New class: Invoker (A Necromancer/Chanter)

Witar

Yeah right let's make necromancer class so i will not be able to defile corpses on my magicka dk.
You will get your necromancy when spellcrafting is out.

Duiwel

I like that they want to add another class & hope they do.

BUT the thing I really really want is more skill trees...

Septimus_Magna

NateAssassin wrote: »

Necromancy is considered evil in the quest line, and considering one of the main bosses from the story IS an evil necromancer, and again necromancy is frowned apon, it makes sense to not have a necromancer class.

This argument is often used and I really dont understand why.

Daedra summoners are also considered evil in TES lore and sorcs have an entire skill line dedicated to it, why would Necromancy be any different?

And why would a Necromancer who saves Tamriel by summoning/controlling Undead be considered evil?

Molag Bal uses a maul and he was evil so am I evil when I use a maul to defeat him?

Ra'Shtar

I don't think pet classes would work on this game you need to have them in both bars wasting a lot of space.

KhajiitiLizard

Septimus_Magna wrote: »

NateAssassin wrote: »

Necromancy is considered evil in the quest line, and considering one of the main bosses from the story IS an evil necromancer, and again necromancy is frowned apon, it makes sense to not have a necromancer class.

This argument is often used and I really dont understand why.

Daedra summoners are also considered evil in TES lore and sorcs have an entire skill line dedicated to it, why would Necromancy be any different?

And why would a Necromancer who saves Tamriel by summoning/controlling Undead be considered evil?

Molag Bal uses a maul and he was evil so am I evil when I use a maul to defeat him?

Summoning things like atronachs wasn't really considered evil and is fairly common. Well I guess that was old lore, though. Atronachs didn't used to be daedra, more like elemental constructs created by mages. In TES:II you'd have fire actronachs and fire daedra as separate things.

It does depend in which region, though, where the summoning occurs. Daedric summoning is pretty much tolerated in Morrowind, but prosecuted in the Summerset Isles.

DuckNoodles

I think if they do bring out a new class, zos needs to introduce 2 new classes at the same time. Then that way there won't be a influxes of 1 new class, players will have more of a choice to if they introduce 2 new classes.

Septimus_Magna

KhajiitiLizard wrote: »

Septimus_Magna wrote: »

NateAssassin wrote: »

Necromancy is considered evil in the quest line, and considering one of the main bosses from the story IS an evil necromancer, and again necromancy is frowned apon, it makes sense to not have a necromancer class.

This argument is often used and I really dont understand why.

Daedra summoners are also considered evil in TES lore and sorcs have an entire skill line dedicated to it, why would Necromancy be any different?

And why would a Necromancer who saves Tamriel by summoning/controlling Undead be considered evil?

Molag Bal uses a maul and he was evil so am I evil when I use a maul to defeat him?

Summoning things like atronachs wasn't really considered evil and is fairly common. Well I guess that was old lore, though. Atronachs didn't used to be daedra, more like elemental constructs created by mages. In TES:II you'd have fire actronachs and fire daedra as separate things.

It does depend in which region, though, where the summoning occurs. Daedric summoning is pretty much tolerated in Morrowind, but prosecuted in the Summerset Isles.

In the recent TES games there was no separation between fire atronachs and fire daedra, all fire atronachs were daedra.

It just seems strange that summoning Daedra and turning into a vampire/WW is all allowed but Necromancy is strictly forbidden.

In TES games you dont have to play the good guy, Morrowind, Oblivion and Skyrim all had spells to turn Undead so I really dont see any arguments why it shouldnt be in ESO.

cazlonb16_ESO

We already have a healer class and a pet skill line. Both are dysfunctional. Combining them sounds like a prime recipe for disaster.

Troneon

Fix the balance and game first, lag and performance plz, not new classes.

If cleric becomes the next best healing class then Templars RIP.

CaptainObvious

One would assume that templars would be adjusted to be more damage oriented if they made a dedicated healer/support class.

Troneon

CaptainObvious wrote: »

One would assume that templars would be adjusted to be more damage oriented if they made a dedicated healer/support class.

A lot of templar healers would leave the game if you forced them to be DD all the time after all the time they put into their builds and characters. Healing/support is pretty much the only thing that stands the templar out against DK/Sorc/NB, we are already the weakest pvp class...for I don't know how long now..

NB and Sorc will always make better DD's so if you you nerf templar heals and make a healer only class well you might as well remove the templars from the game.

