Forums » Pantheon Classes

Traditional Necros aren't needed

    • 159 posts
    December 5, 2018 8:49 AM PST

    Necro, in its "traditional" form is a pointless addition to the game. Somebody had to say it.  It's pure fan service with no redeeming qualities to bring the class, in its expected form, to Terminus

     

    A caster class that uses persistent pets for dps (summoner) while supplementing that damage with spell casts (summoner) while hopefully bringing some additional utility to the group (summoner).   It makes zero sense to bring in a second class that is a carbon copy of another class with a change of graphic mesh on the pet.  It's completely redundant with one exception, poison and disease damage types.

    But Xil, you just said it yourself, they'll bring poison and disease damage into group encounters.  Yes, I did, and how often have you seen a grouping (not raiding, that's different)  necro back on EQ?  Necro was a class for people that didnt want to (or couldn't for other reasons) group with other players.  It was for people that didnt want to share the experience of community gameplay for the most part [yes I know ppl will voice opposition to that statement but it's a fact...and those same necro players will level soloing city guards for days on end]. 

    Necro in its traditional mmo role is a violation of the Vision behind pantheon, group and community focused gameplay.  Bringing Necro in, in the form everyone expects, would require tuning existing content to accommodate for the solo focused class or load the class with potential exploits that will be written off as emergent gameplay unique to the class.

    If Pantheon is going to have a necro, break the mold and make it a group focused class: 

    Short duration utility pets with the necro theme (raise a defender that taunts off your defensive target and can take 5 hits before expiring, summon skeletal hands from a wall to aid in climbing, target a corpse and summon its ghost to distract an enemy for 20 seconds as mez, etc) would be the way to go. 

    Make the necro the master of life AND death, give them siphons they can channel that do x amount of damage per 3 seconds channeled to either the mobs hp or mana and distribute half of it amongst all group members (not enough to replace a healer but enough to be wanted in groups), siphon ac the same way. 

    Drain the life energy from a mob by reducing their speed minorly (let's say a 5 - 10% slow that stacks with shaman or enchanter slow while its channeled) and feed that energy to your defensive target as physical energy/focus/chi. 

    Have the necro be the class that brings use to the  dual offensive and defensive targets and make it bring benefit to a group.

    • 1860 posts
    December 5, 2018 12:10 PM PST

    You've convinced me.  You bring up some good points.

    Especially this:

    Necro in its traditional mmo role is a violation of the Vision behind pantheon, group and community focused gameplay. 

    I'm not sure if some of your suggestions solve the problems but, it may be a step in the right direction.  If Pantheon Necros vary greatly from what many consider a standard "EQ necro" will people be disappointed? 

    • 1247 posts
    December 5, 2018 12:57 PM PST

    Cool ideas. Perhaps there could be a permanent pet (not as strong as Summoner’s) that would be useful in some cases, while the other temporary pets would be much more useful in group play. Necro wouldn’t be able to use both at same time. 

    • 633 posts
    December 5, 2018 1:05 PM PST

    I agree that the original EQ necro would be bad, because it is mainly just the original EQ summoner with an undead bent and some slightly different utility.  But the Kunark/Velious necro was different and extremely fun.  Yes, it also still used a pet for persistent DPS, but a lot of the utility was different from the summoner and necros were desired in raids (I actually joined a guild that wanted my necromancer over my epic'd cleric during this time).

    The Kunark/Velious necro had the ability to siphon life off and give it to the group, and it had the ability to transfer mana to group members.  It could also heal a bit by transfering it's own hit points to another group member.  It could feign death and resurrect people, which was great for raids, as well as summon corpses.  They could also mesmerize mobs, keeping 2 of them locked down at once.

    I personally would like to see the necro as a combination dps/healer (lifetapping for healing the group) and crowd control (using fear based like EQ's Screaming Terror).  This would give another crowd control option that wasn't just some utility and dps along with it, which is the enchanter.

