On the latest Blizzardwatch podcast they discussed whether classes needed more specs, less specs, or were just right. The episode (#99 that came out Dec. 22nd 2016 respectively) had a large discussion. To summarize Anne Stickney and Alex Ziebart both felt there were classes that could use less specs. They pointed out rogues in particular in which Assassination and Subtlety had very little difference in idea and weapons. Matt Rossi felt that with some classes that was correct, but with others (and he cited his favorite which is Warriors) saying that they could use a couple more specs as they lost Gladiators stance which was a DPS sword and shield spec, and single minded Fury which was duel wielding with two one handed weapons.
Honestly, you should dig in and listen to this podcast for this discussion. It is why I want to bring it up here.
There are three classes I have played for any amount of time this expansion. Rogue, Paladin, and Demon Hunter. I have toyed with others a bit, but I have to start with the ones I know.
Paladin is near perfect. They don't need another spec, they don't need to lose another spec. All three specs feel good and different. Ret doesn't feel as good as I would like it too, but damage wise it is fantastic right now and tanking feels smooth. I don't heal on my Pally, but what I have seen of that spec was fine.
Demon Hunter is good as well. While I would like them to figure out a ranged spec for the class, (I think the game is a little Melee heavy when you look at the classes right now) The two it has are solid and feel different. Tanking felt alright the couple of times I have done it and DPS is nice as well.
Rogue I will have to agree with the hosts. They could go to two specs and not lose much. Roll Subtlety and Assassination in together and call it good. I don't see a need for further specs, but unless they can make it feel different pare it down a little.
And the next opinions are subjective as I have not played the classes extensively and I will admit upfront to possibly being dead wrong.
Monk- Keep it as is. Three distinct specs. Three different roles.
Shaman- As is, two roles, two very different types of DPS.
Mage- This I can see being pared down to two specs. I like the suggestion that you do fire and frost and mix the arcane spells into them. Arcane has always felt weird to me in the first place.
Warlock- I think this one needs someone smarter than me. I think all three specs are distinct, but as mentioned in the podcast, Demonology has been overhauled into something else. I don't know how your reface it without stepping into the demon hunter feel of things which is why the demon form aspects were removed. The idea of being a master of demons is still cool, but I don't see why we can't have two classes taking on those aspects if they are different. (Make your demon featured warlock fly and shoot fireballs)
Priest- I am going to disagree with the podcast here. I like all three of the specs. The idea of two different types of healing, one re-active and one pro-active interests me. If anything I would split Discipline into two different specs and have a DPS spec for priests that wasn't shadow/void based and one healing spec that was all about shielding and preparations. I think having Disc straddle both kind of keeps it from being it's own animal.
Druid-is good- Four specs for four different jobs.
Hunter- This one I think is better now that survival is melee spec. From what I've played around with all three specs feel different enough to be justified. No complaints.
Warrior- I am going to agree with Rossi on one point. I would like a sword an board DPS spec. It would make more sense to me with the warrior, but I could see the Paladin having one as well. I do like the idea of the fighter who uses his shield as a weapon as much as his sword. I think a single minded fury spec would end up being to similar to the fury spec we have now. Harder to justify.
Death Knight- I would love to make the argument for a fourth spec here. My favorite tanking was duel wielding as a frost DK in Wrath of the Lich King. I would love to see it come back as I though at the time it had felt darn near perfect. I can't honestly make the argument though. Blood is a good tanking spec, and works. The two DPS specs feel different enough that I can't say we need another choice there either, or that we might need to merge them. Keep them as they are.
How do you feel? Does your class need more specs and variety, or do you feel lost with your choices and would you like it pared down to something else. Is the three spec idea outdated, and would things work better if classes weren't limited by a number that might serve some better than others? Demon Hunters started with two specs, how would you feel if the next class had four? Or maybe just one?
Where do you weigh in on this discussion?
Lag
If you would like to support Ben Marble and his subjegating of killer kittens please consider buying one of his short stories at Amazon.com. Including his new short story "The Trap," Which is free until January 31st, 2016.
No comments:
Post a Comment