...and why Necromancers?

srnekro

About the world skill line thingy... again.... really....

I am not seeing a devoted templer, whose purpose to follow the light, to ever cede a single glance upon the unholy ways of necromancy.

I am not seeing a noble Warden, who wields the power of nature itself, the very life's heartbeat and his fluffy companions, wield Necromancy, which is everything they stand against for.

I am not seeing a sneaky nightblade trying to sneak by their enemies while a flesh atronach/horde of undeads, follow him/her.

I am not seeing a mighty DragonKnight, wielder of the great Akaviri martial arts, that shatters the very earth around him/her and whose very anger and wrath turns in to the very fire that heats the Life itself and tears the darkness apart, raising a single undead minion. They would be extinguished by his/hers very flames HÁ!!! (yes, this last part as a pun).

And, finally. The sorcerer. They already have daedric summoning, why would the need necromancy at the first place? Besides, they rather turn their enemies in to ashes than "making some friends out of them" (if you know what I mean).And when it comes calling for aid, they rather call upon the daedra's rather than the dead for more a "direct" approach. That's why they are called mages/sorcerers and not necromancers!


And, how would you fit all the diseases, plagues, decay and rot, plus and undead army and the cunning way of making weapons, armor and other utilities from bone and flesh, in to just one petty skill line? It shatters my heart just to think about it.

SilverIce58

srnekro wrote: »

About the world skill line thingy... again.... really....

I am not seeing a devoted templer, whose purpose to follow the light, to ever cede a single glance upon the unholy ways of necromancy.

I am not seeing a noble Warden, who wields the power of nature itself, the very life's heartbeat and his fluffy companions, wield Necromancy, which is everything they stand against for.

I am not seeing a sneaky nightblade trying to sneak by their enemies while a flesh atronach/horde of undeads, follow him/her.

I am not seeing a mighty DragonKnight, wielder of the great Akaviri martial arts, that shatters the very earth around him/her and whose very anger and wrath turns in to the very fire that heats the Life itself and tears the darkness apart, raising a single undead minion. They would be extinguished by his/hers very flames HÁ!!! (yes, this last part as a pun).

And, finally. The sorcerer. They already have daedric summoning, why would the need necromancy at the first place? Besides, they rather turn their enemies in to ashes than "making some friends out of them" (if you know what I mean).And when it comes calling for aid, they rather call upon the daedra's rather than the dead for more a "direct" approach. That's why they are called mages/sorcerers and not necromancers!


And, how would you fit all the diseases, plagues, decay and rot, plus and undead army and the cunning way of making weapons, armor and other utilities from bone and flesh, in to just one petty skill line? It shatters my heart just to think about it.

Except, every necromancer was a sorcerer first and foremost. Mannimarco? Sorcerer. N'gasta? Sorcerer. Necromancers are just sorcerers who wanted the power that they already have, mixed with a little bit of difference.

Nightblades? Stamblades are the sneaky, gank types that wouldn't need necromancy. But the magblades who use siphoning magic? Obvi siphon the enemy's health to refuel their minions.

Wardens are all about protecting the forests (bc they were created by bosmer), so as long as their corpses don't desecrate the forest, everything is square.

Templar is harder to explain, but something something Dark Templar, something something profane and desecrate the Aedra.

And DK? The only thing I can think of is raising the dead to set corpses on fire to use as a moving bomb.

srnekro

SilverIce58 wrote: »

srnekro wrote: »

About the world skill line thingy... again.... really....

I am not seeing a devoted templer, whose purpose to follow the light, to ever cede a single glance upon the unholy ways of necromancy.

I am not seeing a noble Warden, who wields the power of nature itself, the very life's heartbeat and his fluffy companions, wield Necromancy, which is everything they stand against for.

I am not seeing a sneaky nightblade trying to sneak by their enemies while a flesh atronach/horde of undeads, follow him/her.

I am not seeing a mighty DragonKnight, wielder of the great Akaviri martial arts, that shatters the very earth around him/her and whose very anger and wrath turns in to the very fire that heats the Life itself and tears the darkness apart, raising a single undead minion. They would be extinguished by his/hers very flames HÁ!!! (yes, this last part as a pun).

And, finally. The sorcerer. They already have daedric summoning, why would the need necromancy at the first place? Besides, they rather turn their enemies in to ashes than "making some friends out of them" (if you know what I mean).And when it comes calling for aid, they rather call upon the daedra's rather than the dead for more a "direct" approach. That's why they are called mages/sorcerers and not necromancers!


And, how would you fit all the diseases, plagues, decay and rot, plus and undead army and the cunning way of making weapons, armor and other utilities from bone and flesh, in to just one petty skill line? It shatters my heart just to think about it.

Except, every necromancer was a sorcerer first and foremost. Mannimarco? Sorcerer. N'gasta? Sorcerer. Necromancers are just sorcerers who wanted the power that they already have, mixed with a little bit of difference.

Nightblades? Stamblades are the sneaky, gank types that wouldn't need necromancy. But the magblades who use siphoning magic? Obvi siphon the enemy's health to refuel their minions.

Wardens are all about protecting the forests (bc they were created by bosmer), so as long as their corpses don't desecrate the forest, everything is square.

Templar is harder to explain, but something something Dark Templar, something something profane and desecrate the Aedra.

And DK? The only thing I can think of is raising the dead to set corpses on fire to use as a moving bomb.

You make good points. And yes, Necromancy is basically the reanimation of corpses. However, a Necromancer, uses much more than just Necromancy. The use of "decay" and deasies and "debuffering" make is essential do be a Necromancer. Which lacks in all 5 classes. And I don't see how someone can mix that with undead minions in just ONE skill line, AND keeping it intereesting and "good" at the same time.

And besides, all this point you made, are good nonetheless, BUT these same arguments can be used at any skill line that these 5 classes have to be "unique". In another words, I can use these same arguments that make them what they are, to put on other classes. The thing is, they would lose its bright, the same it is with Necromancer.

By putting Necromancy on just one skill line, will ruin the joy and valor of a real necromancer. And it won't add this unique flavour to the others classes. they would just ruin it for both sides.

Necromancers are unique because they are the only class that works with damage over time (and sometimes AOE) do cripple its enemies advantage (turning in to desavantage) while his minions finish his enime off. But, with eso skills "tatic", I am sure that would be toons of build to make with this. Maybe some Necromancers won't have minions at all, and maybe others will only have minions. Maybe some Necromancers will have more dd than DoT. Maybe there will be healers, hell, even tanks.
With Death at your side-no- WIth Death all around you, there is a toon of things you can do. With eso, then.... there are not enough words to describe the builds we would create of it.

TheShadowScout

srnekro wrote: »

However, a Necromancer, uses much more than just Necromancy...

No, they don't.
Not in the elder scrolls lore anyhow.

They might in other universes, other lore backgrounds.
Here, they truly -are- all about the playing with corpses!

If -you- think the necromaners in ESO ought to become as the necromancers in your favorite background, that is your wish and desire, and as such to be respected, but... does not make it so! Thus it would be better if you stopped posting as it your wish is how things should be - other people have other wishes, you know?

...and then I would not feel prompted to reply to correct this, again
I mean, we have been at this point in the discussion before, have we not?:

TheShadowScout wrote: »

srnekro wrote: »

Necromancers can inflict diseases, debuffs and decays...

Not in ESO they can't.
Different magics.
Oh, sure, they would fit well together... but then, the same can be said for a lot of other stuff. Diseases and decay magicks are still not necromantic, but more the domain of some daedric princes (Peryite and Namira ring any bells?) And many a caster can debuff in various ways.

