Page 40 of 41 FirstFirst ...
30
38
39
40
41
LastLast
  1. #781
    The Insane Ielenia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Brazil
    Posts
    16,628
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    The simple reality is that you don't need to rework a profession to make room for a class. The two never intersect with each other on any level, and you can be a class and a profession at the same time.
    Do you have no problem in having two concepts that, while gameplay-wise are different, in the lore they're the exact same thing?

    Do you have no problem in having a class that specializes in creating mechs, robots, guns, bombs, rockets, teleporters, etc... but does not know how to create mechs, robots, guns, bombs, rockets, teleporters, etc?

    Think about it: how can a tinker be a tech class, if it doesn't know technology, i.e., the engineering profession? It makes absolutely zero sense from a lore perspective. Should tinker players be forced to have one of their two profession choices be locked to engineering? Or what?
    I did a Necromancer thing. Check it out! All feedback welcome!
    I also did a Bard thing! Questions, comments and ideas, all welcome!

  2. #782
    The Insane Teriz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Undermine
    Posts
    19,156
    Quote Originally Posted by Ielenia View Post
    Do you have no problem in having two concepts that, while gameplay-wise are different, in the lore they're the exact same thing?

    Do you have no problem in having a class that specializes in creating mechs, robots, guns, bombs, rockets, teleporters, etc... but does not know how to create mechs, robots, guns, bombs, rockets, teleporters, etc?
    If a concept is a class and another concept is a profession, then they wouldn't be the exact same thing in lore, and obviously the class concept wouldn't need knowledge of the profession in order to function.


    Think about it: how can a tinker be a tech class, if it doesn't know technology, i.e., the engineering profession? It makes absolutely zero sense from a lore perspective. Should tinker players be forced to have one of their two profession choices be locked to engineering? Or what?
    The same way Rogues can create Crimson Vials and Monks can create Elixirs without the Alchemy profession, Hunters could create Grenades, Bombs, and Nets without Engineering and Tailoring, and Monks can create Brews and Teas without the Cooking profession.
    Last edited by Teriz; 2021-09-20 at 10:56 AM.

  3. #783
    The Insane Ielenia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Brazil
    Posts
    16,628
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    If a concept is a class and another concept is a profession, then they wouldn't be the exact same thing in lore, and obviously the class concept wouldn't need knowledge of the profession in order to function.
    Yes. Yes, they would. And it's demonstrated right now in the game: we have adventuring tinkers and vendor tinkers, as well as adventuring engineers and vendor engineers.

    Not to mention: both tinkers and engineers "create mechs, guns, bombs, rockets, teleporters, etc...".

    The same way Rogues can create Crimson Vials and Monks can create Elixirs without the Alchemy profession, Hunters could create Grenades, Bombs, and Nets without Engineering and Tailoring, and Monks can create Brews and Teas without the Cooking profession.
    Not the same thing. The rogue class is not fundamentally based around the creation of "crimson vials", the monk class is not fundamentally based around the creation of "elixirs", the hunter class is not fundamentally based around the creation of "grenades, bombs and nets" like the tinker class is fundamentally based around the creation of technology gadgets.

    The core of the tinker concept, unlike your examples, is wholly centered around technology. You can know a little bit about a "profession" without delving deeply into the full thing. The overlap is rather minimal between your example classes and your example professions. One is not dependent on the other to be able to exist. Whereas tinkers, without the full knowledge about engineering, about how to build and use mechs, rockets, and other technology gadgets, simply cannot exist.

    Remove "crimson vials" from rogues, "elixirs" from monks and "grenades, bombs and nets" from hunters and what do we get? We still have rogues, monks and hunters. Remove "technology" from tinkers... what do we get?
    I did a Necromancer thing. Check it out! All feedback welcome!
    I also did a Bard thing! Questions, comments and ideas, all welcome!

  4. #784
    The Insane Teriz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Undermine
    Posts
    19,156
    Quote Originally Posted by Ielenia View Post
    Yes. Yes, they would. And it's demonstrated right now in the game: we have adventuring tinkers and vendor tinkers, as well as adventuring engineers and vendor engineers.

