The Bard will be the next class in WoW. Here's why...

[Teriz]

For game mechanics and simplicities sake. Lore has already proven that magical diseases exist in the necromancy school.

Yeah, but again, there are no such magical diseases in the Warlock class. And game mechanic wise they are different from each other, because the DK can spread his disease to other targets easily, and you must use certain spells to dispel diseases. For example, The Monk spell Detox will dispel diseases and poisons, but won't dispel Magical DoTs like UA and Corruption. Meanwhile Dispel Magic will remove UA and Corruption, but won't remove diseases.

You're so hung up on "Necromancy = Undead" when that's already been proven that Necromancy is so much broader. Next you're going to tell me that "Harnessing the shadows into bolts of incendiary energy" could be used for Fire Mages.

The only thing you've proven is that you can't tell the difference between a magical DoT and a disease. DKs are plated Necromancers. Guess what? They have several disease spells and spells that manipulate the dead. Warlocks have no such spells because they don't practice necromancy.

[Monstercloud]

Yeah, but again, there are no such magical diseases in the Warlock class.

Conjure

: to make (something) appear or seem to appear by using magic

Affliction

: something (such as a disease) that causes pain or suffering

The only thing you've proven is that you can't tell the difference between a magical DoT and a disease. DKs are plated Necromancers. Guess what? They have several disease spells and spells that manipulate the dead. Warlocks have no such spells because they don't practice necromancy.

They have spells that for the sake of game mechanics and simplicity, are magic. They aren't going to give 1 class Curses, Magic, and Disease debuffs. And DKs aren't Necromancers, they have abilties that are based in necromancy, just like Warlocks have necromancy based spells, but aren't Necromancers. Go ahead, ignore the "Harnessing the shadows into bolts of incendiary energy" again and dictate just how much the necromancy school actually encompasses.

[Ielenia]

Which means little since none of the Warlock's abilities are diseases.

So, in your words, the Warlocks have a useless passive?

A hold over from a time when each race had a specific Priest ability. Devouring Plague came from Forsaken (undead) Shadow Priests.

Priest necromantic spells: Vampiric Embrace, Vampiric Touch and Devouring Plague. It matters none if DP is a 'hold over time when each race had a specific priest ability'. It doesn't matter. Spells were removed over time. DP was not removed, so it remains part of the Priest's canon necromantic arsenal.

You can keep saying this over and over again. It doesn't make it true. Nothing about Haunt or Soulstone make those abilities necromantic in nature, and there's zero necromancy in the Warlock class.

Nothing in them about being necromantic other than manipulating the souls of the dead, something that is part of the core of the necromancy magic type. Or are you going to tell me that creating a phylactery is not necromancy?

[Teriz]

They have spells that for the sake of game mechanics and simplicity, are magic. They aren't going to give 1 class Curses, Magic, and Disease debuffs. And DKs aren't Necromancers, they have abilties that are based in necromancy, just like Warlocks have necromancy based spells, but aren't Necromancers. Go ahead, ignore the "Harnessing the shadows into bolts of incendiary energy" again and dictate just how much the necromancy school actually encompasses.

Except Death Knights possess all the skills that define Necromancy per your post.
Raise the dead? Raise dead, Army of the Dead, Control Undead, Raise Ally
Conjure diseases? Blood Plague, Frost Fever, Ebony Plague, Scarlet Fever, Necrotic Plague
Chill the living with the power of death? Frost Spec
Reconstruct the dead? Corpse Explosion, Bone shield, Dark Transformation
Shadow magic as incendiary bolts? Death Coil

Good luck doing the same with priests or warlocks.

- - - Updated - - -

So, in your words, the Warlocks have a useless passive?

Nice strawman. If you read Pandemic's tooltip, it's pretty obvious how its useful got Warlocks.

Priest necromantic spells: Vampiric Embrace, Vampiric Touch and Devouring Plague. It matters none if DP is a 'hold over time when each race had a specific priest ability'. It doesn't matter. Spells were removed over time. DP was not removed, so it remains part of the Priest's canon necromantic arsenal.