I mean, we get it. You love necromancers, and want to import your favorite character daydreams about that you think necromancers ought to be based on how they are depicted in other universes into ESO.
And try to build a case for arguing that. And some of us have different ideas, see the whole necromancy thing as only one "play with dead things" skill line like me, or completely unviable for lore reasons like some others (who are still wrong about this, its no more or less unviable then assassins - especially if done refit-able post-mainstory!).

I will say again, I think necromancers as -skill line- would make a good addition to the ESO range of choices, much like vampires and werewolves do. But they are not worthy of a full class, not in ESO lore. And there are a great many other options that also deserve to become part of the ESO range of choices, as depicted by various spells the NPCs have access to that we do not at this point.
The big picture would be better served by making each and every one of them a skill line, and choose some way to refit them to ESO - necromancers, illusionists, martial artists, whatever...

SilverIce58

srnekro wrote: »

SilverIce58 wrote: »

srnekro wrote: »

About the world skill line thingy... again.... really....

I am not seeing a devoted templer, whose purpose to follow the light, to ever cede a single glance upon the unholy ways of necromancy.

I am not seeing a noble Warden, who wields the power of nature itself, the very life's heartbeat and his fluffy companions, wield Necromancy, which is everything they stand against for.

I am not seeing a sneaky nightblade trying to sneak by their enemies while a flesh atronach/horde of undeads, follow him/her.

I am not seeing a mighty DragonKnight, wielder of the great Akaviri martial arts, that shatters the very earth around him/her and whose very anger and wrath turns in to the very fire that heats the Life itself and tears the darkness apart, raising a single undead minion. They would be extinguished by his/hers very flames HÁ!!! (yes, this last part as a pun).

And, finally. The sorcerer. They already have daedric summoning, why would the need necromancy at the first place? Besides, they rather turn their enemies in to ashes than "making some friends out of them" (if you know what I mean).And when it comes calling for aid, they rather call upon the daedra's rather than the dead for more a "direct" approach. That's why they are called mages/sorcerers and not necromancers!


And, how would you fit all the diseases, plagues, decay and rot, plus and undead army and the cunning way of making weapons, armor and other utilities from bone and flesh, in to just one petty skill line? It shatters my heart just to think about it.

Except, every necromancer was a sorcerer first and foremost. Mannimarco? Sorcerer. N'gasta? Sorcerer. Necromancers are just sorcerers who wanted the power that they already have, mixed with a little bit of difference.

Nightblades? Stamblades are the sneaky, gank types that wouldn't need necromancy. But the magblades who use siphoning magic? Obvi siphon the enemy's health to refuel their minions.

Wardens are all about protecting the forests (bc they were created by bosmer), so as long as their corpses don't desecrate the forest, everything is square.

Templar is harder to explain, but something something Dark Templar, something something profane and desecrate the Aedra.

And DK? The only thing I can think of is raising the dead to set corpses on fire to use as a moving bomb.

You make good points. And yes, Necromancy is basically the reanimation of corpses. However, a Necromancer, uses much more than just Necromancy. The use of "decay" and deasies and "debuffering" make is essential do be a Necromancer. Which lacks in all 5 classes. And I don't see how someone can mix that with undead minions in just ONE skill line, AND keeping it intereesting and "good" at the same time.

And besides, all this point you made, are good nonetheless, BUT these same arguments can be used at any skill line that these 5 classes have to be "unique". In another words, I can use these same arguments that make them what they are, to put on other classes. The thing is, they would lose its bright, the same it is with Necromancer.

By putting Necromancy on just one skill line, will ruin the joy and valor of a real necromancer. And it won't add this unique flavour to the others classes. they would just ruin it for both sides.

Necromancers are unique because they are the only class that works with damage over time (and sometimes AOE) do cripple its enemies advantage (turning in to desavantage) while his minions finish his enime off. But, with eso skills "tatic", I am sure that would be toons of build to make with this. Maybe some Necromancers won't have minions at all, and maybe others will only have minions. Maybe some Necromancers will have more dd than DoT. Maybe there will be healers, hell, even tanks.
With Death at your side-no- WIth Death all around you, there is a toon of things you can do. With eso, then.... there are not enough words to describe the builds we would create of it.

It'd be smart to give them a 4-5 skill line with 3-4 passives and an ult. But disease damage? Nightblades can do that. DoTs? Nightblades mostly, Warden has some skills. In terms of crippling an enemy, Nightblade has that skill that fears an enemy, DK and Sorc can stop enemies from moving, DK has fossilize. It just would be better for necromancy to be a skill line. Out of 5 skills, 2 would be pets, one would be that hand that grabs you that the enemy can use, one can be a disease ability that does DoT and cost magicka instead of Stamina, and the last can be a heal skill. The ult could summon a Bonelord and can be morphed to be either a Bonelord that summons bone flayers, or a Flesh Atronach that deals disease damage. Boom, there's your skill line.

srnekro

SilverIce58 wrote: »

srnekro wrote: »

SilverIce58 wrote: »

srnekro wrote: »

About the world skill line thingy... again.... really....

I am not seeing a devoted templer, whose purpose to follow the light, to ever cede a single glance upon the unholy ways of necromancy.

I am not seeing a noble Warden, who wields the power of nature itself, the very life's heartbeat and his fluffy companions, wield Necromancy, which is everything they stand against for.

I am not seeing a sneaky nightblade trying to sneak by their enemies while a flesh atronach/horde of undeads, follow him/her.

I am not seeing a mighty DragonKnight, wielder of the great Akaviri martial arts, that shatters the very earth around him/her and whose very anger and wrath turns in to the very fire that heats the Life itself and tears the darkness apart, raising a single undead minion. They would be extinguished by his/hers very flames HÁ!!! (yes, this last part as a pun).

And, finally. The sorcerer. They already have daedric summoning, why would the need necromancy at the first place? Besides, they rather turn their enemies in to ashes than "making some friends out of them" (if you know what I mean).And when it comes calling for aid, they rather call upon the daedra's rather than the dead for more a "direct" approach. That's why they are called mages/sorcerers and not necromancers!


And, how would you fit all the diseases, plagues, decay and rot, plus and undead army and the cunning way of making weapons, armor and other utilities from bone and flesh, in to just one petty skill line? It shatters my heart just to think about it.

Except, every necromancer was a sorcerer first and foremost. Mannimarco? Sorcerer. N'gasta? Sorcerer. Necromancers are just sorcerers who wanted the power that they already have, mixed with a little bit of difference.

Nightblades? Stamblades are the sneaky, gank types that wouldn't need necromancy. But the magblades who use siphoning magic? Obvi siphon the enemy's health to refuel their minions.

Wardens are all about protecting the forests (bc they were created by bosmer), so as long as their corpses don't desecrate the forest, everything is square.

Templar is harder to explain, but something something Dark Templar, something something profane and desecrate the Aedra.

And DK? The only thing I can think of is raising the dead to set corpses on fire to use as a moving bomb.

You make good points. And yes, Necromancy is basically the reanimation of corpses. However, a Necromancer, uses much more than just Necromancy. The use of "decay" and deasies and "debuffering" make is essential do be a Necromancer. Which lacks in all 5 classes. And I don't see how someone can mix that with undead minions in just ONE skill line, AND keeping it intereesting and "good" at the same time.

And besides, all this point you made, are good nonetheless, BUT these same arguments can be used at any skill line that these 5 classes have to be "unique". In another words, I can use these same arguments that make them what they are, to put on other classes. The thing is, they would lose its bright, the same it is with Necromancer.

