Theres only one possible class left they can add to the game

[rarhyx]

Such is the price of "new" classes taking concepts from existing classes.

that has nothign to do with concept and classes
it's just blizz is unabe to balance it, some examples: 2h windfury and 2h frost just destroyed everything in pvp iirc while in pve dw was stronger
also look at the dk: they had 3 tank and 3 dps but thanks to balance issues not all 3 tank/dps were good enough in pve if they could do it dk would still have 3 tank and 3 dps specs
I mean look at current spec some are just over/under tuned, blizz is just unable to balance classes and that has NOTHING to do with new classes this is a 13 year old problem

[Teriz]

that has nothign to do with concept and classes
it's just blizz is unabe to balance it, some examples: 2h windfury and 2h frost just destroyed everything in pvp iirc while in pve dw was stronger
also look at the dk: they had 3 tank and 3 dps but thanks to balance issues not all 3 tank/dps were good enough in pve if they could do it dk would still have 3 tank and 3 dps specs
I mean look at current spec some are just over/under tuned, blizz is just unable to balance classes and that has NOTHING to do with new classes this is a 13 year old problem

And removal of DW Tanking from Monks?

[Rotomon]

I want a warrior priest like Warhammer online (yeah I know a ret paladin is very similar) Id like to see 4th specs given to current classes imo.

[Teriz]

My belief is a DK doens't need to be gutted. My opinion is that there is plenty of difference here already by nature of having different specs. Paladins and Priests share an entire spec that shares the exact same roles, themes and source of lore. Unholy DK and Unholy Necromancer could exist in that same sort of space.

We're not talking about the sharing of an "entire" spec. We're talking about the sharing of an "entire" class.

Have you seen the Necromancer threads popping up on various forums? Every single one has specs that are variations of the existing DK specs.

I can't help if you can't share my vision of what could happen, especially given the precedent is there within the Paladin and Priest.

Again, you're comparing spec similarity to class similarity.

That's like saying 'I hate vanilla ice cream. Why won't fans of vanilla admit that it tastes like shit'. Maybe that's because they don't think it's as bad as you do.

That's quite a laughable analogy. A better one is that DK players have an ice cream cone which they love and enjoy. Necromancer fans want half of that ice cream cone, and are perfectly willing to take it from DK players regardless of how the latter feels about it.

[Ielenia]

Um, its not irrelevant, especially when the two classes in question have similar themes and magic source. It would be like Warlocks and Demon Hunters both being able to summon demons and both being able to transform into demons.

You seriously don't see that as a problem?

Not sure how valid your example is, considering you're putting two major themes together between two classes. This wouldn't be the case. Just one main theme would be shared: necromancy.

That said, I'll dismiss your example and assume you mean if both the warlock and demon hunter could change into demons. Not the summoning part. That said, I would have no problems. Because if you look at how the warlock's metamorphosis ability was, and how the demon hunter metamorphosis is, right now, both play differently. Warlocks would game some new spells and others would gain different functionalities. The demon hunter metamorphosis would just give the player extra haste or HP (depending on spec), and just increase damage of one or two spells.

The warlock meta worked kind of like void form works for priests, having to fill a bar that would dictate how long they'd remain in that form, according to how full the bar was when casting metamorphosis. The demon hunter meta has just a flat timed duration to it.

In the case of adding the necromancer class, would the death knight's unholy spec be changed? Perhaps. I am of the opinion that Blizzard is capable of making both work. But, in the event of Blizzard deciding to remove undead summoning from the death knight class, only the unholy spec would really suffer. Frost is straight-out frost damage, and blood tanking has no undead summoning in it. Both the necromancer and death knight can easily share a blood/bone theme, as long as the gameplay is different. Which it would be since a blood spec for necromancers would be dps or healing, different from the death knight.

[Challenge]

I want a warrior priest like Warhammer online (yeah I know a ret paladin is very similar) Id like to see 4th specs given to current classes imo.

Another suggestion people keep asking for without actually thinking about what it entails.

And to the last retarded suggestion of "blizzard should just add 4th specs (5th for druids) to every class". It will never happen. Blizzard already said during legion development that they wished back in time they didnt add 3rd specs for certain classes (aka Rogue/Hunter). Not to mention the time it takes to develop 12 new specs to be unique, interesting rotationally, doesnt infringe on existing classes, makes sense and is functionally balanced and then maintain the balance on TWELVE MORE SPECS? Thats basically 4 classes with 3 new specs for a single expansion, or 6 classes if they only can make 2 specs like the demon hunter. Are you people actually insane?

