New Class Prediction: Necromancer

[Rhamses]

Hilarious. Unholy had a max of 7 up at a single time during WotLK. You have to reach to (mutually exclusive) PvP talents and other specs.

They were streamlined for gameplay purposes.

Also are we going to argue that PvP talents somehow don't count?

[Enkrypt]

I'm just gonna leave this here...

https://us.battle.net/d3/en/blog/206...-2017#_Primary

That ability list pretty much outlines my whole point. But sure, there's room for Necrotic Fungi. That will undoubtedly turn the tables on this discussion, and present an entirely new element to the "class" that isn't a Death Knight. *wink, wink*

I'm pretty much done with this thread. The people thinking it could happen without making waves are just too over the top ridiculous for me to take seriously.

Pseudopets and fungi... wtf...

- - - Updated - - -

They were streamlined for gameplay purposes.

Also are we going to argue that PvP talents somehow don't count?

Don't waste your time with ol' Berry.

[Wildberry]

They were streamlined for gameplay purposes.

Are PvP talents integral to the core function of a spec? No, they're not. The spec functions perfectly without them in PvE scenarios. The PvP talents you listed are also mutually exclusive, meaning you can't have both. The fact that you threw Blood's disease on there is just pitiful. I'm honestly surprised you didn't mention Frost Fever at this point.

Pseudopets and fungi... wtf...

Oh, so "wtf" is your grand answer to things that poke holes in your (horrible) arguments. I mean, you do realize the "I can't imagine this fighting muh void!" test would basically exclude the entire monk class, right?

Oh, and for the record there are a number of things in your Necromancer-destroying link that aren't currently in-use by Death Knights. Bravo, I guess.

[Rhamses]

Yet in the same breath ask if we believe Blizzard would ever do something like this; when they already have? Again and again?

An argument could be made that Metamorphosis was kind of tacked onto Warlocks. You can't make that argument with DKs and Necromancy. The DK hero itself could raise the dead.

It's not dishonest. I could come up with a Necromancer concept that incorporates Alchemists who brew undeath, ex-Cult of the Damned mages, spirit-binding Shamans, and Priests of the Cult of Shadow all under one unified concept that is unique to itself. Under this umbrella, no one would contend that a Death Knight would brew potions or a Rogue would delve into the dark, spiritual arts, or that a Warlock even cares about taking a side step into Necromancy. It just has to be packaged in the right way.

Comparatively, if we were to talk about a Undead Warrior who uses Frost magic, don't you think that basic discussion is seemingly dishonest to Warriors and Mages? Yet you don't seem to have any problem with a Death Knight being this concept; mostly because it's integrated fully as its own thing with explanations for why it exists; whereas currently a Necromancer is completely formless and only exists as however we perceive it. In your mind, a Necromancer is nothing more than a reskinned Warlock, and I can't change your perception. But I would see me providing you an alternative to that perception as being dishonest.

Again, you're talking about a spec. I'm talking about on the class level. Warriors can't use magic, and Mages have zero Necromantic abilities. DKs pulled from Lichs like Kel'thuzad and the original Lich King in order to bring in the DK frost spec. That's why it made sense and it didn't overlap with existing classes. The problem with this argument in favor of a "new" Necromancer class is that the majority of Necromancer concepts have already been placed in the DK class. In order to create yet another Necromancer class, we need to unravel the current DK class and change its core concepts, because Necromancy itself is a core concept of the DK class.

Metamorphosis (transforming into a demon) for all of its popularity within the Warlock class was NEVER a core concept for Warlocks.

[Wildberry]

Metamorphosis (transforming into a demon) for all of its popularity within the Warlock class was NEVER a core concept for Warlocks.

Interesting, I remember a very different song being sung on that front by the anti-DH shills.

[Darktbs]

Again, comparing a spec similarity to a class similarity.

We can have a Paladin class without a dedicated healing spec. Could we have a Necromancer or Death Knight class that doesn't raise the dead?

