Theres only one possible class left they can add to the game

[Ielenia]

http://www.wowhead.com/npc=31155/mal...ncer#abilities

http://www.wowhead.com/npc=27539/fri...ncer#abilities

http://www.wowhead.com/npc=10400/thu...ncer#abilities

Ok. I stand corrected on those. But let me offer a counter-point: are you saying that the necromancer NPC's "Bone Armor", which is a damage absorb ability, is the same as the blood DK's "Bone Shield", that reduces damage taken? I'm asking because, if so, by that logic, you're also saying that the DK's "Icebound Fortitude", which reduces damage taken, is the same as the Mage's "Ice Barrier", that absorbs damage?

Not really. Blood magic tends to revolve around the vampirism almost exclusively.

That's irrelevant. You can still make a healing spec out of it without interfering at all with the DK's Blood tanking spec.

If you say so...

Hey, you're the one dismissing other possibilities since because "Blizzard hasn't done something like that before", while ignoring the fact Blizzard has been doing a lot of "things that they haven't done before" lately.

- - - Updated - - -

If I've invested years playing the DK class only to have it pulled from up under me, how is that NOT a middle finger to me?

And I invested the entirety of the Wrath expansion on my Frost DK tanking. I moved on. So will you.

Since the Necromancer class supposedly doesn't exist in WoW, they have nothing to be upset about.

But there are necromancers in Warcraft.

I agree. All three of them suck the oxygen out of every conversation.

Oh, stop it, you. You know you love me. You can't get enough of me. Don't lie to yourself, sugar.

[Thimagryn]

And what if they don't want to play the Necromancer class? What if they don't like casters?

then they can wait for a melee summoner class.

[Alkizon]

And nevertheless, there is no direct reference to death magic in game, it's still physic+shadow(void) (so it always associated with these two schools in game), and everything could be much closer to theory that they last wrote.

Vampires are monoling of life energy by means of death magic with own and others living body (this is in some way close to part of s.priests fantasy), but necromancy with inanimate bodies. Strictly speaking, warlocks (which were planned to be just more powerful mages) have nothing to do with original necromancers (not WoW), because they use fel magic to make golems and invoke demons (who're not dead, so no necromancy), shamans (which are combat mages according to original idea of developers) who have more of "this original Necromancy" manipulate spirits and elements of nature and traditional necromancers draw their abilities from magic of oblivion and death (decay/blood/bone/whatever) linking their magical and vital force with inanimate objects/dead which is respects a lot concerns of DK class. Differences with generally accepted concepts are greatly blurred due to implementation of each of existing classes.

Question is complex because it doesn't have separate direct implementation in game, but is realized through related bypasses.

I have a friend who offered to put engineering, bard and corsair fantasy into separate chain mail class (s.hunters and combat-rogues of Legion with bards together in same class, so they won't damage those classes existing fantasy), but I still didn't understand implementation (it's very difficult when only common language is the one that both don't speak at good level). Something with chemistry, pyrotechnics, mechanics and physics (together with hooks, harpoons, nets, lasers and firearms). Theoretically, presence of musical talent doesn't conflict with engineering scientific abilities, probably, but I still have a lot questions. In any case, this is clearly in conflict with image of this class in the forum.

--- Edit ---
Have my version here.

ps. I don't know, I'm not a big fan of new classes theory considering what kind of mess classes became in Legion. Сurrent team doesn't look like really have distinguish between concepts of specialization and class.

[Teriz]

Ok. I stand corrected on those. But let me offer a counter-point: are you saying that the necromancer NPC's "Bone Armor", which is a damage absorb ability, is the same as the blood DK's "Bone Shield", that reduces damage taken? I'm asking because, if so, by that logic, you're also saying that the DK's "Icebound Fortitude", which reduces damage taken, is the same as the Mage's "Ice Barrier", that absorbs damage?

No, I'm not saying they're the same, I'm saying that Bone Spells are a major component of Necromancers, and I don't see DKs retaining them if you have a Necromancer class inclusion.

That's irrelevant. You can still make a healing spec out of it without interfering at all with the DK's Blood tanking spec.

Not really since Blood's tanking spec is mostly made up of life stealing abilities, and some of those abilities are ranged. It also doesn't help that abilities such as Vampiric aura also appears in WoW necromancers. That puts the entire DK blood spec at risk.

