A Frost or Cold Centric Class which is Elder Scrolls appropriate

austinwalter87ub17_ESO

Do you ever stop and realize that ESO has Templar for magic damage, Dragon knights for fire damage, Sorcerers for shock, and Nightblades just being oddballs?

Fire staves. Lightning Staves. Ice staves. Cold damage sets. Cold damage monster helms. But what's missing? Both a race and a class which is centered around cold damage! Why does this missing link always seem to happen in modern MMOs? I love frost effects. I feel the game desperately needs to fill the void of a missing cold damage class.

Mannimarco is a necromancer. He resides in coldharbour. Necromancers specialize in conjuring which is Elder Scrolls lore friendly. Cold and lifeless dead is often associated with necromancy. As well as poison and disease.

So in terms of a great potential addition to the game? I feel as if Necromancer would be a suitable addition to expand upon the missing cold damage void.

3 Skill Lines:
-Cold Conjuring (Summon pets and provide some unique support abilities)
-Frost (Damage, Survivability, Crowd Control)
-Poison/Disease (Damage, Debuffing)

Do you feel there's a strong market for having a cold damage class?

Anacario

We supposedly already have the Warden class coming, which supposedly specializes in frost damage.

Supposedly.

Jimmy

From "Vaoh"'s post about upcoming ESO content:
Link: https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/306678/all-known-future-content/p1


Warden class
• Warden was the fifth planned class early in the development of ESO. Based information found through datamining, they will return in the future.
• The names of the three Warden skill lines were datamined from One Tamriel's PTS. They are as follows - Winter's Embrace , Green Balance , Animal Companions
• Pet Ranger, Spirit Master, and Shaman are NPC variants of the Warden class, similar to how we see NPC variants of Dragonknights, Nightblades, Sorcerers, and Templars.
• Wardens will feature a Cold-based major skill line (Winter's Embrace), similar to a Dragonknight's Fire-based Ardent Flame and a Sorcerer's Lightning-based Storm Calling.

Abeille

austinwalter87ub17_ESO wrote: »

Do you feel there's a strong market for having a cold damage class?

Well, there is me...

And...

Oh right, these fellas right here.

But a Necromancer class, with no explanation why we are not working under Mannimarco and why we are allowed to use necromancy even though it is illegal or at least frowned upon almost everywhere, isn't what I would find ideal.

But world skill line that we learn through a quest that explains this? I'm all for it.

For a class with Frost Magic, we can have the Warden.

Vaoh wrote: »

Warden

• Warden was the fifth planned class early in the development of ESO. Based information found through datamining, they will return in the future.
• The names of the three Warden skill lines were datamined from One Tamriel's PTS. They are as follows - Winter's Embrace , Green Balance , Animal Companions
• Pet Ranger, Spirit Master, and Shaman are NPC variants of the Warden class, similar to how we see NPC variants of Dragonknights, Nightblades, Sorcerers, and Templars.
• Wardens will feature a Cold-based major skill line (Winter's Embrace), similar to a Dragonknight's Fire-based Ardent Flame and a Sorcerer's Lightning-based Storm Calling.

NewBlacksmurf

Considering the current classes never existed in lore.....not sure any class is lore consistent.

Now any elemental damage is lore appropriate

.....why are there classes again....?

austinwalter87ub17_ESO

NewBlacksmurf wrote: »

Considering the current classes never existed in lore.....not sure any class is lore consistent.

Now any elemental damage is lore appropriate

.....why are there classes again....?

Not the class itself being lore friendly. But the concepts contained in the class. Necromancers, which is what Mannimarco is, is exclusive to ESO but not ES as a whole.

Vrienda

NewBlacksmurf wrote: »

Considering the current classes never existed in lore.....not sure any class is lore consistent.

Now any elemental damage is lore appropriate

.....why are there classes again....?

Nightblades existed in lore. Tiber Septim himself was one according to some sources.

As for sorcerers they're everywhere.

Dragon Knights and templars are another story, but I'm glad for their existence.

