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

[Teriz]

Because they decided to explore Covenants instead of any new class. Same reason why they didn't make a Tech-themed expansion to introduce a Tinker class.

So instead of creating a Necromancer class, they expanded the existing Necromancer theme in the DK class, and gave every other class Necromancer abilities?

That makes zero sense.

Necromancy is far more in demand than Tech themes.

I’ve seen zero evidence that suggests that. Care to provide some?

[Triceron]

So instead of creating a Necromancer class, they expanded the existing Necromancer theme in the DK class, and gave every other class Necromancer abilities?

If you read the official statements, yes

Because if Death Knights were all that important, then they wouldn't have given every class Necromantic abilities. It's clear that there is a demand for the Necromantic theme, and they wanted to explore that as well as the Shadowlands themes in depth through more character customization, thus Covenants.

Otherwise, why dilute the DK and give its theme to other classes? Does that make sense to you either?

No, it wouldn't make sense, unless you disconnect that entire argument and simply regard Necromancy as something that is universally demanded and not exclusive to Death Knights.

I’ve seen zero evidence that suggests that. Care to provide some?

The fact we don't have a Tech-themed expansion right now instead of Shadowlands?

Seems pretty obvious.

[nToxik]

If they made a new class, it would be a class that steals a lot of abilities from current classes and incorporates it as it's own. It would have super mobility and be viable in high M+ keys.

[Teriz]

Irrelevant. The point is that what I said counters what you said earlier. Again: nothing paladins can do, priests can't. Paladins are pure holy magic, and priests have holy magic as well. So, technically, everything the paladins can do, the priests also can. Therefore, by your logic, paladins are a class that shouldn't exist in the game, because priests already cover everything paladins can do.

This response is a contradiction. If being free of Shadow magic is something Priests can’t do, and Paladins can do, then how is that irrelevant? Isn’t that the entire point?

It does not say she is not a necromancer, plus the Ultimate Visual Guide has inconsistencies and parts of it de-canonized by Blizzard. Also, she is a high-ranking member of the Cult of the Damned. And on top of that, I doubt you'd consider Nathrezims and Nerubians to be death knights... and yet their abilities and themes were given to the death knight class when it was made playable.

Again, inconsistencies doesn’t make that guide any less official, and there are no inconsistencies in regards to the Necromancer.

You're playing semantics, here. "Death" and "afterlife" are not the same, in this case. That's like saying that "vehicle" and "motorcycle" are synonyms.

Motorcycle is a type of vehicle, and afterlife is another word for death. Again, simply a fact.

Necromancers are not about the afterlife. They're about undeath. Their theme and concept does not fit the general theme and concept of Shadowlands, which is, again: the afterlife. Which is why I agree with Blizzard when they said that "no class jumped at them".

Interestingly based on the ultimate guide to Warcraft, Death Knights fit the definition of Necromancers completely (since they perform Necromancy) and they fit perfectly fine in Shadowlands where they got additional Necromancer abilities and expansions of their existing Necromancer abilities.

So it would appear that you are incorrect across the board.

- - - Updated - - -

If you read the official statements, yes

Because if Death Knights were all that important, then they wouldn't have given every class Necromantic abilities. It's clear that there is a demand for the Necromantic theme, and they wanted to explore that as well as the Shadowlands themes in depth through more character customization, thus Covenants.

They have everyone Necromancer abilities because that’s the theme of the expansion. How does that invalidate the expansion of Necromancer concepts in the DK class?

No, it wouldn't make sense, unless you disconnect that entire argument and simply regard Necromancy as something that is universally demanded and not exclusive to Death Knights.

I’ve already said that Warlocks have some Necromancer abilities as well, but it’s rather clear that the Necromancer class in WoW is the DK. Adding another Necromancer class would be redundant.

Also you keep mentioning demand. Who cares? Despite all this supposed demand, Blizzard was moved to introduce a Necromancer class in a Necromancer expansion.

