Page 10 of 14

Re: General BlizzCon discussion

Posted: Sun Nov 05, 2017 6:33 pm
by pop
IMHO Horde getting two allied races that can be Druids is a non-issue because for all intents and purposes, the Zandalari Trolls and the Highmountain Taurens are still Trolls and Taurens.

Re: General BlizzCon discussion

Posted: Sun Nov 05, 2017 7:20 pm
by Inay
With new forms for the Zandalari tho'

Re: General BlizzCon discussion

Posted: Sun Nov 05, 2017 7:21 pm
by Lupen202
pop wrote:IMHO Horde getting two allied races that can be Druids are a non-issue because in all intent and purposes the Zandalari Trolls and the Highmountain Taurens are still Trolls and Taurens.
This is what I was arguing about with someone in my discord. Yes, it's pretty cool as a horde player we have more COSMETIC options for druids, especially with zandalari being able to have a raptor travel form. But at the end of the day, Blizz can only do so much when it comes to equality. Zandalari and highmountain make sense as druids. It's not fair for us to not get them as druids just so we don't have a class inbalance... And either way, people need to stop looking at them as entirely separate races and look at them as skins/subraces. They're literally upright trolls, and tauren with antlers. Just like lightforged are draenei with new skins/horns/hair, and dark iron are dwarves with black skin. Nightborne and Void elves are the only ones entirely unique - even though they're NE/BEs they're on the opposite factions finally.


Horde still have two druids and alliance still have two paladins.

Re: General BlizzCon discussion

Posted: Sun Nov 05, 2017 7:22 pm
by Valnaaros
As far as we know, only for Travel Form. We don't know if they get, say, a Skyscreamer flight form, or a Direhorn guardian form.

Re: General BlizzCon discussion

Posted: Sun Nov 05, 2017 7:24 pm
by Valnaaros
Lupen202 wrote:
pop wrote:IMHO Horde getting two allied races that can be Druids are a non-issue because in all intent and purposes the Zandalari Trolls and the Highmountain Taurens are still Trolls and Taurens.
This is what I was arguing about with someone in my discord. Yes, it's pretty cool as a horde player we have more COSMETIC options for druids, especially with zandalari being able to have a raptor travel form. But at the end of the day, Blizz can only do so much when it comes to equality. Zandalari and highmountain make sense as druids. It's not fair for us to not get them as druids just so we don't have a class inbalance... And either way, people need to stop looking at them as entirely separate races and look at them as skins/subraces. They're literally upright trolls, and tauren with antlers. Just like lightforged are draenei with new skins/horns/hair, and dark iron are dwarves with black skin. Nightborne and Void elves are the only ones entirely unique - even though they're NE/BEs they're on the opposite factions finally.


Horde still have two druids and alliance still have two paladins.
Well said, Lupen.

Re: General BlizzCon discussion

Posted: Sun Nov 05, 2017 8:08 pm
by pop
Valnaaros wrote:As far as we know, only for Travel Form. We don't know if they get, say, a Skyscreamer flight form, or a Direhorn guardian form.
I kind of doubt it because unlike travel form, which the word itself doesn't specify any animal, cat form and bear form both specifically mention the name of the animals. Unless of course the spells name are going to be changed just for Zandalari, the forms would still be the same type of animals as others.

Re: General BlizzCon discussion

Posted: Sun Nov 05, 2017 8:16 pm
by Vephriel
pop wrote:
Valnaaros wrote:As far as we know, only for Travel Form. We don't know if they get, say, a Skyscreamer flight form, or a Direhorn guardian form.
I kind of doubt it because unlike travel form, which the word itself doesn't specify any animal, cat form and bear form both specifically mention the name of the animals. Unless of course the spells name are going to be changed just for Zandalari, the forms would still be the same type of animals as others.
I think I read somewhere that 'cat form' was now 'shapeshift form'? Perhaps in the demo? I haven't had a chance to go digging for that yet but, if so, I have high hopes! I would love to see them branch away from mandatory cat/bear forms when other animals could be far more interesting.

Re: General BlizzCon discussion

Posted: Sun Nov 05, 2017 8:19 pm
by Valnaaros
It is still entirely possible that they will give Zandalari different forms. Travel Form has glyphs that specifically call it a stag or doe, but Blizz is still making the Zandalari travel form a raptor. We'll just have to see.

Re: General BlizzCon discussion

Posted: Sun Nov 05, 2017 8:21 pm
by pop
Valnaaros wrote:It is still entirely possible that they will give Zandalari different forms. Travel Form has glyphs that specifically call it a stag or doe, but Blizz is still making the Zandalari travel form a raptor. We'll just have to see.
you do realize if Zandalari use the aforementioned glyphs, they would change into the animals as specified in the glyph name, right?