The only spell on there that could be considered necromancy is Devouring Plague, and again, that's only in the Priest spellbook because its a holdover from Forsaken Priests.

Nothing in them about being necromantic other than manipulating the souls of the dead, something that is part of the core of the necromancy magic type. Or are you going to tell me that creating a phylactery is not necromancy?

Wrong, the core of Necromancy is raising skeletons to fight for you. Diseases and everything else is secondary. Warlocks have none of those attributes beyond the fact that a few of their Shadow-based spells bear a resemblance to necromancy.

It's not necromancy though.

[Ielenia]

The only spell on there that could be considered necromancy is Devouring Plague, and again, that's only in the Priest spellbook because its a holdover from Forsaken Priests.

And both Vampiric spells. That's necromantic. You ignore everything evidence against your theories and claim your theories as fact. Vampiric embrace and Vampiric touch are necromantic.

Wrong, the core of Necromancy is raising skeletons to fight for you.

Wrong. The necromancy is about death and undeath. Manipulating the souls of the dead is just as much part of the Necromancy's core than 'raising skeletons'. Necromancy store souls of the dead in inanimate objects (phylacteries, soul stones, soul shards), manipulate the dead (bring ghosts to haunt their enemies), and even drain the life of the enemy (drain soul, drain life). Pick up just about any RPG and/or fantasy books that deal with necromancy and see how wrong you are.

[Saffa]

Why have another class at all. WoW does not have to be based on every other game out there or people will be wanting a cupcake fairy next. You want to play a bard so much, play a game with bards in them. The same with tinkers.

[hrugner]

The Bard...... Forgive my ignorance.. But as European, I think Asterix.... when I hear bard I associate Troubadix....
And that means:

http://esvi-tennis.at/fotos/rangl_fun/troubadix.jpg

That seems to be a pretty common conception of what a bard is, though it isn't the only one.

In Robert Graves "I Claudius" and "Claudius the God" Graves talks about Rome's dealings with french druids during his time as emperor. While discussing the many things attributed to druids, he also discusses their bardic tradition as well. At this time the bardic tradition was one of historian and lore keeper, in order to be accepted into this role, the druid need to be able to recite ballads and histories from memory for a day while almost completely submerged in water.

D&D as one of the inspirations for many of these type of games also originally held the bard as a keeper of druidic lore. They needed to be both a warrior and a thief before then being taught druidic lore and magic under druidic tutelage.

The more modern and campy vision of the bard as a troubadour is a weird substitution of the bard name onto the troubadour concept. While the bard supposedly had magic powers to compel and influence those around him through stories and songs, their claim to fame wasn't an instrument as much as their knowledge.

The best example of a bard in literature is a character more commonly associated with wizards, as that is the title given to him. However, Gandalf's powers derive more from what he knows, and how he influences those around him, than by any sort of magical power. Even his small tricks of flame and light come from an ancient ring more so than from himself.

If a person does go for the campy concept of the bard, they will certainly find it campy. If they look at the bard for what it is both in fiction and in history, they will find something completely different.

[Yosef1015]

think of this in a business perspective

the bard would not be a good selling point to the majority of customers in this game. this far into the games life they will need something much more epic than a bard to get people to keep returning to this game

[Deleted]

Bard class = worst idea ever
Imho

[Teriz]

And both Vampiric spells. That's necromantic. You ignore everything evidence against your theories and claim your theories as fact. Vampiric embrace and Vampiric touch are necromantic.

No, the Shadow Priest Vampirism is psionic vampirism. The draining of the mind in order to empower onself. Death Knights utilize the more blood based vampirism which is tied to the undead theme.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychic_vampire

Wrong. The necromancy is about death and undeath. Manipulating the souls of the dead is just as much part of the Necromancy's core than 'raising skeletons'. Necromancy store souls of the dead in inanimate objects (phylacteries, soul stones, soul shards), manipulate the dead (bring ghosts to haunt their enemies), and even drain the life of the enemy (drain soul, drain life). Pick up just about any RPG and/or fantasy books that deal with necromancy and see how wrong you are.

