D&D General Has D&D abandoned the "martial barbarian"?

[Garthanos]

Sorry to say for anyone reading this, but this didn't actually happen.

You sure got your panties in a bunch. Did I under sell the amount of variation earlier in the game?

WoW has not "implemented new body types". Nor did it ever have "2 variations of mesomorphic male and 1 variation of mesomorphic female". Blizzard always had wildly exaggerated and varied figures for all the races in WoW.

Oh my they are exaggerated oooh that is completely different not being realistic makes all the difference yep you caught me /sarcasm. The females even between the races in the earlier game just did not seem that varied but I guess I could have called the human ones more super model body types.

Sheesh

The race Garthanos is referring to aren't "a new body type",

These body types are definitely the same exact same human body types.

And Oh my the latter kind of does have the Pandaren body type which is also significantly newer than the other human. (but for a human to be able to be heavier body form whatever you call it is quite new).

The Kul Tiran Humans also have a very thin body type which is not currently a playable option

Being a humanoid panda is not the same feel by any shake and differences between body types on species also just not the same even if they mechanically implement Kul Tirans as another race. Kul Tirans also have the some members (npc) who have the original Azaroth body type.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

You sure got your panties in a bunch. Did I under sell the amount of variation earlier in the game?

I'm pretty sure I said what I meant in my post lol. What you're claiming isn't true, and there's no "new body type". Also, sorry to burst your bubble, but the spindley human model, which is male-only, note, is not going to be playable any time in the foreseeable future (and uses Undead animations).

 

[Garthanos]

What you're claiming isn't true, and there's no "new body type".

Looks new to me... significantly nothing like it without playing a non-human and that heavier non-human was added years after the game started too.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Looks new to me... significantly nothing like it without playing a non-human and that heavier non-human was added years after the game started too.

Kul'Tirans aren't "humans" in any meaningful sense in WoW. They're a different race with different classes allowed, different special abilities, and so on. Also they're goddamn 8ft tall lol (not even exaggerating). And if you're worried about "playing a non-human" WoW is the wrooooooong game for you. Pandaren were added nearly a decade ago.

 

[Garthanos]

Also, sorry to burst your bubble, but the spindley human model, which is male-only, note, is not going to be playable any time in the foreseeable future (and uses Undead animations).

Classic thin Wizard would be great and the current male only part may be why it would be a larger job to translate to a playable.

 

[Garthanos]

Kul'Tirans aren't "humans" in any meaningful sense in WoW.

Sure they are that is the story and the look they are big humans
Kul Tiran Humans Allied Race

The game is quite old and had existed for 8 years before Pandarans were added

 

[Garthanos]

And if you're worried about "playing a non-human" WoW is the wrooooooong game for you.

People talk about feeling represented in entertainment this is often in context of real life human racial variation ... but its also body types, and it seemed like for a long time games never did. Being a somewhat cartoon like non-human does not seem exactly the same.

 

[Laurefindel]

Not having to have characters who you feel uncomfortable playing does in fact, necessarily make for a better game, by any normal measure of "better" that I can think of. I've read your posts on this in this thread and you haven't presented any actual argument, just engaged in a lot of nostalgia and mythmaking.

I think that between "all species and cultures are just an homogeneous soup because everybody can choose everything anyway" and "only a few specific stereotypes are available to be played", there's a pretty generous middle ground.

There will always be some for whom things are too specific and or specific enough. The point isn't to exclude both ends of the spectrum from having fun, but establishing an expectation that will define the game in a positive way. "Everything goes" isn't necessarily positive, and neither is binary choices.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

I think that between "all species and cultures are just an homogeneous soup because everybody can choose everything anyway" and "only a few specific stereotypes are available to be played", there's a pretty generous middle ground.

There will always be some for whom things are too specific and or specific enough. The point isn't to exclude both ends of the spectrum from having fun, but establishing an expectation that will define the game in a positive way. "Everything goes" isn't necessarily positive, and neither is binary choices.

I get what you're saying but I think what you're maybe not considering is how many underlying assumptions about game design you're making in this post, because it is a really large number. The issue I was addressing was that the poster had created an entirely fictional period of gaming design history, which never actually existed, in order to complain about how people were making choices in modern games.

And that's something you're not really addressing too - it's not the mechanics which lead to the complaint, because the mechanics were literally never the issue. It's the choices.

The game is quite old and had existed for 8 years before Pandarans were added

LOL thanks for teaching this grandma how to suck eggs. I literally bought WoW day 1 NA release, at 8am, after playing in the open beta.

 

[Garthanos]

LOL thanks for teaching this grandma how to suck eggs. I literally bought WoW day 1 NA release, at 8am, after playing in the open beta.

Yup and we are just talking to each other in private... ego drips.