As for the OP: Warden will probably use frost and nature magic.

I'd love to see a frost-focused class personally!

Leogon

The warden class is supposedly coming and I hope we get it soon 'cuz I've been waiting a long time for the ability to play a true frost mage.

Artis

No, we don't need no class.

Frost is just a part of Destruction school and has nothing to do with necromancy which is summoning/conjuration.

Also, we don't have a race for magic damage. Should give the simple magic damage bonus to bretons so they are not that much behind altmer and dunmer. And yes we do have races with frost damage bonuses - altmer and dunmer.

Bumblebeelzebub

Abeille wrote: »

But a Necromancer class, with no explanation why we are not working under Mannimarco and why we are allowed to use necromancy even though it is illegal or at least frowned upon almost everywhere, isn't what I would find ideal.

I never understood the argument that we can't have a necromancer class because of social taboos or laws.

Murder is certainly frowned upon, but I can join the Dark Brotherhood. Thievery is frowned upon but I can join the thieves guild. Couldn't I practice necromancy somewhere away from townies and the Worm Cult? Serious question. I'm lost on the lore here.

Oreyn_Bearclaw

If I have to farm a VMA sharpened Ice staff, I might go insane...

Abeille

Bumblebeelzebub wrote: »

Abeille wrote: »

But a Necromancer class, with no explanation why we are not working under Mannimarco and why we are allowed to use necromancy even though it is illegal or at least frowned upon almost everywhere, isn't what I would find ideal.

I never understood the argument that we can't have a necromancer class because of social taboos or laws.

Murder is certainly frowned upon, but I can join the Dark Brotherhood. Thievery is frowned upon but I can join the thieves guild. Couldn't I practice necromancy somewhere away from townies and the Worm Cult? Serious question. I'm lost on the lore here.

Murder and getting caught gives you a bounty. So does thievery.

Do you want to get a bounty whenever you use a class skill and there is an npc nearby? I would rather have special permission to practice necromancy to explain why I don't get a bounty, like is the case with using Daedric Magic in the Dominion - the Mages Guild has special permission to do so.

Bumblebeelzebub

Abeille wrote: »

Do you want to get a bounty whenever you use a class skill and there is an npc nearby? I would rather have special permission to practice necromancy to explain why I don't get a bounty, like is the case with using Daedric Magic in the Dominion - the Mages Guild has special permission to do so.

I'd be happy pay for the privilege of building a flesh golem and living far away from stinky townies >:D

austinwalter87ub17_ESO

Bumblebeelzebub wrote: »

Abeille wrote: »

But a Necromancer class, with no explanation why we are not working under Mannimarco and why we are allowed to use necromancy even though it is illegal or at least frowned upon almost everywhere, isn't what I would find ideal.

I never understood the argument that we can't have a necromancer class because of social taboos or laws.

Murder is certainly frowned upon, but I can join the Dark Brotherhood. Thievery is frowned upon but I can join the thieves guild. Couldn't I practice necromancy somewhere away from townies and the Worm Cult? Serious question. I'm lost on the lore here.

I never understood it either.

We murder stuff all the time on ESO. The initiation of lethal force/aggression/violence is what defines you as a murderer.

I have murdered thousands of NPC'S by initiating the fight.

Abeille

Bumblebeelzebub wrote: »

Abeille wrote: »

Do you want to get a bounty whenever you use a class skill and there is an npc nearby? I would rather have special permission to practice necromancy to explain why I don't get a bounty, like is the case with using Daedric Magic in the Dominion - the Mages Guild has special permission to do so.

I'd be happy pay for the privilege of building a flesh golem and living far away from stinky townies >:D

Well, I would prefer to be able to use class skills anywhere and still have it make sense in the setting.
Having to pay a bounty would seriously gimp new players that wanted to play that class, that would never happen. The other option is to then provide an explanation as to why you are allowed to practice necromancy and not get a bounty for it. Simply adding the class with neither consequences nor an explanation equals to it not being lore-friendly.

