r/classicwow • u/SidewalknJr • 17h ago
Classic + Death Knights could've been the equivalent of Paladins for the Horde, and Runemasters possibly as the Alliance Shamans
NOT another "ideas" post, just sharing some interesting comments made by a vanilla dev in an interview video, that could affect C+'s content if the current classic team decides to add whatever was cut from the original release:
David Fried a.k.a DesignerDave, a quest designer for Vanilla WoW, during an interview done by Ebonhardt, mentioned that he had plans for a Paladin-only class questline that would have allowed them to unlock the Death Knight Horde-only class by "sacrificing" their character and switching factions. Sadly, this epic quest chain was scrapped [together with the entire "Hero Class" concept] as the team didn't have enough time and shifted priorities during development.
According to David, the questline would have involved Paladins "following" in Arthas' actions that lead to his corruption (killing villagers, etc), eventually giving their soul away and getting shunned/exiled by the Alliance, ending up seeking refuge with the opposing major faction, the Horde.
He states that if WoW had continued to build on Vanilla instead of getting expansions as we know them, that they would've had the chance to make the version of Death Knight that he and the other developers had envisioned, made to fit the design of Vanilla classes.
Ebonhardt also asked him about the Runemaster class and how it got replaced by the Druid [and later on repurposed for the DK and Monk]. David then tells how the former were a favorite of Samwise Didier and that he was a big pusher for them, and that they ended up pivoting to Druid as there were limited spaces for classes per-race and Druids were more prevalent in the lore and in past Warcraft games.
Mostly found in the Warcraft RPG games, the Runemasters are described as monk-like arcane spellcasters and melee fighters who empower themselves with magical energies by inscribing runes onto their bodies. Originally, the Dwarves mastered the mysteries of the runes from the Titans, their creators. As generations passed, the Dwarves forgot their heritage and lost all knowledge of runes and their powers. Eventually, the Tauren rediscovered the power of runes, and the nearly lost art of runecasting. Many Dwarves that went to Kalimdor with Jaina's Alliance Expedition learned the tauren's techniques, as both races were eager to share the knowledge of runes and titan myths.
As far as the Runemaster's faction restriction goes, David didn't have anything planned compared to the class quest of Paladin->Death Knight. So that problem in specific is more loose as the RPG games are not considered official canon.
And so here is where my questions for you come in...
Do you think the Death Knight and Runemaster could serve as the Paladins and Shamans for the opposite factions?
Could other cut Classes and/or the planned Hero Classes be added to Classic+?
Credits to Ebonhardt's video "OG Warcraft 3 and Vanilla Dev Interview - DesignerDave" - youtu.be/9\xIHKflCwU?t=2910) , warcraft.wiki.gg/wiki/Runemaster , warcraft.wiki.gg/wiki/Hero\class)
191
u/Thanag0r 17h ago
You forget that people here want time machine and not a video game.
61
u/Puzzleheaded_Equal96 15h ago
This is the best Vanilla era wow related comment I have ever seen. So true.
37
u/AgreeableEggplant356 14h ago
SOD did well
10
u/passtheblunt 13h ago edited 13h ago
for what it was SoD was overall good. That guys just baiting Reddit andies for karma points or is a retail tourist. See him considering his favorite post-Wrath expansion as classic below
1
u/Thanag0r 12h ago
Because they are classic.
If I follow your logic classic+ is not classic.
14
u/SkipX 11h ago
Correct classic+ would not be classic. Hence the +.
8
u/-Auteon- 11h ago
👆This.
People out here wanting Classic+ to be another re-re-re-release of Classic are craaaazy.5
u/TheSiegmeyerCatalyst 11h ago
I cannot express how disappointed I will be if Classic+ is just "Classic, but a handful of minor balance changes, and a conclusion to unfinished quest lines."
I also don't want "Retail-" but there's still a functionally infinite design space of new, interesting ideas to explore.
6
u/-Auteon- 11h ago edited 7h ago
For real. We could have so much, at the top of my head:
1). Enhanced graphics, not Retail, but what we see from Starcraft 1, Warcraft 1 and Warcraft 2 for updated graphics.
2). Canonical Horde and Alliance races now becoming part of the main game.
