Which class should be next?

[Toogoodman]

Simple, you don't make it like your standard vehicle combat, you make it like a Druid form.

You "change forms" and that form is your character riding a mech. Gearing would be no different than Druids, except that while in the mech you can actually see your armor. Weapons would just be stat sticks, again, just like Druids.

Druid actually makes sense though, they've been a class that shape shifts to different affinities to do what they to do spec wise. Tinker would need to upgrade the mech directly, not the character piloting it. Also, the mech would be a vehicle, there would be no way around that, maybe it wouldn't use the common vehicle combat system we see now, but it would still be a mech at the end of the day. This would require a complete system and loot resigned, which they simply wont do, i would image a lot of armor plating upgrades, gears (as in cogs and what not), plugs, and a lot of stuff that would only be for that specific class. They've been making a lot of plate and leather classes to homogenize the loot drops (i.e. tons of leather and plate from raids and dungeons), where as this class would likely lead to a lot of wasted loot, which blizz hates. I fully expect the next class to be either mail or cloth to reduce "wasted gear".

[Deleted]

No more new classes.

[Miztickow]

Blademaster hero class.

[-Joker-]

Druid actually makes sense though, they've been a class that shape shifts to different affinities to do what they to do spec wise. Tinker would need to upgrade the mech directly, not the character piloting it. Also, the mech would be a vehicle, there would be no way around that, maybe it wouldn't use the common vehicle combat system we see now, but it would still be a mech at the end of the day. This would require a complete system and loot resigned, which they simply wont do, i would image a lot of armor plating upgrades, gears (as in cogs and what not), plugs, and a lot of stuff that would only be for that specific class. They've been making a lot of plate and leather classes to homogenize the loot drops (i.e. tons of leather and plate from raids and dungeons), where as this class would likely lead to a lot of wasted loot, which blizz hates. I fully expect the next class to be either mail or cloth to reduce "wasted gear".

Upgrading the mech is no different than upgrading gear. As a Tinker, your Character screen for gear would have two tabs. One for your regular gear, and one for your mech suit. When in your suit, your worn gear stats are your HP and other stats, your weapon stats are over looked. Your mech weapons count toward your ilvl and determine damage, and your other "abilities" while mounted to the suit, and used as spells, do not affect iLvL much like a relic used to do.

[Toogoodman]

necro could have two dps specs and a heal spec. call the heal spec unnatural preservation.

dark ranger could be interesting though, but it'd have to be done right and restricted to only elves and humans, have sylvanas turn to raising night elves for their archery prowess for it, humans, some humans turn forsaken, blood elves.

night elves and humans could escape to the alliance in the starting zone. no reason for the alliance to turn them away, when they didn't turn away(or kill on sight) a fucking death knight, one of the most insidious threats the alliance ever faced.

Big reason i could see some sort of caster (necro, void caster, or whatever) or a ranger is because of gear drops, as i said in another post, blizz hates loot that gets wasted and D/Ed, makes people cry on the forums. I fully expect a mail class with a bow, or a caster cloth class. A void spec for necro could fit the meta for a void xpac, idk how that would work lore wise though. I guess KT (the most famous necro) uses a shit ton of frost magic, so possibly a spec like "frost of undeath", which would be VERY different from frost mages (frost is usually associated a lot with arcane magics), where as a necro using using a spec centered around chill of death would be pretty cool.

- - - Updated - - -

Blademaster hero class.

Id kill myself

[derpkitteh]

Big reason i could see some sort of caster (necro, void caster, or whatever) or a ranger is because of gear drops, as i said in another post, blizz hates loot that gets wasted and D/Ed, makes people cry on the forums. I fully expect a mail class with a bow, or a caster cloth class. A void spec for necro could fit the meta for a void xpac, idk how that would work lore wise though. I guess KT (the most famous necro) uses a shit ton of frost magic, so possibly a spec like "frost of undeath", which would be VERY different from frost mages (frost is usually associated a lot with arcane magics), where as a necro using using a spec centered around chill of death would be pretty cool.

i mean, we just learned from the chronicle that death is its own type of magic, so there could be death bolts, new death damage over time effects or something.

personally, i'd have it do the permanent skeletal army and do direct damage with it and the necro's own spells, no dots. kinda like a mix of beastmaster hunter and destruction warlock i guess.

[Darktbs]

None of these will ever happen, and heres an easy breakdown of why

1.Why use vehicle combat system?Just make it like the druid forms.

