Page 18 of 41 FirstFirst ...
8
16
17
18
19
20
28
... LastLast
  1. #341
    Merely a Setback Teriz's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Soul of Azeroth
    Posts
    29,821
    Quote Originally Posted by Ielenia View Post
    None of that counters what I said: there is no such thing as "core of X magic".
    So you're saying that Totems aren't a core aspect of Shamanistic magic, or that shapeshifting isn't a core attribute of Druidic magic?

    And I'll ask again: why should we? Why can't we make up a lore character on the spot?
    Because such a lore character wouldn't have a strong foundation in the game or with the fanbase. We knew Arthas, Chen, and Illidan for a long time before they were attached to WoW classes.

    It's not semantic nonsense. You're saying it's "semantic nonsense" when I tell you not to call the sidewalk "street".
    It's semantic nonsense because you're ignoring the fact that there are necromancer abilities in the Death Knight class. That isn't ideas outside or related to the necromancer concept, that IS the necromancer concept.

    Except it means exactly that. If you're trying to shoot a target, and you hit "everywhere surrounding the target", it means you did not hit the target. Blizzard never said they "merged the necromancer and death knight concepts into one".
    See above and stop ignoring the facts.


    They're not the same thing, though. A necromancer does not fit an afterlife theme. And the necromancer does not fit the story being told, either.
    And yet we've run into several necromancers and death-using characters in this "afterlife" themed expansion. Heck, there's currently a scourge invasion occurring on Azeroth. Do you feel that necromancers wouldn't fit in that scenario either?

    I love the double-standards, here: "you can't say what a necromancer class is or isn't about. Only I can do that!" Because that is what you have done not only in this entire thread, but in any thread where people discuss necromancers.
    All I've ever said is that the necromancer class in WoW already exists, and it is the Death Knight class.

    None of that is "expanding necromancer themes" considering the DK already had those abilities to begin with.
    Spreading those abilities into ALL of the DK specs is an expansion of Necromancer themes.

    Runes. As in, more runemaster stuff.
    Sacrificial Pact isn't a rune.


    Actually, according to WoW Census from 2020, there are almost fifty percent more goblin players than gnome players. Yes, it's inaccurate data, but it's the only data we have, and it contradicts your claim. Meanwhile, you have not shown any evidence for your claim.
    Fair enough. I guess I got their numbers mixed up.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Triceron View Post
    Yes but that is like saying a Death Knight is a Spellcaster because they use magic, or a Healer because they can heal themselves.
    Incorrect. I call them necromancers because necromancy is all they do.

    You're just ignoring the archetype and broadly generalizing the DK on the basis of their theme and actions, while I am talking about their actual class fantasy and archetype in the game.
    Their archetype in the game is irrelevant. What is relevant is their place in the class lineup. That place is as the class that can utilize necromancy. They are the necromancer class in WoW, which hinders the creation of another class that would utilize similar abilities.

  2. #342
    I am Murloc! Wangming's Avatar
    3+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2019
    Location
    Not Azeroth
    Posts
    5,389
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post


    It's semantic nonsense because you're ignoring the fact that there are necromancer abilities in the Death Knight class. That isn't ideas outside or related to the necromancer concept, that IS the necromancer concept.

    Can I ask what you have a degree in? Because I am an actual linguist and I love arguing about what is semantic nonsense and what is.

  3. #343
    Quote Originally Posted by Wangming View Post
    Can I ask what you have a degree in? Because I am an actual linguist and I love arguing about what is semantic nonsense and what is.
    Likely being used in the context of "semantics being used for the sake of sophistry.

  4. #344
    I like the concept. Really.
    BUT Necromancers are basically the ulimate evil in wow lore.

    Death Knights are only acepted because they have been under mind control and been freed.
    Necromancer activly seek out that what destroyed half the world for their own gain and brought on this whole mess in the first place.
    Warlocks have the same problem, but the fear of what they do is not that ingrained in the population.

  5. #345
    I am Murloc! Wangming's Avatar
    3+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2019
    Location
    Not Azeroth
    Posts
    5,389
    Quote Originally Posted by Shadowferal View Post
    Likely being used in the context of "semantics being used for the sake of sophistry.
    I KNOW what semantics or semantic nonsense is. It is my job to know. But I have a feeling Teriz is just using it as a buzz word to support his agenda.

