What are the Classes FOR?

[Darian]

WARRIOR: main tank.[right][snapback]86042[/snapback][/right]

One of the two absolute, clear-cut jobs in the game. I don't know that you could create a game like this without "intending" for the warrior to hold this position.

PRIEST: main healer/debuffer.

I suspect this will be even more important when we get an expansion, for reasons which should be apparent to anyone with a good knowledge of Warcraft lore, but the crowd-control ability of the priest is also very important. In Stratholme and Scholomance this is extremely true. However, the priest's general role is equally obvious, and pretty clearly in line with Blizzard's intent.

DRUID: secondary healer.  I still don't have enough Druid experience to determine if it's the un-viability of non-healing Druids that forces them into the healing role end-game, or simply because since they can heal pretty well it's what people want them to do because there's always a shortage of healers.  Ever see a bear or cat form Druid in raids?

We joke about letting GG tank Onyxia with Taranna a lot, but the bottom line is that unless you have a "real" tank shortage, a druid's not tanking. It's not that they can't tank, it's that you need ONE person responsible for holding aggro, and the druid's not going to be that one person. That said, I'm not entirely sure even Blizzard knows what their intentions were with the druid (although they certainly handled it better than EQ, where druids were pretty much just buffbots).

PALADIN: secondary healer/buffer/debuffer.  Was this Blizzard's intention?  Why does Paladin gear seem to shift from tank-like bonuses to caster-like bonuses as they get higher in level?  Was this because Blizzard realized over time that they couldn't make these guys be super-tankish and keep game balance?

I think -- and I've rambled on about this previously -- it's because there wouldn't be any alliance warriors. ;) It's got to do with Blizzard's "go ahead and rush to cap" philosophy, mostly. A level 10 paladin with the same TYPE of skill sets as a capped paladin would never get to level 20. He'd give up in disgust and frustration. I think, when you finally get down to endgame, Blizz has the paladin where they want it.

SHAMAN

Although I have one, he's only 24, and since my only capped character is alliance, I don't even have a frame of reference to discuss the shaman end-game.

ROGUE: pure DPS Monkey.

The other clear-cut role. I think their utility is fairly obviously in line with intentions.

HUNTER: ...DPS?

Actually, in end-game, hunters are utility. You never hear "wish we had a hunter around for DPS." It's always "wish we had a hunter around for traps," or "wish we had a hunter around for extra DoTs," or "wish we had a hunter around so we could let his pet pull some aggro and save some healer mana," or "wish we had a hunter around for a feign pull," or "wish we had a hunter around to loot this hunter loot." A well-played hunter who understands his entire bag of tricks is awesome to have on an end-game run.

Having said that... I don't know that the hunter's position is what Blizzard wants for it, because I don't think Blizzard knows either. Again, this comes from sort of throwing it in at the end of the development cycle...

MAGE: AE damage king/crowd control.

...and de-curser. HUGE in end-game. In-line with expectations.

WARLOCK: DPS/utility.

I'd say "debuffer" is more accurate than "DPS," although the one inherently leads to the other. Probably in line with expectations, with the caveats you mentioned.