There's also the disease component. Most necromancer fans want the class to have a robust plague sub-theme. Are you saying that Blizzard wouldn't produce a Necromancer class with that sub-theme?

Hey, you're the one dismissing other possibilities since because "Blizzard hasn't done something like that before", while ignoring the fact Blizzard has been doing a lot of "things that they haven't done before" lately.

Again, Blizzard has a track record for this sort of thing. If we go by what occurred with Warlocks when DHs entered the game, the UH spec will have to be completely remade, Frost loses a few abilities, and Blood loses 30-45% of its abilities. Then we have to rebuild the DK class pretty much from the ground up with no necromancer abilities. Then we have to build the necromancer class without stepping on the toes of the new DK class, or the Warlock class.

When can go that route with Necromancers, or we could go with the Tinker, which takes nothing for any class, and provides Blizzard with far more creative freedom. Additionally, I think the fanbase would appreciate a class that's truly different from existing classes.

- - - Updated - - -

then they can wait for a melee summoner class.

Considering that UH is currently a melee summoner spec, that's pretty messed up. Blizzard would lose a considerable amount of subs if that occurred.

[Wildberry]

As I said, Oozes summoned by plagues.

And you've also repeatedly minimized talents, especially when they're underused. That's not just a talent, it's a PvP talent, and one that's competing with Necrotic Strike at that.

Plus, how many plagues has Unholy had removed?

And yes, a Putricide Necromancer spec would obviously only be able to summon Oozes as a passive from plagues.

Many of those "Mad Scientists" concepts are full of plague spreading abilities, which doesn't help separate them from DKs, whom have an extremely heavy plague/disease sub theme.

Not a problem considering we have multiple classes which draw from Fel, or the Light. How many bleeds do we have? Shadow Words and Warlock Curses are pretty similar too (especially with Shadow Words fitting the literal definition of a curse).

That said, it would appear that the most popular aspect of these Necromancer concepts are the "mad scientist" concepts. That would be an interesting class concept to push, and it wouldn't clash head on with the DK class. I would just recommend that proponents change all of those disease abilities into Chemical abilities (acid, liquid fire, liquid nitrogen, etc.).

It works better as a Necromancer spec, rather than standalone Class.

[Darktbs]

If I've invested years playing the DK class only to have it pulled from up under me, how is that NOT a middle finger to me?



Since the Necromancer class supposedly doesn't exist in WoW, they have nothing to be upset about. There's plenty of MMOs that have a Necromancer class they can sink their teeth into. There's no reason to come into this game and purposely screw up our classes.

oh screw you.I've mained a Dk for 90% of my wow life, only to see in Wod and Legion ALL of cool spells being removed from my Spec Frost.Some from the classe in general, army of the deads, iconic of the Dk?locked on Uh.death pact gone, gorefiend grasps?locked to blood.

But i want to play Frost.blizz give us the Middle finger and we had to Deal with it

So dont come with this"our class" because we are being screwed and no necromancer classe is Being added because of it.

[Teriz]

And you've also repeatedly minimized talents, especially when they're underused. That's not just a talent, it's a PvP talent, and one that's competing with Necrotic Strike at that.

I'm merely pointing out the precedent that DKs have such an ability. It is a theme that the developers could expand on in the future.

Additionally we shouldn't discount PvP talents. Those are part of the game, and PvPers are just as much players as PvEers are.

Plus, how many plagues has Unholy had removed?

Quite a few. However, they still have a decent amount. As do the other DK specs. Those diseases are integral parts of the rotation within those specs as well.

Not a problem considering we have multiple classes which draw from Fel, or the Light. How many bleeds do we have? Shadow Words and Warlock Curses are pretty similar too (especially with Shadow Words fitting the literal definition of a curse).

The Fel and the Light are pretty large schools of magic. Diseases are an ability set, and its an ability set that makes DKs unique. I don't think Blizzard would let two classes posses it.

Bleeds are a debuff. It would make sense for multiple classes to have it, since multiple classes attack with sharp things.

Shadow Word is merely the opposite of the positive Word spells. I mean you can argue that they're like curses, but honestly its just another example of the duality of Shadow and Light within the priest class.

It works better as a Necromancer spec, rather than standalone Class.

Frankly that spec is more interesting that the Necromancer class itself. It's also the only thing that's keeping the class concept from becoming nothing more than a ranged clone of the DK class.

[Wildberry]

I'm merely pointing out the precedent that DKs have such an ability. It is a theme that the developers could expand on in the future.