Like I said fix balance, performance, lag, bugs, exploits, broken stuff FIRST.

Screw having more classes. Seriously.

AngryNord

There already is a Cleric class - the Templar class is pretty much the same as a D&D Cleric.

NewBlacksmurf

I'd rather see "new classes" as additional skill lines added to the game with an opt for free respec. I don't feel the game needs new classes but it could benefit from another heal skill set because the Templar seems far ahead

Volkodav

One link takes me to WoW post on pets,the other doesnt work at all. :{

Garethjolnir

Would not mind seeing a necromancer class.

AmakarGranaen

I have the same plan, but it IS already in progress

TX12001rwb17_ESO wrote: »

I say they need to add 2 new classes cause on that character screen it does look like 2 class's are missing, I would be all for Warden and Necromancer and that would focus on frost magic and raising the dead.

Although I do wonder....what is with so many people having an obsession with Necromancy? seriously how much power can you get out of a rotting corpse? the only undead who are actually powerful are Draugr, Lichs, Vampires and some of the more unique monstrosities like bone colossus or Bone Lord and maybe even the odd Mummy but that's about it, the rest of them are weak.

I think most people think of Necromancy as having LOTS of rotting corpses.
Which would be cool, but probably would not work because of that.

Khaos_Bane

I'm not advocating they introduce a necromancy class. However, the people saying that it is evil or the practice is forbidden and therefor shouldn't be in game make no sense. Just because a practice is forbidden doesn't mean that it doesn't exist. How you can draw a connection to "it's forbidden so it shouldn't be in the game" simply makes no sense at all, none.

hayaschwarz

The concept on itself is interesting, as adding a new class will provide new gameplay and potential theory crafting for a new class would be fun.

Most people are interested in necromancer or Animist (as suggested in the article), which resembles the idea of a sorc. The down part for sorcs in trials and dungeons, their pets need healing, and if the Tank needs healing, the heal might go to the pet instead of the tank and causes maybe a wipe for the raid! If the pets are reliant on the player, then it is a DPS reduction to take care of them. And if the pets are self-sufficient and deal good damage, then they represent a big threat in unbalanced cyrodiil…

The other most common suggestion is a healing class, mostly asking for the return of the “Warden”-class. In theory the game can still profit from a class dedicated for healing, but considering that most of the healing relies on the resto-staff tree line, and most characters “even Templars” required to be able to DPS, makes the whole idea of the class after consideration not very interesting.

I am myself more interested in balancing the existing classes for both builds stamina and magicka. Introducing for stamina builds more class stamina-based abilities, without the need to rely always on the weapon-abilities. Equally also for magicka builds of the classes balancing out the existing abilities and passives, so we don’t have to focus on one class each patch for PvP and PvE.

eventide03b14a_ESO

We don't need more classes. They can barely balance the 4 they have now. What they could use are more skill lines especially weapon skill lines to counter some of the imbalances that already exist and add more options to class builds. There is no reason we need a cleric class and a Templar class.

eventide03b14a_ESO

dwemer_paleologist wrote: »

i would love to see a dark brotherhood pure stamina class that has true stealth and long lasting invisibility. and uses only daggers and physical hand to hand combat just like dark brotherhood from morrowind does.

This should just be a skill line like legerdemain.

eventide03b14a_ESO

JoseDelgadoCub17_ESO wrote: »

Necromancer or Druid.

Necromancer can have.
Summoning undead skill line
disease skill line(FU WW)
Ice skill line(no class has ice skill line)

Druid
Summon X beast skill line(charm??)
Nature damage skill line(disease/poison)
Nature healing skill line( more hots to feel different from templar healing skill line)

You don't need new classes for these. New skill lines would be sufficient. You could even make it a choice between the two like vampire and werewolf.

Dubhliam

hayaschwarz wrote: »

... And if the pets are self-sufficient and deal good damage, then they represent a big threat in unbalanced cyrodiil…

This was the idea I was going for.

I guess it all comes down to this:
We won't see another class in ESO because devs have shown to be incompetent in balancing existing classes and people frown on the possibility of yet another imbalanced class.

TheShadowScout

Khaos_Bane wrote: »

I'm not advocating they introduce a necromancy class. However, the people saying that it is evil or the practice is forbidden and therefor shouldn't be in game make no sense. Just because a practice is forbidden doesn't mean that it doesn't exist. How you can draw a connection to "it's forbidden so it shouldn't be in the game" simply makes no sense at all, none.

