Making room for the Necromancer class

[Deleted]

So we're differentiating based on type of magic then? Neat!

Sure. But what was suggested isn't just a summoner spec with undead flavor. It was literally current demo lock with skeletons instead of demons and current affliction lock and UH dk.

Rogues and demon hunters are nothing alike aside form dualwielding melee weapons.

Summoner necro in this thread is demo lock with evil gray and green stuff instead of purple and green.

Not really. This gets debunked every single Necromancer thread. I have no clue why bell ends keep posting it.

as above.

[Halyon]

snip

Yes, DH bind only 1 demon to themselves, nobody else. Yes, they can go traitor or remegade, what a shocker, not like violent criminals exist anywhere else ever. I get why they're hated for, in 'normal'-people-view, debasing themselves to be so intimately fraternizing with demons.

Warlocks can choose to take soulshards only from animals. Yeah it's cruel to rip the souls from living things and use them for fuel, so much is obvious. Better than from humans. You could argue the same for necromancers. Why not.

And don't get me wrong, DK's are doing some nasty shite, and I don't like it one bit, hence I argue against Necromancers, as they do nothing but up that ante. An ante that doesn't need to be upped. The current actually evil class is DK. Don't really need more.

If it happens, it happens. I won't like it, might try it to see if it's fun, but won't main one. There are games where I like to play the more villain-y things, WoW isn't one of them this time around.

[Caliph]

The best thing to do is pair down some useless specs from many classes and create new ones that fit that archetype.

Since demo lock and uh dk are bad take them away from those 2 classes and create the necromancer class. or the blood mage class. Same can be done with the useless spriest and some other bad spec.

Blizzard is incompetent and or unwilling to fix specs or classes. When they do a revamp it's usually bad like the survival hunter and yes the spriest, demo lock.

just consolidate the classes take some of these bad specs and make new classes by combining them and you'll have a bevy of fun new play styles.

As for the whining crybaby community well tough shit. they'll understand.

[bewbew]

- The Unholy Death Knight will also go to its roots in WCIII and consist of a DoT melee spec that spreads illnesses. No more raising the dead, that will be left to the Necromancer as it has always been.

...

http://classic.battle.net/war3/undea...thknight.shtml

The Death Knight roots is Raising Pets, Saccing Pets and Healing Pets. And an aura. There is nothing even remotely related to DoT in the Warcraft 3 Death knight.

The fuck are you even talking about?

Death Knights are this game's necromancers.

[Drilnos]

Death knights are like a prestige class of a necromancer. Little baby necromancers want to be death knights when they grow up. It's like the difference between a druid and an archdruid. Why would you gut an archdruid to make a druid if you already had an archdruid?

[Hitei]

Death knights are like a prestige class of a necromancer. Little baby necromancers want to be death knights when they grow up. It's like the difference between a druid and an archdruid. Why would you gut an archdruid to make a druid if you already had an archdruid?

Not at all. They are two very different things. You might as well argue priests are baby paladins, or mages are baby shamans.

[shise]

There is no room for necromancer in WoW tbh.

It wouldn´t be justified to, in essence, break two classes to put half of each into a new class.

Maybe if DK´s wouldn´t exist with an unholy spec.

[Wildberry]

Sure. But what was suggested isn't just a summoner spec with undead flavor. It was literally current demo lock with skeletons instead of demons and current affliction lock and UH dk.

I'm not defending the OP's concept. He's on record as saying: "- The Unholy Death Knight will also go to its roots in WCIII and consist of a DoT melee spec that spreads illnesses. No more raising the dead, that will be left to the Necromancer as it has always been." Not the type of concept I want to be associated with. I'm only defending Necromancers in a general sense.

Rogues and demon hunters are nothing alike aside form dualwielding melee weapons.

Very interesting, because I remember Teriz arguing something completely different. That said, I would pick DHs as being closer to monks.

Summoner necro in this thread is demo lock with evil gray and green stuff instead of purple and green.