Wu...WHAT?!

Both Paladins and Priests use Holy magic in all of their specs, minus Shadow. Disc needs to deal damage to heal, Retri is a holy dps spec, and both *holy* specs heal with the Light and Prot uses Holy magic to tank.

By your logic, Necros can have as many Undead summoning specs they want since only ONE Dk spec summons undead as a rotation.

[Thimagryn]

Okay, I'll give you a breakdown of how I'm thinking it will play out:

*snip*

Those are the reasons why I believe Necromancer can't work. What far-reaching elements of Necromancer outweigh ALL THOSE SIMILARITIES? Necrotic fungi? GTFOH if you think "fungi" will be a cornerstone of the Necromancer.

There's no reason to believe a Necromancer has to be so far removed to be absolutely unique from all similarities.

Is a Paladin absent of all similarities from other classes? Do similarities disrupt how a Paladin is defined as a whole? Does it affect the players who choose to play the class? These are the important factors. Categorizing similarities on an individual level are not important.

Like I said, do this with the Demon Hunter. You will get the same results. So ask yourself why Blizzard still chose Demon Hunters. Why aren't players more pissed off at the addition of another Rogue/Monk-like who also takes stuff away from Warlocks.

I understand that you're not convinced because the only Necromancer concept that exists is already exactly 1:1 with Warlocks and Death Knights. In all honesty, it takes a lot of imagination and suspension of disbelief to properly accept this class alongside every other without too many conflicts. Yet we know Blizzard already does this with Paladins and Demon Hunters; two classes that have no necessity to be included amongst other classes that viably fill the same themes and roles. This shows us that overlapping similarities isn't an issue (from a design perspective). Again, all I can say is that Blizzard follows a Rule of Cool. It isn't out of sheer ignorance that they decided to add Necromancers in Diablo 3 despite there already being a pet-class that uses poisons and covers the same general themes.

[Hitei]

I'm just gonna leave this here...

https://us.battle.net/d3/en/blog/206...-2017#_Primary

That ability list pretty much outlines my whole point. But sure, there's room for Necrotic Fungi. That will undoubtedly turn the tables on this discussion, and present an entirely new element to the "class" that isn't a Death Knight. *wink, wink*

Yes, Necrotic fungi.
And plague clouds, cauldrons, and sprays.
And ghosts.
And cursing.
And poison waves, pools and jets and clouds.
And scarabs.
And bone wraiths and golems.
And lichdom.
And soul storms, bolts, and pulling out people's souls into physical existence to be controlled, harmed or consumed.
And bone spikes and spears.
And dark healing.
And various forms of crippling, debilitating and weakening.

Again, you're talking about a spec. I'm talking about on the class level. Warriors can't use magic, and Mages have zero Necromantic abilities. DKs pulled from Lichs like Kel'thuzad and the original Lich King in order to bring in the DK frost spec. That's why it made sense and it didn't overlap with existing classes. The problem with this argument in favor of a "new" Necromancer class is that the majority of Necromancer concepts have already been placed in the DK class. In order to create yet another Necromancer class, we need to unravel the current DK class and change its core concepts, because Necromancy itself is a core concept of the DK class.

Metamorphosis (transforming into a demon) for all of its popularity within the Warlock class was NEVER a core concept for Warlocks.

But Immolation was a core concept for Warlocks, and still is even after Demon Hunters were added.
Evasion is a core concept for Rogues, yet remains even after Monks and Demon Hunters were added.

It's almost like you can let other classes keep traits so long as they aren't anything big, like the defining ability of the class being introduced.

[Darktbs]

An argument could be made that Metamorphosis was kind of tacked onto Warlocks. You can't make that argument with DKs and Necromancy. [B]The DK hero itself could raise the dead.

Maybe thats the reason we believe that those 2 classes can exist together without removing one thing from another?Meta was originally a Dh spell so it made sense it was removed from Warlocks.Why would Blizzard remove Army of the Dead, Raise Dead, Summon Gargoyle and Apocalypse since this is in Dk's nature?