    Necromancer can be a lot of different things. It can be an occupation (same way as you can be a hunter or a brewmaster by trade without that being your class), a theme, an archetype or a class.

    In fact this is the same argument Tinker fans use to try to justify tinkers despite marksmanship hunters and engineers already existing.

  6. #346
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    Incorrect. I call them necromancers because necromancy is all they do.
    Not quite. They kill with swords. That's not Necromancy.

    It's like if you said 'Holy magic is all a Paladin does' then no, that's not true. They also fight with weapons and tank with big honkin' shields.

    You can call the Death Knight a Necromantic Warrior or Necromantic Antipaladin, which is apt to the description. They are an Antipaladin who uses Necromancy. But an Armored Necromancer is a completely different archetype. That is like a Diablo 2 Necromancer wearing full plate armor, or Sauron in Lord of the Rings.

    Their archetype in the game is irrelevant. What is relevant is their place in the class lineup. That place is as the class that can utilize necromancy. They are the necromancer class in WoW, which hinders the creation of another class that would utilize similar abilities.
    You mean like how Priests use Holy magic to heal, which hinders the addition of Paladins who can also use Holy magic to heal?

    See, your conclusion only works if classes were mutually exclusive and could not have any overlap whatsoever. Blizzard has shown us there is no restriction for that. Both Mages and Shamans make use of Elemental Summons. Where is the hindrance?

    In gameplay terms, all that needs to be done is have a line drawn for what type of Undead summons a DK and Necromancer would use, and how they use them differently. And this whole thread provides a concept that does just that.

    Blood Golems, Bone Golems, Oozes, Wraiths, pest swarms, spores; there's plenty that this concept provides that supports a Necromancer archetype as well as not used by a Necromantic Antipaladin archetype.
    Last edited by Triceron; 2021-03-03 at 05:12 PM.

  7. #347
    Quote Originally Posted by Triceron View Post
    And Necromancers are a hated class, just as Warlocks are. Forsaken and Warlocks, both hated, both playable.

    What makes you think being hated or morally wrong makes it impossible to be playable?

    Blizzard making the reviled Death Knights playable wasn't big enough of a hint for you?
    Your never going to convince anyone that necromancer is a plausable class, deathknights at least didnt have a choice and after they regained freewill the factions had no choice but to let them in or you would have a massive faction of powerful soldiers doing whatever they want, necromancers made the choice to do what they do, necromancers are only evil plain and simple.

    Quote Originally Posted by Arafal View Post
    snip
    There was only 2 cosmic forces that created the WoW universe, light and the void energies so everything is made up from those 2 forces, its pretty simple to follow and even the chronicles lacks any detail on anything in WoW.

    Quote Originally Posted by Katchii View Post
    Where's your source that says it comes easily?



    Death Knights are a thing.



    Death Knights are still Death Knights, they're just not under the direct control of the Lich King. They're still cursed people who literally feed off death, they still practice necromancy, they're still only tolerated within their faction.

    You're applying a double standard to Necromancers. I mean, Death Knights are literally armored melee Necromancers. Why would a cloth wearing caster necromancer get completely different treatment than armored melee ones?
    Considering every single warlock was once a mage that proves it comes easy to them, there is no redeeming factor in a necromancer, most problems in azeroth come from necromancers.
    Last edited by kenn9530; 2021-03-03 at 05:26 PM.
    STAR-J4R9-YYK4 use this for 5000 credits in star citizen

  8. #348
    Quote Originally Posted by kenn9530 View Post
    Your never going to convince anyone that necromancer is a plausable class, deathknights at least didnt have a choice and after they regained freewill the factions had no choice but to let them in or you would have a massive faction of powerful soldiers doing whatever they want, necromancers made the choice to do what they do, necromancers are only evil plain and simple.
    Forsaken can also be considered amoral, and are still playable. They supported Sylvanas throughout her tyranny and aided her in the Wrathgate incident. They openly eat corpses as a part of their racial.

