You can literally see a sample of the associated aesthetics in the announcement.
Yes. They add some minor visual effects. I am aware. One of the warriors got some minor lightning effects.
But if those minor visual effects is all you are asking for, and just a color tint difference for em. Knock yourself out.
That’s literally it. 
I think Blizzard will do whatever they want to do and players will whine and do exactly what Blizzards wants them to do . 
2 Likes
I’m still confused why glyphs were taken away from inscription. Wasn’t the whole point of inscription to make glyphs that altered aesthetics?
I agree with your Slayer into Blademaster idea, but disagree with making Warlocks into Necromancers. I believe the overarching idea is to stay within class fantasy while providing the fantasy of certain heros we have encountered through the years, and fitting things in where they make the most sense and filling any gaps. The unfortunate thing for a lot of the names that make less sense or have a “what does that mean” atmosphere to them is that that “spec combination” probably just isnt represented well by heros in game (heros being a broad term not just good guys).
Like Hellcaller (prob destro/demo) and Diabolist (prob destro/aff) don’t really have representatives that I can think of that don’t fit better elsewhere imo.
As far as names Id like to be changed, pack leader, spellslinger, templar, oracle, trickster, fatebound, hellcaller, slayer.
In the lore, Warlocks use a myriad of taboo schools of spellcasting. This includes demonic, elemental, Void, draconic, and even necromancy.
Necromancy has always been a stepping stone to greater power in the WarCraft universe, whether it be to become a Lich, Death Knight, or Warlock. Tapping into that thematically with Warlock is likely the only chance we’ll see anything close to a traditional Necromancer playable.
Glyphs are still a thing. They took away the Glyph UI page and the glyphs that had combat effects, but the cosmetic glyphs still exist and are instead added directly to your spells on your spellbook.
We don’t get nearly as many new ones as we used to, but we still get a couple each expansion. Loamm rep gave us one from Warriors and on for Demon Hunters.
Blizzard doesn’t do near enough with Glyphs though. There should be Paladin Glyphs that change spell effects to suit other orders, like Sunwalkers and Prelates so everyone can have their race/class fantasy.
I dont feel like thats literally all thats being asked for.
We have people asking for radically different capstone abilities. Ways to completely change what weapon is being equipped. Etc.
Shaman, for example, have people asking for chain harvest and to use glaives to be added through hero talents.
You are asking for mirror image/wind walk game play to be added to Warrior. How is that just asking for a slight tint to visual effects to current abilities?
1 Like
I have a feeling glyphs are going to be retired in the near future. I wouldn’t be surprised to see the barbershop/rostrum UI co-opted for spell effects.
How would making warglaives a weapon option going to impact playstyle? That one sounds mostly cosmetic.
Giving shaman access to ranged weapons would be a big change though. But like, enhancement Shaman can already cast Ascendance, which turns all their auto attacks into ranged attacks anyway, amongst other things. I don’t see what the big deal is letting them ranged attack more.
I mean, if we are trying to limit the impact of all hero talents so they don’t change the feel of the class at all, then what’s even the point?
Such a concern might have mattered like 15 years ago. But things like weapon type don’t affect gameplay in any substantial way in modern WoW. They’re interchangeable aesthetic stat sticks now more than ever.
2 Likes
Knowing that this is true kind of makes me sad.
1 Like
The ones that need the most looking at to me are “Totemic”, “Pack Leader”, “Oracle”, “Slayer” and “Hellcaller”. better names and identities are needed for those. Also going to need some serious explanations on what a “Conduit of the Celestials” even means lol.
An Emerald Dream within an Emerald Dream, as it were.
I actually think all the Monk choices are quite strong - they all allude to facets of the class culture that aren’t inherently tied to specializations. Shado-Pan is obviously the strongest choice there, but “harmony” is thematically connected to combating the Sha, and “celestials” are a pretty direct allusion to the more-or-less gods of Pandaria. They might be able to use more elegant names, though.
I am annoyed at fatebound rogue. Dont like it and I know nothing about it.
Rogues, I’m torn about. They’re definitely not 1:1 copies of the specs like Warlock, but Trickster is still very generic. Fatebound is intriguing, though - I do wonder what the background of that could be.
Honestly, I’d love to see something aligned with Garona’s alienation from two worlds. That sense of being a true loner. But that might be difficult to tie into this particular system.
As I play my rogue, I feel more in control over fate. I choose when fights I want happen. I leave and enter as I please.
Sure, not everything is in my control, but that’s outside of rogues as well. No different than any other class at that point.
Fate cheater sounds more rogue than fatebound, imo. Like cheat death.
But what would it mean to be a ‘conduit’ of the Celestials?