[Ielenia]

And removal of DW Tanking from Monks?

Easily explained: they lost dual-wielding in Legion. Legion introduced Artifacts Weapons. Monks already had dual-wield for their DPS spec, so, to make the two specs visually distinct, they gave the tanking spec a 2H staff. And while dual-wield tanking was possible during MoP and WoD, during MoP it was slightly behind 2H tanking, and in WoD it because vastly inferior to 2H.

[rarhyx]

I can't help if you can't share my vision of what could happen, especially given the precedent is there within the Paladin and Priest.

don't forget:
warlocks and demon hunters who use demonic powers/fel in different ways or
frost mages and frost dk who use the same magic school in different ways or
shamans, mages and warlocks who use the fire magic in different ways

[Thimagryn]

We're not talking about the sharing of an "entire" spec. We're talking about the sharing of an "entire" class.

Unless you think Necromancers will dual wield melee with frost spells, melee tank with blood and vampirism and melee spread diseases and use summons with Unholy, you don't really have an argument here, just an opinion.

Have you seen the Necromancer threads popping up on various forums? Every single one has specs that are variations of the existing DK specs.

The one with Devouring Plague seemed pretty unique to me. And it still felt very Necromancery.

That's quite a laughable analogy. A better one is that DK players have an ice cream cone which they love and enjoy. Necromancer fans want half of that ice cream cone, and are perfectly willing to take it from DK players regardless of how the latter feels about it.

Yeah, because you're looking for empathy from a fanbase that you're opposing. What did you expect? You're making the same argument that Necro proponents can't have their ice cream because DK players are already enjoying theirs. At least they have theirs.

Retail players are perfectly willing to add change to Classic regardless of how Classic players feel about it too. If we both look at it objectively from an outside perspective, neither Retail nor Classic players are in the wrong in what should be in Classic servers, they simply have differing self-interests, regardless of the effects on the other group. Blizzard is literally the only ones who can decide which side to pander to.

[rarhyx]

Another suggestion people keep asking for without actually thinking about what it entails.

my 2 cents about 4th spec:
I don't think every class needs a 4th spec just a few:
paladins (shockadin: range/melee holy dps, most is/was already ingame so it's not that new)
shamans (earth warder: tank spec with earth elements)
monks (4th celestial: range dps with pure lightning and wind skills or physical range with bows)
warriors (gladiator stance: not completely new like shockadin since almost everything is already there)
mages (spellbreaker/spellblade: 1hand melee spell with lightning school magic, though I could live without this if 3 from above would be implented)

and somen could need a rework:
rogues (give old combat rogue plx and merge 'sin and sub into one sped and make 'sin range or range/melee hybrid, kinda reverse what they did with outlaw -> range being the core)
hunters (survival change to tank)

they could just bring 1 or 2 spec per expansion and not everything at the same time while I could argue shockadin and gladiator could be done at the same time

[Challenge]

But, in the event of Blizzard deciding to remove undead summoning from the death knight class, only the unholy spec would really suffer

Are you forreal? You gotta be shitting me

Yes, so lets also remove any interaction where playable death knights have with reanimation of the dead such as the starting zone, the class hall, and basically the entire ICC and naxxaramas raid and the entire icecrown zone and part of the entire Zul'drak questline

Remove any instance where Arthas, Darion, or other notable death knights reanimated the dead in game, his WotlK cinematic

Remove any quest where the deathknight was seen raising or reanimating the dead such as the entire Death Knight order hall campign

Go back in WC and remove Arthas ever summoning any undead or raising Sylvannas to a banshee while as a deathknight

Delete Kelthuzad as a character once he died as a human.

For gameplay lets remove army of the undead, the unholy artifact (which IIRC the ability it gives is set so far to continue in BFA), raise dead,dark transformation, summong gargoyle, all associated glyphs and talents adding more summons like skeleton, geist, abomination, and Valkyr, and the Skeletal Archer

Death Knights could never summon undead. It was a myth, an old folks tale. A legend.

So, one more time I'll explain this. Third times the charm I hope?

Necromancer is the Deathknight class. The current, in game gameplay doesnt mean fucking shit. The theme of the death knight IS necromancer. All the lore. All the quest. Our figurehead Arthas. The entire existence of Death Knights is the result of fucking necromancic magic.