By putting Necromancy on just one skill line, will ruin the joy and valor of a real necromancer. And it won't add this unique flavour to the others classes. they would just ruin it for both sides.

Necromancers are unique because they are the only class that works with damage over time (and sometimes AOE) do cripple its enemies advantage (turning in to desavantage) while his minions finish his enime off. But, with eso skills "tatic", I am sure that would be toons of build to make with this. Maybe some Necromancers won't have minions at all, and maybe others will only have minions. Maybe some Necromancers will have more dd than DoT. Maybe there will be healers, hell, even tanks.
With Death at your side-no- WIth Death all around you, there is a toon of things you can do. With eso, then.... there are not enough words to describe the builds we would create of it.

It'd be smart to give them a 4-5 skill line with 3-4 passives and an ult. But disease damage? Nightblades can do that. DoTs? Nightblades mostly, Warden has some skills. In terms of crippling an enemy, Nightblade has that skill that fears an enemy, DK and Sorc can stop enemies from moving, DK has fossilize. It just would be better for necromancy to be a skill line. Out of 5 skills, 2 would be pets, one would be that hand that grabs you that the enemy can use, one can be a disease ability that does DoT and cost magicka instead of Stamina, and the last can be a heal skill. The ult could summon a Bonelord and can be morphed to be either a Bonelord that summons bone flayers, or a Flesh Atronach that deals disease damage. Boom, there's your skill line.

Necromancy, to be whole, should look like Animal Companion Skill LIne from Warden. With a couple skills being permanent pets, and others temporary ones. That said, there is left two more skill lines that can be easily filled. One, would be focused on DoT and maybe AOE. The other one on buffs/debuffs. AND THAT gives you a Necromancer.

It's not a couple of DoT that qualifies you as a DoT Dispenser, as Necros trully are. You need to think bigger. Necros has tons of DoT that can stack on each other, AND it can turn your buffs on debuffs and vice versa. I don't see any class do that.

TheShadowScout

SilverIce58 wrote: »

Boom, there's your skill line.

While we are talking about this... here is what I came up with for necromancers as part of my Class Morph idea (...as sorceror specialization, naturally, though it could just as well be done as standalone line) - just going to leave it here:

TheShadowScout wrote: »

Necromancer (death magic and undead summoning; color: cyan - NPC coldfire)
Skills:
• Spectral Grasp (area snare, dodgeable, like lich)
- Morph1: Spectral Hold (+immobilize, then snare, like NPC necromancers)
- Morph2: Cursed Grasp (+ DoT, like undead death curse)
• Raise Undead (summon one skeleton, duration)
- Morph1: Raise Corpse (summon zombie, +special attacks – punch, vomit)
- Morph2: Army of Undead (summon 3 weak skeletons)
• Drain Strength (channeled, interruptable, do damage, gain magica)
- Morph1: Drain Life (+ also gain health)
- Morph2: Drain Power (+ reduce target spell damage for duration)
• Animate Dead (summon stronger undead, Draugr/Ra-netu, duration)
- Morph1: Animate Flesh (summon Flesh Atronarch)
- Morph2: Animate Bones (Summon Bone Colossus)
• Spirit Blast (like Mannimarco but smaller, two-tier AoE strike)
- Morph1: Spirit Bombardment (+area, Mannimarco sized)
- Morph2: Soul Blast (ignores some spell resistance)
Ultimate: Soul Cage (like the Lich spell, but with extra damage in spell area)
- Morph1: Soul Prison (+duration)
- Morph2: Etheral Cage (+area)
Passives:
• Gravesinger: undead pets get extra damage resistance/HP
• Necropotence: gain extra magica when necromancer pets are active
• Soul Render: do bonus damage against enemies affected by necromancer abilities
• Death Feeder: any time an enemy dies within 20 meters, gain health & magica

timborggrenlarsenb16_ESO

I just want to see the classes we have now, been removed and add all there skill lines as open skill lines for all to use. And from that point ONLY go this way forward.

Chilly-McFreeze

idk wrote: »

It seems to leave out of the "lore" section that necromancers have spread fear throughout Tamriel during this current time. They are seen as evil. That alone would be a lore issue that would prevent or delay a necromancer class being considered at this time.

Nitpicking here.
Same can be said about assasins, thiefs and lifeforce sucking bloodmages, in essence what a Nightblade is.
As far as I remember, Daedras aren't very welcome in most Tamriel either, and still we have daedra summoning Sorcerers here.
We even have a soul magick skill line where you can suck the souls of humans/ elfs/ beasts/ animals/ monsters etc. if you put a spell on them or slay them with your weapons. And to what "magic school" exactly would you count the imprisonment of human/ elven souls in soul gems for the purpose of... giving your weapons magickal power (back)?

Chilly-McFreeze

TheShadowScout wrote: »

srnekro wrote: »

However, a Necromancer, uses much more than just Necromancy...

No, they don't.
Not in the elder scrolls lore anyhow.

They might in other universes, other lore backgrounds.
Here, they truly -are- all about the playing with corpses!

If -you- think the necromaners in ESO ought to become as the necromancers in your favorite background, that is your wish and desire, and as such to be respected, but... does not make it so! Thus it would be better if you stopped posting as it your wish is how things should be - other people have other wishes, you know?

...and then I would not feel prompted to reply to correct this, again
I mean, we have been at this point in the discussion before, have we not?:

TheShadowScout wrote: »

srnekro wrote: »

Necromancers can inflict diseases, debuffs and decays...

Not in ESO they can't.
Different magics.
Oh, sure, they would fit well together... but then, the same can be said for a lot of other stuff. Diseases and decay magicks are still not necromantic, but more the domain of some daedric princes (Peryite and Namira ring any bells?) And many a caster can debuff in various ways.

I mean, we get it. You love necromancers, and want to import your favorite character daydreams about that you think necromancers ought to be based on how they are depicted in other universes into ESO.
And try to build a case for arguing that. And some of us have different ideas, see the whole necromancy thing as only one "play with dead things" skill line like me, or completely unviable for lore reasons like some others (who are still wrong about this, its no more or less unviable then assassins - especially if done refit-able post-mainstory!).

I will say again, I think necromancers as -skill line- would make a good addition to the ESO range of choices, much like vampires and werewolves do. But they are not worthy of a full class, not in ESO lore. And there are a great many other options that also deserve to become part of the ESO range of choices, as depicted by various spells the NPCs have access to that we do not at this point.
The big picture would be better served by making each and every one of them a skill line, and choose some way to refit them to ESO - necromancers, illusionists, martial artists, whatever...

Yes, they do more than just summoning corpses.
Just took a short look in the TES III Build Editor. There are two entries for a Necromancer Class in the NPC tab, Dedaenc and Goris, the maggot king.
Both utilize magickal defense (reflect, absorption, invisibility, dodge chance), CCs and debuffs (silence, burden, sleep, weary, drains, absorb attributes, calm, weaknesses to elements).
Dedaenc utilizes different poison attacks, while Goris uses frost and flame spells (in addition to increased mobility).

Beside that it's to expect that someone magickaly talented enough to raise the dead can also create a simply destruction spell.

srnekro

Chilly-McFreeze wrote: »

TheShadowScout wrote: »

srnekro wrote: »

However, a Necromancer, uses much more than just Necromancy...

No, they don't.
Not in the elder scrolls lore anyhow.

They might in other universes, other lore backgrounds.
Here, they truly -are- all about the playing with corpses!

