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

[ymirsson]

Doesn't have to be. same class, different specializations. a Shadow priest could be a Void elf, a Forsaken Cultist of the Forgotten Shadow or a Shadowmoon orc. a Holy Priest could be a Human Cleric, a Draenei Anchorite or a Zandalari Confessor. there's nothing connecting between them, except being different specializations of the same class.

you explained nothing.

[Imperator4321]

Neither does a Holy Priest and a Shadow Priest. a Frost Mage and a Fire Mage. an Affliction Warlock and a Destruction Warlock.

They can all be different aspects of a Ranger. one uses Necromancy, the other Lunar and the third Sea.

Doesn't have to be. same class, different specializations. a Shadow priest could be a Void elf, a Forsaken Cultist of the Forgotten Shadow or a Shadowmoon orc. a Holy Priest could be a Human Cleric, a Draenei Anchorite or a Zandalari Confessor. there's nothing connecting between them, except being different specializations of the same class.

A class regardless of spec still needs a unifying concept or archetype behind them. Rogues are still rogues regardless of if they are a thief, assassin, outlaw or pirate they are unified by the archetype of being an underhanded, sneaky, opportunistic fighters and their specs reflect that. A mage is still a mage regardless of if they use fire, arcane or frost, a warlock is still a warlock regardless of if they focus on demonology, afflicitions or destruction they still share traits.

Priests are unified by the concept of wielding light and shadow magic (which are linked both thematically and in-universe), regardless of whether they are a priest of elune, the holy light, the loa or naaru and their specs reflect this (holy wields light, shadow wields shadow and discipline balances the two).

Theres no thematic link between Lunar, Necromancy and Sea magic and the only connection you've proposed is that their WC3 incarnations shared mechanically similar abilities, what concept or archetype either thematically or in-universe links the idea's of a priestess of elune, dark ranger and sea witch together?

If this "Ranger class" existed in Legion how would it's Order Hall be designed? what kind of place would Sea Witches, Priests of the Moon and Dark Rangers gather to work together?

[Diaphin]

Why would Mechagon have more sway than Azshara and N’Zoth? If anything, Mechagon was yet another way for Blizzard to ease people into the idea of a tech class, and introduce Mechagnomes.

I guess so. Though can we at least aggree on Mechagnomes being the worst allied race? The robo limbs come off as strange and at leastfor females, they lack all the hairstyles and colors that make female gnomes kinda awesome. Not to forget that the whole concept of Gnomes having a king is just strange. And then theres the diaper gnome meme.

But I mean, as long as you don't argue about Blizzard breaking the traditions of new classes before, Tinkers would need to fit in with the theme of the expansion. So the one piece of gnome content in years being absolute side content is kind of an argument against you.

But then again, your argument relies on Blizz deciding not to include a necromancer or dark ranger class in this expansion, not taking into account that they may drop it any time afterwards and polls on an unofficial forum which is mostly focussed on insulting the company and discussing how bad every piece of content here is. I argue on the basis of what I observed to creat more enthusiasm for a new class as an expansion feature during announcement, which Blizzard is well aware of.

You can't deny, whenever they feel like dropping a new class, Dark Ranger ticks all the boxes that made Death Knights and Demon Hunters popular the most out of all classes. But we also can't make any more than vague guesses at what blizzard might be up to, because they tend to be rather unpredictable. Mist of Pandaria alone as well as many decissions during WoD and BfA were absolutely strange.

[Teriz]

I guess so. Though can we at least aggree on Mechagnomes being the worst allied race? The robo limbs come off as strange and at leastfor females, they lack all the hairstyles and colors that make female gnomes kinda awesome. Not to forget that the whole concept of Gnomes having a king is just strange. And then theres the diaper gnome meme.

I somewhat agree.

But I mean, as long as you don't argue about Blizzard breaking the traditions of new classes before, Tinkers would need to fit in with the theme of the expansion. So the one piece of gnome content in years being absolute side content is kind of an argument against you.