    Not to mention: both tinkers and engineers "create mechs, guns, bombs, rockets, teleporters, etc...".
    But that is just semantics. This is like saying the Daralan Brewmaster, Brewmaster Drohn, and the Brewmaster title you get when you complete Brewfest are the exact same thing as the Brewmaster spec within the Monk class.


    Not the same thing. The rogue class is not fundamentally based around the creation of "crimson vials", the monk class is not fundamentally based around the creation of "elixirs", the hunter class is not fundamentally based around the creation of "grenades, bombs and nets" like the tinker class is fundamentally based around the creation of technology gadgets.
    Degree doesn't matter. Your argument is that if you don't know the profession you can't perform the skill. Rogues don't know the alchemy profession by default so per your argument they should not be able to produce Crimson Vials and hand them off to other players at all unless they spec into the profession. That simply is not the case.

  5. #785
    Moderator Aucald's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Philadelphia, PA-US
    Posts
    35,961
    As per usual, this thread is not about Tinkers or other hero classes, and the comparison argument about "what is or isn't possible" is sucking all the air out of the room. Return to the actual topic at hand concerning a possible Necromancer hero class and drop the derailing tangents about other preferred hero class templates.
    "We're more of the love, blood, and rhetoric school. Well, we can do you blood and love without the rhetoric, and we can do you blood and rhetoric without the love, and we can do you all three concurrent or consecutive. But we can't give you love and rhetoric without the blood. Blood is compulsory. They're all blood, you see." - Tom Stoppard, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead

  6. #786
    Quote Originally Posted by Triceron View Post
    It comes directly from Arthas having a famous Mournblade called Frostmourne. Arthas in HOTS is completely themed on Frost. Howling Blast, Frozen Tempest, Frostmourne Hungers - all of these are new abilities dedicated to a Death Knight. Hungering Cold and Deathchill? These are also Death Knight abilities, as a Lich never had either of these.
    Well, Kel'thuzad has them in HotS.

    If we're talking about a Lich adapted as a playable class? Then it would be through the Necromancer, which represents the Death-themed Spellcaster archetype. Same as Brewmaster being a part of a much broader 'Monk' archetype. Same as a Keeper of the Grove being part of the Druid, and Farseer being part of the Shaman. We don't have Keeper of the Grove class, we don't have Farseer class either.
    Well, I'd argue that it goes against the conventional creation of a new class, as it is usually based on a Hero unit, with lesser units being integrated into it, and not the other way around. So, it would be a Lich class with necromancer themes.

    Addition pattern

    Death Knight is a Melee hero
    Monk is a Melee hero
    DH is a Melee hero.

    So if we're following patterns, so will be the next class.
    I wouldn't say that is necessarily a decisive pattern, but more of a consequence. Monk also has ranged healing and they differ in their themes. A real pattern, for example, would be Hero class -> Basic Class -> Hero class.

    Guess it could be Tinker or Blademaster then?
    And Night Warrior, and Dark Ranger, and Warden, and Shadow Hunter. All use melee weapons.

    So is Lich, and it's not yet represented by any class.
    Well, a Lich is a race, much like a Pitlord or a Dreadlord. It cannot stand as a class of its own.

    Again, tell me how DK actually lets you play as a Lich? It's the same argument you've used for Priestess of the Moon not being covered by other classes. Lich isn't represented by either Mage or Death Knight. Mages don't use necromancy, DK's don't cast spells. Yet the one class that could represent it? The Necromancer. Why? Because Liches ARE Necromancers.
    Death Knight has Lichborne and they can summon a skeletal mage (through Army of the damned), which you claimed to be a Lich (mage Necrolord ability), though it is a different race.

    I'd a agree that a Necromancer can encompass the Lich, since Kel'thuzad literally transformed into one and since they are found in the House of rituals alongside Necromancers.
    The weird thing is how Scourge Liches use Frost magic, but Maldraxxus ones use Death magic.
    The question is, wouldn't you make it even more like a Death Knight if you add a Frost aspect to the Necromancer?