Bumblebeelzebub

Abeille wrote: »

Well, I would prefer to be able to use class skills anywhere and still have it make sense in the setting.
Having to pay a bounty would seriously gimp new players that wanted to play that class, that would never happen. The other option is to then provide an explanation as to why you are allowed to practice necromancy and not get a bounty for it. Simply adding the class with neither consequences nor an explanation equals to it not being lore-friendly.

I mean in order to advance either the Dark Brotherhood or Thieves Guild quests you have to risk gaining a bounty. It hasn't been a problem for most people. Couldn't there be an expansion that had you ally with a sect of necromancers in a similar way? Maybe one that's broken away from Manimarco?

I kill NPCs all the time, and most of their friends in the overland areas don't seem to mind, just the guards. Also, how many guards are hanging out in dungeons or wandering the fields of Cyrodiil where you'd be using your class skills. Why would every class skill violate the law? Why not only those that specifically reanimate corpses? Should sorcerers gain a bounty when they worship/summon daedra?

I'll drop this, but still, I've seen a lot of hand waiving, but not many solid arguments against a necromancer class.

Abeille

Bumblebeelzebub wrote: »

Abeille wrote: »

Well, I would prefer to be able to use class skills anywhere and still have it make sense in the setting.
Having to pay a bounty would seriously gimp new players that wanted to play that class, that would never happen. The other option is to then provide an explanation as to why you are allowed to practice necromancy and not get a bounty for it. Simply adding the class with neither consequences nor an explanation equals to it not being lore-friendly.

I mean in order to advance either the Dark Brotherhood or Thieves Guild quests you have to risk gaining a bounty. It hasn't been a problem for most people. Couldn't there be an expansion that had you ally with a sect of necromancers in a similar way? Maybe one that's broken away from Manimarco?

I kill NPCs all the time, and most of their friends in the overland areas don't seem to mind, just the guards. Also, how many guards are hanging out in dungeons or wandering the fields of Cyrodiil where you'd be using your class skills. Why would every class skill violate the law? Why not only those that specifically reanimate corpses? Should sorcerers gain a bounty when they worship/summon daedra?

I'll drop this, but still, I've seen a lot of hand waiving, but not many solid arguments against a necromancer class.

I already addressed all of these points.

One thing is getting a bounty for doing a criminal side-activity. Having Class Skills give you a bounty means that whenever you are walking around questing you would get a bounty. You won't be able to do the main quest of your alliance without getting a bounty. That's why a world skill line with a quest that gives an explanation would be the right course of action, not simply adding a class.

Members of the Mages Guild have especial permission to use Daedric Magic. While you don't have to be part of the Mages Guild to be a Sorcerer, the vestige canonically becomes part of the Mages Guild (and you can enter it very early in the game).

It is not that you haven't seen solid arguments, but more that you dismissed them and made the same questions that were already answered.

Yes, there could be an expansion that had you ally with a sect of necromancers, if this would be kept a secret, and you get a world skill line for it and then whenever you used that world skill line you would get a bounty, because then it would be a criminal side-activity, and THEN it would be comparable to TG or DB.

Comparing an entire class to the TG and DB activities is like comparing apples and shoes. Not even oranges.

Bumblebeelzebub

I already addressed all of these points.

Nope. You haven't.

One thing is getting a bounty for doing a criminal side-activity. Having Class Skills give you a bounty means that whenever you are walking around questing you would get a bounty. You won't be able to do the main quest of your alliance without getting a bounty.

You cooperate with necromancer's all the time in the name of fighting Molag Bal. Tharn and Aelif come to mind. We don't see guards or anyone else interrupting your quest to soak them for bounties. It would seem that most people are willing to let it go as long as you're saving them from the Plainmeld. Why wouldn't the same apply to you?

That's why a world skill line with a quest that gives an explanation would be the right course of action, not simply adding a class...

... Yes, there could be an expansion that had you ally with a sect of necromancers, if this would be kept a secret, and you get a world skill line for it and then whenever you used that world skill line you would get a bounty, because then it would be a criminal side-activity, and THEN it would be comparable to TG or DB.

