Necromancer fans: What are you looking for in a Necromancer class?

[jellmoo]

I'm kind of confused: Why does a Necromancer need to have a Frost spec (Shadowfrost or otherwise)? There are netric ton of options for what the specs could be. There's no reason to assume that they have to be things like Frost, Unholy, Blood. Blizzard could go in a multitube of directions.

[Teriz]

I'm kind of confused: Why does a Necromancer need to have a Frost spec (Shadowfrost or otherwise)? There are netric ton of options for what the specs could be. There's no reason to assume that they have to be things like Frost, Unholy, Blood. Blizzard could go in a multitube of directions.

If Kel'thuzad is the Necromancer hero, the class would have to have a Frost spec because he's a lich.

[jellmoo]

If Kel'thuzad is the Necromancer hero, the class would have to have a Frost spec because he's a lich.

Why does Kel'thuzad need to be the class hero? Or, alternately, why does he have to remain a Lich if he were to be the class hero?

[Teriz]

Why does Kel'thuzad need to be the class hero? Or, alternately, why does he have to remain a Lich if he were to be the class hero?

Because Kel'thuzad is the only major lore character who is a Necromancer in Warcraft.

And he's famous for being a Lich. I'm not even sure there are images of him as a Necromancer...

[jellmoo]

Because Kel'thuzad is the only major lore character who is a Necromancer in Warcraft.

And he's famous for being a Lich. I'm not even sure there are images of him as a Necromancer...

And? Blizzard could very easily:

A) Create a brand new character to take the role
B) Change an existing character to meet the role (take a Mage, give him a crisis, have him turn to Necromancy)
C) Kel'thuzad returns to life after the events of Shadowlands
D) We don't terribly need to have a super established class hero

[Teriz]

And? Blizzard could very easily:

A) Create a brand new character to take the role
B) Change an existing character to meet the role (take a Mage, give him a crisis, have him turn to Necromancy)
C) Kel'thuzad returns to life after the events of Shadowlands
D) We don't terribly need to have a super established class hero

They could do all of that, but there's no reason to mess with tradition. The class hero is typically a character famous enough to go on the cover of an expansion. Kel'thuzad (in lich form) is certainly famous enough to do that. We're assuming that Blizzard would have a problem with a Frost spec if they decided to create a necromancer class in the first place.

In reality, if Blizzard has decided to go with a necromancer with Kel'Thuzad as its hero, they've already accepted a massive amount of overlap and potential DK, Mage, and Warlock pruning, so overlapping and possibly dismantling the Frost Mage and DK specs wouldn't be an obstacle in their eyes.

[jellmoo]

They could do all of that, but there's no reason to mess with tradition. We're assuming that Blizzard would have a problem with a Frost spec if they decided to create a necromancer class in the first place.

What tradition though? It's not like we have to have a clearly established hero for a class. With two classes already having a Frost spec in the game, why wouldn't Blizzard just avoid it altogether and use one of the myriad of other options?

In reality, if Blizzard has decided to go with a necromancer with Kel'Thuzad as its hero, they've already accepted a massive amount of overlap and potential DK, Mage, and Warlock pruning, so overlapping and possibly dismantling the Frost Mage and DK specs wouldn't be an obstacle in their eyes.

Sure, if that's what they absolutely felt like they had to do. It's just... Why on earth would they do that? I highly doubt that they're method of class design is "how can we negatively impact as many players as humanly possible, muhahaha!".

[Teriz]

What tradition though? It's not like we have to have a clearly established hero for a class. With two classes already having a Frost spec in the game, why wouldn't Blizzard just avoid it altogether and use one of the myriad of other options?

A character famous enough to be on the cover of an expansion. A random necromancer, or Kel'thuzad in human form doesn't fit the bill. Kel'thuzad in Lich form definitely fits the bill.

Sure, if that's what they absolutely felt like they had to do. It's just... Why on earth would they do that? I highly doubt that they're method of class design is "how can we negatively impact as many players as humanly possible, muhahaha!".

I agree, which is more than likely why there was no necromancer released in the Shadowlands expansion. The ONLY way you make a cohesive warcraft necromancer at this point is by dismantling multiple specs in multiple classes.

