WoW Necromancer Hero Class

[kenn9530]

He isn't though.

its his son that is using corrupted ashbringer alexandros mograine but fact still remains he is still a deathknight and is not using a runeblade, his title is the ashbringer and is in the maldraxus covenant hall.

[shoc]

This whole conversation about Runeblades is idiotic.

Any weapon can be turned into a Rune weapon by a Death Knight. A pickaxe can be a Rune weapon. Bolvar's hammer is in all likelihood a Rune weapon.

Mourne weapons are just OP Rune weapons crafted by a God instead of a lowly Death Knight.

[Ielenia]

Since when is the player tormenting souls or even capturing souls,

Except they can, and do, since vanilla.

the only relevant warlock is the player

False. All warlocks are relevant.

so stop talking BS about things you have no clue about.

Drive-in movie theaters wish they could project this hard...

The warlock doesnt do anything to the enemy soul afterwards

Dude, stop being so blatantly dishonest. You have been shown multiple times how you're objectively wrong here.

and even if they did consume it fully it would be a mercy to prevent further suffering.

Oh, so carving pieces off the soul is "mercy"? Geez, even sociopaths and psychopath would look at you and say "dude!"

The player Deathknight summons the same undead thats why his name is constant,

One of them have a fixed them. One.

they dont use corpses of the dead on the battlefield

Army of the Dead, Apocalypse and Reanimation would like to have a word with you. That is, if you don't ignore them like you do for all the evidence that debunk your claims.

and dont have an ability to blow them up,

As always, you're objectively wrong.

even army of undead and apocoylspe is a temporary pure magic summon as it can be used without the need of a corpse.

It raises undead.

You have nothing backing up anything on your so called claims of the extra powers the helm has.

In other words, you're once again ignoring evidence that debunks your claims, handwaving them away.

The helm is connected to torghast, you know the only place the helm lets bolvar look into, it has never once looked anywhere else so even more BS from your mouth.

You're once again stating bullshit. At no point it says that Torghast is the only place the helm can look into. It's the only place that we look into because it's the place we know the Jailer has imprisoned Anduin, Thrall, Jaina and Baine, and since we're looking for Anduin, Thrall, Jaina and Baine, we are of course going to look into Torghast only. No reason to look elsewhere.

The visual presence of runes from some pictures doesnt prove it doesnt have runes on it, he easily created shadowmourne so its not hard to create a hammer version of it.

We don't know if Shadowmourne is an actual mourneblade. For all we know, it could just be a name.

The lore doesnt back you up, it only says they cant battle as a deathknight, it doesnt say they cant battle as the warrior they were before, which is my whole point, your trying to cherry pick quotes and pass them of as evidence.

Except it literally says that: a death knight cannot battle without their runeblade.

It doesnt matter what generation because you are claiming a deathknight is unable to battle without a runeblade when there is actual lore saying otherwise.

Except there is none. You're saying that death knights of the first generation could fight at range therefore the death knights of today can fight at range without their runeblade. And that is objectively wrong. The first generation death knights have nothing to do with the death knights of today.

alexandros morgraine is using corrupted ashbringer currently as a deathknight, that weapon is not a runeblade.

Several things wrong in that statement alone:
• Alexandros Mograine is not wielding Ashbringer. The Ashbringer is currently de-powered, in Azeroth.
• It was Darion Mograine who wielded before when it was the corrupted Ashbringer, which is not a holy weapon.
• Even so, wielding a holy weapon does not mean "using holy powers".

Kenny, everything you've done so far in this thread is ignore official canon lore, and use your own headcanon that contradicts official lore as canon.

- - - Updated - - -

its his son that is using corrupted ashbringer

Darion hasn't wielded the Ashbringer since the Wrath of the Lich King expansion. You're over a decade late.

alexandros mograine but fact still remains he is still a deathknight

How do you know he's a death knight? The lore specifically mentions he was broken free of the curse by his own son: "His soul was ultimately freed by the sacrifice of his younger son Darion"

and is not using a runeblade,

How do you know it's not a runeblade, assuming he is a death knight still?

his title is the ashbringer

Because that was his title in life when he was still a paladin.

[Venziir]

its his son that is using corrupted ashbringer alexandros mograine but fact still remains he is still a deathknight and is not using a runeblade, his title is the ashbringer and is in the maldraxus covenant hall.

No one is using the corrupted Ashbringer. It doesn't even exist anymore and hasn't since Wotlk. The sword used by Alexandros isn't the Ashbringer nor is he a Death Knight anymore. And Alexandros is the father, not Darion.

[GMZohar1]

Too similar to a Death Knight, if anything it would make a 4th spec for a DK

[loras]

I get where you are coming from, but at present necromancer is trying to squeeze into a very tiny-to-nonexistent space between Death Knights, Warlocks and priests in terms of lore and gameplay.

Not exactly the most viable idea, especially given that it lacks the hero representation in WC3 that the other hero classes do have.

[Amunrasonther]

Too similar to a Death Knight, if anything it would make a 4th spec for a DK

Thank you for the bump! Do you say this simply because they share the Necromancy theme? If so, if Paladins/Priests share the holy theme, and Warlocks/Demon Hunters share the Fel & Demon theme, what’s the big deal if Necros/Death Knights share some necromancy themes?

- - - Updated - - -

I get where you are coming from, but at present necromancer is trying to squeeze into a very tiny-to-nonexistent space between Death Knights, Warlocks and priests in terms of lore and gameplay.

Not exactly the most viable idea, especially given that it lacks the hero representation in WC3 that the other hero classes do have.

How do you feel about Necromancers having a blood healing spec? There is no “dark Healer” niche in wow currently.

Also, I think Kel’thuzad would be a pretty good WC3 representative for Necromancers!

[GMZohar1]

Thank you for the bump! Do you say this simply because they share the Necromancy theme? If so, if Paladins/Priests share the holy theme, and Warlocks/Demon Hunters share the Fel & Demon theme, what’s the big deal if Necros/Death Knights share some necromancy themes?

- - - Updated - - -



How do you feel about Necromancers having a blood healing spec? There is no “dark Healer” niche in wow currently.

Also, I think Kel’thuzad would be a pretty good WC3 representative for Necromancers!

The healing aspect Priests and Paladins share, but nothing else at all. I never liked the idea of Demon Hunters, you are right about that one. They shouldn't have been their own class, they took a big part of Demonology and turned it into a class. I guess they could do that again with Necromancer but id rather they didn't. Plus giving DKs a Caster-ish spec would be cool, Plate wearing caster dps would be interesting

[Triceron]

The healing aspect Priests and Paladins share, but nothing else at all. I never liked the idea of Demon Hunters, you are right about that one. They shouldn't have been their own class, they took a big part of Demonology and turned it into a class. I guess they could do that again with Necromancer but id rather they didn't. Plus giving DKs a Caster-ish spec would be cool, Plate wearing caster dps would be interesting

The problem I have with that is DK is themed on using Runeblades and Runic Power, so even their caster spec would literally be an armored sword wielder who doesn't melee. Its not like they will suddenly wear cloth or change out their weapons and resource mechanics.

It works for Paladin because at least they were built with that in mind. DKs were always about tanking and melee DPS, so the spellcasting aspect is a bit awkward. Not impossible, but not a Necromancer either.

[loras]

Thank you for the bump! Do you say this simply because they share the Necromancy theme? If so, if Paladins/Priests share the holy theme, and Warlocks/Demon Hunters share the Fel & Demon theme, what’s the big deal if Necros/Death Knights share some necromancy themes?

- - - Updated - - -



How do you feel about Necromancers having a blood healing spec? There is no “dark Healer” niche in wow currently.

Also, I think Kel’thuzad would be a pretty good WC3 representative for Necromancers!

It would be interesting, but no more so than, say, a tinker heaing you through dubious semi-magical chemicals. Hardly enough to base a class off, and you'd likely have more luck enlarging the shadow-healing aspect of discipline priests.

Kel'thuzad as a necromancer was not a hero, much like Sylvanas as a banshee wasn't one. And liches are quite a lot further down the hole than even death knights are.

[username993720]

Not exactly the most viable idea, especially given that it lacks the hero representation in WC3 that the other hero classes do have.

Kel'thuzad as a necromancer was not a hero, much like Sylvanas as a banshee wasn't one. And liches are quite a lot further down the hole than even death knights are.

Finally, someone who understands how Blizzard added classes so far.

Adding a Necromancer would be like adding an Archer or a Huntress instead of a Priestess of the Moon, or a Witch Doctor instead of a Shadow Hunter.
These units, oftentimes, just get absorbed to their closest Hero unit.

Now, how about first generation of Death Knights as a fourth Death Knight spec?

[Triceron]

Kel'thuzad as a necromancer was not a hero, much like Sylvanas as a banshee wasn't one. And liches are quite a lot further down the hole than even death knights are.

Priest was not a hero while Paladin was, yet we have a Priest class nonetheless.

Rogue wasn't a hero while Blademaster was and had stealth, yet we know what reasons they took to make Rogue playable. We don't play as Pit Lords or Mok'nathal Beastmasters or Dark Rangers or Priestess of the Moon, we have Warlocks and Hunters.

The classic 'DnD' RPG system has a lot of influence over design too, not just WoW heroes. Necromancer stands among the Priests, Warlocks, Shamans and Hunters that were all units and not actually heroes.

[username993720]

Priest was not a hero while Paladin was, yet we have a Priest class nonetheless.

Rogue wasn't a hero while Blademaster was and had stealth, yet we know what reasons they took to make Rogue playable. We don't play as Pit Lords or Mok'nathal Beastmasters or Dark Rangers or Priestess of the Moon, we have Warlocks and Hunters.

The classic 'DnD' RPG system has a lot of influence over design too, not just WoW heroes. Necromancer stands among the Priests, Warlocks, Shamans and Hunters that were all units and not actually heroes.

He was talking about class additions, not base ones.

Actually, it is mostly Fighter (Barbarian), Mage (Sorcerer, Wizard), Cleric, Thief (Rogue), Ranger, Bard, Paladin, Druid, Monk, Warlock, Shaman, Warden, Artificer.

[loras]

Priest was not a hero while Paladin was, yet we have a Priest class nonetheless.

Rogue wasn't a hero while Blademaster was and had stealth, yet we know what reasons they took to make Rogue playable. We don't play as Pit Lords or Mok'nathal Beastmasters or Dark Rangers or Priestess of the Moon, we have Warlocks and Hunters.

The classic 'DnD' RPG system has a lot of influence over design too, not just WoW heroes. Necromancer stands among the Priests, Warlocks, Shamans and Hunters that were all units and not actually heroes.

Fair enough, but necromancers have no dedicated class in DnD either.

- - - Updated - - -

Finally, someone who understands how Blizzard added classes so far.

Adding a Necromancer would be like adding an Archer or a Huntress instead of a Priestess of the Moon, or a Witch Doctor instead of a Shadow Hunter.
These units, oftentimes, just get absorbed to their closest Hero unit.

Now, how about first generation of Death Knights as a fourth Death Knight spec?

Now that would be something, a plate-clad deathcaster.
Could be interesting.

[jellmoo]

Fair enough, but necromancers have no dedicated class in DnD either.

Ehhhh... While generally kinda true as a Necromancer is usually just a Wizard that specialized in Necromancy spells, 3rd edition did have it's own dedicated Necromancy class.

https://dnd.arkalseif.info/classes/d...cer/index.html

Though to be fair, 3rd edition had a metric ton of splatbooks and made base classes out of damn near everything by the end of its life cycle.

[loras]

Ehhhh... While generally kinda true as a Necromancer is usually just a Wizard that specialized in Necromancy spells, 3rd edition did have it's own dedicated Necromancy class.

https://dnd.arkalseif.info/classes/d...cer/index.html

Though to be fair, 3rd edition had a metric ton of splatbooks and made base classes out of damn near everything by the end of its life cycle.

Precisely.

