Lunar Festival achievement guide
Blinded Iraq war vet raids with a little help
The latest Mists of Pandaria news
The latest patch 4.3 newsBreakfast Topic: Hero classes
by Eliah Hecht 
Mar 29th 2007 at 8:00AM
Hero classes were in the "on the horizon" section of the Under Development page for a long time, though they have since been removed. Tseric has said that they are still looking into "alternate character advancement," but we should maybe forget the term "Hero Class." At any rate, they've been since release one of the most desired improvements for the game by many players. So when someone comes forward claiming to be working for Blizzard and to have the inside scoop on how they're looking at hero classes these days, it gets me excited. Now there is, as the poster rightly points out, no credibility whatsoever to this information, aside from the fact, as Tobold says over at his blog, that it's just boring enough to be something Blizz would do.Basically, each class would be able to specialize as one of the three different hero classes, each corresponding to one of the class's talent trees. Then, by spending "Hero Points," which will be earned in unspecified ways (but will be indefinite (!)) in a fourth, linear talent panel, they could gain access to special abilities. The hero classes would also have some passive benefits. It actually sounds pretty decent to me, except for the fact that, supposedly, your choice of hero class would be absolutely permanent, like profession specializations used to be. I think it would be much better to do it how profession specs are now -- you can re-specialize, but only if you completely unlearn the profession. With hero classes, I'd make it so you could choice a new one, but you'd lose all your invested Hero Points.
Anyway, that's the rumor. My question for you: how do you think they should do hero classes? Or is "hero class" just an outdated idea and we should focus on novel methods of character progression?
[via Tobold's MMORPG Blog]
Filed under: Breakfast Topics, Features, Classes
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
Larawen Mar 29th 2007 8:33AM
When I first heard about hero classes I got pretty excited. It sounds like a great idea, and I would love to do it. An extension on the current talent system wouldn't be bad if it actually caused a permanent change. Personally I've only had two build in the game ever. So choosing one permanently wouldn't be a bad thing. It would be nice if there was certain gear that was very Hero specific. For instance a sword that is only for combat hero rogues only. The only people I would feel bad for are the classes that like to switch a lot like priests. If there was a physical model change, that would be cool too.
brandon.levan Mar 29th 2007 9:08AM
I think if they tried to get away with that idea for "hero classes" (or whatever they want to call it) they would lose a lot of long time members.
One of the CMs (Tseric maybe?) said that anything they do wouldn't be called hero classes as there is to much hype surrounding that notion and nothing could live up to it.
That's a fair enough assessment, but this idea is just too lazy, even for Blizzard who lets bugs remain in their game for years at a time.
Character advancement should be just that, a real advancing, not a half-baked offshoot of a talent spec.
Sal Mar 29th 2007 8:51AM
Bah humbug. I'm Canadian and don't know any Canadians or Canadian universities where people refer to themselves as seniors. Immediately I thought this a lie.
First of all, a 12 year old came up with some of those names. I mean "shady thief" and "bringer of pain?" Might as well call the shadow priest a face melter and retribution paladin a retnoob. Being a shaman I am a wee incensed that shadow hunter would even be considered for a restoration shaman, given that they are healers and shamans have no connection with light or shadow.
I agree with Tobold; it's tiring and silly. Hero classes IMO should be "Orders" that you join after a long but soloable quest chain and investment of money. Each order should be open to a few classes but not all. They should offer passive bonuses and active abilities that exist over and above your class abilities and spec. The Cadre of Shadow Hunters for instance should give a +25 passive shadow resist and +3% agility, and an array of basic shadow magic abilities. It would be open to hunters, warriors or rogues, and would alter the way you play your class in order to make things more interesting than "more of the same."
You can of course renounce your Order and do the quest for a new one, but I expect there to be a penalty, like a two week cooldown before you can rejoin the first one.
Superbeef Mar 29th 2007 9:02AM
Well to me it's pretty obvious what Blizzard's TRYING to do, and I think it relates pretty heavily to the fact that respecs AREN'T free. They're trying to diversify each job by its talent tree, so instead of making one new job class, your effective making 3 new one for each job already existing.
Which is a mixed blessing really.
For one, it doesn't sound like it really innovates the current jobs, just rather nudges them along the path they are already on. Plus, if you look at some jobs, right now there are CLEAR talent tree winners, and some jobs are going to be threatened into marginalizing into cookie-cutter hero classes too. Show me a 70 Paladin who'se not 41 Holy, and I'll show you a PvPer who probably isn't liked in a team.
Also the permenant thing really bugs me too. Basically, anyone who dares tread the hero water first has a chance or making some mistakes, or simply going down a path that they'll later regret. Being a permanent fixture may be okay off the bat, but somewhere down the line, Blizzard is going to have to let you repec your hero line somehow.
To me, the best way to do a hero class would to be to have to unlock it somehow. A quest that could be soloed or possibly 5 maned at lvl 60 or 70. And there should be a quest giver in every major city, maybe a few to start, that unlock a hero class on your account. Maybe even have one quest for each class. Then, you get to reroll as your hero class. Start back at the bottom and relearn your class, albeit with more power. I think this would really bring alive the old world too.
Just my thoughts.
aaron Mar 29th 2007 4:24PM
sounds alot lke starwars to me
Ryan Mar 29th 2007 9:20AM
@2 Have you ever played WC3? The shadow hunter is a hero that casts a chain heal and drops totems, I think the shaman class would be the only logical class to take that hero's place.
Cem Apr 13th 2007 4:03AM
~I reackon that this would be a nice step forward fore blizz. Altough it shouldnt be permanent, there should be a penalty of along the lines of 2 days but nothing more except a long quest that could go on for more than an hour or two. This is because waiting a week of membership while your not happy with your character can be really annoying. But I think that this kind of idead can really be good if it follows the lines of maple s.