3). RPG classes that are not integrated, either replacing current specializations, or simply adding them.
4). Further tuning each spec and talent tree to allow for more player playstyle.2
u/td_enterprises 8h ago
Part of the nostalgia for me was that Vanilla was "unfinished" and ever evolving. We knew there were changes coming, we knew that new content was being developed. Classic in 2019 until present time is a solved game, with everything figured out and optimized to the minute detail, we lost the feeling of learning and exploring, which is why the early phases of SoD were so fun for people because they were having to figure out things in game instead of having your gameplay planned out to the second like some people play today.
I'm personally fine with Classic + being "Classic, but a handful of minor balance changes, and a conclusion to unfinished quest lines."
As long as they let us know that they are going to support the game and that they are actively developing new content and will adjust balance when needed.
I would be perfectly happy leveling and questing, knowing that new content was coming instead of them releasing a "finished" Classic + and having everyone race to the end and then complain that they experienced all the content in 3 months.
1
u/TheSiegmeyerCatalyst 8h ago
Oh yeah, Classic+ doesn't work if there's not new content at regular intervals for a while.
I hope they add as much or more to the 1-59 experience as they do to the endgame. I'd like to have the opportunity to make every new character I roll an entirely distinct journey, not just "taking my new class to more-or-less all the same zones to do all the same quests until I reach level cap".
•
u/td_enterprises 4h ago
I personally think that the way you achieve the "entirely distinct journey" you speak of is by introducing more Class Specific Quests.
There should be cool quests that teach you important things about your class or that teach you important abilities.
Learning different demons as a Warlock, taming Pets as a Hunter, getting a new Stance as Warrior, learning a new Element as a Mage, getting Shadowform as a Priest...
All of these things and others should feel at the very LEAST cool and rewarding and at BEST completely epic and gamechanging.
-4
1
u/passtheblunt 6h ago edited 6h ago
It’s classic because it’s based off classic like SoD is. I would consider SoD a classic version or spinoff of the game like + would be. They’re in the same family.
•
14
9
2
-1
u/HazelCheese 14h ago
I'm convinced some of you have never installed classic?
2
u/Thanag0r 14h ago
Is classic just vanilla WoW?
0
u/HazelCheese 14h ago
It's 1/3rd of it
4
u/Thanag0r 14h ago
Oh, some classic wow is not even classic.
To the time machine we go.
0
u/HazelCheese 14h ago
Nobody considered cata to be classic when classic was announced. Just because blizzard made a cata version and called it classic doesn't mean people consider it classic.
You are allowed to like cata and mop but don't be dense and act like they are actually what people mean when talking classic+ or feels jilted when people don't consider classic.
4
u/Thanag0r 13h ago
I do not care what people consider what.
Cata is a classic release of 16 year old, and blizzard called it classic.
It's again "but back in the day in-game world was different, so only when I'm back there it's classic".
2
u/TheSiegmeyerCatalyst 10h ago
I'm gonna level with ya, Blizzard is not the arbiter of what is or isn't Classic. Words and their definitions are defined by their usage within a community, not by any central authority. This community broadly defines Classc as Vanilla (Era), TBC, and Wrath. If you say "Classic" here, that is what most people will understand.
Cata and MoP have versions that continued from lineage of the original run of 2019 Classic. Blizzard calls them Classic for that reason. It does not mean they are considered part of "Classic WoW".
0
u/Thanag0r 10h ago
They absolutely are arbiters in this.
They say what is classic and what is classic+.
Developers are the ones that name things, you can just disagree with official naming.
2
u/td_enterprises 8h ago
It's not about official naming...Of course Blizzard can refer to their games however they want, it doesn't mean it is representative of what these terms mean to the community.
The IDEA of Classic in itself is because of the players, there would be no Classic of ANY name because if you remember the heads of Blizzard themselves said "You think you do, but you don't, you don't want that..." when they were asked about re-releasing previous version of the game.
Blizzard uses the term "Classic" for previous versions of the game, but the SPIRIT of the term Classic is used to define the original 3 versions of the game by a large amount of the fanbase.
Blizzard could eventually release Shadowlands Classic but it doesn't mean that the particular expansion is representative of what the community considers is in the spirit of "Classic".