[Jastall]

I'll say again what I said elsewhere, if they didn't introduce Necromancers during the expansion where we go to the afterlife, including the literal birthplace of necromancy, then I strongly doubt they'll ever want to add them. All 3 classes introduced so far were closely linked to their expansion's overarching theme and I see little reason to add a Necromancer after Shadowlands. It would be like introducing Demon Hunters in BFA instead of Legion.

It's a bit of a shame because with all the new themes added to Shadowlands proper we now actually have a base from which to build a Necromancer class, or at least something quite similar as a caster drawing power from the various realms of death. Maldraxxus, Revendreth and the Maw especially provide ample templates for 3 specs based around constructs/plague, anima manipulation/gargoyle control, and Domination runic magic respectively. But as I said it's highly unlikely they'll add such a class after we leave the Shadowlands.

[Mooshue]

The healing aspect Priests and Paladins share

[Triceron]

I'll say again what I said elsewhere, if they didn't introduce Necromancers during the expansion where we go to the afterlife, including the literal birthplace of necromancy, then I strongly doubt they'll ever want to add them. All 3 classes introduced so far were closely linked to their expansion's overarching theme and I see little reason to add a Necromancer after Shadowlands. It would be like introducing Demon Hunters in BFA instead of Legion.

Story and setting are what matter, and it applies to both classes and races.

BFA may not have added a class, but they did add races that were previously introduced in Legion. Classes just need a reason to exist, and frankly the two Hero classes we got ended up having starting zones that take place in the past, leading up to current events. Or there's Exiles Reach where ever class starts off completely neutral.

Theres so many new Necromantic spells in Shadowlands that they could easily form a new class out of it. Cult of the Damned is still aligned with Mawsworn until Zovaal is defeated, so who knows maybe they can do a flashback of Cultists who decide to ditch Zovaal at some critical point and seek new benefactors, while offering their knowledge to help with reversing Anduins situation.

Its just a question of whether the Devs have any intention to moving forward with Necromancers.

- - - Updated - - -

Fair enough, but necromancers have no dedicated class in DnD either.

They don't have Shamans, Death Knights and Demon Hunters either *shrug*

I wouldn't stick to their archetypes so literally otherwise the only classes left to discuss would be Barbarians, Sorcerers and Bards. I brought it up as a means to illustrate where the broader class archetypes are being formed around, not just drawing direct parallels to Warcraft 3 heroes. Even Units can be represented as playable classes because they'd be treated equally as an RPG class. Power doesn't get differentiated between a Demon Hunter and a Priest, because they're both treated like player RPG classes which are all relatively equal in status and power.

[loras]

Story and setting are what matter, and it applies to both classes and races.

BFA may not have added a class, but they did add races that were previously introduced in Legion. Classes just need a reason to exist, and frankly the two Hero classes we got ended up having starting zones that take place in the past, leading up to current events. Or there's Exiles Reach where ever class starts off completely neutral.

Theres so many new Necromantic spells in Shadowlands that they could easily form a new class out of it. Cult of the Damned is still aligned with Mawsworn until Zovaal is defeated, so who knows maybe they can do a flashback of Cultists who decide to ditch Zovaal at some critical point and seek new benefactors, while offering their knowledge to help with reversing Anduins situation.

Its just a question of whether the Devs have any intention to moving forward with Necromancers.

- - - Updated - - -



They don't have Shamans, Death Knights and Demon Hunters either *shrug*

I wouldn't stick to their archetypes so literally otherwise the only classes left to discuss would be Barbarians, Sorcerers and Bards. I brought it up as a means to illustrate where the broader class archetypes are being formed around, not just drawing direct parallels to Warcraft 3 heroes. Even Units can be represented as playable classes because they'd be treated equally as an RPG class. Power doesn't get differentiated between a Demon Hunter and a Priest, because they're both treated like player RPG classes which are all relatively equal in status and power.

Except all of those you list there *do* have WC3 hero counterparts (shaman as far seer, as seen with Thrall).

Which is kinda the point: Necromancer has neither a DnD precedent nor a WC3 precedent.