Necromancer vs Tinker: Which class would be better for the game?

[Ielenia]

1.Russell Brower (Wedding Hymn) and Temple Guardian Anhur (Reverberating Hymn).
2.Fine, then Wedding Hymn is a combination of two Priest Hymns, and Reverberating Hymn is a holy-based Hymn.

No, Wedding hymn is no longer a "combination of two priest hymns" considering priests lost the mana hymn. Otherwise you should also say that Death Knights have a lot of spells that are altered versions of the priest spell "devouring plague".

Either way, attack "wedding hymn" and "reverberating hymn" all you want. In the end, it's a pointless endeavor from your part, since we're not saying those two particular spells would be present in a bard's repertoire, but just pointing at them as proof that spellsongs as a concept exist, therefore making the concept of a spellsinger bard possible.

I don't raid as a Rogue, so you'll be waiting by the phone for a long time.

You could try to find one that supports your claim. But I'm not holding my breath.

You can't in Eastern Kingdoms, Kalmidor, Northrend, Panderia, Outland, Draenor, Vash'jir, Deepholm, Highmountain, Stormheim, Val'sharah, Suramar, Argus, or Azuna.

So what's the point?

None of that matters, so you pointing that out is pointless.

- - - Updated - - -

The point is this; If your basis for the Bard class are hymns, you might as well advocate for a holy Priest spec based around hymns. It simply makes more sense.

It is not. This is just you strawmaning.

[Illiterate]

Where is the poll option for none? They both sound dumb.

[Psychotrip]

I need a dwarven / goblin tinker in my life. More than anything else I've ever wanted. It's lore-friendly, and right now it's just this giant elephant in the room for gnomes, dwarves, and goblins, where we have endless examples of tinkers or tinker-like npcs but can't play them ourselves.

[Darktbs]

Well I have good news; All signs are pointing towards Survival being a spec based around explosives in the next expansion.

The point is this; If your basis for the Bard class are hymns, you might as well advocate for a holy Priest spec based around hymns. It simply makes more sense.

No Teriz, unlike you, Tinker apologist, i (and i hope many others) don't focus on one thing and one thing alone.

No wonder the last time we debated Necromancers your arguments were based solely on the fact that the spells had the same magic school.

But as memes dictate, im used to disappointment.

[bufferunderrun]

depending how they are done, a Diablo 2 like necro would be my primary choice.

[Teriz]

No, Wedding hymn is no longer a "combination of two priest hymns" considering priests lost the mana hymn. Otherwise you should also say that Death Knights have a lot of spells that are altered versions of the priest spell "devouring plague".

Except Priests no longer have Devouring Plague, but they do still have hymns.

Either way, attack "wedding hymn" and "reverberating hymn" all you want. In the end, it's a pointless endeavor from your part, since we're not saying those two particular spells would be present in a bard's repertoire, but just pointing at them as proof that spellsongs as a concept exist, therefore making the concept of a spellsinger bard possible.

A couple of unrelated spellsongs floating around a bunch of unrelated characters doesn't give much credence to a future Bard class. It's like saying a few unrelated spell-stealing abilities give credence to a future Spellbreaker class. I'll start believing this concept is viable IF we start seeing a more unified group of prominent Bards appear.

You could try to find one that supports your claim.

Nah.

None of that matters, so you pointing that out is pointless.

It doesn't matter to you, but it matters to players who want to play a mech-based class. The fact that so many players went through that arduous process just to pilot a crippled joke mech for a few minutes shows how badly players want the concept in the class lineup.

- - - Updated - - -

It is not. This is just you strawmaning.

My mistake. I forgot that the Bard class has no basis in Warcraft.

[bloodmoth13]

2/3 cloth wearers are already shadow dot dps characters, give affliction a summon skeletons talent and be done with necromancers. Tinker on the other hand brings a whole unexplored dimension to the table, honestly surprised it has taken this long for it, would have been a better addition than monks, almost would say demon hunters but i think blizz did a good job with them so ill leave that.

[BedlamBros]

Wow, over 500 votes in and the Tinker has a pretty dominating lead over the Necromancer. Didn't think it would be this lopsided.

I wonder why the Tinker is so much more popular on this forum than the Necromancer. Any answers?

