Why is this even being debated, they already confirmed a healer will not be in D3 and they don't have any intentions of ever having to rely on healing in the diablo series.
in games like WoW and S.U.N I have played the healer class, however, mainly pvped... did I just heal during pvp? No, I simply made it to make me better...
I see retribution (pretty much all out melee) paladins heal all the time in WoW
I see Ether (pretty much highly offensive mage) Elemental heal for that HP..
And I think that Blizzard might change how self sufficient diablo may be, like, for more fun in pve.. as people said it was the same thing over and over again... maybe bosses might make it kinda more difficult to do those things over.. and over again
This is not WoW. This is not S.U.N. This is Diablo. There are no healers in Diablo. Period. I'm sorry if I come off as a jackass but honestly I'd prefer a cyborg dinosaur ninja class than a healing class in Diablo, and the idea that the fifth class is a healer is horseshit. All classes are self sufficient, which means there is no need to have a healer since they can all take care of themselves. Will you people stop suggesting healing classes, hell has not frozen over yet.
Quote from "agent101" »
if the fifth class is a rogue and not a ranger, I won't even play lol
honestly I'd prefer a cyborg dinosaur ninja class than a healing class in Diablo
I thought I was alone, but I'm glad somebody else agrees that Umpa needs to become a cyborg and then he will be the perfect candidate for the 5th class.
This is not WoW. This is not S.U.N. This is Diablo. There are no healers in Diablo. Period. I'm sorry if I come off as a jackass but honestly I'd prefer a cyborg dinosaur ninja class than a healing class in Diablo, and the idea that the fifth class is a healer is horseshit. All classes are self sufficient, which means there is no need to have a healer since they can all take care of themselves. Will you people stop suggesting healing classes, hell has not frozen over yet.
in JUST ABOUT ALL OF THE GAMES I'VE EVER PLAYED THAT HAVE A ROGUE, has always been into more stealthy, daggerish, assassinish, I can just about name 20 off the top of my head right now
Ofc, a Rogue and a Ranger are not the same
the "Ranger" in D2 was valkyrie, which ofc, is not a ranger, big difference, but I mean, my main point is, when I think of rogue, I think of stealthy, and it's not only me either, it's like, 95% of the world lol... the basic idea of rogues in general, are stealthy, dagger-using (ofc they can use bows in just about every game I've played) but I mean, I see where your coming from, but when I think of Ranger, I think BIG BIG BIG Damage, high DPS, very swift, etc. when I think of rogue, I think of daggers, poisons, sneak attacks, etc.
Examples (I know these are not DIABLO but this is where I'm coming from)
Oblivion, you kinda be a rogue, who uses daggers, stabs people from behind, etc.
Dragon Age: Rogue kinda uses swords / daggers mainly, in this game, the archer-type rogue kinda sux
S.U.N I love the ranger or "valkyrie" in this game, exactly what I look for, big dmg, pretty fast, etc. & pure range
Aion: Assassins mainly use daggers, melee, etc. The Ranger uses BOWS MAINLY and is almost pure range
And y'know, I threw the healer out their cuz' I mean why not? It's something new? No one ever thought of it? I didn't even think it was likely, but I thought it was pretty cool...
Lots of people thought of it, and I'm just tired of telling them "Blizzard said no goddamn healers stfu"
In Diablo, Rogue IS a Ranger, that's what I linked you to.
Dragon Age: Origins - ranged Rogue sucks? Whoa you must not know how to play, I'm sorry but that female Rogue I picked up is amazing with a bow.
My point is, in other games sure, Rogue is invisible stabby dude. In the Diablo universe, follow my link above and read what a Rogue is. We have our up close stabby guy (Monk) we're waiting on our ranged physical damage, most likely a Rogue type class.
Lots of people thought of it, and I'm just tired of telling them "Blizzard said no goddamn healers stfu"
In Diablo, Rogue IS a Ranger, that's what I linked you to.
Dragon Age: Origins - ranged Rogue sucks? Whoa you must not know how to play, I'm sorry but that female Rogue I picked up is amazing with a bow.