2.If it has a dps spec with huge dps its possible.

3.We have Priests and Paladins, Warlocks and Demon hunters...SO WHY ITS A PROBLEM WHEN WE HAVE Necromancers and Death Knights?

I could see some sort of variation of hunter that gets turned into a dark ranger, were they just go full archer/BM for hunters, while dark rangers are a cross between a hunter/rogue, they apply poisons and shadow magic to their arrows. They could use stealth, and be an actually mail wearing class, because we literally have 2. Thinking about it, this actually sounds really cool, and something that could fit the game pretty well.

Dark Ranger:
1) Uses poisons, runes, and shadow magic to buff the damage of arrows. Able to shoot blight and poison vials that explode on targets
2) Uses stealth like a rogue, not a camo like hunters, but a true stealth
3) Mail user who uses int for a shadow magic/blight spec, and agi for a poison/bleed spec
4) Would be open for all races, similar to DK, alliance Dark Rangers would be pissed off hunters who got risen by the forsaken, horde
would be individuals are happy hunters who were risen by the forsaken.
5) Could fit the void or WotLK 2 xpac idea, shadow spec fits void, risen by forsaken fits WotLK 2

So a mage that uses Necromantic magic is nay but Dark Hunters is Okay?

[In Ogres We Trust]

Tinker is the only "real" option, but with that being said, I would be open to playing a Warden, Spellbreaker, or Battlemaster class. Out of those three, Spellbreaker has the best "lore" justification, i.e. the most racial options.

[Teriz]

Druid actually makes sense though, they've been a class that shape shifts to different affinities to do what they to do spec wise.

And a Tinker would have a different mech type for each spec.

Tinker would need to upgrade the mech directly, not the character piloting it.

Yeah, you could get more advanced forms as your character levels. No different than when Druids went from standard bear form to dire bear form in older versions of WoW. A player could also customize their mech via different colors or even decals. Again, no different than what you see with the Druid class.

Also, the mech would be a vehicle, there would be no way around that, maybe it wouldn't use the common vehicle combat system we see now, but it would still be a mech at the end of the day. This would require a complete system and loot resigned, which they simply won't do, i would image a lot of armor plating upgrades, gears (as in cogs and what not), plugs, and a lot of stuff that would only be for that specific class.

Yeah it would need none of that. Just like Monks don't carry around massive bags full of Kegs because they supposedly throw thousands of Kegs during a given encounter, or Hunters are carrying a million arrows or bullets, or Druids carrying around bags or loot orbiting the druid while in animal form, you don't need to show every single aspect of what a class is doing.

They've been making a lot of plate and leather classes to homogenize the loot drops (i.e. tons of leather and plate from raids and dungeons), where as this class would likely lead to a lot of wasted loot, which blizz hates. I fully expect the next class to be either mail or cloth to reduce "wasted gear".

Yeah, this class would be mail. The mech would give the class more armor which would be beneficial for a tanking spec.

[Frandaero]

+1 for Spellblades

[Elise the Seeker]

Bard would be so unique and fun.

[Teech]

Imo a DK and Hunter could fit the theme of a necromancer and bard.
But i don't know how ppl would react, if the would change an existing spec...
With these Spec changes + a new Class we could have all three

[Wildberry]

There's a clear difference between Mages and Shaman, and there's a clear difference between Hunters and Warlocks. There's zero difference between a Necromancer and a DK. Blizzard even said that the Necromancer was used in the design of the Death Knight.

There's actually a lot of room for difference, you're just refusing to acknowledge the fact that Unholy is limited by virtue of being a single spec, of fully exploring such a concept. Your argument is that both classes use "Dead things," but it really doesn't hold up. The only reason you don't see any difference is because of a conscious refusal to do so.

DKs have always been Necromancers. They were designed that way by Blizzard from the very beginning. You seem to want to ignore the fact that in order to bring DHs into the game, Blizzard removed ALL DH-Based abilities from the Warlock class. It's highly doubtful that Blizzard would remove all the Necro abilities from the DK.

Death Knights incorporated certain aspects of a Necromancer and have since their release, absolutely. But to pretend that the modern-trimmed DK is in any way comparable to the way they were in Wrath is a little much, to say the least. Since the release of Death Knights, and the pruning of a handful of abilities, there's more room than ever for a Necromancer.

