I think what they’re doing now is good. You’re getting a lot of non-armor type mog added to the game that unlocks a lot of cool, unique mogs. If you see a priest running around in full plate like the warrior Antorus set that would be a bit ridiculous.
Some exceptions like heritage armor works too. It would be nice to see 1 heritage set for each armor type though.
But a naked priest isn’t?
Doesn’t take any strength to be naked.
Ofc it is, Blizzard is the one who decides that.
About as stupid as these posts of yours, the last one you made you didn’t take a hint. This post only tells me you still haven’t which isn’t surprising.
Plate mogs wouldn’t actually be real plate… From a magic perspective
I guess all the people who want open restrictions with tons of sound reasoning backing it up must be stupid then too.
I guess blizz will also be stupid when it finally happens…
And I guess you’ll either seethe out on the forums or cancel your subscription when it happens
Like you’re reasoning is “no because I think it’s dumb so screw you”
While my reasoning is pointing out how arbitrary it is with all the “exceptions” and naked heros and armor defying NPCs in our face.
I mean I think it’ll be a dumb change but I’m not gonna be a baby about it like you are lol.
You wanna talk about seethe go look in a mirror.
How am I seething…
I’m being purely logical…
You’re being petty because you don’t like it despite having no actual argument against it.
Everything points for it actually happening eventually.
Warbands learning all armor was the first step… If you don’t see that then maybe you should see an eye doctor.
You probably were against mogging swords into axes when xmog first came out lol
Okay so from an illusion magic standpoint then it would work.
I suppose you would have to put restrictions on it. As soon as you enter combat it would have to disappear due to physical interaction breaking the spell.
Except being in a class based rpg with class based armor levels.
RP Moment - You clothies don’t even have the strength to wear such armors.
What… That makes no sense, from that logic all mogs should break in combat.
We can be NAKED, ffs man…
RP moment.
It’s not really plate. It’s Ethereal fashion magic that makes cloth LOOK like plate…
Same magical logic that makes a sword into a freaking staff for warriors
I already made my argument against it, it’s a class based RPG. You want those shenanigans go play one that is soft class.
Lol no I wasn’t, but keep coping.
I mean, this is fine? Learning all armor =/= every class can equip it
My eyes are fine sugar, maybe yours need to be looked at perhaps…? 
Legion is the xpac where classes mattered even more. A Mage STILL can not mount a Priest’s Seeker just like a Warrior STILL can not mount a Shaman’s Tempest. Nvm the fact SMF Fury Warriors can’t use any of Outlaw skins despite both using one-handers.
The fact they haven’t did this for Legion which is considered retail wth makes you think cross-class mogs is even on their radar?
Considering toys exist that change the appearance of characters around you, I’m actually surprised they haven’t implemented a “strip cosmetics” effect for one of them, so you use the toy and it displays only the appearances of the gear a character is wearing.
If that’s what you want to lean on, illusion magic, instead of physically altering the item via transmogrification.
I wish they would just stop putting all this silly crap in general
But if the game is gonna be a clown show they might as well just let you transmog whatever
I didn’t know being naked was in line with paladin fantasy
How is it any different?
You have an argument you need to be consistent.
Why can we mog swords into staffs but not plate into mail.
It’s all magic at the end of the day
How else you justify naked tanks?
With how much you go out of the way to be dishonest I doubt you know much of anything lol.
I’ll let you figure that one out since the word been said multiple times.
What a wonderfully gracious way of describing the horror of those times. ~.^ <3
Exceptions actually do undermine the validity of a rule. By definition, a rule is something that applies universally and without exception. The moment an exception is found, the “rule” ceases to be a rule in the strictest sense. Instead, it becomes more of a general guideline, something that is often true but not absolute.
They don’t explicitly do anything. The rule is the rule because of reasons that are still valid even with exceptions.
Lmao, how have I been dishonest? Everything I’ve pointed out is real.