This site makes extensive use of JavaScript.
Please enable JavaScript in your browser.
Live
PTR
10.2.7
PTR
10.2.6
Beta
The Method Behind the Madness: A Guide to Creating Classes
Post Reply
Return to board index
Post by
HiVolt
There are a number of ways that classes can be thought up. Some can be just random ideas that pop into one's head at any given time. Others are methodically and meticulously planned brainchildren of people with too much time on their hands, myself included. But, regardless of these facts, nearly all of us have thought of an idea from another game, a movie, anything really, that we have thought would be a rather nice inclusion into World of Warcraft.
Having read many of these ideas, I've come up with a plan, not necessarily a fool-proof plan, to help users give their ideas a good polish, and make the class fit in with World of Warcraft. All you need to do, is follow a simple set of rules:
Rule 1
: Gameplay comes first, know your role.
Always remember that your class idea, no matter how ridiculous or overpowered it seems, will have to fit into the gameplay for WoW. That being said, it must fit into a certain role.
This is not to generalize a class as "an underpowered mage with mail armor" or anything of the sort, but to help you understand where your class would fit into the makeup of a group or raid. Hybrid classes can obviously fill multiple roles, but often not as well as classes that are dedicated to a single role. For instance, a Rogue or Mage is(in theory) going to have more DPS output than that of an Enhancement or Elemental Shaman.
There are a few roles that classes can fill: Tanking, Support (Buffing and Crowd Control), Physical Damage (Ranged or Melee), Magical Damage (Ranged or Melee), and Healing.
Rule 2
: Lore is a must have, know your game setting.
Despite your stance on lore, whether you're a lorenerd or someone who just plays the game for "TEH L33T EPIXXX!", you need to come up with some sort of story for how your character class would fit into the Warcraft Universe. This includes Hero Classes. If you decide on making a Hero Class, you must include an explanation as to how they would fit into the game world as we know it, or into a future expansion.
We all know that there are a ton of retcons that have come through the game, some of which are questionable, others are set in stone(until they are retconned again). That being said,
YOU
do
NOT
have the ability to make retcons. If you keep that in mind, you will be much more well received in your ideas if you keep them within the game world. For instance, if you have an idea to make a character class that works solely with phasers, lightsabers, and plasma grenades, chances are, it doesn't fit into the Warcraft Universe as we know it.
Granted, there are a few things you can work in that some might see as outside of the spectrum of Warcraft, and this is fine. But you can't expect people to accept a plethora Master Chiefs, Darth Vaders, and Captain Kirks coming into the game world to pwn some Burning Legion face. Getting fancy, or bending the lore a little is fine, but you can't completely break the lore if you want your class to be taken seriously.
The game is in a fantasy setting for a reason. Whether you decide to go into High Fantasy, Dark Fantasy, Gothic Fantasy, or whatever else, remember to keep it in the realm of Fantasy.
Rule 3
: Have some examples, know your spells and abilities.
We all know that there are a ton of different types of spells and abilities in the game. Many of them take something from other classes, others are completely unique. Do not be afraid to experiment with spell and ability ideas. This is your idea, you don't want to water down the spells and abilities. Just because some might seem overpowered, doesn't necessarily mean that they are. Just because some seem like they aren't overpowered, doesn't mean that they are not.
Through your feedback, you will likely be told if a spell or ability or talent is too overpowered, but you likely won't hear if it needs buffed. With that in mind, you cannot be afraid to make things look like they're powerful. If they look like they're powerful, it could be a draw to the class. If they look too powerful, you'll be told about it so that you can make some adjustments.
One thing that you absolutely need, are some examples for spells and abilities. Without examples all the readers can get from your ideas are generalizations of the class. You do not want this. Once your idea is generalized, it becomes much less appealing. Having a few examples of spells and abilities is a good way to alleviate this problem, especially if those ideas are unique.
Rule 4
: Limit your class, know your power levels.
