This site makes extensive use of JavaScript.
Please enable JavaScript in your browser.
Live
PTR
10.2.7
PTR
10.2.6
Beta
Draenei Druids
Post Reply
Return to board index
Post by
FarseerLolotea
And how do Orc Warlocks make more sense? The existence of the Horde is solely based on the renunciation of demonic practices.That's not entirely accurate. Orc warlocks are condoned only because they swore to use their power
against
the Burning Legion.
Additionally: once again, orcs have an actual history of use of warlock magic. Draenei,
by definition
, do not.
Trolls were forbidden to practice the demonic arts as well, and the classes would have reflected such decisions if it were not for faction balance.I've already said my piece on troll warlocks. It was easier to try to get people to roll trolls (and dwarves) by hitting a toggle than by giving the models a much-needed upgrade.
Bottom-line is I don't believe what you call a
function gap
is a valid claim. I call it an anecdotal trait, a trivia even.Game mechanics say otherwise.
If I had a choice, I would have given Draenei Druids and given Worgen Paladins (I think it's easier to handwave "oh, yeah, Gilneas had a paladin order too" than "oh, yeah, Gilneas was this tight with Malfurion"), just to prevent Draenei enthusiasts from feeling left aside; but considering the amount of furries that would want to roll Worgen, giving them the possibility to be Druids seems a necessary measure of fanservice. So...you haven't noticed how many people seem to think draenei are furries?
That being said, in return, I would expect them to bestow Draenei some protagonism. If they fail to do that once more, I will agree they have given them up. Hopefully the developers will notice this and back-up the lack of a new class with expanded lore and conflicts.They failed once in BC, where the draenei were a plot device for the blood elves.
They failed again in Wrath, where the draenei were scarcely present (except as a brief plot device for the humans).
Unless they do a
hell
of a lot to compensate for the lack of a new class, they've failed a
third
time in Cataclysm.
Maybe, just maybe, instead of killing a bunch of trolls as usual, we might even get to kill our few share of draenei in an instance. That would be grand.Auchenai Crypts?
Post by
Santillan
Unless they give them some much needed focus, they
will
fail in Cataclysm. It's still up in the air.
And don't give me that Auchenai Crypts cop-out everyone always brings up. That's like what, one actually evil Draenei in that place with no real lore about it.
I think we know so much about Forest Trolls because we kill them so often. Maybe giving us an antagonistic Draenei faction would be the best way to expand theirs.
Also, I guess we reached an impasse regarding stealth. I don't consider game mechanics begging for each race to be able to stealth.
Post by
FarseerLolotea
Unless they give them some much needed focus, they
will
fail in Cataclysm. It's still up in the air.I didn't say it wasn't up in the air. I'm saying I don't count on it.
And don't give me that Auchenai Crypts cop-out everyone always brings up. That's like what, one actually evil Draenei in that place with no real lore about it.What are you talking about? It's an entire nihilistic death cult of evil draenei.
I think we know so much about Forest Trolls because we kill them so often. Maybe giving us an antagonistic Draenei faction would be the best way to expand theirs.They gave us one, but their lore began and ended in the same place.
Also, I guess we reached an impasse regarding stealth. I don't consider game mechanics begging for each race to be able to stealth.It
is
"game mechanics." And I
don't
beg.
Post by
Santillan
Also, I guess we reached an impasse regarding stealth. I don't consider
(that)
game mechanics
(are)
begging for each race to be able to stealth.
Fixed for you to better understand what I was saying.
Post by
FarseerLolotea
Fixed for you to better understand what I was saying.I meant that stealth is a game mechanic. Blizzard clearly found it important enough to make sure that every race had it
until
Burning Crusade.
And again: if it's so important that blood elves get access to one particular
class
, why is it
not
important that draenei get access to an entire game mechanic?
Post by
Santillan
Fixed for you to better understand what I was saying.I meant that stealth is a game mechanic. Blizzard clearly found it important enough to make sure that every race had it
until
Burning Crusade.
*Shrug* We don't really know about the latter. I consider it mostly a fluke. My bet is that they wanted to pad class choices a little and just started throwing rogues and warriors around.
And again: if it's so important that blood elves get access to one particular
class
, why is it
not
important that draenei get access to an entire game mechanic?
Because it is not a game mechanic. It's a class mechanic - for Rogues in a much more important fashion than Druids, even Ferals.
You could argue that your like the stealth gameplay of both of those classes and you like Draenei, and you want the possibility of conjugating both of your penchants, and that would be understandable -- but I would hardly consider failing to cater for this desire to be developer mal praxis.
The question is: if they had given Draenei Warlocks, with a very good justification and even questlines for their own - say, you actually are a former adorer of D'Ore whose holy energy became tainted as the naaru died and you had to turn to the dark arts to learn how to stop this arcane power from possessing you, and now Exodar opens its arms to a fellow comrade who might teach them how to subdue the Burning Legion... Draenei Warlocks are troubled by the thought of whether there is redemption for them, and if there is, could there be redemption for their forsaken Eredar brothers? Could the light embrace them all again?
