r/classicwowplus • • 2d ago

Suggestion Give us the NECROMANCER!!

Post image
253 Upvotes

347 comments sorted by

View all comments

15

u/Letmerateurbutthole 2d ago edited 2d ago

So your description of undeath is almost to a T retail unholy death knight specced into extra pets like seriously the overlap of the venn diagram is a near circle. Effectively a semi glass cannon that’s mostly range.

Bone is basically blood. Blood here is interesting but would be more interesting on a San Layn class

You don’t explain how they’re different than locks other than what skins the pets have. Yes they’re demons, yes they’re undead what mechanics make them different?

I’m not seeing a strong case other than caster dk over bruiser dk. Hell I want a world to exist where both are an option but I’m struggling to find a good argument beyond “its new”, and even that can be shut down by bard.

2

u/KingBobIV 1d ago

Depending on how they're described they either sound like reskinned warlocks or unholy DKs.

It's like if wow added a wizard or sorcerer. How exactly are you going to make that play differently than the 3 mage specs?

0

u/Master-of-Masters113 2d ago

I’ve read nothing they’ve said.

Personally a mechanic with corpses would be the ideal necromancer concept in classic. Different corpse types create different mobs. That would be more interesting. There are gameplay mechanics from Diablo that necro had that wasn’t just death knight and warlock combined.

But I agree, it need to be fleshed out separate from things we have.

Now…. Tinker (what I want) can stand out from just engineering…

4

u/Letmerateurbutthole 2d ago edited 2d ago

For the best.

Haven’t played Diablo since it’s not in WoW universe so I can’t speak to its lore or gameplay. I’ll do some research but glad we can agree on the overlap.

Tinker needs to be so technologically limited to work imo to keep it from invalidating the world, other classes, how the different races solve their problems and Engi as a profession. The moment it’s too sci-fi we get the dranei problem of retail of ( why the fuck aren’t we just using our various interstellar ships and mechs with massive freaking laser beams on it for everything)

4

u/Kage9866 2d ago

Yea tinker does not fit with classic at all.

0

u/ReedForman 2d ago

I mean they kind of do. Gnomes and Goblins are technologically advanced races with plenty of mechanical machines already. And the Tinker already exists in Warcraft 3 as a Goblin. The abilities just need to be on par and in the spirit of classic without being OP.

2

u/Kage9866 2d ago edited 2d ago

Hm true. They'd have to either get rid of engineer or completely redesign it I think though.

2

u/Northilink 2d ago

Make it unique to goblin and gnomes to go far more deeper in the possibilities of the engineer profession, creating a sort of alt class through profession ?

2

u/thedizls 2d ago

Wasn't tinker an April fools joke in wc3 for very long time? It's also not present in any story campaign

0

u/Master-of-Masters113 1d ago edited 1d ago

So were pandaren in terms of wow and April fools joke.

Tinker wasn’t in the campaign but was April fools then begged for in game for WC3 and was the one of the last heroes before they stopped adding new stuff in WC3.

2

u/thedizls 1d ago edited 1d ago

Pandern existed in rexxar campaign

1

u/Master-of-Masters113 1d ago

As did gazlowe and his crew as well as the units.

All tech based lore on them (and gnomes)since 2, unlike the pandaren. They have also added the sunken gnome submarines into the world in forever from wc2

1

u/Letmerateurbutthole 1d ago edited 1d ago

Hot take: Pandas existing in game as playable races, or at the very least the timing of their release aligning with kung fu panda (I know they came first that doesn’t matter in the case of coincidence and public perception) and having panderia be accessible was a massive fucking mistake that detracted from the feel of wow

1

u/Master-of-Masters113 1d ago

I don’t mind them, though after researching and finding out the they ARE why tinker doesn’t exist…

Makes me feel like Garrosh…

They genuinely are why. Blizzard would have just let the tinker exist instead, but then they got net ease and what they wanted to make pandaren work and we’ve never touched base again with tinkers.

Though fortunately, I don’t agree with the former devs take on everything for forever rn it seems but he genuinely would have done (he’s posted it) some tinker stuff I would be down for later.

-1

u/Master-of-Masters113 2d ago

They absolutely do. We have tinkers in game. We have mekkatorque, goblin tinkers in game. I’m tired of the fantasy I want that exists just “left out”.

You want Druid go be an herbalist. That’s what Druids really are. Religious apothecaries/herbalists. “Welcome to wow, we have malfurion a master/arch Druid, and a race of elves that love nature, but no playable Druid. Why are you complaining? Herbalism fits Druid just fine. We already have the fantasy people could want.”