My point is, in other games sure, Rogue is invisible stabby dude. In the Diablo universe, follow my link above and read what a Rogue is. We have our up close stabby guy (Monk) we're waiting on our ranged physical damage, most likely a Rogue type class.
sad thing is, I probably won't care unless it actually looks like something nice, I am probably going to be DW barb
And I'll be going Wizard, first. Enjoy the DW Barb :]
with the lack of spells i highly doubt I'd be anything near a caster.. thats one of the only thing I liked about casters was the spell variation, liike having 40 spells or something would be nice regardless useful or useless
with the lack of spells i highly doubt I'd be anything near a caster.. thats one of the only thing I liked about casters was the spell variation, liike having 40 spells or something would be nice regardless useful or useless
There's like 10, and the rune things make the effects differ. D2 there was a TON of spells and you only ever used one or two, tops. Each class in D3 is going to use like 5 skills regularly.
You'd rather have 40 useless spells than 5 useful ones? Agent, it's clear you're upset with the direction Diablo III has taken, yet you are concerned with voicing that opinion with pretty much zero thought taken into the matter.
Only type of healer class I could think of would be an offensive priest type of class. He deals huge amounts of holy damage and his damaging spells would have chance to heal party members and self.
You'd rather have 40 useless spells than 5 useful ones? Agent, it's clear you're upset with the direction Diablo III has taken, yet you are concerned with voicing that opinion with pretty much zero thought taken into the matter.
I said 40 spells are nice, even if SOME are useless
5 spells just simply isn't enough, the only class that looks interesting with abilities (offensive) is Barbarian, Wizards and Witch Doctors (besides summonings) look pretty deprived to me.
Don't get me wrong, as I said, I like the arcane idea within the Wizard, however, their is a lack of spells that I have been seeing.
Pretty much the only spells that look nice to me with the Wizard is the AoE thing, and then the teleport or mirror image w/e it is, and then time stop or w/e.
Other than that, it looks pretty boring.... Barbarians on the other hand, looks like everything is pretty awesome... Witch Doctor I like the Locust Swarm, and the fire Bomb, along with Horror, but other than that, it looks pretty boring to me.
Monks and Barbarians look like the only fun class in the whole game at this point.
Well, I guess you should go back to Modern Warfare 2 because obviously Diablo III doesn't have enough useless crap packed into every facet of the game.
Well, I guess you should go back to Modern Warfare 2 because obviously Diablo III doesn't have enough useless crap packed into every facet of the game.
Heres what I am getting at.
If you have 5 spells, what is the point of leveling? To make those spells stronger and do the same thing over again? Pretty much your passives should balance out with your level, and the level of the monsters correct?
What is the fun of using the same 5 spells throughout the game?
you'll get an idea of how many passive and active abilities there are.
Second, runes change the way spells behave. So, for instance, you could (potentially) have a rune that freezes all enemies when they're hit by Whirlwind. Or maybe sets them on fire. Or maybe it lasts a little longer. Or it knocks enemies back. Or it leaches health. Or the cooldown is reduced. Or it confuses enemies.
Third, the game isn't anywhere near to being finalized, so the sheer amount of changes being made every day invalidates the argument altogether.
But now you'll respond with a pedantic and trivial claim that the game, in some mystical form or shape, has simply displeased you. And I am OK with that, but just as long as you stop using crappy reasoning, like you've been using for the past 5 pages.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
This is simply a theory, such as everything else, I do not know where it is said that the next 5th class will be a rogue..
TBH, I'm actually hoping for something different in Diablo, not the same old same old, so I'm simply throwing out theories..
This is not WoW. This is not S.U.N. This is Diablo. There are no healers in Diablo. Period. I'm sorry if I come off as a jackass but honestly I'd prefer a cyborg dinosaur ninja class than a healing class in Diablo, and the idea that the fifth class is a healer is horseshit. All classes are self sufficient, which means there is no need to have a healer since they can all take care of themselves. Will you people stop suggesting healing classes, hell has not frozen over yet.
A Rogue is a Ranger. Ever played Diablo 1?