    Again, he's not a Priest Hero in Warcraft 3. I'm asking you what Warcraft 3 Hero is the Priest based on.

    Brewmaster = Monk
    Pitlord = Warlock
    Farseer = Shaman
    Archmage = Mage
    Keeper of the Grove = Druid
    ??? = Priest

    So what hero are we talking about here, since you implied a pattern of Classes representing WC3 Heroes.
    You're still not getting it.
    Class additions. Meaning, from the Death Knight onward.
    I don't claim vanilla classes to be based on WC3 heroes.

    Quote Originally Posted by jellmoo View Post
    We had an expansion where we got to play with the Loa of death and then see how it rolled over into the realm of the dead. I don't think it's unrelated at all. At the very least, it's no more unrelated than the concept of the Light and the Void existing within the confines of the Priest class.

    Could the idea of Voodoo be wrapped into its own class? Sure, that would be awesome. I'd love that. But I don't think it's the only way to present that. We already have the example of Shadow Priests to see how an entire idea can be built into only a single spec.
    But, there are other Loas who are unrelated to Death, that you don't account for. The Shadow Hunter, or Witch Doctor, wouldn't follow just one Loa, but several. Only the Priest follows one Loa.

    Okay. So what? It's okay for something not to include the entirety of everything.
    *sigh*

    That's the whole point of a voodoo and Loa class. It calls upon several different Loas to gain different powers and abilities. That's what's so unique about it. Confining it to just one Loa not only is against the lore, but completely butchers the archetype.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ielenia View Post
    Apples and oranges. The Sunwalkers, despite being represented in game by the paladin class, are not paladins in the lore sense. They have nothing to do with the Knights of the Silver Hand or the Blood Knights. In the lore, Sunwalkers are not called "paladins who worship the sun".
    Paladin is just a general name to include different types of it. It might be more based on the Knight of the Silver Hand (since Sunwalkers are a later addition), but saying a Sunwalker doesn't count as a Paladin suggests it deserves its own class.

    What reference?
    That i gave you. About necromancy and its origin.

    Since you're apparently playing dumb:
    Repeating this phrase again and again doesn't make your point stronger.

    Source? And I'll even pre-emptively put the caveat here: no "obvious/common sense" nonsense, please.
    "During the War of the Ancients, the Burning Legion started to experiment with creating an army of unliving, but Kalimdor was probably not the only place that they've been attempting this. The nathrezim, also called dreadlords, were found animating the dead by the orc Broxigar."
    https://wowpedia.fandom.com/wiki/Nec...Burning_Legion

    "The nathrezim originate from Revendreth, one of the infinite realms of the Shadowlands, the afterlife. They were created by Sire Denathrius countless ages ago, just after the first venthyr and Court of Harvesters were sired, to infiltrate the other cosmic forces and spread the influence of Death."

    I specifically wrote "they're all doing the same thing". Meaning it doesn't matter their origins, what matters is what they're doing, if their effects are the same. Fire magic is fire magic, no matter if it's arcane, elemental or fel, because it's fire.
    The different classes show otherwise. You have Warlocks (and Demon Hunters) for Fel Fire; Mages for Arcane-based Fire; and Shaman for Elemental Fire. Saying they are all the same would cause them to be of the same class.

    Dude, stop being dumb try to argue honestly. At no point I said "only the ones I want". This is you putting words into my proverbial mouth, here.
    "Well, it should include Void and Voodoo, but i don't think Fel and Light" was along these lines.

    A difference that, so far, exists only in your mind. Show me the source link.
    I guess you're right, since the Lich has Mage abilities as well.

    Really? Then show me the Lich King displaying those "many frost abilities" before the Wrath of the Lich King expansion came along. You know, the expansion that merged the lich to the death knight.
    "Since the Liches showed unswerving loyalty to their master, The Lich King granted them control over the furious elements of the cold north. Now, Liches wield frost magic along with their own considerable necromantic spells."

    They are still demons. And they were demons back in Warcraft 3. And were still considered demons when the Wrath expansion came along.
    It has been retconned. They are creatures of Death.

    "And as previously discussed, our position within the plane of Disorder is proceeding flawlessly. Consuming fel energy is not a pleasant process, but a necessary one."

    Except, again, it does, because voodoo magic can raise the dead, and can affect one's soul.
    So does Fel magic. You can't just include everything into the playable Necromancer.

    Powers he never demonstrated or even hinted at having until the Wrath of the Lich King expansion came along. Not even in Warcraft 3.
    "Since the Liches showed unswerving loyalty to their master, The Lich King granted them control over the furious elements of the cold north. Now, Liches wield frost magic along with their own considerable necromantic spells."

    Did you know it was "logical" to burn women if they're accused of being witches back in the old days? "It's logical" is another fallacious argument to make, because your own view of logic is heavily influenced on your own biases and knowledge (or lack thereof).
    Not every dark spellcaster out there is a Necromancer.

    Who else? Show me a normal mage, not one who is super-powered and not a representative of your average mage.
    Lightning
    Basic attack
    The Mages of Lordaeron have the ability to discharge lightning from their hands when entering into a melee. These swift bolts of energy strike their victims regardless of any armor they may wear. Being the simplest of nature's forces to command, Lightning requires but a fraction of the caster's mana to employ.

    And necromances could be given a healing spec through the use of blood magic, which would fit a witch doctor theme.
    No, that's just your take on it.

    Except it doesn't? It represents more than one creed, but archetype? It's just one: the priest. Which is why all those creeds are within the same class.
    That's like saying a PotM, a Shadow Hunter and a medic are all the same.

    Again: I'm not choosing anything. I'm just saying there's a lot of possible options, and not all options have to be represented at the same time.
    Just those that you prefer over others?

    "Void", "death" and "Fel" magic are all defined and separated in the lore. There is "sun magic" in the lore of this game. It's not defined. When it is, you'll have a point.
    I'd say it is. As Nature, Fire and Holy.
    Just like Fel can be Fire and Shadow.
    And Death can be Nature and Shadow.
    I'm tempted to apply for a moderator position, just so i can go moderator on your asses.

  7. #787
    Quote Originally Posted by Amunrasonther View Post
    *snip*
    If you'd like to contact me and leave comments or feedback outside of mmo-champion, please email me at wownecromancy@gmail.com

    I appreciate the amount of thought you put into this, it actually looks like the basis of a very interesting class.... BUT.. we basically already HAVE Necromancers in the form of Warlocks. Not to mention the immense amount of work adding a new class entails, and with sub numbers where they are I dont know if Blizz will put that much work into something unless its as a hail mary to try and get people back.... then again, I said the same thing about Demon Hunters so what do I know...

  8. #788
    Titan Syegfryed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    Darkshore, Killing Living and Dead elves
    Posts
    13,151
    If they pull another DH(a no brainer class with two specs) they can easily do a necromancer class

    One class focus entirelly on ranged dps, throwing shit like shadow, death, frost and blood magic and another one that is focused around summoning skeletons an zombies, pumping then while defending yourself with "bone magic",akin to demology and beastmaster

    Problem is that they just missed the opportunity with shadowlands and next one will not make much sense, unless "after The janitor and the shadowlands crisis are gone, now they see they need the power of the death, and necromancers were born from the studies brought fro the shadowlands", but even with that it will feel cheap.

  9. #789
    The Insane Ielenia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Brazil
    Posts
    16,628
    Quote Originally Posted by username993720 View Post
    "Well, it should include Void and Voodoo, but i don't think Fel and Light" was along these lines.
    I don't think I wrote that, and you failed to quote me, but if I did, I have the feeling you cut off important context.

    "Since the Liches showed unswerving loyalty to their master, The Lich King granted them control over the furious elements of the cold north. Now, Liches wield frost magic along with their own considerable necromantic spells."
    Is it really that hard for you to produce links instead of having me guess where you took your quotes from?