You and Thig are advocating that its alright to rip a HUGE part of the death knight theme and history to share/outright GIVE to another spec that is virtually the same fucking class.

Oh and before you decide to argue this, the only 2 instances where a warlock was seen turning fully into a demon, was 1 named non major NPC (Karenthad) in the green fire quest, and a few old no named NPCs in old zones like the blased lands and the burning steepes.

And given that that still doesnt infringe on the entire lore of what warlocks are about. I'd reckon its not quite the same.

[rarhyx]

And removal of DW Tanking from Monks?

did you even read what i wrote or are you just stupid or a troll now?
they changed everything for balance reason because they are not able to have dw and 2h spec at the same time one will always be the superior for them it's just easer if every spec can only have 1 weapon-type equipped(not sure if weapon type is the right word but you get what i mean)


srsly I think you're trolling

[Wildberry]

I would consider a class that contains diseases in all of its specs, and a few in their talents to be a class with a decent amount of plagues.

Each spec has a single disease. Frost and Unholy each have 1 additional disease from PvP talents. That's not a "decent amount" nor is it really fair to suggest they have "a few" in their talents (Unless you somehow define "a few" to mean anything above 1).

Yet Holy can facilitate two classes. I have yet to see two Necromancer classes in any game.

Good thing other games don't have any bearing whatsoever on WoW, then! Holy can facilitate two classes, just as Necromantic Magic can. You're completely ignoring the fact that your anti-Necromancer arguments don't survive the Priest/Paladin test, nor the Demon Hunter/Warlock test.

LoL! Okay then, I guess since Chronicle said it, we can easily apply that to the classes!

Certainly more than other games.

Oh well good. I was wondering one way or the other.

Not to stick on this overly long, but this right here blows the "ability set" argument out of the water.

[Challenge]

my 2 cents about 4th spec:
I don't think every class needs a 4th spec just a few:
paladins (shockadin: range/melee holy dps, most is/was already ingame so it's not that new)
shamans (earth warder: tank spec with earth elements)
monks (4th celestial: range dps with pure lightning and wind skills or physical range with bows)
warriors (gladiator stance: not completely new like shockadin since almost everything is already there)
mages (spellbreaker/spellblade: 1hand melee spell with lightning school magic, though I could live without this if 3 from above would be implented)

and somen could need a rework:
rogues (give old combat rogue plx and merge 'sin and sub into one sped and make 'sin range or range/melee hybrid, kinda reverse what they did with outlaw -> range being the core)
hunters (survival change to tank)

they could just bring 1 or 2 spec per expansion and not everything at the same time while I could argue shockadin and gladiator could be done at the same time

First, imagine the shit storm of what would ensue if only some classes for new specs but not others. Seriously. Telling the mage, hey we couldnt make you guys a 4th spec this time around but we'll get to you in another expansion or 2, just be patient.

Paladins dont need a ranged spec and it doesnt make sense. Shockadin was create from gameplay where it was enabled through tuning. When creating things, its dumb to look at current or past gameplay as a reason I mean shockadin was a thing again in WoD with denounce/HS spam just because it was tuned so high.

Its not establishedor supported in lore a paladin being primarily at ranged to deal damage. Hence why you dont ever see a paladin NPC standing at range spamming smite( or any other ranged spec). Every paladin NPC you ever see engage in combat, will primarily be in melee. EVERY SINGLE ONE. Thats what blizzard intents for the class. If they want a ranged dps holy spec, they make it priest, who is already a caster class. And they already have discipline filling that niche.

The only spec i can see being created is a shaman earth warder tank spec. and thats because A. The earth theme is present in shaman lore but not very much in gameplay. B. Mail tanking spec with either shield or 2h axe/mace is unique without invading another class's theme

The only issue is evaluating if its worth it to hear the other specs bitch and beg for 4th specs aswell, like with what we're discussing now.

[Ielenia]

Are you forreal? You gotta be shitting me

Yes, so lets also remove any interaction where playable death knights have with reanimation of the dead such as the starting zone, the class hall, and basically the entire ICC and naxxaramas raid and the entire icecrown zone and part of the entire Zul'drak questline

You're exaggerating. But regardless, NPCs don't follow the same rules as player classes. Warlocks lost metamorphosis, yet a warlock champion in their Order Hall can still use metamorphosis.