An Undermine expansion dealing with a massive underground robotic war seems to work out. You can even toss in an expanded Gadgetzhan, Gnomes retaking Gnomeregan, Goblins retaking Kezan, full introduction of the Goblin trade princes, and some lost Titan facility stuff to add more layers to the entire thing. There's even a nice empty space to the west of the Maelstrom where a new continent (Undermine) could go.

But then again, your argument relies on Blizz deciding not to include a necromancer or dark ranger class in this expansion, not taking into account that they may drop it any time afterwards and polls on an unofficial forum which is mostly focussed on insulting the company and discussing how bad every piece of content here is. I argue on the basis of what I observed to creat more enthusiasm for a new class as an expansion feature during announcement, which Blizzard is well aware of.

Yeah, not likely. They're not going to introduce a new class mid-expansion, and its highly unlikely that we're going to have ANOTHER expansion themed about death anytime soon. Blizzard tends to like their expansions having different themes. In addition, the really bad news for Dark Rangers is that even if Sylvanas survives Shadowlands, she isn't going to be a Dark Ranger anymore. She's clearly ascending to something else beyond a mere Banshee possessing her old elven Ranger body. She might end up being the new Jailer of death, or something else entirely, but her continued existence is going to be completely separated from the Dark Ranger concept. And with Nathanos joining her in the realm of the dead, there's no notable lore character remaining to push a Dark Ranger class in a future expansion.

You can't deny, whenever they feel like dropping a new class, Dark Ranger ticks all the boxes that made Death Knights and Demon Hunters popular the most out of all classes. But we also can't make any more than vague guesses at what blizzard might be up to, because they tend to be rather unpredictable. Mist of Pandaria alone as well as many decissions during WoD and BfA were absolutely strange.

Yeah, Pandaria was a proposed expansion theme for YEARS before it showed up. Pandaren were one of the most demanded races when WoW originally came out. They were originally planned for TBC. Also the lack of a healing spec for Dark Rangers is a big box they can't tick.

[Ielenia]

Aren't Riftfunners all Void Elves? Wouldn't a Void Elf utilize Void magic by default?

Wouldn't a gnome/goblin/mechagnome use technology by default, so a gnome warrior or goblin hunter would be a tinker, right? No? Then there's your answer.

Bladestorm, Pummel, Heroic Leap, and Thunder Clap are all warrior abilities though.

And Intimidating Shout, Whirlwind, Cleave, Shield Wall, Taunt and Sunder Armor were once part of the death knight repertoire, before it became a playable class. I can argue it's the exact same case, here.

Well not really, since we're talking about Void Elf Warriors and a Void Elf Priest. Again, lore wise a Void Elf warrior will have Void abilities by default.

And by that logic a gnome/goblin/mechagnome warrior and hunter would use technology by default, therefore we don't need a tech class.

We were talking about classes though, not a crafting profession. It's not even established that professions are part of your character's lore.

But engineering is part of the lore, and technology failing is something that also exists in the lore, and quite often too.

Actually there is, because there's a clear lore difference between the engineering profession, the Goblin Tinker hero, Mekkatorque's Gnome tech, Blackfuse's Goblin tech,

And every time you were asked to provide any evidence... you didn't provide any. Only more assertions.

Uh no. Paladins use Magic. Warriors don't use magic.

Didn't you just say that void elf warriors use void magic?

Death Knights and Necromancers use the same school of magic, and do the exact same thing.

And paladins and priests use the same school of magic, and do the exact same thing. Fancy that.

You're acting like Blizzard didn't create/write/plot out this expansion. Are you saying it's impossible to write in a Necromancer class in storyline involving death, Death Knights, the Lich King, Shadowlands, etc?

Oh I understand it completely; You're using semantics in an effort to ignore reality. You have fun with that.