Why not let Necromancers summon you know, the rest of the Undead army?Crypitc Fiends, Banshees, Skeletons, Skeleton Mages, Obisidian Statues(destroyers)

[Thimagryn]

An argument could be made that Metamorphosis was kind of tacked onto Warlocks. You can't make that argument with DKs and Necromancy. The DK hero itself could raise the dead.

The DK hero was never attributed to using Frost or Blood magic. Yet it does now, and you have no problem with that, despite it being the domains of Liches(and Frost Mages) and Dread Lords. Necromancers don't need to only focus on the Unholy aspect. Like I said, there is plausible case to include spirit binding (Teron Gorefiend's dark shamanism), Alchemy (Professor Putricide, Apothecaries) and much more. Death Knight's power comes only from the Scourge and the innate gift granted by the Lich King; just one source of Necromancy but by no means the only. Necromancer as a class can reach well beyond that, exploring aspects that we would not otherwise be able to through Death Knights alone. Would a DK ever explore the powers of the Dark Naaru like Teron'gor? Or brew up alchemical horrors like Heigan? That is the realm of the Necromancer. The DK is a specialist of Necromancy as an offensive tool, similar to how a Paladin uses Holy magic. It's the Priests who expand the knowledge of the light through many different disciplines, like the Naaru, Elune, Sun God and even the Shadow. Paladins then learn trickle down from the Priests, yet they never compete or subvert them simply for the fact they have mastered the Light.

In this way, a Necromancer works to support the Death Knight, not subvert it. Similarly, you don't have a problem with Shamans being masters of the Elements, yet allow room for Mages who use the exact same elements. The concept is simple - they use different disciplines to achieve the same result. No different here with my explanation for Necromancers who encompass dark Shamanism, alchemy, shadow cults and perhaps even those who explore Kil'jaeden's original recipe for creating the original Lich King himself. The thing is, Necromancy has existed in Warcraft far longer than (post Arthas) Death Knights have, and Necromancy isn't something that is exclusive to the Ebon Blade.

[Enkrypt]

Are PvP talents integral to the core function of a spec? No, they're not. The spec functions perfectly without them in PvE scenarios. The PvP talents you listed are also mutually exclusive, meaning you can't have both. The fact that you threw Blood's disease on there is just pitiful. I'm honestly surprised you didn't mention Frost Fever at this point.



Oh, so "wtf" is your grand answer to things that poke holes in your (horrible) arguments. I mean, you do realize the "I can't imagine this fighting muh void!" test would basically exclude the entire monk class, right?

Oh, and for the record there are a number of things in your Necromancer-destroying link that aren't currently in-use by Death Knights. Bravo, I guess.

Dude, you've literally provided nothing. You just keep blowing hot air whilst simultaneously thinking you're some godsend to this debate. You're not. You're a pest that should just go away.

Bravo for literally being nothing other than annoying. You don't even back your arguments up. And yes, you're the one that proposed the utterly moronic "fungi" idea. Woah there, don't get too creative, Berry. You might start something with your (exquisitely lame) idea, but probably not.

Yeah, seriously, I say wtf to your proposal. It was that lame. So now you're actually going to be ignored, because you've reached that boring level of annoyance.

- - - Updated - - -

Yes, Necrotic fungi.
And plague clouds, cauldrons, and sprays.
And ghosts.
And cursing.
And poison waves, pools and jets and clouds.
And scarabs.
And bone wraiths and golems.
And lichdom.
And soul storms, bolts, and pulling out people's souls into physical existence to be controlled, harmed or consumed.
And bone spikes and spears.
And dark healing.
And various forms of crippling, debilitating and weakening.



But Immolation was a core concept for Warlocks, and still is even after Demon Hunters were added.
Evasion is a core concept for Rogues, yet remains even after Monks and Demon Hunters were added.

It's almost like you can let other classes keep traits so long as they aren't anything big, like the defining ability of the class being introduced.