Agreed. It was a poor comparison, but this still doesn't preclude necromancy as a viable playable class.

It is not that you haven't seen solid arguments, but more that you dismissed them and made the same questions that were already answered.

Again, I just don't find your bounty argument convincing. Illegality is not impossibility.

Abeille

Bumblebeelzebub wrote: »

I already addressed all of these points.

Nope. You haven't.

One thing is getting a bounty for doing a criminal side-activity. Having Class Skills give you a bounty means that whenever you are walking around questing you would get a bounty. You won't be able to do the main quest of your alliance without getting a bounty.

You cooperate with necromancer's all the time in the name of fighting Molag Bal. Tharn and Aelif come to mind. We don't see guards or anyone else interrupting your quest to soak them for bounties. It would seem that most people are willing to let it go as long as you're saving them from the Plainmeld. Why wouldn't the same apply to you?

That's why a world skill line with a quest that gives an explanation would be the right course of action, not simply adding a class...

... Yes, there could be an expansion that had you ally with a sect of necromancers, if this would be kept a secret, and you get a world skill line for it and then whenever you used that world skill line you would get a bounty, because then it would be a criminal side-activity, and THEN it would be comparable to TG or DB.

Agreed. It was a poor comparison, but this still doesn't preclude necromancy as a viable playable class.

It is not that you haven't seen solid arguments, but more that you dismissed them and made the same questions that were already answered.

Again, I just don't find your bounty argument convincing. Illegality is not impossibility.

I did, though. You used daedric magic as an excuse when I had already said that you DO have special permission to use it, and you went about how you practice illegal activities to advance on DB and TG when I had already said that you get bounties for that and that getting bounties for using class skills is impossible and would gimp the class.

You cooperate with necromancers in order to save the world. Aelif, you didn't even know she was working with Molag Bal up to the point when you have to fight and kill her. You are not practicing necromancy yourself, and certainly not working under Mannimarco while working with Aelif. And on the one instance when you DO practice necromancy, while working with Tharn, there is an explanation as to why you are working with Tharn. There should also be an explanation as to why you are allowed to practice necromancy. Oh also, the whole deal with Tharn happened away from prying eyes.

Illegality would make a necromancer class not be lore-friendly, that's why illegality is impossibility. On the case of it being a class. On the way you are defending. Even the arguments you used pointed at a world skill instead of a class. If it is a world skill and we get an explanation, then it becomes lore-friendly and everybody (should be) happy, so why not?

It isn't a viable playable class because it will either be gimped (illegal, thus giving you a bounty) or lore-unfriendly (illegal, but not giving you a bounty). The only way out is having it as a world skill and either giving your character special permission to practice it, like you have permission to practice daedric magic once a member of the Mages Guild, or making it a criminal side activity like murder and thievery. That's how Necromancy can be added in a lore-friendly, believable way.

If you prefer it to be added in a way that isn't lore-friendly (just throwing it in the game as a class with no explanation whatsoever), then I am positively 100% against this idea.

Now tell me, why are you against adding necromancy in a lore-friendly way? And, better yet, in a way that would be available to every class? Why must it be added on the one way that would make it lore-unfriendly? Why can't we just have an explanation for being allowed to use necromancy, like we have for daedric magic?

STEVIL

austinwalter87ub17_ESO wrote: »

Do you ever stop and realize that ESO has Templar for magic damage, Dragon knights for fire damage, Sorcerers for shock, and Nightblades just being oddballs?

Fire staves. Lightning Staves. Ice staves. Cold damage sets. Cold damage monster helms. But what's missing? Both a race and a class which is centered around cold damage! Why does this missing link always seem to happen in modern MMOs? I love frost effects. I feel the game desperately needs to fill the void of a missing cold damage class.

Mannimarco is a necromancer. He resides in coldharbour. Necromancers specialize in conjuring which is Elder Scrolls lore friendly. Cold and lifeless dead is often associated with necromancy. As well as poison and disease.