Here's what Blizzard's lead narrative designer says about the theme of this expansion;

https://www.wowhead.com/news=296091/...the-lost-codex

It's not semantics. It's about the context. This isn't an "undead" expansion. It's an "afterlife" expansion. A necromancer wouldn't fit without a lot of shoe-horning and contrivances. Even the death knight presence is rather minimal, with their only purpose being to make a gateway between the mortal realm and the Shadowlands, and be somewhat useful in the Maw.

- - - Updated - - -

I hope blizzard adds a driveable mech suit in the future, with combat capabilities, in the engineering profession.

They did: Reaves Module: Piloted Combat Mode

[Teriz]

Wouldn't a gnome/goblin/mechagnome use technology by default, so a gnome warrior or goblin hunter would be a tinker, right? No? Then there's your answer.

Again, we have defined Tinker abilities. Warriors and Hunters do not possess any of those abilities. Beyond this one character, there's really no definition of what exactly this Void Elf class is.

And Intimidating Shout, Whirlwind, Cleave, Shield Wall, Taunt and Sunder Armor were once part of the death knight repertoire, before it became a playable class. I can argue it's the exact same case, here.

And again, we had established DK abilities even before Vanilla WoW, so we knew what to generally expect from a DK class. There's no foundation for this "Riftwhatever" concept beyond this one NPC.

And by that logic a gnome/goblin/mechagnome warrior and hunter would use technology by default, therefore we don't need a tech class.

See above.

But engineering is part of the lore, and technology failing is something that also exists in the lore, and quite often too.

Engineering in of itself? Certainly. Did the Horde/Alliance champion find an old journal and learn how to build a Sky Golem from that journal? Not likely.

Also it stands to reason that the better the engineer, the better the end product. Like I'm sure that Mekkatorque builds more reliable tech than Findle Whistlesteam.

And every time you were asked to provide any evidence... you didn't provide any. Only more assertions.

I'm sure you believe that....

Didn't you just say that void elf warriors use void magic?

We're talking about general classes here. In general, no Warriors don't use magic. However Void Elves have Void Magic by default, so obviously a Void Elf Warrior is going to have void abilities on top of his/her warrior abilities.

And paladins and priests use the same school of magic, and do the exact same thing. Fancy that.

So we're just going to ignore the 2/3 of the Priest's ability set to try to prove a falsehood? Okay....

It's not semantics. It's about the context. This isn't an "undead" expansion. It's an "afterlife" expansion. A necromancer wouldn't fit without a lot of shoe-horning and contrivances. Even the death knight presence is rather minimal, with their only purpose being to make a gateway between the mortal realm and the Shadowlands, and be somewhat useful in the Maw.

Ah look, more semantics. Now you're trying to use "undead" instead of "Death" like Blizzard said.

In the end, yes, Shadowlands is an expansion whose theme is death, and it takes place in the realm of death. The question NOW is that since Blizzard has established that classes must match the theme of the expansion, what upcoming expansion could possibly match the Necromancer's theme better than this one?

[ymirsson]

They did: Reaves Module: Piloted Combat Mode

Well, question solved, we dont need a tinker any more.

[Teriz]

Well, question solved, we dont need a tinker any more.

Read up on what it takes to get that module and its limitations, and you'll quickly realize that yes, we need a Tinker class.

[username993720]

you explained nothing.

Gameplay reasons. Void elves using the light as priests is lore contradicting. Lightforged Draenei using Void as priests is contradicting. Dark Iron Dwarves using water as Shamans is highly unlikely. Forsaken priests using the light causes unbearable pain and suffering. Mag'har Orcs using the light as priests is not grounded in lore. Zandalari Monks are really off, considering the history Pandaren and Zandalari shared. Therefore, an undead high elf using lunar spells, for that matter, would be for gameplay reasons (because Blizzard can't prohibit you from using one spec or another).

A class regardless of spec still needs a unifying concept or archetype behind them. Rogues are still rogues regardless of if they are a thief, assassin, outlaw or pirate they are unified by the archetype of being an underhanded, sneaky, opportunistic fighters and their specs reflect that. A mage is still a mage regardless of if they use fire, arcane or frost, a warlock is still a warlock regardless of if they focus on demonology, afflicitions or destruction they still share traits.