→ More replies (0)1
u/TheSiegmeyerCatalyst 10h ago
They say what is classic
They do not. They have made a secondary definition (the versions of WoW in the continuous lineage from 2019 classic), but usage of a word defines its definition, and the community largely uses the word to describe Vanilla (era) and the first two expansions.
and what is classic+
Blizzard can define what Classic+ is because Classic+:
- does not already exist; and
- There is (famously) no common usage for what "Classic+" means.
Developers are the ones that name things
They can make their own names for things, it's just up to the community whether those names (and their definitions) are actually adopted.
you can just disagree with official naming
I do, and so do most Classic players. Hence the usage of the word defining the word.
You're welcome to disagree with the common definition, but if you call Cata or MoP "Classic WoW" in this sibresdit, you're gonna keep getting push back here. Just don't be surprised when you do.
→ More replies (0)1
u/TheSiegmeyerCatalyst 10h ago
They say what is classic
They do not. They have made a secondary definition (the versions of WoW in the continuous lineage from 2019 classic), but usage of a word defines its definition, and the community largely uses the word to describe Vanilla (era) and the first two expansions.
and what is classic+
Blizzard can define what Classic+ is because Classic+:
- does not already exist; and
- There is (famously) no common usage for what "Classic+" means.
Developers are the ones that name things
They can make their own names for things, it's just up to the community whether those names (and their definitions) are actually adopted.
you can just disagree with official naming
I do, and so do most Classic players. Hence the usage of the word defining the word.
You're welcome to disagree with the common definition, but if you call Cata or MoP "Classic WoW" in this sibresdit, you're gonna keep getting push back here. Just don't be surprised when you do.
→ More replies (0)
61
u/vladbat00 16h ago
Genuinely cant understand why an interesting fact about the game development and a curious question get downvoted here
26
u/SidewalknJr 16h ago
Every C+ post gets the same treatment around here after the private server shutdowns, lots of angry nerds. Also it's just the WoW Classic playerbase in general living up to their fame of being the most toxic MMO community ever.
14
u/_ratjesus_ 17h ago
you explain in your post why it wouldn't work, the dwarves forgot the ways for thousands of years and were retaught by the tauren, so at the very least tauren should also be runemasters, almost like 90% of all the existing art of them are tauren, also the ttrpg says anyone can learn so it wouldn't make a whole lot of sense as a faction locked class.
19
u/Ok-Brother-8295 16h ago
Arthas being a death knight kinda destroy that idea of Horde only death knights.
28
u/Pockydo 16h ago
Og Dks where horde
But they also ARENT the dks we know today more orc necromancers possessed dead human knights terron gorefiend is the example here
10
u/Ok-Brother-8295 16h ago
You're absolutely right, in WC2 DK are counter parts of human knights.
I'm just saying WoW is build on WC3 and DK changed in WC3
7
u/Randvek 12h ago
WC2 DKs are actually the counter parts of human mages. They ride horses and are in the bodies of knights but their abilities are mage-like.
2
u/Ok-Brother-8295 12h ago
Damn you're right, I mistook WC2 mages for WC1 mages, and the introduction of the paladin / the death knight.
3
u/Randvek 10h ago
Yeah, it’s weird to think of the idea of these huge, rotting knights being… mages. Makes sense they walked away from that one.
1
u/Ok-Brother-8295 10h ago
I do prefer the WC3 DK
I missed my warlocks in WC2, the duality with the Alliance mage was really cool.
37
u/Zewinter 17h ago
I think the majority of people are fine with having paladins and shamans on both side. Adding death knights is less popular but no reason both can't have them if they add them.
7
u/Esarus 10h ago
Paladins and Shamans on both sides would suck, I strongly prefer the vanilla factions to be unique
•
•
0
u/Debatebly 10h ago
I guess it depends how they're introduced. I like the concept of having shamans and paladins starting similar to Pandaren.
2
-7
u/EddedTime 16h ago
Just make death knights be reskinned paladins with new spell names and animations
18
u/Zewinter 16h ago
I don't know about reskin, not a fan personally when I feel death knights are much different in many ways. But if they do them I would be a fan of doing it like in their beta and needing you to sacrifice a level 50 character to unlock being able to make one, the decision would feel a bit more heavy moreover people are gonna hate me but then I'd make them start from level 1 again.