    • 334 posts
    December 5, 2018 1:49 PM PST

    Both Necro and SK are probably the two classes that have had the most insane balancing issues in MMO history. I can't imagine the headaches devs have gone through trying to figure these two classes out. They typically go through cycles of being extremely overpowered and then underpowered, more so than other classes. Necros certainly have been historically antithetical to cohesive group play (due to the "jack-of-all-trades" capabilities they often find themselves with: a class that can do literally everything and can do it well enough to remove the need for other classes, or diminish their impact substantially). Both in EQ and EQ2 they became the pinnacle "solo" class. Can't express how frustrating it was dungeon crawling with a great group only to find a boss being soloed by a Necro who was farming it for drops to sell. No thanks. Necros need to be way more specialized than they have been historically, even a lot of the recommendations for them found here in these forums are for a return to their traditional nature which was basically: "Oh, other classes exist? That's cool, doesn't really impact me since I'm a Necro and can do everything."


    This post was edited by Sicario at December 5, 2018 3:24 PM PST
    • 22 posts
    December 5, 2018 2:27 PM PST

     

    kelenin said:

    The Kunark/Velious necro had the ability to siphon life off and give it to the group, and it had the ability to transfer mana to group members.  It could also heal a bit by transfering it's own hit points to another group member.  It could feign death and resurrect people, which was great for raids, as well as summon corpses.  They could also mesmerize mobs, keeping 2 of them locked down at once.

    I personally would like to see the necro as a combination dps/healer (lifetapping for healing the group) and crowd control (using fear based like EQ's Screaming Terror).  This would give another crowd control option that wasn't just some utility and dps along with it, which is the enchanter.

    I 100% agree with this necros should be more group focus and back before they nerfed Screaming terror we could be used to help with crowd control in group situations not every group had to have a chanter for CC. Pantheon should bring back this class of necro!!.

    • 1247 posts
    December 5, 2018 2:54 PM PST

    @Kelenin cool ideas!

    • 79 posts
    December 9, 2018 8:59 AM PST

    Wow a lot of assumptions on your part.  I played a Necro in Vanilla EQ and grouped quite a bit, so I guess my experiences were different than yours.  I have fond memories of off healing, especially Shamans, throwing out backup mezzes, giving mana to the healer, and keeping my DoTs on whatever we are fighting.  To me that was a heckuva lot of fun and kept me busy.  Now in raids I was pretty much mana battery but that is a whole other kettle of fish.

    I don't know what it is about Necromancers (or pet classes in general) but they always get people riled up.  This is pretty much a PvE game right?  So what difference does it make what another person is playing?  If I play a traditional Necromancer, how is that impacting your gameplay?  If they share some mechanics with another class it doesn't make that other class obsolete or vice versa, and if the Necromancer is violating the tenents of the game (according to you), doesn't that mean the Summoner is as well since you said they are basically the same?  Should we remove the Summoner?

    I like some of your ideas but the temp pet thing is a no go for me, I liked the Vanguard Necro pet quite a bit.  Harvesting parts was a great idea.  But to me the traditional Necromancer in EQ and Vanguard pretty much is what I want out of this game.


    This post was edited by Walpurgis at December 9, 2018 9:03 AM PST
    • 1860 posts
    December 9, 2018 4:18 PM PST

    No one said necros couldn't group.  The point was that their design in EQ made it so they didn't have to rely on other players as much as most classes, which has been a stated goal of Pantheon.


    Wal said: "fond memories of off healing, ... throwing out backup mezzes, giving mana to the healer, and keeping my DoTs on whatever we are fighting."

    This ^ makes them pretty self sufficient.  Pantheon seems to be making a concerted effort to go away from the "jack of all trades", self sufficient classes that don't have to rely as heavily on others. (I'm interested in seeing what they do with bards).

    And in regards to your summoner comment, like the EQ mage,  Summoners can't heal themselves or mez.  They are very different.


    This post was edited by philo at December 9, 2018 4:25 PM PST
    • 633 posts
    December 9, 2018 4:28 PM PST

    I wouldn't say the abilities he listed made them self sufficient, although it did make them a bit of a jack of all trades.  They do have other abilities though that would allow them to be more self sufficient.