Sure they could, but we've seen no indication thus far that they're going to. I'm really not expecting a barely used PvP talent to find its way into the base of the spec.

Additionally we shouldn't discount PvP talents. Those are part of the game, and PvPers are just as much players as PvEers are.

Never claimed otherwise, I PvP far more than I PvE. That said, it is noteworthy that it's not only a talent, but a PvP talent. I mean, you yourself minimized the importance of talents. That was one of the odd times where you were actually completely right. Talents aren't part of the base kit, they're additions. PvP talents even more so.

And you also seem to put some importance on how often talents are chosen. Unh PvP Oozes are competing against Necrotic Strike? Guess what's always going to win?

Quite a few. However, they still have a decent amount. As do the other DK specs. Those diseases are integral parts of the rotation within those specs as well.

Each spec has one. Unholy arguably has three if you're counting Wandering Plague (underused PvP talent) and Festering Wounds (Which aren't really a proper Plague). Even if we're being generous and granting all of them, relative to WotLK, 3 isn't a "decent amount."

The Fel and the Light are pretty large schools of magic.

So is Necromantic Magic!

Diseases are an ability set, and its an ability set that makes DKs unique. I don't think Blizzard would let two classes posses it.

Is your only case for differentiating diseases from bleeds the fact that, thus far, only DKs have them?

Bleeds are a debuff. It would make sense for multiple classes to have it, since multiple classes attack with sharp things.

Diseases are also debuffs. I suppose that, once we have multiple classes who can sensibly use diseases, we'll see multiple classes with diseases?

Shadow Word is merely the opposite of the positive Word spells. I mean you can argue that they're like curses, but honestly its just another example of the duality of Shadow and Light within the priest class.

No, they quite literally fit the definition of a curse. Spin it however you like, you're not getting around that.

Frankly that spec is more interesting that the Necromancer class itself. It's also the only thing that's keeping the class concept from becoming nothing more than a ranged clone of the DK class.

Of course it's more interesting to you, considering you're enamored with anything remotely close to technology. There are plenty of other interesting concepts that could potentially be added that others might find interesting, and would most certainly separate the class from DKs.

[Ielenia]

No, I'm not saying they're the same, I'm saying that Bone Spells are a major component of Necromancers, and I don't see DKs retaining them if you have a Necromancer class inclusion.

You can either: a) not give a "bone spec" to necromancers; or b) just realize that classes can have the same type or magic/school just by virtue of making them play out differently. Examples: frost mages and frost dks. Fire mages and destruction warlocks. Holy priests and paladins, etc.

Not really since Blood's tanking spec is mostly made up of life stealing abilities, and some of those abilities are ranged.

I hope you realize you're basically saying the paladin's protection and retribution specs cannot exist because holy priests exist. Also, the DK heals himself. The necromancer with a healing blood spec would heal others.

There's also the disease component. Most necromancer fans want the class to have a robust plague sub-theme. Are you saying that Blizzard wouldn't produce a Necromancer class with that sub-theme?

I'm not saying they wouldn't. I'm saying they don't have to.

Again, Blizzard has a track record for this sort of thing. If we go by what occurred with Warlocks when DHs entered the game, the UH spec will have to be completely remade, Frost loses a few abilities, and Blood loses 30-45% of its abilities.

Frost doesn't have to lose any of its rotational abilities or important cooldowns, because the necromancer doesn't have to deal with frost magic. Blood doesn't have to lose anything, because a necromancer with a blood healing spec would not be tanking. The only spec really affected by that would be Unholy.

When can go that route with Necromancers, or we could go with the Tinker, which takes nothing for any class, and provides Blizzard with far more creative freedom. Additionally, I think the fanbase would appreciate a class that's truly different from existing classes.

I think the Bard is the "truly different" from other classes. Just my opinion.

[Teriz]

Sure they could, but we've seen no indication thus far that they're going to. I'm really not expecting a barely used PvP talent to find its way into the base of the spec.

Well actually we have. Minions spawning from plagues is a natural progression of spawning minions from auto attacks. Death Knights have had Bloodworms since WotLK, and obviously we've seen the emergence of abilities like Apocalypse and the Shambler, which were extremely popular this expansion. Can't really see Blizzard not pushing this concept more due to the reaction of the fanbase this time around.