(Obligatory "Over 9000" reference)
No class can do absolutely everything, and do it better than any other. There are some classes that can do everything, but can't(in theory) do all of it nearly as well as classes who are dedicated to those roles. Limiting your class is the best way to overcome the problem of making the class as a whole too powerful.
One way that you can do this, is to include drawbacks and penalties into spells. Another way is to limit the class to a single role or just 1 to 2 roles. Limiting a class adds balance to the game, whether it be in PvP or PvE. You don't want to make a class that is simultaneously able to take down enemies quickly, while being able to heal themselves effortlessly. If you make something along these lines, chances are that the class isn't going to be well received.
Rule 5
: Hero Classes, know your availability.
If you do indeed decide to make a hero class idea, keep in mind that if the idea were actually in WoW, it would need to be available to
all
of the races. That's right, all of them. I'm sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but hero classes that are available only to a set group of races, aren't likely to be received well by the community.
The Death Knight broke the mold in allowing all races to have a hero class, despite the existing lore, and as such, all hero classes should follow the same mold. Now, this does not mean that you cannot create a hero class that is only available to certain races. But, if you do indeed decide to take this method, you should be prepared, to back up your claims as to why those races are the only ones allowed to utilize the hero class. Equality is a must when thinking of hero classes, so, if only certain races are allowed to become your hero class, it would be a good idea to create one or more classes that are able to be played by the races not included into the original idea.
Rule 6
: Accept ALL criticism, know your community.
Whether or not you like this idea, if you post your idea, anyone registered on this forum can comment on it. If they don't like it, they could either ignore it, give their criticisms, or tell you that it sucks and that you suck for making it. You need to be prepared to receive
all
comments on your idea, no matter the amount of trolling or flaming contained within. If you are unable to do this, you probably shouldn't post the idea.
Take all constructive criticism into account. People that give these comments, don't do so to deride or complain, but genuinely want to help you make your class better. If someone gives no criticisms, but instead generalizes about the class, making it seem less cool, try and explain what makes the class unique. And one thing that you must remember, never flame others for giving criticism or flaming you, and never feed the trolls, just don't do it, mon!
If you can follow these steps, you can easily create a class that is well received by the Warcraft community. And, if you're serious about creating classes, here are some sources that you may want to use as starting points, references, and tools:
Currently Playable WoW Classes
- Can be used as a reference for currently playable classes.
Warcraft RPG Core Classes
- Can be used as a starting point for ideas.
Warcraft RPG Presitge Classes
- Can be used as a starting point for ideas.
Warcraft RPG Variant Classes
- Can be used as a starting point for ideas.
War Tools
- Allows you to make custom talent trees.
The Hive Workshop
- Can be used as a starting point for ideas. (It's a Warcraft 3 Modding site, but it can inspire many ideas that could carry into WoW.)
Post by
HiVolt
If you feel I've left anything out, please let me know.
Woops, wrong board. If I could get a mod to move this to L&RP it would be much appreciated.
Thanks!
Post by
awarewolf
Great read! One thing I want to mention:
Retcon: Retroactive continuity is the deliberate changing of previously established facts in a work of serial fiction. The change is informally referred to as a "retcon", and producing a retcon is called "retconning". (From Wiki)
Sorry, I never heard of that term before so I had to look it up to fully understand Rule 2.
Thanks Volt!
Post by
229054
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Morec0
A very helpful bit of information. I'm goign to start work on a Dark Ranger Talent tree right away.
Post by
HiVolt
What about adding to the Hero Class section something like: "must be in tune with a future expansion's lore"?
Yeah, I should probably mention that, I'll roll that into Rule 2.
Post by
Orranis
Reported for sticky.
Post by
TheMediator
That being said, YOU do NOT have the ability to make retcons.
Errr....
We don't have the ability to make new classes either.
For ANY new class to become playable, there is going to have to be a change in lore somewhere. While I agree with your point that it should work within the Warcraft Universe, I do NOT agree with the idea that lore shouldn't be able to be shifted to fit the new classes.
