DiabloFans

Im going to keep this short and simple.

Diablo 2: 2 melee (Barb and Pally) 2 casters (Sorc and Necro) and 1 RANGER (Amazon)

Diablo 3: 2 melee (Monk and Barb) 2 casters (Wizard and Witch D) and ? ????? (???)

do you see a pattern? I do.

Also, as I was watching one of the gameplay videos, I noticed that one of the creatures dropped a BOW after it was killed. Now why would there be BOWS in the game if all four revealed classes cant use them (well they can, it would just be very inefficient, you know). So the logical choice, IMHO, is some kind of Ranger. And sorry if you guys already figured this out yourselves. Just wanted to point it out

Quote from "drewber2635" »

And sorry if you guys already figured this out yourselves. Just wanted to point it out

Well, yeah. We had already figured it out

Well, I already saw the ranger connection, but at the same time, we need another sword based melee character. If the "ranger" is added to the main list of characters, then we will most likely see a "knight" in an expansion.

Quote from "Turmobil" »

Just because a bow drops in the gameplay video for Diablo 3 doesn't mean that there will necessary be a Ranger.

That's where I think people got off on the idea that it will be ranged exclusive, but it shouldn't. That's why I keep saying "versatile knight w/ passive tree".

Elyk, I don't see why a ranger couldn't use bows and swords.
Hell, Dungeons and Dragons has it, and it's like.... one of the first big RPG's.

Even D2 had it to an extent, only in the form of spears for the Amazon.

Quote from "Zhar" »

Elyk, I don't see why a ranger couldn't use bows and swords.
Hell, Dungeons and Dragons has it, and it's like.... one of the first big RPG's.

Even D2 had it to an extent, only in the form of spears for the Amazon.

I really don't want anyone calling me Elyk anymore, it just makes things confusing. It's okay, just try to not call me Elyk.

A knight could be a ranger by definition, but the archetypes are way off. A ranger would be more suitable by archetypal means to wield bows, and a knight is more shield and sword suited. I think that's what I forgot to mention.

Well, he doesn't necessarily have to use a shield as well.
He could be more of a skirmisher than a ranger/knight/archetype.

Stalker would probably be a suitable name.

There is no question of a character with at least one tree primarily dedicated to using ranged weapons. As evidence, look at all the Blizz replies to suggestions such as druids, etc: they say they want 5 core classes, and nontraditional non-core classes are expansion material. The only fantasy archetype we're really missing is the ranger.

There are plenty of names they could pick for that class, im fine with it aslong as it has a ranged tree that focuses on bows. As for crossbows im not a fan, they just dont look as cool as bows.

obviously..

Sounds reasonable...another Amazon would be cool, but, if not, maybe a ranger of sorts from somewhere else in Sancuary. I love the idea though!

Very good logic i would have to agree the fact that a bow dropped in one of the game play videos is key evidence. I wonder if blizzard will have the old school pet type things like in Diablo II where u hire a guard to follow you around or if they will have some sort of class specific pet involved with the last class.

Quote from "ymarkman" »

Sounds reasonable...another Amazon would be cool, but, if not, maybe a ranger of sorts from somewhere else in Sancuary. I love the idea though!

Yea, I agree. Amazon would be cool but I would like to have a Wanderer or Pathfinder or something along those lines