The Queue: Digital aspirin
by Alex Ziebart 
Apr 4th 2011 at 11:00AM
As I write this, it's 1:00 a.m., it's hailing outside, and I'm awake with a skull-shattering headache. I could be asleep, but I love all of you too much to leave you Queueless. So here I am.
Today we'll discuss love, hero classes, WoW Insider raiders, and more.
Rai asked:
What is love?
I'm afraid I can't help you there. That answer can only come from within.
Also, I am a robot. Beep beep.
Scott asked:
When will we see the epic livestream of all of the WoW Insider staff in a single raid group tackling bosses in the PTR?
When our staff isn't spread out across the entire world, when our work schedules align with the stars, and when we start hiring based on building a balanced raid group. Also, we have a great working rapport, but that doesn't necessarily translate to a raid setting -- we would be better off streaming a specific team member's established raid, not some wacky WoW Insider PuG.
@darkhonorwow asked via Twitter:
What is the next hero class? Could they release one in patch 4.2, 4.3, 4.4 ...
Well, naturally we have no idea what the next hero class is. We can speculate and generally have fun discussing the possibilities, but Blizzard certainly hasn't come out and told us what it's doing with classes. As for adding one in a Cataclysm patch, I'm going to say that is extremely unlikely. It's a horrible idea. Who wants to find room in their raid for a brand new class in the middle of an expansion? Which member of your 25-man gets the boot mid-expansion for the new class? At least in a new expansion there's a total content reboot, and an existing member of your raid can reroll -- or any new recruit would start out on equal footing with everybody else, as far as gearing is concerned.
Blizzard will do what Blizzard will do, but it just doesn't make any sense to me to add one in a content patch. You would it when making a complete mechanical overhaul would make sense -- and when you can use the addition as a selling point for your new expansion, of course.
@kremlincardinal asked via Twitter:
Is it weird that I follow WoW religiously, even though I haven't played for nearly five years?
I don't think so! Well, maybe it is weird, but not as uncommon as you'd think. There are a lot of things I like to read about that I haven't touched in years -- I haven't played a Resident Evil game since Resident Evil 3, but I like reading about new additions to the series or watching Let's Play videos of them. I haven't played Resident Evil 5, but I've watched other people play the co-op beginning to end.
Long after people have stopped watching a TV show they liked, they'll sometimes open up a forum thread about it to find out what happened on the last episode. The same thing happens with movies and books.
World of Warcraft is something you enjoyed, and even though you have no drive to partake of the game anymore, you're still interested in where the game is going and what it has to offer. I don't know what parts of the game you enjoyed when you did play, but I think it's totally valid to want to keep up with the direction of raiding in the game or additions to the game mythos without actually wanting to play through it.
Hm. My headache is gone. I'll take that as my cue to go put the finishing touches on this week's WoW Archivist -- I think you guys are going to love it.
What, you thought I would sleep after my headache went away? Pish, posh.
Have questions about the World of Warcraft? The WoW Insider crew is here with The Queue, our daily Q&A column. Leave your questions in the comments, and we'll do our best to answer 'em!
Filed under: Analysis / Opinion, The Queue
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 11)
Zayd Apr 4th 2011 11:03AM
Q for the Q
Why does a shamen's casting animation for Chain Heal imply it's a holy spell?
It's the only spell they have that does that.
razion Apr 4th 2011 11:14AM
Well you see, that's because of... I mean that's... um... *looks around nervously*.
razion Apr 4th 2011 11:15AM
(As an aside, I've always thought of it as healing lightning, which would explain the color.)
Lemons Apr 4th 2011 11:17AM
Probably because the spell effect looks like a holy spell.
Eternauta Apr 4th 2011 11:32AM
Because it looks exactly like the Shadow Hunter's "Healing Wave" from Warcraft 3: The Frozen Throne.
I heard they were going to change that animation, though =S
Glaras Apr 4th 2011 12:20PM
I'd love to see the entire animation redone based on the new water-centric themes. Make it look like one of those fountains where the water arcs from spot to spot.
Twill Apr 4th 2011 1:30PM
It's not a holy spell. It's nature. It might be a bright color, but that is still appropriate.
ScorchHellfire Apr 4th 2011 1:45PM
@Eternauta
They already have changed it before... originally it was just yellow but sometime in late BC/early Wrath they added the greenness and that distant thunder sound to it...
Saz Apr 4th 2011 2:31PM
They're Jesus beams. Be healed by my holy chain heals of great love, my friend.
Culhag Apr 4th 2011 2:39PM
What's a shamen ?
(FYI the plural of Shaman is Shamans)
Saeadame Apr 4th 2011 2:42PM
Their other spells did used to have more of a "nature" feel, but that wasn't really shaman-y since they're more "elemental" than "nature" (plus, druids already have "nature"). I really like the new "water" spell effect, and I hope they put it for Chain Heal (although, I guess the issue is that it might look more like an attack than a healing spell, but eh).
twobitgaming Apr 4th 2011 3:07PM
When nature calls, the stream is yellow
Natsumi Apr 4th 2011 5:29PM
@Culhag
Actually the plural of Shaman is Shaman.
The more you know....
Otown Apr 4th 2011 5:57PM
One is a Shaman, two is a Shaman and three is too Shamany.
pancakes Apr 4th 2011 6:14PM
The female form of Shaman is Shamanka, apparently. I always thought that was interesting.
Spazmoose Apr 4th 2011 6:27PM
@Natsumi & @Culhag
Both of you are correct, but as it happens Culhag happens to be slightly more correct.
If you take a look at the "Spelling of Shaman" article on Wowpedia (http://www.wowpedia.org/Spelling_of_shaman) you will notice that the proper pluralization of the word "Shaman" is indeed "Shamans". However, the official stance by Blizzard on whether the proper pluralization is "Shaman" or "Shamans" is that both are deemed acceptable, while Blizzard prefers the use of "Shaman" as the plural.
Blizzard has not been entirely consistent in their own usage, however, and have used "Shamans" in official communications.
Based on that article, though, I would have to agree with Culhag, and state that the usage of "Shamen" would be incorrect.
vertigobliss86 Apr 4th 2011 9:57PM
"shaman's casting..."
it was possessive, not plural
Al Apr 4th 2011 10:07PM
@Spazmoose, it says "the English plural" is Shamans. Given that it's not an English word, we can disregard that.
Terrant Apr 4th 2011 10:20PM
@Al All languages borrow words, and grammatical rules like pluralization get mixed up and adopted. By your logic, we should call more than one sauna "saunat" because it's a Finnish word and that's how it's pluralized in Finnish. But we don't, because the word has entered general use in English and we normally pluralize English words by adding s.
Crispn Apr 4th 2011 11:04AM
Anything on the feature that shows boss loot, abilities etc, isnt that supposed to be 4.2? Or is it next raid patch?