Re: General BlizzCon discussion

Posted: Sun Nov 05, 2017 8:23 pm
by pop
Vephriel wrote:
pop wrote:
Valnaaros wrote:As far as we know, only for Travel Form. We don't know if they get, say, a Skyscreamer flight form, or a Direhorn guardian form.
I kind of doubt it because unlike travel form, which the word itself doesn't specify any animal, cat form and bear form both specifically mention the name of the animals. Unless of course the spells name are going to be changed just for Zandalari, the forms would still be the same type of animals as others.
I think I read somewhere that 'cat form' was now 'shapeshift form'? Perhaps in the demo? I haven't had a chance to go digging for that yet but, if so, I have high hopes! I would love to see them branch away from mandatory cat/bear forms when other animals could be far more interesting.
that would be a really great news because that would open up the possibility of other types of animal forms to be available for other races as well.

Re: General BlizzCon discussion

Posted: Sun Nov 05, 2017 8:30 pm
by Lupen202
Worgen would definitely be cool with a wolf form, maybe their current cat form becoming a glyph.

I think cat fits zandalari just fine though, as a tiger. Ptera as flight, raptor as travel, thresher as aquatic, direhorn as tank/bear. /drool

Re: General BlizzCon discussion

Posted: Sun Nov 05, 2017 9:07 pm
by Death_Dino420
I heard that worgen and goblins weren't getting new models when 8.0 dropped, but later on during BFA. Which I find is so very very weird.

They worked on other models and stuff but not worgen or goblins? Sure I love all of the new pets.. but they worked on complete new animations and models for other humanoid races that arent playable. I think that's weird. And I, who mains both worgen and goblin, am very distraught!

Re: General BlizzCon discussion

Posted: Sun Nov 05, 2017 9:10 pm
by Valnaaros
It's mainly due to the complexity of the animations for playable races, and the facial animations. They have to create a set of facial animations for each face that they can use. Plus, they are adding an entirely new set of faces for Worgen women. Takes time to do all of this.

Re: General BlizzCon discussion

Posted: Sun Nov 05, 2017 10:28 pm
by Death_Dino420
Really?? I had no idea! That's awesome.
I can be patient, then.

Re: General BlizzCon discussion

Posted: Mon Nov 06, 2017 2:15 pm
by Xota
Reason(s) for burning Teldrassil:

Since this is the most extreme act yet in the on-again-off-again faction war, I think it would be difficult to justify to some of the horde members, like the Tauren, especially the Highmountain Tauren (and Ebonhoof) other than just "retaliation" or "strategy". Teldrassil has a long history of corruption, demonic, nightmare, and/or old god (don't correct me, I meant exactly what I typed, it's moot anyways). Current lore is that with the dragons' blessings, Teldrassil has been able to push out that corruption, but that could easily be retconned to not be successful. What better way to convince Ebonhorn that it's necessary to burn Teldrassil, than to let him see its roots drawing in old god corruption using his dragon magic. He might even be the one who sets it ablaze, since that seems like it would take a bit of oomph to start. Or maybe Malfurion didn't stamp out his cigarette butt when Tyrande almost caught him sneaking a smoke.

Re: General BlizzCon discussion

Posted: Mon Nov 06, 2017 2:37 pm
by cowmuflage
I going to go with night elf smoking. :lol:

Re: General BlizzCon discussion

Posted: Mon Nov 06, 2017 2:51 pm
by Valnaaros
The same leaker that leaked the allied races a couple days prior to Blizzcon says that Sylvanas used a fragment of the sword of Sargeras in order to burn down Teldrassil. The question right now is why did she do it (if the leaker is to be believed). We'll just have to wait till the novel releases to find out.

Re: General BlizzCon discussion

Posted: Mon Nov 06, 2017 4:07 pm
by Quiv
I waiting to see how the Undercity council play into the burning of Teldrassil, if any. I have heard some interesting theories, and we simply don't know enough to rule anything out.

Whatever direction they go, I hope it focused on deeper character development. Burning it down in a fit of retaliation and anger is shallow storytelling to me. Maybe if they spin it like "you have the audacity to take Lordaeron, I'll kick this war up to 11 and burn the frickin tree down."

OK maybe not exactly like that, but I just hope its better than "lolumad?"

Re: General BlizzCon discussion

Posted: Tue Nov 07, 2017 12:05 am
by Myzou
Well, it was suggested that burning teldrassil was done first, and that's what motivated Anduin to declare war, and thus the assault on Lordaeron.

Re: General BlizzCon discussion

Posted: Tue Nov 07, 2017 12:19 am
by Wain
I like where Xota is going with her theory. It's rare for them to depict the motivations of Horde leaders (other than Garrosh) as purely evil, they usually bring some sort of misunderstanding - or something you only realize when you've done the quest chain as Horde - into the equation. Perhaps there was a good reason (from a "saving the world" perspective) for burning Teldrassil, or perhaps Sylvanas was possessed by the shard. I guess we'll have to wait and see. Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to make excuses out of any love for her - I can't stand her, and of all the Horde factions, I think the Forsaken and Sylvanas are the closest to actual evil, and even on my Hordie I laughed out loud when Genn ruined Sylvanas's plans. But I'd be surprised if the story writers just decided to make her burn the tree just because she's wicked, they just don't often do that.