~first post XD~
NH2 Mar 29th 2007 9:34AM
I remember reading a message board post a while back that purported somewhat similar claims. This looks to be about the same with a few different names for the hero classes and a nice wrapping.
Todd Mar 29th 2007 9:45AM
Making this a permanent specialization sounds rather stupid. If Blizzard decides to go down this road, is Blizzard also considering making talent specializing permanent as well?
I find this odd, since Blizzard is all about customization and allowing for broad experimentation in talents. This route would almost scream people rerolling their classes if they fuck it up. Seriously.
Take the mage for instance. Anyone who uses an Elemental build, talents spread across fire and frost, what Heroic specialization would they be allowed to pick (if only one) that would match and benefit their talent specialization? If this is all legit thinking, Blizzard needs to consider more options.
Elbows Mar 29th 2007 10:15AM
Before WoW went live, I had always pictured a character's hero class as being dependent on a combination of race and class. So for example, if you were a dwarf warrior, your hero class would be mountain king. I rolled my main specifically because I assumed orc + warrior = blademaster.
whoops.
Sal Mar 29th 2007 9:48AM
@5. Shamans have little to do with their WC3 predecessors. In the WoW context it just doesn't make any sense. In Jintha'alor you find shadow hunters. They are hunters that do some shadow damage. The suggestion in the post is basically just making a random WC3 reference without any basis in logic.
Of course this is the fantasy game that introduced a crashing interdimensional spaceship.
Burning Adrenaline Mar 29th 2007 9:48AM
Blizzard has enough trouble balancing classes and their talents as is. This sounds wonderful.
Scott Pilgrim Mar 29th 2007 10:53AM
Pretty much like the prestige classes of Dungeons and Dragons where your character has to meet a set of requirements before being accepted in that class and learning its abilities.
Requirements could include character level, a skill/ability level, or the presence of a skill or talent.
Ryan Mar 29th 2007 11:26AM
@8 I dunno, we have bloodlust, purge, lightning shield, chain lightning, far sight, we can't cast spirit wolves but we can turn into one. The Shadow Hunter hero, which is what this is talking about, casts totems and a chain heal (which is called healing wave). The only thing that doesn't correspond is the hex ability and the lvl 6 ability (big bad voodoo, which would just be rediculously OP in WoW). The Shadow Hunter hero doesn't cast shadow spells. I'm not sure why you don't see the obvious parallels (not that this information has any credibility imo, just that the shadow hunter in WC3 is obviously a shaman).
Timothy Jaxon Mar 29th 2007 12:24PM
I think everyone should keep in mind that the first of April is this Sunday. I've gone into a fugue-state of disbelieving everything until the middle of next week.
Flit Mar 29th 2007 11:39AM
It should be as hard to become a hero as it was to become high-warlord, to be an intimidating, slightly overpowered class that caused fear in the other faction when seen. Limit it to a handful on each server. Not everyone should have access to something like this. Give them extra group buffs like a "battle shout" that has a range limit of 3000 yards or whatever and lasts 15 min instead of 2. Could be interesting.
Rich Mar 29th 2007 11:55AM
SO SO SO fake.
Druid dude Mar 29th 2007 12:54PM
Permanent specialization would suck for most, if not all classes. Any class that can cast a heal would be forced to specialize in Perma-Heal. Warriors would be required by raid guilds to specialize deeper in to tanking, meaning they would be even better meat shields, but would never be able to farm for repair bills by going Fury for a weekend or anything.
It might be cool, or it might suck, to have one Hero Class for each faction, as a new class. They would be much harder to level, and have very powerful but limited abilities. Their talent trees could make them a tank, healer, single target dps or AOE dps.
Leda Mar 29th 2007 12:34PM
I'm honestly thinking blizz could use doing a little ripping off of another popular franchise on this one... DnD, Prestige classes to be exact; with a twist of course. Many classes with the right talent spec's turn out VERY similar in function, style, or theme.
For instance: fury warriors and combat rogues basic job- get up in your face and dps you to death, Destro locks and fire mages- both generaly centered around bombing the holy shite out of you with hell fire, Demonology locks and beast mastery hunters- both centeralized around powerful pets.
Of course some specs are unique to the class or are the classes one primary function ex. Feral Druid- no other class fights in a shapeshifted form. Holy Priest- other 'healbots' exist but none to the extent of a holy preists ability, the classes' primary function. For this reason I belive that these specs (1 per class) should have unique heroic classes, really just their primary class on R.O.I.D.S.
So heres my idea; make heroic classes are just that, a new class, when you take it at XX lvl you add a new class to your current class and will continue learning 'some' abilities from your original class(ex. sinister strike & poisons for a combat rogue)but as a whole you are this New class.
Lil confusing so let me give an example: Fury Warrior & Combat Rogue can both become the new 'skirmisher' class where both classes will learn more 'head-on' dps and dodging/parry type abilities. The rogue will continue to learn things like his SS and poisons, the warrior will continue with learning cleave, whilwind, etc. There could also be crossovers of abilities between the classes, ex. the rogue might learn how to wear mail armor and actually GAIN aggro where the warrior might learn a finisher similar to evicerate and maybe some low lvl poisons.
I think with a system like this #1 instead of 27 'new' classes you have 18(9 unique, 9 shared) #2 definately make the classes more varied(Skirmisher Rogue CCing then OTing in mail) and finally #3 a system similar to this has worked for WotC in their DnD 3rd ed. Adapting this would be no problem.
Mir Mar 29th 2007 3:22PM
@2: Like your "Orders" idea. Access to specialized abilities after a long and hard investment seems fair, reminds me a little of the now sadly obsolete quest for the epic hunter weapon.