- - - Updated - - -

If they made a new class, it would be a class that steals a lot of abilities from current classes and incorporates it as it's own. It would have super mobility and be viable in high M+ keys.

The Tinker class would steal abilities from none of the existing classes. Neither would a dragon class based on Wrathion.

A Necromancer class on the other hand? Warlocks and DKs would be at risk for severe ability loss.

[Ielenia]

This response is a contradiction. If being free of Shadow magic is something Priests can’t do, and Paladins can do, then how is that irrelevant? Isn’t that the entire point?

Who said priests are not "free of shadow magic"? You do know that just because a character takes up priesthood, it does not mean they are all taught both light and shadow, right? "Priest" is not a single entity, but a condensed agglomerate of various concepts, of priests and clerics and acolytes of both the light, and the shadow.

High Priestess Ishanah is a holy priest, but just because she is a priest does not mean she is also a discipline priest and a shadow priest.

Again, inconsistencies doesn’t make that guide any less official, and there are no inconsistencies in regards to the Necromancer.

Having inconsistencies and having parts of it deemed non-canon makes the source unreliable for extracting canon information. Would you implicitly trust a guy that has been demonstrated that many of the things he said are not true?

Motorcycle is a type of vehicle,

So you're saying that a truck and a motorcycle are the same? Because both are vehicles. That's not how synonyms work, Teriz.

and afterlife is another word for death. Again, simply a fact.

This:


is not the same as this:

Interestingly based on the ultimate guide to Warcraft, Death Knights fit the definition of Necromancers completely (since they perform Necromancy)

And priests fit the description of paladins since they perform holy magic. And yet both paladins and priests exist.

and they fit perfectly fine in Shadowlands

No, they don't. Because the expansion's overarching theme is the afterlife, and as I've explained multiple times, the necromancers are not about the afterlife.

So it would appear that you are incorrect across the board.

Except I'm not, as demonstrated several times over. The death knights do not fulfill the death knight fantasy, because those who want to play a necromancer class do not want to play a heavy-plated melee class whose attacks depend on swinging their heavy sword, heavy mace or heavy axe. They want to play as a light-armored spellcaster, with all the abilities that emerge from that concept.

[Triceron]

They have everyone Necromancer abilities because that’s the theme of the expansion. How does that invalidate the expansion of Necromancer concepts in the DK class?

They don't any more than they would invalidate a future Necromancer class.

That's the point.

I’ve already said that Warlocks have some Necromancer abilities as well, but it’s rather clear that the Necromancer class in WoW is the DK. Adding another Necromancer class would be redundant.

All classes are redundant.

Just look at the thread on the main page about every class playing the same with having one big spender ability comprising big damage, and everything else supporting that one big damage ability. Everything is homogenized to the point where any new class is completely redundant.

And the point of adding any redundant class isn't for new game mechanics or fresh new themes. It's to sell more copies of the game and keep players invested in playing longer.

Also you keep mentioning demand. Who cares?

Well, apparantly you do, since you're still regarding the Necromancer class and actively trying to dismiss it rather than, you know, simply accepting that people will like what they want and letting it go.

If you didn't care, you'd have to reason to actively try to dismiss it. It's like a Star Wars fan who says they don't care about Star Wars then go on a 10-year rant on how bad it has become.

We can say very little people care about a Beastmaster class. No one talks about it, no one has reason to argue for one, no one has reason to argue against one. Making any argument for or against shows that... well, you care about the concept, enough to have to discuss it.

The fact that this class concept still keeps coming around and popping up in polls (in and out of the forum) is due to demand. And who cares? Right?

Well, apparantly we all do, otherwise we wouldn't be talking about them.

[Teriz]

Who said priests are not "free of shadow magic"? You do know that just because a character takes up priesthood, it does not mean they are all taught both light and shadow, right? "Priest" is not a single entity, but a condensed agglomerate of various concepts, of priests and clerics and acolytes of both the light, and the shadow.

Every Priest spec allows the use of shadow magic.
So no, they’re not free of shadow magic.