Most constructive pro-Necromancer class post to date! Keep it up, Hitei. Thanks for actually providing examples instead of just, y'know, talking dumb shit.

[Wildberry]

Dude, you've literally provided nothing. You just keep blowing hot air whilst simultaneously thinking you're some godsend to this debate. You're not. You're a pest that should just go away.

I've actually made constructive posts in this thread, which is why I've been calling you on not having read the thread!

Bravo for literally being nothing other than annoying. You don't even back your arguments up. And yes, you're the one that proposed the utterly moronic "fungi" idea. Woah there, don't get too creative, Berry. You might start something with your (exquisitely lame) idea, but probably not.

Yes, 1/4 of Naxxramas, a progression blocking boss, two Scourge-themed zones, etc. is just sooo lame. Totally unlike the class that gets trashed and hits people. I actually have touched somewhat on the idea in the thread which, again, is why I've been calling on you for not having read it. Here, let me @ some of my responses at you.

God forbid we expand upon a concept. Plus, there are multiple aspects of the Scourge (Plague Cauldrons, Mushrooms, Fungal Aberrations etc. Think Putricide, Plaguelands, Plague Quarter Themes) that simply haven't been utilized by Death Knights or Warlocks

"I have some minor complaint about your signature so it must be tedious to reason with you." Lolwut? You know, it's funny you imply reasonableness on your end considering that line of thought. Bravo!

Aspects of the Scourge that Death Knights Haven't Touched:
-Ghosts/Spectres
-Plague Mushrooms/Necrotic Fungi
-Plague Cauldrons
-Gas/Blight (Putricide)
-Vermin (Rats, etc.)
-Poison
-Spiders (Both Maexxna and Nerubians)
-Reanimating things multiple times (ie, Black Knight)
-Liches (inb4 "but 'Lichborne's' naaame!")
etc.

Aspects of the Scourge that were Touched on by Death Knights but Have Been Cut:
-Insects/Locusts
-Sacrificing Minions to Heal
-Utilization of Blighted Ground
-Corpse Explosion (inb4 "muh Legion cosmetic")
-Self-reanimation
etc.

Aspects of the Scourge that are Currently Touched on by Death Knights but Underutilized:
-Plague/Disease (Unholy went from 7 DoTs to 1)
-Bones (There's what? One defensive blood passive now, and one offensive talent?)
-Mass Necromancy (Unholy has AotD, but no interaction)
-Slime (Unholy currently has a single PvP Talent which draws from this)
etc.

Necromancers have far more, theoretically, than Demon Hunters have. It's entirely possible to create a 3-spec class and barely touch DKs and Warlocks at all.

@Enkrypt @Enkrypt @Enkrypt
Does that work? Is spoonfeeding easier?

Yeah, seriously, I say wtf to your proposal. It was that lame. So now you're actually going to be ignored, because you've reached that boring level of annoyance.

Oh no! Are you going to ignore me this time? Or is that for when I'm actually actually being ignored? Weren't you leaving this thread? I suppose I need to wait for you to actually leave the thread.

[Rhamses]

But Immolation was a core concept for Warlocks, and still is even after Demon Hunters were added.
Evasion is a core concept for Rogues, yet remains even after Monks and Demon Hunters were added.

It's almost like you can let other classes keep traits so long as they aren't anything big, like the defining ability of the class being introduced.

Because those weren't the core concepts of the Demon Hunter or the Warlock. They key concept of the DH is fighting with glances, blindness, and transforming into a demon. The key concept of the Warlock is controlling and summoning demons and their magic.

The core concept of DKs is Necromancy. The core concept of the Necromancer is also Necromancy.

And hence lies the problem.

[Wildberry]

The core concept of DKs is Necromancy. The core concept of the Necromancer is also Necromancy.

And hence lies the problem.

I'm really doing a whole lot of Necromancy whenever I play Frost, let me tell you.

[Darktbs]

I'm really doing a whole lot of Necromancy whenever I play Frost, let me tell you.