    Unfortunately for you, I found the actual quote, which you altered: "Since the Liches showed unswerving loyalty to their master, Ner'zhul granted them control over the furious elements of the cold north. Now, Liches wield frost magic along with their own considerable necromantic spells." [1][2]

    You changed "Ner'zhul" to "Lich King", which makes a huge difference.

    So does Fel magic. You can't just include everything into the playable Necromancer.
    And why not?

    Not every dark spellcaster out there is a Necromancer.
    Considering I never claimed "every dark caster is a necromancer", I fail to see the relevance of this red herring.

    Lightning
    Basic attack
    The Mages of Lordaeron have the ability to discharge lightning from their hands when entering into a melee. These swift bolts of energy strike their victims regardless of any armor they may wear. Being the simplest of nature's forces to command, Lightning requires but a fraction of the caster's mana to employ.
    LINK.
    YOUR.
    SOURCES.


    Just those that you prefer over others?
    Dude, stop acting obtuse. I'm not going to repeat myself.

    I'd say it is. As Nature, Fire and Holy.
    Actually, "nature" is not defined, considering lightning, wind and earth are all "nature magic". A rock to the face has the same damage type as a gust of wind and a lightning strike. Think about that.
    I did a Necromancer thing. Check it out! All feedback welcome!
    I also did a Bard thing! Questions, comments and ideas, all welcome!

  10. #790
    Quote Originally Posted by username993720 View Post

    But, there are other Loas who are unrelated to Death, that you don't account for. The Shadow Hunter, or Witch Doctor, wouldn't follow just one Loa, but several. Only the Priest follows one Loa.

    *sigh*

    That's the whole point of a voodoo and Loa class. It calls upon several different Loas to gain different powers and abilities. That's what's so unique about it. Confining it to just one Loa not only is against the lore, but completely butchers the archetype.
    But that's not what we're talking about here. We aren't talking about covering all of the Loas. This is just an idea for how to build a potential Necromancer class. In this case, having a focus on Bwonsamdi and only Bwonsamdi. If we want to we can accomodate other Loas into another class or other classes. This doesn't need to be wrapped up all into a single class.

    Look at current classes. The concept of using the Light isn't wrapped into a single class. Aspects of it are spread in the Paladin and Priest classes, Or using Fel. Aspects of it are spread into the Warlock and Demon Hunter classes. If we want to bring the concept of the Loas into the game, there's no reason that it too couldn't also be split. In this case, I just happen to think that having a chunk of it in a Necromancer class would be fun. Largely because I would love any potential Necromancer class not to be limited to just the traditional 'Scourge' style, which I find boring AF.

  11. #791
    Quote Originally Posted by username993720 View Post
    Well, Kel'thuzad has them in HotS.
    So you've established that KT can have Death Knight abilities, since that's where these abilities originated from.

    Well, I'd argue that it goes against the conventional creation of a new class, as it is usually based on a Hero unit, with lesser units being integrated into it, and not the other way around. So, it would be a Lich class with necromancer themes.
    I'd a agree that a Necromancer can encompass the Lich
    Odd that you're contradicting yourself in your own response, but you could have easily acknowledged this from the beginning instead of a cherry picking statements out of context and using easily refutable excuses.

    I wouldn't say that is necessarily a decisive pattern, but more of a consequence.
    So sure, let's call it a consequence. And that's exactly how we could regard new classes being based on WC3 heroes. Just a consequence of being Warcraft related.

    Necromancers can be a class, and having ties to represent a WC3 Lich/Kel'thuzad would be the consequence. It absolutely works.

    The question is, wouldn't you make it even more like a Death Knight if you add a Frost aspect to the Necromancer?
    So even if you personally don't like DK and Necromancer both having Frost, DK already share that with Mages who both have thematic connections to Liches, and have a Unholy connection through Covenants. At the end of the day, having closer connections still doesn't make them the same. Blizzard is absolutely fine with overlap, and the real question is why you think it has to be mutually exclusive.

    You're still not getting it.
    Class additions. Meaning, from the Death Knight onward.
    I don't claim vanilla classes to be based on WC3 heroes.
    In your own words, I'd consider this consequence more than a pattern. It's arbitrary and pointless to discuss when it's not a limit to what future classes can be based on.


