Transmogrification Rules

88 Blood Elf Rogue
9755
• Weapons must be the same weapon type (exceptions: Guns, Crossbows, or Bows)

• Guns, Crossbows, and Bows can be used to transmogrify Guns, Crossbows, or Bows.

• Main hand weapons can only be used to transmogrify Main hand weapons.

• Off-hand weapons can only be used to transmogrify Off-hand weapons.

• One handed weapons can be used to transmogrify a Main hand or Off-hand weapon..




as with ALOT of others here please change this my rogue i really would love to be able to have matching items and not have to have a dagger in offhand.

and on my DK I MISS POLL-ARMS with str stats i was sooo redy to use a poll-arm skin agin.

PLEASE rethink this
90 Night Elf Druid
13140
09/19/2011 07:45 PMPosted by Tsharra
The only things I have a major issue with are the enchant rule and no using invisible chest pieces. Power Torrent's glow effect is just so damned overwhelming that you can't see half your weapon for it, and there are dozens of NPCs in this game who run around topless, including my main man Malfurion and his brother Illidan. Malfurion even fights against Rag shirtless, so why the can't I? There's nothing ridiculous or inappropriate about it, like there is with the fish weapons or the staves that look like brooms and shovels etc. Please consider allowing the invisible chest piece to be used and allow us to carry different enchant effects over or nerf the spell effects on some of the current ones because most of them are far too bright and/or chaotic and distract heavily from the weapon art.


Because you just know that every guy who has a female character will have his character running around in a bra trying to distract PvPers or something, who knows.

But yeah.

We'd be seeing shirtless girls everywhere. Not that there aren't already lots of armors that are very scant (especially lower level plate/mail), but I bet those will end up getting nerfed too if they are over-used.


I figured this might be part of the reason, but standing in any major city on most servers is going to get you eyefulls of people's female level 1 bank alts standing around naked dancing on the mailbox anyway, so I don't see why it's a big issue. If Blizz didn't want people to see female characters stripped to their bra and panties then they should have attached permanent shirts to the character model. Just my opinion, though.
94 Worgen Warrior
19345
I have a couple of questions. Can you explain the reason that weapon types have to match up?
Is it a technical issue or merely a decision the devs made?
Is there any chance of allowing legendary transmutes in the future? It seems to me that allowing legendary transmutation would add a longer lifetime to legendaries that wouldn't impact game balance in any way.
90 Worgen Death Knight
9585
09/19/2011 07:16 PMPosted by Dascylus
I still see no clarification on whether or not you need a single One-Handed weapon to transmogrify two for dual wielders... I think information of that nature is very important for people who wish to farm equipment for dual wield sets and such.


• One handed weapons can be used to transmogrify a Main hand or Off-hand weapon.

I see nothing here to preclude using the same one-handed weapon to mog two dual wield items (in any combination of main hand, off hand or one-handed) simultaneously.
85 Blood Elf Paladin
6230
I've got to say, the restriction on the invisible chest is... incoherent to me. In the case of fish weapons and the like, it's obviously theme and tone breaking, it's intentionally cheeky. But consider just how many topless NPCs there are in this game. In lore. Half the Night Elves anywhere? Shirtless. Tons of orcs or slaves or other NPCs? Shirtless. Demon Hunter NPCs? Shirtless. Fist-cleaving Darius Crowley? Shirtless.

So immediately we can rule out the idea that a character not wearing chest armor is theme breaking in any way. So what's left to justify the restriction -- that it's inappropriate because it results in topless player characters? That's where it becomes incoherent -- nevermind that the game clearly doesn't care about naked male chests, and that there are no naked female chests. The real question is, why is the item in the game in the first place if having the topless player character is "inappropriate"?

I thought I "got" transmogrification, I bought all the restrictions as reasonable or at least things that could be reviewed and improved*. But this no Sangrene's thing is baffling. I was actually hoping they'd announce the availability of "invisible" chests and shoulders in every armor class. That's what would have made sense, what would have realized that many more of the fantasy genre tropes.

