear, those warriors are not warriors and not fit WoW because you don’t like.

Yeah yea, we already know you are heavy biased towards colossus, is a nice spec, i like too, doesn’t mean warrior need to be only one thing, sorry.

Easy way to fix that, already mentioned: Rework :v:t5: