If they made a new class in the future, what would it be?

[Teriz]

What's wrong with having two Blood specs in the game? We have two Frost specs, two Holy specs, two Resto specs. Each do their own thing even if there is massive overlap (Holy)

If the Necro uses Blood as a healing spec, it would fit the class, open up new gameplay that we haven't seen before and still be something that classic Necromancer fans would want out of the class given that they have 2 specs to cover the more traditional Summons/Shadowfrost gameplay.

Nothing, except the fact that you're going to have Blood, Frost, and Unholy, which is the exact same spec configuration as the DK class. Yes, I know Necromancer fans don't believe that, but that's really the only way it works.

- - - Updated - - -

Poison is different from Disease. The school of magic might be the same but their classification isn't.

Druids can cure poisons and not diseases, while Priests can clear diseases but not poisons.

Necromancers are known to have alchemically created the blight, and used it to create the Plaguelands. In the lore the blight is a mixture of disease and poison, and in the game it has been represented by both.

The new blight that the Forsaken created is even more interesting, since they seem to imply some level of radiation into it. A bit of a shame that no class has tapped into this since it's proven to be an incredibly strong weapon against both living and undead.

That wasn't what we were arguing. The argument was school of magic. And yes, through the opening of Plague, DKs do have access to poison.

BTW, they also have access to poison because they're ALSO part of the Scourge which is the basis from which these fan-made Necromancer concepts are coming from.

[Amunrasonther]

Not true in the slightest. Look at what occurred to DKs in this expansion for example. They reverted quite a few changes and added in some new concepts. Further as I explained earlier, it makes little sense for Blizzard to attempt to make a separate class for Poison-based Necromancy when the DK class is perfectly capable of offering that concept.

What new concepts and changes are you referring to? And right, even though there exists zero poison and alchemy in Death Knights, but does exist within Necromancers, it's perfectly logical that DKs would resort to poison/alchemy and not Necromancers. Come on Teriz...

Yeah, but that leaves the remaining specializations DPS with pet and DPS DoT and/or direct damage. Those are exactly the same spec types that Warlocks have. So essentially you're creating a Warlock style caster with a blood healing gimmick that is similar to the DK class. On top of stealing abilities from both existing classes.

So new spell caster classes aren't allowed to have pets, dots, or deal direct damage? Crazy.

No, classes do virtually the same things. What matters is that the concept, themes, and roles are different. Healing specs, Undead minions, Poison, Mail Armor, Nature magic, and Alchemy are not part of the Warlock class, and only one of those things are shared with DKs.

Fair enough, and the DK has had Blood magic abilities that has benefitted their allies in WoW as well.

I'm glad you can now recognize the possibility of a blood healer spec for Necromancers.

The plague he created didn't raise people from the dead, it killed them and turned them into the undead. Regardless, the mad scientist theme really doesn't fit into the Necromancer concept. On one hand you have a magic user, and the other you have someone using science and technology.

Yes, that's what I meant. The plague was for turning living things into the undead. And much like Putricide, it was the Necromancers, Kel'thuzad and Heigan who created Plague Cauldrons, filled with "vile toxins and poisons" to also kill living beings and turn them into undead minions.

And Blizzard has had no issue in the past making magical melee concepts into a Necromancers.

Death Knights practice necromancy, but they are not Necromancers. Much like Priests use the Light, but are not Paladins.

WotLK was popular because it happened after an Outland expansion, and before Cataclysm. People really don't want another death expansion after they just went through one. Blizzard tends to make expansions very different from each other.

Your opinion.

Yes, if they somehow believed that a class they purposely made the necromancer in WoW was no longer WoW's necromancer.

No, because again, the class concepts between DKs and Necromancers are different.

Really? Reanimation allows you to summon a zombie that walks towards a target and explodes, dealing AoE damage and stunning (bomb). Your ghoul spreads festering wounds. Your Abomination spreads disease (gas), Unholy Mutation created Oozes and slimes from Virulent Plagues. etc.

None of that involves alchemy bombs, poison sprays, gasses, burning chemicals, poison puddles, and again, DKs do not create Oozes.

Yes, a Covenant ability because they're in the realm of the dead, and it will be gone after Shadowlands. And again, these comparisons don't mean anything because you're talking about classes with different themes. A Necromancer and a Death Knight is like the difference between an Enhancement Shaman and an Elemental Shaman.

You said Paladins NEVER use shadow magic. Yet here we are with Paladins using shadow magic. Certainly, they could have given Paladins something else to use if such a notion was to remain true. Your shaman analogy is a complete failure because those are two specs within the same class vs two separate classes entirely.

Poison is in the nature school of magic. Unholy Mutation, Necrotic Strike, and Gargoyle’s attack all have a nature damage component (plague).

The Plague School of Magic is not the Nature School of magic. They're different schools and the abilities you mention deal PLAGUE damage (there is no "nature damage component"). In addition, this part of my last response that you like to ignore:

The Paladin spell Wake of Ashes uses the Radiant school (fire and holy magic combined), this doesn't make Paladins fire magic users. Chaos Magic combines every school of magic, this doesn't make Demon Hunters and Warlocks Holy, Nature, or Frost magic users. And certainly, one Plague spell in the Plague magic school that deals Plague damage doesn't make DKs nature nor poison magic users.

[Triceron]

Nothing, except the fact that you're going to have Blood, Frost, and Unholy, which is the exact same spec configuration as the DK class. Yes, I know Necromancer fans don't believe that, but that's really the only way it works.

Why would that be the only way it works?

Why could there not be Necromancy-based specs outside of Blood, Frost and Unholy?

I mean I'm fine with having a Necromancer that uses similar themes to the DK since it's already well established in the lore and associated directly to the Scourge, but saying it's the only way it works seems a bit contrived.

[Teriz]

So is lightning magic, earth magic, wind magic, and druid magic. Are you going to say that death knights have access to those kinds of magic too? Those are all "nature damage" magic types. Should death knights have access to druid and elemental magic, then?

Considering that the DK abilities utilizing nature are corrosive and corrupted, you're doing nothing but straw-manning here.

In other words, your argument is nonsensical. Plague and poison are different than one-another.

Again, we were talking about schools of magic. Poison is nature magic, and DKs have access to nature magic. Further, DKs are also from the exact same source of lore as these Necromancer concepts, so there's no reason for them not to be able to utilize poison as well.

So like I said; no different than Elemental Shaman vs Enhancement Shaman.

- - - Updated - - -

Why would that be the only way it works?

Are you saying it's impossible to have any other Necromancy-based specs outside of Blood, Frost and Unholy?

Pretty much, since Poison/Oozes/undead monstrosities is also falls under Unholy, and there's zero chance you create a WoW Necromancer without Kel'thuzad/Lich influence, and then you have the Blood healing spec.

It's the same thing, just repackaged.

[Amunrasonther]

That wasn't what we were arguing. The argument was school of magic. And yes, through the opening of Plague, DKs do have access to poison.

BTW, they also have access to poison because they're ALSO part of the Scourge which is the basis from which these fan-made Necromancer concepts are coming from.

The fact that Teriz is now resorting to, "PoiSoN NoW BeLOnGs To DeAtH KnIgHTs!!!" is H-I-L-A-R-I-O-U-S!

[Triceron]

Pretty much, since Poison/Oozes/undead monstrosities is also falls under Unholy, and there's zero chance you create a WoW Necromancer without Kel'thuzad/Lich influence, and then you have the Blood healing spec.

It's the same thing, just repackaged.

Right. So what's the problem again?

Monks are literally using the same magic as Shamans, completely repackaged. The only difference is that they draw the energy internally instead of externally.

Warlocks and Demon Hunters use literally the same magic themes. It's all fel magic.

Paladins and Priests are even more aggregious in having Heal specs that literally do the same thing using spells that are incredibly derivative of each other.

What exactly is the problem? Oozes and poisons would fall under unholy but a DK doesn't use either. Using a lich-form would fall under Frost but a DK doesn't do either. And I don't think we should automatically assume that the DK would immediately take up these abilities if added to the game; Xelnath even tried this with folding Demon Hunters into Warlocks and we saw what happened to the Demon Hunter.

What exactly is the problem with two classes having the same specs if they are using these specs very differently? Even Mages and DK's have Frost specs that work completely differently from each other.

[Ielenia]

Nothing, except the fact that you're going to have Blood, Frost, and Unholy, which is the exact same spec configuration as the DK class.

A necromancer class, if realized into the game, would not have "blood frost and unholy" specs. In other words, it wouldn't be a carbon-copy of the death knight like you're explicitly saying it would.

[cocomen2]

Why would that be the only way it works?

Why could there not be Necromancy-based specs outside of Blood, Frost and Unholy?

I mean I'm fine with having a Necromancer that uses similar themes to the DK since it's already well established in the lore and associated directly to the Scourge, but saying it's the only way it works seems a bit contrived.

So you didn't saw his bullshit "PILLARS OF NECROMANCY";

For a Tinker-fan he somehow are sure that He knows what Necromancer-fans wants and thinks that there no developer that can image any specs for Necromancer class other than Blood, Frost and Unholy, so to prove his point of being carbon copy paste Death Knight concept.

Just look at that cute ....... :

Again, two specs can share similar themes, but entire classes cant.

It isnt shared by Necromancer fans because they don't want to admit that their desired class is similar to the existing DK class. Unfortunately, blood, frost, and Unholy are the pillars of WoW Necromancy. As I've said multiple times, a Necromancer is only possible through a severe revamp of Warlock and DK classes. Frost Mages may lose a couple of abilities too.

Necromancer picked up a book about alchemy ....randomy appears The Teriz and says :

"Hey you , you don't allowed to read it.... read only about Blood, Frost and Unholy magic , only my Tinker concept has a rights to cannibalize Alchemy and use it as spec"



O Undead that was made without any Teriz's "pillars of WoW Necromancy"..... Oh shit , EASY.

[Teriz]

The fact that Teriz is now resorting to, "PoiSoN NoW BeLOnGs To DeAtH KnIgHTs!!!" is H-I-L-A-R-I-O-U-S!

What's more hilarious is that you think a Necromancer has more power within the Scourge than Death Knights. There's a reason there's obedient Necromancers in the DK class hall, and not the other way around.

[Ielenia]

Considering that the DK abilities utilizing nature are corrosive and corrupted, you're doing nothing but straw-manning here.

They do not utilize "nature", Teriz. The death knight simply is not a concept that utilizes nature magic. And for the record, neither is the necromancer.

Again, we were talking about schools of magic. Poison is nature magic, and DKs have access to nature magic.

No. Schools of magic and magic damage type are wildly different thing. Schools of magic are 'druid magic', 'shaman magic', 'demon magic', 'holy magic', 'frost magic', 'water magic', 'void magic', etc. The schools of magic are thematic in difference, and are different between themselves despite sharing magic damage types. For example: rogues deal nature damage through their poisons, while shamans deal nature damage through their lightning bolts and druids deal nature damage through sunfire and other druidic spells. All deal nature damage, but you wouldn't argue that a rogue has access to shamanistic and druidic magic, just because their abilities happen to share a damage type, would you? Both the mage and death knight deal frost damage, but you wouldn't argue that mages have access to necromantic magic because both the DK and the mage deal frost damage. Would you?

Magic damage types are divided in the basic types: fire, frost, arcane, fel, shadow, holy and nature. "Shadow" damage type encompasses fel magic, necromantic magic, and void magic. But you wouldn't say that all three of those are one and the same now, would you? Likewise, "nature" damage type encompasses druidic magic, shamanistic magic, most poisons and many diseases.

Further, DKs are also from the exact same source of lore as these Necromancer concepts,

So do the paladin and priests draw from the exact same source for their holy spells and abilities..