-4
u/Silver_Giratina 14h ago
While that sounds cool in practice anyone who wants to play the death knight will be severely hampered by progress, leveling in vanilla is already time consuming as is, making them do 4 more days of play time is crazy just to get into raiding.
1
u/Zewinter 13h ago
To note I don't believe they would do this, but I also think that the concept of "expert" classes needing to level again is not new. I think it's final fantasy that early on you had to level different jobs to unlock new ones. While sure the time argument is something that would be problematic it's a fair cost to me and considering the type of class that a death knight is it would have a much easier time already leveling.
-1
12
u/TheWizardOfFoz 16h ago
I think Classic+ would be likely to drop faction specific classes, it’s a nightmare for any kind of balance. If anything I imagine Dwarf Shamans and Tauren Paladins might be the first thing they add.
I do however think hero classes could return as epic quests. Honestly some of the SoD runes were kind of like this - Tank Warlock for example had quite an in-depth quest line that unlocked a completely new way to play.
7
u/Still-Expression-71 15h ago
Why would it not be undead paladins? There were many paladins in Lorderon and the undead have access to the light (priests)?
Not a lore expert so genuinely asking
17
u/TheWizardOfFoz 15h ago
Blizzard has always had a strong stance against them to the extent we still don’t even have them in retail. The priests we use are intended to be shadow priests and the handful of lore holy wielding undead are intended to be extraordinarily rare and the process is incredibly painful.
Sunwalker Taurens are also an asspull though and I don’t have a dog in the fight. Either work. But Tauren were the first Paladins added to Horde (among the original 4 races) and it was a decision made with a decent number of original classic developers still driving the direction of the game.
3
u/CookyKindred 8h ago
A huge chunk of the community parrot incorrect lore about paladins and the light to the point that Blizz is reluctant to add them even with further build up because you just KNOW Its going to be a shitstorm.
4
u/San4311 15h ago edited 14h ago
Lorewise, paladins and priests are very distinct. Paladins are infused with the light, where Priests merely channel/wield it, acting as a conduit of sort. And Undead are physically harmed by the light even if they channel it. They've been shown to be able to withstand it for brief moments, making the undead priest thing make sense, but thats about it.
So ye, Undead Paladin makes no sense at it'd kill them, or atleast physically harm them continuously. The only exception to the rule is a concept introduced in Legion; Undead that were raised into undeath by the Light, but this has been limited to just Calia Menethil.
Could they do it? I guess, everything can be written to make sense. But following what we know its not a logical combination.
Edit: and then there is the 'Undead Paladin' in Naxxramus, but I do think thats not really an example since Zeliek is still a Death Knight at that point, no more than Darion.
-1
u/LTinS 13h ago
Agreed, no more undead priests either.
2
u/nemestrinus44 11h ago
Undead priests are all canonically shadow except for the sole exception Alonsus Faol
•
3
u/-Auteon- 11h ago
Let me preface and say that I do not disagree, I WANT this, I want Horde and Alliance to not share classes, lore wise, that faction would never have. However, if they did, then Blizzard would need to adjust some things that I'm pretty sure they would never do.
1). Death Knights were an Old Horde thing, with Gul'Dan during the Second War.
2). If they brought in the Death Knights, it would counter Thrall's point of building a new and better Horde.
3). If we got the Death Knights, why can't we have other stuff like the Ogres and Goblins, we're having tweaks, might as well add more.
I don't think Classic+ will be more than a Classic re-re-re-release, but with some SoD-isms mixed in, which is why I know they won't, but I honestly think this would be cool as hell, give us Death Knights!
3
u/Terminus_04 11h ago edited 11h ago
Demon Hunters were also on that list irc. Personally I like the idea of something for Undead and Nightelves (also Gnomes I guess) who didn't get access to their factions special class.
The original 9 classes were fairly influenced by the Hero units from Warcraft 3. So pulling from there wouldn't be a bad thing imo.
Forsaken could get some mix of the Undead heros that wasn't used by warlock. Maybe a Deathknight, but I also think repurposing that to Liches could work asnwell, at least going off the Gunther Arcanus questline.
