Deathknights Are Necromancers Is A FALLACY

[Raelbo]

A necromancer - by definition - is a practitioner of necromancy. What I wanted to say was spelt out clearly.

All death knights are necromancers.

Well, you're wrong then. You clearly don't understand what it means to be a practitioner of Necromancy and therefore a Necromancer. Simpy put, the degree to which Death Knights make use of necromantic magic is not sufficient to classify them as practitioners of Necromancy.

The term practitioner implies a lot more than simply having some knowledge of an art, it entails a significant degree of expertise. From vocabulary.com: "A practitioner is someone who has learned everything about his or her field and is actively working in that field."

Death knights have an innate mastery over the dead, but they don't study the art of Necromancy. They aren't Sorcerors.

Typically the word "practitioner" is applied to the medical field, so that lends itself to a nice analogy:

A medical doctor - by definition - is a practioner of medicine

Paramedics, first aiders, nurses, attendants, homeopaths or pharmacists all have some medical training, but they are not medical doctors.

Other good real world analogies would be the difference between a mechanic and a mechanical engineer,
or an electrician and an electrical engineer,
or an interior decorator and interior designer,
or a draftsman and an architect,
or a sailor and ship's captain
etc etc etc.

Simply put, Death Knights are categorically not Necromancers even though they may have some skill in the arts of necromancy.

[Steelcryo]

Never played Diablo 2 or 3 I can see. What about the Lich King, the ultimate Necromancer? Guess he’s not Uber enough for you.

- - - Updated - - -



Yeah, a “traditional” Necromancer does nothing but raise dead. So sure, Blizzard could make a class around that. It would have 1 spec and do nothing but channel mana (life force) to summon undead. It would have no offensive spells of it’s own. Unless you want to make them casters with Necromancer themed spells, but then they wouldn’t be “traditional” Necromancers.

Depends what your version of traditional necromancers are. Personally I look at things like DnD, in which they can cast spells as well as manipulate the dead. So you could have a caster class who's main abilities involve that sort of thing. Raising and empowering dead minions, but also able to cast death magic based spells. Again, just saying that it could be done and made a very different type of class to a DK and would make sense. The question really is, do we need another caster class?

[Self Inflicted Wounds]

Priests and Paladins are similar but also have some fundamental differences.

They aren't really that similar.

OT: Its fine to want a Necromancer. Unholy DK should really become something more akin to what people want. They can have many cheap ghouls they raise, with diseases. Its already pretty close to that.

- - - Updated - - -

A necromancer - by definition - is a practitioner of necromancy. What I wanted to say was spelt out clearly.

All death knights are necromancers.

Some necromancers are death knights.

Some necromancers are not death knights.

- - - Updated - - -

"Logically" this makes sense, but contextually, and on a practical level, it does not.

[Dalheim]

The fact that this is even a problem goes to show that Blizzard has failed to present to their audience a difference between Necromancers and Death Knights (who can also raise the dead, and - to the audience - is seemingly just a cooler Necromancer).

Pff! Necromancers are way cooler than a Death Knight.

[Kaver]

• Why should Blizzard add something that's already in the game?
• We can't have demon hunters because we already have warlocks.
• You cannot have both because adding one will detract from the other. There is no alternative.

Why do people use these dumb reasonings to justify not adding necromancers to the game?

Just because a Deathknight is a Necromancer doesn't mean that a Necromancer is a Deathknight. Using the existence of Death Knights as an excuse to barricade the entry of Necromancers under the premise that Death Knights are in fact Necromancers is a false dichotomy.

This is not a fucking game of 'you can have this one or you can have that one but not both.'

WE CAN HAVE BOTH.

Edit: Someone pointed out that my title is incorrect and I agree. It should have been titled, 'Necromancers Are Deathknights Is a FALLACY'.

There is a limit to how many classes they can put into the game. Therefore they are not going to waste this limit on classes which are very similar.

[Hastis]

Necro is not a dk xDD
You could also say that paladins are priests co we can get rid one of them cuz why not

[Kalontas]

There is easily enough room to fit a necromancer class in WoW. We may never have it, or any other new class, anymore, but they could totally do it.

[Garfurion]

Necromancer was considered as one of the original classes for WoW but scrapped at the time because it would be too similar in play-style to warlocks.

They later added some of the ideas/spells designed for necromancers to Deathknights

"World of Warcraft lead designer Jeff Kaplan has revealed that two other hero classes were under serious consideration for second expansion Wrath of the Lich King - before ultimately being beaten to it by the Death Knight.

In the seventh of Blizzard's occasional podcasts, Kaplan described the Necromancer and Rune Master designs that were being kicked around.

"The class choice was super hard and eventually we had it down to three front runners," he said.