So like I said; no different than Elemental Shaman vs Enhancement Shaman.

False. It's the difference between paladins and priests.

[Teriz]

What new concepts and changes are you referring to? And right, even though there exists zero poison and alchemy in Death Knights, but does exist within Necromancers, it's perfectly logical that DKs would resort to poison/alchemy and not Necromancers. Come on Teriz...

Well Sacrificial Pact for starters, which is sort of a combination of Unholy and Blood magic. Unholy Pact creates flame chains between yourself and your pet that sets enemies on fire. etc...

And like I said, with poison being within the nature school, and Plague being so close to poison, and DKs being part of the same faction as Necromancers, there's no reason for DKs not to have access to whatever Necromancers have access to.

So new spell caster classes aren't allowed to have pets, dots, or deal direct damage? Crazy.

The same ones as existing classes? I don't think so.

No, classes do virtually the same things. What matters is that the concept, themes, and roles are different. Healing specs, Undead minions, Poison, Mail Armor, Nature magic, and Alchemy are not part of the Warlock class, and only one of those things are shared with DKs.

I would love for you give me an example of two classes that do the same thing, share the same schools of magic, and have the same general theme as much as a Necromancer and a DK.

I'm glad you can now recognize the possibility of a blood healer spec for Necromancers.

I'm recognizing that Blood Magic has a lot of healing prosperities.

Yes, that's what I meant. The plague was for turning living things into the undead. And much like Putricide, it was the Necromancers, Kel'thuzad and Heigan who created Plague Cauldrons, filled with "vile toxins and poisons" to also kill living beings and turn them into undead minions.

Quite fitting then that Death Knights have Plague damage which combines Shadow magic and nature magic right?

Death Knights practice necromancy, but they are not Necromancers. Much like Priests use the Light, but are not Paladins.

Necromancer literally means someone who practices Necromancy.

No, because again, the class concepts between DKs and Necromancers are different.

Yeah, one is ranged and one is hybrid melee.

Just like Elemental and Enhancement Shaman.

None of that involves alchemy bombs, poison sprays, gasses, burning chemicals, poison puddles, and again, DKs do not create Oozes.

https://wow.gamepedia.com/Unholy_Mutation

And you may say they don't have that ability currently, but Blizzard brings back removed abilities all the time.

You said Paladins NEVER use shadow magic. Yet here we are with Paladins using shadow magic. Certainly, they could have given Paladins something else to use if such a notion was to remain true. Your shaman analogy is a complete failure because those are two specs within the same class vs two separate classes entirely.

Yes, using shadow magic in the Shadowlands. They won't have those abilities when this expansion is done.

How do you know that Necromancer and DK isn't the same class? Blizzard themselves said that they used the Necromancer class concept to create the DK class.

The Plague School of Magic is not the Nature School of magic. They're different schools and the abilities you mention deal PLAGUE damage (there is no "nature damage component"). In addition, this part of my last response that you like to ignore:

Plague refers to a type of magic that is wielded by Unholy death knights. It is a multi-school, combining the Nature and Shadow schools.

https://wow.gamepedia.com/Plague_(spell_school)

The Paladin spell Wake of Ashes uses the Radiant school (fire and holy magic combined), this doesn't make Paladins fire magic users. Chaos Magic combines every school of magic, this doesn't make Demon Hunters and Warlocks Holy, Nature, or Frost magic users. And certainly, one Plague spell in the Plague magic school that deals Plague damage doesn't make DKs nature nor poison magic users.

Where did I say that Death Knights used poison? I simply said that Necromancer fan concepts use the same schools of magic as the DK.

- - - Updated - - -

They do not utilize "nature", Teriz. The death knight simply is not a concept that utilizes nature magic. [B]And for the record, neither is the necromancer.