I thought I was alone, but I'm glad somebody else agrees that Umpa needs to become a cyborg and then he will be the perfect candidate for the 5th class.
in JUST ABOUT ALL OF THE GAMES I'VE EVER PLAYED THAT HAVE A ROGUE, has always been into more stealthy, daggerish, assassinish, I can just about name 20 off the top of my head right now
Ofc, a Rogue and a Ranger are not the same
the "Ranger" in D2 was valkyrie, which ofc, is not a ranger, big difference, but I mean, my main point is, when I think of rogue, I think of stealthy, and it's not only me either, it's like, 95% of the world lol... the basic idea of rogues in general, are stealthy, dagger-using (ofc they can use bows in just about every game I've played) but I mean, I see where your coming from, but when I think of Ranger, I think BIG BIG BIG Damage, high DPS, very swift, etc. when I think of rogue, I think of daggers, poisons, sneak attacks, etc.
Examples (I know these are not DIABLO but this is where I'm coming from)
Oblivion, you kinda be a rogue, who uses daggers, stabs people from behind, etc.
Dragon Age: Rogue kinda uses swords / daggers mainly, in this game, the archer-type rogue kinda sux
S.U.N I love the ranger or "valkyrie" in this game, exactly what I look for, big dmg, pretty fast, etc. & pure range
Aion: Assassins mainly use daggers, melee, etc. The Ranger uses BOWS MAINLY and is almost pure range
And y'know, I threw the healer out their cuz' I mean why not? It's something new? No one ever thought of it? I didn't even think it was likely, but I thought it was pretty cool...
In Diablo, Rogue IS a Ranger, that's what I linked you to.
Dragon Age: Origins - ranged Rogue sucks? Whoa you must not know how to play, I'm sorry but that female Rogue I picked up is amazing with a bow.
My point is, in other games sure, Rogue is invisible stabby dude. In the Diablo universe, follow my link above and read what a Rogue is. We have our up close stabby guy (Monk) we're waiting on our ranged physical damage, most likely a Rogue type class.
But nothing beats a Sorcerer with maxed Apocalypse.
sad thing is, I probably won't care unless it actually looks like something nice, I am probably going to be DW barb
with the lack of spells i highly doubt I'd be anything near a caster.. thats one of the only thing I liked about casters was the spell variation, liike having 40 spells or something would be nice regardless useful or useless
There's like 10, and the rune things make the effects differ. D2 there was a TON of spells and you only ever used one or two, tops. Each class in D3 is going to use like 5 skills regularly.
The possibility of a class coming back from Diablo 1 still exists. My bets are on Rogue, or some redux of the rogue in a hunter/ranger type deal.
Pure healing wouldn't fit diablo very well.
RIP: Demon Hunter: lvl 50 | Barb: lvl 60 (plvl 5) | Monk: lvl12 & lvl70 (plvl 200)
I said 40 spells are nice, even if SOME are useless
5 spells just simply isn't enough, the only class that looks interesting with abilities (offensive) is Barbarian, Wizards and Witch Doctors (besides summonings) look pretty deprived to me.
Don't get me wrong, as I said, I like the arcane idea within the Wizard, however, their is a lack of spells that I have been seeing.
Pretty much the only spells that look nice to me with the Wizard is the AoE thing, and then the teleport or mirror image w/e it is, and then time stop or w/e.
Other than that, it looks pretty boring.... Barbarians on the other hand, looks like everything is pretty awesome... Witch Doctor I like the Locust Swarm, and the fire Bomb, along with Horror, but other than that, it looks pretty boring to me.
Monks and Barbarians look like the only fun class in the whole game at this point.
Heres what I am getting at.
If you have 5 spells, what is the point of leveling? To make those spells stronger and do the same thing over again? Pretty much your passives should balance out with your level, and the level of the monsters correct?
What is the fun of using the same 5 spells throughout the game?
http://www.diablowiki.com/Barbarian#Abilities
you'll get an idea of how many passive and active abilities there are.
Second, runes change the way spells behave. So, for instance, you could (potentially) have a rune that freezes all enemies when they're hit by Whirlwind. Or maybe sets them on fire. Or maybe it lasts a little longer. Or it knocks enemies back. Or it leaches health. Or the cooldown is reduced. Or it confuses enemies.
Third, the game isn't anywhere near to being finalized, so the sheer amount of changes being made every day invalidates the argument altogether.
But now you'll respond with a pedantic and trivial claim that the game, in some mystical form or shape, has simply displeased you. And I am OK with that, but just as long as you stop using crappy reasoning, like you've been using for the past 5 pages.