Post by
HiVolt
That being said, YOU do NOT have the ability to make retcons.
Errr....
We don't have the ability to make new classes either.
For ANY new class to become playable, there is going to have to be a change in lore somewhere. While I agree with your point that it should work within the Warcraft Universe, I do NOT agree with the idea that lore shouldn't be able to be shifted to fit the new classes.
No, for many classes, lore would not have to change to make them playable. All they need to do is take them directly from the pen & paper Warcraft RPG. There is already lore to support the classes, even if they are not readily available in the game we play. All that would be needed is adding an explanation to make them playable, that's not a retcon unless it directly changes something within the lore that has been previously established.
Example:
Adding Runemasters to the game would not change any previously established lore, unless the class were tailored to fit all races, rather than just Tauren, Trolls, Orcs, Dwarves, Night Elves and Humans. All that would be needed is an explanation as to why the class is now playable in-game. If the explanation does not change anything that is previously established in the story, other than making them playable, it is not a retcon, but an addition to the lore.
And I didn't say you couldn't bend and tweak the lore to make it work. What I was trying to get across with that statement is that if a person wants their idea to be well received, they should not drastically alter the lore to accommodate the idea they have.
This thread isn't about what exactly you should make your class able to do, what you should call it, or directly making the class playable; it's all about making sure that you have an idea that's well received by the community, and within the realm of plausibility for the Warcraft universe.
Take my Warmage idea as an example:
History and Lore:
Warmages are spellcasters who accompany soldiers into the heart of battle. The generations of warfare on Azeroth have given warmages time to hone useful spells into simple and secret rituals, called "battlemagics", which are passed from warmage to another. Warmages are proficient with some melee weapons, and relatively light armor.
and the differences from WoWWiki:
Warmages are arcane spellcasters who accompany soldiers into the heart of battle. The generations of warfare on Azeroth have given warmages time to hone useful spells into simple and secret rituals, called "battlemagics", which are passed from warmage to another.
Warmages are proficient with all simple melee and ranged weapons, and light armor. They can wield a sword in one hand, and a staff in the other. Armor of any type interferes with the warmage's arcane gestures, which can cause his spells to fail (if those spells have somatic components)
. As warmages accompany warriors into battle, they become better at defending themselves than other wizards. They develop greater martial skill in the crucible of battle
The only difference is the matter of what armor and weapons they wield, and the idea that armor of any type causes their spells to fail. This isn't necessarily a retcon because all it does is change the mechanics of the class a bit, and not the story behind it.
If you were to propose the Dark Ranger class and say that the class itself originates from something other than the Scourge and Sylvanas,
that
would be a retcon.
Post by
Claggi
That's right, all of them. I'm sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but hero classes that are available only to a set group of races, aren't likely to be received well by the community.
But then every class starts becoming available to everyone at that rate, and the game starts to suffer homogonization to the point that some races will simply fade out of usage or commonity amongst some classes.
Warriors and Death Knights are already underwhelming for this reason, and Mages, Priests and Hunters are almost there as well.
The expectations of players will be underwhelming if we start getting Witch Doctors, Spell Breakers, Necromancers, Bards and Felsworn classes and somehow Tauren, Draenei and Worgen can be them all just because heroes are able to be all races.
What if we start to get playable races who haven't been on Azeroth much at all. You're going to tell me Lich King plucked a hand into that world just so we could get Arrakoa Death Knights?
Like everything else, hero lore should reflect the choice. The excuse of all races worked once, it might not work as a surprise next class.
In fact, I go out of my way to ensure certain racial class patterns and availability combos are avoided at times. That's another story for another thread.
Post by
Orranis
Yes, I disagree that it should be available to all races, but it should be available to both factions.
Post by
HiVolt
That's right, all of them. I'm sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but hero classes that are available only to a set group of races, aren't likely to be received well by the community.