Never claimed otherwise, I PvP far more than I PvE. That said, it is noteworthy that it's not only a talent, but a PvP talent. I mean, you yourself minimized the importance of talents. That was one of the odd times where you were actually completely right. Talents aren't part of the base kit, they're additions. PvP talents even more so.

And you also seem to put some importance on how often talents are chosen. Unh PvP Oozes are competing against Necrotic Strike? Guess what's always going to win?

See above.

Each spec has one. Unholy arguably has three if you're counting Wandering Plague (underused PvP talent) and Festering Wounds (Which aren't really a proper Plague). Even if we're being generous and granting all of them, relative to WotLK, 3 isn't a "decent amount."

Well we can't just count the diseases themselves, we also need to count the abilities and passives associated with the diseases. When all pulled together, that forms a fairly robust sub-theme in every spec.

So is Necromantic Magic!

Not really. I can't really think of any MMORPG that has two Necromantic classes.

Is your only case for differentiating diseases from bleeds the fact that, thus far, only DKs have them?

As I said before, DKs have a multitude of abilities and passives associated with diseases. Bleeds tend to only be debuffs from certain attacks.

No, they quite literally fit the definition of a curse. Spin it however you like, you're not getting around that.

Aren't Warlocks the only class that possess curses spells?

[Wildberry]

Well actually we have. Minions spawning from plagues is a natural progression of spawning minions from auto attacks. Death Knights have had Bloodworms since WotLK, and obviously we've seen the emergence of abilities like Apocalypse and the Shambler, which were extremely popular this expansion. Can't really see Blizzard not pushing this concept more due to the reaction of the fanbase this time around.

There's nothing there to indicate we'll be seeing a PvP talent baked into the base rotation.

Well we can't just count the diseases themselves, we also need to count the abilities and passives associated with the diseases. When all pulled together, that forms a fairly robust sub-theme in every spec.

That's dishonest list padding and you know it.

Not really. I can't really think of any MMORPG that has two Necromantic classes.

Good thing other MMORPGs don't have any bearing here, and canonically Necromantic magic is just as broad as Holy or Fel.

As I said before, DKs have a multitude of abilities and passives associated with diseases. Bleeds tend to only be debuffs from certain attacks.

So interacting with a debuff seperates it entirely and turns it into a class-defining trait?

Aren't Warlocks the only class that possess curses spells?

If you require "Curse of" to classify something as a curse, yes. If you're working off from the literal definition of a curse, no.

[Teriz]

You can either: a) not give a "bone spec" to necromancers; or b) just realize that classes can have the same type or magic/school just by virtue of making them play out differently. Examples: frost mages and frost dks. Fire mages and destruction warlocks. Holy priests and paladins, etc.

Bone spells aren't a school or magic, they are abilities within a school of magic. Bone magic is an ability within the Necromancy school of magic.

I hope you realize you're basically saying the paladin's protection and retribution specs cannot exist because holy priests exist. Also, the DK heals himself. The necromancer with a healing blood spec would heal others.

I never said a blood healing spec couldn't exist. I'm saying that Blood DKs would have to be completely changed to accommodate a blood spec within a new Necromancer class.

Also while DKs in the current expansion can't heal others, they did in the past, and they will again in BfA.

I'm not saying they wouldn't. I'm saying they don't have to.

As you can see from @Wildberry, and the Necromancer 2017 thread, Necromancer advocates want diseases to play a major role in a possible Necromancer class.

Frost doesn't have to lose any of its rotational abilities or important cooldowns, because the necromancer doesn't have to deal with frost magic.

Necromancer advocates want a Lich spec.

Blood doesn't have to lose anything, because a necromancer with a blood healing spec would not be tanking.

See above.

The only spec really affected by that would be Unholy.

And even if that were the case, that would be a massive change to a class.

I think the Bard is the "truly different" from other classes. Just my opinion.

Well it would be truly different because Bards don't really work in Warcraft.

- - - Updated - - -

There's nothing there to indicate we'll be seeing a PvP talent baked into the base rotation.

So you're saying its highly unlikely to see the DK get more "spawn minion from plagues" ability when we've already seen the expansion of "spawn minion from attacks" ability?

That's dishonest list padding and you know it.

How is that dishonest padding? In the Blood spec for example, Blood Boil, Death's Caress, and Crimson Plague all work through Blood Plague.

Good thing other MMORPGs don't have any bearing here, and canonically Necromantic magic is just as broad as Holy or Fel.

