Next class leaked!

Healing is not support. That’s its own thing.

Windfury totem is support. Bloodlust is support. Purge is support. I’m thankful that we’ve retained or regained these things, but they truly should be the focus of the class.

A true support helps allies perform their core functions better while hindering the ability of the enemy to perform theirs. Not damaging those enemies. Not keep your allies alive. Just making your enemies frustrated while ensuring your allies are having a great time, excelling in their roles.

1 Like

Plenty of groups have offheals for support.

Support in the dictionary definition of the term, yes, but not in the RPG definition. You are referring to flexibility, in having someone in a DPS role about to contribute to another role - healing, in this case.

It’s like the Ret Paladin throwing on the sword and board when the tank goes down. It’s flexibility, sure. But it’s not support.

That’s coming from your brain not any orthodox definition of support in this game.

Plenty of groups exist to support more healing or more tanking or more DPS. Some groups run exclusively DPS. Or two tanks. Or two healers.

And others do off tanking or off healing. It’s just a way of explaining support role vs primary role.

I’d like a bard, but the way people describe Tinkerer with a tanking Giant robot spec and healing turrets it just sounds so tempting.

1 Like

It’s a definition used in other RPGs - not so much WoW, because it got rid of the role when it didn’t work as they wished. They tried to fix the situation by making the previously faction-exclusive support classes available to both sides. And just decided to phase it out entirely the next expansion and dilute their utility throughout the classes.

What you are referring to is more commonly referred to as “offhealing” and “offtanking.” Yes, by the dictionary definition, this is “supporting” your group. But this does not constitute a support class.

Tinkerer specs:

  1. Mechanist - Specializes in building robotic prosthetics to enhance combat abilities. (Tank)
  2. Demolitionist - Specializes in weaponry. (DPS)
  3. Robotics - Specializes in summoning various robotic allies to support a party. (CC)

Bard specs:

  1. Singer - Specializes in controlling masses of enemies (CC).
  2. Storyteller - Specializes in enhancing the party through inspirational stories (Heals).
  3. Fool - Specializes in acrobatic combat (DPS).

Way back in EQ 1999 we called paladins and shadowknights support classes. The term has existed for over 20 years. It’s nothing new.

The distinction being a person who shows up to just to tank is primarily tanking. A person, let’s say a balance druid is showing up primarily to tank but may also act to support healing.

The idea of making entire specs revolve around CC sounds incredibly pointless to me

1 Like

That would be their primary role.

And you’re looking at it from what WoW has offered for content which is nothing like the game could be with primary CC roles.

WoW doesn’t work with “primary” or “secondary” roles

You have Tank, you have DPS, and you have Healer. Some classes have some abilities that can help in a pinch - a shaman can throw out a couple of heals if the healer is low on mana, or a death knight could pop taunt and some defensives if the tank goes down, but neither of those things are going to work in place of the actual role for more than a few moments

On top of that, classes already have CC by default for when it’s needed. Not only would making a spec dedicated to CC be a waste of time, it would be a detriment to the group by taking up likely one of the dps slots

I feel they need to add another class with a full healer option

Either by adding a healing spec to an existing class
Or a while new class with tank dps specs.

Not a support class a full healer.

It would be fun to heal a new way, it’s less represented than others in the triad.

A new tank would also be nice

I like it. Although I wager it’d be like a college-type thing, since WoW is inspired a bit by D&D. Valor (DPS) and Lore (Healing)

1 Like

Those are primary roles and they mostly all also do DPS. So they have primary and secondary roles already.

Again you’re looking at the game as-is today. WoW has no content like EQ had, where entire rooms could empty out to attack you. The aggro range has been intentionally very small so groups wouldn’t overpull their capacity.

A 30-45 second cooldown would be woefully inadequate in EQ where entire rooms might need to be CC’d. Also I find the notion of rounding up entire rooms and burning them down inside of one or two CCs incredibly limited when you could have rooms of mobs that are as powerful as bosses. Where you’d actually want an off tank or two healers or CC. A greater flexibility in choices make encounters more interesting.

Also playing an enchanter or bard in EQ wasn’t boring. It was one of the best things to play in EQ.

Good for EQ

WoW isn’t EQ

1 Like

Both are MMORPGs.

1 Like

so by your logic, WoW should also implement turn-based battling, because Dragon Quest is an RPG too

1 Like

MMORPG isn’t RPG.

Besides the point I’m making is that a simpler system isn’t better by default. To justify WoW’s simpler role layout you need content like groups of mobs don’t aggro 20 yards apart. Where groups can be emptied very simply on touch aggro without having a big fight.

There are drawbacks to having no CC role that you’re not seeing.

1 Like

I would actually like a class in Wow that was similar to the Dragoons in FF XIV…spear wielders only.

I don’t know why, but spears are criminally underrepresented in games, and I think it is time to give them their due and for Blizz to give us some new combat animations.

an MMORPG is an RPG with a lot of players

and a more complex system isn’t better by default either

stop trying to turn WoW into EQ. the entire point of WoW back in 2004 is that it wasn’t EQ. if you want to play EQ then go play EQ