    I'd never be able to convince you that Forsaken are playable either, because obviously you have a penchant for pushing your beliefs that 'evildoers' shouldn't be playable rather than discuss with reason.

    Again, you have no problems with using magic to intercept souls, you have no problems with animating the dead with magic, and your argument boiled down to it all being about desecrating corpses. And when it comes to a Race within the Horde that does so, or an entire faction of Death Knights that do this, you excuse it away because 'they're already hated so might as well'. When it comes to Necromancers you're all 'NO WAY! IMPLAUSIBLE!'

    That's a double standard.
    Last edited by Triceron; 2021-03-03 at 05:21 PM.

  9. #349
    The Unstoppable Force Ielenia's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Brazil
    Posts
    21,877
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    So you're saying that Totems aren't a core aspect of Shamanistic magic, or that shapeshifting isn't a core attribute of Druidic magic?
    Funny how you're both dead wrong in both accounts. Totems are not a "core aspect of shamanistic magic" in the least. They're just a focus through which spells could be cast, like runes for death knights. And even that: shamans don't use much totems. My shaman doesn't need a totem to cast: lightning bolt, earthquake, flame shock, earth shock, healing wave, earth/fire elemental, healing rain, lava burst, weapon enchantments, ghost wolf, etc. So, no, totems are not a "core aspect" of shamanistic magic. Likewise, I can show you a long list of spells that do NOT depend on shapeshifting on the druid. Shapeshifting and druidic magic are separate things.

    Because such a lore character wouldn't have a strong foundation in the game or with the fanbase.
    We knew little about Chen and the character didn't have a "strong foundation" either.

    It's semantic nonsense because you're ignoring the fact that there are necromancer abilities in the Death Knight class.
    There are necromancy abilities in the death knight class. Not "necromancer abilities". And I'm ignoring that just like you're ignoring you have "paladin abilities" in the priest class, but we still have paladins.

    That isn't ideas outside or related to the necromancer concept, that IS the necromancer concept.
    No, it's not. Demonstrably so. And demonstrated several times already.

    See above and stop ignoring the facts.
    Take your own advice, first. Then we'll talk.

    And yet we've run into several necromancers and death-using characters in this "afterlife" themed expansion.
    And we've run into several tinkers and tech-using characters in not just BfA, but almost every expansion. By that logic, tinkers are never happening.

    All I've ever said is that the necromancer class in WoW already exists, and it is the Death Knight class.
    Again: "you can't say what a necromancer class is or isn't about. Only I can do that!" Once again you demonstrate heavy double-standards.

    Spreading those abilities into ALL of the DK specs is an expansion of Necromancer themes.
    It's not. It's really not. That's like saying "hey, you see this class that can use these abilities? Well, it can use its abilities." This is another instance of your double-standards because you love to say "specs don't matter, the class does."

    Sacrificial Pact isn't a rune.
    No, but it's just the old version of "Death Pact" only with a damage component. I mean, this was literally how "Death Pact" worked in the past: "sacrifice an undead minion, healing the death knight for 25% of their health."

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by kenn9530 View Post
    Your never going to convince anyone that necromancer is a plausable class, deathknights at least didnt have a choice and after they regained freewill the factions had no choice but to let them in or you would have a massive faction of powerful soldiers doing whatever they want, necromancers made the choice to do what they do, necromancers are only evil plain and simple.
    Death knights also have the "free will" to not desecrate the dead and violate their corpses. But they still do it. On a near constant basis. Hell, during Legion, we raised more death knights, and then now in Shadowlands, Bolvar raised even more death knights.

    Which tanks your entire argument against necromancers "because they desecrate the body of the dead."
    Last edited by Ielenia; 2021-03-03 at 05:39 PM.
    "Torturing someone is not an evil thing to do if it is done for good reasons" by Varodoc
    "You sit in OG/SW waiting on a Mythic+ queue" by Altmer <- Oh, the pearls in this forum...
    "They sort of did this Dragonriding, which ushered in the Dracthyr race." by Teriz <- the BS some people reach for their narratives...

  10. #350
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    So you're saying that Totems aren't a core aspect of Shamanistic magic, or that shapeshifting isn't a core attribute of Druidic magic?