We've already established that you believe magical differentiation is enough. Necromantic and Fel are two distinct categories of magic. Regardless, yes the Necromancer idea in this thread isn't good. I'm convinced it's just a shitpost given how little thought was actually put into it. Really though, there's plenty of room for mechanical differentiation between Necromancers and Demonology Warlocks. Sacrifice v. Empowerment, etc.

If it happens, it happens. I won't like it, might try it to see if it's fun, but won't main one. There are games where I like to play the more villain-y things, WoW isn't one of them this time around.

So just to be clear, it's not that Necromancers are "too evil" you just don't want another "evil" class in the game, then?

- - - Updated - - -

There is no room for necromancer in WoW tbh.

It wouldn´t be justified to, in essence, break two classes to put half of each into a new class.

Maybe if DK´s wouldn´t exist with an unholy spec.

Necromancers can be made without significantly impacting either Demo or Unholy. The OPs concept is garbage in that regard, but it is possible.

[Drilnos]

Not at all. They are two very different things. You might as well argue priests are baby paladins, or mages are baby shamans.

Priests are baby Prophet Velens, and mages are baby Archmage Khadgars. The most powerful necromancer in the setting is the Lich King. He wears plate and has a runesword.

[Wildberry]

Priests are baby Prophet Velens, and mages are baby Archmage Khadgars. The most powerful necromancer in the setting is the Lich King. He wears plate and has a runesword.

You do realize that Turalyon, perhaps the most notable Paladin at this point, started out a priest, and continued using the same sort of magic when he became a Paladin, right? Does this somehow make priests redundant?

[Drilnos]

You do realize that Turalyon, perhaps the most notable Paladin at this point, started out a priest, and continued using the same sort of magic when he became a Paladin, right? Does this somehow make priests redundant?

If every cloth-wearing priest was a cannon fodder mook who literally worshipped Turalyon as a god, then yes, they would be redundant.

[Hitei]

Priests are baby Prophet Velens, and mages are baby Archmage Khadgars. The most powerful necromancer in the setting is the Lich King. He wears plate and has a runesword.

The most powerful necromancer (the general sense of the word) is Arthas.

The most powerful Necromancer (the warcraft character type) is probably the former mage Kel'thuzad, followed by the most powerful of the Naxxramas necromancers, Gothik, Noth, and Heigan--and then lesser ones (Maleki, Gandling, Salramm, Rage, AU Ner'zhul, Dar'khan). You will notice these all share a lot in common (they are all casters, many of them are either Liches, or use the same set of iconic armor)

Much like Illidan and Arthas are two of the most powerful warriors (the general sense of the word) around, but neither is a Warrior (the warcraft character type) or by extension, the strongest Warrior.

If every cloth-wearing priest was a cannon fodder mook who literally worshipped Turalyon as a god, then yes, they would be redundant.

I hope you aren't actually pretending Necromancers are cannon fodder. They make most DKs look like a joke.

[Wildberry]

If every cloth-wearing priest was a cannon fodder mook who literally worshipped Turalyon as a god, then yes, they would be redundant.

You do realize the Cult of the Damned has been acting independent of the Lich King at the moment, right?

[Drilnos]

You do realize the Cult of the Damned has been acting independent of the Lich King at the moment, right?

So? Their god dying didn't somehow make them more advanced than they were before.

- - - Updated - - -

The most powerful necromancer (the general sense of the word) is Arthas.

The most powerful Necromancer (the warcraft character type) is probably the former mage Kel'thuzad, followed by the most powerful of the Naxxramas necromancers, Gothik, Noth, and Heigan--and then lesser ones (Maleki, Gandling, Salramm, Rage, AU Ner'zhul, Dar'khan). You will notice these all share a lot in common (they are all casters, many of them are either Liches, or use the same set of iconic armor)

Much like Illidan and Arthas are two of the most powerful warriors (the general sense of the word) around, but neither is a Warrior (the warcraft character type) or by extension, the strongest Warrior.



I hope you aren't actually pretending Necromancers are cannon fodder. They make most DKs look like a joke.

We're comparing the generals of his armies to the faces of his PR campaign. You probably noticed the ones you were able to come up with as powerful examples were all wiped out in the vanguard of the Scourge forces. There were no standard necromancers in Icecrown Citadel. The place where, y'know, the Lich King gathered all his most powerful minions. Oh wait, yeah, there were some... groveling in front of the lich on the first floor.