Priests are unified by the concept of wielding light and shadow magic (which are linked both thematically and in-universe), regardless of whether they are a priest of elune, the holy light, the loa or naaru and their specs reflect this (holy wields light, shadow wields shadow and discipline balances the two).

Theres no thematic link between Lunar, Necromancy and Sea magic and the only connection you've proposed is that their WC3 incarnations shared mechanically similar abilities, what concept or archetype either thematically or in-universe links the idea's of a priestess of elune, dark ranger and sea witch together?

If this "Ranger class" existed in Legion how would it's Order Hall be designed? what kind of place would Sea Witches, Priests of the Moon and Dark Rangers gather to work together?

They are all "Elven Ranger" archetype. one is Undead high elf, the other is a Night elf and the third a former Night elf. they possess Archery skills because of their common heritage. That's why they all use bow and arrow. they just branched off into different magical expertises. while one Archer is using necromancy, due to its undeadish nature, the other one uses lunar abilities, due to its belief in Elune, and the third sea magic, due to its oceanic nature. the common denominator they will all use is archery skills, while the different specializations will dive into each one of their natures.

"Elven ranger refers to a ranger of elven ancestry. Elven rangers are elite archers. the title of ranger existed as far back as before the Great Sundering". That's why Night elves have Sentinels (which, accepted worgen later on), High elves/Blood elves have Farstriders, Dark Rangers were composed of Undead High elves (until they trained forsaken), Void elves have Umbral/Ren'dorei Rangers and Nagas have Sea Witches.

"Rangers were eventually cancelled as a hero unit. Most of their abilities were given to the Priestess of the Moon instead, and their model was reused for the in-game appearances of Sylvanas Windrunner and Jennalla Deemspring. Shandris Feathermoon uses a night elf version of the Ranger. When the The Frozen Throne expansion was released, Cold Arrows was given to Naga Sea Witches, renamed to Frost Arrows and given a new icon."

I guess their Class order hall would be of Elven ancestry. perhaps, moonlit Zin-Azshari, as seen in the Chronicle book (yes, i'm aware it is in ruins right now). Remember how Illidan gathered around him "elven-ancestry" characters like Kael'thas Sunstrider and Lady vash'j? they shared, in common, a magical addiction. Illidan trained Demon Hunters from Night elves and Blood elves only. they shared the elves' agility and slim physique.

Yeah, not likely. They're not going to introduce a new class mid-expansion, and its highly unlikely that we're going to have ANOTHER expansion themed about death anytime soon. Blizzard tends to like their expansions having different themes. In addition, the really bad news for Dark Rangers is that even if Sylvanas survives Shadowlands, she isn't going to be a Dark Ranger anymore. She's clearly ascending to something else beyond a mere Banshee possessing her old elven Ranger body. She might end up being the new Jailer of death, or something else entirely, but her continued existence is going to be completely separated from the Dark Ranger concept. And with Nathanos joining her in the realm of the dead, there's no notable lore character remaining to push a Dark Ranger class in a future expansion.

Yeah, Pandaria was a proposed expansion theme for YEARS before it showed up. Pandaren were one of the most demanded races when WoW originally came out. They were originally planned for TBC. Also the lack of a healing spec for Dark Rangers is a big box they can't tick.

Dark Ranger Velonara and Delaryn Summermoon.

Tyrande is a healer hero in Heroes of the Storm.

[Amunrasonther]

I think we're beyond this point in this discussion. The discussion now is how can you implement a Necromancers class into WoW after you've had a prime opportunity in Shadowlands?

- - - Updated - - -

Oh? That’s convenient for you, or did I miss the part where you recognize and concede that Necromancers do use Alchemy, poison, nature magic, and other schools of magic to which DKs do not? I wouldn’t want you to use the same debunked points in future arguments.

As for the topic at hand, I don’t really plan on playing Shadowlands nor understand it’s storyline. But I think it would be pretty easy to explain that our dealings in the Shadowlands has caused a great upset in the balance between life and death, and there are now mass armies of undead beings and death cults swarming Azeroth. The stigma that necromancy is evil is now gone because of what we learned from the denizens of Shadowlands, and so the heroes of Azeroth embrace Necromancers in the fight against the undead, in addition to our newly acquired Shadowland allied races who now want to help us restore the balance in our world like we’ve done for them.

- - - Updated - - -

Oh, those are a lot of NPCs I forgot. Thanks for the info, dude.

Also, I'd say 'welcome to the conversation', but I'm not sure that's a good thing for you. :P

BTW, I'm thinking in remaking my concept to incorporate some oozes to my poison spec, too.

Haha, no problem! And you should absolutely incorporate them into your concept. They’re an unused mechanic that fits the Alchemical side of Necromancers perfectly.

[Traveler Voltin]

Oh? That’s convenient for you, or did I miss the part where you recognize and concede that Necromancers do use Alchemy, poison, nature magic, and other schools of magic to which DKs do not? I wouldn’t want you to use the same debunked points in future arguments.

As for the topic at hand, I don’t really plan on playing Shadowlands nor understand it’s storyline. But I think it would be pretty easy to explain that our dealings in the Shadowlands has caused a great upset in the balance between life and death, and there are now mass armies of undead beings and death cults swarming Azeroth. The stigma that necromancy is evil is now gone because of what we learned from the denizens of Shadowlands, and so the heroes of Azeroth embrace Necromancers in the fight against the undead, in addition to our newly acquired Shadowland allied races who now want to help us restore the balance in our world like we’ve done for them.

enough. I moved the discussion because its been the same circle conversation for awhile.
let it die.

"Necromancers do use Alchemy, poison, nature magic, and other schools of magic to which DKs do not" i want you to prove this.

[ymirsson]

Gameplay reasons. Void elves using the light as priests is lore contradicting. Lightforged Draenei using Void as priests is contradicting. Dark Iron Dwarves using water as Shamans is highly unlikely. Forsaken priests using the light causes unbearable pain and suffering. Therefore, an undead elf using lunar spells, for that matter, would be for gameplay reasons (because Blizzard can't prohibit you from using one spec or another).

But your concept takes that convenience for the sake of gameplay even further. That would mean that one could play an archetypal Night Elf Drk Ranger, and with the click of a button, Night Elf Sea Witch.

Im all for removing class/race restrictions, but i cant see this happening.

[username993720]

But your concept takes that convenience for the sake of gameplay even further. That would mean that one could play an archetypal Night Elf Drk Ranger, and with the click of a button, Night Elf Sea Witch.

Im all for removing class/race restrictions, but i cant see this happening.

Why not? are the examples i've shown not weird enough?

If they can, recently, all of the sudden, come up with Night elven Dark Rangers, they can come up with Elven Sea Witches.

Wasn't the Pandaren Brewmaster a Pandaren-only associated Class/spec, and come Mists of Pandaria, everyone can be one?

Wasn't the Death Knight restricted to core races only, and they've come up with Bolvar raising allied races, for everyone to be a Death Knight?

[Amunrasonther]

"Necromancers do use Alchemy, poison, nature magic, and other schools of magic to which DKs do not" i want you to prove this.

Refer to my first response in this thread.

Post #852 on page 43.

[Traveler Voltin]

Refer to my first response in this thread.

Post #852 on page 43.

so you have no proof. alright.

[Teriz]

Oh? That’s convenient for you, or did I miss the part where you recognize and concede that Necromancers do use Alchemy, poison, nature magic, and other schools of magic to which DKs do not? I wouldn’t want you to use the same debunked points in future arguments.

Are there "Necromancer" NPCs that use those schools of magic, sure.