[jellmoo]

A character famous enough to be on the cover of an expansion. A random necromancer, or Kel'thuzad in human form doesn't fit the bill. Kel'thuzad in Lich form definitely fits the bill.

The expansion box doesn't need to have a new class character though. Blizzard can just as easily pop the villain's face on the box, just like they've done in expansions without a new class. If Necromancers join in on the hunt for Sylvanas in World of Warcraft: Oh Yay, Another Sylvanas Expansion, she could easily be the cover art.

I agree, which is more than likely why there was no necromancer released in the Shadowlands expansion. The ONLY way you make a cohesive warcraft necromancer at this point is by dismantling multiple specs in multiple classes.

A Warcraft Necromancer is whatever the Blizzard development decides it is. If they want to make something new and completely different, so be it. If they want to port over the Necromancer from Diablo, then that's what they do. There is no reason that any class needs to be dismantled to satisfy a Necromancer concept.

And I say this as somebody who doesn't particularly want a Necromancer class.

[Th3Scourge]

I am already playing a Necromancer but playing Unholy, the spec that Blizzard decided is the playable wow necromancer

[Teriz]

The expansion box doesn't need to have a new class character though. Blizzard can just as easily pop the villain's face on the box, just like they've done in expansions without a new class. If Necromancers join in on the hunt for Sylvanas in World of Warcraft: Oh Yay, Another Sylvanas Expansion, she could easily be the cover art.

They could, but again, why mess with tradition?

A Warcraft Necromancer is whatever the Blizzard development decides it is.

I agree, and they decided that it's the Death Knight, twice.

[jellmoo]

They could, but again, why mess with tradition?

Because it's a video game, not the 4th of July. Tradition isn't exactly steeped here. Plus, somebody at Blizzard seems to have a hardon for Sylvanas, so putting her on the box isn't such a stretch...

I agree, and they decided that it's the Death Knight, twice.

And tomorrow, this whole new development team could decide otherwise. What was decided 10 years ago by a different group of people isn't some hard and fast rule that Blizzard needs to follow for time eternal.

[Teriz]

Because it's a video game, not the 4th of July. Tradition isn't exactly steeped here. Plus, somebody at Blizzard seems to have a hardon for Sylvanas, so putting her on the box isn't such a stretch...

Sylvanas on the box art after this expansion? Not likely.

And tomorrow, this whole new development team could decide otherwise. What was decided 10 years ago by a different group of people isn't some hard and fast rule that Blizzard needs to follow for time eternal.

If they decide otherwise, then there will be mass pruning in the Death Knight and Warlock classes.

[Melkirth]

Once upon a time, Death Knights couldn't be added to the game because Warlocks had a spell called Death Coil. A simple name change was all that was needed to solve that problem. There are some arguments against adding a new class that I would like to address:

• Necromancer would only be a range version of death knight... And? Priests are a ranged version of Paladins and vice versa. In fact, Death Knights are a unholy version of Paladin and thats what makes them attractive as a class. Another side of the same coin, doesn't mean it's exactly the same. There are room for differences even if the base concept is spellcaster or melee spellcaster. They aren't exactly giving new toys to the existing classes so a class that can summon more and different types of undead wouldn't clash with death knights who have limited summoning abilities.

• Necromancers can't be added because only warlocks can use curses. Might be the weakest argument I've seen in this thread. There are more curses in the game from non-Warlock sources than from Warlocks. True that it's the only class so far that can use it but how is that a problem for adding another class? A lot of undead minions in the game have cursed in its name so there is a precedent that some curses are connected to death. A Necromancer class curses doesn't need to be the same as a Warlocks, there is room for more than the few curses that got added to one class back in vanilla.

• If Blizzard wants to add a new class to the game then they will. There isn't a single valid counter argument in this thread that would prevent it. New abilities can always be added, spells with names that is associated with that class given to other classes previously can be renamed and overlap with a melee version is not a problem since it would be a ranged class and there are plenty of ranged counterparts to melee classes in both WoW and other fantasy worlds that can exist together without any difficulty. The only issue is do they want to add in another class. That's all.