    Necromancer is a well defined archetype that is not yet playable in WoW, and are not represented by any existing class in the game. All you've been doing is cherry picking statements that you try and twist into an excuse, rather than consider that Necromancers are perfectly fine as a playable class if you took the time to sit down and look at how classes are designed and how the Necromancer would fit.

    -Edit- Just noticed the mod post, clearing out the non-Necromancer related stuff.
    Last edited by Triceron; 2021-09-20 at 07:05 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    Since Arthas used Frostmourne, which is a Runeblade, and Frostmourne's power eminates from those runes, that made him a Runemaster by default.

  12. #792
    Feel bad for the OPs in these threads. Have all the fun sucked out by the same people arguing about semantics and other equally fictional entities when Blizzard willingly just invent any old shit they think is cool, and can create reasons why things are/aren't.

  13. #793
    The Insane Teriz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Undermine
    Posts
    19,156
    Quote Originally Posted by Falkeshall View Post
    Feel bad for the OPs in these threads. Have all the fun sucked out by the same people arguing about semantics and other equally fictional entities when Blizzard willingly just invent any old shit they think is cool, and can create reasons why things are/aren't.
    Regardless of people’s personal views about this, I will always say that the OP makes excellent class concepts. Cant wait to see what he comes up with next.

  14. #794
    The Patient The Banshee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Playing in Traffic
    Posts
    261
    I love the concept! Do you have one for Dark Rangers? If we got necromancers I wouldn't be so sad about losing out on Dark Rangers.
    Team Dark Ranger Customization

    Plague Deviser Marileth is love. Plague Deviser Marileth is life.

    https://www.reddit.com/r/wow/comment...ack_on_player/

  15. #795
    with the effort you have exerted on this. This looks like it was done by a professional.

  16. #796
    Quote Originally Posted by username993720 View Post
    Not every dark spellcaster out there is a Necromancer.
    Unrelated to that particular quote, but I was doing digging into the Maldraxxus Gladiator stuff and found this related to Necromancy. Fairly recent stuff, back in July. It's the Red Shirt Guy's interview with Danuser.

    https://games.no1geekfun.com/red-shi...n-shadowlands/


    Sure, the necrolords can also create soulless constructs from body parts. The highest art of necromancy in Maldraxxus, however, remains to transfer a soul from body to body. However, you cannot bring back a dead soul. The type of necromancy Arthas used is different from the magic used by the necrolords. The Scourge is the creation of the Burning Legion. The demons stole only a small part of the knowledge of the necrolords in the Shadowlands. Basically, the demonic necromancers are botchers who did not understand the philosophy of the necrolords.


    This is a clear separation of the Scourge-based Necromancy that Arthas and the Death Knights used, and the greater 'Necrolord' Necromancy that Kel'thuzad had since aimed to usurp through trying to become the leader of the House of Rituals/Primus of Maldraxxus.

    And to tie it further with my previous statements about Runeblades being the source of DK powers rather than traditional necromancy, the article continues

    The creation of undead such as banshees or death knights, on the other hand, is part of the supreme discipline of necromancy. Arthas could only work this kind of magic with Frostmourne. The rune blade was forged from the jailer’s chains and decorated with the runes of lordship. These powerful runes are the key for soul transfers between reality and the Shadowlands. At the same time, they ensure that the respective souls submit to the will of their master – as in the case of Arthas and Sylvanas.

    So a clear and distinct difference between Death Knights and the Necrolords. I think that's sufficient to consider a Necromancer Class since they would be the ones seeking to master the highest art of Necromancy.
    Last edited by Triceron; 2021-09-30 at 09:45 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    Since Arthas used Frostmourne, which is a Runeblade, and Frostmourne's power eminates from those runes, that made him a Runemaster by default.

  17. #797
    Quote Originally Posted by Ielenia View Post
    I don't think I wrote that, and you failed to quote me, but if I did, I have the feeling you cut off important context.


    Is it really that hard for you to produce links instead of having me guess where you took your quotes from?