Here's the problem with your argument though. You're assuming that Unholy's anemic interpretation of Necromancer is the pinnacle of the concept. There are plenty of other dead things to utilize, different ways to interact with minions mechanically, etc. It's entirely possible to trim very little from Unholy and have a fully functional Necromancer class. Why you're ignoring this possibility, I don't know.

As I said, I was correct in my statements about the Demon Hunter; Their design space was small, in order to bring them into the game you would have to gut the Warlock class, they would be redundant gameplay wise, they would have to be elven only.

Yes, the entirety of the Warlock class was gutted Personally, I find DHs refreshing both thematically and mechanically. A good chunk of the community, barring those that had an obsession about Tinkers over Demon Hunters, seems to agree. They've certainly taken much better to Demonology changes and Demon Hunters than they have Survival's redesign, which you're promoting.

The only mistake I made was not believing that Blizzard would gut Warlocks and shoehorn in such a shallow class. So who knows? Maybe Blizzard WILL bring in Necromancers and damage the game even further.

No see, your mistake was that you argued constantly in bad faith, expected others to take the most disingenuous framework seriously, etc. and shoehorned yourself into an anti-DH, pro-Tinker tirade. DH has worked out fairly well, all things considered, but I get the feeling that you'd be unhappy and illogically against anything that's not a tinker, at this point.

And the difference is that Engineering is a profession, not a competing class. Additionally, the Tinker concept in its rumored form is quite a bit different than anything else we have in the game currently.

Really, I was just trying to hammer home how poor and dishonest the argument was. Apparently you missed that bit, despite me specifically stating that.

A DK and a Necromancer would be competing for the same goals, meaning that not only would they cannibalize each other, but they would be mechanically and thematically redundant. A profession and a class have very different goals.

Monks were mechanically redundant, truthfully. Thematically, Paladins & Priests, Warlocks & Demon Hunters, etc. are "redundant." Separate things into specs and there are even more thematic redundancies.

Regardless, again you are outright refusing to acknowledge that there are plenty of ways to separate Necromancer from Unholy DK mechanically. You, for some reason, aren't even considering the possibility. God forbid we have proper pet interaction, make use of some of the Wrath-era DK abilities left on the cutting room floor, explore and utilize plagues, etc.

You do understand that Plague spreading is a major component of the Necromancer concept right?

Yes, that's part of the reason why I'm an advocate for a Necromancer class (aside from the Tinker salt mine). My main gripe isn't that Necromancers should be a ranged class, rather than melee. My gripe is that Unholy has always been in the predicament of being caught between "Runeblade-wielding badass," "Spreader of Plague, Disease and Pestilence" and "Reanimator." When it goes too far into one territory, the others suffer. It's impossible to keep Unholy as a coherent, playable spec and fully explore all three concepts. The spec is being pulled in too many directions. Considering Frost's makeover this expansion, it might be best to trim Unholy back so that it becomes the "Runeblade-wielding Knight of Death" again, with diseases and some pets tacked on, and let a new class utilize the concepts that Unholy won't be able to make use of. Truthfully though, Unholy could be kept as-is, and Necromancy, plagues, etc. could still be explored by a totally new class.

It would take a lot more than forcing Unholy to be ranged (Which would harm overall DK fantasy, given Frost's state). To even come close to delivering on a proper Necromancer, Unholy would have to be broken into two separate specs to fully utilize everything that a Necromancer would be capable of doing.

Again, if Blizzard desires to create a ranged Necromancer, they're far more likely to simply make UH a ranged spec. By many accounts, they're going in that direction anyway.

If Blizzard desired to create a Demon Hunter, they'd have been far more likely to bake Dark Apotheosis into Demonology. For a while, they were going in that direction.

Then look at what happened. It seems they'd much rather trim a single spec back to clear the way for a new class (minimal damage, major payoff), than to redesign a spec from the ground up (minimal damage, minimal payoff). Considering how well the Survival redesign went, I can't see them doing that again.

[Teriz]

There's actually a lot of room for difference, you're just refusing to acknowledge the fact that Unholy is limited by virtue of being a single spec, of fully exploring such a concept. Your argument is that both classes use "Dead things," but it really doesn't hold up. The only reason you don't see any difference is because of a conscious refusal to do so.

Please tell me an aspect of Necromancy that DKs currently can't do. Not degrees, but a theme of abilities that Warcraft Necromancers haven been shown to do that DKs cannot do.

