Neth on Death Knights being the only new class
by Michael Gray 
May 31st 2008 at 11:00AM
We all know by now that Death Knights are the new class being added with Wrath of the Lich King. And, what's more, they're the only class being added with the new expansion. Skudo (Altar of Storms) doesn't like that much, and would rather see Shadow Hunters or Demon Hunters added.
Posts like these are common enough, but Nethaera showed up to add some clarifying candlelight. First, she reiterated that Blizzard isn't closed to the idea of adding more classes in the future. But what she really seems to strive to get across is that adding a class isn't easy.
There's a lot that goes into creating a new archetype for players to operate, play, defeat, vanquish, and exploit for every bit of Warcraft goodness. There's balance to consider, and the need to make each class play in unique ways. Heck, we all spend enough time arguing now about whether the existing classes are even balanced. Can you imagine what it's going to be like with a brand new class added?
So these things take time. Assuming that Blizzard's team pulls off Death Knights well, I'm pretty sure we'll see more new classes in later expansions. Let's see how the first new class goes, before we put our eggs in new baskets.
Filed under: Analysis / Opinion, Expansions, Classes, Death Knight, Wrath of the Lich King
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
Bunkai May 31st 2008 11:36AM
Balance should not be an excuse for "Hero" classes. At least, not balance with the other classes. If the hero class was done properly, and at max level so that your character evolves in to it, then it's playstyle would be relatively similar. A hero class SHOULD be more powerful than any non-hero class, and therefore it's balance would be with other hero classes, and Blizz should NOT try to fit it in as just another class. Which, IMO, that is exactly what they are doing.
There's really nothing HEROIC about the new HERO class, if you ask me. It's really nothing more than a free ride to level 55 so that you can get the new class in to Northrend faster.
glorft May 31st 2008 11:48AM
Then no one would play the original classes or want to raid with the non-hero classes. "Heroc class" just refers to a new class which functions differently than the other though to the same ends (i.e. the Rune system). The term 'hero class' was not founded by blizz, but suggested years ago by other players. Blizz has stated from the beginning that death knights and others would be balanced just like everything else.
Also, wasn't there mention about Archdruids maybe being added in a patch inbetween wotlk and the xpac after that?
Doppelman May 31st 2008 11:50AM
I completely agree with you Bunkai!
"your character evolves in to it"
That is how I have always thought the Hero class
should be done. I want my druid to evolve into something greater, not a 55 level unlock. Warriors and Paladins that are willing to give up their holy ways should hit end-level and get a choice to evolve into the Death Knight Hero Class, or other Hero Classes, but no blizzard is doing this and I must say I have not been happy with it.
jrb May 31st 2008 11:52AM
the names archdruid, and shadow/demon hunter suggest sub classes, more than distinct and unique classes of their own.
depa May 31st 2008 12:43PM
You hit the nail on the head. The balance of hero classes should be considered in relation to other hero classes, not the other ones. But that also means your character is upgraded into a hero class after a certain level -- another important concept that Blizzard is throwing out with their Death Knight idea. Actually, when you think about it the Death Knight is NOT a hero class at all, precisely because of those differences.
Eternalpayn May 31st 2008 2:55PM
Blizzard did coin the term Hero Class... Go play Warcraft 3 and Starcraft.
Also, the Death Knight is a Hero class in that it is supposed to have an epic feel, not be overpowered.
Asgaroth Jun 2nd 2008 9:36AM
That would be totally stupid. If the hero classes were more powerful, then PvP and PVE experiences would cause the normal classes to be irrelevant additions to raids or groups. Balance needs to be the most important aspect in any game. Otherwise the gaming experience will be either too easy or way too hard.
Bunkai Jun 2nd 2008 9:58AM
What all of you have missed is the fact that your character would evolve in to the hero at max level. So there would not be a mass exodus of people jumping off of their regular characters over to their Hero class. So it wouldn't cause the game-breaking situation that you are trying to imply.
Also, PvE would have to be built around the inclusion of the hero classes in to the raid... which has to be done anyway, so that arguement is invalid also.
PvP wouldn't be a problem either, as long as the gear-matching bracket system included the hero class gear as a filter so that teams with no hero classes would not get matched up against a team of all hero classes.
All of the argument points that everyone keeps trying to bring up against this are things that are already done in the game, just not to the extent that would be needed to allow for the hero classes as I've suggested. However, if development were pointed in the direction that I've suggested, those things would naturally follow as part of the normal development process.
I've yet to see an argument that actually can logically state why my suggestion is game-breaking. More development and testing time would be necessary, or at least those processes would need to be intensified, but by making the Hero Class just an extension of the already existing classes, some of the time needed for the Death Knight development would be offset. It wouldn't be a one-to-one comparision (not just multiplying the DK dev time by 9). That's not how development works.
To me, at least, this would be an interesting topic to get some "Blue" feedback on, but I've posted about it in the official forums before, and have never seen a blue response.
Varus May 31st 2008 11:42AM
These things take time...
Just like releasing expansions.. Seems other companies with MMO's can crank out quarterly content updates and still manage paid expansion (Turbine for LotRO) during the same year - Blizzard seems to be struggling with "expansion every 2 years" schedule (and they're not even adding anything that alters the game mechanics drastically).
QA and Polish are great, but adding a new classes shouldn't be *that* complicated, especially if you're sitting on top of Mnt. Everest made out of dollar bills.
roycommi May 31st 2008 12:16PM
I have to agree. this issue of new content taking soooooooooo long has been an issue since the game came out. I would think you could add some utilities that would streamline and accelerate the prototyping process. If other game companies can do it quickly then i would think a bigger company with more resources could be better equipped to do this. its strange that its not and i suspect its not "really" an issue of play balance per se but more of an issue of not wanting to since they dont really need to. If WOW were a small MMORPG that was trying to add users i bet the content would be put out much much faster. as is, why rock the boat when u dont have to?
