Don’t expect people to write 2 pages worth of text just to satisfy your needs.
Glyphs and hard-to-do, non boostable, mage tower style stuff that lets you have different themea on your spells.
Maybe a fire mage could habe blue/gree /purple etc fire
Or a paladin could have silver, red, or whatever pink spells.
You can never go to far with customization imo.
This is literaly the stupidest argument I have ever seen. So acording to your logic blizz should delete every class that is not warror/rogue/hunter.
So you have nothing to add to the conversation then.
No class uses both range physical damage and magic heavily, one of the key features of hunters is to be able to damage while on the move, something your arcane hunter wouldn’t be able to do while casting it’s spell so it’s something you will have to consider as these two parts of the kit contradict themselves.
And on max level you can spec to become either a Soulbeast or a Druid… oh wait…
Yea please. More dps specs.
Shorter queues for my tank.
Also: 3rd DH spec with dual wielding fel pistols. While at it, make the off-hand for outlaw rogues a pistol instead of sword.
Actually I have added my points already, you’re the one that wasn’t satisfied and demanded more.
Hell yeah!… as characters. As classes? No.
I don’t think they’re remotely similar. They’re all melee, that’s about it. If we get another ranged physical dps, an archer even, it can’t be a mail user. Simple as that. It’s just hunter 2.0 at that point.
Absolutely! Still doesn’t change the fact that dark rangers are MM hunter with a specific skin though. I do believe that lorewise they can wield daggers as well. So they’re …rogue/hunters with a specific skin?
A few of the replies suggest that what you descibe sounds too much like a hunter. Not only my reply. So obviously there’s more layers needed until it can work as a separate class. That’s all I’m saying. You’ve put in the ground work already. 
This topic was automatically closed 30 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.