Would there ever be a Necromancer class that uses such abilities? Doubtful. Why? Because the DK already handles the Scourge variety of Necromancy, which includes the NPCs you mention. You would have to find another undead faction in the game unaffiliated with the Scourge or the Lich King.

As for the topic at hand, I don’t really plan on playing Shadowlands nor understand it’s storyline. But I think it would be pretty easy to explain that our dealings in the Shadowlands has caused a great upset in the balance between life and death, and there are now mass armies of undead beings and death cults swarming Azeroth. The stigma that necromancy is evil is now gone because of what we learned from the denizens of Shadowlands, and so the heroes of Azeroth embrace Necromancers in the fight against the undead, in addition to our newly acquired Shadowland allied races who now want to help us restore the balance in our world like we’ve done for them.

Yeah, the idea that we move on from Shadowlands into WotLK 2.0 is unlikely. Especially when Sylvanas and the Lich King is playing such a major role in this expansion, and you consider we have an entire realm in Shadowlands dedicated to the Undead/Scourge already. Like I said, if you wanted to bring a Necromancer into the game, you do it in this expansion where the theme fits perfectly.

[Traveler Voltin]

lets see.
Heigan is a warlock.
Scourge necromancer is using warlock abilities.
Feltotem necromancer is using fel magic.

Master necromancer, this one might be a maybe but looks close DK blood spec since it deals with bones.
Acherus necromancer, the one ability does fire damage but its a corpse explosion which i think falls under unholy.
Necromancer conjurer, this one is the closest to a true necromancer. not sure why raise skeleton is nature.

i didnt see alchemy. the nature magic doesnt make sense for some spells.

[Amunrasonther]

so you have no proof. alright.

Are you not capable of referring back to my first post or you read it and felt it wasn’t sufficient enough? Because you asked me to provide proof that Necromancers do X and I linked several Necromancers who do just that.

Are there "Necromancer" NPCs that use those schools of magic, sure.

Would there ever be a Necromancer class that uses such abilities? Doubtful. Why? Because the DK already handles the Scourge variety of Necromancy, which includes the NPCs you mention. You would have to find another undead faction in the game unaffiliated with the Scourge or the Lich King.

Now now Teriz, there you famously go pushing goalposts again. You asked repeatedly for Necromancers using alchemy, poison, nature magic, and other schools of magic that DKs do not, and your only response when presented that evidence is, “well sure... but they’re still affiliated with DKs!”....as if that’s an actual problem.

DKs rely on brute force for dispatching their enemies, Necromancers do not. This is why Alchemy & Poison are so fitting for Necromancers. It’s why we see them using it and it’s why we see them being taught how to use it in Scholomance.

Also, correct me if I’m wrong but the Necromancers of the Maldraxus (some of whom I linked) are not affiliated with the Scourge/Lich King.

Yeah, the idea that we move on from Shadowlands into WotLK 2.0 is unlikely. Especially when Sylvanas and the Lich King is playing such a major role in this expansion, and you consider we have an entire realm in Shadowlands dedicated to the Undead/Scourge already. Like I said, if you wanted to bring a Necromancer into the game, you do it in this expansion where the theme fits perfectly.

I disagree. The Legion expansion is the most recent and popular expansion to date and heavily relied on TBC’s foe: Demons. TBC was a very popular expansion. What’s the other super popular expansion? WOLK.

- - - Updated - - -

lets see.
Heigan is a warlock.
Scourge necromancer is using warlock abilities.
Feltotem necromancer is using fel magic.

Master necromancer, this one might be a maybe but looks close DK blood spec since it deals with bones.
Acherus necromancer, the one ability does fire damage but its a corpse explosion which i think falls under unholy.
Necromancer conjurer, this one is the closest to a true necromancer. not sure why raise skeleton is nature.

i didnt see alchemy. the nature magic doesnt make sense for some spells.

