Flux agrees: Wizard = Sorceress

Not trying to stir up (too much) trouble here, but I did think this was funny.

In what must have been a Freudian slip, Flux mislabelled this image and this image of a Blizz con Wizard poster when he posted them in the image gallery.



On a side note, I do think it's awesome that the Sorceress... er, Wizard ... is dual wielding a sword and a staff. Finally it'll be worth it to actually use staves!|||Flux does it on purpose. He's been doing it ever since he got back from Blizzcon. He stated the demo he played with the Wizard felt too much like a reskinned Sorc, or something like that. Ah well, I will know myself next year at Blizzcon if this is true |||It's just concept art, it doesn't necessarily means that Wizards will be able to dual wield like a Barbarian. Although I hope they will.

Regarding the "Sorc=Wizz" arguement. I think that Wizard equals Sorceress just like the Barbarian from D2 equals the Barbarian from D3. They completely re-polished the archetype... and I think that the Wizard is only half as much as a Sorceress. Same goes to the Barbarian.|||I think Flux got it right if he's doing it on purpose. But before the Wiz fans want to kill me, let me also say that re-doing the Sorceress really isn't a bad thing. Iif they were to try to make all entirely new classes, it would seem like they're just tossing the old lore aside and trying to make something new. I feel like the games blend together better this way.

What's most important to me is the way each class plays -- balance, variety of skills, etc. -- the appearance and especially the name don't matter nearly as much as the playability.|||lol @ OP, that's funny. :P

Wizard x Sorceress: If the Wizard really plays like a Sorceress, then I am guaranteed to like a class in DIII. I absolutely loved the Sorc in D2, it's really topping my favorites list along with Amazon - the fast paced gameplay was a total blast, if they can repeat that in DIII with the Wiz, I know I'll love her.|||Sadly, I've yet to do it on purpose. Of course that just makes it funnier...

I'm not critical of the lack of innovation in character design, but changing the sorc's name for D3 seems an entirely calculated move so they could say that only the Barb is a returning/repeating character. Even though not one fan would have batted an eye if they'd just called the D3 mage a Sorcerer/Sorceress.

• D1: Eastern wizard styled male mage character called the Sorcerer


• D2: Eastern wizard styled female mage character called the Sorceress


• D3: Eastern wizard styled male/female mage character called the... Wizard.

It's almost as if the game program wouldn't allow the char name to change by gender, which made Sorcerer/Sorceress. And someone on the design staff's kids had been watching Harry Potter non-stop, so they were like... "Wizard! Plus that way it won't be repeating the same character from the previous 2 games, even though that would make far more sense in terms of lore and world fiction continuity! Also, the light-armor, staff-wielding, open-hand-fighting Monk isn't a repeat of the light-armor, staff-wielding, open-hand-fighting Monk from Hellfire because um... beard! And the Rogue won't be a repeat either b/c now... there are male rogues too!"|||Quote:








I'm not critical of the lack of innovation in character design, but changing the sorc's name for D3 seems an entirely calculated move so they could say that only the Barb is a returning/repeating character.






I think that's the key point that most people miss. The Barb is the only returning character, not the only returning/repeating class. There's so much lore that's been written for the Diablo games that it would be a mistake not to build on top of it, and I think that includes revisiting old classes. Of course they should be improved, evolved, and given a more well-rounded skill set; that's the point of a sequel. I don't see why they needed to pretend that the Wizard was a new class.

As for the name, the Harry Potter theory is interesting, but whatever the cause, I think it fits in with what we've seen in past games. In D1 and D2, a ______ of Wizardry always gave higher bonuses than a ______ of Sorcery. So think of the Wizard as a tougher Sorceress, though still a Sorceress all the same.|||Quote:








I think that's the key point that most people miss. The Barb is the only returning character, not the only returning/repeating class.




So I guess all the female barbs in D3 are D2 barbs who had sex changes, then?|||Quote:








Sadly, I've yet to do it on purpose. Of course that just makes it funnier...

I'm not critical of the lack of innovation in character design, but changing the sorc's name for D3 seems an entirely calculated move so they could say that only the Barb is a returning/repeating character. Even though not one fan would have batted an eye if they'd just called the D3 mage a Sorcerer/Sorceress.

• D1: Eastern wizard styled male mage character called the Sorcerer


• D2: Eastern wizard styled female mage character called the Sorceress


• D3: Eastern wizard styled male/female mage character called the... Wizard.

It's almost as if the game program wouldn't allow the char name to change by gender, which made Sorcerer/Sorceress. And someone on the design staff's kids had been watching Harry Potter non-stop, so they were like... "Wizard! Plus that way it won't be repeating the same character from the previous 2 games, even though that would make far more sense in terms of lore and world fiction continuity! Also, the light-armor, staff-wielding, open-hand-fighting Monk isn't a repeat of the light-armor, staff-wielding, open-hand-fighting Monk from Hellfire because um... beard! And the Rogue won't be a repeat either b/c now... there are male rogues too!"




lol I never really considered this. That's hilarious.

Question - are you saying that the lack of innovation is not a bad thing (you aren't critical of that decision) or that you don't want to even attempt to critically analyze the decision (you refuse to form a position)?

One thing - I always thought Sorcerer was African.|||Quote:








So I guess all the female barbs in D3 are D2 barbs who had sex changes, then?




How about the Barbarian going from a level high enough to kill Diablo, with massive skills and awesome loot and whatnot down to level 1 again with no skills, items or abilities?