No. Schools of magic and magic damage type are wildly different thing. Schools of magic are 'druid magic', 'shaman magic', 'demon magic', 'holy magic', 'frost magic', 'water magic', 'void magic', etc. The schools of magic are thematic in difference, and are different between themselves despite sharing magic damage types. For example: rogues deal nature damage through their poisons, while shamans deal nature damage through their lightning bolts and druids deal nature damage through sunfire and other druidic spells. All deal nature damage, but you wouldn't argue that a rogue has access to shamanistic and druidic magic, just because their abilities happen to share a damage type, would you? Both the mage and death knight deal frost damage, but you wouldn't argue that mages have access to necromantic magic because both the DK and the mage deal frost damage. Would you?

Magic damage types are divided in the basic types: fire, frost, arcane, fel, shadow, holy and nature. "Shadow" damage type encompasses fel magic, necromantic magic, and void magic. But you wouldn't say that all three of those are one and the same now, would you? Likewise, "nature" damage type encompasses druidic magic, shamanistic magic, most poisons and many diseases.

Wow, you missed the point.

I'll try again; Since Death Knights utilize nature magic through Plague, they have access to the same schools of magic as the Necromancer fan concept, and poison is in that school of magic That's all I'm saying.

So do the paladin and priests draw from the exact same source for their holy spells and abilities..

I'll have to look it up.

False. It's the difference between paladins and priests.

What school of magic can Necromancers use that DKs can't use? Also I find it kind of silly to argue that Necromancers would have a magic type unknown to DKs when Necromancers work for DKs and are subordinate to them in Archerus.

- - - Updated - - -

So you didn't saw his bullshit "PILLARS OF NECROMANCY";

For a Tinker-fan he somehow are sure that He knows what Necromancer-fans wants and thinks that there no developer that can image any specs for Necromancer class other than Blood, Frost and Unholy, so to prove his point of being carbon copy paste Death Knight concept.

Of course. Why do you think there's no new Necromancer class in Shadowlands; An expansion revolving around the Lich King, Sylvanas, the Jailer of Death, and the realm of death?

[Imperator4321]

This is often the problem with almost every fan class concept: they don't fill in an existing archetype or are clearly understandable in a single sentence, which is why I am happy nobody here is an actual class designer/developer for wow. Most of these ideas don't fit well or are too much of a niche at best (not saying that I could do better lol).

This is also why I hope wow won't get a new class, but rather new specs for some classes (maybe release 4 or 5 every few patches to keep up with balance

Frankly there seems to be an trend of players wanting a new class every time an NPC does a single unique thing we can't do or players want an absurdly specific archetype that already exists but doesn't fit it 100% exactly what they want so it needs to become an entire class in of itself.

Unholy DK's do basically everything a Necromancer would do as a gameplay archetype (Pets, Dots, temporary pets, empowering pets) they have an undead pet, abilities that summon more pets, abilities that empower their pets, they conjure diseases and festering wounds but because they aren't a ranged cloth spellcaster we 100% need a necromancer class to fulfill that overly specific niche, even stuff like Blood Healer spec is just what Blood DK's do with extra steps (instead of siphoning life to sustain youself you're siphoning life to heal you allies real real huge difference there guys 100% new concept original class.)

Wardens per their warcraft 3 abilities are just rogues they have fan of knives, they use poison, shadowstep is a blink, both spirit of vengeance and shadow technique create a shadow clone, the only unqiue thing wardens have left is that they wear plate which could easily just be a cosmetic transmog set.

Sylvanas & Dark Rangers are defined in game as hunters Dark Rangers show up in the Hunter Class Hall just because they show a handful of unique abilities doesn't make them an entirely seperate concept, Sylvanas unique abilities don't even come from being a "Dark Ranger" they come from her nature as a Banshee/Her pact with the Jailor. play a Forsaken/Blood Elf hunter, wear a dark transmog, get an undead pet and play marksman hunter and you've accomplished majority of what having a Dark Ranger class would be both in gameplay and design.