There is no lore-ish reason for there not to be player necromancers. Yes, -most- necromancers in the ESO era follow the worm cult, and yes, necromancy has a really bad reputation and is shunned by many. So?
We know there are necromancers who got fed up with Mannimarco, gave him the one finger salute and turned their back on all things worm culty and molag bal lickspittle-ish. Not many, perhaps, but there are some.
We know a good many other groups have a really bad reputation andt are shunned by many. Assassins for example... and yet we will get the dark brotherhood.
So basically, there is enough precedent to make a player character necromancer viable, backstory-wise. Especially if they started out as common sorcerors escaping from coldharbour and later on learned a thing or two from encountering all those wormies, and decided to fight fire with fire... or in that case, necromancy with necromancy. (a narrative which works very well for many class upgrades, and was one of the notions I had been thinking of when I did my class morph idea...)

Game-technically... too many pets would be iffy, right, but the game is limited to what can be fittted on our ability slots anyhow. And since pets alone are not all that great... since a few nice spells to back them up are always a good thing... that keeps their numners down. Besides, any player can always keep a non-pet setup at hand for fights where pets would be rather suboptimal.

Healing class... we have that with Templar.

Warden class... is a leftover from development, and just a name anyhow.

But there are several things kinda missing, things we see NPCs doing, but don't get to do ourselves... be it mages casting ice walls or ice rings, be it shamans casting totems and those green bird attacks, be it thunger-warriors and their lightning-arc attack, be it rangers calling a wolf/spider/whatever to aid them in battle or be it, yes indeed, necromancers and bonelords raising the dead to send against us.

It would indeed be nifty to have those options, in some way...

Oh, and for the usual balance-it-already criers... the game will never be perfectly balanced, there always will besome imbalance. More options would be more work, true, but also would be much ore enjoyable, and thus keep more people playing (and paying) and thus keep up the cash flow to finance more balancing... just saying...

Robbmrp

I think @ZOS is going to have a hard time putting in another pet class. There's so many Sorc's out there that wish they had a different skill line that didn't include Pets. They would be better off putting in a all magicka class with no pets, maybe a type of mage or if they want to add another pet class, go with a hunter.

eliisra

Templars already fill the cleric archetype spot.

New class will be b2p for sure. So more likely, they go for a popular(missing) archetype or something people want badly.

Obvious one is hunter/ranger, pewpew'ing with a bow, setting traps, using disease and poison dmg. Possibly able to summon forest animals like a bear to aid in combat. This is the most popular archetype in MMO's, especially among casual players.

Daedric race like a Dremora class is another bet, that one would sell loads and be insanely popular. Not sure how they fit them roaming around Tamriel with current lore and back story tho. Actually feels impossible. But knowing ZoS, they always find a creative solution, even if it breaks something lol.

Zorrashi

I'd advocate for no more (new) classes. But more skill lines? Heck yes.

Autolycus

I would rather have a Necromancer class with no healing potential outside of resto staff, and potentially one or two skills that revolves around sacrificing minions to restore health. Every class can be a competitive end-game healer as it is, there's no need to add another class specifically designed to heal. That's what templars were for initially, but countless people have proven they're good for more then just that, so why add a second class and limit what it can do by forcing a healing tree? Just make an actual necromancer, which people have been asking for since day zero.

I would also like them to implement the Bard's college, including a series of active skills that produce auras and buffs for parties. There are limitless opportunities for what these auras/buffs can be - and every other class could and would swallow up every chance they get (especially healers) to use them. Every group would have to have a bard!

XANTITHESISX

I miss my Hunter (Beast Tamer) from WoW.... this would be a very good move for ESO.

Saltypretzels

@OP, you should come up with a new name. Clerics have been around since the first D&D books and everyone has very preconceived notions about them . "Cleric" does not inspire me in any way...

AfkNinja

Gidorick wrote: »

@ZOS_GinaBruno @ZOS_RichLambert , can someone tell us if ZOS is actually actively and currently considering adding a new class to ESO? If you guys are, I implore you to please consider the Class Morph concept posted by @TheShadowScout here: http://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/240186/class-morph-idea/p1

We don't even need all the class morphs at once. They could be released in sets of four, one morph for each class.

Loved those ideas too.