High Priestess Ishanah is a holy priest, but just because she is a priest does not mean she is also a discipline priest and a shadow priest.

This has nothing to do with the priest class.

Having inconsistencies and having parts of it deemed non-canon makes the source unreliable for extracting canon information. Would you implicitly trust a guy that has been demonstrated that many of the things he said are not true?

Every aspect of WoW and Warcraft contains inconsistencies, so is everything deemed non-canon?

Except I'm not, as demonstrated several times over. The death knights do not fulfill the death knight fantasy, because those who want to play a necromancer class do not want to play a heavy-plated melee class whose attacks depend on swinging their heavy sword, heavy mace or heavy axe. They want to play as a light-armored spellcaster, with all the abilities that emerge from that concept.

And as I said, what a small group of people want to play is irrelevant to the fact that the DK class is the Necromancer class of WoW. As demonstrated in Shadowlands and many other instances.

- - - Updated - - -

They don't any more than they would invalidate a future Necromancer class.

That's the point.

So again, if your entire point is that Blizzard will introduce a Necromancer class because of this demand you can’t verify, what stopped them from implementation in a Necromancer based expansion? You’re really going to argue that they wanted to make a Necromancer class but couldn’t because they had to give Necromancer abilities to everyone else?

All classes are redundant.

If you don’t understand how classes are structured, that’s definitely something you would believe.

Well, apparantly you do, since you're still regarding the Necromancer class and actively trying to dismiss it rather than, you know, simply accepting that people will like what they want and letting it go.

I certainly accept that there are people who will never be satisfied by what’s in the game and will believe that a concept with a tiny tweak is somehow completely different than what we currently have and is needed.

My point is who cares? Obviously they don’t sway Blizzard as evidenced by the lack of a Necromancer in this expansion, so why are we talking about them as if they influence WoW design?

The fact that this class concept still keeps coming around and popping up in polls (in and out of the forum) is due to demand. And who cares? Right?

Well, apparantly we all do, otherwise we wouldn't be talking about them.

And Blizzard does not. Hence why there’s no new Necromancer class in Shadowlands despite this “demand” you keep talking about.

Anyway, the Necromancer is a dead concept wrapped up in the DK class. You guys are free to continue talking about it if you want. I’d rather discuss more likely concepts like the Tinker or Dragonsworn.

[Ielenia]

Every Priest spec allows the use of shadow magic.
So no, they’re not free of shadow magic.

Again: this is not about game mechanics. It's about the class concept. And if you're going that way, then the paladin is also not "free of shadow magic" considering they can use shadow magic in this expansion, and the 2nd generation death knights were paladins.

This has nothing to do with the priest class.

It has everything to do with it. You're taking game mechanics and applying it as lore. Just because the priest playable class can use both shadow and holy in all of its specs, it doesn't mean that every priest in the lore can use both shadow and holy magic at the same time.

Every aspect of WoW and Warcraft contains inconsistencies, so is everything deemed non-canon?

I think everyone would agree that the World of Warcraft game's lore would trump everything, unless being directly retconned or contradicted by a developer.

And as I said, what a small group of people want to play is irrelevant to the fact that the DK class is the Necromancer class of WoW.

By that same token, we can say that "one person saying the DK class is the necromancer class of WoW is irrelevant to the fact that death knights and necromancers are separate concepts."

As demonstrated in Shadowlands and many other instances.

You mean Shadowlands, that revealed that there is more to necromancy than death knights? We also have Scholomance, which is a necromancer school, where necromancer acolytes are learning alchemic poison, and Grand Widow Faerlina who is a high-ranking member of the cult of the Damned.

If you don’t understand how classes are structured, that’s definitely something you would believe.

This is both ironic AND heavy projection to the highest degrees.

[Triceron]

So again, if your entire point is that Blizzard will introduce a Necromancer class because of this demand you can’t verify, what stopped them from implementation in a Necromancer based expansion? You’re really going to argue that they wanted to make a Necromancer class but couldn’t because they had to give Necromancer abilities to everyone else?