Here's the problem with your argument though. You're assuming that Unholy's anemic interpretation of Necromancer is the pinnacle of the concept. There are plenty of other dead things to utilize, different ways to interact with minions mechanically, etc.

That's your opinion though, not a mechanical deficiency or lack of theme within the DK class itself.

Yes, the entirety of the Warlock class was gutted Personally, I find DHs refreshing both thematically and mechanically. A good chunk of the community, barring those that had an obsession about Tinkers over Demon Hunters, seems to agree. They've certainly taken much better to Demonology changes and Demon Hunters than they have Survival's redesign, which you're promoting.

https://us.battle.net/forums/en/wow/topic/20755726916
https://eu.battle.net/forums/en/wow/topic/17614743960
https://us.battle.net/forums/en/wow/topic/20753117316
https://eu.battle.net/forums/en/wow/topic/17615634438

Yep.

No see, your mistake was that you argued constantly in bad faith, expected others to take the most disingenuous framework seriously, etc. and shoehorned yourself into an anti-DH, pro-Tinker tirade. DH has worked out fairly well, all things considered, but I get the feeling that you'd be unhappy and illogically against anything that's not a tinker, at this point.

My mistake was believing that Blizzard would delete an entire spec and shoehorn in a class with very limited design space. I have no issue with the DH, if people enjoy playing it, that's fine. However, I have to roll my eyes at people who say that they're perfectly fine with Warlock players getting screwed over, and DH only having 2 specs.

Monks were mechanically redundant, truthfully. Thematically, Paladins & Priests, Warlocks & Demon Hunters, etc. are "redundant." Separate things into specs and there are even more thematic redundancies.

Monks utilize hand to hand martial arts, akin to Kung Fu movies. They also have the cool side theme of brewing drinks and potions that enhance their abilities. They even had great mobility options like Roll and Flying Serpent Kick (until DHs took the "mobility" mantle for some reason ). By all means, name another class that's anything like it.

Regardless, again you are outright refusing to acknowledge that there are plenty of ways to separate Necromancer from Unholy DK mechanically. You, for some reason, aren't even considering the possibility. God forbid we have proper pet interaction, make use of some of the Wrath-era DK abilities left on the cutting room floor, explore and utilize plagues, etc.

I refuse to acknowledge it because you have yet to prove it. All you've done so far is complain that DKs don't match the fantasy of your idea of what a Necromancer SHOULD be. That's not a good enough reason to bring a copy-cat class into the game.

At least DH proponents had the argument that Warlocks "stole" Metamorphosis from Demon Hunters, and that still ticked off plenty of Warlock players.

[Darktbs]

Please tell me an aspect of Necromancy that DKs currently can't do. Not degrees, but a theme of abilities that Warcraft Necromancers haven been shown to do that DKs cannot do..

Turn into a Lich.

Again, i dont know how many times i said this, its the same thing with Paladins and Priests.

One its the warrior that wields the light and the other is a caster that wields the light(with the unique flavour that its Shadow.)but BOTH have similiar themes.WIELD THE FUCKING LIGHT AS A WEAPON.

The same way Holy Paladins and Holy priests can heal with the light, Uh Dk and possibly Uh necromancers(or whatever you want to call then) can summon hordes of the Undead to fight for then, just give each one of then something unique.

While Dk summon waves of undead and a couple of stronger ones.

Necromancers can sacrifice their minions to make a stronger one or each one of their spells its a different undead summon with focus on bringing their strongest minions using the fallen corpses as material.

A spec that tears apart the enemy soul or physical form with dark magic or drain their vital essence with the ability to raise fallen mobs in their original form.

Im tired of this stupid argument of Dks = Necromancers, and Necromancers aren't even in my wish list.

[K i s u]

Tinker for me, seems to make the most sense.

[Wildberry]

Please tell me an aspect of Necromancy that DKs currently can't do. Not degrees, but a theme of abilities that Warcraft Necromancers haven been shown to do that DKs cannot do.

You do realize that such criteria discounts Priests, due to Paladins, right? Or vice versa, either way works, really.

Regardless, rituals, curses, souls, etc.

Then there are Scourge aspects that can easily be incorporated into a Necromancer class due to heavy thematic overlap: Gasses, potions, plague cauldrons, blights, etc.