Well if its as broad as Holy or Fel, why can't anyone make a class concept that doesn't involve raising corpses, using diseases, or messing around with Blood?

So interacting with a debuff seperates it entirely and turns it into a class-defining trait?

See the above example with Blood Plague.

If you require "Curse of" to classify something as a curse, yes. If you're working off from the literal definition of a curse, no.

I'm working off the game having a set of abilities under the "Curse" magic type. Warlocks being the only class being able to perform curses is yet another example of how Blizzard keeps classes separated ability-wise. As you said, Spriests could have curses, but they don't, since they are the dominion of Warlocks.

[Ielenia]

Bone spells aren't a school or magic, they are abilities within a school of magic. Bone magic is an ability within the Necromancy school of magic.

You haven't addressed the question. Two classes can still have the same magic type/school without any issue by virtue of simply making them play out differently. WoW is full of examples of that.

I never said a blood healing spec couldn't exist. I'm saying that Blood DKs would have to be completely changed to accommodate a blood spec within a new Necromancer class.

And you're wrong. The Blood tanking DK spec would not have to be changed at all to fit a Blood healing Necromancer spec. Just like the Frost DPS Mage spec was not changed at all when the Frost DPS/Tanking DK spec was introduced. And remember: both use frost magic. According to you, that's not allowed.

Also while DKs in the current expansion can't heal others, they did in the past, and they will again in BfA.

Irrelevant, because 'healing others' is not the purpose of the spec. You're basically saying that the Paladin's Holy spec is redundant because ret paladins can heal others.

As you can see from @Wildberry, and the Necromancer 2017 thread, Necromancer advocates want diseases to play a major role in a possible Necromancer class.

That is completely irrelevant because players don't dictate what Blizzard does. If Blizzard wants to introduce a Necromancer class without giving them plagues, they'll do so.

Necromancer advocates want a Lich spec.

Ok? Give it to them. Both can co-exist. Unless you're implying that a lich is a plate-wearing, dual-wielding melee fighter with melee frost abilities and a small handful of ranged frost spells?

See above.

So you're saying that a Blood healer necromancer would be a plate-wearing melee fighter wielding a two-handed sword, mace or axe, have strength as its best stat, and have tank cooldowns?

And even if that were the case, that would be a massive change to a class.

Nowhere near the "massive change" you erroneously advocate would happen.

Well it would be truly different because Bards don't really work in Warcraft.

Except they do. The only reason you claim they don't is because you refuse to budge on your misconceived idea that Bards are support class and nothing else, when they could easily fill almost all class types save for tanking. They could be physical melee, spell melee, physical ranged, spell ranged, and healer. "But Bards buff others!" So? Buffs are coming back for BfA.

[rarhyx]

That is irrelevant because, lore-wise, your character is just not there. My Draenei Paladin was not present during the fight against C'Thun. My Human Death Knight was not present during the fight against Illidan back in Black Temple. My Worgen Druid was not present during the fight against the Lich King. My Night Elf Monk was not present during the fight against Deathwing. My Night Elf Demon Hunter was not present during the fight against Archimonde in the Hellfire Citadel.

Just like whatever class (and most races) added later on do not participate, lore-wise, in what happened prior to it becoming available to players, unless clearly specified by lore.

had a brainfart there, completly forgot about them
then artifacts and OH really don't matter and I bet after BfA, wod and leion will get the lvling treatment like all the other expaniosn zones got (i.e. you can lvl 90-110 in both wod and legion and not how it is atm)

[Wildberry]

So you're saying its highly unlikely to see the DK get more "spawn minion from plagues" ability when we've already seen the expansion of "spawn minion from attacks" ability?

I'm saying it's unlikely that we get the ooze carried over from a PvP talent.

How is that dishonest padding? In the Blood spec for example, Blood Boil, Death's Caress, and Crimson Plague all work through Blood Plague.

You're conflating "abilities that interact with and/or apply a plague" with "plagues." You said DKs had a "decent amount of plagues." Having a few abilities that interact with a single plague is not the same as having multiple plagues.

Well if its as broad as Holy or Fel, why can't anyone make a class concept that doesn't involve raising corpses, using diseases, or messing around with Blood?

Gee, I don't know. Perhaps the same reason classes that wield Light finding their holy shields overlapping, or classes that use Fel utilizing Fel fire and soul attacks in some fashion?

This isn't debatable, though. Chronicle clearly ranked Necromantic magic as being a major school of magic alongside Arcane, Fel, Light etc.