They didn't add a class at all. What reason do we have to assume that they were in a position to do so or assume what they want or give us? They literally said nothing jumped out at them the way the Demon Hunter did for Legion.

Should we assume we aren't getting Tinkers because Mechagon already gave everyone tech stuff to play with? We're still absolutely clear in Covenants not making any existing class turn into Necromancers. That's the bottom line.

If you don’t understand how classes are structured, that’s definitely something you would believe.

I know enough that there are enough classes in the game where adding any new one is absolutely redundant.

Simple answer is WoW and Shadowlands has proven that new classes aren't needed to be successful.

I certainly accept that there are people who will never be satisfied by what’s in the game and will believe that a concept with a tiny tweak is somehow completely different than what we currently have and is needed.

My point is who cares? Obviously they don’t sway Blizzard as evidenced by the lack of a Necromancer in this expansion, so why are we talking about them as if they influence WoW design?

Because correlations aren't what drive Blizzard design either.

Tinkers aren't in the game yet, doesn't that concern you as well? I mean, if they were so obvious and in demand, don't you think we'd have them by now? Especially if we literally had Mechagon setting them up last expansion? I find it a bit difficult to see how Blizzard would follow up Shadowlands with a Tech theme right now, and if we don't get a new class by next expansion it really hurts the chances of getting them at all.

Anyway, the Necromancer is a dead concept wrapped up in the DK class. You guys are free to continue talking about it if you want. I’d rather discuss more likely concepts like the Tinker or Dragonsworn.

Oh, I would too. I'm not discussing Necromancers because I want to, but because you keep using bogus arguments to dismiss them. I'd easily stip talking about them if you aren't making bogus claims, simple as that.

Again, the ball is in your park. We discuss because we care.

- - - Updated - - -

You're playing semantics, here. "Death" and "afterlife" are not the same, in this case. That's like saying that "vehicle" and "motorcycle" are synonyms.

Necromancers are not about the afterlife. They're about undeath. Their theme and concept does not fit the general theme and concept of Shadowlands, which is, again: the afterlife. Which is why I agree with Blizzard when they said that "no class jumped at them".

Death, Undeath and the Afterlife are all themes that Necromancers are tied to. They deal in matters of all three, and none of these themes are excluded. I'm not quite sure you still think they don't fit the Shadowlands when Necromancy was created there, sourced from there and have major Necromancer characters derived from there.

The 'no class jumped at them' was not concerning Necromancers, it was concerning a class concept that was tied to Shadowlands's story and setting (specifically this expansion) as much as Demon Hunters were to Legion's story and setting. That has nothing to do with Necromancer's connection to the afterlife or to Shadowlands, it has to do with the fact they didn't value them particularly fitting into the specific settings and story they built for this expansion, and chose to focus redirecting their efforts on character customization (like we saw in WoD) instead of into a new class. It was pretty clear stated.

You can't assert Necromancers having no interest or connection to the afterlife when Maldraxxus is literally full of Necromancers.

That's like you trying to say Monks don't have an interest in Healing because Chen and Taran Zhu aren't healers. You're outright ignoring the elephant in the room.

https://wow.gamepedia.com/Maldraxxus...%20Shadowlands.

[Ielenia]

Death, Undeath and the Afterlife are all themes that Necromancers are tied to. They deal in matters of all three, and none of these themes are excluded. I'm not quite sure you still think they don't fit the Shadowlands when Necromancy was created there, sourced from there and have major Necromancer characters derived from there.

"Afterlife" is related to necromancers only tangentially, at best, in the sense that necromancers deny the afterlife to the souls they raise as undead minions. You don't see necromancers caring about redeeming souls, or ferrying them to the Shadowlands, or anything. To them, souls are just... a resource. An expendable resource.

The 'no class jumped at them' was not concerning Necromancers, it was concerning a class concept that was tied to Shadowlands's story and setting (specifically this expansion) as much as Demon Hunters were to Legion's story and setting.