But then every class starts becoming available to everyone at that rate, and the game starts to suffer homogonization to the point that some races will simply fade out of usage or commonity amongst some classes.
Warriors and Death Knights are already underwhelming for this reason, and Mages, Priests and Hunters are almost there as well.
The expectations of players will be underwhelming if we start getting Witch Doctors, Spell Breakers, Necromancers, Bards and Felsworn classes and somehow Tauren, Draenei and Worgen can be them all just because heroes are able to be all races.
What if we start to get playable races who haven't been on Azeroth much at all. You're going to tell me Lich King plucked a hand into that world just so we could get Arrakoa Death Knights?
Like everything else, hero lore should reflect the choice. The excuse of all races worked once, it might not work as a surprise next class.
In fact, I go out of my way to ensure certain racial class patterns and availability combos are avoided at times. That's another story for another thread.
From the same Rule you took your quotation from:
Equality is a must when thinking of hero classes, so, if only certain races are allowed to become your hero class, it would be a good idea to create one or more classes that are able to be played by the races not included into the original idea.
Equality among the players is an absolute necessity in this game. That's why Blizzard is constantly adjusting the game for balance. What you call homogenization, I call fair and equal opportunity. But like I said in the rule, you do have other options, just make sure that you do something that allows for all races to have a new hero class.
Post by
Orranis
That's right, all of them. I'm sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but hero classes that are available only to a set group of races, aren't likely to be received well by the community.
But then every class starts becoming available to everyone at that rate, and the game starts to suffer homogonization to the point that some races will simply fade out of usage or commonity amongst some classes.
Warriors and Death Knights are already underwhelming for this reason, and Mages, Priests and Hunters are almost there as well.
The expectations of players will be underwhelming if we start getting Witch Doctors, Spell Breakers, Necromancers, Bards and Felsworn classes and somehow Tauren, Draenei and Worgen can be them all just because heroes are able to be all races.
What if we start to get playable races who haven't been on Azeroth much at all. You're going to tell me Lich King plucked a hand into that world just so we could get Arrakoa Death Knights?
Like everything else, hero lore should reflect the choice. The excuse of all races worked once, it might not work as a surprise next class.
In fact, I go out of my way to ensure certain racial class patterns and availability combos are avoided at times. That's another story for another thread.
From the same Rule you took your quotation from:
Equality is a must when thinking of hero classes, so, if only certain races are allowed to become your hero class, it would be a good idea to create one or more classes that are able to be played by the races not included into the original idea.
Equality among the players is an absolute necessity in this game. That's why Blizzard is constantly adjusting the game for balance. What you call homogenization, I call fair and equal opportunity. But like I said in the rule, you do have other options, just make sure that you do something that allows for all races to have a new hero class.
I see your point, it is OP for only one group of people to have one class and another not, creates too many balance issues (I.E. Shamans and Paladins in vanilla), but I don't think you have to make it for
every
race, just as long as you give it to both factions. First of all, it's incredibly limiting lore-wise, and will often contradict the "No huge retcons" rule. Also, it just seems unnecessary. They do have access to that class, and they can still play it with all their old friends and stuff, and they still have access to it's buffs and such in PvP and PvE. You can do whatever you want. You don't have to go that far to cater to everyone. If you make a sentinel/headhunter thrown weapon focused class that only works lore-wise for Night Elves and Trolls, and you have an alliance who doesn't want to play a Night Elf (Who wouldn't want to play a Troll?) he still has access to the buffs and such, and if they really want to play the class, they still can.
Post by
HiVolt
I see your point, it is OP for only one group of people to have one class and another not, creates too many balance issues (I.E. Shamans and Paladins in vanilla), but I don't think you have to make it for
every
race, just as long as you give it to both factions. First of all, it's incredibly limiting lore-wise, and will often contradict the "No huge retcons" rule. Also, it just seems unnecessary. They do have access to that class, and they can still play it with all their old friends and stuff, and they still have access to it's buffs and such in PvP and PvE. You can do whatever you want. You don't have to go that far to cater to everyone. If you make a sentinel/headhunter thrown weapon focused class that only works lore-wise for Night Elves and Trolls, and you have an alliance who doesn't want to play a Night Elf (Who wouldn't want to play a Troll?) he still has access to the buffs and such, and if they really want to play the class, they still can.