Then, even though you're going to fly into an incomprehensible fit over this, there are the things that DKs barely do, or did, but don't anymore. Because just like Fel, Holy, Elemental, Life, etc. magic, Death magic is far too broad to be adequately covered by a single class. So: Bone damage, minion sacrifice (health/damage), insects, Slime/Oozes, Exploding corpses (inb4 muh cosmetics), etc.

That's your opinion though, not a mechanical deficiency or lack of theme within the DK class itself.

That's literally not an opinion, Teriz, it's a fact. There are a good number of things that Unholy doesn't do thematically or mechanically. You might like the way it plays (I do too), but there are objectively plenty of aspects where it doesn't deliver.

Yep.

So let's see:
1. A low traffic thread where the majority of responses focus on the better performance of two other specs, Demo's gear dependence, and lower skill floor than Affliction.
2. A low traffic thread where the opinion relevant to your focus is 8-7?
3. A thread where yet again, consensus is split if the first page is anything to go by. I skimmed through the above for a tally, I really don't care enough to do it here.
4. A thread complaining about the performance of the class in general, the lack of utility (Hey that's literally every class these days)

This is what I mean by intellectual dishonesty by the way.

But hey, you want to go over to the Hunter forums? If we use your criteria, we could reference the entire section. If we use proper criteria, we could get a majority in every thread regarding the Survival redesign. My point was never that Demonology/DH went off without a hitch, rather that it went far better than Survival's redesign did. Seeing this, and understanding in this context we're discussing a potential class rather than spec (which now has precedent) it's fairly easy to see what solution is both better, and more likely to actually be done.

I have no issue with the DH, if people enjoy playing it, that's fine. However, I have to roll my eyes at people who say that they're perfectly fine with Warlock players getting screwed over, and DH only having 2 specs.

In comparison to the Survival Hunter debacle, Warlocks got off fairly easily. Considering the Combat Rogues, Survival Hunters, etc. all got their specs redesigned for no good reason, I'd say I'm fairly happy with the way things turned out. Regarding DH's 2 specs, what exactly is the problem? I really hate defending Blizzard, but it was the right choice. There's not much else that most people wanted from Demon Hunters. A third spec would have been detrimental to them, just as it's been detrimental to Rogues, and Hunters specifically.

Monks utilize hand to hand martial arts, akin to Kung Fu movies. They also have the cool side theme of brewing drinks and potions that enhance their abilities. They even had great mobility options like Roll and Flying Serpent Kick (until DHs took the "mobility" mantle for some reason ). By all means, name another class that's anything like it.

An agile melee class using concoctions to give it an edge in combat that also relies on combo points and energy? I feel like I've heard of that somewhere.

I refuse to acknowledge it because you have yet to prove it. All you've done so far is complain that DKs don't match the fantasy of your idea of what a Necromancer SHOULD be. That's not a good enough reason to bring a copy-cat class into the game.

That's actually not what it is at all. You refuse to acknowledge it (despite the fact that you've previously made a thread dedicated to your idea of a unique Necromancer class, thus you acknowledge the possibility) because you're on an autistic crusade for Tinkers.

It's not about my idea of a Necromancer, it's more about the unutilized and underutilized aspects of Death magic, Scourge-stuff, etc. that has left a void large enough for a class to fill.

At least DH proponents had the argument that Warlocks "stole" Metamorphosis from Demon Hunters, and that still ticked off plenty of Warlock players.

Considering Demon Hunters weren't a class at the time, much like Necromancers aren't a class now, there's plenty that Death Knights have "stolen" from Necromancers.

[Addict]

I dont care what class it is, just no more melee-range classes, for the love of Gul'Daniel.

[Darktbs]

Considering Demon Hunters weren't a class at the time, much like Necromancers aren't a class now, there's plenty that Death Knights have "stolen" from Necromancers.

Death and Decay not only was stolen but nerfed.

[Teriz]

Turn into a Lich.

http://wow.gamepedia.com/Lichborne

Again, i dont know how many times i said this, its the same thing with Paladins and Priests.

Uh no. Priests can use shadow magic, Paladins cannot.

While Dk summon waves of undead and a couple of stronger ones.

Necromancers can sacrifice their minions to make a stronger one or each one of their spells its a different undead summon with focus on bringing their strongest minions using the fallen corpses as material.

You mean like the ability Shadow Infusion?

A spec that tears apart the enemy soul or physical form with dark magic or drain their vital essence with the ability to raise fallen mobs in their original form.

You mean like how DKs use Shadow magic to tear apart the enemy soul, drain their vital essence with Death Strike, and then raise their corpses as ghouls or a variety of other minions?