If -you- think the necromaners in ESO ought to become as the necromancers in your favorite background, that is your wish and desire, and as such to be respected, but... does not make it so! Thus it would be better if you stopped posting as it your wish is how things should be - other people have other wishes, you know?

...and then I would not feel prompted to reply to correct this, again
I mean, we have been at this point in the discussion before, have we not?:

TheShadowScout wrote: »

srnekro wrote: »

Necromancers can inflict diseases, debuffs and decays...

Not in ESO they can't.
Different magics.
Oh, sure, they would fit well together... but then, the same can be said for a lot of other stuff. Diseases and decay magicks are still not necromantic, but more the domain of some daedric princes (Peryite and Namira ring any bells?) And many a caster can debuff in various ways.

I mean, we get it. You love necromancers, and want to import your favorite character daydreams about that you think necromancers ought to be based on how they are depicted in other universes into ESO.
And try to build a case for arguing that. And some of us have different ideas, see the whole necromancy thing as only one "play with dead things" skill line like me, or completely unviable for lore reasons like some others (who are still wrong about this, its no more or less unviable then assassins - especially if done refit-able post-mainstory!).

I will say again, I think necromancers as -skill line- would make a good addition to the ESO range of choices, much like vampires and werewolves do. But they are not worthy of a full class, not in ESO lore. And there are a great many other options that also deserve to become part of the ESO range of choices, as depicted by various spells the NPCs have access to that we do not at this point.
The big picture would be better served by making each and every one of them a skill line, and choose some way to refit them to ESO - necromancers, illusionists, martial artists, whatever...

Yes, they do more than just summoning corpses.
Just took a short look in the TES III Build Editor. There are two entries for a Necromancer Class in the NPC tab, Dedaenc and Goris, the maggot king.
Both utilize magickal defense (reflect, absorption, invisibility, dodge chance), CCs and debuffs (silence, burden, sleep, weary, drains, absorb attributes, calm, weaknesses to elements).
Dedaenc utilizes different poison attacks, while Goris uses frost and flame spells (in addition to increased mobility).

Beside that it's to expect that someone magickaly talented enough to raise the dead can also create a simply destruction spell.

Thank you, but don't waste your time with scouty guy here. He can't see reason here.

Seraphayel

Necromancy Staff could work. So could every other staff with one of the magic schools of Elder Scrolls. Don't know why there's no conjuration, alteration etc. staff.

SilverIce58

Seraphayel wrote: »

Necromancy Staff could work. So could every other staff with one of the magic schools of Elder Scrolls. Don't know why there's no conjuration, alteration etc. staff.

Necromancy staff? If it does magic damage, then I'm for it.

TheShadowScout

Chilly-McFreeze wrote: »

Yes, they do more than just summoning corpses.
Just took a short look in the TES III Build Editor. There are two entries for a Necromancer Class in the NPC tab, Dedaenc and Goris, the maggot king.
Both utilize magickal defense (reflect, absorption, invisibility, dodge chance), CCs and debuffs (silence, burden, sleep, weary, drains, absorb attributes, calm, weaknesses to elements).
Dedaenc utilizes different poison attacks, while Goris uses frost and flame spells (in addition to increased mobility).

Beside that it's to expect that someone magickaly talented enough to raise the dead can also create a simply destruction spell.

Thanks for making anopther point in my case that necromancy is a mere specialization then!

The thing is, -necromancy- IS nothing but a subset to conjuration in the TES magic lore. Nothing but raising corrpses, animating flesh and bone constructs, using death magic...
It does not include any poison spells, it does not include any disease spells, it does not include any decay spells, it does not include any ice spells, it does not include any fire spells, it does not include any defense spells...
All that are -different- magic schools in the TES universe.

Now, in the other TES games, players had free spell selection. They could with enough effort learn whatever they choose to study, in some of the games they could even learn -everything- if they put in the effort, learn every spell available in the game.

But that does not mean all the other skills are part of the "necromancer package" - that package would include -only- those skills noone but dedicated necromancers can learn to use...

Every mage can use fire spells, be it through learning them in the destruction school of magic in other TES games, or by racking up their destro weapon line and grabbing a fire staff in ESO. Dragonknights can learn extra fire magic in ESO, since the powers that be decided this games magic sysem would be different from the schools of magic system of other TES games, to allow them to add more "awesome" class skills without things getting too unbalanced.
But even here in this system, necromancy is considered a mere specialization of sorcery. As I keep pointing out.

So, following all that lore... and considering that necromancy is a specialization of conjuration... and that conjuration is represented by the sorcerors daedric summoning class skill line... it -would- make most sense to portray necromancy as "prestige class" option for sorcerors, yes?
Which would give you "necromancers" that can... utilize daedric magica defense, dark magic CCs and destruction (staff) spells... sounds about right to me...

Seraphayel wrote: »

Necromancy Staff could work. So could every other staff with one of the magic schools of Elder Scrolls. Don't know why there's no conjuration, alteration etc. staff.

There is no "necromancy staff" - but there ought to be a "coldfire staff" like we see NPC necromancers and molag bal minion daedric casters use! As I pointed out in my weapon suggestions elsewhere (anomg other things):

TheShadowScout wrote: »

Alternate Staves - we have fire, ice and shock as well as healing, but who here wouldn't want more? Cyan "coldfire" destruction staves (fire effect visuals in cyan, but ice effect status and damage), purple "warlock" destro staves (pure magic damage, shock effect status), green acid destro staves (fire status effects, poison damage), or red blood magic healing staves (less damage, but as lifedrain)

...I would really, really love to see them expand the staff options for more diversity among magic damage casters! (as well as the other options for magica character weapon options I mentioned there)

SilverIce58

TheShadowScout wrote: »

Chilly-McFreeze wrote: »

Yes, they do more than just summoning corpses.
Just took a short look in the TES III Build Editor. There are two entries for a Necromancer Class in the NPC tab, Dedaenc and Goris, the maggot king.
Both utilize magickal defense (reflect, absorption, invisibility, dodge chance), CCs and debuffs (silence, burden, sleep, weary, drains, absorb attributes, calm, weaknesses to elements).
Dedaenc utilizes different poison attacks, while Goris uses frost and flame spells (in addition to increased mobility).

Beside that it's to expect that someone magickaly talented enough to raise the dead can also create a simply destruction spell.

Thanks for making anopther point in my case that necromancy is a mere specialization then!

The thing is, -necromancy- IS nothing but a subset to conjuration in the TES magic lore. Nothing but raising corrpses, animating flesh and bone constructs, using death magic...
It does not include any poison spells, it does not include any disease spells, it does not include any decay spells, it does not include any ice spells, it does not include any fire spells, it does not include any defense spells...
All that are -different- magic schools in the TES universe.

Now, in the other TES games, players had free spell selection. They could with enough effort learn whatever they choose to study, in some of the games they could even learn -everything- if they put in the effort, learn every spell available in the game.

But that does not mean all the other skills are part of the "necromancer package" - that package would include -only- those skills noone but dedicated necromancers can learn to use...

Every mage can use fire spells, be it through learning them in the destruction school of magic in other TES games, or by racking up their destro weapon line and grabbing a fire staff in ESO. Dragonknights can learn extra fire magic in ESO, since the powers that be decided this games magic sysem would be different from the schools of magic system of other TES games, to allow them to add more "awesome" class skills without things getting too unbalanced.
But even here in this system, necromancy is considered a mere specialization of sorcery. As I keep pointing out.