[Ielenia]

Except Priests no longer have Devouring Plague, but they do still have hymns.

Have one hymn.

A couple of unrelated spellsongs floating around a bunch of unrelated characters doesn't give much credence to a future Bard class. It's like saying a few unrelated spell-stealing abilities give credence to a future Spellbreaker class. I'll start believing this concept is viable IF we start seeing a more unified group of prominent Bards appear.

"A couple" out of several. There are many other spellsong abilities. And either way, the fact those exist is enough to say that a character based on spellsongs could be viable. Also, such a group exists: the Lorewalkers.

It doesn't matter to you, but it matters to players who want to play a mech-based class.

Then take that up with the one who posed the original question. Not me. I simply answered the question as it was presented.

My mistake. I forgot that the Bard class has no basis in Warcraft.

Look at you, trying to play it off as smart, yet failing spectacularly.

[Flurryfang]

So a Spec that has a similar theme to a new class could simply turn away from it to create more room for a new class. Sounds feasible for Unholy if they planned on Necromancers. Just focus more on Runeblade strikes and diseases and less on summoning.

Also, 'theme in use' never stopped Priests and Paladins, Mages and Shamans or Warlocks and Demon Hunters.

That could be done ofcourse, they did it before with Warlocks for Demon Hunters, but then you have the risk of running into the current Warlock problem and the Survival problem. Many Warlocks look back to the days of MoP as the glory days, because they really liked that design and that was proberly because it had alot of the coolness from the demon hunters The same with Survival. Now, Survival was not changed for another class to take its theme/abilities, but it is a good example of what might happend when you change the core of a spec, people get angry and feel left behind, if they really loved that spec.

Theme of use is important and outside of the Warlock and Demon Hunters, the themes have not been mixed. Priests and Paladins both use holy, but they are different on a core lvl, paladins always using strikes or empowerments, never shooting anything or casting for periods for attacks. The same with Shamans and Mages, where each have a core, which make them different.
Warlocks had the problem, that they used the metamorph as an ability, but aside from that, warlocks casts, demon hunters hit.

You could make the same core difference with necromancers and DKs, but with death coil, summoned undead and skeletons, blood magic and etc., the DKs really have to give away alot of abilities and themes for a new Necromancer class to take the stage.

It is not impossible for Blizz to make a necromancer class, i just think it would be alot easier, more straight forward and interesting if we had a Tinker class with distinct specs

[Thimagryn]

Necromancers don't need anything that the DK's already have. Its not hard either considering 'skeletons' is the only overlap, and thats no where close to the thematic overlap between priests and pallies. Necros don't need death cool or blood magic. They can be easily themed on poison and constructs and necromantic magic. Naxxramas is a good start for general themes.

a Necromancer is a magic user who seeks to master life and death. This is a cross-culture theme like how Priests source different gods or light magic, wheras the Death Knight is a remnant of the Lich King Scourge.

[Teriz]

Necromancers don't need anything that the DK's already have. Its not hard either considering 'skeletons' is the only overlap, and thats no where close to the thematic overlap between priests and pallies.

From an earlier post....

"Necromancers are practitioners of necromancy (also called the dark arts or the black arts)the study and use of magic to raise and control the dead. Necromantic magic (or death magic) has many functions beyond simply raising the dead. Masters of this tainted field of magic can conjure festering diseases, harness the shadows into bolts of incendiary energy, and chill the living with the power of death. Necromancy can also be used to reconstruct the flesh of undead creatures, allowing them to function again even after the foul monsters have been destroyed. Necromancers are the enemies of life itself, and all hands are raised against them. Some of the worst evils in Azeroth's history have been perpetrated by necromancers, and they deserve their malevolent reputation. Few things are as abhorrent and horrifying as necromancy."
From the WoWPedia page.

So lets look:
Necromancers are practitioners of necromancy (also called the dark arts or the black arts)the study and use of magic to raise and control the dead: DK, raise dead, minions/control undead
can conjure festering diseases: DK, Festering Wound/Crypt Fever/Virulent Plague/Wandering Plague
harness the shadows into bolts of incendiary engery: DK, Death Coil
chill the living with the power of death: DK, literally frost dk
Necromancy can also be used to recontruct the flesh of undead creatures: DK, Dark Transformation

If that cant prove to you that Unholy DK is a Necromancer, idk what else will.

