You know, I never really thought they'd implement a feature like this. Of course, the moment they did, we began to see the fallout in terms of restrictions, spurring several threads into being protesting the restrictions.On the subject of not allowing items in a different armor class:
I'm not sure what you're trying to preserve here, Blizz. There are plenty of examples you provide yourself in the form of NPCs decked in attire that isn't in their armor class. Shaman and Druids in cloth, Warriors and Paladins in mail, and Hunters in leather are the initial examples that come to mind. Is it really so terrible to allow a nature themed Hunter running around in the leathers with leaves and such on them? Is it really so terrible to allow Rogues or run around in masks and hoods typed as cloth? Would it be unsettling to allow Orc Warriors to run around in the harnesses so many Orc NPCs do?On the subject of not allowing items in a different weapon class:
I have to admit, more often than not I'm attracted to a class for a concept of weapon use (or for the weapon animations) than anything else. Unfortunately, there's no way to really have some of the concepts some people desire. Not just anyone who dual wields and can wield fist weapons can make a brawler, just being able to wield polearms doesn't mean they will be itemized at higher levels (or any, really), which leaves a bitter taste in mine, and I'd wager others', mouths. A newbie who reads that Warriors can wield polearms is likely expecting to use them, not have to find they need to switch to axes, swords, or maces, based on which is being itemized at their level. This could
alleviate that by providing players the ability to actually wield what they want to.
Paladins who are more traditionalist could insist on wielding hammers, while those going for more of a stereotypical crusader might opt for swords. Warriors who want to wield polearms could finally do so, Rogues that want to dual wield fists could indulge. It's not as though every race doesn't have animations for every weapon out there. Is it that there's an intrinsic desire to limit to appearance to weapons that could be wielded by that class? If that's all it is, I honestly hope effort is invested to allow for weapon Transmogrifying within those bounds quickly, because part of the appeal for me would be the ability to keep the appearance of the weapon I like without having to be constricted by what weapon I actually have to wield.On the subject of items without stats being ineligible:
Again, I'm not really seeing an issue if someone wants to run around in a skirt, civilian outfit, Don Carlos' hat, a tuxedo, considering some of the other items you let players run around in. If a girl can run around in a plate bikini, what's wrong with letting them run around in the valentine's dress if they so desire? If they can also run around in what essential are a shirt and pants with stats, why not allow the items without stats that look nearly identical (but may have different color themes or other aesthetic differences) as well?On the subject of silliness:
t4 or t6 with stylin' purple hat and Dual Dark Herring.
Well, I don't want to be the bearer of bad news, but...
We have an obligation to players and to our hard working artists to keep the game from looking too silly. I know looking ridiculous is fun for some players, but World of Warcraft was established with a design that the game overall kept its silliness in check. That’s one of the reasons we resisted adding a feature like Transmogrification for so long.
So weapons that look like fish, for example, probably won't be available as source items for Transmogrification, even if one is technically a dagger and has stats. There are a handful other weapons with "silly" models (such as frying pans, brooms, etc.) that may or may not be allowed -- it's still under discussion.
If that's truly your stance, then I respect it and will stand behind you. But you have to demonstrate that your goal is actually to keep silliness in check. Because right now, to put things into perspective, I'd like to point out some of the things we can currently do in the heat of battle:
Be a Moonkin
Transform creatures from the average bandit to the eldritch horrors from beyond insanity into: Cats, Rabbits, Monkeys, Chickens, Frogs, Penguins, Polar Bears and Sheep
/dance, /flirt, /silly, /chicken
Throw a tree
Shoot a rainbow
Turn into a Ninja, Pirate, or a Skeleton reliably
Turn into a Kalu'ak, Dark Iron, Iron Dwarf, etc. less often
Have a Hunter's Fox dance
Have a Hunter's Monkey throw poo at the enemy
Shoot "wee critters" with a ranged weapon
Listen to Bosses proclaim that deaths were merely a setback, to 'kill the one in the dress,' or "Ding!" "Grats!"
If the goal is to keep immersion in tact by keeping silliness in check, the aforementioned silliness should be dealt with. I suspect that this stuff is going to remain in game, though, in which case a handful of people deciding they have
to fight with fish, rolling pins, fishing poles or other weapons doesn't seem nearly so out of place. Because really, if I'm going to be fighting alongside a pirate and a ninja while critters go whizzing by as ammunition, I may as well be allowed to wield a frying pan or two.