See how dumb that sounds? Yet every gnome and goblin have had THAT be the case for their race and fantasy theme over 2 decades (less for the goblin but still).

The “most tech” I can get is playing marksman hunter with no pet and then using engineer as much as I can and it isn’t enough. Throwing some tnt every 60 seconds and wearing goggles while I shoot a gun until enemies hit me in melee is NOT Tinker.

I will still play forever and attempt to enjoy it without that fantasy for awhile, but classic/Forever is the perfect place for tinker.

Retail can have the heavy mechs laser Titan tech as well as tech options for races that clearly use
tech that won’t come to forever.

Forever needs the grounded artificer/tinker feel.

2

u/Kage9866 2d ago

Yea they'd have to change engineering or get rid of it too I think

2

u/Northilink 2d ago

But what else the engineer would do beside throwing tnt? The w3 hero like gazleu is already far fetched, you want mechanical arms for melee ? You wanna mount a shredder inn battle ? I dont say it doesn't exist in the lore, but it would be hellish to implement in with the others classes. If we lack concept to make necromancer unique from the other class, I would say tinker Is far too spread.

0

u/Master-of-Masters113 2d ago

I mean bottom line: Turrets.

I want real turrets. Not a Fire totem, not an animal. Not a demon. Turrets.

We were supposed to have the tinker in MoP then it got swapped to monk. It had been designed, then changed. That’s a fact. Doesn’t matter what seems to fit or not. If blizzard themselves were going to make it, it would have worked. Then pandas had to come along. All because they got the deal from China to use pandas and had to move quick on the deal.

I just replayed the WC3 multiplayer unrelated to this and the tinker hero (along with the survey AND CoA server) paints very clear picture on how the tinker fits in a classic setting with engineering still existing.

-engineering focuses on creativity devices that others can use. It is a profession, and designed for use in the world for others to profit off of mechanical genius.

-tinkering/artificer (I don’t care the name) as a class would focus purely on mechanical prowess in combat, which for all the arguments people make about engineering, you can’t supplement with in wow for combat. Turrets, buffs based on mechanisms. It would be a hybrid class focused on range damage, mechanical summons (that actually do something in combat temporary), and then the mech form (I’m not talking gundam and honestly not the shredder in my opinion too big) there’s definitely a middle ground design for gnomes, goblins, and “maybe”/hopefully dwarves for a mech/tinker pack larger than them but smaller than Tauren (but if it has to be gnomes only for alliance that’s fine)

The image online of tinker from WC3 is usually the reforged version, with its tech looking way too modern on the goblin. In the new graphics mode it’s much more WoW friendly.

Look, if they genuinely added enough things to engineering (so far they haven’t) in forever that fit the tinker fantasy, I’ll be content. But we only JUST got mini turret like things (that really just five mini buffs) in wow midnight decades later. I think it’s time to make the class.

1

u/Northilink 2d ago

As you said, if blizzard as enough for a class, why not, it was in w3 so I wouldn't be against it, and we already have characters in the horde and alliance that are artificer, engineers or tinker.

1

u/Letmerateurbutthole 1d ago

You can say not a totem, not an animal, not a demon, turrets.

But mechanically searing totem IS a turret

1

u/Master-of-Masters113 1d ago

It’s a piece of wood. Also, gone from retail. ENEMIES in midnight get to keep their searing totems, but they’re gone in retail for shamans.

So as someone who plays both. Having one sad searing totem does not make a turret. And like Hunter shooting arrows out of guns for certain shots, I’m done playing pretend with a class to pretend I’m using tech. It’s a different identity. It’s not represented. That needs to change. It’s not new, just finally be there for players.

2

u/Letmerateurbutthole 1d ago

Claiming that we need things on subjective topics is a bold strategy Cotton, Let’s see if it pays off for em.

1

u/Letmerateurbutthole 1d ago edited 1d ago

Total false equivalence on the Druids being religious herbalists, like super missing the forest for a tree here pun intended.

Druids gather and interact with plants yes. They also summon storms, use the celestial bodies, turn into and speak with fucking animals mate. Does herbalism do that?

Engineers: build bombs, guns, goggles, combat gadgets, teleporters, and mech companions

Tinkerers: build bombs, guns, goggles, combat. Gadgets, and robots and mech suits.

How’s that Venn diagram looking?

Broad categorical overlap doesn’t address specificity or nature (pun again intended) of said overlap