I'm working off the game having a set of abilities under the "Curse" magic type. Warlocks being the only class being able to perform curses is yet another example of how Blizzard keeps classes separated ability-wise. As you said, Spriests could have curses, but they don't, since they are the dominion of Warlocks.

So just to be clear, you want to completely ignore the dictionary definition of a curse and focus exclusively on how abilities are classified in-game? Okay, Hex is classified as a curse. You're wrong either way.

[Teriz]

You haven't addressed the question. Two classes can still have the same magic type/school without any issue by virtue of simply making them play out differently. WoW is full of examples of that.

Sure, but it's the themes and abilities within the class and spec that matters.

And you're wrong. The Blood tanking DK spec would not have to be changed at all to fit a Blood healing Necromancer spec.

Then you're quite naive.

Irrelevant, because 'healing others' is not the purpose of the spec. You're basically saying that the Paladin's Holy spec is redundant because ret paladins can heal others.

Tanking via healing is the purpose of the spec, placing various DK abilities at risk if there is a Blood healing spec. Additionally, Holy is a broad magic school. Necromancy is not.

That is completely irrelevant because players don't dictate what Blizzard does.

Actually its very relevant, since players desiring a Necromancer class is why we're having this conversation.

Ok? Give it to them. Both can co-exist. Unless you're implying that a lich is a plate-wearing, dual-wielding melee fighter with melee frost abilities and a small handful of ranged frost spells?

And doing that places Frost DK spells at risk, along with having three specs in the game that are frost-based.

Nowhere near the "massive change" you erroneously advocate would happen.

Actually it places it right in line with the massive change I was talking about.

Except they do. The only reason you claim they don't is because you refuse to budge on your misconceived idea that Bards are support class and nothing else, when they could easily fill almost all class types save for tanking. They could be physical melee, spell melee, physical ranged, spell ranged, and healer. "But Bards buff others!" So? Buffs are coming back for BfA.

Yes, for every class, making a buff-based class like Bards superfluous.

[Ielenia]

Sure, but it's the themes and abilities within the class and spec that matters.

Theme: Death Knight - blood tanking; Necromancer - blood healing. Different themes.
Abilities: Death Knight - melee and tanking cooldowns; Necromancer - ranged healing cooldowns. Different ability types.

Then you're quite naive.

No, you're just dishonest. Because there is nothing in the DK Blood tanking tree that a Necromancer with a blood healing spec would need. And even if there were to be any similar abilities, I'll just point you at the Evasion/Blur "issue".

Tanking via healing is the purpose of the spec, placing various DK abilities at risk if there is a Blood healing spec.

Tanking via self-healing. That's a huge difference from tanking via healing. "Tanking via healing" was how a paladin would tank the Onyxia adds back in vanilla: the paladin would pop Righteous Fury and begin healing himself and others non-stop to get healing aggro from the whelps.

Additionally, Holy is a broad magic school. Necromancy is not.

Oh? Is it, now? Elaborate, please? How is Holy a "broad magic school" and necromancy isn't?

And doing that places Frost DK spells at risk,

No, it doesn't. The implementation of the DK's frost spec did not affect the Frost mage spec any. And again: the necromancer's lich spec would be a ranged cloth-wearing spellcaster, not a plate-wearing melee fighter. So the frost DK's abilities are not in any danger.

along with having three specs in the game that are frost-based.

Affliction warlock, demonology warlock, shadow priest: three shadow-based specs. Holy priest, holy paladin, protection paladin, retribution paladin: four holy-based specs.

Actually it places it right in line with the massive change I was talking about.

No, it doesn't, because you're also advocating that the blood and frost specs would be severely altered as well. And they wouldn't.

Yes, for every class, making a buff-based class like Bards superfluous.

BARDS WOULD NOT BE A BUFF-BASED CLASS IN WORLD OF WARCRAFT.

It's really painfully dishonest how you keep ignoring every single time others describe how the Bard can easily work within WoW's 'holy trinity'.

[Teriz]

I'm saying it's unlikely that we get the ooze carried over from a PvP talent.

Well I suppose we'll know one way or another soon enough.

You're conflating "abilities that interact with and/or apply a plague" with "plagues." You said DKs had a "decent amount of plagues." Having a few abilities that interact with a single plague is not the same as having multiple plagues.

I would consider a class that contains diseases in all of its specs, and a few in their talents to be a class with a decent amount of plagues.