It was not concerning necromancer specifically, but it was concerning them, as well. I simply gave my reasons why I agree with Blizzard's decisions.

You can't assert Necromancers having no interest in the afterlife when Maldraxxus is literally full of Necromancers.

But the necromances that exist in Maldraxxus are not the necromances we see on Azeroth. And even so, the ones in Maldraxxus don't care much about the afterlife. They care about fighting and war, like warriors. Their concern about the afterlife is tangential, because they live (It's 'live' a valid term to use to describe those existing in the afterlife?) there. Just like a warlock's concern about the mortal realm is because they live there, not because part of the class and concept is themed around the mortal realm.

Also: I didn't say they have no connections. I said they are not about the afterlife. There's a difference. Hunters have a connection to the afterlife through Ardenweald, but that doesn't mean the class is about the afterlife now, is it?

[Teriz]

Should we assume we aren't getting Tinkers because Mechagon already gave everyone tech stuff to play with? We're still absolutely clear in Covenants not making any existing class turn into Necromancers. That's the bottom line.

Mechagon came in the middle of expansion, all classes didn't get a technology ability as an expansion feature, BFA didn't revolve around technology/Goblins/Gnomes, and Demon Hunters had just been introduced in the previous expansion.

I know enough that there are enough classes in the game where adding any new one is absolutely redundant.

Necromancer would be redundant. A Tinker or Dragon class would not be based on their WC3 and HotS abilities.

Tinkers aren't in the game yet, doesn't that concern you as well? I mean, if they were so obvious and in demand, don't you think we'd have them by now? Especially if we literally had Mechagon setting them up last expansion? I find it a bit difficult to see how Blizzard would follow up Shadowlands with a Tech theme right now, and if we don't get a new class by next expansion it really hurts the chances of getting them at all.

Clearly mechagon wasn't the lingering theme from the last expansion, it was Sylvanas and her obsession with death, which is why we're in Shadowlands now.

As for what comes next, who knows? However, until we get a technology-themed expansion, Tinker is still on the table. Until we get a Dragon Isles expansion, a Dragon class is still on the table.

Necromancers and Dark Rangers are decidedly off the table.

Oh, I would too. I'm not discussing Necromancers because I want to, but because you keep using bogus arguments to dismiss them. I'd easily stip talking about them if you aren't making bogus claims, simple as that.

Again, the ball is in your park. We discuss because we care.

I dismiss Necromancers because;

1. Blizzard stated that they incorporated the "ideas surrounding the Necromancer" into the Death Knight class.
2. The WC3 Necromancer's abilities were placed into the DK class.
3. Lichs, Ghouls, Frost Wyrms, Crypt lords, Abominations, Banshees, and other undead/necromantic units were also incorporated into the DK class.
4. The Ultimate Guide to WoW's definition of a Necromancer is exactly what the DK class does.
5. When Shadowlands rolled around Blizzard increased the necromantic theme within the entire class.
6. No new Necromancer class in a Necromancer-based expansion focused on death and where every class gets a necromancer ability.

I fail to see how any of those arguments are bogus, especially when your counter to those arguments is pretty much "people are demanding it".

- - - Updated - - -

"Afterlife" is related to necromancers only tangentially, at best, in the sense that necromancers deny the afterlife to the souls they raise as undead minions. You don't see necromancers caring about redeeming souls, or ferrying them to the Shadowlands, or anything. To them, souls are just... a resource. An expendable resource.


It was not concerning necromancer specifically, but it was concerning them, as well. I simply gave my reasons why I agree with Blizzard's decisions.


But the necromances that exist in Maldraxxus are not the necromances we see on Azeroth. And even so, the ones in Maldraxxus don't care much about the afterlife. They care about fighting and war, like warriors. Their concern about the afterlife is tangential, because they live (It's 'live' a valid term to use to describe those existing in the afterlife?) there. Just like a warlock's concern about the mortal realm is because they live there, not because part of the class and concept is themed around the mortal realm.