[Teriz]

Once upon a time, Death Knights couldn't be added to the game because Warlocks had a spell called Death Coil. A simple name change was all that was needed to solve that problem. There are some arguments against adding a new class that I would like to address:

• Necromancer would only be a range version of death knight... And? Priests are a ranged version of Paladins and vice versa. In fact, Death Knights are a unholy version of Paladin and thats what makes them attractive as a class. Another side of the same coin, doesn't mean it's exactly the same. There are room for differences even if the base concept is spellcaster or melee spellcaster. They aren't exactly giving new toys to the existing classes so a class that can summon more and different types of undead wouldn't clash with death knights who have limited summoning abilities.

Yeah, except Priests aren't the ranged version of Paladins. 50% of the Priest class utilizes shadow magic, a type of magic that Paladins don't use at all.

[jellmoo]

Sylvanas on the box art after this expansion? Not likely.

That was a tongue in cheek remark, but the point is that they can and have put NPCs completely unrelated to a character class on box art before. Nothing is stopping them from doing it again.

If they decide otherwise, then there will be mass pruning in the Death Knight and Warlock classes.

You keep saying that, but it doesn't magically make it so. They can create a Necromancer class without pruning a single ability from another class.

[Amunrasonther]

Yeah, except Priests aren't the ranged version of Paladins. 50% of the Priest class utilizes shadow magic, a type of magic that Paladins don't use at all.

There's more that could differentiate Necromancers from Death Knights than there currently is between Priests and Paladins.

Necromancers could utilize poison/alchemy/nature magic, shadowfrost magic, permanent Lich transformations, and be inability to use runic magic like Death Knights can. That's a lot more than just ....shadow!" between Paladins and Priests.

[Teriz]

You keep saying that, but it doesn't magically make it so. They can create a Necromancer class without pruning a single ability from another class.

I simply don't see a scenario where Blizzard allows two classes to raise undead on the level that DKs currently do, and Necromancers would be required to do. Beyond that, there simply isn't much to work with spec wise that isn't absorbed by existing classes.

- - - Updated - - -

There's more that could differentiate Necromancers from Death Knights than there currently is between Priests and Paladins.

Necromancers could utilize poison/alchemy/nature magic, shadowfrost magic, permanent Lich transformations, and be inability to use runic magic like Death Knights can. That's a lot more than just ....shadow!" between Paladins and Priests.

Isn't that simply revisions of what the DKs already do? Poison in the place of diseases? Shadowfrost in the place of Frost? a permanent lich transformation in the place of the temporary Lich transformation via Lichborne?

I mean, there's not much original here. You mention alchemy, but if we're following previous expansion class inclusions, a class using alchemy would be taking from the Goblin Alchemist hero, and that hero is pretty firmly on the technological/whimiscal side of the equation and fits better with the Goblin Tinker.

[Gaidax]

Yeah, except Priests aren't the ranged version of Paladins. 50% of the Priest class utilizes shadow magic, a type of magic that Paladins don't use at all.

I mean, I'm not hot or cold about Necromancers, but really - Paladins are pretty much priests with martial training.

That analogy is very valid, because all in all there are a lot of similarities between Priests and Paladins, but also enough differences to make them separate classes.

Overall DK existing does not somehow prevent Necromancers as a class - they are 2 different things despite overlapping themes just like Priest and Paladin.

[jellmoo]

I simply don't see a scenario where Blizzard allows two classes to raise undead on the level that DKs currently do, and Necromancers would be required to do. Beyond that, there simply isn't much to work with spec wise that isn't absorbed by existing classes.

We already have multiple specs that "do" the same thing. There is little functional difference between a Fire Mage, Destruction Warlock and Elemental Shaman. They all go 'pew pew pew' with slight variations. Having another class that has an undead theme doesn't need to change how Unholy Death Knights handle that schtick, and having multiple summons doesn't need to be done in the same fashion that Warlocks do it.

There are plenty of examples of other games having very different approaches to how their Necromancers function. Blizzard need not pigeonhole themselves and say "we need to make it like Death Knights and warlocks". Why would they? Take a different approach and create a thematically appropriate class that is unique.