Gee, I don't know. Perhaps the same reason classes that wield Light finding their holy shields overlapping, or classes that use Fel utilizing Fel fire and soul attacks in some fashion?

Yet Holy can facilitate two classes. I have yet to see two Necromancer classes in any game.

This isn't debatable, though. Chronicle clearly ranked Necromantic magic as being a major school of magic alongside Arcane, Fel, Light etc.

LoL! Okay then, I guess since Chronicle said it, we can easily apply that to the classes!

So just to be clear, you want to completely ignore the dictionary definition of a curse and focus exclusively on how abilities are classified in-game? Okay, Hex is classified as a curse. You're wrong either way.

Oh well good. I was wondering one way or the other.

- - - Updated - - -

Theme: Death Knight - blood tanking; Necromancer - blood healing. Different themes.
Abilities: Death Knight - melee and tanking cooldowns; Necromancer - ranged healing cooldowns. Different ability types.

So you're saying that DK has no blood healing abilities?

BTW, this is assuming that it would be a healing spec. It could very well be a DPS spec.

No, you're just dishonest. Because there is nothing in the DK Blood tanking tree that a Necromancer with a blood healing spec would need. And even if there were to be any similar abilities, I'll just point you at the Evasion/Blur "issue".

One dodge ability compared to multiple Blood abilities?

[quote]Tanking via self-healing. That's a huge difference from tanking via healing. "Tanking via healing" was how a paladin would tank the Onyxia adds back in vanilla: the paladin would pop Righteous Fury and begin healing himself and others non-stop to get healing aggro from the whelps.

No, it doesn't. The implementation of the DK's frost spec did not affect the Frost mage spec any. And again: the necromancer's lich spec would be a ranged cloth-wearing spellcaster, not a plate-wearing melee fighter. So the frost DK's abilities are not in any danger.

Probably because it was Frost spec with melee as opposed to another Frost ranged spec. That said, the issue is the multitude of ranged frost spells alongside necromancer abilities.

Affliction warlock, demonology warlock, shadow priest: three shadow-based specs. Holy priest, holy paladin, protection paladin, retribution paladin: four holy-based specs.

Yeah, that's not the same thing.

No, it doesn't, because you're also advocating that the blood and frost specs would be severely altered as well. And they wouldn't.

There's that naivety again.

BARDS WOULD NOT BE A BUFF-BASED CLASS IN WORLD OF WARCRAFT.

I'm afraid they would be. I don't know why you just can't accept that.

It's really painfully dishonest how you keep ignoring every single time others describe how the Bard can easily work within WoW's 'holy trinity'.

Easily? I have yet to see a Bard class thread on this forum (except for the one I created 4 years ago).

There's a reason for that btw.

[Thimagryn]

Considering that UH is currently a melee summoner spec, that's pretty messed up. Blizzard would lose a considerable amount of subs if that occurred.

The game has to move forward, otherwise they can wait till Wrath+ Classic to play what they want.

[Ielenia]

So you're saying that DK has no blood healing abilities?

They have self-healing abilities. They don't heal others. DKs don't stand at range casing blood spells over and over to heal the group.

BTW, this is assuming that it would be a healing spec. It could very well be a DPS spec.

It could very well be. But it would change nothing.

One dodge ability compared to multiple Blood abilities?

An example. Do you know what the word "example" means?

Probably because it was Frost spec with melee as opposed to another Frost ranged spec. That said, the issue is the multitude of ranged frost spells alongside necromancer abilities.

Jesus Christ, the hypocrisy and double-standard is painful! So two frost specs can co-exist because one is melee and the other is ranged, but two blood specs cannot co-exist even if one is melee and the other is ranged, just like the 'frost' example?

Yeah, that's not the same thing.

Nor would DK blood tanking and the Necromancer blood healing/DPS.

I'm afraid they would be. I don't know why you just can't accept that.

Because I'm not naive, like you claim. Because I'm not close-minded, like you are. Because I can adapt concepts to work within a different set of rules. Once again: Bards easily fit the "holy trinity": they could have a healing spec based on music, a spellcasting dps based off spell-songs, a physical ranged dps with archery, and/or a physical melee spec with swordplay.

Easily? I have yet to see a Bard class thread on this forum.

There's a reason for that btw.

Correlation does not imply causation. Also, thanks for at least admitting you have never bothered to actually read anything about Bards that I posted in this forum.