Okay, imagine if that happened and it was slightly better scripted. AND you got a firey Dreadelekk.
Would you consider that Draenei are not missing out? Or would you still consider the lack of stealth such a terrible thing? Is the developers paying attention to the Ds the problem, or that particular deficiency, if it could be called one?
Post by
FarseerLolotea
Because it is not a game mechanic. It's a class mechanic - for Rogues in a much more important fashion than Druids, even Ferals. It
is
a game mechanic. It serves a certain specific purpose.
You could argue that your like the stealth gameplay of both of those classes and you like Draenei, and you want the possibility of conjugating both of your penchants, and that would be understandable -- but I would hardly consider failing to cater for this desire to be developer mal praxis. That's...an
incredible
oversimplification that ignores Blizzard's entire track record in regards to draenei.
The question is: if they had given Draenei Warlocks, with a very good justification and even questlines for their own - say, you actually are a former adorer of D'Ore whose holy energy became tainted as the naaru died and you had to turn to the dark arts to learn how to stop this arcane power from possessing you, and now Exodar opens its arms to a fellow comrade who might teach them how to subdue the Burning Legion... Draenei Warlocks are troubled by the thought of whether there is redemption for them, and if there is, could there be redemption for their forsaken Eredar brothers? Could the light embrace them all again?
Okay, imagine if that happened and it was slightly better scripted. AND you got a firey Dreadelekk.
Would you consider that Draenei are not missing out? Or would you still consider the lack of stealth such a terrible thing?The addition of warlock, unless handled
very
well, would suggest to me that they really don't give a damn. I'd probably start reconsidering my continued subscription.
Is the developers paying attention to the Ds the problem, or that particular deficiency, if it could be called one?The function gap in question—and it's there, no matter how much you may want to deny it—is, again, a
symptom
.
Post by
306612
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Azetidine
Or you could be a masochist and have 9 Dwarves and 1 Worgen....*shudder*
I'd tap that.
Post by
Grythak
All races will eventually have access to every class. Blizzard is clearly moving in that direction, and they are using Cataclysm to already lay the groundwork.So...should I begin collecting ugly souvenir mugs? When draenei/tauren warlocks and Forsaken druids happen, I'm going to have to go through a few of them. (Should dig up my sledgehammer and my welder's mask, while I'm at it.)Nothing is stopping you from griefing players who implicitly support Blizzard's lore decisions.
I'm not saying that it will never happen.
I'm saying I don't
like
the idea of the hooves-and-tails set getting mucked up with warlock. It's bad enough that dwarves and trolls are getting that treatment. Hence, wanton cruelty to cheap ceramic.Orcs also received that treatment. According to lore, being a warlock carries the death penalty to the orcs. Expanding warlocks to every race is becoming an increasingly appealing idea to me: it highlights that
any
race can be lured to damnation by quick access to fel power. I am aware that draenei explicitly do not have a history of fel magic, but times change. I believe now that having draenei warlocks would be a constant reminder of just how easy and alluring that fel magic would be to them. Yes, they can point to the Burning Legion as that reminder, but it would be nice to see that inner struggle play out within the draenei through warlocks. The orc's campaign of genocide could have triggered a new, a "desperate times calls for desperate measures" mindset that seeks to fight fel fire with fel fire. A dark sect of draenei mages who, like the night elf demon hunters, are willing to damn themselves through the use of fel magic in order to save their people.
Which leaves the Alliance one combo short on the Horde. And since draenei are the only race left out of the loop, this supports the theory that they're being singled out.It can be used to support that hypothesis, yes. Draenei may be singled-out in this case, but I doubt it was done out of malice or fear of further nerdrage.
And again: leaving a race entirely out of the loop should be a bigger no-no than making a class less "exclusive" or imbalancing a ratio. It's a matter of professionalism.How is it a matter of professionalism? It's the professionalism that put the druid ratio there in the first place. If the draenei need another class, please take the rogue. Then you get your "needed" stealth mechanic, 8th class, maintaining the druid ratio, and (present) lack of draenei warlocks.
Let's just say that anyone who likes the new worgen lore has no business
ever
complaining about the implementation of draenei again.Beside the point.
Their explanation is "we just didn't want to." Seriously.I would like to see a Blue post to that regards. If this is the Blue post that I'm thinking of, I would think that even you would like to hear further explanation.
I meant that stealth is a game mechanic. Blizzard clearly found it important enough to make sure that every race had it
until
Burning Crusade.I'm not sure if that was a deliberative move on their part to have stealth classes for the Classic races. As someone said, most of it looks like spreading rogues around.
And again: if it's so important that blood elves get access to one particular
class
, why is it
not
important that draenei get access to an entire game mechanic?Because ALL races should be warriors. It's supposed to be the base class to which all races have access.
Post by
Santillan
Because ALL races should be warriors. It's supposed to be the base class to which all races have access.
