Difference between revisions of "Talk:Other classes"

Latest revision as of 02:38, 8 October 2010

Speculation[edit source]

well so the fifth class cant be represented by a normal char, so it is obviosly very exotic and doesnt take up the same space as normal char. that is my closest speculation. im curious now. other plz veiws -- 21:51, 22 February 2009 Deadlyambitions

Before I reply let me ask you to sign your posts on talk pages... you have to manually add the line that I'm placing at the bottom. It makes it easier to read. Check out the Help:Talk article. Dating them also helps put comments in context... like if someone comes over here and looks at this talk page after the 4th class is released...

That said the two theories I like best are shape-shifter and summoner. It should be easy to make an NPC frame take the place of any class... maybe with a shape-shifter you couldn't... tho I would think you could just pick a different NPC for the other form... also it would seem like with a summoner you could use NPC or MOB graphics as the summons...

--Belushi81x 12:52, 23 February 2009 (CET)

Thanks for holding the fort, Belushi!

Personally, I think that the summoner is very possible, but a little bit of his mandate is weakened by the fact that the Witch Doctor actually has summons AT ALL. I think we'll DEFINITELY see a ranged non-magic or semi-magic class, much like an Amazon, and the Summoner is having to battle it out with a Melee/Magic user, similar to a Paladin, or similar class... (A Dervish)? --Leord 16:24, 26 February 2009 (CET)

I think it's gonna be a Ranger with charmable pet. There was strong changes in the past at the Witchdoc's skills, everything went a zombie-like way. So maybe the toads, fire bats and spiders was just a placeholder from the ranger tree. As archetype a human from bordermarch is missing, something "nature like", like the druid. Wilson also said they wanna back to the roots, back to old RPGs... what else, then D&D's "lawful good" chars like "Paladin" and "Ranger"? Maybe the Paladin will come back in the expansion. A defensive profession is missing imho. --TerminusTechnicus 02:36, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

btw... It's NOT SURE, that the last class is revealed... there is no "character panel" on BC2010 like on the two previous Cons... The last class from Diablo2 wasn't revealed until the Beta of the game. So why they should reveal it now? --TerminusTechnicus 02:21, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

Can't be rogue[edit source]

In Diablo 3, every character can be a male or female. So I think rogue (which is a pure sisterhood) or amazon cannot be the 5th class. The character could be a ranger (male or female) with good ranged skills, tracking and healing abilities :D If he is able to fight with a mount, that'd be awesome. Maybe requiring a mount is why that 5th class cannot be represented using existing NPC model art.

Being a Rogue doesn't mean being part of the Sisterhood of the Sightless Eye per se. --Vipermagi 18:20, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Vipermagi is right. (Sorry guys, added links for easier access)

Anyone can be a rogue, and the Sisterhood were just nicknamed Rogues anyway. Also, who's to say they did not open it up further as they were all but extinct by Andariel and Blood Raven? --Leord 10:55, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

@@ Line 11: / Line 11: @@
 ::Personally, I think that the summoner is very possible, but a little bit of his mandate is weakened by the fact that the [[Witch Doctor]] actually has summons AT ALL. I think we'll DEFINITELY see a ranged non-magic or semi-magic class, much like an Amazon, and the Summoner is having to battle it out with a Melee/Magic user, similar to a Paladin, or similar class... (A [[Dervish]])? --[[User:Leord|Leord]] 16:24, 26 February 2009 (CET)
-'''Can't be rogue'''
+::: I think it's gonna be a Ranger with charmable pet. There was strong changes in the past at the Witchdoc's skills, everything went a zombie-like way. So maybe the toads, fire bats and spiders was just a placeholder from the ranger tree. As archetype a human from bordermarch is missing, something "nature like", like the druid. Wilson also said they wanna back to the roots, back to old RPGs... what else, then D&D's "lawful good" chars like "Paladin" and "Ranger"? Maybe the Paladin will come back in the expansion. A defensive profession is missing imho. --[[User:TerminusTechnicus|TerminusTechnicus]] 02:36, 8 October 2010 (UTC)
-In Diablo 3, every character can be a male or female. So I think rogue (which is a pure sisterhood) or amazon cannot be the 5th class. The character could be a ranger (male or female) with good ranged skills, tracking and healing abilities :D If he is able to fight with a mount, that'd be awesome. Maybe requiring a mount is why that 5th class cannot be represented using existing NPC model art.
+btw... It's NOT SURE, that the last class is revealed... there is no "character panel" on BC2010 like on the two previous Cons... The last class from Diablo2 wasn't revealed until the Beta of the game. So why they should reveal it now? --[[User:TerminusTechnicus|TerminusTechnicus]] 02:21, 8 October 2010 (UTC)
+==Can't be rogue==
+In [[Diablo 3]], every character can be a male or female. So I think [[rogue]] (which is a pure sisterhood) or [[amazon]] cannot be the 5th class. The character could be a ranger (male or female) with good ranged skills, tracking and healing abilities :D If he is able to fight with a mount, that'd be awesome. Maybe requiring a mount is why that 5th class cannot be represented using existing NPC model art.
+:Being a Rogue doesn't mean being part of the [[Sisterhood of the Sightless Eye]] per se. --[[User:Vipermagi|Vipermagi]] 18:20, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
+::Vipermagi is right. (Sorry guys, added links for easier access)
+::Anyone can be a rogue, and the Sisterhood were just nicknamed Rogues anyway. Also, who's to say they did not open it up further as they were all but extinct by [[Andariel]] and [[Blood Raven]]? --[[User:Leord|Leord]] 10:55, 26 July 2010 (UTC)