Sylvanas & Dark Rangers aren't even unique in this regard Tyrande is a Priest/Hunter/Balance Druid multiclass, Anduin is a priest in plate armor and using a sword, Thrall wore plate armor, Tidesages are Priest/Mage/Shamans and there are numerous other examples of npc's not following the exact classes we have available. If it doesn't fulfill a missing overall archetype (in gameplay or thematic design) we really don't need another class (and we probably won't get anymore classes since there honestly aren't any missing archetypes at this point that aren't redundant in some form).

[Traveler Voltin]

So you didn't saw his bullshit "PILLARS OF NECROMANCY";

For a Tinker-fan he somehow are sure that He knows what Necromancer-fans wants and thinks that there no developer that can image any specs for Necromancer class other than Blood, Frost and Unholy, so to prove his point of being carbon copy paste Death Knight concept.

Just look at that cute ....... :



Necromancer picked up a book about alchemy ....randomy appears The Teriz and says :

"Hey you , you don't allowed to read it.... read only about Blood, Frost and Unholy magic , only my Tinker concept has a rights to cannibalize Alchemy and use it as spec"



O Undead that was made without any Teriz's "pillars of WoW Necromancy"..... Oh shit , EASY.

calia is also massively hated and she also makes no sense.

[Ielenia]

https://wow.gamepedia.com/Plague_(spell_school)

Browsing WoWpedia, I was reminded of something very, very interesting: warlocks already had an ability called "Chaos Bolt" waaaay back in Wrath. Sure, it didn't cause "chaos damage" then but then again "multi-school" damage types did not exist back then. I suppose we should tell the demon hunters they cannot have chaos-damage abilities, right?

Wow, you missed the point.

I'll try again; Since Death Knights utilize nature magic through Plague,

You accuse me of "missing the point", and yet you are the one who actually misses the point. Death knights do not have access to nature magic. At all. The fact that two of their abilities deal plague damage, which is a multi-school type that deals both shadow and nature damage, is irrelevant. Because none of those abilities are actual nature magic.

Unless you're also arguing that death knights also have access to druidic magic and shamanistic magic, since those are nature magic as well. Either way, you're being very dishonest.

I'll have to look it up.

You have to look it up to know that both paladins and priests draw their holy magic from the Light? Really?

What school of magic can Necromancers use that DKs can't use?

Poison magic.

Also I find it kind of silly to argue that Necromancers would have a magic type unknown to DKs when Necromancers work for DKs and are subordinate to them in Archerus.

And priests and paladins work together more often than not. That's meaningless.

- - - Updated - - -

calia is also massively hated and she also makes no sense.

Hated or not, she is still part of the lore of the game. She is still an undead risen through the Light.

[Teriz]

Frankly there seems to be an trend of players wanting a new class every time an NPC does a single unique thing we can't do or players want an absurdly specific archetype that already exists but doesn't fit it 100% exactly what they want so it needs to become an entire class in of itself.

Unholy DK's do basically everything a Necromancer would do as a gameplay archetype (Pets, Dots, temporary pets, empowering pets) they have an undead pet, abilities that summon more pets, abilities that empower their pets, they conjure diseases and festering wounds but because they aren't a ranged cloth spellcaster we 100% need a necromancer class to fulfill that overly specific niche, even stuff like Blood Healer spec is just what Blood DK's do with extra steps (instead of siphoning life to sustain youself you're siphoning life to heal you allies real real huge difference there guys 100% new concept original class.)

Wardens per their warcraft 3 abilities are just rogues they have fan of knives, they use poison, shadowstep is a blink, both spirit of vengeance and shadow technique create a shadow clone, the only unqiue thing wardens have left is that they wear plate which could easily just be a cosmetic transmog set.

Sylvanas & Dark Rangers are defined in game as hunters Dark Rangers show up in the Hunter Class Hall just because they show a handful of unique abilities doesn't make them an entirely seperate concept, Sylvanas unique abilities don't even come from being a "Dark Ranger" they come from her nature as a Banshee/Her pact with the Jailor. play a Forsaken/Blood Elf hunter, wear a dark transmog, get an undead pet and play marksman hunter and you've accomplished majority of what having a Dark Ranger class would be both in gameplay and design.