    The same thing could be said about other classes that were in EQ.  The druid, for example, could solo very well, as well or better than the necro depending on circumstances.  The magician and enchanters in EQ both had sufficient abilities where they could level all the way to 50 without a group.  The enchanter arguably being the best soloer in game the at all levels.  All three of those classes are in Pantheon.


    This post was edited by kelenin at December 9, 2018 4:30 PM PST
    • 79 posts
    December 9, 2018 8:32 PM PST

    philo said:

    No one said necros couldn't group.  The point was that their design in EQ made it so they didn't have to rely on other players as much as most classes, which has been a stated goal of Pantheon.


    Wal said: "fond memories of off healing, ... throwing out backup mezzes, giving mana to the healer, and keeping my DoTs on whatever we are fighting."

    This ^ makes them pretty self sufficient.  Pantheon seems to be making a concerted effort to go away from the "jack of all trades", self sufficient classes that don't have to rely as heavily on others. (I'm interested in seeing what they do with bards).

    And in regards to your summoner comment, like the EQ mage,  Summoners can't heal themselves or mez.  They are very different.

    I didn't say anything about their ability to group, I was talking about him making this statement as if it was a fact "Necro was a class for people that didnt want to (or couldn't for other reasons) group with other players.  It was for people that didnt want to share the experience of community gameplay for the most part [yes I know ppl will voice opposition to that statement but it's a fact...and those same necro players will level soloing city guards for days on end]. "  It is an opinion, not a fact.  I was invited to many groups because I participated and played my class to its fullest extent, and was a boon to any group I was a member of.  The only reason I play these games is because of community, making friends, and enjoying being part of the world.

    I wouldn't mind if they moved the Necromancer away from jack of all trades honostly.  I don't want a pure DPS, but I would like if they kept to how they previously worked Necromancers with a pet, some DoTs and utility that helps the group (doesn't have to be multiple utility abilities).

    • 2752 posts
    December 10, 2018 4:51 PM PST

    They were just "bad" DPS for a group because they didn't have time to get the most out of their DoTs (wasted mana) and their nukes were not mana friendly either. The key part of Necromancer in groups for EQ was they changed roles almost entirely (the good ones anyway) to that of a support and NOT a DPS. So hopefully they land as more of a support/CC here as grouping is the focus. 

    • 945 posts
    December 11, 2018 6:43 AM PST

    Xilshale said:

    Necro, in its "traditional" form is a pointless addition to the game. Somebody had to say it.  It's pure fan service with no redeeming qualities to bring the class, in its expected form, to Terminus

     

    A caster class that uses persistent pets for dps (summoner) while supplementing that damage with spell casts (summoner) while hopefully bringing some additional utility to the group (summoner).   It makes zero sense to bring in a second class that is a carbon copy of another class with a change of graphic mesh on the pet.  It's completely redundant with one exception, poison and disease damage types.



    To play devil's advocate, this could be said about any of the non-core role classes.  Why have other ways to soak damage when you have a Warrior, why have other healers when there's the Cleric, CC -Enchanter, melee DPS Rogue, or ranged DPS Wizard).... 
    Also, the Necro's DPS was comparable to that of any non-melee DPS (monk/rogue).   Buffed pets did way more damage than people gave them credit for (especialy the rogue and monk pets).  The problem was that most necro's didn't use their godmode pet buff that was the equivalent of Enchanter haste and Shaman strength and some necros didn't bother summoning the strongest version of their pets because there was a fairly significant difference between summoning a lvl 40 rogue or a level 44 rogue with dual wield, double attack, lifesteal and backstab.

    • 79 posts
    December 12, 2018 6:17 AM PST

    Iksar said:

    They were just "bad" DPS for a group because they didn't have time to get the most out of their DoTs (wasted mana) and their nukes were not mana friendly either. The key part of Necromancer in groups for EQ was they changed roles almost entirely (the good ones anyway) to that of a support and NOT a DPS. So hopefully they land as more of a support/CC here as grouping is the focus. 