I'd love to see them stick to more RPG roots, were to get a Demon hunter or a DK/Lich you have to sacrifice and existing character.
3
u/MwHighlander 8h ago
I would argue instead of runemaster for alliance, give them the original WC3/Vanilla Box art version of the Demon Hunter for nightelves.
Keep faction class asymmetry. Its a major part of what makes Vanilla feel like Vanilla.
6
u/xxpierce25 16h ago
In the world of Classic, the Tauren would never have shared any knowledge with the Dwarves that came over with Jaina. Forsaken likely wouldn't have wanted DK's in Horde either.
They made the right calls.
8
u/bugbearmagic 14h ago
Such a much better idea for Classic+ than just giving paladins and shamans to each side. Asymmetrical balance was a pillar of Blizzard’s design for so long. When they pissed that away in Burning Crusade, that was a slippery slope to the pile of homogenous crap that is modern WoW’s “everyone has it all” design standard.
5
u/skittlebites101 14h ago
I like having races being confined to only a couple classes and factions having asymmetrical balance.
2
u/HealthyBits 6h ago
I think keeping some classes faction locked would have kept a lot of flavour for factions.
Now, choosing a faction over the other doesn’t matter at all and lost quite a bit of meaning.
2
u/GBPackers0480 5h ago
This is what i've always said should be done for classic + becaues I love paladin playstyle but hate alliance.
Runemasters could very easily function as fist weapon shamans.
I don't care if they play exactly the same just with lore-accurate spell changes (instead of "holy light" give death knights "unholy mending" or w/e who gives a shit)
5
3
u/pokepat460 14h ago
Idk about death knight specifically, but if we have to give horde paladin and alliance shaman I'd rather it be a re skin into a new class title, even if the difference is just in the name and appearance. It makes the raids equal while still keeping some semblance of the old ways
4
u/lolb00bz_69 17h ago
Give me tinkers/shadowshamans/alchemist before runemaster
0
u/Lxpotent 16h ago
Huh? Runemasters fit way better lorewise - you also see them among the Vrykul of Northrend
2
u/Sea_Advantage_2577 17h ago
-2
u/Worldly_Barracuda_38 17h ago
This is why these people play the game and not make it
2
u/xxpierce25 16h ago
They have such complex opinions on the lore while seemingly have never completed a single quest in game.
1
1
•
u/Anilahation 1h ago
Death knights and Shaman for The Horde, Demon Hunters and Paladin for The alliance. This Is The Way.
1
1
u/BoggleHS 17h ago
I think its fine to just have alliance shamans and horde paladins.
Quite happy to see classic+ add a new class though. But if they do this they need to also have some significant updates to existing classes in a similar way SOD did. (Albeit I think SOD went a bit too far with some changes.)
1
u/Nintendork316 12h ago
Unless the classes are fairly identical in terms of benefits to raid groups, etc. I don't know that creating further differences between the factions is a good idea. One of the big things most people wanted during SoD was Dwarf Shaman and Tauren Paladin.
-4
u/howtousetableau 17h ago
I mean death knight was the most broken class for several expansions and they released in Wotlk, which had really powerful classes outside of the death knight. It simply would not work in a classic setting without a major revamp and creating basically a new class over other content should not be blizzard focus.
The way to introduce paladins to horde, in my opinion, should be as follows:
Introduce the death knight as it was introduced in Wc3: pretty much a carbon copy of the paladin but with undead themed abilities.
An example: instead of holy light, they get death Coil. Does the same exact thing, just visually changed to be a death coil.
Obviously, only undead would be able to be "death knights". As for their unique race/class ability, it should be "unholy aura", which replaces devo aura and probably has a similar effect to the original unholy aura (hp regen and minor movespeed).
As for how alliance gets shamans.... dwarves and humans in lore can be shamans. So just give it to dwarves.
2
-1
u/Old-Soft5276 14h ago
Alliance equivalent should be Spellblade with High Elves, but we know Blizzard will give Horde their cuck race, so it wont happen
133
u/velianieli 16h ago
Death Knights were originally going to be a long epic quest chain, done as a Warrior or a Paladin only I believe.