When you think of a Necromancer, what's the first thing that pops in your head? If it isn't a spellcaster who has summoned a risen corpse or ghoul, you're lying to yourself.

In any case, this thread has been derailed long enough. Feel free to have the last word.

[Veritas94]

It doesn't seem practical to have a Bard or a Demon Hunter (Warlock Demonology), but what I'm counting on is a Dervish (Guild Wars 1) type of class. That would be so sick. A class built around scythes. I can dream though, right? ;-;

[Monstercloud]

Except Death Knights possess all the skills that define Necromancy per your post.
Raise the dead? Raise dead, Army of the Dead, Control Undead, Raise Ally

Funny you mention "Raise Ally"

Pours dark energy into a dead target, reuniting spirit and body to allow the target to reenter battle with 60% health and 20% mana.

"BUT SPIRITS AND SOULS ARE DIFFERENT!"

Conjure diseases? Blood Plague, Frost Fever, Ebony Plague, Scarlet Fever, Necrotic Plague

We've covered this already, you're being obstinate.

Chill the living with the power of death? Frost Spec

I've looked quickly, and can't see one instance where "Enemies are slowed with the power of ice and death". It's all frost based...

Reconstruct the dead? Corpse Explosion, Bone shield, Dark Transformation

Reconstructing isn't deconstructing or explosions, the bones aren't reconstructing anything, and Dark Transformation is a result of the shadow power being infused. It's not a direct result of the DK modifying the structure of the ghoul.

Shadow magic as incendiary bolts? Death Coil

Do I REALLY need to quote the definition of incendiary?

You really do fall apart when you don't have your unprovable imagination to fall back on.

[Ielenia]

No, the Shadow Priest Vampirism is psionic vampirism. The draining of the mind in order to empower onself. Death Knights utilize the more blood based vampirism which is tied to the undead theme.

"Psyonic vampirism", in the link you provided, says such being feeds off the "life force" (link taken directly from your link) which are not their physical health. Vampires (and abilities such as Vampiric Touch and Vampiric Embrace) feed off the person's physical health. The Priest is not feeding off their opponents' mind or soul energy. They're feeding off their physical health. Blood.

When you think of a Necromancer, what's the first thing that pops in your head? If it isn't a spellcaster who has summoned a risen corpse or ghoul, you're lying to yourself.

Nice of you to have the galls to know what I'm thinking or not thinking. When I think of a necromancer, I think of a spellcaster that not only feeds off the life energy of others, through life drains or curses, as well as raising skeletons/zombies. And, by the way? The name 'warlock' is just a synonym for 'mage' or 'magician', and doesn't really have a 'dark' conotation, implying it deals with shadow and demonic.

In any case, this thread has been derailed long enough. Feel free to have the last word.

This 'derailing' occurred because you refuse to accept that singing bards are possible since spellsongs already exist in the game, because you claim we should not have bards and 'all hymns should go to priests', despite the fact that, until the DK's introduction, everything necromantic should have gone to the Warlock and Priests, as per these evidences, but when the DK was introduced, necromatic gained a new 'target class'.

[Teriz]

Funny you mention "Raise Ally"



"BUT SPIRITS AND SOULS ARE DIFFERENT!"

I was talking about the old version that rereaised your dead ally into a ghoul.

We've covered this already, you're being obstinate.

And you don't know the difference between disease, and magic DoT spells.

I've looked quickly, and can't see one instance where "Enemies are slowed with the power of ice and death". It's all frost based...

Look up Frost Fever. That should help.

Reconstructing isn't deconstructing or explosions, the bones aren't reconstructing anything, and Dark Transformation is a result of the shadow power being infused. It's not a direct result of the DK modifying the structure of the ghoul.

That's some impressive semantic backflips. In the end, the DK can reconstruct the dead. Shadow Priests and Warlocks cannot.

Do I REALLY need to quote the definition of incendiary?

You REALLY need to come up with examples of Warlocks and SPriests performing necromancy at the level I just showed for death knights.

You really do fall apart when you don't have your unprovable imagination to fall back on.

I just realized that I'm "debating" with someone who thinks a Death Knight has nothing to do with the dead or Necromancy, and thinks that all damaging DoTs are the same.

So, yeah feel free to have the last word as well.

[Monstercloud]

I was talking about the old version that rereaised your dead ally into a ghoul.

So hold on.... it's not ok for Ielenia to use devouring plague because it was a left over spell, but it's ok for you to invoke how old spells worked. Gotcha, moving along.

And you don't know the difference between disease, and magic DoT spells.

Go get a cracker for yourself

Look up Frost Fever. That should help.

No where does it say "Death", nor does it slow. Even the modifying ability that does slow enemies, Chilblains, doesn't have anything close to the word "Death". It's all cold based.

That's some impressive semantic backflips.

...yes, because "Demolitions" and "Builder" are practically the same thing.....wow...

Also, Bone Shield isn't building into anything... it's just large bones moving around you.

You REALLY need to come up with examples of Warlocks and SPriests performing necromancy at the level I just showed for death knights.

Warlocks can bind and drain souls, and drain life... Necromancy. It's not my problem that I need to make an argument that trumps your obstinateness.

Considering that I'm "debating" with someone who thinks a Death Knight has nothing to do with the dead or Necromancy.......

Never said it has nothing to do with necromancy, I said they aren't necromancers. Massive difference... poor effort though on trying to twist my words. Finally, you don't debate, you argue for the sake of arguing.

[Ielenia]

That's some impressive semantic backflips. In the end, the DK can reconstruct the dead. Shadow Priests and Warlocks cannot.

Resurrection and Soulstone. Nuff' said.

[Thimagryn]

No, the Shadow Priest Vampirism is psionic vampirism. The draining of the mind in order to empower onself. Death Knights utilize the more blood based vampirism which is tied to the undead theme.

So you can make a distinction between Shadow Priests who use Vampirism and Death Knights who also use Vampirism, yet you can't make a distinction between Demon Hunters and Warlocks who use Fel Magic in very different ways. Sounds like bias to me.

[Teriz]

So you can make a distinction between Shadow Priests who use Vampirism and Death Knights who also use Vampirism, yet you can't make a distinction between Demon Hunters and Warlocks who use Fel Magic in very different ways.

Yes, because Vampirism isn't the main theme of either class.

[Deleted]

Here's a reason why it won't: there aren't any playable bards in the Warcraft universe.

Last class was monk in a panda theme playing on the Pandaren Brewmaster hero, which could split into three characters with his ultimate skill, so a possible next class must have some previous lore in the Warcraft universe and bard just doesn't. That's more Everquest-like and the whole MMO-genre and -age, but not Warcraft.

I don't think there'll be a next class for a bit, but bards are just so foreign to the universe which the game lives in and was intended to be based on.

[Ielenia]

Here's a reason why it won't: there aren't any playable bards in the Warcraft universe.

Last class was monk in a panda theme playing on the Pandaren Brewmaster hero, which could split into three characters with his ultimate skill, so a possible next class must have some previous lore in the Warcraft universe and bard just doesn't. That's more Everquest-like and the whole MMO-genre and -age, but not Warcraft.

I don't think there'll be a next class for a bit, but bards are just so foreign to the universe which the game lives in and was intended to be based on.

Your argument doesn't work when we consider the fact that there were no playable monks in the Warcraft Universe. Sure, you can say "The Pandaren Brewmaster was available in Warcraft 3!!", but need I remind you that, back in Warcraft 3, the Pandaren Brewmaster was not a monk, but actually just a simple, drunk Pandaren? None of his animations, none of his lines, nothing about his art really resembled anything martial-arts-y or monk-y. The clothes and straw hat are just simple commoner, peasant clothes from ancient China. The staff is just a simple staff, and the barrel... well, it's a barrel. Of beer, most likely.