    I was able to hold my own in DPS, I wasn’t the top, but I did my part.  I wouldn’t say my DPS was just plain bad though.  The thing about Necromancers in Vanilla EQ was we didn’t just change to one role, we could CC, heal, give mana, etc. and we couldn’t fill a role, more like back up.  That was difficult and threw a lot of people off.  You had to be very flexible in your playstyle to get the most out of playing a Necromancer.

    A pure support/CC wouldn’t work.  I have already seen a thread that is discussing the most efficient group setup for XP.  Necros would never get a group.  I still stand by having DPS and a support.  I hope they don’t go the jack of all trades route but focus on one support ability.  I liked what Kelenin said about DPS/Healer, I could play something to that effect.

    • 2752 posts
    December 12, 2018 7:48 PM PST

    Walpurgis said:

    A pure support/CC wouldn’t work.  I have already seen a thread that is discussing the most efficient group setup for XP.  Necros would never get a group.  I still stand by having DPS and a support.  I hope they don’t go the jack of all trades route but focus on one support ability.  I liked what Kelenin said about DPS/Healer, I could play something to that effect.

    Curious as to what makes you think that, given that enchanter and bard are slated to be CC/Support and they are essential to any kind of efficient group. (That doesn't mean they have no damage, just that they won't be touching DPS class output)

    • 79 posts
    December 13, 2018 6:31 AM PST

    Iksar said:

    Curious as to what makes you think that, given that enchanter and bard are slated to be CC/Support and they are essential to any kind of efficient group. (That doesn't mean they have no damage, just that they won't be touching DPS class output)

    Got it from this thread:

    https://www.pantheonmmo.com/content/forums/topic/9631/party-makeup-meta/view/page/3

    People are always going to be focused on down time and killing efficiency.  Also based on my own experience, people will always drift towards the easiest and fastest method of leveling.  I know this is a generalization, but that is what I have experienced.  As long as they give the Enchanter, Bard, or Necromancer a decent DPS output as well as good utility they should get a group.  But honestly, I haven't seen that since Everquest, I would love to see it here.

    I am not trying to get the Necromancer to be a pure DPS, but I do want it to be more like the traditional Necromancer with DOTs, pets out all the time, and utility.  I really enjoyed playing that in Everquest and haven't really gotten that from another game.  Vanguard was fun, and the Mastermind from City of Heroes was a blast (like playing an RTS in an MMoRPG).  Now it seems most pet classes are nothing but different variations of pure DPS.

    • 1860 posts
    December 13, 2018 2:00 PM PST

    Don't look to much into that thread.  It was a generalization on perceived optimal group makeup. 

    Did you play EQ heavily prior to 2003ish when it started to change?  During the time frame that Pantheon is trying to harken back to? 

    These seem like strange comments if so:

    A pure support/CC wouldn’t work.

    As long as they give the Enchanter, Bard, or Necromancer a decent DPS output as well as good utility they should get a group. 

    Enchanters will be one of the most sought after classes for every group.

    Part of my questioning is also because you called it vanilla EQ...which is a very new term that was never used.  There are plenty of people who played EQ/P99 later, or who barely wet their toes during EQs prime, who don't have an accurate perspective.  Some of your statements make me wonder where you are coming from?

     

    • 79 posts
    December 14, 2018 6:06 AM PST

    philo said:

    Don't look to much into that thread.  It was a generalization on perceived optimal group makeup. 

    Did you play EQ heavily prior to 2003ish when it started to change?  During the time frame that Pantheon is trying to harken back to? 

    These seem like strange comments if so:

    A pure support/CC wouldn’t work.

    As long as they give the Enchanter, Bard, or Necromancer a decent DPS output as well as good utility they should get a group. 

    Enchanters will be one of the most sought after classes for every group.