*Since I'm already on the subject, long term, there's also no real way to justify MH/OH restrictions, or weapon type restrictions -- you've already tipped your hand letting all Ranged be interchangeable. All 1H should be made interchangeable, and all 2H should be interchangeable. If a Cataclysm Ret Paladin wants to DPS with the cool polearm from Hellfire Ramparts, that should not be a problem with transmogrification. Transmog should make enhancement shaman with swords possible. There's no meaningful difference between 1Hs from other 1Hs or 2Hs from other 2Hs.
Edited by Stormdash on 9/19/2011 7:57 PM PDT
85 Draenei Hunter
10960
09/19/2011 07:34 PMPosted by Bynir
Honestly, the rest of the classes still have the better deal because your changes will be noticeable.


Hi, I'm a druid. Nice to meet you.

/shifts out of bear form to see my better deal and dies.


Two out of your three specs shows your weapon 99% of the time. Heck, you even now have a weapon that /completely changes your cat form/. Bears also swap into caster form frequently if there are pauses between pulls, making their weapon visible. Again, no one is looking at your weapon in combat...except possibly that rather flashy flame cat look.



Remind me how we have the "better deal"?

You can still change your not-ranged weapon.

You have flexibility changing your ranged weapon -- the one you actually use to do damage, the one that's out in your armory profile, et cetera -- and the same restrictions in changing your not-ranged weapon.

We don't have flexibility in changing our main weapon -- our equivalent of your ranged weapon -- and you literally never see our ranged weapon, so whatever flexibility exists there is irrelevant.


Yes, I'm sure everyone who sees me is going to alt-tab out of the game or pull out their iPhone just to look me up on the armory so they can see what I did with my /actual/ weapon. That makes lots of sense. As opposed to you, strutting around in a main city able to show off your entire mogged gear set at once. As noted, no one is going to see my ranged weapon in combat, because there are more important things to worry about. Heck, when it comes down to it, we're having some of the same problems as some other classes with our visible weapon because Blizzard has changed back and forth on what they want us using. Don't get me wrong, many of the staves and polearms are really cool, but much like rogues used to use other things than daggers as off-hands, we used to use swords, axes (a relic of which you can still see in H Deadmines), even dual-wielded various one-handers. Now, despite being able to use anything but the two types of maces, we are shoehorned into two weapon types.

The only advantage hunters are getting is having the option to get rid of that awful gun sound, which actually benefits the rest of you too.
85 Gnome Warrior
9975
Any chance there will be an exception for Gnomeregan D!@*%? It is the only cloak in the game I'd consider wearing, and has sat useless in my bank for a long time.
90 Worgen Death Knight
9585
Any chance there will be an exception for Gnomeregan D!@*%? It is the only cloak in the game I'd consider wearing, and has sat useless in my bank for a long time.


Language filter luls.
Shaman cannot equip swords, Stormdash.

As I said a page ago, it's probably about resources. Blizzard doesn't want to have to redesign their engine to allow face-stabbing mutilates with swords, rather than daggers.

I guess.
90 Draenei Death Knight
16200
I have a couple of questions. Can you explain the reason that weapon types have to match up?
Is it a technical issue or merely a decision the devs made?
Is there any chance of allowing legendary transmutes in the future? It seems to me that allowing legendary transmutation would add a longer lifetime to legendaries that wouldn't impact game balance in any way.


MH vs OH is a technical issue, as well as a fairness issue. MH and OH are usually designed in such a way that they only have the correct appearance in one hand. Many MH and OH weapons have mirror weapons available elsewhere in the game, so if they just mirrored the graphics, it would be like having the other item, even if they don't. There's also a technical issue in that there's no such way to mirror the graphics right now, and there's no guarantee that a mirrored weapon would look right in an off-hand, which is often held completely differently than a main hand.

As for swords, vs. axes, vs maces, etc. Who knows... I think that's just Blizzard's way of keeping the feature restricted at first, and getting it out there with as few parts to break as possible.
70 Goblin Rogue
1020
Im glad the restrictions are as described. If you allow the limitation to be "equipable" then what about the classes with limited equipable armor and weapons?

Just seems to me that the classes with already the most variety in gear and weapons want even more variety. And the cloth classes which are limited to ONLY cloth and ONLY staffs, 1h maces, daggers, and 1 swords would be screwed.

So, if Blizz lifts these restrictions then the only fair way to do it would be to lift all restrictions and allow us to mog anything anyway we wanted. AND THAT WOULD BE STUPID!