So in terms of a great potential addition to the game? I feel as if Necromancer would be a suitable addition to expand upon the missing cold damage void.

3 Skill Lines:
-Cold Conjuring (Summon pets and provide some unique support abilities)
-Frost (Damage, Survivability, Crowd Control)
-Poison/Disease (Damage, Debuffing)

Do you feel there's a strong market for having a cold damage class?

I think cold morphs for mage wrath, ,lightning flood, ball light overload and adding cold to passives would do the trick.

S1ipperyJim

[quote="Abeille;3613911"Do you want to get a bounty whenever you use a class skill and there is an npc nearby?[/quote] Yeah this doesn't make sense considering we have the werewolf and vampire skill lines, both of these creatures are attacked on site in ES normally but we can have ESO characters with this and even do quests where they talk about how evil vampires or werewolves are even though you are actually one yourself

Abeille

reapthetempestrwb17_ESO wrote: »

Yeah this doesn't make sense considering we have the werewolf and vampire skill lines, both of these creatures are attacked on site in ES normally but we can have ESO characters with this and even do quests where they talk about how evil vampires or werewolves are even though you are actually one yourself

That's because there really wasn't really way to introduce Vampire and Werewolf in a lore-friendly way without having people attacking us that makes 100% sense for everybody. That isn't the case with Necromancy. There is a way to introduce Necromancy, and it is the same way these were introduced: As world skills, not as a class.

Werewolf has no excuses, really, but at least we know from the Vampire quest line that our bloodline cut the ties with Molag Bal, who is our main enemy in the game. How can we know that our Necromancer did the same? On the same way, of course. Through the quest that introduced the reanimation skill line.

Artis

Oreyn_Bearclaw wrote: »

If I have to farm a VMA sharpened Ice staff, I might go insane...

You don't have to farm anything there now and will never have to in the future.

TheRealPotoroo

Jimmy wrote: »

Warden class

I want. With Frostcaster armour and a pet Frost Atronach.

Mojmir

You can't argue the main questline to prohibit necromancy anymore.it's optional and not needed to progress in the game.I have characters who have never even done it and maxed out otherwise. Necromancy exists in lore, find your own way to accept it.

mb10

whats the point in having a class thats like sorc or anything else with different animations that look like ice and fancy names to go with them?

If they do create a class related to ice there is no direct correlation to necromancy lol not sure where you got that one from.

Also if they do create the class it must be different from the others.

Sorc and DK arent the same skills but fire instead of ligthning, its a completely different class. So this icey class needs to be too.

Rataroto

put them on snow demons of akavir? https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en-GB/discussion/309455/for-all-of-those-who-want-new-races-classes#latest

Abeille

Mojmir wrote: »

You can't argue the main questline to prohibit necromancy anymore.it's optional and not needed to progress in the game.I have characters who have never even done it and maxed out otherwise. Necromancy exists in lore, find your own way to accept it.

The way to accept it is for it to be included in a way that makes sense. The existence of it doesn't make any implementation automatically lore-friendly. For example, Dwemer as playable race. Dwemer exist in the lore, but that doesn't make the addition of Dwemer as a playable race lore-friendly.

The issue with Necromancy goes way beyond the main story. It is an issue the cultures of Tamriel have with it. It doesn't matter if your character does the main story or not, because the damage necromancers are causing isn't confined to the main story.

Necromancy doesn't have to be added in a way that makes no sense. It can be added in a lore-friendly way. All it needs is for it to be explained, for you to be granted permission to use it, and preferably for Vanus Galerion to begrudgingly accept what you are doing. Really, this can be done by adding a piece of paper with the permit to the game.

I don't understand why you guys are so adamant against adding it in a way that doesn't break lore since it is not like it would detract from your precious corpse-raising skills. They would be added just the same, only with a background to it and open to any class. You wouldn't even have to reroll. Why would you not support it? Why does it have to be added in the one way that would make no sense in universe?