Skeletons aren't the only thematic overlap.

- - - Updated - - -

Have one hymn.

Doesn't change what I said.

"A couple" out of several. There are many other spellsong abilities. And either way, the fact those exist is enough to say that a character based on spellsongs could be viable. Also, such a group exists: the Lorewalkers.

Has there ever been a Lorewalker in WoW with a class-like ability?

[XHunter]

Afflcition Warlock+ Death Knight= Necromancer

[Ielenia]

Doesn't change what I said.

Yes, it does. It fundamentally changes what you said. Because now you can no longer say "they're a combination of two priest spells", for one. And if you're going to say "this ability is similar to this other ability", then guess what? Almost every ability in this game is "similar" to another ability. I mean, for example, look at "Flash of Light" and "Flash Heal": two holy healing abilities that heal for a very similar amount and both have "flash" in their name.

Has there ever been a Lorewalker in WoW with a class-like ability?

I fail to see any relevance, other than this being another arbitrary rule you made up.

[Thimagryn]

From an earlier post....



Skeletons aren't the only thematic overlap.

No, they aren't. But we're well beyond established that thematic overlap doesn't matter. I was referring to mechanics overlap of summoning skeletons.

Besides, half of what you listed already applies to Warlocks (shadowy dark incendiary magic) and Shadow Priests.

The Anti-DH argument doesn't work a second time when it didn't even work at first.

[Teriz]

Yes, it does. It fundamentally changes what you said. Because now you can no longer say "they're a combination of two priest spells", for one. And if you're going to say "this ability is similar to this other ability", then guess what? Almost every ability in this game is "similar" to another ability. I mean, for example, look at "Flash of Light" and "Flash Heal": two holy healing abilities that heal for a very similar amount and both have "flash" in their name.

Which isn't really the same thing.

Paladins and Priests both have healing spells because they healing specializations. Every healing class in the game has healing spells, and in a few expansions Blizzard purposely made the healing spells similar (I believe it was Cataclysm). This situation is a bit different. In this case you're saying we should have a Bard class because we need a class that specializes "spellsongs" for some reason. In reality the "spellsongs" you mention are no different than the spells currently being used by Priests and other class.

I'm pretty sure that "spellsong" isn't even a term used in WoW.

I fail to see any relevance, other than this being another arbitrary rule you made up.

How can you build a class around characters who have no abilities? When you run across Demon Hunters, Monks, Death Knights and Goblins/Gnomes in mech armor, they all had abilities. Does their lore state that they're fighters or adventurers?

- - - Updated - - -

No, they aren't. But we're well beyond established that thematic overlap doesn't matter. I was referring to mechanics overlap of summoning skeletons.

The last time we had thematic overlap Warlocks lost a spec. The DKs entire class is a thematic overlap with the Necromancer. You think Blizzard is going to change the entire DK class in order to simply bring in a caster version of what we already have?

I don't.

[Darktbs]

Necromancers don't need anything that the DK's already have. Its not hard either considering 'skeletons' is the only overlap, and thats no where close to the thematic overlap between priests and pallies. Necros don't need death cool or blood magic. They can be easily themed on poison and constructs and necromantic magic. Naxxramas is a good start for general themes.

a Necromancer is a magic user who seeks to master life and death. This is a cross-culture theme like how Priests source different gods or light magic, wheras the Death Knight is a remnant of the Lich King Scourge.

As i have been creating a concept.I been slowly been realizing how cool and potentialy interesting a Necromancer class can really be.


The Dks we have are a specific breed, they are the Scourge Dks.

But Necromancers, we have stuff going to all corners of Azeroth and Draenor, honestly, creating specs for a Necro class isn't hard, what is hard is creating a Undead summoning spec that would make Teriz and alikes shut up in regards of overlaps.

[Ielenia]

Which isn't really the same thing.

Paladins and Priests both have healing spells because they healing specializations. Every healing class in the game has healing spells, and in a few expansions Blizzard purposely made the healing spells similar (I believe it was Cataclysm). This situation is a bit different. In this case you're saying we should have a Bard class because we need a class that specializes "spellsongs" for some reason.

It's the exact same thing. They're holy spells that heal for a very similar amount and both spells have the word "flash" in their name. Wasn't that the argument you used against the 'Reverberating hymn' and 'wedding hymn'? That they're holy hymns?

In reality the "spellsongs" you mention are no different than the spells currently being used by Priests and other class.

And, if the bard class is implemented, do you think Blizzard is incapable of creating new spellsong-type spells for the class? Like they did with every single class they implemented?

I'm pretty sure that "spellsong" isn't even a term used in WoW.

And what's the problem with that? "Chaos" damage wasn't a thing until Cataclysm (I believe). Same with "frostfire" and "shadowfrost" and "astral" (arcane+nature). Those were terms that didn't exist until they were implemented.

How can you build a class around characters who have no abilities?

This might be shocking news to you, Teriz, but classes are not built around abilities. They're built around concepts, and abilities are created new or adapted to fit the concept. Not the other way around.

Does their lore state that they're fighters or adventurers?

You do know new lore can and is always being created, right?

[Teriz]

It's the exact same thing. They're holy spells that heal for a very similar amount and both spells have the word "flash" in their name. Wasn't that the argument you used against the 'Reverberating hymn' and 'wedding hymn'? That they're holy hymns?

Yes, but Paladins have a very specific purpose and history in Warcraft, so there had to be a Paladin class, and that Paladin class had to use holy magic to heal.

You still have yet to establish what the purpose of the Bard class is in Warcraft, especially since they're pretty much non-existent beyond a few random, unrelated NPCs.

And, if the bard class is implemented, do you think Blizzard is incapable of creating new spellsong-type spells for the class? Like they did with every single class they implemented?

What exactly is a "spellsong-type" spells?

Every single class implemented had a base set of abilities to work with because there were heroes and units easily associated with them. There's really nothing to associate the Bard with in any of the RTS games or WoW itself.

And what's the problem with that? "Chaos" damage wasn't a thing until Cataclysm (I believe). Same with "frostfire" and "shadowfrost" and "astral" (arcane+nature). Those were terms that didn't exist until they were implemented.

Actually Chaos damage originated in WC3.

This might be shocking news to you, Teriz, but classes are not built around abilities. They're built around concepts, and abilities are created new or adapted to fit the concept. Not the other way around.

Except the concept of the Bard doesn't exist the way the concept of the DK, Monk, and DH existed before they were announced as classes. There's nothing there but a bunch of unrelated NPCs with channel spells.

You do know new lore can and is always being created, right?

Only if there is good reason to create it. You haven't established that there is a good reason to create new lore for Lorewalkers that will essentially change them into completely different characters.

[Ielenia]

Yes, but Paladins have a very specific purpose and history in Warcraft, so there had to be a Paladin class, and that Paladin class had to use holy magic to heal.

It's almost as if classes are built around concepts and not abilities... but that can't be the case, can it, Teriz? Because if they are, arguing against specific abilities become a meaningless endeavor...

You still have yet to establish what the purpose of the Bard class is in Warcraft, especially since they're pretty much non-existent beyond a few random, unrelated NPCs.

And a purpose would be created for the bard, if Blizzard decides to implement the class.

What exactly is a "spellsong-type" spells?

Spells cast through singing.

Every single class implemented had a base set of abilities to work with because there were heroes and units easily associated with them. There's really nothing to associate the Bard with in any of the RTS games or WoW itself.

Assuming, for the sake of argument, that what you say is true, what's the problem? Wouldn't that technically give the developers greater freedom to create the class?

Actually Chaos damage originated in WC3.

One down, three to go?

Except the concept of the Bard doesn't exist the way the concept of the DK, Monk, and DH existed before they were announced as classes. There's nothing there but a bunch of unrelated NPCs with channel spells.

I repeat: "Assuming, for the sake of argument, that what you say is true, what's the problem? Wouldn't that technically give the developers greater freedom to create the class?"

Only if there is good reason to create it.

Adapting a class concept to the game's lore sounds like a very good reason to do it.

You haven't established that there is a good reason to create new lore for Lorewalkers that will essentially change them into completely different characters.

Except it wouldn't change them that much, if at all?