uh yeah, it’s pretty obvious wrath went on a completely different design trajectory than vanilla, buddy 
This is dishonesty at it’s finest.
I can hammer a nail into a board it doesn’t make me a carpenter.
1 Like
A tank doing damage while tanking is dishonest?
A rogue tanking via evasion is dishonest?
I think you just know how dumb the argument is for hybrid semantics.
A priest can smite dps as holy or disc. Doesn’t make him a “dps” or a hybrid.
Why don’t they remove all damaging abilities from holy priests?
The argument is a bottomless pit and is being blown massively out of proportion
It’s not my definition. It’s blizzard’s, and not up for debate since they made the game.
I dont care if warriors are hybrids or not. It means nothing to me.
You think if I agree with you that they are hybrids and agree with you that they excel at two roles I must also agree with you that this is somehow a problem - I don’t. I can see it your way but still be against class changes. Warriors being a problem because of this is where I part ways with you - aside from not considering warriors hybrids even though I admit a case could be made if you want to use a very rigid understanding of what a hybrid is.
1 Like
The argument in question was one poster asking for “hybrid tax” on warriors.
How exactly are you going to “tax” a spec with only 1 job? Melee
Blizzard consider hybrids to be any class that has two or more functions that they can spec for. If the definition is widened in this manner then shamans, warriors, death knights, and priests are added to the list of hybrids.
I don’t know. But this wasn’t what I was saying. I am simply stating what is / is not a hybrid. I don’t care about the tax.
Now you’re getting sloppy. Your 20+ posts ITT claiming warriors are not hybrids betrays this transparent posturing.
Warriors are hybrids. In light of this, they are in direct violation of Hybrid Tax, a foundational design philosophy for Classic’s Class System. In all likelyhood, this was an oversight that simply fell through the cracks nearly 2 decades ago. That does not change the fact that it’s a flaw in the class’s design.
+threat modification doesn’t do you much good if you hit like a wet noodle
1 Like
Alright, so despitebeings begging of warrior hybrid tax already exists.
Prot warriors do less damage than fury warriors. Right?
1 Like
Irrelevant.
I don’t care. A hybrid is a hybrid and that’s all I was saying.
1 Like
Then your job here is done.
We are looking for his hybrid tax
I want to make this perfectly clear. If you think warriors are a hybrid, you are an MMO scrub simple as.
2 Likes
It doesn’t matter what you think a hybrid is. It’s blizzard’s definition that matters here.
I also want to point out that the “HYBRID TAX” is a wrath of the lich king design philosophy and should not be used for vanilla. However what is/is not a hybrid remains the same.
Originally Posted by **Ghostcrawler**
What is a hybrid tax? Why is there a hybrid tax?
I'm going to sticky this since it gets brought up more than almost any other topic.
We only recognize two types of classes for PvE purposes:
Can respec to fulfill a different role = hybrid.
Cannot respec to fulfill a different role = pure.
The roles are tank, healing and damage.
In our design, having two healing trees (priest) or half a tanking tree (druid) or three dps trees (DK) does not put these classes in different categories of hybridness. A hybrid is a hybrid.
It's the roles that your class lets you do that is important, not how those roles are organized into talent trees. The paladin is one way to organize the trees (a tanking tree, healing tree and melee dps tree) but not the only way. However, there is a reason we don't do this for every class -- it would be boring.
In our design, the pure dps classes (hunter, mage, warlock and rogue) should do slightly higher dps than hybrid damage-dealers all things being equal. All things are rarely equal. Player skill, gear, raid comp, latency, random luck and most importantly the specifics of the encounter will often favor one class, spec or player over another.
The reason we want pures to so slightly higher damage is that pures can only fulfill one role. If your guild or raid has no more need for damage-dealers, there is no way for these classes to raid with you. By contrast, the six other classes always have the option to respec for another role either temporarily or for the long haul.
The Blizzard definition of hybrid in this context has nothing to do with whether you can perform multiple roles within a single fight or even within a single raid. It has more to do with the potential for your class to ever fulfill more than one role.
Likewise, the Blizzard definition of hybrid in this context has nothing to do with the power of certain buffs or class synergy. We want all classes to bring useful tools to the raid.
Just because you’re not interested in doing anything other than damage does not qualify your class as a pure as long as the option to change roles is there. For the pure classes the only option is to reroll. We think the pure classes would start to disappear over time, at least from high-end raiding, if there was no advantage for being a pure. The hybrid advantage is flexibility.
There is not a “5% rule” that says pures should be 5% higher than hybrids in every circumstance. Again, most of the time other factors such as the encounter specifics will have a greater effect. The “5% rule” was either something a player suggested that stuck or something we threw out at some point as an example. It isn’t a hard and fast rule. We aren’t going to provide a hard and fast rule because players would then attempt to invoke that rule every time they thought their damage was too low instead of exploring other ways to improve their character’s performance.
TLDR:
Hybrid = can respec to fulfill a different role (damage, tanking, or healing).
Hybrid != can fill multiple roles at the same time.
Hybrid != has awesome, amazing buffs or utility.
Hybrid != pure. Beyond that, there are no shades of gray among hybrids.
In general, we ask that players focus their feedback more on class mechanics and what is fun or not fun about the classes and not simply on “My dps is too low so you must buff me.”
All you had to do is recognize the hybrid tax of each hybrid
A warrior suffers in damage when specced prot. Other specs take more damage.
Semantics = gearing to take less damage. Shield. Etc
Agree or not?
Ghostcrawler is WotLK. The game is fundamentally different in WotLK.
In WotLK, a Paladin with 51 points in Prot is a better tank than a Warrior with 0 points in Prot.
In TBC, a Paladin with 41 points in Prot is a better tank than a Warrior with 0 points in Prot.
In Classic, a Warrior with 0/0/0 talents is a better tank than a Paladin with 31 points in Prot.
Warriors are a pure melee tank in Classic.
2 Likes
Again, I don’t care about a tax. I only care about Blizzards definition of what a hybrid is.
I don’t think Vanilla should have a tax.
Unfortunately that was the only post I could find and it focuses heavily on tax.
The semantics of this are below. And what people are saying when they talk about a “tax”
When specd for damage output, pure dps classes (Hunters, Rogues, Mages, Warlocks) Should do more damage than other classes who have the option to spec for another role.
All that being said, this design does not work for vanilla.
“This design does not work for vanilla”
Thank you. That clears everything up.
And as axe wipe said, the GC post was from wrath.
1 Like