So, following all that lore... and considering that necromancy is a specialization of conjuration... and that conjuration is represented by the sorcerors daedric summoning class skill line... it -would- make most sense to portray necromancy as "prestige class" option for sorcerors, yes?
Which would give you "necromancers" that can... utilize daedric magica defense, dark magic CCs and destruction (staff) spells... sounds about right to me...

Seraphayel wrote: »

Necromancy Staff could work. So could every other staff with one of the magic schools of Elder Scrolls. Don't know why there's no conjuration, alteration etc. staff.

There is no "necromancy staff" - but there ought to be a "coldfire staff" like we see NPC necromancers and molag bal minion daedric casters use! As I pointed out in my weapon suggestions elsewhere (anomg other things):

TheShadowScout wrote: »

Alternate Staves - we have fire, ice and shock as well as healing, but who here wouldn't want more? Cyan "coldfire" destruction staves (fire effect visuals in cyan, but ice effect status and damage), purple "warlock" destro staves (pure magic damage, shock effect status), green acid destro staves (fire status effects, poison damage), or red blood magic healing staves (less damage, but as lifedrain)

...I would really, really love to see them expand the staff options for more diversity among magic damage casters! (as well as the other options for magica character weapon options I mentioned there)

While I do agree with everything you're saying, keep in mind that magic schools like destruction, illusion, conjuration were just made by the Mage's Guild to put some order into magic. Spells like nature healing that warden can do or dark magic that sorc can do are technically seen as hedge (non-classically trained spell) magic. Hedge magic and Mage's Guild magic is literally the same, but the only difference is one is taught by others (MG) and the other is learned by yourself (hedge).

TheShadowScout

SilverIce58 wrote: »

While I do agree with everything you're saying, keep in mind that magic schools like destruction, illusion, conjuration were just made by the Mage's Guild to put some order into magic. Spells like nature healing that warden can do or dark magic that sorc can do are technically seen as hedge (non-classically trained spell) magic. Hedge magic and Mage's Guild magic is literally the same, but the only difference is one is taught by others (MG) and the other is learned by yourself (hedge).

...technbically, ESO is set -before- the mages guild introduces the sachools of magic system. There even is a lorebook in-game that mentions this, in an "hey, look at this nifty system for organizing magic, should we mages guild not steal it from the shad astula curriculum?"
So, in a way, ALL the magic in ESO would be "hedge magic" from the point of view of the later mages guild of the solo player TES games. As a reasoning to justify their class system.

But even so, even in ESO, necromancy is considered a subset of conjuration.
The relevant part of that text being:

Now, it is true, of course, that conjuration is a common tool of sorcery, and we sorcerers often resort to summoning aid from Oblivion when a problem is best solved by judicious application of vicious brute force. It is also true that summoning Daedric spirits to possess and animate corpses, or calling up the souls of the dead for information or other services—in short, necromancy—is a subset of the art of conjuration, albeit inherently distasteful and degrading. However, to infer from this that all sorcerers are de facto necromancers as well is false, misleading, and libelous.

...and that is the lore on the matter.
That is the lore-supported connection between sorcery and necromancy, even in the pre-magic-school system of ESO.
That is the core of my conviction that necromancy in ESO would best be portrayed as "prestige class" specialization for sorcerors instead as a class of its own.

Bam_Bam

I DEFINIETLY don't see Necromancy as "Baddie Pet Sorcs". There is wayyyyyyyyyy more that can be applied to such a class than "a sorc who runs about with a pet skeleton/zombie". I mean, it seems a lot of people don't the concept of Necromancy actually is....

necromancy
ˈnɛkrə(ʊ)mansi/Submit
noun
the supposed practice of communicating with the dead, especially in order to predict the future.
"alchemy, necromancy, and other magic practices"
witchcraft, sorcery, or black magic in general.

Personally, I associate them with death, black and negative schools of magic. Anti-healers and MASTER-debuffers.If they are conjurers, then I would say that they would be in the minority (powreful individuals such as Mannimarco). In game, any sort of "conjuring" would be more to do with (PvP) raising and communicating with the souls of the fallen to either have them fight for the Necromancer OR ishe temporarily absorbs the skills and power of the fallen (increase the players stats significantly) - hmmmm maybe use Black Magic to absorb the power of and skillsof the LIVING, aswell.

The same principles could be applied in PvE and there is a MASSIVE ooportunity to add some amazing spells and skills to the game....

SilverIce58

TheShadowScout wrote: »

SilverIce58 wrote: »

While I do agree with everything you're saying, keep in mind that magic schools like destruction, illusion, conjuration were just made by the Mage's Guild to put some order into magic. Spells like nature healing that warden can do or dark magic that sorc can do are technically seen as hedge (non-classically trained spell) magic. Hedge magic and Mage's Guild magic is literally the same, but the only difference is one is taught by others (MG) and the other is learned by yourself (hedge).

...technbically, ESO is set -before- the mages guild introduces the sachools of magic system. There even is a lorebook in-game that mentions this, in an "hey, look at this nifty system for organizing magic, should we mages guild not steal it from the shad astula curriculum?"
So, in a way, ALL the magic in ESO would be "hedge magic" from the point of view of the later mages guild of the solo player TES games. As a reasoning to justify their class system.

But even so, even in ESO, necromancy is considered a subset of conjuration.
The relevant part of that text being:

Now, it is true, of course, that conjuration is a common tool of sorcery, and we sorcerers often resort to summoning aid from Oblivion when a problem is best solved by judicious application of vicious brute force. It is also true that summoning Daedric spirits to possess and animate corpses, or calling up the souls of the dead for information or other services—in short, necromancy—is a subset of the art of conjuration, albeit inherently distasteful and degrading. However, to infer from this that all sorcerers are de facto necromancers as well is false, misleading, and libelous.

...and that is the lore on the matter.
That is the lore-supported connection between sorcery and necromancy, even in the pre-magic-school system of ESO.
That is the core of my conviction that necromancy in ESO would best be portrayed as "prestige class" specialization for sorcerors instead as a class of its own.

Oh my god, I literally read that book last week and I already forgot about it. You're right tho.

srnekro

Baranthus wrote: »

I DEFINIETLY don't see Necromancy as "Baddie Pet Sorcs". There is wayyyyyyyyyy more that can be applied to such a class than "a sorc who runs about with a pet skeleton/zombie". I mean, it seems a lot of people don't the concept of Necromancy actually is....

necromancy
ˈnɛkrə(ʊ)mansi/Submit
noun
the supposed practice of communicating with the dead, especially in order to predict the future.
"alchemy, necromancy, and other magic practices"
witchcraft, sorcery, or black magic in general.

Personally, I associate them with death, black and negative schools of magic. Anti-healers and MASTER-debuffers.If they are conjurers, then I would say that they would be in the minority (powreful individuals such as Mannimarco). In game, any sort of "conjuring" would be more to do with (PvP) raising and communicating with the souls of the fallen to either have them fight for the Necromancer OR ishe temporarily absorbs the skills and power of the fallen (increase the players stats significantly) - hmmmm maybe use Black Magic to absorb the power of and skillsof the LIVING, aswell.

The same principles could be applied in PvE and there is a MASSIVE ooportunity to add some amazing spells and skills to the game....

Yes, that is correct.

srnekro

It comes to my attention that there is a misunderstanding here.

Some of you seem rather confused. Allow me to clarify.

There is a slight different between a Necromancer and Necromancy. Slight, but enough to make a difference.

Now, if you all please, just turn off your eggo for a second and read with your full attention, or with the most that you can muster, you will see it is madness to turn necromancy into a world skill line.

Yes, NecromANCY alone, is a subclass of conjuration. However, that's not the case to a NecromanCER.