Sylvanas & Dark Rangers aren't even unique in this regard Tyrande is a Priest/Hunter/Balance Druid multiclass, Anduin is a priest in plate armor and using a sword, Thrall wore plate armor, Tidesages are Priest/Mage/Shamans and there are numerous other examples of npc's not following the exact classes we have available. If it doesn't fulfill a missing overall archetype (in gameplay or thematic design) we really don't need another class (and we probably won't get anymore classes since there honestly aren't any missing archetypes at this point that aren't redundant in some form).

Tinkers say hello. There's no technology class and we have multiple races that embrace technology (Mechagnomes do it completely). So yeah, that's a class archetype that needs to be filled.

- - - Updated - - -

Browsing WoWpedia, I was reminded of something very, very interesting: warlocks already had an ability called "Chaos Bolt" waaaay back in Wrath. Sure, it didn't cause "chaos damage" then but then again "multi-school" damage types did not exist back then. I suppose we should tell the demon hunters they cannot have chaos-damage abilities, right?

Chaos damage is part of Demonic magic, so obviously two classes with demonic themes would both have chaos magic.

It should be noted that Plague magic would also obviously used by two classes revolving around Necromancy. Of course unlike DHs and Warlocks, DKs already have loads of undead minions and ranged spells, which makes a Necromancer completely unnecessary.

You accuse me of "missing the point", and yet you are the one who actually misses the point. Death knights do not have access to nature magic. At all. The fact that two of their abilities deal plague damage, which is a multi-school type that deals both shadow and nature damage, is irrelevant. Because none of those abilities are actual nature magic.

There's a reason Frost and Fire mages could both use Firefrost bolt; Because it was both fire and frost.

Unless you're also arguing that death knights also have access to druidic magic and shamanistic magic, since those are nature magic as well. Either way, you're being very dishonest.

How silly, as if Shaman or Druids would ever use a corrosive type of Nature magic.

I mean Necromancers obviously would, but not Shaman or Druids..

Poison magic.

Which isn't far from Plague magic.

And priests and paladins work together more often than not. That's meaningless.

I don't think there were any Priests in the Paladin Class hall or Vice Versa...

Yet we have Necromancers in the DK class hall groveling to Death Knights and "The Deathlord".

Something to think about.

[Imperator4321]

Tinkers say hello. There's no technology class and we have multiple races that embrace technology (Mechagnomes do it completely). So yeah, that's a class archetype that needs to be filled.

I meant as both a Thematic and Gameplay archetype, a class needs a niche if they are going to be anything other than a redundant addition for instance Warlocks have utility (summoning, healthstones, demonic gateway.), Shamans have utility in the form of totems. Paladins have support (Blessings/Healing) and survivability, Rogues have stealth, Druids are jacks of all trades. theres probably a ton of thematic niches that can be filled (including the necromancer concept) but a class needs a gameplay niche as well, even Demon Hunters who i'd argue are fairly redunant as a class have their vertical mobility as a niche

I don't think there were any Priests in the Paladin Class hall or Vice Versa...

Did you play the Priest and/or Paladin Order Hall? the entire questline involves both Order Halls working together and the endgame involves the legion invading the Priest Order Hall and one of the members of the Priest Order Hall joining the Paladin Order Hall

[Shandalar]

Tinkers say hello. There's no technology class and we have multiple races that embrace technology (Mechagnomes do it completely). So yeah, that's a class archetype that needs to be filled.

- - - Updated - - -



Chaos damage is part of Demonic magic, so obviously two classes with demonic themes would both have chaos magic.

It should be noted that Plague magic would also obviously used by two classes revolving around Necromancy. Of course unlike DHs and Warlocks, DKs already have loads of undead minions and ranged spells, which makes a Necromancer completely unnecessary.



There's a reason Frost and Fire mages could both use Firefrost bolt; Because it was both fire and frost.



How silly, as if Shaman or Druids would ever use a corrosive type of Nature magic.