    Unfortunately for you, I found the actual quote, which you altered: "Since the Liches showed unswerving loyalty to their master, Ner'zhul granted them control over the furious elements of the cold north. Now, Liches wield frost magic along with their own considerable necromantic spells." [1][2]

    You changed "Ner'zhul" to "Lich King", which makes a huge difference.


    And why not?


    Considering I never claimed "every dark caster is a necromancer", I fail to see the relevance of this red herring.


    LINK.
    YOUR.
    SOURCES.



    Dude, stop acting obtuse. I'm not going to repeat myself.


    Actually, "nature" is not defined, considering lightning, wind and earth are all "nature magic". A rock to the face has the same damage type as a gust of wind and a lightning strike. Think about that.
    Quote Originally Posted by jellmoo View Post
    But that's not what we're talking about here. We aren't talking about covering all of the Loas. This is just an idea for how to build a potential Necromancer class. In this case, having a focus on Bwonsamdi and only Bwonsamdi. If we want to we can accomodate other Loas into another class or other classes. This doesn't need to be wrapped up all into a single class.

    Look at current classes. The concept of using the Light isn't wrapped into a single class. Aspects of it are spread in the Paladin and Priest classes, Or using Fel. Aspects of it are spread into the Warlock and Demon Hunter classes. If we want to bring the concept of the Loas into the game, there's no reason that it too couldn't also be split. In this case, I just happen to think that having a chunk of it in a Necromancer class would be fun. Largely because I would love any potential Necromancer class not to be limited to just the traditional 'Scourge' style, which I find boring AF.
    Quote Originally Posted by Triceron View Post
    So you've established that KT can have Death Knight abilities, since that's where these abilities originated from.



    Odd that you're contradicting yourself in your own response, but you could have easily acknowledged this from the beginning instead of a cherry picking statements out of context and using easily refutable excuses.



    So sure, let's call it a consequence. And that's exactly how we could regard new classes being based on WC3 heroes. Just a consequence of being Warcraft related.

    Necromancers can be a class, and having ties to represent a WC3 Lich/Kel'thuzad would be the consequence. It absolutely works.



    So even if you personally don't like DK and Necromancer both having Frost, DK already share that with Mages who both have thematic connections to Liches, and have a Unholy connection through Covenants. At the end of the day, having closer connections still doesn't make them the same. Blizzard is absolutely fine with overlap, and the real question is why you think it has to be mutually exclusive.



    In your own words, I'd consider this consequence more than a pattern. It's arbitrary and pointless to discuss when it's not a limit to what future classes can be based on.


    Necromancer is a well defined archetype that is not yet playable in WoW, and are not represented by any existing class in the game. All you've been doing is cherry picking statements that you try and twist into an excuse, rather than consider that Necromancers are perfectly fine as a playable class if you took the time to sit down and look at how classes are designed and how the Necromancer would fit.

    -Edit- Just noticed the mod post, clearing out the non-Necromancer related stuff.
    Funny how i'm the only one infracted. This is what Aucald had to say:
    "your post did indeed violate the substance of the thread warning, continuing a number of arguments that were derailing the thread well after the warning".

    And here you are continuing the same arguments as i did with no apparent repercussions.
    Biased much?

    Quote Originally Posted by Triceron View Post
    Unrelated to that particular quote, but I was doing digging into the Maldraxxus Gladiator stuff and found this related to Necromancy. Fairly recent stuff, back in July. It's the Red Shirt Guy's interview with Danuser.

    https://games.no1geekfun.com/red-shi...n-shadowlands/


    Sure, the necrolords can also create soulless constructs from body parts. The highest art of necromancy in Maldraxxus, however, remains to transfer a soul from body to body. However, you cannot bring back a dead soul. The type of necromancy Arthas used is different from the magic used by the necrolords. The Scourge is the creation of the Burning Legion. The demons stole only a small part of the knowledge of the necrolords in the Shadowlands. Basically, the demonic necromancers are botchers who did not understand the philosophy of the necrolords.
    "Maldraxxus is the birthplace of necromantic magic and home to the forces that were called upon by the Lich King and the Scourge on Azeroth."