Those summon Singragosas mate...i feel like Kel'thu freaking zad.

[Wildberry]

Those summon Singragosas mate...i feel like Kel'thu freaking zad.

That's the thing, we just summon her. We're not exactly raising her. I mean, the only reanimation that's gone on in Frost this expansion is the reanimation of the braindead Obliteration talent.

[Rotomon]

Id like to see a fire based healing class personally.

[Rhamses]

Maybe thats the reason we believe that those 2 classes can exist together without removing one thing from another?Meta was originally a Dh spell so it made sense it was removed from Warlocks.Why would Blizzard remove Army of the Dead, Raise Dead, Summon Gargoyle and Apocalypse since this is in Dk's nature?

Why not let Necromancers summon you know, the rest of the Undead army?Crypitc Fiends, Banshees, Skeletons, Skeleton Mages, Obisidian Statues(destroyers)

For the same reason Warlocks couldn't keep metamorphosis, despite it being completely different than the DH incarnation.

Also DKs can already summon skeletons.

- - - Updated - - -

I'm really doing a whole lot of Necromancy whenever I play Frost, let me tell you.

Chains of Ice, Decomposing Aura, Necrotic Aura, Delirium, Control Undead, Sindragosa?

[Wildberry]

Chains of Ice, Decomposing Aura, Necrotic Aura, Delirium, Control Undead, Sindragosa?

Chains of Ice isn't Necromancy. We aren't reanimating Sindragosa. So that leaves you with two (mutually exclusive) PvP Talents and Control Undead. Wow, those are so integral to the core identity of Frost!

[Rhamses]

The DK hero was never attributed to using Frost or Blood magic. Yet it does now, and you have no problem with that, despite it being the domains of Liches(and Frost Mages) and Dread Lords. Necromancers don't need to only focus on the Unholy aspect. Like I said, there is plausible case to include spirit binding (Teron Gorefiend's dark shamanism), Alchemy (Professor Putricide, Apothecaries) and much more. Death Knight's power comes only from the Scourge and the innate gift granted by the Lich King; just one source of Necromancy but by no means the only. Necromancer as a class can reach well beyond that, exploring aspects that we would not otherwise be able to through Death Knights alone. Would a DK ever explore the powers of the Dark Naaru like Teron'gor? Or brew up alchemical horrors like Heigan? That is the realm of the Necromancer. The DK is a specialist of Necromancy as an offensive tool, similar to how a Paladin uses Holy magic. It's the Priests who expand the knowledge of the light through many different disciplines, like the Naaru, Elune, Sun God and even the Shadow. Paladins then learn trickle down from the Priests, yet they never compete or subvert them simply for the fact they have mastered the Light.

The problem with that argument is that those aspects isn't why people want the class. People want the Necromancers because they can raise and control the dead in a ranged format. People don't want to roll a Necromancer class in order to play around with necrotic fungus. They want a Necromancer in order to summon hordes of undead minions. Thus, the core of this argument is a simple one:

How adversely affected would the Death Knight and the Warlock class be from a Necromancer inclusion? I believe that ALL of the summoning undead and related abilities and diseases from the DK would have to be removed. If you're trying to argue that DKs or Warlocks wouldn't be effected from this inclusion, you're being dishonest.

Similarly, you don't have a problem with Shamans being masters of the Elements, yet allow room for Mages who use the exact same elements. The concept is simple - they use different disciplines to achieve the same result. No different here with my explanation for Necromancers who encompass dark Shamanism, alchemy, shadow cults and perhaps even those who explore Kil'jaeden's original recipe for creating the original Lich King himself. The thing is, Necromancy has existed in Warcraft far longer than (post Arthas) Death Knights have, and Necromancy isn't something that is exclusive to the Ebon Blade.

Mages don't use Wind or Earth Magic. Additionally, Mage Frost magic is different than the water magic that prevails the Shaman Restoration spec. Conversely, Shaman don't use Arcane magic.