You see, the Necromancy is a dark art, which is basically the reanimation of the dead yes, but that alone don't make you a Necromancer.

Let's look at Mannimarco. Besides all the evil he has brough to us, he WAS a Necromancer. He was a powerfull magigician, yes, but everyone refered to him as Necromancer and not a powerfull wizard. Why?!

He used Necromancy, of course, but he also has other weapons at his arsenal. Any Major Necromancer on the lore, have never single used just Necromancy.Although, this single branch alone can be divided in to the reanimation of minions and the sole constructs of bone and flesh, which can provide many utility things, from weapons and armors to traps/CC. They all use some sort of "disease" magic, that I say IT IS possible. if you dig enough on Restoration, Alteration, Illusion and Mysticism. Because, if you know how to cure (like a disease for example) you also know how to spread it.

The Elder Scrolls franchise did let us explore all the plains of magic in every single way we could find and fit. In this case, this is not like any Elder Scrolls game. This is a Massive Multiplayer Online rpg, that means, in order to balance the builds, there must be a class system. Yes. it maybe unfair to some, since we are going to split the branches of all school magics in to classes and skill lines. But it is necessessary.
Although, if you ask me, if magic were real, it would be impossible to a single man, mastered all schools, unlike in a video game. Therefore, classes. Classes are more like an individual who choose to main a specific group of schools to reach his goal. And, as we create a character with that class/individually we are basing ourselves on that idea.
A Necromancer CLASS, would bring us the arts of undead minions (both temporary and permanent. From, skeletons, zombies, Atronachs, maybe even colossals, and spirits), diseases and plagues (several types of dot and aoe), debuffing the enemy (applying direct debuffs AND making her buffs in to more debuffs), "utility constructs" (like those skeletons hand from the ground, and as we are getting this far, we can go further by adding like others bone part to do things similar, like an whole arm pushing enemies to the necromancer or bashing them away, a whole fist smiting them down, rib cages to make an actual cage. And covering themselves with bone (temporary or even permanent) to make their current armor stronger and their weapons to make them also strongeror even making bone separs to throw directly at them). And ALL this, can easily be brought you by Restoration, Alteration, Illusion, Mysticism and Necromancy.

Necromancers can not be whole with just Necromancy. Since it is the study on the fallen and the rot corpses and more, it may lead to the pratice of "disease" magic, that can be easly found on Restoration and Alteration.

Once you go black, there's no going back.

Taking off Necromancy from a Necromancer is the same of taking off the Akaviri martial arts from the Dragon Knight, taking the "Naturism" of Wardem and the light of the Templars and put on world skill line as well. Can you all see how obsolete they would become in such scenario?
That's the same thing that will happen to Necromancers. That's why I create all this trheads, To stand up for what is right.

Sometimes, light alone can not fight against the horde of evil. Darkness rises to its cause. For both make the balance of all things. The good in evil and the evil in good. Without that balance, we are set loose on havoc, chaos and insanity. So, fight fire with fire, is a good option, making Necromancers as an eligible class, by not just making the dead raise, but to weaken their foes strengths, by Debuffs and DoTs.

Although, I can do nothing but to put my faith on @ZOS, and hope they understand the truths I speak. As I seek no harm to the lore itself, but just enlightenment of this beautiful CLASS. And hope with all my heart they won't make it a world skill line. Because Necromancy itself is not a guild or some sort of vampirism, it's the whole essence of a Necromancer, which is a class that can offer far more than just a couple of raised bones.

Now that we have Necromancer CLASS and an idea, imagine how it could morph (class morph) in to something bigger??
Like, Lich (form), "Plague Lorde" ("plague"=disease, you get the idea) and even The Physician if you may (like an healer from a Necromancer, based on restoration and alteration). But this is just a thought, class morphs itself sound rather overrating. I would satisfy with just Necromancer. and how about you?

ForsakenSin

Just want to add... i hope its a new guild skill... i really don't fell like leaving my main character ive been playing with since the launch of the game got achievements ect and start new necro character ...

srnekro

ForsakenSin wrote: »

Just want to add... i hope its a new guild skill... i really don't fell like leaving my main character ive been playing with since the launch of the game got achievements ect and start new necro character ...

You don't need to create a new other character if you don't want to. Just keep in mind that other class will happen. This won't just be a mmorpg with 5 classes (and "yesterday" we had 4, if you know what I mean).

TheShadowScout

srnekro wrote: »

It comes to my attention that there is a misunderstanding here.

Some of you seem rather confused. Allow me to clarify.

We are not confused at all. We understand your views just right.
We just disagree with your point of view.
There is a difference!

srnekro wrote: »

There is a slight different between a Necromancer and Necromancy. Slight, but enough to make a difference.

Now, if you all please, just turn off your eggo for a second and read with your full attention, or with the most that you can muster, you will see it is madness to turn necromancy into a world skill line.

Yes, NecromANCY alone, is a subclass of conjuration. However, that's not the case to a NecromanCER.

You see, the Necromancy is a dark art, which is basically the reanimation of the dead yes, but that alone don't make you a Necromancer.

Wrong.
That is -exactly- what makes you a necromancer - in TES lore!

I mean, you are kinda saying is like "oh, finishing your doctorate education in medicine and starting your medical practice alone doesn't really make you a doctor..." and "baking baked goods for a living alone doesn't really make you a baker" or "comitting crimes for a living alone doesn't make you a criminal" or similar...

If you learn necromancy, and practice necromancy, and specialize in necromancy... then you get to be called a necromancer.
That's it. That's all of it. That's all there is to it.

Just like a mage who specializes in ice magic would be a cryomancer and a mage who specializes in fire magic would be a pyromancer, and a mage who specializes in conjuring would be aconjurer, and a mage who specializes in illusion magic would be an illusionist.

srnekro wrote: »

Let's look at Mannimarco. Besides all the evil he has brough to us, he WAS a Necromancer. He was a powerfull magigician, yes, but everyone refered to him as Necromancer and not a powerfull wizard. Why?!

For the same reason everyone refers to Emric as king, and not as knight which he also has been before his crowning, or squire before his knighthood.
The exceptional thing is given precedence over the common feature of a persons history...
There are many powerful mages.
Few of them dare to openly specialize in necromancy... (though some of them may dabble in their youth, when they are feeling rebellions, and noone else is looking. Or at least can be easily dissapeared before they can tell on you...)

srnekro wrote: »

He used Necromancy, of course, but he also has other weapons at his arsenal.

All too true.
Thanks for making my point once again that necromancy is a skill line, taken not by itself, but as addition to "other weapons in ones arsenal"...
Though it -would- be a skill line that is a big deal to take up... making it the "new prime focus" as its the exceptional rather then the commonplace...

srnekro wrote: »

Any Major Necromancer on the lore, have never single used just Necromancy.

So, you are judging the matter by the exceptional people and not the common ones?
Has it never occured to you that this is the wrong way of looking at it?
That the exceptional necromancers -are- exceptional because they have a much wider range of skills then just necromancy?
That therefore their wider range of skills is NOT part of the necromancy alone?

Anyone can choose to specialize in necromancy. Just look at all those worm cultist necromancers - a septim a score, and none of them can do much but use a little necromancy before the vestige hero plows them under in their way to the next quest.
By all accounts, that is the core of what a necromancer is in ESO. It says so right in their floating description...

Those who become worthy of note, those who become more then "trash mobs"... they do so not on necromancy alone, but because they have other skills to back it up! That makes them exceptional... but it does not mean they are the measure for necromancy...

srnekro wrote: »

They all use some sort of "disease" magic, that I say IT IS possible. if you dig enough on Restoration, Alteration, Illusion and Mysticism. Because, if you know how to cure (like a disease for example) you also know how to spread it.