    Notice how it says "demonic necromancers" - which are neither Arthas nor the Scourge, but Demons.

    I agree that the Burning Legion stole the secrets of necromancy (or was introduced to it by the Dreadlords) and integrated it into their magic. That pretty much confirms what i've been telling lelenia about the Burning Legion's necromancy. It originates from the Shadowlands.

    The creation of undead such as banshees or death knights, on the other hand, is part of the supreme discipline of necromancy. Arthas could only work this kind of magic with Frostmourne. The rune blade was forged from the jailer’s chains and decorated with the runes of lordship. These powerful runes are the key for soul transfers between reality and the Shadowlands. At the same time, they ensure that the respective souls submit to the will of their master – as in the case of Arthas and Sylvanas.
    It talks about specific cases, such as Sylvanas and the playable Death Knight.

    So a clear and distinct difference between Death Knights and the Necrolords. I think that's sufficient to consider a Necromancer Class since they would be the ones seeking to master the highest art of Necromancy.
    Let me ask you this. If a Maldraxxian Gladiator race is added, which class and spec would be the most fitting for them?

    P.S. - i do not wish to continue this discussion, since i'm clearly being targeted and i do not wish to be banned again over bullshit.
    I'm tempted to apply for a moderator position, just so i can go moderator on your asses.

  18. #798
    Quote Originally Posted by username993720 View Post
    "Maldraxxus is the birthplace of necromantic magic and home to the forces that were called upon by the Lich King and the Scourge on Azeroth."

    Notice how it says "demonic necromancers" - which are neither Arthas nor the Scourge, but Demons.
    Arthas wasn't created by the Maldraxxians, nor directly by the Jailer. He was created by the demonic Necromancers, and thus empowered by the gifts they provided him, which included a Runeblade that allowed him to tap into a portion of the Maldraxxian Necromancy.

    I agree that the Burning Legion stole the secrets of necromancy (or was introduced to it by the Dreadlords) and integrated it into their magic. That pretty much confirms what i've been telling lelenia about the Burning Legion's necromancy. It originates from the Shadowlands.
    Necromancy originates in the Shadowlands but the Death Knight does not. The Death Knight continues to merely tap into a portion of its power.

    Let me ask you this. If a Maldraxxian Gladiator race is added, which class and spec would be the most fitting for them?

    P.S. - i do not wish to continue this discussion, since i'm clearly being targeted and i do not wish to be banned again over bullshit.
    Warrior, since the Maldraxxi Gladiators represent the House of the Chosen, which is their Warrior-centric faction.

    The term Gladiator is heavily associated with Warriors already in WoW.

    I don't particularly see the connection to Necromancers here?
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    Since Arthas used Frostmourne, which is a Runeblade, and Frostmourne's power eminates from those runes, that made him a Runemaster by default.

  19. #799
    Quote Originally Posted by username993720 View Post
    Funny how i'm the only one infracted. This is what Aucald had to say:
    "your post did indeed violate the substance of the thread warning, continuing a number of arguments that were derailing the thread well after the warning".

    And here you are continuing the same arguments as i did with no apparent repercussions.
    Biased much?
    Er... We're in a thread all about a potential Necromancer class. I fail to see how me saying what I think would be cool in a Necromancer class would be considered off topic...

  20. #800
    The Insane Ielenia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Brazil
    Posts
    16,628
    Quote Originally Posted by username993720 View Post
    Funny how i'm the only one infracted. This is what Aucald had to say:
    "your post did indeed violate the substance of the thread warning, continuing a number of arguments that were derailing the thread well after the warning".

    And here you are continuing the same arguments as i did with no apparent repercussions.
    Biased much?
    There's no bias? My post with my replies to you are still within the confines of the thread's subject, talking about the necromancer class and its possibilities, and contesting your affirmations.
    I did a Necromancer thing. Check it out! All feedback welcome!
    I also did a Bard thing! Questions, comments and ideas, all welcome!

Posting Permissions

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