I mean Necromancers obviously would, but not Shaman or Druids..



Which isn't far from Plague magic.



I don't think there were any Priests in the Paladin Class hall or Vice Versa...

Yet we have Necromancers in the DK class hall groveling to Death Knights and "The Deathlord".

Something to think about.

I have bad news for you: Tinkers will not happen. I will say it again: tinkers will not happen. They will never happen.

They have less chances than a pure Alchemist class.

So deal with it.

[Teriz]

I meant as both a Thematic and Gameplay archetype, a class needs a niche if they are going to be anything other than a redundant addition for instance Warlocks have utility (summoning, healthstones, demonic gateway.), Shamans have utility in the form of totems. Paladins have support (Blessings/Healing) and survivability, Rogues have stealth, Druids are jacks of all trades. theres probably a ton of thematic niches that can be filled (including the necromancer concept) but a class needs a gameplay niche as well, even Demon Hunters who i'd argue are fairly redunant as a class have their vertical mobility as a niche

You don't think a class that utilizes a vehicle wouldn't be a gameplay niche?

Did you play the Priest and/or Paladin Order Hall? the entire questline involves both Order Halls working together and the endgame involves the legion invading the Priest Order Hall and one of the members of the Priest Order Hall joining the Paladin Order Hall

I did, and there's a big difference between a Priest becoming a Paladin, and a group of Necromancers being subservient to the Deathlord (player DK) and the new Four Horsemen.

- - - Updated - - -

I have bad news for you: Tinkers will not happen. I will say it again: tinkers will not happen. They will never happen.

They have less chances than a pure Alchemist class.

So deal with it.

They've already happened;




They just need to allow us to play them in WoW.

[Imperator4321]

You don't think a class that utilizes a vehicle wouldn't be a gameplay niche?

Depends on how the Vehicle is implimented, Gameplay/Mechanically it could just be how Druids turn into animals (new form with extra stats/abilities) only with a different visual and visuals aren't enough difference if it's the exact same type of gameplay.

Classes can certainly share elements or niches (specifically individual specs between classes) Unholy, Beast Mastery, Survival and Demonology are all pet specs but they interact with them in different ways.

I did, and there's a big difference between a Priest becoming a Paladin, and a group of Necromancers being subservient to the Deathlord (player DK) and the new Four Horsemen.

Having one of my quests as a priest literally be "go to the paladin's and beg them for help" sure made me feel empowered.

[Ielenia]

Chaos damage is part of Demonic magic, so obviously two classes with demonic themes would both have chaos magic.

So it's fine for warlocks and demon hunters share their thematic, and even share school types...

But the necromancers and death knights cannot share their thematic or even share school types.

In other words: "rules for thee but not for me". Textbook definition of "double-standards".

It should be noted that Plague magic would also obviously used by two classes revolving around Necromancy.

No. No, it would not. Plague magic is not poison magic.

Of course unlike DHs and Warlocks, DKs already have loads of undead minions and ranged spells, which makes a Necromancer completely unnecessary.

And paladins already have loads of ranged spells, which makes a priest completely unnecessary.

There's a reason Frost and Fire mages could both use Firefrost bolt; Because it was both fire and frost.

Frostfire Bolt was spec-agnostic. Even arcane mages could use it.

How silly, as if Shaman or Druids would ever use a corrosive type of Nature magic.

Oh, so now there are different types of nature magic? How utterly dishonest of you.

Which isn't far from Plague magic.

It is. That's like saying lightning magic isn't far from plague magic. Or druidic magic isn't far from plague magic.

I don't think there were any Priests in the Paladin Class hall or Vice Versa...

Aside from the priest who literally became a paladin, which even proves how utterly similar they are? And how both order halls worked together in Legion?

By the way, I found what looks to be two tinkers in the Trueshot Lodge: Bamm Megabomb and Isaac Blastimov. Why do I say they may be tinkers? Because the two created sentient robots. And then there are Practicus Rozzbin and Drupala Nearmiss who talk about using technology...