Eternalpayn May 31st 2008 2:57PM
Adding a new class is complicated. Have you ever taken a game design course?
Every single spell, and talent, has to be balanced with all parts of the game. The mechanics have to work and be fun. Also, a lot of polish goes into it. Other companies put out content quicker, but they give out less per release.
my2cents May 31st 2008 3:54PM
Yes, other companies do it quickly, but Blizzard does it *well*. If you ask me, that's precisely why they're on top and why games like LOTRO have only managed to carve out a very, very tiny niche in the MMO market.
Josef May 31st 2008 11:49AM
Excuse me, but when you are trying to balance the constant criticism of 10 million people, and trying to balance things quite well I imagine things are a bit too tricky to think about introducing a new class. No other online game has ever been this successful, I would imagine it is stupidly difficult to find a slot into which to put new classes and keep everything fair.
Fair enough I WOULD like to see new hero classes in the future, but I am not going to go down in a rage simply because blizzard are doing a thorough (can't spell, my apoligise) job of making a class.
Carl May 31st 2008 12:07PM
I think that we are seeing two definitions of "hero." Many of us seem to be thinking of hero as someone who is capable of abilities and deeds greater than other people. In most cases this is true of a hero.
The Death Knight is a hero class. In this game we are all heroes. Look at the basic NPC. They are not capable of traveling to Outland deep into the Black Temple and fighting Illidan. Heck most of them seem to have difficulty selling bread. This is the first class that does not start at level 1 with no gear. When every other class starts they are nobodies. Your character may have had their own motivation or back-story but in the end they start out helping others. Death Knights joined Arthas and through their skill or Arthas' sick sense of humor rose to be some of his more powerful warriors. They already had substantial training and phat loot but for some reason are breaking away. They start out already larger than life with great power.
By end game we are all heroes and that is what Blizzard is trying to balance.
Avaloner May 31st 2008 1:12PM
If you ask me Blizzard are just being careful. They are in a good position now, they do not necessitate to crank out the new content so they are biding their time with expansions. Problem is, the game is getting stale. I know it is for me. I do not like raiding too much so the only alternative for me is a new class or more levels. As is things are going too slow for most of the population. No wonder so many people flocked for Age of Conan. Hopefully such games (AoC and WAR) should push Blizzard towards churning out new content at a more acceptable rate.
Sylythn May 31st 2008 12:26PM
Whenever someone says adding content/classes should be easier - I'm reminded of Customizable Card Games. Namely Star Trek 1st Edition. Marketing of the product demanded a very fast schedule of new content, with each of the expansions adding new dimensions, skills, mechanics...very similar to the kind of additions you get when adding a new class. Well, if you're at all familiar with this game, you know what happened. After about 12-13 content upgrades (read patches) we were left with one of the most stupidly difficult games to play in terms of keeping all the rules straight. Mechanics didn't work together, exploitation decks were what won tournaments, the balance was totally out of whack and it was near impossible to enjoy playing anymore. If Blizzard added classes at the speed some people want, I see exactly the same thing occurring. The fact that they haven't changed basic game mechanics in a long time is a GOOD thing - although it will also mean that eventually they'll have to come out with WoW 2.0, rather than just infinite expansions for this one.
kabshiel May 31st 2008 1:20PM
Haha, yeah Decipher was never very good at keeping things simple. I remember each new expansion for the Star Wars game added like fifty new pages of rules. It really became impossible to play.
Filabane May 31st 2008 12:43PM
For those who complain about the time it takes them to develop new content, you need to remember that expansions aren't the only thing they give us. Just in patch 2.4 they gave us one of the largest content additions to the game outside of the expansion itself.
It does take them a long while to produce expansions, and I like many others would like them to come out faster, but I prefer the idea of quality over quantity that they try so hard to stay to.
I came to WoW from EverQuest 1. That game very quickly in the last year or two that I played it became all about quantity. They had new pay content coming out every couple of months, and honestly very little of it was any good.
I would much rather have the one quality expansion every couple of years of WoW with several large free content patches in between then them just throwing content at us.
Asgaroth Jun 2nd 2008 10:06AM
To add on to your comment. Blizzard is a very professional and value-centric company. The reason they are conservative with their information is to allow them to perfect every nuance within the game design. Sure bugs happen, but because Blizzard is so meticulous and careful with releasing information about upcoming games/expansions, the reward is having 10m subscribers and a successful game that set the bar for future MMOs. I'd rather for them to take a couple of years building an awesome game, than to rush release crap.
zappo Jun 2nd 2008 10:19AM
Yeah, it's sad to see people don't understand how hard it is to develop a game like this. Everquest 1 was the defacto standard for quite some time... and it was a nightmare. Patch after patch things were like a roller coaster with class (im)balance. New content? Sure, and half of it didn't work right. And sad as THAT was, games that tried to be the EQ killer were even worse!
Blizzard has done an amazing job with WoW and I think the pacing is quite good. Heck, they even add content for us later between expansions at no cost. It still amazes me to no end that they have made a world so massive and complex yet my character never gets "stuck". In EQ not a week would go by before a GM would have to drag me (or my body) out of some dumb buggy area.
I have concerns that inscription is going to majoryly bork class balance at first, but they'll probably have it corrected within a month or two after release.