S1ipperyJim

Abeille wrote: »

from the Vampire quest line that our bloodline cut the ties with Molag Bal, who is our main enemy in the game

You forget the fact that the protagonist in Elder Scrolls is not necessarily altruistic, it is the choice of the player whether they choose to be good or evil as in most ES games. Therefore a necromancer would be, if not a perfectly acceptable skill line, at least a lore-friendly one just as 'dark magic' sorc skill line is. The term 'sorcerer' in elder scrolls is often understood to mean 'evil wizard' after all. And shadow magic as used by nightblades is also, shall we say, morally iffy. Keep in mind every time you use a soul gem you are technically employing necromancy (especially in ESO where humans can fill normal soul gems). As for necromancy there are actual examples of compassionate ethical necromancers, interestingly from the time the ESO takes place - for instance a contemporary of Minnimarco's named Vastarie : http://www.uesp.net/wiki/Lore:The_Legend_of_Vastarie

Abeille

reapthetempestrwb17_ESO wrote: »

Abeille wrote: »

from the Vampire quest line that our bloodline cut the ties with Molag Bal, who is our main enemy in the game

You forget the fact that the protagonist in Elder Scrolls is not necessarily altruistic, it is the choice of the player whether they choose to be good or evil as in most ES games. Therefore a necromancer would be, if not a perfectly acceptable skill line, at least a lore-friendly one just as 'dark magic' sorc skill line is. The term 'sorcerer' in elder scrolls is often understood to mean 'evil wizard' after all. And shadow magic as used by nightblades is also, shall we say, morally iffy. Keep in mind every time you use a soul gem you are technically employing necromancy (especially in ESO where humans can fill normal soul gems). As for necromancy there are actual examples of compassionate ethical necromancers, interestingly from the time the ESO takes place - for instance a contemporary of Minnimarco's named Vastarie : http://www.uesp.net/wiki/Lore:The_Legend_of_Vastarie

I am not forgetting anything, gods, adding it as a skill line is EXACTLY WHAT I AM DEFENDING.
I am feeling like nobody is reading my posts. You guys are just cherry-picking a phrase out of context and refuting with my very own arguments that I actually use to support the idea. It's ridiculous to the point of being insulting.

I will try again because this is getting on my nerves already.

CLASS ADDED WITH NO EXPLANATION = BAD

SKILL LINE WITH EXPLANATION = GOOD

Come on! I suggested us to become disciples of Vastarie myself at least five times this week, as a way to introduce necromancy!

It has nothing to do with your character being good or evil. It has to do with how it makes sense in the story.

Also the soul gem thing was discussed by the Mages Guild and the Great Mage allows it. There is a book about it.

STEVIL

reapthetempestrwb17_ESO wrote: »

Abeille wrote: »

from the Vampire quest line that our bloodline cut the ties with Molag Bal, who is our main enemy in the game

You forget the fact that the protagonist in Elder Scrolls is not necessarily altruistic, it is the choice of the player whether they choose to be good or evil as in most ES games. Therefore a necromancer would be, if not a perfectly acceptable skill line, at least a lore-friendly one just as 'dark magic' sorc skill line is. The term 'sorcerer' in elder scrolls is often understood to mean 'evil wizard' after all. And shadow magic as used by nightblades is also, shall we say, morally iffy. Keep in mind every time you use a soul gem you are technically employing necromancy (especially in ESO where humans can fill normal soul gems). As for necromancy there are actual examples of compassionate ethical necromancers, interestingly from the time the ESO takes place - for instance a contemporary of Minnimarco's named Vastarie : http://www.uesp.net/wiki/Lore:The_Legend_of_Vastarie

zsgree with that point. one of the nice layers that ESO adds in is evil doesn't get along with other evil. During the main questline and others we see other daedra helping to defeat molag for their own ends. Nothing stopping me from being a just as bad evildoer who doesn't want Molag bal messing with my little piece of the action.

Not to be taken as endorsing necromancer or anything just the "can play evil" option being fine.