A reported player survey for World of Warcraft: Forever has sparked a very particular kind of MMO daydream: not simply whether more classes could arrive, but whether the game could make room for roles its familiar group structure does not usually accommodate.

Multiple players have said they received a prompt through the Battle.net launcher during the past week that asked about prospective classes. The survey is unverified. Participants were reportedly prohibited from sharing screenshots, no public image establishes its contents, and there has been no confirmation that any listed concept is being developed, planned, or even under active consideration. One purported extraction of survey descriptions has circulated alongside player accounts, but that too should be treated as unconfirmed.

Still, the recurring list is interesting because it mixes three classes already available in retail World of Warcraft—Demon Hunter, Death Knight, and Monk—with concepts that would be new to the MMORPG. The latter group includes Bard, Tinker, Witch, Necromancer, San’layn, Warden, Illusionist, and a class reportedly labeled either Metalborn or Runesmith.

The most consequential detail is not necessarily the possibility of a rocket-firing Tinker or a musical Bard. It is the apparent repeated use of the word support. If that label is accurate, the survey may be testing an approach that could alter how parties are assembled, how encounters are tuned, and how players think about a class’s job beyond the conventional tank, healer, and damage-dealer split.

What players say the survey included

The reported lineup ranges from familiar Warcraft-adjacent archetypes to ideas that would need a carefully defined mechanical niche. Descriptions are incomplete, inconsistent in at least one case, and not official class specifications. They are useful only as a snapshot of the concepts players say were presented.

  • Demon Hunter, Death Knight, and Monk: existing retail classes, though their potential Forever versions—if this survey is genuine and if any of them move forward—could differ substantially from those versions.
  • San’layn: said to wear plate armor and framed around a vampire-like identity.
  • Warden: reportedly a plate-wearing tank and melee damage class. The claimed details surrounding its abilities are unclear because the circulated information appears to mix up part of this entry with San’layn material.
  • Necromancer: a cloth-wearing caster described as using shadow- and death-themed magic.
  • Witch: reportedly a cloth caster with ranged damage and support capabilities, including a cauldron to enhance allies and a blood golem summoned at a cost to the caster’s own health.
  • Tinker: said to use mail armor and combine tanking, ranged damage, and support through a mech, rockets, and supply drops that can heal allies.
  • Metalborn/Runesmith: a mail class reportedly powered by runes, with an ability to transform its body into metal for attacks. Different players have reported different names.
  • Bard: a leather-wearing support and healing concept built around songs that strengthen allies and weaken enemies.
  • Illusionist: a leather-wearing ranged damage class said to create illusory creatures, including murlocs or other monsters, and mirror images.

That is a long list, which is another reason to avoid reading it as a roadmap. Surveys can test broad interest, compare fantasy appeal, or identify which concepts players feel overlap too heavily with existing choices. A class appearing in a questionnaire would not mean it is approved for production, much less close to release.

Support is the potentially disruptive word

In MMO terms, a support is generally a character whose primary contribution is enabling teammates rather than simply absorbing enemy attacks, restoring health, or maximizing direct damage. That can include damage buffs, defensive tools, enemy debuffs, resource assistance, positioning effects, and other party-wide advantages.

Classic-style group structure is generally discussed in three roles: tank, healer, and DPS, shorthand for damage per second. Every class may bring utility, but utility is not necessarily the same thing as being assigned a dedicated support slot. The distinction matters. A healer who can offer a helpful buff remains a healer; a support class needs its power budget and expected group position accounted for from the beginning.

Related coverage includes WoW: Forever Survey Claims Put Bard, Tinker and More New Class Ideas in Play.

Several of the reported concepts appear to test that distinction. Bard is described as a healer and support built around songs. Witch is described as a ranged caster and support, using a cauldron to buff allies. Tinker is the broadest proposition, potentially covering tanking, ranged damage, and support with machinery, rockets, and healing supplies.

Such options could give players more ways to express their preferred fantasy without simply making another version of an established caster, healer, or melee specialist. But they would also create balance questions. If a party gains an additional permanent slot for support, encounters and rewards may need to assume that slot exists. If it does not gain one, then a support would need to replace a healer or damage dealer without becoming mandatory. Either path requires a deliberate framework.

Retail WoW has already experimented with the idea through one Evoker specialization, but the reported context here is different. The current party ecosystem is not built around routinely including support, and the experiment has been described as less optimal because of that mismatch. A fresh Classic-oriented environment could, in theory, be a cleaner place to test multiple support designs—but only if the surrounding group composition and encounter expectations are designed with them in mind.

Fresh class fantasy versus familiar class territory

The proposed list also highlights a practical design divide. Demon Hunter, Death Knight, and Monk already have retail identities. Bringing them into Forever could appeal to players who like those archetypes but want to see how they work in a different ruleset. Yet that path inevitably invites comparisons with the versions people already know.

The newer concepts carry a different attraction: they offer fantasies that are not presently represented as full playable WoW classes. Tinker stands out because its reported toolkit is visually and mechanically direct—mech construction, rockets, and supply deployment immediately suggest how it might play. Bard has similarly readable potential: songs can make the fantasy legible while leaving room for healing, buffs, and debuffs. San’layn offers a distinct plate-armored, vampiric angle rather than merely another dark spellcaster.

Necromancer may face the sharpest identity challenge based on the reported description. Shadow and death magic on a cloth-wearing caster naturally sits close to existing Warlock territory. That does not make the idea impossible, but it does mean its central loop would need to be clearer than a theme alone. A class earns room in a roster when its moment-to-moment decisions, party contribution, and visual identity feel different—not just when its spell names use a different shade of darkness.

Illusionist poses a related question in a more playful form. Summoning false monsters and creating mirror images could make for an immediately recognizable trickster fantasy, but a final design would need to establish whether those illusions primarily deal damage, deceive enemies, control space, protect allies, or do something else. The survey description, if authentic, does not answer that question. It only suggests a potentially broad canvas.

Why the uncertainty should remain central

It is tempting to rank favorites and treat the reported entries as candidates in a tournament bracket. But every level of the story remains provisional. Players say they saw a launcher survey. The claimed text has been summarized and circulated without an authorized public image. Even if the survey is genuine, no evidence establishes how Blizzard will interpret the responses or whether it will decide to pursue any new class.

There are also small but meaningful signs of uncertainty in the details themselves. Metalborn and Runesmith have both been reported as names for what may be the same class, while the Warden entry’s ability notes appear unreliable. Those gaps are a useful reminder that speculative design discussion should not become a promise ledger.

For players, the practical takeaway is simple: this is a reason to discuss what kind of class variety they would value, not a reason to plan a launch-day character. The compelling question is less “which rumored class wins?” than “what problem should a new class solve?” A Bard, Tinker, or Witch that reinforces a meaningful support ecosystem could change party play in a way another conventional damage specialist may not. Conversely, a poorly integrated support design could create pressure to recruit one for every group.

That tension—between fresh fantasy and system-wide consequences—is why the report is more intriguing than a standard wish list. The same concern over how changes affect the feel of an established game also shapes debates around large-scale remasters, including the arguments over presentation and design trade-offs in The Witcher 3 Remastered.

For now, Bard songs, Tinker rockets, Witch cauldrons, and San’layn plate armor remain alleged survey material rather than announced features. But if the reports are accurate, the presence of several support-oriented concepts suggests the most ambitious idea on the table is not just expanding a class list. It is testing whether WoW: Forever could make a different kind of party composition feel at home.