But that is NOT necromancy anymore.
Yes, there is disease magic in the elder scrolls lore. Just ask any peryite cultists. (and maybe the argonians, or perhaps the hist, rumor has it, there was something iffy about that knarhaten flu...).
Though its more closely associated with alchemy, as anyone who followed the dialouge in Deshaan knows.

But that's it.
It has nothing to do with necromancy in the elder scrolls universe.
Nothing. At. All.

Take the Deshaan plague again as example... how many necromancers did you see working on that mess?
Now... how many general cultists and alchemists?
You see my point?

srnekro wrote: »

Necromancers can not be whole with just Necromancy.

...which is why it would go well as "specialization" instead of a standalone class. Thanks for making my point once more!

srnekro wrote: »

Since it is the study on the fallen and the rot corpses and more, it may lead to the pratice of "disease" magic, that can be easly found on Restoration and Alteration.

And that's grasping at straws, especially since none of the necromancers in ESO use disease attacks.
Also, necromancy is NOT the study of dead bodies, it is the magic dealing with animating them, its the summoning and enslaving of the spirits of the dead, its dealing with lifeforce and all that. The corpses are just... a side effect.

In TES lore, healers are more likely to know diseases then necromancers... and a healer turned evil would not hesitate to use them as weapon. Doesn't make them necromancers tho, riiiight?
...

Now, as has been said, in many other backgrounds necromancers are indeed paired with disease magic. But not in the TES lore. No matter how much you'd like to import it.

In the TES lore, necromancy is -indeed- merely a specialization of conjuring.
Nothing more.

And so I still think it would be way better implemented as such - a specialization for sorcerors, together withg a bunch of other specializations for -everyone else- to also enjoy, not just something for the necromancer lovers like you.

Lord_Hev

TheShadowScout wrote: »

And so I still think it would be way better implemented as such - a specialization for sorcerors, together withg a bunch of other specializations for -everyone else- to also enjoy, not just something for the necromancer lovers like you.

I disagree. Necromancy as a world skill-line would be a half-arsed job, one need only look at Vampirism to get an idea of what it would look like.

A specialization option is definitely never going to happen, as it creates exclusivity for an existing class vs the others while on top of that, opening up a can of worms for overall class balancing.


Necromancy would be done justice as an actual class, and 2 other skill-lines besides undead summoning would allow for introduction of other magic schools(mysticism coming to mind). Not to mention all the necro magic offensive abilities already existing in the game files(necro bolts and Lich soul cages/crystals)

Iccotak

@TheShadowScout
The problem being that what you want is more akin to a classless system which has no place in ESO to be frank.

We have seen data mining of info related to Spell Crafting recently.
But as it stands right now the classes are basically different specializations bundled together and sorted into specific niches and playstyles.
For Example: Sorcerer specialize in Daedric Summoning and Lightning

Necromancy would have no place for a Templar as not only does that not fit the theme but it also doesn't fit the playstyle.
Sure I can use whatever gear I want but the abilities do determine what kind of character you can play.

Classes aren't leaving as we have had this system for over 3 years.

@srnekro
The problem with your Necromancers is that they don't fit Elder Scrolls very much, if at all.
Your version sounds like Diablo which is its own thing.

In Elder Scrolls; Necromancy is raising the dead and that's it.
The practice pertains to a specific Daedric Prince, of your choice, or they simply go the "The Ideal Masters".
Disease Magic is a power that belongs to the Daedric Prince Peryite. You can't use disease magic if you are not a follower of Peryite.
However...there is Poison Magic in Restoration, as evident in Skyrim there was a spell called "Poison Rune". So look into that.

Again the classes simply take different specializations and bundle them together.

That being said you are getting way too preachy about this.

That's why I create all this trheads, To stand up for what is right.

Sometimes, light alone can not fight against the horde of evil. Darkness rises to its cause. For both make the bla bla bla bla

tbh as soon as you start talking this way I can't take it seriously anymore and I skip the majority of it.
I understand that you really want Necromancers, BUT at the end of the day it's a video game.

I'm on your side as I think it would work better as a Class. BUT this is not Diablo, so actually take into account what Necromancy entails in Elder Scrolls.

srnekro

Thank you @Lord_Hev that's exactly what I want to say.

And yes @Iccotak , I understand what you are saying. The reason why I love Necromancers, goes way beyond words and meaning itself. It's a bigger story for other day, that may never come.

However, yes, the image that I wrote was based on Diablo. Is the most recent game with actual Necromancer. But, this, was just a thought. Of Course I want to see what the Devs have stored for us.
And of course, I want to see a ESO Necromancer, not Diablo. If I want to play Blizzards Diablo, I would have went on Diablo itself and not here. how ever, this is not the case.

I WANT to see ESO making a Necromancer class, because lets be honest, it does fit on the lore and in to elder scrolls.C'mon, I play since oblivion, and I realise it's not old and I am not a veteran nor I want to be a lore master, but c'mon,let's face it, necromancers are possible, AND when I can say they can fit on the lore, I mean depending on the angle.

So far, the devs have just announced what they want us to know. Maybe there will be a chapter that tells us a different side of the Necromancers that hasn't been told to us yet. Or maybe not.

Only Zos to decide now, and I pray to any Daedric Prince, any of the "8" and even Talos if I have to (I know the time line is not there yet, I think, but still) that they make the right choice and make this as a whole new class!

Chilly-McFreeze

TheShadowScout wrote: »

Chilly-McFreeze wrote: »

Yes, they do more than just summoning corpses.
Just took a short look in the TES III Build Editor. There are two entries for a Necromancer Class in the NPC tab, Dedaenc and Goris, the maggot king.
Both utilize magickal defense (reflect, absorption, invisibility, dodge chance), CCs and debuffs (silence, burden, sleep, weary, drains, absorb attributes, calm, weaknesses to elements).
Dedaenc utilizes different poison attacks, while Goris uses frost and flame spells (in addition to increased mobility).

Beside that it's to expect that someone magickaly talented enough to raise the dead can also create a simply destruction spell.

Thanks for making anopther point in my case that necromancy is a mere specialization then!


But even here in this system, necromancy is considered a mere specialization of sorcery. As I keep pointing out.

So, following all that lore... and considering that necromancy is a specialization of conjuration... and that conjuration is represented by the sorcerors daedric summoning class skill line... it -would- make most sense to portray necromancy as "prestige class" option for sorcerors, yes?
Which would give you "necromancers" that can... utilize daedric magica defense, dark magic CCs and destruction (staff) spells... sounds about right to me...

Is that the same book that ends with "So, at any rate, I know whereof I speak when I say to you: sorcery and necromancy—there IS a difference."?

Indeed, it says "necromancy—is a subset of the art of conjuration, albeit inherently distasteful and degrading", only to continue with "However, to infer from this that all sorcerers are de facto necromancers as well is false, misleading, and libelous."

So you can either push your agenda and argument that one sorcerer says necromancy is degrading part of summoning, and summoning is part of the sorcery that sorcerers do.

Or you can get the insight that, although it's a subset of summoning, just like fire/ice/lightning are subsets of destruction, necromancy is not what every sorcerer practises. Just take a look at how the classes are split now. Sorcs with lightning, DK with fire, Wardens with ice. Your argument already falls short here, since you could say "it's all just part of destruction magick, we don't need these classes, they are mere specialisations of that school."
Just like in "fire magick is a subset of the art of destruction. However, to infer that all destruction users are de facto fire mages is false."

