So this is a design analysis on the classes in classic WoW and the new pitched classes. WoW Forever is in an odd spot. It is Blizzard resetting to the older game ideas while also leveraging the retail technology. They are fully aware that retail is getting long in the tooth and slowly bleeding players. At the same time, the classic player base, as well as the many private servers that run classic, seem to be staying healthy for much longer. 

This is the odd position: both are declining, the retail player base is declining faster but starting at a higher starting point. The classic player base is declining much slower but at a lower starting point. For the long term viability of the product, getting the classic and retail player bases merged is clearly the right business objective. 

This is where wow forever has a huge potential for blizzard. It gives them the ability to merge both audiences in a way where they were not before. I assume Blizzard assumes that retail players just want the newest thing and classic players are going for a specific feel. WoW Forever is the attempt to bridge both. Bridge both is critical as it massively cuts costs. Not in half, both games share servers, base line technology and assets. This is something Sand Stone Games has done for years with D&D Online as well as Lord of the Rings Online. It is a proven method to contain costs which allows more resources to be put into new content and store items. 

So with the objective in mind of “how do we merge both retail and classic players” let’s talk about where classes are and where they might be going. The original 9 classes were… almost right. The 4 foundational fantasy classes are there: Warrior (prime tank and prime DPS), Priest (prime healer), Rogue (solid DPS and pvp), and Mage (niche DPS). Great, those are well understood and they play really well in classic wow. And here is the thing: you do not need any more classes after that. If WoW had only 4 classes, the game would still be great. In fact if you look at the standard raid make up in a 40 man, 30 of that 40 are going to be those 4 classes. All other classes are just a bit of spice on top of the game. To justify them in the end game, each was given a token skill or two so they were mandatory in a raid, but only in limited quantities. Rogues are alternatives to Warriors as melee DPS but with nice bonuses to world pvp. 

This mix is often called “Warrior Supremacy” because you just keep stacking warriors and everyone else has to justify their positions in higher raids. They are the best DPS and they are the go-to tank. This is part of why all races get a warrior option. That said, Warriors lack internal support and are very slow to level. This forces them to make friends and others helping them along the way creates those bonds that later gets non-warriors a spot in the raid. This is part of the social fabric that holds the game together so I hope dps do NOT get balanced completely. Improve the balance, but not 100% equalized. That imbalance serves a purpose. Unfortunately, I don’t think Blizzard understands that. 

So what are the remaining 5 classes? 2 are pet driven solo classes, 2 are faction specific, and 1 is a shapeshifter that acts as a weak version of all 4 of the foundational fantasy classes. Ok, so fine mix for flavor. The 2 pet driven solo classes have radically different themes and utility so they are fine together and each borrow elements from other classes. This makes them feel like points on a spectrum or alternative versions of another class. You can add 20+ new classes to the “pet driven solo class with a utility or 2” niche and it would not change the overall class balance in the game. 

The 2 faction specific classes are where I think Blizzard dropped the ball and I think Blizzard agrees with me. So each faction got something unique. One is a healer and buffer that is tankier than normal. The other one is… the same thing. Now Blizzard clearly wanted the Paladin to be able to tank. What I think they wanted to do was have an alternative main healer for the Horde side and an alternative main tank for the Alliance side. That is simple and gives raids/dungeons some different options. It worked for the Shaman but not for the Paladin, however Paladin players figured out how to break the game mechanics to make themselves a good healer… or at least to make the healer options less bad then prot or ret. Having both Shaman and Paladin slot into the same role makes both sides a bit more cookie-cutter than I think was intended. 

So this gives classic a weird mixed design, what should a “corrected” version of this look like in wow forever. Well, here is the problem. Given the legacy of Paladin healers, instead of Paladin tanks that do a bit of off healing, having a core healadin option becomes mandatory by tradition. They are also giving both classes to both factions, thus removing the uniqueness of each faction… which I think is a huge mistake. 

Part of what made classic feel unique compared to retail was that the factions were unique,  world PvP was a thing, and often specific dungeons forced players to go into enemy territory. That made your faction feel impactful. You cared if your side was winning. Part of what made the game interesting is that people would have both Horde and Alliance characters but on different servers. They would interact with the same content, but in two very different ways. This variety is part of what gave the game depth and replayability. By making the Horde and the Alliance the same, you lose that. 

If I was in charge, yea, I would fix Paladin to be tanks. I would also fix the broken mana-efficiency game that healer Paladins were exploiting, thus knock them out of top tier healing roles. I would keep Shaman and Paladin to be faction specific. Once again, if the point of this is to keep players subscribing with the minimal amount of upkeep costs, then this choice expands replayability on the same content. You want Horde and Alliance to feel different because that gives people a reason to play each side and thus spend another 6 months subscribing to level another character. Then when they hop on their alliance character 6 months later, it feels different so clearly they should keep playing (read: paying). 

This is also where new classes can come into the picture. I am sure many will play more like retail, which is fine. I am good with both classic style and retail style classes playing next to each other. I am sure Blizzard can even figure out a way to partially do that within some classes via the talent tree and some aggressive trade-offs. 

So here is what Blizzards is looking into adding: 

• San’layn (Vampire Elves): Tank, Range/Melee DPS – ideas pulled from Blood DK in Retail 
• Demon Hunters: Tank, Melee DPS – ideas WC3 more than retail 
• Death Knight: Tank, Melee DPS – from Wraith minus Blood  
• Tinker: Tank, Range DPS, Support – technically WC3 but really a mix of new mechanics and classic theme 
• Bard: Support, Healer – general fantasy 
• Necromancer: ranger dps – general fantasy with deep history in across Warcraft 
• Warden: Tank, Melee DPS – warcraft 3 and TBC 
• Illusionist: Range DPS – general fantasy with some temporary pets 
• Witch: Range DPS and Support – general fantasy 
• Metalborn / Runemasters: Tank, Healer, Melee – another set of DK elements and Titans 
• Monk: same-ish as retail 

Looks like Blizzard wants to add in support classes.  I am in favor of that, but maybe do 3 support classes. One is shared and the other two are faction specific. In this case, let them share the Bard but make the Tinker Alliance (Gnome) specific and make the Witch Horde specific. If you want additional pet classes, give Illusionist to the Alliance and Necromancer to the Horde. Lean into the factions being different. This gives them specific themes and playing in a Horde party will often feel different than an Alliance party. Not every time, but some of the time. That is a good thing. 

Once again, let’s lean into those specs by faction. Give Tinker or Warden some tank or off-tank options. Give Witch some healing and the Necromancer some battle res and/or healing via liching. This makes Alliance a mix of noble knights with tanking options with dependence on Priests and Druids. While the Horde fights like, well, a horde with a mix of healers keep them up and with waves of ferocious Warriors and bears holding down the front line. 

The more you give each side the same thing the more they become the same thing. The problem is given the marketing and sales, it is too late to fix this. And that is a shame because what is really happening here is both factions are asking wildly different questions and both are worth answering. 

The tank is the traditional party/raid leader and the Alliance gives you multiple tanks with varied approaches, they ask the question “what does a good leader look like?”

Q: Are they brave and lead the way in battle? 

A: Then play a Warrior. 

Q: Can only pious people lead through moral strength and devotion?

A: Then play a Paladin or Warden

Q: Is leadership a matter of intelligence? Is the pen mightier than the sword? 

A: Then play a Tinker 

Q: Is leadership best in the hands of those with experience who have learned hard lesions from their mistakes? 

A: Sounds like a Death Knight to me

This is played out in the lore with the Alliance having a leadership crisis. The King in Stormwind is missing and a young boy is serving in his place, being advised by a good and bad advisor. The dwarves are missing their leader too. The Night Elves are missing one of their two leaders, being trapped in the emerald dream. This is a faction-wide leadership crisis, and you as the tank help fill in those gaps. 

The Horde asks a different question. Clearly, the strong should lead in battle. This is not in debate in the Horde. What the Horde asks is how do you heal a broken people? What are their spiritual needs? Priests give you a modern answer. Shamans give you a traditional answer. Druids give you a wise, long term answer. All of this is already in the game and the differences between these answers give you the moral questions the Horde often asks. A Witch and Necromancer would bring out this line of questions even more. They could serve as counter parts to the current 3 answers as darker alternatives, much the same way the Warlock does to the Mage. The morality of “if you can, you should.” That works for the Horde because they need to be edgy. They need to be broken but seeking answers. 

This is already happening to some extent with Thrall as a middle man between the Druidic Tauren and the clearly vengeful and machiavellian undead. It is an uneasy alliance. Not because of poor leadership but because of splintering moral paths. And that middleman is overcoming their previous alliance, and withdraw symptoms from the Burning Legion and their demonic powers. That middle ground is fighting an internal battle with themselves. 

So here is my pitch here, and yes, all of these can be some kind of DPS as well 

Both Factions 

• Bard: Support

Alliance: 

• Tinker: Support and Tank 
• A 4th Tank: either Death Knight or San’layn or Warden or Demon Hunter or Metal Born 
• Illusionist: Pet Driven Solo 

Horde: 

• Witch: Support and Healer 
• A 4th Healer: Monk (fits Horde better than Alliance as there is a spiritual side) 
• Necromancer: Pet Driven Solo 

I do like the idea of giving races specific classes. On the Alliance side humans and dwarves are the most popular so gnome Tinker and for night elves either Warden or Demon Hunter makes sense. The Alliance is flush with tanking options, so there are multiple combinations here that work for a tank heavy Alliance. 

The Horde is a bit trickier. I was never a fan of the Monk in retail, but I do like the idea of them as a Horde only option. Drop the movement heavy brew master, lean into the ferocious looking fist weapons, and keep the mist weaver. This gives you a Horde flavor match in DPS while giving you a healing option that instantly pairs with a philosophical view on morality. 

The Witch also fits Trolls well and it is already in their lore. This gives Trolls a far more well rounded ethical position with the Monk being philosophical while the Witch is practical. Tauren’s have Druids and Shamans on the same page, Orcs get Shamans debating with warriors and warlocks (maybe necromancers), Trolls have practical v. philosophical, and undead lack the moral debate which makes them suspicious. 

This gives both factions the classic 4 classes, the Druid as the only do-it-all class, 2 universal pet classes, and 1 universal support class. A nice 8 classes across both factions. Then each faction gains 1 pet class, 1 support plus tank or heal, and 2 tank or heal (1 new, 1 old). Each faction gets 4 unique classes, making ⅓ of the classes in each faction unique to that faction.  This also corrects the biggest problems for both factions. Each has enough dps. Horde parties are often finding the healer last, now they have 5 options to encourage people to play healers and give themselves an interesting tapestry of healers/support in raids. The Alliance does well getting healers, so this gives you more tanks while maintaining Warrior Supremacy on the DPS side. 

The Alliance knows its morality, they need to better understand their strength. The Horde knows its strength, they need to better understand their morality. These are powerful and fundamental questions, timeless questions, and they make for great stories, quests, themes, and characters. That is the opportunity I think Blizzard is leaving on the table by just making everything available to everyone. By giving everything to all sides, they are removing the larger question and theme. A theme your character lives and breathes every time you form a party or make a new character. Sure it helps with balance, but at what cost? And that sucks, because that is what gave those factions deep meaning, not just game mechanics.