I get what you mean, but I still think that it would be fair to make multiple classes that would allow for all races to have a new hero class. That way, everyone will be able to have a hero class that they can play with their favorite race, no matter what the class is.
Take Morec's Dark Ranger and Arcanist ideas. The former is only playable by the Horde and the latter by the Alliance. I
love
that idea.
Post by
Claggi
Take Morec's Dark Ranger and Arcanist ideas. The former is only playable by the Horde and the latter by the Alliance. I
love
that idea.
Yet... we had that with Paladins vs Shamans, that only lasted one version of the game.
In any case, that reminds me a big rule:
Be careful in your class naming. A name says a lot: while Shadow
Hunter
speaks volumes on a lore level, new players think Hunters less valuable or makes newbs think them comparable.
Post by
366611
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Claggi
In any case, that reminds me a big rule:
Be careful in your class naming. A name says a lot: while Shadow
Hunter
speaks volumes on a lore level, new players think Hunters less valuable or makes newbs think them comparable.
True, that's pretty much why i called my new idea Solar Binder, and not Solar Mage or anything such as that aswell, i didn't want them to be related to other classes, it also makes the idea look more original :p
Exactly, and the name can lead to new encompassments of style.
For instance, I frown on the idea of a Blademaster class: it sounds like a lightly armored warrior or even a 2h Rogue.
Sure there are still aspects of them still unused, but why limit the name. For me, I chose Barbarian and encompassed some of the aspects of the Blademaster within.
By being called a Barbarian, one could still be a
blade
master, but can be a mace thug if the situation calls for it.
Post by
HiVolt
Take Morec's Dark Ranger and Arcanist ideas. The former is only playable by the Horde and the latter by the Alliance. I
love
that idea.
Yet... we had that with Paladins vs Shamans, that only lasted one version of the game. That doesn't automatically mean that it was a bad idea. I really think the only reason that Blizzard allowed the classes to be available to both of the factions was to play into the Lore they had written up for The Burning Crusade anyway. Before that, there were no hints of the idea changing.
In any case, that reminds me a big rule:
Be careful in your class naming. A name says a lot: while Shadow
Hunter
speaks volumes on a lore level, new players think Hunters less valuable or makes newbs think them comparable.
You make a good point with this, but wouldn't that also mean that Death
Knight
sort of undermines the Paladin and Warrior classes, making them seem less viable just because the former is a hero class?
Don't get me wrong, I know what you're saying here, but I'm just not sure how to include it into a rule.
Post by
Claggi
You make a good point with this, but wouldn't that also mean that Death
Knight
sort of undermines the Paladin and Warrior classes, making them seem less viable just because the former is a hero class?
Don't get me wrong, I know what you're saying here, but I'm just not sure how to include it into a rule.
You're misunderstanding: They're not called Dark Warriors or Death Paladins, they're Death Knights, while Knight and Paladin can be synonymous, are different words.
Post by
HiVolt
You make a good point with this, but wouldn't that also mean that Death
Knight
sort of undermines the Paladin and Warrior classes, making them seem less viable just because the former is a hero class?
Don't get me wrong, I know what you're saying here, but I'm just not sure how to include it into a rule.
You're misunderstanding: They're not called Dark Warriors or Death Paladins, they're Death Knights, while Knight and Paladin can be synonymous, are different words.
Yeah, perhaps it's just my ability to identify synonyms easily.
I'm still not sure on how I would work it into a rule though. Any suggestions on where I could put it, because I don't think that it merits it's own rule.
Post Reply
You are not logged in. Please
log in
to post a reply or
register
if you don't already have an account.