I disagree. Saying that means that all races should have rogues because stealth plays an integral part of the development of the game.
The reason all races have warriors is because it is easy to hand them out. They are also a pretty popular class, so it is fairly never wasted.
The reason Gnomes have warriors is only due to padding their options somehow. If it were up to me, I would have removed Gnome warriors in the first place and maybe added Gnome hunters (mostly due to the Gnome/Hunter/Engineering overlap.)
The reason BEs should get Warriors is because they were both a unit in WCIII that formed part of the campaign and it was a playable class in the RPG, and, while they can be pushed aside to better portray the BEs as delicate and lithe, I believe a lot of players were also looking to fulfill a "noble elven swordsman" cliché.
Post by
GVHB
The idea of warriors is that an individual of any race can develop a high amount of physical strength and high ability using melee weapons. That is why even a tiny gnome can be one.
Not all races are stealthty nor can they be able to channel every kind of magic (Arcane, Druidic, Shamanic or the Light) that is why you don't see any other class in all the races.
Every race has individuals who can took up a weapon, go berserk and start tearing their enemies apart, even a gnome as illogical it may seem.
Post by
Adamsm
The reason Gnomes have warriors is only due to padding their options somehow. If it were up to me, I would have removed Gnome warriors in the first place and maybe added Gnome hunters (mostly due to the Gnome/Hunter/Engineering overlap.)Except your reason for BE's having the warrior class, because they could in the RPG, works for Gnomes too, as they could be them as well.
Post by
Santillan
The reason Gnomes have warriors is only due to padding their options somehow. If it were up to me, I would have removed Gnome warriors in the first place and maybe added Gnome hunters (mostly due to the Gnome/Hunter/Engineering overlap.)Except your reason for BE's having the warrior class, because they could in the RPG, works for Gnomes too, as they could be them as well.
I stand corrected.
Post by
229054
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
FarseerLolotea
Nothing is stopping you from griefing players who implicitly support Blizzard's lore decisions. I didn't say anything about griefing, and it does not interest me.
Orcs also received that treatment. According to lore, being a warlock carries the death penalty to the orcs.Source?
It can be used to support that hypothesis, yes. Draenei may be singled-out in this case, but I doubt it was done out of malice or fear of further nerdrage. With their track record, after a certain point, it begins to look like denial to claim otherwise.
How is it a matter of professionalism?If you can't see how leaving
one
race entirely
out
of a major component of the expansion pack is unprofessional... It's the professionalism that put the druid ratio there in the first place.Keeping one class perfectly balanced on both sides has nothing to do with "professionalism" and everything to do with someone's desire for symmetry.
If the draenei need another class, please take the rogue. Then you get your "needed" stealth mechanic, 8th class, maintaining the druid ratio, and (present) lack of draenei warlocks. I'd have
taken
rogue.
Beside the point. No, it's really not.
I would like to see a Blue post to that regards. If this is the Blue post that I'm thinking of, I would think that even you would like to hear further explanation. There have been several. They all added up to "we just didn't want to."
I'm not sure if that was a deliberative move on their part to have stealth classes for the Classic races. As someone said, most of it looks like spreading rogues around. Again: a little
too
convenient.
Because ALL races should be warriors. It's supposed to be the base class to which all races have access.It could just as easily be argued that rogue is just as "basic."
Not all races are stealthty nor can they be able to channel every kind of magic (Arcane, Druidic, Shamanic or the Light) that is why you don't see any other class in all the races.They've already established in-game that draenei
can
channel druidic magic (Lost Ones do not acquire
new
capabilities). And, as I hear it, an NPC named "Exarch Cyn" has no trouble with being stealthy.
Post by
GVHB
I wasn't talking about Draeneis in particular but about the whole of the game races. For me, it doesn't really matter, if Blizzard wanted they could add Rouge and Druid to the Draenei class poll and I wouldn't complain. And I know little about Exarch Cyn (and we probably won't ever know nothing) so I don't know if she is a rogue, or even capable of using stealth, but judging by her title it makes me think she is paladin.
Post by
FarseerLolotea
I wasn't talking about Draeneis in particular but about the whole of the game races. For me, it doesn't really matter, if Blizzard wanted they could add Rouge and Druid to the Draenei class poll and I wouldn't complain.Ah, I see.
And I know little about Exarch Cyn (and we probably won't ever know nothing) so I don't know if she is a rouge, or even capable of using stealth, but judging by her title it makes me think she is paladin.She reportedly fights like a rogue. (And the draenei paladin title is "vindicator," at any rate.)
Post by
229054
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
FarseerLolotea
I think that's because she's a part of the SI:7, which could be a nice way to introduce Draenei Rogues IMO.Indeed, although I was thinking "military scouts." (My thought was that a fury warrior, minus armor, plus padded hooves, equals a "Scout of the Hand" who's a rogue for purposes of game mechanics.)
Post Reply
You are not logged in. Please
log in
to post a reply or
register
if you don't already have an account.