How would a necromancer be different from a warlock?
Spell Breakers would be cool though.
1 Like
Frost does constant, steady damage based around frozen orb and procs. (Not cooldown reliant)
Fire damage is all centered around combust and resetting combust by consuming hot streak, which you achieve by landing crits. (Cooldown reliant, but at variable intervals based on gameplay.)
Arcane damage is centric on 2 burst windows, rotating between the 2 on a steady and predictable cooldown timer. (Cooldown reliant, on static and predictable intervals)
They are all extremely distinct, and donât amount to monke do damage melee diffrant than monke throw banana. What your pet does, where your pet stands is not a mechanical difference to the player. If Felguard stood beside me and threw fireballs with an occasional firepatch to replace felstorm, they would function exactly the same as they do now.
1 Like
Would evokers have been created if they didnt have a unique gameplay style associated with them? If they were just gonna beâŠsay balance druids. But look like dragons?
Evokers, Demon Hunters, Monks, Death Knights all came with a unique style associated with them. They filled a gap, mechanically.
I would say that Demon Hunterâs having to take abilities from Warlocks (and the back lash against it) is an example of something they will most likely strive not to do again.
I am not saying aesthetics arent important. But I am saying they can not carry a new class on their own. If there is not a new gameplay involved, new mechanics involved, etcâŠI do not see the class being created.
In this example, the person is asking for prot pallies, but with arcane aesthetics. Demo Warlocks but with necromancer aesthetics.
That is not enough to justify a new class. Aesthetics alone do not create a class. If there is not a gameplay/mechanical hole it is filling, I do not see the class being created.
Can your imagine the outrage if they just took prot pallies, made them arcane basedâŠand introduced them as a new class?
We have the magical sword and board tank. We have the caster with ranged pets. Just because someone wants those two to look differentlyâŠaestheticallyâŠthat isnt enough to justify a new class being created.
2 Likes
Witch doctor from Diablo
Do they really? Because it feels like a bunch of dissonant mechanics rather than a defined alternative style.
If you are just throwing together a bunch of mechanics, itâd be easy enough to come up with a class concept for spellbreakers. Just pull the DOTA1 mechanic for the Invoker for a class, which would fit well enough because the Blood Mage has Spellbreaker vibes anyways. Combine a spell with a move to create a different effect. EZ PZ. I mean weâve also already seen this in-game for a few different bosses - Imperator Margok and Spellblade Aluriel both have Spellbreaker combining components to produce different end results.
Heck, the boss before Imperator Margok is literally a Spellbreaker. The groundwork is already laid.
Monks brought new mechanics. Death knights brought new mechanics.
I just need to hear ground work other than âmagical sword and board tank that disrupts magicâ. If something is added that expands on this and makes it unique? Sure.
But my response is based on the information given to me.
âRanged caster with ranged petsâ is not enough to justify a new class.
I am not saying I am against any new class given these specific names. I am against the information given to me on why those classes need to be created.
âarcane sword and board that disrupts magicâ and âranged caster that uses ranged petsâ is basically the extent of what is being laid out. Those are not unique mechanics to justify a new class.
Give me something that makes it unique, and I will reconsider.
I can get behind these ideas, only if I can tank :â)
Plz, I really hate outlaw and it would be better off being a tank spec.
I mean⊠youâre not listening then⊠because Iâve already explained it.
Weâve seen literally two/three different raid bosses use the Spellbreaker mechanics. They can brand/mark targets with magic, fortify the mark for increased effect, replicate the brand to spread it multi-target, or detonate the marks. They can also animate the brand. Fire, Ice, and Arcane each have different effects based on what effect is branded onto the target.
They can also create barriers or magical zones to repel or suppress magic.
https://wowpedia.fandom.com/wiki/Ko%27ragh
https://wowpedia.fandom.com/wiki/Imperator_Mar%27gok_(tactics)
https://wowpedia.fandom.com/wiki/Spellblade_Aluriel
Spellbreaker would be pointless if you couldnât tank with it, considering that the sword and board look is iconic for it.
1 Like
Well the OP specifically wanted arcane only.
And a tank that uses brands? I meanâŠ
I mean thatâs fair enough.
Still, I feel as though thereâs design space to explore with building a primary gameplay loop around interacting with inflicted debuffs for different effects. While demon hunter does apply a few debuffs and thematically they may brand the targets, itâs not really the main gameplay gimmick. The closest thing we have is Flame Shock â> Lava Lash (Replicate) â> Fire Nova (Detonate) as an alternate playstyle build for Enh Shammy or maybe Aff Lock ramping a few DoTs and then using an effect to amplify their damage. This would take that concept but raise it to the next level, with the player able to diverge in different directions based on the demand of the situation. In single target situations they can fortify or animate the effects, in multi-target replicate and detonate. Deal damage, or reduce incoming damage, or siphon life back to yourself as an absorb, etc.
I think it could be fun.
So I am not saying I am against it.
I was against the ideas originally presented to me. Hence my âaesthetics are irrelevantâ statement.
Once we get into this thought process of finding mechanics unique to the gameplay, I can potentially be on board.
I am not against any new class being added, regardless of name. As long as it can fill a mechanical void. If we find a way to make it unique? Lets do it.
Tinker class should come next. It could cover tank, healer, and range dps. Also could be another mail armor type class and use range weapons other than Hunters.
Bards could be possible as a healer and support class. Healer spec, a buff/ debuff spec, and a dps caster spec. Leather or cloth armor.
1 Like
we dont have ranged petsâŠ
1 Like
UmmmmmmmmâŠ
It is time Blizzard attempted to create a Bard class.
hunters donât, we have a pet that is melee.
You might want to check again.
i dont see a ranged hunter pet.
closest we had was a snake that was only a temporary one.
1 Like
We used to have several ranged pets. Bliz took the ability way as they homogenized all the pets. 
You should check again.