Interesting how Blizzard was able to tie Death Knights to Shadowlands, but not Necromancers;

Blood

At home in the Shadowlands and amongst their fellow dead, Blood Death Knights can learn new abilities and Talents. Blood Tap allows Death Knights to consume essence from slain enemies to generate 1 Rune, and is repeatable whenever a Bone Shield charge is used. Blood Death Knights will also get Rune Tap without needing to select it as a Talent.

Relish in Blood will significantly heal these bloody bruisers for each active Bone Shield charge and grant 5 Runic Power when Death and Decay is cast while Crimson Scourge is active.

Unholy
While all Death Knights have some ability to control and reanimate undead minions, an Unholy Death Knight has chosen to specialize necromantic magic, and their abilities should reflect that. All Unholy Death Knights will be able to use Summon Gargoyle (previously a Talent) to bring these flying terrors to their side. Army of the Damned (Talent) returns as an even stronger force with a familiar and faithful recruit—a Magus of the Dead. These formidable magic-wielders have fought side by side with Maldraxxus’ bannermen and their presence rallies Unholy Death Knights’ ghoulish armies, lobbing Frostbolt and Shadow Bolt spells into the enemy. Death Coil and Epidemic casts will reduce Army of the Dead’s cooldown, allowing Unholy Death Knights to summon forth a relentless stream of monstrosities into battle. Magus of the Dead will also fight by a Death Knights’ side when they cast Apocalypse, which also benefits from a cooldown reduction whenever Death Coil and Epidemic are cast. Unholy Death Knights’ Mastery: Dreadblade will benefit both master and servant by also increasing the Death Knights’ Shadow damage and the damage of their ghoulish minions, allowing undead armies to trample all in their wake.

https://worldofwarcraft.com/en-gb/ne...-class-updates

[Ielenia]

Interesting how Blizzard was able to tie Death Knights to Shadowlands, but not Necromancers;

Who said they didn't? We have actual necromancers in Maldraxxus, as well as Kel'Thuzad, who is a necromancer, too. So, again, who said they didn't? You?

And of course you're not going to find any class spec descriptions like that for the necromancer because... guess what? The necromancer class does not exist in the game yet.

I mean, let's look at the tinker class and engineering profession: I can find lots of official information about the profession, but I can find absolute zero information about the class. And you know why? Because, just like the necromancer class, the tinker class does not exist.

[Teriz]

Who said they didn't? We have actual necromancers in Maldraxxus, as well as Kel'Thuzad, who is a necromancer, too. So, again, who said they didn't? You?

And of course you're not going to find any class spec descriptions like that for the necromancer because... guess what? The necromancer class does not exist in the game yet.

I mean, let's look at the tinker class and engineering profession: I can find lots of official information about the profession, but I can find absolute zero information about the class. And you know why? Because, just like the necromancer class, the tinker class does not exist.

Where's the statement from Blizzard saying that the ideas surrounding the Tinker class were incorporated into the engineering profession? That's what they said about the Necromancer and the Death Knight.

Further, it's kind of hard to argue that a class based on necromancy is not a necromancer class.

[Ielenia]

Where's the statement from Blizzard saying that the ideas surrounding the Tinker class were incorporated into the engineering profession? That's what they said about the Necromancer and the Death Knight.

Your statement was about "linking the death knight to the Shadowlands, but not the necromancer", to which I disputed by showing evidence that Blizzard did tie necromancers to Shadowlands, too. But now you're moving goalposts by pointing at the original Blizzard statement regarding the development of the death knight class, which has nothing to do with your original claim.

Further, it's kind of hard to argue that a class based on necromancy is not a necromancer class.

It's actually really easy. Because a class based on holy magic is not a priest, in this case, the paladin class. A class based on demons is not a warlock, in this case, the demon hunter class. Two classes can share the same mechanics if the lore AND gameplay behind them are different.