    Part of my questioning is also because you called it vanilla EQ...which is a very new term that was never used.  There are plenty of people who played EQ/P99 later, or who barely wet their toes during EQs prime, who don't have an accurate perspective.  Some of your statements make me wonder where you are coming from?

     

    In that comment you chose I was talking about the perceptions now, not back in Vanilla EQ, and yes I started back in 1999.  You are just cherry picking at this point and taking what I say out of context, I really don't have to prove anything to you.  I stated my opinion only because I didn't like how the OP stated his and tried to give another side to it.  I am not going to argue over little things.


    This post was edited by Walpurgis at December 14, 2018 6:11 AM PST
    • 945 posts
    December 14, 2018 8:28 AM PST

    Fair enough.  Lets wait and see what the devs decide (since it is ultimately out of our hands).  I'm sure they welcome our feedback/input but all we can do is wait and see what they have in mind for the necro.

    • 1860 posts
    December 14, 2018 10:43 AM PST

    Walpurgis said:

    In that comment you chose I was talking about the perceptions now, not back in Vanilla EQ, and yes I started back in 1999.  You are just cherry picking at this point and taking what I say out of context, I really don't have to prove anything to you.  I stated my opinion only because I didn't like how the OP stated his and tried to give another side to it.  I am not going to argue over little things.

    No need to get defensive about it.  It just seemed like some odd comments so I asked about them.  I guess maybe part of the miscommunication has to do with the definition of "decent" when referring to "decent dps"?

    Enchanters only ever did "decent dps" themselves when they had a charmed pet.  Bards?...when they were swarm kiting/aoe'n I guess.  Necros? umm?

    The benefits of those 3 classes in a group or raid primarily came from their support abilities, helping other classes.  Doing "decent dps" wasn't ever necessary so, again,  to say that:

    "a pure support/CC wouldn't work" or that "As long as they give the Enchanter, Bard, or Necromancer a decent DPS output as well as good utility they should get a group."

    Is not accurate, now or then.    That's not the perception now unless you are playing with new gamers who don't know any better (that will be much less common in Pantheon than some other games).  To say a support class isn't viable in todays mmos is simply a strange statement so I asked you about it.  I guess I'm not going to get an explanation about the comments...


    This post was edited by philo at December 14, 2018 10:45 AM PST
    • 4 posts
    December 15, 2018 1:40 PM PST
    I like it.
    Some class ideas that necro can have
    Cc power (right now we only have the enchanter ans possibly bard)
    Spells like fear make the mob cower instead of run away. Cage of bones. Mob is imprisoned in a cage of bones. Disease. Mob is overcome by a violent fever
    Visions of death mob is in awe of what awaits in the after life
    A resurrect spel
    Aoe exploding corpse
    Zombie A spell that being back a dead mob for a short time that engages another mob
    All kinds of things
    • 432 posts
    December 19, 2018 7:25 AM PST

    Xilshale said:

     

      Necro was a class for people that didnt want to (or couldn't for other reasons) group with other players.  It was for people that didnt want to share the experience of community gameplay for the most part [yes I know ppl will voice opposition to that statement but it's a fact...and those same necro players will level soloing city guards for days on end]. 

     

    Well , no . My main since 99 was a Gnome Necromancer (called Deadshade :)) and I choose that class for purely RP reasons . Necromances and Paladins are for me the best classes to be RPed . It also seems to me that you assume too much and then illegimately generalize these invalid assumptions .

    I have never EVER soloed guards in 4 years of EQ . Actually I played around 80 % of my time in groups . And no, it was not only my dots (or pets) that I brought for groups . I brought CC (screaming terror), corpse recovery (Summon Corpse), roots , ghetto heals and mana recovery . There was also a unique and very lore relevant set of tools to deal with undead (charm , mez , nuke) which had no equivalent among other classes . Lower Guk or Howling Stones belonged to the places where Necros were welcome in any group . Could I have soloed more than 20 % ? Sure but it was so boring that I always preferred to join a group, no questions asked .

    So having an extensive experience with the (EQ style) Necromancer class, I can tell you that it felt VERY different to a summoner and it definitely was not just a dotting pet class . It was much more . So yes , from the RP and lore point of view , a necromancer class is clearly necessary for every fantasy based RPG . And Pantheon belongs to this category too .

    • 945 posts
    December 19, 2018 1:21 PM PST

    Deadshade said:

    Xilshale said:

     

      Necro was a class for people that didnt want to (or couldn't for other reasons) group with other players.  It was for people that didnt want to share the experience of community gameplay for the most part [yes I know ppl will voice opposition to that statement but it's a fact...and those same necro players will level soloing city guards for days on end]. 

     

    Well , no . My main since 99 was a Gnome Necromancer (called Deadshade :)) and I choose that class for purely RP reasons . Necromances and Paladins are for me the best classes to be RPed . It also seems to me that you assume too much and then illegimately generalize these invalid assumptions .

    I have never EVER soloed guards in 4 years of EQ . Actually I played around 80 % of my time in groups . And no, it was not only my dots (or pets) that I brought for groups . I brought CC (screaming terror), corpse recovery (Summon Corpse), roots , ghetto heals and mana recovery . There was also a unique and very lore relevant set of tools to deal with undead (charm , mez , nuke) which had no equivalent among other classes . Lower Guk or Howling Stones belonged to the places where Necros were welcome in any group . Could I have soloed more than 20 % ? Sure but it was so boring that I always preferred to join a group, no questions asked .

    So having an extensive experience with the (EQ style) Necromancer class, I can tell you that it felt VERY different to a summoner and it definitely was not just a dotting pet class . It was much more . So yes , from the RP and lore point of view , a necromancer class is clearly necessary for every fantasy based RPG . And Pantheon belongs to this category too .

    In defense of Xilshade's post, I believe their opion may come from necros that started AFTER the game had been live for a few years and people actually knew the solo power of the Necro.  I too chose my initial class solely for RP reasons back in 99, but I later made a necro and bard (for their solo ability and desirability in groups) after discovering how difficult creating groups was for certain classes (hybrids before several expansions).  No need to say that Xil's opinions are illegitimate just because YOU never soloed guard in EQ like many necros do to this very day in Project1999... and Necro/Bard/Mage are the top played classes... due to their ability to solo.

    edit:  I will add though, that I think the necro will fulfill its role in PRotF.  I just (personally) hope that they have the role of CC/DPS instead of DPS/Utility.


    This post was edited by Darch at December 19, 2018 1:27 PM PST
    • 79 posts
    December 20, 2018 6:17 AM PST

    Darch said:

    In defense of Xilshade's post, I believe their opion may come from necros that started AFTER the game had been live for a few years and people actually knew the solo power of the Necro.  I too chose my initial class solely for RP reasons back in 99, but I later made a necro and bard (for their solo ability and desirability in groups) after discovering how difficult creating groups was for certain classes (hybrids before several expansions).  No need to say that Xil's opinions are illegitimate just because YOU never soloed guard in EQ like many necros do to this very day in Project1999... and Necro/Bard/Mage are the top played classes... due to their ability to solo.

    edit:  I will add though, that I think the necro will fulfill its role in PRotF.  I just (personally) hope that they have the role of CC/DPS instead of DPS/Utility.

    I think the main issue that me and Deadshade have with what Xilshade said is that he basically stated his opinion as fact and that anyone that disagrees with him is lying.  He said that we only chose the necromancer for soloing and because we didn't want to group (and said it was fact) and if we deny it we would end up soloing guards.  We are just giving an opposing opinion.  It is like someone telling you why you played the class you enjoyed in Everquest and ignoring anything you have to say.  I understand that method of arguing, but it doesn't sit right with me and of course I am going to speak up.

    • 523 posts
    December 21, 2018 12:03 AM PST

    Agree that both Necro and Bard should be "Support" classes.  If the game is based around a quaternity of concepts (Tank, Heals, DPS, and Support), you need at least 3 support classes to compete with the 3+ classes of the other roles.