Thats not a thing. Tanks don’t have classes, they have a preferred role. Any class could offer that role and suddenly become attractive to people who like tanking. It wouldn’t make that class a lesser version of itself, nor would it make the people who have decided that they like the new spec lesser versions. All it takes is finding a way to make it fit thematically. The people who played hunter in WoD, the people who play hunter now, they don’t own the class.
Sure, but every class does not have to be a hybrid.
It’s perfectly fine, having classes that are pure DMG-based. Right now we have 3 times the number of options for how to tank compared to how many options we have for playstyles focusing on ranged weapon-damage.
And melee dmg? That’s closer to 7 times.
2 Likes
This would not solve the tank shortage problem. Unless you get rid of all the social headaches that come with being a tank (what you don’t know the most optimal route to the boss, what this is your first time doing this dungeons, your to slow etc…) allowing SV to tank, or giving mages a tank spec or giving X a tank spec, will not solve the tanking problem.
Absolutely. I hate this idea. I just hate gatekeeping and the no true Scotsman fallacy more.
As in, some players arguing that we shouldn’t change classes to make them more attractive/appealing to players playing other classes?
Not every class have to be perfect for everyone. That’s the whole reason for why we have so many classes/individual spec options that come with distinct playstyles.
Not sure what this means…
The “no true Scotsman” fallacy is when you say “no hunter wants to tank” and when someone inevitably says “I want to tank” you would then follow that up with “you’re not a true hunter”.
I mean, sure, a select few have said this to other players in the past.
More often than not, in such cases, it’s more about how certain suggestions have no historical base whatsoever within the class as a whole.
Take the current topic as an example. The Hunter class was specifically designed to rely on pets for tanking. And for group-based content, it’s intended for us to rely on other classes for tanking.
If we forget the many potential problems with the idea of how a spec which relies on pets for tanking group-based content would even work.
My question is more or less: What is it with the idea of tanking as a Hunter that makes it appealing to some?
Is it the idea of standing in there with your pet?
Is it the act of taking the hits for everyone else?
The overall control of the battle?
What is it? Why would they specifically want to tank, while playing as a hunter?
And to tie back in, how would it even work? Reliance on the pet AI for tanking e.g. simply won’t work as it is now.
I like tanking.
I might tank on a Hunter, though it would have to offer something compelling over Warrior for me to swap tanks.
That would not increase the number of tanks in the pool.
It should not be created just to create something, unless we are creating a 4th hybrid spec for all pure DPS, and for Hunters specifically, RSV should come back first.
I don’t doubt it. 
This was sort of what I was after before.
Why should they specifically make a Hunter spec designed for tanking? Sure, some players want one. But again, why?
Maybe, maybe not. But I doubt it. At least not to any significant degree.
This.
I cant say for sure. I think DPS who use lfg to find groups want more tanks. (And incorrectly believe more tanking options will provide that).
I can say some of the most fun I ever had was double hunter two manning old wailing caverns. Obviously its not the same game, but I could see a very tanky SV build being a blast in Torghast.
BRM is already a very pet heavy tank and I try to avoid angry Dave because I don’t like it. I do like ox statue though. (Its a stationary pet) The Venthyr ability makes even more pets for monk. Ugh.
Perhaps, although that might turn out quite differently in raids/M+.
While its not a bad idea. I like msv, and don’t want to lose it
can we burry this thread??
It was, then some tauren dug it up.
Making a melee hunter tank akin to how Rexxar plays in heros of the storm where you pet is the main tank and you can support it with abilities
1 Like
No thanks. I don’t wanna be a tank.
Hunter pets should be tanky but hunters should not be tanks. Also, holy necro batman
1 Like
A tank spec could have been interesting as a 4th spec before Legion.
Anyone at this point who still wants a 4th spec wants RSV back. No way we’re going to get a tank spec. And changing current SV to fit that is going to just do the same thing that happened to those who enjoyed RSV.
It’s a terrible idea every way you look at it.
Also this
I’ve also wanted this, in the dark recesses of my mind, for many years. But every time I allow myself to indulge in the theorycrafting, it all falls apart.
Firstly, the Pet should be the tank, not the Hunter. The Hunter would be the support for the tanky pet. It would just make the most sense, and align with most of our spells better.
The issue becomes: You have an AI drawing the enemies’ attention, and in-charge of postioning.
The Blizzard UI for pet control is awful. Plain and Simple. Pets require constant manual instruction for repositioning. It’s tedious, using the blizzard UI. Moving the boss is one of the most basic responsibilities of a tank. Blizzard’s UI makes that so cumbersome. I personally have every pet command bound to specific keys, so it’s much easier, but it’s not what I would call ‘accessible’, for new players. So you have a niche, and harder to play Tank spec, than any of the other, frankly, faceroll tanks in the game. What’s the advantage? Why would they do it?
We’re basically asking Blizzard to take away a spec that 7 or 8 Hunters already like, for a spec that 4 or 5 Hunters will actually enjoy, and 1 or 2 guilds will actually allow. You can check my numbers on that. They’re dead on.
Lol that’s a solid N O
Also No way
Also Nope
1 Like