If you go with route a) I can only wonder where, oh where, are my necromancy skills in the sorcerer class trees?
If you go with route b) you're backed up by the current class design of designated but not exclusionary subsets of a main magicka "school", that get's additional spells from other schools as well.

I think it's only logical to go with b) since it's the the conclusion from the book and it's how this game is layed out.

TheShadowScout wrote: »

Nothing but raising corrpses, animating flesh and bone constructs, using death magic...
It does not include any poison spells, it does not include any disease spells, it does not include any decay spells, it does not include any ice spells, it does not include any fire spells, it does not include any defense spells...
All that are -different- magic schools in the TES universe.

"Raising corpses/ animating flesh and bone constructs"- sounds like a nice skill line to me. Just like daedric summoning and animal companions.

"using death magick" - I guess it depends what you understand as death magick. That tricks that nightblades (bloodmages) do? Siphoning lifeforce and instilling it into others?

"it does not include any decay spells, it does not include any ice spells, it does not include any fire spells, it does not include any defense spells..." - You mean like every class has an inherent subset of a magickschool - e.g. destruction magick - and in addition to that spells from other schools?

So let's see what other classes use.
If we use en.uesp.net/wiki/Lore:Magic as source:

Sorcerer: a.k.a. the lightning mage/ summoner
Destruction - lightning [LL, Mage's Fury]
Conjuration (summon daedra)
Alteration (wards, paralyse [rune cage, prison], armor [from Lightning form and Bound Armor)
Mysticism (silence [negate magic]),
Restoration (fortify attributes and restore health [surge, bound armor, expert summoner, blood magic])
and whatever you want to call the rest of the spells (mines, streak, curse etc.)

DK: a.k.a the fire mage
Destruction - fire [flame lash, fiery breath]
Alteration (wards, paralyse, armor)
Restoration (restore health [GDB], fortify attributes [spiked armore, inferno, molten weapons])
Mysticism (Reflect [wings])

NB: a.k.a. the illusionist
Illusion (fear, invisibility [cloak}, blind/evasion [blur])
Mysticism (Mark & Recall [shadow image]),
Destruction (Energy Leech/ Absorb [leeching strikes, funnel health])
Conjuration (summoning entities and weapons[dark shades, grim focus])

Templar: a.k.a. the healer
Destruction - here's not even an element beside fire from vamp's bane
Restoration (restore health [BoL], Cure [Purge]),
Alteration (wards [blazing shield])
Mysticism (dispell [purge], absorb [Restoring aura], fortify attributes [rune focus, restoring aura])

Wardens: a.k.a. - I have no idea what you would call this - green mage?
Destruction - ice [whole winter's embrace tree])
Conjuration (summoning entities [whole animal companion tree])
Restoration (restore health, fortify attributes [green balance]
Mysticism (Reflect, Absorb [shimmering shield])


It's not even close to complete, I didn't even include where the debuffs belong to . Also most of these spells share different mag schools over the periods of TES.
It's more than just the first look/ stereotype of the class.
So where exactly do you get the conclusion from that a new class has to be limited to his exact profession only? No other class does that. They all use a mishmash of spells from different schools. Why should a new class be an expection to that?

TheShadowScout wrote: »

Now, in the other TES games, players had free spell selection. They could with enough effort learn whatever they choose to study, in some of the games they could even learn -everything- if they put in the effort, learn every spell available in the game.

But that does not mean all the other skills are part of the "necromancer package" - that package would include -only- those skills noone but dedicated necromancers can learn to use...

Right, but this isn't other games. In ESO each class has skills that derive from different schools (destr., resto, alteration...). But that doesn't mean that all that has to be inherent to necromancy as a school per se. Why? Because every class draws from different schools. It is not as easy as saying "Templars represent the restoration school and they use nothing else, DKs are the fire mages and nothing else".

TheShadowScout wrote: »

Every mage can use fire spells, be it through learning them in the destruction school of magic in other TES games, or by racking up their destro weapon line and grabbing a fire staff in ESO. Dragonknights can learn extra fire magic in ESO, since the powers that be decided this games magic sysem would be different from the schools of magic system of other TES games, to allow them to add more "awesome" class skills without things getting too unbalanced.

If every mage can use "fire spells", e.g. through learning or bc the devs decided so, what does someone stop from putting spell X into other classes as well? If there are no mag schools like in other tes games, then why limit a new class to one when other classes are not? I feel you argument against yourself in this.
And if it's the "but flame belongs to DK and ice to wardens, we already divided the elements to classes", then explain to me why templars and NB share the same "magic dmg" main component in their skills and why every class picks skills from magick schools that other classes get their spells from as well?




tl;dr: Classes are more than "Templar uses restoration and nothing else", their skills (or schools) overlap and expand far from the first look of e.g. "DK is a fire mage and nothing else". No reason to limit a new class down to only one tiny subset of a school.



Sorry for the late answer, lost track of this thread. Also I haven't read beyond that post, so my answer might be outdatet.

Have a nice day

Edits for spelling and to make things a bit more clear

SilverIce58

@Chilly-McFreeze I'd just like to point out one thing that you got wrong, and that's that nightblades don't use destruction or conjuration. They use a form of magic called "Shadow Magic" http://en.uesp.net/wiki/Lore:Shadow_Magic
(Which is a thing, it sounds dumb, but it's part of lore), and most of their abilities are Shadow magic, while the rest fall under; Thaumaturgy, Illusion, and Mysticism.

You could argue that thaumaturgy isn't a form of magic anymore, but the mage's guild currently doesn't categorize their magic (destruction, restoration), but it was suggested that they change their categorization and ways of study to match Shad Astula (who do say that thaumaturgy is a form of magic)
http://en.uesp.net/wiki/Lore:Proposal:_Schools_of_Magic

Chilly-McFreeze

SilverIce58 wrote: »

@Chilly-McFreeze I'd just like to point out one thing that you got wrong, and that's that nightblades don't use destruction or conjuration. They use a form of magic called "Shadow Magic" http://en.uesp.net/wiki/Lore:Shadow_Magic
(Which is a thing, it sounds dumb, but it's part of lore), and most of their abilities are Shadow magic, while the rest fall under; Thaumaturgy, Illusion, and Mysticism.

You could argue that thaumaturgy isn't a form of magic anymore, but the mage's guild currently doesn't categorize their magic (destruction, restoration), but it was suggested that they change their categorization and ways of study to match Shad Astula (who do say that thaumaturgy is a form of magic)
http://en.uesp.net/wiki/Lore:Proposal:_Schools_of_Magic

Interesting. I will read into that. Thanks for the info!
Point still stands that all classes use more than only their trademark "school".

srnekro

« (...) It's not even close to complete, I didn't even include where the debuffs belong to . Also most of these spells share different mag schools over the periods of TES.
It's more than just the first look/ stereotype of the class.
So where exactly do you get the conclusion from that a new class has to be limited to his exact profession only? No other class does that. They all use a mishmash of spells from different schools. Why should a new class be an expection to that?
(...)
Right, but this isn't other games. In ESO each class has skills that derive from different schools (destr., resto, alteration...). But that doesn't mean that all that has to be inherent to necromancy as a school per se. Why? Because every class draws from different schools. It is not as easy as saying "Templars represent the restoration school and they use nothing else, DKs are the fire mages and nothing else". (...)»

@Chilly-McFreeze Thank you for aiding us to clarify more this subject. If I had a round table, you would have be one of the "12" knights Há! Love you man