    Because such a lore character wouldn't have a strong foundation in the game or with the fanbase. We knew Arthas, Chen, and Illidan for a long time before they were attached to WoW classes.



    It's semantic nonsense because you're ignoring the fact that there are necromancer abilities in the Death Knight class. That isn't ideas outside or related to the necromancer concept, that IS the necromancer concept.



    See above and stop ignoring the facts.




    And yet we've run into several necromancers and death-using characters in this "afterlife" themed expansion. Heck, there's currently a scourge invasion occurring on Azeroth. Do you feel that necromancers wouldn't fit in that scenario either?



    All I've ever said is that the necromancer class in WoW already exists, and it is the Death Knight class.



    Spreading those abilities into ALL of the DK specs is an expansion of Necromancer themes.



    Sacrificial Pact isn't a rune.




    Fair enough. I guess I got their numbers mixed up.

    - - - Updated - - -



    Incorrect. I call them necromancers because necromancy is all they do.



    Their archetype in the game is irrelevant. What is relevant is their place in the class lineup. That place is as the class that can utilize necromancy. They are the necromancer class in WoW, which hinders the creation of another class that would utilize similar abilities.
    For one, death knights MOSTLY use weapons to defeat their foes. They'll sprinkle in powers but it's their rune blades that do most of the work. Two, your comparison would be like saying there's no need for priests since we already have paladins. There would be no need demon hunters since we already have warlocks. No need for monk when we already have warrior.

    See how ridiculous the comparison is? Why not come up with an ACTUAL argument like how necromancers are pretty much one of the most evil practitioners in the lore instead of saying asinine like necromancers can't happen since death knights are capable of replicating some of necromancer's effects?

  11. #351
    The Insane Raetary's Avatar
    7+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Location
    Base Camp
    Posts
    19,046
    Quote Originally Posted by kenn9530 View Post
    There was only 2 cosmic forces that created the WoW universe
    Ok? That takes away from the other forces, because?

    There are 6 cosmic forces laddy, you not liking that doesn't make it non-canon.


    Formerly known as Arafal

  12. #352
    Quote Originally Posted by Triceron View Post
    Forsaken can also be considered amoral, and are still playable. They supported Sylvanas throughout her tyranny and aided her in the Wrathgate incident. They openly eat corpses as a part of their racial.

    I'd never be able to convince you that Forsaken are playable either, because obviously you have a penchant for pushing your beliefs that 'evildoers' shouldn't be playable rather than discuss with reason.

    Again, you have no problems with using magic to intercept souls, you have no problems with animating the dead with magic, and your argument boiled down to it all being about desecrating corpses. And when it comes to a Race within the Horde that does so, or an entire faction of Death Knights that do this, you excuse it away because 'they're already hated so might as well'. When it comes to Necromancers you're all 'NO WAY! IMPLAUSIBLE!'

    That's a double standard.
    There are plenty of Forsaken that DIDN'T agree with Sylvanas and rebelled against her. Necromancers literally have absolutely no redeeming qualities and every necromancer in lore has been some shade of evil.

  13. #353
    Merely a Setback Teriz's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Soul of Azeroth
    Posts
    29,821
    Quote Originally Posted by Wangming View Post
    I KNOW what semantics or semantic nonsense is. It is my job to know. But I have a feeling Teriz is just using it as a buzz word to support his agenda.

    Necromancer can be a lot of different things. It can be an occupation (same way as you can be a hunter or a brewmaster by trade without that being your class), a theme, an archetype or a class.
    And herein lies the problem with this discussion.

    We are talking about classes. Not lore, not "jobs", not what you imagine the necromancer can be based on JRGPS, not what the necromancer could potentially be, but the actual class system within the game and what that class system has been consistently based upon.

    Semantic nonsense is when you say "The developer stated that they took ideas surrounding the Necromancer and implemented them into the Death Knight class. That literally means the surrounding ideas, not the idea itself!" That is semantic nonsense because that isn't what "surrounding" means in that context, and the person pushing that nonsense knows it.

    In fact this is the same argument Tinker fans use to try to justify tinkers despite marksmanship hunters and engineers already existing.
    What justifies Tinkers is that Hunters and Engineers don't possess the Tinker's ability set from WC3 or HotS. Every WoW class is based around those fundamental abilities, and to just bring this point back around; The Death Knight class contains the majority of the Necromancer unit's WC3 abilities.