Heigan is a Necromancer and a famous one at that, not a Warlock. You also completely ignored Krick the poison wielding, arcane exploding Necromancer. And wether or not the other Necromancers are using warlock spells is irrelevant. Teriz wanted to see Necromancers using other forms of magic. DKs don’t use fire magic or nature magic. Necromancers can and do.

[Teriz]

Now now Teriz, there you famously go pushing goalposts again. You asked repeatedly for Necromancers using alchemy, poison, nature magic, and other schools of magic that DKs do not, and your only response when presented that evidence is, “well sure... but they’re still affiliated with DKs!”....as if that’s an actual problem.

Well it is a problem, because the DK class is the scourge class, and the Necromancer class.

DKs rely on brute force for dispatching their enemies, Necromancers do not. This is why Alchemy & Poison are so fitting for Necromancers. It’s why we see them using it and it’s why we see them being taught how to use it in Scholomance.

Nothing in lore states that a Necromancer can't use brute force.

Also there's a next to zero chance that you'll see a "Necromancer" class utilizing a mad scientist concept. For starters, mad science really doesn't work with a Blood magic spec. You have to remember that a class tends to be multiple aspects of the same class. A mad scientist is using alchemy and science, and the idea that that that same character is also a blood magic user simply doesn't make much sense.

Further, WoW classes tend to revolve around WC3 hero concepts, and the WC3 hero concept that utilized the mad scientist concept was a Goblin Alchemist. Guess what class concept that's more likely to go to....

Also, correct me if I’m wrong but the Necromancers of the Maldraxus (some of whom I linked) are not affiliated with the Scourge/Lich King.

No, but Maldraxxus is where the Lich King, and Scourge pull their undead armies from. So yeah, they are connected.

I disagree. The Legion expansion is the most recent and popular expansion to date and heavily relied on TBC’s foe: Demons. TBC was a very popular expansion. What’s the other super popular expansion? WOLK.

Yeah, but TBC wasn't the foretold Legion invasion, it was us going to the land where the Orcs had invaded from, and saw first hand the devastation the Legion could do to a world. In the expansions following TBC, the threat of a Legion invasion always loomed on the horizon, so there was still a story opening about the Legion finally invading Azeroth and the armies of both the Horde and the Alliance having to band together and stop it.

We've already had the undead invasion story, and now we have the story of where the Undead and other aspects of death come from. Again, if the plan was to bring in a necromancer class, now would have been the time to do it.

[Traveler Voltin]

Are you not capable of referring back to my first post or you read it and felt it wasn’t sufficient enough? Because you asked me to provide proof that Necromancers do X and I linked several Necromancers who do just that.




Now now Teriz, there you famously go pushing goalposts again. You asked repeatedly for Necromancers using alchemy, poison, nature magic, and other schools of magic that DKs do not, and your only response when presented that evidence is, “well sure... but they’re still affiliated with DKs!”....as if that’s an actual problem.

DKs rely on brute force for dispatching their enemies, Necromancers do not. This is why Alchemy & Poison are so fitting for Necromancers. It’s why we see them using it and it’s why we see them being taught how to use it in Scholomance.

Also, correct me if I’m wrong but the Necromancers of the Maldraxus (some of whom I linked) are not affiliated with the Scourge/Lich King.



I disagree. The Legion expansion is the most recent and popular expansion to date and heavily relied on TBC’s foe: Demons. TBC was a very popular expansion. What’s the other super popular expansion? WOLK.

- - - Updated - - -



Heigan is a Necromancer and a famous one at that, not a Warlock. You also completely ignored Krick the poison wielding, arcane exploding Necromancer. And wether or not the other Necromancers are using warlock spells is irrelevant. Teriz wanted to see Necromancers using other forms of magic. DKs don’t use fire magic or nature magic. Necromancers can and do.

krick was on the list?
Heigan is labelled as Warlock. go check the page yourself.

the only one i really agree on is the fire, which is very strange for a necromancer to use.

i find is strange that Raise dead for Death knights is physical school but the NPC necromancers is listed as nature.