Remove any instance where Arthas, Darion, or other notable death knights reanimated the dead in game, his WotlK cinematic

Remove any quest where the deathknight was seen raising or reanimating the dead such as the entire Death Knight order hall campign

Go back in WC and remove Arthas ever summoning any undead or raising Sylvannas to a banshee while as a deathknight

Delete Kelthuzad as a character once he died as a human.

None of that needs to happen, especially since I don't see why it should, considering NPCs don't follow the same rules as player classes.

For gameplay lets remove army of the undead, the unholy artifact (which IIRC the ability it gives is set so far to continue in BFA), raise dead,dark transformation, summong gargoyle, all associated glyphs and talents adding more summons like skeleton, geist, abomination, and Valkyr, and the Skeletal Archer

Ok. And?

Death Knights could never summon undead. It was a myth, an old folks tale. A legend.

Just like warlocks using metamorphosis and becoming tall, purple demons?

Necromancer is the Deathknight class.

No, he's not. He utilizes the undead raising concept, but not the necromancer concept. The necromancer is more than just raising skeletons. It's also about being a light-armored ranged spellcaster, things the DK is not.

[Thimagryn]

Are you forreal? You gotta be shitting me

Yes, so lets also remove any interaction where playable death knights have with reanimation of the dead

Reanimating the dead is something that is a core part of their Warcraft 3 identity. They do this in quests and such that you mentioned, but DK's don't actually do this in the game any more. They lost Raise Ally, and that was more relevant to the DK's ability to reanimate fresh corpses than any of their other dead summoning spells.

Army of the Dead is just an ability that raises a bunch of ghouls temporarily, and the DK's identity isn't dependant on that for their identity or gameplay. It wouldn't really matter whether they kept it or not, they would still be DK's. I mean, you lost Raise Ally and you don't think any lesser of the DK do you?

They could keep the ghoul pet though. It doesn't really impact a spellcasting Necromancer.

For gameplay lets remove army of the undead, the unholy artifact (which IIRC the ability it gives is set so far to continue in BFA), raise dead,dark transformation, summong gargoyle, all associated glyphs and talents adding more summons like skeleton, geist, abomination, and Valkyr, and the Skeletal Archer

Artifact is going away so potentially all of that will be lost by the time of BFA. By the time we reach the expansion after that, those lost summons would be history. As for the other built in abilities, they don't really conflict with a Necromancer being able to summon stuff all that much. Frost Mages and Shamans both summon Elementals in different ways.

Necromancer is the Deathknight class. The current, in game gameplay doesnt mean fucking shit. The theme of the death knight IS necromancer. All the lore. All the quest. Our figurehead Arthas. The entire existence of Death Knights is the result of fucking necromancic magic.

Which is all sourced to their Runeblades. Sure, they can use Necromantic magic, but they aren't spellcasters nor are they Necromancers.

The alternative view is if you do consider it a Necromancer because they use necromantic magic, then you must also view a Paladin as a Priest in Armor since that is exactly what they are in lore, including Warcraft 2 where that was exactly how the Silver Hand was created.

You and Thig are advocating that its alright to rip a HUGE part of the death knight theme and history to share/outright GIVE to another spec that is virtually the same fucking class.

Paladins and Priests share a history and theme. They're virtually the same class too. The only difference is one wears armor and one can cast shadow magic. DK's and Necromancers easily have enough lore to draw from to separate themselves in that same way, considering Paladins are literally Priests in lore while DK's were Paladins and Necromancers were Mages...

[Challenge]

None of that needs to happen, especially since I don't see why it should, considering NPCs don't follow the same rules as player classes.

No NPCs dont follow the same rules as players. They follow the LORE and HISTORY of the class. Which is soaked with undead summoning. Which is why you saying removing undead summoning to unholy would only hurt the spec is the most retarded thing I've ever read. It hurts our entire identity, regardless if its played out through our other specs.

Oh and before you decide to argue this, the only 2 instances where a warlock was seen turning fully into a demon, was 1 named non major NPC (Karenthad) in the green fire quest, and a few old no named NPCs in old zones like the blased lands and the burning steepes.

And given that that still doesnt infringe on the entire lore of what warlocks are about. I'd reckon its not quite the same.

Go ahead and read the last part of my post I made in anticipation to you Ielenia. You must of missed it like you frequently do.

[Teriz]

That said, I'll dismiss your example and assume you mean if both the warlock and demon hunter could change into demons. Not the summoning part. That said, I would have no problems. Because if you look at how the warlock's metamorphosis ability was, and how the demon hunter metamorphosis is, right now, both play differently. Warlocks would game some new spells and others would gain different functionalities. The demon hunter metamorphosis would just give the player extra haste or HP (depending on spec), and just increase damage of one or two spells.

I actually agree with you that the two different metas could have worked in the game.

None of that matters though, because Blizzard did not think they could.

In the case of adding the necromancer class, would the death knight's unholy spec be changed? Perhaps. I am of the opinion that Blizzard is capable of making both work. But, in the event of Blizzard deciding to remove undead summoning from the death knight class, only the unholy spec would really suffer. Frost is straight-out frost damage, and blood tanking has no undead summoning in it. Both the necromancer and death knight can easily share a blood/bone theme, as long as the gameplay is different. Which it would be since a blood spec for necromancers would be dps or healing, different from the death knight.

LoL! You honestly believe that when Blizzard wouldn't even let Warlocks keep a completely different version of Metamorphosis? Their move on metamorphosis is exactly why I believe that if Blizzard brought in a Necromancer class, they would go scorched earth on the Death Knight class.

[rarhyx]

First, imagine the shit storm of what would ensue if only some classes for new specs but not others. Seriously. Telling the mage, hey we couldnt make you guys a 4th spec this time around but we'll get to you in another expansion or 2, just be patient.

so what?
people will always cry
they cried when druids got feral seperated (and their class didn't get a thing)
they cried when monks got only 3 specs
they cried when dh got only 2 spec
they cried when their class/spec got overhauled
they cried when worgen went to the alliance instead the horde
they cried when belfs went to hored and not to their alliance
they cried because of, I quote, kung-fu panda became playable
people will always cry, they will never stop

[Teriz]

Unless you think Necromancers will dual wield melee with frost spells, melee tank with blood and vampirism and melee spread diseases and use summons with Unholy, you don't really have an argument here, just an opinion.

And your welcome to that opinion. However, Warlocks don't have a tanking spec, or melee, and they weren't allowed to keep any aspect of Metamorphosis, so your opinion is simply wrong.

The one with Devouring Plague seemed pretty unique to me. And it still felt very Necromancery.

You mean the concept containing these abilities;

I meant to go over this ability by ability, so let's go...

One's a passive class buff that reduces magical damage and increases the closer they are to death, the other are active spells that temporarily either absorb magic or reduce it. Two+ classes are capable of dampening magic attacks. It's fine.

Since that would be a massively overpowered aura, Blizzard would more than likely tone it down to a cooldown, which would make it almost a clone of Anti-Magic Zone.

One's summoning a whole troop of class-based undead minions, the other is summoning an extra minion who shoots arrows. Two+ classes are capable of utilizing the same type of minion.

If I'm not mistaken, you're summoning three skeletal minions versus summoning 2 skeletal minions (with the glyph). Outside of the # of minions and the passives you've placed upon them, I'm not seeing a difference.

One's a casted disease that spawns minions, the other is a disease DoT that comes from a physical attack. Two+ classes capable of utilizing diseases and plagues.

Unholy Mutation.

One spawns from plagued targets who die with an active plague, the other spawns from random attacks. Two+ classes are capable of creating spawn minions from abilities.

Apocalypse

One's an absorb, the other is a tank's damage reduction spell. Two+ classes are capable of utilizing bone magic.

I said VERY similar, not the same. They're already talking about changing Bone Shield in the next expansion, so it could end up quite close to what you're proposing.

One's an execute ability, the other is a basic attack. Two+ classes are capable of utilizing the scythe theme or flinging a weapon.

Both are examples of magical ranged Scythes dealing AoE damage.

Many classes have battle rezes.

Yeah but they don't all have the Necromancer theme to justify it.

One's an out-of-combat self rez, the other is a universal rez. See above.

I don't see how that changes the fact that its pretty much a weaker version of Soulstone. I will say though that that's probably the "safest" ability on that list.

As to your secondary remarks about how "two+classes are capable of utilizing the same abilities within the same theme" I couldn't disagree more. Blizzard has shown in the past that they're perfectly content with removing abilities that appear too similar to one another. You're advocating for a class that is utilizing DK abilities with minor tweaks to make them appear unique.

Yeah, because you're looking for empathy from a fanbase that you're opposing. What did you expect? You're making the same argument that Necro proponents can't have their ice cream because DK players are already enjoying theirs. At least they have theirs.

Or they could just play the class that already has tons of necromancer themes contained within it? Just a thought.