Man people quit pissing and moaning and just be grateful you got what you did.
100 Blood Elf Warrior
10610
09/19/2011 07:55 PMPosted by Adalia
Yes, I'm sure everyone who sees me is going to alt-tab out of the game or pull out their iPhone just to look me up on the armory so they can see what I did with my /actual/ weapon. That makes lots of sense. As opposed to you, strutting around in a main city able to show off your entire mogged gear set at once. As noted, no one is going to see my ranged weapon in combat, because there are more important things to worry about. Heck, when it comes down to it, we're having some of the same problems as some other classes with our visible weapon because Blizzard has changed back and forth on what they want us using. Don't get me wrong, many of the staves and polearms are really cool, but much like rogues used to use other things than daggers as off-hands, we used to use swords, axes (a relic of which you can still see in H Deadmines), even dual-wielded various one-handers. Now, despite being able to use anything but the two types of maces, we are shoehorned into two weapon types.


You're missing the point.

Blizzard flip-flops on what weapons physical dps uses just as often as they flip-flop on what hunters use.

For example, last tier it was swords, now it's axes. Tanking weapons are a missed bag, you have swords, axes, and maces just about equally, maybe more swords.

So again:

You have the same restrictions on your displayed weapon as we do, but you get absolute freedom with the weapon you use to do damage.

You have a better deal than we do, period.

09/19/2011 07:55 PMPosted by Adalia
The only advantage hunters are getting is having the option to get rid of that awful gun sound, which actually benefits the rest of you too.


People play with sound on?
85 Draenei Hunter
10960
The fact that you're a druid doesn't necessarily mean anything.

Note: There's a druid spec that doesn't stay in their form 100% of the time.


Thanks for pointing that out. I hadn't realised that...

I was replying to the ridiculous statement of 'the rest of the classes get a better deal'. 3/4 druid specs won't even get to see their transmogrification unless they're out of form. Better deal? I think not. Having unnecessary limitations such as staves not being able to transmogrify into polearms is silly. They both serve exactly the same purpose and the majority of the time look like one or the other.


First, for a druid, you don't know a lot about your class. Boomkins most certainly show their weapons while in form. Fairly certain trees don't, but since I only ever do that in combat, really not paying attention to weapons as I've said. Secondly, as I noted, I am /all for/ the restrictions being lifted. I'm just saying stop targeting the hunters for hate, because we're not getting some amazing favoritism here.
90 Draenei Death Knight
16200
09/19/2011 07:52 PMPosted by Stormdash
Since I'm already on the subject, long term, there's also no real way to justify MH/OH restrictions, or weapon type restrictions


So I should be able to equip a right-hand deathwing claw in my left? that'd look pretty messed up.
100 Worgen Druid
19385
any news on old quest items people deleted to make room in their banks?
still hoping to get my Clefthoof Hide Leggings back.
85 Blood Elf Paladin
6230
I know shaman can't equip swords. That was actually sort of my point -- they wouldn't be equipping one after all, they would just be displaying one. But that's a second layer -- there are two.

1) All weapons that are equippable as 1H or equippable as 2H for any class should be useable as transmog for any other equippable 1H or 2H respectively. That one I don't even know how it would be possible to mount an argument against. They don't animate differently, or not differently enough, to matter, even in the mutilate example.

2) That eventually all unequippable 1H or 2H should also be useable as transmog for equippable ones. I could buy that as being somewhat resource limited, but probably not too hard to work out.

But it's actually the invisible chest thing that's annoying me most. I won't lie; like a lot of people, I had a mental picture of making a homemade version of a demon hunter out of a rogue. The very fact that the invisible chest would be key to making a homemade version of one of Blizzard's own lore classes should be proof enough that it's not "inappropriate".
85 Human Paladin
CFT
8765
Sweet, paladins can't transmog the SM set.

Guess I'll stop farming SM now..

EDIT: Before anyone points out that I can, I'll clarify that I can't make my actual raiding gear look like the SM set.
Edited by Commatitank on 9/19/2011 8:06 PM PDT
This topic has reached its post limit. You may no longer post or reply to posts for this topic.

Please report any Code of Conduct violations, including:

Threats of violence. We take these seriously and will alert the proper authorities.

Posts containing personal information about other players. This includes physical addresses, e-mail addresses, phone numbers, and inappropriate photos and/or videos.

Harassing or discriminatory language. This will not be tolerated.

Forums Code of Conduct

Report Post # written by

Reason
Explain (256 characters max)
Submit Cancel

Reported!

[Close]