And the Lich King is the one who raised Kel'thuzad, so we're already starting out a rung down the ladder here.

[Wildberry]

So? Their god dying didn't somehow make them more advanced than they were before.

Nice backpedaling there. You were inarguably wrong, and your parallel is ridiculous anyway.

[Halyon]

So just to be clear, it's not that Necromancers are "too evil" you just don't want another "evil" class in the game, then?

Aside from that I personally think that they'd end up too similar to existing classes, that would be my complaint, yes. I don't mind grey areas or moral complexity, but DK's have already crossed that border. Don't need more. Warlocks less so, I find them to be acceptable as for the playable ones, personal rp and backstories not in mind, as I cannot reasonably do that at all.


The best way to spin necromancers would be something along the lines of how Dragon Age Inquisition does it, with that they're more like glorified stewards of the dead with magic competence. Not so much with the fear due to how bosses work and such, but could be worked into pvp potentially... Probably wouldn't flat out call it a necromancer either tbh... But that's my 2 cents. If anything, I guess we can agree to disagree.

[Drilnos]

Nice backpedaling there. You were inarguably wrong, and your parallel is ridiculous anyway.

That was a question. It had one word in it. Shouldn't be that hard to answer. Unless you didn't really have a point in throwing that factoid out.

[Hitei]

We're comparing the generals of his armies to the faces of his PR campaign. You probably noticed the ones you were able to come up with as powerful examples were all wiped out in the vanguard of the Scourge forces. There were no standard necromancers in Icecrown Citadel. The place where, y'know, the Lich King gathered all his most powerful minions. Oh wait, yeah, there were some... groveling in front of the lich on the first floor.

And the Lich King is the one who raised Kel'thuzad, so we're already starting out a rung down the ladder here.

There aren't a ton of Necromancers in Icecrown because they were the vanguard. You are honestly deluded if you think KT is not more powerful that every person in ICC sans Arthas. Please do not pretend I had to struggle to come up with powerful examples, I just pulled the most notable ones.

What a dumb line of logic to begin with. You know who wasn't in Black Temple? Kael'thas. Neither was Vashj. Were those two just too weak to bring to BT? No. Stop kidding yourself. Your first job as a player DK is literally running bitch errands for Necromancers because they are too important for the grunt work.

But I suppose you also don't remember that all the player DKs and the general unnamed Death Knights of Acherus were raised by minor necromancers.

[Wildberry]

That was a question. It had one word in it. Shouldn't be that hard to answer. Unless you didn't really have a point in throwing that factoid out.

You said:

If every cloth-wearing priest was a cannon fodder mook who literally worshipped Turalyon as a god, then yes, they would be redundant.

I simply pointed out that not even the Cult of the Damned Necromancer worships the Lich King as a God. That's not even getting into Necromancers that have never had a Scourge-affiliation.

Your question was bad, and you're trying to get away from the fact that your argument got completely dismantled.

[Drilnos]

There aren't a ton of Necromancers in Icecrown because they were the vanguard. You are honestly deluded if you think KT is not more powerful that every person in ICC sans Arthas. Please do not pretend I had to struggle to come up with powerful examples, I just pulled the most notable ones.

What a dumb line of logic to begin with. You know who wasn't in Black Temple? Kael'thas. Neither was Vashj. Were those two just too weak to bring to BT? No. Stop kidding yourself. Your first job as a player DK is literally running bitch errands for Necromancers because they are too important for the grunt work.

But I suppose you also don't remember that all the player DKs and the general Death Knights of Acherus were raised by minor necromancers.

The vanguard is where the cannon fodder goes. That's why It's called cannon fodder, it's the first thing in front of the cannon.

- - - Updated - - -

You said:

I simply pointed out that not even the Cult of the Damned Necromancer worships the Lich King as a God. That's not even getting into Necromancers that have never had a Scourge-affiliation.

Your question was bad, and you're trying to get away from the fact that your argument got completely dismantled.

My question was, gonna quote now, "So?" End quote.