- - - Updated - - -

You do realize that such criteria discounts Priests, due to Paladins, right? Or vice versa, either way works, really.

Regardless, rituals, curses, souls, etc.

Ah, we'll be taking from the Warlock class as well. Interesting.

Then there are Scourge aspects that can easily be incorporated into a Necromancer class due to heavy thematic overlap: Gasses, potions, plague cauldrons, blights, etc.

Too bad half of that is already incorporated into the DK class.

Then, even though you're going to fly into an incomprehensible fit over this, there are the things that DKs barely do, or did, but don't anymore. Because just like Fel, Holy, Elemental, Life, etc. magic, Death magic is far too broad to be adequately covered by a single class. So: Bone damage, minion sacrifice (health/damage), insects, Slime/Oozes, Exploding corpses (inb4 muh cosmetics), etc.

It isn't called "Death Magic" it's called "Shadow Magic" and Death Knights, Warlocks, Priests, and Demon Hunters all use it.

That's literally not an opinion, Teriz, it's a fact. There are a good number of things that Unholy doesn't do thematically or mechanically. You might like the way it plays (I do too), but there are objectively plenty of aspects where it doesn't deliver.

Uh, you saying that a DK doesn't adequately fit your view of what a Necromancer should be is definitely your opinion. It is a fact that DKs use Necromancy, and that Blizzard is pulling from Necromancers in the DK class design.

So let's see:
1. A low traffic thread where the majority of responses focus on the better performance of two other specs, Demo's gear dependence, and lower skill floor than Affliction.
2. A low traffic thread where the opinion relevant to your focus is 8-7?
3. A thread where yet again, consensus is split if the first page is anything to go by. I skimmed through the above for a tally, I really don't care enough to do it here.
4. A thread complaining about the performance of the class in general, the lack of utility (Hey that's literally every class these days)

This is what I mean by intellectual dishonesty by the way.

But hey, you want to go over to the Hunter forums? If we use your criteria, we could reference the entire section. If we use proper criteria, we could get a majority in every thread regarding the Survival redesign. My point was never that Demonology/DH went off without a hitch, rather that it went far better than Survival's redesign did. Seeing this, and understanding in this context we're discussing a potential class rather than spec (which now has precedent) it's fairly easy to see what solution is both better, and more likely to actually be done.

It doesn't matter how Survival feels about their redesign, the point is that there are plenty of Warlock players bitter about losing the old demonology spec. If Blizzard implements a Necromancer at the expense of the DK class, that feeling of bitterness would be even more widespread because the DK=Necromancer relationship is leagues closer than the Warlock=DH relationship.

In comparison to the Survival Hunter debacle, Warlocks got off fairly easily. Considering the Combat Rogues, Survival Hunters, etc. all got their specs redesigned for no good reason, I'd say I'm fairly happy with the way things turned out. Regarding DH's 2 specs, what exactly is the problem? I really hate defending Blizzard, but it was the right choice. There's not much else that most people wanted from Demon Hunters. A third spec would have been detrimental to them, just as it's been detrimental to Rogues, and Hunters specifically.

There's a difference between Blizzard wanting to diversify the Rogue and Hunter classes, and what Blizzard pulled with Demonology. They literally nuked the spec in WoD to make people not play it, then removed it altogether to bring in a new class. Believe it or not, there are still a lot of Warlock players pissed off about that. Take that situation and amplify it by a factor of 10, and that would be the situation with the Necromancy class.

An agile melee class using concoctions to give it an edge in combat that also relies on combo points and energy? I feel like I've heard of that somewhere.

I wasn't aware that Rogues performed martial arts and drinking their own poisons. I also didn't realize they had a Healing and a Tanking spec....

That's actually not what it is at all. You refuse to acknowledge it (despite the fact that you've previously made a thread dedicated to your idea of a unique Necromancer class, thus you acknowledge the possibility) because you're on an autistic crusade for Tinkers.

And I'm pretty sure I even said in that thread that it is highly unlikely that they would ever implement a Necromancy class into WoW. I still stand by that opinion. However, Blizzard could introduce a Necromancer class into game, and make the game far worse than it currently is.

- - - Updated - - -

Death and Decay not only was stolen but nerfed.

LoL! Death and Decay wasn't stolen. Death Knight class design includes the Lich hero from WC3. That's where Death and Decay and its entire Frost spec comes from.