    Again, herein lies the problem; The majority of people in this discussion simply don't understand or don't want to accept how WoW classes are structured.

  14. #354
    Quote Originally Posted by Triceron View Post
    Forsaken can also be considered amoral, and are still playable. They supported Sylvanas throughout her tyranny and aided her in the Wrathgate incident. They openly eat corpses as a part of their racial.

    I'd never be able to convince you that Forsaken are playable either, because obviously you have a penchant for pushing your beliefs that 'evildoers' shouldn't be playable rather than discuss with reason.

    Again, you have no problems with using magic to intercept souls, you have no problems with animating the dead with magic, and your argument boiled down to it all being about desecrating corpses. And when it comes to a Race within the Horde that does so, or an entire faction of Death Knights that do this, you excuse it away because 'they're already hated so might as well'. When it comes to Necromancers you're all 'NO WAY! IMPLAUSIBLE!'

    That's a double standard.
    Its up to the user to choose to eat a corpse, they could use it on beasts but that racial barely gets used as it is sinces its pretty useless, so its not the class its the user that makes the choice since they dont have to eat corpses.

    Destroying an enemy soul is also no problem, its not destroying it and using it for necromancer purposes thats an issue, warlocks just use souls from the twisting nether whenever they want so no issues with moral souls at all, and again as a deathknight you dont need to use your necromatic powers as its the player that chooses to do so.

    It wouldnt even be worth implementing a necromancer class because the whole point in it is having lots of undead minions and in WoW you would be lucky to have more than one active so its not really a necromancer it would be a warlock with different skill visuals, new classes are not needed in WoW.
    STAR-J4R9-YYK4 use this for 5000 credits in star citizen

  15. #355
    Quote Originally Posted by VinceVega View Post
    I like the concept. Really.
    BUT Necromancers are basically the ulimate evil in wow lore.

    Death Knights are only acepted because they have been under mind control and been freed.
    Necromancer activly seek out that what destroyed half the world for their own gain and brought on this whole mess in the first place.
    Warlocks have the same problem, but the fear of what they do is not that ingrained in the population.
    death knights, while being members of the alliance/horde, actively practice necromancy. The act of necromancy is not mutually exclusive with wanting to destroy half the world. That’s like saying warlocks cant be playable because gul’dan wanted to conquer the world lol

  16. #356
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    And herein lies the problem with this discussion.

    We are talking about classes. Not lore, not "jobs", not what you imagine the necromancer can be based on JRGPS, not what the necromancer could potentially be, but the actual class system within the game and what that class system has been consistently based upon.

    Semantic nonsense is when you say "The developer stated that they took ideas surrounding the Necromancer and implemented them into the Death Knight class. That literally means the surrounding ideas, not the idea itself!" That is semantic nonsense because that isn't what "surrounding" means in that context, and the person pushing that nonsense knows it.



    What justifies Tinkers is that Hunters and Engineers don't possess the Tinker's ability set from WC3 or HotS. Every WoW class is based around those fundamental abilities, and to just bring this point back around; The Death Knight class contains the majority of the Necromancer unit's WC3 abilities.

    Again, herein lies the problem; The majority of people in this discussion simply don't understand or don't want to accept how WoW classes are structured.
    The tinker abilities from WC3 aren't canon and don't exist in WoW. If they did, we would have seen at least ONE NPC using them. We haven't and the game has been around for 16 years. Those abilities simply don't exist. It doesn't fucking matter if the HotS abilities aren't in game or whatever because it's not a warcraft game. You are literally arguing semantics while trying to claim you're not using semantics. It'd be funny if it wasn't the base of every single point you try to make.

  17. #357
    Quote Originally Posted by Arafal View Post
    Ok? That takes away from the other forces, because?

    There are 6 cosmic forces laddy, you not liking that doesn't make it non-canon.
    Because in the beginning there is only 2 cosmic forces that created everything, everything else didnt exist until after the WoW big bang so the 6 you think are cosmic forces really are not.