And, lore-wise, it's indisputable that they're different: death knights are heroes of the past that were risen forcibly against their will into servitude, gaining new powers in the process, while the necromancers are those who willingly approach and engage with the powers offered by necromancy.

And as for gameplay, it's also indisputable that a class which uses cloth armor, is ranged, and relies on spellcasting inherently plays vastly different than a class which uses plate armor, is melee, and relies on weapon swings:
• The low armor aspect means they take increased damage from physical attacks, meaning it forces necromancers to stay at range, relying on their minions or other allies to keep the enemies away from them.
• The ranged aspect allows the necromancers to avoid having to fight in melee range, therefore avoiding taking unnecessary hits from their opponents' melee weapons.
• The spellcasting aspect means that the necromancers have to cast spells, meaning many, if not most of their offensive abilities have either a cast time or a channel time, requiring them to remain stationary most of the time.

[Triceron]

Mechagon came in the middle of expansion, all classes didn't get a technology ability as an expansion feature, BFA didn't revolve around technology/Goblins/Gnomes, and Demon Hunters had just been introduced in the previous expansion.

BFA had plenty of technology

Mekkatorque had a Mech battle in the first raid. Island Expedition had entire engineer factions using HotS abilities. An entire nation of technology was discovered. That's plenty of tech I'd say.

Necromancer would be redundant. A Tinker or Dragon class would not be based on their WC3 and HotS abilities.

Redundant if you consider them Death Knights

I dismiss Necromancers because;

1. Blizzard stated that they incorporated the "ideas surrounding the Necromancer" into the Death Knight class.
2. The WC3 Necromancer's abilities were placed into the DK class.
3. Lichs, Ghouls, Frost Wyrms, Crypt lords, Abominations, Banshees, and other undead/necromantic units were also incorporated into the DK class.
4. The Ultimate Guide to WoW's definition of a Necromancer is exactly what the DK class does.
5. When Shadowlands rolled around Blizzard increased the necromantic theme within the entire class.
6. No new Necromancer class in a Necromancer-based expansion focused on death and where every class gets a necromancer ability.

I fail to see how any of those arguments are bogus, especially when your counter to those arguments is pretty much "people are demanding it".

You fail because you are purposefully not recognizing the Necromancer Class for the purpose of dismissing them. You fail to see it because you are willingly playing ignorant.

Again, these arguments are all invalid.

1- Not mutually exclusive to them making a new class.
2- 99% of any class is comprised of new abilities and mechanics. Case in point - Demon Hunter only has Metamorphosis and every other ability is new or revised from something another class has.
3- Themes can overlap. Again, Demon Hunter. Also, Mage has a Skeletal Mage form, I don't see you having issues.
4- Ultimate Visual Guide isn't what WoW classes are based on. Look up Demon Hunters in the visual guide for example. You won't find Vengeance Demon Forms in there.
5- Shadowlands creates more precedent for more variation and diversity in Necromancer class influences.
6- Not mutually exclusive to Blizzard making a new class either, completely irrelevant.

All in all, invalid arguments because you haven't addressed the Necromancer class fantasy. You're simply bringing up tangential excuses. No different if we were talking about how we can't ever have another Old God themed expansion because we already had Old Gods appear in previous lore or because the Lore books said we already dealt with all the known Old Gods. These aren't reasons to dismiss any future possibility of an Old God expansion, simple as that. You can't prove a negative with this argument.

The possibilities are all there. The demand is all there. It's up to Blizzard to decide what their priorities are and how they want to present them. Like you said, they planned a Demon Hunter class as far back as TBC, but they weren't ready to release the class so we had to wait after DK's and Monks 10+ years later to get the Demon Hunter class. Same would apply to Necromancers.

[nToxik]

Quote Originally Posted by nToxik View Post
If they made a new class, it would be a class that steals a lot of abilities from current classes and incorporates it as it's own. It would have super mobility and be viable in high M+ keys.
The Tinker class would steal abilities from none of the existing classes. Neither would a dragon class based on Wrathion.

A Necromancer class on the other hand? Warlocks and DKs would be at risk for severe ability loss.


I just described Demon Hunters and how they stripped great and iconic abilities from other classes.

[Teriz]

I just described Demon Hunters and how they stripped great and iconic abilities from other classes.

Yep, and I was saying that a Tinker and a Dragonsworn class based on Wrathion wouldn’t take abilities from existing classes.

Necromancers and Dark Rangers on the other hand, would strip great and iconic abilities from other classes though. That may partly explain why they weren’t implemented in Shadowlands.

[Ielenia]

Necromancers and Dark Rangers on the other hand, would strip great and iconic abilities from other classes though.

Blatantly false. Demonstrably false.

This has been explained and demonstrated to you several times over how your statement is false, and yet you constantly dismiss evidence on the contrary.

Also: OMEGA-LUL at you saying 'Black Arrow' is a 'great and iconic ability', something that has been changed so much over time... and then currently removed from the hunter repertoire.

[Triceron]

Necromancers and Dark Rangers on the other hand, would strip great and iconic abilities from other classes though. That may partly explain why they weren’t implemented in Shadowlands.

Whatever gets stripped would be iconic to the Necromancer class, not to the Warlock or Death Knight.

Death Coil being removed from the Warlock was a good move, this was always a Death Knight's most iconic ability. So is removing Metamorphosis, which they should never have had.

What Necromancer iconic abilities need to be removed from DKs or Warlocks? This is a baseless argument.

[Imperator4321]

Further, it's kind of hard to argue that a class based on necromancy is not a necromancer class.

And in the past would you dismiss Demon Hunters as a class by saying "It's kind of hard to argue a class based on demonic magic is not a warlock class" but that wouldn't be correct because not only are demon hunters different from warlocks in the gameplay department (mobility focused melee fighter vs ranged imobile spellcaster) they have distinct thematic identities (vengeance driven, fel infused warriors who transform into demons vs masters of demonic/dark magic who summon and command demons).

Necromancers and Death Knights are different archetypes no matter how you try to spin it, they are distinct in gameplay (ranged spellcaster vs melee fighter) they are distinct in theme, Death Knights are fallen heroes, raised into unwilling servitute, who were freed and wield the dark powers they were granted meanwhile Necromancers like Kel'thuzad willingly studied necromancer for the sake of power, ambition or knowledge, they are distinct archetypes the Death Knight is not a Necromancer class it is a Dark Knight/Anti-paladin class, they are distinct archetypes no matter how much you conflate them, Kel'Thuzad isn't called a Death Knight hes always been called a Necromancer.

If Demon Hunters can exist as a melee fighter equivalent of Warlocks despite using the same type of magic (fel) because of metamorphosis, melee fighting, mobility why can't Necromancers exist as a spellcaster equivalent to the Death Knight class, theres no rule that Necromancy in WoW can only be represented Frost, Unholy and Blood especially now that Shadowlands has greatly expanded on Necromancy and if a Necromancer class had access to different forms of Necromancy (like poison or anima-based spells) why can't they exist on the same paradigm as Demon Hunters and Warlocks or Paladins and Priests who share forms of magic.

No fan necromancer concept i've seen just retreads Frost, Unholy and Blood without changing them, theres are plenty of things DK's don't do or aren't massive parts of the DK specs identity, Insects, Poison, Corpses, Anima, Contructs, Bone. Even things like Blood Healing are different expressions of the same theme (Blood Magic) and if Blood tank spec prevents Blood healer spec from existing why do things like Holy, Protection and Retribution Paladin exist when Holy Priest exists? if "Blood Tanking" is enough ways "Blood magic" can be expressed why do we have 4 specs that use holy magic i shouldn't Holy priest be enought? why do we need a Holy dps, Holy tank and another Holy healer if one Holy magic-based healer is enough ways to express "holy magic" as a power/theme following this logic? and if not why can't 2 specs share Blood magic but 4 specs can share holy magic?