"We were talking for a while about a Necromancer. He would kind of be a range caster, do a lot of corpse explode, that sort of thing. Things we ended up incorporating into the Death Knight.

"We also had a cool idea for a Rune Master. That was going to be more of a melee type - think rogue or monk type character. But Death Knight ultimately fit."

source

In a recent blizzcon interview Ion Hazzikostas stated that it is becoming more and more difficult for them to find a gap that is not filled and that a new class should be thematically linked to the story.

Since Necromancers could clearly have a link to the Shadowlands story it seems clear Blizzard believes there is no room for necromancer class which is sufficiently unique in terms of play-style.

[Shakana]

Necromancer was considered as one of the original classes for WoW but scrapped at the time because it would be too similar in play-style to warlocks.

They later added some of the ideas/spells designed for necromancers to Deathknights

"World of Warcraft lead designer Jeff Kaplan has revealed that two other hero classes were under serious consideration for second expansion Wrath of the Lich King - before ultimately being beaten to it by the Death Knight.

In the seventh of Blizzard's occasional podcasts, Kaplan described the Necromancer and Rune Master designs that were being kicked around.

"The class choice was super hard and eventually we had it down to three front runners," he said.

"We were talking for a while about a Necromancer. He would kind of be a range caster, do a lot of corpse explode, that sort of thing. Things we ended up incorporating into the Death Knight.

"We also had a cool idea for a Rune Master. That was going to be more of a melee type - think rogue or monk type character. But Death Knight ultimately fit."

source

In a recent blizzcon interview Ion Hazzikostas stated that it is becoming more and more difficult for them to find a gap that is not filled and that a new class should be thematically linked to the story.

Since Necromancers could clearly have a link to the Shadowlands story it seems clear Blizzard believes there is no room for necromancer class which is sufficiently unique in terms of play-style.

Ye i have been saying this. A guy once showed me a panel where they talk about it, they said in the beginning of wow they thought about adding necromancers, but i think they always had in mind to later do a wrath of the lich king expansion already, and i think they have been scrapping it to this day.

[DrMcNinja]

What mostly separates Death Knights and Necromancer is their role and means of combat, kinda like how you'd separate Priest and Paladin.

Necromancers are more or less raising the dead as their main task, using shadow magic in combat. DKs are more like military commanders.

[Shakana]

Death knights are tied to the scourge. To northrend.
Necromancers are not tied to anything, they are not soldiers of anything. They are way more versatile.

I see necromancer as the true runemasters, and necromancers having abilities with communicating with ghosts and all that shit too.
They are way older than Death knights, they know necrotic magic better than any dk spec.

Lich King created a breed of death knights that were simply rune-wielding warriors of the Scourge.

Necromancers should be at their own, without any connection with the scourge at all. And pure raw necromancy.

I usually like to see this image, i like how dks have also "water" element (frost):

[Beefhammer]

What mostly separates Death Knights and Necromancer is their role and means of combat, kinda like how you'd separate Priest and Paladin.

Necromancers are more or less raising the dead as their main task, using shadow magic in combat. DKs are more like military commanders.

Priest and Paladin are so much further apart from each that Necros and DKs. Unless arguing in bad faith no one believes Paladins and Priests are similar outside for using holy magic and having a heal. The Necro ability set is all corpse raising dead and using Unholy Frenzy (DK) and using Cripple(Warlock). That's it. Sure they can expand and build but the core of the class is already incorporated into the DK. Might as well just make up a new class. I read here one Necro concept that basically made him a plague doctor. Might as well just call him that too if you are going through all that trouble to change what the class is to be something unique.

- - - Updated - - -

Death knights are tied to the scourge. To northrend.
Necromancers are not tied to anything, they are not soldiers of anything. They are way more versatile.

I see necromancer as the true runemasters, and necromancers having abilities with communicating with ghosts and all that shit too.
They are way older than Death knights, they know necrotic magic better than any dk spec.

Lich King created a breed of death knights that were simply rune-wielding warriors of the Scourge.

Necromancers should be at their own, without any connection with the scourge at all. And pure raw necromancy.

Though they retained their Humanity after making a pact with death, Necromancers became the most terrifying agents of the Scourge. These dark, insidious men were once thought to be aspiring geniuses by the Magocracy of Dalaran. However, their insatiable lust to delve into the secrets of the dark arts drove them to forsake their very souls. Ner'zhul, the Lich King, granted these malevolent sorcerers true power over the dead in exchange for their loyalty and obedience. The shadowy Necromancers have the power to command various types of Undead and even spread the foul undead plague as well.

Blizzards description of the Necromancer from D3. They directly tied to the scourge

[Khrux]

You're never getting a Necromancer, get over it.