    The chronicles barely give any information as it is, pretty much most of WoW lore is made up into theories of what it actually is.
    Last edited by kenn9530; 2021-03-03 at 05:46 PM.
    STAR-J4R9-YYK4 use this for 5000 credits in star citizen

  18. #358
    The Unstoppable Force Ielenia's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Brazil
    Posts
    21,877
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    And herein lies the problem with this discussion.

    We are talking about classes. Not lore, not "jobs", not what you imagine the necromancer can be based on JRGPS, not what the necromancer could potentially be, but the actual class system within the game and what that class system has been consistently based upon.
    Funny how he never mentioned japanese RPGs. You've injected that into what he said. The problem here is that you're conflating the "archetype" of the necromancer (i.e. the frail, robed spellcaster that depends on their undead minions to keep their foes at bay) with your own "personal definition" of necromancer (i.e. casts necromantic magic, regardless of everything else it can or cannot do).
    "Torturing someone is not an evil thing to do if it is done for good reasons" by Varodoc
    "You sit in OG/SW waiting on a Mythic+ queue" by Altmer <- Oh, the pearls in this forum...
    "They sort of did this Dragonriding, which ushered in the Dracthyr race." by Teriz <- the BS some people reach for their narratives...

  19. #359
    Herald of the Titans TigTone's Avatar
    3+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2019
    Location
    Westfall
    Posts
    2,747
    Why do people still respond to Teriz?

    He will never accept the possibility of a range spell caster necromancer class.

    In his mind is it not possible for blizzard to create such a class.

    Teriz logic is he lacks the creativity to imagine a spell caster necromancer class so therefore the same must apply to Blizzard employees.

    Also as long as DK exist there is no need for necromancer because it fits his minds belief of what a necromancer is.

    It is like arguing with a Flat earth believer.

    It’s a waste of time and Teriz will always derail necromancer threads created by necromancer fans.

    Ignore him and let the speculations/creativity continue.

  20. #360
    Merely a Setback Teriz's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Soul of Azeroth
    Posts
    29,821
    Quote Originally Posted by Triceron View Post
    Not quite. They kill with swords. That's not Necromancy.
    So when my DK's Ghoul mauls someone to death, or when it's Blood Plague or Death and Decay ticks them to death that's my sword and not my necromancy at work?

    It's like if you said 'Holy magic is all a Paladin does' then no, that's not true. They also fight with weapons and tank with big honkin' shields.

    You can call the Death Knight a Necromantic Warrior or Necromantic Antipaladin, which is apt to the description. They are an Antipaladin who uses Necromancy. But an Armored Necromancer is a completely different archetype. That is like a Diablo 2 Necromancer wearing full plate armor, or Sauron in Lord of the Rings.
    More semantics... Wonderful.

    Howabout we just call the DK what it is; a Necromancer. It's entire ability set is based on necromancy.

    You mean like how Priests use Holy magic to heal, which hinders the addition of Paladins who can also use Holy magic to heal?
    Healing with holy magic isn't the sole purpose of the Paladin class. For that matter, healing with holy magic isn't the sole purpose of the Priest class either.

    The sole purpose for a Necromancer class is to use necromancy. DKs already do that.

    See, your conclusion only works if classes were mutually exclusive and could not have any overlap whatsoever. Blizzard has shown us there is no restriction for that. Both Mages and Shamans make use of Elemental Summons. Where is the hindrance?
    Mages uses frost, fire, and arcane magic. Shaman use elemental magic. There is no hinderance because they are fundamentally different classes. The difference being pushed for a necromancer and a DK is no different than an elemental shaman and an enhancement shaman.

    In gameplay terms, all that needs to be done is have a line drawn for what type of Undead summons a DK and Necromancer would use, and how they use them differently. And this whole thread provides a concept that does just that.

    Blood Golems, Bone Golems, Oozes, Wraiths, pest swarms, spores; there's plenty that this concept provides that supports a Necromancer archetype as well as not used by a Necromantic Antipaladin archetype.
    Yeah, the problem is none of that is out of place in the DK class. In fact, all of that could easily go into any DK spec and no one would bat an eyelash. In fact, DKs have had Golems, Oozes and Pest swarms in the past.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •