So dumb ass ogres can be necromancers that revive dragons....

[Teriz]

I always thought necromancers should've been a 4th spec for warlocks.

Raising the dead is considered dark magic, isn't it? Correct me if I'm wrong.

Didn't the Burning Legion also create the Scourge?

So yeah, I can see it.

[kenn9530]

So is making pacts with demons and using magic based on corrupted life force.


I would trust just as much as I would someone who makes pacts with demons and consumes the souls of the living for his own profit. Warlocks shouldn't be allowed as a player class for the same reasoning you say necromancers shouldn't be allowed as a playable class.


Death knights still willingly continue those same "evil practices" you condemn the necromancers. And "in reality" they continue desecrating corpses by their own free will. Nobody is forcing them to do that.


This statement of yours is all over the place and says nothing. "Only two forms of magic: light, dark and arcane".

There is no evil magic only what you use it for, so if you raise corpses as a necromancer then thats evil and the player is not suited for that role, DKs only get away with it because they had no freewill and were forced to use the magic and they are in game already so they are not going to take abilitys away.

As a player Dk you dont need to use your necromancy abilities to raise the dead as thats the choice you yourself made, you cant say that for every other deathknight who has regained freewill. Necromancers are superceeded by a more powerful class the deathknight otherwise there would of been no reason to create a deathknight.

Arcane is a source of magic, the lifeblood of the planet which all magic users tap into, even priests and paladins will use a few arcane abilities, all magic was formed from the creation of the universe from the light and dark.

[Lochton]

Nothing about a plate wearing melee dps makes me feel like im playing a necromancer.

It would be like if rogue didnt exist and people said "Just play windwalker monk or feral druid". Just because they use similar mechanics doesn't mean they feel the same to play.

You can level as ranged unholy to 120 - sadly, raiding and so on, you need melee. They should just make unholy a plate caster, rename to Necromancer. Give stronger minion control as well as more directed spells.

[Teriz]

Nothing about a plate wearing melee dps makes me feel like im playing a necromancer.

It would be like if rogue didnt exist and people said "Just play windwalker monk or feral druid". Just because they use similar mechanics doesn't mean they feel the same to play.

The difference is that Rogues would have a basis to exist, since neither Monks or Druids are thieves or assassins that use poison.

Necromancers have no purpose to exist because the DK completely cover the concept.

[Ielenia]

There is no evil magic only what you use it for, so if you raise corpses as a necromancer then thats evil and the player is not suited for that role, DKs only get away with it because they had no freewill and were forced to use the magic and they are in game already so they are not going to take abilitys away.

So what? If "doing evil magic" was really a problem, Blizzard wouldn't have added the "evil magic" as player abilities. But they did.

And to make matters worse, the warlock does equally evil things. The Healthstones? They're made from the soul of the dead. Haunt? Souls of the dead. Summoning demons? Uses souls of the dead. I'd qualify that as "evil things".

[Nnyco]

They are called death knight and we got em since 12 years.

[Shadowsgrace]

But players still don't have a proper, true necromancy class?

Come on Blizzard.

The only time I've ever seen Ogres, in wow, portrayed as "Dumb" is when they are Melee. Casters have always been intelligent. Hell... look at Cho'Gal. As for "necromancers" yeah as others have stated, you've got Warlocks and Unholy DK's.

[Ielenia]

Except we can't because we don't know that to be true. Necromancers could easily have an ability based on Scythes for example, or a Bone armor ability could easily be based on the armor they're wearing.

That wouldn't happen because cloth is the weakest of all armor, so giving abilities that increase your armor are useless. At best, the necromancers would get am absorption shield, like it is for all cloth casters. And what's the problem with the necromancer class gaining an ability that spawns or acts like a scythe? It still wouldn't be weapon-based because: a) it'd limit the class to a single weapon type within a weapon type, since scythes are polearms, but not all polearms are scythes; and b) there's no reason to make the ability be based on your weapon damage instead of your spell damage.

Please provide an example of two classes in WoW that are the same except for a difference in range and/or armor.

For Pete's sake, Teriz, read my damn post. It's right there, in the very first line you quoted:

And nobody is saying that "a difference in range or armor" are the only things that separate the two.

You seem to miss the point that the DK represents the ENTIRE scourge faction. Thus, Blood and Frost specs make perfect sense,

"The DK represents the entire scourge faction" is your headcanon, to argue that "blood and frost make perfect sense."

and a dedicated Necromancer class becomes unnecessary.

All class ideas are "unnecessary" if you look at them from specific angles. Hell, all class ideas are "unnecessary" from the "too many classes already" angle, for one.

Again, the purpose of alchemy for Necromancers is to produce plague.

Source that alchemy is solely for plague, considering we have an alchemy instructor teaching budding necromancers poison?

Except it isn't just frost magic. It's frost magic blended with necromancy from the Lich hero.

I'm sorry, but source for this idea that the DK's frost magic is "frost magic + necromancy magic"?

[Teriz]

That wouldn't happen because cloth is the weakest of all armor, so giving abilities that increase your armor are useless. At best, the necromancers would get am absorption shield, like it is for all cloth casters. And what's the problem with the necromancer class gaining an ability that spawns or acts like a scythe? It still wouldn't be weapon-based because: a) it'd limit the class to a single weapon type within a weapon type, since scythes are polearms, but not all polearms are scythes; and b) there's no reason to make the ability be based on your weapon damage instead of your spell damage.

DKs have a scythe ability, and they aren't limited to polearms. Also Warlocks had demonic armor for years, and that wasn't an absorption shield.

For Pete's sake, Teriz, read my damn post. It's right there, in the very first line you quoted:

That's exactly what it is. Every Necromancer request is nothing more than a ranged version of the existing DK class.

"The DK represents the entire scourge faction" is your headcanon, to argue that "blood and frost make perfect sense."

Blood comes from the Dreadlord hero. Frost comes from the Lich hero. Unholy comes from the DK hero. This was even further proven by the presences in the oringal DK class in WotLK: Blood Presence was pretty much Vampiric Aura, Frost was pretty much Frost Armor, and Unholy Presence was pretty much Unholy Aura. How is that head cannon? Those are facts.

All class ideas are "unnecessary" if you look at them from specific angles. Hell, all class ideas are "unnecessary" from the "too many classes already" angle, for one.

No, class concepts that do the exact same thing as existing classes to the point where existing classes have to be stripped of abilities are completely unnecessary. The Demon Hunter was unnecessary, but at least all it required was the removal of metamorphosis from Warlocks to be viable. Metamorphosis wasn't a native Warlock ability, and the Demonology spec was originally a summoner spec, so its removal could somewhat be justified. Necromancers would require the removal of multiple abilities across multiple DK specs, and may even require the removal of Warlock abilities as well. Those abilities have been in those classes since their inception into the game, and are core aspects of their class thematics.

Source that alchemy is solely for plague, considering we have an alchemy instructor teaching budding necromancers poison?

https://wow.gamepedia.com/Plague_of_Undeath

I'm sorry, but source for this idea that the DK's frost magic is "frost magic + necromancy magic"?

The DK trainer of Frost in Archerus is a Lich. Every Lich from Kel'thuzad to the Lich hero in WC3 utilize Frost and Necromancy. You can even see it in the Lich here's abilities: Death and Decay (Necromancy), Frost Armor (Frost), Frost Nova (Frost), Dark Ritual (Necromancy).

[Candy Cough]

Warlocks fill the Necromancer niche. A spellcaster that relies on summoned minions.

Sorry dude, the demons won this battle. You can always be unholy DK.

Lmao that is the same as saying "Why play paladin when you can be a priest"

A death knight and necromancer is completely different

[Teriz]

Lmao that is the same as saying "Why play paladin when you can be a priest"

A death knight and necromancer is completely different

Explain how they are "completely different".

[Ielenia]

DKs have a scythe ability, and they aren't limited to polearms.

So I'll repeat: "what's the problem with the necromancer class gaining an ability that spawns or acts like a scythe?" And I'll add a second question: why should they have one? I'm guessing because it would give you more ammo in your "necromancers are just ranged DKs".

Also Warlocks had demonic armor for years, and that wasn't an absorption shield.

Except the main point of the spell was to greatly increase your health regeneration from spells. The armor bonus was just that: a bonus.

That's exactly what it is. Every Necromancer request is nothing more than a ranged version of the existing DK class.

That is false. That is objectively false. I know of two necromancer request that aren't a "ranged version of existing DK class". That alone disproves your claim, there. Can you provide two requests that portray the necromancer as "nothing more a ranged version of the existing DK class"?

Blood comes from the Dreadlord hero.

Which is not a death knight.

Frost comes from the Lich hero.

which is not a death knight.

This was even further proven by the presences in the oringal DK class in WotLK: Blood Presence was pretty much Vampiric Aura, Frost was pretty much Frost Armor, and Unholy Presence was pretty much Unholy Aura. How is that head cannon? Those are facts.

That is nothing more than post-hoc rationalization, Teriz.

No, class concepts that do the exact same thing as existing classes

A necromancer class would not do the "exact same thing" as the death knight class. This has been explained to you numerous times.

https://wow.gamepedia.com/Plague_of_Undeath

And so what? I'll repeat my question, and give emphasis on the key word: "Source that alchemy is solely for plague?" Because the fact that the new plague is made through apothecaries in no way counters the link that poison is being taught to necromancers in Scholomance.

The DK trainer of Frost in Archerus is a Lich. Every Lich from Kel'thuzad to the Lich hero in WC3 utilize Frost and Necromancy.

And mages can cast both fire and frost and arcane. It doesn't mean that their firebolts are "frost+fire+arcane" magic, or that their arcane blasts are "frost+fire+arcane" magic. Shamans know water magic. But that doesn't mean their Lava Lashes have water magic in them.

And this is getting off-topic, so I'm ending the necromancer vs death knight talk here.

[Rhaide]

I mean...they literally did this when they added the demon hunter, they ripped abilities right out of demo warlock for example, and their resource system is a reskinned rage bar.

Its not something they HAVE to do, its something they chose to do. Its okay to have classes share similar abilities when they pull from similar sources, so long as they also maintain a unique identity. We have holy priests and holy paladins, for example - no one is crying about those play styles being too similar.

They pulled metamorphosis (which should have never been a warlock ability to begin with). What else did they pull from warlock?

[FelPlague]

It sounds like you're describing the warlock class, there.

Raising people is harmful to those that were once allies
controlling demons, our enemies, are not...

- - - Updated - - -

They pulled metamorphosis (which should have never been a warlock ability to begin with). What else did they pull from warlock?

pretty sure you asked me the exact same question earlier and i gave you a list, there was atleast 7 abilities lost.

[Ielenia]

Raising people is harmful to those that were once allies
controlling demons, our enemies, are not...

So is consuming their souls, I imagine. Remember: spells like summon demon, ritual of summoning, healthstone, soulwell, and many other warlock abilities used to require soul shards, which were acquired by killing a mob with an ability called 'Drain Soul'. The mechanic was removed, but the concept remains.

[FelPlague]

So is consuming their souls, I imagine. Remember: spells like summon demon, ritual of summoning, healthstone, soulwell, and many other warlock abilities used to require soul shards, which were acquired by killing a mob with an ability called 'Drain Soul'. The mechanic was removed, but the concept remains.

presumably these souls would be evil things.

[Ielenia]

presumably these souls would be evil things.

I'm not quite sure what you mean. Do you mean that those souls would be from evil beings so it's not evil to consume them?

[Teriz]

So I'll repeat: "what's the problem with the necromancer class gaining an ability that spawns or acts like a scythe?" And I'll add a second question: why should they have one? I'm guessing because it would give you more ammo in your "necromancers are just ranged DKs"

The problem is that DKs already have such an ability, yet again showing that DKs are WoW's Necromancer class.

Except the main point of the spell was to greatly increase your health regeneration from spells. The armor bonus was just that: a bonus.

Except that isn't how the spell is described. The Armor boost is the primary attribute of the spell, the healing component is the bonus. Further, the overall point of this is that it wasn't an absorption shield, it was an armor boost on cloth armor. You can include Frost Armor to that list as well, since it also increased the Mage's armor. This gives credence for a Necromancer having a bone armor spell.

Well, at least it would if DKs already didn't have a bone armor spell.....

That is false. That is objectively false. I know of two necromancer request that aren't a "ranged version of existing DK class". That alone disproves your claim, there. Can you provide two requests that portray the necromancer as "nothing more a ranged version of the existing DK class"?

Again, that's exactly what they are. You can change the name to whatever you want and add nonsense like a Plague Doctor spec, but the essential core of all of those requests is a ranged DK.

Which is not a death knight.

which is not a death knight.

Again, Blizzard fused all of those concepts together to create the DK class. Where do you think abilities like Death and Decay or the entire Vampiric theme of the Blood spec came from?

A necromancer class would not do the "exact same thing" as the death knight class. This has been explained to you numerous times.

So you're saying that a Necromancer class wouldn't summon and control undead minions, utilize death-based shadow magic, and spread plagues? That's what Warcraft Necromancers do, and ironically that's what DKs do as well.

And so what? I'll repeat my question, and give emphasis on the key word: "Source that alchemy is solely for plague?" Because the fact that the new plague is made through apothecaries in no way counters the link that poison is being taught to necromancers in Scholomance.

Again, it's nothing more than bottled plague. Necromancers utilizing poison is a Diablo attribute, not a Warcraft attribute. In Warcraft, it's Undead minions, Plague, and Shadow magic. Again, all three of those pillars went to DKs.

And mages can cast both fire and frost and arcane. It doesn't mean that their firebolts are "frost+fire+arcane" magic, or that their arcane blasts are "frost+fire+arcane" magic. Shamans know water magic. But that doesn't mean their Lava Lashes have water magic in them.

Look at you being intellectually dishonest. You know darn well that the spells themselves don't have to be combinations of schools of magic. The blending of magic comes from the caster. In other words, if the spec allows Shadow and Frost magic to be used, then the spec is a combination of those schools of magic. Stop being purposely obtuse.

And this is getting off-topic, so I'm ending the necromancer vs death knight talk here.

Why is a Lich training DKs in Lich magic off topic? Doesn't that simply reinforce the fact that DKs are using Necromancy?

[Syegfryed]

Because ogres are the best race

[hynx]

i love how there is so much argument about how a necromancer is NOT a death knight, when in fact, in the wow universe, and this goes back to warcraft 2, they are in fact the same fucking thing, just range v melee. quit conflating what other fantasy universes would consider a death knight or a necromancer. yes a D&D necromancer is completely fucking different than a wow dk, or a wow lock, or even the elusive hypothetical wow necromancer.or even what a forgotten realms dk/necroamncer is, or even a warhammer necromancer/death knight. you are bleeding other worlds lore and abilities, into a universe with already established rules,lore, etc about death/shadow magic. and all the whining in the world wont change the fact that the niche (although divided into two different classes) already fills the role you want, in a different package than you are accustomed to see...from other fantasy realms, none the less.